Reading through all these comments, I have come to the following observations:
1. People on both sides of the aisle put so much stock in FACTS yet they always conveniently forget about the CONTEXT. Facts are cold and hard, context gives them warmth. Translate that however you like. 2. I am struck constantly as of late as to how arrogant, self-righteous and self-absorbed some of the Left is in the country. Several commentors have made an effort to come across as fair and balanced, but instead have given off a scent of arrogance, especially when talking of the unwashed masses of the very stupid and caveman-ish American public. It is convenient to believe that people who don't believe what you believe are cretons, much easier to just right them off I suppose. I used to believe the same, but I no longer do. People _ARE_ smarter than you think, perhaps you need to try harder to explain your case. And to the Right, you aren't innocent here either, a lot of the same criticisms apply. 3. The Right has nothing to fear from this film. Moore will make a lot of money, some will see confirmation of their views in his film, others will see the opposite. In the end, though, Moore is still a ghoulish opportunist who is more interested in fanning the flames of discontent than anything else, especially if it enhances his standing as spokesperson of the Left and it makes money. 4. Fishbowls are a dangerous place to be. For all those who may visit a website, see a lot of people who agree with you, and then assume that that must be so across the board: big mistake! 5. What is with all the anti-Christianity stuff? For a group who proclaims to be all about acceptance, understanding, loving your fellow man, diversity, there is a lot of intolerance here, an uncomfortable amount. 6. Those on the Left with a seething hatred for Bush. Stop it, it makes you look foolish and petty and turns off those who are in the middle. You want the moderate vote, so don't alienate them. You are in big enough trouble already by having Kerry, don't make it worse.
"Strace for NT is a debugging/investigation utility for examining the NT system calls made by a process. It is meant to be used like the strace (or truss) on linux and other unix OSes."
One possible idea for curbing the slashdot effect, especially on bandwidth limited websites, would be to have some mechanism whereby when you post such a story about a website that the story submitter could check an option that would allow for "Google" style mirroring of the page(s) to be stored on slashdot for the time that the story is on the homepage. Once the story goes to the archives or just falls off the homepage, then the cached pages are dumped. Just an idea.
I'd really like to see something like this on the bus. I can't tell you how many times I've wanted to strangle the lady two rows back that is having a loud conversation with someone about her self-actualization "techniques" and how people who don't practice such "techniques" are destined to failure and some other bullshit, or the person who is talking about their sex life in very graphic detail, or the guy who is completely in love with himself and is bullshitting some poor soul over the phone about his "excellent" career and about all the money he's making, or how about the lady that...
My only concerns would be about the radiation from the "jammer", and maybe the civil liberties issues of blocking communication.:)
When hooked.net started out it provided IMHO great service. I received a "lifelong" free merchant account due to some promotional deal that hooked.net made with Egghead software where I worked at the time (I think this was around 1994). Everything was great until Wenet bought them out and then service became worse (numerous busies, explosion of spam emails, random network outages, hellish peering), but life was great because it was still free. Along comes ClearData and things really go downhill. I was still content because after all it was still free, or so I thought. A couple of months ago they sent me a bill for usage and it was over $250.00. Nevermind I hadn't dialed in via a modem in over two years, way before they bought Wenet. They tried to do some quasi-retroactive billing and they still can't get my billing address right! I basically told them to screw off, but I'm still troubled by how a company can summarily decide to back-charge you for services you were promised were "free for life". After all, aren't they supposed to honor the previous agreements made by the companies with their customers that they are buying out?
"At 6:30 p.m. Tuesday (PST), a Microsoft technician made a configuration change to the routers on the edge of Microsoft's Domain Name Server network..."
One possible (hidden) motive for bringing down some of these ecommerce sites is that it is the perfect cover for doing some task that would be prohibitive during normal business hours. An example would be an internal audit of a amazon.com type ebiz, or DB work on a site like eBay.com. So if something seriously goes wrong they can at least play the "Y2K" card.
It would seem that doing anything with this mindset would be, at the least, bad practice, but I know of some exec's that would stop at nothing to cut costs, and cut corners.
"The predecessor to MSNBC, known then as MSN News, was first published prematurely when a member of the production team, sitting up on a desk to study a schematic, clicked a mouse button with his derriere. The team watched in horror as the content went live to a public server before it was ready."
"Mark Ingalls recalls how he mistakenly deleted the live default.htm file that served as the microsoft.com home page, in the days before staging servers. While home page visitors were receiving File Not Found errors, Ingalls rooted around in his browser cache - where the cache filenames did NOT map to their real names - to find and restore the page to active duty."
Why in the hell would you allow your kid to be used for such a publicity stunt? I don't understand it. A 3 year old kid and he has is face and name plastered all over the net and papers. I would think most parents would'nt want that to happen to their kids.
I don't know, but IMHO it seems exploitive and just plain wrong...
The "attacks" on the Second Amendment in regards to firearms are actually a piece of a bigger cake, which is the "how-hard-is-it-to-kill-someone" factor. Someone has to be really pissed off and committed to a course of action to kill someone with a baseball bat, a butcher's knife, or something even more blunt. It's a very close and personnal activity. Whereas firearms (and Nukes, Chemical/Biological) are a "standoff" type weapon, useable from a "clean" distance. In other words, just pull the trigger and your problem is supposedly solved.
The bottom line IMHO is a matter of trust. People who support bans on firearms just don't trust those who do have them, and those who do have firearms don't trust those who don't to some extent.
"The cold war was never about democracy, but about money. Many new wars to "stop tyrant X from killing his poor people" are setups to boost US arms sales..."
Wow. More unfounded conspiracy theories... Get over it saq.
"Whatever, to defend, or justify the US actions on the international stage is to be completely ignorant of the facts..."
Ouch evilad, ya hurt me man. Maybe you can be my "wingman" when we both storm the steps of Congress...
First off, Am I happy with the way the US Government has acted in the past? NO Am I troubled by the incidents of US funding being used in ways that was not intended initially? YES Does that make me a Baby-killer? perhaps.
Anyway, my previous posting was of course overly simplistic, but I personally get tired of constantly hearing people slam the various US Government agencies for past funding of regimes that (may) have had human rights abuses. It was/is, to put it mildly, unfortunate, but what were/are the alternatives? The US isn't exactly adept at resolving issues purely in a diplomatic fashion without at least a threat of violence or some other "covert" action.
During the Cold War era, we sacrificed certain levels of morality (turned a blind eye, if you will) in order to keep in check the spread of the USSR's influence. Of course, in retrospect, the choices that were made, and the dictators, despots, etc. that we supported were not that hospitable to their own citizens. What would you have done instead? Turned a blind eye? Let the USSR spread? or maybe come up with some other option that the politicians never considered?
Respectfully, I personally don't know.
Note: we in this context stands for the US Government and to a lesser extent me:)
Until the citizens of the respective countries you named take responsibility and control of their governments from despots, zealots, and the greedy/power hungry then none of them are innocent; They are no better than accomplices. The children are exceptions (of course).
I would assume that the (future) house itself would have just one point of entry from the inet. The router/pfilter/whatever would do some type of Network Address Translation for the appliances in the house, which themselves should have private IP's; not a "real" ip. Anyway, wouldn't we run out of real IP's pretty quickly if we didn't use private IP's (assuming IPv6 is still in limbo...)?
Interesting problem though, although privacy would be my biggest concern, especially if you've got netcam's for home security, HDTV pay-per-view decoders, some banking functionaility where your home "house-computer" interfaces with the Bank's computer to reconcile bills and other items (a next generation quickbooks), your eating patterns via the "frig" talking to Safeway's Mainframe regarding the restocking of Vanilla Chocolate Chip Ice Cream and Tombstone Pizzas (tm) cuz your currently low, etc. etc... This could be a pretty tricky firewall configuration task.:)
One interesting problem might be if a person breaks into your "house-computer" and learns your habits over a series of weeks. S/He knows when you get up in the morning (the time the lights go on, the time the water heater comes on due to you taking a shower/bath, and the time the coffee machine starts brewing). S/he knows when you leave via the garage door opener, and the lights turning off. S/he will know when you get back from work using the signs mentioned above.
Virtually everything about you could be gleaned from the comfort of a chair anywhere in the world when someone "roots" your "house-computer".
Now that's scary (assuming a very paranoid view of the future)... Also, I would think there would be some type of AI "Centurion" (sic?) Network Daemon protecting your home network from trouble makers, by reconfiguring the firewall on-the-fly.
"... a view promoted by environmentalists that don't understand how big the planet is...".
Oh boy, yeah this planet is large. How long until I'll have to start lookin' where I'm steppin' to avoid your trash piles!:()
According to the EPA's own projections (Circa 1996), most of the Northeast will use up their Landfill capacity in the next 5 years or so. Do you want a dump in your backyard? Probably not, and a lot of people in the northeast probably don't want anymore dumps either. Hell, it's dirty enough already (in spots).
The EPA also projects that the Midwest and Southeast will use up their space in 10 years or so. Well, they have a little more room to spare, so you might see dumps migrating to the Great Plains, since it's probably more cost effective to turn the land there into dumps, since the farmers will probably get more money for storing garbage then the paultry sums they've been receiving recently for cash crops like corn, wheat, and hogs.
As for the Western States, the EPA projects more than 10 years worth of capacity left in pre-existing dumps.
The good news is that the overall trend (according to their data) is that total yearly deposits to dumps are decreasing due to improvements in packaging, recycling, etc.
We have tried several DSL providers for Small Business connectivity in San Francisco, all have failed when it comes to honoring their Guarantee of Service agreement.
PacBell is a mess, InternetConnect is terrible, and where you do find a reputable provider with impressive peering agreements and such they only offer 1.1MBit (Covad) SDSL, not 1.4MBit. The providers that offer 1.4MBit (NorthPoint) SDSL that we have tried have had daily network downtime, with a 22 hour outage just yesterday. This is unacceptable for a business such as a (small) ecommerce site, or mail servers for small businesses where sales people require email every minute of the day or else they go completely insane.
Affordable T1's are still a good bet for those startups that require stable internet access, at least until they are able to afford collocation or a T3/DS3 connection.
It's an extension of the old programmer stereotype about programmers being very poor about documenting the software they write, such as source comments, docs, etc.
In the end you could probably write it off as either laziness (doesn't care) or ignorance (really doesn't care or ESL).
Suppose you are IBM, and one day you are approached by NASA to "participate" in a "people" mission to Mars. Now, participate, in this setting, means commit a large number of resources and money to the project. You're (IBM's) task is to design the workstations, servers, and communication networks. You would undoubtedly use the expertise of 3com or one of the other networking companies to provide that aspect of the project, but for the sake of argument, let's say that you are providing that as well. You spend several million dollars on R&D. You monopolize the time of certain core groups of engineers in your company, taking them away from "profitable" endeavors. You involve the reputation of your company in the project... this is something that is rather "high stakes", since if it fails, everyone will know about (imagine losing some/all of the astronauts due to a malfunction in one of the systems you designed). The mission and people would have no doubt had full insurance coverage before departure, but it is still a large risk for a company to take on (for some, their business is tied intricately to their reputation).
So I wonder, What is the "payoff" for a company like IBM to partner with entities like NASA?
Incentives: I can foresee a time when NASA (the US Government) will sign a contract with a private company guaranteeing them mining, land, mineral, etc rights to a particular chunk of Martian real estate. Now, this opens an interesting and probably contentious debate (if not wars) about who can make those dispersals of "property" that technically no government owns.
IMHO, The real space race might be the huge land-grab of the next century where multinational corporations are in a race to claim as much Martian "property" as they can for future terraforming (mining).
HAHA! Re: Linux is a success and *BSD is a failure
on
*BSD News
·
· Score: 1
Hold on, let me wipe the tears induced by uncontrollable laughter from my eyes!
Wow, what a bold statement. "The main difference is that Linux is a success and *BSD is a failure" and "Most BSDs will be gone within a year or two due to fincancial problems".
Hmm, what "facts" do you have to support such a bold statement? (Personal feelings, etc?)
As for *BSD dists dieing, HAHA. There are many corporate/commercial sites that only run FreeBSD for their "live" web, mail, and DNS servers.
Sarcasm On
Gamespot, Yahoo, the Apache Group, etc... They must be insane!!! for using FreeBSD; educate them before it's too late!!!...
Sarcasm Off
Ahh, anyway, why would I want to buy, for my purposes, a FreeBSD CD if I can:
Do a FTP install
Make a local CVS copy
So, CD publishers are not a big concern for me, and maybe the other users of the *BSD's as well, although I don't have any data to back that statment up.:)
"But only a fool would switch to this BSD sinking ship"
Oh man, you top it off by insulting the *BSD users! Clearly yours is the attitude of a person who has not used a BSD variant (correctly) before. As for me, and I can ONLY speak from personal experience, *BSD is here to stay. It has been truely "Rock Solid" for me, and has met and surpassed any requirements we have thrown it's way. Linux is great as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Reading through all these comments, I have come to the following observations:
1. People on both sides of the aisle put so much stock in FACTS yet they always conveniently forget about the CONTEXT. Facts are cold and hard, context gives them warmth. Translate that however you like.
2. I am struck constantly as of late as to how arrogant, self-righteous and self-absorbed some of the Left is in the country. Several commentors have made an effort to come across as fair and balanced, but instead have given off a scent of arrogance, especially when talking of the unwashed masses of the very stupid and caveman-ish American public. It is convenient to believe that people who don't believe what you believe are cretons, much easier to just right them off I suppose. I used to believe the same, but I no longer do. People _ARE_ smarter than you think, perhaps you need to try harder to explain your case. And to the Right, you aren't innocent here either, a lot of the same criticisms apply.
3. The Right has nothing to fear from this film. Moore will make a lot of money, some will see confirmation of their views in his film, others will see the opposite. In the end, though, Moore is still a ghoulish opportunist who is more interested in fanning the flames of discontent than anything else, especially if it enhances his standing as spokesperson of the Left and it makes money.
4. Fishbowls are a dangerous place to be. For all those who may visit a website, see a lot of people who agree with you, and then assume that that must be so across the board: big mistake!
5. What is with all the anti-Christianity stuff? For a group who proclaims to be all about acceptance, understanding, loving your fellow man, diversity, there is a lot of intolerance here, an uncomfortable amount.
6. Those on the Left with a seething hatred for Bush. Stop it, it makes you look foolish and petty and turns off those who are in the middle. You want the moderate vote, so don't alienate them. You are in big enough trouble already by having Kerry, don't make it worse.
tekan - somewhere in the middle
"Strace for NT is a debugging/investigation utility for examining the NT system calls made by a process. It is meant to be used like the strace (or truss) on linux and other unix OSes."
d me .html
http://razor.bindview.com/tools/desc/strace_rea
Nice subtle addition of "niggers", "coons", and other crap into the original article, dumb shit. How this could be rated "Informative" is beyond me.
One possible idea for curbing the slashdot effect, especially on bandwidth limited websites, would be to have some mechanism whereby when you post such a story about a website that the story submitter could check an option that would allow for "Google" style mirroring of the page(s) to be stored on slashdot for the time that the story is on the homepage. Once the story goes to the archives or just falls off the homepage, then the cached pages are dumped. Just an idea.
My only concerns would be about the radiation from the "jammer", and maybe the civil liberties issues of blocking communication. :)
"At 6:30 p.m. Tuesday (PST), a Microsoft technician made a configuration change to the routers on the edge of Microsoft's Domain Name Server network..."
More Info
CNN is reporting (as of July 28, 2000 05:48 p.m. EDT, 2148 GMT) that the injunction has been stayed. They are supposed to have more news soon.
It would seem that doing anything with this mindset would be, at the least, bad practice, but I know of some exec's that would stop at nothing to cut costs, and cut corners.
"The predecessor to MSNBC, known then as MSN News, was first published prematurely when a member of the production team, sitting up on a desk to study a schematic, clicked a mouse button with his derriere. The team watched in horror as the content went live to a public server before it was ready."
"Mark Ingalls recalls how he mistakenly deleted the live default.htm file that served as the microsoft.com home page, in the days before staging servers. While home page visitors were receiving File Not Found errors, Ingalls rooted around in his browser cache - where the cache filenames did NOT map to their real names - to find and restore the page to active duty."
Kids should spend their childhood being kids, and not have their parents living vicariously thru them.
Why in the hell would you allow your kid to be used for such a publicity stunt? I don't understand it. A 3 year old kid and he has is face and name plastered all over the net and papers. I would think most parents would'nt want that to happen to their kids.
I don't know, but IMHO it seems exploitive and just plain wrong...
The bottom line IMHO is a matter of trust. People who support bans on firearms just don't trust those who do have them, and those who do have firearms don't trust those who don't to some extent.
Wow. More unfounded conspiracy theories... Get over it saq.
"Whatever, to defend, or justify the US actions on the international stage is to be completely ignorant of the facts..."
Were's your "facts"? Love to see them saq...
First off, Am I happy with the way the US Government has acted in the past? NO
Am I troubled by the incidents of US funding being used in ways that was not intended initially? YES
Does that make me a Baby-killer? perhaps.
Anyway, my previous posting was of course overly simplistic, but I personally get tired of constantly hearing people slam the various US Government agencies for past funding of regimes that (may) have had human rights abuses. It was/is, to put it mildly, unfortunate, but what were/are the alternatives? The US isn't exactly adept at resolving issues purely in a diplomatic fashion without at least a threat of violence or some other "covert" action.
During the Cold War era, we sacrificed certain levels of morality (turned a blind eye, if you will) in order to keep in check the spread of the USSR's influence. Of course, in retrospect, the choices that were made, and the dictators, despots, etc. that we supported were not that hospitable to their own citizens. What would you have done instead? Turned a blind eye? Let the USSR spread? or maybe come up with some other option that the politicians never considered?
Respectfully, I personally don't know.
Note: we in this context stands for the US Government and to a lesser extent me :)
Until the citizens of the respective countries you named take responsibility and control of their governments from despots, zealots, and the greedy/power hungry then none of them are innocent; They are no better than accomplices. The children are exceptions (of course).
Ignorance is bliss I suppose...
Interesting problem though, although privacy would be my biggest concern, especially if you've got netcam's for home security, HDTV pay-per-view decoders, some banking functionaility where your home "house-computer" interfaces with the Bank's computer to reconcile bills and other items (a next generation quickbooks), your eating patterns via the "frig" talking to Safeway's Mainframe regarding the restocking of Vanilla Chocolate Chip Ice Cream and Tombstone Pizzas (tm) cuz your currently low, etc. etc... This could be a pretty tricky firewall configuration task. :)
One interesting problem might be if a person breaks into your "house-computer" and learns your habits over a series of weeks. S/He knows when you get up in the morning (the time the lights go on, the time the water heater comes on due to you taking a shower/bath, and the time the coffee machine starts brewing). S/he knows when you leave via the garage door opener, and the lights turning off. S/he will know when you get back from work using the signs mentioned above.
Virtually everything about you could be gleaned from the comfort of a chair anywhere in the world when someone "roots" your "house-computer".
Now that's scary (assuming a very paranoid view of the future)... Also, I would think there would be some type of AI "Centurion" (sic?) Network Daemon protecting your home network from trouble makers, by reconfiguring the firewall on-the-fly.
"... a view promoted by environmentalists that don't understand how big the planet is...".
Oh boy, yeah this planet is large. How long until I'll have to start lookin' where I'm steppin' to avoid your trash piles! :()
According to the EPA's own projections (Circa 1996), most of the Northeast will use up their Landfill capacity in the next 5 years or so. Do you want a dump in your backyard? Probably not, and a lot of people in the northeast probably don't want anymore dumps either. Hell, it's dirty enough already (in spots).
The EPA also projects that the Midwest and Southeast will use up their space in 10 years or so. Well, they have a little more room to spare, so you might see dumps migrating to the Great Plains, since it's probably more cost effective to turn the land there into dumps, since the farmers will probably get more money for storing garbage then the paultry sums they've been receiving recently for cash crops like corn, wheat, and hogs.
As for the Western States, the EPA projects more than 10 years worth of capacity left in pre-existing dumps.
The good news is that the overall trend (according to their data) is that total yearly deposits to dumps are decreasing due to improvements in packaging, recycling, etc.
PacBell is a mess, InternetConnect is terrible, and where you do find a reputable provider with impressive peering agreements and such they only offer 1.1MBit (Covad) SDSL, not 1.4MBit. The providers that offer 1.4MBit (NorthPoint) SDSL that we have tried have had daily network downtime, with a 22 hour outage just yesterday. This is unacceptable for a business such as a (small) ecommerce site, or mail servers for small businesses where sales people require email every minute of the day or else they go completely insane.
Affordable T1's are still a good bet for those startups that require stable internet access, at least until they are able to afford collocation or a T3/DS3 connection.
In the end you could probably write it off as either laziness (doesn't care) or ignorance (really doesn't care or ESL).
Suppose you are IBM, and one day you are approached by NASA to "participate" in a "people" mission to Mars. Now, participate, in this setting, means commit a large number of resources and money to the project. You're (IBM's) task is to design the workstations, servers, and communication networks. You would undoubtedly use the expertise of 3com or one of the other networking companies to provide that aspect of the project, but for the sake of argument, let's say that you are providing that as well. You spend several million dollars on R&D. You monopolize the time of certain core groups of engineers in your company, taking them away from "profitable" endeavors. You involve the reputation of your company in the project... this is something that is rather "high stakes", since if it fails, everyone will know about (imagine losing some/all of the astronauts due to a malfunction in one of the systems you designed). The mission and people would have no doubt had full insurance coverage before departure, but it is still a large risk for a company to take on (for some, their business is tied intricately to their reputation).
So I wonder, What is the "payoff" for a company like IBM to partner with entities like NASA?
Incentives: I can foresee a time when NASA (the US Government) will sign a contract with a private company guaranteeing them mining, land, mineral, etc rights to a particular chunk of Martian real estate. Now, this opens an interesting and probably contentious debate (if not wars) about who can make those dispersals of "property" that technically no government owns.
IMHO, The real space race might be the huge land-grab of the next century where multinational corporations are in a race to claim as much Martian "property" as they can for future terraforming (mining).
Wow, what a bold statement. "The main difference is that Linux is a success and *BSD is a failure" and "Most BSDs will be gone within a year or two due to fincancial problems".
Hmm, what "facts" do you have to support such a bold statement? (Personal feelings, etc?)
As for *BSD dists dieing, HAHA. There are many corporate/commercial sites that only run FreeBSD for their "live" web, mail, and DNS servers.
Sarcasm On
Gamespot, Yahoo, the Apache Group, etc... They must be insane!!! for using FreeBSD; educate them before it's too late!!!...
Sarcasm Off
Ahh, anyway, why would I want to buy, for my purposes, a FreeBSD CD if I can:
So, CD publishers are not a big concern for me, and maybe the other users of the *BSD's as well, although I don't have any data to back that statment up. :)
"But only a fool would switch to this BSD sinking ship"
Oh man, you top it off by insulting the *BSD users! Clearly yours is the attitude of a person who has not used a BSD variant (correctly) before. As for me, and I can ONLY speak from personal experience, *BSD is here to stay. It has been truely "Rock Solid" for me, and has met and surpassed any requirements we have thrown it's way. Linux is great as well.
Use what you like. Use what works best for you.