Why the hatred for LinuxOne? Because they're doing exactly what the GPL allows and reselling a version of Linux that they themselves haven't changed at all? They're really not that evil, I don't think. Just a couple guys seeing dollar signs... Give them a chance.
Maybe everyone would have a different outlook if they were offering shares back to the community? Probably....
Oh, and maybe possibly first post.
Re:why it should be stopped...
on
AOL Nation
·
· Score: 1
What happened to Netscape that AOL caused? I think instead, with their last dying breath, Netscape convinced AOL to buy them up, with the hope that maybe something would come out of it. But netscape as we knew them was destroyed by Windows 98 and NT - with integrated browsers on the client side and integrated servers on the server side, both 100% free, what could they do?
Funny though, how now that the only competition that's left is MSFT vs. Apache, Microsoft chose to change the licensing of IIS to $2,000 to run a server that uses NT validation... Granted, that's for unlimited users, but that's what happens without much in the way of competition.
Re:This merger is good... how?
on
AOL Nation
·
· Score: 3
It benefits shareholders, first. It benefits AOL second, as they get an inside track on all of Time-Warners content. I doubt they'll make it AOL only though, because that'd lock them out of over 50% of the market. Time Warner will finally get major Internet clout. I think it's a good thing for those three.
As for consumers. It makes me kind of nervous with one huge company owning that much of our news outlets. But then, the theory would go that the beauty of the internet is in the fact that anyone (witness Rob and Jeff) can start a website, and if they have actual content, succeed. Yeah, there'll be one huge giant supplying news for the lazy people that don't bother to look elsewhere. That won't change what news is like today. And there will forever be the hundreds and thousands of niche sites that supply news to readers with specific interests.
What i can't figure out is why everyone hates AOL so much? Because they're the onyl company that actually made the internet easy enough for non-techies to use? What have they done wrong (not counting yesterday, if that was bad) to merit any hatred? I'm genuinely curious.
The goal of INVESTING is to earn money from your investment. Microsoft is a rock solid investment.
Think about it:
They have a huge marketshare with very minimal real competition (it's the truth right now. Maybe not tomorrow).
They're the most valuable company in the world.
They've posted annual growth for 15 or 20 years so far.
Incedentally, they're a monopoly. Because the government can't fine them, they won't lose their cash horde. The worst that can happen is that they get broken into serveral new companies... If you'd owned AT&T before they broke up, and were still holding stock in them today, you'd have made something like 14x the amount of if you'd left all that money in IBM.
Ethics work good when purchasing products, etc... But when planning out your retirement, I'd think that the goal would be to invest your money in companies with a proven track record, etc. Microsoft is one of the few companies around that you know will still be a major force in the next decade... Maybe not as much so as they are today, but they ARE NOT going away.
It's not Microsofts fault that they have so much sway in the software industry, per se.
But besides that, they're not the only company that deals in vaporware. Along their respective histories, Apple, IBM, Oracle, Intel and every other "successful" company has used vaporware and FUD tactics. Since Microsofts the biggest, they stick out more as being the sore thumb.
If opensource gains more of a foothold, we won't see so much FUD and pre-announcements, compared to anticpation. Already, people chatter about "I can't wait til version 2.4 of the kernels released because that will do this and this and this...". If Linux/other Open Source projects ever achieve the same market share as Microsoft does today, that anticipation could very well freeze the market. Even more so, because no company even has to acknowledge any activites... there will simply be the hope that someone, somwhere is fixing the problem.
That's got to be the worst yet... They didn't kill it by asking for money for the actual ports, but by asking for money for the NAME? No...
One point that's been brought up is that Firewire is far from dead... but it would have been so much less so if there hadn't been so much Wintel FUD concerning it, when the truth of the matter is that Microsoft and Intel want to hear nothing about Apple possibly owning a piece of their platform. It's bad enough that Quicktime runs under Windows...
Firewire could potentially kill off IDE, SCSI, USB, Serial and Parallel ports, Video capture hardware, and probably others as well... For instance if USB speakers could be workable, FireWire sound could have been as well. Imagine the simplicity the Wintel world could have had if not for Intels stubbornness...
I'd suppose that even includes the what, Lintel? world as well... You'd basically have had Mac hardware, except with an x86 chip instead... All plug and play, supposing ISA can be killed off...
I'll continue to say - blame Intel... And yes, we Mac users already have the benefits, because it's not dead... it just should have been bigger than it has been/
So let me get this straight... A dollar a port adds up the the most expensive part of the system???
Intel Celerons run $100 or so Pentium III's run $400 or so
The BX chipset is about $18-23
Integrated SCSI adds about $120 to the price it seems....
If intel would license firewire, chipsets would run you what? $25
I think you've just fallen for the FUD that was perpetrated in order to get consumers uninterested in the technology, so Microsoft and Intel could retain full control of their platform.
How did Apple kill FireWire? They invented it. It's in most of the shipping Macs, aside from the low-end iMac and the iBook. Did they kill it by asking for ONE DOLLAR PER PORT? Give me a break...
The dollar a port wasn't the issue. It was Intel suffering from same Not-Invented-Here syndrome as Apple used to have.
IEEE 1394 is open. Anyone can use it. Apple just wanted money for the use of the FireWire name... Isn't that aweful? A company spends hundreds of millions of dollars to create a wonderful new bus archecture and gets slammed for asking an extremely modest fee for it's use.
Ahh... no matter how much we hate moderation around here, i need to preface this with this:
I hate the slashdot mentality.
Just because you can get something for free doesn't mean that's what you should do. You trully just don't care about quality if a VHS copy made from even a Hi-8 deck in the theatre is a comparable experience to the theatre, a DVD or even a VHS version.
Just like x86's better than Alpha or Power PC, or IDE's better than SCSI, or anything else... It's the lowest common denominator factor. Yes it's cheaper. But is it nearly as good? no! but you'll settle for it anyways, because of the percieved value of the dollar.... dollars come and go you know... no like star wars is spiritual... TPM was aweful in my opinion... but still.
You're sick. That's the entire reason I disagree with opensource... NOt creating anything new, just reinventing the old for cheaper. Yay!
Good night. I'm drunk... And I'll stop now. But moderators, do your jobs... i expect this to be a -1 flamebait or offtopic by the tiem i wake up....
That would just increase the costs for regular people like you and me who want to register domains... we'd have to get a huge amount of domains to cover all our bases...
Besides... what's the advantage of
WWW.IBM.SALES
versus
SALES.IBM.COM or WWW.IBM.COM/SALES?
I don't see any... In fact I see a huge amount of overhead being created by your concept. No offense, or anything.
How many of your ISP's even have your private key? I know once I generated my keypair, i sent mine the public key and kept the private key for myself. They just forward me my data and i decrypt it from my computer, rather than let them decryp and reencrypt and send to me.
Likewise... I doubt (and hope that not) many of the major e-commerce sites keep their complete key pair on the same machine... Likely, they'll have a cluster of webserves with read only access to the products database, and write only to the orders database. those machines don't need to know what the data that they're passing back and forth is, they just need to get it from the server to the client.
If your server software know to access the correct key from the other thousand, it would seem to be easy for an intruder to discern that information as well. And really, 1000 keys is not all that much extra garbage to sift through in the first place....
So far as your encryped filesystem goes... NTFS 5.0... unless, of course, it's been cracked already:)
If it used just the date and time to seed the random number generator, that wouldn't be very random, now would it? There's countless ways to generate good random numbers... And the best are free for all anyhow, so it's really unlikely that it would be that simple.
This actually wasn't really news to me... I thought I'd read it on Counterpanes site a great while ago, but i'm looking and now can't find it. But anyways, SOMEONE out there had a great article about somethinglike this. Like, how to find private keys if you actually do get access to a computer they're stored on.... I think the whole premis of the article is that you need to be sitting at the computer, running very low-level disk utilities that let you sort through all the garbage really quickly. Maybe you could do it with telnet, i don't know.
But two things pop into mind right now.
#1 - is that of course things are going to mess up if the systems are insecure in the first place.
#2 - this whole thing was brought to ZDNETs attention by a company that clames to have hardware solution for this "problem"... Does that say anything to you? Maybe this was more of that companies advertising effort and less of its general research.
So really... who cares, is what i think. If the servers ARE secured, then the keys aer safe. If they aren't, well then, the keys could have been subsitituted... It's just how pararnoid do you want to be?
If you have an old Power Computing machine... Like PowerBase or what not, those were based on ATX motherboards so as to keep costs down.
That gets you into the case you're looking for, so long as you don't mind being rather dated. Current generation macs? I don't think you'll have any luck.
Read it and fucking weep... Slash is GPL'ed... except for you have to use his logo or else pay him money which in and of itself seems like a license violation... Plus he adamantly refuses to release code. Ahem?
Maybe if he hadn't sprinkled the word GPL around so lightly he wouldn't have gotten himself into this mess... but the fact is, once you've GPL'ed something, it will always be... you can't revoke access to the source.... and blah blah blah...
Someone, or me, should probably go re-read the REAL gpl (not rob's take on it) and see whatelse he's overlooking... probably lots... YAY....
Oh... and has anyone noticed that ANDN is hobbling downwards? Below it's price on it's opening day, i do believe.
Hey buddy... Go here. You'll see that, indeed, Rob kind of has himself backed into a corner on this one... it says right there, in plain english, that the codes been GPLed with an additional restiction (link back)... That, plus in the READ ME, it request money if you don't use the link.... sounds like thats an actual violation of the GPL, doesn't it...
After all the wondering around here of which company (hmmm... Corel?) is going to be the one that finally violates the GPL and goes to court over it... It's laughable that perhaps Slashdot/Andover is the most easy target... Where's RMS when we need him?
That's so 100% Hypocritical... People scream at apple for using the words Open-Source in relation to OS-X, when in fact they HAVE open sourced the kernel and a few services of their OS... yet they defend Rob, when he's commited himself to so much more, yet accomplishes so much less...
Oh... and I wonder how much longer that FAQ'll be there.... hurry up!
But the fact remains. SCSI is superior to IDE, for those willing to pay a premium for that performance. It produces almost zero drain on the CPU and the drives are generally much higher quality than that of IDE. That's all I'm saying... for me, i boot from IDE disks, but store all my data on UW-SCSI disks... The performance is more than worth the premium for me.
Yeah... i realized anyways it's absurd... But i do like my nick, so i'd rather not jeopardize it if i don't need to. Not even saying that they would, but there is like the power to delete and revoke accounts that's in their hands.... plus, more importantly, though i was talking about a coordinated mailbombing effort, i'd much prefer that my own mailbox not get bombed by all the people saying "leave rob alone... he's a cool guy... i idolize him because he's worth more than me.... and he likes linux.... hot grits!"...
anyways.
Really, in the end, who cares... i hate my domain name anyways.... time for a new one... that maybe i'll do something with... so if anyone wants it, let me know.
and besides... Apaches server side, isn't it? Linux is basically "server side" as well, when you condsider what percentage of websites run on linux...
Yeah they can do whatever the hell pleases them, but if they're going to whine about company a not doing this and company b not doing that, why can't we complain about company c not doing what they want a and b to do?
Slashdots refusal to do this will come back to huant them... I mean, why would anyone who hasn't even consider opening their code if the most central site to the open source thang won't open theres... obviously, opening the codes really not that important, right?
And according to ESR, wouldn't it be that opening the source would result in a much better slashdot? Rob'd have to spend less time nitpicking and more time coding... He could see what other people were doing, incorportate what he liked, and vice versa... if all Robs time is spent coding, there's really no excuse for not being able to enter a couple commands...
but I think soon, once I get enough accounts set up, I'm going to make it a point to send at least one email a day to Rob requesting the source code to his open source advocacy site.... I encourage you all to do the same... Only two things can happen - we get the source soon, or we hopelessly delay it until mid-2068, due to his stupid "delay by another 24 hour rule"...
posted via anonymizer for fear of karmatic reprisals by the powers that be.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Why the hatred for LinuxOne? Because they're doing exactly what the GPL allows and reselling a version of Linux that they themselves haven't changed at all? They're really not that evil, I don't think. Just a couple guys seeing dollar signs... Give them a chance.
Maybe everyone would have a different outlook if they were offering shares back to the community? Probably....
Oh, and maybe possibly first post.
What happened to Netscape that AOL caused? I think instead, with their last dying breath, Netscape convinced AOL to buy them up, with the hope that maybe something would come out of it. But netscape as we knew them was destroyed by Windows 98 and NT - with integrated browsers on the client side and integrated servers on the server side, both 100% free, what could they do?
Funny though, how now that the only competition that's left is MSFT vs. Apache, Microsoft chose to change the licensing of IIS to $2,000 to run a server that uses NT validation... Granted, that's for unlimited users, but that's what happens without much in the way of competition.
It benefits shareholders, first. It benefits AOL second, as they get an inside track on all of Time-Warners content. I doubt they'll make it AOL only though, because that'd lock them out of over 50% of the market. Time Warner will finally get major Internet clout. I think it's a good thing for those three.
As for consumers. It makes me kind of nervous with one huge company owning that much of our news outlets. But then, the theory would go that the beauty of the internet is in the fact that anyone (witness Rob and Jeff) can start a website, and if they have actual content, succeed. Yeah, there'll be one huge giant supplying news for the lazy people that don't bother to look elsewhere. That won't change what news is like today. And there will forever be the hundreds and thousands of niche sites that supply news to readers with specific interests.
What i can't figure out is why everyone hates AOL so much? Because they're the onyl company that actually made the internet easy enough for non-techies to use? What have they done wrong (not counting yesterday, if that was bad) to merit any hatred? I'm genuinely curious.
The goal of INVESTING is to earn money from your investment. Microsoft is a rock solid investment.
Think about it:
They have a huge marketshare with very minimal real competition (it's the truth right now. Maybe not tomorrow).
They're the most valuable company in the world.
They've posted annual growth for 15 or 20 years so far.
Incedentally, they're a monopoly. Because the government can't fine them, they won't lose their cash horde. The worst that can happen is that they get broken into serveral new companies... If you'd owned AT&T before they broke up, and were still holding stock in them today, you'd have made something like 14x the amount of if you'd left all that money in IBM.
Ethics work good when purchasing products, etc... But when planning out your retirement, I'd think that the goal would be to invest your money in companies with a proven track record, etc. Microsoft is one of the few companies around that you know will still be a major force in the next decade... Maybe not as much so as they are today, but they ARE NOT going away.
It's not Microsofts fault that they have so much sway in the software industry, per se.
But besides that, they're not the only company that deals in vaporware. Along their respective histories, Apple, IBM, Oracle, Intel and every other "successful" company has used vaporware and FUD tactics. Since Microsofts the biggest, they stick out more as being the sore thumb.
If opensource gains more of a foothold, we won't see so much FUD and pre-announcements, compared to anticpation. Already, people chatter about "I can't wait til version 2.4 of the kernels released because that will do this and this and this...". If Linux/other Open Source projects ever achieve the same market share as Microsoft does today, that anticipation could very well freeze the market. Even more so, because no company even has to acknowledge any activites... there will simply be the hope that someone, somwhere is fixing the problem.
That's got to be the worst yet... They didn't kill it by asking for money for the actual ports, but by asking for money for the NAME? No...
One point that's been brought up is that Firewire is far from dead... but it would have been so much less so if there hadn't been so much Wintel FUD concerning it, when the truth of the matter is that Microsoft and Intel want to hear nothing about Apple possibly owning a piece of their platform. It's bad enough that Quicktime runs under Windows...
Firewire could potentially kill off IDE, SCSI, USB, Serial and Parallel ports, Video capture hardware, and probably others as well... For instance if USB speakers could be workable, FireWire sound could have been as well. Imagine the simplicity the Wintel world could have had if not for Intels stubbornness...
I'd suppose that even includes the what, Lintel? world as well... You'd basically have had Mac hardware, except with an x86 chip instead... All plug and play, supposing ISA can be killed off...
I'll continue to say - blame Intel... And yes, we Mac users already have the benefits, because it's not dead... it just should have been bigger than it has been/
Not really... All video is is 30 pictures per second with sound on top of that.
Most capture boards capture each frame individually. The only time interfame compression is used is right at the end of the creation process.
An MJPEG-2000 codec could do wonders... And if it's open, you can add things like keyframing and lessen it's storage requirements even more.
So let me get this straight... A dollar a port adds up the the most expensive part of the system???
Intel Celerons run $100 or so
Pentium III's run $400 or so
The BX chipset is about $18-23
Integrated SCSI adds about $120 to the price it seems....
If intel would license firewire, chipsets would run you what? $25
I think you've just fallen for the FUD that was perpetrated in order to get consumers uninterested in the technology, so Microsoft and Intel could retain full control of their platform.
How did Apple kill FireWire? They invented it. It's in most of the shipping Macs, aside from the low-end iMac and the iBook. Did they kill it by asking for ONE DOLLAR PER PORT? Give me a break...
The dollar a port wasn't the issue. It was Intel suffering from same Not-Invented-Here syndrome as Apple used to have.
IEEE 1394 is open. Anyone can use it. Apple just wanted money for the use of the FireWire name... Isn't that aweful? A company spends hundreds of millions of dollars to create a wonderful new bus archecture and gets slammed for asking an extremely modest fee for it's use.
Apple didn't kill Firewire... Intel did.
Ahh... no matter how much we hate moderation around here, i need to preface this with this:
I hate the slashdot mentality.
Just because you can get something for free doesn't mean that's what you should do. You trully just don't care about quality if a VHS copy made from even a Hi-8 deck in the theatre is a comparable experience to the theatre, a DVD or even a VHS version.
Just like x86's better than Alpha or Power PC, or IDE's better than SCSI, or anything else... It's the lowest common denominator factor. Yes it's cheaper. But is it nearly as good? no! but you'll settle for it anyways, because of the percieved value of the dollar.... dollars come and go you know... no like star wars is spiritual... TPM was aweful in my opinion... but still.
You're sick. That's the entire reason I disagree with opensource... NOt creating anything new, just reinventing the old for cheaper. Yay!
Good night. I'm drunk... And I'll stop now. But moderators, do your jobs... i expect this to be a -1 flamebait or offtopic by the tiem i wake up....
That would just increase the costs for regular people like you and me who want to register domains... we'd have to get a huge amount of domains to cover all our bases...
Besides... what's the advantage of
WWW.IBM.SALES
versus
SALES.IBM.COM
or
WWW.IBM.COM/SALES?
I don't see any... In fact I see a huge amount of overhead being created by your concept. No offense, or anything.
How many of your ISP's even have your private key? I know once I generated my keypair, i sent mine the public key and kept the private key for myself. They just forward me my data and i decrypt it from my computer, rather than let them decryp and reencrypt and send to me.
Likewise... I doubt (and hope that not) many of the major e-commerce sites keep their complete key pair on the same machine... Likely, they'll have a cluster of webserves with read only access to the products database, and write only to the orders database. those machines don't need to know what the data that they're passing back and forth is, they just need to get it from the server to the client.
If your server software know to access the correct key from the other thousand, it would seem to be easy for an intruder to discern that information as well. And really, 1000 keys is not all that much extra garbage to sift through in the first place....
:)
So far as your encryped filesystem goes... NTFS 5.0... unless, of course, it's been cracked already
If it used just the date and time to seed the random number generator, that wouldn't be very random, now would it? There's countless ways to generate good random numbers... And the best are free for all anyhow, so it's really unlikely that it would be that simple.
This actually wasn't really news to me... I thought I'd read it on Counterpanes site a great while ago, but i'm looking and now can't find it. But anyways, SOMEONE out there had a great article about somethinglike this. Like, how to find private keys if you actually do get access to a computer they're stored on.... I think the whole premis of the article is that you need to be sitting at the computer, running very low-level disk utilities that let you sort through all the garbage really quickly. Maybe you could do it with telnet, i don't know.
But two things pop into mind right now.
#1 - is that of course things are going to mess up if the systems are insecure in the first place.
#2 - this whole thing was brought to ZDNETs attention by a company that clames to have hardware solution for this "problem"... Does that say anything to you? Maybe this was more of that companies advertising effort and less of its general research.
So really... who cares, is what i think. If the servers ARE secured, then the keys aer safe. If they aren't, well then, the keys could have been subsitituted... It's just how pararnoid do you want to be?
If you have an old Power Computing machine... Like PowerBase or what not, those were based on ATX motherboards so as to keep costs down.
That gets you into the case you're looking for, so long as you don't mind being rather dated. Current generation macs? I don't think you'll have any luck.
Go here.
Read it and fucking weep... Slash is GPL'ed... except for you have to use his logo or else pay him money which in and of itself seems like a license violation... Plus he adamantly refuses to release code. Ahem?
Maybe if he hadn't sprinkled the word GPL around so lightly he wouldn't have gotten himself into this mess... but the fact is, once you've GPL'ed something, it will always be... you can't revoke access to the source.... and blah blah blah...
Someone, or me, should probably go re-read the REAL gpl (not rob's take on it) and see whatelse he's overlooking... probably lots... YAY....
Oh... and has anyone noticed that ANDN is hobbling downwards? Below it's price on it's opening day, i do believe.
Hey buddy... Go here. You'll see that, indeed, Rob kind of has himself backed into a corner on this one... it says right there, in plain english, that the codes been GPLed with an additional restiction (link back)... That, plus in the READ ME, it request money if you don't use the link.... sounds like thats an actual violation of the GPL, doesn't it...
After all the wondering around here of which company (hmmm... Corel?) is going to be the one that finally violates the GPL and goes to court over it... It's laughable that perhaps Slashdot/Andover is the most easy target... Where's RMS when we need him?
That's so 100% Hypocritical... People scream at apple for using the words Open-Source in relation to OS-X, when in fact they HAVE open sourced the kernel and a few services of their OS... yet they defend Rob, when he's commited himself to so much more, yet accomplishes so much less...
Oh... and I wonder how much longer that FAQ'll be there.... hurry up!
But the fact remains. SCSI is superior to IDE, for those willing to pay a premium for that performance. It produces almost zero drain on the CPU and the drives are generally much higher quality than that of IDE. That's all I'm saying... for me, i boot from IDE disks, but store all my data on UW-SCSI disks... The performance is more than worth the premium for me.
Yeah... i realized anyways it's absurd... But i do like my nick, so i'd rather not jeopardize it if i don't need to. Not even saying that they would, but there is like the power to delete and revoke accounts that's in their hands.... plus, more importantly, though i was talking about a coordinated mailbombing effort, i'd much prefer that my own mailbox not get bombed by all the people saying "leave rob alone... he's a cool guy... i idolize him because he's worth more than me.... and he likes linux.... hot grits!"...
anyways.
Really, in the end, who cares... i hate my domain name anyways.... time for a new one... that maybe i'll do something with... so if anyone wants it, let me know.
You probably hate bill gates yet use his software... as does at least three quarter of the rest of the slashdot crowd - myself included, i won't lie.
and besides... Apaches server side, isn't it? Linux is basically "server side" as well, when you condsider what percentage of websites run on linux...
Yeah they can do whatever the hell pleases them, but if they're going to whine about company a not doing this and company b not doing that, why can't we complain about company c not doing what they want a and b to do?
Slashdots refusal to do this will come back to huant them... I mean, why would anyone who hasn't even consider opening their code if the most central site to the open source thang won't open theres... obviously, opening the codes really not that important, right?
And according to ESR, wouldn't it be that opening the source would result in a much better slashdot? Rob'd have to spend less time nitpicking and more time coding... He could see what other people were doing, incorportate what he liked, and vice versa... if all Robs time is spent coding, there's really no excuse for not being able to enter a couple commands...
Whoops! :)
:)
:)
Guess it wasn't through anonymizer afterall! so many damn windows confused me, i guess....
Anyways, you get my drift.
And yes, i can say "IDIOT", thanks
but I think soon, once I get enough accounts set up, I'm going to make it a point to send at least one email a day to Rob requesting the source code to his open source advocacy site.... I encourage you all to do the same... Only two things can happen - we get the source soon, or we hopelessly delay it until mid-2068, due to his stupid "delay by another 24 hour rule"...
:)
posted via anonymizer for fear of karmatic reprisals by the powers that be.