I disagree with the original poster that it would be amusing to see EBay swiped at the last minute - in fact, I thing the only way auction houses like Sotheby's can exist is to make themselves part of a larger trend that is going to be huge - bot commerce.
In order to have commerce work for us through agents, it is a given that prices must be flexible. Be it through barter, auctions, or bulk buying, people need to be able to capitalize on time and opportunity to minimize the price spent on goods.
For the consumer, this could be revolutionary. What would life be like if you could finagle any type of special deal or leverage that wholesalers/dealers/distributors use to get discounts? What if your bot stood on equal ground in bids against institutions?
Static pricing has got maybe ten years left in it. Disagree if you want, but to me/. is a Luddite board anyway - an overwhelming number of you just days ago were singing the praises of newspapers.
Frankly, at some point if you want to have a meaningful debate, you need to shut off the noise from the uninterested/mildly interested/just passing by crowd. ICANN can't afford to support the equivalent of "Hot grits".
I support the fee structure - not only does it suport the organization, but it keeps only serious parties involved.
By the way, if you are halfway serious at all about running a registrar, getting that sort of capital should be a trivial matter. In fact, you should already have it. Visit your local Angel Investor, VC, or bank for more info.
Linux interfaces so far have yet to demonstrate much in the way of innovation.
The developers of Eazel claim their product will be "revolutionary". Currently it looks like Midnight Commander++ - certainly nothing to get worked up over.
If typing is your bottleneck when engineering software, you've got troubles.
Code length is directly proportional to costs and errors. This has been a well understood engineering principle for decades.
Unfortunately, Caldera must IPO or be left behind
on
Caldera Prices Its IPO
·
· Score: 2
Caldera is already slipping off of the radar as RedHat bulks up and outmarkets them.
Caldera's only hope at avoiding complete irrelevancy is to bulk up with some quick cash and either start marketing their product for real, or make aquisitions that give it a reason to exist.
Of all of the production linux shops I go to, one thing they all have in common is the distro they aren't running - Caldera.
This isn't to say that it isn't of high quality, but simply that Caldera has been outmarketed and outpromoted by Red Hat.
I just don't see how Caldera can make a go of it unless they drop their witless marketing department and really start working on getting Caldera into more places that matter.
This is why you see things like all of Amazon's stock changing hands four times in its first week. The VC's get in at prices you wouldn't believe and get out before you can even place a trade.
Its fairly obvious - anyone who passes off ridiculous statements like "x86 has no place in production environment" clearly hasn't been in one, ever.
Before you reply, decide whether you consider half the web companies running multibillion operations on linux/BSD running on x86 not to be in "production".
I've met many a programmer who thought that the "idiot-proof" approach take by Java was going to get them to a paycheck faster than other tools.
Man, were they wrong.
First things first - Java is not "write once run anywhere". You can choose to believe the Sun hype, or you can try it out for yourself. If you develop anything useful with Java, you will not only be supporting various platforms (tough with no preprocessor), but you will also be supporting different version of the JDK! Yes, thats right - Many developers have to force users to adopt one JDK version in order to get the damn thing out.
I'm glad that Java worked out for you - I know many programmers that have shipwrecked many a project by using it.
But you pay the same price as you would coding a C++ program - many lines of tedious coding, to get the less performance than perl can crank out of a program 10% the size. The gain must match the pain. Java's pain is equivalent to C++ - the gain is equivalent to VB. Where is the advantage?
Yes, generic programming, multiple inheritence and operator overloading are things that can be beneficial sometimes. But it also means it is harder to understand what is really going on.
You mean like trying to figure out which Java classes are synchronized and which aren't?
At least C++ is trying to sneak something under your nose.
It is almost difficult to make a Java program that is difficult to understand
What's interesting to me about Sun is how well they've done by keeping control of their key technology
No, you're confusing "control" with "closed". Sun used to actually be about open systems - now its about Sun end-to-end solutions that are out of step with trends in open computing.
Sun has control over their own operating system(s),they're successfully pushing their own language, Java
You don't follow standards proceedings, do you? Sun's recent double-talk attempt at "opening" Java was met with deserved jeers - Sun wants to control the code in a closed fashion while having the moral legitimacy of an blessed standard. Thankfully other companies joined with ISO and ECMA to derail this ludicrous strategy. Sun's moves with Java smack of pure McNealy arrogance.
SGI same thing, total failure trying to sell their own NT workstations
SGI was already doomed when they took this step. Their downfall had little to do with their strategy with regards to NT.
I don't get it, it just seems common sense to me for companies to keep control of technology.
Like Microsoft keeping undocumented calls in its API?
If the existence of the Internet hasn't convinced of the value of open standards, then really there is no hope for you.
Sun equipment continues to eat away at the mainframe market, and Lintel equipment continues to eat away at the Sun market.
Sooner or later Sun will have to combat the Lintel market directly - the low end is where its at for web companies in particular (no, no one runs Apache on an E10k).
Sun's current strategy is to continue to go higher up the food chain, but they're soon going to find out that IBM is defending their mainframe turf vigorously, with uptimes and sustainability that even Sun boxes can't touch.
Meanwhile, companies like VA are eating Sun's lunch at the low end.
I predict that pressures from both directions will invariably force Sun to choose the weaker opponent - VA - and attack the low end vigorously. Thats going to mean lower prices for the same equipment. Look for lower Sun profits as the Linux freeware brigade takes it toll on Sun's fat margins.
Running x86 in a production environment is laughable
Don't tell that to nearly every company running a server farm at any colocation I've ever been to in Silicon Valley, or to nearly any Frotune 500 company that invariably uses Intel boxes in almost all environments.
Intel sells 85% of the world's CPUs. They're everywhere. Deal with it.
I've found that the extra quality you get with a Sun box is irrelvant - you upgrade it due to performance issues inherent in any system long before you deal with MTBF and other issues that may have "quality" ramifications.
Like it or lump it, disposable computing is the way to go. If you're going to upgrade a box in 18 months, why get fleeced on the price?
As it stands, Sun boxes at the high end do have nice features - at the low end, the quality is typically far inferior to what you get in name brand PCs.
Precisely. The only way to get uniformity is to put one group in control. Same thing goes for Apple. The Mac wouldn't be elegant if its development was distributed in a fashion similar to linux.
Unless you haven't noticed, some people control the kernel, some control the graphics libs, some the GUIs, but no one controls all of them. There is no governing unit to set the standards you describe, and by the way, people have been trying this since with NeWS on Sun in 1990.
Nor will he ever. Linux is never going to capture the desktop market - even current efforts are well behind what Microsoft and Apple have been supporting for nearly a decade. Linux is not Joe Sixpack's OS, and I fear linux users are going to shipwreck the OS learning this lesson the hard way.
Agreed - its all about the web browser now anyway.
on
Making Linux Beautiful
·
· Score: 1
Frankly, the only interface that matters to me in any substantial way is the web browser.
Once agian linux chases the tail-lights, trying to figure out how to get to the desktop model Microsoft introduced in 1995.
I'm not being sarcastic - linux has gone too far down the road of customization to really make a go at standardization - its not even clear that a majority of linux users want GUI standardization.
If uniformity is what you want, you'll be far happier with a G4 running OSX - the standardization runs straight down to hardware (plug and play) - you'll be very happy.
Overstated vulnerabilities due to buffer overflows
on
SSH v. SRP
·
· Score: 1
The possibility to hack a site certainly existed.
Please look into the ease with which a buffer overflow can be exploited. Its extremely, extremely difficult.
Buffer overflows should be fixed, but by no means should you remove an entire security suite due to the suspicion of a buffer overflow.
Re:Once again, name a major hack due to SSH flaws
on
SSH v. SRP
·
· Score: 1
Having my box compromised due to someone evading tcp wrappers, or talking unencrypted.
These aren't SSH-specific issues, these are issues of your users not using tools as they should. Installing SRP isn't going to make them more courteous.
The other, someone *might* be able to snoop me, assuming they have some node between myself and my box.If you can't secure your physical network, software based security is irrelevant. I think you're reaching at straws.
Once again, name a major hack due to SSH flaws
on
SSH v. SRP
·
· Score: 1
All you've pointed me to are the usual rootshell alerts put out by the author of SSH himself - a process which is healthy and beneficial to SSH users.
I never denied that SSH suffers occasional buffer overflows - like I said - they get fixed.
SRP has a tiny userbase- you should assume that it also has an equal number of issues waiting to be discovered anf fixed.
Your only other alternatives are telnet/rsh or take your box off the web.
Slashdot Mirror
In order to have commerce work for us through agents, it is a given that prices must be flexible. Be it through barter, auctions, or bulk buying, people need to be able to capitalize on time and opportunity to minimize the price spent on goods.
For the consumer, this could be revolutionary. What would life be like if you could finagle any type of special deal or leverage that wholesalers/dealers/distributors use to get discounts? What if your bot stood on equal ground in bids against institutions?
Static pricing has got maybe ten years left in it. Disagree if you want, but to me /. is a Luddite board anyway - an overwhelming number of you just days ago were singing the praises of newspapers.
I support the fee structure - not only does it suport the organization, but it keeps only serious parties involved.
By the way, if you are halfway serious at all about running a registrar, getting that sort of capital should be a trivial matter. In fact, you should already have it. Visit your local Angel Investor, VC, or bank for more info.
The developers of Eazel claim their product will be "revolutionary". Currently it looks like Midnight Commander++ - certainly nothing to get worked up over.
Expect to see Aqua ripoffs on linux by 2003.
Code length is directly proportional to costs and errors. This has been a well understood engineering principle for decades.
Caldera's only hope at avoiding complete irrelevancy is to bulk up with some quick cash and either start marketing their product for real, or make aquisitions that give it a reason to exist.
This isn't to say that it isn't of high quality, but simply that Caldera has been outmarketed and outpromoted by Red Hat.
I just don't see how Caldera can make a go of it unless they drop their witless marketing department and really start working on getting Caldera into more places that matter.
I guess all the multibillion dollar web operations I saw running on x86 boxes over at globalcenter and exodus were just illusions.
This is why you see things like all of Amazon's stock changing hands four times in its first week. The VC's get in at prices you wouldn't believe and get out before you can even place a trade.
Its fairly obvious - anyone who passes off ridiculous statements like "x86 has no place in production environment" clearly hasn't been in one, ever.
Before you reply, decide whether you consider half the web companies running multibillion operations on linux/BSD running on x86 not to be in "production".
JDK 0.9 was released for "use" to the public more than five years ago - I know - I used it for my grad project when I was in school than.
The requirements of the embedded, standalone market closely match those of a networked, distributed world,
That doesn't make any sense at all.
Man, were they wrong.
First things first - Java is not "write once run anywhere". You can choose to believe the Sun hype, or you can try it out for yourself. If you develop anything useful with Java, you will not only be supporting various platforms (tough with no preprocessor), but you will also be supporting different version of the JDK! Yes, thats right - Many developers have to force users to adopt one JDK version in order to get the damn thing out.
I'm glad that Java worked out for you - I know many programmers that have shipwrecked many a project by using it.
But you pay the same price as you would coding a C++ program - many lines of tedious coding, to get the less performance than perl can crank out of a program 10% the size. The gain must match the pain. Java's pain is equivalent to C++ - the gain is equivalent to VB. Where is the advantage?
Yes, generic programming, multiple inheritence and operator overloading are things that can be beneficial sometimes. But it also means it is harder to understand what is really going on.
You mean like trying to figure out which Java classes are synchronized and which aren't?
At least C++ is trying to sneak something under your nose.
It is almost difficult to make a Java program that is difficult to understand
That comment is idiocy, and you know it.
No, you're confusing "control" with "closed". Sun used to actually be about open systems - now its about Sun end-to-end solutions that are out of step with trends in open computing.
Sun has control over their own operating system(s),they're successfully pushing their own language, Java
You don't follow standards proceedings, do you? Sun's recent double-talk attempt at "opening" Java was met with deserved jeers - Sun wants to control the code in a closed fashion while having the moral legitimacy of an blessed standard. Thankfully other companies joined with ISO and ECMA to derail this ludicrous strategy. Sun's moves with Java smack of pure McNealy arrogance.
SGI same thing, total failure trying to sell their own NT workstations
SGI was already doomed when they took this step. Their downfall had little to do with their strategy with regards to NT.
I don't get it, it just seems common sense to me for companies to keep control of technology.
Like Microsoft keeping undocumented calls in its API?
If the existence of the Internet hasn't convinced of the value of open standards, then really there is no hope for you.
Sooner or later Sun will have to combat the Lintel market directly - the low end is where its at for web companies in particular (no, no one runs Apache on an E10k).
Sun's current strategy is to continue to go higher up the food chain, but they're soon going to find out that IBM is defending their mainframe turf vigorously, with uptimes and sustainability that even Sun boxes can't touch.
Meanwhile, companies like VA are eating Sun's lunch at the low end.
I predict that pressures from both directions will invariably force Sun to choose the weaker opponent - VA - and attack the low end vigorously. Thats going to mean lower prices for the same equipment. Look for lower Sun profits as the Linux freeware brigade takes it toll on Sun's fat margins.
Don't tell that to nearly every company running a server farm at any colocation I've ever been to in Silicon Valley, or to nearly any Frotune 500 company that invariably uses Intel boxes in almost all environments.
Intel sells 85% of the world's CPUs. They're everywhere. Deal with it.
Like it or lump it, disposable computing is the way to go. If you're going to upgrade a box in 18 months, why get fleeced on the price?
As it stands, Sun boxes at the high end do have nice features - at the low end, the quality is typically far inferior to what you get in name brand PCs.
Precisely. The only way to get uniformity is to put one group in control. Same thing goes for Apple. The Mac wouldn't be elegant if its development was distributed in a fashion similar to linux.
Unless you haven't noticed, some people control the kernel, some control the graphics libs, some the GUIs, but no one controls all of them. There is no governing unit to set the standards you describe, and by the way, people have been trying this since with NeWS on Sun in 1990.
Yes, that is what i meant.
Nor will he ever. Linux is never going to capture the desktop market - even current efforts are well behind what Microsoft and Apple have been supporting for nearly a decade. Linux is not Joe Sixpack's OS, and I fear linux users are going to shipwreck the OS learning this lesson the hard way.
Once agian linux chases the tail-lights, trying to figure out how to get to the desktop model Microsoft introduced in 1995.
If uniformity is what you want, you'll be far happier with a G4 running OSX - the standardization runs straight down to hardware (plug and play) - you'll be very happy.
Please look into the ease with which a buffer overflow can be exploited. Its extremely, extremely difficult.
Buffer overflows should be fixed, but by no means should you remove an entire security suite due to the suspicion of a buffer overflow.
These aren't SSH-specific issues, these are issues of your users not using tools as they should. Installing SRP isn't going to make them more courteous.
The other, someone *might* be able to snoop me, assuming they have some node between myself and my box.If you can't secure your physical network, software based security is irrelevant. I think you're reaching at straws.
I never denied that SSH suffers occasional buffer overflows - like I said - they get fixed.
SRP has a tiny userbase- you should assume that it also has an equal number of issues waiting to be discovered anf fixed.
Your only other alternatives are telnet/rsh or take your box off the web.
Given those choices, I'll stick with SSH.