Everything I have found talks about darwin, and how it's open source, and from apple, or now it compiles on x86.
Can anyone explain to me what darwin is? is it part of OSx, is it an alternative to OSx? is it like linux? (freeBSD based, right) Just looking for a bit more background than I've been able to track down on all these sites that assume people know what the heck darwin is.
I can finally watch asf files in linux (maybe, we don't know that real's agreement extended to linux, or that they are going to port the version supporting asf within a year or so)
Another area where linux is starting to catch up.
negative:
Microsoft media will become a more dominating, proprietary format. (I always thought it was based on open formats, like Mpeg-4, which wouldn't require licensing, guess not)
Linux (and other) users will no longer fight against sites who don't choose open formats, since we can still see the microsoft format.
"Bell accessed the VP Projects computer system and installed a software program called LOphtCrack, which is designed to extract user IDs and passwords. He logged into the VP Projects computer system several times with other people's IDs and passwords,"
"A search of Bell's home computer revealed a list of VP Projects user IDs and passwords within the LOphtCrack program files."
"During the course of the investigation, police also found a LOphtCrack file on Bell's home computer which contained user IDs and passwords for Epicor's computer network. When Bell was employed at Epicor, he had used the LOphtCrack program to extract all of the employee user IDs and passwords, and then stored them on his home computer."
It's just irresponsible to present this story as the guy is in trouble for having a simple program. I can't see how anyone can defend this guys actions.
Can you really tell me you think there would be any problems if he just had the program, and that he should be allowed to steal any passwords he likes, and do any illegal activities he wants with them?
People who defend this kind of crap suck. How the hell can you not see the problem here?
they didn't get in trouble for having cracking tools, they got into trouble for breaking into and stealing information.
Are you people really trying to say they shouldn't be in trouble for that?
"Newsflash: boy, 6, charged with owning a gun" (forgetting to mention the fact that he actually committed a crime with said weapon is the worst kind of biased journalism.
This is a good thing. Redhat is finally starting to do some useful things with all their money. I appreciate it.
I don't care if it's better than windows, I don't care if it's not open source. We will finally have a player that's NOT alpha crap quality.
The disheartening part is all of the people who will now complain about how real player sucks, or that it isn't open source. I've never seen anything done for the linux community which wasn't immediately shot down or complained about. It's probably happened, but I just haven't seen it.
Linux is still in the position where it is desparate for applications. We still need all the help we can get. If it takes redhat to help convince these companies of the worthyness of linux, that can only benefit everyone. More stuff like this, and we are on the road to a point where we are no longer applicationally challenged when compared to windoze users.
I know many do not want to see that day, but I am very eager for it, since it's one of linux's biggest shortcomings at this point.
linuxes, linux's, linuxs, linux'es... whatever.
thank you redhat. (I for one am glad you didn't waste 900 million buying a website that you had to promise not to influence or change anyway when you could use it for projects like this.)
Originally posted by en: 'I've been on the 'net since 1992, and have NEVER been haxored. Probably because I don't run Linux (A.K.A. "Hack-me Invitation").
Every now and then someone will discover some way to remotely crash windows. Microsoft always releases a patch within 8 hours to fix these problems. I think there have been about ten since the original 95. Keep up with these, and you simply won't get hacked.
Linux, on the other hand... spend three hours a day readig bugtraq and hacking your kernel... you MIGHT not get hacked.'
we aren't talking about amazon.com's patent either.
please read before replying. If you would have bothered to read you would have seen that was used as an example. Nobody here has a problem with linus' trademark on linux, while most people have a problem with Amazon.com. The difference between the two is not that the patent exists, it's the fact that Amazon.com is using the patent to harm competition while Linus is using the patent to protect from others who would want to hurt linux.
and if you are going to flame me without bothering to read the post, at least have the guts to use your real name.
but it's ok to have tangent thoughts every so often.:)
This story just made me think of the fact that any time they show these numbers, they talk of sales figures. Well, I'd venture the number of people using linux (even in servers) is much more than twice the number than those who have purchased it. Not only can you download for free, but you can install on multiple systems from the same CD (which you already knew) and I don't know why people wouldn't do that. This makes sales figures seriously flawed as a means of measuring total overall usage. "Microsoft makes more money before the morning coffee break every day of the year" than all the purveyors of Linux made in the entire year" Because every NT system has purchased a copy of NT - that's not true with linux.
I personally care more about the desktop market, and I'd like to see some real figures of linux boxes in use, instead of copies of linux sold. I run 3 linux boxes, and since I'm a cheap bastard I didn't buy a single copy of linux retail, so my 3 systems aren't being counted. they should be.
everybody knows your employer can read your email.
the sick out was illegal, and if those people used equipment owned by the company to organize an event intended to hurt the company (and consumers) I'm all for it.
this is not a free speech issue. This is a stupidity issue. Don't use company property to hurt the company. Buy your own damn computer if you want to organize an illegal event against your employer.
I'll say it again, I know it's not the slashdot mentality, but I think in this case it's a good thing.
to wait for Redhat 7, or whatever the next distro is?
Can I assume with any amount of safety that the next redhat release after 6.2 (probably what, 4 months?) will come with XF86 4.0 and the new KDE?
I've been hearing a lot about both of those. As a newbie, can you tell me if they will drastically change my linux experience, or if I've just been getting hype?
I don't think I'll upgrade to 6.2 from my 6.1 install, but 7.0 (if it comes with new X and KDE) would be great to have.
well, since this an opinion thread I can only offer my own. here it is.
First, since the name was purchased for legitimate use, I don't think this falls under the category of domain squatting (which takes names others want for that specific purpose - preventing them from getting unused names.)
Second, I think it's wrong to sell the name for a lot of money. Though your company may not have origionated with the idea of squatting, auctioning the name for a high price will only give validation and incentive to future domain squatters.
Lastly, that being said, I would still sell it.
As mentioned here, domains on ebay often go for very high prices, and that would be the most logical place to sell it. I do think there are some moral issues to selling domain names, but personally, I wouldn't be naive enough to suggest selling the name for $35, and not expect whoever bought it to turn around in a year and sell it for the big bucks anyway. It's not your job to take the moral high ground, even though it would be the preferred path. Until there are laws or rules regulating the sale of domains, do as so many others have and go for the $$$ by putting it up on ebay.
"If you don't do it, somebody else will" applies here. It's not a solid justification, and all the caveats and moral issues still apply. But I think that sums up the driving force behind what will happen in this case. You'll come out richer, but your hands will be dirtied in the process.
Assuming these sites were targeted for some type of revenge, what did buy.com do?
I know Amazon.com has the patent thing, Yahoo is owned by the AOL or something, CNN is owned by Turner, who has pissed off just about everybody over his lifetime, but I thought buy.com was good?
I was all proud of myself the other day because I was helping a blind dude who wanted to buy a load of CDs from amazon.com, and I told him I wouldn't help him buy from amazon (and explained why) then proceeded to show him buy.com, and help him get about $100 worth of CDs there (saving him about $30 over amazon in the process)
now I find out that buy.com has probably done something worse. ack. is there a database somewhere of evil companies ranked in order of evilness?
Slashdot Mirror
What I'd like to know, is when will it be likely to see a distro with 2.4, x 4, and kde 2 ?
I'm not competent to add those components manually yet, but I'm itching to try em out.
thanks.
Can anyone explain to me what darwin is? is it part of OSx, is it an alternative to OSx? is it like linux? (freeBSD based, right) Just looking for a bit more background than I've been able to track down on all these sites that assume people know what the heck darwin is.
signed... confused.
I can finally watch asf files in linux (maybe, we don't know that real's agreement extended to linux, or that they are going to port the version supporting asf within a year or so)
Another area where linux is starting to catch up.
negative:
Microsoft media will become a more dominating, proprietary format. (I always thought it was based on open formats, like Mpeg-4, which wouldn't require licensing, guess not)
Linux (and other) users will no longer fight against sites who don't choose open formats, since we can still see the microsoft format.
let me know what you think
please don't be too harsh, I'm a geek, not a comedian. :)
I love the idea of "open source cartoons" I think it could catch on.
I saw that. I did think it was funny. I assumed it was from before this story since it was way back in the order.
"A search of Bell's home computer revealed a list of VP Projects user IDs and passwords within the LOphtCrack program files."
"During the course of the investigation, police also found a LOphtCrack file on Bell's home computer which contained user IDs and passwords for Epicor's computer network. When Bell was employed at Epicor, he had used the LOphtCrack program to extract all of the employee user IDs and passwords, and then stored them on his home computer."
It's just irresponsible to present this story as the guy is in trouble for having a simple program. I can't see how anyone can defend this guys actions.
Can you really tell me you think there would be any problems if he just had the program, and that he should be allowed to steal any passwords he likes, and do any illegal activities he wants with them?
People who defend this kind of crap suck. How the hell can you not see the problem here?
Are you people really trying to say they shouldn't be in trouble for that?
"Newsflash: boy, 6, charged with owning a gun" (forgetting to mention the fact that he actually committed a crime with said weapon is the worst kind of biased journalism.
how does anyone expect "boycotts" to have any effect on a company that has never made a dime, yet still sells stock at any price they want to name?
They don't make money, at least as much, off windows, they make it off office.
I'd seriously consider office under linux.
I'd seriously rethink my views of Microsoft
I'd seriously think it would be a truely great thing for both linux, and consumers.
if (when?) Microsoft does make that leap, everyone will benefit. Even microsoft. At least in my perspective.
But I'd swear we have the beginnings of a Bill Gates Jr. here.
thanks. Not quite as earth-shattering as I'd been led to believe, but sounds very promising, and any steps are good ones.
I've been hearing for months how XF4.0 is gonna revolutionize linux, and make so much more stuff possible, programming easier, everything better.
Would anyone be willing to explain what these great new features are, and what they will do for us?
I'd appreciate if you could keep it civil, but if you must insult me, please include a real answer with your response. thanks.
I don't care if it's better than windows, I don't care if it's not open source. We will finally have a player that's NOT alpha crap quality.
The disheartening part is all of the people who will now complain about how real player sucks, or that it isn't open source. I've never seen anything done for the linux community which wasn't immediately shot down or complained about. It's probably happened, but I just haven't seen it.
Linux is still in the position where it is desparate for applications. We still need all the help we can get. If it takes redhat to help convince these companies of the worthyness of linux, that can only benefit everyone. More stuff like this, and we are on the road to a point where we are no longer applicationally challenged when compared to windoze users.
I know many do not want to see that day, but I am very eager for it, since it's one of linux's biggest shortcomings at this point.
linuxes, linux's, linuxs, linux'es... whatever.
thank you redhat. (I for one am glad you didn't waste 900 million buying a website that you had to promise not to influence or change anyway when you could use it for projects like this.)
I suppose they might be ok to taste, but ick, those are the nastiest looking foodstuffs I've seen in a long time.
thanks, but I'll stick to pizza, beer, and flintstones chewable vitamins to get all my required vitamins and minerals.
'I've been on the 'net since 1992, and have NEVER been haxored. Probably because I don't run Linux (A.K.A. "Hack-me Invitation").
Every now and then someone will discover some way to remotely crash windows. Microsoft always releases a patch within 8 hours to fix these problems. I think there have been about ten since the original 95. Keep up with these, and you simply won't get hacked.
Linux, on the other hand... spend three hours a day readig bugtraq and hacking your kernel... you MIGHT not get hacked.'
please don't tell me this guy is correct...
Are you being serious or sarcastic? I honestly can't tell.
please read before replying. If you would have bothered to read you would have seen that was used as an example. Nobody here has a problem with linus' trademark on linux, while most people have a problem with Amazon.com. The difference between the two is not that the patent exists, it's the fact that Amazon.com is using the patent to harm competition while Linus is using the patent to protect from others who would want to hurt linux.
and if you are going to flame me without bothering to read the post, at least have the guts to use your real name.
This story just made me think of the fact that any time they show these numbers, they talk of sales figures. Well, I'd venture the number of people using linux (even in servers) is much more than twice the number than those who have purchased it. Not only can you download for free, but you can install on multiple systems from the same CD (which you already knew) and I don't know why people wouldn't do that. This makes sales figures seriously flawed as a means of measuring total overall usage. "Microsoft makes more money before the morning coffee break every day of the year" than all the purveyors of Linux made in the entire year" Because every NT system has purchased a copy of NT - that's not true with linux.
I personally care more about the desktop market, and I'd like to see some real figures of linux boxes in use, instead of copies of linux sold. I run 3 linux boxes, and since I'm a cheap bastard I didn't buy a single copy of linux retail, so my 3 systems aren't being counted. they should be.
and it's called enforcement. Let's please wait to see how this patent is enforced before we jump to conclusions.
with all the free downloads, it's just too hard to get REAL numbers of linux users, especially on desktop users.
the sick out was illegal, and if those people used equipment owned by the company to organize an event intended to hurt the company (and consumers) I'm all for it.
this is not a free speech issue. This is a stupidity issue. Don't use company property to hurt the company. Buy your own damn computer if you want to organize an illegal event against your employer.
I'll say it again, I know it's not the slashdot mentality, but I think in this case it's a good thing.
Can I assume with any amount of safety that the next redhat release after 6.2 (probably what, 4 months?) will come with XF86 4.0 and the new KDE?
I've been hearing a lot about both of those. As a newbie, can you tell me if they will drastically change my linux experience, or if I've just been getting hype?
I don't think I'll upgrade to 6.2 from my 6.1 install, but 7.0 (if it comes with new X and KDE) would be great to have.
First, since the name was purchased for legitimate use, I don't think this falls under the category of domain squatting (which takes names others want for that specific purpose - preventing them from getting unused names.)
Second, I think it's wrong to sell the name for a lot of money. Though your company may not have origionated with the idea of squatting, auctioning the name for a high price will only give validation and incentive to future domain squatters.
Lastly, that being said, I would still sell it.
As mentioned here, domains on ebay often go for very high prices, and that would be the most logical place to sell it. I do think there are some moral issues to selling domain names, but personally, I wouldn't be naive enough to suggest selling the name for $35, and not expect whoever bought it to turn around in a year and sell it for the big bucks anyway. It's not your job to take the moral high ground, even though it would be the preferred path. Until there are laws or rules regulating the sale of domains, do as so many others have and go for the $$$ by putting it up on ebay.
"If you don't do it, somebody else will" applies here. It's not a solid justification, and all the caveats and moral issues still apply. But I think that sums up the driving force behind what will happen in this case. You'll come out richer, but your hands will be dirtied in the process.
Assuming these sites were targeted for some type of revenge, what did buy.com do?
I know Amazon.com has the patent thing, Yahoo is owned by the AOL or something, CNN is owned by Turner, who has pissed off just about everybody over his lifetime, but I thought buy.com was good?
I was all proud of myself the other day because I was helping a blind dude who wanted to buy a load of CDs from amazon.com, and I told him I wouldn't help him buy from amazon (and explained why) then proceeded to show him buy.com, and help him get about $100 worth of CDs there (saving him about $30 over amazon in the process)
now I find out that buy.com has probably done something worse. ack. is there a database somewhere of evil companies ranked in order of evilness?
or maybe this was just random.