Maybe this is a stupid question, but on all of my boxes, after I run shutdown -h and all of the killall scripts are run, it runs S01halt, which then calls either halt or reboot. This either stops the processor (soft power down) or else reboots the thing. The author didn't mention how he avoided this problem in his efforts - if you want the box to run in run level 0, you have to also disable the script that runs at that run level that shuts down the machine. Otherwise your machine really will be halted and there won't be any firewalling going on. Or more precisely, everything will be firewalled:) Did he not mention this problem, or did I just miss it somehow?
You mean the part where he mentions the need to edit the rc0.d scripts, to stop killall, network, and ipchains from running? So that the needed services survive the shutdown?
It's not a case of ust configuring your firewall, and running shutdown -now. Some tweaking is definitly required. But it's an interesting idea....
The teklling part is that the target of the article is a 2.2 kernel with IPChains. I'd be much more interested in knowing if this is possible with a 2.4 kernel and IPTables....
Flash is great, but make sure that it is failsafe.
Example -- I had 2 USR Courier modems in the mid-90s that were 'flash upgradeable'... Once the V90 standard was stable, I flashed one of them.
And killed it.
The modem was supposed to be flashable, and I did everything right, but USR had got the hardware wrong. They replaced both modems at their cost, and both the new modems flashed correctly.
There are also frequently warnings on motherboard flash programs and Palm flash programs to this effect -- if you screw up the flash, you will have a product that you *cannot* use, and must send in/replace to get functioning again.
With that in mind, make sure your product either has a flash loader, or default software image in ROM that can be accessed if the flash image is corrupt, either automatically, or by a jumper. Otherwise you may end up with angry customers who have upgraded paperweights.
(IANAL)
With regards to solvent companies opening "obsolete" software...
It occurs to me that part of the problem may also be in terms of companies and protecting their existing intelectual property. If a company decides that a particular software product is too old, or not selling well enough, and they release it to the public (either as source or binary) then might it be argued that they are no longer actively protecting their IP and leave themselves more open to their competitors?
For example, you can no longer (I think) buy a copy of Doom or Quake, and while the *engine* code has been released under the GPL, the rest of the games (graphics, levels, sounds, etc) remain copyrighted to id.
Read the article -- if the company that fails fails through reasons unrelated to software quality, it will have a huge detriment to companies that provide a similar product, even if the remaining company had a slightly superior product.
ie: If Microsoft were to cut loose SQL server, and published the full and complete source code under a completely free and open license (Quit laughing! It's just an example!) would Oracle maintain their current sales volume?
(sarcasm)actually you are wrong. everthing that exists today was
created in 7 days by god.(/sarcasm)
(pedant)Six days.(/pedant)
Windows in the screenshot, Linux in the text?
on
Dashboard Linux
·
· Score: 1
It might be that the screenshots are of a "proof-of-concept" prototype that had Win98 loaded, but Linux will be loaded on the "production" version...
If (as has been previously suggested) this is not much more than a mini-PC with some additional extra stuff to manage a graceful shutdown, then replacing a full Win98 install with a Linux install should not be too difficult.
I have no idea where the name "War Driving" came from, though.
Damn. Now I'm going to have to date myself.
"War driving" probably derives from "War dialing", the practice used in the days of BBSs and earlier (remember modems?) to locate systems with unpublished modems on open lines. A "war dialer" was a program that dialed all numbers in an exchange, and noted which numbers were voice, which were fax and which were data. Hence, driving around, looking for unpublished, open networks has been dubbed "war driving".
"Nothing has changed since 1998 that would lead members of Congress to upset the careful balance that was struck," says Bob Holleyman, head of the Business Software Alliance.
>What is this guy smoking? "Careful balance"? The whole problem with this law is that there's no balance at all! >It's completely one-sided, giving copyright holders dictatorial power over consumers.
BIG_BUSINESSSounds like a good balance to us!/BIG_BUSINESS
Having different interfaces (e.g. voice recognition/GUI/command line) is vital for a usable computer. So is being able to change the interfaces you are given. MS don't seem to be aware of this fact.
Whadda mean M$ isn't aware of this? You've got lots of interfaces to choose from! There's
Jesus H. Cheap-bastard Christ, I am sick unto fucking death of people suggesting that we have even more ads rammed down our throats to "defray" the cost of some inexpensive item that they don't want to pay for.
Then how do you propose to fund the production of content? I'd personally be quite happy to pay a reasonable price ($10-$15) to d/l a movie, or ($0.50-$1.00) a 'one-time' stream. But others are unwilling to, and have the means to insure that they don't pay if they don't want to. You can see this in action with Napster et al.
We need to find some revenue model that provides content to the consumer that they can use as they wish, yet provides sufficient renumeration to the content providers that they continue to create content. Ads are one method to do this. If you don't like ads, suggest another revenue model that will make everyone happy.
Capturing a data stream to a file is fairly trivial, and even if they use a special client and/or a closed format to play it, that won't take long to break. We know this and they know this, so what is the incentive for them to do provide this service? If they charge for it, it will be circumvented, and if they don't charge for it, there is no reason for them to provide the service.
As a suggestion, how would people react to Miramax (in this case, but it generalises to other content providers as well) moving to an ad-based revenue model? ie: release a player that will show the [movie|book|mp3] at no cost the the user, but will display an ad banner as the stream is playing. It might even be possible to encode the ads into the content stream, for that matter.
This would seem to benefit all camps. Piracy would likely be reduced, as there is no financial or convenience benefit -- you still have to d/l the stream, either from the content provider or your favorite warez site, and both are free. The provider gets revenue from the advertising, and the advertisers get lots of eyeballs. Win win. For that matter, they could make the files available for stream and/or download in a standard format with the adbar overlayed on the bottom.
I realise this is likely a pipe-dream, as the providers have shown much more interest in keeping far more control than this would allow, but what do the rest of us think?
Slashdot Mirror
Competition is good, right? :)
grnbrg
It might take an infinite number of monkeys to produce the internet, but apparently it only takes a finite number of pigeons to rank it...
:)
grnbrg
I'm sorry Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that. :)
grnbrg
Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
A URL or something?
Google just points you to http://new.net/, which doesn't look like anything.....
You mean the part where he mentions the need to edit the rc0.d scripts, to stop killall, network, and ipchains from running? So that the needed services survive the shutdown?
It's not a case of ust configuring your firewall, and running shutdown -now. Some tweaking is definitly required. But it's an interesting idea....
The teklling part is that the target of the article is a 2.2 kernel with IPChains. I'd be much more interested in knowing if this is possible with a 2.4 kernel and IPTables....
Brian Greenberg
Flash is great, but make sure that it is failsafe.
Example -- I had 2 USR Courier modems in the mid-90s that were 'flash upgradeable'... Once the V90 standard was stable, I flashed one of them.
And killed it.
The modem was supposed to be flashable, and I did everything right, but USR had got the hardware wrong. They replaced both modems at their cost, and both the new modems flashed correctly.
There are also frequently warnings on motherboard flash programs and Palm flash programs to this effect -- if you screw up the flash, you will have a product that you *cannot* use, and must send in/replace to get functioning again.
With that in mind, make sure your product either has a flash loader, or default software image in ROM that can be accessed if the flash image is corrupt, either automatically, or by a jumper. Otherwise you may end up with angry customers who have upgraded paperweights.
Brian.
Another point:
Microsoft started giving IE away, and this *seriously* damaged Netscape.
Has this, in the end, been good or bad for the consumer?
Good for us, bad for Oracle.
Who do you think businesses and the courts will think is a better outcome?
(IANAL)
With regards to solvent companies opening "obsolete" software...
It occurs to me that part of the problem may also be in terms of companies and protecting their existing intelectual property. If a company decides that a particular software product is too old, or not selling well enough, and they release it to the public (either as source or binary) then might it be argued that they are no longer actively protecting their IP and leave themselves more open to their competitors?
For example, you can no longer (I think) buy a copy of Doom or Quake, and while the *engine* code has been released under the GPL, the rest of the games (graphics, levels, sounds, etc) remain copyrighted to id.
(/IANAL)
Read the article -- if the company that fails fails through reasons unrelated to software quality, it will have a huge detriment to companies that provide a similar product, even if the remaining company had a slightly superior product.
ie: If Microsoft were to cut loose SQL server, and published the full and complete source code under a completely free and open license (Quit laughing! It's just an example!) would Oracle maintain their current sales volume?
Not likely.
(pedant)Six days.(/pedant)
It might be that the screenshots are of a "proof-of-concept" prototype that had Win98 loaded, but Linux will be loaded on the "production" version...
If (as has been previously suggested) this is not much more than a mini-PC with some additional extra stuff to manage a graceful shutdown, then replacing a full Win98 install with a Linux install should not be too difficult.
And he wouldn't have to may the M$ tax.
Just my C$0.02...
grnbrg
Heh.
:)
I am amused. One question, three nearly identical answers.
Two of which quote the Jargon File.
Damn. Now I'm going to have to date myself.
"War driving" probably derives from "War dialing", the practice used in the days of BBSs and earlier (remember modems?) to locate systems with unpublished modems on open lines. A "war dialer" was a program that dialed all numbers in an exchange, and noted which numbers were voice, which were fax and which were data. Hence, driving around, looking for unpublished, open networks has been dubbed "war driving".
Cool until people hurt themselves or others...
... and then it's a sport!
BITTER
* 2001-08-22 16:19:50 ssh vulnerable to keystroke latency attack? (articles,encryption) (rejected)
/BITTER
"Nothing has changed since 1998 that would lead members of Congress to upset the careful balance that was struck," says Bob Holleyman, head of the Business Software Alliance.
>What is this guy smoking? "Careful balance"? The whole problem with this law is that there's no balance at all!
>It's completely one-sided, giving copyright holders dictatorial power over consumers.
BIG_BUSINESSSounds like a good balance to us!/BIG_BUSINESS
Perhaps an http link to the code itself, for starters?
Brian.
The truth hurts, hmmmm?
Lighten up!
Whadda mean M$ isn't aware of this? You've got lots of interfaces to choose from! There's
See? Lots of options!
Then how do you propose to fund the production of content? I'd personally be quite happy to pay a reasonable price ($10-$15) to d/l a movie, or ($0.50-$1.00) a 'one-time' stream. But others are unwilling to, and have the means to insure that they don't pay if they don't want to. You can see this in action with Napster et al.
We need to find some revenue model that provides content to the consumer that they can use as they wish, yet provides sufficient renumeration to the content providers that they continue to create content. Ads are one method to do this. If you don't like ads, suggest another revenue model that will make everyone happy.
Capturing a data stream to a file is fairly trivial, and even if they use a special client and/or a closed format to play it, that won't take long to break. We know this and they know this, so what is the incentive for them to do provide this service? If they charge for it, it will be circumvented, and if they don't charge for it, there is no reason for them to provide the service.
As a suggestion, how would people react to Miramax (in this case, but it generalises to other content providers as well) moving to an ad-based revenue model? ie: release a player that will show the [movie|book|mp3] at no cost the the user, but will display an ad banner as the stream is playing. It might even be possible to encode the ads into the content stream, for that matter.
This would seem to benefit all camps. Piracy would likely be reduced, as there is no financial or convenience benefit -- you still have to d/l the stream, either from the content provider or your favorite warez site, and both are free. The provider gets revenue from the advertising, and the advertisers get lots of eyeballs. Win win. For that matter, they could make the files available for stream and/or download in a standard format with the adbar overlayed on the bottom.
I realise this is likely a pipe-dream, as the providers have shown much more interest in keeping far more control than this would allow, but what do the rest of us think?
So, can we sue them for patent infringement, then? ;)
grnbrg
Today, a team of open-source programmers posted new beta of BrainEMU, the open-source software that emulates the human brain. But does it run emacs?