You forget that every one of those kernel hackers is sharing their code, thus eliminating duplication of effort.
I think that right now, there are two major distribution types out there: Red Hat and Debian. All the others are basicly based on one of those two, with Slackware being the only real exception. Other then that, you have a bunch of specialty distros like Maragda (which boots off a CD) or ucLinux (small distro for PDAs).
There is some duplication of effort between Debian and Red Hat (produce diffrent package manager programs, etc.), but they ultimately base themselves off the same code. The specialtiy distributions must have lots of duplication, but only because they are specialized and what works for someone else doesn't work for them.
Diversity is a strength.
------
Re:Which other protocols *also* have holes?
on
Security Hole In TCP
·
· Score: 1
2.1.53 would have been an unstable kernel anyway. SMB is bloated all on it's own, made worse by Microsoft. How could it not have huge, unknown bugs?
Umm, when was the last time you saw a scr1pt k1dd13 tool posted to 2600. DeCSS, arguably (and I would argue not, but whatever). 2600 is more of a political/news site, not a script kiddie outpost.
I was actualy just thinking about this over lunch. Orginaly, I had planed the naive approach where it fetched the data off Freenet every time. Now I'm thinking of having it store the data in memory just like a normal DNS server. When a request comes, it checks the cache first. If it can't find it there, it looks for it on Freenet. If it's not there either, it recursivly checks other DNS servers and returns the data to the requester. It then inserts the new data into Freenet and to its own cache.
I should add that Freenet favors large files to be droped out long before small ones. DNS zone files would be pretty small. I might even put mandatory encryption on all in-Freenet zone files, just to get them a little smaller. We'll see.
I'm free this weekend so I don't mind doing it.....
Well, I'm working on a DNS server that stores its cache in Freenet. This means the cache can be called up by any other such DNS server. This elimanates the need for a tree-based DNS structure and its centralized control.
The ruling came in, but it does nothing to break MS up (it only says they should be broken up at a future date, but will be held off until it's appealed). It is not broken up now, nor was it then. How can it have any effect on the NASDAQ? Well, the overly paranoid people running Wall Street might think that an ineffective ruling will have an effect, they bail out of MS and other tech stocks, and things go bust.
Now what other causes for a crashing stock market could there be? Hmmm, lots of.coms, running on venture capital, with bad buissness plans and lots of high-priced tech workers. VC runs out, the artificial inflation of the economy due to.coms runs dry, things go back to normal. How does MS and the ruling enter this?
Oh, and Greenspan is actualy a lot smarter then most people realize. He and his cronies know quite well that huge growth usualy comes just before a huge downturn. So, they take steps to slow down things in a huge growth (by increasing interest rates), and then lowering intrest rates when things start to go down. It is better this way, as it means better succsess in the long term.
innovations in telephony would have continued if AT&T was not split...
Certianly there would be, but would those innovations have gotten to the consumer? Certianly there are lots of innovations in OS desgin today, but are those innovations getting to the consumer? It's all for naught if it doesn't get to the consumer.
As for "browser as a platform", a platform basicly means "a bunch of APIs used to write useful programs". A browser is a platform because it can execute code (be it a Java applet, JavaScript, a markup language, and so on) using an API. Java is also a platform because it provides a basic API that will work on top of any other platform. You still need an underlieing OS to use both a browser or Java, but you are not (in a perfect world) tied to a specific underlieing OS to run those programs.
Except that the appalete court is now saying the findings of fact are not based in fact (as noted in the article above). I don't beleive they are allowed to totally throw them out, though. IANAL, as allways.
A 50-year-old dial up customer shouldn't use Windows, either. Really, give them an iMac. Whatever else you can say about it, at least it's easy (easier then Windows, even) and it's not Microsoft.
If click-and-drool was the reason for going to Windows, then they went the wrong way. They should be in Mac OS, which (ignoring its other deficencies) has a much better GUI then any MS product does.
No, mearly gaining a monopoly if it's gained because you truly have a better product is not illegal. This is how 90% of all web traffic runs over Cisco routers, but the DOJ isn't banging down Cisco's doors.
Now, assuming, as you do, that Office is truely the "best product" (which is debateable, but I'll follow your guide and say it is for the moment), whats wrong with it? Well, lots of people didn't like it when nVidia strong armed reviewers, even though nVidia's product's superiority is much less questionable then Office 2000 (nVidia later apologized).
We could go on in a debate of GeForce 2 vs. Radeon vs. VooDoo [3-5], but for my purpases, it's good enough that no one is really saying that the GeForce 2 is a horrible product (overpriced, maybe); the debate is really over what is "best". A lot of people, including myself, love their products. Yet, those same people (myself included) still flamed nVidia for those practices.
Many believe Microsoft to be engaged in similar practices. Even if they were "the best", as we are assuming for this discussion, it is still fair to flame them for these practices. Add on to that many people think their product is the most bloated, slow, and kludgy word processor on earth and you have even more reason to be angry.
While my short-sighted, revenge-seeking side wants MS to be broken into tiny little peices, my more rational side says that a break up is not the best option. If Micros~1 gets the OS side, then Micros~1 will have a monopoly instead of the full Microsoft. They will also be using the same lame code base, non-Free Software, poor programing practices, and will still need to be rebooted at least once a day. Just because the full Microsoft company is not doing it doesn't really make it better.
I do believe, though, that there is a better plan here. Force them to fully document the Windows API (and also other basic APIs, like DirectX). Forcing them to put the Windows code under something like the GPL or BSD would be better, but not required for this plan to work.
You know those microserfs who say "It's not Windows falut! It's third-party programs!"? Well, if thats true, then Microsoft should work twards helping third-party programs work better, since that would make the whole OS look better. Certainly, providing a better documented API set would work twards that goal. So, the DOJ can put it to Microsoft as a win for Microsoft.
In reality, this is the tool we use to dig Microsoft's grave. With a better documented API, WINE can do a much better job of replicating that API on unix systems. Samba can do a better job of replicating the Windows SMB protocol (its done such a great job even without it; think how good it will be with it).
Don't break them apart; just force them to do something thats "in their best intrests" *g*.
Allow me to go off on a wierd story that, yes, does in fact relate to this:
Durring the cold war, the USSR had way better rockets then their western couterparts. They were more expensive, but better built and able to carry more. This is why the US laged way behind the USSR early on.
Then something strange happend. The USSR started slowing down their space program and pretty much came to a halt (more or less) after the American moon landing. They still had a few succsesses, like Mir, but their space program was taking up too much money, and certianly didn't help with their final collapse.
On the other hand, America still had rockets that couldn't take as much, but they were cheeper. More importantly, it forced NASA to miniturize components. This ment they had problems keeping up in the short term, but were better off in the long term.
So how does this relate? KEEP IT SIMPLE, STUPID. Even if you have the capablity to do it, that doesn't mean you should waste it. It's that sort of philosphy that drove the Solviet/Russian space program to have so many problems in the long run, and thus were beaten by their western counterparts.
Most bands don't make money on their actual sales. They get it from concerts and merchandise (t-shirts, hats, etc.). There is no substitue for seeing a live performance. If anything, free (speech and beer) music will generate a bigger fan base, thus brining more people to their concerts and buying t-shirts.
Also, as another post pointed out, what would be so wrong if there was "no Eminem, no N-Sync and no Limp Biskit"?
From what I have studied and been told, there is nothing you can do to the data that would make it impossible for a determied foe with bottomless pockets (i.e., NSA, FBI, other evil-three-letter-acronym) to get the data. You must completely de-gauss the hard drive to do it, which is only theoreticly possible. You must destroy the hard drive completely.
Using an EMP device would be good, but it still might not be enough. However, going in this direction might have some great side effects if it's strong enough. Imagine this: The FBI breaks into your home with the mandatory guns and dogs, then you hit the button for the EMP device. They load all your stuff in their van, turn the ignition and . . . nothing. The EMP fried their van's computer. Ha Ha, suckers!
Some sort of explosion might do it, but it still might be possible to pick up every little peice of the hard drive and put it back together (unlikely, though). Burning it isn't really enough (there are data-restore compaines that restore burned hard drives all the time). The last two options are going to totaly destroy it anyway, so you might as well make sure the job is totaly done.
For this, you need something like thermite. Useing this on your hard drive, it becomes diffcult to even say "this is a hard drive" *g*.
Ummm, yes it does. The 2D card on this particular system is an equaly aging Stelth 3D 4000. The Voodoo 2 card I have is the Monster II, BTW. I'm putting both in my GNU/Linux box and have the GeForce in my Winblows DSM (Dedicated Solitare Machine).
Waiting. Allow me to go through the story so far, in the Monty Python sense:
It's no fun being the only life in existance. God is a great hacker who loves facinating problems, so he creates other life. Eventualy, theres life all over the place.
One of his creations rebels, and gets others to rebel (we call them "Satan" and "Demons"). After a time, the rebels trick humans into a dangerous path away from God.
Now God has a problem. He could just wipe away the rebels. Quite easily in fact. However, that would be tyrannical and wouldn't solve the issue the rebels have brought up: Does God have the right to rule? And, probably more important, can his creations rule themselves?
So he lets them go on for a few thousand years. It might be a long time in the eyes of his creations, but it's nothing to God. He might not like what humans are doing to one another, but it must go on like this until he's done proving his point (humans can't rule themselves anymore then this computer in front of me can create this post without me typing on the keyboard). Things get really messy down here, but that just proves God's point further.
With time, God gets sick of it all and just wipes the rebels out. He's proven his point beyond a shadow of a doubt, so any further rebellions bringing up these issues can just be destroyed (more likely, nobody would bother because they see the evidance God has presented).
It is my belief, based on Jesus words in the Bible and upon a prophecy of Daniel that the time for the start of this distruction was 1914. At that point, heaven was cleared of the rebellion and the rebels were thrown to Earth (or Earth's universe, depending on how literaly you want to take the Bible's words). You will note the tremendus upheaval that started then (WWI). Things are inheriantly diffrent from 1914 on compared to 6,000 years previous because Satan is directly affecting human matters.
It is said that the final destruction of those rebels (along with any humans following them) would occur within one generation. Less ambigously, someone alive in 1914 would see the final destruction.
It's stuff like this that made me not consider myself a Creationist, even though I still believe in creation. I've (over?) used this phrase in many of my posts to this disscusion: Creationists know even less about the Bible then they do science.
Slashdot Mirror
You forget that every one of those kernel hackers is sharing their code, thus eliminating duplication of effort.
I think that right now, there are two major distribution types out there: Red Hat and Debian. All the others are basicly based on one of those two, with Slackware being the only real exception. Other then that, you have a bunch of specialty distros like Maragda (which boots off a CD) or ucLinux (small distro for PDAs).
There is some duplication of effort between Debian and Red Hat (produce diffrent package manager programs, etc.), but they ultimately base themselves off the same code. The specialtiy distributions must have lots of duplication, but only because they are specialized and what works for someone else doesn't work for them.
Diversity is a strength.
------
2.1.53 would have been an unstable kernel anyway. SMB is bloated all on it's own, made worse by Microsoft. How could it not have huge, unknown bugs?
------
Umm, when was the last time you saw a scr1pt k1dd13 tool posted to 2600. DeCSS, arguably (and I would argue not, but whatever). 2600 is more of a political/news site, not a script kiddie outpost.
------
. . . they took freedom of speech away from the Internet.
------
I was actualy just thinking about this over lunch. Orginaly, I had planed the naive approach where it fetched the data off Freenet every time. Now I'm thinking of having it store the data in memory just like a normal DNS server. When a request comes, it checks the cache first. If it can't find it there, it looks for it on Freenet. If it's not there either, it recursivly checks other DNS servers and returns the data to the requester. It then inserts the new data into Freenet and to its own cache.
------
I should add that Freenet favors large files to be droped out long before small ones. DNS zone files would be pretty small. I might even put mandatory encryption on all in-Freenet zone files, just to get them a little smaller. We'll see.
------
Yep. No way around it. Thats a feature, not a bug.
------
I'm free this weekend so I don't mind doing it.....
Well, I'm working on a DNS server that stores its cache in Freenet. This means the cache can be called up by any other such DNS server. This elimanates the need for a tree-based DNS structure and its centralized control.
------
Oh, for crying out loud!
The ruling came in, but it does nothing to break MS up (it only says they should be broken up at a future date, but will be held off until it's appealed). It is not broken up now, nor was it then. How can it have any effect on the NASDAQ? Well, the overly paranoid people running Wall Street might think that an ineffective ruling will have an effect, they bail out of MS and other tech stocks, and things go bust.
Now what other causes for a crashing stock market could there be? Hmmm, lots of .coms, running on venture capital, with bad buissness plans and lots of high-priced tech workers. VC runs out, the artificial inflation of the economy due to .coms runs dry, things go back to normal. How does MS and the ruling enter this?
Oh, and Greenspan is actualy a lot smarter then most people realize. He and his cronies know quite well that huge growth usualy comes just before a huge downturn. So, they take steps to slow down things in a huge growth (by increasing interest rates), and then lowering intrest rates when things start to go down. It is better this way, as it means better succsess in the long term.
------
innovations in telephony would have continued if AT&T was not split...
Certianly there would be, but would those innovations have gotten to the consumer? Certianly there are lots of innovations in OS desgin today, but are those innovations getting to the consumer? It's all for naught if it doesn't get to the consumer.
As for "browser as a platform", a platform basicly means "a bunch of APIs used to write useful programs". A browser is a platform because it can execute code (be it a Java applet, JavaScript, a markup language, and so on) using an API. Java is also a platform because it provides a basic API that will work on top of any other platform. You still need an underlieing OS to use both a browser or Java, but you are not (in a perfect world) tied to a specific underlieing OS to run those programs.
------
Except that the appalete court is now saying the findings of fact are not based in fact (as noted in the article above). I don't beleive they are allowed to totally throw them out, though. IANAL, as allways.
------
A 50-year-old dial up customer shouldn't use Windows, either. Really, give them an iMac. Whatever else you can say about it, at least it's easy (easier then Windows, even) and it's not Microsoft.
------
If click-and-drool was the reason for going to Windows, then they went the wrong way. They should be in Mac OS, which (ignoring its other deficencies) has a much better GUI then any MS product does.
------
No, mearly gaining a monopoly if it's gained because you truly have a better product is not illegal. This is how 90% of all web traffic runs over Cisco routers, but the DOJ isn't banging down Cisco's doors.
Now, assuming, as you do, that Office is truely the "best product" (which is debateable, but I'll follow your guide and say it is for the moment), whats wrong with it? Well, lots of people didn't like it when nVidia strong armed reviewers, even though nVidia's product's superiority is much less questionable then Office 2000 (nVidia later apologized).
We could go on in a debate of GeForce 2 vs. Radeon vs. VooDoo [3-5], but for my purpases, it's good enough that no one is really saying that the GeForce 2 is a horrible product (overpriced, maybe); the debate is really over what is "best". A lot of people, including myself, love their products. Yet, those same people (myself included) still flamed nVidia for those practices.
Many believe Microsoft to be engaged in similar practices. Even if they were "the best", as we are assuming for this discussion, it is still fair to flame them for these practices. Add on to that many people think their product is the most bloated, slow, and kludgy word processor on earth and you have even more reason to be angry.
------
While my short-sighted, revenge-seeking side wants MS to be broken into tiny little peices, my more rational side says that a break up is not the best option. If Micros~1 gets the OS side, then Micros~1 will have a monopoly instead of the full Microsoft. They will also be using the same lame code base, non-Free Software, poor programing practices, and will still need to be rebooted at least once a day. Just because the full Microsoft company is not doing it doesn't really make it better.
I do believe, though, that there is a better plan here. Force them to fully document the Windows API (and also other basic APIs, like DirectX). Forcing them to put the Windows code under something like the GPL or BSD would be better, but not required for this plan to work.
You know those microserfs who say "It's not Windows falut! It's third-party programs!"? Well, if thats true, then Microsoft should work twards helping third-party programs work better, since that would make the whole OS look better. Certainly, providing a better documented API set would work twards that goal. So, the DOJ can put it to Microsoft as a win for Microsoft.
In reality, this is the tool we use to dig Microsoft's grave. With a better documented API, WINE can do a much better job of replicating that API on unix systems. Samba can do a better job of replicating the Windows SMB protocol (its done such a great job even without it; think how good it will be with it).
Don't break them apart; just force them to do something thats "in their best intrests" *g*.
------
It's about time the rest of the world starts suffering as much as we have in the United States.
------
Allow me to go off on a wierd story that, yes, does in fact relate to this:
Durring the cold war, the USSR had way better rockets then their western couterparts. They were more expensive, but better built and able to carry more. This is why the US laged way behind the USSR early on.
Then something strange happend. The USSR started slowing down their space program and pretty much came to a halt (more or less) after the American moon landing. They still had a few succsesses, like Mir, but their space program was taking up too much money, and certianly didn't help with their final collapse.
On the other hand, America still had rockets that couldn't take as much, but they were cheeper. More importantly, it forced NASA to miniturize components. This ment they had problems keeping up in the short term, but were better off in the long term.
So how does this relate? KEEP IT SIMPLE, STUPID. Even if you have the capablity to do it, that doesn't mean you should waste it. It's that sort of philosphy that drove the Solviet/Russian space program to have so many problems in the long run, and thus were beaten by their western counterparts.
------
Have you ever heard of a shell script?
In any case, I'm warry of anything that tries to convert from one lossy compression to another. Thats just begging for quality loss.
------
Most bands don't make money on their actual sales. They get it from concerts and merchandise (t-shirts, hats, etc.). There is no substitue for seeing a live performance. If anything, free (speech and beer) music will generate a bigger fan base, thus brining more people to their concerts and buying t-shirts.
Also, as another post pointed out, what would be so wrong if there was "no Eminem, no N-Sync and no Limp Biskit"?
------
From what I have studied and been told, there is nothing you can do to the data that would make it impossible for a determied foe with bottomless pockets (i.e., NSA, FBI, other evil-three-letter-acronym) to get the data. You must completely de-gauss the hard drive to do it, which is only theoreticly possible. You must destroy the hard drive completely.
Using an EMP device would be good, but it still might not be enough. However, going in this direction might have some great side effects if it's strong enough. Imagine this: The FBI breaks into your home with the mandatory guns and dogs, then you hit the button for the EMP device. They load all your stuff in their van, turn the ignition and . . . nothing. The EMP fried their van's computer. Ha Ha, suckers!
Some sort of explosion might do it, but it still might be possible to pick up every little peice of the hard drive and put it back together (unlikely, though). Burning it isn't really enough (there are data-restore compaines that restore burned hard drives all the time). The last two options are going to totaly destroy it anyway, so you might as well make sure the job is totaly done.
For this, you need something like thermite. Useing this on your hard drive, it becomes diffcult to even say "this is a hard drive" *g*.
------
No, they just use similar rule sets in DNA to produce the fractal pattern.
------
Ummm, yes it does. The 2D card on this particular system is an equaly aging Stelth 3D 4000. The Voodoo 2 card I have is the Monster II, BTW. I'm putting both in my GNU/Linux box and have the GeForce in my Winblows DSM (Dedicated Solitare Machine).
------
Wouldn't ya know it? Just as soon as I finaly replace my aging Voodoo 2 with a GeForce 2 (MX), they spring this on me. Happens every time.
------
Where's your God
Waiting. Allow me to go through the story so far, in the Monty Python sense:
It's no fun being the only life in existance. God is a great hacker who loves facinating problems, so he creates other life. Eventualy, theres life all over the place.
One of his creations rebels, and gets others to rebel (we call them "Satan" and "Demons"). After a time, the rebels trick humans into a dangerous path away from God.
Now God has a problem. He could just wipe away the rebels. Quite easily in fact. However, that would be tyrannical and wouldn't solve the issue the rebels have brought up: Does God have the right to rule? And, probably more important, can his creations rule themselves?
So he lets them go on for a few thousand years. It might be a long time in the eyes of his creations, but it's nothing to God. He might not like what humans are doing to one another, but it must go on like this until he's done proving his point (humans can't rule themselves anymore then this computer in front of me can create this post without me typing on the keyboard). Things get really messy down here, but that just proves God's point further.
With time, God gets sick of it all and just wipes the rebels out. He's proven his point beyond a shadow of a doubt, so any further rebellions bringing up these issues can just be destroyed (more likely, nobody would bother because they see the evidance God has presented).
It is my belief, based on Jesus words in the Bible and upon a prophecy of Daniel that the time for the start of this distruction was 1914. At that point, heaven was cleared of the rebellion and the rebels were thrown to Earth (or Earth's universe, depending on how literaly you want to take the Bible's words). You will note the tremendus upheaval that started then (WWI). Things are inheriantly diffrent from 1914 on compared to 6,000 years previous because Satan is directly affecting human matters.
It is said that the final destruction of those rebels (along with any humans following them) would occur within one generation. Less ambigously, someone alive in 1914 would see the final destruction.
------
It's stuff like this that made me not consider myself a Creationist, even though I still believe in creation. I've (over?) used this phrase in many of my posts to this disscusion: Creationists know even less about the Bible then they do science.
------