It is funny to see you saying that, after what you posted on the older article.
> I got caught up in the moment here and did something stupid with it, but normally I used it just to make my job easier. What's wrong with that?
What's wrong is that nobody beleives you. No one. You are now doing damage control by trying to unlink your 'redir' slashdot account with your real identity. It will not work. You did not offered any sincere apology for your scam. Most of the 'apologies' were posted as an AC.
In my eyes, and for the majority of slashdot readers, you are both Philip Ferreira (your real name) and Chris Chabot (one of your "writer" names), as well as a couple of other slashdot identities. You'll need pretty hard evidence to prove the opposite. And as no one beleive anything you post, the case seems to be settled on:
* you own a shitty review site
* provide content by cut-n-pasting from around the net
* and get money by dragging slashdot audience to it
Furthermore,
* you are an total liar
* and quite an aggressive person.
Cheers,
--fred
> Can you please start by providing an idiot's guide to how this CPRM thing is actually supposed to work.
Yes, yes, yes. I was about to ask the exact same thing.
In particular, I'd like to see when the data is encrypted/decrypted, and on what key.
For instance, if I buy a song on the internet via a proprietary browser, on a proprietary OS, and later play it with a proprietary music application, I fail to see why I can't fool the disk by writing a 'music' application that write the music back to the disk as a raw unencrypted mp3 file instead of playing it (by reverse engineering the player application, if necessary)
Please, please, enlighten me.
Btw, I am french, and I will now have to pay a 3.70 francs (about 70 cents) tax on the CD-Rs I use to do my weekly backup (a lot of thanks to the socialist government). I never 'pirated' music, but now feel entitled to.
To make a long story short, the user should first check that its tools are at correct release (check the kernel documentation to find what is needed). If the poor sould have a RedHat 6.0 and do what you suggest, he'll probably regret it.
You obviously tracked the kernel development, so you probably are almost up to date. This is definitely not the case for most people, in particular the one that never compiled a kernel.
Furthermore, the particular distro the guy is using may use non-standard patches (say reiserfs), so he may get into deep troubles doing what you suggest.
In my experience, jumping from 2.0 to 2.2 have been quite painfull. FreeBSD is much better there. Much much better. Debian should also be easy to upgrade (but well, a stable debian with 2.4 will take a lot of time to hit the digital shelves)
Cheers,
--fred
I waited for that a long time
on
GTK+ without X!
·
· Score: 1
This is just great. It won't reduce the bloat that much. But this is pretty cool for platform with no X, or for ports (say BeOS, or Mac OS X).
In any case, reducing dependancies is nice.
(Extra bonus. As a X hater, this is good news [I don't really hate X per-see, but I hate the window manager concept, mostly because there are so much to choose from, and none correctly working out of the box, IMHO])
>.. And have a criminal case for falsificating evidence when an unhappy employee proves that you *did* have the source.
In that case: "Oh, glad you found it back. Having lost it was a big problem for us"
Be serious. See the huge load of evident bullshit that Bill Gates or the RIAA/MPAA heads told to the us courts. In the antitrust case, M$ falsificated shitloads of evidence, from the faked 'Remove-explorer-from-Windows video tape' to the 'sorry-we-count-licenses-of-windows-solds-to-eom-o n-papers-that-we-have-destroyed', or the 'I-dont-understand-what-you-mean-by-marketshare'
Wanna laugh ? Re-read 'http://www.2600.com/dvd/docs/2000/0606-valenti.tx t' (remove the space betweem 'tx' and 't':-))
> The judge doesn't order it [the source] turned over to the Court; he orders it to be turned over to a panel of independent experts chosen by the Court
With a normal, standard win32 inferno emulator (similar to appletviever). This emulator would execute '.whatever' files, which could be downloaded from the web site in a single click. For the use you describe, having a web browser plugin in is (IMHO) pretty weak.
But sure, it is cool. Strangely, it make more sense as a mozilla-plugin, as mozilla appliances will probably appear in a not so far future...
The mail have not been held, it was plain refused. But I suspect that some can confiugure its inbox so smapcop reject any suspicious mail.
Btw, isn't spamcop a joke ?
My second account is on easynet.fr. Looks they have spam problems too. Starts to be ridiculous, as every provider have spam problem.
I tried the major french ISP on spamcop: club-internet, noos, all are 'detained'.
Even apple.com or microsoft.com are 'detained'. Or 'mozilla.org '. This seem pretty effective to reduce the amount of mail that one receives. Rotfl.
I get about 200 mails per day, and one or two are spam. From what I see, I could probably get the number of emails in my mailbox near zero with spamcop...
> And setting the high bit shifted those pixels overy by half a pixel
Oh my god. I just understand _now_ why setting the high bit made different colors for different bits ! (ie: odd and even bits didn't have same color) More than 15 years later. It is never too late, I guess...
If a particular exploit is changed from little or no risk to high risk, then a new advisory will be posted to warn people of this (if this was not the case, this means that you would have to spend all days and nights scanning little or no risk advisories to see if their rating change).
The real problem is in the other way. If an advisory have been posted, that said that on Operating System X version 6.37, the software foo version 117.12 have a hole, I expect this information to stay here. Having a link to an external resource make this information at risk. If, 5 years after that, I need that info (for instance, because I happen to have a X-6.37 with foo-118.12) I need the correct link. (I expect security report to be mounted with the immutable flag, like any respectable root partition, or beeing in a append-only chflaged file:-) ).
I agree in advance with the fact that, in the l0pht case, the probably don't plan to remove advisories (but M$ surely do).
There are a lot resources here that were only avalaible in deja usenet archives. I recall replying to technical cocoa questions with deja usenet links on next-progs. If someone now scans the mailing list archive, he'll be left with incomplete answers. This is why linking is sometimes a bad idea.
Errm. I am referring to "Thus it is good for the program to be ported ASAP."
plex86 is a very complex piece of code, mostly because of the presence of a linux kernel module that plays tricks to do the virtualisation.
In presence of such code, early port can put an unecessary burden on the project, because it 'freezes' the avalaible options (unless they want to break the NetBSD port, which can cost developers). OTOH, it can have a very benefit effect by showing at early stages of development what are linux kludges, and what are not.
Btw, I am extremely impressed here. I wouldn't have bet anything on a BSD port. (Now, if someone could port it to FreeBSD...)
> I get moderated to +4 for admitting I'm a dunce:-)
Not at all. It is because moderators don't follow you sig and forgot to question authority.
"Ooooh. A bruce Pernes post !. He must be smart. Let's moderate him up"
Then, the same assholes that moderated you up to 4/Funny for saying that you have been moderated to 4/Informative in a correction to a wrong traceroute moderated to 3/Informative are going to moderate me to -1/Overrated/Flamebait/Offtopic/Troll.
> it's kept the S/N to the point that I can read your mail.
This is wrong. For an unkown reason, some email I send are refused by some servers with a message:
MAIL From:<myemailadress>
550 5.0.0 We don't accept mail from spammers
I don't really qualify as a spammer. I mean that I hate spam, always reply to abuse@ adresses when I get spam, etc, etc.
What is uberfun is that I sent emails to postmaster@ and abuse@ at the site where I wanted to sent the original mail (to update technical points on a development FAQ). Those mails were returned with the very same message. I tried to mail them from two different accounts. Same problem.
I contacted the guy vhen replying to him in a public mailing list. He said that my ISP was probably supporting spam. As I used two different providers, and one of them is wanadoo.fr, this seems pretty unlikely. And, no, the various IP addresses of mail servers were not in the MAPS database.
This guy is the maintainer of the Darwin FAQ. This email is the official feedback email for the FAQ. He silently loose an unkown amount of mail, pisses off an unkown number of people.
The trend is very dangerous. It is the same kind of trend that try to forbid deep linking.
As a user of the web, I seek information. Old information is very valuable for me. This is why I loved deja usenet archives when they worked.
OTOH, information providers are marketing driven. They run. Their web site changes very very often to track the new trends. Take one of your old bookmarks (say 4 or 5 years ago). There should still be very valuable _information_ in there. I bet that 90% of the links are broken. The information is lost because the links have changed.
Copyrighting information and asking for links instead of copies is planned obsolescense of the information. This is a very very bad trend.
Unfortunately, it is just what marketing want. I bet that, in a few years, the concept of linking will disapear in comercial sites. URLs will probably be based on the value of personal cookies, ie: will only work for you. Other users will have to seek for the information for themselves. You will only be allowed to link to front pages. (I am already pretty depressed of the current state of the web. Lame articles, like the various P4 tests, that are splitted on 12 or 15 pages of 10 lines each make me vomit. Unfortunately, it can only go worse...)
I could reverse the modem on the model I used (that I still have). Was a magic key combination, like Function-M, R (Modem, Reversed), or something like that...
I can't beleive I made sooo much errors in my post. Sure, it was 75/1200.
> how would would you type more than 9 8-bit characters per second in order to explode this debit ?
I used a minitel hooked to a NeXTstation to move files from/to my university account in 1991. I used the 75 bauds as a control connection. That was fun.
And it was possible to "reverse" the modem to get 1200/75.
There seems to be problems with the x86 that make virtualisation difficult.
It seems an obvious flaw. Why intel or AMD didn't do anything about it ? It seems pretty trvial to add a way to trap the dozen or so of non-virtualisable instructions.
Often, choosing between two processors vendors is a matter of personal taste (I for one, buy only AMDs since intel added the CPUID), and the one who'll make 'virtualisable' processors would have a definite benefit technically, (ie: plex86/vmware would run faster on them), commercially (another buzzword) and would be an obvious choice for everyone running multiple OSes.
My job prohibits my discussing how VMware approaches these problems, and for lack of knowledge I can't tell you how Plex86 approaches them. However, this should give a flavor for some of the problems in virtualizing an unvirtualizable architecture.
Great illustration of difference between proprietary and free software. VMWare knowledge is not accessible while Plex86 is just one link away:
Redundant ? I scanned all the previous modded-up posts, and I saw no question about large scale virtualisation. If this have been modded down only because of the beowulf joke at the end, it is pretty ridiculous.
Large scale virtualisation means having an architecture where additional emulated hosts are not costly. This can have a lot of use for colocation facilities (but only if plex86 can be secured, which may be very difficult), or for labs (each student have access to each own private operating system).
(Btw, the current ad on top of this page is for vmware (http://ads12.focalink.com/SmartBanner/page?15445. 45-;ord=976706407976706407). Rotfl)
Slashdot Mirror
the quote on top of the object oriented langages chapter was something like:
"object: to feel distate for something"
I laughed my ass off (even if I do OO programming since 1991).,
Cheers,
--fred
> That's harsh man
It is funny to see you saying that, after what you posted on the older article.
> I got caught up in the moment here and did something stupid with it, but normally I used it just to make my job easier. What's wrong with that?
What's wrong is that nobody beleives you. No one. You are now doing damage control by trying to unlink your 'redir' slashdot account with your real identity. It will not work. You did not offered any sincere apology for your scam. Most of the 'apologies' were posted as an AC.
In my eyes, and for the majority of slashdot readers, you are both Philip Ferreira (your real name) and Chris Chabot (one of your "writer" names), as well as a couple of other slashdot identities. You'll need pretty hard evidence to prove the opposite. And as no one beleive anything you post, the case seems to be settled on:
* you own a shitty review site
* provide content by cut-n-pasting from around the net
* and get money by dragging slashdot audience to it
Furthermore,
* you are an total liar
* and quite an aggressive person.
Cheers,
--fred
> Can you please start by providing an idiot's guide to how this CPRM thing is actually supposed to work.
Yes, yes, yes. I was about to ask the exact same thing.
In particular, I'd like to see when the data is encrypted/decrypted, and on what key.
For instance, if I buy a song on the internet via a proprietary browser, on a proprietary OS, and later play it with a proprietary music application, I fail to see why I can't fool the disk by writing a 'music' application that write the music back to the disk as a raw unencrypted mp3 file instead of playing it (by reverse engineering the player application, if necessary)
Please, please, enlighten me.
Btw, I am french, and I will now have to pay a 3.70 francs (about 70 cents) tax on the CD-Rs I use to do my weekly backup (a lot of thanks to the socialist government). I never 'pirated' music, but now feel entitled to.
Cheers,
--fred
Last step:
Watch your system break.
To make a long story short, the user should first check that its tools are at correct release (check the kernel documentation to find what is needed). If the poor sould have a RedHat 6.0 and do what you suggest, he'll probably regret it.
You obviously tracked the kernel development, so you probably are almost up to date. This is definitely not the case for most people, in particular the one that never compiled a kernel.
Furthermore, the particular distro the guy is using may use non-standard patches (say reiserfs), so he may get into deep troubles doing what you suggest.
In my experience, jumping from 2.0 to 2.2 have been quite painfull. FreeBSD is much better there. Much much better. Debian should also be easy to upgrade (but well, a stable debian with 2.4 will take a lot of time to hit the digital shelves)
Cheers,
--fred
This is just great. It won't reduce the bloat that much. But this is pretty cool for platform with no X, or for ports (say BeOS, or Mac OS X).
In any case, reducing dependancies is nice.
(Extra bonus. As a X hater, this is good news [I don't really hate X per-see, but I hate the window manager concept, mostly because there are so much to choose from, and none correctly working out of the box, IMHO])
Cheers,
--fred
Cheers,
--fred
> What, for example, is the most addictive game, now or ever: Asheron's Call? Quake? Final Fantasy 8? Red Alert2?
Lode Runner of course !
Cheers,
--fred
> > "Errr. Sorry, we lost the source. "
.. And have a criminal case for falsificating evidence when an unhappy employee proves that you *did* have the source.
o n-papers-that-we-have-destroyed', or the 'I-dont-understand-what-you-mean-by-marketshare'
x t' (remove the space betweem 'tx' and 't' :-))
>
In that case: "Oh, glad you found it back. Having lost it was a big problem for us"
Be serious. See the huge load of evident bullshit that Bill Gates or the RIAA/MPAA heads told to the us courts. In the antitrust case, M$ falsificated shitloads of evidence, from the faked 'Remove-explorer-from-Windows video tape' to the 'sorry-we-count-licenses-of-windows-solds-to-eom-
Wanna laugh ? Re-read 'http://www.2600.com/dvd/docs/2000/0606-valenti.t
Cheers,
--fred
> The judge doesn't order it [the source] turned over to the Court; he orders it to be turned over to a panel of independent experts chosen by the Court
Errr. Sorry, we lost the source.
This have already been done a *lot* of time.
Cheers,
--fred
"point and grunt". I like this.
Now I'm going to grunt Submit.
Cheers,
--fred
> How do you go about it?
With a normal, standard win32 inferno emulator (similar to appletviever). This emulator would execute '.whatever' files, which could be downloaded from the web site in a single click. For the use you describe, having a web browser plugin in is (IMHO) pretty weak.
But sure, it is cool. Strangely, it make more sense as a mozilla-plugin, as mozilla appliances will probably appear in a not so far future...
Cheers,
--fred
> a javascript enabled web browser
So I could run a web browser inside IE5 ? If so, will inferno be avalaible as a plugin for that browser ?
Cheers,
--fred
Thanks for the info.
The mail have not been held, it was plain refused. But I suspect that some can confiugure its inbox so smapcop reject any suspicious mail.
Btw, isn't spamcop a joke ?
My second account is on easynet.fr. Looks they have spam problems too. Starts to be ridiculous, as every provider have spam problem.
I tried the major french ISP on spamcop: club-internet, noos, all are 'detained'.
Even apple.com or microsoft.com are 'detained'. Or 'mozilla.org '. This seem pretty effective to reduce the amount of mail that one receives. Rotfl.
I get about 200 mails per day, and one or two are spam. From what I see, I could probably get the number of emails in my mailbox near zero with spamcop...
Cheers,
--fred
> And setting the high bit shifted those pixels overy by half a pixel
Oh my god. I just understand _now_ why setting the high bit made different colors for different bits ! (ie: odd and even bits didn't have same color) More than 15 years later. It is never too late, I guess...
Cheers,
--fred
> was linear from left to right, but not sequential from top to bottom
Yeah. With 7 bits columns, IIRC.
Mmmm. "CALL -151". Mmmm.
Cheers,
--fred
If a particular exploit is changed from little or no risk to high risk, then a new advisory will be posted to warn people of this (if this was not the case, this means that you would have to spend all days and nights scanning little or no risk advisories to see if their rating change).
:-) ).
The real problem is in the other way. If an advisory have been posted, that said that on Operating System X version 6.37, the software foo version 117.12 have a hole, I expect this information to stay here. Having a link to an external resource make this information at risk. If, 5 years after that, I need that info (for instance, because I happen to have a X-6.37 with foo-118.12) I need the correct link. (I expect security report to be mounted with the immutable flag, like any respectable root partition, or beeing in a append-only chflaged file
I agree in advance with the fact that, in the l0pht case, the probably don't plan to remove advisories (but M$ surely do).
There are a lot resources here that were only avalaible in deja usenet archives. I recall replying to technical cocoa questions with deja usenet links on next-progs. If someone now scans the mailing list archive, he'll be left with incomplete answers. This is why linking is sometimes a bad idea.
Cheers,
--fred
Yes but no.
Errm. I am referring to "Thus it is good for the program to be ported ASAP."
plex86 is a very complex piece of code, mostly because of the presence of a linux kernel module that plays tricks to do the virtualisation.
In presence of such code, early port can put an unecessary burden on the project, because it 'freezes' the avalaible options (unless they want to break the NetBSD port, which can cost developers). OTOH, it can have a very benefit effect by showing at early stages of development what are linux kludges, and what are not.
Btw, I am extremely impressed here. I wouldn't have bet anything on a BSD port. (Now, if someone could port it to FreeBSD...)
Cheers,
--fred
> I get moderated to +4 for admitting I'm a dunce :-)
Not at all. It is because moderators don't follow you sig and forgot to question authority.
"Ooooh. A bruce Pernes post !. He must be smart. Let's moderate him up"
Then, the same assholes that moderated you up to 4/Funny for saying that you have been moderated to 4/Informative in a correction to a wrong traceroute moderated to 3/Informative are going to moderate me to -1/Overrated/Flamebait/Offtopic/Troll.
Cheers,
--fred
> it's kept the S/N to the point that I can read your mail.
This is wrong. For an unkown reason, some email I send are refused by some servers with a message:
MAIL From:<myemailadress>
550 5.0.0 We don't accept mail from spammers
I don't really qualify as a spammer. I mean that I hate spam, always reply to abuse@ adresses when I get spam, etc, etc.
What is uberfun is that I sent emails to postmaster@ and abuse@ at the site where I wanted to sent the original mail (to update technical points on a development FAQ). Those mails were returned with the very same message. I tried to mail them from two different accounts. Same problem.
I contacted the guy vhen replying to him in a public mailing list. He said that my ISP was probably supporting spam. As I used two different providers, and one of them is wanadoo.fr, this seems pretty unlikely. And, no, the various IP addresses of mail servers were not in the MAPS database.
This guy is the maintainer of the Darwin FAQ. This email is the official feedback email for the FAQ. He silently loose an unkown amount of mail, pisses off an unkown number of people.
What were you saying ?
> to the point that I can read your mail
Mmm. Maybe not. And you don't even know it.
Cheers,
--fred
The trend is very dangerous. It is the same kind of trend that try to forbid deep linking.
As a user of the web, I seek information. Old information is very valuable for me. This is why I loved deja usenet archives when they worked.
OTOH, information providers are marketing driven. They run. Their web site changes very very often to track the new trends. Take one of your old bookmarks (say 4 or 5 years ago). There should still be very valuable _information_ in there. I bet that 90% of the links are broken. The information is lost because the links have changed.
Copyrighting information and asking for links instead of copies is planned obsolescense of the information. This is a very very bad trend.
Unfortunately, it is just what marketing want. I bet that, in a few years, the concept of linking will disapear in comercial sites. URLs will probably be based on the value of personal cookies, ie: will only work for you. Other users will have to seek for the information for themselves. You will only be allowed to link to front pages. (I am already pretty depressed of the current state of the web. Lame articles, like the various P4 tests, that are splitted on 12 or 15 pages of 10 lines each make me vomit. Unfortunately, it can only go worse...)
Cheers,
--fred
> the problem was to upload
I could reverse the modem on the model I used (that I still have). Was a magic key combination, like Function-M, R (Modem, Reversed), or something like that...
Cheers,
--fred
> Not even : it was 75/1200 bauds.
I can't beleive I made sooo much errors in my post. Sure, it was 75/1200.
> how would would you type more than 9 8-bit characters per second in order to explode this debit ?
I used a minitel hooked to a NeXTstation to move files from/to my university account in 1991. I used the 75 bauds as a control connection. That was fun.
And it was possible to "reverse" the modem to get 1200/75.
Cheers, and thanks for the corrections,
--fred
There seems to be problems with the x86 that make virtualisation difficult.
It seems an obvious flaw. Why intel or AMD didn't do anything about it ? It seems pretty trvial to add a way to trap the dozen or so of non-virtualisable instructions.
Often, choosing between two processors vendors is a matter of personal taste (I for one, buy only AMDs since intel added the CPUID), and the one who'll make 'virtualisable' processors would have a definite benefit technically, (ie: plex86/vmware would run faster on them), commercially (another buzzword) and would be an obvious choice for everyone running multiple OSes.
Why didn't this occured ?
Cheers,
--fred
Great illustration of difference between proprietary and free software. VMWare knowledge is not accessible while Plex86 is just one link away:
http://www.plex86.org/research/paper.txt (And is a very very interesting read)
Thanks for the interesting post, anyway
Cheers,
--fred
Redundant ? I scanned all the previous modded-up posts, and I saw no question about large scale virtualisation. If this have been modded down only because of the beowulf joke at the end, it is pretty ridiculous.
. 45-;ord=976706407976706407). Rotfl)
Large scale virtualisation means having an architecture where additional emulated hosts are not costly. This can have a lot of use for colocation facilities (but only if plex86 can be secured, which may be very difficult), or for labs (each student have access to each own private operating system).
(Btw, the current ad on top of this page is for vmware (http://ads12.focalink.com/SmartBanner/page?15445
Cheers,
--fred