Solution: Run an SELinux based distro with vmware. User data stored on a vmware "shared folder". You always have nice, clean images to run from. Snapshots are your friend. If you are cheap, use vmware player in the same way (lose snapshots though...)
Actually there IS a huge amount of dark fiber. Dark fiber is not the problem. Lighting it up is the problem. HUGELY expensive. Then you need to upgrade your routers to handle 10 times more traffic. Again, not cheap. You end up having to redsign your network from scratch if you up the last mile speed that much.
Here is the issue. Verizon is installing it's fiber in Verizon ILEC areas. AT&T(SBC/Pacbell) is still on DSL in its ILEC areas. There is no competition between the two. AFAIK Verizon is not sticking it's fiber in AT&T(SBC's) turf.
I have co-workers in other states that have Verizon FIOS. It ROCKS. One regularly gets 12Mb/sec downloads and 4Mb uploads. I'm lucky to get 1.5Mb down and 350kb up.
not everyone agrees with the court decisions which determined Microsoft was a monopoly
Well, you have to qualify that. There are those who TRUELY believe that, and there are those that just SAY that they believe that, such as those that hold lots of Microsoft stock, work for microsoft, or have some other vested financial interest in microsoft's continued dominance.
they see a cash cow and an easy target
The EU really wants MS to open their protocols and file formats. MS has so far has not fully complied with that. Instead they have released poor incomplete incorrect documentation with a license that is so costly and restrictive that it will do NOTHING to restore competition. MS has been doing everything in their power to delay the day of reckoning. This is not about money. It is about Microsoft's behavior. But there is no convincing a microsoft apologist / fanboi.
I thing the poster was refering that you have to buy "major" new releases of OS X. If you own ONE mac, it is a little steep. If you own multiples, it's not bad do to the availability of the "family pack". If you are REALLY cheap, apple doesn't have any DRM / activation crap so you can grab a copy from a friend (which is of course not legal.)
It wouldn't be an issue except that apple stops supporting (no updates) older releases of OS X. The last security update for 10.2 was in December 2004 for example. Panther (10.3) still has some updates, but I wouldn't expect that to continue for much longer. Furthermore, You can't get a new version of Safari for Panther as another example (other than security fixes.) Some people compare OS X major releases to Win 2K / XP which was for all practical purposes an eye-candy release with a few minor new features.
Personally, if I pay a premium for the hardware, I have a hard time constantly paying for OS updates too. It's definately a high initial-cost system. On the other hand, you are free of the Windows malware issue which reduces TCO significantly (hard to put exact costs on that.)
5-10 years??? Not hardly. A 5 year old mac is pretty pathetic - I have 2 of them, a g4 500 desktop and a g4 500 titanium powerbook. Both are VERY slow, even with maxed out RAM and everything else. No WAY would I get another 5 years more out of them. Furthermore, OS X 5 years ago was REALLY buggy. You really need at LEAST 10.3. Wintel machines are the same way. After about 5 years, everything needs to be refreshed, but they DO last about 5 years. Hell, I used a P-133 for at LEAST 5 years before upgrading to a P3-500, which I used for ANOTHER 5 years before upgrading nearly 2 years ago to a P4-2.8. I'll easily get another 3 years out of it. Linux runs just fine and I have no interest in the DRM/TPM "All your base" loaded Vista.
Ding ding! Exactly. Going in front of customers is not the same as wrangling code in a back-office cube. The reality of the business world is that "corporate image" is HUGELY important. When you are in front of a client, you ARE the company as far as the client is concerned. Grooming and dress are a big part of "image."
While YOU may like a companies products, the pointy haired bean counters may be unwilling to sign a PO for $1,200,000 if the company reps are in "long-haired hippie freaks in jeans and sandles."
But being a team member is also not the same as being part of a management team. This has even non-client facing impact.
I was in a merger situation once where one of the managers in the acquiring company was a total Goth with enough piercings to set off a metal detector 100 feet away. All of the acquired staff members in the department that was merged ended up quitting as they "couldn't work for someone like that" out of self respect. This ended up damaging the merger process so much the company ended up in bankruptsy - a situation that could have been avoided since the employees concerns were clearly transmitted to the senior executive team prior to the merger. Yes, this is more than hair, but the point remains.
Like it or not, your personal image, and how you present yourself DOES have an impact on people's willingingness to trust and respect you. Some people will just NOT trust people with facial hair, or tattoos, or "guys with long hair". It's frequently not a concious decision, but an automatic reaction due to a conflict with one's subconcious ideas of social norm. Most people can overcome this in time as they grow to understand a person, but some cannot.
No, I wouldn't want to foster forth on some poor newbie, although forth was cool back in the day:-)
I've worked with a number of different assembler environments - 6502, Z80, IBM 360, PDP-11, 68000, and yes, x86. X86 is by far the most !@#$%^&*() instruction set ever. And when I went from 6502 to Z80 I thought the Z80 was bad... Sheesh.
This is quite true. I had a hosting account that did NOT provide SSH access, so I installed cgi-shell and was able to chsh my account to get ssh. Mainly I wanted it to use scp / rsync instead of ftp. Ftp blows.
Ha. Just wait until you get into Man Scouts. In Man Scouts you get to travel to foreign countries, drive 10 ton vehicles, fly airplains, helecoptors, sail in ships the size of small towns, and play with massive amounts of firepower! Only downside is that you have to put up with sandstorms, and getting shot at.
I would expect that if MS pulled their products from the EU, the EU would suspend MS's copyright due to the economic impact on the EU and basically approve "piracy" of MS products.
This is a fight that MS can NOT ultimately win IF the EU stands its ground. MS is dragging this out as long as possible to further cement their monopoly and push out the date that they will have no choice but to comply as far in to the future as possible.
The EU should get off it's duff and start fining MS now until they DO fully comply. This foot dragging continues to harm competitors and discourage potential competitors.
The US DOJ totally capitulated for political reasons which has severely damaged "true" competition in the US. Don't let that happen in the EU too.
Drugs are patented, music is copyrighted. TOTALLY different.
The reason some drugs can go generic after only a few years is that it can frequently take 10 years or more for new patented drugs to get to market. This is why some drug makers want to lengthen the term of patent protection.
As it stands, copyrights are WAY WAY too long. I think 50 years would be totally reasonable, 20 years for software.
Generally you can get exchange for defective within 30-90 days on CD's and DVD's. That's not the point. CD's and DVD are fragile media, and are easily damaged (as any parent with children understands all too well. My 4 year old once moved her Little-Tykes table in from another room and used it to get at her "circles" which were stored out of reach. There goes the widescreen version of "Finding Nemo.")
Backups are DEFINATELY fair use and should be protected be law, regardless of what the Recording Industry Asshole's of America think.
this assumes that the institution doesn't sell its email list
This also assumes that the institution only has one domain name, doesn't outsource ever, etc. In reality, they usually have many domain names, outsource to 98745983 different companies, etc. Even "consistant" messages are not consistant for long.
For example: Bank of america now has their "sitekey" security feature, but then outsources notifications that contain confidential information to third party companies. Clueless.
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses (x) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected ( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks ( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it (x) Users of email will not put up with it (x) Microsoft will not put up with it ( ) The police will not put up with it ( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers (x) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once (x) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers ( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists ( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it (x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email (x) Open relays in foreign countries ( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses ( ) Asshats (x) Jurisdictional problems ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money (x) Huge existing software investment in SMTP ( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack ( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email (x) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes ( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches ( ) Extreme profitability of spam (x) Joe jobs and/or identity theft ( ) Technically illiterate politicians ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers ( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves ( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering ( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable ( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation ( ) Blacklists suck ( ) Whitelists suck ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud ( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks ( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually (x) Sending email should be free ( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers? ( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses ( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome ( ) I don't want the government reading my email ( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work. ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it. ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
What's worse is when banks OUTSOURCE email communication to random companies. BOA does this. For example: I have alerts setup for certain activity on my account. Furthermore, these alerts frequently have confidential data in them. Here are the relavant headers:
Return-path: b-SEA-######-1@alert.bankofamerica.com Received: from sea-mail02.par3.com ([63.251.12.160]) ###deleted### From: notices@alert.bankofamerica.com
You look up par3.com and see: Registrant: PAR3 Communications 821 2nd Ave Ste 1000 - 10th Floor Seattle, WA 98104
Needless to say, I'm in the process of transfering all my accounds out to a local bank where I've had a chat with their CIO to ensure that the new bank doesn't do this kind of crap.
Um, no. That is ONLY the case when you have a CLEC like covad that puts their own equipment in Verizon's offices. Again, generally only happens in larger markets. Other ISP's just resell Verizon DSL lines by getting a PVC to the VOL network. Usually it costs even more than Verizon too, for service that is as bad or worse. In larger metro areas, you can get alternatives like Speakeasy which rock. Not the case everywhere.
Definitions for the Geek Impaired: POP = Point of Presence, FIOS = Verizon's fiber to the home service. Loop = phone line to the house. What the fuck is WTF and IMHO? In my humble opinion you shouldn't use bizzare acronyms...:-)
Things are worse when you are too far for DSL and the local cable segment is oversubscribed to the point that you get modem-like speeds during prime time. I used to live in a part of San Jose, CA that didn't have ANY high-speed options except IDSL for $130 / month. The cable company was disputing the city franchise terms and wouldn't roll out cable modems unless they got what they wanted, and SBC basically just didn't give a damn.
Re:Verizon's recent purchase makes this subject mo
on
Is Verizon a Network Hog?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Considering that they are going to be rolling out a massive video on demand service, probably centralized, I would expect that they WOULD do something like carve out PVC's. This would be an anticompetitive move to ensure that no other outside provider (think google) could compete with VOL's VOD service due to lack of bandwidth.
I think that is the POINT of google being upset. It's not stupid, it's just a nasty anticompetitive thing to do.
Slashdot Mirror
Solution: Run an SELinux based distro with vmware. User data stored on a vmware "shared folder". You always have nice, clean images to run from. Snapshots are your friend. If you are cheap, use vmware player in the same way (lose snapshots though...)
I do think that if the same % population used it as currently uses windows, then there would be more serious problems with it.
FYI, That statement has been proven to be FUD for quite some time now.
Probably because everyone is pretty sick of lamed-assed jokes by noon...
Actually there IS a huge amount of dark fiber. Dark fiber is not the problem. Lighting it up is the problem. HUGELY expensive. Then you need to upgrade your routers to handle 10 times more traffic. Again, not cheap. You end up having to redsign your network from scratch if you up the last mile speed that much.
Here is the issue. Verizon is installing it's fiber in Verizon ILEC areas. AT&T(SBC/Pacbell) is still on DSL in its ILEC areas. There is no competition between the two. AFAIK Verizon is not sticking it's fiber in AT&T(SBC's) turf.
I have co-workers in other states that have Verizon FIOS. It ROCKS. One regularly gets 12Mb/sec downloads and 4Mb uploads. I'm lucky to get 1.5Mb down and 350kb up.
not everyone agrees with the court decisions which determined Microsoft was a monopoly
Well, you have to qualify that. There are those who TRUELY believe that, and there are those that just SAY that they believe that, such as those that hold lots of Microsoft stock, work for microsoft, or have some other vested financial interest in microsoft's continued dominance.
they see a cash cow and an easy target
The EU really wants MS to open their protocols and file formats. MS has so far has not fully complied with that. Instead they have released poor incomplete incorrect documentation with a license that is so costly and restrictive that it will do NOTHING to restore competition. MS has been doing everything in their power to delay the day of reckoning. This is not about money. It is about Microsoft's behavior. But there is no convincing a microsoft apologist / fanboi.
I thing the poster was refering that you have to buy "major" new releases of OS X. If you own ONE mac, it is a little steep. If you own multiples, it's not bad do to the availability of the "family pack". If you are REALLY cheap, apple doesn't have any DRM / activation crap so you can grab a copy from a friend (which is of course not legal.)
It wouldn't be an issue except that apple stops supporting (no updates) older releases of OS X. The last security update for 10.2 was in December 2004 for example. Panther (10.3) still has some updates, but I wouldn't expect that to continue for much longer. Furthermore, You can't get a new version of Safari for Panther as another example (other than security fixes.) Some people compare OS X major releases to Win 2K / XP which was for all practical purposes an eye-candy release with a few minor new features.
Personally, if I pay a premium for the hardware, I have a hard time constantly paying for OS updates too. It's definately a high initial-cost system. On the other hand, you are free of the Windows malware issue which reduces TCO significantly (hard to put exact costs on that.)
5-10 years??? Not hardly. A 5 year old mac is pretty pathetic - I have 2 of them, a g4 500 desktop and a g4 500 titanium powerbook. Both are VERY slow, even with maxed out RAM and everything else. No WAY would I get another 5 years more out of them. Furthermore, OS X 5 years ago was REALLY buggy. You really need at LEAST 10.3. Wintel machines are the same way. After about 5 years, everything needs to be refreshed, but they DO last about 5 years. Hell, I used a P-133 for at LEAST 5 years before upgrading to a P3-500, which I used for ANOTHER 5 years before upgrading nearly 2 years ago to a P4-2.8. I'll easily get another 3 years out of it. Linux runs just fine and I have no interest in the DRM/TPM "All your base" loaded Vista.
Ding ding! Exactly. Going in front of customers is not the same as wrangling code in a back-office cube. The reality of the business world is that "corporate image" is HUGELY important. When you are in front of a client, you ARE the company as far as the client is concerned. Grooming and dress are a big part of "image."
While YOU may like a companies products, the pointy haired bean counters may be unwilling to sign a PO for $1,200,000 if the company reps are in "long-haired hippie freaks in jeans and sandles."
But being a team member is also not the same as being part of a management team. This has even non-client facing impact.
I was in a merger situation once where one of the managers in the acquiring company was a total Goth with enough piercings to set off a metal detector 100 feet away. All of the acquired staff members in the department that was merged ended up quitting as they "couldn't work for someone like that" out of self respect. This ended up damaging the merger process so much the company ended up in bankruptsy - a situation that could have been avoided since the employees concerns were clearly transmitted to the senior executive team prior to the merger. Yes, this is more than hair, but the point remains.
Like it or not, your personal image, and how you present yourself DOES have an impact on people's willingingness to trust and respect you. Some people will just NOT trust people with facial hair, or tattoos, or "guys with long hair". It's frequently not a concious decision, but an automatic reaction due to a conflict with one's subconcious ideas of social norm. Most people can overcome this in time as they grow to understand a person, but some cannot.
Apparently the mods didn't get my joke :-(
:-)
No, I wouldn't want to foster forth on some poor newbie, although forth was cool back in the day
I've worked with a number of different assembler environments - 6502, Z80, IBM 360, PDP-11, 68000, and yes, x86. X86 is by far the most !@#$%^&*() instruction set ever. And when I went from 6502 to Z80 I thought the Z80 was bad... Sheesh.
Ruby however IS worth a look for new programmers.
Basic? E-gads, man! No, the proper language to start all newbies on is Forth.
This is quite true. I had a hosting account that did NOT provide SSH access, so I installed cgi-shell and was able to chsh my account to get ssh. Mainly I wanted it to use scp / rsync instead of ftp. Ftp blows.
Ha. Just wait until you get into Man Scouts. In Man Scouts you get to travel to foreign countries, drive 10 ton vehicles, fly airplains, helecoptors, sail in ships the size of small towns, and play with massive amounts of firepower! Only downside is that you have to put up with sandstorms, and getting shot at.
I would expect that if MS pulled their products from the EU, the EU would suspend MS's copyright due to the economic impact on the EU and basically approve "piracy" of MS products.
This is a fight that MS can NOT ultimately win IF the EU stands its ground. MS is dragging this out as long as possible to further cement their monopoly and push out the date that they will have no choice but to comply as far in to the future as possible.
The EU should get off it's duff and start fining MS now until they DO fully comply. This foot dragging continues to harm competitors and discourage potential competitors.
The US DOJ totally capitulated for political reasons which has severely damaged "true" competition in the US. Don't let that happen in the EU too.
Drugs are patented, music is copyrighted. TOTALLY different.
The reason some drugs can go generic after only a few years is that it can frequently take 10 years or more for new patented drugs to get to market. This is why some drug makers want to lengthen the term of patent protection.
As it stands, copyrights are WAY WAY too long. I think 50 years would be totally reasonable, 20 years for software.
Generally you can get exchange for defective within 30-90 days on CD's and DVD's. That's not the point. CD's and DVD are fragile media, and are easily damaged (as any parent with children understands all too well. My 4 year old once moved her Little-Tykes table in from another room and used it to get at her "circles" which were stored out of reach. There goes the widescreen version of "Finding Nemo.")
Backups are DEFINATELY fair use and should be protected be law, regardless of what the Recording Industry Asshole's of America think.
this assumes that the institution doesn't sell its email list
This also assumes that the institution only has one domain name, doesn't outsource ever, etc. In reality, they usually have many domain names, outsource to 98745983 different companies, etc. Even "consistant" messages are not consistant for long.
For example: Bank of america now has their "sitekey" security feature, but then outsources notifications that contain confidential information to third party companies. Clueless.
Your post advocates a
( ) technical ( ) legislative (x) market-based ( ) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
(x) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
(x) Users of email will not put up with it
(x) Microsoft will not put up with it
( ) The police will not put up with it
( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
(x) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
(x) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
(x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
(x) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
( ) Asshats
(x) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
(x) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
(x) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
( ) Extreme profitability of spam
(x) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
( ) Technically illiterate politicians
( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
(x) Sending email should be free
( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
What's worse is when banks OUTSOURCE email communication to random companies. BOA does this. For example: I have alerts setup for certain activity on my account. Furthermore, these alerts frequently have confidential data in them. Here are the relavant headers:
Return-path: b-SEA-######-1@alert.bankofamerica.com
Received: from sea-mail02.par3.com ([63.251.12.160]) ###deleted###
From: notices@alert.bankofamerica.com
You look up par3.com and see:
Registrant:
PAR3 Communications
821 2nd Ave
Ste 1000 - 10th Floor
Seattle, WA 98104
Needless to say, I'm in the process of transfering all my accounds out to a local bank where I've had a chat with their CIO to ensure that the new bank doesn't do this kind of crap.
You have: 10,489 viruses on your computer
I've seen similar, although generally it's ONE virus infecting 10,489 files...
Dark fiber is long-haul for the google-POP concept (datacenter in a crate - get content closer to the users.)
The problem in the FA is about local internet providers. Totally different.
Um, no. That is ONLY the case when you have a CLEC like covad that puts their own equipment in Verizon's offices. Again, generally only happens in larger markets. Other ISP's just resell Verizon DSL lines by getting a PVC to the VOL network. Usually it costs even more than Verizon too, for service that is as bad or worse. In larger metro areas, you can get alternatives like Speakeasy which rock. Not the case everywhere.
Definitions for the Geek Impaired: POP = Point of Presence, FIOS = Verizon's fiber to the home service. Loop = phone line to the house. What the fuck is WTF and IMHO? In my humble opinion you shouldn't use bizzare acronyms... :-)
Things are worse when you are too far for DSL and the local cable segment is oversubscribed to the point that you get modem-like speeds during prime time. I used to live in a part of San Jose, CA that didn't have ANY high-speed options except IDSL for $130 / month. The cable company was disputing the city franchise terms and wouldn't roll out cable modems unless they got what they wanted, and SBC basically just didn't give a damn.
Considering that they are going to be rolling out a massive video on demand service, probably centralized, I would expect that they WOULD do something like carve out PVC's. This would be an anticompetitive move to ensure that no other outside provider (think google) could compete with VOL's VOD service due to lack of bandwidth.
I think that is the POINT of google being upset. It's not stupid, it's just a nasty anticompetitive thing to do.