You can develop for both.. my point is that sometimes you come down to a choice between having something (IE only) or not (everything else). In those cases, I do what I can to make sure that the "everything else" will work and display. Then, the IE version (usually Windows only) gets the full functionality. It's not right - but it's reality.
No it's not: it's pathetic.
If you can't cope with targetting a wide range of browsers you should rethink whether your capable to play in this game. Sometimes the client does not have a choice of browser or platform. What do you tell these people? "Sorry but you must use Browser X with this site" ?
Even different versions of IE have different quirks and that's harder to test because you can't install any version of IE alongside IE6. So to test this you need multiple OS installations. It sucks. That's life. That's why you get paid.
I work for a webdev company, 95% Linux-based. We find that practically all of our stuff renders in Gecko flawlessly, but IE screws it up due to not complying with standards. We employ various techniques including vbscript hacks and "catering to the lowest common denominator for a specific thing", etc. It's annoying yes but that's our job.
You people just hate Bush especially more because he's a conservative Republican.
Somehow I doubt that. A lot of us outside of the US wouldn't understand exactly what a US Conservative Republican is. An Australian Republican is different from an American Republican for instance.
I can't speak for anyone else but I hate him because he's a dangerous, obstinate, self-serving moron who fraudulently took office and tries to run the world through fear, uncertaintly and doubt. He could be a fucking democrat for all I care.
The good news is I think all us non-USians are calming down and not directing hatred towards Americans in general. We hate your leaders, we hate your corporation-focused infrastructure and seemingly blind US focus. We don't hate you.
To all republican voters: we feel sorry for you. You must live in a pretty narrowly-focused universe.
I felt the same way about David Dawes: he seemed arrogant, obstinate and difficult to carry a meaninfgul debate with. He even admitted that he doesn't even run X anymore: he uses Windows. Therefore it seems reasonable to suggest that his opinion on X is of less significance now than it was a few years ago.
But before jumping all over DD, have a quick look at the CVS commits for XFree86 over the years. He certainly has contributed a lot to the free X Server we have been using for years. Despite his abrasiveness I don't think it's fair for all his hard work to be disregarded.
Anyone who has ever had to manage a CheckPoint box for a period of time knows about Phoneboy.
Stors spews forth: - Check out phoneboy's stuff for details on FTP configuration. You used to write/patch in some custom inspect to get it to work right in some configurations. i.e. the Policy Editor is not enough. - During testing, tcpdump/ethereal are your friends. Also if you're new to all this and you're doing static translations, you might need to get used to futzing with the translations configuration stuff (src->dst xlate/don't xlate stuff) - If you've got it on a Solaris box, you ought to harden Solaris' TCP options in the kernel. This is documented... Google for hardening solaris. - If you've got one of those qfe cards and it's plugged into a Cisco switch (there may be other cards/switches that exhibit this behaviour) you may need to force the speed and duplex (on both devices), otherwise they can go into an autonegotiating frenzy intermittently.
*Practically* speaking, that's a crap argument. I haven't seen any linux distros installing libc5 support by default recently. Which means old libc5 apps won't run (unless they happened to be statically linked). I even seem to recall some pain in the glibc 2.0->2.1 transition. Or how about trying to install some older rpms on a shiny new distribution? It's about a 50-50 shot that it works.
I disagree. A fortnight ago I had to install an old version of trend antivirus on a Linux MTA I was building. It needed libc5 and this was a Redhat 9 box (glibc). So I downloaded compat-libc-6.2-blah, installed and it all worked fine.
Sometimes you need to create a symlink or two when the.so names don't match exactly but this is pretty straight-forward.
Yep. Resolve was the wrong term. My bad. What was the term I'm after? Basically, the client should be connected to a local intranet where the other machine is every IP address.
I'm unsure as to whether there's a special term for that: it's just configuring the routing in a bogus fashion to "send the client to a sink" so to speak. You may need to use source routing to make it work.
Packet mangling and/or dynamic translation would also be tools in your arsenal to take care of this.
You tend to find in ISPs that Border and Core routers are fairly overloaded as-is, with large routing tables (incl. OSPF/RIP/BGP) and a lot of traffic to deal with so introducing this seems a bit risky and ugly. I'd tend to investigate using a proxy especially since the goal is really to filter the content, not disrupt network services.
It should be possible to connect them to a router that resolves *.*.*.* to a server that contains only a website with information on why they have been disconnected, and how to remove the virus/trojan from their system.
Well maybe not exactly. If you're talking about name resolution the client machine will use whatever nameservers it is configured to use, whether that be via dhcp or set manually.
You *could* do that with some funky routing and packet mangling but I'd avoid that. You could also just get your nameservers to return bogus stuff to their IP Address when queried, like resolving a worm's target address e.g. www.sco.com to 127.0.0.1. But as above, the user can easily circumvent that by entering nameservers manually or running their own dns.
Using a proxy/ transparent proxy is more appropriate: you can do funky stuff with a proxy without disrupting the routing or dns by introducing (admittedly harmless and localised if properly configured) bogons.
Another alternative (or addition, depending...) could be performing selective port forwarding to content filtering proxies. Check out amavisd-new, spamassassin, vipul's razor, postfix/exim's proxying abilities...
Just remember: force all troublesome traffic through a proxy/content filter and filter the stuff.
None of this is rocket science. The main problem to the business is the initial and ongoing costs of the system. It certainly wouldn't be trivial to do this at a large ISP: you've got bucketloads of important traffic to deal with. That means a large, highly-available, costly system.
They're trying to attack that problem in Japan. There has been a lot of opportunity for foreigners to teach "Conversational English" to native Japanese in the past few years. There are agencies over there specialising in providing teachers of C.E.
In fact my brother is currently in Tokyo doing just that (he's been there for over a year now). A few friends of mine have done it too.
It's interesting you bring up this behaviour. I have observed it myself but not with Mormons specifically but rather certain people in any religious or cultural group.
It's an odd human behaviour: forming groups of individuals (generally a positive thing) and then looking down on everyone else (which ruins everything).
This is of course bad for SCO, who claims they need IBM to provide AIX before they can identify what is infringing.
Yeah that does seem to be their claim but I have no idea how they can claim something like that.
Their original claim was that IBM has taken bits of Unix and copied it into Linux. If this is true then all they need is:
1. The Unix Source Code That They Own The Copyright To 2. The Linux Source Code
WHY in heaven's name is Dynix/AIX relevant AT ALL? Are SCO trying to claim the following?:
IBM Takes SCO Code --> put it into AIX/Dynix as a kind of "laundering" facility --> puts the "laundered" derivative work into Linux.
Or are they claiming that IBM misappropriately used their code in AIX? If that's what they're claiming then Linux isn't relevant right? If _that's_ the case then why are they still threatening Linux users and companies?
I've got a friend with a C64. He loves it and won't trade it for anything. I told him I could emulate a C-64 with fuck-all CPU and he replied with "Emulamer!"
He also has a laser disc player (bought it a month or so ago), a couple of reel-to-reels and a tabletop Galaga that he's converted into an Atari 2600 (you insert the cartridges into the side)
Did you realise that the demo scene on the C-64 is still alive and well and that they're pushing out impressive stuff? If you're a true geek (esp. if you're a "demo" geek) you'd be suprised at what these C-64 geeks have managed to accomplish. I sure was.
His letter is basically "What's your plan for moving out of your parents' place?"
Oh c'mon. He said a lot more than that.
It was more like "What's your plan for moving out of your parents' place? Your current plan seems stupid. You're going to be living in the gutter while IBM profits from your hard work and laughs. What are you thinking, idiot? You're just a naive idealistic kid and if you keep your current morals the industry will eat you alive."
It was patronising, cynical, heavily biased, uninformed FUD.
Thank you to the dudes that write Free/Open Source software: in these times where "Only the Bottom Line Matters(tm)" we're unbelievably fortunate to have you around.
Slashdot Mirror
The US government funded the Taliban. So if there's no middle ground, I guess all Americans are terrorists.
Cheers
Stor
The US has some of the cleanest air and water in all the world.
Sorry, what planet/parallel dimension are we referring to again?
Cheers
Stor
Brick Wall.
Cheers
Stor
You can develop for both.. my point is that sometimes you come down to a choice between having something (IE only) or not (everything else). In those cases, I do what I can to make sure that the "everything else" will work and display. Then, the IE version (usually Windows only) gets the full functionality. It's not right - but it's reality.
No it's not: it's pathetic.
If you can't cope with targetting a wide range of browsers you should rethink whether your capable to play in this game. Sometimes the client does not have a choice of browser or platform. What do you tell these people? "Sorry but you must use Browser X with this site" ?
Even different versions of IE have different quirks and that's harder to test because you can't install any version of IE alongside IE6. So to test this you need multiple OS installations. It sucks. That's life. That's why you get paid.
I work for a webdev company, 95% Linux-based. We find that practically all of our stuff renders in Gecko flawlessly, but IE screws it up due to not complying with standards. We employ various techniques including vbscript hacks and "catering to the lowest common denominator for a specific thing", etc. It's annoying yes but that's our job.
Cheers
Stor
Since the last version, computers have become 10% faster
Yeah that's right! I'm sure I read that in a benchmark somewhere... computers in general, 10% faster since the last version of Mozilla.
What?
Cheers
Stor
You people just hate Bush especially more because he's a conservative Republican.
Somehow I doubt that. A lot of us outside of the US wouldn't understand exactly what a US Conservative Republican is. An Australian Republican is different from an American Republican for instance.
I can't speak for anyone else but I hate him because he's a dangerous, obstinate, self-serving moron who fraudulently took office and tries to run the world through fear, uncertaintly and doubt. He could be a fucking democrat for all I care.
The good news is I think all us non-USians are calming down and not directing hatred towards Americans in general. We hate your leaders, we hate your corporation-focused infrastructure and seemingly blind US focus. We don't hate you.
To all republican voters: we feel sorry for you. You must live in a pretty narrowly-focused universe.
Cheers
Stor
I felt the same way about David Dawes: he seemed arrogant, obstinate and difficult to carry a meaninfgul debate with. He even admitted that he doesn't even run X anymore: he uses Windows. Therefore it seems reasonable to suggest that his opinion on X is of less significance now than it was a few years ago.
But before jumping all over DD, have a quick look at the CVS commits for XFree86 over the years. He certainly has contributed a lot to the free X Server we have been using for years. Despite his abrasiveness I don't think it's fair for all his hard work to be disregarded.
Cheers
Stor
We haven't yet abolished elections so that isn't ever happening.
But what happens when the elections are not fair?
Cheers
Stor
I mean, why should the US be able to force its laws on other countries and other countries not be able to force their laws on the US?
Quote Denis Leary:
"Because WE got the bomb, ok?"
Or Bill Hicks:
"We're the bullies of the World"
Cheers
Stor
No reason to hold back until you find one.
*applause and chuckling*
I couldn't have said that better myself.
Cheers
Stor
Anyone who has ever had to manage a CheckPoint box for a period of time knows about Phoneboy.
Stors spews forth:
- Check out phoneboy's stuff for details on FTP configuration. You used to write/patch in some custom inspect to get it to work right in some configurations. i.e. the Policy Editor is not enough.
- During testing, tcpdump/ethereal are your friends. Also if you're new to all this and you're doing static translations, you might need to get used to futzing with the translations configuration stuff (src->dst xlate/don't xlate stuff)
- If you've got it on a Solaris box, you ought to harden Solaris' TCP options in the kernel. This is documented... Google for hardening solaris.
- If you've got one of those qfe cards and it's plugged into a Cisco switch (there may be other cards/switches that exhibit this behaviour) you may need to force the speed and duplex (on both devices), otherwise they can go into an autonegotiating frenzy intermittently.
Cheers
Stor
Yes this does indeed seem to be MS's answer to the "reliability" question:
Just build a cluster! All of them won't blow up at the same time, right?
Cheers
Stor
*Practically* speaking, that's a crap argument. I haven't seen any linux distros installing libc5 support by default recently. Which means old libc5 apps won't run (unless they happened to be statically linked). I even seem to recall some pain in the glibc 2.0->2.1 transition. Or how about trying to install some older rpms on a shiny new distribution? It's about a 50-50 shot that it works.
.so names don't match exactly but this is pretty straight-forward.
I disagree. A fortnight ago I had to install an old version of trend antivirus on a Linux MTA I was building. It needed libc5 and this was a Redhat 9 box (glibc). So I downloaded compat-libc-6.2-blah, installed and it all worked fine.
Sometimes you need to create a symlink or two when the
This is certainly not an extraordinary situation.
Cheers
Stor
circular reference dependency problems such as MySQL needs Perl which needs MySQL-DBI which can't be installed without MySQL
....
rpm -Uvh mysql-blahblah.rpm dbi-blah.rpm dbd-blah.rpm
Resolving circular dependencies is simple: you just install them at the same time.
Cheers
Stor
See this: /|
That's the world's smallest violin, playing just for Joe Infected.
Cheers
Stor
Yep. Resolve was the wrong term. My bad. What was the term I'm after? Basically, the client should be connected to a local intranet where the other machine is every IP address.
I'm unsure as to whether there's a special term for that: it's just configuring the routing in a bogus fashion to "send the client to a sink" so to speak. You may need to use source routing to make it work.
Packet mangling and/or dynamic translation would also be tools in your arsenal to take care of this.
You tend to find in ISPs that Border and Core routers are fairly overloaded as-is, with large routing tables (incl. OSPF/RIP/BGP) and a lot of traffic to deal with so introducing this seems a bit risky and ugly. I'd tend to investigate using a proxy especially since the goal is really to filter the content, not disrupt network services.
Cheers
Stor
It should be possible to connect them to a router that resolves *.*.*.* to a server that contains only a website with information on why they have been disconnected, and how to remove the virus/trojan from their system.
Well maybe not exactly. If you're talking about name resolution the client machine will use whatever nameservers it is configured to use, whether that be via dhcp or set manually.
You *could* do that with some funky routing and packet mangling but I'd avoid that. You could also just get your nameservers to return bogus stuff to their IP Address when queried, like resolving a worm's target address e.g. www.sco.com to 127.0.0.1. But as above, the user can easily circumvent that by entering nameservers manually or running their own dns.
Using a proxy/ transparent proxy is more appropriate: you can do funky stuff with a proxy without disrupting the routing or dns by introducing (admittedly harmless and localised if properly configured) bogons.
Another alternative (or addition, depending...) could be performing selective port forwarding to content filtering proxies. Check out amavisd-new, spamassassin, vipul's razor, postfix/exim's proxying abilities...
Just remember: force all troublesome traffic through a proxy/content filter and filter the stuff.
None of this is rocket science. The main problem to the business is the initial and ongoing costs of the system. It certainly wouldn't be trivial to do this at a large ISP: you've got bucketloads of important traffic to deal with. That means a large, highly-available, costly system.
Cheers
Stor
Who wants to kill Darl?
Good question.
Many people here have answered "geeks do... well, we might!" but I seriously doubt that. Most geeks I know don't want to hurt anyone.
Darl has a history of fucking over companies. I personally believe he's been carrying a gun for a while now.
Cheers
Stor
They're trying to attack that problem in Japan. There has been a lot of opportunity for foreigners to teach "Conversational English" to native Japanese in the past few years. There are agencies over there specialising in providing teachers of C.E.
In fact my brother is currently in Tokyo doing just that (he's been there for over a year now). A few friends of mine have done it too.
Cheers
Stor
It's interesting you bring up this behaviour. I have observed it myself but not with Mormons specifically but rather certain people in any religious or cultural group.
It's an odd human behaviour: forming groups of individuals (generally a positive thing) and then looking down on everyone else (which ruins everything).
Cheers
Stor
Is electrowetting wetting the bed with the Electric Blanket on?
Cheers
Stor
This is of course bad for SCO, who claims they need IBM to provide AIX before they can identify what is infringing.
Yeah that does seem to be their claim but I have no idea how they can claim something like that.
Their original claim was that IBM has taken bits of Unix and copied it into Linux. If this is true then all they need is:
1. The Unix Source Code That They Own The Copyright To
2. The Linux Source Code
WHY in heaven's name is Dynix/AIX relevant AT ALL? Are SCO trying to claim the following?:
IBM Takes SCO Code --> put it into AIX/Dynix as a kind of "laundering" facility --> puts the "laundered" derivative work into Linux.
Or are they claiming that IBM misappropriately used their code in AIX? If that's what they're claiming then Linux isn't relevant right? If _that's_ the case then why are they still threatening Linux users and companies?
Ahh fuck it... wake me up in 45 days.
Cheers
Stor
Hey Dominic!
I just wanted to let you know:
I was flipping through a PC Mag at Sydney airport while waiting for a plane and it had a section reviewing sound applications.
So there was SoundForge, CoolEdit, a wholy bunch of expensive proprietary Windows sound applications and... Audacity!
I had to blink to ensure I wasn't hallucinating. It got a good review, too. The reviewer was impressed.
Just thought you'd like to know that you're officially playing with the big boys.
Cheers
Stor
I've got a friend with a C64. He loves it and won't trade it for anything. I told him I could emulate a C-64 with fuck-all CPU and he replied with "Emulamer!"
He also has a laser disc player (bought it a month or so ago), a couple of reel-to-reels and a tabletop Galaga that he's converted into an Atari 2600 (you insert the cartridges into the side)
Did you realise that the demo scene on the C-64 is still alive and well and that they're pushing out impressive stuff? If you're a true geek (esp. if you're a "demo" geek) you'd be suprised at what these C-64 geeks have managed to accomplish. I sure was.
Cheers
Stor
His letter is basically "What's your plan for moving out of your parents' place?"
Oh c'mon. He said a lot more than that.
It was more like "What's your plan for moving out of your parents' place? Your current plan seems stupid. You're going to be living in the gutter while IBM profits from your hard work and laughs. What are you thinking, idiot? You're just a naive idealistic kid and if you keep your current morals the industry will eat you alive."
It was patronising, cynical, heavily biased, uninformed FUD.
Thank you to the dudes that write Free/Open Source software: in these times where "Only the Bottom Line Matters(tm)" we're unbelievably fortunate to have you around.
Cheers
Stor