Really? I am so glad you believe in the Constitution, and have library skills. Here is some food for thought from that Constitution:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably
to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Main Entry: abridge
1 a archaic : DEPRIVE b : to reduce in scope : DIMINISH [attempts to abridge the right of free speech]
(definition ironically abridged in order to satisfy slashdot's troll filters...):(
Just because our illustrious government has been ignoring the constitution for the past century and you seem to think that the right to peaceably assemble and speak your mind are too radical to stomach does not make it so.
As for your reference to the "20th terrorist" I would be concerned too if I was a lawyer whose client was being charged with crimes which occurred while he was in jail.
As for your claim this guy is a "skinhead." Well, that is just unjustified, as he clearly is not. IN fact our government routinely protects skinheads and the Klan when they protest, even when they are in town to gloat over their recent killing of a black man by being dragged to death by a pickup truck. Protestors of logging, war, US-sponsored terrorism, racist trade agreements, and pollution, well, they are clearly dangerous and must be immediately gassed and attacked.
Good. I hope you go on every blacklist there is. In fact, I hope you go out of business. Maintaining a host that enables spam is just plain wrong. And people get sick of receiving mail from lists saying "Oh! if you want to opt-out you can go to our ad-filled website!" not getting taken off the list they never subscribed to in the first place, and being told it was "opt-in." For a lot of these sites "opt-in" means you once put your email address on one of their "partners" websites to see an article or download a patch.
The purpose of mailing lists was to give groups of people access to discussion and infromation. It was NOT so I can get hundreds of "informative" scam advertisements. It was NOT for spurious "newsletters" containing nothing but get-rich-quick schemes and mlm to be sent to milions of people. And it was certainly not for bastards like you to make a quick buck off of it.
Harbouring spammers, IMHO should be treated just as harbouring terrorists is now. I think a lot of people will rejoice when what you do is illegal and all ISP's must blackhole scum like you.
Indeed, on any platform Mozilla runs on, it lets you disable these "features" of javascript and still run javascript and java. Konquerer lets you turn off popups, but I haven't seen it available for anything but Linux.
Mozilla lets you disable popup windows, status bar changes, resizing, and raising/lowering windows.
The same applies to GPLed software. In the absence of a license, you have no right to copy a copyrighted work. To say that the limited grant of rights under the GPL deprives you of anything, or requires you to "give up" other rights, is a vicious lie.
Slow down,pocahontas*. While your analogy is correct for eulas, with the GPL we have a thornier problem indeed. In the GPl you not only tell a person they can only take from one tree, but also that when you make a pie, you must provide a method to obtain apples, and the recipe for the pie. You don't have to give away the pie, but most people end up doing so and selling t-shirts with pictures of birds on them.
Granted, as a derivative work, the creation of the pie maker would not exist without the original apples, but you are certainly meddling with the way the pie-maker handles his distribution. Some might consider this taking away rights they might otherwise have had, others might point the way to Red Devil farm, which does not care what you do with the pie you make. (Though they are also curiously relegated to selling t-shirts:) ).
Honestly I like the GPL, because I agree with some of Stallman's ideas, and certainly would like to see a world in which the more mundane parts of the computer such as OS and office apps were gratis et libre, therefore freeing programmers from reinventing the wheel, allowing said technologies to advance beyond the 1960's in feature sets, and allowing said programmers and the companies they work for to focus on truly novel uses for computers and applications.
In a recent article in The Economist, they are quoted as saying that indeed this sort of thing is a planned new revenue stream. In fact there are now companies whose sole business is finding patents otehr companies have that might make them revenue by suing other companies and forcing them to pay licensing fees...
Actually, this is precisely why I use OpenBSD. Think about it. Microsoft adds all kinds of insecurity to their OS because they are afraid of losing customers and developers if they leave out "features," whereas Theo's response to such whining would be something on the order of "tough titty."
When security is a concern, having a paranoid asshole at the helm is beneficial, because he is not going to take in any crap. Honestly, though, it seems to me from reading Theo's posts he is not an asshole in a general way, he isn't just cruel to people for no reason. But he is an asshole when it counts, when it comes to making sure that code quality, security, and technical perfection are there.
A good example is the recent IP Filtering debacle. When the maintainer of the IP filtering system used by OpenBSD tried to cause licensing problems, Theo said "no way" and was not afraid to take it out completely even though he knew most people using OpenBSD were using it for firewalling and would be using the filter. But he would rather rewrite the whole thing than allow the project to be held hostage or allow bad design decisions and licensing problems into the project.
Of course people said "There he goes, again. What an asshole!" And I say they were absolutely right. Thank you , Theo, for not being afraid to be an asshole when it really counted.:)
If what I have read onthe mailing lists is any indication, it is unlikely Theo will lose control (well, of teh project anyway:) ). Most seemed to agree that this kind of stunt is exactly what Darren was trying to pull when he put the offending clause in the license in the first place. And regardless of how people feel, it seems the "Official" OpenBSD is still more trusted.
NetBSD out of business? What? Are you smoking Moderator crack, Mr. Troll? Besides, Theo was locked out of the NetBSD project and waited almost a year (holding the only Sparc port BTW) before coming out with OpenBSD. It is not the same situation.
Actually, the reason FreeBSD can use it is that it uses an unmodified ipfilter. Ipfilter was originally written for FreeBSD, IIRC. But while FreeBSD uses ipfilter in userspace, OpenBSD always used a heavily modified form which lived in kernel space. The problem was that Darren and Theo got in a pissing match and Darren put a clause in his license that said he had to approve any release of ipfilter. Theo responded by dumping ipfilter, now Darren is trying to counter by creating his own OpenBSD.
While this is legal, the problem is that the whole point of OpenBSD is the security audtnig the OpenBSD team does. The version Darren is pushing is essentially a patched version of what they are putting out, but any security auditing of his patches is likely going to be done by him alone. I don't think this is a way to go, frankly.
Slackware is alive, well and better than ever. It is the most UNIX-like of all the disributions, and super-clean. Version 8.0 recently came out and has all kinds of great hardware support and a vastly updated user area, plus KSH93 (at last!).
Some troll posted further down this thread that Slackware was not for the enterprise. Perhaps if they were in the enterprise they would have heard of a little operating system called Solaris. Well, Slackware is like Solaris in a lot of ways, and the administration of the two is very similar.
I have found Slackware does in fact make it easy to set up a minimal system, but it lacks nothing in the way of features for business use, especially as a server.
As for Patrick, the creator of one of the earliest Linux distros as well as the earliest Linux Programming book, he is just fine, alive, well, and still kicking out CDs and books which you can buy or download on their site.
What's wrong with having an AOLClient in Linux? It seems/. recently had an article on the protocol being open source, can't find the story, but honestly I think an AOL client would be a step toward getting OEM's to accept Linux more for the desktop...
One other thing. The poster you replied to was talking about our current government controlling the distribution of music. So obviously Capitalism != free distribution in a true sense.
Another misnomer in this country is the notion Communism means the government controls everything. That may be what Cuba and Russia did, but it is not really Communism. Communism is an economic theory which was not really practiced in those countries. Essentially, they were practicing a kind of feudal/mafia capitalism and giving it Communist trappings to make it sound good. The idea of the government controlling everything is Fascism/Stalinism, not Communism.
The original idea of Communism was in fact very democratic as it was to result in control of resources by the people at large instead of by a few. Of course this is not what happened and is unlikely to happen given the propensity of humans to create power structures. And of course the greed/laziness factor is something a complete Communist model would have to overcome.
You will find you will understand ideas better if you read about them from their proponents rather than or at least in conjunction with their opponents. The kind of straw men you are describing only occur in propaganda designed to create FUD and tear down ideas, rather than seek to understand them.
Actually, there was a lot of great underground music in Russia. But it is rare in the US to hear anything from other countries. We seem to be busy producing so much cultural noise we are unlikely to hear anyone else's voice, and if American media companies had their way, people in otehr countries would be unable to hear local music for all the noise from the US.
They have not had a remote root exploit in the default install of a default distribution, yes. They of course have lots of flaws, and even remote root exploits. It is just that the daemons which are exploitable are turned off by default. They came close on that sshd one, but when it was announced they had already been up-to-date for months. Usually any holes which are found in the current version have a patch available, and a lot of stuff is preemptively fixed.
Nevertheless, it is possible to install OpenBSD and then be vulnerable because you were using an old version, or turned on some daemons before checking on the latest patches. For instance the latest version, 3.0, had an lpd remote root exploit but there was a patch at the time of release and the lpd is turned off by default.
No OS will ever protect you from having to do your homework, at least until they successfully build that in...
I used to leave Napster on 24/7 sharing Gigabytes of MP3's which I had categorized and worked to cull out the bad ones. I am rarely home, so I was certainly sharing more than I was downloading. Then my cable modem company sent me a nasty email saying that
1) Napster Violates their TOS since it is a Server
2) They would be monitoring upload traffic and people with large uploads would start being cut off.
Now maybe it was because they are merged with AOL, BMI, etc... (hint hint)
I would have switched to DSL, where having a server is not a violation, but it is still not available at my current address. I think it is unlikely to change even though I live in the city, in a city with widespread dsl. So until I move I am stuck and can't afford to lose my connection so people can download MP3's.
Actually, before gnutella, etc were around, there was dcc on IRC (and yes before that ftp). And therein you will find the solution to the problem, something that was also done on bbs's, etc.
Essentially, if the software enforces an upload/download ratio, you have the same effect. You must upload so much before you can download, and the amount you can download depends on your upload. The best ratios are purposefully designed such that you can still download more than you upload, which matches both human behaviour and the grim reality of scarcity of resources (you can't build a collection of files unless you can download a lot of stuff, and if you don't download a lot of stuff, you don't have a lot to upload).
Those who refuse to learn history are doomed to repeat it. Programmers who refuse to learn computer history cause users to suffer needlessly with problems which were solved decades ago. (Witness Office programs without features which existed on ancient word processing systems, and MMRPG's which miss out on lessons learned from MUD's, etc...)
Slashdot Mirror
Hacker goofs
Hackers goof
Seems to be correct grammar to me...
We are discussing XP Workstation in this case, anyway. There is no XP Server at the moment...
As a matter of fact, the tactics you describe were indeed discussed on the raisethefist.com website.
How many people did he kill?
Really? I am so glad you believe in the Constitution, and have library skills. Here is some food for thought from that Constitution:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably
to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
And from the dictionary:
Main Entry: abridge
1 a archaic : DEPRIVE b : to reduce in scope : DIMINISH [attempts to abridge the right of free speech]
(definition ironically abridged in order to satisfy slashdot's troll filters...) :(
Just because our illustrious government has been ignoring the constitution for the past century and you seem to think that the right to peaceably assemble and speak your mind are too radical to stomach does not make it so.
As for your reference to the "20th terrorist" I would be concerned too if I was a lawyer whose client was being charged with crimes which occurred while he was in jail.
As for your claim this guy is a "skinhead." Well, that is just unjustified, as he clearly is not. IN fact our government routinely protects skinheads and the Klan when they protest, even when they are in town to gloat over their recent killing of a black man by being dragged to death by a pickup truck. Protestors of logging, war, US-sponsored terrorism, racist trade agreements, and pollution, well, they are clearly dangerous and must be immediately gassed and attacked.
Good. I hope you go on every blacklist there is. In fact, I hope you go out of business. Maintaining a host that enables spam is just plain wrong. And people get sick of receiving mail from lists saying "Oh! if you want to opt-out you can go to our ad-filled website!" not getting taken off the list they never subscribed to in the first place, and being told it was "opt-in." For a lot of these sites "opt-in" means you once put your email address on one of their "partners" websites to see an article or download a patch.
The purpose of mailing lists was to give groups of people access to discussion and infromation. It was NOT so I can get hundreds of "informative" scam advertisements. It was NOT for spurious "newsletters" containing nothing but get-rich-quick schemes and mlm to be sent to milions of people. And it was certainly not for bastards like you to make a quick buck off of it.
Harbouring spammers, IMHO should be treated just as harbouring terrorists is now. I think a lot of people will rejoice when what you do is illegal and all ISP's must blackhole scum like you.
Indeed, on any platform Mozilla runs on, it lets you disable these "features" of javascript and still run javascript and java. Konquerer lets you turn off popups, but I haven't seen it available for anything but Linux.
Mozilla lets you disable popup windows, status bar changes, resizing, and raising/lowering windows.
The same applies to GPLed software. In the absence of a license, you have no right to copy a copyrighted work. To say that the limited grant of rights under the GPL deprives you of anything, or requires you to "give up" other rights, is a vicious lie.
Slow down,pocahontas*. While your analogy is correct for eulas, with the GPL we have a thornier problem indeed. In the GPl you not only tell a person they can only take from one tree, but also that when you make a pie, you must provide a method to obtain apples, and the recipe for the pie. You don't have to give away the pie, but most people end up doing so and selling t-shirts with pictures of birds on them.
Granted, as a derivative work, the creation of the pie maker would not exist without the original apples, but you are certainly meddling with the way the pie-maker handles his distribution. Some might consider this taking away rights they might otherwise have had, others might point the way to Red Devil farm, which does not care what you do with the pie you make. (Though they are also curiously relegated to selling t-shirts :) ).
Honestly I like the GPL, because I agree with some of Stallman's ideas, and certainly would like to see a world in which the more mundane parts of the computer such as OS and office apps were gratis et libre, therefore freeing programmers from reinventing the wheel, allowing said technologies to advance beyond the 1960's in feature sets, and allowing said programmers and the companies they work for to focus on truly novel uses for computers and applications.
oddly, us phone companies have yellow pages and also publish them online without such trouble as sun had...
In a recent article in The Economist, they are quoted as saying that indeed this sort of thing is a planned new revenue stream. In fact there are now companies whose sole business is finding patents otehr companies have that might make them revenue by suing other companies and forcing them to pay licensing fees...
gtk programmers, apparently :)
Actually, this is precisely why I use OpenBSD. Think about it. Microsoft adds all kinds of insecurity to their OS because they are afraid of losing customers and developers if they leave out "features," whereas Theo's response to such whining would be something on the order of "tough titty."
When security is a concern, having a paranoid asshole at the helm is beneficial, because he is not going to take in any crap. Honestly, though, it seems to me from reading Theo's posts he is not an asshole in a general way, he isn't just cruel to people for no reason. But he is an asshole when it counts, when it comes to making sure that code quality, security, and technical perfection are there.
A good example is the recent IP Filtering debacle. When the maintainer of the IP filtering system used by OpenBSD tried to cause licensing problems, Theo said "no way" and was not afraid to take it out completely even though he knew most people using OpenBSD were using it for firewalling and would be using the filter. But he would rather rewrite the whole thing than allow the project to be held hostage or allow bad design decisions and licensing problems into the project.
Of course people said "There he goes, again. What an asshole!" And I say they were absolutely right. Thank you , Theo, for not being afraid to be an asshole when it really counted. :)
If what I have read onthe mailing lists is any indication, it is unlikely Theo will lose control (well, of teh project anyway :) ). Most seemed to agree that this kind of stunt is exactly what Darren was trying to pull when he put the offending clause in the license in the first place. And regardless of how people feel, it seems the "Official" OpenBSD is still more trusted.
NetBSD out of business? What? Are you smoking Moderator crack, Mr. Troll? Besides, Theo was locked out of the NetBSD project and waited almost a year (holding the only Sparc port BTW) before coming out with OpenBSD. It is not the same situation.
Actually, the reason FreeBSD can use it is that it uses an unmodified ipfilter. Ipfilter was originally written for FreeBSD, IIRC. But while FreeBSD uses ipfilter in userspace, OpenBSD always used a heavily modified form which lived in kernel space. The problem was that Darren and Theo got in a pissing match and Darren put a clause in his license that said he had to approve any release of ipfilter. Theo responded by dumping ipfilter, now Darren is trying to counter by creating his own OpenBSD.
While this is legal, the problem is that the whole point of OpenBSD is the security audtnig the OpenBSD team does. The version Darren is pushing is essentially a patched version of what they are putting out, but any security auditing of his patches is likely going to be done by him alone. I don't think this is a way to go, frankly.
I thought pf was rules-compatable with ipf?
Slackware is alive, well and better than ever. It is the most UNIX-like of all the disributions, and super-clean. Version 8.0 recently came out and has all kinds of great hardware support and a vastly updated user area, plus KSH93 (at last!).
Some troll posted further down this thread that Slackware was not for the enterprise. Perhaps if they were in the enterprise they would have heard of a little operating system called Solaris. Well, Slackware is like Solaris in a lot of ways, and the administration of the two is very similar.
I have found Slackware does in fact make it easy to set up a minimal system, but it lacks nothing in the way of features for business use, especially as a server.
As for Patrick, the creator of one of the earliest Linux distros as well as the earliest Linux Programming book, he is just fine, alive, well, and still kicking out CDs and books which you can buy or download on their site.
What's wrong with having an AOL Client in Linux? It seems /. recently had an article on the protocol being open source, can't find the story, but honestly I think an AOL client would be a step toward getting OEM's to accept Linux more for the desktop...
Perhaps this is why Miguel De Icaza is working to create a .NET implementation in Linux...
That is, unless you live in a country governed by corporate interests (USA)
One other thing. The poster you replied to was talking about our current government controlling the distribution of music. So obviously Capitalism != free distribution in a true sense.
Another misnomer in this country is the notion Communism means the government controls everything. That may be what Cuba and Russia did, but it is not really Communism. Communism is an economic theory which was not really practiced in those countries. Essentially, they were practicing a kind of feudal/mafia capitalism and giving it Communist trappings to make it sound good. The idea of the government controlling everything is Fascism/Stalinism, not Communism.
The original idea of Communism was in fact very democratic as it was to result in control of resources by the people at large instead of by a few. Of course this is not what happened and is unlikely to happen given the propensity of humans to create power structures. And of course the greed/laziness factor is something a complete Communist model would have to overcome.
You will find you will understand ideas better if you read about them from their proponents rather than or at least in conjunction with their opponents. The kind of straw men you are describing only occur in propaganda designed to create FUD and tear down ideas, rather than seek to understand them.
Actually, there was a lot of great underground music in Russia. But it is rare in the US to hear anything from other countries. We seem to be busy producing so much cultural noise we are unlikely to hear anyone else's voice, and if American media companies had their way, people in otehr countries would be unable to hear local music for all the noise from the US.
They have not had a remote root exploit in the default install of a default distribution, yes. They of course have lots of flaws, and even remote root exploits. It is just that the daemons which are exploitable are turned off by default. They came close on that sshd one, but when it was announced they had already been up-to-date for months. Usually any holes which are found in the current version have a patch available, and a lot of stuff is preemptively fixed.
Nevertheless, it is possible to install OpenBSD and then be vulnerable because you were using an old version, or turned on some daemons before checking on the latest patches. For instance the latest version, 3.0, had an lpd remote root exploit but there was a patch at the time of release and the lpd is turned off by default.
No OS will ever protect you from having to do your homework, at least until they successfully build that in...
Bourgeoisie, more like, intelligentsia, perhaps. But the proletariat would be the users of the system.
I used to leave Napster on 24/7 sharing Gigabytes of MP3's which I had categorized and worked to cull out the bad ones. I am rarely home, so I was certainly sharing more than I was downloading. Then my cable modem company sent me a nasty email saying that
1) Napster Violates their TOS since it is a Server
2) They would be monitoring upload traffic and people with large uploads would start being cut off.
Now maybe it was because they are merged with AOL, BMI, etc... (hint hint)
I would have switched to DSL, where having a server is not a violation, but it is still not available at my current address. I think it is unlikely to change even though I live in the city, in a city with widespread dsl. So until I move I am stuck and can't afford to lose my connection so people can download MP3's.
Therefore I feel for you.
Actually, before gnutella, etc were around, there was dcc on IRC (and yes before that ftp). And therein you will find the solution to the problem, something that was also done on bbs's, etc.
Essentially, if the software enforces an upload/download ratio, you have the same effect. You must upload so much before you can download, and the amount you can download depends on your upload. The best ratios are purposefully designed such that you can still download more than you upload, which matches both human behaviour and the grim reality of scarcity of resources (you can't build a collection of files unless you can download a lot of stuff, and if you don't download a lot of stuff, you don't have a lot to upload).
Those who refuse to learn history are doomed to repeat it. Programmers who refuse to learn computer history cause users to suffer needlessly with problems which were solved decades ago. (Witness Office programs without features which existed on ancient word processing systems, and MMRPG's which miss out on lessons learned from MUD's, etc...)