The current Wine licence has not substantially been abused. That's more a reflection of the state of Wine up to this point more than any intent to hijack the project.
Yet, the current code is good. It's quite good. Yesterday, I fired up a demo version of Lightwave 7.0 under it. Most of the application worked flawlessly including interactive modeling, camera position, and on-screen rendering. Though I didn't test everything, the main problem I found was that the file dialog had a focus problem and would flicker. I can't see that still being a problem when an official 1.0 release of Wine is released.
With the current licence, and the recient improvements to Wine, it is becoming a tempting target to hijack. With comparitively minimal funds, about 10 years of work could be rolled into a commercial product that never gives a line of code back.
The LGPL or similar licences would allow largely unhindered commercial production with a much greater chance that many changes would be folded back into the core Wine tree. A licence like this would not prevent a company or individual from making supplementary and seperate libraries that are closed, but it would encourage some more general code to be returned. That's at a minimum.
The best case would be that larger changes are rolled back into CVS, and good feedback like the kind that came from Codeweavers, Corel, Transgaming, and Lindows (benifit of a doubt).
No kidding, this is the one thing that's really been a let-down about DVD-- no support for *true* HDTV. We'll all be re-buying our DVD libraries when the new TV standard takes hold in a few years...
I tell people this and even the ones with digital-everything with HDTV setups look confused when I mention it.
It's a nasty little detail about DVDs that is never mentioned. That, and the fact that they will degrade over time. Looks like one complements the other?
Underclock your fans...
on
Mini-PC w/o Fans?
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Putting resistors on the fan wire will slow the fan down, cutting down on the noise substantially. A slight drop in RPM will make it difficult to hear the fan, while still providing the majority of the air turn over (and thus cooling).
Some kits with dials are sold for this job, though you can do the same thing by doing some math and calculating what resistor to get. Plenty of details are in the links below;
http://home.swipnet.se/tr/silence.html
http://www.cocoon-culture.com/lib/noise-report/c om puter-noise-report.htm
http://www.hardware-corner.net/guides/fanbus_1.p hp
The person who posted the SVG Gorilla theme on kde-look was a troll. Yet, they were also right; Gnome _now_ has vector icon themes. No theory, no guesswork, 100% available. Now.
That KDE will have them later is no surprise -- the KDE team works hard and has a polished desktop.
That it is available for a version of KDE beyond a release that hasn't occured is stretching the word 'exists' beyond it's practical application. Yes, it exists. No, it is not recommended for anyone at this point. In a few months, after KDE 3.0 is out, a back port will probably show up but nothing in the main release till later.
Hmmm. I thought I posted a response earlier. My mistake.
Much better in my view is to wash them.... To summarise: smarter people, not dumber tools.
The right thing is the ideal way to go. Unfortunately, most people aren't interested. Even those who know better, and I include in this two people I know -- a C/C++ guru (even wrote compilers and decompilers), and a theoretical chemist with a strong background in information system design and theory at the PHD-level. Both know Unix. Both like Unix. Both can use different OS environments and feel at home.
Neither likes diddling with server or operating system issues. At that level, they are unabashed users. Now, they do know the right thing to do. They even do the right thing when they manage thier own systems -- but still as little as possible. Both use GUI tools under Unix if they don't know exactly what to change or don't want to know what makes one Unix different from the next. Webmin fixes that problem.
Yet, my two friends who are capable don't care one whit and aren't taking the MCSE jobs -- they have other interests.
The majority of MCSEs (not all!) who have the "It's a job" attitude. Some care, but are just clicks and don't actually know how these systems work. Should these techs and admins know better? Sure. It is thier job, so they should care and they should learn the details but...they mostly do not. [insert your favorite reasons for this here]
What we need to do is change behavior, not attitudes. There are plenty of attitudes in both the Unix and Windows worlds. Changing the behaviors in the Windows world will not be possible if they use Windows exclusively.
So, stuck with the actual people in those positions, what are we going to do? Leave them as MSCEs and perpetuate Windows-only networks? Leave them as MCSEs who wipe out Unix as soon as they have an option to? Or, educate them and show them there is a better way? Webmin might seem like it's a step back, but it is a step forward. The behavior of the MCSEs changes, they learn Unix isn't alien or ancient. At that point, you can introduce them to VI, scripting, and other tools -- things that are available on both Unix and Windows systems.
It would be less painful to have them go cold turkey. Yet, few of us have that authority. Instead, having them slowly learn on the job is much more effective. Who knows, maybe they will get enthusiastic and start switching over some Windows servers?
Then, and only then, are you going to get smarter people.
Agreed. I'd add that using Grace Hooper as an inspiratin at times can be quite an asset; It's easier to appologize then to get permission. Facinating person.
Along those lines and other trechery in the name of thwarthing bad management attitudes and behavior, I've used this tactic to CYA with great sucess;
Problem: Something has to be done but you know that management won't sign off on it. If you don't get them to agree, you will end up in a heap of trouble even if you warn them months in advance.
Solution: Take the thankless job of doing required documentation, or add in a progress/status report.
On a very regular basis(!), get management to review the documents till they are just not interested and want the summary. If possible, get them to sign off on the document.
After it looks like nobody is reading what you're writing anymore, drop in a clause or section that adds in a stern warning about what you are concerned over. If you can do this with a minimal amount of changes, that's even better.
When the shit hits the fan, point to the document and thier signatures -- but do so in a non-confrontational manner; don't say 'I told you so'.
It is important to not to hide anything, to distribute these documents widely within the company or project areas.
This can also be used to 'authorize' certian activities without asking flat out. Yes, I have been refered to as evil at times.
Congratulations. Now you understand how the real world works. Not everyone wants to be an administrator/computer geek/Linus. And why should they? Things like Webmin make it easy to configure a machine so the majority of users (so called unwashed masses - heh, the "masses" probably think the same thing about computer geeks) can get can back to what they were doing. Having a better set of config files is a fine idea, especially for sysadmins, but will the majority of regular users want to fiddle with that? No.
Well, I have friends who wouldn't agree with you, though I tend to think of myself as "a bludgeoned and retreating idealist willing to make some compromises".
All good points -- and I agree with them if not with the same emphasis.
Where we differ is that I desperately want more Unix-friendly work environments, and Webmin is one way to increase Unix adoptation instead of giving in to the flood of Windows systems. If you have this goal also, then tell me how you would address it. So far, I've heard lots of complaints about Webmin but no solutions beyond work harder + be smarter. OK, done.:)
There are problems with anything, Webmin included. With about 200 plugins, I'd be stunned if there weren't any security issues. A security audit, though, occurs per-app on installation and on a regular basis network wide. Those can't be avoided regaurdless of what you do. But, under most Unix systems, you have a chance to fix security issues.
Since it will not be possible to fix problems with Windows or any closed source environment/server, why not fix the problems where we can?
If it takes 2, 3, 5 years to get a unified configuration system why not start with what we can use and fix right now?
You think you can bring enlightenment by encouraging ignorance?
Absolutely not. Right now -- by encouraging only one way of managing Unix systems -- we're not enligtening anyone except ourselves.
Simplify them, and then we can coax the Unix ignorant into learning a wee-bit more...a universe more then what they have now.
What you suggest is preaching to the chior. I'd like to see a larger chior, even if they can't cary a note. Later on, we can teach them how to sing. Right now, they aren't.
True: things like package management can be a problem -- any automated tool can be. It's not the same as a bare-metal hands-on I-wrote-the-code installation. Never will be.
Yet, there are people who can't or won't learn every nuance of every system file. There are people who know and like one OS or distribution or server application and hate everything else. Those people are called your co-workers. I know, I have the same co-workers.
There are other groups, call them managers, who want to know that when you get hit by a bus they are capable of finding someone who can figure out what the hell you were doing just before you got your Greyhound tatoo.
If Webmin causes you security problems, be that person who can check for those problems before deployment. Most modules are in Perl, and the permissions can be checked system-wide on any static files easily enough. Hell, create a crontab to check if you don't trust others, or even write a Webmin module to do a basic check when you're not around!
[Full-Rant Mode]
...If we want a chance of getting Unix to the unwashed masses -- to enlighten them a bit, maybe to get them to do the right thing.
...If we want to break out of the present canabilism between different Unix systems.
...IF IF IF...we _NEED_ something that works like a camel's nose.
We _need_ to get in more tents before we get any figs. Right now, most non-Unix folks don't give a fig about Unix.:)
(I just counted the word 'Webmin' like 17 times in your post...)
Well, I went to both the Creation Science and L.Ron Hubbard schools of logic -- both known for scientifically proving a point by repeating it as many times as possible no matter how correct. Unfortunately, I feel as if I've shamed them since I did include some information that could be verified. Facts are such pesky things.:)
Corporations aren't people though they are legaly treated as 'persons'. They have rights -- some quite substantial and not available to non-corporation persons.
What we are talking about are legal constructs. If a mechanism is created that has it's own motivations, and laws are either created to benifit that mechanism or (more likely) do not restrict that mechanism, it then has 'rights'.
How many people write wills and leave everything to thier pets? If those pets could argue in thier defense, they wouldn't need a human executor. In 20 years, a robot or an AI in any form (say, built into a house), could be granted these freedoms. Once done, it's not a far stretch to use that in a case for direct autonomy -- no will required.
Now, having said that, I doubt that there will be whole nations taken over by rampaging robots. Though, the possiblity that a 'bad' and defiant robot could be created is likely -- more so then a smart one. Depending on AI motivation, such a mechanism could loby for it's own independance or simply ignore people entirely.
I've mentioned this before, so I'll just quote myself;
Get Webmin. Setup Webmin. Use Webmin. Show Webmin to all other administrators. Teach them Webmin. Eventually, when the time is right, show Webmin to management. Drive home the idea that Webmin is a one-stop-shopping, simplified, and robust server management web app that anyone can grasp (if not master). Point out that Webmin supports Unix (including OSX) but not Windows servers (except for Windows with Cygwin). Over time, point out that on the server side, the few remaining Windows servers take much longer to manage and are less reliable then the multitude managed under Webmin.
The complaints about Webmin is that it isn't perfect. It doesn't solve the desire for a universal config mechanism or encourage the editing of files directly. OK. It doesn't. Yet, it exists now and is a lifesaver when using multiple UNIXs. Anyone who wants to know what any Webmin module is doing probably also knows how to use find -cmin, ls -lart, or read the module itself since they tend to be in Perl.
When a universal config comes along, I'll use it and guess what -- it'll work with WebMin.
Webmin might not be the right thing, but it is good enough for a vast number of uses.
On the 'whining' part, you do realize that there are many dirty tricks MS has been shown to do in the past.
The Notes/NT issue not being one of them doesn't discount the saying "Windows isn't done till Lotus doesn't run". Lotus, in that instance, being the once #1 Lotus 123.
"Kollar-Kotelly said there was too little time to find the right person for that role."
Yeah, I took that to mean that the judge has basically made a decision, and that is to accept the agreement in principle but tighten it up to close the numerous loopholes and freebies that MS added in.
There might be a few parts that are tweaked, but comments like this make me think that these will be few and moderate in scope.
...would do; they would use it as evidence in law suits against Microsoft. With the source code as evidence, they could find the convienent places where the code did wierd things.
Didn't an NT fix pack a while ago prevent Lotus Notes server from working? What's this about Netscape era seiniew? There's got to be current things that are more than just screwups or inside jokes. MS has a long track record of this sort of thing.
Now, the only question is; Can the source be siezed to prevent modification? Is it too late already?
That surprised me too, since they do have the Linux+ and other non-MS specific exams.
It's a shame that they have some of my money from previous certifications. From now on, though, they are on my _hit list and won't get a dime or a positive comment.
I'm largely in agreement. I don't think that MS will change unless there's a business reason to do so.
My main gripe is that they really don't seem to be trying to offer even moderately secure systems. Here's one recient nasty example;
Login as a valid user.
Try and go to another user's file area using Explorer. This fails.
Open up a command prompt.
Use cd to change to the same directory. Succeeds.
This level of security is implicit in Unix-style systems and has been for decades. I can't even imagine how they missed this. What other things did they miss that are infinately more obscure?
...we'd be lucky to understand the writers, let alone believe them. This was way back in the Atari 2600 era.
Seriously. The people writing the game articles looked like they were -- like me -- also in thier teens. Unlike me, they had access to press releases, and did a fine job of mangling them.
As an adult, I've been interviewed by reporters and had projects I've worked on reviewed. Nothing makes me wince more then having to read something that is simply wrong -- even if it's a "positive" error. I don't lie, so why should I expect someone else, supposedly objective, to hype or lie for me?
That the articles are still being faked isn't a surprise at all. Ethics and objectivity in popular tech journalism (ZD) is rare, and sometimes missing even at the bottom of the totem pole (Mozillaquest).
Oops! The first rule should read (and this is important);
"1. If directly to or from me/known person/known list."
Notes:
This catches the rare case where a stranger replies to a message where my address is masked but that is directed to someone I know. This does not catch the case where all addresses are masked (this has happened once).
Slashdot Mirror
Yet, the current code is good. It's quite good. Yesterday, I fired up a demo version of Lightwave 7.0 under it. Most of the application worked flawlessly including interactive modeling, camera position, and on-screen rendering. Though I didn't test everything, the main problem I found was that the file dialog had a focus problem and would flicker. I can't see that still being a problem when an official 1.0 release of Wine is released.
With the current licence, and the recient improvements to Wine, it is becoming a tempting target to hijack. With comparitively minimal funds, about 10 years of work could be rolled into a commercial product that never gives a line of code back.
The LGPL or similar licences would allow largely unhindered commercial production with a much greater chance that many changes would be folded back into the core Wine tree. A licence like this would not prevent a company or individual from making supplementary and seperate libraries that are closed, but it would encourage some more general code to be returned. That's at a minimum.
The best case would be that larger changes are rolled back into CVS, and good feedback like the kind that came from Codeweavers, Corel, Transgaming, and Lindows (benifit of a doubt).
I tell people this and even the ones with digital-everything with HDTV setups look confused when I mention it.
It's a nasty little detail about DVDs that is never mentioned. That, and the fact that they will degrade over time. Looks like one complements the other?
Some kits with dials are sold for this job, though you can do the same thing by doing some math and calculating what resistor to get. Plenty of details are in the links below;
http://www.cocoon-culture.com/lib/noise-report/c om puter-noise-report.htm
http://www.hardware-corner.net/guides/fanbus_1.p hp
http://people.freenet.de/s.urfer/fan_control.htm
http://www.overclockers.com/tips746
That KDE will have them later is no surprise -- the KDE team works hard and has a polished desktop.
That it is available for a version of KDE beyond a release that hasn't occured is stretching the word 'exists' beyond it's practical application. Yes, it exists. No, it is not recommended for anyone at this point. In a few months, after KDE 3.0 is out, a back port will probably show up but nothing in the main release till later.
Much better in my view is to wash them. ... To summarise: smarter people, not dumber tools.
The right thing is the ideal way to go. Unfortunately, most people aren't interested. Even those who know better, and I include in this two people I know -- a C/C++ guru (even wrote compilers and decompilers), and a theoretical chemist with a strong background in information system design and theory at the PHD-level. Both know Unix. Both like Unix. Both can use different OS environments and feel at home.
Neither likes diddling with server or operating system issues. At that level, they are unabashed users. Now, they do know the right thing to do. They even do the right thing when they manage thier own systems -- but still as little as possible. Both use GUI tools under Unix if they don't know exactly what to change or don't want to know what makes one Unix different from the next. Webmin fixes that problem.
Yet, my two friends who are capable don't care one whit and aren't taking the MCSE jobs -- they have other interests.
The majority of MCSEs (not all!) who have the "It's a job" attitude. Some care, but are just clicks and don't actually know how these systems work. Should these techs and admins know better? Sure. It is thier job, so they should care and they should learn the details but...they mostly do not. [insert your favorite reasons for this here]
What we need to do is change behavior, not attitudes. There are plenty of attitudes in both the Unix and Windows worlds. Changing the behaviors in the Windows world will not be possible if they use Windows exclusively.
So, stuck with the actual people in those positions, what are we going to do? Leave them as MSCEs and perpetuate Windows-only networks? Leave them as MCSEs who wipe out Unix as soon as they have an option to? Or, educate them and show them there is a better way? Webmin might seem like it's a step back, but it is a step forward. The behavior of the MCSEs changes, they learn Unix isn't alien or ancient. At that point, you can introduce them to VI, scripting, and other tools -- things that are available on both Unix and Windows systems.
It would be less painful to have them go cold turkey. Yet, few of us have that authority. Instead, having them slowly learn on the job is much more effective. Who knows, maybe they will get enthusiastic and start switching over some Windows servers?
Then, and only then, are you going to get smarter people.
Along those lines and other trechery in the name of thwarthing bad management attitudes and behavior, I've used this tactic to CYA with great sucess;
Solution: Take the thankless job of doing required documentation, or add in a progress/status report.
On a very regular basis(!), get management to review the documents till they are just not interested and want the summary. If possible, get them to sign off on the document.
After it looks like nobody is reading what you're writing anymore, drop in a clause or section that adds in a stern warning about what you are concerned over. If you can do this with a minimal amount of changes, that's even better.
When the shit hits the fan, point to the document and thier signatures -- but do so in a non-confrontational manner; don't say 'I told you so'.
It is important to not to hide anything, to distribute these documents widely within the company or project areas.
This can also be used to 'authorize' certian activities without asking flat out. Yes, I have been refered to as evil at times.
Well, I have friends who wouldn't agree with you, though I tend to think of myself as "a bludgeoned and retreating idealist willing to make some compromises".
Where we differ is that I desperately want more Unix-friendly work environments, and Webmin is one way to increase Unix adoptation instead of giving in to the flood of Windows systems. If you have this goal also, then tell me how you would address it. So far, I've heard lots of complaints about Webmin but no solutions beyond work harder + be smarter. OK, done. :)
There are problems with anything, Webmin included. With about 200 plugins, I'd be stunned if there weren't any security issues. A security audit, though, occurs per-app on installation and on a regular basis network wide. Those can't be avoided regaurdless of what you do. But, under most Unix systems, you have a chance to fix security issues.
Since it will not be possible to fix problems with Windows or any closed source environment/server, why not fix the problems where we can?
If it takes 2, 3, 5 years to get a unified configuration system why not start with what we can use and fix right now?
Absolutely not. Right now -- by encouraging only one way of managing Unix systems -- we're not enligtening anyone except ourselves.
Simplify them, and then we can coax the Unix ignorant into learning a wee-bit more...a universe more then what they have now.
What you suggest is preaching to the chior. I'd like to see a larger chior, even if they can't cary a note. Later on, we can teach them how to sing. Right now, they aren't.
True: things like package management can be a problem -- any automated tool can be. It's not the same as a bare-metal hands-on I-wrote-the-code installation. Never will be.
Yet, there are people who can't or won't learn every nuance of every system file. There are people who know and like one OS or distribution or server application and hate everything else. Those people are called your co-workers. I know, I have the same co-workers.
There are other groups, call them managers, who want to know that when you get hit by a bus they are capable of finding someone who can figure out what the hell you were doing just before you got your Greyhound tatoo.
If Webmin causes you security problems, be that person who can check for those problems before deployment. Most modules are in Perl, and the permissions can be checked system-wide on any static files easily enough. Hell, create a crontab to check if you don't trust others, or even write a Webmin module to do a basic check when you're not around!
[Full-Rant Mode]
...If we want a chance of getting Unix to the unwashed masses -- to enlighten them a bit, maybe to get them to do the right thing.
...If we want to break out of the present canabilism between different Unix systems.
...IF IF IF...we _NEED_ something that works like a camel's nose.
We _need_ to get in more tents before we get any figs. Right now, most non-Unix folks don't give a fig about Unix. :)
Well, I went to both the Creation Science and L.Ron Hubbard schools of logic -- both known for scientifically proving a point by repeating it as many times as possible no matter how correct. Unfortunately, I feel as if I've shamed them since I did include some information that could be verified. Facts are such pesky things. :)
Even if these changes were added in right now, it would still take a few years for them to be so common that they could be relied upon.
What we are talking about are legal constructs. If a mechanism is created that has it's own motivations, and laws are either created to benifit that mechanism or (more likely) do not restrict that mechanism, it then has 'rights'.
How many people write wills and leave everything to thier pets? If those pets could argue in thier defense, they wouldn't need a human executor. In 20 years, a robot or an AI in any form (say, built into a house), could be granted these freedoms. Once done, it's not a far stretch to use that in a case for direct autonomy -- no will required.
Now, having said that, I doubt that there will be whole nations taken over by rampaging robots. Though, the possiblity that a 'bad' and defiant robot could be created is likely -- more so then a smart one. Depending on AI motivation, such a mechanism could loby for it's own independance or simply ignore people entirely.
The complaints about Webmin is that it isn't perfect. It doesn't solve the desire for a universal config mechanism or encourage the editing of files directly. OK. It doesn't. Yet, it exists now and is a lifesaver when using multiple UNIXs. Anyone who wants to know what any Webmin module is doing probably also knows how to use find -cmin, ls -lart, or read the module itself since they tend to be in Perl.
When a universal config comes along, I'll use it and guess what -- it'll work with WebMin.
Webmin might not be the right thing, but it is good enough for a vast number of uses.
On the 'whining' part, you do realize that there are many dirty tricks MS has been shown to do in the past.
The Notes/NT issue not being one of them doesn't discount the saying "Windows isn't done till Lotus doesn't run". Lotus, in that instance, being the once #1 Lotus 123.
Maybe they did. Maybe they didn't submit something the DOJ considered 'major'? I'd be surprised if they didn't do anything, but it is possible.
Yeah, I took that to mean that the judge has basically made a decision, and that is to accept the agreement in principle but tighten it up to close the numerous loopholes and freebies that MS added in.
There might be a few parts that are tweaked, but comments like this make me think that these will be few and moderate in scope.
Didn't an NT fix pack a while ago prevent Lotus Notes server from working? What's this about Netscape era seiniew? There's got to be current things that are more than just screwups or inside jokes. MS has a long track record of this sort of thing.
Now, the only question is; Can the source be siezed to prevent modification? Is it too late already?
Yes, they have some of my money.
No, they won't get a dime more.
Your list overlaps mine a bit.
That surprised me too, since they do have the Linux+ and other non-MS specific exams.
It's a shame that they have some of my money from previous certifications. From now on, though, they are on my _hit list and won't get a dime or a positive comment.
Since the bad-guy list is short, here's a complete(?) list of those who submitted one of the 'major' papers saying the settlement was appropriate;
Washington Legal Foundation: "The United States has said it best: "[T]he [Proposed Judgment], once implemented by the Court, will achieve the purposes of stopping Microsoft's unlawful conduct, preventing its reoccurrence, and restoring competitive conditions in the personal computer operating system market, while avoiding the time, expense and uncertainty of a litigated remedy."(19) We support the Proposed Judgment. The matter is long overdue for resolution, and the States that have declined to join the settlement should, in our judgment, be urged by the Department and the Court to reconsider and adopt it."
My main gripe is that they really don't seem to be trying to offer even moderately secure systems. Here's one recient nasty example;
This level of security is implicit in Unix-style systems and has been for decades. I can't even imagine how they missed this. What other things did they miss that are infinately more obscure?
Seriously. The people writing the game articles looked like they were -- like me -- also in thier teens. Unlike me, they had access to press releases, and did a fine job of mangling them.
As an adult, I've been interviewed by reporters and had projects I've worked on reviewed. Nothing makes me wince more then having to read something that is simply wrong -- even if it's a "positive" error. I don't lie, so why should I expect someone else, supposedly objective, to hype or lie for me?
That the articles are still being faked isn't a surprise at all. Ethics and objectivity in popular tech journalism (ZD) is rare, and sometimes missing even at the bottom of the totem pole (Mozillaquest).
"1. If directly to or from me/known person/known list."
Notes:
This catches the rare case where a stranger replies to a message where my address is masked but that is directed to someone I know. This does not catch the case where all addresses are masked (this has happened once).
In all examples, "To" means cc, bc, or to.