It was after he went and researched the one ring that he threw it in the fire to confirm his research. To which he knew it was when he saw the lidless eye.
Re:Where's the source?
on
Xandros version 2
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Having used/installed debian over a dialup, updating is really not that bad. I would suggest buying the cd's for sarge(testing) from whatever linux cd vendor you can trust (sorry no experience there) and update via dialup afterword. The power of debians package management is that it looks at package A, resolves it's dependencies, the dependencies dependencies and grabs them all and configures them.
You can set up your own package source on your local system so you can grab all the necissary packages from a location with more bandwidth and place them in your local repository and then install them. (I beleive it is "apt-get -s install " to get a list of what it would grab and install, but not actually do it.)
having said that there are some caveats to debian which I will be happy to discuss offline.
(sorry this is horribly OT)
Re:Where's the source?
on
Xandros version 2
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Not to worry and certainly nothing to be embarrassed about... the GPL is a lot less restrictive than it is made out to be. The key to a commercial distro is about the cherry on top, and not the two scoops of ice cream or the hot fudge. They keep to themselves that which isn't in the community at large, or at least which is poorly refined. As I see it that doesn't really amount to much.
The thing that I like the least about Debian based distros is the hiding the debian package management tools. This _is_ why I use debian almost exclusively on all my systems. These distros muck it up with click-n-run or xandros network when the cli or open ncurses and gtk/kde frontends already do the job so well. I may not be their audience though.
Minus any of their copywrited material. Truthfully I fail to see the need when you can get the same thing straight from debian without worry of having to remove such stuff. I am sure the valuable part of the os is their own closed source stuff, which is yet another reason to avoid them if you are a Free Software Zealot.
If you have _any_ OS sitting on the internet with no firewall between you and joe script kiddie and have not at least turned off all unnecissary services then it is simply your own stuppidity. When you _can't_ turn off those services and you get caught with microsofts pants down switch to some other system who cares. Having installed slackware circa 94 I don't remember having all services on. Knowing the people I did at college would have given them ample oppertunity to screw with me... So your either misinformed or worse...
It is not the kernel that is the problem. It _is_ the GUI. NT's kernel is just as good as Darwin as it shares almost the entire design methodology. All the insecure stuff exists in userland (IE, ISS, Outlook, MS scripting, MSSQL, COM, and so on) As was haughtily brought up in the rebuttal was that by default most services are off in OSX. (Of course I fail to see how either OSX or windows are better than Linux or BSD in this regard.) Changing kernels isn't going to stop the nearly twenty years of unaudited, insecure legacy crap that is layered on top of it.
I seem to like feeding trolls today so here goes...
Seeing how "Capitalism" flurished in Poland with it's toady economy well after a decade of reforms I don't see it as some free wonderland. Poland has strugled like most eastern block countries to rid themselvs of the tyrannies they existed in during communism. I wouldn't seriously consider them a paragon of freedom.
We (the US) have something that doesn't exist in the rest of the world, which is a jury of your peers. This has been occasional currupted but it is still better than other systems.
Money has always existed, and has always been valued because it is literal representation of interest. You show your interest by buying something. The corperations who spend that money in washington a literally spending your interest. If you are not interested in a policy quit spending money on it.
Crime and violence exist everywhere it is just the type that matters. Statiscally there is very little difference between the US and any other country. At least in the US you have an option of having your day in court.
Makes me wonder if there is a good congress agenda tracking site out there. Of course if I had that much time to pay attention to issues I'd be an activist.
No, information is not universal. Information is contributed by individuals whether paid for by corporations, or devised through his/her own means.
The free-market system depends on scarcity of information. You cannot profit from something that everyone has a right to. FreeSoftware companies are not an example of this. They profit from service (i.e. a collection of information services provided by said company to an customer.) or proprietary innovation (MS is an example of expanding public information).
Without resources you interests have no value to society in this context. The correlary is that only things that interest society get the most attention. That is why counting cow farts can only get supported by the government.
Of _course_ linux is a target for professional black hats. As a Unix clone it is familiar territory and a hell of a lot more likely to contain sensitive information than MS OSes. Just look at the companies moving RDBMSes to linux. Microsoft has never been a serious contender their and that is where the drool information is for people wanting to make a buck on stolen info. MS hacking is for people who want to screw with large swaths of people at once for _grudge_ reasons, not serious espionage artists.
I really think your giving as much attention as the US patent office to the prior art here. Their is quite an extensive list of condescending Europeans to pick from. Hell, France is a whole country for christ's sake. England is still bitter over the whole tea in the harbor and 4 channels of tv thing. Ireland is still ticked about allowing Sinead O'Conner a modicum of success. And Germany is, well, Germany.
The beauty of debian is it targets itself. It doesn't have to pander to anyone but itself. It's arguments are both of meritocracy and philosophical. It could care less if _you_ don't get it. It could care less if you want to spend money on it. It only cares about your man hours and intelectual ability. This is democracy at it's finest.
Like democracy, debian is advanced citizenship. You get what you give. Most user communities are not allowed this oppertunity. The social contract sets in stone that you are granted the chance to prove your worth and not just tell others what to do.
Why is debian more exclusive to new users? I agree that debian could take some notes from Gentoo. But that also applies to Redhat, Suse and Slackware. but it is not like gentoo is all that friendly on new users, just that the community is strong. As far as quality is concerned I have found them quite lacking. These are not problems with with who I mentioned before. But the _community_ is important so I do agree with your final comment.
In theory all would see the benefit of share and share alike. It stops inefficiency, causing truelly the most innovative superior. Those who lose their innovation lose their lead and therefore their position.
Now to reality. If I as a vendor spend money to fix problems in my public codebase and my competitors don't that is a competive edge. I have something that those people don't. Hell, I can always move back to the main tree when those things get fixed, but not until I exploit the difference to my gain. If I didn't it is a diservice to my shareholders.
OTOH, the GPL forces everyone to gain the benefit to the greater good of the code. It is not about competitive advantage. It is not about IP. It is not about the money. It is only about the quality of the code.
The implications embrace the free market and democracy. You can call it communist, but that is loaded. Utopian communism as proposed by Marx doesn't match what the GPL proposes. Communism as has been implemented in reality failed to be anything but totalitarian regimes. _I_ force you to do this. GPL says that _WE_ force you to do this if you agree. It is choice. You choose by improving or distributing. _NOT_ even by using.
While Linux may have been in the Right Place at the Right Time, it is the enabler of the GNU system(hehe). The GNU system (frequently shortened to just Linux) is a philosophical one which has gotten the mind share. BSD was around a _lot_ longer and never caught on fire like linux.
I'm not saying that BSD is dead, dying or morally bankrupt. That's a religous war that I frankly could care less about. There _many_ systems based on parts of BSD out there. (NT, OSX, etc...)
What can't be argued though is that BSD has never had the mind share that Linux does. I will wager that it never will because of the money being pored into Linux.
Slashdot Mirror
It was after he went and researched the one ring that he threw it in the fire to confirm his research. To which he knew it was when he saw the lidless eye.
Having used/installed debian over a dialup, updating is really not that bad. I would suggest buying the cd's for sarge(testing) from whatever linux cd vendor you can trust (sorry no experience there) and update via dialup afterword. The power of debians package management is that it looks at package A, resolves it's dependencies, the dependencies dependencies and grabs them all and configures them.
You can set up your own package source on your local system so you can grab all the necissary packages from a location with more bandwidth and place them in your local repository and then install them. (I beleive it is "apt-get -s install " to get a list of what it would grab and install, but not actually do it.)
having said that there are some caveats to debian which I will be happy to discuss offline.
(sorry this is horribly OT)
Not to worry and certainly nothing to be embarrassed about... the GPL is a lot less restrictive than it is made out to be. The key to a commercial distro is about the cherry on top, and not the two scoops of ice cream or the hot fudge. They keep to themselves that which isn't in the community at large, or at least which is poorly refined. As I see it that doesn't really amount to much.
The thing that I like the least about Debian based distros is the hiding the debian package management tools. This _is_ why I use debian almost exclusively on all my systems. These distros muck it up with click-n-run or xandros network when the cli or open ncurses and gtk/kde frontends already do the job so well. I may not be their audience though.
A good resource would be here
Minus any of their copywrited material. Truthfully I fail to see the need when you can get the same thing straight from debian without worry of having to remove such stuff. I am sure the valuable part of the os is their own closed source stuff, which is yet another reason to avoid them if you are a Free Software Zealot.
While technically true it follows something called convention. Both systems have legacy roots, *nix just happens to be deeper...
I would love to see the source of this message in all of it's troll glory... anybody got a non goatse link?
If you have _any_ OS sitting on the internet with no firewall between you and joe script kiddie and have not at least turned off all unnecissary services then it is simply your own stuppidity. When you _can't_ turn off those services and you get caught with microsofts pants down switch to some other system who cares. Having installed slackware circa 94 I don't remember having all services on. Knowing the people I did at college would have given them ample oppertunity to screw with me... So your either misinformed or worse...
Can't it be both a DE and a religion? But then we would probably need to include mozilla too.
It is not the kernel that is the problem. It _is_ the GUI. NT's kernel is just as good as Darwin as it shares almost the entire design methodology. All the insecure stuff exists in userland (IE, ISS, Outlook, MS scripting, MSSQL, COM, and so on) As was haughtily brought up in the rebuttal was that by default most services are off in OSX. (Of course I fail to see how either OSX or windows are better than Linux or BSD in this regard.) Changing kernels isn't going to stop the nearly twenty years of unaudited, insecure legacy crap that is layered on top of it.
I seem to like feeding trolls today so here goes...
Seeing how "Capitalism" flurished in Poland with it's toady economy well after a decade of reforms I don't see it as some free wonderland. Poland has strugled like most eastern block countries to rid themselvs of the tyrannies they existed in during communism. I wouldn't seriously consider them a paragon of freedom.
We (the US) have something that doesn't exist in the rest of the world, which is a jury of your peers. This has been occasional currupted but it is still better than other systems.
Money has always existed, and has always been valued because it is literal representation of interest. You show your interest by buying something. The corperations who spend that money in washington a literally spending your interest. If you are not interested in a policy quit spending money on it.
Crime and violence exist everywhere it is just the type that matters. Statiscally there is very little difference between the US and any other country. At least in the US you have an option of having your day in court.
Makes me wonder if there is a good congress agenda tracking site out there. Of course if I had that much time to pay attention to issues I'd be an activist.
Talk about shameless plugs for craplications. At least you should say adpost in your URL link.
No, information is not universal. Information is contributed by individuals whether paid for by corporations, or devised through his/her own means.
The free-market system depends on scarcity of information. You cannot profit from something that everyone has a right to. FreeSoftware companies are not an example of this. They profit from service (i.e. a collection of information services provided by said company to an customer.) or proprietary innovation (MS is an example of expanding public information).
Without resources you interests have no value to society in this context. The correlary is that only things that interest society get the most attention. That is why counting cow farts can only get supported by the government.
Of _course_ linux is a target for professional black hats. As a Unix clone it is familiar territory and a hell of a lot more likely to contain sensitive information than MS OSes. Just look at the companies moving RDBMSes to linux. Microsoft has never been a serious contender their and that is where the drool information is for people wanting to make a buck on stolen info. MS hacking is for people who want to screw with large swaths of people at once for _grudge_ reasons, not serious espionage artists.
What's the point of doing this if you don't effect the distribution. Seems pretty insipid to me.
I really think your giving as much attention as the US patent office to the prior art here. Their is quite an extensive list of condescending Europeans to pick from. Hell, France is a whole country for christ's sake. England is still bitter over the whole tea in the harbor and 4 channels of tv thing. Ireland is still ticked about allowing Sinead O'Conner a modicum of success. And Germany is, well, Germany.
Anybody got prior art on the use of cookies to allow the punters to customise a page, details of such customisation being held on the server?
/.
Your reading from it right now. I remember doing that eons ago on
And maybe I don't need to drink beer after work. Although I _really_ like cold beer, so I probably will.
Wow! that is the most refreshing clich joke I have seen in a monthes.
Now pointing out cliche jokes on /. is what's comming. Anybody think this really funny. Sorry Uncle Rage, The ironing _is_ delicious.
The beauty of debian is it targets itself. It doesn't have to pander to anyone but itself. It's arguments are both of meritocracy and philosophical. It could care less if _you_ don't get it. It could care less if you want to spend money on it. It only cares about your man hours and intelectual ability. This is democracy at it's finest.
Like democracy, debian is advanced citizenship. You get what you give. Most user communities are not allowed this oppertunity. The social contract sets in stone that you are granted the chance to prove your worth and not just tell others what to do.
Why is debian more exclusive to new users? I agree that debian could take some notes from Gentoo. But that also applies to Redhat, Suse and Slackware. but it is not like gentoo is all that friendly on new users, just that the community is strong. As far as quality is concerned I have found them quite lacking. These are not problems with with who I mentioned before. But the _community_ is important so I do agree with your final comment.
In theory all would see the benefit of share and share alike. It stops inefficiency, causing truelly the most innovative superior. Those who lose their innovation lose their lead and therefore their position.
Now to reality. If I as a vendor spend money to fix problems in my public codebase and my competitors don't that is a competive edge. I have something that those people don't. Hell, I can always move back to the main tree when those things get fixed, but not until I exploit the difference to my gain. If I didn't it is a diservice to my shareholders.
OTOH, the GPL forces everyone to gain the benefit to the greater good of the code. It is not about competitive advantage. It is not about IP. It is not about the money. It is only about the quality of the code.
The implications embrace the free market and democracy. You can call it communist, but that is loaded. Utopian communism as proposed by Marx doesn't match what the GPL proposes. Communism as has been implemented in reality failed to be anything but totalitarian regimes. _I_ force you to do this. GPL says that _WE_ force you to do this if you agree. It is choice. You choose by improving or distributing. _NOT_ even by using.
While Linux may have been in the Right Place at the Right Time, it is the enabler of the GNU system(hehe). The GNU system (frequently shortened to just Linux) is a philosophical one which has gotten the mind share. BSD was around a _lot_ longer and never caught on fire like linux.
I'm not saying that BSD is dead, dying or morally bankrupt. That's a religous war that I frankly could care less about. There _many_ systems based on parts of BSD out there. (NT, OSX, etc...)
What can't be argued though is that BSD has never had the mind share that Linux does. I will wager that it never will because of the money being pored into Linux.
It is... It's the interaction with MS windows systems on a network that makes other OS's insecure.