First of all, since when does a speed limit matter, especially in georgia/atlanta, if it's a 65 it's a 75... by most peoples accounts, around here, that usually means a 95 in a 55...
Second of all, I'm not talking about snow plows... The vast majority of Georgia, except in the north in the mountains, it doesn't get snow more than once a year... if it does, it's never more than an inch! I've never even seen a snow plow on the hiway, even when it does snow! (there may be some in north georgia, but I don't know.) I've never seen a salt truck or anything.
I'm just telling you my experiences with people that operate these vehicles.
I don't know about yall... but I'm from BumFuk Georgia , USA... and I'm sick of plows/tractors on the roads, hiways, and sh1t going 25 in a 75. Anything to keep them where they are supposed to be is fine with me... Orwellian or not...
A tractor and/or plow is meant as a utility vehicle, period, only. Anything to keep track of thier movements can only be good. Because the guys that drive them are freakin rednecks, and I'm related to most of them so I know what they are capable of...;-) At 7 in the morning, they are hungover, and they think driving at 25 on a hiway is funny. You think I'm joking... but when I was 17, before I started writing code, I worked with these guys on the weekends grading asphalt, so I know... heh.
I don't see how he can be very interested in computer security at all, if he's sharing directories over the internet... When almost ALL ISP's leave the L2TP, and PPTP ports open so you can use VPN...
He could have easily posted this vulnerability to bugtraq and other channels, without exploiting it on there systems. He basically cracked into there systems, and forwarded a bunch of emails to customers on the site explaining why the site is insecure. That seems okay to you? There is a difference between putting up a website containing some exploit code, and using that code to break into someone elses systems.
I definately wouldn't have informed the public about a vulnerability this way. He had malicious intent and made a childish decision. I think he deserved what he got.
As a recording engineer I wait every day of my life for this to happen. If someone could write a solid cubase/logic/sonar replacement for linux, I'd switch immediately. There are some cool apps out there now that I check up on every once in a while, but if there was an app that could actually compete with the current windows audio production apps (WITH compatibility for vst/directx plugins and instruments) I'd open my wallet like the bitch that I am and fuckin shell it out yo.
I hate windows, it crashes to much. If I had the ability to kill -9 my apps when they hang, and not take down my entire operating system, I'd do... just about anything.
sql servers running on windows are regularly trading tpc/c 1st place scores with other machines - we're now in the realm of doing all of the NYSE transactions for a YEAR in a matter of a day or so
How does microsoft index the web? They'd probably have to use some SQL server variant, Oracle Parallel or something, since they have no other technology that I know of to store/query that much data.
Last time I checked google was searching 16 billion documents in a tenth of a second, with very good results. I'd like to see how long that SQL query would take to run on the most advanced windows 2000 cluster, available today, regardless of price. Just a simple select statement search for a word pattern, no complex search algorithms like google uses. Would you say at least 2 seconds? That's very generous.
Plus that's only one person doing one search, how many people are clicking on the search button at google.com at any one instant, thousands, sometimes tens of thousands with no noticable difference in speed? Keep in mind, google is thousands of machines operating in parallel, how many can windows 2000 cluster handle? I don't know, but I would guess it can't be more than 30 or so with any kind of scalability? Am I right?
I don't know, the current msn search/portal is laughable compared to google. The sheer volume, speed and accuracy of google is astounding to me, but I'll give MS credit and I'd like to see what they come up with! My guess is by the time they catch up with where google is now, google will have already made a another huge leap forward.
That would be hilarious. Remember when they bought hotmail? It was running on FreeBSD for the longest time because NT couldn't handle the load, and that's just some www, pop and smtp servers! Good lord, I'd like to see them replace a 2000+ machine linux parallel/cluster environment with Windows 2000. HAHAHA! Ah hem, yeah right...
I don't care how you slice it or what anybody says, I've checked out windows 2000's clustering stuff, and there is no way in hell any Windows 2000 cluster will be able to search 16 billion documents in.1 seconds. No way in HELL.
We'll just ignore the fact that it WILL be bloated, and hence already lost the battle against google. But judging by the Hotmail fiasco it'll be 3-4 years before they even come close to getting any software running that could come within 1/2 of that performance of google now, and by then google will be light years ahead of what it is now, so...
The only thing I'm worried about is Microsoft bullying them out of the market somehow. That would suck dude!
Hmm, that's not logical at all... The nomenclature in the bible say's nothing about one of "God's days". And thereafter God repeatedly uses the term day to measure lengths of time for his various actions, which are always the length of our "Human day".
As a Christian, I believe that the entire Bible is true.
So I'm assuming by this statement that you believe that the bible is fact... Sigh... I love our new christianity, and this redefinition of faith. As we advance it becomes more and more apparent that none of it's real. I hear this kind of interpretation of the bible over, and over. It's sad that we've resorted to completely subjectifying the facts. Warping them to our needs, reobjectifying them and THEN blindly following that interpretation. Guess what, you're not worshipping Him, your following your own beliefs at that point. Why don't you just drop the baggage and come up with your own beliefs, and at least base them on something tangible.
"They suck because they're shutting down my favorite piracy outlet."
What are you talking about? Napster was the WORST piracy outlet. I fully admit that I'm stealing when I download music I don't own and never buy, but Napster was no where near the best outlet for my mass-piracy effort.
You're stealing, you know it, I know it, now be a man about it... or something like that.
Whatever... loser. You're stealing from your employer right now from posting on Slashdot when you should be working. Get off your fat, four-eyed ass, AND GET TO WORK YOU SLACK-ASS MUTHA FUCKA!
So, now that I've owned up, and "been a man about it". I can honestly say that 90% of the time things I download are either A) public domain, or B) CD's I've already bought that are scratched all to hell, C) or CD's that I go buy afterwards. I'd say that for most of my friends as well.
Shut your mouth old man, and get back to work. You by no means have your Thumb On The Pulse Of America(tm)...
Am I the only one who thinks this is rather transparent marketing on the part of slashdot?
No, and I applaud Slashdot for taking on the entrepreneurial spirit and helping our capitalist society move along smoothly by using sound, honest business practices. This was a well thought out review, with good points and bad points for people that might be interested in buying something. This is nowhere akin to some obviously biased ZDNET review of some Microsoft product. What's more, it's written by a Slashdot member who thought he could share his thoughts on this subject. Anyhow he explicitly states whom he believes this product would help, and sent his review to slashdot because it would reach the largest target audience. What, so you don't believe slashdot should be trying to make money? Do you think Slashdot should host this site for your amusement and live in boxes to make sure you're false idealism is satisfied? Welcome to the real world you communist, hippie-dumbfuck.
...how many people have worked with co-workers who completely clueless about how to perform their jobs but held degrees...
Hmmm... I've never met anyone fresh out of college that wasn't completely clueless as to how to do thier job. They always end up having to relearn everything anyway.
Take this "cheating detector" for example. I wonder how many weeks of "academia", and design went into writing software that's equivalent reading every students code into a database and running:
select c1.*
from "code.db" c1, "code.db" c2
where c1."Exam Code" = c2."Exam Code"
Yes, but one of the goals of a CS department should be to produce programmers who are capable of doing work themselves.
One of thier other goals is to produce programmers that spend so much time writing documentation for completely overcomplicated designs that they can't even finish a simple project that should have taken 2 hours, in less than 8 weeks.
Personally, I dont think anyone is particularly confused by hard-disk icons, and think the article is just blowing smoke...The article never really tries to back up its arguments or give real-world alternatives except at a very superficial level.
Exactly, this article is absolute nonsense. The kind of logic brought to you by the makers of the Mach microkernel, and other college edumacated "computer scientists". There are some people that will never understand that the pragmatic system always wins, because they have never tried to accomplish an actual task in a real world environment. They live in this half-baked world of how computing should be on a spiritual level, like somehow it's a philosophical struggle. It's not. Period. Even my grandma understands that a harddrive holds data. Even my computer illiterate mother understands the concept of a file containing information and that information must be stored on a physical medium.
Welcome to the planet earth people! This is the parallel to the way nature defines it's rules! Filesystems are finite, they are contained on physical media!
Re:Who does this benifit commercially
on
Ximian for HP-UX
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Answer. This just helps HP-UX system administrators goof off.:-) I actually like the HPUX Visualize workstations, they kick ass as far as the hardware is concerned. I roast comparable ultra5 workstations on a regular basis, running benchmarks on the code I'm fiddling with. Hell yeah, I wouldn't mind one of those running GNU tools instead of a puny x86 linux box. In fact, I used to work at HP and a couple days before I left I saw a guy in the lab boot an hp9000 using the linux kernel to bash. It was pretty neat. Though I'm not sure if there are PIX drivers yet to run X.
I agree, but also there major design flaws in fundamental software that makes up the internet as we know it that are just inherently insecure. Like.... TCP/IP for example.
Man, that's completely idiotic. Almost to the point of being embarrassing. What are these goofy "secure" audio "protections" supposed to do?! None of these protections will ever work, because at some point there has to be a signal sent to the analog domain. Even if the whole system is digital, and "secure" all the way up to speakers. With a little work in my studio, trusty oscilloscope, two good mics, and some good monitor speakers I could reproduce any track and make sure it sounded little different from the original recording (maybe even better).
What's another form of security? Security based on sound techniques where one can disclose the nature of thier mechanism and it still be secure.
Example:
1) Company A encrypts a key file in thier software using DES because "that's good enough", and they rely on the fact that no one knows that they use DES as a means of security. "They can't even brute force it, they don't know what encryption mechanism we are using. DES is good enough!"
An attacker then does a few simple tests, say disassembles the binary that is used as a tool to encrypt the file, and figures out that they are using DES and runs a few tests where they produce a encrypted file where they know the plain text, and proceed to brute force for the key. This was a mistaken notion of security through obscurity.
2) Company B encrypts a file for thier software, but they use RC6, and then encrypt that file with Two-fish. Or heck, use a totally different security mechanism where this file doesn't even need to be encrypted because it's inherently secure. Then they disclose how they do it so that the mechanism has peer review to make sure that security can be improved in the future.
Aside from these obvious points, your other arguments are totally bogus from a security standpoint. A company or organization can easily prevent simple "social engineering attacks", using security procedures in thier company. If they are good procedures, they could even disclose them to the public. Your argument that "Well, if someone wants to, they can get into your system anyway." is absolutely not security concious. I don't see why any of this has to do with Intellectual Property either, it's just logical.
I gaurantee you Securityfocus found out about this it was because some hacker group on IRC has been using it for weeks. Trading it amongst themselves for whatever, and someone leaked it to them. For them to "hide it until the vendors can make a fix" just extended the time that these current criminals could use it, and left my system at risk. I agree with RedHat. I'm sure the fix is a one or two liner, and I wanted it as soon as they found out about it. Not when they were ready to tell me.
Are you kidding me? I never would have developed my final stage alcoholism without the help of my overworked and overpaid collegues in the IT sector. Who's more likely to throw down 100 bucks at a bar. A police man, or a crazed, BASTARD OPERATOR FROM HELL?!
Eh, I don't think system administrator is really something that you have to work from the bottom to get into. It pretty much is the bottom... I had no professional experience as a System Administrator, or even with computers at all, but I was very interested in it personally from using linux at home.
I just got a phone interview for a junior sys admin position making nothing, and basically just told them what I knew and how driven I was to learning more. Plus, answering all the general UNIX questions correctly helped. I knew regular expressions and all the general commands, enough to navigate effeciently, and perform most tasks a junior admin would. So I ended up getting the job.
Of course this was in the days when there was 10 jobs for every employee... so they had no choice but to hire me.;-)
Pardon me? I guess I don't get it, but what in the world does this buzzword "innovation" have to do with anything?! That's a word used by people trying to sell a product, or getting people hyped up to do thier work for them. Most open source software was written because people had a job to do, and there was no software that a) could do it to the extent that they wanted it to. b) Was free, as in freedom or as in beer. Whichever.
Nowhere does the free software world dictate that they are trying to create software which will change the course of human evolution. The dictum of the freesoftware world is that people have tasks they want to complete, and they should be able to complete these tasks in a free manner. Yes, it sounds boring because that's what it is, nothing more and nothing less. If this isn't glamourous enough for you then by all means, make it glamorous and if you are interested in freedom, go ahead show us the code.
WTF?! This isn't his field?! The guy who invented the backbone of most of our security infrastructure (meaning public key encryption), has no insight into matters concerning security?
They both sound like crap compared to my old reel-to-reel tapes played on my Studer A77, thru my Mackie HR824's. Regardless, with any decent digital hi-fi system if you play a mp3 or other compressed format, versus the CD you will notice a difference in sound quality. I don't care what anyone says.
This on top of the fact that the 16 bit 41 khz signal you get from a CD is lowsy compared to the analog/24 bit digital your music was probably originally recorded in. I can't see why anyone would continue to slaughter the signal even more by applying one of these lossy compression formats (other than to disseminate your music over the internet or something, that's worth the compromise I think.) Especially if you've got a 100 gig harddrive.
Slashdot Mirror
First of all, since when does a speed limit matter, especially in georgia/atlanta, if it's a 65 it's a 75... by most peoples accounts, around here, that usually means a 95 in a 55...
Second of all, I'm not talking about snow plows... The vast majority of Georgia, except in the north in the mountains, it doesn't get snow more than once a year... if it does, it's never more than an inch! I've never even seen a snow plow on the hiway, even when it does snow! (there may be some in north georgia, but I don't know.) I've never seen a salt truck or anything.
I'm just telling you my experiences with people that operate these vehicles.
I don't know about yall... but I'm from BumFuk Georgia , USA... and I'm sick of plows/tractors on the roads, hiways, and sh1t going 25 in a 75. Anything to keep them where they are supposed to be is fine with me... Orwellian or not...
;-) At 7 in the morning, they are hungover, and they think driving at 25 on a hiway is funny. You think I'm joking... but when I was 17, before I started writing code, I worked with these guys on the weekends grading asphalt, so I know... heh.
A tractor and/or plow is meant as a utility vehicle, period, only. Anything to keep track of thier movements can only be good. Because the guys that drive them are freakin rednecks, and I'm related to most of them so I know what they are capable of...
I don't see how he can be very interested in computer security at all, if he's sharing directories over the internet... When almost ALL ISP's leave the L2TP, and PPTP ports open so you can use VPN...
He could have easily posted this vulnerability to bugtraq and other channels, without exploiting it on there systems. He basically cracked into there systems, and forwarded a bunch of emails to customers on the site explaining why the site is insecure. That seems okay to you? There is a difference between putting up a website containing some exploit code, and using that code to break into someone elses systems.
I definately wouldn't have informed the public about a vulnerability this way. He had malicious intent and made a childish decision. I think he deserved what he got.
As a recording engineer I wait every day of my life for this to happen. If someone could write a solid cubase/logic/sonar replacement for linux, I'd switch immediately. There are some cool apps out there now that I check up on every once in a while, but if there was an app that could actually compete with the current windows audio production apps (WITH compatibility for vst/directx plugins and instruments) I'd open my wallet like the bitch that I am and fuckin shell it out yo.
I hate windows, it crashes to much. If I had the ability to kill -9 my apps when they hang, and not take down my entire operating system, I'd do... just about anything.
sql servers running on windows are regularly trading tpc/c 1st place scores with other machines - we're now in the realm of doing all of the NYSE transactions for a YEAR in a matter of a day or so
How does microsoft index the web? They'd probably have to use some SQL server variant, Oracle Parallel or something, since they have no other technology that I know of to store/query that much data.
Last time I checked google was searching 16 billion documents in a tenth of a second, with very good results. I'd like to see how long that SQL query would take to run on the most advanced windows 2000 cluster, available today, regardless of price. Just a simple select statement search for a word pattern, no complex search algorithms like google uses. Would you say at least 2 seconds? That's very generous.
Plus that's only one person doing one search, how many people are clicking on the search button at google.com at any one instant, thousands, sometimes tens of thousands with no noticable difference in speed? Keep in mind, google is thousands of machines operating in parallel, how many can windows 2000 cluster handle? I don't know, but I would guess it can't be more than 30 or so with any kind of scalability? Am I right?
I don't know, the current msn search/portal is laughable compared to google. The sheer volume, speed and accuracy of google is astounding to me, but I'll give MS credit and I'd like to see what they come up with! My guess is by the time they catch up with where google is now, google will have already made a another huge leap forward.
That would be hilarious. Remember when they bought hotmail? It was running on FreeBSD for the longest time because NT couldn't handle the load, and that's just some www, pop and smtp servers! Good lord, I'd like to see them replace a 2000+ machine linux parallel/cluster environment with Windows 2000. HAHAHA! Ah hem, yeah right...
.1 seconds. No way in HELL.
I don't care how you slice it or what anybody says, I've checked out windows 2000's clustering stuff, and there is no way in hell any Windows 2000 cluster will be able to search 16 billion documents in
We'll just ignore the fact that it WILL be bloated, and hence already lost the battle against google. But judging by the Hotmail fiasco it'll be 3-4 years before they even come close to getting any software running that could come within 1/2 of that performance of google now, and by then google will be light years ahead of what it is now, so...
The only thing I'm worried about is Microsoft bullying them out of the market somehow. That would suck dude!
Hmm, that's not logical at all... The nomenclature in the bible say's nothing about one of "God's days". And thereafter God repeatedly uses the term day to measure lengths of time for his various actions, which are always the length of our "Human day".
As a Christian, I believe that the entire Bible is true.
So I'm assuming by this statement that you believe that the bible is fact... Sigh... I love our new christianity, and this redefinition of faith. As we advance it becomes more and more apparent that none of it's real. I hear this kind of interpretation of the bible over, and over. It's sad that we've resorted to completely subjectifying the facts. Warping them to our needs, reobjectifying them and THEN blindly following that interpretation. Guess what, you're not worshipping Him, your following your own beliefs at that point. Why don't you just drop the baggage and come up with your own beliefs, and at least base them on something tangible.
"They suck because they're shutting down my favorite piracy outlet."
What are you talking about? Napster was the WORST piracy outlet. I fully admit that I'm stealing when I download music I don't own and never buy, but Napster was no where near the best outlet for my mass-piracy effort.
You're stealing, you know it, I know it, now be a man about it... or something like that.
Whatever... loser. You're stealing from your employer right now from posting on Slashdot when you should be working. Get off your fat, four-eyed ass, AND GET TO WORK YOU SLACK-ASS MUTHA FUCKA!
So, now that I've owned up, and "been a man about it". I can honestly say that 90% of the time things I download are either A) public domain, or B) CD's I've already bought that are scratched all to hell, C) or CD's that I go buy afterwards. I'd say that for most of my friends as well.
Shut your mouth old man, and get back to work. You by no means have your Thumb On The Pulse Of America(tm)...
Am I the only one who thinks this is rather transparent marketing on the part of slashdot?
No, and I applaud Slashdot for taking on the entrepreneurial spirit and helping our capitalist society move along smoothly by using sound, honest business practices. This was a well thought out review, with good points and bad points for people that might be interested in buying something. This is nowhere akin to some obviously biased ZDNET review of some Microsoft product. What's more, it's written by a Slashdot member who thought he could share his thoughts on this subject. Anyhow he explicitly states whom he believes this product would help, and sent his review to slashdot because it would reach the largest target audience. What, so you don't believe slashdot should be trying to make money? Do you think Slashdot should host this site for your amusement and live in boxes to make sure you're false idealism is satisfied? Welcome to the real world you communist, hippie-dumbfuck.
Excuse me:
SELECT NAME, CODE FROM code.db
GROUP BY CODE
HAVING COUNT(*) > 1;
Would be better.
...how many people have worked with co-workers who completely clueless about how to perform their jobs but held degrees...
Hmmm... I've never met anyone fresh out of college that wasn't completely clueless as to how to do thier job. They always end up having to relearn everything anyway.
Take this "cheating detector" for example. I wonder how many weeks of "academia", and design went into writing software that's equivalent reading every students code into a database and running:
select c1.*
from "code.db" c1, "code.db" c2
where c1."Exam Code" = c2."Exam Code"
Brilliant, send me that man's resume!
Yes, but one of the goals of a CS department should be to produce programmers who are capable of doing work themselves.
One of thier other goals is to produce programmers that spend so much time writing documentation for completely overcomplicated designs that they can't even finish a simple project that should have taken 2 hours, in less than 8 weeks.
Personally, I dont think anyone is particularly confused by hard-disk icons, and think the article is just blowing smoke...The article never really tries to back up its arguments or give real-world alternatives except at a very superficial level.
Exactly, this article is absolute nonsense. The kind of logic brought to you by the makers of the Mach microkernel, and other college edumacated "computer scientists". There are some people that will never understand that the pragmatic system always wins, because they have never tried to accomplish an actual task in a real world environment. They live in this half-baked world of how computing should be on a spiritual level, like somehow it's a philosophical struggle. It's not. Period. Even my grandma understands that a harddrive holds data. Even my computer illiterate mother understands the concept of a file containing information and that information must be stored on a physical medium.
Welcome to the planet earth people! This is the parallel to the way nature defines it's rules! Filesystems are finite, they are contained on physical media!
Answer. This just helps HP-UX system administrators goof off. :-) I actually like the HPUX Visualize workstations, they kick ass as far as the hardware is concerned. I roast comparable ultra5 workstations on a regular basis, running benchmarks on the code I'm fiddling with. Hell yeah, I wouldn't mind one of those running GNU tools instead of a puny x86 linux box. In fact, I used to work at HP and a couple days before I left I saw a guy in the lab boot an hp9000 using the linux kernel to bash. It was pretty neat. Though I'm not sure if there are PIX drivers yet to run X.
I agree, but also there major design flaws in fundamental software that makes up the internet as we know it that are just inherently insecure. Like.... TCP/IP for example.
Man, that's completely idiotic. Almost to the point of being embarrassing. What are these goofy "secure" audio "protections" supposed to do?! None of these protections will ever work, because at some point there has to be a signal sent to the analog domain. Even if the whole system is digital, and "secure" all the way up to speakers. With a little work in my studio, trusty oscilloscope, two good mics, and some good monitor speakers I could reproduce any track and make sure it sounded little different from the original recording (maybe even better).
What's another form of security? Security based on sound techniques where one can disclose the nature of thier mechanism and it still be secure.
Example:
1) Company A encrypts a key file in thier software using DES because "that's good enough", and they rely on the fact that no one knows that they use DES as a means of security. "They can't even brute force it, they don't know what encryption mechanism we are using. DES is good enough!"
An attacker then does a few simple tests, say disassembles the binary that is used as a tool to encrypt the file, and figures out that they are using DES and runs a few tests where they produce a encrypted file where they know the plain text, and proceed to brute force for the key. This was a mistaken notion of security through obscurity.
2) Company B encrypts a file for thier software, but they use RC6, and then encrypt that file with Two-fish. Or heck, use a totally different security mechanism where this file doesn't even need to be encrypted because it's inherently secure. Then they disclose how they do it so that the mechanism has peer review to make sure that security can be improved in the future.
Aside from these obvious points, your other arguments are totally bogus from a security standpoint. A company or organization can easily prevent simple "social engineering attacks", using security procedures in thier company. If they are good procedures, they could even disclose them to the public. Your argument that "Well, if someone wants to, they can get into your system anyway." is absolutely not security concious. I don't see why any of this has to do with Intellectual Property either, it's just logical.
I gaurantee you Securityfocus found out about this it was because some hacker group on IRC has been using it for weeks. Trading it amongst themselves for whatever, and someone leaked it to them. For them to "hide it until the vendors can make a fix" just extended the time that these current criminals could use it, and left my system at risk. I agree with RedHat. I'm sure the fix is a one or two liner, and I wanted it as soon as they found out about it. Not when they were ready to tell me.
Do you even have drinks with them after work?
Are you kidding me? I never would have developed my final stage alcoholism without the help of my overworked and overpaid collegues in the IT sector. Who's more likely to throw down 100 bucks at a bar. A police man, or a crazed, BASTARD OPERATOR FROM HELL?!
Eh, I don't think system administrator is really something that you have to work from the bottom to get into. It pretty much is the bottom... I had no professional experience as a System Administrator, or even with computers at all, but I was very interested in it personally from using linux at home.
;-)
I just got a phone interview for a junior sys admin position making nothing, and basically just told them what I knew and how driven I was to learning more. Plus, answering all the general UNIX questions correctly helped. I knew regular expressions and all the general commands, enough to navigate effeciently, and perform most tasks a junior admin would. So I ended up getting the job.
Of course this was in the days when there was 10 jobs for every employee... so they had no choice but to hire me.
Pardon me? I guess I don't get it, but what in the world does this buzzword "innovation" have to do with anything?! That's a word used by people trying to sell a product, or getting people hyped up to do thier work for them. Most open source software was written because people had a job to do, and there was no software that a) could do it to the extent that they wanted it to. b) Was free, as in freedom or as in beer. Whichever.
Nowhere does the free software world dictate that they are trying to create software which will change the course of human evolution. The dictum of the freesoftware world is that people have tasks they want to complete, and they should be able to complete these tasks in a free manner. Yes, it sounds boring because that's what it is, nothing more and nothing less. If this isn't glamourous enough for you then by all means, make it glamorous and if you are interested in freedom, go ahead show us the code.
Good thing the main page doesn't even validate as XHTML 1.0 strict...
Funny, the W3C doesn't seem to think so...
WTF?! This isn't his field?! The guy who invented the backbone of most of our security infrastructure (meaning public key encryption), has no insight into matters concerning security?
Listen to what you are saying...
They both sound like crap compared to my old reel-to-reel tapes played on my Studer A77, thru my Mackie HR824's. Regardless, with any decent digital hi-fi system if you play a mp3 or other compressed format, versus the CD you will notice a difference in sound quality. I don't care what anyone says.
This on top of the fact that the 16 bit 41 khz signal you get from a CD is lowsy compared to the analog/24 bit digital your music was probably originally recorded in. I can't see why anyone would continue to slaughter the signal even more by applying one of these lossy compression formats (other than to disseminate your music over the internet or something, that's worth the compromise I think.) Especially if you've got a 100 gig harddrive.