what a load of bullshit. take your tinfoil hat off. BSD as a group are far harder to control as they aren't off on zealotry crusades or out to dominate, they just get stuff done. Many commercial companies have had long term involvement with them including MS, this isn't new.
Agreed, and MS's money spends like any other money - if they do think they can control BSD they've got a surprise coming. Personally I don't think that's the plan. They do need to get into OpenStack, and they are desperate to get PowerShell ported to 'nix. Paying to have it supported, and contributing to the development of the pieces of BSD they use is just good business sense. MS may be all sorts of things - but generally they are not dumb when it comes to money.
It's not like they don't have their own Unix (SCO wasn't just a Linux attack venture) which may (possibly) be resurrected sometime in the future.
the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (foundation) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust. Both entities are tax-exempt private foundations that are structured as a charitable.
Fuck McAfee
Mod +5 Insightful because you know it is.
No, I won't. And no I don't. It's two words that give no illumination on the subject. How do you suppose that enlightens anyone? Hint: your sexual preferences aren't interesting.
How about:-
I have no idea what the purchase price was for McAfee, or what it's existing revenue stream was/is - but I have to wonder whether the people that made the decision truly consider it's effect on Intel's image, and whether they costed a plan to turn around the scumbag image McAfee has. ?
WTF is your issue? The original question (go on, look it up, the words and thread hasn't changed) was "how to enable permanent swap" . The answer was, and still is, set the correct level of swappiness for the swap
"swapon" is the correct answer, yours is an answer to a different question (that was not asked) about tuning it.
[sigh] creating a swapfile and running swapon does not enable permanent swap. It only enable the possible use of swap - if the system runs out of RAM. Even pushing swappiness up doesn't make it permanent swap. Maybe you read all that n00bs guide. Surely it has a section about/etc/fstab.
It's not easy to follow either your post - but I'll try. Please consider a spell checker and the use of formatting.
In hindsight, the whole com, net, org idea was stupid to begin with.
Could you expand on that?
The best would have been to ONLY use the countries different TLDs.
.TLD for US,.TLD.countrycode system works fine for me. It would be simpler is.TLD hadn't been made available to entities based in other countries - but that's part of a long history of ICAANs fuckups. It's impossible to start over - but if we could then I'd have made.com and.com.* only available to commercial organisations, and.org/.org.* only available to registered non-profits.
It would solve a lot of the shit that happens because we need to look at international rules all the time and it would take away the dominance of the USofA.
Huh? Does not parse. What do you mean "we need to look at international rules all the time" and "the dominance of the USofA"??
IMO, is that.com(.*) sites are not exclusively commercial, and other TLDs can be commercial. If you want to run a commercial site that takes money (not advertising revenue) from sales - you should provide publicly accessible, verified, identification and contact details.
If you're a small company that operates out of your home, you may not want your street address and home phone directly published in association with your company name.
Then you should register your business at another address or you shouldn't be in business. I never said or implied that the home address of business principals should be in whois (and neither is ICAAN) - only that the correct contact details for the business should be.
How is a whois privacy guard that acts as a proxy any different than say Amazon listing their legal department with a PO box? It's not like a PO box is a real person or publically accessible. It really doesn't give you any more information then the whois proxy. I mean, should't Amazon's whois information list Jeff Bezos's personal information or something?
Since when is a PO box not publicly accessible? Amazon (Amazon Technologies, Inc.) is a registered company, not Jeff Bezo as a sole trader using a trading name registered to his house.
The test is - is the business legally registered? Are the published details correct? Is the contact address real? NOTE: if you can't be contacted at the provided address then anyone can petition ICAAN to take back your domain name. Which is as it should be.
If you don't want people who buy your products or services to know your name - register a company. If the business structure you legally operate under allows a PO box as a contact address - then that's the contact address you can use for whois.
The whole "peeps will know my home address" is a distortion on reality - which best serves the interests of shonky businesses that don't operate within the law in the countries they are based.
> https://packages.debian.org/je...
is 31.x here and afaik built on the latest ESR release. you're using backports, that's a different deal (like ubuntu PPAs).
Apropos of what? I run the same version Iceweasel on oldstable, stable, testing and unstable. Identical features, functionality, and extension support - the difference is the external libraries they use.
And iirc backports have no guarantee for security patches, but just ship the new version (with new fixes and new bugs)
Guarantee no - at least not for ever (nor did I say there was). Security patches are provided on the basis of the version number - not whether it's a backport or not (see glandium.org, the debian security list and the sources I've provided previously for up-to-date details). Backports are different only in that they work with older (in this case oldstable) libraries.
If you want to get security patches for version Monsieur Hommey and crew no longer support (currently pre-3.5) it's not hard, just do the following and adjust until the error messages vanish:-
apt-get source iceweasel # Install its build dependencies apt-get build-dep iceweasel #Build it cd iceweasel-* PRODUCT_NAME=firefox dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot
True but there are few religions that call for violence against people that leave the faith.
That's a corner case - and (Judeao-)Christianity has plenty of it's own. I'm not going to attempt to defend any nut-job belief system.
Nor am I going to attack moderates - as most main stream religions tend to be. To do so only gives strength to the extremist elements.It's the fundamentalist (one-bookian), the only faith is our faith, the written word is the literal word of god that cause the most problems. In this case the Caliphatists. People whose espouse views such as yours are just as bad by lumping all followers of a particular branch of a religion in one bucket and labelling them as extremists.
Both the Islamists and the Christians pull their excuses for extremism from the same sources - the Old Testament. And justify it with later "books". (Islam - the Koran, Christianity has Paul (and Mark).
The simple facts are that the Islamic definition of apostasy includes anyone who leaves the faith. That inst so uncommon among world religions. What is a little more unusual is that Islamic law does hold that the death penalty is appropriate for such cases.
Which just goes to show how little you know about Christianity, and other religions. They all justify death to unbelievers and until they reject and remove those sections of their Bibles - will continue to revive those practices. Any that leave the faithful are unbelievers.
Christianity has some similar history around heretics (centuries ago) and phrases like "thou shall not suffer a witch" are still in print. I don't think any major branch of Christan scholorships still advocates for the killing of people who leave the flock though and that isn't true of Islam.
Many branches of Christianity preach that the Bible (whatever they deem to be "The Bible") is the literal word. Maybe you should actually read the entire Bible?
As for current practises... yes, many of those that claim to be Christians still kill those they deem as unbelievers. And witches. Ironically people like you pretend those practices don't exist by claiming "they aren't real Christians". But the LRA believes they are. Ireland would not have had much of it's wars without the Catholic/Protestant divide. The Holy Roman Empire was hundreds of years of war on unbelievers - with special emphasis on those that left the true faith.
The whole - current practices, and centuries ago, is a straw man that provides little comfort to those who study history - or who read a little more widely than you. Two hundred years is the blink of an eye in religious history - which is full of repeats. The Caliphists are not the only groups preaching End-Times bullshit, and we are currently on the brink of a return to the fucking Crusades (of stupidity). The US in particular (Australia too) is home to many that believe their duty is to create the conditions that will bring about the return of Jesus and there ascension into Heaven before the war to end all wars. Killing people in the name of your mythical sky god is just stupid. Just as stupid as ignoring some instances and focusing on others (ignore killing doctors, and blacks - look over there they just killed an ex-follower).
tl;dr? You're no better than the Caliphists. Each has something in their eye that stops them from seeing clearly - each builds a platform of righteousness to justify their hatred. I fear the growing cult of "muscular Christians" (Soldiers for Christ is not a empty name) just as much as the Caliphists who seek to provoke them into the last and final battle that both religions have as core elements of the books they base their religion on.
[...]"But what about debian.org and the like?"[...]
Noted, bookmarked, not understood (I can be a bit thick) - I'll get back to it (my apologies, I'm busy and tired (and emotional - it's an Aussie thing) at present.
This is how it used to be done in some countries. I remember Australian registrars refusing to register.com.au domains if you didn't have an associated ABN (Australian Business Number assigned by the tax office to registered businesses). I had a problem where outdated ABN details didn't match the entry I was trying to put in the WHOIS records. Clearing the mess took a few days.
Though today it looks like click and play just like.com domains.
It's still supposed to be the case (I'm a registered domain registrar) - but it is rarely enforced, despite my continual arguments (please don't guess who I am, it should be pretty obvious but... I use a pseudonym for a reason).
MelbourneIT, GoHosting, and VentraIP are the worst offenders by numbers. The last two are the biggest scumbags (front-running and domain hijacking). GoHosting have spent years stalling on DNSSEC and avoiding penalties for flagrant breaching of policies. In fairness the fish rots from the head down and ICAAN started the shower of shit.
By law we are still required to verify an ABN and a contact address - likewise publication of the Registrant's Rights and Responsibilities (a quick Google will show you how many are compliant - likewise registration of resellers).
I'm sorry to hear about the ATO stalling on your ABN - the ATO's outsourcing of their systems is a whole 'nuther barrel of rotten fish. But thanks for saying that anyway - the problems won't go away if people don't complain.
Any website that accepts payment for goods or services via the Internet should be required (as part of its PCI compliance for payment processing) to have first party verifiable (i.e. not anonymous or 3rd party) contact details for their domain name.
And that's the extent to which "commercial" websites or domains should be required to be not anonymous for their owner(s).
I'd mod you up if I had points - and not just for echoing my own post (not that I'm implying you copied me). The original ICAAN proposal was that.com was for commercial and be transparent - what's happened since is complex, and the cause of the problem.
In short - yes whois should match PCI, but it should be extended to all those who directly benefit from sales (not perusal) - regardless of whether they process the payments themselves or through credit cards. It won't stop scumbag "traders" but it will make it easier for consumers to distinguish (if they can be bothered) and to police scumbags. Note: that ICAAN will (if pressured) remove domain name leases if the registrant is uncontactable, the proposed change of policy is not in the interests of better business or making the market safer for consumers - it's all about invasion of privacy).
Just because your speech is free - you are not resolved of the consequences. Also if Businesses are people why should they be able to hide behind ownership anoniminty when that is a courtesy they try to deny the rest of us?
If your site doesn't sell things then you should be able to protect your details from the public.
What if your site has advertising banners?
Are you selling things? (i.e. pay per view or pay per conversion). If you benefit from sales you are selling things - and should be able to be held liable. No different than bricks and mortar.
e.g. you own a shop - you tell people the drug shop down the road sells good drugs, and you get paid for every customer that goes through the drug shop door. I don't have a problem with you wearing a false moustache and telling people your name is Bill Smith - different issue if you get paid for every customer that buys drugs at that store (and it turns out their selling pigeon crap labelled Amoxylin).
Your comment is pointless drivel. It doesn't matter if there is one Islam or not.
Of course not... if your only tool is a hammer then only absolutes count and moderation should not be seen as a path to progress. Burn them all (one-bookians that is).[sigh]
In case that isn't clear (I suspect you have one-eyebrow, no neck, and the sort of forehead that keeps the soap out of your eyes during your infrequent showers - the world ain't black and white.
the answer is have a swap partition/file and set swappiness.
Which is why I can't understand the bile of "Your Windows "knowledge""
Your failure to understand and conflation of "I dinna calculate RAM demand" with "lucky I have swap" is your own problem. Have you heard of planning?
and the deliberate stupidity about powered off systems
I'm glad you (finally) got that. I don't hold it against you - but you really should attribute the stupid scenario to the person who suggested it (Hint: it were you).
when I made a few short comments right out of linux memory management for newbies.
There's your problem - right there. if you're going to talk trash like "bargain basement" (as if you are aspiring to ITIL standards) don't mix scenarios and quote from "n00b" guides (it's called "lugging the goal posts"/shifting grounds). The Google university isn't knowledge.
What was so deeply offensive about "If the system knows it has swap it will eventually use it unless you tell it not to"?
I'm not your mama (poor soul). If you insist on riding the bike without a saddle down bumpy hills don't come crying to me about butt hurt.
WTF is your issue? The original question (go on, look it up, the words and thread hasn't changed) was "how to enable permanent swap" . The answer was, and still is, set the correct level of swappiness for the swap (as others have pointed out, much more civilly - but you ignore that also to pursue a bad emotional investment). What the n00b guide at a cursory read didn't tell you (it's a guide for n00bs, not Enterprise BP with an SLA that bites), is that swap == performance loss (allocate more RAM, and adjust your plans))
Next time you launch your mouth attach less ego, more brain, and less ambiguity. Maybe write a business plan and include an escape clause.
You're mixing personalities with facts. If you make yourself a prisoner of the opinion of pseudonymous poster you're a dick. In this case, patently and demonstrably - you're both. Get over it and move on, hopefully the wiser. If you're posting to/. hoping to make a rep - you've got it wrong, on a number of levels.
It ain't news, it's opinions - some informative, be informed or waste your time. Pick one.
This is particularly concerning for organisations who speak the truth about Islam. The "religion of peace" has a habit of violence towards those who expose it's true nature.
Please don't post stupid. There is no one Islam any-more than there is one Christianity or Buddhism (or Hindu). If all Christians were "true" Christians (literally interpreted all the Bible) there'd be a lot more public stonings (throwing rocks that is). Religion is stupid full-stop - but until the world is solely occupied by those that don't need religion we have a problem. You and your broad brush of hate trying to pass as truth - which invariably hides a fundamentalist religious agenda - are part of the problem.
The problem, IMO, is that.com(.*) sites are not exclusively commercial, and other TLDs can be commercial. If you want to run a commercial site that takes money (not advertising revenue) from sales - you should provide publicly accessible, verified, identification and contact details.
If your site doesn't sell things then you should be able to protect your details from the public.
You should also be able to not be liable for people speaking their mind, within limitations - but that's another complex issue.
did you think my tech creds are playing video games?
[...]back when SSDs had very short read-write lifetimes it was a bad idea to use them for swap.
Agreed
The world has moved on but some tech journalists etc got left behind
I don't see the relevance.
, as probably did the bargain basement VPS deals too.
That's your opinion - we made it a policy because it made no sense for the business model. And sub-$10pm (AU) is bargain basement.)
Just because it's a cheap deal doesn't mean it's a good idea if you want stuff to stay up.
Agreed - but that has nothing to do with whether you are running a swap. And this is not "back on track". The track was "how do you enable permanent swap" - the answer is have a swap partition/file and set swappiness.
iceweasel is an older firefox and ESR release, currently both is an advantage
Actually Iceweasel is available in the same versioning as Firefox - the difference is that the Debian packagers backport security patches to older versions. i.e. I'm running v39.0 (39.0-1~bpo70+1 on Wheezy as I type)
If I chose the default version that comes with oldoldstable (squeeze) I'd be running 3.5.16-20.
Are you always such an asshole, or are you just having a bad day? People are trying to have a civil conversation with you, and you bust out the insults. You may know more than the majority of us about aquaculture, but you don't have to be such a jerk whenever anyone has an
opinion different than yours.
There's opinions - which are fine, anyone over 30 holds the ones they deserve - and then there's bullshit posing as authority. You want to defend the right for people to spout bullshit?
It isn't always true that they are even talking about exactly the same type of farm as you run,
Then maybe they should qualify their opinion - just like you should specify what the fuck you are defending. If you don't like the tone don't read it.
they could just be talking about the normal ground based farms that many of us have to deal with.
In short, chill out and be civil
or you won't last long here
How do you fit your head through doorways?
, no one wants to have a discussion with a jerk.
Maybe you should re-read what your defending - then you'd come off as less of a patronising dick seeking the high moral ground to satisfy your superiority complex. If I offended someone and they think it's unfair - it should be them that responds. tl;dr? You have tickets on yourself. Manners are butter for those without bread - and the devil is a gentleman with honeyed speech.
Don't you have better things to do with your time than post to tell people you don't want to talk to them? It seems a bit redundant - maybe you should try eating your own dog food - and chill out?
Slashdot Mirror
[...]Flash is going to be with us for many years.
Like herpes. Except that HTML5 can, and does cure it.
what a load of bullshit. take your tinfoil hat off. BSD as a group are far harder to control as they aren't off on zealotry crusades or out to dominate, they just get stuff done. Many commercial companies have had long term involvement with them including MS, this isn't new.
Agreed, and MS's money spends like any other money - if they do think they can control BSD they've got a surprise coming. Personally I don't think that's the plan. They do need to get into OpenStack, and they are desperate to get PowerShell ported to 'nix. Paying to have it supported, and contributing to the development of the pieces of BSD they use is just good business sense. MS may be all sorts of things - but generally they are not dumb when it comes to money.
It's not like they don't have their own Unix (SCO wasn't just a Linux attack venture) which may (possibly) be resurrected sometime in the future.
Show me someone from the open source community who has helped and donated more towards charities than Bill Gates. Uh huh, that's what I thought.
Bill - is that you? Don't forget to lodge your claims for charitable donations - we filed it under "the spit shield fund".
the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (foundation) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust. Both entities are tax-exempt private foundations that are structured as a charitable.
One good thing Bill Gates has done. Though not everyone agrees.
Dear coward
You should add a net on top of your head so you can catch all the things soaring over it.
When medicine and welfare advances you may be able to add a head to your neck so you can attach a net.
Fuck McAfee Mod +5 Insightful because you know it is.
No, I won't. And no I don't.
It's two words that give no illumination on the subject. How do you suppose that enlightens anyone? Hint: your sexual preferences aren't interesting.
How about:-
I have no idea what the purchase price was for McAfee, or what it's existing revenue stream was/is - but I have to wonder whether the people that made the decision truly consider it's effect on Intel's image, and whether they costed a plan to turn around the scumbag image McAfee has. ?
"swapon" is the correct answer, yours is an answer to a different question (that was not asked) about tuning it.
[sigh] creating a swapfile and running swapon does not enable permanent swap. It only enable the possible use of swap - if the system runs out of RAM. Even pushing swappiness up doesn't make it permanent swap. Maybe you read all that n00bs guide. Surely it has a section about /etc/fstab.
It's not easy to follow either your post - but I'll try. Please consider a spell checker and the use of formatting.
In hindsight, the whole com, net, org idea was stupid to begin with.
Could you expand on that?
The best would have been to ONLY use the countries different TLDs.
.TLD for US, .TLD.countrycode system works fine for me. It would be simpler is .TLD hadn't been made available to entities based in other countries - but that's part of a long history of ICAANs fuckups. It's impossible to start over - but if we could then I'd have made .com and .com.* only available to commercial organisations, and .org/.org.* only available to registered non-profits.
It would solve a lot of the shit that happens because we need to look at international rules all the time and it would take away the dominance of the USofA.
Huh? Does not parse. What do you mean "we need to look at international rules all the time" and "the dominance of the USofA"??
IMO, is that .com(.*) sites are not exclusively commercial, and other TLDs can be commercial. If you want to run a commercial site that takes money (not advertising revenue) from sales - you should provide publicly accessible, verified, identification and contact details.
If you're a small company that operates out of your home, you may not want your street address and home phone directly published in association with your company name.
Then you should register your business at another address or you shouldn't be in business. I never said or implied that the home address of business principals should be in whois (and neither is ICAAN) - only that the correct contact details for the business should be.
How is a whois privacy guard that acts as a proxy any different than say Amazon listing their legal department with a PO box? It's not like a PO box is a real person or publically accessible. It really doesn't give you any more information then the whois proxy. I mean, should't Amazon's whois information list Jeff Bezos's personal information or something?
Since when is a PO box not publicly accessible? Amazon (Amazon Technologies, Inc.) is a registered company, not Jeff Bezo as a sole trader using a trading name registered to his house.
The test is - is the business legally registered? Are the published details correct? Is the contact address real? NOTE: if you can't be contacted at the provided address then anyone can petition ICAAN to take back your domain name. Which is as it should be.
If you don't want people who buy your products or services to know your name - register a company. If the business structure you legally operate under allows a PO box as a contact address - then that's the contact address you can use for whois.
The whole "peeps will know my home address" is a distortion on reality - which best serves the interests of shonky businesses that don't operate within the law in the countries they are based.
> https://packages.debian.org/je... is 31.x here and afaik built on the latest ESR release. you're using backports, that's a different deal (like ubuntu PPAs).
Apropos of what? I run the same version Iceweasel on oldstable, stable, testing and unstable. Identical features, functionality, and extension support - the difference is the external libraries they use.
And iirc backports have no guarantee for security patches, but just ship the new version (with new fixes and new bugs)
Guarantee no - at least not for ever (nor did I say there was). Security patches are provided on the basis of the version number - not whether it's a backport or not (see glandium.org, the debian security list and the sources I've provided previously for up-to-date details). Backports are different only in that they work with older (in this case oldstable) libraries.
If you want to get security patches for version Monsieur Hommey and crew no longer support (currently pre-3.5) it's not hard, just do the following and adjust until the error messages vanish:-
For more information please re-read.
True but there are few religions that call for violence against people that leave the faith.
That's a corner case - and (Judeao-)Christianity has plenty of it's own. I'm not going to attempt to defend any nut-job belief system.
Nor am I going to attack moderates - as most main stream religions tend to be. To do so only gives strength to the extremist elements.It's the fundamentalist (one-bookian), the only faith is our faith, the written word is the literal word of god that cause the most problems. In this case the Caliphatists. People whose espouse views such as yours are just as bad by lumping all followers of a particular branch of a religion in one bucket and labelling them as extremists.
Both the Islamists and the Christians pull their excuses for extremism from the same sources - the Old Testament. And justify it with later "books". (Islam - the Koran, Christianity has Paul (and Mark).
The simple facts are that the Islamic definition of apostasy includes anyone who leaves the faith. That inst so uncommon among world religions. What is a little more unusual is that Islamic law does hold that the death penalty is appropriate for such cases.
Which just goes to show how little you know about Christianity, and other religions. They all justify death to unbelievers and until they reject and remove those sections of their Bibles - will continue to revive those practices. Any that leave the faithful are unbelievers.
Christianity has some similar history around heretics (centuries ago) and phrases like "thou shall not suffer a witch" are still in print. I don't think any major branch of Christan scholorships still advocates for the killing of people who leave the flock though and that isn't true of Islam.
Many branches of Christianity preach that the Bible (whatever they deem to be "The Bible") is the literal word. Maybe you should actually read the entire Bible?
As for current practises... yes, many of those that claim to be Christians still kill those they deem as unbelievers. And witches. Ironically people like you pretend those practices don't exist by claiming "they aren't real Christians". But the LRA believes they are.
Ireland would not have had much of it's wars without the Catholic/Protestant divide. The Holy Roman Empire was hundreds of years of war on unbelievers - with special emphasis on those that left the true faith.
The whole - current practices, and centuries ago, is a straw man that provides little comfort to those who study history - or who read a little more widely than you. Two hundred years is the blink of an eye in religious history - which is full of repeats. The Caliphists are not the only groups preaching End-Times bullshit, and we are currently on the brink of a return to the fucking Crusades (of stupidity). The US in particular (Australia too) is home to many that believe their duty is to create the conditions that will bring about the return of Jesus and there ascension into Heaven before the war to end all wars. Killing people in the name of your mythical sky god is just stupid. Just as stupid as ignoring some instances and focusing on others (ignore killing doctors, and blacks - look over there they just killed an ex-follower).
tl;dr? You're no better than the Caliphists. Each has something in their eye that stops them from seeing clearly - each builds a platform of righteousness to justify their hatred. I fear the growing cult of "muscular Christians" (Soldiers for Christ is not a empty name) just as much as the Caliphists who seek to provoke them into the last and final battle that both religions have as core elements of the books they base their religion on.
[...]"But what about debian.org and the like?"[...]
Noted, bookmarked, not understood (I can be a bit thick) - I'll get back to it (my apologies, I'm busy and tired (and emotional - it's an Aussie thing) at present.
This is how it used to be done in some countries. I remember Australian registrars refusing to register .com.au domains if you didn't have an associated ABN (Australian Business Number assigned by the tax office to registered businesses). I had a problem where outdated ABN details didn't match the entry I was trying to put in the WHOIS records. Clearing the mess took a few days.
Though today it looks like click and play just like .com domains.
It's still supposed to be the case (I'm a registered domain registrar) - but it is rarely enforced, despite my continual arguments (please don't guess who I am, it should be pretty obvious but... I use a pseudonym for a reason).
MelbourneIT, GoHosting, and VentraIP are the worst offenders by numbers. The last two are the biggest scumbags (front-running and domain hijacking). GoHosting have spent years stalling on DNSSEC and avoiding penalties for flagrant breaching of policies. In fairness the fish rots from the head down and ICAAN started the shower of shit.
By law we are still required to verify an ABN and a contact address - likewise publication of the Registrant's Rights and Responsibilities (a quick Google will show you how many are compliant - likewise registration of resellers).
I'm sorry to hear about the ATO stalling on your ABN - the ATO's outsourcing of their systems is a whole 'nuther barrel of rotten fish. But thanks for saying that anyway - the problems won't go away if people don't complain.
Any website that accepts payment for goods or services via the Internet should be required (as part of its PCI compliance for payment processing) to have first party verifiable (i.e. not anonymous or 3rd party) contact details for their domain name.
And that's the extent to which "commercial" websites or domains should be required to be not anonymous for their owner(s).
I'd mod you up if I had points - and not just for echoing my own post (not that I'm implying you copied me). The original ICAAN proposal was that .com was for commercial and be transparent - what's happened since is complex, and the cause of the problem.
In short - yes whois should match PCI, but it should be extended to all those who directly benefit from sales (not perusal) - regardless of whether they process the payments themselves or through credit cards. It won't stop scumbag "traders" but it will make it easier for consumers to distinguish (if they can be bothered) and to police scumbags. Note: that ICAAN will (if pressured) remove domain name leases if the registrant is uncontactable, the proposed change of policy is not in the interests of better business or making the market safer for consumers - it's all about invasion of privacy).
Just because your speech is free - you are not resolved of the consequences. Also if Businesses are people why should they be able to hide behind ownership anoniminty when that is a courtesy they try to deny the rest of us?
It is all Gooses and ganders.
Especially if they take money from you.
If your site doesn't sell things then you should be able to protect your details from the public.
What if your site has advertising banners?
Are you selling things? (i.e. pay per view or pay per conversion). If you benefit from sales you are selling things - and should be able to be held liable. No different than bricks and mortar.
e.g. you own a shop - you tell people the drug shop down the road sells good drugs, and you get paid for every customer that goes through the drug shop door. I don't have a problem with you wearing a false moustache and telling people your name is Bill Smith - different issue if you get paid for every customer that buys drugs at that store (and it turns out their selling pigeon crap labelled Amoxylin).
Your comment is pointless drivel. It doesn't matter if there is one Islam or not.
Of course not... if your only tool is a hammer then only absolutes count and moderation should not be seen as a path to progress. Burn them all (one-bookians that is).[sigh]
In case that isn't clear (I suspect you have one-eyebrow, no neck, and the sort of forehead that keeps the soap out of your eyes during your infrequent showers - the world ain't black and white.
When processing an ECParameters structure OpenSSL enters an infinite loop if the curve specified is over a specially malformed binary polynomial field. This can be used to perform denial of service against any system which processes public keys, certificate requests or certificates. This includes TLS clients and TLS servers with client authentication enabled.
original advisory Hidden in plain sight. (sigh)
Isn't The Register a news satire site? [if not it needs reclassifying]
This is not the first time that has happened either. Making me think the same thing.
Good to hear your satire inoculation is working.
[sigh]
Which is why I can't understand the bile of "Your Windows "knowledge""
Your failure to understand and conflation of "I dinna calculate RAM demand" with "lucky I have swap" is your own problem. Have you heard of planning?
and the deliberate stupidity about powered off systems
I'm glad you (finally) got that. I don't hold it against you - but you really should attribute the stupid scenario to the person who suggested it (Hint: it were you).
when I made a few short comments right out of linux memory management for newbies.
There's your problem - right there. if you're going to talk trash like "bargain basement" (as if you are aspiring to ITIL standards) don't mix scenarios and quote from "n00b" guides (it's called "lugging the goal posts"/shifting grounds). The Google university isn't knowledge.
What was so deeply offensive about "If the system knows it has swap it will eventually use it unless you tell it not to"?
I'm not your mama (poor soul). If you insist on riding the bike without a saddle down bumpy hills don't come crying to me about butt hurt.
WTF is your issue? The original question (go on, look it up, the words and thread hasn't changed) was "how to enable permanent swap" . The answer was, and still is, set the correct level of swappiness for the swap (as others have pointed out, much more civilly - but you ignore that also to pursue a bad emotional investment). What the n00b guide at a cursory read didn't tell you (it's a guide for n00bs, not Enterprise BP with an SLA that bites), is that swap == performance loss (allocate more RAM, and adjust your plans))
Next time you launch your mouth attach less ego, more brain, and less ambiguity. Maybe write a business plan and include an escape clause.
You're mixing personalities with facts. If you make yourself a prisoner of the opinion of pseudonymous poster you're a dick. In this case, patently and demonstrably - you're both. Get over it and move on, hopefully the wiser. If you're posting to /. hoping to make a rep - you've got it wrong, on a number of levels.
It ain't news, it's opinions - some informative, be informed or waste your time. Pick one.
[...]were you looking for a fight?
Grow the fuck up. What are you, 16?
The only linux based mobile platform that matters is android. These guys are 10 years late.
I guess their name is their destiny... the fish has already sailed.
You're trolling right? Even if you're not you're pushing ignorance. Jolla has a bunch of interesting features that actually work.
I hope the Jolla project succeeds financially - it may break a lot of walled gardens.
This is particularly concerning for organisations who speak the truth about Islam. The "religion of peace" has a habit of violence towards those who expose it's true nature.
Please don't post stupid. There is no one Islam any-more than there is one Christianity or Buddhism (or Hindu). If all Christians were "true" Christians (literally interpreted all the Bible) there'd be a lot more public stonings (throwing rocks that is). Religion is stupid full-stop - but until the world is solely occupied by those that don't need religion we have a problem. You and your broad brush of hate trying to pass as truth - which invariably hides a fundamentalist religious agenda - are part of the problem.
The problem, IMO, is that .com(.*) sites are not exclusively commercial, and other TLDs can be commercial. If you want to run a commercial site that takes money (not advertising revenue) from sales - you should provide publicly accessible, verified, identification and contact details.
If your site doesn't sell things then you should be able to protect your details from the public.
You should also be able to not be liable for people speaking their mind, within limitations - but that's another complex issue.
[...]back when SSDs had very short read-write lifetimes it was a bad idea to use them for swap.
Agreed
The world has moved on but some tech journalists etc got left behind
I don't see the relevance.
, as probably did the bargain basement VPS deals too.
That's your opinion - we made it a policy because it made no sense for the business model. And sub-$10pm (AU) is bargain basement.)
Just because it's a cheap deal doesn't mean it's a good idea if you want stuff to stay up.
Agreed - but that has nothing to do with whether you are running a swap. And this is not "back on track". The track was "how do you enable permanent swap" - the answer is have a swap partition/file and set swappiness.
For more information please re-read.
iceweasel is an older firefox and ESR release, currently both is an advantage
Actually Iceweasel is available in the same versioning as Firefox - the difference is that the Debian packagers backport security patches to older versions. i.e. I'm running v39.0 (39.0-1~bpo70+1 on Wheezy as I type)
If I chose the default version that comes with oldoldstable (squeeze) I'd be running 3.5.16-20.
Every release from oldoldstable to testing can make use of various releases. All releases except the latest get security patches backported - so if you don't like new features you can keep the older version without sacrificing security. (Thanks Monsieur Hommey and others)
Are you always such an asshole, or are you just having a bad day? People are trying to have a civil conversation with you, and you bust out the insults. You may know more than the majority of us about aquaculture, but you don't have to be such a jerk whenever anyone has an
opinion different than yours.
There's opinions - which are fine, anyone over 30 holds the ones they deserve - and then there's bullshit posing as authority. You want to defend the right for people to spout bullshit?
It isn't always true that they are even talking about exactly the same type of farm as you run,
Then maybe they should qualify their opinion - just like you should specify what the fuck you are defending. If you don't like the tone don't read it.
they could just be talking about the normal ground based farms that many of us have to deal with.
In short, chill out and be civil
or you won't last long here
How do you fit your head through doorways?
, no one wants to have a discussion with a jerk.
Maybe you should re-read what your defending - then you'd come off as less of a patronising dick seeking the high moral ground to satisfy your superiority complex. If I offended someone and they think it's unfair - it should be them that responds.
tl;dr? You have tickets on yourself.
Manners are butter for those without bread - and the devil is a gentleman with honeyed speech.
Don't you have better things to do with your time than post to tell people you don't want to talk to them? It seems a bit redundant - maybe you should try eating your own dog food - and chill out?