Some search engines don't just check the pages linked from other pages on the server, but also look for other files in the subdirectories presented in links.
So if http://credit.com/ has a link to http://credit.com/signin/entry.html then these engines will also check http://credit.com/signin/ - which will, if directory indexes are on and there is no index.html page there, show all the files in the directory. In which case http://credit.com/signin/custlist.dat - your flatfile list including credit cards - gets indexed.
So if you're going to have directory indexing on (which there can be valid reasons for) you really need to create an empty index.html file as the very next step each time you set up a subdirectory, even if you only intend to link to files within it.
Take the original, thoughtful premise. Have everyone except Sorbo and the AI leave for their own series. Then Sorbo can do goofball episodic fluff like the last three years of Hercules, and everyone else can get to the real business, like all but the last year of Xena.
How about: A new drug is developed which - when used in a Wayist, super(wo)man, love machine setting with the right dodad in the neck-jack - transforms members of various (sub)species into truly peaceful, cooperative, enlightened folk. The crew realize that among them they have the resources to transform civilizations by distributing this drug. Sorbo won't go along because the "High Guard" mission statement holds too much consciousness to be a bad thing. Sorbo becomes recurrent guest character Last Unhappy Man - sort of a Flying Dutchman against the background of expanding waves of utopian transformation.
Plenty of techs in the US passed through the stage in the early 90s where folks who'd been running BBS systems (for instace, FidoNet) transitioned to starting local ISPs.
If you were advising someone in a minor 3rd-World town about a minimal working setup to provide local ISP service, what would they need? Sure, a line in. Power. A couple cheap clone PCs with Linux. Modems. More phone lines - or are there places where wireless or even local ether would make more sense?
Are there Net resources - or books - that provide basic instructions for the would-be local startup 3rd-World ISP? Because Somalia's problem is it only had two, and their lines were to companies under US sway. If they had 20 ISPs - or 100 - linked out through many other nations, this wouldn't be trouble. If new ISPs came up faster than old ones could be shut down, also just a nuisance.
Once the kit is designed, what would be required for it to enable stealth ISPs, say in China, Tibet....
Software increasingly is everywhere. Everything, increasingly, is programmable. Use is programming. Do we want a world where our household, let alone office, devices say politely, "Sir/Madam, I've just scanned your national ID, and you are lacking the qualification to issue that last command"?
We've already got pragmatic boundaries in place - most VCRs, famously, will not accept programming from common users. So it is with all complex systems - most folk can't make 'em do much. Which is why anyone who can can make decent bucks from doing so. That pragmatic test is plenty - burdening the economy by disqualifying and locking out people who otherwise are capable of charming our devices into productive behavior is lunacy - except for the priesthood who would be on the inside, and hoard the power of their certifications, while leading us into the twilight of eternal Microsoft.
Yeah, too melodramatic... still, it's like requiring a certificate in "kitchen engineering" before you can cook your family dinner. And don't bring up the certificates in food preparation required of restaurant operators - most of their kitchens are filthy anyhow - it's a false security.
Wouldn't it be simple for ISPs to block queries from their customers to port 53 on any systems but their designated name servers?
I'm not raising this because I think it's a good idea, but because it's obvious enough that we may have to provide a work-around, such as setting up DNS on other ports, in a widely-distributed way.
Yup. Jumpdomain is just a Tucows reseller, but the guy running it has _always_ responded to questions within a day, and has a perfect attitude. (I can be nasty in my quest for perfection too; I don't say that lightly.) Plus the Tucows scripts he's running are really pretty good (altho Konq can choke on some of the Javascript - fine under Netscape though). Transfers usually process in about a day, too, and then you're in control. I _always_ have clients with NetSol-registered domains move 'em to where we can control 'em without the never-ending NetSol glitches. It's basically free, just the $15 for whenever the next year starts. Someone who wants to see the service for less than that, I wouldn't trust 'em to stay in business.
Re:No wonder America is viewed as corrupt
on
Message from Kabul
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
the concept of manly men frolicking with scantily-clad women
Hey, that is the Muslim heaven - the central concept that's been used to sell martyrdom to the religion. If we can't offer them at least this much, and on this earth rather then some future realm, we can't even begin to compete. Wait, we are offerring them this!
It may be crass, but it's a lot more just and moral than getting them so frustrated in this world that they kill for the false promise of the next one. Yeah, I hate those shows too... but we win if we convince them we're more fun, as well as swing a mean sword of justice. You never win at the "morality" game, since morality is always defined by retrograde local religions, there as here.
There are two fundamentally different approaches to Open Source: capitalistic and communal.
Are the capitalistic and communal fundamentally different, or aspects of a common creature? Consider our current 'capitalist' president. How did he get there? By being a part of three groups - the Yale-Harvard axis, the Texas-oil axis, and the Connecticut old-money WASP contingent - which look out for their communal interests. Those with wealth and power in our society generally get there by being communal with some significant group of their counterparts. It's how the capital is accumulated to allow for capitalism in the first place.
So the question for those of us in the computer trades is whether we can achieve a quality of communalism among ourselves that will make us a true center of economic and political power. In the 90s we were getting there, centered largely on new West Coast elites. Wall Street was threatened by this, so it blew it into a bubble in order to (1) take East Coast profits on it and (2) make it go away.
If we quit being communalist now we're being penny wise and pound foolish. Do we want real power down the line, or do we want to be the sadder sort of "honest tradesmen" who have to rent their basic tools before they go out to the jobsite?
Remember, capitalism isn't about being some mean-ass son-of-a-hound to all and sundry, capitalism is about accumulating capital. Tools are a form of capital, productive of future earnings. Sharing capital within your communal group is the proven method by which Bush gained shares in several oil companies and a baseball team. And it's why he will be so good at paying back his friends - these values run deep enough in his character that his friends were comfortable sharing their monetary piles with his campaign.
The bottom line is that computers can do tremendously productive work. Those who can make the computers do that work can always get a cut of it. We individually have more capital if our tools are better - and the more we can share this capital as a group, the more politically and economically powerful we become.
In the old European empires knowledge of trade routes was capital, to be merged with the monetary capital of those who'd - largely out of pursuing the communal interests of their class - collected and preserved it. In the new empires knowledge of computer routing is capital....
Which libraries are using the government demands as lists of materials to move to overseas public Internet archives? Those CD-ROMS they break, keeping a shard as evidence of their distruction, they burn a few copies first, somewhere, right?? (Oops, "burn" in the "lase" sense.) As Ashcroft goes increasingly over the line, who will organize his impeachment?
99+% of all corporate data that isn't in a flat-file or (possibly three-dimensional) spreadsheat is in relational tables. The typical task that XML has been designed for is to standardize data exchanges between differently-structured relational systems, by providing sets of tags specific to the standards of specific industries. The whole point of XML is to enable companies to continue to use their current investment in relational databases, without the drag of having to do custom data conversions when dealing with suppliers or distant divisions in the company.
If you're going to throw out the installed investment in relational databases, you might as well just design a common database standard per industry (rather than an XML data exchange standard) and let them all exchange native data rather than translating in and out of any exchange format. Obviously that won't happen.
Now, if you're a new firm, you might decide it's easier to go OO or heirarchical or keep your data in slips of paper in a shoe box. But most of the available tools and solutions will continue to respect that relational works real, real well for inventory, manufacturing, accounts... just about everything industry consists of. So if there's an impedence mismatch between relational and XML that's enough to make trouble, it's XML that should be replaced by another model.
What design changes would be required to produce XML's relational equivalent?
Oddly, the WTO is a step beyond democratic: it operates only by complete concensus among members - a bit like a Quaker meeting. If a single representative of a member government disagrees with one if its proposals, it doesn't go through. This means that each WTO action has the consent of most national governments on the planet.
Now, who would suggest that there is not a single WTO-member government that favors legitimate protest to the degree of dissenting from this action and thus removing the complete concensus of member governments which is the WTO's only authorization to act? Does every single government favor surrendering the rights of its people in the name of "free" trade? Preposterous!
If that's the case then "free" is just a cover word for tyranny - and Microsoft has every reason to sound the alarm at the rise of "free" software....
If I decided to call my bookstore "Barnes and Noble Bites" should I be forced to pick a new name? Yes.
If I title a magazine article "weez75 Sucks" you'd come after me? I'm not selling what you're selling in competition with you, I'm just reviewing your business and character. If we get to a world where it infringes your property to mention your name in a noncomplimentary context, then, weez75, because you will have helped in your insignificant way to get us there, what I'll do if I catch up with you will also be unspeakable.
Between Kennedy Airport and the crash site lies Gateway National Recreation Area, providing ample opportunities for New York's Muslim Arab community to enjoy such recreational activities as birding, boating and fishing. Brooklyn, just next door to Queens, has the largest concentration of Arabs in the US - the second-largest after Detroit. One Brooklyn high-schooler, of an Egyptian immigrant family, proudly told his class a week before 9/11, "See those towers. In a week they won't be there." Authorities appear to believe this a coincidence, as they let the boy's father return to Egypt after questioning.
VA's annual report makes much of the "quarter-million" developers currently using Source Forge - which it turns out are mostly the users of the public site. Since the public site is a great benefit for free software, what does it matter if Source Forge itself is free software? That's like saying, "I won't go to a church built of bricks, but only one built purely of faith." Would there be a point of having a second public Source Forge - say, the way there is a point in having slash/code clones? For what, Windows freeware? And is there any point in having Fortune 2000 companies be able to get the latest Source Forge free for their internal development efforts?
The current program: get large firms to pay for it, let the open community make wide use if it, use the open community's experience to help hone it and market it... what's not to like?
From the front page of today's (11/9) New York Times:
"... Bush.. in the last days of his presidential campaign... complained that... Gore, 'trusts government, which stands in stark contrast to our view.'"
Is this better than "Read my lips, no new taxes," or what?
Here's how to get part way there (in this case for Nimda). In httpd.conf:
SetEnvIf Request_URI "cmd\.exe" ATTACK
SetEnvIf Request_URI "root\.exe" ATTACK
CustomLog/www/logs/access_log
common env=!ATTACK
CustomLog/www/logs/attack_log common env=ATTACK
<Location/>
Order Allow,Deny
Allow from all
Deny from env=ATTACK
ErrorDocument 403 "
</Location>
And then optionally for individual bad directories:
<Location/scripts/>
Deny from all
ErrorDocument 403 "
</Location>
At this point requests for cgi.exe are not being logged in access_log but only attack_log (leave out the attack_log line if you don't want even that much). They'll still show in error_log (but with a shorter error statement). The ErrorDocument line instructs Apache to send back nothing and just drop the connection - not as nasty as a tar pit, but at least you don't waste outgoing bandwidth, generally tighter than incoming for a Webserver. Also, Apache doesn't waste any time checking the file system on these requests, since the rules preclude that.
Very large and complex projects do get completed, sometimes even on-time/on-budget. Examples include skyscrapers, nuclear submarines, aircraft carriers, power plants (whether conventional or nuclear), oil refineries, B-747/A-320, etc. And all of these systems nowadays have a software component as well.
Yes but. The important components of a skyscraper are steel beams. Put them up correctly, after calculating loads and stresses, and it doesn't matter what the twenty tons of stuff you have sitting on the 27th floor is. It doesn't matter if the beams come from different foundaries, either, because the specs are clear enough (dimensions, strength, where the bolt holes are).
Now try putting together a typically complex business software solution, meshing a bunch of different, reasonably good, existing programs and components with some custom code and configuration. Even where there are reasonably good standards spec'd in some areas of the project, if you're not solving new problems it shouldn't be a software engineering project at all - it should just be system administration using the available solutions. That it's real software engineering means you're running into unpredictable surprises where the components at hand don't fit without a great deal of extra labor.
A parallel can be found in work on the portions of the New York City infrastructure that are under the streets: We still have wooden water mains in some places from the mid-1800s, mixed with gas, electric, steam pipes, sewer, subways, gas lines... most of which was not documented to current standards on either installation or subsequent changes, despite most of it being reasonably well done by the standards of its time (pretty amazing, those wooden water mains still working, right?).
So what happens when we finally go in to improve one of the services - say, lay new water mains? Other stuff is found that's in the way where you didn't expect it, or that need's fixing on examination when you didn't expect it. Meanwhile you've got the street ripped up but you have to cap it again quickly or traffic is too snarled for too long. So a single block's 4-week project can stretch out for over a year - dig up the street, fix one problem, discover more, recap while designing and provisioning the next stage, repeat - because it's all stuff that needs to be done once you get into it, that can't be properly assessed until you get into it.
Well, software in the real world isn't as old as New York, but if anything it's more complex, and the layers of crufty stuff that have to be accommodated in current projects are as considerable, and often as poorly documented by current standards (which will always advance so as to obsolete whatever we do now). Building a skyscraper, by contrast, is just a sysadmin job. Put the beams and bolts in the normal places, and it stands.
"Unfortunately its the few who do turn a technical argument into a religious one that give the rest of us a bad name...."
Curious parallel, at a time when we're entering a major war that's essentially a religious argument. There is no OS but Windows and Gates is its prophet. There is no freedom but American and Bush is its prophet. There is no god but Allah and bin Laden is his prophet.
Maybe, on a certain level, these all are religious wars. We are somehow in cultures that want one answer to be a total answer: one god, one OS, one brand of freedom, one superpower. Okay, we don't all want that. Some of us are happier in a world with many gods, many OSes, many freedoms, diverse powers. But that's why bin Laden, Gates, Falwell see us as decadent and evil.
So if there's a deeper psycho-social vortex that sucks so many members of our cultures in mono-moniacle delusions, whether of the defeated fascist kind, the waning communist kind, or the ascendant worship at the temples of Microsoft and Disney... well, don't we have to somehow ease the effects of that deeper vortex if we're to get on with our personal choices of OSs and goddesses and musics and causes to die for, and not be sucked into the looming battles of the competing vortexes, each of which believes not just in its immortality, but that, "There can be only one!"
"independently of Microsoft: CNET/ZDNET, eTesting Labs, eWeek, PC Magazine, and PC World"
Independently of the big three automakers, ExxonMobile says, "We objectively consider the newest crop of SUVs to be the most wonderful ever, and urge their immediate purchase by all."
From the time the Net became more open in 1991, to the time the commercial interests descended on it in 1994 ("We Must Conquer New Media" - main headline in Advertising Age in about March '94), the content of newsgroups, gopher sites and then Websites both expanded exponentially and maintained (or even improved on) the quality it had inherited from its academic/defense heritage. Openness != commercial. As the commerical deluge snowballed from '94 to '99, quality nearly disappeared. Random surfing, which in the mid-'90s was still rewarding, there being so many gems to stumble across, has also - according to surveys - nearly disappeared. And the general public enthusiasm for the Net, which was based on the exciting experience of quality, has deflated faster than tech stocks. The new commons, so rewarding to those who made early use of it, has become a mere extension of the office, the shopping mall, and the television.
Isn't the memory of that brief window, when the Net was both open and largely built for community rather than commercial values, what motivates those of us working with free/open software? And don't the commercial interests have about as much fondness for truly free/open culture as the Taliban does? Profit motive = prophet motive? Please, I'm not siding against business. I'm just questioning the doctrine that there is no other god, and no other profit. Might not business, in the longer run, be healthier if prevented from devouring too much in the short run? Isn't this a proper function of a standards body?
But when it comes to making a mission-critical application, they're not going to allow them to run down to PC Joe's, pick up a $2k box, install a $30 OS and believe it will run 24/7 without failure.
No, they're going to allow you to call up Dell, buy 2 $1.5k boxes, and configure them for high availability. Of course, there's some labor costs involved here to get to Sun-equivalence in terms of guaranteed uptime, but I'm selling my labor, not Sun (or Dell, for that matter) hardware. And hardware + labor still comes in way below Sun.
Fifteen would be a crowd in my living room. But wait, it's now 2005 and Web cams have progressed and all the dark fiber is lit and lots of folks are starting to leave their living room cams on so that friends can share virtual space. Now, you're watching a k3wl show in your house, and I'm there too, and I zoom the cam in by remote and watch with you.
Where's the difference between this - a capability we'll surely have in 2015 if not 2005 (long as we don't shoot ourselves too seriously in the foot while gunning for Afghans) - and Replay buddies? Really, none at all. Unless there are agents in the Web cams that blank out all copyrighted media from retransmission.
So, do we want a future where we just can't fully share our living rooms virtually, because the police quite literally have extensions within our devices? That's where this goes tomorrow, if SonicBLUE doesn't win today. There's no other way the networks' strategy makes the slightest sense in the long run. And heck, our buddies might be getting one of those bootleg terrorist-friendly channels off the satellites - better make sure we can't pick that up from their living rooms either....
This will both ease entry into secure areas, and reassure the vigilant among us that you, as agent of government, aren't carrying, say, surveillance devices in your pockets.
By strange coincidence, "Stand in the place where you work" is intoned by REM on my stereo just as I compose this, confusing the coherence of my reply.
So, either the war on drugs is creating the economic environment that supports al Qaeda, or else this claim by a "senior official" is BS intended to excuse military action in S. America. Why does it seem incredible to me that S. American coke runners would welcome or benefit from partnership with Moslem religious/political extremists? Yes, they do business with local Marxist insurgencies, but that's because those have a political base there. Like, Columbians need help money laundering or running drugs? And we're supposed to be prepared for this war not to end in "our lifetime"?
I'm prepared to stand behind America doing some really ugly things to those who have actually attacked us. Doing ugly things to those who provide consumer society with its vices I'm only for it also broadens to include the idiots who sold us the SUVs that make us oil-addicted clients of the Saudi princes who have financed bin Lauden all along.
Slashdot Mirror
Some search engines don't just check the pages linked from other pages on the server, but also look for other files in the subdirectories presented in links.
So if http://credit.com/ has a link to http://credit.com/signin/entry.html then these engines will also check http://credit.com/signin/ - which will, if directory indexes are on and there is no index.html page there, show all the files in the directory. In which case http://credit.com/signin/custlist.dat - your flatfile list including credit cards - gets indexed.
So if you're going to have directory indexing on (which there can be valid reasons for) you really need to create an empty index.html file as the very next step each time you set up a subdirectory, even if you only intend to link to files within it.
Take the original, thoughtful premise. Have everyone except Sorbo and the AI leave for their own series. Then Sorbo can do goofball episodic fluff like the last three years of Hercules, and everyone else can get to the real business, like all but the last year of Xena.
How about: A new drug is developed which - when used in a Wayist, super(wo)man, love machine setting with the right dodad in the neck-jack - transforms members of various (sub)species into truly peaceful, cooperative, enlightened folk. The crew realize that among them they have the resources to transform civilizations by distributing this drug. Sorbo won't go along because the "High Guard" mission statement holds too much consciousness to be a bad thing. Sorbo becomes recurrent guest character Last Unhappy Man - sort of a Flying Dutchman against the background of expanding waves of utopian transformation.
Plenty of techs in the US passed through the stage in the early 90s where folks who'd been running BBS systems (for instace, FidoNet) transitioned to starting local ISPs.
If you were advising someone in a minor 3rd-World town about a minimal working setup to provide local ISP service, what would they need? Sure, a line in. Power. A couple cheap clone PCs with Linux. Modems. More phone lines - or are there places where wireless or even local ether would make more sense?
Are there Net resources - or books - that provide basic instructions for the would-be local startup 3rd-World ISP? Because Somalia's problem is it only had two, and their lines were to companies under US sway. If they had 20 ISPs - or 100 - linked out through many other nations, this wouldn't be trouble. If new ISPs came up faster than old ones could be shut down, also just a nuisance.
Once the kit is designed, what would be required for it to enable stealth ISPs, say in China, Tibet....
Software increasingly is everywhere. Everything, increasingly, is programmable. Use is programming. Do we want a world where our household, let alone office, devices say politely, "Sir/Madam, I've just scanned your national ID, and you are lacking the qualification to issue that last command"?
... still, it's like requiring a certificate in "kitchen engineering" before you can cook your family dinner. And don't bring up the certificates in food preparation required of restaurant operators - most of their kitchens are filthy anyhow - it's a false security.
We've already got pragmatic boundaries in place - most VCRs, famously, will not accept programming from common users. So it is with all complex systems - most folk can't make 'em do much. Which is why anyone who can can make decent bucks from doing so. That pragmatic test is plenty - burdening the economy by disqualifying and locking out people who otherwise are capable of charming our devices into productive behavior is lunacy - except for the priesthood who would be on the inside, and hoard the power of their certifications, while leading us into the twilight of eternal Microsoft.
Yeah, too melodramatic
Wouldn't it be simple for ISPs to block queries from their customers to port 53 on any systems but their designated name servers?
I'm not raising this because I think it's a good idea, but because it's obvious enough that we may have to provide a work-around, such as setting up DNS on other ports, in a widely-distributed way.
Yup. Jumpdomain is just a Tucows reseller, but the guy running it has _always_ responded to questions within a day, and has a perfect attitude. (I can be nasty in my quest for perfection too; I don't say that lightly.) Plus the Tucows scripts he's running are really pretty good (altho Konq can choke on some of the Javascript - fine under Netscape though). Transfers usually process in about a day, too, and then you're in control. I _always_ have clients with NetSol-registered domains move 'em to where we can control 'em without the never-ending NetSol glitches. It's basically free, just the $15 for whenever the next year starts. Someone who wants to see the service for less than that, I wouldn't trust 'em to stay in business.
Hey, that is the Muslim heaven - the central concept that's been used to sell martyrdom to the religion. If we can't offer them at least this much, and on this earth rather then some future realm, we can't even begin to compete. Wait, we are offerring them this!
It may be crass, but it's a lot more just and moral than getting them so frustrated in this world that they kill for the false promise of the next one. Yeah, I hate those shows too ... but we win if we convince them we're more fun, as well as swing a mean sword of justice. You never win at the "morality" game, since morality is always defined by retrograde local religions, there as here.
Are the capitalistic and communal fundamentally different, or aspects of a common creature? Consider our current 'capitalist' president. How did he get there? By being a part of three groups - the Yale-Harvard axis, the Texas-oil axis, and the Connecticut old-money WASP contingent - which look out for their communal interests. Those with wealth and power in our society generally get there by being communal with some significant group of their counterparts. It's how the capital is accumulated to allow for capitalism in the first place.
So the question for those of us in the computer trades is whether we can achieve a quality of communalism among ourselves that will make us a true center of economic and political power. In the 90s we were getting there, centered largely on new West Coast elites. Wall Street was threatened by this, so it blew it into a bubble in order to (1) take East Coast profits on it and (2) make it go away.
If we quit being communalist now we're being penny wise and pound foolish. Do we want real power down the line, or do we want to be the sadder sort of "honest tradesmen" who have to rent their basic tools before they go out to the jobsite?
Remember, capitalism isn't about being some mean-ass son-of-a-hound to all and sundry, capitalism is about accumulating capital. Tools are a form of capital, productive of future earnings. Sharing capital within your communal group is the proven method by which Bush gained shares in several oil companies and a baseball team. And it's why he will be so good at paying back his friends - these values run deep enough in his character that his friends were comfortable sharing their monetary piles with his campaign.
The bottom line is that computers can do tremendously productive work. Those who can make the computers do that work can always get a cut of it. We individually have more capital if our tools are better - and the more we can share this capital as a group, the more politically and economically powerful we become.
In the old European empires knowledge of trade routes was capital, to be merged with the monetary capital of those who'd - largely out of pursuing the communal interests of their class - collected and preserved it. In the new empires knowledge of computer routing is capital....
Which libraries are using the government demands as lists of materials to move to overseas public Internet archives? Those CD-ROMS they break, keeping a shard as evidence of their distruction, they burn a few copies first, somewhere, right?? (Oops, "burn" in the "lase" sense.) As Ashcroft goes increasingly over the line, who will organize his impeachment?
99+% of all corporate data that isn't in a flat-file or (possibly three-dimensional) spreadsheat is in relational tables. The typical task that XML has been designed for is to standardize data exchanges between differently-structured relational systems, by providing sets of tags specific to the standards of specific industries. The whole point of XML is to enable companies to continue to use their current investment in relational databases, without the drag of having to do custom data conversions when dealing with suppliers or distant divisions in the company.
... just about everything industry consists of. So if there's an impedence mismatch between relational and XML that's enough to make trouble, it's XML that should be replaced by another model.
If you're going to throw out the installed investment in relational databases, you might as well just design a common database standard per industry (rather than an XML data exchange standard) and let them all exchange native data rather than translating in and out of any exchange format. Obviously that won't happen.
Now, if you're a new firm, you might decide it's easier to go OO or heirarchical or keep your data in slips of paper in a shoe box. But most of the available tools and solutions will continue to respect that relational works real, real well for inventory, manufacturing, accounts
What design changes would be required to produce XML's relational equivalent?
Now, who would suggest that there is not a single WTO-member government that favors legitimate protest to the degree of dissenting from this action and thus removing the complete concensus of member governments which is the WTO's only authorization to act? Does every single government favor surrendering the rights of its people in the name of "free" trade? Preposterous!
If that's the case then "free" is just a cover word for tyranny - and Microsoft has every reason to sound the alarm at the rise of "free" software....
If I title a magazine article "weez75 Sucks" you'd come after me? I'm not selling what you're selling in competition with you, I'm just reviewing your business and character. If we get to a world where it infringes your property to mention your name in a noncomplimentary context, then, weez75, because you will have helped in your insignificant way to get us there, what I'll do if I catch up with you will also be unspeakable.
Between Kennedy Airport and the crash site lies Gateway National Recreation Area, providing ample opportunities for New York's Muslim Arab community to enjoy such recreational activities as birding, boating and fishing. Brooklyn, just next door to Queens, has the largest concentration of Arabs in the US - the second-largest after Detroit. One Brooklyn high-schooler, of an Egyptian immigrant family, proudly told his class a week before 9/11, "See those towers. In a week they won't be there." Authorities appear to believe this a coincidence, as they let the boy's father return to Egypt after questioning.
VA's annual report makes much of the "quarter-million" developers currently using Source Forge - which it turns out are mostly the users of the public site. Since the public site is a great benefit for free software, what does it matter if Source Forge itself is free software? That's like saying, "I won't go to a church built of bricks, but only one built purely of faith." Would there be a point of having a second public Source Forge - say, the way there is a point in having slash/code clones? For what, Windows freeware? And is there any point in having Fortune 2000 companies be able to get the latest Source Forge free for their internal development efforts?
... what's not to like?
The current program: get large firms to pay for it, let the open community make wide use if it, use the open community's experience to help hone it and market it
From the front page of today's (11/9) New York Times:
.. in the last days of his presidential campaign ... complained that ... Gore, 'trusts government, which stands in stark contrast to our view.'"
"... Bush
Is this better than "Read my lips, no new taxes," or what?
SetEnvIf Request_URI "cmd\.exe" ATTACK /www/logs/access_log
common env=!ATTACK
/www/logs/attack_log common env=ATTACK
SetEnvIf Request_URI "root\.exe" ATTACK
CustomLog
CustomLog
<Location />
Order Allow,Deny
Allow from all
Deny from env=ATTACK
ErrorDocument 403 "
</Location>
And then optionally for individual bad directories:
<Location /scripts/>
Deny from all
ErrorDocument 403 "
</Location>
At this point requests for cgi.exe are not being logged in access_log but only attack_log (leave out the attack_log line if you don't want even that much). They'll still show in error_log (but with a shorter error statement). The ErrorDocument line instructs Apache to send back nothing and just drop the connection - not as nasty as a tar pit, but at least you don't waste outgoing bandwidth, generally tighter than incoming for a Webserver. Also, Apache doesn't waste any time checking the file system on these requests, since the rules preclude that.
Yes but. The important components of a skyscraper are steel beams. Put them up correctly, after calculating loads and stresses, and it doesn't matter what the twenty tons of stuff you have sitting on the 27th floor is. It doesn't matter if the beams come from different foundaries, either, because the specs are clear enough (dimensions, strength, where the bolt holes are).
Now try putting together a typically complex business software solution, meshing a bunch of different, reasonably good, existing programs and components with some custom code and configuration. Even where there are reasonably good standards spec'd in some areas of the project, if you're not solving new problems it shouldn't be a software engineering project at all - it should just be system administration using the available solutions. That it's real software engineering means you're running into unpredictable surprises where the components at hand don't fit without a great deal of extra labor.
A parallel can be found in work on the portions of the New York City infrastructure that are under the streets: We still have wooden water mains in some places from the mid-1800s, mixed with gas, electric, steam pipes, sewer, subways, gas lines ... most of which was not documented to current standards on either installation or subsequent changes, despite most of it being reasonably well done by the standards of its time (pretty amazing, those wooden water mains still working, right?).
So what happens when we finally go in to improve one of the services - say, lay new water mains? Other stuff is found that's in the way where you didn't expect it, or that need's fixing on examination when you didn't expect it. Meanwhile you've got the street ripped up but you have to cap it again quickly or traffic is too snarled for too long. So a single block's 4-week project can stretch out for over a year - dig up the street, fix one problem, discover more, recap while designing and provisioning the next stage, repeat - because it's all stuff that needs to be done once you get into it, that can't be properly assessed until you get into it.
Well, software in the real world isn't as old as New York, but if anything it's more complex, and the layers of crufty stuff that have to be accommodated in current projects are as considerable, and often as poorly documented by current standards (which will always advance so as to obsolete whatever we do now). Building a skyscraper, by contrast, is just a sysadmin job. Put the beams and bolts in the normal places, and it stands.
Curious parallel, at a time when we're entering a major war that's essentially a religious argument. There is no OS but Windows and Gates is its prophet. There is no freedom but American and Bush is its prophet. There is no god but Allah and bin Laden is his prophet.
Maybe, on a certain level, these all are religious wars. We are somehow in cultures that want one answer to be a total answer: one god, one OS, one brand of freedom, one superpower. Okay, we don't all want that. Some of us are happier in a world with many gods, many OSes, many freedoms, diverse powers. But that's why bin Laden, Gates, Falwell see us as decadent and evil.
So if there's a deeper psycho-social vortex that sucks so many members of our cultures in mono-moniacle delusions, whether of the defeated fascist kind, the waning communist kind, or the ascendant worship at the temples of Microsoft and Disney ... well, don't we have to somehow ease the effects of that deeper vortex if we're to get on with our personal choices of OSs and goddesses and musics and causes to die for, and not be sucked into the looming battles of the competing vortexes, each of which believes not just in its immortality, but that, "There can be only one!"
Independently of the big three automakers, ExxonMobile says, "We objectively consider the newest crop of SUVs to be the most wonderful ever, and urge their immediate purchase by all."
Isn't the memory of that brief window, when the Net was both open and largely built for community rather than commercial values, what motivates those of us working with free/open software? And don't the commercial interests have about as much fondness for truly free/open culture as the Taliban does? Profit motive = prophet motive? Please, I'm not siding against business. I'm just questioning the doctrine that there is no other god, and no other profit. Might not business, in the longer run, be healthier if prevented from devouring too much in the short run? Isn't this a proper function of a standards body?
No, they're going to allow you to call up Dell, buy 2 $1.5k boxes, and configure them for high availability. Of course, there's some labor costs involved here to get to Sun-equivalence in terms of guaranteed uptime, but I'm selling my labor, not Sun (or Dell, for that matter) hardware. And hardware + labor still comes in way below Sun.
Fifteen would be a crowd in my living room. But wait, it's now 2005 and Web cams have progressed and all the dark fiber is lit and lots of folks are starting to leave their living room cams on so that friends can share virtual space. Now, you're watching a k3wl show in your house, and I'm there too, and I zoom the cam in by remote and watch with you.
Where's the difference between this - a capability we'll surely have in 2015 if not 2005 (long as we don't shoot ourselves too seriously in the foot while gunning for Afghans) - and Replay buddies? Really, none at all. Unless there are agents in the Web cams that blank out all copyrighted media from retransmission.
So, do we want a future where we just can't fully share our living rooms virtually, because the police quite literally have extensions within our devices? That's where this goes tomorrow, if SonicBLUE doesn't win today. There's no other way the networks' strategy makes the slightest sense in the long run. And heck, our buddies might be getting one of those bootleg terrorist-friendly channels off the satellites - better make sure we can't pick that up from their living rooms either....
This will both ease entry into secure areas, and reassure the vigilant among us that you, as agent of government, aren't carrying, say, surveillance devices in your pockets.
By strange coincidence, "Stand in the place where you work" is intoned by REM on my stereo just as I compose this, confusing the coherence of my reply.
So, either the war on drugs is creating the economic environment that supports al Qaeda, or else this claim by a "senior official" is BS intended to excuse military action in S. America. Why does it seem incredible to me that S. American coke runners would welcome or benefit from partnership with Moslem religious/political extremists? Yes, they do business with local Marxist insurgencies, but that's because those have a political base there. Like, Columbians need help money laundering or running drugs? And we're supposed to be prepared for this war not to end in "our lifetime"?
I'm prepared to stand behind America doing some really ugly things to those who have actually attacked us. Doing ugly things to those who provide consumer society with its vices I'm only for it also broadens to include the idiots who sold us the SUVs that make us oil-addicted clients of the Saudi princes who have financed bin Lauden all along.
Shoot me. "<" 2.20 - didn't catch on preview that the less-than carrot gets eaten even in POT.