Well, based on the review above, yes. I don't specifically want to attack the reviewer, but his point about being too technically specific is unwarranted. After all, what good is a technical book that isn't technically specific? From Tim M's point of view, it's job security, as well: if the first edition is a good seller, then the second edition (targeted for FreeBSD 5.x) will be a sure thing. Case in point: I have Solaris and Microsoft books that are targeted at different OS versions, and I found them to be quite handy - especially from the perspective that a diff on two versions of the same book (i.e. Solaris 2.6 Advanced System Administration vs Solaris 7 A.S.A.) can quickly bring you up to speed on the new and/or altered functionality of the new system. Any technical book that is general enough to please this reviewer is sure to include the word Dummies or Idiot in the title.
Furthermore, if the author is so disappointed that a change he suggested to someone else's book wasn't included at press time and hasn't appeared in the errata, maybe he should write his own book. Based on the quality of the review (not the quality of the publication, mind you), I would be inclined to ignore anything the reviewer said.
Maybe/. and community should put together a set of guidelines, almost like a checklist, for reviewing new material: the anyone-can-submit-a-review model sucks.
Some of the chief proponents of Open Source sit on the board of Sair, which is interested in "[taking] the necessary and proper steps to protect its copyrighted training and certification materials..." So, Mad Dog, are you telling us that software should be free but knowledge should not? I'm very confused...
Given that X is an inherently insecure system (though great strides have been made to rectify this), how do you see the relationship between X and FreeBSD going forward? xfree86 v3.x is nice, v4.x is nicer (though it hasn't made it to the "default" windowing system for FreeBSD, presumably because of some gaping security holes). Surely, for the mindless masses, X (or some derivative) is a necessary part of the complete OS distribution. What does the core feel is a reasonable tradeoff between security and functionality, WRT this issue, and to what extent will the core move to "correct" any serious problems (non-platform specific) with future releases of X?
Now draws near the time when the world will truly see the power of the open source community. The entertainment and hardware industries have issued their ultimatum: pay us or be deprived of content and performance. Allowing these Nazis to have control over our purchased equipment is tantamount to martial law.
We have a unique opportunity as a worldwide community to bend these corporations to our will. Do not purchase any hardware that abides by these new standards. We can at the very least send these copy protections the way of the Pentium serial numbers, if not prevent them from being manufactured at all.
Early BSD development - in fact, the very basis for the Internet - was funded by DARPA many moons ago.
By the way, I believe NASA (not NSA) uses/used OpenBSD as they used to run the mirror site that I would always download from - I think this was at Goddard? in Silicone Valley (Sunnyvale/Mountain View area)
Believe it or not, I saw (I think I saw) a Togo's in north Philadelphia a few weeks ago. It looked like the same sign as the Cali chain, but I haven't had opportunity to check this out, yet.
I may be wayyyyyy off base, here, but I remember being told a story several years ago about solar radiation being a potential cause of eventual death in microchips... the story talks about how Intel built a huge bunker of lead and concrete to conduct experiments in, supposedly costing multi-millions of dollars. The end result was that they could never prove conclusively that solar radiation had anything to do with it.
The next time you go to Togo's for a hot pastrami, remember to count how many individual techie conversations are happening. It's sickening that you can't even find solace in a lunch break.
JKH *always* says that you should never run a.0 release of FreeBSD (if you want stability, that is). It is common knowledge that a first release of anything is generally not very friendly in the defects department - try reading a Consumer Reports magazine sometime.
My advice to all is either use it and don't complain or wait for the next point release. This is not to suggest that reporting bugs is complaining.
In an ideal OSS world, people would always include a patch/workaround with the bug report. Those that don't aren't using Linux for the real reason that it's cool to use Linux.
Personally, I can't wait for the recalls to start on the PT Cruisers;)
Be careful of communication barriers in (spoken) languages. Also, be sure to decide, review, and finalize all requirements prior to signing the deal. It never hurts to be very specific. Also, establish a rigid timeline and a payment schedule based on successful implementation of requirements. Best of luck!
It is sad that big bad software company decides to work with the "Linux Community" only after their IP is exposed. What these companies are failing to understand is that there is an INCREDIBLE MARKET right under their nose, and if they choose to ignore that market - well, as any student of economics will tell you, the market will provide a solution.
Furthermore, as a non-Linux user, I object to being grouped into the collective "Linux Community," but only because I choose to use BSD. True enough that BSD users do frequently get the spoils of whatever wars Linux wins, but by letting companies off with *only* Linux support, we are not accomplishing the true goal (all hail RMS). Indeed, there is probably a better name for our community that will encompass all OS's, text editors, browsers, licensing schemes, and other insert-your-holy-war-here items.
Download the code, specs, whatever as soon as they come out, then don't share with people you don't know. I know this is a little anti-community, but... it becomes increasingly difficult for the owners of the original product (CSS, CueCat) to persecute/prosecute because they don't know who has the code.
Disclaimer: I do not endorse or support illegal behavior. All behavior should be legal. ALL HAIL DISCORDIA!
Problem is there was no core file nor any kind of information concerning a crash in any log file during any one of these crashes that occur every three to four days.
It's quite nice that you're sticking up for Sun - I usually do - but in this case, you should get the facts before you try to blast me. I've been dealing with Sun long enough to have a good feel for how they operate, and you, sir, have no sense of the sarcastic!
This may be a case of luck or bad reporting... I'm currently in tech support with Sun for this very same issue, and believe it or not, my case is currently pending in the kernel group.
It may well be that Sun has been hiding this issue from their own people as well as from the rest of the world. Then again, maybe not - maybe when they heard my initial symptoms, it was a deliberate deferral to software groups to avoid this story getting any more publicity. Things that make you go hmmm...
Unlike digital books, like the VitalBook, once you purchase a textbook, it's yours FOREVER! I could see paying $3600 for a lifetime subscription to a digital service, if the information was really that important to me... textbooks are most valuable after the schooling experience, when they become not learning fodder, but reliable reference material. So, as a dental student at NYU, I have to pay $3600 for the VitalBooks that are only good while I'm in school, then pay for additional materials when I go to my residency? This calls for a boycott!
Now here's a buyout I'd like to see...
on
Endgame For SCO
·
· Score: 1
It would be more than interesting (though it may not line up with their business goals) to see the new BSDI take over SCO - thus bringing BSD operating systems full circle, from BSD is UNIX improved to BSD is UNIX-free to BSD is free UNIX. Hell, we might even get SYSV source code sans licensing fees;)
Then again, I don't see what the contribution would be - I like BSD as is more than any commercially-licensed UNIX.
I was pleasantly surprised to see the term "cracking" used in place of "hacking" near the end of the article. It's hard to believe, I know, but it almost represents responsible reporting on behalf of CNN - something that comes as even more of a surprise.
BSDi buys Walnut Creek, giving them a software/publishing outlet. BSDi buys Telesys, giving them a hardware outlet. Sounds like somebody's been taking lessons from Microsoft and Sun - which begs the question 'when will we see our first BSDi-branded peripherals?'. Or, maybe the better question is 'who will they buy next?'. I think we'll see movement in the applications arena next - maybe something like Applix or BRU. Or I could just be wrong. It appears to me that BSDi is taking the right steps to combat the establishment on all fronts, and I'm happy for them.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, based on the review above, yes. I don't specifically want to attack the reviewer, but his point about being too technically specific is unwarranted. After all, what good is a technical book that isn't technically specific? From Tim M's point of view, it's job security, as well: if the first edition is a good seller, then the second edition (targeted for FreeBSD 5.x) will be a sure thing. Case in point: I have Solaris and Microsoft books that are targeted at different OS versions, and I found them to be quite handy - especially from the perspective that a diff on two versions of the same book (i.e. Solaris 2.6 Advanced System Administration vs Solaris 7 A.S.A.) can quickly bring you up to speed on the new and/or altered functionality of the new system. Any technical book that is general enough to please this reviewer is sure to include the word Dummies or Idiot in the title.
Furthermore, if the author is so disappointed that a change he suggested to someone else's book wasn't included at press time and hasn't appeared in the errata, maybe he should write his own book. Based on the quality of the review (not the quality of the publication, mind you), I would be inclined to ignore anything the reviewer said.
Maybe /. and community should put together a set of guidelines, almost like a checklist, for reviewing new material: the anyone-can-submit-a-review model sucks.
Some of the chief proponents of Open Source sit on the board of Sair, which is interested in "[taking] the necessary and proper steps to protect its copyrighted training and certification materials..." So, Mad Dog, are you telling us that software should be free but knowledge should not? I'm very confused...
Given that X is an inherently insecure system (though great strides have been made to rectify this), how do you see the relationship between X and FreeBSD going forward? xfree86 v3.x is nice, v4.x is nicer (though it hasn't made it to the "default" windowing system for FreeBSD, presumably because of some gaping security holes). Surely, for the mindless masses, X (or some derivative) is a necessary part of the complete OS distribution. What does the core feel is a reasonable tradeoff between security and functionality, WRT this issue, and to what extent will the core move to "correct" any serious problems (non-platform specific) with future releases of X?
Argh - it's the return of the spelling Nazis!
Now draws near the time when the world will truly see the power of the open source community. The entertainment and hardware industries have issued their ultimatum: pay us or be deprived of content and performance. Allowing these Nazis to have control over our purchased equipment is tantamount to martial law.
We have a unique opportunity as a worldwide community to bend these corporations to our will. Do not purchase any hardware that abides by these new standards. We can at the very least send these copy protections the way of the Pentium serial numbers, if not prevent them from being manufactured at all.
Early BSD development - in fact, the very basis for the Internet - was funded by DARPA many moons ago.
By the way, I believe NASA (not NSA) uses/used OpenBSD as they used to run the mirror site that I would always download from - I think this was at Goddard? in Silicone Valley (Sunnyvale/Mountain View area)
Believe it or not, I saw (I think I saw) a Togo's in north Philadelphia a few weeks ago. It looked like the same sign as the Cali chain, but I haven't had opportunity to check this out, yet.
I may be wayyyyyy off base, here, but I remember being told a story several years ago about solar radiation being a potential cause of eventual death in microchips... the story talks about how Intel built a huge bunker of lead and concrete to conduct experiments in, supposedly costing multi-millions of dollars. The end result was that they could never prove conclusively that solar radiation had anything to do with it.
The next time you go to Togo's for a hot pastrami, remember to count how many individual techie conversations are happening. It's sickening that you can't even find solace in a lunch break.
JKH *always* says that you should never run a .0 release of FreeBSD (if you want stability, that is). It is common knowledge that a first release of anything is generally not very friendly in the defects department - try reading a Consumer Reports magazine sometime.
;)
My advice to all is either use it and don't complain or wait for the next point release. This is not to suggest that reporting bugs is complaining.
In an ideal OSS world, people would always include a patch/workaround with the bug report. Those that don't aren't using Linux for the real reason that it's cool to use Linux.
Personally, I can't wait for the recalls to start on the PT Cruisers
Be careful of communication barriers in (spoken) languages. Also, be sure to decide, review, and finalize all requirements prior to signing the deal. It never hurts to be very specific. Also, establish a rigid timeline and a payment schedule based on successful implementation of requirements. Best of luck!
It is sad that big bad software company decides to work with the "Linux Community" only after their IP is exposed. What these companies are failing to understand is that there is an INCREDIBLE MARKET right under their nose, and if they choose to ignore that market - well, as any student of economics will tell you, the market will provide a solution.
Furthermore, as a non-Linux user, I object to being grouped into the collective "Linux Community," but only because I choose to use BSD. True enough that BSD users do frequently get the spoils of whatever wars Linux wins, but by letting companies off with *only* Linux support, we are not accomplishing the true goal (all hail RMS). Indeed, there is probably a better name for our community that will encompass all OS's, text editors, browsers, licensing schemes, and other insert-your-holy-war-here items.
Download the code, specs, whatever as soon as they come out, then don't share with people you don't know. I know this is a little anti-community, but... it becomes increasingly difficult for the owners of the original product (CSS, CueCat) to persecute/prosecute because they don't know who has the code.
Disclaimer: I do not endorse or support illegal behavior. All behavior should be legal. ALL HAIL DISCORDIA!
This message written by a Pope.
Problem is there was no core file nor any kind of information concerning a crash in any log file during any one of these crashes that occur every three to four days.
It's quite nice that you're sticking up for Sun - I usually do - but in this case, you should get the facts before you try to blast me. I've been dealing with Sun long enough to have a good feel for how they operate, and you, sir, have no sense of the sarcastic!
This may be a case of luck or bad reporting... I'm currently in tech support with Sun for this very same issue, and believe it or not, my case is currently pending in the kernel group.
It may well be that Sun has been hiding this issue from their own people as well as from the rest of the world. Then again, maybe not - maybe when they heard my initial symptoms, it was a deliberate deferral to software groups to avoid this story getting any more publicity. Things that make you go hmmm...
Unlike digital books, like the VitalBook, once you purchase a textbook, it's yours FOREVER! I could see paying $3600 for a lifetime subscription to a digital service, if the information was really that important to me... textbooks are most valuable after the schooling experience, when they become not learning fodder, but reliable reference material. So, as a dental student at NYU, I have to pay $3600 for the VitalBooks that are only good while I'm in school, then pay for additional materials when I go to my residency? This calls for a boycott!
It would be more than interesting (though it may not line up with their business goals) to see the new BSDI take over SCO - thus bringing BSD operating systems full circle, from BSD is UNIX improved to BSD is UNIX-free to BSD is free UNIX. Hell, we might even get SYSV source code sans licensing fees ;)
Then again, I don't see what the contribution would be - I like BSD as is more than any commercially-licensed UNIX.
I was pleasantly surprised to see the term "cracking" used in place of "hacking" near the end of the article. It's hard to believe, I know, but it almost represents responsible reporting on behalf of CNN - something that comes as even more of a surprise.
BSDi buys Walnut Creek, giving them a software/publishing outlet. BSDi buys Telesys, giving them a hardware outlet. Sounds like somebody's been taking lessons from Microsoft and Sun - which begs the question 'when will we see our first BSDi-branded peripherals?'. Or, maybe the better question is 'who will they buy next?'. I think we'll see movement in the applications arena next - maybe something like Applix or BRU. Or I could just be wrong. It appears to me that BSDi is taking the right steps to combat the establishment on all fronts, and I'm happy for them.