Unfortunately, they're one of the few remaining in the bay area. However, they've been around for about 8 years now AFAIK, and they show no sign of being bought out. I have DSL service through them, and I have to say that their service is excellent. It doesn't go down every couple of days like PacBell's does (shudder), and when you call their number and ask for support, I've NEVER failed to get a Human Bean. Plus, they offer free shell access:) What more could a geek want?
Do we really want to turn Linux into another Windows?
The way I see it, the minute Linux is regulated by any person, company, or consortium that is in any way shape or form subject to commercial considerations, the game is up. We do NOT need an entity who's mind is in any way dwelling upon "what is the best for the stockholders?".
Why do you think MS produces as crappy a series of OSes as it does? Simply because Bill Gates was and still is in it for the money. Linus ISN'T, and IMO, that's what makes it great.
The Linux kernels constantly come out better and more stable than their counterparts. Why? Because the man who controls the kernel says "it will be released when it's ready".
... and I haven't seen any evidence of any power loss at all. During the entire "energy crisis", my APC's not even hinted to a load drop, much less a complete loss of power.
Now, while Alameda doesn't use PG&E power (we have our own company, Alameda Power & Telecom), still, none of my friends in PG&E territory have reported power loss at all.
First off, as always, it's good that this is being brought to our attention essentially right off the bat. Although there will probably ALWAYS be hardcore MS users (Disclaimer: IANAHCMSU), we're not really constrained as much by OS as we think. While Linux is still developing its multimedia muscles, we have the Mac. Sure, they're expensive, but all you really need is one...:P, and Linux for the rest.
Now, since I'm a GCM, I'll delve into the technical part. It's been stated that MS will track computers via, among other things, MAC address. Apparently, this happens during the registration process. Well, what if you don't register?
Now, some MS drone's sure to have thought of this eventuality, so maybe the OS will force you to register. Well, in that case, no registration == totally non-usable/partially cripped OS. *BANG* -- That's the sound of MS shooting themselves in the foot. The Technical Support issues in such a case would be overwhelming, IMO.
Well, suppose that MS makes the OS surrupticiously(sp?!) register itself over any available internet connection? FIREWALL it! Setup your handy Sonicwall, Cisco Router, or even ZoneAlarm to deny the bloody registration agent access to the internet.
And if all else fails, SOMEONE will hack the damn thing. Garunteed. We will see a patch to "mswhst_reg.exe" within a WEEK that kills the damn thing.
Never fear. We will prevail. No matter WHAT MS does.
The first thing that struck me when I read the article was the iDVD and iTunes bit. I did a double take.
Steve Jobs is not as dumb as a lot of people say he looks. Not only is he including tools, standard, to manipulate two of today's more popular media formats, but he's doing what very few other major computer manufacturers are not... not bowing to the interests of Holywood (at least that we know of, and there's no reason, given Apple's past track record, that they would). You can bet your asses that the MPAA & RIAA aren't happy with this.
While covering that distance in only two weeks would seem to mean you'd have to go very fast (true), humans can go very fast too. It's the starting and stopping that'd kill them:)
Realisticly, you'd probably have to spend the first week accellerating, and the last week decelrating. On the 7th day after you'd left, you'd have reached max velocity, and then immediately take your foot off the gas and slam it on the breaks.
Anybody with any better knowledge of the actual distance needed to travel care to compute this?
Of course, it's one in an extremely spiffy and compact box, but still! The fact that you can "domain" the thing, what makes it any different from those... *retch* 16 node iMac clusters? Essentially, none:)
Next year there'll be two, the next, three, the next, four, and so on.
By the end of the Millenium, we'll have Monoliths across America, and God will reach down and start the biggest domino effect in the history of the world!
What about countries where there are no such laws as the DMCA?
Specifically, what happens if I live in France, and I want to buy a new hard dive? Well, the hard drive I buy 10 years down the road may have the capacity to be copy-protected, but I can't see how the industry leaders could force the drive to have such a system enabled, especially in a country where such measures may be illegal. I can't imagine any one manufacturer choosing to loose the sales of an entire country just to please the US Media Cartel.
So, you could simply order hard drives from, say, France. Unless the Cartel decided to bribe some more legislators, and then... I can just imagine it:
In the year 2010, the United States' War on Drugs was replaced by another, even more sinister game...
The war on Hard Drives
Then again, if something like this happens, you may only be able to read about it in that foreign country.
In the article, Kurt spends a couple of paragraphs expostulating on the lackluster way in which SSH clients present new/changed key issues. While I agree that SSH clients should be more strenuous in warning the user of new/changed keys, the failure to do so is not a fault of the protocol, simply of the writers of the software.
I use PuTTY on my Win boxes to SSH into my servers, and its messages are exactly as he says they should be... "Warning!", etc, so clearely, this is not a universal problem.
Also, AFAIK, there is no facility in the SSL/SSH protocols themselves to deal with alert messages such as this, although I don't think that the protocol itself is the place for these kinds of messages.
To put it succinctly, it's not the protocol's fault if a user blindly accepts these new keys as authentic.
The software community in general, and the OSS community in particular, seems to have forgotten their mother's admonishment that "If you don't have anything good to say, don't say anything at all".
I'm developing my own forum system in Perl, and I've long been considering the problem of off-site submissions beng used to spam/harm the forum (like is happening here).
I was considering using only the HTTP_REFERER environment variable, but I've come to the realization that a) my server doesn't return that variable, and b) other's might not, either. Now, since I'm eventually intending to release this, I thought I should try and develop a solution that doesn't depend on that field.
Anyways, my idea was using a hidden input field which would contain partially or wholly encrypted data from the server. This would be checked at submittal time to see if it matched up with what what the CGI said it should be.
My main question is what data should I use. I was thinking of doing something with the date/time, but that opens up a whole can of worms.
Comments appreciated. Y'all can e-mail me with your ideas, just un-spam-protectify my e-mail addy above.
I'm having a hard time understanding HOW they've made these monitors work. Specifically, I'm not sure how they'd use two display planes, one behind the other, to make something look 3d.
I'm assuming that it'd be something like having your background on the farther back plane and your apps on the nearer plane. Sure, that'd make the apps look like they're floating over the background, but that's not real 3d. (Remember, I'm guessing how the work here, so feel free to correct me:) )
Anyway, I think that the true future of 3d monitors will be something like an Active Holographic Display; i.e. a monitor who's elements can emit different light patterns in different directions. For example, an LCD-type screen that had a mechanism by which one pixel could emit blue light in one direction and green in another. The same concept is what makes holograms work. Surely it couldn't be too hard to make a monitor that does this same kind of thing?
Slashdot Mirror
Lanminds
:) What more could a geek want?
Unfortunately, they're one of the few remaining in the bay area. However, they've been around for about 8 years now AFAIK, and they show no sign of being bought out. I have DSL service through them, and I have to say that their service is excellent. It doesn't go down every couple of days like PacBell's does (shudder), and when you call their number and ask for support, I've NEVER failed to get a Human Bean. Plus, they offer free shell access
Do we really want to turn Linux into another Windows?
The way I see it, the minute Linux is regulated by any person, company, or consortium that is in any way shape or form subject to commercial considerations, the game is up. We do NOT need an entity who's mind is in any way dwelling upon "what is the best for the stockholders?".
Why do you think MS produces as crappy a series of OSes as it does? Simply because Bill Gates was and still is in it for the money. Linus ISN'T, and IMO, that's what makes it great.
The Linux kernels constantly come out better and more stable than their counterparts. Why? Because the man who controls the kernel says "it will be released when it's ready".
I wouldn't have it any other way.
Akardam Out
... ankles will heal, strikes will be over, and replacement actors will be had.
Hey, Neo DID take the... uh... which pill was it again?
Akardam Out
... and I haven't seen any evidence of any power loss at all. During the entire "energy crisis", my APC's not even hinted to a load drop, much less a complete loss of power.
Now, while Alameda doesn't use PG&E power (we have our own company, Alameda Power & Telecom), still, none of my friends in PG&E territory have reported power loss at all.
First off, as always, it's good that this is being brought to our attention essentially right off the bat. Although there will probably ALWAYS be hardcore MS users (Disclaimer: IANAHCMSU), we're not really constrained as much by OS as we think. While Linux is still developing its multimedia muscles, we have the Mac. Sure, they're expensive, but all you really need is one... :P, and Linux for the rest.
Now, since I'm a GCM, I'll delve into the technical part. It's been stated that MS will track computers via, among other things, MAC address. Apparently, this happens during the registration process. Well, what if you don't register?
Now, some MS drone's sure to have thought of this eventuality, so maybe the OS will force you to register. Well, in that case, no registration == totally non-usable/partially cripped OS. *BANG* -- That's the sound of MS shooting themselves in the foot. The Technical Support issues in such a case would be overwhelming, IMO.
Well, suppose that MS makes the OS surrupticiously(sp?!) register itself over any available internet connection? FIREWALL it! Setup your handy Sonicwall, Cisco Router, or even ZoneAlarm to deny the bloody registration agent access to the internet.
And if all else fails, SOMEONE will hack the damn thing. Garunteed. We will see a patch to "mswhst_reg.exe" within a WEEK that kills the damn thing.
Never fear. We will prevail. No matter WHAT MS does.
"I threw the coherency out the nearest airlock."
The first thing that struck me when I read the article was the iDVD and iTunes bit. I did a double take.
Steve Jobs is not as dumb as a lot of people say he looks. Not only is he including tools, standard, to manipulate two of today's more popular media formats, but he's doing what very few other major computer manufacturers are not... not bowing to the interests of Holywood (at least that we know of, and there's no reason, given Apple's past track record, that they would). You can bet your asses that the MPAA & RIAA aren't happy with this.
And for that, I have to congradulate him.
... can be found at http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.asp?S=11&T= 1&X=823&Y=9741&Z=17&W=1. And yes, the link is permanent.
Disclaimer: IANAS (I am not a scientist)
:)
While covering that distance in only two weeks would seem to mean you'd have to go very fast (true), humans can go very fast too. It's the starting and stopping that'd kill them
Realisticly, you'd probably have to spend the first week accellerating, and the last week decelrating. On the 7th day after you'd left, you'd have reached max velocity, and then immediately take your foot off the gas and slam it on the breaks.
Anybody with any better knowledge of the actual distance needed to travel care to compute this?
Akardam Out
... I still like to be able to see my nameserver flip out and go "kernel panic!" after line 12!
... I have only one thing to say...
:)
*smack*
This machine IS a Beowulf Cluster! DUH!
Of course, it's one in an extremely spiffy and compact box, but still! The fact that you can "domain" the thing, what makes it any different from those... *retch* 16 node iMac clusters? Essentially, none
... it's the first year of the new Millenium.
Next year there'll be two, the next, three, the next, four, and so on.
By the end of the Millenium, we'll have Monoliths across America, and God will reach down and start the biggest domino effect in the history of the world!
Specifically, what happens if I live in France, and I want to buy a new hard dive? Well, the hard drive I buy 10 years down the road may have the capacity to be copy-protected, but I can't see how the industry leaders could force the drive to have such a system enabled, especially in a country where such measures may be illegal. I can't imagine any one manufacturer choosing to loose the sales of an entire country just to please the US Media Cartel.
So, you could simply order hard drives from, say, France. Unless the Cartel decided to bribe some more legislators, and then... I can just imagine it:
Then again, if something like this happens, you may only be able to read about it in that foreign country.
Akardam Out
In the article, Kurt spends a couple of paragraphs expostulating on the lackluster way in which SSH clients present new/changed key issues. While I agree that SSH clients should be more strenuous in warning the user of new/changed keys, the failure to do so is not a fault of the protocol, simply of the writers of the software.
I use PuTTY on my Win boxes to SSH into my servers, and its messages are exactly as he says they should be... "Warning!", etc, so clearely, this is not a universal problem.
Also, AFAIK, there is no facility in the SSL/SSH protocols themselves to deal with alert messages such as this, although I don't think that the protocol itself is the place for these kinds of messages.
To put it succinctly, it's not the protocol's fault if a user blindly accepts these new keys as authentic.
Akardam Out
... in case The Man makes them take it down again.
I've already started to mirror the main packages themselves.
I've established a mirror of the three main packages here: http://mike.akardam.net/dump/selinux/
See the info for Space Trader, a game for PalmOS capable PDA's.
... "Could you imagine a Beowulf Cluster of these things?"
*goes back to trying to get QMail up*
Sounds like Monty Python's "Word Association...".
Hmm... maybe they could hire Kevin Mitnick to help them sort through all the extra data...
Akardam Out
The software community in general, and the OSS community in particular, seems to have forgotten their mother's admonishment that "If you don't have anything good to say, don't say anything at all".
That's kinda what I was thinking in my thread here. I just don't get how the 2-layer thing is supposed to make it look 3d.
I'm developing my own forum system in Perl, and I've long been considering the problem of off-site submissions beng used to spam/harm the forum (like is happening here).
I was considering using only the HTTP_REFERER environment variable, but I've come to the realization that a) my server doesn't return that variable, and b) other's might not, either. Now, since I'm eventually intending to release this, I thought I should try and develop a solution that doesn't depend on that field.
Anyways, my idea was using a hidden input field which would contain partially or wholly encrypted data from the server. This would be checked at submittal time to see if it matched up with what what the CGI said it should be.
My main question is what data should I use. I was thinking of doing something with the date/time, but that opens up a whole can of worms.
Comments appreciated. Y'all can e-mail me with your ideas, just un-spam-protectify my e-mail addy above.
Akardam Out
Then again, we should thank him/her/it for their hidden warning:
"If you use Outlook, you'd better Look Out!"
One less Anonymous Coward...
*does the Happy Dance*
Well, I've learnt my lesson for the day.
:P
And you all know I've used the CCK on my browser.
"I run Linux most of the time. I swear!"
I'm having a hard time understanding HOW they've made these monitors work. Specifically, I'm not sure how they'd use two display planes, one behind the other, to make something look 3d.
:) )
I'm assuming that it'd be something like having your background on the farther back plane and your apps on the nearer plane. Sure, that'd make the apps look like they're floating over the background, but that's not real 3d. (Remember, I'm guessing how the work here, so feel free to correct me
Anyway, I think that the true future of 3d monitors will be something like an Active Holographic Display; i.e. a monitor who's elements can emit different light patterns in different directions. For example, an LCD-type screen that had a mechanism by which one pixel could emit blue light in one direction and green in another. The same concept is what makes holograms work. Surely it couldn't be too hard to make a monitor that does this same kind of thing?
Anyhoo, enjoy the thoughts.
Akardam Out