It has always been the most obvious solution to me that what we really need is SMTP 2.0,
You don't get out much do you?
where a server only accepts mail from a user that can authenticate themselves with a name and password.
This is called SMTPAUTH. Augment this with sender maps, then you can only send mail from an e-mail address that matches your username.
A server can also accept mail from another server, but only for mail directed at legitimate users on it's system.
This is called relay control. Every mail server should be set up this way anyway.
Mail servers would have to register with a central authority, and must include their active IP address in that registration. Any attempt to deliver mail from an unregistered server is bounced.
A central authority like DNS? This is called SPF. The first problem is virtually nobody uses it. The second problem is that spammers register domains and list whatever they want in the SPF records.
Everything you propose is already available, and with the exception of SPF widely used.
The outrage is because the submitter is including a link to a "story" wich is merely his own blog page commenting on someone else's story, assumedly to generate traffic to their own site. While sometimes useful (e.g., when ESR offers a bounty on Linux code in UNIX) it's usually just some fool trying to up his readership. Slashdotters hate self-linkers for the same reason they hate karma whores.
Epson printers have had the head on the printer rather than the cartridge for at least 10 years. HP didn't invent jack.
Secondly, I buy HP printers precisely because the head is on the cartridge. When it gets clogged on an HP you just buy a new cartridge. When the head gets clogged with an Epson you buy a new printer. The cost of repairing the head is many times more than the cost of a new printer. Keep all of this in mind and then realize that Epson cartridges are not significantly cheaper than HP cartridges.
The only thing HP has done here is find a new way to dick over customers.
All of this is why you're not in the category of people who use only Word, IE and iTunes. Wil's original point, was that Mac users use their computers, and Windows users merely put up with them.
I know several Mac and Linux users who do all those things, but only a very few windows users who do.
Games. Games. Games. Did I mention games? Oh yeh, games.
Too bad you don't read Wil's blog. It sounds like the person you describe is a 15-year-old boy.
In Wil's discussion on piracy he says
Here's the deal: 15-year-old boys with no money pirate software. The harder you make it to crack the software, the more elite they'll feel when they do it, so the harder they'll work to publicize their feat.
But, and let me stress this point, IF YOUR BUSINESS MODEL IS TO SELL SOFTWARE TO 15-YEAR-OLD BOYS, YOU ARE SCREWED ALREADY.
So yes, we know that 15-year-old boys use all those programs, but seriously, does anyone else? I know a lot of people, and nobody I know over the age of 25 has ever used aim, burned a cd, watched a dvd on their computer or heard of Google Earth.
But even if the did, Wil's point is that if you create software for windows it doesn't matter if yours is better or not, it will soon be cloned by a hundred crappy free versions and then no one will buy yours anyway.
Regardless of all of that, it's obvious by your comment that you either didn't read TFA, or didn't understand it.
The casual gamer gets... One game. And after every 5 months, he's spent enough keeping this game that he could have bought an entirely new game, and then he'd have two [then 3, 4,...] instead of just one he has to keep re-buying.
That's the main reason I don't play subscription games. If they were all free to download, and I could pay a subscription to a publisher or gaming service and have the choice of 50 games to play whenever I wanted I would definitely consider that. But $10 for Warcraft, and $10 for Everquest, and $10 for Diablo, and $10 for FFXI, and this game and that game really starts to add up quickly.
In addition to that it's really no fun for a casual gamer because the games are based on aquiring items, and gaining power. There's no endless stream of mushrooms to jump on. In order to have fun there's not only a significant financial investment required, but also one of time.
You want casual gamers to play? Make it fun even if I'm only going to play for 20 minutes, make it either free to get or free to play (but don't make me pay for both) and make it so I can't be killed every 5 minutes by people who don't have a real life.
I have used the iPod, the Rio Karma, and various Creative Labs players. The Rio Karma is the best of the bunch by far. The iPod is pretty but nowhere near as efficient to use as the Karma, nor does it have the feature set of the karma.
That's odd. I had a Rio Karma before I bought my iPod because I wanted vorbis support, but the java based interface completely sucked and was maddening to use. Playlist editing either on the Karma or in the Java interface was the worst thing about it. Other than that the interface is pretty much identical to the iPod. You've got forward, back, pause/play and menu buttons with a wheel. Plus, the damn thing's fragile. I dropped it on a padded shag carpet floor and the wheel snapped off. I called Rio about repair and they wanted to charge $250 for a $1 plastic part. I bought an iPod instead.
Once I got my iPod, I found the "zen" of digital music players. Coming from the Karma, at first I kept thinking the iPod interface was a lot like the Karma just leaner with only the good stuff. In reality it's the reverse. The Karma interface is an iPod rip-off with a bunch of crap thrown in. I've also dropped my iPod more times than I can count onto much harder surfaces than padded shag carpeting and the thing is a tank, a few scuffs here and there but it works perfectly.
SGI, HP, Sun and IBM have created moderately successful UNIX based workstations, but none of them can be had for less than $10,000. Apple on the other hand has pro workstations starting at $2,000 and consumer desktops starting at $500.
These distros are clearly not ready to take on OS X, which will soon be the primary x86 alternative to Windows
No distro is ready to take on OS X, on x86 or any other platform. The day OS X came out Linux GUI developers should have instantly shifted focus to being as much like the Mac as possible rather than as much like Windows as possible.
The greatest failing of both GNOME and KDE desktops is that they try too much to be like Windows. I used Linux as my desktop exclusively for 5 years, and every time GNOME or KDE came out with a new release I would give it a try. I've used almost every WM as my desktop in that period and the only one was not a pain in the ass to use was WindowMaker. WindowMaker was based on NeXT, and Mac OS X is the evolution of NeXT. This is not brain surgury. It's disappointing that there hasn't been a fork of WindowMaker to create an Aqua enviornment on Linux.
There's only one company on earth that has created a successful UNIX based desktop system. I think that every Linux developer should sit up and take notice of that fact.
Unless you are into digital editing, or watching TV on your PC, this dual monitor bit is nothing more than a rich man's folly.
I beg to differ. I'm a systems administrator and I've been using dual 19" LCD's on my Linux workstation for months. I regularly load my screens with more xterms than you can shake a stick at. I have two virtual desktops filled with terms, one with a browser and my e-mail each a full screen and one for various other things (usually Ethereal, Gimp or OpenOffice) and I still find myself craving more space. And when I see the tripple screen desktops from Digital Blasphemy I start thinking to myself that it's time to upgrade.
2560x1024 is nice, but it's just too derned cramped.
We use Foundry ServerIrons. We have two of them set up in an active/standby configuration. We've got approximately 35 servers (5 services) load balanced between the SI's, and average traffic over 50Mb/s just to those services. The SI's are very robust, and I'm quite pleased we got them.
I for one never realised that iPods wouldn't let you copy music *off* them. Thank god I never bought one, that would annoy the hell out of me.
That isn't exactly true. I bought an album off of iTunes exactly one day before my hard drive gave up the ghost on my iMac and I hadn't yet copied it to my iBook, but it was on my iPod. When I got my new hard drive I just opened up a shell and copied/Volumes/iPod/iPod_Control/Music to my desktop and then did a Spotlight searcy for the album name. The exact number of items came up in the results as are in the album and I dropped them all on iTunes.
There's a huge misconception about Apple and music. The iPod and iTunes are only designed to prevent the majority of piracy. Anybody with any decent knowledge can pretty much do whatever they want. Just like the lock on your front door is meant to keep out the majority of thieves, but anybody who's an experienced locksmith can pretty much do whatever they wants. Anything beyond basic protection is up to the integrity of the person to not violate the law.
If they are going to feel betrayed when the project forks they shouldn't put it under a free license anyway.
Apple publishes changes they make to khtml. They have to because khtml is [L]GPLed. If anybody bothered to check, WebCore is licensed under the LGPL 2.1. There's absolutely nothing preventing KDE (or any other Linux destkop for that matter) from incorporating WebCore into the system.
What if someone wrote a new VM subsystem or scheduler for the Linux kernel, and then published patches and the new vm/scheduler? Would they still be villians? Even if they sold it commercially? Even if Linus didn't use it?
All you KDE developers, quitcherbitchen. Why GPL your code and then get pissed when someone uses or forks it? Don't snivle that Apple's version of khtml links against WebCore. Use WebCore. If you don't know how or don't have time to learn it, that's not Apple's problem, is it?
The thing that really frustrates me is that OS X's SMB support uses Samba. I don't have any problems accessing SMB shares using Nautilus, but the Finder can't seem to connect.
Actually, I've been running into this problem at work the past few days. For some reason browsing to the server doesn't work, but if I use the "Connect to Server" menu option and type in "smb://1.2.3.4/" it connects no problem in just a few seconds and shows me all the shares available. I'm beginning to think it's merely a problem in resolving NetBIOS names to IP addresses. If anybody knows a tweak to take care of this.
We live in a capitalistic society. Money is exchanged for goods and services. That is how life works.
Homer: Awww... 20 dollars!? I wanted a peanut. Homer's brain: 20 dollars can buy many peanuts! Homer: Explain how. Homer's brain: Money can be exchanged for goods and services! Homer: Woo hoo!
That was actually said to an associate of mine by someone from Novel. Somewhere around NetWare 5 there was a way for a regular user who had supervisor access to a subsection of the directory structure to remove all access from the real Supervisor (read root) to those files. He reported it as a bug, they claimed it was a feature.
Slashdot Mirror
you insensitive cloud!
Your insult would have much more sting if you could provide some examples of sensitive clouds (maybe they're the ones raining?)
You don't get out much do you?
This is called SMTPAUTH. Augment this with sender maps, then you can only send mail from an e-mail address that matches your username.
This is called relay control. Every mail server should be set up this way anyway.
A central authority like DNS? This is called SPF. The first problem is virtually nobody uses it. The second problem is that spammers register domains and list whatever they want in the SPF records.
Everything you propose is already available, and with the exception of SPF widely used.
That's pretty much what the article said. Competitors have to offer much more money to lure people away from joining Google.
The outrage is because the submitter is including a link to a "story" wich is merely his own blog page commenting on someone else's story, assumedly to generate traffic to their own site. While sometimes useful (e.g., when ESR offers a bounty on Linux code in UNIX) it's usually just some fool trying to up his readership. Slashdotters hate self-linkers for the same reason they hate karma whores.
Apparently you haven't heard...
Apple - Mac OS X Downloads - Games
I play lots of games on my computer. Lots of good ones. I own only Macs (well, I own a Sun box too, but who's counting?).
...it's hiddeous!
Epson printers have had the head on the printer rather than the cartridge for at least 10 years. HP didn't invent jack.
Secondly, I buy HP printers precisely because the head is on the cartridge. When it gets clogged on an HP you just buy a new cartridge. When the head gets clogged with an Epson you buy a new printer. The cost of repairing the head is many times more than the cost of a new printer. Keep all of this in mind and then realize that Epson cartridges are not significantly cheaper than HP cartridges.
The only thing HP has done here is find a new way to dick over customers.
Thanks HP.
All of this is why you're not in the category of people who use only Word, IE and iTunes. Wil's original point, was that Mac users use their computers, and Windows users merely put up with them.
I know several Mac and Linux users who do all those things, but only a very few windows users who do.
Wow, I've heard of sites being slashdotted, but I've never heard of one being slashcommaed before!
Too bad you don't read Wil's blog. It sounds like the person you describe is a 15-year-old boy.
In Wil's discussion on piracy he says
So yes, we know that 15-year-old boys use all those programs, but seriously, does anyone else? I know a lot of people, and nobody I know over the age of 25 has ever used aim, burned a cd, watched a dvd on their computer or heard of Google Earth.
But even if the did, Wil's point is that if you create software for windows it doesn't matter if yours is better or not, it will soon be cloned by a hundred crappy free versions and then no one will buy yours anyway.
Regardless of all of that, it's obvious by your comment that you either didn't read TFA, or didn't understand it.
That's the main reason I don't play subscription games. If they were all free to download, and I could pay a subscription to a publisher or gaming service and have the choice of 50 games to play whenever I wanted I would definitely consider that. But $10 for Warcraft, and $10 for Everquest, and $10 for Diablo, and $10 for FFXI, and this game and that game really starts to add up quickly.
In addition to that it's really no fun for a casual gamer because the games are based on aquiring items, and gaining power. There's no endless stream of mushrooms to jump on. In order to have fun there's not only a significant financial investment required, but also one of time.
You want casual gamers to play? Make it fun even if I'm only going to play for 20 minutes, make it either free to get or free to play (but don't make me pay for both) and make it so I can't be killed every 5 minutes by people who don't have a real life.
That's odd. I had a Rio Karma before I bought my iPod because I wanted vorbis support, but the java based interface completely sucked and was maddening to use. Playlist editing either on the Karma or in the Java interface was the worst thing about it. Other than that the interface is pretty much identical to the iPod. You've got forward, back, pause/play and menu buttons with a wheel. Plus, the damn thing's fragile. I dropped it on a padded shag carpet floor and the wheel snapped off. I called Rio about repair and they wanted to charge $250 for a $1 plastic part. I bought an iPod instead.
Once I got my iPod, I found the "zen" of digital music players. Coming from the Karma, at first I kept thinking the iPod interface was a lot like the Karma just leaner with only the good stuff. In reality it's the reverse. The Karma interface is an iPod rip-off with a bunch of crap thrown in. I've also dropped my iPod more times than I can count onto much harder surfaces than padded shag carpeting and the thing is a tank, a few scuffs here and there but it works perfectly.
SGI, HP, Sun and IBM have created moderately successful UNIX based workstations, but none of them can be had for less than $10,000. Apple on the other hand has pro workstations starting at $2,000 and consumer desktops starting at $500.
No distro is ready to take on OS X, on x86 or any other platform. The day OS X came out Linux GUI developers should have instantly shifted focus to being as much like the Mac as possible rather than as much like Windows as possible.
The greatest failing of both GNOME and KDE desktops is that they try too much to be like Windows. I used Linux as my desktop exclusively for 5 years, and every time GNOME or KDE came out with a new release I would give it a try. I've used almost every WM as my desktop in that period and the only one was not a pain in the ass to use was WindowMaker. WindowMaker was based on NeXT, and Mac OS X is the evolution of NeXT. This is not brain surgury. It's disappointing that there hasn't been a fork of WindowMaker to create an Aqua enviornment on Linux.
There's only one company on earth that has created a successful UNIX based desktop system. I think that every Linux developer should sit up and take notice of that fact.
or how to put a PC motherboard in a Mac case.
Not much different that putting one in a PC case, or an SGI case, or a Sun case, or a Tie Fighter case or a . . .
I beg to differ. I'm a systems administrator and I've been using dual 19" LCD's on my Linux workstation for months. I regularly load my screens with more xterms than you can shake a stick at. I have two virtual desktops filled with terms, one with a browser and my e-mail each a full screen and one for various other things (usually Ethereal, Gimp or OpenOffice) and I still find myself craving more space. And when I see the tripple screen desktops from Digital Blasphemy I start thinking to myself that it's time to upgrade.
2560x1024 is nice, but it's just too derned cramped.
We use Foundry ServerIrons. We have two of them set up in an active/standby configuration. We've got approximately 35 servers (5 services) load balanced between the SI's, and average traffic over 50Mb/s just to those services. The SI's are very robust, and I'm quite pleased we got them.
That isn't exactly true. I bought an album off of iTunes exactly one day before my hard drive gave up the ghost on my iMac and I hadn't yet copied it to my iBook, but it was on my iPod. When I got my new hard drive I just opened up a shell and copied
There's a huge misconception about Apple and music. The iPod and iTunes are only designed to prevent the majority of piracy. Anybody with any decent knowledge can pretty much do whatever they want. Just like the lock on your front door is meant to keep out the majority of thieves, but anybody who's an experienced locksmith can pretty much do whatever they wants. Anything beyond basic protection is up to the integrity of the person to not violate the law.
Don't forget Google answers, blogger, directory, froogle, groups, hello, images, keyhole, local, mail, maps, news, translation and, a few other things.
Yea, those google guys don't have much going for them. Definitely out of business in five years.
If they are going to feel betrayed when the project forks they shouldn't put it under a free license anyway.
Apple publishes changes they make to khtml. They have to because khtml is [L]GPLed. If anybody bothered to check, WebCore is licensed under the LGPL 2.1. There's absolutely nothing preventing KDE (or any other Linux destkop for that matter) from incorporating WebCore into the system.
What if someone wrote a new VM subsystem or scheduler for the Linux kernel, and then published patches and the new vm/scheduler? Would they still be villians? Even if they sold it commercially? Even if Linus didn't use it?
All you KDE developers, quitcherbitchen. Why GPL your code and then get pissed when someone uses or forks it? Don't snivle that Apple's version of khtml links against WebCore. Use WebCore. If you don't know how or don't have time to learn it, that's not Apple's problem, is it?
The thing that really frustrates me is that OS X's SMB support uses Samba. I don't have any problems accessing SMB shares using Nautilus, but the Finder can't seem to connect.
Actually, I've been running into this problem at work the past few days. For some reason browsing to the server doesn't work, but if I use the "Connect to Server" menu option and type in "smb://1.2.3.4/" it connects no problem in just a few seconds and shows me all the shares available. I'm beginning to think it's merely a problem in resolving NetBIOS names to IP addresses. If anybody knows a tweak to take care of this.
Homer: Awww... 20 dollars!? I wanted a peanut.
Homer's brain: 20 dollars can buy many peanuts!
Homer: Explain how.
Homer's brain: Money can be exchanged for goods and services!
Homer: Woo hoo!
That was actually said to an associate of mine by someone from Novel. Somewhere around NetWare 5 there was a way for a regular user who had supervisor access to a subsection of the directory structure to remove all access from the real Supervisor (read root) to those files. He reported it as a bug, they claimed it was a feature.
a2ps