What ever happened to the rights of the people coming before the rights of companies? Has government become so weak that they cannot protect a company from being crushed by another because of those who use its services? Have companies become so much more powerful than the gorvernment that the word of the the people cannot be heard? Have the minds of the masses been so poisoned with anti-government claptrap that they cannot see that the government can set them free rather than imprison them?
Heck, I've downloaded tracks from great bands that many of my friends haven't heard about off of mp3.com. I rarely actually break any copyrigth laws in doing so, but often burn these mp3 tracks to CD.
The mp3's AREN'T CD quality, so anybody saying that these copies are first generation certainly doesn't understand the term "lossy compression."
Through this practice, I have learned about a good number of bands, and gotten tracks from bands that play in smaller venues, whose CD's are hard to find. Although I rarely purchase music (you would be rare to buy a CD too if you were in college and didn't want to break mommy and daddy's bank), most of these bands are usually at the top of my christmas list, and many of my more affluent friends often pick up a copy of a cd by a band I introed them to in this fashion.
Perhaps its that the recording industry can't tell us what to listen to if we can choose it for ourselves. I had to listen to Emenem all the way to New York last summer until I decided to get a CD adapter for my car. SOMEBODY had to pay those stations to get that damned real slim shady song played so many times that it was stuck in my head (especially since I mainly listen to punk music).
It would be wise for the music industry to realize that the only way to make a first generation copy of the CD is to share the ISO of it, which is essentially the same as making copies of tapes.
Perhaps they should attach copyright offenders rather than innovators. The last thing that I want my computer to become is just another distribution medium for media fat cats. For goodness sake, perhaps if there were no Internet, people would still realize that computers are computers, and not televisons or radios. I'm absolutely sick of people trying to cut into my computing so they can get their cut.
What the hell will the Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center do when they have to double the number of harddrives in their raid systems in order to make up for the slowdown from mandatory copyright protection schemes? After they've illegalized CD and DVD burning, is everyone going to get a removable hard drive and then they'll illegalize writeable media altogether? Where will this foolishness stop?
The source code was distributed with UNIX, but the terms of the license pretty much said not to sell the code or give it away. It was open source (the souce comes with the product), just not "free" in the way that that the GPL states or as in beer. BSD was originally rooted in college students rewriting large chunks of this code as part of a course in operating systems, the code made its way into textbooks and could be bought and sold. AT&T didn't like this obviously. I remember large parts of this story being in "Geeks (1.0 or 2.0)" so you might go there for more details.
By the By, linux is not based on ANY of this code, it was written from scratch, which is why it is posix but not unix (and only posix if the distribution is posix, many fail this test).
Being "part of the Unix family" is usually just meaning "pretty close to posix compliant" these days. Most Unix Sys V systems I've seen have the BSD compatibility package loaded. BSD also has roots in projects based on the original AT&T source. Also, check out SecureBSD's mascot if you want a cute chick.
I dunno. BSD has been around for a LONG TIME. In many ways, no offense, I am using a linux box to type this, it is a superior OS to linux (not to say that linux doesn't beat it in other areas). It's not any harder to install than most linux distributions (save mandrake, redhat, oh, perhaps it is harder to install), but I think that what makes Linux more popular is a face recognition and the loud mouths of its user (again, nothing wrong with that). BSD has been popular in academic circles for AGES, but you hardly ever hear someone who's never touched unix say "hrmm, maybe I'll try BSD." Whereas you hear plenty of windows users either slamming linux, in an uninformed manner, or saying "gosh, maybe I'll try that, often in an equally uninformed manner." BSD is a great OS, but I don't think that a lack of documentation is the reason linux has "more popularity (if it does)." I just think that it's more advertised.
Nothing like replacing compiler machine code with something that must run in a VM. Java's a fine language and all, but it makes me wonder what the driving force behind such a change is. Do people just not understand that it's at LEAST a little better when their programs have the performace that C offers?
Re:still the windows metaphor
on
Windows in 2020
·
· Score: 1
I've seen 3D interfaces, and still have yet to see them offer anything other than a bunch of buzzwords. After all, reading isn't exactly a 3D thing. I suppose that by 2020 we'll all be illiterate though, and that an actual keyboard will be seen as less user friendly than a virtual one in 3D.
Most unix systems allow you to use SOCK_RAW, the only assumption that makes it "bad" on windows is that windows is SO inferior that we should not allow people to write to a raw socket under it. I don't think that that's the case, unix systems have seen their share of viruses in the past.
Yeah, but it's not a security risk to the system using it (unless the software using SOCK_RAW poses such a risk, in which case, it probably wouldn't matter if it were SOCK_RAW or not). Why would you want to not include a feature, just because it could allow you to do something "bad."
Yeah, but that doesn't make you more ready of a victim, it just means that if someone sent you a virus to zombie your machine for a DDoS then they could spoof your IP too, IE, who cares?
This is true, I have NO IDEA what Cringley is saying when he says that raw sockets allow for more viruses and such to be introduced to your system.
For the uninitiated...
Generally, when programming, you define a great many things when defining a socket, the layer of abstraction to tcp/ip defining a single connection.
SOCK_RAW is a bit less abstract, you define more of the data that is being used by hand rather than allowing for the socket code to do it for you. Generally the you use SOCK_STREAM of SOCK_DGRAM, which define TCP and UDP sockets, respectively. SOCK_RAW writes directly to IP, so you must encode many of the headers manually rather than automatically, as the other 2 would do, and then write them to this socket.
In other words, it has NOTHING to do with getting viruses! SOCK_RAW is just another socket, but you are writing to the IP protocol, rather than TCP or UDP (which sit on top of IP). It also has nothing to do with being DoS attacked. I have NO CLUE where he got that from.
I've only downloaded linux CD sets, I've never paid a dime for it. Additionally, people who are truly zealous about Windows (they do exist), are willing to pay for beta CD's and every new boxed copy that comes out, and I have seen them go to great expense to do so. There are people who pay for Linux cd sets, I'm not really sure WHY people do this, but some do and they're free to do so. I update linux regularly too. apt-get update...
Well, I'm not going to say that Yahoo is just another porn site, but, well, you've read the stories, and now you've seen the ads and been bounced around to other sites.
It sounds kind of lame, but you should get some topical textbooks, not just ones like Java in a Nutshell (though I would recommend a copy of that), but also some AI, Neural Network, Graphics, and Operating Systems books. These books have a long shelf life and lasting value, so they won't go out of style. Also, perhaps a couple C/C++ programming books. Theory is always a good thing. Then I would get some really beginner sorts of books as well. I think that the best way to start if you're working on a monthly budget sort of deal is to get topical reference books first, and work your way to more fad/language oreinted books that won't have so long a shelf life. Also, try to stick to ANSI standards, as they are the ones that will be the most applicable across platforms. IE, get a book on ANSI C, and maybe hold off on the one on Visual C++. Try to cover a smattering of topics and things that are of general academic interest more in depth rather than getting several books on a single language.
Perhaps you could generate some usage reports using the online catalog, see what the people are checking out, and buy more in that direction. If you bought a sampling of books from many different subjects, and then looked on the catalog to see which ones are out the most, you could tailor your library to what the local interest seems to be.
While I agree that 9600 baud is fine for a connection to a bbs or for telnet. The protocol that telnet uses relies heavily on round trip time rather than the speed of the line for it's speed. Telnet is also IP based and has a much lower network utilization than many other applications. At time telnet can feel pretty tight at 56k because of these conditions. It's still a good protocol though. The real question being how well connected the host is by hops rather than how well by bandwidth, but bandwidth can exacerbate the problem. Telnet IS much more comfy on cable. Bare in mind that I recently moved from my 28.8 connection from an appartment at school, to a different state, and a cable connection... and telnet is much happier of here than it was there. Of course, the servers also have much lower load now than they did then, so it's really a circular argument. The point of the argument really was that telnet is a different beast from a BBS on a local dialup.
An operating system should just load software and get out of the way. EVERYTHING else is in software land. The OS loads different program stacks, and does things like process handling and multithreading. Libraries that everything uses should be loaded into memory. I don't remember the last time IE had anything to do with any of my video games. Use static libraries and DLLs and all of that stuff to load the code that you need. This is all really making incorrect abstractions. MS already does these things, they just replaced explorers functionality with extensions provided by IE. Well, good on them. I don't know if it was just to get a browser monopoly, but who really cares? If the people at large don't make educated decisions, and MS markets to these bad decisions, good on them. They're trying to run a business, not bring about world peace.
But I think that myself and several of my friends are pretty much the subject of this article... Though I have a couple friends who readily come to mind even to me as exceedingly displaying this property.
Small racks are made for network equipment such as switches and routers and hubs. Some of these racks are as cheap as $100 and come with attractive glass windows and even wooden enclosures. Many can be wall mounted or stood up on rubber feet. All of them have more than enough room to hold all of your home networking and computing toys.
If you want to try a guitar rack, you might try www.carvin.com or www.musiciansfriend.com. Both sites have attractive, nice racks and cabinets.
Slashdot Mirror
What ever happened to the rights of the people coming before the rights of companies? Has government become so weak that they cannot protect a company from being crushed by another because of those who use its services? Have companies become so much more powerful than the gorvernment that the word of the the people cannot be heard? Have the minds of the masses been so poisoned with anti-government claptrap that they cannot see that the government can set them free rather than imprison them?
Heck, I've downloaded tracks from great bands that many of my friends haven't heard about off of mp3.com. I rarely actually break any copyrigth laws in doing so, but often burn these mp3 tracks to CD.
The mp3's AREN'T CD quality, so anybody saying that these copies are first generation certainly doesn't understand the term "lossy compression."
Through this practice, I have learned about a good number of bands, and gotten tracks from bands that play in smaller venues, whose CD's are hard to find. Although I rarely purchase music (you would be rare to buy a CD too if you were in college and didn't want to break mommy and daddy's bank), most of these bands are usually at the top of my christmas list, and many of my more affluent friends often pick up a copy of a cd by a band I introed them to in this fashion.
Perhaps its that the recording industry can't tell us what to listen to if we can choose it for ourselves. I had to listen to Emenem all the way to New York last summer until I decided to get a CD adapter for my car. SOMEBODY had to pay those stations to get that damned real slim shady song played so many times that it was stuck in my head (especially since I mainly listen to punk music).
It would be wise for the music industry to realize that the only way to make a first generation copy of the CD is to share the ISO of it, which is essentially the same as making copies of tapes.
Perhaps they should attach copyright offenders rather than innovators. The last thing that I want my computer to become is just another distribution medium for media fat cats. For goodness sake, perhaps if there were no Internet, people would still realize that computers are computers, and not televisons or radios. I'm absolutely sick of people trying to cut into my computing so they can get their cut.
What the hell will the Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center do when they have to double the number of harddrives in their raid systems in order to make up for the slowdown from mandatory copyright protection schemes? After they've illegalized CD and DVD burning, is everyone going to get a removable hard drive and then they'll illegalize writeable media altogether? Where will this foolishness stop?
While I agree that the people who develop such drugs deserve compensation, not a single life should be lost in the name of a buck.
The source code was distributed with UNIX, but the terms of the license pretty much said not to sell the code or give it away. It was open source (the souce comes with the product), just not "free" in the way that that the GPL states or as in beer. BSD was originally rooted in college students rewriting large chunks of this code as part of a course in operating systems, the code made its way into textbooks and could be bought and sold. AT&T didn't like this obviously. I remember large parts of this story being in "Geeks (1.0 or 2.0)" so you might go there for more details.
By the By, linux is not based on ANY of this code, it was written from scratch, which is why it is posix but not unix (and only posix if the distribution is posix, many fail this test).
Why would anybody want to get on the net to word process, or am I merely misunderstanding this statement?
Being "part of the Unix family" is usually just meaning "pretty close to posix compliant" these days. Most Unix Sys V systems I've seen have the BSD compatibility package loaded. BSD also has roots in projects based on the original AT&T source. Also, check out SecureBSD's mascot if you want a cute chick.
I dunno. BSD has been around for a LONG TIME. In many ways, no offense, I am using a linux box to type this, it is a superior OS to linux (not to say that linux doesn't beat it in other areas). It's not any harder to install than most linux distributions (save mandrake, redhat, oh, perhaps it is harder to install), but I think that what makes Linux more popular is a face recognition and the loud mouths of its user (again, nothing wrong with that). BSD has been popular in academic circles for AGES, but you hardly ever hear someone who's never touched unix say "hrmm, maybe I'll try BSD." Whereas you hear plenty of windows users either slamming linux, in an uninformed manner, or saying "gosh, maybe I'll try that, often in an equally uninformed manner." BSD is a great OS, but I don't think that a lack of documentation is the reason linux has "more popularity (if it does)." I just think that it's more advertised.
Nothing like replacing compiler machine code with something that must run in a VM. Java's a fine language and all, but it makes me wonder what the driving force behind such a change is. Do people just not understand that it's at LEAST a little better when their programs have the performace that C offers?
I've seen 3D interfaces, and still have yet to see them offer anything other than a bunch of buzzwords. After all, reading isn't exactly a 3D thing. I suppose that by 2020 we'll all be illiterate though, and that an actual keyboard will be seen as less user friendly than a virtual one in 3D.
Just updated my cvs tree and it's golden now. Oops.
Anybody else with an aureal vortex got compile errors? I'm working on a solution now, but that bug hasn't bit me in a good while.
Most unix systems allow you to use SOCK_RAW, the only assumption that makes it "bad" on windows is that windows is SO inferior that we should not allow people to write to a raw socket under it. I don't think that that's the case, unix systems have seen their share of viruses in the past.
Yeah, but it's not a security risk to the system using it (unless the software using SOCK_RAW poses such a risk, in which case, it probably wouldn't matter if it were SOCK_RAW or not). Why would you want to not include a feature, just because it could allow you to do something "bad."
Yeah, but that doesn't make you more ready of a victim, it just means that if someone sent you a virus to zombie your machine for a DDoS then they could spoof your IP too, IE, who cares?
Yeah, but that's not a "victim" distinction. People would send out DDoS viruses anyways, and it doesn't open the host machine to any new attacks.
This is true, I have NO IDEA what Cringley is saying when he says that raw sockets allow for more viruses and such to be introduced to your system.
For the uninitiated...
Generally, when programming, you define a great many things when defining a socket, the layer of abstraction to tcp/ip defining a single connection.
SOCK_RAW is a bit less abstract, you define more of the data that is being used by hand rather than allowing for the socket code to do it for you. Generally the you use SOCK_STREAM of SOCK_DGRAM, which define TCP and UDP sockets, respectively. SOCK_RAW writes directly to IP, so you must encode many of the headers manually rather than automatically, as the other 2 would do, and then write them to this socket.
In other words, it has NOTHING to do with getting viruses! SOCK_RAW is just another socket, but you are writing to the IP protocol, rather than TCP or UDP (which sit on top of IP). It also has nothing to do with being DoS attacked. I have NO CLUE where he got that from.
I've only downloaded linux CD sets, I've never paid a dime for it. Additionally, people who are truly zealous about Windows (they do exist), are willing to pay for beta CD's and every new boxed copy that comes out, and I have seen them go to great expense to do so. There are people who pay for Linux cd sets, I'm not really sure WHY people do this, but some do and they're free to do so. I update linux regularly too. apt-get update...
Well, I'm not going to say that Yahoo is just another porn site, but, well, you've read the stories, and now you've seen the ads and been bounced around to other sites.
It sounds kind of lame, but you should get some topical textbooks, not just ones like Java in a Nutshell (though I would recommend a copy of that), but also some AI, Neural Network, Graphics, and Operating Systems books. These books have a long shelf life and lasting value, so they won't go out of style. Also, perhaps a couple C/C++ programming books. Theory is always a good thing. Then I would get some really beginner sorts of books as well. I think that the best way to start if you're working on a monthly budget sort of deal is to get topical reference books first, and work your way to more fad/language oreinted books that won't have so long a shelf life. Also, try to stick to ANSI standards, as they are the ones that will be the most applicable across platforms. IE, get a book on ANSI C, and maybe hold off on the one on Visual C++. Try to cover a smattering of topics and things that are of general academic interest more in depth rather than getting several books on a single language.
Perhaps you could generate some usage reports using the online catalog, see what the people are checking out, and buy more in that direction. If you bought a sampling of books from many different subjects, and then looked on the catalog to see which ones are out the most, you could tailor your library to what the local interest seems to be.
I'm sure that there will be quite a few hacks out there using lex & yacc & C :-)
While I agree that 9600 baud is fine for a connection to a bbs or for telnet. The protocol that telnet uses relies heavily on round trip time rather than the speed of the line for it's speed. Telnet is also IP based and has a much lower network utilization than many other applications. At time telnet can feel pretty tight at 56k because of these conditions. It's still a good protocol though. The real question being how well connected the host is by hops rather than how well by bandwidth, but bandwidth can exacerbate the problem. Telnet IS much more comfy on cable. Bare in mind that I recently moved from my 28.8 connection from an appartment at school, to a different state, and a cable connection... and telnet is much happier of here than it was there. Of course, the servers also have much lower load now than they did then, so it's really a circular argument. The point of the argument really was that telnet is a different beast from a BBS on a local dialup.
An operating system should just load software and get out of the way. EVERYTHING else is in software land. The OS loads different program stacks, and does things like process handling and multithreading. Libraries that everything uses should be loaded into memory. I don't remember the last time IE had anything to do with any of my video games. Use static libraries and DLLs and all of that stuff to load the code that you need. This is all really making incorrect abstractions. MS already does these things, they just replaced explorers functionality with extensions provided by IE. Well, good on them. I don't know if it was just to get a browser monopoly, but who really cares? If the people at large don't make educated decisions, and MS markets to these bad decisions, good on them. They're trying to run a business, not bring about world peace.
Saying that you are sometime self-righteous is not self-flattery. The fact that I try to avoid it is a "good thing."
BTW, I'm 1000 X as humble as you are!
*grin*
But I think that myself and several of my friends are pretty much the subject of this article... Though I have a couple friends who readily come to mind even to me as exceedingly displaying this property.
Small racks are made for network equipment such as switches and routers and hubs. Some of these racks are as cheap as $100 and come with attractive glass windows and even wooden enclosures. Many can be wall mounted or stood up on rubber feet. All of them have more than enough room to hold all of your home networking and computing toys.
If you want to try a guitar rack, you might try www.carvin.com or www.musiciansfriend.com. Both sites have attractive, nice racks and cabinets.