Harping on this "you have the source" point can never become redundant. So, I feel compelled to say you have the source code to everything. From the kernel, to system libs, to the editor (vi naturally), to the compiler, to whatever other toolkits you use.
I learned C from a guy posting tutorials on USENET some seven years ago. Nothing helps you learn better than looking through example programs and tweaking them. With all this free software, there are billions of lines of code to look at.
Who says anyone has a right to use another person's creation? If Walt makes up a mouse, it's his to do what he wishes, including prevent others from drawing it. When I create a program, I want to be the one that decides how it is licensed. Not you hippies who think you should be able to just because. If having more Mickeys and people doing what they want with it is not a bad thing, how can having more Linuxes be bad? Let Microsoft, Sun, etc use the Linux kernel code in their operating systems to make it better without the need to GPL their things. The whole world will then be less crash prone.
So, it doesn't matter what you wish to be free, information, software, etc. What matter is what the author wishes. Feel free to preach to folks the benefits of freeing what they create. What protects Disney, the RIAA, etc also protects us.
Tree hugging hippies have too many other targets to wipe out first. Issues like flushing the toilet or doing laundry must be stopped first to avoid global warming! Once those are gone, I'm sure there'll be problems with bathing, eating foods they disapprove of, farting, driving automobiles, and sitting in chairs. Maybe after all of us are purified of these nasty, global-warming-inducing habits they can cry about boxes.
Heh, you'd think Quicken of all things would be somewhat smart about importing QIF files. I loaded up some QIFs I downloaded from my bank back when the year was young. They have the dates as "mm/dd/00." What's Quicken 2000 do? Marks them as year 0 and sticks all of them at the top. A simple sed changes those to/2000, but it is still a hassle. At least with source, I could fix it myself.:)
Microsoft could take a page and name things w_something. It's better than reinventing every regular word to their own convoluted meaning. For many people, SQL is that Microsoft database thing, and Office is not a place to do business, but a means of running virii on your computer. Exploring is no longer something adventurers do, travelling to far off lands. Now it means to crash/reboot your computer. And we see what they are doing with their open specs for Kerberos. Open, unless you do anything with them. And the "industry-standard Kerberos" unless you want to use them with any other platform. I'll take a little unimaginative g* or k*, there are less disasterous repurcutions.
Just what is it about everything that people whine about "bloat?" If you don't want one coherent set of desktop apps, run twm or leave Linux in console mode and play color-yahtzee. Windows 9x/nt, on the other hand, is pretty much useless/impossible in dos mode as it comes from Microsoft. I can see people calling Windows stuff "bloat" because it crawls even when you have a 500+ Mhz processor and 64+ MB of RAM. I have run KDE (1 and 2) in various environments from a 300 Mhz K6 to my current Athlon 550. Seeing as pretty much any modern computer has 64 or more MB of RAM, KDE (and I'm sure GNOME as well) run perfectly well. Sure, if you try running it on that 486/33 with 4MB RAM it will be slow. But for those with a computer that was new in the last five years, it's fairly sufficient to handle KDE/GNOME.
The beauty of Linux is you can shut things off, uninstall, etc to tailor it to how you wish. Windows, you must take it all (including those damn AOL/AT&T/Earthlink shortcuts). If you have specific things you wish to label bloat, say so. But remember you can just skip them altogether. If it's just because you don't like them or do not wish to run them, that's not a good enough reason to bitch about it.
I visited The Mill a few weeks ago when I was thinking about getting back into Myth 2 with its various mods, perhaps even buying it from Loki if I ever get GL working in XFree86 4. With the message they have there, saying MS told them to shut down, it is puzzling. Does MS now see fan sites as "threats?" One may never know what goes on in those billion-dollar heads of theirs.
I was wondering, what sort of "license" does MS put on those specs? Is it similar to those fine Kerberos specs, "You can look at these but don't you dare try doing anything with them, especially on non-Windows platforms?"
As far as I can see, no one here is demanding Debian include KDE in the distribution. On the other hand, Debian is demanding KDE take their interpretation of the GPL. This has been rehashed over and over (see the kde-licensing list for even a discussion with a lawyer on the subject).
One specific part of the license that I don't like is the patchware clause.
I must say, this is complete and utter bullshit. Quoting the QPL:
3. You may make modifications to the Software and distribute your modifications, in a form that is separate from the Software, such as patches. The following restrictions apply to modifications:
Why does everyone want to interpret "such as" as "only as?" "Such as" is a clause meaning things such as "for example" or "one possibility is." It in no way implies as the only solution. The key to this clause is the nine words preceding "such as." It must be a separate form. This can be as simple as joes-super-duper-extra-qt-2.1.1.tar.gz. Troll Tech just wishes you to make it distincly clear to your users that what you offer is a modified Qt, and not their official Qt. Is this asking too freaking much for you people?? How about I take gnome, change it to forward any passwords to a secret log on a cracked account I have and name it helix-desktop-1.0.tar.gz (or a scheme GNOME uses, I don't keep up with it so I don't know a verbatim name to use:)). Somehow, I doubt GNOMErs will idly sit by and allow that to go. Troll Tech put some valuable time into their product and they do not wish it be confused with anything else. It's as simple as that.
Now that this is cleared up, please, go out and modify Qt to your heart's content. Make it better, faster, slower, worse. The license allows you.
The Mozilla Public License (MPL). This is a free software license which is not a strong copyleft; unlike the X11 license, it has some complex restrictions that make it incompatible with the GNU GPL. That is, a module covered by the GPL and a module covered by the MPL cannot legally be linked together. We urge you not to use the MPL for this reason.
Note that "cannot legally be linked together" part. That certainly sounds like you cannot have a Mozilla renderer in a GPL app. I don't keep up with GNOME to know if they do use it. But I have seen it said here many, many times (ie with each milestone release or KDE release), "Why are KDE people making their own HTML rendering engine? Just use Mozilla, no duplication of effort, etc." To me, this would be a fine reason.
If you're going to sue everyone (damn Americans and their lawyers), you must have a plantiff, a defendent, and a list of damages the plantiff has incurred as a result of the defendent.
So you want to sue every distribution, ok, they are defendents. Who is the plantiff? Joe Schmuck who wrote ksomething, provided binary rpms on his web site? Perhaps the KDE folks liked it enough they include it in kdesomepack. How suable is KDE, as it's just a bunch of schmucks working together, just as Debian is. Is Troll Tech the plantiff? Were they somehow damaged because a developer decided to use the GPL on ksomething? Likely that will happen.:) Is it a class-action lawsuit by everyone who has ever gotten a RedHat/Caldera/etc CD as a magazine filler? They didn't ask for it per se, yet here is this illegal item in their home. Will the police bust down their door any minute for possession of such illegal goods? Is RMS the plantiff, as he made up the GPL. That would seem to go against everything he has stood for, "You may use the GPL as long as I say so." No. Is Debian the one who shall do the suing since their interpretation of the vague document is the only one that counts? How were they hurt? They have thousands/millions of users. Their userbase hasn't been hurt by not including KDE. They aren't in it for money, so there is no loss of revenue in CDs.
Or, as I suspect it, Debian is just the sole judge, jury, and executioner in all matters they deem theirs? Every week when this comes up it's the same thing, Debians interprets it one way, KDE interprets it another. Debian says, "You better think our way, or else!" And why has RMS left this document so vague as it could be interpretted different ways? Why is it still dated June 1991, where is GPLv3? Wouldn't everything be so much stronger if there were nothing left to be interpreted? Is $3000 needed to "encourage" someone to make a proper GPL license which says definitively what can be linked and where/when?
People are always saying how Netscape on Linux is oh so horrible and you can't do a damn thing with it. I was just wondering, what distribution, platform, etc do you use?
I run Netscape constantly, version 4.7. I haven't found another GUI IMAP mail client to my liking. (Pine/mutt are fine, but I like pretty GUIs sometimes.) I sometimes leave Netscape up for days at a time. I compile all of KDE2 frequently, so I shut down X for that, at least once a week, sometimes twice. I have Mandrake 7.0 currently on my Athlon 550 computer. I have Java shut off and my preferences.js non-writable to preserve some of my personal preferences Netscape enjoys deleting when it can. If I see that a ridiculous plugin loading, I quickly stop, go back and never return to the site. I do that mostly because I find them quite annoying. Javascript is still left on.
There are some complaints I have with it, but nothing to the point of "Netscape on Linux is extraordinarily buggy." So, what are you people running? I see so many people bitching about Netscape, I feel left out. Please, clue me in. With all the terrible things we've seen IE capable of doing, you'd think it would be on the Slashdot crowd's list of things worse than death.
There are places like paypal.com that do credit-card processing for free. I'm not sure if they have a minimum amount, charging a quarter seems a bit futile. So there are ways to do this now. All that's really needed is a good band to give away some MP3s and build a cult. That'll show those RIAA lawyers.;)
Just make a browser that works and is fast guys.. leave the e-mail/chat/news/widget stuff for an addon or something.
You're thinking of Konqueror.:)
Re:Why don't we give this a chance to mirror...
on
Mozilla M16 Released
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot has mainstream journalismitis. You see, they have an IPO, they have a book. And, as every sappy young journalist in this wacky country knows, you have to create the stories, and you must be first with them. Let LinuxPR or LinuxToday put up the latest distribution official press release first, it's a sign of weakness.
I wouldn't doubt it if they have perl scripts running checking various ftp mirrors for new RedHats, Mandrakes, Debians, Mozillas, etc. Then it is fed through a simple script to create the post. "(Any name) pointed us to the (Product)-x+1.0 directory being created on (Product) mirror sites. Please pound their network connection for the next sixteen hours or they will get the full mirror of it."
Then there's the ever-so provacotive questions on an article, "Is Evil Empire #32 stealing your private data? We won't ask them first to explain their position; you all just conjure up some good scenarios so we can write a book on why business is bad for everyone."
This is how media works in the United States today. Report first, cover your tracks later. We spend 24 hours for seven straight days on every network on things like Princess Di or King JFK Jr's death when there are exactly two and half new bits of information in a day. That doesn't stop them, they MUST create the news. So you get these crazy media whores to come on and say, "Yeah, um, I flew in a plane ones up around Massachusetts. It's pretty hard. That's what it must have been like for JFK Jr." Or, "We have some new information. We are getting word.. Yes, yes.. it appears a luggage tag has washed up on the shore." It's sad.. but these are who the Slashdot crew want to be like. It was cute when it was a couple college guys in a basement.
Who uses Perl now? Python is da bomb, for sure. Die Perl, die, die, die!
Re:You've gotta be kidding...
on
Napster Wars
·
· Score: 1
Copyrights have no sense serving public interest. They are about serving the inventor (and those he assigns power to). So you don't like it, go with something else than. There are millions of bands out there performing in little bars and grandparents' basements. I've seen MP3s on their rinky-dink web pages.
The fact is you've got few avenues to take when you decide to listen to a certain artist's work. A) You pay what they deam appropriate. B) You pirate it and deal with the ensuing consequences. If you hate the RIAA and big corporate types in the music industry, then don't support any bands that choose to enlist in their ranks. Plain and simple.
Since when do you need to be a commercial/non-profit site to get attacked? I'm on a simple 56k dynamic IP modem. I'm on probably 8-10 hours a day, working from home. I get about 5 attempts a day to get to some service on my machine. Yesterday one started just 4 minutes after connecting.
Anyone can be targetted. And I take this story as a lesson to be learned. Back when I first saw this line of articles (around part 2), I started running tcpdump on my connection all the time. This is how I learn of these attempts. I don't know what they do, scan entire blocks of IP address continually?
Over the last few months I have taken to running tcpdump on my connection just to see how many folks try and get in. Understand I am in a cable modem/DSL deprived area, so I dial up with my mighty 56k modem. My ISP uses two C class blocks for the dynamic IP dialup sessions. So I guess crackers are just making attempts at any/all of these class C networks.
I'd say I get about 4-6 attempts per day to do something on my box. Mostly it is folks looking for something good on Windows SMB ports. I'm sure there are millions of 2 PC households that share their C drive wide open so they can copy to and fro. I've gone through the logs keeping a list, and banning the entire class C network of offending IPs. You can see some of that on my site under Security.
All those attempts got me to thinking. I should set up a much simpler firewall/masquerade box that doesn't run too much. Holes could be poked in the wall for necessary services (web, mail, etc) and forwarded to an internal machine. Perhaps something like the Linux Router Project would work. But what I'm looking into is that, with good crack monitors, syslogging things to another box, checking for portscans, running snort or tcpdump. Are there any? If not I may have to start one.
Even if someone finds a hole in the mail server (or whatever), it is on a second machine beind the wall and they cannot (easily) get to it to run that suid shell they just created. If the system is kept down to a floppy or small bit of a CDROM, you can easily mount the entire ramdisk readonly, or just reboot and have the original setup restored. Just having a full Linux desktop setup directly on the 'net worries me when/if I move to a DSL area.
Slashdot Mirror
Harping on this "you have the source" point can never become redundant. So, I feel compelled to say you have the source code to everything. From the kernel, to system libs, to the editor (vi naturally), to the compiler, to whatever other toolkits you use.
I learned C from a guy posting tutorials on USENET some seven years ago. Nothing helps you learn better than looking through example programs and tweaking them. With all this free software, there are billions of lines of code to look at.
Then we just need to blast a rocket with plenty of Koolaid to Mars and start mixing.
Who says anyone has a right to use another person's creation? If Walt makes up a mouse, it's his to do what he wishes, including prevent others from drawing it. When I create a program, I want to be the one that decides how it is licensed. Not you hippies who think you should be able to just because. If having more Mickeys and people doing what they want with it is not a bad thing, how can having more Linuxes be bad? Let Microsoft, Sun, etc use the Linux kernel code in their operating systems to make it better without the need to GPL their things. The whole world will then be less crash prone.
So, it doesn't matter what you wish to be free, information, software, etc. What matter is what the author wishes. Feel free to preach to folks the benefits of freeing what they create. What protects Disney, the RIAA, etc also protects us.
Isn't it funny though that moderators thought the troll was interesting?
Tree hugging hippies have too many other targets to wipe out first. Issues like flushing the toilet or doing laundry must be stopped first to avoid global warming! Once those are gone, I'm sure there'll be problems with bathing, eating foods they disapprove of, farting, driving automobiles, and sitting in chairs. Maybe after all of us are purified of these nasty, global-warming-inducing habits they can cry about boxes.
Heh, you'd think Quicken of all things would be somewhat smart about importing QIF files. I loaded up some QIFs I downloaded from my bank back when the year was young. They have the dates as "mm/dd/00." What's Quicken 2000 do? Marks them as year 0 and sticks all of them at the top. A simple sed changes those to /2000, but it is still a hassle. At least with source, I could fix it myself. :)
Microsoft could take a page and name things w_something. It's better than reinventing every regular word to their own convoluted meaning. For many people, SQL is that Microsoft database thing, and Office is not a place to do business, but a means of running virii on your computer. Exploring is no longer something adventurers do, travelling to far off lands. Now it means to crash/reboot your computer. And we see what they are doing with their open specs for Kerberos. Open, unless you do anything with them. And the "industry-standard Kerberos" unless you want to use them with any other platform. I'll take a little unimaginative g* or k*, there are less disasterous repurcutions.
Just what is it about everything that people whine about "bloat?" If you don't want one coherent set of desktop apps, run twm or leave Linux in console mode and play color-yahtzee. Windows 9x/nt, on the other hand, is pretty much useless/impossible in dos mode as it comes from Microsoft. I can see people calling Windows stuff "bloat" because it crawls even when you have a 500+ Mhz processor and 64+ MB of RAM. I have run KDE (1 and 2) in various environments from a 300 Mhz K6 to my current Athlon 550. Seeing as pretty much any modern computer has 64 or more MB of RAM, KDE (and I'm sure GNOME as well) run perfectly well. Sure, if you try running it on that 486/33 with 4MB RAM it will be slow. But for those with a computer that was new in the last five years, it's fairly sufficient to handle KDE/GNOME.
The beauty of Linux is you can shut things off, uninstall, etc to tailor it to how you wish. Windows, you must take it all (including those damn AOL/AT&T/Earthlink shortcuts). If you have specific things you wish to label bloat, say so. But remember you can just skip them altogether. If it's just because you don't like them or do not wish to run them, that's not a good enough reason to bitch about it.
I visited The Mill a few weeks ago when I was thinking about getting back into Myth 2 with its various mods, perhaps even buying it from Loki if I ever get GL working in XFree86 4. With the message they have there, saying MS told them to shut down, it is puzzling. Does MS now see fan sites as "threats?" One may never know what goes on in those billion-dollar heads of theirs.
I was wondering, what sort of "license" does MS put on those specs? Is it similar to those fine Kerberos specs, "You can look at these but don't you dare try doing anything with them, especially on non-Windows platforms?"
As far as I can see, no one here is demanding Debian include KDE in the distribution. On the other hand, Debian is demanding KDE take their interpretation of the GPL. This has been rehashed over and over (see the kde-licensing list for even a discussion with a lawyer on the subject).
One specific part of the license that I don't like is the patchware clause.
:)). Somehow, I doubt GNOMErs will idly sit by and allow that to go. Troll Tech put some valuable time into their product and they do not wish it be confused with anything else. It's as simple as that.
I must say, this is complete and utter bullshit. Quoting the QPL:
3. You may make modifications to the Software and distribute your modifications, in a form that is separate from the Software, such as patches. The following restrictions apply to modifications:
Why does everyone want to interpret "such as" as "only as?" "Such as" is a clause meaning things such as "for example" or "one possibility is." It in no way implies as the only solution. The key to this clause is the nine words preceding "such as." It must be a separate form. This can be as simple as joes-super-duper-extra-qt-2.1.1.tar.gz. Troll Tech just wishes you to make it distincly clear to your users that what you offer is a modified Qt, and not their official Qt. Is this asking too freaking much for you people?? How about I take gnome, change it to forward any passwords to a secret log on a cracked account I have and name it helix-desktop-1.0.tar.gz (or a scheme GNOME uses, I don't keep up with it so I don't know a verbatim name to use
Now that this is cleared up, please, go out and modify Qt to your heart's content. Make it better, faster, slower, worse. The license allows you.
From Gnu.org:
The Mozilla Public License (MPL).
This is a free software license which is not a strong copyleft; unlike the X11 license, it has some complex restrictions that make it incompatible with the GNU GPL. That is, a module covered by the GPL and a module covered by the MPL cannot legally be linked together. We urge you not to use the MPL for this reason.
Note that "cannot legally be linked together" part. That certainly sounds like you cannot have a Mozilla renderer in a GPL app. I don't keep up with GNOME to know if they do use it. But I have seen it said here many, many times (ie with each milestone release or KDE release), "Why are KDE people making their own HTML rendering engine? Just use Mozilla, no duplication of effort, etc." To me, this would be a fine reason.
If you're going to sue everyone (damn Americans and their lawyers), you must have a plantiff, a defendent, and a list of damages the plantiff has incurred as a result of the defendent.
:) Is it a class-action lawsuit by everyone who has ever gotten a RedHat/Caldera/etc CD as a magazine filler? They didn't ask for it per se, yet here is this illegal item in their home. Will the police bust down their door any minute for possession of such illegal goods? Is RMS the plantiff, as he made up the GPL. That would seem to go against everything he has stood for, "You may use the GPL as long as I say so." No. Is Debian the one who shall do the suing since their interpretation of the vague document is the only one that counts? How were they hurt? They have thousands/millions of users. Their userbase hasn't been hurt by not including KDE. They aren't in it for money, so there is no loss of revenue in CDs.
So you want to sue every distribution, ok, they are defendents. Who is the plantiff? Joe Schmuck who wrote ksomething, provided binary rpms on his web site? Perhaps the KDE folks liked it enough they include it in kdesomepack. How suable is KDE, as it's just a bunch of schmucks working together, just as Debian is. Is Troll Tech the plantiff? Were they somehow damaged because a developer decided to use the GPL on ksomething? Likely that will happen.
Or, as I suspect it, Debian is just the sole judge, jury, and executioner in all matters they deem theirs? Every week when this comes up it's the same thing, Debians interprets it one way, KDE interprets it another. Debian says, "You better think our way, or else!" And why has RMS left this document so vague as it could be interpretted different ways? Why is it still dated June 1991, where is GPLv3? Wouldn't everything be so much stronger if there were nothing left to be interpreted? Is $3000 needed to "encourage" someone to make a proper GPL license which says definitively what can be linked and where/when?
It's the You-shall-interpret-this-license-only-as-Debian-fo lks-see-fit clause. You have to look hard, with a magnifying glass.
People are always saying how Netscape on Linux is oh so horrible and you can't do a damn thing with it. I was just wondering, what distribution, platform, etc do you use?
I run Netscape constantly, version 4.7. I haven't found another GUI IMAP mail client to my liking. (Pine/mutt are fine, but I like pretty GUIs sometimes.) I sometimes leave Netscape up for days at a time. I compile all of KDE2 frequently, so I shut down X for that, at least once a week, sometimes twice. I have Mandrake 7.0 currently on my Athlon 550 computer. I have Java shut off and my preferences.js non-writable to preserve some of my personal preferences Netscape enjoys deleting when it can. If I see that a ridiculous plugin loading, I quickly stop, go back and never return to the site. I do that mostly because I find them quite annoying. Javascript is still left on.
There are some complaints I have with it, but nothing to the point of "Netscape on Linux is extraordinarily buggy." So, what are you people running? I see so many people bitching about Netscape, I feel left out. Please, clue me in. With all the terrible things we've seen IE capable of doing, you'd think it would be on the Slashdot crowd's list of things worse than death.
There are places like paypal.com that do credit-card processing for free. I'm not sure if they have a minimum amount, charging a quarter seems a bit futile. So there are ways to do this now. All that's really needed is a good band to give away some MP3s and build a cult. That'll show those RIAA lawyers. ;)
Just make a browser that works and is fast guys.. leave the e-mail/chat/news/widget stuff for an addon or something.
:)
You're thinking of Konqueror.
Slashdot has mainstream journalismitis. You see, they have an IPO, they have a book. And, as every sappy young journalist in this wacky country knows, you have to create the stories, and you must be first with them. Let LinuxPR or LinuxToday put up the latest distribution official press release first, it's a sign of weakness.
.. Yes, yes .. it appears a luggage tag has washed up on the shore." It's sad .. but these are who the Slashdot crew want to be like. It was cute when it was a couple college guys in a basement.
I wouldn't doubt it if they have perl scripts running checking various ftp mirrors for new RedHats, Mandrakes, Debians, Mozillas, etc. Then it is fed through a simple script to create the post. "(Any name) pointed us to the (Product)-x+1.0 directory being created on (Product) mirror sites. Please pound their network connection for the next sixteen hours or they will get the full mirror of it."
Then there's the ever-so provacotive questions on an article, "Is Evil Empire #32 stealing your private data? We won't ask them first to explain their position; you all just conjure up some good scenarios so we can write a book on why business is bad for everyone."
This is how media works in the United States today. Report first, cover your tracks later. We spend 24 hours for seven straight days on every network on things like Princess Di or King JFK Jr's death when there are exactly two and half new bits of information in a day. That doesn't stop them, they MUST create the news. So you get these crazy media whores to come on and say, "Yeah, um, I flew in a plane ones up around Massachusetts. It's pretty hard. That's what it must have been like for JFK Jr." Or, "We have some new information. We are getting word
Who uses Perl now?
Python is da bomb, for sure.
Die Perl, die, die, die!
Copyrights have no sense serving public interest. They are about serving the inventor (and those he assigns power to). So you don't like it, go with something else than. There are millions of bands out there performing in little bars and grandparents' basements. I've seen MP3s on their rinky-dink web pages.
The fact is you've got few avenues to take when you decide to listen to a certain artist's work. A) You pay what they deam appropriate. B) You pirate it and deal with the ensuing consequences. If you hate the RIAA and big corporate types in the music industry, then don't support any bands that choose to enlist in their ranks. Plain and simple.
Since when do you need to be a commercial/non-profit site to get attacked? I'm on a simple 56k dynamic IP modem. I'm on probably 8-10 hours a day, working from home. I get about 5 attempts a day to get to some service on my machine. Yesterday one started just 4 minutes after connecting.
Anyone can be targetted. And I take this story as a lesson to be learned. Back when I first saw this line of articles (around part 2), I started running tcpdump on my connection all the time. This is how I learn of these attempts. I don't know what they do, scan entire blocks of IP address continually?
Over the years, I've found it is either half, the same, or double the CPU speed. I don't know much more than that. :)
Over the last few months I have taken to running tcpdump on my connection just to see how many folks try and get in. Understand I am in a cable modem/DSL deprived area, so I dial up with my mighty 56k modem. My ISP uses two C class blocks for the dynamic IP dialup sessions. So I guess crackers are just making attempts at any/all of these class C networks.
I'd say I get about 4-6 attempts per day to do something on my box. Mostly it is folks looking for something good on Windows SMB ports. I'm sure there are millions of 2 PC households that share their C drive wide open so they can copy to and fro. I've gone through the logs keeping a list, and banning the entire class C network of offending IPs. You can see some of that on my site under Security.
All those attempts got me to thinking. I should set up a much simpler firewall/masquerade box that doesn't run too much. Holes could be poked in the wall for necessary services (web, mail, etc) and forwarded to an internal machine. Perhaps something like the Linux Router Project would work. But what I'm looking into is that, with good crack monitors, syslogging things to another box, checking for portscans, running snort or tcpdump. Are there any? If not I may have to start one.
Even if someone finds a hole in the mail server (or whatever), it is on a second machine beind the wall and they cannot (easily) get to it to run that suid shell they just created. If the system is kept down to a floppy or small bit of a CDROM, you can easily mount the entire ramdisk readonly, or just reboot and have the original setup restored. Just having a full Linux desktop setup directly on the 'net worries me when/if I move to a DSL area.
How many more years of "Bogomips are not a benchmark" does it take to get to the center of one's brain? BTW, my Athlon 550 does 1104.28 bogomips. :)