You sir, are full of shit. Sudo IS ROOT. Repeat after me a second time, sudo IS ROOT. It's just annoying root. If users need root to do their mundane work--which is what sudo is for--there's something wrong that needs to be handled by code.
As far as slipping up, uh, what are you going to screw up? I mean, all your configs are version controlled in CFEngine/svn/cvs right? And you have an extensive library of base system images right? You have a bootstrapper right? And your data is on external snapshotted storage right? And you have backups right?
Surely you do a double take on each rm -f, that's about the only one you have to think about. And sudo is not going to save your ass in that scenario anyway, unless you have rm turned off, which....what would be the point of that? Compared with a database where you can just drop all; bye, replicate to the peers, I'd say you're pretty paranoid and frightened little bunny and probably don't really understand your system enough to rebuild it from the ground up (which is the worst case) (rm -rf/). When you do have that understanding and the ability to rebuild very quickly (a fully running production environment), as all good admins do, then you have the confidence to run around as root and actually get stuff done. In fact, I recommend rebuilding as much as you can until you can do it in minutes. Because "serious environments" don't have lots of crufty hacks and unauditable implementations and changes. They have testable, provable, deployable configurations. See ya, wouldn't want to be ya!;)
Build the network. Because that won't happen in the U.S. any time soon, but it is happening elsewhere and information wants to be free. Now, just because through leaks and stuff we now see that our country has kindof taken the place of honor at the table of assholes formerly headed by the British Empire, doesn't mean it's most likely in the "next few years" that the U.S. government will lose it's marbles. If it was going to happen, it would have happened when Cheney was running things. And it did, to a certain extent, but it's really not about the U.S. any more, it's about the world. It's about everyone being able to access the information they need to make informed decisions. It's about all of our rights, as Thomas Jefferson might have said, to "live copiously".
Well, we need to focus on something simple, like sending SMTP or even more bare bones text email between nodes. This has already been done P2P on a very large scale for chat programs. And besides that, do you think the wired connections are just going to go away? Wired will always be faster because you have isolated bandwidth, kindof a little tunnel through space time to send your signal. With radio waves propagated through the atmosphere, you're going to get some spray effect, even with the most tightly focused antenna. Lasers are better but can be subject to interference. Maybe a laser operating in the microwave range or soemthign would be good. Anyway, the point is, there's always going to be wires.
In a world with mesh networks, Google would look the same as it does today: Central data centers, with regional and local data hubs for caching and distributed content, all connected via company owned or leased fiber with likely some type of packet level security. There's no reason comapnies need to change. In fact, I see the current model being used for a long time for entertainment and shopping and stuff. But you have this whole other idea about the Internet or computer communications as a distributed publishing system free, or at least mostly out of reach, of censorship. For that you don't need high bandwidth, just a good mail system.. The problem is right now it's heavily weighted toward this government/telecom controlled backbone, because the universities don't provide the public access like they used to. And really, it's useless to look toward the past on this simply because we're at an unprecedented time.
Hey, and of course if there were a real emergency that the government needed to stop people from talking to one another, they could just do a EMP and zap it right quick anyway, so it's not really a threat, just means they have to be much more serious than the FBI has been lately, "casually" tapping phones. And there's nothing wrong with that. I just don't think it's wise to depend on a government, any government, for your right to speak and assemble. And this network, this freedom toolset, once developed, could be put to use in countries that really need it.
I do want to say, however, that like the parent I remember a time before everyone had broadband or other reliable, always on connections and UUCP was the way it was done for those types of sites. SMTP and newsgroups are built aroudn the same idea of unreliability.
So basically a server supports it's local area by phone modem, radio modem, in person terminals, etc. and then connects to the outside world as much as possible. When it does get a connection, it copies as much as it can from it's upstream providers and then sorts it and makes it available to the local users. That's decentralization. It's all still there in the roots of everything we use, it just works a lot faster now. But you can unplug your network cable, dump a bunch of emails into an SMTP queue and then plug it in later and it'll send it. So, I guess my point is that we don't really need much networking power to get the "freedom" benefits of the internet (free speech, assembly, etc.) Twitter uses SMS which is what, 140 characters max. Even 56K modem could carry thousands of those a second. And I don't know if you've seen some of the new wireless technology but there's some new pulse modulated stuff that's just insane on range and bandwidth and power use.
So, we already have the protocols--the computer tools that will enable a loosely coupled distributed network. Yes, we have a lot of entertainment options and shiny things like video and shopping and stuff and it would be nice to have that also, but I think we need first the very basics of a communication system--for the written word--that's free from any government and we already have it. We just all chose to move to the government and corporate provided fast connections for the shiny things. But as I said, the mesh thing is really within reach. And with IPv6 there's ample address space for all the additional routers needed for a mesh network. Yes, you will still have to trust your upstream, but when did you not--ever? And most of that big network above you is still run by the same dwarves that ran it in the 70's and we're still shoving coal into the boiler in the basement. Yes, there's been a lot of invasion into those boiler rooms under the name of "security" but no one will ever be able to change the fact that information wants to be free. Build the network, don't depend on politics.
Hopefully they fix the bug in 4.2.1 which has caused WiFi to stop working entirely on my MB702LL (8gb 3G). And reinstalling iOS, emergency bare metal install, and master reset do nothing. In fact, word on the street says even going back to any 4.0 firmware doesn't fix it. You have to have 3.x. Apparently 4.2.1 update breaks the firmware for the WiFi chip. No word from Apple. The Apple "Genius" (after scoffing at "how old it is" [2 years]) says there's no fix, I have to "buy a new phone". I'm going to a linux phone and I'm selling my stock.
Thing is, apple apps install cleaner than Linux apps.
Actually, it's really up to you. In OSX, apps must be packaged in a special folder which has all this metadata. It's big and it's impossible to transmit using HTTP, thus that in turn has to be packaged into a disk image. Yes, you do get the benefit of having all the shared libraries and stuff packaged in. Of course, you don't get the benefit of enjoying "shared libraries" because you're going to have across 10 apps 10 versions of a given library. Of course the closed source proprietary system libraries are going to be identical on all macs running a given version, which provides a level of convenience in exchange for, uh, your freedom..
ALL Linux apps distributed via source using gnu make can be installed wherever you want. --prefix is your friend;) I really like/usr/local/[appname] for linux compiled stuff and then big packages of tomcat and java apps and prepackaged binaries of commercial software I usually put in/opt/[appname].
RPM packages and the like are generally made to conform to the distro's standards which generally are pretty good, but sometimes they make judgement calls about the final location of some files. I avoid using RPMs as much as possible when I'm installing an app in a production environment. rpm also has a --prefix and relocatable packages can be installed wherever you want.
Now of course, if you do this you'll need to make some config changes to make sure they still run right. In general, you might need to extend your shells PATH to search in the application's bin/sbin/libexec director(ies) and you make need to add the lib directory to/etc/ld.so.conf and run ldconfig (this adds to the shared libraries index).
Need to move the app to another server with the same architecture and libraries? Rsync or copy the application folder, setup path, done.
Goldman bought those insurance contracts fair and square and AIG had every ability to underwrite each and every one to insure it was a sound investment. The American people are to blame, for beleiving housing prices would forever go up and that they could buy houses they couldn't afford in the future if the prices didn't go up. Yes, the evil banks enabled this, but there was a market and people were signing these papers so why the hell not? The problem is now, the American people don't want to make good on their loans. Total shit balls are stripping their granite and bathtubs out of their foreclosed properties rendering them useless. There are four kinds of people as I see it:
1. People who gambled on real estate and lost (~90% of foreclosures) 2. People who were tricked into loans that the banks knew would not be paid back (~10% of foreclosures) 3. People who already owned houses or bought a house they could afford and are still making the payments on, or invested in a good rental market 4. People who stayed out because they were poor or scared.
It seems like #1 and #4 are the people who are complaining the loudest, and those are just shitty people. #3 are the people who are going to see us through because they work hard and are now carrying this whole thing on their backs. And #2 will always be there, because there's always some new starry eyed immigrant who can get duped into a loan. It's not a good thing but it's a fact.
The only thing that can save us is people buckle down, save money and create new wealth rather than sucking on the teat of the tax payer or gambling on something people really need. So I don't think we'll see the huge gains in the real estate for a long time. But I hear facebook stock is going to be a great investment!;)
GS didn't actually take very many losses because all the MBSs they had were hedged or insured. Funny that AIG hasn't had to pay back that $150B yet but Goldman made good in only a few months. Goldman is sitting on an absolute PILE of cash--the pile is so big they haven't even counted it yet.
But another poster said it best--Goldman will simply run it like a private equity trade; they can't sell Facebook stock but they can own it and then sell the right to gamble on it. Seems like it it should be illegal and it is exactly how the CDOs and MBSs worked as well. It should be illegal because it's unfair to investors who only have the opportunity to play on the public market. Goldman can place all kinds of restrictions on the trading, like "you need to have an account with us for 100M or more", etc. It's actually pretty diabolical and brilliant and it's the same JP Morgan shit that's been happening in New York for over a century.
So many companies have been taken private recently to hide this private cash from the SEC. They just take a company private, suddenly don't have to file with the feds anymore (except the IRS, which is real independent of the general bureaucracy) and just file with their state whatever minimal amount they have to. Ship it out of the country to Dubai or whatever, it's not rocket science. We got fucked, and they even fucked the government, and they still have public opinion on their side. Amazing.
Anyway, what can we learn? Number one, the cash is still out there, plus all the money the government printed to cover the cash being dropped out of circulation. So in order to get some sort of return they are going to have to start investing in stuff. They are the lucky ones who get to spend the money first, before the multiplier decays its value. So they get the most value for each dollar by spending it now. By the time it trickles down to the little guy they have bought more land, installed more factories, bought their houses and islands cheap, etc. and the little guy gets just enough to keep up with inflation and keep him where he is, or hopefully (for the rich) a little less powerful. So, if you have any money, you should put it in stuff that the rich will buy with their cash before inflation and interest rates go up.
And what kills me is Warren Buffet saw all this almost two years ago when he (firstly) bought GS in the dumps, preferred shares mind you, and then took the profits from that and bought burlington northern and netjets. Trains and planes. Two things the very rich use to move stuff between their factories with their low priced midwest hick labor and the city markets and planes because they gotta travel. Gold's up, not because of any safe haven mentality (ok, there is some of that) but because the rich buy lots of gold when they have extra cash.
Not sure where I'm going with this but uh, hasn't everyone here made around 30% on the market in the past year just by buying nasdaq index or have you all been too scared? It's not hard, run away from the herd and you won't get run over. Yes, the "market leaders" will always have some time advantage but that doesn't mean you can't be there waiting when the peopel that follow the market leaders plow in their money. Facebook would be a great investment in the short term; I like long term it is....just a website.
No, Skype is not a "peer to peer network". It's a decentralized tree topology. They (Skype) runs the supernodes. They are basically servers. Naturally all the clients can't connect to one server, so they need many. This means there's a problem of server-to-server communications. So all the servers pass around lists of who's connected. The thing about a tree is that you can have a cascade effect when one server goes down, if you use certain automatic "self-healing" features for high availability like Round Robin DNS, etc. Then you have something like a message bot that sits out there and becomes users when they log off. Then it can absorb any "offline" messages and when they come back on forward them along. If your buddy is online, it gives you their IP address for direct connection, or employs some other secondary methods so it will work regardless of firewall config.
This is exactly how, say, Internet Relay Chat (IRC) has worked for oh, 30 years or so. The difference being they probably use some type of cryptographically secure hash to identify clients uniquely, and some type of round robin dns to route to a given server rather than the user needing to maintain a list of servers, etc.. Makes it easier to scale quickly as it pretty much sets itself up but the self-healing can be a problem when clients are trying to reconnect autoamtically at very high rates--you have a sort of internal DOS situation that cascades as more nodes fail. IRC is a very good basis for chat programs of any kind and has been tried and tested for a long time and highly effective. I'd be surprised if anything "invented" at these proprietary companies is going to be very different. Some IRC daemons even do sophisicated mesh networking and stuff and use QoS packets to detect splits and reroute messages.
Possible solutions for them are to not use a single global server address (fanned out with Round Robin DNS) for everything. They need to segment their network into multiple trees each with a round robin DNS entry that in turn forwards to many servers. You could do this automatically by having a two step authentication where the client authenticates and then gets it's server for the session. The server/tree could be picked by carefully analyzing the social network and trying to put "friends" or "buddies" near each other, hopefully on the same tree. You'd also maybe want to allow the client to disconnect itself and switch servers to get closer to their friends.
They have a lot of web services that a lot of people use that probably aren't as well backed as the homepage. Likewise for the card networks and banks. There's lots of web services published that are rather thinly over back-end hardware. That being said, you shouldn't DOS people. Better to write to your newspaper or copy the torrent of the cables and burn it to disks and slide the disks between certain obscure books in your university library. Information wants to be free, but if you're attacking people for distancing themselves from information, you're not going to win. THAT being said, everyone knows that "anonymous" is just that, random people doing stuff without using their name. It's not a group, it's a phenomenon. It seems groupy but it's just a trend that the old people in the country don't realize--that the young people today truely believe in truth, justice and helping the downtrodden. Greed is NOT good to them. That's what anonymous is. And lots of other people too. That's the beauty of it. It's EVERYONE.
Actually, it worked and the recession is ending. In fact, jobless claims (people trying to get unemployment) peaked (at almost 650,000) on Apr 2, 2009. We have a functioning banking system, jobs are picking up every month (now at around 400,000, which is close to "normal"), home prices are climbing out of the shitter. When money like that is spent it takes time to filter out and hit the system. But it did restore confidence.
Now, you can spout whatever talking points you want about the Obama and democrats spending huge amounts of money but the money supply has grown every year for a damn long time. People don't understand money is the problem. Money is like TCP or UDP packets of information on the internet. Guess what, to move more data between two points you need more packets. No one complains that there are 10 million times as many packets today on the internet as their were 10 years ago. No one complains that their 28,800 bps modem has been made obsolete by huge internet companies "printing more packets". Money is the same thing. Money is not "something", it's a medium which we can transmit information with. With the rise of the global enconomy, digital commerce and payments, debit cards, and of course a steadily growing world population demands more money for more transactions. Money itself is nothing, it's just a way to exchange information. Yes, the value of money is variable based on the quantity and yes it's not a good investment to hold on to it when there's inflation. But when you see inflation coming you need to buy real stuff, it's not that big of a deal. Enough people buy real stuff, the values go up and the inflation is naturally absorbed. It's really quite beautiful.
It's not the U.S., it's the people they let run the servers. I wouldn't do that, and I'm American. So let's hire some new root servers. I can change my DNS to point to them in a few minutes.
Yeah, the U.S. Government has taken control of ICANN and the root servers for "national security" reasons. Fortunately there are other sources of DNS information.
Actually, it's the Germans, and it's the ones living in the U.S. now. And if you're of German descent and aren't participating in any way, please tell your people to stop it. And by participating I mean formenting any kind of negative attitude.
That dude is pretty bad ass. And you know he's just a talking head for us, we the people, who are the organization behind wikileaks, just like we're the organization behind wikipedia. It's open, distributed publishing. Unfortunately that will always be counteracted by a desire for total control by the few who have it in their grasp. It's the essential conflict of humanity. There's no solution, just struggle. Unless the people at the top are willing to give it all away (and let's face it--would YOU if you were there?), this will always be the case.
Well, yes, now that the supreme court has ruled that corporations are citizens and can vote for candidates with their pocketbooks, it's only natural that they would band together and send representatives to congress. Corporations are like robots and they are gaining more rights every day. That's why I recommend you buy stock.
Maybe, but don't forget that all of the internet passes through no more than 300000 routes, many of which are government owned or otherwise covered. So it's conceivable, probably even likely, that there are some people who know everyone who's downloaded the archive. P2P is great but it's not anonymous. And there's no substitute for some LTO4 tapes in an attorney's safe deposit box. True, P2P can distribute wide enough that it's possible to keep the data for ever being deleted, but only if the people who download it actually do something with it themselves, such as burning a few DVDs and sliding them in between books at their campus library or something.
Anyway, I think the U.S. Government had to respond in some way, even if the data isn't all that important. They can't just stand by and say nothing. That being said, I'm not sure what the law is about information once it's been leaked outside of the government umbrella. Is SECRET just an internal policy classification or is there some legal basis behind the info? I would guess not, judging by the war of words they're waging. If they really could prosecute this and win they would have already for the previous releases.
What about a local DNS cache with version control on the cache dumps. Thus every time you visit a site, you ask the cache, who asks the net. If it's changed, it saves the previous IP for posterity along with a date stamp. Since you only visit 1-2000 sites per year the storage would be miniscule. Plus, you have a local cache which will speed up your browsing. Obviously local DNS caches are present in many operating systems already (such as OS X) but the version control (or incremental saving of the cache) idea is novel, I believe.
Yeah, I thought wikileaks was supposed to be a "wiki", where people could post and edit any stories. Now it's just publicity. But you're right--shit, what if Assange works for Rupert Murdoch or even the U.S. Government? No way to tell! That's why we need more sites like wikileaks.
Having looked at a number of the cables, it's interesting to see that the vast majority of this information probably should be available to U.S. IP addresses. I mean, there are 3+ Million people with Secret clearance alone. It shows that stuff is being classified that probably doesn't need to be. And that goes against the Obama executive order for transparency. But, a lot of these are from previous times.
Lastly, I think Wikileaks as a concept is good; people should be able to leak information anonymously. But people should also be aware that people are looking for them so they should probably avoid a place like Wikileaks and use something else like a torrent of the latest episode of Weeds or something. Also, I really like Cryptome.org and what they do. We really need someone to watch the powerful, as they have proven time and time again that they'll take advantage of the poor and downtrodden if given the chance. And with no powerful growing religion to help balance that (shit, the fastest growing religion in the U.S. fans the flames more than not), we don't have a lot to look forward to.
Things are changing, like they always are, but rreally the big new deal is the Internet.
And yet all of my carefully done customizations and scripting are instantly erased if I make the error of installing an OS update or using one of the gui tools designed to edit 30% of the possible config. Apple doesn't give a rats ass about Unix, it was a free stable kernel for them to hang their proprietary crap on. I have a feeling the terminal will be going away fairly soon.
Slashdot Mirror
You sir, are full of shit. Sudo IS ROOT. Repeat after me a second time, sudo IS ROOT. It's just annoying root. If users need root to do their mundane work--which is what sudo is for--there's something wrong that needs to be handled by code.
As far as slipping up, uh, what are you going to screw up? I mean, all your configs are version controlled in CFEngine/svn/cvs right? And you have an extensive library of base system images right? You have a bootstrapper right? And your data is on external snapshotted storage right? And you have backups right?
Surely you do a double take on each rm -f, that's about the only one you have to think about. And sudo is not going to save your ass in that scenario anyway, unless you have rm turned off, which....what would be the point of that? Compared with a database where you can just drop all; bye, replicate to the peers, I'd say you're pretty paranoid and frightened little bunny and probably don't really understand your system enough to rebuild it from the ground up (which is the worst case) (rm -rf /). When you do have that understanding and the ability to rebuild very quickly (a fully running production environment), as all good admins do, then you have the confidence to run around as root and actually get stuff done. In fact, I recommend rebuilding as much as you can until you can do it in minutes. Because "serious environments" don't have lots of crufty hacks and unauditable implementations and changes. They have testable, provable, deployable configurations. See ya, wouldn't want to be ya! ;)
Actually, correction:
10. Veteran Unix admins don't "write articles for InfoWorld".
Build the network. Because that won't happen in the U.S. any time soon, but it is happening elsewhere and information wants to be free. Now, just because through leaks and stuff we now see that our country has kindof taken the place of honor at the table of assholes formerly headed by the British Empire, doesn't mean it's most likely in the "next few years" that the U.S. government will lose it's marbles. If it was going to happen, it would have happened when Cheney was running things. And it did, to a certain extent, but it's really not about the U.S. any more, it's about the world. It's about everyone being able to access the information they need to make informed decisions. It's about all of our rights, as Thomas Jefferson might have said, to "live copiously".
Well, we need to focus on something simple, like sending SMTP or even more bare bones text email between nodes. This has already been done P2P on a very large scale for chat programs. And besides that, do you think the wired connections are just going to go away? Wired will always be faster because you have isolated bandwidth, kindof a little tunnel through space time to send your signal. With radio waves propagated through the atmosphere, you're going to get some spray effect, even with the most tightly focused antenna. Lasers are better but can be subject to interference. Maybe a laser operating in the microwave range or soemthign would be good. Anyway, the point is, there's always going to be wires.
In a world with mesh networks, Google would look the same as it does today: Central data centers, with regional and local data hubs for caching and distributed content, all connected via company owned or leased fiber with likely some type of packet level security. There's no reason comapnies need to change. In fact, I see the current model being used for a long time for entertainment and shopping and stuff. But you have this whole other idea about the Internet or computer communications as a distributed publishing system free, or at least mostly out of reach, of censorship. For that you don't need high bandwidth, just a good mail system.. The problem is right now it's heavily weighted toward this government/telecom controlled backbone, because the universities don't provide the public access like they used to. And really, it's useless to look toward the past on this simply because we're at an unprecedented time.
Hey, and of course if there were a real emergency that the government needed to stop people from talking to one another, they could just do a EMP and zap it right quick anyway, so it's not really a threat, just means they have to be much more serious than the FBI has been lately, "casually" tapping phones. And there's nothing wrong with that. I just don't think it's wise to depend on a government, any government, for your right to speak and assemble. And this network, this freedom toolset, once developed, could be put to use in countries that really need it.
I do want to say, however, that like the parent I remember a time before everyone had broadband or other reliable, always on connections and UUCP was the way it was done for those types of sites. SMTP and newsgroups are built aroudn the same idea of unreliability.
So basically a server supports it's local area by phone modem, radio modem, in person terminals, etc. and then connects to the outside world as much as possible. When it does get a connection, it copies as much as it can from it's upstream providers and then sorts it and makes it available to the local users. That's decentralization. It's all still there in the roots of everything we use, it just works a lot faster now. But you can unplug your network cable, dump a bunch of emails into an SMTP queue and then plug it in later and it'll send it. So, I guess my point is that we don't really need much networking power to get the "freedom" benefits of the internet (free speech, assembly, etc.) Twitter uses SMS which is what, 140 characters max. Even 56K modem could carry thousands of those a second. And I don't know if you've seen some of the new wireless technology but there's some new pulse modulated stuff that's just insane on range and bandwidth and power use.
So, we already have the protocols--the computer tools that will enable a loosely coupled distributed network. Yes, we have a lot of entertainment options and shiny things like video and shopping and stuff and it would be nice to have that also, but I think we need first the very basics of a communication system--for the written word--that's free from any government and we already have it. We just all chose to move to the government and corporate provided fast connections for the shiny things. But as I said, the mesh thing is really within reach. And with IPv6 there's ample address space for all the additional routers needed for a mesh network. Yes, you will still have to trust your upstream, but when did you not--ever? And most of that big network above you is still run by the same dwarves that ran it in the 70's and we're still shoving coal into the boiler in the basement. Yes, there's been a lot of invasion into those boiler rooms under the name of "security" but no one will ever be able to change the fact that information wants to be free. Build the network, don't depend on politics.
The machines have declared war on Christmas. Thus Neojus has to rise from the dead to save this precious holiday. Christrix IV, the Second Coming.
Dude, The Empire Strikes Back. End of message.
Hopefully they fix the bug in 4.2.1 which has caused WiFi to stop working entirely on my MB702LL (8gb 3G). And reinstalling iOS, emergency bare metal install, and master reset do nothing. In fact, word on the street says even going back to any 4.0 firmware doesn't fix it. You have to have 3.x. Apparently 4.2.1 update breaks the firmware for the WiFi chip. No word from Apple. The Apple "Genius" (after scoffing at "how old it is" [2 years]) says there's no fix, I have to "buy a new phone". I'm going to a linux phone and I'm selling my stock.
Thing is, apple apps install cleaner than Linux apps.
Actually, it's really up to you. In OSX, apps must be packaged in a special folder which has all this metadata. It's big and it's impossible to transmit using HTTP, thus that in turn has to be packaged into a disk image. Yes, you do get the benefit of having all the shared libraries and stuff packaged in. Of course, you don't get the benefit of enjoying "shared libraries" because you're going to have across 10 apps 10 versions of a given library. Of course the closed source proprietary system libraries are going to be identical on all macs running a given version, which provides a level of convenience in exchange for, uh, your freedom..
ALL Linux apps distributed via source using gnu make can be installed wherever you want. --prefix is your friend ;) I really like /usr/local/[appname] for linux compiled stuff and then big packages of tomcat and java apps and prepackaged binaries of commercial software I usually put in /opt/[appname].
RPM packages and the like are generally made to conform to the distro's standards which generally are pretty good, but sometimes they make judgement calls about the final location of some files. I avoid using RPMs as much as possible when I'm installing an app in a production environment. rpm also has a --prefix and relocatable packages can be installed wherever you want.
Now of course, if you do this you'll need to make some config changes to make sure they still run right. In general, you might need to extend your shells PATH to search in the application's bin/sbin/libexec director(ies) and you make need to add the lib directory to /etc/ld.so.conf and run ldconfig (this adds to the shared libraries index).
Need to move the app to another server with the same architecture and libraries? Rsync or copy the application folder, setup path, done.
Zuckerberg needs the cash to fund his charity.
Goldman bought those insurance contracts fair and square and AIG had every ability to underwrite each and every one to insure it was a sound investment. The American people are to blame, for beleiving housing prices would forever go up and that they could buy houses they couldn't afford in the future if the prices didn't go up. Yes, the evil banks enabled this, but there was a market and people were signing these papers so why the hell not? The problem is now, the American people don't want to make good on their loans. Total shit balls are stripping their granite and bathtubs out of their foreclosed properties rendering them useless. There are four kinds of people as I see it:
1. People who gambled on real estate and lost (~90% of foreclosures)
2. People who were tricked into loans that the banks knew would not be paid back (~10% of foreclosures)
3. People who already owned houses or bought a house they could afford and are still making the payments on, or invested in a good rental market
4. People who stayed out because they were poor or scared.
It seems like #1 and #4 are the people who are complaining the loudest, and those are just shitty people. #3 are the people who are going to see us through because they work hard and are now carrying this whole thing on their backs. And #2 will always be there, because there's always some new starry eyed immigrant who can get duped into a loan. It's not a good thing but it's a fact.
The only thing that can save us is people buckle down, save money and create new wealth rather than sucking on the teat of the tax payer or gambling on something people really need. So I don't think we'll see the huge gains in the real estate for a long time. But I hear facebook stock is going to be a great investment! ;)
GS didn't actually take very many losses because all the MBSs they had were hedged or insured. Funny that AIG hasn't had to pay back that $150B yet but Goldman made good in only a few months. Goldman is sitting on an absolute PILE of cash--the pile is so big they haven't even counted it yet.
But another poster said it best--Goldman will simply run it like a private equity trade; they can't sell Facebook stock but they can own it and then sell the right to gamble on it. Seems like it it should be illegal and it is exactly how the CDOs and MBSs worked as well. It should be illegal because it's unfair to investors who only have the opportunity to play on the public market. Goldman can place all kinds of restrictions on the trading, like "you need to have an account with us for 100M or more", etc. It's actually pretty diabolical and brilliant and it's the same JP Morgan shit that's been happening in New York for over a century.
So many companies have been taken private recently to hide this private cash from the SEC. They just take a company private, suddenly don't have to file with the feds anymore (except the IRS, which is real independent of the general bureaucracy) and just file with their state whatever minimal amount they have to. Ship it out of the country to Dubai or whatever, it's not rocket science. We got fucked, and they even fucked the government, and they still have public opinion on their side. Amazing.
Anyway, what can we learn? Number one, the cash is still out there, plus all the money the government printed to cover the cash being dropped out of circulation. So in order to get some sort of return they are going to have to start investing in stuff. They are the lucky ones who get to spend the money first, before the multiplier decays its value. So they get the most value for each dollar by spending it now. By the time it trickles down to the little guy they have bought more land, installed more factories, bought their houses and islands cheap, etc. and the little guy gets just enough to keep up with inflation and keep him where he is, or hopefully (for the rich) a little less powerful. So, if you have any money, you should put it in stuff that the rich will buy with their cash before inflation and interest rates go up.
And what kills me is Warren Buffet saw all this almost two years ago when he (firstly) bought GS in the dumps, preferred shares mind you, and then took the profits from that and bought burlington northern and netjets. Trains and planes. Two things the very rich use to move stuff between their factories with their low priced midwest hick labor and the city markets and planes because they gotta travel. Gold's up, not because of any safe haven mentality (ok, there is some of that) but because the rich buy lots of gold when they have extra cash.
Not sure where I'm going with this but uh, hasn't everyone here made around 30% on the market in the past year just by buying nasdaq index or have you all been too scared? It's not hard, run away from the herd and you won't get run over. Yes, the "market leaders" will always have some time advantage but that doesn't mean you can't be there waiting when the peopel that follow the market leaders plow in their money. Facebook would be a great investment in the short term; I like long term it is....just a website.
Oh sorry boss you had to find out that I think you're an idiot, can I still keep my job, please please please?
"If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." --Eric Schmidt
No, Skype is not a "peer to peer network". It's a decentralized tree topology. They (Skype) runs the supernodes. They are basically servers. Naturally all the clients can't connect to one server, so they need many. This means there's a problem of server-to-server communications. So all the servers pass around lists of who's connected. The thing about a tree is that you can have a cascade effect when one server goes down, if you use certain automatic "self-healing" features for high availability like Round Robin DNS, etc. Then you have something like a message bot that sits out there and becomes users when they log off. Then it can absorb any "offline" messages and when they come back on forward them along. If your buddy is online, it gives you their IP address for direct connection, or employs some other secondary methods so it will work regardless of firewall config.
This is exactly how, say, Internet Relay Chat (IRC) has worked for oh, 30 years or so. The difference being they probably use some type of cryptographically secure hash to identify clients uniquely, and some type of round robin dns to route to a given server rather than the user needing to maintain a list of servers, etc.. Makes it easier to scale quickly as it pretty much sets itself up but the self-healing can be a problem when clients are trying to reconnect autoamtically at very high rates--you have a sort of internal DOS situation that cascades as more nodes fail. IRC is a very good basis for chat programs of any kind and has been tried and tested for a long time and highly effective. I'd be surprised if anything "invented" at these proprietary companies is going to be very different. Some IRC daemons even do sophisicated mesh networking and stuff and use QoS packets to detect splits and reroute messages.
Possible solutions for them are to not use a single global server address (fanned out with Round Robin DNS) for everything. They need to segment their network into multiple trees each with a round robin DNS entry that in turn forwards to many servers. You could do this automatically by having a two step authentication where the client authenticates and then gets it's server for the session. The server/tree could be picked by carefully analyzing the social network and trying to put "friends" or "buddies" near each other, hopefully on the same tree. You'd also maybe want to allow the client to disconnect itself and switch servers to get closer to their friends.
They have a lot of web services that a lot of people use that probably aren't as well backed as the homepage. Likewise for the card networks and banks. There's lots of web services published that are rather thinly over back-end hardware. That being said, you shouldn't DOS people. Better to write to your newspaper or copy the torrent of the cables and burn it to disks and slide the disks between certain obscure books in your university library. Information wants to be free, but if you're attacking people for distancing themselves from information, you're not going to win. THAT being said, everyone knows that "anonymous" is just that, random people doing stuff without using their name. It's not a group, it's a phenomenon. It seems groupy but it's just a trend that the old people in the country don't realize--that the young people today truely believe in truth, justice and helping the downtrodden. Greed is NOT good to them. That's what anonymous is. And lots of other people too. That's the beauty of it. It's EVERYONE.
Actually, it worked and the recession is ending. In fact, jobless claims (people trying to get unemployment) peaked (at almost 650,000) on Apr 2, 2009. We have a functioning banking system, jobs are picking up every month (now at around 400,000, which is close to "normal"), home prices are climbing out of the shitter. When money like that is spent it takes time to filter out and hit the system. But it did restore confidence.
Now, you can spout whatever talking points you want about the Obama and democrats spending huge amounts of money but the money supply has grown every year for a damn long time. People don't understand money is the problem. Money is like TCP or UDP packets of information on the internet. Guess what, to move more data between two points you need more packets. No one complains that there are 10 million times as many packets today on the internet as their were 10 years ago. No one complains that their 28,800 bps modem has been made obsolete by huge internet companies "printing more packets". Money is the same thing. Money is not "something", it's a medium which we can transmit information with. With the rise of the global enconomy, digital commerce and payments, debit cards, and of course a steadily growing world population demands more money for more transactions. Money itself is nothing, it's just a way to exchange information. Yes, the value of money is variable based on the quantity and yes it's not a good investment to hold on to it when there's inflation. But when you see inflation coming you need to buy real stuff, it's not that big of a deal. Enough people buy real stuff, the values go up and the inflation is naturally absorbed. It's really quite beautiful.
It's not the U.S., it's the people they let run the servers. I wouldn't do that, and I'm American. So let's hire some new root servers. I can change my DNS to point to them in a few minutes.
Yeah, the U.S. Government has taken control of ICANN and the root servers for "national security" reasons. Fortunately there are other sources of DNS information.
Actually, it's the Germans, and it's the ones living in the U.S. now. And if you're of German descent and aren't participating in any way, please tell your people to stop it. And by participating I mean formenting any kind of negative attitude.
That dude is pretty bad ass. And you know he's just a talking head for us, we the people, who are the organization behind wikileaks, just like we're the organization behind wikipedia. It's open, distributed publishing. Unfortunately that will always be counteracted by a desire for total control by the few who have it in their grasp. It's the essential conflict of humanity. There's no solution, just struggle. Unless the people at the top are willing to give it all away (and let's face it--would YOU if you were there?), this will always be the case.
Well, yes, now that the supreme court has ruled that corporations are citizens and can vote for candidates with their pocketbooks, it's only natural that they would band together and send representatives to congress. Corporations are like robots and they are gaining more rights every day. That's why I recommend you buy stock.
Maybe, but don't forget that all of the internet passes through no more than 300000 routes, many of which are government owned or otherwise covered. So it's conceivable, probably even likely, that there are some people who know everyone who's downloaded the archive. P2P is great but it's not anonymous. And there's no substitute for some LTO4 tapes in an attorney's safe deposit box. True, P2P can distribute wide enough that it's possible to keep the data for ever being deleted, but only if the people who download it actually do something with it themselves, such as burning a few DVDs and sliding them in between books at their campus library or something.
Anyway, I think the U.S. Government had to respond in some way, even if the data isn't all that important. They can't just stand by and say nothing. That being said, I'm not sure what the law is about information once it's been leaked outside of the government umbrella. Is SECRET just an internal policy classification or is there some legal basis behind the info? I would guess not, judging by the war of words they're waging. If they really could prosecute this and win they would have already for the previous releases.
What about a local DNS cache with version control on the cache dumps. Thus every time you visit a site, you ask the cache, who asks the net. If it's changed, it saves the previous IP for posterity along with a date stamp. Since you only visit 1-2000 sites per year the storage would be miniscule. Plus, you have a local cache which will speed up your browsing. Obviously local DNS caches are present in many operating systems already (such as OS X) but the version control (or incremental saving of the cache) idea is novel, I believe.
Yeah, I thought wikileaks was supposed to be a "wiki", where people could post and edit any stories. Now it's just publicity. But you're right--shit, what if Assange works for Rupert Murdoch or even the U.S. Government? No way to tell! That's why we need more sites like wikileaks.
Having looked at a number of the cables, it's interesting to see that the vast majority of this information probably should be available to U.S. IP addresses. I mean, there are 3+ Million people with Secret clearance alone. It shows that stuff is being classified that probably doesn't need to be. And that goes against the Obama executive order for transparency. But, a lot of these are from previous times.
Lastly, I think Wikileaks as a concept is good; people should be able to leak information anonymously. But people should also be aware that people are looking for them so they should probably avoid a place like Wikileaks and use something else like a torrent of the latest episode of Weeds or something. Also, I really like Cryptome.org and what they do. We really need someone to watch the powerful, as they have proven time and time again that they'll take advantage of the poor and downtrodden if given the chance. And with no powerful growing religion to help balance that (shit, the fastest growing religion in the U.S. fans the flames more than not), we don't have a lot to look forward to.
Things are changing, like they always are, but rreally the big new deal is the Internet.
And yet all of my carefully done customizations and scripting are instantly erased if I make the error of installing an OS update or using one of the gui tools designed to edit 30% of the possible config. Apple doesn't give a rats ass about Unix, it was a free stable kernel for them to hang their proprietary crap on. I have a feeling the terminal will be going away fairly soon.