..be FreeBSD's fault? The reason the virus scanners aren't for BSD/*nix is that there are NO viruses. Now, why doesn't MS just write themselves some scanning software for BSD? If you can detect a virus just by scanning file headers and what not, it shouldn't matter what OS you're in, you just have to WRITE it.
His ideas and his attitude.. Well, one is positive, the other is less so. For making GNU, yay! Of course, it's other hackers working together that has made the REAL GNU, but he did lay the foundation, so hats off to him. The rest though, he's just a little too arrogant.
Anyway, here goes. The first AC was more right then this one. This one seems a die hard feminist, though the previous was a little too extreme.
Lets look at the real compromise: Kids need loving, nurturing parents. Like ones that stay home. I don't care which one, it's no difference. Lets point out that it's both parents fault. And it's a decison for each couple to make, who should work. That decision should never be 'both' though.
The point about poor single mothers is well made though. But that's an ENTIRELY difference social aspect, dealing with deadbeat dads and what not. Extended family raising family can be positive. Daycares though, are a mixed bag. Some are good, some aren't. In general, a stable parent would be better.
You forget why Linux took off instead of BSD, the licensing garbage. Even if it had been solved quickly, it was a bad stain. So Linux grew instead. If Linux hadn't been around then.. There's no telling.
I have to say that Linux is a real spearhead. It's further along then BSD (please, no flames, I'm not trying to cause trouble. Linux DOES do more by a small margin.). So contemplate: There was no Linux. BSD became the GNU choice. There's the fresh stain of AT&T's lawyers on the system. That may turn away developers.
Also, Linus isn't around as a leader. That's more important then most would consider. RMS is a jerk. ESR is more tolerable. Linus, for all intents and purposes, makes a great leader/role-model. And the no-Penguin thing.. A good mascot is a great thing for anything that wants to be popular.
So I could see BSD being 'the big thing' right now, but I can't see it being where Linux is now. Everything would have moved a little slower I think. Many people say that Linux isn't the difference, that we'd just be using the Free OS that came instead. I disagree, Linux is popular for more reasons then it's freedom. Linus does mean something to this, as does the lack of any real legal garbage.
My 2 cents canadian (worth a good laugh in the States)
Sure, CD's boot, but it's not an easy to task to make yourself a boot disk (read: rescue disk, on hand for the day you fsck your kernel). Which is easier to make? A CD-R that's bootable, or a floppy disk? They make a nice fallback =)
Mostly because there are more systems with floppy drives that can make boot disks then there are systems with CD-R's that can make bootable CD's.
Better point: The most disturbed are the ones that hide it best. 'He always seemed the quiet type..'
So how hard could it be for someone to circumvent the system? If it was a test, lie. If it's a system you database behavior in, just watch what you do in public. There's always the dark corners of the persons mind where the violent bits hide..
OK, if NASA pretty much makes these images freely available, has anyone made really nice Posters out of them? Some of those colour shots of Io are just stellar (pun intended).
Have you tried out BO2k? It's not amazingly easy to set up. BO was easier (i.e. Dumber, more Scr1pt K1dd13), but this program.. I used BO to admin my LAN at home (about a half dozen machines) and it was ok.
Then BO2k comes along, and I'm suddenly no longer afraid to leave these machines connected to the 'net while running BO2k. Encryption (now I feel safe admining a home system from campus), a small memory footprint (good for older machines), stealthy (good for family members who don't NEED another Taskbar icon). This program is legitimate as far as I'm concerned.
What would you think if it WASN'T the cDc that released it, but rather a small group of security specialists with a better media reputation (and a better name..)? You'd hail it as a great IT program. It's small, powerful, free. Like Linux. BO was a script kiddie toy. No denying it. BO2k can be used to the same ends, but dammit, it DOES have legit uses.
Point of fact: I was babbling about a Perfect System, where, through the fact that there are no other vehicles really on the road and funding would be fairly extensive, it wouldn't be the transit system we're all used to.
*ahem* I'm not. Read my post, I say '..but that's NOT the issue.' In other words: We have the majority of servers, but for this, it really doesn't mean jack. OK?
Consider: There are no longer swarms of cars on the road. Public transportation is FUNDED! There are regular busses, and this new system could inform terminals at the bus stops themselves how far the bus is, if it's late, full, etc.
Of course, this is Utopia. Noone's gonna give up the pride of owning a vehicle to drive around anywhere, anytime.
Majority of systems maybe, majority of desktops for sure. Majority of servers, no, but that's not the issue.
The issue is that out of all the OS'es out there, Windows, Be, Linux, Solaris, IRIX, MacOS, whatever, more then just Windows and MacOS are used. So why does Quicktime claim to be a crossplatform standard when it's neither crossplatform that much, nor is it an open standard?
"Every operating system has it's advantages and disadvantages. Quicktime is a pretty open standard, available on the vast majority of computer systems. If yours is not one of them, then that is your limitation. "
OK, this is a load of baloney. Quicktime 3/4 are available ONLY on Win9x/Mac. This is NOT a vast majority by a longshot. Quicktime 3 however, are largely all available for Linux.
The only group at fault here is Apple, for hanging onto the Sorenson codec like it was more valuable then gold. When, honestly, it isn't. If Quicktime hopes to defeat MPEG (or replace it) then the least they should do is cross onto as many platforms as MPEG does.
Now, besides this, your point is completely valid. There is no One True OS. It would just be nice to see Apple have more of a commitment to Open Source and Open Standards, especially with projects like Darwin. By not releasing the codecs, even in a binary form, they ruin their own reputation in the market they hope to penetrate with their new Open stuff.
I still think this should be posted on/. though. And anyone who feels like making an MPEG out of this is more then welcome =)
Well, I'll bite. Firstly, Nvidea, the Riva ppl, are not open. They've simply released a driver with no specs, making peer improvement difficult at best. Pity =(
Matrox on the other hand, is one of the companies that has helped get device drivers to a level where they are today, by releasing specs since Way Back When (tm) in the days of the orginal Millenium.
Now, the GLX group ( Link) has had specs for the ATI cards for a lil while now, and even has a preliminary driver in the works with DMA and everything. Anyone with a Matrox G200, G400, Nvidea card or ATI card should stop in here, and lend a hand if they can.
Anyway, insert a cheer here. For every company releasing specs, it sets a precedent for others to do the same!
I hear (this is second hand knowlege) that the code for Half Life is really deeply involved with MFC's (Microsoft Foundation Classes) and REALLY hard to port outside of Windows.
Uhm.. That's also AMD's fault. IIRC, they're making the chipsets that the mobo companies need. And not olny are Athlons in short supply, so are the chipsets!
Your evengelism is NOT forgiven. I've had this argument before, consistency is entirely up to the third party developer, and I can find apps that are NOT consistent with Apple's main Look 'n Feel.
Frankly, and I've said this before, the consistency is common sense. Apple laid out this common way of doing things, it's common sense for third party developers to follow this.
So really, all you're saying is that because there's common sense in most Mac developers that the Mac is better. Hell, look at MS Office for MacOS. There's an example of third party developers NOT following the common sense policy. So please don't preach it as a product of Apple's genius, preach it as Apple trying to get developers to use common sense.
And before we can have any consistency in Linux, we need a standard. Help define it =)
And we both seem to have gone a wee bit far on this one, no? A flamewar is good for the ego, but not the soul.
Seriously though, the moderation around here isn't all THAT bad. While it's true that a post that just says 'MS sucks, haha' is less likely to be moderated down then a 'Linux sucks, haha' post, the general idea of moderation DOES work. I've seen the silly 'MS sucks, haha' comments get moderated down for redundancy. Heck, we should be both be taking Karmic penalty for wandering this far offtopic =)
My point is that the moderation around here doesn't suck as bad as you say. I like to think I'm fairly level headed, and as an active moderator, I don't like to see the moderation slandered. The local bias does weigh down on the people fighting the general consensus around here, but at the same time, quality posting still ends up being seen at Score:2.
I'll agree though, that the blatant anti-MSness around here is getting to me. I hardly think MS's code is worth the CD's it's burned on, but in the end, I don't want to see endless 'MS sux my A$$' posts. There just aren't enough moderator points for all the redundancy, and the moderation guidelines say to score up more then you score down.
And as far as me being the One True Right, not even my ego can swallow that whole. And I did assume much. I think we'll both survive though.
Once again, you have proven yourself to be an idiot. You assume that everyone with moderation points hates NT and MS and loves Linux. Sorry, this is not the case. As I stated before, moderation is about what's GOOD and INFORMATIVE, not what's popular.
Those were 3 posts from ONE article. There were more in that article itself, I didn't even have to look hard. The scoring of posts is NOT about pro/anti Linux with the intellegent moderators, it's about what's written well and what contributes to the discussion at hand.
You though, seem to do little to contribute to the discussion at hand, and even in the face of information that proves you wrong, you continue to act like a troll, not listening, babbling on your tired point again and again. I only respond to you because I am in favor of moderation, I support how it works around here. Peer review is what makes Free Software work, and it works to moderate this place. What you need to do is grow up yourself, and remember that the world isn't against you, and that the only person you're impressing with your anti-moderation and groundless anti-linux babble is yourself. Find me some GOOD points that disprove GNU Software and I'll be glad to give you a dozen reasons in counterpoint to every one you give.
"I love what the world is becoming... a society based on stereotypical nothings."
LOL, this world has been stereotypical forever, and now that we have mass media (TV), we get even more stereotypes. It's just now that WE'RE being stereotyped. It's nothing new, just new to us.
IIRC, QT 1.x was non-free due to a license clause that restricted commercial use. According to various Free Software definitions (RMS's, FSF's, Debian's..) the license can't be restrictive to any one group specifically. Let me dig up the Debian defn..
1.Free Redistribution
The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license may not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.
This was taken from the Debian free software guidelines (http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines)
Now, as stated by RMS himself, the QT 2.x license IS free. So no worries, it's just that there are no versions of KDE linked against QT 2 that are release quality. So KDE 1.x, linked against QT 1.x, is non-free.
Slashdot Mirror
There are plenty of 'free' logins.
cypherpunk/cypherpunk comes to mind.
Let the list begin again =)
..be FreeBSD's fault? The reason the virus scanners aren't for BSD/*nix is that there are NO viruses. Now, why doesn't MS just write themselves some scanning software for BSD? If you can detect a virus just by scanning file headers and what not, it shouldn't matter what OS you're in, you just have to WRITE it.
His ideas and his attitude.. Well, one is positive, the other is less so. For making GNU, yay! Of course, it's other hackers working together that has made the REAL GNU, but he did lay the foundation, so hats off to him. The rest though, he's just a little too arrogant.
Wow, am I the only logged in user on this thread?
Anyway, here goes. The first AC was more right then this one. This one seems a die hard feminist, though the previous was a little too extreme.
Lets look at the real compromise: Kids need loving, nurturing parents. Like ones that stay home. I don't care which one, it's no difference. Lets point out that it's both parents fault. And it's a decison for each couple to make, who should work. That decision should never be 'both' though.
The point about poor single mothers is well made though. But that's an ENTIRELY difference social aspect, dealing with deadbeat dads and what not. Extended family raising family can be positive. Daycares though, are a mixed bag. Some are good, some aren't. In general, a stable parent would be better.
Easy: Put a team of hackers to the source code, fix it, and blackmail Billy Gates into submission. Else they release a BUG FREE MS PRODUCT!
As we all know, that's one of the signs of impending apocolypse.
You forget why Linux took off instead of BSD, the licensing garbage. Even if it had been solved quickly, it was a bad stain. So Linux grew instead. If Linux hadn't been around then.. There's no telling.
I have to say that Linux is a real spearhead. It's further along then BSD (please, no flames, I'm not trying to cause trouble. Linux DOES do more by a small margin.). So contemplate: There was no Linux. BSD became the GNU choice. There's the fresh stain of AT&T's lawyers on the system. That may turn away developers.
Also, Linus isn't around as a leader. That's more important then most would consider. RMS is a jerk. ESR is more tolerable. Linus, for all intents and purposes, makes a great leader/role-model. And the no-Penguin thing.. A good mascot is a great thing for anything that wants to be popular.
So I could see BSD being 'the big thing' right now, but I can't see it being where Linux is now. Everything would have moved a little slower I think. Many people say that Linux isn't the difference, that we'd just be using the Free OS that came instead. I disagree, Linux is popular for more reasons then it's freedom. Linus does mean something to this, as does the lack of any real legal garbage.
My 2 cents canadian (worth a good laugh in the States)
One word: Bootability.
Sure, CD's boot, but it's not an easy to task to make yourself a boot disk (read: rescue disk, on hand for the day you fsck your kernel). Which is easier to make? A CD-R that's bootable, or a floppy disk? They make a nice fallback =)
Mostly because there are more systems with floppy drives that can make boot disks then there are systems with CD-R's that can make bootable CD's.
Better point: The most disturbed are the ones that hide it best. 'He always seemed the quiet type..'
So how hard could it be for someone to circumvent the system? If it was a test, lie. If it's a system you database behavior in, just watch what you do in public. There's always the dark corners of the persons mind where the violent bits hide..
OK, if NASA pretty much makes these images freely available, has anyone made really nice Posters out of them? Some of those colour shots of Io are just stellar (pun intended).
Have you tried out BO2k? It's not amazingly easy to set up. BO was easier (i.e. Dumber, more Scr1pt K1dd13), but this program.. I used BO to admin my LAN at home (about a half dozen machines) and it was ok.
Then BO2k comes along, and I'm suddenly no longer afraid to leave these machines connected to the 'net while running BO2k. Encryption (now I feel safe admining a home system from campus), a small memory footprint (good for older machines), stealthy (good for family members who don't NEED another Taskbar icon). This program is legitimate as far as I'm concerned.
What would you think if it WASN'T the cDc that released it, but rather a small group of security specialists with a better media reputation (and a better name..)? You'd hail it as a great IT program. It's small, powerful, free. Like Linux. BO was a script kiddie toy. No denying it. BO2k can be used to the same ends, but dammit, it DOES have legit uses.
Point of fact: I was babbling about a Perfect System, where, through the fact that there are no other vehicles really on the road and funding would be fairly extensive, it wouldn't be the transit system we're all used to.
But as I said, Perfect Systems don't work.
*ahem* I'm not. Read my post, I say '..but that's NOT the issue.' In other words: We have the majority of servers, but for this, it really doesn't mean jack. OK?
Consider: There are no longer swarms of cars on the road. Public transportation is FUNDED! There are regular busses, and this new system could inform terminals at the bus stops themselves how far the bus is, if it's late, full, etc.
Of course, this is Utopia. Noone's gonna give up the pride of owning a vehicle to drive around anywhere, anytime.
Majority of systems maybe, majority of desktops for sure. Majority of servers, no, but that's not the issue.
The issue is that out of all the OS'es out there, Windows, Be, Linux, Solaris, IRIX, MacOS, whatever, more then just Windows and MacOS are used. So why does Quicktime claim to be a crossplatform standard when it's neither crossplatform that much, nor is it an open standard?
Greylist: netscan.org
Here's a list of the most offending broadcast IP's on the net, and any one who can parse HTML can get a nice smurf broadcast list from here.
Of course, it also can be used as a good place for a netadmin to set up 'ignore broadcasts from x ip'.
God dammit. That should say "Quicktime versions less then 3 however.."
Forgot that the Shift-. button wouldn't show up with the HTML formatting around here, even with Plain Text mode on.
"Every operating system has it's advantages and disadvantages. Quicktime is a pretty open standard, available on the vast majority of computer systems. If yours is not one of them, then that is your limitation. "
/. though. And anyone who feels like making an MPEG out of this is more then welcome =)
OK, this is a load of baloney. Quicktime 3/4 are available ONLY on Win9x/Mac. This is NOT a vast majority by a longshot. Quicktime 3 however, are largely all available for Linux.
The only group at fault here is Apple, for hanging onto the Sorenson codec like it was more valuable then gold. When, honestly, it isn't. If Quicktime hopes to defeat MPEG (or replace it) then the least they should do is cross onto as many platforms as MPEG does.
Now, besides this, your point is completely valid. There is no One True OS. It would just be nice to see Apple have more of a commitment to Open Source and Open Standards, especially with projects like Darwin. By not releasing the codecs, even in a binary form, they ruin their own reputation in the market they hope to penetrate with their new Open stuff.
I still think this should be posted on
Well, I'll bite. Firstly, Nvidea, the Riva ppl, are not open. They've simply released a driver with no specs, making peer improvement difficult at best. Pity =(
Matrox on the other hand, is one of the companies that has helped get device drivers to a level where they are today, by releasing specs since Way Back When (tm) in the days of the orginal Millenium.
Now, the GLX group ( Link) has had specs for the ATI cards for a lil while now, and even has a preliminary driver in the works with DMA and everything. Anyone with a Matrox G200, G400, Nvidea card or ATI card should stop in here, and lend a hand if they can.
Anyway, insert a cheer here. For every company releasing specs, it sets a precedent for others to do the same!
I hear (this is second hand knowlege) that the code for Half Life is really deeply involved with MFC's (Microsoft Foundation Classes) and REALLY hard to port outside of Windows.
Can I get a comment on this?
Uhm.. That's also AMD's fault. IIRC, they're making the chipsets that the mobo companies need. And not olny are Athlons in short supply, so are the chipsets!
D'oh!
Your evengelism is NOT forgiven. I've had this argument before, consistency is entirely up to the third party developer, and I can find apps that are NOT consistent with Apple's main Look 'n Feel.
Frankly, and I've said this before, the consistency is common sense. Apple laid out this common way of doing things, it's common sense for third party developers to follow this.
So really, all you're saying is that because there's common sense in most Mac developers that the Mac is better. Hell, look at MS Office for MacOS. There's an example of third party developers NOT following the common sense policy. So please don't preach it as a product of Apple's genius, preach it as Apple trying to get developers to use common sense.
And before we can have any consistency in Linux, we need a standard. Help define it =)
And we both seem to have gone a wee bit far on this one, no? A flamewar is good for the ego, but not the soul.
Seriously though, the moderation around here isn't all THAT bad. While it's true that a post that just says 'MS sucks, haha' is less likely to be moderated down then a 'Linux sucks, haha' post, the general idea of moderation DOES work. I've seen the silly 'MS sucks, haha' comments get moderated down for redundancy. Heck, we should be both be taking Karmic penalty for wandering this far offtopic =)
My point is that the moderation around here doesn't suck as bad as you say. I like to think I'm fairly level headed, and as an active moderator, I don't like to see the moderation slandered. The local bias does weigh down on the people fighting the general consensus around here, but at the same time, quality posting still ends up being seen at Score:2.
I'll agree though, that the blatant anti-MSness around here is getting to me. I hardly think MS's code is worth the CD's it's burned on, but in the end, I don't want to see endless 'MS sux my A$$' posts. There just aren't enough moderator points for all the redundancy, and the moderation guidelines say to score up more then you score down.
And as far as me being the One True Right, not even my ego can swallow that whole. And I did assume much. I think we'll both survive though.
Once again, you have proven yourself to be an idiot. You assume that everyone with moderation points hates NT and MS and loves Linux. Sorry, this is not the case. As I stated before, moderation is about what's GOOD and INFORMATIVE, not what's popular.
Those were 3 posts from ONE article. There were more in that article itself, I didn't even have to look hard. The scoring of posts is NOT about pro/anti Linux with the intellegent moderators, it's about what's written well and what contributes to the discussion at hand.
You though, seem to do little to contribute to the discussion at hand, and even in the face of information that proves you wrong, you continue to act like a troll, not listening, babbling on your tired point again and again. I only respond to you because I am in favor of moderation, I support how it works around here. Peer review is what makes Free Software work, and it works to moderate this place. What you need to do is grow up yourself, and remember that the world isn't against you, and that the only person you're impressing with your anti-moderation and groundless anti-linux babble is yourself. Find me some GOOD points that disprove GNU Software and I'll be glad to give you a dozen reasons in counterpoint to every one you give.
"I love what the world is becoming... a society based on stereotypical nothings."
LOL, this world has been stereotypical forever, and now that we have mass media (TV), we get even more stereotypes. It's just now that WE'RE being stereotyped. It's nothing new, just new to us.
Here we go =)
)
IIRC, QT 1.x was non-free due to a license clause that restricted commercial use. According to various Free Software definitions (RMS's, FSF's, Debian's..) the license can't be restrictive to any one group specifically. Let me dig up the Debian defn..
1.Free Redistribution
The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license may not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.
This was taken from the Debian free software guidelines (http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines
Now, as stated by RMS himself, the QT 2.x license IS free. So no worries, it's just that there are no versions of KDE linked against QT 2 that are release quality. So KDE 1.x, linked against QT 1.x, is non-free.
There, I said it =)