If you are sending email from work, you are probably violating your company's email policy if you encrypt your outgoing email. And, if you send encrypted email to someone at a company with a tyrant IT admin, expect to get them into trouble.
I don't think that the barrier-of-entry to email encryption has anything to do with how easy or widespread it is - I think it is almost completely because it is considered improper to use encryption on email. You are perceived as either a wrongdoer ("he must be covering up something") or a troublemaker ("she's corresponding with someone shady").
It only needs to be stored until we invent a way to make it safe. (Perhaps we'll invent cheap ways to manipulate things at a subatomic level?)
At the current rate of technological improvement, I doubt that will be more than 200 years before we figure something out.
Of course, I just pulled that "200 years" figure from my ass, but the point is, stop hugging trees and trying to hide/bury the problem (which seems nearly impossible) and start figuring out a way to fix the problem.
I have always selected the "Upgrade" option. The only snag I've ever hit is that you don't always get all the new packages installed, unless you specify them explicitly.
One thing I noticed this time though: I didn't get all the same install options by upgrading to 7.1, that I would have gotten by installing a clean system; for example, I didn't get a chance to configure a security level. I guess they assume that already-installed systems are already configured and should not be messed with, which is probably a pretty good assumption.
I haven't tried the player, but there's a big limitation that prevents it from being any use for me: doesn't support the VGA overlay output. Since I don't have any "normal" TV anymore (only a HiDef w/VGA inputs), it makes this a bit useless:(
Linuxen just don't have a "/Program Files" concept down - and I think it is sorely missed.
I agree. Many years ago I worked for a well-known university installing Unix software. The policy there was to install every single piece of software into its own directory hierarchy. For example "/usr/software/make-3.74". Next we would create a symlink such as "/usr/software/make" to the package. Then we would create symlinks to the relevant files from/usr/bin,/usr/lib, etc. This approach was great: you always knew exactly what software you had, you could always find exactly what package a file belonged to, and you could easily upgrade or uninstall. The best part, though, was that if an incompatibility was found, the "/usr/software/make" symlink could be redirected back to the older version in a matter of seconds while the problem was tracked down and resolved.
When it was desirable to support multiple versions of the same program, e.g. emacs-19 & emacs-20, the symlink to the "emacs" executable was replaced with a shell script that checked an environment variable and executed the correct binary. Each user could therefore choose the version most appropriate for them.
Most of these problems are solved nowadays by package managers, but IMHO package managers are still inferior because it is not as easy to see exactly what is installed, where. It is also not possible to have multiple versions of the same software installed simultaneously, because every version stubbornly places its executables into/usr/bin.
In this regard, Windows has it right: each program should have its own directory hierarchy.
Hmm.. maybe I'll go create my own Linux distro now:)
However, do you think that the existence of Linux Office might entice business users of Linux (by that I mean, people who use Linux as a desktop OS in the workplace) to keep from switching to StarOffice or KOffice? Quite possibly.
Interesting point. There's another spin on this software lock-in: most likely, in order to get the best features in the quickest time frame, you're going to need Windows.
Plan to take over the world:
1. make sure Office has near 100% market share
2. make sure Office works best on Windows
3. laugh evilly (i.e. "muhahaha") because you've now created MORE demand for Windows rather than less.
Others pointed out that Win98 is more like $170. But that's not even the whole story..
Win98 does not include:
- web server
- email server
- news server
- telnet server
- remote graphics protocol
- professional-quality image manipulation program
- word processor
- programming editors
- compilers
- source code - stability
- etc.
You get all of these in the $39 low-end RedHat distro (and the under-$5 CheapBytes copy of it).
SCO will retain its Tarantella Division, and the SCO OpenServer revenue stream and intellectual properties.
I am confused as to what falls under the "OpenServer" division. Obviously, this includes OpenServer, but does it also include UnixWare, which seems to be decended from OpenServer?
If UnixWare is part of OpenServer, then what is the "Server Software" division comprised of?
After reading through your impressions / experience with Linux I feel that you have two problems:
1) Your hardware is shit. You admit that even Windows (which has the best hardware support of any OS) has multiple problems. Just some of your problems:
2MB RAM "shared" (stolen) by video card
integrated modem/sound/game controller with proprietary interface, which barely works (game controller doesn't work, half of the sound card doesn't work)
"Msgsrv Illegal Operation" errors under Windows, although who knows what the hell that means.
2) You have obviously read almost nothing about Linux, including the documentation that came with the copy that you bought. If you had read anything, you would have known the "startx" command. I have not personally seen the Corel Linux manual, however I am sure that they have documented this command.
Solution to #1: Don't complain about an OS's inability to make broken hardware magically repair itself. Don't expect Linux to work with hardware that is designed to work only under Windows. Don't support vendors that won't give you a choice of OS.
Solution to #2: RTFM.
Note: I use Windows every day, as my primary (only!) OS. I don't claim that Linux is the holy grail, or that it is as easy as Windows. It just irritates me that you paint the OS in such a bad light when you have not even taken the time to learn about "startx". BTW, were you really surprised to see a SERVER OS (as you configured it) start without a graphical interface? If so then you need to rethink your definition of SERVER.
Think of this as "tough love". Yes, Linux is a little bit harder than Windows, but if you spend a couple of hours learning Linux you can easily get a (working) system up and running. Once you have something working, you can then judge the OS based on its merits instead of on its pretty face.
This is a great idea. One of the common complaints about the Open Source world is that there is "less innovation" and that the popular projects are playing catch-up to Microsoft and Windows software. (Funny, though.. I can't think of anything MS invented other than "Bob"..)
This site should be able to spark people's imaginations and hopefully will result in some real innovation!
One other benefit: in the commercial world, I'm sure many people without the background / expertise to program come up with some great ideas that never see the light of day. Maybe this can help to change that.
There's a well-known concept called "the tyranny of the majority". Imagine if the emancipation proclamation was brought to a vote by the general population. I'll bet we'd still be living in a society of slavery.
The fact is, the majority is not always right, and sometimes democracy doesn't work to bring about positive change.
I hate to participate in a "Me Too" comment, but I really think I need to speak up here and be counted. I really HATE Jon Katz. I hate reading what he writes, I hate reading ABOUT what he writes, I hate reading about HIM answering questions!
Why, oh why, doesn't the JonKatz filter catch this crap?? You should offer a "grep JonKatz" filter that removes all articles even mentioning this idiot.
The idea is to embed the 'real' calculation within a much larger 'outer' calculation such that operations in the 'outer' calculation gradually perform operations for the 'inner' calculation. The outer calculation is a cryptographic mask hiding the 'real' inner calculation.
I am interesting in hearing more about what you've described here. Do you have any links to info on this topic?
Do you upload foo.txt to the server, run the app remotely, and download foo.txt when you're done?
Nope, with MetaFrame, your local drives are automatically mapped at connection time. Therefore, if you save to drive "w:" for example, the data is saved on your local "c:" drive (or home directory, or whatever.)
Let me address this in the context of Citrix Metaframe (note: these opinions are my own and not sanctioned by Citrix):
Backup / Security / Liability Although your application runs remotely, your data can stay local. Therefore, you can do your own backup if you wish. Of course, one of the benefits of the ASP model is that your data can be backed up by the ASP, if you choose to store it remotely. The tradeoff is yours to make. While it is true that an unscrupulous ASP could dump the system memory on the server, this is an obvious violation of privacy laws, and can be dealt with in a court of law.
Bandwidth Bandwidth really is becoming less of an issue. Metaframe is certainly useable over a 28.8 modem, and practically seamless over a LAN connection.
The Slashdot Effect Simple answer: more servers, with load balancing. The costs can be offset by serving more people, in different time zones (thus with different peak usage times).
Cost Although you didn't have cost as a point, you did mention it. "[T]he local hardware it would be replacing [will get cheaper]." This may be true, but with the ASP model, you never need to replace the local hardware, even if applications become much more resource intensive. The real cost savings with an ASP comes with reduced system administration costs. You never need to upgrade your software, you don't need to worry about backups, you don't need to hire a tech to do sysadmin work - these are all taken care of by the ASP.
Better than local servers? The answer is: depends. I'm not going to claim that remote applications are a panacea for everyone, but it does make sense in many business applications. Those who want a computer to play 3D shooters will probably never be served by an ASP. But those who use a computer for business applications can certainly get a benefit from remote applications.
I saw a documentary on the Discovery channel that hinted that Canada has a very similar system to Echelon, and that they trade information with each other. Thus, the NSA still spies on the USA, just indirectly.
Therefore, even as a US citizen, I am troubled by the power of the NSA wrt Echelon.
-TomK
Re:What disk size do you sysadmins actually trust?
on
IBMs 73Gig Drive
·
· Score: 1
The correct answer to this question is obvious: none. You should never trust a drive of any size if you are in a mission-critical situation.
Get five of 'em, put 4 in your machine with RAID-5, and keep one on the shelf. WHEN (not if) one of the drives fails, swap it out with the spare. You can be back up and running in a matter of minutes. Most hard drive companies that I've dealt with are more than happy to replace that defective drive for free, but it takes a few weeks of turnaround time.
That annoying P.O.S. "assistant" is based on Bob technology. That explains the extreme irritation and mental anxiety caused by even brief exposure to the f***ing thing.
This is what you would call "security through obscurity" and is a very poor method of encryption. In order for anyone to decode the message, they will need to have the algorithm in hand (either in the form of source or a binary). In either case, it is child's play to figure out the decryption algorithm.
Not that I think Tk is all that great (in fact, I think it is ugly and slow.. but damn fast to develop in)... but you are wrong that you have to use Tcl in order to use Tk. You can get Perl/Tk in order to get the Tk GUI on the much more useful foundation of perl.
BTW, if you thought Tcl/Tk was slow, wait until you see Perl/Tk.
You can also use Tk directly from C / C++, although personally I've never done this because the documentation of how to do it was severely lacking.
Slashdot Mirror
If you are sending email from work, you are probably violating your company's email policy if you encrypt your outgoing email. And, if you send encrypted email to someone at a company with a tyrant IT admin, expect to get them into trouble.
I don't think that the barrier-of-entry to email encryption has anything to do with how easy or widespread it is - I think it is almost completely because it is considered improper to use encryption on email. You are perceived as either a wrongdoer ("he must be covering up something") or a troublemaker ("she's corresponding with someone shady").
-TomK
.. or even until it naturally becomes "safe"..
It only needs to be stored until we invent a way to make it safe. (Perhaps we'll invent cheap ways to manipulate things at a subatomic level?)
At the current rate of technological improvement, I doubt that will be more than 200 years before we figure something out.
Of course, I just pulled that "200 years" figure from my ass, but the point is, stop hugging trees and trying to hide/bury the problem (which seems nearly impossible) and start figuring out a way to fix the problem.
-TomK
FYI: I personally run a machine that has been:
RH 5.0
RH 5.1
RH 5.2
RH 6.0
RH 6.2
RH 7.0
RH 7.1
I have always selected the "Upgrade" option. The only snag I've ever hit is that you don't always get all the new packages installed, unless you specify them explicitly.
One thing I noticed this time though: I didn't get all the same install options by upgrading to 7.1, that I would have gotten by installing a clean system; for example, I didn't get a chance to configure a security level. I guess they assume that already-installed systems are already configured and should not be messed with, which is probably a pretty good assumption.
-TomK
I haven't tried the player, but there's a big limitation that prevents it from being any use for me: doesn't support the VGA overlay output. Since I don't have any "normal" TV anymore (only a HiDef w/VGA inputs), it makes this a bit useless :(
So, I'm stuck rebooting into windows.. sigh.
Linuxen just don't have a "/Program Files" concept down - and I think it is sorely missed.
/usr/bin, /usr/lib, etc. This approach was great: you always knew exactly what software you had, you could always find exactly what package a file belonged to, and you could easily upgrade or uninstall. The best part, though, was that if an incompatibility was found, the "/usr/software/make" symlink could be redirected back to the older version in a matter of seconds while the problem was tracked down and resolved.
/usr/bin.
:)
I agree. Many years ago I worked for a well-known university installing Unix software. The policy there was to install every single piece of software into its own directory hierarchy. For example "/usr/software/make-3.74". Next we would create a symlink such as "/usr/software/make" to the package. Then we would create symlinks to the relevant files from
When it was desirable to support multiple versions of the same program, e.g. emacs-19 & emacs-20, the symlink to the "emacs" executable was replaced with a shell script that checked an environment variable and executed the correct binary. Each user could therefore choose the version most appropriate for them.
Most of these problems are solved nowadays by package managers, but IMHO package managers are still inferior because it is not as easy to see exactly what is installed, where. It is also not possible to have multiple versions of the same software installed simultaneously, because every version stubbornly places its executables into
In this regard, Windows has it right: each program should have its own directory hierarchy.
Hmm.. maybe I'll go create my own Linux distro now
However, do you think that the existence of Linux Office might entice business users of Linux (by that I mean, people who use Linux as a desktop OS in the workplace) to keep from switching to StarOffice or KOffice? Quite possibly.
Interesting point. There's another spin on this software lock-in: most likely, in order to get the best features in the quickest time frame, you're going to need Windows.
Plan to take over the world:
1. make sure Office has near 100% market share
2. make sure Office works best on Windows
3. laugh evilly (i.e. "muhahaha") because you've now created MORE demand for Windows rather than less.
Others pointed out that Win98 is more like $170. But that's not even the whole story..
Win98 does not include:
- web server
- email server
- news server
- telnet server
- remote graphics protocol
- professional-quality image manipulation program
- word processor
- programming editors
- compilers
- source code
- stability
- etc.
You get all of these in the $39 low-end RedHat distro (and the under-$5 CheapBytes copy of it).
Actually that would be "KCABDRAWS", unless the string is in unicode.. then it would be "ABKCAWDRS".
-tk
From the press release:
SCO will retain its Tarantella Division, and the SCO OpenServer revenue stream and intellectual properties.
I am confused as to what falls under the "OpenServer" division. Obviously, this includes OpenServer, but does it also include UnixWare, which seems to be decended from OpenServer?
If UnixWare is part of OpenServer, then what is the "Server Software" division comprised of?
1) Your hardware is shit. You admit that even Windows (which has the best hardware support of any OS) has multiple problems. Just some of your problems:
2) You have obviously read almost nothing about Linux, including the documentation that came with the copy that you bought. If you had read anything, you would have known the "startx" command. I have not personally seen the Corel Linux manual, however I am sure that they have documented this command.
Solution to #1: Don't complain about an OS's inability to make broken hardware magically repair itself. Don't expect Linux to work with hardware that is designed to work only under Windows. Don't support vendors that won't give you a choice of OS.
Solution to #2: RTFM.
Note: I use Windows every day, as my primary (only!) OS. I don't claim that Linux is the holy grail, or that it is as easy as Windows. It just irritates me that you paint the OS in such a bad light when you have not even taken the time to learn about "startx". BTW, were you really surprised to see a SERVER OS (as you configured it) start without a graphical interface? If so then you need to rethink your definition of SERVER.
Think of this as "tough love". Yes, Linux is a little bit harder than Windows, but if you spend a couple of hours learning Linux you can easily get a (working) system up and running. Once you have something working, you can then judge the OS based on its merits instead of on its pretty face.
-Tom
If this was real, it would have had WORDS in the interface instead of chicken scratches.
What good is a PDA if it doesn't speak english?
This is a great idea. One of the common complaints about the Open Source world is that there is "less innovation" and that the popular projects are playing catch-up to Microsoft and Windows software. (Funny, though.. I can't think of anything MS invented other than "Bob"..)
This site should be able to spark people's imaginations and hopefully will result in some real innovation!
One other benefit: in the commercial world, I'm sure many people without the background / expertise to program come up with some great ideas that never see the light of day. Maybe this can help to change that.
-TomK
There's a well-known concept called "the tyranny of the majority". Imagine if the emancipation proclamation was brought to a vote by the general population. I'll bet we'd still be living in a society of slavery.
The fact is, the majority is not always right, and sometimes democracy doesn't work to bring about positive change.
-TomK
I hate to participate in a "Me Too" comment, but I really think I need to speak up here and be counted. I really HATE Jon Katz. I hate reading what he writes, I hate reading ABOUT what he writes, I hate reading about HIM answering questions!
Why, oh why, doesn't the JonKatz filter catch this crap?? You should offer a "grep JonKatz" filter that removes all articles even mentioning this idiot.
-TomK
The idea is to embed the 'real' calculation within a much larger 'outer' calculation such that operations in the 'outer' calculation gradually perform operations for the 'inner' calculation. The outer calculation is a cryptographic mask hiding the 'real' inner calculation.
I am interesting in hearing more about what you've described here. Do you have any links to info on this topic?
Thanks!
-TomK
Do you upload foo.txt to the server, run the app remotely, and download foo.txt when you're done?
Nope, with MetaFrame, your local drives are automatically mapped at connection time. Therefore, if you save to drive "w:" for example, the data is saved on your local "c:" drive (or home directory, or whatever.)
-TomK
Although your application runs remotely, your data can stay local. Therefore, you can do your own backup if you wish. Of course, one of the benefits of the ASP model is that your data can be backed up by the ASP, if you choose to store it remotely. The tradeoff is yours to make. While it is true that an unscrupulous ASP could dump the system memory on the server, this is an obvious violation of privacy laws, and can be dealt with in a court of law.
Bandwidth really is becoming less of an issue. Metaframe is certainly useable over a 28.8 modem, and practically seamless over a LAN connection.
Simple answer: more servers, with load balancing. The costs can be offset by serving more people, in different time zones (thus with different peak usage times).
Although you didn't have cost as a point, you did mention it. "[T]he local hardware it would be replacing [will get cheaper]." This may be true, but with the ASP model, you never need to replace the local hardware, even if applications become much more resource intensive. The real cost savings with an ASP comes with reduced system administration costs. You never need to upgrade your software, you don't need to worry about backups, you don't need to hire a tech to do sysadmin work - these are all taken care of by the ASP.
The answer is: depends. I'm not going to claim that remote applications are a panacea for everyone, but it does make sense in many business applications. Those who want a computer to play 3D shooters will probably never be served by an ASP. But those who use a computer for business applications can certainly get a benefit from remote applications.
-TomK
Actually, only the infrared receiver is limited. The transmitter works as well as any of the other remotes I own.
Unfortunately, my HP-48GX can't seem to "learn" the remote codes for any of my Pioneer stereo equipment (though it does work for my TV and VCR)
-TomK
I saw a documentary on the Discovery channel that hinted that Canada has a very similar system to Echelon, and that they trade information with each other. Thus, the NSA still spies on the USA, just indirectly.
Therefore, even as a US citizen, I am troubled by the power of the NSA wrt Echelon.
-TomK
The correct answer to this question is obvious: none. You should never trust a drive of any size if you are in a mission-critical situation.
Get five of 'em, put 4 in your machine with RAID-5, and keep one on the shelf. WHEN (not if) one of the drives fails, swap it out with the spare. You can be back up and running in a matter of minutes. Most hard drive companies that I've dealt with are more than happy to replace that defective drive for free, but it takes a few weeks of turnaround time.
BTW: RAID-5 is not an alternative to backups!
-TomK
(drool.. 69*3 = 207 gigs..)
Don't forget, this drive is "only" 69.6 Gibibytes.
Those funny marketing people.
-TomK
Actually, Flight Simulator was made by Simulogic, and bought by Microsoft.
I think Microsoft might have invented FUD...
-Tom
That annoying P.O.S. "assistant" is based on Bob technology. That explains the extreme irritation and mental anxiety caused by even brief exposure to the f***ing thing.
-Tom
This is what you would call "security through obscurity" and is a very poor method of encryption. In order for anyone to decode the message, they will need to have the algorithm in hand (either in the form of source or a binary). In either case, it is child's play to figure out the decryption algorithm.
Stick with the tested encryption methods.
-Tom
Not that I think Tk is all that great (in fact, I think it is ugly and slow.. but damn fast to develop in)... but you are wrong that you have to use Tcl in order to use Tk. You can get Perl/Tk in order to get the Tk GUI on the much more useful foundation of perl.
BTW, if you thought Tcl/Tk was slow, wait until you see Perl/Tk.
You can also use Tk directly from C / C++, although personally I've never done this because the documentation of how to do it was severely lacking.
-TomK