This is incorrect. Look at www.junkfaxes.org for more information.
A quote from the page regarding the federal law:
The TCPA (47 USC 227) and its implementing FCC regulations ( mainly 47 CFR 64.1200) prohibits the transmission of any material advertising the commercial availability or quality of any product, service or property to any person without that person's prior express permission or request.
Under the TCPA, recipients of unsolicited fax advertisements, if otherwise permitted by the laws in their state, can file suit in state court to collect the greater of $500 or actual damages for each fax, and/or obtain an injunction. If a court determines that the violations were willful or knowing, the damages can be tripled at the discretion of the court
First, I must say that I like Shadow of the Hegemon least of all the stories involved (although Children of the Mind would probably be close). It is a decent story, but it just didn't grip me as much as some other stories.
I understand what you are saying about his authoring abilities, and as indicated in the review you will often hear the characters espousing Card's ideas and ideals (a very frustrating thing for me, because I recognize it quickly and it breaks me out of the story, like watching a movie and seeing someone stand up, and you realize that you're just looking at this screen).
However, I would recommend that you read Maps in a Mirror, which is a short fiction anthology (there are 4 soft cover sections, or one big hardcover of everything). It has some _really_ good stories in it, and a lot of interesting twists. I strongly recommend that you read 'Unaccompanied Sonata' if nothing else.
In the Post Office, you do not have to be a member of the Union, and so do not have to pay dues, but -are_ provided full access to the union.
I would think that letting anyone have the benefit of the contract is reasonable (I don't really like it, but it isn't that terrible), but they can even register complaints with the union, etc just as a paying member can.
Call the state and see if they have someone that can help you. Here it is called the 'Employment Relations Division'(?).
They can tell you what the law is, so you may actually be legally entitled to more than you are making (backpay and all). If being oncall restricts your mobility (ie, you can't go hiking in the woods), then here in MT you need to be compensated for that time. If you have to work when on call, that needs to be paid at an hourly rate.
Now if your salary or wage isn't really worth providing 24/7 support, then you will need to talk to your employer and work out a more adequate bit, but it sounds like you probably have some labor laws backing you up.
In any question about this, check the law books. Sometimes you will be pleasantly surprised at what is on the books.
Mac has this advantage as well, with the proviso that you have to buy "Inside Mac". Once you've bought it, you've got a UNIX level of documentation.
Inside Mac is very nice, but you do not need to buy it. All the files are available as PDFs on the web (dev.apple.com is a good starting point, I believe). I had access to some real heavy duty printers, and would print out entire inside mac editions, double sided and drilled - still have them lying around.
Where do people see this weakness in crypt(3)? There was a thread on Bugtraq awhile back, but it trailed off with no conclusion. I haven't seen anyone say that crypt has weaknesses in terms of its algorithm, just that it brute force attacks will work on it.
I did some rough calculations to see what sort of efforts it would take to brute force a _GOOD_ password. I think people know about password cracking programs and think that they invalidate crypt passwords. However, the password cracking programs work by encrypting dictionary words, with various permutations surrounding it; if you don't have a dictionary word in your password, then you are pretty safe.
I first checked to see how fast you would have to crack passwords to break a crypt password in 6mos. If you allow 84 possible characters (a-z0-9,.z\/= and all their shifted partners) then there are 84 ^ 8 possible passwords = 2,478,758,911,082,496. There are 15552000 seconds in 6 months, so you need to crack 159385218 passwords per second. If you just want to allow a-zA-Z0-9, then it still requires 14039358 cracks per second. This is out of the range of almost anyone.
Anyone that is really serious about this, though, will have precompiled encryptions, and compare those. If we assume the lower bound of a-zA-Z0-9 as the possible characters in the password, that is 218340105584896 encrypted passwords. Assume 1 byte per password, and assuming 75% compression (it is all text, but fairly random, so that is easily over likely compression ratios) it is 54,585,026,396,224 bytes. This is within the grasp of very large organizations, but a great cost (and note that this is a very generous estimate). If we allowed symbols, and allowed for a more modest 25-50% compression, then it is still likely to be 10 years before anyone (other than the NSA) will be able to brute force a strong crypt(3) password.
So, it appears that a strong crypt password is still strong. Anyone but the most powerful organization will be pretty much stuck. Note that almost the crypted password is usually not the weak link; social engineering or poor password security (having it written down on paper, sending it over an insecure link, etc) is far more likely to result in security breaches.
I find it extremely strange that QNX derived their own algorithm, because I don't see a weakness in the crypt scheme (either speed or crypt strength), and with MD5 or various other extensions (allowing passwords > 8 characters in length) there should be no reason to switch to another scheme. The only thing that I can think is that they may have WANTED to be able to reverse passwords, in case Joe Big Customer calls up and says 'We need this! We need it NOW!' (not that HP or SGI have caved, but still).
RSS DUL RBL The RSS is a toned down version of ORBS; it only lists relays that have been used to spam, which makes it easier to explain the problem. The DUL blocks any direct from dialup spam. The RBL blocks blackhole sites. The main problem with ORBS is that it is harder to explain (with RSS you can say 'spam _has_ been sent through this server'), and it blocks a lot more sites, which makes it hard to handle on anything larger than a personal mail machine.
Erm, if you read the article the G4 only had 64M of RAM. Both machines (G3/400 256M, and G4/350 64M) performed well, the only difference that I noted was the G3 didn't do QT movie playback when restoring from the dock.
Here's an idea for a distributed client that doesn't use spare clock cycles, but instead just uses a few spare minutes out of everyone's day.
Provide a simple cgi that will give 10 URLs out of the 50 million that were allowed through. Let them be marked as 'clean', 'porn' or potentially something else, with some double entries to verify results.
After that there should be a set of sites that could be blocked/should be blocked, but weren't. I'd probably set the specs to only block outright hardcore sites; ie anything that is even remotely purient would be marked 'clean'.
It doesn't deal with issues about whether censorship is right, but if it can be showed that 1% of the unique sites visited was porn that would hurt censorship.
Statistics people should get in on this also:
If we take out all the 100% legit requests (assume that cnn.com is _not_ an attempt to see porn), that should leave us with a set of potentially shady requests; the user _might_ have been trying to view porn. Checking those sites for actual porn/not porn would give a pretty accurate reading about how well sites block porn.
Since so many sites visited are not requests for porn, citing them as proof of 'blocking effectiveness' is not valid math; You need to look at only the potentially invalid requests to actually determine when porn was or was not blocked.
When I was a sysadmin I installed a package with a terrible gui installation routine. The only people who would use this installation routine (the software cost around $750,000) are experianced system administrators. The next revision of the installation was not graphical but it worked. The new system was well accepted.
What's my point? Good UI design is not important for applications that cater to IT pros.
That isn't really the point that you are making (if you permit me to tell you what point you're making:-). What this example shows is that a good UI doesn't need to be graphical (and that a GUI is not necessarily a good UI). A lot of people make the assumption that if it's GUI it must be easier, but if you think about it I'm sure you have examples of purely evil GUIs (not just ones that don't tell you things you want to know, but ones that are flat-out _wrong_). There are non-GUI interfaces that are just as bad.
I probably abstained from 50% of the choices, because I know that I am not remotely qualified to judge (having never used a wm or x -- that is about 40% right there).
There is a 'correct' choice for unsung hero though; just take a look at the choices, and then remember where you heard/saw the name. If it was in the media, they probably aren't unsung. If it is in the init code for... well, you get the poin t:-)
You just changed the age at which we discriminate. Why is 12 ok, but not 18? What is ok as a 'general guideline' and what isn't?
If you believe that age restrictions are legitimate, but that the age should be lower (not the 18/21 it is in most of the US) that is fine, but it doesn't seem like that is what you are trying to say.
Hmmm? I'm reading this further, and I can't make sense of your two main paragraphs. In the first, you indicate that:
'I would not accept that it's a parent's right to deny online access to their children, for any reason'
but the second paragraph talks about when censorware might be ok (ie, if it only blocks true porn, and none of the other sites listed).
In addition, the general stance of anti-censorware proponents is that _any_ censorship is a problem, even if all it censors is true hardcore/illegal porn from children (primarily because, due to the human factor, that ideal is unreachable).
How is the web interface supposed to speed up your connection? Unless there is some silly FTP filter ing at a proxy or firewall, they should be fairly equal, with FTP having the advantage.
Conventional Wisdom has it that FTP is faster than HTTP, because of the way that the protocols are handled (http starts slow, and speeds up the connection until it the other end can't handle the pipe).
Re:This v2-os.. no protection.
on
V2 OS
·
· Score: 1
"No source available"
Am I missing something? AFAIK (not very far), there _isn't_ any source (it's written in asm). True, they could give you the ASM instead of the straight binary, but the ASM in just a set of nuemonics (no idea how to spell that)(ie you can map one-to-one ASM with binary data, but not C code with binary data).
If you wish to do it without X windows: (assuming US locale)
RedHat: alias asdf 'loadkeys/usr/lib/kbd/keytables/i386/dvorak/dvorak.map.gz' alias aoeu 'loadkeys/usr/lib/kbd/keytables/i386/qwerty/us.map.gz'
Debian: alias asdf 'loadkeys/usr/share/keymaps/i386/dvorak/dvorak.map.gz' alias aoeu 'loadkeys/usr/share/keymaps/i386/qwerty/us.map.gz'
Remember, with both these systems, if you fsck it up, you can reboot and restore your default keymaps. In addition, check to make sure that those paths are right - I did it from memory, and it is possible that your system is different.
Well, I attended a private school: Northfield Mount Hermon School, and I have to say that it was much better about attitudes and behaviour. There were still all the groups that you'd see a public school (and some others; foriegn students hanging together), but it was possible to cross over without reprecussion, and there was a great deal less problems - I can't really remember ever getting hassled for my geekiness (and I got up in front of half the school to announce the GEECS club). I don't know if most private schools are like this (a good deal of the more 'old money' suit & collar schools are probably worse in this respect) but it worked out well for me.
Private schools are definately worth checking out; NMH cost $20,000/yr, and even with a good deal of scholorships and loans, I still ended up spending most of my summer earnings to attend school, but I think that it was worth it.
I might caution: Make sure you see someone who knows what the hell they are talking about (ie, probably not a GP). I saw a GP at my high school clinic (private school, hence no visit to a local specialist). It was back in 1995, so RSI was still not as much in the spotlight.
I was given a hand brace (big metal thing you'd get if you broke your wrist) - which only served to move the injury from my one hand to both.
Make sure that you see someone that is recommended, and that is a specialist, not a GP. In addition, I strongly recommend checking some books out of the library so that you know specifics.
Using X to configure a system scares me. I am a Mac user, so this might seem funny, but it makes sense to me. On a mac, I know what files to change, and how to change them (using GUI tools). On a linux machine, I know what files to change, and how to change them (or I'll learn how to). However, using a GUI is a scary proposition, because it makes it harder for me to figure out was/is being changed. I also don't handle changes very easy, so I view it with some reluctance.
I don't even care for the distros very much, because I never know what they put on my system. Of course, I'm not quite at a level where I want to roll my own, so I do use the distros, but I never feel like I learned anything by doing the install. I think part of the problem is that I was pretty familiar with linux before I did my first install, so most of the challenges (mount points, directory structure, etc) were not difficult for me to handle.
I will never forget the time I was on IRC recently, and was helping someone with PPP setup. He told me that the last time he had configured it in X, so he didn't know how to do it from the command line. It cracked me up. (He actually knew most of what he needed to know, but the modem was still acting up, so he thought that he was going about it the wrong way).
The cost of retraining is worth paying
on
The Myth of QWERTY
·
· Score: 1
>In the local computer lab (albeit populated by evil win 95 boxen), one of my Dvorak friends wrote a Delphi program to switch between Dvorak and QWERTY.)
As opposed to adding a keyboard layout in the Keyboard Control Panel, and using LA + shift to switch between layouts? Really it is kind of bass-ackwards, but also handy: Windows lets you have a different keyboard layout per program incarnation, so that you can have a telnet session open using Dvorak, and another open using QWERTY. This allows you to use Dvorak without having to worry about another user coming up and getting confused (having that happen a couple of times can get you the boot from the lab). It may be that since they are lab computers they are locked down to prevent that, but hey, I thought I'd let some people know that you don't need to hack Delphi to use Dvorak (nor do you need to purchase a special keyboard). Unfortunately, Windows doesn't let you chose two "English (United States)" language settings, but I find that "English (Australian)" works fine.
On the other side, a friend wrote a nice set of scripts call aoeu and asdf (LH home row in Dvorak and QWERTY respectively) which would switch the console mappings back and forth...and created a login that would run each also, so you could login even if the mappings were wrong.
> Apple are also being completely two faced about it. They provide Linux which has no "go away cubans" clause yet claim they cannot take that clause out of the APSL.
Could you point me to where that information resides? All I've heard so far is that the APSL has this clause; where did you hear that they "claim they cannot take that clause out"?
I talked with Seth (name-dropping etc etc)about it, because I was annoyed that he had not presented it to Apple before making this document, and he told me that he had in fact mailed Apple about it a week ago, and received no response. That doesn't, however, mean that they say they can't remove that clause.
Again, don't post a comment unless it adds new information, and please be sure of your facts (presenting links to evidence when necessary/if available.
> Can we just say the APSL is crap and Not Good Enough(tm) for the Open Source community?
No. The APSL allows for access to some Apple Source code, and permission to modify it. I like that; it means a chance to fix bugs (something I probably won't do, but other people will) which means a more stable, better OS. Period.
If you want to debate the merits of the APSL as it relates to Open Source, feel free to do so, but please keep the distinction clear.
Most of the posts I've read about the APSL are bitching about all sorts of problems and coming up with the conclusion that the APSL sucks rocks. It might not meet various qualifications, etc, but it _still_ provides source, and will give _me_ a more stable (even just a little) OS as a result. (This is assuming that I ever get a chance to use MacOS X Server)
Slashdot Mirror
The TCPA (47 USC 227) and its implementing FCC regulations ( mainly 47 CFR 64.1200) prohibits the transmission of any material advertising the commercial availability or quality of any product, service or property to any person without that person's prior express permission or request.
Under the TCPA, recipients of unsolicited fax advertisements, if otherwise permitted by the laws in their state, can file suit in state court to collect the greater of $500 or actual damages for each fax, and/or obtain an injunction. If a court determines that the violations were willful or knowing, the damages can be tripled at the discretion of the court
First, I must say that I like Shadow of the Hegemon least of all the stories involved (although Children of the Mind would probably be close). It is a decent story, but it just didn't grip me as much as some other stories.
I understand what you are saying about his authoring abilities, and as indicated in the review you will often hear the characters espousing Card's ideas and ideals (a very frustrating thing for me, because I recognize it quickly and it breaks me out of the story, like watching a movie and seeing someone stand up, and you realize that you're just looking at this screen).
However, I would recommend that you read Maps in a Mirror, which is a short fiction anthology (there are 4 soft cover sections, or one big hardcover of everything). It has some _really_ good stories in it, and a lot of interesting twists. I strongly recommend that you read 'Unaccompanied Sonata' if nothing else.
In the Post Office, you do not have to be a member of the Union, and so do not have to pay dues, but -are_ provided full access to the union.
I would think that letting anyone have the benefit of the contract is reasonable (I don't really like it, but it isn't that terrible), but they can even register complaints with the union, etc just as a paying member can.
Call the state and see if they have someone that can help you. Here it is called the 'Employment Relations Division'(?).
They can tell you what the law is, so you may actually be legally entitled to more than you are making (backpay and all). If being oncall restricts your mobility (ie, you can't go hiking in the woods), then here in MT you need to be compensated for that time. If you have to work when on call, that needs to be paid at an hourly rate.
Now if your salary or wage isn't really worth providing 24/7 support, then you will need to talk to your employer and work out a more adequate bit, but it sounds like you probably have some labor laws backing you up.
In any question about this, check the law books. Sometimes you will be pleasantly surprised at what is on the books.
Inside Mac is very nice, but you do not need to buy it. All the files are available as PDFs on the web (dev.apple.com is a good starting point, I believe). I had access to some real heavy duty printers, and would print out entire inside mac editions, double sided and drilled - still have them lying around.
Links.vbs predates ILOVEYOU. It scans net blocks looking for open shares and replicating, and was out there in early 2000 at the latest.
Where do people see this weakness in crypt(3)? There was a thread on Bugtraq awhile back, but it trailed off with no conclusion. I haven't seen anyone say that crypt has weaknesses in terms of its algorithm, just that it brute force attacks will work on it.
I did some rough calculations to see what sort of efforts it would take to brute force a _GOOD_ password. I think people know about password cracking programs and think that they invalidate crypt passwords. However, the password cracking programs work by encrypting dictionary words, with various permutations surrounding it; if you don't have a dictionary word in your password, then you are pretty safe.
I first checked to see how fast you would have to crack passwords to break a crypt password in 6mos. If you allow 84 possible characters (a-z0-9,.z\/= and all their shifted partners) then there are 84 ^ 8 possible passwords = 2,478,758,911,082,496. There are 15552000 seconds in 6 months, so you need to crack 159385218 passwords per second. If you just want to allow a-zA-Z0-9, then it still requires 14039358 cracks per second. This is out of the range of almost anyone.
Anyone that is really serious about this, though, will have precompiled encryptions, and compare those. If we assume the lower bound of a-zA-Z0-9 as the possible characters in the password, that is 218340105584896 encrypted passwords. Assume 1 byte per password, and assuming 75% compression (it is all text, but fairly random, so that is easily over likely compression ratios) it is 54,585,026,396,224 bytes. This is within the grasp of very large organizations, but a great cost (and note that this is a very generous estimate). If we allowed symbols, and allowed for a more modest 25-50% compression, then it is still likely to be 10 years before anyone (other than the NSA) will be able to brute force a strong crypt(3) password.
So, it appears that a strong crypt password is still strong. Anyone but the most powerful organization will be pretty much stuck. Note that almost the crypted password is usually not the weak link; social engineering or poor password security (having it written down on paper, sending it over an insecure link, etc) is far more likely to result in security breaches.
I find it extremely strange that QNX derived their own algorithm, because I don't see a weakness in the crypt scheme (either speed or crypt strength), and with MD5 or various other extensions (allowing passwords > 8 characters in length) there should be no reason to switch to another scheme. The only thing that I can think is that they may have WANTED to be able to reverse passwords, in case Joe Big Customer calls up and says 'We need this! We need it NOW!' (not that HP or SGI have caved, but still).
We use three spam lists:
RSS
DUL
RBL
The RSS is a toned down version of ORBS; it only lists relays that have been used to spam, which makes it easier to explain the problem. The DUL blocks any direct from dialup spam. The RBL blocks blackhole sites. The main problem with ORBS is that it is harder to explain (with RSS you can say 'spam _has_ been sent through this server'), and it blocks a lot more sites, which makes it hard to handle on anything larger than a personal mail machine.
Erm, if you read the article the G4 only had 64M of RAM. Both machines (G3/400 256M, and G4/350 64M) performed well, the only difference that I noted was the G3 didn't do QT movie playback when restoring from the dock.
Here's an idea for a distributed client that doesn't use spare clock cycles, but instead just uses a few spare minutes out of everyone's day.
Provide a simple cgi that will give 10 URLs out of the 50 million that were allowed through. Let them be marked as 'clean', 'porn' or potentially something else, with some double entries to verify results.
After that there should be a set of sites that could be blocked/should be blocked, but weren't. I'd probably set the specs to only block outright hardcore sites; ie anything that is even remotely purient would be marked 'clean'.
It doesn't deal with issues about whether censorship is right, but if it can be showed that 1% of the unique sites visited was porn that would hurt censorship.
Statistics people should get in on this also:
If we take out all the 100% legit requests (assume that cnn.com is _not_ an attempt to see porn), that should leave us with a set of potentially shady requests; the user _might_ have been trying to view porn. Checking those sites for actual porn/not porn would give a pretty accurate reading about how well sites block porn.
Since so many sites visited are not requests for porn, citing them as proof of 'blocking effectiveness' is not valid math; You need to look at only the potentially invalid requests to actually determine when porn was or was not blocked.
What's my point? Good UI design is not important for applications that cater to IT pros.
That isn't really the point that you are making (if you permit me to tell you what point you're making :-). What this example shows is that a good UI doesn't need to be graphical (and that a GUI is not necessarily a good UI). A lot of people make the assumption that if it's GUI it must be easier, but if you think about it I'm sure you have examples of purely evil GUIs (not just ones that don't tell you things you want to know, but ones that are flat-out _wrong_). There are non-GUI interfaces that are just as bad.
Agreed.
... well, you get the poin t :-)
I probably abstained from 50% of the choices, because I know that I am not remotely qualified to judge (having never used a wm or x -- that is about 40% right there).
There is a 'correct' choice for unsung hero though; just take a look at the choices, and then remember where you heard/saw the name. If it was in the media, they probably aren't unsung. If it is in the init code for
'especially before the age of 12 or so'
You just changed the age at which we discriminate. Why is 12 ok, but not 18? What is ok as a 'general guideline' and what isn't?
If you believe that age restrictions are legitimate, but that the age should be lower (not the 18/21 it is in most of the US) that is fine, but it doesn't seem like that is what you are trying to say.
Hmmm? I'm reading this further, and I can't make sense of your two main paragraphs. In the first, you indicate that:
'I would not accept that it's a parent's right to deny online access to their children, for any reason'
but the second paragraph talks about when censorware might be ok (ie, if it only blocks true porn, and none of the other sites listed).
In addition, the general stance of anti-censorware proponents is that _any_ censorship is a problem, even if all it censors is true hardcore/illegal porn from children (primarily because, due to the human factor, that ideal is unreachable).
How is the web interface supposed to speed up your connection? Unless there is some silly FTP filter ing at a proxy or firewall, they should be fairly equal, with FTP having the advantage.
Conventional Wisdom has it that FTP is faster than HTTP, because of the way that the protocols are handled (http starts slow, and speeds up the connection until it the other end can't handle the pipe).
"No source available"
Am I missing something? AFAIK (not very far), there _isn't_ any source (it's written in asm). True, they could give you the ASM instead of the straight binary, but the ASM in just a set of nuemonics (no idea how to spell that)(ie you can map one-to-one ASM with binary data, but not C code with binary data).
Care to set me straight?
If you wish to do it without X windows:
/usr/lib/kbd/keytables/i386/dvorak/dvorak.map.gz' /usr/lib/kbd/keytables/i386/qwerty/us.map.gz'
/usr/share/keymaps/i386/dvorak/dvorak.map.gz' /usr/share/keymaps/i386/qwerty/us.map.gz'
(assuming US locale)
RedHat:
alias asdf 'loadkeys
alias aoeu 'loadkeys
Debian:
alias asdf 'loadkeys
alias aoeu 'loadkeys
Remember, with both these systems, if you fsck it up, you can reboot and restore your default keymaps. In addition, check to make sure that those paths are right - I did it from memory, and it is possible that your system is different.
Hmmm. I don't have a logic book handy so I could be really wrong, but:
Beg ~ means "to ask for"
So: This asks for the question....
Or, paraphrased: "This article prompts the question..."
So what is the missing logic that you refer to?
Well, I attended a private school:
Northfield Mount Hermon School, and I have to say that it was much better about attitudes and behaviour. There were still all the groups that you'd see a public school (and some others; foriegn students hanging together), but it was possible to cross over without reprecussion, and there was a great deal less problems - I can't really remember ever getting hassled for my geekiness (and I got up in front of half the school to announce the GEECS club). I don't know if most private schools are like this (a good deal of the more 'old money' suit & collar schools are probably worse in this respect) but it worked out well for me.
Private schools are definately worth checking out; NMH cost $20,000/yr, and even with a good deal of scholorships and loans, I still ended up spending most of my summer earnings to attend school, but I think that it was worth it.
IANAL, but no.
It means that if you do decide to file suit against Apple for patent infringement you are no longer allowed to work on the source via this license.
In no way does it restrict your ability to defend your own patents.
I might caution: Make sure you see someone who knows what the hell they are talking about (ie, probably not a GP). I saw a GP at my high school clinic (private school, hence no visit to a local specialist). It was back in 1995, so RSI was still not as much in the spotlight.
I was given a hand brace (big metal thing you'd get if you broke your wrist) - which only served to move the injury from my one hand to both.
Make sure that you see someone that is recommended, and that is a specialist, not a GP. In addition, I strongly recommend checking some books out of the library so that you know specifics.
Using X to configure a system scares me. I am a Mac user, so this might seem funny, but it makes sense to me. On a mac, I know what files to change, and how to change them (using GUI tools). On a linux machine, I know what files to change, and how to change them (or I'll learn how to). However, using a GUI is a scary proposition, because it makes it harder for me to figure out was/is being changed. I also don't handle changes very easy, so I view it with some reluctance.
I don't even care for the distros very much, because I never know what they put on my system. Of course, I'm not quite at a level where I want to roll my own, so I do use the distros, but I never feel like I learned anything by doing the install. I think part of the problem is that I was pretty familiar with linux before I did my first install, so most of the challenges (mount points, directory structure, etc) were not difficult for me to handle.
I will never forget the time I was on IRC recently, and was helping someone with PPP setup. He told me that the last time he had configured it in X, so he didn't know how to do it from the command line. It cracked me up. (He actually knew most of what he needed to know, but the modem was still acting up, so he thought that he was going about it the wrong way).
>In the local computer lab (albeit populated by evil win 95 boxen), one of my Dvorak friends wrote a Delphi program to switch between Dvorak and QWERTY.)
As opposed to adding a keyboard layout in the Keyboard Control Panel, and using LA + shift to switch between layouts? Really it is kind of bass-ackwards, but also handy: Windows lets you have a different keyboard layout per program incarnation, so that you can have a telnet session open using Dvorak, and another open using QWERTY. This allows you to use Dvorak without having to worry about another user coming up and getting confused (having that happen a couple of times can get you the boot from the lab). It may be that since they are lab computers they are locked down to prevent that, but hey, I thought I'd let some people know that you don't need to hack Delphi to use Dvorak (nor do you need to purchase a special keyboard). Unfortunately, Windows doesn't let you chose two "English (United States)" language settings, but I find that "English (Australian)" works fine.
On the other side, a friend wrote a nice set of scripts call aoeu and asdf (LH home row in Dvorak and QWERTY respectively) which would switch the console mappings back and forth...and created a login that would run each also, so you could login even if the mappings were wrong.
> Apple are also being completely two faced about it. They provide Linux which has no "go away cubans" clause yet claim they cannot take that clause out of the APSL.
Could you point me to where that information resides? All I've heard so far is that the APSL has this clause; where did you hear that they "claim they cannot take that clause out"?
I talked with Seth (name-dropping etc etc)about it, because I was annoyed that he had not presented it to Apple before making this document, and he told me that he had in fact mailed Apple about it a week ago, and received no response. That doesn't, however, mean that they say they can't remove that clause.
Again, don't post a comment unless it adds new information, and please be sure of your facts (presenting links to evidence when necessary/if available.
> Can we just say the APSL is crap and Not Good Enough(tm) for the Open Source community?
No. The APSL allows for access to some Apple Source code, and permission to modify it. I like that; it means a chance to fix bugs (something I probably won't do, but other people will) which means a more stable, better OS. Period.
If you want to debate the merits of the APSL as it relates to Open Source, feel free to do so, but please keep the distinction clear.
Most of the posts I've read about the APSL are bitching about all sorts of problems and coming up with the conclusion that the APSL sucks rocks. It might not meet various qualifications, etc, but it _still_ provides source, and will give _me_ a more stable (even just a little) OS as a result. (This is assuming that I ever get a chance to use MacOS X Server)