they describe their hardware in the faq. however, as i recall from attending a talk hemos gave a few weeks back at wpi, those stats are all out of date. i think the ram in those boxen has doubled since the last update to the desciption, and is about to do so again.
(i changed the link, so it pointed to their server)
Well what if i don't want to use javascript? What if i think it's annoying? what if i (gasp!) don't use a browser that supports it? I could use javascript, but i find it to be just one more annoying way of making things "pretty."
i think the information is more important than the presentation. why do people have to use javascript and flash everywhere? for a lot of people, that just makes it harder to view the web pages. there are some things that flash is suitable for. tragically, it is too often used for things like navigation bars.
According to Microsoft, Fatal Exception 0E means invalid page fault. a bsod with fatal exception 0e should mean that a critical system raised an invalid page fault.
it would be easier to convince network admins to let http through. ftp is a bitch to firewall properly, since in normal mode it opens a connection back to the client. If i remember right, though, passive mode makes a firewall around the server a pain.
in addition to all that complexity, a lot of linux distros, particularly when the it's not the most recent version, come with massively vulnerable ftp daemons. if somebody manages a root shell, then the firewall doesn't offer any protection anyway. just bandwidth limitation. and who wants rooted boxes on their network anyway?
he's done that. there was a story on slashdot a while ago about it, but it would be a horrendous pain in the ass about it. basically, linus has no problem with use of the lunix trademark as long as it's done in good faith. but when somebody registered a bunch of linux-related domain names so he could sell them, linus threatened action, and the guy backed down.
note: that's how i remember it. i could be on crack.
Personally, i think that WPI has a pretty good AUP, (which is not to say i haven't had problems with netops regarding a few violations, only one of which i was actually responsible for.) it doesn't say that they can read our email personal files and other miscellany, and it requires us not to go poking around. However, it doesn't say that they can't.
how do you feel about policies like that? It doesn't guarantee our privacy, but it doesn't infringe on it either. Is lack of a guarantee an implicit infringement?
I DON'T drag linux into every thread on slashdot. it's just that it's both relevant to this conversation, and useful information. If you ran windows full time and you had to reboot into linux every time you wanted to change the songs on your mp3 player, wouldn't you start to find it annoying? i sure as hell would get kind of miffed by having to reboot into windows for it.
Linux is my operating system of choice, separate from any "Free the Source!" ranting pseudo-philosophers. i would want to be able to use the player in linux, and i really don't think that should be too much to ask.
as for the oppenness of its communication protocols, i fully acknowledge that it might not be practical for the company to make a linux client. that doesn't mean they need to make it difficult for anybody else to make one on their own. openning their protocols is a sign of support and good faith toward those that wish to use their products in linux, and while i would be willing to use a product with reverse-engineered drivers, i would rather give my money to a company that doesn't shun me, my operating system, and the community around it.
So the question is, which portable mp3 players have linux clients? and which are open protocols? those are the first two questions i'd consider before buying one.
i was using the portable version, it's just that, by default, it likes you to use PAM for password authentication, which slackware doesn't. if you don't use PAM, it likes you to heve your passwords encrypted with crypt. mine aren't.
i had to use a few special configuration parameters (i think they were --enable-md5 --enable-shadow and --disable-pam, but i'm not sure. that's from memory.)
there were arguments to switch to openssh before, but never one that was this practical in nature.
the only downside of openssh that i've seen was that it was a pain to figure out which compile-time options i needed. make sure you know exactly how your passwords are stored on your box. once i had that figured out, i liked it better than i ever liked the commercial SSH.
Re:So which OSen have ksh93 installed by default?
on
David Korn Tells All
·
· Score: 1
that particular tasteless joke is in fortunes2-o.
this begs the question, Why the hell are they including offensive fortunes in the bottom of the page? and yes, "offensive" is the official designation, and they are separate from regular fortunes, requiring an additional parameter on the fortune command.
(besides, there's much better offensive fortunes than that. just rot13 it and search for the word Radcliffe in a Jabberwocky parody.)
lately, companies have been getting patents for all sorts of insanely simple things, including those with obvious prior art. Altavista wasn't even the first search engine one the web, let alone the internet as a whole. If (when?) this patent gets shot down, it might start to send a message to other companies out there basing themselves off of frivolous patents.
we can't stand for this, and this is an excellent first step
it looks to be a whole new campaign. i saw two of those tonight. one for their database software and one for their web server software. both of them made me want to attack somebody with a sharpened slackware cd.
Anime is merely a medium, independant of its message. Watch "Neon Genesis Evangelion" and then watch "Pokemon" and tell me that they are the same.
True, the anime medium was traditionally shunned by the US for many years, and now has come into acceptance. This is not so much a consequence of the medium as the proconceptions people had about it. Most people thought it was obscure, confusing crap in a foreign language, or thought it was all porn, or any number of other misconceptions about anime (most of which apply to at least some anime, but hardly to all of it.) However, when pokemon came into popular acceptance, many of those misconceptions were proven wrong. True, pokemon and the like will, at some point, fall from favor, but how many artistic movements have passed without the dissapearance of oil on canvas?
honestly, it depends on the film. Kubrick put years of effort into the pre-production aspects of it, and had it pretty much done. My understanding is that he had *everything* planned as to how to film it.
p.s. you might not want to say that to anybody that ever poured their heart out into a script
i recall reading (not sure where, though) that Kubrick had already done a lot for A.I. himself, and just about all that was left was the transferrence of his ideas to film, via the whole filming process, plus casting, scouting and all that mess. he even had storyboards done (a rarity for kubrick.)
in the mid-90's he found himself in a position where he had to make a choice. There were two movies he wanted to make: an adaption of Arthur Schnitzler's Traumnovelle, and A.I. He decided to adapt Traumnovelle first, and it became Eyes Wide Shut. However, days after completing that project, he died.
However, before he died, he decided to pass the film, storyboards, and all of that on to Spielberg for him to complete the work on what had been his project for so many years. It *was* his intention for the film to be completed, and he realized he couldn't do it. He just chose somebody else to work on it in his place.
I was so focused on his upcoming adaption of Philip K. Dick's "The Minority Report" that i didn't realize Spielberg was actually doing A.I. I knew Kubrick was thinking of having Spielberg do the movie from the previously prepared storyboards, but that was the last i heard of it until now.
A.I. sounds cool (damn quicktime. i want to see the trailer, too), but as a newly-initiated PKD fan, i'm looking forweard to "The Minority Report" more.
i only ever had one teacher that truly understood that: Tony McCann, 12th grade english. yes, an english teacher, even though i'm very much a technical person. I never really liked english class that much until i had him, since he was the first person to treat it like more than the prescribed curriculum. he gave us assignments, but no assignment was outright required, or had rigid requirements. He graded us on what he thought of what he thought we were learning, not on some objetive-esqe evaluation of trite questions about the same "classics" that people have been reading in school for decades.
He gave us a day off on the first day after the leaves started falling so we could appreciate its beauty, and again when things bloomed in spring. that, in itself, might seem stupid, but he was also teaching us to recognize the beauty we see everyday.
he didn't just teach us a curriculum. he taught us something much more valuable than memories of having read and overanalyzed a John Steinbeck book. He taught us to think about all these things for ourselves. He worked in the fringes of the system and showed us that we don't need to stick to the prescribed curriculum of life.
I would often (more like virtually always...) stay after class just chatting with him because he was such an open, accessible person, with no pretenses. He did not look on us as students, but as people.
When i got my Eagle Scout award the following summer, i invited him to speak, since i have rarely respected anyone as much as i respected him. I will never forget him or the lessons he taught me.
even if the chat itself has a peer-to-peer architecture, you would have to get some info from a server somewhere. You can't talk to someone if you don't know how to conteact them. So you would have to ask the server:
What conversations can i join? (alalagous to getting a listing of channels in irc.)
Who's in this conversation? You would need to know where to send the packets to talk to somebody.
You'd have to get yourself listed/unlisted as being in a conversation
Just look at gnutella. You have to get a list of servers to talk to from somewhere, and with that, you aren't even dealing with separate conversations.
of course, this setup has many advantages and disadvantages over irc.
advantages:
The server doesn't need to hear your conversation (more privacy, yay!)
If the server goes down you can continue a conversation already in progress.
disadvantages:
Well, given the nature of the requests, it sounds like a job for udp instead of tcp. But, udp is simple to spoof, so choosing a transport protocol is a big issue.
limited bandwidth clients - let's pick a situation such as a celebrity inerview over this protocol, where one person at a time can ask a question. If there are enough people listening to the conversation, sending that many packets over a low-bandwidth line could be painful. (yeah, yeah, multicast, but that can be a pain in the ass for routers, especially if the protocol spreads widely enough)
back to the spoofing issue:
what if you unjoin everybody in a conversation? nobody else could join it.
what if you join a whole lot of bogus ip's? it's a ddos.
how about waiting for a conversation to die (i.e. everybody unjoins/empty channel) and then create a new one and drop all the chat packets that come to you? depending on the protocol, this could be harmless, or it could render a conversation permanently dead.[1]
imagine this scenario: two people get in an argument, one DOS's the other to shut him up.
i've thought of a few different quick variations of such a protocol while writing this, and none is anywhere as near as secure as irc. as crappy as it can be to have a big ol' server that handles the conversation, at least you have a trusted server.
[1] If the server trusts that a person is joining when they tell the server, then they can easily create a dos/ddos. If the server requires confirmation from others in the conversation, then you can blackhole a conversation as mentioned above. it's messy.
it almost sounds from that last comment he made ("I don't even want to plan 2.5.x or 3.0 at this point yet.") that he intends to make the next stable release be 3.0 instead of 2.6.
Slashdot Mirror
they describe their hardware in the faq. however, as i recall from attending a talk hemos gave a few weeks back at wpi, those stats are all out of date. i think the ram in those boxen has doubled since the last update to the desciption, and is about to do so again.
it redirected me to: http://www.abanet.org/nojavascript.html which reads:
(i changed the link, so it pointed to their server)
Well what if i don't want to use javascript? What if i think it's annoying? what if i (gasp!) don't use a browser that supports it? I could use javascript, but i find it to be just one more annoying way of making things "pretty."
i think the information is more important than the presentation. why do people have to use javascript and flash everywhere? for a lot of people, that just makes it harder to view the web pages. there are some things that flash is suitable for. tragically, it is too often used for things like navigation bars.
I've ranted now, i'm better, i think.
According to Microsoft, Fatal Exception 0E means invalid page fault. a bsod with fatal exception 0e should mean that a critical system raised an invalid page fault.
it would be easier to convince network admins to let http through. ftp is a bitch to firewall properly, since in normal mode it opens a connection back to the client. If i remember right, though, passive mode makes a firewall around the server a pain.
in addition to all that complexity, a lot of linux distros, particularly when the it's not the most recent version, come with massively vulnerable ftp daemons. if somebody manages a root shell, then the firewall doesn't offer any protection anyway. just bandwidth limitation. and who wants rooted boxes on their network anyway?
he's done that. there was a story on slashdot a while ago about it, but it would be a horrendous pain in the ass about it. basically, linus has no problem with use of the lunix trademark as long as it's done in good faith. but when somebody registered a bunch of linux-related domain names so he could sell them, linus threatened action, and the guy backed down.
note: that's how i remember it. i could be on crack.
Personally, i think that WPI has a pretty good AUP, (which is not to say i haven't had problems with netops regarding a few violations, only one of which i was actually responsible for.) it doesn't say that they can read our email personal files and other miscellany, and it requires us not to go poking around. However, it doesn't say that they can't.
how do you feel about policies like that? It doesn't guarantee our privacy, but it doesn't infringe on it either. Is lack of a guarantee an implicit infringement?
I DON'T drag linux into every thread on slashdot. it's just that it's both relevant to this conversation, and useful information. If you ran windows full time and you had to reboot into linux every time you wanted to change the songs on your mp3 player, wouldn't you start to find it annoying? i sure as hell would get kind of miffed by having to reboot into windows for it.
Linux is my operating system of choice, separate from any "Free the Source!" ranting pseudo-philosophers. i would want to be able to use the player in linux, and i really don't think that should be too much to ask.
as for the oppenness of its communication protocols, i fully acknowledge that it might not be practical for the company to make a linux client. that doesn't mean they need to make it difficult for anybody else to make one on their own. openning their protocols is a sign of support and good faith toward those that wish to use their products in linux, and while i would be willing to use a product with reverse-engineered drivers, i would rather give my money to a company that doesn't shun me, my operating system, and the community around it.
So the question is, which portable mp3 players have linux clients? and which are open protocols? those are the first two questions i'd consider before buying one.
i was using the portable version, it's just that, by default, it likes you to use PAM for password authentication, which slackware doesn't. if you don't use PAM, it likes you to heve your passwords encrypted with crypt. mine aren't.
i had to use a few special configuration parameters (i think they were --enable-md5 --enable-shadow and --disable-pam, but i'm not sure. that's from memory.)
there were arguments to switch to openssh before, but never one that was this practical in nature.
the only downside of openssh that i've seen was that it was a pain to figure out which compile-time options i needed. make sure you know exactly how your passwords are stored on your box. once i had that figured out, i liked it better than i ever liked the commercial SSH.
that particular tasteless joke is in fortunes2-o.
this begs the question, Why the hell are they including offensive fortunes in the bottom of the page? and yes, "offensive" is the official designation, and they are separate from regular fortunes, requiring an additional parameter on the fortune command.
(besides, there's much better offensive fortunes than that. just rot13 it and search for the word Radcliffe in a Jabberwocky parody.)
crap. i misspelled precedent. still no taco, though.
lately, companies have been getting patents for all sorts of insanely simple things, including those with obvious prior art. Altavista wasn't even the first search engine one the web, let alone the internet as a whole. If (when?) this patent gets shot down, it might start to send a message to other companies out there basing themselves off of frivolous patents.
we can't stand for this, and this is an excellent first step
it looks to be a whole new campaign. i saw two of those tonight. one for their database software and one for their web server software. both of them made me want to attack somebody with a sharpened slackware cd.
Anime is merely a medium, independant of its message. Watch "Neon Genesis Evangelion" and then watch "Pokemon" and tell me that they are the same.
True, the anime medium was traditionally shunned by the US for many years, and now has come into acceptance. This is not so much a consequence of the medium as the proconceptions people had about it. Most people thought it was obscure, confusing crap in a foreign language, or thought it was all porn, or any number of other misconceptions about anime (most of which apply to at least some anime, but hardly to all of it.) However, when pokemon came into popular acceptance, many of those misconceptions were proven wrong. True, pokemon and the like will, at some point, fall from favor, but how many artistic movements have passed without the dissapearance of oil on canvas?
screenz? i really have difficultiez respecting those that use z'z to pluralize their wordz.
honestly, it depends on the film. Kubrick put years of effort into the pre-production aspects of it, and had it pretty much done. My understanding is that he had *everything* planned as to how to film it.
p.s. you might not want to say that to anybody that ever poured their heart out into a script
I believe you're thinking of Bjork's video for All Is Full of Love, directed by the amazing Chris Cunningham.
(all i found of the video was a low-quality 30-sec. clip, but i didn't look that hard...)
i recall reading (not sure where, though) that Kubrick had already done a lot for A.I. himself, and just about all that was left was the transferrence of his ideas to film, via the whole filming process, plus casting, scouting and all that mess. he even had storyboards done (a rarity for kubrick.)
in the mid-90's he found himself in a position where he had to make a choice. There were two movies he wanted to make: an adaption of Arthur Schnitzler's Traumnovelle, and A.I. He decided to adapt Traumnovelle first, and it became Eyes Wide Shut. However, days after completing that project, he died.
However, before he died, he decided to pass the film, storyboards, and all of that on to Spielberg for him to complete the work on what had been his project for so many years. It *was* his intention for the film to be completed, and he realized he couldn't do it. He just chose somebody else to work on it in his place.
I was so focused on his upcoming adaption of Philip K. Dick's "The Minority Report" that i didn't realize Spielberg was actually doing A.I. I knew Kubrick was thinking of having Spielberg do the movie from the previously prepared storyboards, but that was the last i heard of it until now.
A.I. sounds cool (damn quicktime. i want to see the trailer, too), but as a newly-initiated PKD fan, i'm looking forweard to "The Minority Report" more.
i only ever had one teacher that truly understood that: Tony McCann, 12th grade english. yes, an english teacher, even though i'm very much a technical person. I never really liked english class that much until i had him, since he was the first person to treat it like more than the prescribed curriculum. he gave us assignments, but no assignment was outright required, or had rigid requirements. He graded us on what he thought of what he thought we were learning, not on some objetive-esqe evaluation of trite questions about the same "classics" that people have been reading in school for decades.
He gave us a day off on the first day after the leaves started falling so we could appreciate its beauty, and again when things bloomed in spring. that, in itself, might seem stupid, but he was also teaching us to recognize the beauty we see everyday.
he didn't just teach us a curriculum. he taught us something much more valuable than memories of having read and overanalyzed a John Steinbeck book. He taught us to think about all these things for ourselves. He worked in the fringes of the system and showed us that we don't need to stick to the prescribed curriculum of life.
I would often (more like virtually always...) stay after class just chatting with him because he was such an open, accessible person, with no pretenses. He did not look on us as students, but as people.
When i got my Eagle Scout award the following summer, i invited him to speak, since i have rarely respected anyone as much as i respected him. I will never forget him or the lessons he taught me.
all that and i didn't even think of what a headache NAT could be until after i submitted the comment. oh well, that's life i guess.
even if the chat itself has a peer-to-peer architecture, you would have to get some info from a server somewhere. You can't talk to someone if you don't know how to conteact them. So you would have to ask the server:
Just look at gnutella. You have to get a list of servers to talk to from somewhere, and with that, you aren't even dealing with separate conversations.
of course, this setup has many advantages and disadvantages over irc.
advantages:
disadvantages:
i've thought of a few different quick variations of such a protocol while writing this, and none is anywhere as near as secure as irc. as crappy as it can be to have a big ol' server that handles the conversation, at least you have a trusted server.
[1] If the server trusts that a person is joining when they tell the server, then they can easily create a dos/ddos. If the server requires confirmation from others in the conversation, then you can blackhole a conversation as mentioned above. it's messy.
it almost sounds from that last comment he made ("I don't even want to plan 2.5.x or 3.0 at this point yet.") that he intends to make the next stable release be 3.0 instead of 2.6.
the BugFree comment is a reference to announcements linus made to some old devel kernels, 1.3.x, i believe. it's in the linuxcookie fortune file.