Or rent a rack for 99 a month and CRON a perl script with tar/gzip/wget. Its not the prettiest, but its quick, reliable, cheap, and the server sits idle for 98% of the time, thus makes a great tfc/cs/ns2 server:D (ok, maybe not that last part...)
Because this is unthinking vigilantism, real pitchforks and torches stuff, and spammers will just use your wrath to launch joe jobs against anti-spam companies and individuals.
So can't we all just get along? This is the kind of excuse that just gets me. Sometimes a little vigilantism isn't such a bad thing. The way several people snail mail spammed a notorious spammer, by making so many requests for catalogs to be sent to his home address, that he couldn't read his mail because he was getting bags and bags every day? Yes, this is a proper application of vigilatism.
Most companies what give a 800 number AND spam, deserve to be autodialed until they quit spamming. Their actions make spam seem legitimate, and also makes autodialing/spamming them seem just as legitimate.
If windows is so bad why do we keep trying to copy it?
Excellent question. I see two basic reasons.
1. We are already familiar with it, so the learning curve is less steep. Although the Windows desktop is not perfect, it IS pretty good, and the flexibility of Linux will allow more configurability under all circumstances, so it can be made less like Windows and more like what you want it to be, if you know how. If you don't know how to configure it, then the "Windows like" look is probably the best desktop anyway.
2. The closer the Linux desktop looks to Windows 9x/xp, the more people will be willing and/or able to use it. The more people that use it, the more likely that popular applications will get ported to it OR some group will form to develop an open source application to replace the proprietary software. Linux doesn't need 97% to be successful. 20% of the desktop market is more than enough for this to happen. We are about 17%+ at this time.
In business, a company that want to compete with larger companies in the same industry will often compete on the lower price part of the market. Units are less expensive to stock, and you can gain "economy of scale" at a lower investment level. You make the cheap stuff and sell it for less, then work your way up the ladder, eating away your competitor's market share. The same holds true for Linux.
As an advocate of Linux, who uses Windows and Linux, I have faith that the applications and commercial support for Linux will continue to grow. Broadening the appeal of Linux to mainstream users will excellerate this process, by increasing the potential financial returns for companies who are considering developing or porting applications on Linux.
You may or may not like software from Adobe, Macromedia, and the like, but many DO, and they will be more willing to switch if they can get their favorite software (or free alternatives to a degree). Me, I just want Photoshop on Linux so I can work up CMYK stuff. But we need less technical minded people using Linux before we will get broader support by developers.
It is in our own best interest to welcome the broadest range of Linux users, an open tent that all are welcome in. This includes people who don't want to know how the OS works, they just want it to work. When all is said and done, Linux has the best potential to do this.
I'm not hear to bash CB'ers, yet i am a former CB'er and didn't make use of any electrical theory to use the tranceiver. HAM's mostly have *some* electrical theory, but that will change when the FCC is put back in line that it lawfully has NO IMPLIED JURISDICTION on the use of radio waves.
There, I said it. FCC didn't create physics, and it can't regulate the application of these natural laws. Although, Microsoft created Microsoft Windows 2003, and Microsoft regulates the use of such. Don't ask me how Microsoft does it, but FCC backs up its jurisdiction with the U.S. Military (another corporation) by use of second ammendment and unlawful application of Admiralty Law. Of'course, most of us think "We, the People" are the self-governing being and create puppet-entities (corporations/states) with certain aura of influence, yet today's world is where a out-of-hand pseudo Representative Republic will assume control of neighboring countries and is allowed to have "Federal Possesions, enclaves, garrisons, forts, and arsenals" without the consent of "We, the People" which hath created such business fiction entity. Can you say Anti-Trust?
An interesting point, although I have issues with your analogy. Then what exactly do you propose, other than airwave anarchy? "We, the People" is supposed to include the government, since we either elect them, or they are appointed by people we elect, so they are "of the people".
I may agree with your implication that the FCC is more interested in commercial interest than individual rights, but this is not always A Bad Thing(tm). If 10 people want to broadcast at 1400AM (for instance) and it turns into a wattage war (winner take all) then the average joe who is only interested in listening, loses. They key is to find a balance. I would even agree that the FCC leans too heavily toward commercial interests, but again: We know your complain, but what is your SOLUTION?
My guess is you are a bit more rational than your post comes across.
It's not that they have a soul, it's just that they have a certain image of their company (which they apparently think will help them with profits in either the short or long run) they want to project onto consumers, and being unbiased, clear, and honest is part of that image.
Yea, but that is just as bad as having a soul...;)
You just need to alter the words you get listed. Search for a product model number, and you'll get no hits for reviews or real sites, but hundreds for 'shopping comparison' sites like Dooyoo, Shopsmary and kelkoo. (ie I tried to find info about a TV - Panasonic TX28PL1, try it for yourself).
Oh, we are top listed:D With anything related to our business. The key is how you setup the website, not by depending on the customers to use different terms. That is my job, above all else. Its more art than science, but google also considers 'click thru' as part of 'relevence' so if you CHANGE your ad, you start over. The key is not NOT change your ad, which makes you start over in relevence. Learned this the hard way. Most of this is not documented, and frankly, I wouldn't give anyone the info I have learned, for any price. Anyone who *IS* selling this info is selling garbage or misinformation. I have bought enough of it to know. There is still much more I don't know about their methods than I do know.
It just so happens we ARE relevent for our search terms, at least the one's we care enough to pay a few dollars EACH for. But we would still love to see the ads mixed in, in a purely selfish way (of course) to make more money from people who are adverse to ads. Most of our customers only seach when they are ready to buy anyway, so its not critical, it would just be handy.
On the other hand, as a USER of google, I would hate it if they did that. If I had to choose, I choose mix them because I get a % of sales, and yes, I am a greedy fucker working very hard toward the day I do not have to do this for a living.:D
And they only started doing this under pressure from people who figured out what was going on. Google is a souless company, just like all the others.
Not true. I know for a fact they have a soul. We have tried to get them to mix ads with results because we are a huge advertiser and want better return for our investment. You can't even BUY your way to the top of the advertising list. You place a bid, but the highest bid doesn't get the best position, it is also based on "relevence". They have used this method for over a year now.
NEVER use their underhanded techniques against them, Grasshopper; it validates them.
Upholding the GPL license is ALL this fight is about, pure and simple.
That being said, it is NOT time to become radical about it; if the GPL is BY the people and FOR the people, then it must be used in that honorable sense.
SCO is infringing on the copyright, ie: violating the GPL. This is too obvious. Inforcing the law is not underhanded, its required. If the DMCA applies, then it should be used, no matter that it is a stupid law. If you REALLY care about the GPL, then you would want to use every legal method at your disposal to insure those that attack it are brought to justice.
Ultimately, since it's illegal and rather immature, we really should put our foots down against this type of technique. SCO will be crushed in the marketplace and in court soon enough. We don't need to take down their site for that to happen.
And SCO's webserver is running Linux and Apache. You wouldn't want McBride to say it was Linux's fault.
The DDoSers should know better!
Did you ever consider that SCO could have done this themselves, as part of their "IBM is beating us up" campaign? Exploit your own system, and blame it IBM inflamming others to attack them. I certainly don't KNOW this to be true, but come on, this is SCO, and certainly within their mentality, to make themselves "the victim" yet again. They can't win on evidence, so they try to win the public opinion battle.
Hint, whenever a Bad Thing(tm) happens to US citizens or to something related to the US it gets massive coverage in all the media all over the world, you can thank the US media corporations for that one..
Or perhaps its because in space, Russia and the USA has lead the world, so when tragedy hits either, it matters to everyone. I mean, what do YOU think other countries are catching up TO? Their goals are to catch up to Russia and the USA, this is what they compare their OWN space programs to. Before the fall of the USSR, their space program is exactly what we Americans compared our space program against, especially in the 50s and 60s when they were ahead of us in space technology. Now, the American space program *IS* the standard, so yea, its going to get SOME press globally when something happens.
I don't think the US media corporations own the media in Brazil, nor exercise any control for other countries. What is more laughable is thinking "US media corporations" as if they are a single conspiracy. Good lord, each news based company tries to cut the throat of every other news agency. Look at Fox and CNN and the way they talk about each other as a reference.
This is THE world! This is AMERICA! You guys shuld have some shame. Apparently you don't. Why is it quiet? Why is there no world-wide minute of silence? Cause Americans don't care. All they care about is THEIR god and THEIR president, THEIR soldiers dying during liberation war with evil enemy and THEIR McDonalds, and above all THEIR fucking democracy. This is crazy.
And our fellow citizens who are not afraid to post under a name, instead of cowering behind AC.
Many of the Non-US citizens don't get it. We hate to see Brazilians die in any accident. We understand better than most how painful it is to suffer this kind of loss and technical setback. It is easy to *talk* about their loss, if you come from a country that has never risked it all to get into the space business. Come back and complain about us when you have a relevent perspective.
The fact is, Slashdot, this admittedly US centric news site (read the faq) put this on the front page in the "try try again" dept. This is admittedly an American philosophy that perhaps you don't understand. So Americans ARE paying attention, and care. We just don't care what YOU think about the way we express it. Personally, I want to see other countries get into space, which will fire our own govt. up to fund OUR space program better, which everyone gains from, including you.
America has "open sourced" most of the stuff we have learned from space travel, sharing the science with others. Not every country has the done the same (although Russia is much more open now).
As to our soldier's dying while liberating another country: Our soldiers (along with those of several other countries) HAVE died for many years, to help insure that asshats like you can freely speak out, even if it's to speak out against us. Ironic.
p.s. and no there will be no 8 hour special on any channel about what happened or who died
There probably will be an 8 hour special, in Brazil. There was probably not an 8 hour special in Brazil about the loss of our shuttle. That is to be expected, not trashed. Its not unusual for a country to spend more time focusing on the loss of their own citizens. Because the US and Russia have the most experience in space, and pull off more missions, its not THAT unusual if they get more press, fair or not, its just they put people in space and so far Brazil hasn't.
You are correct that the media doesn't really care about the technicians. Tech's are not sexy, they aren't "taking great risks" like astronauts...or you would have thought until now. This has more to do with astronauts being celebrities and the tech's not. This is not an exclusively American problem. Then again, the astronauts ARE the one's who are sitting on enough explosives to take out a small town, and the risk IS generally higher, on average. Since Brazil hasn't put anyone on top of a rocket, it hasn't generated the same interest...yet.
Even the movie "Apollo 13" paid more attention to the astronauts, but at least it did put a heavy focus on the ground crew.
That's the thing, there is very little that is allowed to come inbound, so even if I didn't have something patched, any inbound connectivity at home can only come from "trusted" hosts. Usually other networks that I administer and can vouch for their security.
I haven't nfs'd or really trusted my home to my work other than short term testing. Just afraid it would be too easy to get fully owned if someone DOES get in one of my boxes, and could spread through the system too easily. I run servers as isolated as possible for this reason. A bit of paranoid, but the lesson I learned was if you are not at least slightly paranoid, you are vulnerable and you will get owned.
But there's no conspiracy against SCO; it only looks that way because everyone hates them.
Yea, I think the whole concept of "conspiracy" means you are doing it in secret. Its pretty obvious that there is no conspiracy since everyone is being quite outspoken about how SCO sucks. I honestly think that THEY think there is a conspiracy. I would not be shocked if they really DONT get it.
Their demands are so outrageous, it reminds me of how North Korea is acting: Loud, false claims, outrageous demands, unreasonable acts, all to get SOMETHING, all because they are not capable of producing value/products on their own. They both can only make money with threats to take everyone down with them.
I think the issue is that while I would mind someone comming to my house even to take a peek, I don't seem to care if a program checks wethere it is legally installed, as long as that is all it checks.
That is the problem, once they have a foot in the door, acceptance of software spying on you, then it doesn't stop. What if they decide to also gather info on the types of files you manipulate, to "offer you deals" on other products? Sounds innocent enough, but its not since you don't know what they are doing with the info, or who is seeing it. What about the recent debacle with Turbo Tax? That was minor compared to this: it just wouldn't run.
The other problem is legally using fakecd programs so you don't have to have the disk with you to use it (I am on my laptop now, as I usually am when I am/.ing) Not convenient.
A seperate point is this: I DO install software on my laptop and my desktop because I have to use it in the field. This is like the old "book" license, that some software used to have. You can put it on two computers as long as you are only using one at a time. Even MS Office lets you do this. Some software considers this as pirating, even tho I am the only one using it. If I can't do this, legal or not, I will change software. There are few programs I need that there are no alternatives to. Even GIMP is catching up to Photoshop.
I have to say that my box has been attacked plenty too. I see ~20 attacks per day, people scanning etc. I also haven't had one break in, I built with all it needed and setup firewall rules on it. The only thing that is touching it, is what I allowed.
I check my logs on my linux web server, and the vast majority of script kiddies/worms attempts I see are for WINDOWS servers. Obviously, these exploits don't pose a problem, but it is actually about 90% of the 'illegal' log entries.
Adding to your point: Any computer that has an internet connection is going to have attempted break ins/script kiddies/worms hit it regularly. That has nothing to do with what OS you are running. The net result from those attempts, DOES have to do with the OS.
I have only had ONE linux box 0wned in the last 5 years, about 4 years ago, because of not updating wuftp quickly enough. It was a learning experience, and a mistake I am not likely to make again. I learned the most important component to securing your computers is the person doing the securing.
I fully expect that if Linux becomes a major desktop OS, it'll become the thing that's fun to hate. You're in the 'cool club' if you hate Linux.
Oh god, you mean we will to start listening to why BSD is more L33T than Linux, while Linux lovers will scream how BSD is dead/dying? Oh wait, we already have to listen to that...
My main point is, actually, to make you aware that on different platforms, there are different ways to exploit the SAME user ignorance! Telling them that linux is more secure because they have less chance of viral infection will keep them ignorant and bring those problems to linux platforms.
I agree with your point. People who don't understand Linux will often just say it is more secure, because "they heard it somewhere". The two main things that make Linux typically more secure is 1) most linux users are a bit more technically savvy and 2 ) most security exploits are written for Windows or Linux SERVER daemons that you normally don't run on a Linux desktop (bind and wuftpd come to mind) It also helps that the type of 'social engineering' you talk about WILL wipe out the user files and not the OS if you are not running as root, which is slightly better.
5 or 10 years from now, people may be preaching how Windows is more secure because, then, most of the exploits may be aimed for Linux (assuming windows dips to 50%), using the the same flawed logic.
Until then, for absolute 100% protection from all viruses and exploits, I would suggest people just unplug their computers and go outside.
The 2.4+ kernel supports ipchains, but iptables is recommended and usually compiled in.
Actually, a simple firewall is very easy in Linux using LOKKIT. Its installed with most distributions, and its pretty easy to use. Even if you dont run Xwindows lokkit has a console interface that is quite easy to use. If you get into complex firewalls for advanced routing, then lokkit isn't the cure all, but for most of us, its easy and effective.
If not, Windows is more secure than Linux for a desktop user.
Windows can not do this. It takes a seperate program to do this. Windows built in firewall can only ACCEPT or REJECT based on port. (maybe DROP but I doubt it)
With IPTABLES, (which is actually built into the kernel) you CAN filter more than just ports. You don't filter by the name of the program, but you can filter types of packets and allow or deny according to rules. Its not the easiest to do, but there is probably a GUI program out there for Linux that makes it easy (i use Linux in init 3 mainly, so GUI apps are not my forte.)
Oh yea, and the firewall in Linux is free, doesn't require licensing, works at the kernel level rather than the user level thus provides a slightly higher level of security and is much more configurable since it also allows for sharing an internet connection, with the shared connection having different firewall rules than the host computer. And you never see the pop up ads, like Zone Alarm, that recommend you upgrade to an expensive version. It just works.
NOw, go crawl back under your bridge, you nasty little troll.
I dunno, I run the same pirated copy of Norton Antivirus and Norton Internet Security on every windows pc I've got, and the Live Update works correctly on all of them
Most OEM versions of AV expire in 90 days, retail in 365, but most computers just come with the 90 days worth. The goal being to get you to pay the $10 to extend your access to their network for another year. Personally, I just set the clock back a year when i run update. I guess you could boot your new computer with a floppy the first time, and set the clock ahead two years before it fires up, so the AV software time stamps that it expires two years and 3 months from now.
Or buy the retail version and set your clock ahead while you install, and put it on all your computers.
Or just uninstall and reinstall the AV every year (if its retail version and you have the disk)
Yea, there are lots of ways to pirate it. But they still really want you to pay THEM directly to update for another year, since they don't have to share that money with retailers. They pretty much give away that 90 day version anyway.
I don't understand this hate against the publisher. I would think they are simply protecting their software. They are in no way harming legitimate paying customers. Even when phoning home about a pirated copy there is no harm, it is the pirate who is harming the publisher.
So we should let the police search your home without a warrant? I mean, if you aren't doing anything illegal, it is in no way harming you, right? Or just allow them to put cameras in all homes (ala 1984) I mean, if you don't do anything illegal, why would you mind?
People work no more than 40 hours, and get 1.5 comp time when they work over. They CAN check email from other stations, but not loiter. I am NOT the manager, im the guy who has to fix the shit when it breaks, so yea, if the credit dept. doesn't need internet access, then they wont get it, because we don't need to pay to support it.
If you knew how cushy the jobs are there, you would apply. Its a 18 year old company. Only one person has quit, and few have been fired. The average person has been there around 7 years. This is NOT a slave factory. On average, it pays a solid 10%-15% more than similar companies, and there are several other perks as well. Twice in the last 10 years, an employee was out for a few MONTHS because of surgery or pregnancy. Both times, neither employee missed a single paycheck. This isn't law, its just a pretty good place to work.
The owner doesn't give a damn if you drink or get high, as long as you don't do it on the job. (I've burned one with him after hours, more than once) Most of the people replying to the original post just simply don't get it. Its a good place to work, BUT WE ARE NOT HERE TO ENTERTAIN YOU. Its that simple. We just moved to a new building, and you can bet the new DNS server (and logging) will insure the porn stops, not just because it wastes time, but its a potential lawsuit waiting to happen. (half the crew is female)
The fact that the employeer IS a reasonable is the problem. People constantly take advantage of it. That was the 70% problem. He didn't order the change, I just made it. I went in and took people who NEEDED internet access and were abusing it, and all of a sudden, the internet didn't work, and it just took me a couple of weeks to get it fixed on their computers. They were forced to do work from backup, very crappy workstations. (p100s) I wasn't very popular during that time, but now uptime is exceptional, and everyone has what they need. Now they don't install stuff, they are terrified of launching attachments, and since I showed them logs where they did visit porn (in spite of "I don't know how it got there!") this is reduced about 99%. Yea, a regular BOFH, but like I keep saying, the computers are not there to provide intertainment. Not ironically, the people whose computers never break down tend to get first grabs on the new machines as well.
I DO own my own business as well (very unrelated) and the work I do for this company is contractual (30 hours average a week is all) but I happen to like the owner and agree with the internet policy, even tho it wasn't even HIS to begin with:) Its the same basic policy we (wife and I) have with our own business.
You and so many other take this entirely too black and white. People go out to smoke, technically they don't get paid to smoke, and they smoke NOT during a break, but when they want a smoke. They talk to each other during work. They are fully compensated with overtime by comp-time. But if they don't NEED internet access for their job, then they should not have it. They don't need to look at porn at work. They don't need to spend all day with fantasy football. If they want to check email, fine. But when 70% of your time fixing equipment is due to ABUSE, you have a problem, and it needs fixing.
You can take anything to any extreme, especially when it supports your theoretical point.
Heh... so he likes the fact that they can't download stuff to use on their machines. Sounds kind of draconian in the end.
Last time we measured, 70% of the downtime on our network was related to the employees installing other software, or downloading stupid crap, like viruses. It is a work computer, your boss doesn't owe you the ability to scan ebay while you are being paid to do work. By doing so, you cost the company money. Obviously, this doesn't bother you, but then again, you don't own the company.
I take every station that doesn't need internet access OFF, so they won't browse the net for the same reason. Its not my job to provide intertainment for you while you are on your break. If you worked in construction, would you expect the foreman to provide a computer on the internet so you could browse Ebay while you were on break? Then why would you expect this from an office job?
The problem is you expect your boss to entertain you for 7 hours a day, so you can get your 1 hour of work done. Please don't apply for a job where I work.
Slashdot Mirror
Or rent a rack for 99 a month and CRON a perl script with tar/gzip/wget. Its not the prettiest, but its quick, reliable, cheap, and the server sits idle for 98% of the time, thus makes a great tfc/cs/ns2 server :D (ok, maybe not that last part...)
Because this is unthinking vigilantism, real pitchforks and torches stuff, and spammers will just use your wrath to launch joe jobs against anti-spam companies and individuals.
So can't we all just get along? This is the kind of excuse that just gets me. Sometimes a little vigilantism isn't such a bad thing. The way several people snail mail spammed a notorious spammer, by making so many requests for catalogs to be sent to his home address, that he couldn't read his mail because he was getting bags and bags every day? Yes, this is a proper application of vigilatism.
Most companies what give a 800 number AND spam, deserve to be autodialed until they quit spamming. Their actions make spam seem legitimate, and also makes autodialing/spamming them seem just as legitimate.
If windows is so bad why do we keep trying to copy it?
Excellent question. I see two basic reasons.
1. We are already familiar with it, so the learning curve is less steep. Although the Windows desktop is not perfect, it IS pretty good, and the flexibility of Linux will allow more configurability under all circumstances, so it can be made less like Windows and more like what you want it to be, if you know how. If you don't know how to configure it, then the "Windows like" look is probably the best desktop anyway.
2. The closer the Linux desktop looks to Windows 9x/xp, the more people will be willing and/or able to use it. The more people that use it, the more likely that popular applications will get ported to it OR some group will form to develop an open source application to replace the proprietary software. Linux doesn't need 97% to be successful. 20% of the desktop market is more than enough for this to happen. We are about 17%+ at this time.
In business, a company that want to compete with larger companies in the same industry will often compete on the lower price part of the market. Units are less expensive to stock, and you can gain "economy of scale" at a lower investment level. You make the cheap stuff and sell it for less, then work your way up the ladder, eating away your competitor's market share. The same holds true for Linux.
As an advocate of Linux, who uses Windows and Linux, I have faith that the applications and commercial support for Linux will continue to grow. Broadening the appeal of Linux to mainstream users will excellerate this process, by increasing the potential financial returns for companies who are considering developing or porting applications on Linux.
You may or may not like software from Adobe, Macromedia, and the like, but many DO, and they will be more willing to switch if they can get their favorite software (or free alternatives to a degree). Me, I just want Photoshop on Linux so I can work up CMYK stuff. But we need less technical minded people using Linux before we will get broader support by developers.
It is in our own best interest to welcome the broadest range of Linux users, an open tent that all are welcome in. This includes people who don't want to know how the OS works, they just want it to work. When all is said and done, Linux has the best potential to do this.
I'm not hear to bash CB'ers, yet i am a former CB'er and didn't make use of any electrical theory to use the tranceiver. HAM's mostly have *some* electrical theory, but that will change when the FCC is put back in line that it lawfully has NO IMPLIED JURISDICTION on the use of radio waves.
There, I said it. FCC didn't create physics, and it can't regulate the application of these natural laws. Although, Microsoft created Microsoft Windows 2003, and Microsoft regulates the use of such. Don't ask me how Microsoft does it, but FCC backs up its jurisdiction with the U.S. Military (another corporation) by use of second ammendment and unlawful application of Admiralty Law. Of'course, most of us think "We, the People" are the self-governing being and create puppet-entities (corporations/states) with certain aura of influence, yet today's world is where a out-of-hand pseudo Representative Republic will assume control of neighboring countries and is allowed to have "Federal Possesions, enclaves, garrisons, forts, and arsenals" without the consent of "We, the People" which hath created such business fiction entity. Can you say Anti-Trust?
An interesting point, although I have issues with your analogy. Then what exactly do you propose, other than airwave anarchy? "We, the People" is supposed to include the government, since we either elect them, or they are appointed by people we elect, so they are "of the people".
I may agree with your implication that the FCC is more interested in commercial interest than individual rights, but this is not always A Bad Thing(tm). If 10 people want to broadcast at 1400AM (for instance) and it turns into a wattage war (winner take all) then the average joe who is only interested in listening, loses. They key is to find a balance. I would even agree that the FCC leans too heavily toward commercial interests, but again: We know your complain, but what is your SOLUTION?
My guess is you are a bit more rational than your post comes across.
It's not that they have a soul, it's just that they have a certain image of their company (which they apparently think will help them with profits in either the short or long run) they want to project onto consumers, and being unbiased, clear, and honest is part of that image.
Yea, but that is just as bad as having a soul...;)
You just need to alter the words you get listed. Search for a product model number, and you'll get no hits for reviews or real sites, but hundreds for 'shopping comparison' sites like Dooyoo, Shopsmary and kelkoo. (ie I tried to find info about a TV - Panasonic TX28PL1, try it for yourself).
:D With anything related to our business. The key is how you setup the website, not by depending on the customers to use different terms. That is my job, above all else. Its more art than science, but google also considers 'click thru' as part of 'relevence' so if you CHANGE your ad, you start over. The key is not NOT change your ad, which makes you start over in relevence. Learned this the hard way. Most of this is not documented, and frankly, I wouldn't give anyone the info I have learned, for any price. Anyone who *IS* selling this info is selling garbage or misinformation. I have bought enough of it to know. There is still much more I don't know about their methods than I do know.
:D
Oh, we are top listed
It just so happens we ARE relevent for our search terms, at least the one's we care enough to pay a few dollars EACH for. But we would still love to see the ads mixed in, in a purely selfish way (of course) to make more money from people who are adverse to ads. Most of our customers only seach when they are ready to buy anyway, so its not critical, it would just be handy.
On the other hand, as a USER of google, I would hate it if they did that. If I had to choose, I choose mix them because I get a % of sales, and yes, I am a greedy fucker working very hard toward the day I do not have to do this for a living.
And they only started doing this under pressure from people who figured out what was going on. Google is a souless company, just like all the others.
Not true. I know for a fact they have a soul. We have tried to get them to mix ads with results because we are a huge advertiser and want better return for our investment. You can't even BUY your way to the top of the advertising list. You place a bid, but the highest bid doesn't get the best position, it is also based on "relevence". They have used this method for over a year now.
NEVER use their underhanded techniques against them, Grasshopper; it validates them.
Upholding the GPL license is ALL this fight is about, pure and simple.
That being said, it is NOT time to become radical about it; if the GPL is BY the people and FOR the people, then it must be used in that honorable sense.
SCO is infringing on the copyright, ie: violating the GPL. This is too obvious. Inforcing the law is not underhanded, its required. If the DMCA applies, then it should be used, no matter that it is a stupid law. If you REALLY care about the GPL, then you would want to use every legal method at your disposal to insure those that attack it are brought to justice.
Ultimately, since it's illegal and rather immature, we really should put our foots down against this type of technique. SCO will be crushed in the marketplace and in court soon enough. We don't need to take down their site for that to happen.
And SCO's webserver is running Linux and Apache. You wouldn't want McBride to say it was Linux's fault.
The DDoSers should know better!
Did you ever consider that SCO could have done this themselves, as part of their "IBM is beating us up" campaign? Exploit your own system, and blame it IBM inflamming others to attack them. I certainly don't KNOW this to be true, but come on, this is SCO, and certainly within their mentality, to make themselves "the victim" yet again. They can't win on evidence, so they try to win the public opinion battle.
Hint, whenever a Bad Thing(tm) happens to US citizens or to something related to the US it gets massive coverage in all the media all over the world, you can thank the US media corporations for that one..
Or perhaps its because in space, Russia and the USA has lead the world, so when tragedy hits either, it matters to everyone. I mean, what do YOU think other countries are catching up TO? Their goals are to catch up to Russia and the USA, this is what they compare their OWN space programs to. Before the fall of the USSR, their space program is exactly what we Americans compared our space program against, especially in the 50s and 60s when they were ahead of us in space technology. Now, the American space program *IS* the standard, so yea, its going to get SOME press globally when something happens.
I don't think the US media corporations own the media in Brazil, nor exercise any control for other countries. What is more laughable is thinking "US media corporations" as if they are a single conspiracy. Good lord, each news based company tries to cut the throat of every other news agency. Look at Fox and CNN and the way they talk about each other as a reference.
This is THE world! This is AMERICA!
You guys shuld have some shame. Apparently you don't. Why is it quiet? Why is there no world-wide minute of silence? Cause Americans don't care. All they care about is THEIR god and THEIR president, THEIR soldiers dying during liberation war with evil enemy and THEIR McDonalds, and above all THEIR fucking democracy. This is crazy.
And our fellow citizens who are not afraid to post under a name, instead of cowering behind AC.
Many of the Non-US citizens don't get it. We hate to see Brazilians die in any accident. We understand better than most how painful it is to suffer this kind of loss and technical setback. It is easy to *talk* about their loss, if you come from a country that has never risked it all to get into the space business. Come back and complain about us when you have a relevent perspective.
The fact is, Slashdot, this admittedly US centric news site (read the faq) put this on the front page in the "try try again" dept. This is admittedly an American philosophy that perhaps you don't understand. So Americans ARE paying attention, and care. We just don't care what YOU think about the way we express it. Personally, I want to see other countries get into space, which will fire our own govt. up to fund OUR space program better, which everyone gains from, including you.
America has "open sourced" most of the stuff we have learned from space travel, sharing the science with others. Not every country has the done the same (although Russia is much more open now).
As to our soldier's dying while liberating another country: Our soldiers (along with those of several other countries) HAVE died for many years, to help insure that asshats like you can freely speak out, even if it's to speak out against us. Ironic.
p.s. and no there will be no 8 hour special on any channel about what happened or who died
There probably will be an 8 hour special, in Brazil. There was probably not an 8 hour special in Brazil about the loss of our shuttle. That is to be expected, not trashed. Its not unusual for a country to spend more time focusing on the loss of their own citizens. Because the US and Russia have the most experience in space, and pull off more missions, its not THAT unusual if they get more press, fair or not, its just they put people in space and so far Brazil hasn't.
You are correct that the media doesn't really care about the technicians. Tech's are not sexy, they aren't "taking great risks" like astronauts...or you would have thought until now. This has more to do with astronauts being celebrities and the tech's not. This is not an exclusively American problem. Then again, the astronauts ARE the one's who are sitting on enough explosives to take out a small town, and the risk IS generally higher, on average. Since Brazil hasn't put anyone on top of a rocket, it hasn't generated the same interest...yet.
Even the movie "Apollo 13" paid more attention to the astronauts, but at least it did put a heavy focus on the ground crew.
That's the thing, there is very little that is allowed to come inbound, so even if I didn't have something patched, any inbound connectivity at home can only come from "trusted" hosts. Usually other networks that I administer and can vouch for their security.
I haven't nfs'd or really trusted my home to my work other than short term testing. Just afraid it would be too easy to get fully owned if someone DOES get in one of my boxes, and could spread through the system too easily. I run servers as isolated as possible for this reason. A bit of paranoid, but the lesson I learned was if you are not at least slightly paranoid, you are vulnerable and you will get owned.
But there's no conspiracy against SCO; it only looks that way because everyone hates them.
Yea, I think the whole concept of "conspiracy" means you are doing it in secret. Its pretty obvious that there is no conspiracy since everyone is being quite outspoken about how SCO sucks. I honestly think that THEY think there is a conspiracy. I would not be shocked if they really DONT get it.
Their demands are so outrageous, it reminds me of how North Korea is acting: Loud, false claims, outrageous demands, unreasonable acts, all to get SOMETHING, all because they are not capable of producing value/products on their own. They both can only make money with threats to take everyone down with them.
I think the issue is that while I would mind someone comming to my house even to take a peek, I don't seem to care if a program checks wethere it is legally installed, as long as that is all it checks.
/.ing) Not convenient.
That is the problem, once they have a foot in the door, acceptance of software spying on you, then it doesn't stop. What if they decide to also gather info on the types of files you manipulate, to "offer you deals" on other products? Sounds innocent enough, but its not since you don't know what they are doing with the info, or who is seeing it. What about the recent debacle with Turbo Tax? That was minor compared to this: it just wouldn't run.
The other problem is legally using fakecd programs so you don't have to have the disk with you to use it (I am on my laptop now, as I usually am when I am
A seperate point is this: I DO install software on my laptop and my desktop because I have to use it in the field. This is like the old "book" license, that some software used to have. You can put it on two computers as long as you are only using one at a time. Even MS Office lets you do this. Some software considers this as pirating, even tho I am the only one using it. If I can't do this, legal or not, I will change software. There are few programs I need that there are no alternatives to. Even GIMP is catching up to Photoshop.
I have to say that my box has been attacked plenty too. I see ~20 attacks per day, people scanning etc. I also haven't had one break in, I built with all it needed and setup firewall rules on it. The only thing that is touching it, is what I allowed.
/worms attempts I see are for WINDOWS servers. Obviously, these exploits don't pose a problem, but it is actually about 90% of the 'illegal' log entries.
I check my logs on my linux web server, and the vast majority of script kiddies
Adding to your point: Any computer that has an internet connection is going to have attempted break ins/script kiddies/worms hit it regularly. That has nothing to do with what OS you are running. The net result from those attempts, DOES have to do with the OS.
I have only had ONE linux box 0wned in the last 5 years, about 4 years ago, because of not updating wuftp quickly enough. It was a learning experience, and a mistake I am not likely to make again. I learned the most important component to securing your computers is the person doing the securing.
I fully expect that if Linux becomes a major desktop OS, it'll become the thing that's fun to hate. You're in the 'cool club' if you hate Linux.
Oh god, you mean we will to start listening to why BSD is more L33T than Linux, while Linux lovers will scream how BSD is dead/dying? Oh wait, we already have to listen to that...
My main point is, actually, to make you aware that on different platforms, there are different ways to exploit the SAME user ignorance! Telling them that linux is more secure because they have less chance of viral infection will keep them ignorant and bring those problems to linux platforms.
I agree with your point. People who don't understand Linux will often just say it is more secure, because "they heard it somewhere". The two main things that make Linux typically more secure is 1) most linux users are a bit more technically savvy and 2 ) most security exploits are written for Windows or Linux SERVER daemons that you normally don't run on a Linux desktop (bind and wuftpd come to mind) It also helps that the type of 'social engineering' you talk about WILL wipe out the user files and not the OS if you are not running as root, which is slightly better.
5 or 10 years from now, people may be preaching how Windows is more secure because, then, most of the exploits may be aimed for Linux (assuming windows dips to 50%), using the the same flawed logic.
Until then, for absolute 100% protection from all viruses and exploits, I would suggest people just unplug their computers and go outside.
The 2.4+ kernel supports ipchains, but iptables is recommended and usually compiled in.
Actually, a simple firewall is very easy in Linux using LOKKIT. Its installed with most distributions, and its pretty easy to use. Even if you dont run Xwindows lokkit has a console interface that is quite easy to use. If you get into complex firewalls for advanced routing, then lokkit isn't the cure all, but for most of us, its easy and effective.
Can Linux do this?
If not, Windows is more secure than Linux for a desktop user.
Windows can not do this. It takes a seperate program to do this. Windows built in firewall can only ACCEPT or REJECT based on port. (maybe DROP but I doubt it)
With IPTABLES, (which is actually built into the kernel) you CAN filter more than just ports. You don't filter by the name of the program, but you can filter types of packets and allow or deny according to rules. Its not the easiest to do, but there is probably a GUI program out there for Linux that makes it easy (i use Linux in init 3 mainly, so GUI apps are not my forte.)
Oh yea, and the firewall in Linux is free, doesn't require licensing, works at the kernel level rather than the user level thus provides a slightly higher level of security and is much more configurable since it also allows for sharing an internet connection, with the shared connection having different firewall rules than the host computer. And you never see the pop up ads, like Zone Alarm, that recommend you upgrade to an expensive version. It just works.
NOw, go crawl back under your bridge, you nasty little troll.
I dunno, I run the same pirated copy of Norton Antivirus and Norton Internet Security on every windows pc I've got, and the Live Update works correctly on all of them
Most OEM versions of AV expire in 90 days, retail in 365, but most computers just come with the 90 days worth. The goal being to get you to pay the $10 to extend your access to their network for another year. Personally, I just set the clock back a year when i run update. I guess you could boot your new computer with a floppy the first time, and set the clock ahead two years before it fires up, so the AV software time stamps that it expires two years and 3 months from now.
Or buy the retail version and set your clock ahead while you install, and put it on all your computers.
Or just uninstall and reinstall the AV every year (if its retail version and you have the disk)
Yea, there are lots of ways to pirate it. But they still really want you to pay THEM directly to update for another year, since they don't have to share that money with retailers. They pretty much give away that 90 day version anyway.
I don't understand this hate against the publisher. I would think they are simply protecting their software. They are in no way harming legitimate paying customers. Even when phoning home about a pirated copy there is no harm, it is the pirate who is harming the publisher.
So we should let the police search your home without a warrant? I mean, if you aren't doing anything illegal, it is in no way harming you, right? Or just allow them to put cameras in all homes (ala 1984) I mean, if you don't do anything illegal, why would you mind?
People work no more than 40 hours, and get 1.5 comp time when they work over. They CAN check email from other stations, but not loiter. I am NOT the manager, im the guy who has to fix the shit when it breaks, so yea, if the credit dept. doesn't need internet access, then they wont get it, because we don't need to pay to support it.
:) Its the same basic policy we (wife and I) have with our own business.
If you knew how cushy the jobs are there, you would apply. Its a 18 year old company. Only one person has quit, and few have been fired. The average person has been there around 7 years. This is NOT a slave factory. On average, it pays a solid 10%-15% more than similar companies, and there are several other perks as well. Twice in the last 10 years, an employee was out for a few MONTHS because of surgery or pregnancy. Both times, neither employee missed a single paycheck. This isn't law, its just a pretty good place to work.
The owner doesn't give a damn if you drink or get high, as long as you don't do it on the job. (I've burned one with him after hours, more than once) Most of the people replying to the original post just simply don't get it. Its a good place to work, BUT WE ARE NOT HERE TO ENTERTAIN YOU. Its that simple. We just moved to a new building, and you can bet the new DNS server (and logging) will insure the porn stops, not just because it wastes time, but its a potential lawsuit waiting to happen. (half the crew is female)
The fact that the employeer IS a reasonable is the problem. People constantly take advantage of it. That was the 70% problem. He didn't order the change, I just made it. I went in and took people who NEEDED internet access and were abusing it, and all of a sudden, the internet didn't work, and it just took me a couple of weeks to get it fixed on their computers. They were forced to do work from backup, very crappy workstations. (p100s) I wasn't very popular during that time, but now uptime is exceptional, and everyone has what they need. Now they don't install stuff, they are terrified of launching attachments, and since I showed them logs where they did visit porn (in spite of "I don't know how it got there!") this is reduced about 99%. Yea, a regular BOFH, but like I keep saying, the computers are not there to provide intertainment. Not ironically, the people whose computers never break down tend to get first grabs on the new machines as well.
I DO own my own business as well (very unrelated) and the work I do for this company is contractual (30 hours average a week is all) but I happen to like the owner and agree with the internet policy, even tho it wasn't even HIS to begin with
You and so many other take this entirely too black and white. People go out to smoke, technically they don't get paid to smoke, and they smoke NOT during a break, but when they want a smoke. They talk to each other during work. They are fully compensated with overtime by comp-time. But if they don't NEED internet access for their job, then they should not have it. They don't need to look at porn at work. They don't need to spend all day with fantasy football. If they want to check email, fine. But when 70% of your time fixing equipment is due to ABUSE, you have a problem, and it needs fixing.
You can take anything to any extreme, especially when it supports your theoretical point.
Heh... so he likes the fact that they can't download stuff to use on their machines. Sounds kind of draconian in the end.
Last time we measured, 70% of the downtime on our network was related to the employees installing other software, or downloading stupid crap, like viruses. It is a work computer, your boss doesn't owe you the ability to scan ebay while you are being paid to do work. By doing so, you cost the company money. Obviously, this doesn't bother you, but then again, you don't own the company.
I take every station that doesn't need internet access OFF, so they won't browse the net for the same reason. Its not my job to provide intertainment for you while you are on your break. If you worked in construction, would you expect the foreman to provide a computer on the internet so you could browse Ebay while you were on break? Then why would you expect this from an office job?
The problem is you expect your boss to entertain you for 7 hours a day, so you can get your 1 hour of work done. Please don't apply for a job where I work.