All the free-speech, I-should-be-able-to-do-what-I-want rhetoric aside, it's just bad business sense to not allow more than one domain name per organization. I work for a company that has two completely different "official" domain names and various other subsidiary domain names (like, instead of company.com, company.org and company.net, just to cover the bases). They're owned by the same company, but they apply to two completely different services this company offers.
So what if you can't register the domain name you want because someone's holding it? They're not limiting you, they're just limiting your execution. If what you say is really important, people will find your information.
The web site talks about how they're encoding the data to ensure that it's not false. Does anyone have any idea how any of this is being done? I'm not a cracker or anything, I'm just curious as to whether they're using known algorithms or came up with something new.
Wouldn't it be interesting if they used the pattern itself to encrypt the data? Sure would make life simple, and although if someone discovered that, I suppose the code would be broken.
I don't think he did a whole lot of research into programming practices. There are reasons that Windows 2000 is reaching an insane number of code lines and why people feel the need to reinvent the wheel. When people keep adding features to programs (for this example, we'll use Windows), they get bloated software with tons of features that were available in previous versions but have been obsoleted by newer functions. Thus, you get a word processor that's almost as big as an operating system (and I'm not talking about emacs here) and software that takes many more resources than it should.
Enter the 'yoot'. They have free time and excellent motivations, namely, making things work better. They decide to simply "reinvent the wheel", rather than trying to port the current one or add more features to it. Code comes out cleaner, smaller, and with the same features that people actually need and use. I think we only need to look at the Mozilla project to see this in action. Sure, it's taking a long time to get the project out the door, but damn, what they're producing is slick, fast, and still has the same features as its predecessor.
The problem with the Microsoft wheel is it's really big and it's really flat. People are "reinventing" it because it needs to be. It's not working; it's not rolling along. Unfortunately, the enthusiasm for redefining the status quo can't be found in the old codgers in corporate America, it has to come from us 'yoots'.
I don't fault the author, though. He/is/ over twice my age.:)
The problem is that Microsoft, while trying to create a client-server architecture like Unix, has also maintained most of the consumer-appealing aspects of its Windows line. Windows was always a consumer-oriented operating system, so it comes as no surprise to me that a) people don't want to use it for high-end server tasks and b) that Microsoft hasn't done a good job with the server aspects. The fact that Microsoft is shipping a "home user" version of Windows 2000 whenever it does ship is ludicrous. It's the same basic operating system with more actual server-like utilities in the "Enterprise" version. Microsoft needs to quit worrying about appealing to Ma and Pa and start worrying about the actual server characteristics of its OS. When that's finished,/then/ go back and tweak the UI. This is essentially the position that Linux is in, and we know about the stability of Linux.
Where I work, we have both Unix and NT systems. We use NT as basically a file-sharing system for Windows computers and use Unix for everything else. Guess how often the NT machine has to be taken down for some reason or another.
Guterman set out to do one thing: find out how easy it is to setup Redhat Linux on a Windows machine. Why is this key? If Linux is going to "crush Microsoft", it's going to have to do it by converting current users. What he found is that it isn't easy. He gave relatively good reasons why it isn't. Yes, for experienced Slashdotters, it is relatively easy. We know how it works. If something minor goes wrong, we can adjust and fix it. Guterman doesn't care about you. He cares about the other people who can't fix something minor, i.e. the people who use only Windows.
People basically have been saying, "Well, Windows ext2 support sucks, so thank your lucky stars that any FAT32 support was available at all!" Wrong attitude. You're basically saying that "If Windows doesn't support it, we shouldn't have to be expected to either." The whole reason we like Linux is because it does stuff well, not just because it does stuff better than Windows. If something isn't done well, that's a call to make it work correctly, not say, "Well, look at what Microsoft can't do..."
I think Guterman was wrong about Partition Magic, though. No operating system should have to include a utility to make it dual boot with another OS. If people want to run more than one OS on their computer, they need to expect to cough up extra for it, not expect it as a feature of their OS's installation setup.
I'd like to see Jimmy do a review of Caldera's new OpenLinux 2.2. His criticism seems much more constructive than it is biting. If there's something painfully wrong with the process, I'm sure he'll point it out a lot faster than a regular Slashdot reader will. Of course, I could give it to my Mom; she'd find it the fastest.
And, finally, what's with everyone clamoring for the man's e-mail address? Hell, the whole point of this latest article was that he received a/flood/ of e-mail. He obviously reads/. Let him read your comments.
There's a very fine line between advocacy and arrogance.
I dunno. I see a lot of people bashing MS hardware here and there and what they call new and where it was developed from. Guess what, the mouse is pretty basic. All of the designs for it essentially come from the same basic idea.
I've never had a problem with a Microsoft mouse, and it's comfort is unbeat (Logitech and Kensingtons just don't fit into the palm of my hand like the MS mouse does). I have a computer that's four years old that's still using the same MS mouse that it came with. I have another computer with one of the newer wheelie deals and it works fine, too (I don't really use the wheel much, but it's still a great idea, IMHO). Of course, I treat my hardware with respect. The only trauma my mice undergo is the three day trip between school and home every summer. I do find that they have problems running over some surfaces, but all mice have these problems. A good $1 mouse pad tends to take care of this (one with that funky grain to its fabric).
As for their other hardware, their keyboards work great. I've used other ergonomic keyboards and none matches up to the comfort of the MS one. I find it rather large and klunky (I have one of the older, non-Elite versions), but I don't care cause I don't move it a whole lot. My Linux system has a standard Dell keyboard which I use constantly, but I'm much more relaxed typing in my MS keyboard.
A lot of people replying to these messages tend to take MS-bashing to new heights. Chiding a company that you hate for putting a tail light on a mouse is ridiculous. It was a design decision meant to appeal to the mass consumer. MS isn't targeting stuff at you and I. They're targeting it at the 70% of the world's home computer population that is clueless and likes to look cool. It's an excellent marketing decision. Flashing lights and bells have always appealed to consumer society.
And of the 30 or so comments I saw, only two of the people had actually used the mouse. They had good things to say. One might criticize MS for their product, but at least look at it first. Otherwise, you look like a ranting/raving buffoon.
Mostly Perl. A dab of C here and there and I once took a class in Pascal (talk about the most useless class I've ever taken.. worse than Human Sexuality).
Oh yeah, this is great. I can see disaster coming
on
SETI@Home For Linux
·
· Score: 1
Big deal. How's the alien going to know it's porn? You're assuming that a) aliens know that there's something inherently private about a naked body and/or the act of procreating in our culture and b) what the Hell's going on in the picture anyway.
I kind of like this suggestion. There are stories about Slashdot which are pretty cool and I'd miss out on if I turned off Slashdot stories, but little system maintenance things could go in a Slashbox on the side (that's what I would like to see). Subtlely adjust the spill method isn't really a "story".
And I really like all the changes, too. Rob's done a great job with Slashdot (and of listening to people to see which changes need to be made and which ones need to be ignored).
How can someone 'predict' that something will be an 'unpredicted' force? Of course, that's ignoring the fact that open source software has already become a huge force and people have already been predicting it's leaps and bounds in this New Year.
Slashdot Mirror
All the free-speech, I-should-be-able-to-do-what-I-want rhetoric aside, it's just bad business sense to not allow more than one domain name per organization. I work for a company that has two completely different "official" domain names and various other subsidiary domain names (like, instead of company.com, company.org and company.net, just to cover the bases). They're owned by the same company, but they apply to two completely different services this company offers.
So what if you can't register the domain name you want because someone's holding it? They're not limiting you, they're just limiting your execution. If what you say is really important, people will find your information.
The web site talks about how they're encoding the data to ensure that it's not false. Does anyone have any idea how any of this is being done? I'm not a cracker or anything, I'm just curious as to whether they're using known algorithms or came up with something new.
Wouldn't it be interesting if they used the pattern itself to encrypt the data? Sure would make life simple, and although if someone discovered that, I suppose the code would be broken.
I don't think he did a whole lot of research into programming practices. There are reasons that Windows 2000 is reaching an insane number of code lines and why people feel the need to reinvent the wheel. When people keep adding features to programs (for this example, we'll use Windows), they get bloated software with tons of features that were available in previous versions but have been obsoleted by newer functions. Thus, you get a word processor that's almost as big as an operating system (and I'm not talking about emacs here) and software that takes many more resources than it should.
/is/ over twice my age. :)
Enter the 'yoot'. They have free time and excellent motivations, namely, making things work better. They decide to simply "reinvent the wheel", rather than trying to port the current one or add more features to it. Code comes out cleaner, smaller, and with the same features that people actually need and use. I think we only need to look at the Mozilla project to see this in action. Sure, it's taking a long time to get the project out the door, but damn, what they're producing is slick, fast, and still has the same features as its predecessor.
The problem with the Microsoft wheel is it's really big and it's really flat. People are "reinventing" it because it needs to be. It's not working; it's not rolling along. Unfortunately, the enthusiasm for redefining the status quo can't be found in the old codgers in corporate America, it has to come from us 'yoots'.
I don't fault the author, though. He
So, by 'suspended server' does one mean that the system hangs or does it mean that the organization supplying the IP address has shut him down?
I think in this case, it must mean both.
If we're now going to start blaming the Internet for our problems, does this mean that we can sue Al Gore?
The problem is that Microsoft, while trying to create a client-server architecture like Unix, has also maintained most of the consumer-appealing aspects of its Windows line. Windows was always a consumer-oriented operating system, so it comes as no surprise to me that a) people don't want to use it for high-end server tasks and b) that Microsoft hasn't done a good job with the server aspects. The fact that Microsoft is shipping a "home user" version of Windows 2000 whenever it does ship is ludicrous. It's the same basic operating system with more actual server-like utilities in the "Enterprise" version. Microsoft needs to quit worrying about appealing to Ma and Pa and start worrying about the actual server characteristics of its OS. When that's finished, /then/ go back and tweak the UI. This is essentially the position that Linux is in, and we know about the stability of Linux.
Where I work, we have both Unix and NT systems. We use NT as basically a file-sharing system for Windows computers and use Unix for everything else. Guess how often the NT machine has to be taken down for some reason or another.
Guterman set out to do one thing: find out how easy it is to setup Redhat Linux on a Windows machine. Why is this key? If Linux is going to "crush Microsoft", it's going to have to do it by converting current users. What he found is that it isn't easy. He gave relatively good reasons why it isn't. Yes, for experienced Slashdotters, it is relatively easy. We know how it works. If something minor goes wrong, we can adjust and fix it. Guterman doesn't care about you. He cares about the other people who can't fix something minor, i.e. the people who use only Windows.
..."
/flood/ of e-mail. He obviously reads /. Let him read your comments.
People basically have been saying, "Well, Windows ext2 support sucks, so thank your lucky stars that any FAT32 support was available at all!" Wrong attitude. You're basically saying that "If Windows doesn't support it, we shouldn't have to be expected to either." The whole reason we like Linux is because it does stuff well, not just because it does stuff better than Windows. If something isn't done well, that's a call to make it work correctly, not say, "Well, look at what Microsoft can't do
I think Guterman was wrong about Partition Magic, though. No operating system should have to include a utility to make it dual boot with another OS. If people want to run more than one OS on their computer, they need to expect to cough up extra for it, not expect it as a feature of their OS's installation setup.
I'd like to see Jimmy do a review of Caldera's new OpenLinux 2.2. His criticism seems much more constructive than it is biting. If there's something painfully wrong with the process, I'm sure he'll point it out a lot faster than a regular Slashdot reader will. Of course, I could give it to my Mom; she'd find it the fastest.
And, finally, what's with everyone clamoring for the man's e-mail address? Hell, the whole point of this latest article was that he received a
There's a very fine line between advocacy and arrogance.
I dunno. I see a lot of people bashing MS hardware here and there and what they call new and where it was developed from. Guess what, the mouse is pretty basic. All of the designs for it essentially come from the same basic idea.
I've never had a problem with a Microsoft mouse, and it's comfort is unbeat (Logitech and Kensingtons just don't fit into the palm of my hand like the MS mouse does). I have a computer that's four years old that's still using the same MS mouse that it came with. I have another computer with one of the newer wheelie deals and it works fine, too (I don't really use the wheel much, but it's still a great idea, IMHO). Of course, I treat my hardware with respect. The only trauma my mice undergo is the three day trip between school and home every summer. I do find that they have problems running over some surfaces, but all mice have these problems. A good $1 mouse pad tends to take care of this (one with that funky grain to its fabric).
As for their other hardware, their keyboards work great. I've used other ergonomic keyboards and none matches up to the comfort of the MS one. I find it rather large and klunky (I have one of the older, non-Elite versions), but I don't care cause I don't move it a whole lot. My Linux system has a standard Dell keyboard which I use constantly, but I'm much more relaxed typing in my MS keyboard.
A lot of people replying to these messages tend to take MS-bashing to new heights. Chiding a company that you hate for putting a tail light on a mouse is ridiculous. It was a design decision meant to appeal to the mass consumer. MS isn't targeting stuff at you and I. They're targeting it at the 70% of the world's home computer population that is clueless and likes to look cool. It's an excellent marketing decision. Flashing lights and bells have always appealed to consumer society.
And of the 30 or so comments I saw, only two of the people had actually used the mouse. They had good things to say. One might criticize MS for their product, but at least look at it first. Otherwise, you look like a ranting/raving buffoon.
Mostly Perl. A dab of C here and there and I once took a class in Pascal (talk about the most useless class I've ever taken .. worse than Human Sexuality).
Big deal. How's the alien going to know it's porn? You're assuming that a) aliens know that there's something inherently private about a naked body and/or the act of procreating in our culture and b) what the Hell's going on in the picture anyway.
Umm .. you already have a computer in your brain.
I kind of like this suggestion. There are stories about Slashdot which are pretty cool and I'd miss out on if I turned off Slashdot stories, but little system maintenance things could go in a Slashbox on the side (that's what I would like to see). Subtlely adjust the spill method isn't really a "story".
And I really like all the changes, too. Rob's done a great job with Slashdot (and of listening to people to see which changes need to be made and which ones need to be ignored).
... it probably doesn't help any when you type the article up with "so that we they can be tracked."
How can someone 'predict' that something will be an 'unpredicted' force? Of course, that's ignoring the fact that open source software has already become a huge force and people have already been predicting it's leaps and bounds in this New Year.