I have to wonder what the number was like for consuming alcohol during prohibition. Just a very uneducated guess that today it's probably easily 50%+, maybe more back in the early 1900s. I wonder how many still did in defiance of the law?
What are you talking about? Did I say that I thought Gore should have won? I don't care that he had more electoral votes than Bush did. I know the rules of the election, and I support the outcome.
That has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic at hand. The point is that (if you believe the source quoted above) more people use file sharing, mostly for "illegal" purposes, than voted for EITHER of them.
We all know that (did you notice that Gore had a higher number?). That's not the point.
Otherwise, states like California (that give driver's licenses to ILLEGAL ALIENS) would have too much influence over elections.
Agreed, but the popular vote is still needed within the states so that each state knows who to vote for. Sure, long ago the stete legislatures used to just pick whomever they wanted, but today the popular vote does play an important role in selecting the electoral votes.
I also think low voter turnout is a direct result of people not liking either (major) candidate, but that discussion is best suited for a different article.
The point here is that 57 million is a LOT of people. The RIAA would do well to consider that before threatening them.
how fast could there connection be??? if they truely are on subsidized housing then they are most likely using dial-up. maybe they didn't notice kazaa's icon in the start bar, but how much could they truely share on dial-up versus the tens of thousands of college kids on T1 connections?
If they had 1000 files on a dial-up connection they would still be sharing 1000 files, just not very effectively. I'll bet the RIAA's bots just get the list of files and don't actually try to download them.
Um, the US has a bunch more citizens than the number that voted in the last election.
Yes, unfortunately the 57 million who use P2P (I'm with you that I'd like to see where they came up with that number) are probably mostly those who didn't vote...
Still, outlawing something that even 20% of the population does is pretty insane.
I don't think any new laws were passed to enable the RIAA to file copyright infringement suits, and I don't think the majority of citizens download pirated software/music. Could you site a source, please?
Maybe not a "majority", but certainly enough to elect a president.
We got a call last week by a customer that was having problems with mail.app (OS X email app) getting "poor performance". Come to find out she, and most everyone at her company, had upwards of 2000 emails in EACH mail folder, and they had many mail folders.
Somewhat at a loss for good ideas, I suggested she try Enterage. That's apparently what they used to use, until they broke its limit of a 2mb index, at which point Enterage crashes.
Nothing in the "Ask Slashdot" question about that many message either, so I'm not sure what you're referring to...
All that says is 2000+ messages in each folder. And 2mb index (but doesn't say how much bigger each message mages the index). IMHO, 2000 messages-per-folder is not a very large number. Any mail client that slows down based on how many messages are in folders you don't have open at the moment is seriously broken.
And the mail server I was talking about DOES have a large number of folders with a large number of messages in each (freebsd-current, freebsd-stable mailing lists going back 2 years, bugtraq and vuln-dev going back even farther, etc. etc.). The freebsd-current list alone averages about 2,000 messages per month...
Nice thing about IMAP4 is that the mail client can tell the server "go find this" and the server will come back with only the matching emails. Good for low-bandwidth connections. Not all mail clients are smart enough to take full advantage of this though:(
Um... archive? I don't think any Mail app (that's not CLI only) will handle that, OS X or not.
For 2,000 items? That doesn't sound like very much for a mail client to be choking on. I frequently have 3,000 (mailing list archive) - 20,000 items (snort alerts after getting back from vacation) in a mail folder and my mail client hardly flinches. I'm currently using KMail, but have done this with Evolution, Mozilla Mail, and even Outook Express.
Perhaps it's just the local mail store of some of these programs that sucks? I've always kept all of my mail on an IMAP server (Cyrus on FreeBSD). The big folders can be a little slow over a VPN link but on the local LAN it just zips right along.
The problem isn't the backend. It's the Access FRONTend. If you open a 97-format.mbd it will complain that it must be converted (you can get READ ONLY access without converting it, but it has to be 2k format to make any changes). Of course then Access 97 can't open it at all anymomre. It can be converted back to 97 format, but it's a major pain and pretty much impossible to have a shared database used across versions.
screen captures can be prevented from within the win32 api, i have seen it done. Basically the screen capture happens as tho the window isnt there and you get whatever is behind it.
And what are they going to do about screen caps through Terminal Server? I really doubt they're going to just dump it altogether after all the money they've put into pushing thin-client solutions.
The only thing stopping it is that Microsoft tech-monkeys don't know and don't want it.
Well, that and the fact that password protected excel sheets won't load, and those hideous macro-infested worksheets that all the accountants create out of Oracle don't work at all.
That's complete BS. Anything created in 2000 will be readable in 97; however new formatting features might be missing... SINCE THEY WEREN'T PRESENT IN 97.
Either you saw the Unix code and compared it to the Linux code, or you did not. If you didn't see the Unix code, how can you sit there and say that it's identical to the Linux code?
I know this has been said a hundred times, but even if they are identical it doesn't prove that Linux copied the code from System V. There are 3 possibilities, in no particular order:
A. Linux copied code from System V B. System V copied code from Linux C. Both Linux and System V copied code from a third party
Given that access to the System V source code is much more tightly controlled than the Linux source code, B and C are logically more probable than A Additionally, B is a GPL violation for whoever did the copying.
C is probably likely for the networking code -- both are derived from BSD code, which is legal as long as they keep the copyright notice. I'm guessing this is similar for JFS as well.
Re:Brought to you by the letter K (OT)
on
Aethera 1.0
·
· Score: 1
It all goes back to the old saying that if someone has physical access to yuor machine, you're already fucked.
I don't disagree. But that's no reason to make it easy for them...
If the only way they can get in is by disconnecting the hard drive and plugging it into another machine, then by all means make them do that. It's a much bigger barrier to entry than just typing a command at the prompt and will keep out casual snoops. It's also harder to disassemble the case and yank out the drive without anyone noticing.
Re:Brought to you by the letter K (OT)
on
Aethera 1.0
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
lilo: linux init=/bin/bash - Instant root without password
All of said daughter's friends use MSN, so if she were to try jabber or similar, she wouldn't have anyone to chat to (not much point in chatting to self...).
I have an eliza bot on the Jabber network she could talk to. Not the best converstaionalist, but it beats talking to yourself...
Nope. "I Agree" is agreement. Maybe you're thinking of Counter-Offer?
Speaking of which, with an actual physical contract I could cross out paragraphs and modify the contract before it's agreed to -- and as long as it's the modified version that's signed that's the legally binding text.
So shouldn't I be able to modify the text of the EULA before cliking "I Agree"? Difficult with this Dell thing, but for Office XP it's just a few Win32 calls... Microsoft says that I implicitly agree to their contract by clicking and using the software (even though they are not present to witness or sign it). By that logic, they implicitly agree to my modified version due to the fact that they wrote the software that accepted the modified version without complaint.
I'm not sure what you mean here. You can certainly create.so files to be included into Postgres for calling from SQL. You can build Oracle from source, and there is the libpq library for accessing it. What is missing?
My guess is the poster was talking about the fact that in order to compile libpq, you pretty much have to compile the whole database server too. You can still only INSTALL libpq if that's all you want (FreeBSD even now has a handy postgresql-client port to do this), but you still have to waste time downloading and compiling everything.
Konqueror can do that, "Archive Webpage" creates a single.WAR file.
And a.WAR file is basically a ZIP file with the HTML page and all the images, so even if you're not using Konqueror in the future you'll still be able to read the,.
Slashdot Mirror
I have to wonder what the number was like for consuming alcohol during prohibition. Just a very uneducated guess that today it's probably easily 50%+, maybe more back in the early 1900s. I wonder how many still did in defiance of the law?
I don't care that he had more electoral votes than Bush did.
I meant to say popular votes, not electoral. Thinking about my next reply before I finished writing this one...
Slow down cowboy!
[rant]
What are you talking about? Did I say that I thought Gore should have won? I don't care that he had more electoral votes than Bush did. I know the rules of the election, and I support the outcome.
That has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic at hand. The point is that (if you believe the source quoted above) more people use file sharing, mostly for "illegal" purposes, than voted for EITHER of them.
-- Presidents are not elected by popular vote --
We all know that (did you notice that Gore had a higher number?). That's not the point.
Otherwise, states like California (that give driver's licenses to ILLEGAL ALIENS) would have too much influence over elections.
Agreed, but the popular vote is still needed within the states so that each state knows who to vote for. Sure, long ago the stete legislatures used to just pick whomever they wanted, but today the popular vote does play an important role in selecting the electoral votes.
I also think low voter turnout is a direct result of people not liking either (major) candidate, but that discussion is best suited for a different article.
The point here is that 57 million is a LOT of people. The RIAA would do well to consider that before threatening them.
how fast could there connection be??? if they truely are on subsidized housing then they are most likely using dial-up. maybe they didn't notice kazaa's icon in the start bar, but how much could they truely share on dial-up versus the tens of thousands of college kids on T1 connections?
If they had 1000 files on a dial-up connection they would still be sharing 1000 files, just not very effectively. I'll bet the RIAA's bots just get the list of files and don't actually try to download them.
Um, the US has a bunch more citizens than the number that voted in the last election.
Yes, unfortunately the 57 million who use P2P (I'm with you that I'd like to see where they came up with that number) are probably mostly those who didn't vote...
Still, outlawing something that even 20% of the population does is pretty insane.
I don't think any new laws were passed to enable the RIAA to file copyright infringement suits, and I don't think the majority of citizens download pirated software/music. Could you site a source, please?
Maybe not a "majority", but certainly enough to elect a president.
According to CNN:
Bush received 50,456,169 popular votes.
Gore received 50,996,116 popular votes.
According to yesterday's article in the Washing ton Post (reprinted by Yahoo):
About 57 million Americans use file-sharing services...
I think the winner is pretty clear.
I'm not seeing it...
:(
We got a call last week by a customer that was having problems with mail.app (OS X email app) getting "poor performance". Come to find out she, and most everyone at her company, had upwards of 2000 emails in EACH mail folder, and they had many mail folders.
Somewhat at a loss for good ideas, I suggested she try Enterage. That's apparently what they used to use, until they broke its limit of a 2mb index, at which point Enterage crashes.
Nothing in the "Ask Slashdot" question about that many message either, so I'm not sure what you're referring to...
All that says is 2000+ messages in each folder. And 2mb index (but doesn't say how much bigger each message mages the index). IMHO, 2000 messages-per-folder is not a very large number. Any mail client that slows down based on how many messages are in folders you don't have open at the moment is seriously broken.
And the mail server I was talking about DOES have a large number of folders with a large number of messages in each (freebsd-current, freebsd-stable mailing lists going back 2 years, bugtraq and vuln-dev going back even farther, etc. etc.). The freebsd-current list alone averages about 2,000 messages per month...
Nice thing about IMAP4 is that the mail client can tell the server "go find this" and the server will come back with only the matching emails. Good for low-bandwidth connections. Not all mail clients are smart enough to take full advantage of this though
Um... archive? I don't think any Mail app (that's not CLI only) will handle that, OS X or not.
For 2,000 items? That doesn't sound like very much for a mail client to be choking on. I frequently have 3,000 (mailing list archive) - 20,000 items (snort alerts after getting back from vacation) in a mail folder and my mail client hardly flinches. I'm currently using KMail, but have done this with Evolution, Mozilla Mail, and even Outook Express.
Perhaps it's just the local mail store of some of these programs that sucks? I've always kept all of my mail on an IMAP server (Cyrus on FreeBSD). The big folders can be a little slow over a VPN link but on the local LAN it just zips right along.
The problem isn't the backend. It's the Access FRONTend. If you open a 97-format .mbd it will complain that it must be converted (you can get READ ONLY access without converting it, but it has to be 2k format to make any changes). Of course then Access 97 can't open it at all anymomre. It can be converted back to 97 format, but it's a major pain and pretty much impossible to have a shared database used across versions.
screen captures can be prevented from within the win32 api, i have seen it done. Basically the screen capture happens as tho the window isnt there and you get whatever is behind it.
And what are they going to do about screen caps through Terminal Server? I really doubt they're going to just dump it altogether after all the money they've put into pushing thin-client solutions.
It takes a G4 two days of processing and a couple gigabytes of storage just to compile it once.
It takes my "less advanced" x86 processor about 24 hours to compile it. So much for the megahertz myth.
The only thing stopping it is that Microsoft tech-monkeys don't know and don't want it.
Well, that and the fact that password protected excel sheets won't load, and those hideous macro-infested worksheets that all the accountants create out of Oracle don't work at all.
That's complete BS. Anything created in 2000 will be readable in 97; however new formatting features might be missing... SINCE THEY WEREN'T PRESENT IN 97.
Guess you never use Access or PowerPoint.
Either you saw the Unix code and compared it to the Linux code, or you did not. If you didn't see the Unix code, how can you sit there and say that it's identical to the Linux code?
I know this has been said a hundred times, but even if they are identical it doesn't prove that Linux copied the code from System V. There are 3 possibilities, in no particular order:
A. Linux copied code from System V
B. System V copied code from Linux
C. Both Linux and System V copied code from a third party
Given that access to the System V source code is much more tightly controlled than the Linux source code, B and C are logically more probable than A Additionally, B is a GPL violation for whoever did the copying.
C is probably likely for the networking code -- both are derived from BSD code, which is legal as long as they keep the copyright notice. I'm guessing this is similar for JFS as well.
It all goes back to the old saying that if someone has physical access to yuor machine, you're already fucked.
I don't disagree. But that's no reason to make it easy for them...
If the only way they can get in is by disconnecting the hard drive and plugging it into another machine, then by all means make them do that. It's a much bigger barrier to entry than just typing a command at the prompt and will keep out casual snoops. It's also harder to disassemble the case and yank out the drive without anyone noticing.
lilo: linux init=/bin/bash - Instant root without password
Dude: Use grub. Set a password.
Troll?! I sure hope this one comes to me in metamod...
The problem is that spiders are just stubborn; they spin webs pretty much only when they feel like it.
Must be distantly related to cats...
Yeah, I've been getting that to.
I just reply with stuff like "No, I'm not, moron." or "Your 'upgrade' doesn't run on my computer. Thanks for nothing."
Not that anybody's watching responses to that fictional account, but it makes me feel a little better anyway.
All of said daughter's friends use MSN, so if she were to try jabber or similar, she wouldn't have anyone to chat to (not much point in chatting to self...).
I have an eliza bot on the Jabber network she could talk to. Not the best converstaionalist, but it beats talking to yourself...
It's called Jabber.
Not P2P, but it's decentralized like e-mail so anybody can run a server and chat with people on other servers.
Nope. "I Agree" is agreement. Maybe you're thinking of Counter-Offer?
Speaking of which, with an actual physical contract I could cross out paragraphs and modify the contract before it's agreed to -- and as long as it's the modified version that's signed that's the legally binding text.
So shouldn't I be able to modify the text of the EULA before cliking "I Agree"? Difficult with this Dell thing, but for Office XP it's just a few Win32 calls... Microsoft says that I implicitly agree to their contract by clicking and using the software (even though they are not present to witness or sign it). By that logic, they implicitly agree to my modified version due to the fact that they wrote the software that accepted the modified version without complaint.
I'm not sure what you mean here. You can certainly create .so files to be included into Postgres for calling from SQL. You can build Oracle from source, and there is the libpq library for accessing it. What is missing?
My guess is the poster was talking about the fact that in order to compile libpq, you pretty much have to compile the whole database server too. You can still only INSTALL libpq if that's all you want (FreeBSD even now has a handy postgresql-client port to do this), but you still have to waste time downloading and compiling everything.
Konqueror can do that, "Archive Webpage" creates a single .WAR file.
.WAR file is basically a ZIP file with the HTML page and all the images, so even if you're not using Konqueror in the future you'll still be able to read the,.
And a