Aren't these the same people who bought Byte and then almost immediately closed it down? Oh wait, there's a webpage now with about a hundredth the content the magazine used to have, so everything's just dandy! Jerry Pournelle notwithstanding, I really liked that mag - it was the only major publication that wasn't in the back pocket of the industry (can anyone say ziff-davis? I thought you could). I'm still pissed that these clowns took it over only to shitcan it.
Now, I know I'm not an mba or anything, but where's the sense in buying up a bunch of print magazines and then shutting them down? Is it some sort of a tax dodge to lose money, or what?
As for the future of tpj: it'll come out a couple of times a year, with a couple of articles each time. Yippee...
Use an older distro. I suggested this the last time this topic came up here, and generally got flamed for it, but I still think it's worth considering. If you're only running CLI or old style X apps, you may find it a lot easier to use Red Hat 5.0 and add the newer pieces you want than to try to cut one of the newer megadistros down to size. New distros don't even come with stuff like xplaycd or xfm. Just made sure to update for any security holes.
Security - that's just the problem with older, unsupported distributions like rh5.x. There would be so many holes that would have to be plugged that you'd effectively end up with a new distro anyway. That's the best case, assuming you were willing to scour several years worth of bugtraq vulnerabilities and do a lot of manual labour yourself. Why bother with all the hassle, when a newer distro does all the heavy lifting for you?
I've installed Slackware 8 on a few older systems and I'm very impressed with it. Very lean and stable. It gives you good control over the install process, and it's easy to squeeze it onto small hard drives and old computers. And it's new and still supported, meaning that security updates are only a download away.
I would just like to say at the outset that I am not a raving nut. But I have puzzled at the unusually close relationship between Microsoft and the Bush administration. And consider the following disclaimer from the End User License Agreement (EULA) at passport.com:
.NET Passport will disclose personal information if required to do so by law or in the good-faith belief that such action is necessary to:
. . . d. Act under exigent circumstances to protect the personal safety of users of Microsoft, the.NET Passport Web Site, or the public.
With the recent terrorist activities and the sweeping new anti-terrorist legislation, any "exigent circumstances" could be said to be met as a matter of course. So what guarantees do we have that MS and the gov't doesn't have a secret agreement in place to continuously sift and profile all the data (OUR data) that the.Net databases will surely contain? And is there a person on the planet who believes that MS wouldn't use its users privacy as a bargaining chip to extract a favourable deal from the gov't? (Not that they ever had any respect for it before, of course.)
All you need to do is run a local proxy like webwasher (www.webwasher.com) and you can view whatever webpages you want without being annoyed by ads, webbugs, cookies, etc. I don't use windows, so I can't say whether the windows version can be made to block activex controls. But I believe ie itself allows you to stop them from being downloaded...
Among other things, the EULA at passport.com/Consumer/PrivacyPolicy.asp?lc=1033.NE T says: Passport will disclose personal information if required to do so by law or in the good-faith belief that such action is necessary to... Act under exigent circumstances to protect the personal safety of users of Microsoft, the.NET Passport Web Site, or the public.
How interestingly broad, given that in light of recent terrorist activities any "exigent circumstances" could be said to be met as a matter of course. And there is no doubt that all the information that's bound to be stored on.Net servers could be sifted and profiled in many fascinating ways by the intelligence community.
Kinda makes you wonder how it all fits together, given the walk Microsoft got on the anti-trust case.
I use the squid proxy on my linux box, which enables me to send any UA string I want. I'm sure it will surprise no one that if I set it to Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows 98 and view it in Mozilla.95, the page renders just fine.
I have to say I'm a little confused by the brazenness of this move. These people did lose the antitrust case, after all. What the hell are they thinking?
If all else fails, there's always w3m, lynx and links - pure content, no frills:)
Ah yes, ad-less browsing. All you need is something like webwasher and you can block all the ads you want, and cookies, and pretty much anything you want.
There are free for personal use versions of webwasher both windows and linux, but it is not open source. But since mozilla is not beholden to giant corporate entities, *cough*AOL*cough* what's to stop our intrepid developers from decent garbage filtering into it? Inquiring minds want to know!
Microsoft is in big trouble right now. Its market cap is half what it used to be and it needs to keep the bucks rolling in to keep itself from imploding. So now they're going after money in places they haven't much bothered with in the past - such as licence compliance. After all, how many large organizations can produce evidence that all their windows machines are legal?
Slashdot Mirror
Aren't these the same people who bought Byte and then almost immediately closed it down? Oh wait, there's a webpage now with about a hundredth the content the magazine used to have, so everything's just dandy! Jerry Pournelle notwithstanding, I really liked that mag - it was the only major publication that wasn't in the back pocket of the industry (can anyone say ziff-davis? I thought you could). I'm still pissed that these clowns took it over only to shitcan it.
Now, I know I'm not an mba or anything, but where's the sense in buying up a bunch of print magazines and then shutting them down? Is it some sort of a tax dodge to lose money, or what?
As for the future of tpj: it'll come out a couple of times a year, with a couple of articles each time. Yippee...
Use an older distro. I suggested this the last time this topic came up here, and generally got flamed for it, but I still think it's worth considering. If you're only running CLI or old style X apps, you may find it a lot easier to use Red Hat 5.0 and add the newer pieces you want than to try to cut one of the newer megadistros down to size. New distros don't even come with stuff like xplaycd or xfm. Just made sure to update for any security holes.
Security - that's just the problem with older, unsupported distributions like rh5.x. There would be so many holes that would have to be plugged that you'd effectively end up with a new distro anyway. That's the best case, assuming you were willing to scour several years worth of bugtraq vulnerabilities and do a lot of manual labour yourself. Why bother with all the hassle, when a newer distro does all the heavy lifting for you?
I've installed Slackware 8 on a few older systems and I'm very impressed with it. Very lean and stable. It gives you good control over the install process, and it's easy to squeeze it onto small hard drives and old computers. And it's new and still supported, meaning that security updates are only a download away.
I would just like to say at the outset that I am not a raving nut. But I have puzzled at the unusually close relationship between Microsoft and the Bush administration. And consider the following disclaimer from the End User License Agreement (EULA) at passport.com:
.NET Passport will disclose personal information if required to do so by law or in the good-faith belief that such action is necessary to:
.NET Passport Web Site, or the public.
.Net databases will surely contain? And is there a person on the planet who believes that MS wouldn't use its users privacy as a bargaining chip to extract a favourable deal from the gov't? (Not that they ever had any respect for it before, of course.)
. . . d. Act under exigent circumstances to protect the personal safety of users of Microsoft, the
With the recent terrorist activities and the sweeping new anti-terrorist legislation, any "exigent circumstances" could be said to be met as a matter of course. So what guarantees do we have that MS and the gov't doesn't have a secret agreement in place to continuously sift and profile all the data (OUR data) that the
All you need to do is run a local proxy like webwasher (www.webwasher.com) and you can view whatever webpages you want without being annoyed by ads, webbugs, cookies, etc. I don't use windows, so I can't say whether the windows version can be made to block activex controls. But I believe ie itself allows you to stop them from being downloaded...
Among other things, the EULA at passport.com/Consumer/PrivacyPolicy.asp?lc=1033.NE T says: Passport will disclose personal information if required to do so by law or in the good-faith belief that such action is necessary to... Act under exigent circumstances to protect the personal safety of users of Microsoft, the .NET Passport Web Site, or the public.
.Net servers could be sifted and profiled in many fascinating ways by the intelligence community.
How interestingly broad, given that in light of recent terrorist activities any "exigent circumstances" could be said to be met as a matter of course. And there is no doubt that all the information that's bound to be stored on
Kinda makes you wonder how it all fits together, given the walk Microsoft got on the anti-trust case.
I use the squid proxy on my linux box, which enables me to send any UA string I want. I'm sure it will surprise no one that if I set it to Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows 98 and view it in Mozilla .95, the page renders just fine.
I have to say I'm a little confused by the brazenness of this move. These people did lose the antitrust case, after all. What the hell are they thinking?
If all else fails, there's always w3m, lynx and links - pure content, no frills :)
Ah yes, ad-less browsing. All you need is something like webwasher and you can block all the ads you want, and cookies, and pretty much anything you want.
There are free for personal use versions of webwasher both windows and linux, but it is not open source. But since mozilla is not beholden to giant corporate entities, *cough*AOL*cough* what's to stop our intrepid developers from decent garbage filtering into it? Inquiring minds want to know!
Microsoft is in big trouble right now. Its market cap is half what it used to be and it needs to keep the bucks rolling in to keep itself from imploding. So now they're going after money in places they haven't much bothered with in the past - such as licence compliance. After all, how many large organizations can produce evidence that all their windows machines are legal?