Unix and NetBSD have almost always been flawless for server use, both in security and stability. If you're a BSD, you may want to consider NetBSD, but if you want the best, you should turn to the mother of ice and stick with Unix.
Some of the best used attacks won't work on either, but Unix can be a bit more pro-active with less hassle.
NetBSD, however, is somewhat easier to learn. It's all in what you prefer.
As for GNU/Linux, my recommendation for server use would be Debian.
That's just my/.-er hood helping out another/.-er, even if it is an AnonCow.
You think the NSA just lets anyone upgrade the bits and bobs in the kernel without it being checked by an internal commitee? Let's be honest, that's a laudible idea. As a result, there's no kernel hacker to put in a back door; you can only do that on your own system, then distribute it. I'm sure most fixes that the NSA will use will be internal and well reviewed; there won't be much chance for the unmaintainable code master to mess with the best...out of date, but still the best.
The big question should be...who's got root access...I think it's the cigarrett smoking guy or a Roswell grey!
Now get dressed for dinner and tell Katherine not to be spend sixty years doing her hair.
Nah, I usually only go after anonymous cowards and people with names Bess would block.
Other than using an older kernel as the base, though, I don't see how this is out of date. If anything, all you're missing are the nifty applications the NSA uses. I believe, but don't quote me on it, that it was "60 minutes" that recently got to take a look at many nifty security tools and devices at NSA HQ. Among them were all your favourites, retinal scanners, hand prints, voice patterns and the ever increasing in popularity, physical recognition scanner.
Besides, as I've argued several times in/. before, Open Source does NOT mean Open Security.
"Welcome to level fifteen, Mr. Bond. Please submit to a genetic scan."
RE: What's in name
TOKAMAK is the name of the project; I'll ask that you understand that I haven't heard much of it in the last year or so, and around midnightish, it all sort of blends together
RE: Nuclear Remination
It's not bombarded by high energy neutrons; that is how one begins a FISSION reaction. There have only been to chambers in the projects history, and the original was damaged during maintainance, making it unsafe for reuse. One could say, even if what you claimed were true, that the same is true for the U 236 fission reaction used in most current nuclear plants, who's chambers ALSO continue to be reused, except, as I pointed out in the continuation of the comment, "that do not need to be stored a mile underground...," there is no byproduct that needs to be carefully stored, such Po 216
RE: A note to other/. users:
I often do not make myself as clear as possible and am bound to make mistakes, but I am not one to spread on the bs, so, if you catch something, or I get marked a troll, feel free to ask for clarification, or enjoy my.sig.
As I mentioned before, due to Ohm's law, unless this is a superconductor, it takes more than one electron, and the "single atom" is about width of the relay switch, not the total number of atoms involved in the transistor.
Normally, the atom chain would be guessed at Si, silicon, but it sounds like it will be Ag, silver.
200-250 is not a bad guess...for the number of pokemon. 124 would be more accurate by ways of the atomic table, including the undeclareds, the unnamed and the unstable.
Now that we've had a jausle into the world of chemistry, can we play a game of chartuse camerrida?
First off, in case you didn't actually READ this article*, the refence is to the thickness not the length of the transistor. Second, due to the ever annoying presence of Ohm's law, what starts off as a single electron could just be capacitated as another form of energy until it is release by the atom that transfered its energy, most likely in the form of heat.
This is why the field of superconductors is so much more interesting--perhaps, one day, it will only require a single electron, but you'll still be measuring atomic thickness.
*New abbreviation for/. : RTFA; I'm sure you can guess what it means.
The happy little lepton we like to call the electron cannot be used as a transistor because it cannot be kept still. If you could stop a lepton, it would "shatter" into another form of radiation--in theory, that would be mostly microwave radiation though, it could invert or, after the moment of microwave release, revert, into beta radiation.
Though, I'm sure you only meant that as a joke, I just thought I'd throw in some momentary thought. I'm having a good day for a troll.
By the laws of quantum computing, that is NOT outside the realm of science, though, I think we're more likely to hear "single polymer beowulf cluster" than "single atom beowulf cluster," since, without more than one atom, you don't have a cluster yet.
Whoever marked you a troll should be dragged out to MIT and forced to sit in on a semester of Quantum Theory: Engineering for the Future
No, I don't know who comes up with these 1940's titles, but I'm willing bet it's been the same guy coming up with this stuff for the past 60 years. He's probably eight or ninety and a millionare with his own naming firm that now caetors to those disk-hogging power-point presentations.
Personally, I think I'll live to see Moore's Law get sent to/dev/null with things like "Man will not fly" and "Man will never walk on the moon"*.
With the extensive probing into quantum machinery**, the question is, "How soon will it be that processors create their own dimension to perform advanced mathematical calculations. The question is, "When will be using planck's width to record data rather than Fe-Si combinates?" The question is, "Will the term 'wireless' come to mean that a small quantum bridge is created by the computer to read the data on another computer atoms?"
Or, one of my friend's favourite questions: Will a molecule count as a network?
You can keep your one atom transistors, I'm waiting for the chance to upgrade to a 2 1 H isotope!***
*No replies on the one-sided Fox special, please
**This has actually been around for a few years already, and has been mentioned on slashdot a few times, as well as making it to Michael Crichton's "Timeline", as a background to the ideas conveyed in the story.
***Don't tell me not to hold my breath, that, too, is another AnonCow-esk comment
Yes, you are wrong.
A) Not all superconductors are of a crystalline structure, in fact, crystal-like and crystal-based superconductores are the minority.
B) C=C, whether single, doubled or tripled, shared or humologous, bonds would not be put under any stress. Since all electron fields would collaps, as polar molecules, such as water or crystals, would not be directly formative
C) If the contraction rate is properly controlled, it wouldn't effect the overall unit or the conducting material
D) If the contraction rate were uncontrolled in anything, yeah, bonds and molecular groupings would begin to seperate, thus makinc C, D and your latter cause of concern moot.
The actual term "cold fusion" refers to a process that has yet to be provable in Einstien's original theory. The idea is producing large amounts of energy, from the merging of atoms, at radiation variant that is within limit of biological toleration. This is, in that form, impossible.
Now, what exists in our fun little world is TOMAHOK, a fusion chamber that produces large amounts of energy, but only some of which can be converted. It barely makes surpasses the "break even point," that is the point at which more energy was produced than was required to produce and maintain the reaction. Right now, the project has reached a stage where it can power a whole city block of residential housing for about eight months.
It's not cold fusion, but it is fusion, and it leaves no nasty reminants that have to be stored a mile beneath some mountain...in a desert...far away from me...yet, ironically close to Las Vegas...guess no one will notice a giant green luminescent monster there...since there's already eighty of them....
For my self, I am very familiar with the interactions of the universe on the quantum level, but Crichton's "Timeline" is the only book I have read that even makes a hint to it in the world of pulp fiction*.
I did enjoy the novel, and also enjoy sword fighting, though, the book was given to me because of the beginning. Now, if I recall, does not fortune remind us of Arthure Clark's famous quote, "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from magic."**
*It's not just a movie; it's also the category of the most heavily bought fiction--those just published yesterday legal thrillers and...well, actually, that's about 90% of the pulp I actually see people with, but, typically, anything published by someone who's only been writing for twenty years, or is still alive, and writes remarkably often, like Stephen King, is considered pulp.
**I apoligize if I get the quote wrong. If you prefer..."Any operating system sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from Linux."
Which, I may be, since I mis-appropriated a reply on a similar article, but has not Berkly AND MIT already started in the world of quantum computing? Has this not already been THREE slashdot articles? Granted, this may not be something that I use on my desktop computer in the next century, but I'm hopeful.
Not having a beowulf cluster to complete the calculation for me, I do believe the number has the number for in it if calculated into ounces...followed briefly by the number eight....then, there's a lot of zeros....after that, you can convert that into whatever the schmeck makes you happy.
Can we go shopping now?
Who's up for volleyball?
Don't you just hate it when you reply to the wrong article and not notice until after you see the whole page it's been posted too?
The question is, do I copy and move in hopes of balancing out my offtopic karma deduction, or hope for TMAO (then, a miracle occurs, a replacement for ICBS, it can be shown, though, if you jump too far, people will just say it stands for I see b.s.)
Personally, I think I'll live to see Moore's Law get sent to/dev/null with things like "Man will not fly" and "Man will never walk on the moon"*.
With the extensive probing into quantum machinery**, the question is, "How soon will it be that processors create their own dimension to perform advanced mathematical calculations. The question is, "When will be using planck's width to record data rather than Fe-Si combinates?" The question is, "Will the term 'wireless' come to mean that a small quantum bridge is created by the computer to read the data on another computer atoms?"
Or, one of my friend's favourite questions: Will a molecule count as a network?
You can keep your one atom transistors, I'm waiting for the chance to upgrade to a 2 1 H isotope!***
*No replies on the one-sided Fox special, please
**This has actually been around for a few years already, and has been mentioned on slashdot a few times, as well as making it to Michael Crichton's "Timeline", as a background to the ideas conveyed in the story.
***Don't tell me not to hold my breath, that, too, is another AnonCow-esk comment
Since my karma's in the negatives, I thought I'd just whine on all AnonCow FP's on near-topic topics.
All in one media, or as I like to call it, gouloshware, which is disrespectful to goulosh everywhere, is M$-style thinking, and worse, can be a very bad thing in the occassionally laggy x-windows system environment. Have you tried playing "Tuxedo T. Penguin: A Quest for Herring"?
Let's look at M$ for just a moment. Eons ago, technologically speaking, even Windows(tm) had to call on lots of little programmes that did one task at a time. This saved on processor space. This is still not such a bad idea.
Today, you only use three applications to run a programme: Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player and M$ Office. Depending on what modules you load in IE, it's not so bad; of course, it's also the least original programme from M$. The other two can take as long as Star Office trying to load in a C environment, and stability during that time isn't garunteed by the M$ Bill of Gates.
My theory is: In 2000 XP, all applications will be open by M$ new Internet Media Office, which will require 2Ghz processor, 4.4 terrabytes of disk space and 9GB RAM. Clippit will nolonger work alone, and many fun creatures will hop and play on the screen. You will also receive the following easter eggs: five flight simulators, Age of Empires: A Time of Conquest, MacOs X with DVD, Atari's top 100, Commodore's top 100, video Bill Gates being Janet Reno's Dominatrix, a complete list of everything M$ has ever stolen*, "War and Peace", M$ Encarta: The World of Bill, "Blue Screen of Life: M$ Stress Re-Organization" plus free stress game, a copy of M$ Bob, a complete collection of every paper by "The Onion" and finally, "Bill's Top 100 In & Out Burger fast-food franchises of North America"
Now, it's one thing if you have a programme for the sheer purpose of working all the media into one comprehensive pro-gartum something or other, but in the WSOGMM, it's just not worth it for standard use.
No, I did not miss the article; I've just been dying to whine about this for awhile, and gstream was about as close as the subject may come in the next month.
As usual, I'm now going to steal something just to make my article longer:
Microsoft Windows 2000 is based on technology produced by Xerox, Apple, IBM, Bell Labs, Valence Software, ZoomIt Co.,Red Hat, Symantec, Spyglass, Sun Microsystems, Santa Cruz Operation, Corel, VisiCorp, Cooper Software, LinkAge Software, Caldera, General Magic, Dynamic Systems, Citrix, AT&T, the GNU Project, Sendmail Inc., Novell, Borland/Inprise, Digital Research, NeXT, Informix, Netscape, and the following universities: Yale, Dartmout, MIT, Berkeley and Stanford. BlueScreen technology is an original Microsoft innovation created by the BlueScreen Development Team, headed by Steve Ballmer and Ed Muth. This paragraph continues to comply with the Department of Injustice's Vigilante Kangaroo Court Consent Decree (TM).
Thank you for marking me as off-topic and dropping my Karma into a double-digit negative number. Now, I must throw bejana beans at my guests.
You're the previous AnonCow, aren't you?
on
Announcing PHP-GTK
·
· Score: 2
If so, I already yelled at you. If not, well...FOOEY ON YOU!
Hey, here's a thought, why not run a "Make the Best Widgets for Slashdot" Campaign?
Winner enters the circle of advanced moderators, and gets Rob's autograph on any shirt from Think Geek.
And Rob didn't select it.
And, personally, I don't care much for the nut. The PHP icon is important. It means...well, it's just nifty, and I stole for use on another site, so:P
Slashdot Mirror
Unix and NetBSD have almost always been flawless for server use, both in security and stability. If you're a BSD, you may want to consider NetBSD, but if you want the best, you should turn to the mother of ice and stick with Unix. /.-er hood helping out another /.-er, even if it is an AnonCow.
Some of the best used attacks won't work on either, but Unix can be a bit more pro-active with less hassle.
NetBSD, however, is somewhat easier to learn. It's all in what you prefer.
As for GNU/Linux, my recommendation for server use would be Debian.
That's just my
You think the NSA just lets anyone upgrade the bits and bobs in the kernel without it being checked by an internal commitee? Let's be honest, that's a laudible idea. As a result, there's no kernel hacker to put in a back door; you can only do that on your own system, then distribute it. I'm sure most fixes that the NSA will use will be internal and well reviewed; there won't be much chance for the unmaintainable code master to mess with the best...out of date, but still the best.
The big question should be...who's got root access...I think it's the cigarrett smoking guy or a Roswell grey!
Now get dressed for dinner and tell Katherine not to be spend sixty years doing her hair.
Nah, I usually only go after anonymous cowards and people with names Bess would block. /. before, Open Source does NOT mean Open Security.
Other than using an older kernel as the base, though, I don't see how this is out of date. If anything, all you're missing are the nifty applications the NSA uses. I believe, but don't quote me on it, that it was "60 minutes" that recently got to take a look at many nifty security tools and devices at NSA HQ. Among them were all your favourites, retinal scanners, hand prints, voice patterns and the ever increasing in popularity, physical recognition scanner.
Besides, as I've argued several times in
"Welcome to level fifteen, Mr. Bond. Please submit to a genetic scan."
I prefer my replies to be shaken...not stirred.
# Just because there's a comment
doesnt_really mean.u C the-truth* cycle seq
RE: What's in name
/. users:
.sig.
TOKAMAK is the name of the project; I'll ask that you understand that I haven't heard much of it in the last year or so, and around midnightish, it all sort of blends together
RE: Nuclear Remination
It's not bombarded by high energy neutrons; that is how one begins a FISSION reaction. There have only been to chambers in the projects history, and the original was damaged during maintainance, making it unsafe for reuse. One could say, even if what you claimed were true, that the same is true for the U 236 fission reaction used in most current nuclear plants, who's chambers ALSO continue to be reused, except, as I pointed out in the continuation of the comment, "that do not need to be stored a mile underground...," there is no byproduct that needs to be carefully stored, such Po 216
RE: A note to other
I often do not make myself as clear as possible and am bound to make mistakes, but I am not one to spread on the bs, so, if you catch something, or I get marked a troll, feel free to ask for clarification, or enjoy my
As I mentioned before, due to Ohm's law, unless this is a superconductor, it takes more than one electron, and the "single atom" is about width of the relay switch, not the total number of atoms involved in the transistor.
Normally, the atom chain would be guessed at Si, silicon, but it sounds like it will be Ag, silver.
200-250 is not a bad guess...for the number of pokemon. 124 would be more accurate by ways of the atomic table, including the undeclareds, the unnamed and the unstable.
Now that we've had a jausle into the world of chemistry, can we play a game of chartuse camerrida?
First off, in case you didn't actually READ this article*, the refence is to the thickness not the length of the transistor. Second, due to the ever annoying presence of Ohm's law, what starts off as a single electron could just be capacitated as another form of energy until it is release by the atom that transfered its energy, most likely in the form of heat.
/. : RTFA; I'm sure you can guess what it means.
This is why the field of superconductors is so much more interesting--perhaps, one day, it will only require a single electron, but you'll still be measuring atomic thickness.
*New abbreviation for
The happy little lepton we like to call the electron cannot be used as a transistor because it cannot be kept still. If you could stop a lepton, it would "shatter" into another form of radiation--in theory, that would be mostly microwave radiation though, it could invert or, after the moment of microwave release, revert, into beta radiation.
Though, I'm sure you only meant that as a joke, I just thought I'd throw in some momentary thought. I'm having a good day for a troll.
By the laws of quantum computing, that is NOT outside the realm of science, though, I think we're more likely to hear "single polymer beowulf cluster" than "single atom beowulf cluster," since, without more than one atom, you don't have a cluster yet.
Whoever marked you a troll should be dragged out to MIT and forced to sit in on a semester of Quantum Theory: Engineering for the Future
No, I don't know who comes up with these 1940's titles, but I'm willing bet it's been the same guy coming up with this stuff for the past 60 years. He's probably eight or ninety and a millionare with his own naming firm that now caetors to those disk-hogging power-point presentations.
It's a Rodenbury allusion to the character William Boone from "Earth: Final Conflict"
either that, or it's a "clever" way to say surpass or "move beyond the logic of"
Who's up for volleyball?
Personally, I think I'll live to see Moore's Law get sent to /dev/null with things like "Man will not fly" and "Man will never walk on the moon"*.
With the extensive probing into quantum machinery**, the question is, "How soon will it be that processors create their own dimension to perform advanced mathematical calculations. The question is, "When will be using planck's width to record data rather than Fe-Si combinates?" The question is, "Will the term 'wireless' come to mean that a small quantum bridge is created by the computer to read the data on another computer atoms?"
Or, one of my friend's favourite questions: Will a molecule count as a network?
You can keep your one atom transistors, I'm waiting for the chance to upgrade to a 2 1 H isotope!***
*No replies on the one-sided Fox special, please
**This has actually been around for a few years already, and has been mentioned on slashdot a few times, as well as making it to Michael Crichton's "Timeline", as a background to the ideas conveyed in the story.
***Don't tell me not to hold my breath, that, too, is another AnonCow-esk comment
Timmy, now would be a good time to SLEEP
Yes, you are wrong.
A) Not all superconductors are of a crystalline structure, in fact, crystal-like and crystal-based superconductores are the minority.
B) C=C, whether single, doubled or tripled, shared or humologous, bonds would not be put under any stress. Since all electron fields would collaps, as polar molecules, such as water or crystals, would not be directly formative
C) If the contraction rate is properly controlled, it wouldn't effect the overall unit or the conducting material
D) If the contraction rate were uncontrolled in anything, yeah, bonds and molecular groupings would begin to seperate, thus makinc C, D and your latter cause of concern moot.
The actual term "cold fusion" refers to a process that has yet to be provable in Einstien's original theory. The idea is producing large amounts of energy, from the merging of atoms, at radiation variant that is within limit of biological toleration. This is, in that form, impossible.
Now, what exists in our fun little world is TOMAHOK, a fusion chamber that produces large amounts of energy, but only some of which can be converted. It barely makes surpasses the "break even point," that is the point at which more energy was produced than was required to produce and maintain the reaction. Right now, the project has reached a stage where it can power a whole city block of residential housing for about eight months.
It's not cold fusion, but it is fusion, and it leaves no nasty reminants that have to be stored a mile beneath some mountain...in a desert...far away from me...yet, ironically close to Las Vegas...guess no one will notice a giant green luminescent monster there...since there's already eighty of them....
Which is odd, as plastic doesn't conduct electricity in my experience.
Now go back to sleep
Having to tell people affiliations is a full time bznez*
*produced out of sheer boredom
For my self, I am very familiar with the interactions of the universe on the quantum level, but Crichton's "Timeline" is the only book I have read that even makes a hint to it in the world of pulp fiction*.
I did enjoy the novel, and also enjoy sword fighting, though, the book was given to me because of the beginning. Now, if I recall, does not fortune remind us of Arthure Clark's famous quote, "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from magic."**
*It's not just a movie; it's also the category of the most heavily bought fiction--those just published yesterday legal thrillers and...well, actually, that's about 90% of the pulp I actually see people with, but, typically, anything published by someone who's only been writing for twenty years, or is still alive, and writes remarkably often, like Stephen King, is considered pulp.
**I apoligize if I get the quote wrong. If you prefer..."Any operating system sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from Linux."
Which, I may be, since I mis-appropriated a reply on a similar article, but has not Berkly AND MIT already started in the world of quantum computing? Has this not already been THREE slashdot articles? Granted, this may not be something that I use on my desktop computer in the next century, but I'm hopeful.
Not having a beowulf cluster to complete the calculation for me, I do believe the number has the number for in it if calculated into ounces...followed briefly by the number eight....then, there's a lot of zeros....after that, you can convert that into whatever the schmeck makes you happy.
Can we go shopping now?
Who's up for volleyball?
Don't you just hate it when you reply to the wrong article and not notice until after you see the whole page it's been posted too?
The question is, do I copy and move in hopes of balancing out my offtopic karma deduction, or hope for TMAO (then, a miracle occurs, a replacement for ICBS, it can be shown, though, if you jump too far, people will just say it stands for I see b.s.)
Personally, I think I'll live to see Moore's Law get sent to /dev/null with things like "Man will not fly" and "Man will never walk on the moon"*.
With the extensive probing into quantum machinery**, the question is, "How soon will it be that processors create their own dimension to perform advanced mathematical calculations. The question is, "When will be using planck's width to record data rather than Fe-Si combinates?" The question is, "Will the term 'wireless' come to mean that a small quantum bridge is created by the computer to read the data on another computer atoms?"
Or, one of my friend's favourite questions: Will a molecule count as a network?
You can keep your one atom transistors, I'm waiting for the chance to upgrade to a 2 1 H isotope!***
*No replies on the one-sided Fox special, please
**This has actually been around for a few years already, and has been mentioned on slashdot a few times, as well as making it to Michael Crichton's "Timeline", as a background to the ideas conveyed in the story.
***Don't tell me not to hold my breath, that, too, is another AnonCow-esk comment
I'd save the hat for kernel releases
Since my karma's in the negatives, I thought I'd just whine on all AnonCow FP's on near-topic topics.
All in one media, or as I like to call it, gouloshware, which is disrespectful to goulosh everywhere, is M$-style thinking, and worse, can be a very bad thing in the occassionally laggy x-windows system environment. Have you tried playing "Tuxedo T. Penguin: A Quest for Herring"?
Let's look at M$ for just a moment. Eons ago, technologically speaking, even Windows(tm) had to call on lots of little programmes that did one task at a time. This saved on processor space. This is still not such a bad idea.
Today, you only use three applications to run a programme: Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player and M$ Office. Depending on what modules you load in IE, it's not so bad; of course, it's also the least original programme from M$. The other two can take as long as Star Office trying to load in a C environment, and stability during that time isn't garunteed by the M$ Bill of Gates.
My theory is: In 2000 XP, all applications will be open by M$ new Internet Media Office, which will require 2Ghz processor, 4.4 terrabytes of disk space and 9GB RAM. Clippit will nolonger work alone, and many fun creatures will hop and play on the screen. You will also receive the following easter eggs: five flight simulators, Age of Empires: A Time of Conquest, MacOs X with DVD, Atari's top 100, Commodore's top 100, video Bill Gates being Janet Reno's Dominatrix, a complete list of everything M$ has ever stolen*, "War and Peace", M$ Encarta: The World of Bill, "Blue Screen of Life: M$ Stress Re-Organization" plus free stress game, a copy of M$ Bob, a complete collection of every paper by "The Onion" and finally, "Bill's Top 100 In & Out Burger fast-food franchises of North America"
Now, it's one thing if you have a programme for the sheer purpose of working all the media into one comprehensive pro-gartum something or other, but in the WSOGMM, it's just not worth it for standard use.
No, I did not miss the article; I've just been dying to whine about this for awhile, and gstream was about as close as the subject may come in the next month.
As usual, I'm now going to steal something just to make my article longer:
Microsoft Windows 2000 is based on technology produced by Xerox, Apple, IBM, Bell Labs, Valence Software, ZoomIt Co.,Red Hat, Symantec, Spyglass, Sun Microsystems, Santa Cruz Operation, Corel, VisiCorp, Cooper Software, LinkAge Software, Caldera, General Magic, Dynamic Systems, Citrix, AT&T, the GNU Project, Sendmail Inc., Novell, Borland/Inprise, Digital Research, NeXT, Informix, Netscape, and the following universities: Yale, Dartmout, MIT, Berkeley and Stanford. BlueScreen technology is an original Microsoft innovation created by the BlueScreen Development Team, headed by Steve Ballmer and Ed Muth. This paragraph continues to comply with the Department of Injustice's Vigilante Kangaroo Court Consent Decree (TM).
Thank you for marking me as off-topic and dropping my Karma into a double-digit negative number. Now, I must throw bejana beans at my guests.
We get the point, you don't need to keep posting.
.oO(Fluff for brains, I swear)
If so, I already yelled at you. If not, well...FOOEY ON YOU!
Hey, here's a thought, why not run a "Make the Best Widgets for Slashdot" Campaign?
Winner enters the circle of advanced moderators, and gets Rob's autograph on any shirt from Think Geek.
And Rob didn't select it. :P
And, personally, I don't care much for the nut. The PHP icon is important. It means...well, it's just nifty, and I stole for use on another site, so