I'm running Debian/unstable, blackbox, mozilla, and a few multi-gnome-terminals, oh and emacs21, here, oh and the box is using XFS on LVM just for fun as well.
Do you think the author would know one of these if it bit them on the bum?
People ought to define this idea of "the desktop", because I keep thinking people mean "it's got to be accepted by mass corporations", for no good reason. If there's one thing I've fought AGAINST it's getting the clueless masses involved in linux in any way; I am so not interested in fielding "mummy, if I click here it segfaults!" on usenet it's incredible.
" Rather, this substance would be the underlying "space-time" fabric of the universe, which, as Einstein showed long ago, "curves""
...
Aaaaaargh. This article reads like BBC2's _Horizon_ programme. All "these people discovered some random idea, aren't they wonderful?" BS explaining why "blue" is a colour to the clueless population never mind concentrating on the idea to hand at all - apparently Bose-Einsten condensate is somehow the "fabric of the universe"?
I said way back at Uni, and will say it again: I don't want to know whether Einsten *liked* a particular idea, I want to know the *idea* and I'll make up my own mind. Give me equations, keep the pop-psych AWAY.
Depends entirely what you're going to want to do next with it. The ?: operator (which is totally a C idiom) is not readily expanded if you decide you want to go off and shove extra bits in the `then' clause - for which your `if..else' example has space a-plenty.
(Yes, I'd've missed out the { } in the if/else version, on the grounds that if I wanted to put more stuff in, I could put them back.)
"Danny's code probably will be easier to extend and modify, and likely will have a longer lifespan, because of its compactness."
This is potentially utter rot. If you make something "compact" then you're quite likely *using* the language to insert every idiom you can think of. That makes code *unreadable*, not productive at all. (Yes, I've been known to argue in favour of using prgramming languages' idioms before now, and more to the point I expect folks who dare to look at my code output to be able to read it, or else have the decency not to criticise it) but there are limits.
The alternative is that he's implemented a sufficiently different top-level algorithm - and at that point you're not comparing like with like so you can't say one person is any more productive than another. However, you could introduce "amount of desired algorithm implemented per day" into the formula for productivity calculation.
Aside: If they have a restrictive firewall but let you bring your own software in through the front door, don't you think they have a slightly strange idea of security?;)
"lost 'marketshare' due to restricting ISOs."
In my case, they lost marketshare due to having portmapper started by default and yet claiming to be "the most secure BSD". OK so it might not be vulnerable *today* - but there's such a thing as asking for it.
WEll, just in case you wanted a "technical" reason for trying-not-to-slag OpenBSD, that is;)
"FreeBSD is not doing as well as Linux. Why? Buzzword Bingo."
No, it's down to hardware driver lack of support. When I can't install FreeBSD on my Vaio but NetBSD works, I don't use FreeBSD. When the Linux kernel recognises my dodgy eetherpro/100B("Sony") NIC, but the Hurd doesn't, I run Linux.
The fun question is: if the source is openly available for linux to support a given bit of kit, would someone want to take the code and use it gratuitously (munging licensing arrangements as need be) or do they want to preserve independence and duplicate effort? The latter has the advantage of providing alternatives but doubles the creating and debugging effort. Not to mention, I'm a lazy fellow as well.
More and more I think we're heading for a different singularity: modularity. "Kernel by Hurd, userspace by netbsd, hardware.networking by linux", you name it. Now the Openness of Source more or less allows this, how about some cross-OS distributions?;)
...and as soon as his stuff starts connecting to mine, expect to be well & truly blacklisted as well.
As for ethics:
if you run a mail relay you can do so for a few IP#s and domains,for all IPs and domains, or just for your own local stuff that you own. Accordingly you get varying potential for valid use or misuse. Amongst these options tailoring his relay to just those IP#s and/or domains for which his "friends" want to relay, no more no less, would've resulted in an optimum amount of relaying, no more no less.
Hence he is not doing the best he could.
Not to mention, whatever happened to SMTPAUTH? Why doesn't he at least have the common courtesy to run an SSL-wrapped authenticating SMTP server if he wants to provide a relay?
The FSF have a similar attitude to relays - all this cuddly "free speech" stuff really strikes me as so much horse-excrement when it's *me* that has to process the spam - and yes, I've seen stuff relayed through the fsf's open relay before now. I would've thought that such an organisation would have far more sense of the *responsibility* that goes with Free Speech than to abuse it in such an unthinking childish manner.
Indeed. There's still junkbuster, anyway... Or for those of us with Galeon, `right-click / block images from'... which already works wonders on images.slashdot.org and theregister.co.uk....;) In fact, why not set up a local version of the slash code and suck the news RDF down yourself?
Isn't there some philosophical difference between "hey, pay us to get this many readers" and making the readers pay??
Re:You don't need any blasted iPod!
on
iWarez
·
· Score: 2
Too right we don't...;)
I hate to think how much dough I blew on 2 boxes of 50 floppies just to copy C*rel Draw... and never even used it!;8^)
If you write it, you do your best to make it secure and keep it that way. If you write insecurities into it, that's your problem. If you install it, it's up to you to make sure it stays uptodate with patches.
I've got no sympathy for people with cracked boxes when there's a patch that should've been applied (ie in 99.9% of linux and 99.99% windoze cases).
I don't see what casting it in law is going to achieve; far rather use common sense that people are responsible for their own doings, with a few precedent cases to back it up. (That'd be a first;)
Hmmm. Has anyone else noticed WatcomC++ considering going Open?
Personally, I think open-source will only have arrived when there's a *choice* of equally good free compilers available, and I can use any of them to compile the linux kernel and netbse userspace together for my Psion. That's where the portability aspect really comes in - it's "theoretically possible" now with GCC, so come on intel, catch up!
Which bit of "defaults in our gnutella client" did you not understand?
If you're going to criticise the article, then you want to ask *where* this 8Gb/s is going to be - it's all very well summing up the total traffic that *might* be generated, but it's not as though I'm going to have to download all 8Gb down my 56K modem line in order to get every result matching "grateful dead live", is it? Not only am I only going to restrict myself to a couple of minutes' searching, but the traffic itself is distributed all over the 'Net so no one link has to experience the disruption.
Without analysis of the size of the network as a denominator by which to divide the above, claiming "it won't scale" is utter tripe, and I'd expect better from any article claiming to be "mathematical". Duh.
How do I agree without being scored down as redundant?;)
Yes, it's partly linus' fault that 2.4.n=10 a more stable VM has appeared, although that shouldn't have been in 2.4.x at all.
Here's wishing 2.5 not only solves all these silly bickerings and mismanagements, but that 2.6 comes out with New Toys resulting from a lengthy 2.5.x tree as well.
Yes, such a thing would be appreciated. It's all very well developing linux in order to "improve itself" but one can take the "stuff the users" approach too far.
The problem is that there isn't a decent multi-patch versioning system out there: how would you tell CVS you wanted to store versions of files pertaining to 2.5.2-mjc and 2.4.13-ac1 and 2.4.18 and then a set of files for Rik's VM? Then how on earth would you pull out the set of files that constitutes a `linus+mjc' tree, or a `linus+ac' tree, from what you've stored?
The definition of `Free' is to be found on http://www.gnu.org/. Hint: SuSE is not it.
And the answer to your ignorant question is, `me'.
And to the idiotic "moderator" who marked my original down as flamebait: learn not to read flames where there are none. If you can't discuss simple facts, don't assume a role of responsibility.
I wonder why he chose SuSE rather than any other distro (they're the only ones whose key distinctive feature is non-Free - YaST)...
But much as I despise the non-free nature of the distro, I do hope SuSE can stand up to this asshole.
If the lawyer's not prepared either to name his "client" (yeah, right) or to tackle the package with a "conflicting" name at source, then he really has to be a dipshit, sorry, I mean "he deserves to lose in court".
The government doesn't own my head, but they sure as heck would get a framed copy of the notice from solicitors if someone were to be so sensible as to mug me for the cash they somehow saw in my pocket.
I guess the best we can do is vote with our feet, anyway...
You could look into _spamassassin_(.taint.org) and _razor_(.sourceforge.net) as well, btw.
I'm now using those, finding spams semi- heuristically and reporting SHA1 hashes to razor servers, with much happiness.
"It challenges unknown senders and holds their mail in a pending queue."
FWIW I find this system pretty stupid. The amount of work that *you* have to do resulting from spam is that you have to press `delete' or deal with it. It is highly unfair to multiply that work off onto all senders of legitimate email - you could reasonably say that that means the spammers have won.
Slashdot Mirror
"Linux on the desktop is toast."
Takes two to make a desktop work.
I'm running Debian/unstable, blackbox, mozilla, and a few multi-gnome-terminals, oh and emacs21, here, oh and the box is using XFS on LVM just for fun as well.
Do you think the author would know one of these if it bit them on the bum?
People ought to define this idea of "the desktop", because I keep thinking people mean "it's got to be accepted by mass corporations", for no good reason.
If there's one thing I've fought AGAINST it's getting the clueless masses involved in linux in any way; I am so not interested in fielding "mummy, if I click here it segfaults!" on usenet it's incredible.
" Rather, this substance would be the underlying "space-time" fabric of the universe, which, as Einstein showed long ago, "curves""
...
Aaaaaargh. This article reads like BBC2's _Horizon_ programme. All "these people discovered some random idea, aren't they wonderful?" BS explaining why "blue" is a colour to the clueless population never mind concentrating on the idea to hand at all - apparently Bose-Einsten condensate is somehow the "fabric of the universe"?
I said way back at Uni, and will say it again: I don't want to know whether Einsten *liked* a particular idea, I want to know the *idea* and I'll make up my own mind. Give me equations, keep the pop-psych AWAY.
Depends entirely what you're going to want to do next with it.
The ?: operator (which is totally a C idiom) is not readily expanded if you decide you want to go off and shove extra bits in the `then' clause - for which your `if..else' example has space a-plenty.
(Yes, I'd've missed out the { } in the if/else version, on the grounds that if I wanted to put more stuff in, I could put them back.)
Spot the bug in this thought, then:
"Danny's code probably will be easier to extend and modify, and likely will have a longer lifespan, because of its compactness."
This is potentially utter rot. If you make something "compact" then you're quite likely *using* the language to insert every idiom you can think of. That makes code *unreadable*, not productive at all.
(Yes, I've been known to argue in favour of using prgramming languages' idioms before now, and more to the point I expect folks who dare to look at my code output to be able to read it, or else have the decency not to criticise it) but there are limits.
The alternative is that he's implemented a sufficiently different top-level algorithm - and at that point you're not comparing like with like so you can't say one person is any more productive than another.
However, you could introduce "amount of desired algorithm implemented per day" into the formula for productivity calculation.
Did you ever have moons of Saturn in your list of "space-related" things? If so, that might just overlap a bit with the mythological stuff ;)
"oh that's right, no pretty installer oh"
Actuall, 80x25 is more than pretty enough for me.
If you want to do something useful, make the installer CD recognise its own DVD/CD device. *Then* I'll allow you to be sarcastic.
"I had to burn the ISOs at home"
;)
;)
Aside: If they have a restrictive firewall but let you bring your own software in through the front door, don't you think they have a slightly strange idea of security?
"lost 'marketshare' due to restricting ISOs."
In my case, they lost marketshare due to having portmapper started by default and yet claiming to be "the most secure BSD". OK so it might not be vulnerable *today* - but there's such a thing as asking for it.
WEll, just in case you wanted a "technical" reason for trying-not-to-slag OpenBSD, that is
"No official OpenBSD ones available for free; you buy CDs to support OpenBSD."
;)
;)
There is a boot floppy image in the regular tree. mkisofs takes a `-b' and `-c' parameter. You really *can* do the obvious thing - worked for me
(I suppose it helps if you have another machine capable of running mkisofs on which to perform the download, of course?
"FreeBSD is not doing as well as Linux. Why? Buzzword Bingo."
;)
No, it's down to hardware driver lack of support.
When I can't install FreeBSD on my Vaio but NetBSD works, I don't use FreeBSD.
When the Linux kernel recognises my dodgy eetherpro/100B("Sony") NIC, but the Hurd doesn't, I run Linux.
The fun question is: if the source is openly available for linux to support a given bit of kit, would someone want to take the code and use it gratuitously (munging licensing arrangements as need be) or do they want to preserve independence and duplicate effort? The latter has the advantage of providing alternatives but doubles the creating and debugging effort. Not to mention, I'm a lazy fellow as well.
More and more I think we're heading for a different singularity: modularity. "Kernel by Hurd, userspace by netbsd, hardware.networking by linux", you name it.
Now the Openness of Source more or less allows this, how about some cross-OS distributions?
...and as soon as his stuff starts connecting to mine, expect to be well & truly blacklisted as well.
As for ethics:
if you run a mail relay you can do so for a few IP#s and domains,for all IPs and domains, or just for your own local stuff that you own. Accordingly you get varying potential for valid use or misuse.
Amongst these options tailoring his relay to just those IP#s and/or domains for which his "friends" want to relay, no more no less, would've resulted in an optimum amount of relaying, no more no less.
Hence he is not doing the best he could.
Not to mention, whatever happened to SMTPAUTH? Why doesn't he at least have the common courtesy to run an SSL-wrapped authenticating SMTP server if he wants to provide a relay?
The FSF have a similar attitude to relays - all this cuddly "free speech" stuff really strikes me as so much horse-excrement when it's *me* that has to process the spam - and yes, I've seen stuff relayed through the fsf's open relay before now. I would've thought that such an organisation would have far more sense of the *responsibility* that goes with Free Speech than to abuse it in such an unthinking childish manner.
I thought we already *had* one Flash virus, didn't we?
In any case:
ProxyBlock macromedia.com
to the rescue.
The Web is no place for proprietary shit.
Indeed. There's still junkbuster, anyway... Or for those of us with Galeon, `right-click / block images from'... which already works wonders on images.slashdot.org and theregister.co.uk.... ;)
In fact, why not set up a local version of the slash code and suck the news RDF down yourself?
Isn't there some philosophical difference between "hey, pay us to get this many readers" and making the readers pay??
Too right we don't... ;)
... and never even used it! ;8^)
I hate to think how much dough I blew on 2 boxes of 50 floppies just to copy C*rel Draw
I don't see what the problem is.
;)
If you write it, you do your best to make it secure and keep it that way. If you write insecurities into it, that's your problem.
If you install it, it's up to you to make sure it stays uptodate with patches.
I've got no sympathy for people with cracked boxes when there's a patch that should've been applied (ie in 99.9% of linux and 99.99% windoze cases).
I don't see what casting it in law is going to achieve; far rather use common sense that people are responsible for their own doings, with a few precedent cases to back it up. (That'd be a first
Hmmm. Has anyone else noticed WatcomC++ considering going Open?
._ ! _. i
Personally, I think open-source will only have arrived when there's a *choice* of equally good free compilers available, and I can use any of them to compile the linux kernel and netbse userspace together for my Psion. That's where the portability aspect really comes in - it's "theoretically possible" now with GCC, so come on intel, catch up!
Oh, and the smiley you seek is i
;8)
Which bit of "defaults in our gnutella client" did you not understand?
If you're going to criticise the article, then you want to ask *where* this 8Gb/s is going to be - it's all very well summing up the total traffic that *might* be generated, but it's not as though I'm going to have to download all 8Gb down my 56K modem line in order to get every result matching "grateful dead live", is it? Not only am I only going to restrict myself to a couple of minutes' searching, but the traffic itself is distributed all over the 'Net so no one link has to experience the disruption.
Without analysis of the size of the network as a denominator by which to divide the above, claiming "it won't scale" is utter tripe, and I'd expect better from any article claiming to be "mathematical". Duh.
How do I agree without being scored down as redundant? ;)
Yes, it's partly linus' fault that 2.4.n=10 a more stable VM has appeared, although that shouldn't have been in 2.4.x at all.
Here's wishing 2.5 not only solves all these silly bickerings and mismanagements, but that 2.6 comes out with New Toys resulting from a lengthy 2.5.x tree as well.
Yes, such a thing would be appreciated. It's all very well developing linux in order to "improve itself" but one can take the "stuff the users" approach too far.
The problem is that there isn't a decent multi-patch versioning system out there: how would you tell CVS you wanted to store versions of files pertaining to 2.5.2-mjc and 2.4.13-ac1 and 2.4.18 and then a set of files for Rik's VM? Then how on earth would you pull out the set of files that constitutes a `linus+mjc' tree, or a `linus+ac' tree, from what you've stored?
The definition of `Free' is to be found on http://www.gnu.org/. Hint: SuSE is not it.
And the answer to your ignorant question is, `me'.
And to the idiotic "moderator" who marked my original down as flamebait: learn not to read flames where there are none. If you can't discuss simple facts, don't assume a role of responsibility.
I wonder why he chose SuSE rather than any other distro (they're the only ones whose key distinctive feature is non-Free - YaST)...
But much as I despise the non-free nature of the distro, I do hope SuSE can stand up to this asshole.
If the lawyer's not prepared either to name his "client" (yeah, right) or to tackle the package with a "conflicting" name at source, then he really has to be a dipshit, sorry, I mean "he deserves to lose in court".
The government doesn't own my head, but they sure as heck would get a framed copy of the notice from solicitors if someone were to be so sensible as to mug me for the cash they somehow saw in my pocket.
I guess the best we can do is vote with our feet, anyway...
You could look into _spamassassin_(.taint.org) and _razor_(.sourceforge.net) as well, btw.
I'm now using those, finding spams semi- heuristically and reporting SHA1 hashes to razor servers, with much happiness.
"If that's too much work for a sender, I probably don't want to hear from them anyway."
You're right, you obviously don't want to hear from me, for starters. Tell me *why* I should have to do your work for you?
"This validates the source of incoming threats."
No, it validates a chosen outgoing email address of *yours* to someone else who's more likely to change their address and sell yours on as validated.
"It challenges unknown senders and holds their mail in a pending queue."
FWIW I find this system pretty stupid. The amount of work that *you* have to do resulting from spam is that you have to press `delete' or deal with it. It is highly unfair to multiply that work off onto all senders of legitimate email - you could reasonably say that that means the spammers have won.
"Without STABILITY Linux will NEVER succeed... "
ITYM `without stability we will be unable to continue using it for production purposes'. HTH. HAND.
"But the "TOTAL WORLD DOMINATION" is about the non "nerd/technical" people..."
Precisely why I don't give a fig about total world domination.
Go read the Advocacy-HOWTO.