Well yes, trusting clients does lower the bandwidth. It doesn't make real-time internet games impossible. I mean some people have the bandwidth to use X sessions via fast connections - I see no reason why there isn't a way to provide enough bandwidth to describe a gaming session. Even if it is something silly like bloated like jpeg screenshots - there's even enough bandwidth for that to be done.
But to render landscape data, and xyz of several player's members, and projectiles - that sounds possible.
"Imagine if this box had been shipped with GNOME as the default window manager. I would have had to get hold of WindowMaker, and some libs so that it would compile for Solaris, and then hack the configuration of the Solaris X graphical login and session handler in such a way that it recognized Windowmaker as existing and was willing to start Windowmaker for me instead of GNOME."
Even the, erm, "sucky" distros have rather easy options when it comes to changing window managers. I doubt that they wouldn't ship with libraries for whatever GUI they had before - they don't want to (and haven't) switched too many default things at once always providing the old. And if Windowmaker wasn't the standard distro before then you'd have to do this anyway so why the belly-aching?
It needn't be difficult and - as a default - Gnome is better choice than Windowmaker.
Now if Sun were to repoint GDK to their own non XWindows thang then that might be something to w00p about.
Yeah and i'm sure Windows will continue to be improve too.
PalmOS will improve to become a good server.
Linux and BSD are similar if you take the scope of cellphones to mainframes -- but if you put them side-by-side you'll note their differences. They are not the same. They are not heading towards the same place. They will not improve to become equal.
Consider times when a government wants to stop its Citizens from amassing or talking to each other (South Africa - thirty years ago). A certain ammount of "anonymity" is required to maintain privacy and to maintain free speech.
"But I shouldn't be able to send an anonymous bomb threat to some student at Columbine and get away with it."
Well, OK. But should you be able to write down a bomb threat in a truck stop's bathroom? In one of the stalls? What about spray painting the side of a truck on it's way to columbine? == If you do something bad you must be caught always, you must identify yourself when you do anything in life in case you might be a danger or do damage to society.
Righto.
As for slashdot itself a login makes no difference to an anonymous coward post - just look at all the trolls with accounts. You either remove posts or moderate them. Choose +2 if you want out, or go away. This place probably isn't what you want anymore.
It may be screwy but some people use the Internet as their own network.
The same reasons that you may want root locally also apply to root remotely.
It's convoluted security at best to have three passwords instead of one (I say three passwords as you don't know the username: so you brute the "username/password then root's password" as opposed to just "root's password").
No one is supposed to be standing at your machine. Physical security is important too.
As the AOL kids say "LOL!"
No one is supposed to be standing at your machine? What? So how did it get there? - who installed the OS? - how do you install drivers or do any number of the things that require root - and if you can give those rights to a plain user who sets this up... root? And where is the person standing?!
Thanks for the description of the random account thing, though.
Uh... read whatever conclusion you want - it's not what I said.
My point was that legacy is the entire architecture, it's the entire operating system - and sure, with enough work, any operating system could behave like another and be good at server and desktop... but efforts are better spent adapting something closer to the target than something further away - therefore one example will be better than another at desktop.
Argh... long sentences.
Linux and BSD differ slightly and there's a reason BSD is used for most big servers. It has better SMP handling, a better TCP/IP stack (Linux 2.4 is much better, though), whereas Linux has much more software and drivers, especially x86 Linux has all kinds of software unavailable on BSD... it's a good desktop.
Conversely, compare Linux uptimes at Netcraft to BSD you'll see BSD is up for longer (slightly screwy data as there's no proof it's not user created problems, anecdotal evidence at best - natch).
They are both sucessful server OSs, they could be both successful desktop machines too - but for Linux with the benefits of non-cross-platform software and more consumer drivers and company support... vs... BSD with it's better: SMP, TCP/IP stack, threading -- there is a legacy that one cannot ignore and although both can be sucessful only one can be best.
If root logins are disabled and people must use su, you can see from which account they su'ed, which, if multiple admins have root on the same machine, is really really useful in tracking down who broke something.
...and if they're standing there right at the machine they don't get tracked... genius! Sounds like something that should be tracked anyway. I don't see the point of blocking it remotely as opposed to locally yet.
Can you please explain what you meant by 1), I understand the terms but the sentence makes no sense to me. Probably because i'm an idiot, yes.
There are many reasons to login as root remotely, the same reasons to login as root locally. To setup a headless box on a network, to administer, to do many things you need root remotely.
And then the half-assed solution to not allowing root access remotely is "su" once you've logged in with a plain-jane account. Jeez, that'll stop evil people using root remotely - now won't it. It's like a "Are you sure? (Y/N)" prompt - it's becomes a stepping stone in the way when you want to do something rather than an actual security measure.
I have yet to hear a good reason why not to allow remote root logins - any takers?
There's no reason that both OSs can't be good on the server and the desktop.
Yeah.. all you need to do is write bits to make it work. What? There's a legacy of architecture that can be defined as the operating system so although theoretically there's no reason bits can be replaced and made as good as each other the legacy is difficult to change and some operating systems are better able to suit server and some are better suited for the desktop and some are better suited to cellphones and watches.
Sounds like you want to be lazy and want someone else to produce things they don't want and that you do.
I think one of the best definitions of Open Source I have read is that it's the easiest way to fork a project.
They'll provide you with almost everything you need to make a fork - that's what's required here and it's not supposed to be easy.
Now so far as your "'official' version of Linux", there are already several forks of the Linux kernel by IBM for mainframes and other such forks. Join one of them if you give a fuck - but me? I like to harass people on slashdot. Thank you.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
Re:Don't embed anything, create DOM as LoLs instea
on
Mason 1.0 Released
·
· Score: 2
Just from glancing at Perlet Engine it seems to have so much HTML definitions (not tags, but you specify p then pass it attributes) inside the code rather than a template - why?
I mean aside from remembering to close tags why does Perlet bother with tags that much?
Why is this from Perlet any advantage over a regular anchor tag?: [a => {href => 'http://www.yahoo.com'}, 'Yahoo']
About as racist as those fijians wanting Fiji just for them, when 40% of the population are Indians that helped them out in the early 1900s. Fuck you Fiji.
Slashdot Mirror
But to render landscape data, and xyz of several player's members, and projectiles - that sounds possible.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
"Imagine if this box had been shipped with GNOME as the default window manager. I would have had to get hold of WindowMaker, and some libs so that it would compile for Solaris, and then hack the configuration of the Solaris X graphical login and session handler in such a way that it recognized Windowmaker as existing and was willing to start Windowmaker for me instead of GNOME."
Even the, erm, "sucky" distros have rather easy options when it comes to changing window managers. I doubt that they wouldn't ship with libraries for whatever GUI they had before - they don't want to (and haven't) switched too many default things at once always providing the old. And if Windowmaker wasn't the standard distro before then you'd have to do this anyway so why the belly-aching?
It needn't be difficult and - as a default - Gnome is better choice than Windowmaker.
Now if Sun were to repoint GDK to their own non XWindows thang then that might be something to w00p about.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
Yes, but why?
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
PalmOS will improve to become a good server.
Linux and BSD are similar if you take the scope of cellphones to mainframes -- but if you put them side-by-side you'll note their differences. They are not the same. They are not heading towards the same place. They will not improve to become equal.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
Consider times when a government wants to stop its Citizens from amassing or talking to each other (South Africa - thirty years ago). A certain ammount of "anonymity" is required to maintain privacy and to maintain free speech.
"But I shouldn't be able to send an anonymous bomb threat to some student at Columbine and get away with it."
Well, OK. But should you be able to write down a bomb threat in a truck stop's bathroom? In one of the stalls? What about spray painting the side of a truck on it's way to columbine? == If you do something bad you must be caught always, you must identify yourself when you do anything in life in case you might be a danger or do damage to society.
Righto.
As for slashdot itself a login makes no difference to an anonymous coward post - just look at all the trolls with accounts. You either remove posts or moderate them. Choose +2 if you want out, or go away. This place probably isn't what you want anymore.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
The same reasons that you may want root locally also apply to root remotely.
It's convoluted security at best to have three passwords instead of one (I say three passwords as you don't know the username: so you brute the "username/password then root's password" as opposed to just "root's password").
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
As the AOL kids say "LOL!"
No one is supposed to be standing at your machine? What? So how did it get there? - who installed the OS? - how do you install drivers or do any number of the things that require root - and if you can give those rights to a plain user who sets this up... root? And where is the person standing?!
Thanks for the description of the random account thing, though.
Ho ho ho!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
My point was that legacy is the entire architecture, it's the entire operating system - and sure, with enough work, any operating system could behave like another and be good at server and desktop... but efforts are better spent adapting something closer to the target than something further away - therefore one example will be better than another at desktop.
Argh... long sentences.
Linux and BSD differ slightly and there's a reason BSD is used for most big servers. It has better SMP handling, a better TCP/IP stack (Linux 2.4 is much better, though), whereas Linux has much more software and drivers, especially x86 Linux has all kinds of software unavailable on BSD... it's a good desktop.
Conversely, compare Linux uptimes at Netcraft to BSD you'll see BSD is up for longer (slightly screwy data as there's no proof it's not user created problems, anecdotal evidence at best - natch).
They are both sucessful server OSs, they could be both successful desktop machines too - but for Linux with the benefits of non-cross-platform software and more consumer drivers and company support ... vs ... BSD with it's better: SMP, TCP/IP stack, threading -- there is a legacy that one cannot ignore and although both can be sucessful only one can be best.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
...and if they're standing there right at the machine they don't get tracked... genius! Sounds like something that should be tracked anyway. I don't see the point of blocking it remotely as opposed to locally yet.
Can you please explain what you meant by 1), I understand the terms but the sentence makes no sense to me. Probably because i'm an idiot, yes.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
But then I guess you're only talking about those "necessary applications" rather than those other toys.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
There are many reasons to login as root remotely, the same reasons to login as root locally. To setup a headless box on a network, to administer, to do many things you need root remotely.
And then the half-assed solution to not allowing root access remotely is "su" once you've logged in with a plain-jane account. Jeez, that'll stop evil people using root remotely - now won't it. It's like a "Are you sure? (Y/N)" prompt - it's becomes a stepping stone in the way when you want to do something rather than an actual security measure.
I have yet to hear a good reason why not to allow remote root logins - any takers?
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
Yeah.. all you need to do is write bits to make it work. What? There's a legacy of architecture that can be defined as the operating system so although theoretically there's no reason bits can be replaced and made as good as each other the legacy is difficult to change and some operating systems are better able to suit server and some are better suited for the desktop and some are better suited to cellphones and watches.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
I think one of the best definitions of Open Source I have read is that it's the easiest way to fork a project.
They'll provide you with almost everything you need to make a fork - that's what's required here and it's not supposed to be easy.
Now so far as your "'official' version of Linux", there are already several forks of the Linux kernel by IBM for mainframes and other such forks. Join one of them if you give a fuck - but me? I like to harass people on slashdot. Thank you.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
About as racist as those fijians wanting Fiji just for them, when 40% of the population are Indians that helped them out in the early 1900s. Fuck you Fiji.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
If you just mean... erm, forking, I have yet to see anyone call that stealing unless it broke a licence and tried to BSD their arse.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
Just pay more attention, or setup Junkbuster, or something.
Free JEFFK!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
Religion's been going down since they tried to make god so fucking friendly and appealing.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
Done by one of the Berlin programmers.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!