You're still missing the whole point. Tolerance has nothing to do with allowing violence against others. It's about tolerating different beliefs, ideas and cultures.
You know as well as I that the old testament contains lots of really ugly, violent and weird stuff. Does that mean that most christians agree with its contents? No. Exactly.
The same thing applies to most muslims. Try getting to know some, discuss with them and you'll soon realize that they're not that different from you.
Since this thread has gone sour, name calling and projections have taken over, let's put and end to it now.
I've been to a mosque, and I've listened to what's been said there. Have you?
You seem to be on a mission to propagate misconceptions about islam. Fact is that most muslims are like everyone else. They want to live their life in peace.
I agree that a lot of intolerance comes from religious teachings. In my view the dominant religions are often the worst, i.e. christianity here in the western world. As long as we keep church and state well separated that shouldn't need to pose a big problem. The law should not be based on religious views.
As for your assumptions about me I can only tell you that you are wrong.
I consider hypothetical questions like that of little use. Anyone trying to harm me or my kids in a serious way would certainly not be tolerated to do so. I think most people would agree on that.
I have no problems at all with any of the muslim, ahteist or gay people that I know. They live their life without harming other people (to the extent that one can do that reasonably).
Again, it's about tolerating different views on life, even if you disagree wholeheartedly with some of those views. If most people would do that, we would have a lot less problems in our society.
One of the biggest problems today is religious politicians trying to turn their own moral values into law, and by that limiting other peoples personal freedom.
For me, tolerance is about tolerating different beliefs, no matter how much I may disagree with them. It's about letting other people lead their lives as they wish. As long as they don't harm anyone else against their will.
It has nothing to do with sweeping generalisations of others.
Their web site is probably not on the same net as their attacking servers. It should be quite easy to confirm from where the attacks are originating and blacklist those addresses. Blacklisting is not in any way optimal and mistakes are expensive, but it will make new ISPs hesitate before letting them in as customers. It's not fun when you're on the tar end of the blacklisting stick. But it sure works.
The article makes a point of this tool enabling online forensics, as opposed to having to reboot. Which of course makes it _a lot_ easier to read encrypted partitions too. As long as they're mounted.
As far as I know there's no way you could do that with unix/linux.
There's a fundamental difference between the IETF and ISO. IETF makes standards of stuff that has been proven to work (or at least be implementable), whereas ISO wants to write specs to tell people what should work.
A bit like comparing tcp/ip and whatsitsname (x400?). It doesn't really matter how nice something looks on paper if there's no good implementation of it.
Try using setroubleshoot, if I remember correctly it's even installed default in Fedora 8. Anyway, it pops up a notice saying what was denied access and why, and more or less how you can grant permission for that program or what have you.
Then again, you could also run SELinux in permissive mode by running "setenforce 0 (or Permissive instead of 0)". Absolutetly no need to uninstall. Permissive will let you se what would have been denied.
I'm running Fedora 8 here and most of the time SELinux does not complain. The few tweaks I've made were mostly no-brainers.
This isn't to prove how fast connections can be put in the home cheaply. It's to prove how you can build really fast connections (think backbones and such) way cheaper than before. That makes it really useful, actually.
I too have a quad core Q6600 with 4GB RAM, running Fedora 8. WinXP and Ubuntu (8.04 beta) are both blazingly fast under VMware (workstation 6.0.3) compared to my older desktops and laptops. Actually compared to most 2+ year old machines that I've used with WinXP or Linux natively.
That's because there's people who would rather see people who inject drugs die than see them receive any sort of help. Not only injecting drugs, apparently. Just read this. Sad, really.
Poor products or not it looks like they invested $50k to cement their format as a standard. Considering they stand to make billions from that, it was a wise investment. It is the people who designed a system that could so easily be bought who should be ashamed, if that wasn't their intended outcome in the first place. A company can't deny its nature. A company is part of their society too. If they fuck it, they should be prepared to be met by something similar.
On the spot. It is a means to cut the little guy out. The big guys could continue to spam you, they'll just have to pay up. ISP:s are bountiful (in most places), play them against each other if they misbehave. If you don't have that option, explain and complain.
Then again, loads and loads of projects are using MySQL. The stuff about MySQL not being good for them might be right, but the abundance of projects/code using MySQL is quite telling.
Arguing about it is like arguing about favorite colors, and wanting the same color on everything, always.
An rpm package can have dependencies of both files and packages (and their versions). So, that fundamental difference just isn't there. Sorry.
If apt is more popular than rpm is a question neither of us can answer. They're both _very_ widespread. That's what matters.
I'd really like to see a technical comparison between the formats instead of loads of not-so-informed semi-religious opinions on which one's the best. If I remember correctly rpm had gpg signing and multi-arch way before debs/apt for example. That's completely uninteresting to me. What's interesting are the technical merits that are here today (and how easy new funtionality can be put in). Is there a recent, well done (as in mostly unbiased) comparison, if so, where?
The thing is, utilizing yum may not be the "most obvious way" to us old-timers that cut our teeth on RPM. Well, yum has been around for a few years at least. Before that there was up2date and apt-rpm, to name a few (that could accomplish more or less the same thing with more or less the same command).
Trying to resolve dependencies manually, well it can certainly be done (been there), but really. I honestly thought that most people involved would have heard about dependecy solving package managers by now. Those who haven't, rejoice, they're here!
Slashdot Mirror
You're still missing the whole point.
Tolerance has nothing to do with allowing violence against others. It's about tolerating different beliefs, ideas and cultures.
I'm not excusing anything. I'm advocating tolerance towards people with other beliefs. It's what we're discussing, right?
I suggest you try discussing the matter with some muslims. I can assure you that the absolute majority will disapprove of violence in most ways.
Implying that christianity hasn't "hurt a fly" is just ridiculous.
Most religions have a lot of blood in their tracks. I attribute most of that to intolerance, which in turn comes mostly from fear.
Prejudice tends to fuel fear and intolerance.
Now you're just being sad.
You know as well as I that the old testament contains lots of really ugly, violent and weird stuff. Does that mean that most christians agree with its contents? No. Exactly.
The same thing applies to most muslims. Try getting to know some, discuss with them and you'll soon realize that they're not that different from you.
Since this thread has gone sour, name calling and projections have taken over, let's put and end to it now.
I've been to a mosque, and I've listened to what's been said there. Have you?
You seem to be on a mission to propagate misconceptions about islam. Fact is that most muslims are like everyone else. They want to live their life in peace.
I agree that a lot of intolerance comes from religious teachings. In my view the dominant religions are often the worst, i.e. christianity here in the western world.
As long as we keep church and state well separated that shouldn't need to pose a big problem. The law should not be based on religious views.
As for your assumptions about me I can only tell you that you are wrong.
I consider hypothetical questions like that of little use. Anyone trying to harm me or my kids in a serious way would certainly not be tolerated to do so. I think most people would agree on that.
I have no problems at all with any of the muslim, ahteist or gay people that I know. They live their life without harming other people (to the extent that one can do that reasonably).
Again, it's about tolerating different views on life, even if you disagree wholeheartedly with some of those views.
If most people would do that, we would have a lot less problems in our society.
One of the biggest problems today is religious politicians trying to turn their own moral values into law, and by that limiting other peoples personal freedom.
For me, tolerance is about tolerating different beliefs, no matter how much I may disagree with them. It's about letting other people lead their lives as they wish. As long as they don't harm anyone else against their will.
It has nothing to do with sweeping generalisations of others.
Can you elaborate on that?
How sure are you? On a scale from one to ten.
Happy you.
1.1.4 -> 2.0.1 was/is a horrible turn.
The Shulgins should set the setting.
There's also esync, but as far as I know (I emailed the guy a few years ago) he got swamped with other stuff and never got any further.
There's quite a bit of theory on his pages though. Might be of interest.
Have you checked out rsyncrypto?
The question was "So, what would be the coolest and most far out thing you would do with this kind of hardware ?"
Playing around and looking for the most far out stuff is perfectly fine. No need to get mainstream boring _all_the_time_.
Their web site is probably not on the same net as their attacking servers. It should be quite easy to confirm from where the attacks are originating and blacklist those addresses. Blacklisting is not in any way optimal and mistakes are expensive, but it will make new ISPs hesitate before letting them in as customers.
It's not fun when you're on the tar end of the blacklisting stick. But it sure works.
The article makes a point of this tool enabling online forensics, as opposed to having to reboot.
Which of course makes it _a lot_ easier to read encrypted partitions too. As long as they're mounted.
As far as I know there's no way you could do that with unix/linux.
There's a fundamental difference between the IETF and ISO. IETF makes standards of stuff that has been proven to work (or at least be implementable), whereas ISO wants to write specs to tell people what should work.
A bit like comparing tcp/ip and whatsitsname (x400?). It doesn't really matter how nice something looks on paper if there's no good implementation of it.
Try using setroubleshoot, if I remember correctly it's even installed default in Fedora 8.
Anyway, it pops up a notice saying what was denied access and why, and more or less how you can grant permission for that program or what have you.
Then again, you could also run SELinux in permissive mode by running "setenforce 0 (or Permissive instead of 0)". Absolutetly no need to uninstall. Permissive will let you se what would have been denied.
I'm running Fedora 8 here and most of the time SELinux does not complain. The few tweaks I've made were mostly no-brainers.
This isn't to prove how fast connections can be put in the home cheaply. It's to prove how you can build really fast connections (think backbones and such) way cheaper than before.
That makes it really useful, actually.
I too have a quad core Q6600 with 4GB RAM, running Fedora 8. WinXP and Ubuntu (8.04 beta) are both blazingly fast under VMware (workstation 6.0.3) compared to my older desktops and laptops. Actually compared to most 2+ year old machines that I've used with WinXP or Linux natively.
Poor products or not it looks like they invested $50k to cement their format as a standard. Considering they stand to make billions from that, it was a wise investment. It is the people who designed a system that could so easily be bought who should be ashamed, if that wasn't their intended outcome in the first place. A company can't deny its nature. A company is part of their society too. If they fuck it, they should be prepared to be met by something similar.
On the spot. It is a means to cut the little guy out. The big guys could continue to spam you, they'll just have to pay up.
ISP:s are bountiful (in most places), play them against each other if they misbehave. If you don't have that option, explain and complain.
Then again, loads and loads of projects are using MySQL. The stuff about MySQL not being good for them might be right, but the abundance of projects/code using MySQL is quite telling.
Arguing about it is like arguing about favorite colors, and wanting the same color on everything, always.
An rpm package can have dependencies of both files and packages (and their versions). So, that fundamental difference just isn't there. Sorry.
If apt is more popular than rpm is a question neither of us can answer. They're both _very_ widespread. That's what matters.
I'd really like to see a technical comparison between the formats instead of loads of not-so-informed semi-religious opinions on which one's the best. If I remember correctly rpm had gpg signing and multi-arch way before debs/apt for example. That's completely uninteresting to me. What's interesting are the technical merits that are here today (and how easy new funtionality can be put in). Is there a recent, well done (as in mostly unbiased) comparison, if so, where?
Trying to resolve dependencies manually, well it can certainly be done (been there), but really. I honestly thought that most people involved would have heard about dependecy solving package managers by now. Those who haven't, rejoice, they're here!