But for the amount you pay for the hardware and support contract, you could buy a dozen or more PCs, and just junk bits of PC as and when they blow up.... it's disposable hardware!
True, but fdisk(8) and disklabel(8) are still hosed on 5.0, so I'm keeping my (minimal) 4.7 slice around for a while until it's fixed. Okay, it isn't that important - until you want to do stuff to your disk partitions, then it's _really_ annoying.
It took me an entire weekend, but then again I rebuilt everything from source with "-O2 -march=athlon-xp". When "everything" includes the base system and kernel, GNOME, OpenOffice and Mozilla, this can take a while.:)
Shame the guy at eWeek doesn't appear to have read the CERT advisory either. Next to "Microsoft Corporation", it says: "Not vulnerable". Though the situation surrounding third-party drivers for Microsoft OSes isn't made entirely clear.
It's even less than that, if you consider the number of ISPs that use transparent Web proxies. (Which, incidentally, is also why I have no way of verifying or debunking this article, since I don't happen to know the location of an IIS server that isn't running on port 80.)
If this trend continues, I expect that in twenty years or so, there'll be a headline "A scientific research team states that it's 99% sure the Universe was created before last Tuesday"?
BULLSHIT! I was suppose to have a flying car back in the 80's according to "experts" in the '50s.
It's called a helicopter.:)
Re:Tech predictions ignore basic social change
on
Christmas in 2050
·
· Score: 2
We saw this sort of thing in the 50's with predictions about vacuum cleaner robots, almost always accompanied by an image of a very happy woman (assumed to be a housewife). No one could imagine the Women's Movement just one decade hence.
Women's rights movements existed before the 60s. And while they were admirable, the contraceptive Pill did far more to liberate women than most of those movements ever could. It's no coincidence that Women's Lib really took off at the same time as the Pill.
In other words, it was a social consequence of a technological breakthrough, and these can be predicted with slightly more ease than the arbitrary changes in society that occasionally (and often temporarily) occur.
Re:I don't think it's wishfull thinking
on
Christmas in 2050
·
· Score: 2
Were I to bet on it, I'd say the walking/talking Barbie WILL exist by 2050
I'm surprised it doesn't already. The technology is pretty much there.
Agreed. Both 3.0-RELEASE and 3.1-RELEASE were fairly flaky releases (3.0-RELEASE still contained a lot of a.out binaries, and still required you to build an a.out kernel; I can't remember what went wrong with 3.1 but I _do_ remember I went out and bought 3.2 fairly shortly after!) Newbies to FreeBSD would be well advised either to get 3.4-RELEASE, or to wait for 4.1.
On this whole tired argument of Linux vs. *BSD vs. any-other-OS-you-care-to-name - what does it matter what OS you use, as long as you're happy with it? It's your computer, after all.
At one time or another, I've used (in no particular order) HP-UX, Solaris (Intel and Sparc), FreeBSD, Slackware, Debian, Red Hat, MacOS and various versions of Windows. They all (yes, even Windows) have their strengths and weaknesses. That the only OSes which are still installed on my machines are Windows 98 and FreeBSD (until I find another hard disk, at which point Debian goes back on there) probably says more about me than the OSes in question.
Computers are mere tools. OSes are the nuts and bolts. If you want to use a Phillips screwdriver, I see no reason to flame you just because I prefer to use a Torx. Chill out, folks!
-- "This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
I'm still limping along with 1.1 (or is it 1.2?) at the moment; I'm not sure if 2.0 has been ported to FreeBSD yet (I ditched the bogus RH6.0 install a month or two back). Don't use it much anymore though as I tend to avoid the computers when not at work nowadays, sadly.
-- "This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
The only thing I could find on the website about migration to FreeBSD was this snippet, dated September 30:
'Any UNIX Dedicated Servers ordered after Sunday October 3 will be set up and configured in our new data center in Vienna, VA instead of Orem, UT and will run FreeBSD 3.2 instead of BSDi Unix. The core software services (Apache, FTP, POP, IMAP, SMTP) will be available as before. However, some of the "contrib" software has not yet been ported to the FreeBSD platform. We expect to have the full complement of contrib software ported to FreeBSD in the very near future.'
So it looks like it's been a part of their ongoing strategy for a little while. Good to see FreeBSD get one over on the closed-source competition, though.:)
-- "This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
Okay, I'll probably get (Score: -6, Flamebait) for this but here goes.
Much on the contrary, because it does limit contributors to those with sufficient skill, this guarantees that the result will have a very high quality.
Not always necessarily true. The second part of the poster's statement was "and have the time to figure it out". I imagine there are quite a few highly skilled people out there who would contribute to [Open Source project of choice] but don't have time because they've all got full-time jobs working for a software house producing closed-source software.
Also, companies generally do not pay for software developers who don't have a clue, at least if they can help it, so the full-time employees of a software house are not necessarily any less skilled than the contributors to an open-source project - and often they've been hired because they have the specific skills required to do the job. (I.T. skill shortage notwithstanding.)
So to suggest that having maybe several hundred skilled volunteers poring over code is necessarily going to produce a better result than having a couple of dozen skilled full-time employees who are being paid to do it is a little naïve.
It worries me that there are some fundamental skills that still appear to be very rare in the open-source community - the two biggies that spring to mind are user-interface design and documentation. It is probably the nature of the beast, of course, that none of us can draw for toffee and we all hate writing documentation, of course;) Perhaps the community needs to set up a Hire-Some-Graphic-Designers-And-Documentation-Expe rts Fund?
-- "This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
Well, I don't know what kind of welfare system you have in the States, but here in the UK it'd be practically impossible to support any kind of serious drug habit on forty quid a week. And I think you'll find that the vast majority of people on welfare are there short-term.
-- "This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
Slashdot Mirror
But for the amount you pay for the hardware and support contract, you could buy a dozen or more PCs, and just junk bits of PC as and when they blow up.... it's disposable hardware!
I downloaded the RC2 ISO a while back and started cvsup'ing RELENG_5_0, thankfully, so no fighting for bandwidth for me :)
(ie - move BX INTO AX, and not the correct meaning). (Heck - who decided to put the destination BEFORE the source in i86 ASM?)
It's historical, IIRC. 8080/Z80 assembly is the same.
True, but fdisk(8) and disklabel(8) are still hosed on 5.0, so I'm keeping my (minimal) 4.7 slice around for a while until it's fixed. Okay, it isn't that important - until you want to do stuff to your disk partitions, then it's _really_ annoying.
You can use RELENG_5_0 for the time being to track 5.0-RC/RELEASE + errata and security patches, until they get around to creating the RELENG_5 tag.
It took me an entire weekend, but then again I rebuilt everything from source with "-O2 -march=athlon-xp". When "everything" includes the base system and kernel, GNOME, OpenOffice and Mozilla, this can take a while. :)
Hardly. NetBSD is toaster-compatible, so we'll just stop buying x86 junk.
Shame the guy at eWeek doesn't appear to have read the CERT advisory either. Next to "Microsoft Corporation", it says: "Not vulnerable". Though the situation surrounding third-party drivers for Microsoft OSes isn't made entirely clear.
Don't you mean .95 * .3 == .285??
It's even less than that, if you consider the number of ISPs that use transparent Web proxies. (Which, incidentally, is also why I have no way of verifying or debunking this article, since I don't happen to know the location of an IIS server that isn't running on port 80.)
If this trend continues, I expect that in twenty years or so, there'll be a headline "A scientific research team states that it's 99% sure the Universe was created before last Tuesday"?
BULLSHIT! I was suppose to have a flying car back in the 80's according to "experts" in the '50s.
:)
It's called a helicopter.
We saw this sort of thing in the 50's with predictions about vacuum cleaner robots, almost always accompanied by an image of a very happy woman (assumed to be a housewife). No one could imagine the Women's Movement just one decade hence.
Women's rights movements existed before the 60s. And while they were admirable, the contraceptive Pill did far more to liberate women than most of those movements ever could. It's no coincidence that Women's Lib really took off at the same time as the Pill.
In other words, it was a social consequence of a technological breakthrough, and these can be predicted with slightly more ease than the arbitrary changes in society that occasionally (and often temporarily) occur.
Were I to bet on it, I'd say the walking/talking Barbie WILL exist by 2050
I'm surprised it doesn't already. The technology is pretty much there.
A better solution: if you poked out both their eyes, you wouldn't need a cloak.
If you'd bought an HP48g(x), you'd already have both "g" and "G" defined in your calculator. :)
:)
....and they'd both be inaccurate by now.
--
"This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
Wow. Smoke signal technology. :)
--
"This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
with the make vulnerability reported a few days ago ? thats one buggy OS.
Fixed in -STABLE I think.
--
"This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
Cool! That may have to find its way into a .sig :)
--
"This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
You like the sound of your own keyboard, don't you?
Feh. Troll.
--
"This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
Agreed. Both 3.0-RELEASE and 3.1-RELEASE were fairly flaky releases (3.0-RELEASE still contained a lot of a.out binaries, and still required you to build an a.out kernel; I can't remember what went wrong with 3.1 but I _do_ remember I went out and bought 3.2 fairly shortly after!) Newbies to FreeBSD would be well advised either to get 3.4-RELEASE, or to wait for 4.1.
On this whole tired argument of Linux vs. *BSD vs. any-other-OS-you-care-to-name - what does it matter what OS you use, as long as you're happy with it? It's your computer, after all.
At one time or another, I've used (in no particular order) HP-UX, Solaris (Intel and Sparc), FreeBSD, Slackware, Debian, Red Hat, MacOS and various versions of Windows. They all (yes, even Windows) have their strengths and weaknesses. That the only OSes which are still installed on my machines are Windows 98 and FreeBSD (until I find another hard disk, at which point Debian goes back on there) probably says more about me than the OSes in question.
Computers are mere tools. OSes are the nuts and bolts. If you want to use a Phillips screwdriver, I see no reason to flame you just because I prefer to use a Torx. Chill out, folks!
--
"This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
Use http://204.121.6.57/ to get around Netscrape Proxy's dumb anti-pr0n rules. ;)
--
"This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
I'm still limping along with 1.1 (or is it 1.2?) at the moment; I'm not sure if 2.0 has been ported to FreeBSD yet (I ditched the bogus RH6.0 install a month or two back). Don't use it much anymore though as I tend to avoid the computers when not at work nowadays, sadly.
--
"This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
The only thing I could find on the website about migration to FreeBSD was this snippet, dated September 30:
:)
'Any UNIX Dedicated Servers ordered after Sunday October 3 will be set up and configured in our new data center in Vienna, VA instead of Orem, UT and will run FreeBSD 3.2 instead of BSDi Unix. The core software services (Apache, FTP, POP, IMAP, SMTP) will be available as before. However, some of the "contrib" software has not yet been ported to the FreeBSD platform. We expect to have the full complement of contrib software ported to FreeBSD in the very near future.'
So it looks like it's been a part of their ongoing strategy for a little while. Good to see FreeBSD get one over on the closed-source competition, though.
--
"This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
Okay, I'll probably get (Score: -6, Flamebait) for this but here goes.
;) Perhaps the community needs to set up a Hire-Some-Graphic-Designers-And-Documentation-Expe rts Fund?
Much on the contrary, because it does limit contributors to those with sufficient skill, this guarantees that the result will have a very high quality.
Not always necessarily true. The second part of the poster's statement was "and have the time to figure it out". I imagine there are quite a few highly skilled people out there who would contribute to [Open Source project of choice] but don't have time because they've all got full-time jobs working for a software house producing closed-source software.
Also, companies generally do not pay for software developers who don't have a clue, at least if they can help it, so the full-time employees of a software house are not necessarily any less skilled than the contributors to an open-source project - and often they've been hired because they have the specific skills required to do the job. (I.T. skill shortage notwithstanding.)
So to suggest that having maybe several hundred skilled volunteers poring over code is necessarily going to produce a better result than having a couple of dozen skilled full-time employees who are being paid to do it is a little naïve.
It worries me that there are some fundamental skills that still appear to be very rare in the open-source community - the two biggies that spring to mind are user-interface design and documentation. It is probably the nature of the beast, of course, that none of us can draw for toffee and we all hate writing documentation, of course
--
"This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
Well, I don't know what kind of welfare system you have in the States, but here in the UK it'd be practically impossible to support any kind of serious drug habit on forty quid a week. And I think you'll find that the vast majority of people on welfare are there short-term.
--
"This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."