I don't know about the UK, but I am an IT Manager here in the states, and I couldn't agree more. I don't make much more than your typical blue-collar worker (please, no offense meant to anyone - I was blue collar up until about 6 years ago), yet I have to deal with phone calls at night, on the weekends, and when I am on vacation. I cannot get away from my job. Not to mention, there are plenty of people that work for me that can solve 99% of the problems that come across my desk, yet *I* am the one on everyone's speed dial. And if I find the mother-f***er that gave the entire company my cell phone #, they are dead!!
The only solution to the problem is to start paying for sending emails. Before everybody starts modding me down, tell me is it a problem for you to pay 1 cent per sent email?
I work for a company that sends out legitimate email newsletters to several million subscribers a day. Even at 1 million emails a day, that would effectively put my company out of business.
Also, what about all the mailing lists out there. This would have the same net effect on say the Linux Kernel Mailing List as having patents in OSS/Free software.
I don't like KMail's html rendering. I have been using mozilla mail for over a year, and it renders beautifully. I have only had a couple of problem emails in the whole time I have used mozilla -- and those problems always were due to bad html.
If Lucas thought to embrace these fans (much in the manner of the Rocky Horror Picture Show) he would still be collecting royalties on his work, right? i.e. if it is a theatre playing the parody, don't they have to pay royalties to show the film anyway? Why not try to generate a phenomena surrounding SW parodies (and increase profits) rather than show bad will towards his fans; unless Lucas is truly a purist and feels that strongly about the integrity his work (I think not!)? It really seems to me this is a great chance for a win-win situation for Lucas and his fans.
*blush* You are right, I should have read the article before posting (but then this wouldn't be/. would it? lol). I was basing my assumption on the quote from the original article by the original poster -- which made it sound like university officials were worried about how students were getting on the network.
I would think that the University would be more worried about insecure and wide open access points allowing access to the university network. Although, that is probably what the unwritten reason was for the ban was originally.
Its going to be a mail/file server. I think you don't need a ton of horsepower.......
It depends on whether you are planning on doing any mail filtering. I have a bunch of experience with MailScanner and ClamAV -- a sendmail server that normally eats 4-5% CPU will quickly start hitting 75% and more. SpamAssassin will add a bunch more to the load. As far as file sharing goes though, you are probably safe.
I have an old Compaq laptop -- 266Mhz PII w/64 Mb RAM that I have been thinking about using in place of my current Linux router. The big reason I was thinking about it was cuz it has a built-in UPS -- I can save the battery in my other UPS for the machines that need it!
I don't think the original poster meant that the way they were doing it was wrong, only that it should have been done ages ago, much like it was in the *nixes.
From my experience, MSSQL installs just fine on a desktop (non-server) version of Windows.
Let me clarify: MSSQL 2000 production versions (either enterprise or regular, I don't remember) will not install on Windows 2000 Pro. Possibly the development version does, that I don't know.
Actually, that would cut out quite a bit of the market. As I recall, MSSQL won't install on a desktop operating system, you need one of the server versions. I am not sure if this applies to the free version as well. For test applications, many shops don't have spare MS servers (licenses) laying around, but chances are they have machines they can throw their distro of choice on.
You obviously are a spammer and that's why you love them so. Why else would you even be receiving complains from RR?
You must be some kind of anti-business zealot to make that statement.There are tons of legitimate emails that get complained about because the receiver didn't remember signing up for a newsletter, didn't recognize a receipt for his purchase etc.... I have seen spam complaints (mostly coming from spamcop.net) for *hundreds* of legitimate emails. You need to step off your high horse and realize that there are thousands (millions?) of idiots out there that blanketly complain about everything that comes into their inbox. In fact, Yahoo and AOL make it so easy to complain that even those people can figure it out.
I thought the very same thing. Will/would China contribute back to OSS? I am almost of the thinking that they would have to. If they do not, they would risk forking to a point where their system is no longer compatible with the original. At that point, China would either have to rewrite every component of an OS or stay behind the rest of the world, technologically. Should this happen can China support this new bastard child they have fathered? (Honest question)
You have 2 admins for 9 Linux machines? I need to work for you -- I am the sole Linux admin (and Windows admin for that matter) for about 30+ Linux boxes and about the same number of Windoze desktops.
Perhaps there will be no adoption of sender-id; perhaps an open solution will prevail. The reason the internet works as well as it does is open standards. Perhaps these companies that are trying to encumber "standards" are slowly learning that they will not gain the acceptance of their "standards" and will have to compete on the merit of implementations of open standards rather than locking people into a "standard". This is just the newest version of proprietary file formats; unfortunately it is the only way Microsoft knows to compete anymore. Rather than compete on a level playing field, Microsoft wants to lock you into their new "standard" rather than compete on the merits of their products.
I would tend to agree with one exception. While a cell phone still demands certain etiquettes of the caller (i.e. don't call me at 3 a.m. unless you have a damn good reason) most internet related communications don't seem to follow common courtesy (or if they do, it is to the nth degree lower than that of a face to face meeting). It is much like the person who has another personality while driving -- you must have met someone like this, a normally polite and patient person that becomes borderline pyschotic while driving? In that same style I know that many people have an online personality that is not nearly the same as the personality that they have when you meet them in person.
My point is that I don't see the normal balance taking place because, through the impersonification of people by the internet, people have become disconnected with etiquette and the social balance which would normally force the evolution of a happy medium is now out of balance as a result. i.e. people will force their presence where in the past they may not have. I cite spam as an example of this social malady to the extreme.
1.) Linux is small in number, so it's hard to get a 'wave' effect with a self replicating exploit.
Ok, you have that one. (only for now IMHO)
2.) Right now, the Open Source Community has a lot of people willing to do it. Is it reasonable to assume that'll be constant?
I think, considering the number of large companies (IBM, Novell, Dell, etc...) that are directly involved with OSS and betting their financial future on OSS, that yes, we can expect this to remain the case. Consider Microsoft's approach -- it can be fixed if they decide it can be fixed (or probably more accurately, if it is in their best interest for it to be fixed). In the case of OSS, if IBM suspects a flaw will affect them, they can fix it if need be (or at least throw some money at the develpment team in charge of the project so they can devote the necessary resources). At least with OSS there is the option of someone outside of the original developers fixing the problem.
3.) Again, Linux's small number means fewer apps out there. What happens if the number of people writing OSS apps mulitplies by 10? If security problems become abundant in a lot of those apps, and yes I am reaching a bit, will the OSS Community be spread too thin?
I don't know if you know what you are talking about here -- small number of apps? As opposed to Windows? As opposed to Microsoft in general? How many browsers are there available for Windows? How many OSS browsers? Office suites? Media players? etc... This seems to be a rehash of the old "Linux has X number of bugs but Microsoft only has Y" when a standard Linux distro contains several thousand applications and windows has how many? As a side note, I do think there is a lack of quality applications in specific areas with regard to Linux, but there certainly isn't a "small" number of apps.
4.) What if a popular proprietary app for Linux becomes a security risk?
Again, without trying to sound redundant, most Linux/*nix users are not running as root/administrator so at most the damage is limited to areas that user has rights in. Many (if not most) applications that run on Windows require that the user have administrator rights. So, in its simplest form, the answer is that you are in no worse shape than if you have the same bug in the same app running on Windows, however, chances are you are in much better shape (assuming you are not running your *nix system as root). Not to mention, how many popular proprietary apps for Linux are there?
I don't see how this is a firewall. It still allows the connection, it still downloads the mail for further investigation. What exactly is being firewalled? Oh, you mean if it doesn't pass the test it gets dumped to/dev/null? And that is different from every other spam filter in what way?
If that quote isn't evidence enough, perhaps this one is:
"The state attorneys general have been looking at this issue for much of the year and have been consulting entertainment groups, including the Motion Picture Association of America."
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about the UK, but I am an IT Manager here in the states, and I couldn't agree more. I don't make much more than your typical blue-collar worker (please, no offense meant to anyone - I was blue collar up until about 6 years ago), yet I have to deal with phone calls at night, on the weekends, and when I am on vacation. I cannot get away from my job. Not to mention, there are plenty of people that work for me that can solve 99% of the problems that come across my desk, yet *I* am the one on everyone's speed dial. And if I find the mother-f***er that gave the entire company my cell phone #, they are dead!!
The only solution to the problem is to start paying for sending emails. Before everybody starts modding me down, tell me is it a problem for you to pay 1 cent per sent email?
I work for a company that sends out legitimate email newsletters to several million subscribers a day. Even at 1 million emails a day, that would effectively put my company out of business.
Also, what about all the mailing lists out there. This would have the same net effect on say the Linux Kernel Mailing List as having patents in OSS/Free software.
I don't like KMail's html rendering. I have been using mozilla mail for over a year, and it renders beautifully. I have only had a couple of problem emails in the whole time I have used mozilla -- and those problems always were due to bad html.
just my $0.02
Well, it is more of a pyschological addiction rather than a physical one 8)
It just isn't a viable argument to say that it's too expensive. It can easily be obtained for free.
Yes, but a majority of us have morals.
I have a few questions/comments here.
If Lucas thought to embrace these fans (much in the manner of the Rocky Horror Picture Show) he would still be collecting royalties on his work, right? i.e. if it is a theatre playing the parody, don't they have to pay royalties to show the film anyway? Why not try to generate a phenomena surrounding SW parodies (and increase profits) rather than show bad will towards his fans; unless Lucas is truly a purist and feels that strongly about the integrity his work (I think not!)? It really seems to me this is a great chance for a win-win situation for Lucas and his fans.
*blush* You are right, I should have read the article before posting (but then this wouldn't be /. would it? lol). I was basing my assumption on the quote from the original article by the original poster -- which made it sound like university officials were worried about how students were getting on the network.
I would think that the University would be more worried about insecure and wide open access points allowing access to the university network. Although, that is probably what the unwritten reason was for the ban was originally.
Its going to be a mail/file server. I think you don't need a ton of horsepower.......
It depends on whether you are planning on doing any mail filtering. I have a bunch of experience with MailScanner and ClamAV -- a sendmail server that normally eats 4-5% CPU will quickly start hitting 75% and more. SpamAssassin will add a bunch more to the load. As far as file sharing goes though, you are probably safe.
I'm using an old P233 box as a server.
I have an old Compaq laptop -- 266Mhz PII w/64 Mb RAM that I have been thinking about using in place of my current Linux router. The big reason I was thinking about it was cuz it has a built-in UPS -- I can save the battery in my other UPS for the machines that need it!
I don't think the original poster meant that the way they were doing it was wrong, only that it should have been done ages ago, much like it was in the *nixes.
From my experience, MSSQL installs just fine on a desktop (non-server) version of Windows.
Let me clarify: MSSQL 2000 production versions (either enterprise or regular, I don't remember) will not install on Windows 2000 Pro. Possibly the development version does, that I don't know.
Actually, that would cut out quite a bit of the market. As I recall, MSSQL won't install on a desktop operating system, you need one of the server versions. I am not sure if this applies to the free version as well. For test applications, many shops don't have spare MS servers (licenses) laying around, but chances are they have machines they can throw their distro of choice on.
You obviously are a spammer and that's why you love them so. Why else would you even be receiving complains from RR?
You must be some kind of anti-business zealot to make that statement.There are tons of legitimate emails that get complained about because the receiver didn't remember signing up for a newsletter, didn't recognize a receipt for his purchase etc.... I have seen spam complaints (mostly coming from spamcop.net) for *hundreds* of legitimate emails. You need to step off your high horse and realize that there are thousands (millions?) of idiots out there that blanketly complain about everything that comes into their inbox. In fact, Yahoo and AOL make it so easy to complain that even those people can figure it out.
I thought the very same thing. Will/would China contribute back to OSS? I am almost of the thinking that they would have to. If they do not, they would risk forking to a point where their system is no longer compatible with the original. At that point, China would either have to rewrite every component of an OS or stay behind the rest of the world, technologically. Should this happen can China support this new bastard child they have fathered? (Honest question)
You have 2 admins for 9 Linux machines? I need to work for you -- I am the sole Linux admin (and Windows admin for that matter) for about 30+ Linux boxes and about the same number of Windoze desktops.
The only difference here is that it can be malicious.
Articles in newspapers can be malisciously incorrect as well. One name: Jayson Blair
Perhaps there will be no adoption of sender-id; perhaps an open solution will prevail. The reason the internet works as well as it does is open standards. Perhaps these companies that are trying to encumber "standards" are slowly learning that they will not gain the acceptance of their "standards" and will have to compete on the merit of implementations of open standards rather than locking people into a "standard". This is just the newest version of proprietary file formats; unfortunately it is the only way Microsoft knows to compete anymore. Rather than compete on a level playing field, Microsoft wants to lock you into their new "standard" rather than compete on the merits of their products.
I would tend to agree with one exception. While a cell phone still demands certain etiquettes of the caller (i.e. don't call me at 3 a.m. unless you have a damn good reason) most internet related communications don't seem to follow common courtesy (or if they do, it is to the nth degree lower than that of a face to face meeting). It is much like the person who has another personality while driving -- you must have met someone like this, a normally polite and patient person that becomes borderline pyschotic while driving? In that same style I know that many people have an online personality that is not nearly the same as the personality that they have when you meet them in person.
My point is that I don't see the normal balance taking place because, through the impersonification of people by the internet, people have become disconnected with etiquette and the social balance which would normally force the evolution of a happy medium is now out of balance as a result. i.e. people will force their presence where in the past they may not have. I cite spam as an example of this social malady to the extreme.
Do you mean something like these?
1.) Linux is small in number, so it's hard to get a 'wave' effect with a self replicating exploit.
Ok, you have that one. (only for now IMHO)
2.) Right now, the Open Source Community has a lot of people willing to do it. Is it reasonable to assume that'll be constant?
I think, considering the number of large companies (IBM, Novell, Dell, etc...) that are directly involved with OSS and betting their financial future on OSS, that yes, we can expect this to remain the case. Consider Microsoft's approach -- it can be fixed if they decide it can be fixed (or probably more accurately, if it is in their best interest for it to be fixed). In the case of OSS, if IBM suspects a flaw will affect them, they can fix it if need be (or at least throw some money at the develpment team in charge of the project so they can devote the necessary resources). At least with OSS there is the option of someone outside of the original developers fixing the problem.
3.) Again, Linux's small number means fewer apps out there. What happens if the number of people writing OSS apps mulitplies by 10? If security problems become abundant in a lot of those apps, and yes I am reaching a bit, will the OSS Community be spread too thin?
I don't know if you know what you are talking about here -- small number of apps? As opposed to Windows? As opposed to Microsoft in general? How many browsers are there available for Windows? How many OSS browsers? Office suites? Media players? etc... This seems to be a rehash of the old "Linux has X number of bugs but Microsoft only has Y" when a standard Linux distro contains several thousand applications and windows has how many? As a side note, I do think there is a lack of quality applications in specific areas with regard to Linux, but there certainly isn't a "small" number of apps.
4.) What if a popular proprietary app for Linux becomes a security risk?
Again, without trying to sound redundant, most Linux/*nix users are not running as root/administrator so at most the damage is limited to areas that user has rights in. Many (if not most) applications that run on Windows require that the user have administrator rights. So, in its simplest form, the answer is that you are in no worse shape than if you have the same bug in the same app running on Windows, however, chances are you are in much better shape (assuming you are not running your *nix system as root). Not to mention, how many popular proprietary apps for Linux are there?
I don't see how this is a firewall. It still allows the connection, it still downloads the mail for further investigation. What exactly is being firewalled? Oh, you mean if it doesn't pass the test it gets dumped to /dev/null? And that is different from every other spam filter in what way?
Absolutely, however be careful not to infer that proprietary software = high quality. I think we all know that is not always the case either.
Someone MOD parent up! That is extremely intuitive.
If that quote isn't evidence enough, perhaps this one is:
"The state attorneys general have been looking at this issue for much of the year and have been consulting entertainment groups, including the Motion Picture Association of America."