I use tcpdump to capture what is on the wire... which is run as root.
Then, as a non-root user, I pull the data into ethereal.
I do this because the network is over a thousand miles away and the machines don't even have X on them... so... I capture remotely and then look at the data on my workstation.
Every move they have made fits very nicely with the desire to close the hardware and keep Linux and Open Source off the platform. And... they'll kill the baby if they have to do it to get what they want.
I remember one of my supervisors telling this little story... he volunteered for the Air Force because he didn't want to get drafted by the Army and sent to some hill in Vietnam with a gun.
So... he became a "communications specialist"... and was put on a hill in Vietnam... without a gun.
Since I was actually talking about the future... would is probably most correct. That is why I said "would" for OS software and "would" for Mac OSX and Windows...
I was, very poorly, trying to say that in the future I would be paying as much, or more even, for Open Source software than I would be for the proprietary stuff.
I've compared them, and found the OS stuff to be the better product.
And, I have paid for my software in the past... and plan to continue in the future.
Sorry, that wasn't clear... in the future I would pay more for OS than the proprietary stuff. Because in the past it has proven itself more beneficial to me.
In the past I have contributed money and made bug reports... little code to speak of. Most of my coding is niche type stuff and paid "work for hire" stuff.
And since it is Perl, it is probably "too ugly" for most folks...;-)
I also install Linux where I can... mostly replacing Windows.
It highlights the fact that the determining factor of whether they fight back or not is motivated by self-preservation and not some weird notion of oppressors always winning
You are probably right for those people. Which, in a way, drives home my point. They were victims of their own apathy. It took a threat to their own life to make them care enough to fight back.
And, it was too late by then.
I think the two (oppression and survival) are linked. The more oppressors win, the lower you chance of survival.
To me, "surviving" isn't worth it on its own. Someone once said "the purpose of life is to live, not to exist".
So, the origial topic was about fighting... vs. waiting for a better chance later... and, I still hold that later may be too late.
And... I believe that if the people on the other planes, and planes for the last decade or more, had insisted on confronting hijackers instead of "going along for the ride" then the incidence of hijacking would have been much lower. And, 9/11 probably would not have even been attempted... at least not on a passenger airline.
Same goes for our government. If people would start acting at the earliest sign of trouble... instead of not caring until it affects them personally... then things would be much better.
As I understand it, the one plane that didn't make it to its target due to passenger intervention is the one plane where the passengers did learn about what was happening, which kinda blows your whole theory out of the water.
You lost me with that line of thinking.
They refused to be subservient. Fought. And kept the terrorist from accomplishing their goals.
What about that blows my theory out of the water?
I am not talking about how one individual can increase their own chance for survival. I'm talking about how a society can keep itself from being "enslaved" by people with a goal that is counter to the desire of the society.
My point is to make hijacking irrational by making the chance of revolt by the passengers and crew high.
And... back on topic... making any action contrary to the actual desire of society expensive. In more ways than just money.
Slashdot Mirror
It's called a distraction.
Yeah, looks like someone needs to call the taliban and order up another "distraction" to keep these boys busy until they can be voted out of office.
It will be "just like home".
It would be unfortunate if it was a closed source application and the company had no desire to fix the problems.
That isn't the case.
This is just another step in making the product even better than it already is...
I use tcpdump to capture what is on the wire... which is run as root.
Then, as a non-root user, I pull the data into ethereal.
I do this because the network is over a thousand miles away and the machines don't even have X on them... so... I capture remotely and then look at the data on my workstation.
Relax, it isn't personal. If I meant to imply that flewp was bitching and complaining I would have said so... by name.
I've added a sig that should (hopefully) help in that regard.
As for the what is for sale comment I made... that would be the good 'ol USA.
Going... Going... Gone! To the highest bidder.
You should think about that paint sniffing if you really think the graphic chip change is the reason for the incompatibility.
Also, think about the missing hard drive while you are at it.
And the change from X86 to one of IBM's PowerPC chips... you know... the ones they won't let open source developers have documentation for.
Every move they have made fits very nicely with the desire to close the hardware and keep Linux and Open Source off the platform. And... they'll kill the baby if they have to do it to get what they want.
It isn't backwards compatible for a reason.
XBox runs Linux and that won't do. The platform will be eliminated and redone from scratch.
If you don't like it... tough. Go cry to someone that gives a shit. This is America, and MS bought the part they needed... fair and square.
It isn't their fault that you didn't know it was for sale.
Jeeze... don't you understand capitalism yet!?
Now, go and scientifically prove it 2000 plus years ago.
Come back when you've reached puberty...
That, sir, spits on the grave of anyone who ever tried to stick up for their rights.
Yeah... especially if the issue is free speech.
How 'bout this response to both...
Where the hell are they going to live if they can't live anywhere? (Let me guess, anywhere but here.)
In my book... both arguments are the same. You can tell because both would require the same solution.
Do what Jesus would do... fuck 'em.
Maybe, but... why the link to a page on IE?
I'd rather see the goatse guy than run IE...
Not a very good page to link to when talking about "Voluntary vs. Forced", IMHO.
Yeppers...
The difference between Clinton and Bush is who gets screwed.
Clinton tries to screw the people in the room, Bush tries to screw the people not in the room.
I preferred Clinton's results myself.
Sounds fishy... but... wtf.
Why not have a web browser that sends the info in the "accept" part of the header?
Now that would be a useful RFC I think...
Then the onus goes back to the person doing the requesting. I mean, seriously... if you don't want the shit on your computer... don't ask for it.
Who the hell is running your computer anyway?
Well, I don't know about you... but anything having to do with a "virgin birth" should automatically get sent to the .sex domain IMHO.
.god domain to keep that filth away from the unsuspecting.
;-)
I mean, seriously... what kind of bs is that.
Maybe they should set up a
A community ought to be able to have standards, after all...
Damn, that shoe feels good on the other foot!
It sure would be nice for them to do something like xxx.free and xxx.cc (for credit card).
;-O
Could save some serious time that way...
I couldn't read what you wrote.
Your message got cut by my censorship filter on the "boob" in your name, Buck-a-boob-ob.
So much for content control...
Why were kids watching the superbowl? Don't they have better role models?
Maybe if we start regulating that kind of stupid behavior... we could really solve the problem.
If idiots didn't watch that crap there might actually be something educational on TV for your kids to watch.
OK... remember that gay issue and religion?
;-)
Well... guess what role the J guy plays...
I'll give you a hint... "tis better to give than to receive"
He isn't on the better side.
P.S. I bet I could get labeled as profane or indecent without using foul language.
They have a "falling bathtub mode".
Wonder how much they could make selling rides on that thing.
I was in the Air Force for eight years.
;-)
I remember one of my supervisors telling this little story... he volunteered for the Air Force because he didn't want to get drafted by the Army and sent to some hill in Vietnam with a gun.
So... he became a "communications specialist"... and was put on a hill in Vietnam... without a gun.
Nothing like not having to do "real" combat...
Since I was actually talking about the future... would is probably most correct. That is why I said "would" for OS software and "would" for Mac OSX and Windows...
I was, very poorly, trying to say that in the future I would be paying as much, or more even, for Open Source software than I would be for the proprietary stuff.
I've compared them, and found the OS stuff to be the better product.
And, I have paid for my software in the past... and plan to continue in the future.
I would in the future.
;-)
I did in the past.
Sorry, that wasn't clear... in the future I would pay more for OS than the proprietary stuff. Because in the past it has proven itself more beneficial to me.
In the past I have contributed money and made bug reports... little code to speak of. Most of my coding is niche type stuff and paid "work for hire" stuff.
And since it is Perl, it is probably "too ugly" for most folks...
I also install Linux where I can... mostly replacing Windows.
It highlights the fact that the determining factor of whether they fight back or not is motivated by self-preservation and not some weird notion of oppressors always winning
You are probably right for those people. Which, in a way, drives home my point. They were victims of their own apathy. It took a threat to their own life to make them care enough to fight back.
And, it was too late by then.
I think the two (oppression and survival) are linked. The more oppressors win, the lower you chance of survival.
To me, "surviving" isn't worth it on its own. Someone once said "the purpose of life is to live, not to exist".
So, the origial topic was about fighting... vs. waiting for a better chance later... and, I still hold that later may be too late.
And... I believe that if the people on the other planes, and planes for the last decade or more, had insisted on confronting hijackers instead of "going along for the ride" then the incidence of hijacking would have been much lower. And, 9/11 probably would not have even been attempted... at least not on a passenger airline.
Same goes for our government. If people would start acting at the earliest sign of trouble... instead of not caring until it affects them personally... then things would be much better.
IMHO
I would think that Google beat you to it.
Does this mean that they now own the internet?
Hm... have they had their IPO yet?
As I understand it, the one plane that didn't make it to its target due to passenger intervention is the one plane where the passengers did learn about what was happening, which kinda blows your whole theory out of the water.
You lost me with that line of thinking.
They refused to be subservient. Fought. And kept the terrorist from accomplishing their goals.
What about that blows my theory out of the water?
I am not talking about how one individual can increase their own chance for survival. I'm talking about how a society can keep itself from being "enslaved" by people with a goal that is counter to the desire of the society.
My point is to make hijacking irrational by making the chance of revolt by the passengers and crew high.
And... back on topic... making any action contrary to the actual desire of society expensive. In more ways than just money.