When the printing press was invented, the Catholic church banned its use. In particular they didn't want the bible to be disseminated. Why? Because then people might read it and form their own conclusions about theological matters instead of believing as they were told. This was a direct threat to the church's power.
The freedom of information and the freedom of humanity go hand in hand. People who have access to information cannot be as easily fooled as those whose access is limited or non-existant.
One of the things that Katz is saying is that the young now have access to information, much of which their elders would rather hide from them. Because of this our culture is changing and evolving. The undermining of the "establishment" that the counterculture types in the 60's and 70's worked so hard to achieve, is now being idly accomplished by millions of youngsters, most of whom don't even know they're doing it.
Old prejudices, old biases, old bullshit... these things are on their way out. Perhaps only to be replaced by new prejudices, new biases, and new bullshit. But then again maybe not.
Actually Gates helped write a version of Basic for the Altair. Gary Kildall of Digital Research was the one behind CP/M, which was the primary operating system for Altairs, Imsai's, and other 8080/Z80 based systems. Dos itself was originally nothing but a reverse engineered clone of CP/M for the 8086. Tim Patterson wrote DOS for Seattle computer, which made altair clones, and then Microsoft bought it from him before turning around and licensing a modified version of it for the PC.
As for the rest of what you said about the young being the primary innovators and the general public being clueless about it. That is right on the money.
"if you don't know your Representative, like most of us, use the look-up... Be polite and very nonthreatening, but make it clear that you vote, and that you don't like this bill."
If you voted you'd know who your representative was. Not that contacting them and lying about it wouldn't be a good idea. But be sure to follow up on it by showing up at the ballot box next election day and voting based on how they vote on this bill.
If more people did this and took responsibility for our government, then bills like this would never see the light of day and everyone who cherishes the freedom this country was founded on would sleep a little easier at night.
The best way to contact the appropriate lawmakers is to show up on election day.
The reason why bullshit like this even makes it to the floor, let alone passed into law, is because people don't take responsibility for their government. Politicians live and die by the vote, they care about nothing else and will respond to nothing else. They know which segments of society vote and which don't. Those who don't are going to get the short end of the stick from those who do. Representational democracies only work if those being represented hold the people representing them accountable for their actions. Not voting does nothing but give more power to special interest groups and left/right wing zealots, because those guys ALWAYS vote.
Thank you for an honest reply. It was refreshing to read something from a mac person which didn't include that familiar and annoying whiny tone so common to posts from mac people. You're rare in that you talk about why macs are good for YOU, as opposed to trying to tell the rest of us a bunch of BS reasons why macs would be better for us.
If only more people from all the computing camps were so reasonable, we might not have flamewars!
Never has one person said so many right and true things about apple in so few words.
You've really got to tell us where you buy your hammers cuz you hit ever nail square on the head and sank each on with one strike.
The issues you brought up are the very reason why I can't stand apple systems, let alone the people for whom they are a religion. I'm not fan of windows but at least I'm not dishonest with myself about how it works and where its strenghts and weaknesses lie. Windows is unstable and buggy, those are implementation issues. But when it comes to design, windows isn't bad at all. The Mac "OS" on the other hand is an utter pile of steaming turds. Even win9x, which thunks everything down to 16bit 286 protected-mode function calls, multitasks better than it does.
Back in '84 the MacOS was revolutionary. The problem is that apple has done a piss poor job of keeping up to date with current features of other desktop OS's. Pretty pictures do not make a modern OS. But of course to the mac freaks the OS is the one true operating system that is flawlessly perfect and anyone who doesn't see that is stupid. Well the good news is that we won't have to put up with it much longer. The fastest mac systems clock in at 500mhz and come with a three grand price tag. The fastest PC systems clock in at a gigahertz and come with a price tag of maybe half that. The powerpc may be a more efficient design, but its not 100% more efficient, and unlike the MacOS, windows and linux don't cripple the cpu.
But at the end of the day we still have them by the balls. Why? They depend on us an our money for their very existence. Their ability to harrass and abuse the public begins and ends with their bottom line.
If a company is being a bastard, don't do business with it. Your dollars are votes, they vote for whether that company will continue to exist and be profitable.
One of the companies mentioned in the article as providing this "service" is PR Newswire, which is controlled by the "Church" of $cientology.
Its no suprise that they want to be able to track people online and then go pay them a visit or otherwise harrass them into silence. Nothing scares a scientologist more than the truth.
I'm totally in favor of genetic engineering of humans. There are issues which will have to be dealt with of course, but the potential for good is too great not to do it.
I think that most people are afraid that we'll do something stupid. This seems strange to me since the number one thing that anyone would try to design a person to be is intelligent. In other words it is a self-correcting problem. Also there are superstitious^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hreligious types who are still smarting from creationism being disproven.
I think the sooner we get started the better. Figure out which genes control, or at least influence, intelligence and use that understanding to make some really bright people. Imagine if the kinds of geniuses which only come around once in a generation, someone like einstein, were as abundant as mensa members. Imagine if the average IQ were somewhere around 150. In other words, the average person would be as bright as the average slashdotter. Wouldn't that be cool??
This is pretty damned silly. The only thing that will happen is people will turn it off. If they can't turn it off then they won't buy a cell phone equipped with it.
This goes back to the idea of trying to correct another person's stupidity or ignorance. Sorry, but you can't create a system intelligent enough to deal with human stupidity.
The computers themselves are not the problem. The problem is that educators have no idea how to effectively use them as a learning tool.
In general educators and other experts seem to have no idea what learning is or how to encourage it.
The basic problem of all education is that you need a student who wants to learn and a teacher who has some desire and ability to teach. If you can get those two things in, all other problems are trivial. Most of the things that you hear educators complaining about, such as lack of funding etc. are just excuses for the fact that the kids don't want to learn and there isn't anything educators can do to change that.
Computers have been seen as a way to encourage kids to learn. I'm sorry but putting something on a computer screen isn't going to make someone want to understand it any better than reading it on paper. Now educators are realizing this and soon the search for the next new thing in education will begin.
Computers can be a tremendous tool for learning. But in order to be that, the student using it must want to learn. If they don't then its as useless as any other educational tool that has ever been used to try and teach those unwilling to learn.
I think a big part of the problem is that students are discouraged from wanting to learn by the very methods used to try and teach them. Education is made into something that is done to students instead of something that they do themselves. How many kids go to school because they have to and work for grades instead of knowledge? How many students temporarily memorize things for a test instead of truly trying to understand concepts?
Knowledge is a tool. Any information or understanding is only as valuable as its ability to be applied. Students who memorize have no understanding and cannot apply what they have supposedly learned.
The best way to fix this problem is to change the criteria which students are judged by. Test them on comprehension and the ability to use their knowledge and you'll encourage them to truly learn.
I do think the idea that small children should be kept away from computers is pretty damned silly. I've been around them since I was 5 years old and I certainly have no deficiency in the learning department. Its just proof that the "experts" are a bunch of flunkies.
The auto-negotiation protocol is a method whereby stations at either end of an ethernet link can communicate with each other using FLP (fast link pulses) and choose the fastest protocol that both are capable of using.
Auto-negotiation is relevant with UTP because of the multiple speeds that media is commonly used for. Everything from 10 megabit per second at half duplex, to 1000 megabit per second at full duplex is common.
Fiber optic lines are also used for all of these speeds, however 10mps cables use different connectors than those of 100 and 1000mps cables. If these cards are 100mbps only then autonegotiation just isn't relevant since there is only one speed to choose from and these cards are usually used in full duplex mode anyway because if offers twice the bandwidth.
Auto-negotiation on UTP most of the time boils down to choosing between 10 and 100 megabit (1000 megabit isn't very common yet) and half or full duplex. Full duplex means that the cards are sending and receiving at the same time, half means they are only doing one or the other at any given time.
The difference in media would not create any difference in performance since both UTP and fiber operate at the same rate and both are capable of full duplex operation. If both cards use the same chipset but only differ in the type of transciever used, which they would have to since UTP and Optic uses different transciever types, then there should be no difference at all in the performance offerd by either card. As far as a computer is concerned, the two are identical.
Human history is largely a story of what those whose rights were acknowledged and protected did to those whose rights were denied. All peole have natural rights which they are born with. However our society pretends that only people over a certain age whose skin is a certain color and who only belong to certain religous sects and make over a certain ammount of money truly have rights. Others may enjoy priviliges which are much like what the chosen few have as rights, but these are priviliges. They can be stripped away whenever they become inconvenient or troublesome to those who have power. I believe that everyone who can read and write should have the right to vote, regardless of age. Now before you assume I'm some stupid kid you should know that I'm 28 years old and a college graduate. I think that the young should be able to vote because their rights are not currently being protected. The young are trampled upon and exploited at every turn. Elected officials respond to votes. They are very much aware of who votes for them and who doesn't. They are very careful to act on the behalf of those groups whose members vote. The young cannot vote, therefore the govenrmnent will never act on their behalf. Instead the government will use them as scapegoats for problems, both real and made up for election day. If the young could vote, things like the CDA or COPA would never see the light of day. Laws such as these which are supposed to "potect children," aren't about that at all. They're about censorship and nothing more. Their creators and backers use the idea of protecting children to justify the stifling of information that they fild personally offensive, usually on superstitious grounds. These are the same kinds of people who have caused oppression throughout the history of mankind. One must be forever vigilant against them and always willing to fight back and never surrender. Lee
Our elected officials respond to the people who vote for them. If they can con said people by playing up half-hearted efforts to make the changes they want, it is almost as useful come election day as if they had actually pushed those changes through.
Politicians respond to the people who vote for them. The right wing in this country vote, therefore they are able to push laws like this through.
A good deal of being a successful politician comes down to knowing what issues are important to your constituents and voting on bills you know they will like, or against ones you know they won't. Even if these bills are dumb or doomed to failure. Why? So that when election day comes the record will show that you voted they way you were supposed to. This is especially true of the house of representatives, where members are elected every other year. The senate is somewhat insulated from this as elections for a seat are held every six years.
If a person doesn't vote, their opinion doesn't matter to anyone in government. The people in Washington know very well who they have to keep happy and it isn't the apathetic types who bitch and moan but are never in line on election day.
A law like this makes it through congress because neither the Republicans nor the Democrats can afford not to vote for it. A law like this is promoted as being "for the children," and no politician can afford to give his future opponents the opportunity to say he voted against something that would protect kids.
The courts are able to make decisions that aren't based on public fads or religious supertitions. They can do this because federal judges don't have to kiss anyone's ass or pander to anyone's agenda.
COPA, as I'm sure everyone knows, is simply a continuation of the right wing's agenda to control what we see and hear. It was originally put forth as the CDA. The right wing has the power to put laws like this forth because its people vote. Needless to say, politicians respond to votes.
Laws like the CDA and COPA make me very angry. Angry for what they represent and doubly angry for how the right tries to misrepresent them. The law is supposedly meant to "protect the children," when in fact that is simply a convenient and effective excuse to violate the rights of us all.
Freedom of speech has as its counterpart the freedom to listen. If each of us is free to express our ideas or opinions, then likewise each of us is be free to choose which ideas and opinions we are an audience to. The CDA and COPA are attempts to take that choice away from us. Why? Because certain ideas and opinions go against what the right would like us all to believe and these same ideas and opinions cannot be easily discredited.
The only effective means of mind control is information control. Control a person's information and you control the conclusions they reach.
To attempt to do this violates a right which is even more fundamental than freedom of speech or the freedom to listen, and that is freedom of thought. What use is freedom of expression if the ideas and opinions expressed are not a person's own?
Reading this you might think I'm a member of the left wing, well I'm not. The left is just as guilty of this and other things as the right. You might call me a libertarian but you'd be wrong. Many of my beliefs are libertarian in nature but I hardly subscribe to the philosophy as a whole. Pure libertarianism wouldn't work any better than any other system of government derived from ideology instead of reality.
Unlike so many others I have the misfortune of knowing, my mind, and the thoughts which originate from it, are my own.
When you were playing around with windows coding, were you by chance using MFC? If so then there is a big part of why the system was muddied up.
I've been coding since I was ten years old on various systems. When I went to go learn how to code on windows I quickly said "screw this!" All the books and information I could find only dealt with MFC, or were heavily focused on MFC.
But then I found Charles Petzold's book and took another look at windows. His book deals with the API itself instead of a bunch of wrappers (MFC) that only make the code more bloated and inefficient. Writing code this way is so much better. With his book you actually learn how the system works rather than relying on an abstraction of it. MFC may have its uses if you're coding something in a hurry, but if I'm going to be writing code for real, its going to be directly to the API.
As for linux coding, I learned it after dos and before windows. With toolkits such as GTK+, the real differences between Linux coding and Windows become differences in syntax rather than semantics as many of the concepts are the same.
Oh my, I feel so pathetic. We poor americans have a lot to feel bad about. I mean we produce more food than any other country on earth. Our industrial capacity is also the biggest anywhere. Also our economy is the largest as well as the fastest growing on earth. Then there is the fact that our military capability is the greatest the world has ever known. Being the birthplace of modern democracy doesn't help much either.
God, we suck!!!
I think that other countries like France, Germany, or Great Britain, who once had vast empires only to lose them, are by far superior to this country. But then again maybe they aren't and the people who live there are simply jealous? I really can't say for sure, since I've never been to those countries. But I'd be willing to bet that most of the people there who point out how much we suck have never been to America either.
I guess the only thing that sucks more than being an american is being someone whose inferiority complex is set off by americans.
I'm downloading the entire package right now. But then again I work for a University where I have T1 access at my desk. Many a night I've stayed here in my cubicle till well past midnight downloading some package or another.
As for your question, I do think OpenBSD is still relevant. If FreeBSD (or linux, or ????) ever achives its level of security then maybe it will be obsolete. But that day is not here yet and I don't see it coming anytime soon.
The entire purpose of OpenBSD is security. An operating system that is secure will never be out of date unless another OS comes along that is even more secure.
Mac OS X is supposedly derived from FreeBSD. OpenBSD is another product altogether. They all ultimately come from BSD 4.4 Lite, but the code bases have branched away from each other to too great an extent to just cut and paste anything from OpenBSD into darwin.
What OpenBSD offers is security and stability. Those are features that should be included in any operating system. But if apple wants them for darwin/OSX, it will have to do the job themselves.
I don't know whether there is a howto specifically for what you are talking about. If I were you I'd take an old hard drive and use it to play with rather than try to resize a linux partition. I tried once to get openbsd to install alongside linux and for some reason it kept wiping out the partition table. I had all the info for the partitions written down, so it wasn't a big deal. But even so I couldn't get it to work either. So I just threw it on an old 540 meg hard drive I had and played with it that way.
More recently I bought an Orb drive specifically so I could have a bootable removable drive. I've got a cartridges for OpenBSD, NetBSD, freeBSD, Caldera 2.4, Suse, Debian, slackware, and even one for Dos and win311. The drive is around 200 bucks and the media is relatively cheap, around 35 bucks for 2.2 gigs of space. The drives themselves are pretty fast as well.
OpenBSD does have support for ext2fs filesystems, but you've got to configure the kernel to turn it on and of course recompile.
As for the linux emulation... not everything will run right. You're much better off recompiling whatever it is you want to use.
I'm glad that someone here is telling it like it is. I don't like MS. I don't like their business practices and I don't like how buggy many of their products are. Not that any product doesn't have bugs. They all do and that is just the nature of the beast.
One area I don't fault MS in is how innovative many of their products are. People complain about them being a monopoly and then go on to imply it is soley because the people who head the company and determine corporate strategies are rat bastards. They may be bastards, but in many cases their dominance of a market segment is due to the lack of worthy competition. Years ago Wordperfect was the dominant word processor. Before that it was Wordstar. Wordstar is a fossil and Wordperfect an also ran. Lotus-123 used to be the dominant spreadsheet. But then IBM bought the company (for notes) and 123 is almost forgotten. Meanwhile MS was actively promoting its office products every step of the way while working to recruit and cultivate the best talent they could find to push the products forward technologically.
So what do you have? A computer software industry dominated by the rat bastards who run a company whose products are boldy concieved, if not always well executed.
But many members of the "Brotherhood of the Penguin" like to pretend that MS does none of these things. That MS's software sucks in every way blah, blah, blah. If it sucked that bad, they wouldn't have the market position they do. Their software is hardly the best around, but it is good enough to get by. Products with the most technical merit aren't the ones that necessarily win. Ask Sony, they'll tell you a hell of a story about something called Betamax.
If linux is to "win," it will have to be more than just better than other products. It will have to offer something that other products don't. Something that is important enough to potential customers that it alone would encourage them to buy. Being better in some obscure way that only matters to hackers like us won't cut it. Hackers don't define the market like we used to. Nowadays it is the mom and pop types that make up most of the users. Those are the people who we have to cater to if linux is to be more than another server room curiosity.
There was an article published by O'reilly about how the 10-simultaneous users limit that NT workstation has and which server lacks is wholly due to registry tweaks.
I've set up several NT server systems and without a doubt there are differences between them. But then again I never claimed there were NO differences, only that the most important ones were due to changes in the registry.
The registry access API may be clearly defined, but the registry itself hardly is. It is just like I said, a way for microsoft to obscure the configuration details. The fact that is also serves other purposes does not change this.
The idea of the registry isn't all that bad of an idea. However the use M$ has put that idea to is.
Also, don't you know by now that ANYTHING M$ does is part of Billy Boy's master plan?
If you're not paranoid about M$, it means you haven't been paying attention.
Slashdot Mirror
When the printing press was invented, the Catholic church banned its use. In particular they didn't want the bible to be disseminated. Why? Because then people might read it and form their own conclusions about theological matters instead of believing as they were told. This was a direct threat to the church's power.
The freedom of information and the freedom of humanity go hand in hand. People who have access to information cannot be as easily fooled as those whose access is limited or non-existant.
One of the things that Katz is saying is that the young now have access to information, much of which their elders would rather hide from them. Because of this our culture is changing and evolving. The undermining of the "establishment" that the counterculture types in the 60's and 70's worked so hard to achieve, is now being idly accomplished by millions of youngsters, most of whom don't even know they're doing it.
Old prejudices, old biases, old bullshit... these things are on their way out. Perhaps only to be replaced by new prejudices, new biases, and new bullshit. But then again maybe not.
Lee
Actually Gates helped write a version of Basic for the Altair. Gary Kildall of Digital Research was the one behind CP/M, which was the primary operating system for Altairs, Imsai's, and other 8080/Z80 based systems. Dos itself was originally nothing but a reverse engineered clone of CP/M for the 8086. Tim Patterson wrote DOS for Seattle computer, which made altair clones, and then Microsoft bought it from him before turning around and licensing a modified version of it for the PC.
As for the rest of what you said about the young being the primary innovators and the general public being clueless about it. That is right on the money.
Lee
"if you don't know your Representative, like most of us, use the look-up... Be polite and very nonthreatening, but make it clear that you vote, and that you don't like this bill."
If you voted you'd know who your representative was. Not that contacting them and lying about it wouldn't be a good idea. But be sure to follow up on it by showing up at the ballot box next election day and voting based on how they vote on this bill.
If more people did this and took responsibility for our government, then bills like this would never see the light of day and everyone who cherishes the freedom this country was founded on would sleep a little easier at night.
Lee
The best way to contact the appropriate lawmakers is to show up on election day.
The reason why bullshit like this even makes it to the floor, let alone passed into law, is because people don't take responsibility for their government. Politicians live and die by the vote, they care about nothing else and will respond to nothing else. They know which segments of society vote and which don't. Those who don't are going to get the short end of the stick from those who do. Representational democracies only work if those being represented hold the people representing them accountable for their actions. Not voting does nothing but give more power to special interest groups and left/right wing zealots, because those guys ALWAYS vote.
Lee
Thank you for an honest reply. It was refreshing to read something from a mac person which didn't include that familiar and annoying whiny tone so common to posts from mac people. You're rare in that you talk about why macs are good for YOU, as opposed to trying to tell the rest of us a bunch of BS reasons why macs would be better for us.
If only more people from all the computing camps were so reasonable, we might not have flamewars!
Lee
Never has one person said so many right and true things about apple in so few words.
You've really got to tell us where you buy your hammers cuz you hit ever nail square on the head and sank each on with one strike.
The issues you brought up are the very reason why I can't stand apple systems, let alone the people for whom they are a religion. I'm not fan of windows but at least I'm not dishonest with myself about how it works and where its strenghts and weaknesses lie. Windows is unstable and buggy, those are implementation issues. But when it comes to design, windows isn't bad at all. The Mac "OS" on the other hand is an utter pile of steaming turds. Even win9x, which thunks everything down to 16bit 286 protected-mode function calls, multitasks better than it does.
Back in '84 the MacOS was revolutionary. The problem is that apple has done a piss poor job of keeping up to date with current features of other desktop OS's. Pretty pictures do not make a modern OS. But of course to the mac freaks the OS is the one true operating system that is flawlessly perfect and anyone who doesn't see that is stupid. Well the good news is that we won't have to put up with it much longer. The fastest mac systems clock in at 500mhz and come with a three grand price tag. The fastest PC systems clock in at a gigahertz and come with a price tag of maybe half that. The powerpc may be a more efficient design, but its not 100% more efficient, and unlike the MacOS, windows and linux don't cripple the cpu.
Anyway, I'm done ranting for now.....
Lee
But at the end of the day we still have them by the balls. Why? They depend on us an our money for their very existence. Their ability to harrass and abuse the public begins and ends with their bottom line.
If a company is being a bastard, don't do business with it. Your dollars are votes, they vote for whether that company will continue to exist and be profitable.
Lee
One of the companies mentioned in the article as providing this "service" is PR Newswire, which is controlled by the "Church" of $cientology.
Its no suprise that they want to be able to track people online and then go pay them a visit or otherwise harrass them into silence. Nothing scares a scientologist more than the truth.
Lee
I'm totally in favor of genetic engineering of humans. There are issues which will have to be dealt with of course, but the potential for good is too great not to do it.
I think that most people are afraid that we'll do something stupid. This seems strange to me since the number one thing that anyone would try to design a person to be is intelligent. In other words it is a self-correcting problem. Also there are superstitious^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hreligious types who are still smarting from creationism being disproven.
I think the sooner we get started the better. Figure out which genes control, or at least influence, intelligence and use that understanding to make some really bright people. Imagine if the kinds of geniuses which only come around once in a generation, someone like einstein, were as abundant as mensa members. Imagine if the average IQ were somewhere around 150. In other words, the average person would be as bright as the average slashdotter. Wouldn't that be cool??
Lee
This is pretty damned silly. The only thing that will happen is people will turn it off. If they can't turn it off then they won't buy a cell phone equipped with it.
This goes back to the idea of trying to correct another person's stupidity or ignorance. Sorry, but you can't create a system intelligent enough to deal with human stupidity.
Lee
The computers themselves are not the problem. The problem is that educators have no idea how to effectively use them as a learning tool.
In general educators and other experts seem to have no idea what learning is or how to encourage it.
The basic problem of all education is that you need a student who wants to learn and a teacher who has some desire and ability to teach. If you can get those two things in, all other problems are trivial. Most of the things that you hear educators complaining about, such as lack of funding etc. are just excuses for the fact that the kids don't want to learn and there isn't anything educators can do to change that.
Computers have been seen as a way to encourage kids to learn. I'm sorry but putting something on a computer screen isn't going to make someone want to understand it any better than reading it on paper. Now educators are realizing this and soon the search for the next new thing in education will begin.
Computers can be a tremendous tool for learning. But in order to be that, the student using it must want to learn. If they don't then its as useless as any other educational tool that has ever been used to try and teach those unwilling to learn.
I think a big part of the problem is that students are discouraged from wanting to learn by the very methods used to try and teach them. Education is made into something that is done to students instead of something that they do themselves. How many kids go to school because they have to and work for grades instead of knowledge? How many students temporarily memorize things for a test instead of truly trying to understand concepts?
Knowledge is a tool. Any information or understanding is only as valuable as its ability to be applied. Students who memorize have no understanding and cannot apply what they have supposedly learned.
The best way to fix this problem is to change the criteria which students are judged by. Test them on comprehension and the ability to use their knowledge and you'll encourage them to truly learn.
I do think the idea that small children should be kept away from computers is pretty damned silly. I've been around them since I was 5 years old and I certainly have no deficiency in the learning department. Its just proof that the "experts" are a bunch of flunkies.
Lee
The auto-negotiation protocol is a method whereby stations at either end of an ethernet link can communicate with each other using FLP (fast link pulses) and choose the fastest protocol that both are capable of using.
Auto-negotiation is relevant with UTP because of the multiple speeds that media is commonly used for. Everything from 10 megabit per second at half duplex, to 1000 megabit per second at full duplex is common.
Fiber optic lines are also used for all of these speeds, however 10mps cables use different connectors than those of 100 and 1000mps cables. If these cards are 100mbps only then autonegotiation just isn't relevant since there is only one speed to choose from and these cards are usually used in full duplex mode anyway because if offers twice the bandwidth.
Auto-negotiation on UTP most of the time boils down to choosing between 10 and 100 megabit (1000 megabit isn't very common yet) and half or full duplex. Full duplex means that the cards are sending and receiving at the same time, half means they are only doing one or the other at any given time.
The difference in media would not create any difference in performance since both UTP and fiber operate at the same rate and both are capable of full duplex operation. If both cards use the same chipset but only differ in the type of transciever used, which they would have to since UTP and Optic uses different transciever types, then there should be no difference at all in the performance offerd by either card. As far as a computer is concerned, the two are identical.
Lee
Human history is largely a story of what those whose rights were acknowledged and protected did to those whose rights were denied. All peole have natural rights which they are born with. However our society pretends that only people over a certain age whose skin is a certain color and who only belong to certain religous sects and make over a certain ammount of money truly have rights. Others may enjoy priviliges which are much like what the chosen few have as rights, but these are priviliges. They can be stripped away whenever they become inconvenient or troublesome to those who have power. I believe that everyone who can read and write should have the right to vote, regardless of age. Now before you assume I'm some stupid kid you should know that I'm 28 years old and a college graduate. I think that the young should be able to vote because their rights are not currently being protected. The young are trampled upon and exploited at every turn. Elected officials respond to votes. They are very much aware of who votes for them and who doesn't. They are very careful to act on the behalf of those groups whose members vote. The young cannot vote, therefore the govenrmnent will never act on their behalf. Instead the government will use them as scapegoats for problems, both real and made up for election day. If the young could vote, things like the CDA or COPA would never see the light of day. Laws such as these which are supposed to "potect children," aren't about that at all. They're about censorship and nothing more. Their creators and backers use the idea of protecting children to justify the stifling of information that they fild personally offensive, usually on superstitious grounds. These are the same kinds of people who have caused oppression throughout the history of mankind. One must be forever vigilant against them and always willing to fight back and never surrender. Lee
Socialism is simply (yet another) way in which the government would be in charge of the people instead of the other way around.
It's like Winston Churchill said, democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others.
Lee
You hit the nail right on the head.
Our elected officials respond to the people who vote for them. If they can con said people by playing up half-hearted efforts to make the changes they want, it is almost as useful come election day as if they had actually pushed those changes through.
Lee
Politicians respond to the people who vote for them. The right wing in this country vote, therefore they are able to push laws like this through.
A good deal of being a successful politician comes down to knowing what issues are important to your constituents and voting on bills you know they will like, or against ones you know they won't. Even if these bills are dumb or doomed to failure. Why? So that when election day comes the record will show that you voted they way you were supposed to. This is especially true of the house of representatives, where members are elected every other year. The senate is somewhat insulated from this as elections for a seat are held every six years.
If a person doesn't vote, their opinion doesn't matter to anyone in government. The people in Washington know very well who they have to keep happy and it isn't the apathetic types who bitch and moan but are never in line on election day.
A law like this makes it through congress because neither the Republicans nor the Democrats can afford not to vote for it. A law like this is promoted as being "for the children," and no politician can afford to give his future opponents the opportunity to say he voted against something that would protect kids.
The courts are able to make decisions that aren't based on public fads or religious supertitions. They can do this because federal judges don't have to kiss anyone's ass or pander to anyone's agenda.
Lee
COPA, as I'm sure everyone knows, is simply a continuation of the right wing's agenda to control what we see and hear. It was originally put forth as the CDA. The right wing has the power to put laws like this forth because its people vote. Needless to say, politicians respond to votes.
Laws like the CDA and COPA make me very angry. Angry for what they represent and doubly angry for how the right tries to misrepresent them. The law is supposedly meant to "protect the children," when in fact that is simply a convenient and effective excuse to violate the rights of us all.
Freedom of speech has as its counterpart the freedom to listen. If each of us is free to express our ideas or opinions, then likewise each of us is be free to choose which ideas and opinions we are an audience to. The CDA and COPA are attempts to take that choice away from us. Why? Because certain ideas and opinions go against what the right would like us all to believe and these same ideas and opinions cannot be easily discredited.
The only effective means of mind control is information control. Control a person's information and you control the conclusions they reach.
To attempt to do this violates a right which is even more fundamental than freedom of speech or the freedom to listen, and that is freedom of thought. What use is freedom of expression if the ideas and opinions expressed are not a person's own?
Reading this you might think I'm a member of the left wing, well I'm not. The left is just as guilty of this and other things as the right. You might call me a libertarian but you'd be wrong. Many of my beliefs are libertarian in nature but I hardly subscribe to the philosophy as a whole. Pure libertarianism wouldn't work any better than any other system of government derived from ideology instead of reality.
Unlike so many others I have the misfortune of knowing, my mind, and the thoughts which originate from it, are my own.
Lee
When you were playing around with windows coding, were you by chance using MFC? If so then there is a big part of why the system was muddied up.
I've been coding since I was ten years old on various systems. When I went to go learn how to code on windows I quickly said "screw this!" All the books and information I could find only dealt with MFC, or were heavily focused on MFC.
But then I found Charles Petzold's book and took another look at windows. His book deals with the API itself instead of a bunch of wrappers (MFC) that only make the code more bloated and inefficient. Writing code this way is so much better. With his book you actually learn how the system works rather than relying on an abstraction of it. MFC may have its uses if you're coding something in a hurry, but if I'm going to be writing code for real, its going to be directly to the API.
As for linux coding, I learned it after dos and before windows. With toolkits such as GTK+, the real differences between Linux coding and Windows become differences in syntax rather than semantics as many of the concepts are the same.
I like emacs too, especially xemacs 21
Lee
Oh my, I feel so pathetic. We poor americans have a lot to feel bad about. I mean we produce more food than any other country on earth. Our industrial capacity is also the biggest anywhere. Also our economy is the largest as well as the fastest growing on earth. Then there is the fact that our military capability is the greatest the world has ever known. Being the birthplace of modern democracy doesn't help much either.
God, we suck!!!
I think that other countries like France, Germany, or Great Britain, who once had vast empires only to lose them, are by far superior to this country. But then again maybe they aren't and the people who live there are simply jealous? I really can't say for sure, since I've never been to those countries. But I'd be willing to bet that most of the people there who point out how much we suck have never been to America either.
I guess the only thing that sucks more than being an american is being someone whose inferiority complex is set off by americans.
Lee
Riiiiiighhht........
I'm downloading the entire package right now. But then again I work for a University where I have T1 access at my desk. Many a night I've stayed here in my cubicle till well past midnight downloading some package or another.
As for your question, I do think OpenBSD is still relevant. If FreeBSD (or linux, or ????) ever achives its level of security then maybe it will be obsolete. But that day is not here yet and I don't see it coming anytime soon.
The entire purpose of OpenBSD is security. An operating system that is secure will never be out of date unless another OS comes along that is even more secure.
Lee
What??
Mac OS X is supposedly derived from FreeBSD. OpenBSD is another product altogether. They all ultimately come from BSD 4.4 Lite, but the code bases have branched away from each other to too great an extent to just cut and paste anything from OpenBSD into darwin.
What OpenBSD offers is security and stability. Those are features that should be included in any operating system. But if apple wants them for darwin/OSX, it will have to do the job themselves.
Lee
I don't know whether there is a howto specifically for what you are talking about. If I were you I'd take an old hard drive and use it to play with rather than try to resize a linux partition. I tried once to get openbsd to install alongside linux and for some reason it kept wiping out the partition table. I had all the info for the partitions written down, so it wasn't a big deal. But even so I couldn't get it to work either. So I just threw it on an old 540 meg hard drive I had and played with it that way.
More recently I bought an Orb drive specifically so I could have a bootable removable drive. I've got a cartridges for OpenBSD, NetBSD, freeBSD, Caldera 2.4, Suse, Debian, slackware, and even one for Dos and win311. The drive is around 200 bucks and the media is relatively cheap, around 35 bucks for 2.2 gigs of space. The drives themselves are pretty fast as well.
OpenBSD does have support for ext2fs filesystems, but you've got to configure the kernel to turn it on and of course recompile.
As for the linux emulation... not everything will run right. You're much better off recompiling whatever it is you want to use.
Lee
I'm glad that someone here is telling it like it is. I don't like MS. I don't like their business practices and I don't like how buggy many of their products are. Not that any product doesn't have bugs. They all do and that is just the nature of the beast.
One area I don't fault MS in is how innovative many of their products are. People complain about them being a monopoly and then go on to imply it is soley because the people who head the company and determine corporate strategies are rat bastards. They may be bastards, but in many cases their dominance of a market segment is due to the lack of worthy competition. Years ago Wordperfect was the dominant word processor. Before that it was Wordstar. Wordstar is a fossil and Wordperfect an also ran. Lotus-123 used to be the dominant spreadsheet. But then IBM bought the company (for notes) and 123 is almost forgotten. Meanwhile MS was actively promoting its office products every step of the way while working to recruit and cultivate the best talent they could find to push the products forward technologically.
So what do you have? A computer software industry dominated by the rat bastards who run a company whose products are boldy concieved, if not always well executed.
But many members of the "Brotherhood of the Penguin" like to pretend that MS does none of these things. That MS's software sucks in every way blah, blah, blah. If it sucked that bad, they wouldn't have the market position they do. Their software is hardly the best around, but it is good enough to get by. Products with the most technical merit aren't the ones that necessarily win. Ask Sony, they'll tell you a hell of a story about something called Betamax.
If linux is to "win," it will have to be more than just better than other products. It will have to offer something that other products don't. Something that is important enough to potential customers that it alone would encourage them to buy. Being better in some obscure way that only matters to hackers like us won't cut it. Hackers don't define the market like we used to. Nowadays it is the mom and pop types that make up most of the users. Those are the people who we have to cater to if linux is to be more than another server room curiosity.
Lee
There was an article published by O'reilly about how the 10-simultaneous users limit that NT workstation has and which server lacks is wholly due to registry tweaks.
I've set up several NT server systems and without a doubt there are differences between them. But then again I never claimed there were NO differences, only that the most important ones were due to changes in the registry.
The registry access API may be clearly defined, but the registry itself hardly is. It is just like I said, a way for microsoft to obscure the configuration details. The fact that is also serves other purposes does not change this.
The idea of the registry isn't all that bad of an idea. However the use M$ has put that idea to is.
Also, don't you know by now that ANYTHING M$ does is part of Billy Boy's master plan?
If you're not paranoid about M$, it means you haven't been paying attention.