...anyone else notice how bad their switches suck? We've run into problems where even cards manufactured by 3com will not work with their 10/100 switches. I wouldn't trust something like this in my data center or in my bedroom walls...
The funniest thing is, it's perfectly fine for me to tell little kids how to create and purify heroin or synthesize MDMA on the Internet, but if I write three lines about how to delete a file and burn a CD, I've somehow broken a law. What the hell's up with that?
In the meantime, we found a work-around that may be even better than the one we were looking for. Instead of finding a file on the hard drive that we could modify to fool the Installer, we found a file on the Installer that we could delete and thereby bypass the checking process altogether!
We found the file by comparing a Mac OS X 10.1 "full" Install CD with an Update CD. Both CDs had the aforementioned VolumeCheck file. However, only the Update CD had the CheckforOSX file. Could this be the only critical difference between the two CDs? What if we made a bootable copy of the OS X Update CD, but with the CheckforOSX file missing? Would it act as a full install CD? We tried it. It worked! In brief, here is what
to do:
1. Using instructions posted on this page, create a disk image of the Update CD.
2.Delete the CheckforOSX file from the Essentials.pkg file in System/Installation/Packages folder of the image file. [You need to use the Open Package Contents contextual menu item to access this file.]
3.Burn the image to a CD using Disk Copy.
You can now boot from this CD. When you do, it will list any volume - even one that has no version of Mac OS X at all - as eligible for an install of Mac OS X 10.1. We did not test to see if this actually correctly installed the OS, but we have no reason to believe it would not. This method thus apparently converts an Update CD into a full install CD! A neat trick (although we suspect Apple may not find this so wonderful).
How can anyone support a company this litigious? Steve "I look so gay^Wgreat in a turtleneck" Jobs would sue his own mother if she had an Apple web site.
The thing weighs about 20 pounds, has less memory than most modern hard drives have cache, and is about as portable as a suitcase. Why not retire it to the nearest landfill (after recycling key components, I suppose), and pick up something made in the past decade? What could you possibly do on something that old anyway? Use it as a portable...terminal?
"Ask Slashdot" seems to be, a lot of the time, about chasing your tail and wasting hours of your time figuring out kludgey solutions to silly problems. This is the case here, I think.
So, by your logic, I should be able to string coax around the neighborhood to hook my friends up to cable too? Hmm, can I do that for my whole town? I could even maybe start charging for it, at a lower price than the cable company does. With enough cable amps, I might actually be able to pull it off!
The article isn't targeting people who do NAT in their own homes, among their own machines. It targets, rather legitimately, people who use services without paying for them. Right now, there's simply no way to tell if people are using NAT for illegitimate purposes (or even using it at all, for that matter.) The article merely brings this fact to light.
If you somehow manage to post your credit card info on the web, exactly whose fault is it? The only way it *can't* be your fault is if it's a poorly-constructed e-commerce site that leaks out that kind of info.
Imagine trying to install it on a machine without one of the 80 billion interpreters or libraries or virtual machines your code needs in order to run? Is it multiplatform? How do you maintain this stuff? Do you get paid to write it, or is this simply stuff you write for yourself and use by yourself? I guess, if the former, there's quite a bit of job security there. But I'd shoot code that looked like that, just by the sound of it.
Slashdot Mirror
...32 more bits.
people tell stories in boiler rooms?
and what the hell do you do with 60 kids, anyway?
With enough pelts, you can make a stunning fur coat.
- A.P.
where apparently it's perfectly okay to bribe IOC officials into selecting your city...
but what can you expect from a state where it's a-okay to have a dozen wives?
Way to refute all his points. You must be from Texas, because you sound dumb as fuck.
...is that of thousands of rabid Furries creaming their shorts after reading this news story.
- A.P.
Only AOL Time Warner Turner, News Corp, Verizon [lostbrain.com] and Oprah should be allowed to make Web pages.
Everyone else doing it will just mess stuff up!
You do realize the irony of this statement being posted to slashdot, right?
at 9.8 meters per second per second.... :(
...anyone else notice how bad their switches suck? We've run into problems where even cards manufactured by 3com will not work with their 10/100 switches. I wouldn't trust something like this in my data center or in my bedroom walls...
The funniest thing is, it's perfectly fine for me to tell little kids how to create and purify heroin or synthesize MDMA on the Internet, but if I write three lines about how to delete a file and burn a CD, I've somehow broken a law. What the hell's up with that?
- A.P.
By posting the entire text of said article?
Convert your Update CD to a full Install CD
In the meantime, we found a work-around that may be even better than the one we were looking for. Instead of finding a file on the hard drive that we could modify to fool the Installer, we found a file on the Installer that we could delete and thereby bypass the checking process altogether!
We found the file by comparing a Mac OS X 10.1 "full" Install CD with an Update CD. Both CDs had the aforementioned VolumeCheck file. However, only the Update CD had the CheckforOSX file. Could this be the only critical difference between the two CDs? What if we made a bootable copy of the OS X Update CD, but with the CheckforOSX file missing? Would it act as a full install CD? We tried it. It worked! In brief, here is what
to do:
1. Using instructions posted on this page, create a disk image of the Update CD.
2.Delete the CheckforOSX file from the Essentials.pkg file in System/Installation/Packages folder of the image file. [You need to use the Open Package Contents contextual menu item to access this file.]
3.Burn the image to a CD using Disk Copy.
You can now boot from this CD. When you do, it will list any volume - even one that has no version of Mac OS X at all - as eligible for an install of Mac OS X 10.1. We did not test to see if this actually correctly installed the OS, but we have no reason to believe it would not. This method thus apparently converts an Update CD into a full install CD! A neat trick (although we suspect Apple may not find this so wonderful).
By posting a link that tells you how to do it?
- A.P.
How can anyone support a company this litigious? Steve "I look so gay^Wgreat in a turtleneck" Jobs would sue his own mother if she had an Apple web site.
The thing weighs about 20 pounds, has less memory than most modern hard drives have cache, and is about as portable as a suitcase. Why not retire it to the nearest landfill (after recycling key components, I suppose), and pick up something made in the past decade? What could you possibly do on something that old anyway? Use it as a portable...terminal?
"Ask Slashdot" seems to be, a lot of the time, about chasing your tail and wasting hours of your time figuring out kludgey solutions to silly problems. This is the case here, I think.
So, by your logic, I should be able to string coax around the neighborhood to hook my friends up to cable too? Hmm, can I do that for my whole town? I could even maybe start charging for it, at a lower price than the cable company does. With enough cable amps, I might actually be able to pull it off!
- A.P.
The article isn't targeting people who do NAT in their own homes, among their own machines. It targets, rather legitimately, people who use services without paying for them. Right now, there's simply no way to tell if people are using NAT for illegitimate purposes (or even using it at all, for that matter.) The article merely brings this fact to light.
- A.P.
Spinning containers of peanut butter?
- A.P.
Spend a little extra for an actual modem next time. Why do people buy garbage anyway?
- A.P.
Why aren't you at least using Shorten? It's lossless audio compression and it'll at least double the amount of stuff you can archive.
I'm doing it now on a 300 GB RAID 5 partition, and things are sweet.
Read about SHN here, and then use it.
If you somehow manage to post your credit card info on the web, exactly whose fault is it? The only way it *can't* be your fault is if it's a poorly-constructed e-commerce site that leaks out that kind of info.
I just don't see what the big deal here is.
- A.P.
Hell, Industrial Light and Magic just dumped them in favor of Linux.
Says so here.
Imagine trying to install it on a machine without one of the 80 billion interpreters or libraries or virtual machines your code needs in order to run? Is it multiplatform? How do you maintain this stuff? Do you get paid to write it, or is this simply stuff you write for yourself and use by yourself? I guess, if the former, there's quite a bit of job security there. But I'd shoot code that looked like that, just by the sound of it.
Can we concentrate on either loving or hating Microsoft? All this wavering back and forth is making me dizzy!
- A.P.
slashdot
seems
to
think
they're
pretty
cool,
maybe
they're
what I
want!
"Mitchell" is also available, according to amazon.com.
- A.P.