Linux (I cannot speak for other Unices) changes your MAC address by setting the card into promiscuous mode, so that it listens to every MAC address. Then in software, it filters out MAC addresses that don't match the MAC address you have specified. It also attaches the specified MAC to outgoing packets, obviously.
At least this is how it was done in the 2.0 series kernels. I can't imagine it has changed much.
I think that paper books are the way to go. Screen real-estate is always at a premium, especially when programming. And no one would want to clutter that with yet-another-window.
With that said, it's also useful to make the content available online if possible, as an abridged reference if nothing else. It's really handy for when you don't have the book handy and just want to look up "hey, how did they do that trick again?"
As for subjects I'd like to see? I prefer books that don't neccesarily focus on a single library (everything you ever needed to know about gtk!). While useful as reference manuals, the same thing is generally online. Focus instead on using some combination of libraries to come up with a useful working environment for whatever it is you're aiming for, be that quick apps, huge apps, games, or what have you.
Err. I didn't read the comments on etoy vs. eToys, but I think you're reading into something that isn't there.
If the common sentiment expressed in that article was "yay, etoy is going to kick eToys butt!" (which I don't agree with anyway) that doesn't automatically translate into "domain disputes are good!" The fact that the domain dispute resolution system is badly flawed still remains. The comments are there not because suddenly we like domain disputes all of a sudden, they're there because there is a sense of justice in the scenario of hunter becoming hunted. The hunter armed with his mighty UDRP and rabid lawyers.
If you still insist that slashdotters are flip-flopping around on issues like this, then I'm afraid you're just nitpicking comments and points out of context. When they're out of context it's oh-so-easy to say "well you said something completely opposite just the other day". If you look at the whole picture, you wouldn't be able to say that.
You obviously haven't done tech support much. While old-school DOS users may find it easier to 'put file X in directory Y', I've got a feeling that 90% of the people attempting this would feel FAR more comfortable booting up Internet Explorer, going to the site, downloading junkbuster, and clicking the "open this file when done" checkbox.
How often do people these days move files around directories? especially ones with big scary warnings and thousands of files like C:\windows\system? I'd venture that running an installer is much more intuitive these days than shuffling files around on the hard drive. most people don't even know how to access the hard drive and its folders, they just know how to run programs.
I was hoping this functionality (along with Junkbuster itself) would be integrated into Mozilla someday. Since it's an open source program, I have no doubts that someday, someone, somewhere will hack up a nifty privacy-enabled version of Mozilla.
There is an incredibly useful MUD client called zMUD that contains a feature I'd love to see more often: tiny little toggle buttons for various features that you may want to turn on or off, sitting unobtrusively to the right of the input bar. Would it be that difficult to put a little 'proxy' icon to the side of the location bar? God knows they don't have enough stupid little useless icons up there. Click it to toggle the proxy on and off, among other things. Also a little toggle for Javascript would be immensely helpful.
Go figure. I liked him. He told it like it was. Honesty is a rare thing these days. Especially mass-media-public-honesty. Course, if you'd rather hear only what you want to hear, go right ahead.
Me, I'll mourn the loss of Mr. Steed from my second favourite video game company (Loki being the first). Not just because of the artistic talents that leave with him, but because he had actual opinions and feelings. Gee, he wasn't just a corporate PR robot. Good for him. Do we really need more of those? I don't think so.
No, actually very few people have wasted points on your posts, and I hope it stays that way. You are a very talented and insightful troll to attack in this way, I salute you.
Unfortunately, you're still just a troll.
As for everyone else, I suggest that you just change your threshhold to 1 and make him magically disappear.
> I whish this ``www.[any word].com'' nonsense would stop. My suggested solution would be to > invent another, better adapted, distribute data base, to transform a word or phrase to a URL, > call it, say, ``true names''; then add a truename:// URL scheme, which gets relocated > using the ``true names'' database to the correct URL. Integrate that scheme in every popular > browser, and make it the default URL scheme. Then DNS names can become again what they are > supposed to be: computer names, not resource names. Admittedly, I am only suggesting > displacing the problem, but maybe the other database I mention can be better attuned to > the kind of problems we have with the DNS, and which the DNS was not designed to handle.
This is probably one of the first feasable and workable suggestions on this issue that I've ever heard. Bravo!
This idea would need a bit more fleshing out to become something substantial enough to distract all the big corporations from their domain name buying sprees, and it wouldn't even phase those people that buy domain names to use for email sites (*cough* mailbank.com has a few...)
It could potentially put an end to the web redirectors though, which are as far as I'm concerned one of the worst things on the net. Especially the porn ones (whitehouse.com for example) If we had a nice truename system to replace the current www..com addresses, that would accomplish a whole lot. It'd take a lot of the load off of the DNS system if this 'truename' system sent you not only the IP of the system, but also the DNS name so the browser can cache it appropriately. I would assume that http:// style hyperlinks will remain the standard even if a truename:// URL format worked.
But I wouldn't expect any need for a URL. Instead what we need is some standardization on how browsers treat these "keywords". You should be able to specify your own 'truename database server' instead of "Netscape's parner" or "Microsoft's partner". ISPs should start running 'truename database servers' that operate similarly to the DNS servers.
Anyone who's used Netscape 4.7 or MSIE 5.0 knows that we're already on the road to replacing DNS with truenames as the default web-lookup-service. One day, domain names will be as antiquated and ugly-looking to most users as IP numbers are today. Us techies will be quite happy with our DNS though. Regardless, we've still got a ways to go. What we do need to do is to start pressuring the internet community, ISPs, and in particular, the browser companies, to put this into effect and get some standards designed. Netscape and Microsoft will have to get along, just for this once.
Re:NEWS: Richard Stallman Missing
on
Quake 1 GPL'ed
·
· Score: 1
He said GNU software, not GPL'd software. GNU software is in fact made by the FSF. It is all (AFAIK) GPL'd, naturally. But there are other, non-GNU programs that are GPL'd too. Just because they are doesn't mean the FSF owns them nor does it mean the FSF claims to own them. GNU software != GPL software. Sometimes, but not always.
Besides, when you create 25% of the software in most Linux distributions and most of those are really basic, core files (like say, grep), you have a right to be glory-hogs. They do not claim to own anything that's released under GPL, get your story straight.
In my humble opinion, the framework is just not there to support user-friendly installation of linux, especially on machines with goofy hardware (that vastly outnumber the number of ones without any goofy hardware, as far as I can tell).
isapnp is very much *NOT* automated, and the sad part is that it could so easily be fitted with a pretty little interface.
PCI PNP support is sketchy at best in my experience (at least with some of the modules that SHOULD support it but don't)
Other things that are sorely missing are in-kernel graphics and video support (will be addressed in 2.4.x, I hear? pleasepleasepleaseplease...) and sound support (which is, quite frankly, horrific. Although I have never tried 'sndconfig' since I don't use Mandrake)
> Shouldn't RMS be putting his efforts to better use, like informing people about how the patent should be invalid rather than this rediculous call for a boycott?
Why not do both? There's nothing wrong with refusing to buy from a company because their views contrast with your views. Except that maybe you have to pay a higher price. But if "The bottom line" is all you can worry about...
I had some other insightful comments to add, but I forget what they are now, so I'll just leave with that.
Well, you have to admit that LambdaMOO is *by far* the worst for that sort of thing, though. At least, that's what I hear from all the females I'm friends with there.
There are plenty of other MOOs and MU*s that are a whole lot less tolerant of that form of harassment. I'll assume that Kyrrin already knew that, but I dunno if everyone else did.
Just defending the MOOs from bad publicity, seeing as I run one of Canada's largest, myself. (shameless plug)
Oh, and on a more on-topic note: I've been through the online dating scene extensively, and while I am growing convinced that the odds of it working are like winning a lottery, I continue to search for someone to prove me wrong.
Hopeless romantic or something? Maybe just pathetic. Labels don't mean much to me. I'm just me.
I don't believe that it is hypocracy. The idea is that Linux, judging it by its merits, *should* be competition for the various Windows operating systems. It has the technical excellence to compete.
However, Microsoft, through its unfair business practices and monopoly power, do not allow Linux and other operating systems to compete on a level playing field like they should have the opportunity to do.
Note that I don't neccesarily agree nor disagree with the above sentiments, I'm just saying that they aren't neccesarily being hypocrites.
I'd suggest that you don't be too hard on people for posting this. It's good to get the word out to newbies. I would assume that ('twould be bad if not) slashdot's readership is continuously growing. With growing readership comes new readers.
Also, while I admit this will rarely be the case, I'm glad they were discussing shared accounts, because the one I used to use (l/p:cypherpunks) is no longer working.
Re:Slashdot. News for nerds. Hoaxes that don't mat
on
Telnet into Dreamcast?
·
· Score: 1
It bothers me slightly to see messages like this... While I do sympathize with your feelings, Rob and the other newsdudes are doing the best they can to publish important, meaningful, and kewl news.
I for one would much rather see one or two hoaxes now and then than I would like to see (or rather NOT see) all the cutting-edge stories they refrain from posting because they might be a hoax.
You admit that you got swept away in the excitement yourself, why isn't it okay for (Hemos, in this case) to be swept away too? It certainly wasn't like it was a glaring hoax. My first thought was that it would a totally cool feature!
In any case, I don't think its fair to attack slashdot for posting hoaxes. Like I said, its much better to post questionable material and let the user decide for him or herself whether it is true, than it is to blatantly censor things. In being liberal in their posting, Slashdot is passing the ability to decide to US, rather than deciding what is useful or stupid for us.
Which brings up another thought for me, but I will discuss it in a thread of its own.
As much as I agree with you in theory, I have yet to hear any significant difference between and MP3 and the WAV it was converted from. Most of the 'sucky quality' I've heard from MP3s has been the infamous Netscape-downloads-MP3s-as-text effect or badly-ripped WAVs (Such as when I accidentally rip at 11kHz or 8bit)...
Of course, perhaps your ears are better than mine, or maybe I'm just not focussing hard enough on hearing it suck. I just sit back and enjoy the music, not analyze it. Maybe you should give that a try too?:)
The speed of light is certainly not constant, it was never claimed to be.
It is the speed of light in a vacuum that was supposed to be constant, but I believe that is being called into question recently by new experimental evidence? (correct me if I'm wrong)
In any case, this thread is fairly offtopic, and should end here. As for SETI@Home being cracked, this was obviously not a malicious hateful cracker. Really, it could've been a hell of a lot worse. Stop acting like it's the end of the world. It was a joke, and an easily repaired one, that surely didn't damage SETI and probably helped them out quite a bit by pointing out their security hole!
Re:I'll buy when I can backup/restore my shows...
on
Digital VCRs
·
· Score: 1
Myself as well. It would be cool if it had it's own built in VHS recorder for archiving shows, movies, etc that have already been recorded on the Hard disk. I mean, who hasn't said at some point, "Oh, gee, I wish I had taped that for So-and-so."
More than that, though. I'd like to see a whole lot of extensability. Sure, network card would be cool, jaz drive, DVD-ROM even. But I think this thing's real road to success lies in an interface to a PC. That's where the network card would come in real handy.
Heck, there's so much neat stuff you could do with it. Video streaming, archiving, even printing a still frame. I liked that guy's suggestion about MP3s too, and while it's probably useful for some people, I don't think that this box is optimally set up to do that.
Well that's enough of my random musings for now. I like this box already.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not entirely true.
Linux (I cannot speak for other Unices) changes your MAC address by setting the card into promiscuous mode, so that it listens to every MAC address. Then in software, it filters out MAC addresses that don't match the MAC address you have specified. It also attaches the specified MAC to outgoing packets, obviously.
At least this is how it was done in the 2.0 series kernels. I can't imagine it has changed much.
I think that paper books are the way to go. Screen real-estate is always at a premium, especially when programming. And no one would want to clutter that with yet-another-window.
With that said, it's also useful to make the content available online if possible, as an abridged reference if nothing else. It's really handy for when you don't have the book handy and just want to look up "hey, how did they do that trick again?"
As for subjects I'd like to see? I prefer books that don't neccesarily focus on a single library (everything you ever needed to know about gtk!). While useful as reference manuals, the same thing is generally online. Focus instead on using some combination of libraries to come up with a useful working environment for whatever it is you're aiming for, be that quick apps, huge apps, games, or what have you.
Err. I didn't read the comments on etoy vs. eToys, but I think you're reading into something that isn't there.
If the common sentiment expressed in that article was "yay, etoy is going to kick eToys butt!" (which I don't agree with anyway) that doesn't automatically translate into "domain disputes are good!" The fact that the domain dispute resolution system is badly flawed still remains. The comments are there not because suddenly we like domain disputes all of a sudden, they're there because there is a sense of justice in the scenario of hunter becoming hunted. The hunter armed with his mighty UDRP and rabid lawyers.
If you still insist that slashdotters are flip-flopping around on issues like this, then I'm afraid you're just nitpicking comments and points out of context. When they're out of context it's oh-so-easy to say "well you said something completely opposite just the other day". If you look at the whole picture, you wouldn't be able to say that.
You obviously haven't done tech support much. While old-school DOS users may find it easier to 'put file X in directory Y', I've got a feeling that 90% of the people attempting this would feel FAR more comfortable booting up Internet Explorer, going to the site, downloading junkbuster, and clicking the "open this file when done" checkbox.
How often do people these days move files around directories? especially ones with big scary warnings and thousands of files like C:\windows\system? I'd venture that running an installer is much more intuitive these days than shuffling files around on the hard drive. most people don't even know how to access the hard drive and its folders, they just know how to run programs.
I was hoping this functionality (along with Junkbuster itself) would be integrated into Mozilla someday. Since it's an open source program, I have no doubts that someday, someone, somewhere will hack up a nifty privacy-enabled version of Mozilla.
There is an incredibly useful MUD client called zMUD that contains a feature I'd love to see more often: tiny little toggle buttons for various features that you may want to turn on or off, sitting unobtrusively to the right of the input bar. Would it be that difficult to put a little 'proxy' icon to the side of the location bar? God knows they don't have enough stupid little useless icons up there. Click it to toggle the proxy on and off, among other things. Also a little toggle for Javascript would be immensely helpful.
That's MY "what I want..."
Go figure. I liked him. He told it like it was. Honesty is a rare thing these days. Especially mass-media-public-honesty. Course, if you'd rather hear only what you want to hear, go right ahead.
Me, I'll mourn the loss of Mr. Steed from my second favourite video game company (Loki being the first). Not just because of the artistic talents that leave with him, but because he had actual opinions and feelings. Gee, he wasn't just a corporate PR robot. Good for him. Do we really need more of those? I don't think so.
No, actually very few people have wasted points on your posts, and I hope it stays that way. You are a very talented and insightful troll to attack in this way, I salute you.
Unfortunately, you're still just a troll.
As for everyone else, I suggest that you just change your threshhold to 1 and make him magically disappear.
I have to agree. That is "a crappy of options".
It's okay, we love you anyway Hemos. And all the other Slashdot guys, too.
> I whish this ``www.[any word].com'' nonsense would stop. My suggested solution would be to
> invent another, better adapted, distribute data base, to transform a word or phrase to a URL,
> call it, say, ``true names''; then add a truename:// URL scheme, which gets relocated
> using the ``true names'' database to the correct URL. Integrate that scheme in every popular
> browser, and make it the default URL scheme. Then DNS names can become again what they are
> supposed to be: computer names, not resource names. Admittedly, I am only suggesting
> displacing the problem, but maybe the other database I mention can be better attuned to
> the kind of problems we have with the DNS, and which the DNS was not designed to handle.
This is probably one of the first feasable and workable suggestions on this issue that I've ever heard. Bravo!
This idea would need a bit more fleshing out to become something substantial enough to distract all the big corporations from their domain name buying sprees, and it wouldn't even phase those people that buy domain names to use for email sites (*cough* mailbank.com has a few...)
It could potentially put an end to the web redirectors though, which are as far as I'm concerned one of the worst things on the net. Especially the porn ones (whitehouse.com for example) If we had a nice truename system to replace the current www..com addresses, that would accomplish a whole lot. It'd take a lot of the load off of the DNS system if this 'truename' system sent you not only the IP of the system, but also the DNS name so the browser can cache it appropriately. I would assume that http:// style hyperlinks will remain the standard even if a truename:// URL format worked.
But I wouldn't expect any need for a URL. Instead what we need is some standardization on how browsers treat these "keywords". You should be able to specify your own 'truename database server' instead of "Netscape's parner" or "Microsoft's partner". ISPs should start running 'truename database servers' that operate similarly to the DNS servers.
Anyone who's used Netscape 4.7 or MSIE 5.0 knows that we're already on the road to replacing DNS with truenames as the default web-lookup-service. One day, domain names will be as antiquated and ugly-looking to most users as IP numbers are today. Us techies will be quite happy with our DNS though. Regardless, we've still got a ways to go. What we do need to do is to start pressuring the internet community, ISPs, and in particular, the browser companies, to put this into effect and get some standards designed. Netscape and Microsoft will have to get along, just for this once.
He said GNU software, not GPL'd software. GNU software is in fact made by the FSF. It is all (AFAIK) GPL'd, naturally. But there are other, non-GNU programs that are GPL'd too. Just because they are doesn't mean the FSF owns them nor does it mean the FSF claims to own them. GNU software != GPL software. Sometimes, but not always.
Besides, when you create 25% of the software in most Linux distributions and most of those are really basic, core files (like say, grep), you have a right to be glory-hogs. They do not claim to own anything that's released under GPL, get your story straight.
In my humble opinion, the framework is just not there to support user-friendly installation of linux, especially on machines with goofy hardware (that vastly outnumber the number of ones without any goofy hardware, as far as I can tell).
isapnp is very much *NOT* automated, and the sad part is that it could so easily be fitted with a pretty little interface.
PCI PNP support is sketchy at best in my experience (at least with some of the modules that SHOULD support it but don't)
Other things that are sorely missing are in-kernel graphics and video support (will be addressed in 2.4.x, I hear? pleasepleasepleaseplease...) and sound support (which is, quite frankly, horrific. Although I have never tried 'sndconfig' since I don't use Mandrake)
> Shouldn't RMS be putting his efforts to better use, like informing people about how the patent should be invalid rather than this rediculous call for a boycott?
Why not do both? There's nothing wrong with refusing to buy from a company because their views contrast with your views. Except that maybe you have to pay a higher price. But if "The bottom line" is all you can worry about...
I had some other insightful comments to add, but I forget what they are now, so I'll just leave with that.
Well, you have to admit that LambdaMOO is *by far* the worst for that sort of thing, though. At least, that's what I hear from all the females I'm friends with there.
There are plenty of other MOOs and MU*s that are a whole lot less tolerant of that form of harassment. I'll assume that Kyrrin already knew that, but I dunno if everyone else did.
Just defending the MOOs from bad publicity, seeing as I run one of Canada's largest, myself. (shameless plug)
Oh, and on a more on-topic note: I've been through the online dating scene extensively, and while I am growing convinced that the odds of it working are like winning a lottery, I continue to search for someone to prove me wrong.
Hopeless romantic or something? Maybe just pathetic. Labels don't mean much to me. I'm just me.
I don't believe that it is hypocracy. The idea is that Linux, judging it by its merits, *should* be competition for the various Windows operating systems. It has the technical excellence to compete.
However, Microsoft, through its unfair business practices and monopoly power, do not allow Linux and other operating systems to compete on a level playing field like they should have the opportunity to do.
Note that I don't neccesarily agree nor disagree with the above sentiments, I'm just saying that they aren't neccesarily being hypocrites.
I'd suggest that you don't be too hard on people for posting this. It's good to get the word out to newbies. I would assume that ('twould be bad if not) slashdot's readership is continuously growing. With growing readership comes new readers.
Also, while I admit this will rarely be the case, I'm glad they were discussing shared accounts, because the one I used to use (l/p:cypherpunks) is no longer working.
It bothers me slightly to see messages like this... While I do sympathize with your feelings, Rob and the other newsdudes are doing the best they can to publish important, meaningful, and kewl news.
I for one would much rather see one or two hoaxes now and then than I would like to see (or rather NOT see) all the cutting-edge stories they refrain from posting because they might be a hoax.
You admit that you got swept away in the excitement yourself, why isn't it okay for (Hemos, in this case) to be swept away too? It certainly wasn't like it was a glaring hoax. My first thought was that it would a totally cool feature!
In any case, I don't think its fair to attack slashdot for posting hoaxes. Like I said, its much better to post questionable material and let the user decide for him or herself whether it is true, than it is to blatantly censor things. In being liberal in their posting, Slashdot is passing the ability to decide to US, rather than deciding what is useful or stupid for us.
Which brings up another thought for me, but I will discuss it in a thread of its own.
As much as I agree with you in theory, I have yet to hear any significant difference between and MP3 and the WAV it was converted from. Most of the 'sucky quality' I've heard from MP3s has been the infamous Netscape-downloads-MP3s-as-text effect or badly-ripped WAVs (Such as when I accidentally rip at 11kHz or 8bit)...
:)
Of course, perhaps your ears are better than mine, or maybe I'm just not focussing hard enough on hearing it suck. I just sit back and enjoy the music, not analyze it. Maybe you should give that a try too?
> Must be a user error...
:)
More likely that it would be hardware incompatability, unless this particular user started stabbing a butter knife into his i740.
If you ask me, "Must be a user error..." tends to be one of those knee-jerk reactions like "Well of course it doesn't work, it's Windows!"
Not that I disagree with the latter, in most cases...
The speed of light is certainly not constant, it was never claimed to be.
It is the speed of light in a vacuum that was supposed to be constant, but I believe that is being called into question recently by new experimental evidence? (correct me if I'm wrong)
In any case, this thread is fairly offtopic, and should end here. As for SETI@Home being cracked, this was obviously not a malicious hateful cracker. Really, it could've been a hell of a lot worse. Stop acting like it's the end of the world. It was a joke, and an easily repaired one, that surely didn't damage SETI and probably helped them out quite a bit by pointing out their security hole!
Myself as well. It would be cool if it had it's own built in VHS recorder for archiving shows, movies, etc that have already been recorded on the Hard disk. I mean, who hasn't said at some point, "Oh, gee, I wish I had taped that for So-and-so."
More than that, though. I'd like to see a whole lot of extensability. Sure, network card would be cool, jaz drive, DVD-ROM even. But I think this thing's real road to success lies in an interface to a PC. That's where the network card would come in real handy.
Heck, there's so much neat stuff you could do with it. Video streaming, archiving, even printing a still frame. I liked that guy's suggestion about MP3s too, and while it's probably useful for some people, I don't think that this box is optimally set up to do that.
Well that's enough of my random musings for now. I like this box already.