I can understand it to some extent, but there are a couple of things that he said that don't make much sense.
First, he complained of the complexity involved with installing Linux as a second OS on the same box. When someone offered up a suggestion (Partition Magic), he blew it off because it required purchase of another program. You can't just go to sleep at night expecting the Partition Fairy to drop by and do the work for you. He wanted the results, but did not want to make the effort to get them. (And if you've ever used Partition Magic, you know how little effort it really requires. Especially version 4.)
Secondly, he implied that Linux is not free because he chose to spend $50 to purchase a Red Hat retail version. Heck, if he would have stopped by I would have burned him a copy for no charge. (Of course I live in Phoenix, so his travel cost might make the $50 seem reaonable.) Surely he could have found someone in Chicago to burn him a copy. And then he could have applied the $50 toward the purchase of Partition Magic. Free software (beer, speech, whatever) is no less free if you consciously choose to spend $$$ to buy it from somebody.
Jimmy, if you seriously want to test the installation of this OS on the box that currently contains Windows you have two wonderful choices: 1. Install Linux over Windows (aka Windows upgrade) 2. Purchase Partition Magic and make an effort.
I don't doubt your sincerity in wanting to install and run it. But your expectations are a little out of line.
p.s.: If you don't want to buy Partition Magic, you can get Caldera's 2.2 release. It has a limited version of Partition Magic that should work just fine for you.
So now I can get "official" support for my HP Netserver LD Pro (RH 5.2, kernel 2.2.5, Squid 2.1.PATCH2). That should reassure some of the bosses around here.
The bosses were a little nervous about letting me test Linux/Squid in place of our NT/IIS proxy solution. But after two weeks of testing, I put our NT machine back in place. Three days later I received a mandate to fdisk the NT server and put Linux into production. I like the bosses.:-)
Thank you, HP, for coming on-board with the official support.
I'm not sure that the existence of shrinkwrap was what caused the explosion of pc purchases. It seems that the first wave was people wanting to get onto the Internet. And the computers they bought came with "free" Windows 95. Gaming on this platform came later.
As far as usability, that is still debatable. I have never met anyone without computer experience who found Windows 95 intuitive. In my experience it has always been a matter of conditioning.
Consumers are usually going to pursue the best deal. Often this means the lowest price. The US Postal Service has been hurt by the increased use of e-mail. That indicates that they should look for alternative ways to make money. But it doesn't mean that people using e-mail are "endangering tomorrow's messaging choices."
Open-source developers have done a fine job of getting reliable, useful products to the masses. They have every incentive to test and verify the product. But that does not mean that the testing and verification is done by a closed group of people on the payroll. You're right that the packaging is usually not a big concern. But the functionality and reliability are a huge factor.
Now, more than ever, consumers are becoming aware of the choices available to them. If they choose something other than shrinkwrapped software, then the companies who rely solely upon selling that software will become victims of technological darwinism.
This guy fails to consider the fact that a lot of companies apparently have a poor business model. Everyone seemed happy to jump into pc sales, not thinking that the market might just become saturated one day. And now that just about evereyone interested has a pc, these companies are starting to worry. And we should feel sorry for them?
No, now is the time for the good companies to differentiate themselves. That is the natural evolution of business. This is not the oil industry: you cannot arbitrarily raise prices and expect people to continue paying.
And as far as his last three statements: >There's no such thing as free software, and >there's no such thing as a cheap computer. Those >who say otherwise are endangering tomorrow's IT >choices.
1. There is such thing as free software. It pre-dates the stuff sitting on store shelves. 2. There is such thing as a cheap computer. People all over have suddenly begun purchasing them. 3. I say otherwise, and I find that tomorrow's IT choices are looking better than ever.
self censorship vs. filtering
on
ShutUp Software
·
· Score: 2
What you refer to as self censorship is in fact filtering. You have a right to free speech. But I am under no obligation to listen to you. If, for instance, you call me during dinner and try to sell me something I will probably hang up on you. Yet I do not consider this type of filtering to be harmful. Another example is that I refuse to watch the Springer show. Does that mean that I am refusing to face reality? No, it means I have better things to do with my time (watch grass grow, boil a pot of water, etc.).
While reading articles or postings I am going to skip some. If there is an automated feature to save me time in the selection, I might use it. Sure, some people are going to take this type of filtering to extreme lengths. But that is their choice to make. If certain/. readers choose to filter your articles and postings, that is their choice. If you choose to take it personally, that is your choice.
Please do not confuse filtering choices with censorship. There is absolutely no comparison.
He can FUD all he wants. I just FDISKed an NT4/IIS4 machine and dropped Linux on it. Even upgraded kernel to 2.2.5 without calling Redmond for help.
I now have 1200+ users grateful that their proxy server doesn't crap out several times per day. I get the benefit of reduced NetBIOS traffic on my network, as well as reduced browser wars and WINS tracking. Sure it's only one machine. But I expect it to be the first of many.
OK. After reading some of the court transcripts I see this guilty plea. But the math still does not make sense. If he pled guilty for the N.C. crimes and received 22 months, then he should have served that time by 12/97.
What isn't accounted for is the rest of time. My point isn't that he shouldn't serve time for crimes committed. It is that his extensive imprisonment without trial is a big problem that should make us all uncomfortable.
It's interesting to hear people claim that Mitnick's time was "earned." I fear the day when any of the rest of us is imprisoned without trial for an extended period of time because we could possibly be a threat.
I don't condone illegal activity of any kind. But the system is extremely flawed. Anyone who rationalizes his imprisonment ought to think very carefully. Paranoia kept Mitnick behind bars. This same paranoia could keep any one of us behind bars too.
then all of us are in trouble. Life without parody would be hell. I mean, no more comic strips. No more Saturday Night Live. No more ZD articles.
I can't wait to hear the results. If this is a joke, then he did a fine job of building up to it. If not, then some big bad company will feel the wrath. Either way, it is the most interesting story I have read about today.
I didn't mean to imply that he had a poor grasp of the English language. I know why they're happening, but they are certainly avoidable. What I was getting at was that spelling and grammar mistakes really do bother me. I usually look the other way (depending on the writer's mastery of the language).
I would think that someone who has a good grasp of English, such as Jon, would be equally irritated that these bothersome question marks are littered throughout his articles. I doubt that he would accept them if they always showed up in printed text that way.
And Jon, he's right. Use vi. If you need help learning it go here.
I really do like most of your articles. But I can't (not can?t) bear seeing those horrible question marks all over the place. I am not a literary genius, but I did learn how to use the English language properly. That's why it is difficult to read the articles. And I know that many others have complained.
If people that enjoy your articles stop reading them, who is left? Please, have mercy on us before it is too late.
>If you want to prevent your child from viewing >anything you find objectionable, I suggest you >hold your child's hand and restrict, TV,books, >movies, school, as well as anything else found >outside your home.
If I had children I would be an active parent to them. That does not mean that I would let them raise themselves, or expect society to do it for me. And I'd spend the $20/month to give them basic Internet access. My government does not owe this to me. But you're missing the point.
By your account libraries are required to provide access to all things all of the time. This is not how libraries are run. Try asking for Club magazine (or some other sex publication) from the periodicals section of the public library next time you are there. See if they have it available for you. If not, scream censorship.
The whole point I was originally making was that blaming the software for the situation is downright silly! The software is a tool used to implement the policy. Everyone here that is screaming about censorship should be addressing the policy. If the software is blocking sites that the library did not want blocked, then that can be easily addressed (edit the smartfilter.site file or wait for the updated filter binary).
Blaming the software for the policy is like blaming the bullet for the shooting.
Servo's voice was actually provided by Josh Weinstein (aka Dr. Larry Erhart). Man, talk about an irritating voice! I'm glad that Kevin Murphy took over and stuck around.
I am using Smartfilter for a 30-day eval period. (Squid version.) Like other filter vendors they do not publish the list of filtered sites. But there are also other configuration files that allow you to exempt sites and workstations. In short, there's flexibility.
With filtering in place, ACLU types bitch & moan about suppressed free speech. Without it, conservative types bitch & moan about subsidizing perverts.
Smartfilter was intentionally purchased to filter "objectionable" sites. It enforces a policy. If a user unsuccessfully attempts to access a "non-objectionable" site then the user should notify the IT person in charge. That site can then be exempted.
Smartfilter is not perfect. It is, however, flexible.
How many trees must sacrifice their lives so that this "innovative genius" can spew forth his "vision" for us? Trees help clean our environment. Bill helps pollute it. Please, stop the carnage!
for various reasons. The easiest being that Star Division, Corel, Applix, etc. have incentive to make a cool product that is affordable. MS has incentive to make a temporarily affordable product that will eventually defy standards and cost too much $$$. They are so transparent.
So if they are diverting any $$$ to a product for Linux, fine. It's fewer $$$ spent on that windows garbage.
re:Anyone use Linux to use Linux anymore..
on
Red Hat Backlash?
·
· Score: 1
I agree. I don't understand why people get their undies in a wad over a particular distro. I primarily used OS/2 for 6 years because it did cool stuff for me. Now I use Linux for many of the same reasons. I also have more control over the Linux machine.
Too many people define their computing need as "I need to use Word 97" instead of "I need a word processor." Darnit, define a need and select a good tool. If you select RedHat as a Linux distro then fine. If you don't then fine too. Bitching about a Linux distro is a waste of time. At least you are free to select another distro.
I'm way out of my league in evaluating the use of slow light. So please, someone explain the benefit of slowing down light. It just seems a little weird to intentionally slow down the fastest known thing in the universe.
That's one of the reasons for the protest. The EULA was scripted by ms and included with the pc bundle. The pc makers would not honor it. They insisted that the whole pc be returned, even though the EULA specifically states that the software product may be returned for a refund. It appears that if the EULA is enforceable to any extent, then ms will very likely be held accountable for the refunds. Can't wait to see what the various state attorneys general say about this issue.
Slashdot Mirror
I can understand it to some extent, but there are a couple of things that he said that don't make much sense.
First, he complained of the complexity involved with installing Linux as a second OS on the same box. When someone offered up a suggestion (Partition Magic), he blew it off because it required purchase of another program. You can't just go to sleep at night expecting the Partition Fairy to drop by and do the work for you. He wanted the results, but did not want to make the effort to get them. (And if you've ever used Partition Magic, you know how little effort it really requires. Especially version 4.)
Secondly, he implied that Linux is not free because he chose to spend $50 to purchase a Red Hat retail version. Heck, if he would have stopped by I would have burned him a copy for no charge. (Of course I live in Phoenix, so his travel cost might make the $50 seem reaonable.) Surely he could have found someone in Chicago to burn him a copy. And then he could have applied the $50 toward the purchase of Partition Magic. Free software (beer, speech, whatever) is no less free if you consciously choose to spend $$$ to buy it from somebody.
Jimmy, if you seriously want to test the installation of this OS on the box that currently contains Windows you have two wonderful choices:
1. Install Linux over Windows (aka Windows upgrade)
2. Purchase Partition Magic and make an effort.
I don't doubt your sincerity in wanting to install and run it. But your expectations are a little out of line.
p.s.: If you don't want to buy Partition Magic, you can get Caldera's 2.2 release. It has a limited version of Partition Magic that should work just fine for you.
So now I can get "official" support for my HP Netserver LD Pro (RH 5.2, kernel 2.2.5, Squid 2.1.PATCH2). That should reassure some of the bosses around here.
:-)
The bosses were a little nervous about letting me test Linux/Squid in place of our NT/IIS proxy solution. But after two weeks of testing, I put our NT machine back in place. Three days later I received a mandate to fdisk the NT server and put Linux into production. I like the bosses.
Thank you, HP, for coming on-board with the official support.
I'm not sure that the existence of shrinkwrap was what caused the explosion of pc purchases. It seems that the first wave was people wanting to get onto the Internet. And the computers they bought came with "free" Windows 95. Gaming on this platform came later.
As far as usability, that is still debatable. I have never met anyone without computer experience who found Windows 95 intuitive. In my experience it has always been a matter of conditioning.
Consumers are usually going to pursue the best deal. Often this means the lowest price. The US Postal Service has been hurt by the increased use of e-mail. That indicates that they should look for alternative ways to make money. But it doesn't mean that people using e-mail are "endangering tomorrow's messaging choices."
Open-source developers have done a fine job of getting reliable, useful products to the masses. They have every incentive to test and verify the product. But that does not mean that the testing and verification is done by a closed group of people on the payroll. You're right that the packaging is usually not a big concern. But the functionality and reliability are a huge factor.
Now, more than ever, consumers are becoming aware of the choices available to them. If they choose something other than shrinkwrapped software, then the companies who rely solely upon selling that software will become victims of technological darwinism.
This guy fails to consider the fact that a lot of companies apparently have a poor business model. Everyone seemed happy to jump into pc sales, not thinking that the market might just become saturated one day. And now that just about evereyone interested has a pc, these companies are starting to worry. And we should feel sorry for them?
No, now is the time for the good companies to differentiate themselves. That is the natural evolution of business. This is not the oil industry: you cannot arbitrarily raise prices and expect people to continue paying.
And as far as his last three statements:
>There's no such thing as free software, and
>there's no such thing as a cheap computer. Those
>who say otherwise are endangering tomorrow's IT
>choices.
1. There is such thing as free software. It pre-dates the stuff sitting on store shelves.
2. There is such thing as a cheap computer. People all over have suddenly begun purchasing them.
3. I say otherwise, and I find that tomorrow's IT choices are looking better than ever.
What you refer to as self censorship is in fact filtering. You have a right to free speech. But I am under no obligation to listen to you. If, for instance, you call me during dinner and try to sell me something I will probably hang up on you. Yet I do not consider this type of filtering to be harmful. Another example is that I refuse to watch the Springer show. Does that mean that I am refusing to face reality? No, it means I have better things to do with my time (watch grass grow, boil a pot of water, etc.).
/. readers choose to filter your articles and postings, that is their choice. If you choose to take it personally, that is your choice.
While reading articles or postings I am going to skip some. If there is an automated feature to save me time in the selection, I might use it. Sure, some people are going to take this type of filtering to extreme lengths. But that is their choice to make. If certain
Please do not confuse filtering choices with censorship. There is absolutely no comparison.
(Overall, this was a good article.)
Imagine the productivity measurement if you excluded the NT5 development team. Man, our numbers would drop even more!
Productivity != efficiency. I don't know why studies are still done based upon lines of code.
He can FUD all he wants. I just FDISKed an NT4/IIS4 machine and dropped Linux on it. Even upgraded kernel to 2.2.5 without calling Redmond for help.
I now have 1200+ users grateful that their proxy server doesn't crap out several times per day. I get the benefit of reduced NetBIOS traffic on my network, as well as reduced browser wars and WINS tracking. Sure it's only one machine. But I expect it to be the first of many.
OK. After reading some of the court transcripts I see this guilty plea. But the math still does not make sense. If he pled guilty for the N.C. crimes and received 22 months, then he should have served that time by 12/97.
What isn't accounted for is the rest of time. My point isn't that he shouldn't serve time for crimes committed. It is that his extensive imprisonment without trial is a big problem that should make us all uncomfortable.
I haven't heard that one. As far as I've seen, he has been awaiting trial. Here's a link to his indictment:
http://www.kevinmitnick.com/indictment.ht ml
He has apparently spent the entire time behind bars trying to prepare a defense. What other guilty plea are you referring to?
It's interesting to hear people claim that Mitnick's time was "earned." I fear the day when any of the rest of us is imprisoned without trial for an extended period of time because we could possibly be a threat.
I don't condone illegal activity of any kind. But the system is extremely flawed. Anyone who rationalizes his imprisonment ought to think very carefully. Paranoia kept Mitnick behind bars. This same paranoia could keep any one of us behind bars too.
then all of us are in trouble. Life without parody would be hell. I mean, no more comic strips. No more Saturday Night Live. No more ZD articles.
I can't wait to hear the results. If this is a joke, then he did a fine job of building up to it. If not, then some big bad company will feel the wrath. Either way, it is the most interesting story I have read about today.
pete
Skeptopotamus does not believe it, and neither do I!
I didn't mean to imply that he had a poor grasp of the English language. I know why they're happening, but they are certainly avoidable. What I was getting at was that spelling and grammar mistakes really do bother me. I usually look the other way (depending on the writer's mastery of the language).
I would think that someone who has a good grasp of English, such as Jon, would be equally irritated that these bothersome question marks are littered throughout his articles. I doubt that he would accept them if they always showed up in printed text that way.
And Jon, he's right. Use vi. If you need help learning it go here.
I really do like most of your articles. But I can't (not can?t) bear seeing those horrible question marks all over the place. I am not a literary genius, but I did learn how to use the English language properly. That's why it is difficult to read the articles. And I know that many others have complained.
If people that enjoy your articles stop reading them, who is left? Please, have mercy on us before it is too late.
>If you want to prevent your child from viewing
>anything you find objectionable, I suggest you
>hold your child's hand and restrict, TV,books,
>movies, school, as well as anything else found
>outside your home.
If I had children I would be an active parent to them. That does not mean that I would let them raise themselves, or expect society to do it for me. And I'd spend the $20/month to give them basic Internet access. My government does not owe this to me. But you're missing the point.
By your account libraries are required to provide access to all things all of the time. This is not how libraries are run. Try asking for Club magazine (or some other sex publication) from the periodicals section of the public library next time you are there. See if they have it available for you. If not, scream censorship.
The whole point I was originally making was that blaming the software for the situation is downright silly! The software is a tool used to implement the policy. Everyone here that is screaming about censorship should be addressing the policy. If the software is blocking sites that the library did not want blocked, then that can be easily addressed (edit the smartfilter.site file or wait for the updated filter binary).
Blaming the software for the policy is like blaming the bullet for the shooting.
Servo's voice was actually provided by Josh Weinstein (aka Dr. Larry Erhart). Man, talk about an irritating voice! I'm glad that Kevin Murphy took over and stuck around.
pete
I am using Smartfilter for a 30-day eval period. (Squid version.) Like other filter vendors they do not publish the list of filtered sites. But there are also other configuration files that allow you to exempt sites and workstations. In short, there's flexibility.
With filtering in place, ACLU types bitch & moan about suppressed free speech. Without it, conservative types bitch & moan about subsidizing perverts.
Smartfilter was intentionally purchased to filter "objectionable" sites. It enforces a policy. If a user unsuccessfully attempts to access a "non-objectionable" site then the user should notify the IT person in charge. That site can then be exempted.
Smartfilter is not perfect. It is, however, flexible.
I have no interest in this product. But since M$ is in denial, it will probably ship before NT5.
pete
How many trees must sacrifice their lives so that this "innovative genius" can spew forth his "vision" for us? Trees help clean our environment. Bill helps pollute it. Please, stop the carnage!
not a tree hugger...
pete
for various reasons. The easiest being that Star Division, Corel, Applix, etc. have incentive to make a cool product that is affordable. MS has incentive to make a temporarily affordable product that will eventually defy standards and cost too much $$$. They are so transparent.
So if they are diverting any $$$ to a product for Linux, fine. It's fewer $$$ spent on that windows garbage.
I agree. I don't understand why people get their undies in a wad over a particular distro. I primarily used OS/2 for 6 years because it did cool stuff for me. Now I use Linux for many of the same reasons. I also have more control over the Linux machine.
Too many people define their computing need as "I need to use Word 97" instead of "I need a word processor." Darnit, define a need and select a good tool. If you select RedHat as a Linux distro then fine. If you don't then fine too. Bitching about a Linux distro is a waste of time. At least you are free to select another distro.
Actually, 3.51 was never certified. 3.50 was, and I know that the following 2 conditions applied to the certification:
1) No floppy drive.
2) No network connectivity of any kind.
Kinda sad how they have been getting away with claims of C-2 certification for all these years.
then at least let us hear those famous words one last time during the final episode:
"Push the button, Frank"
I'm way out of my league in evaluating the use of slow light. So please, someone explain the benefit of slowing down light. It just seems a little weird to intentionally slow down the fastest known thing in the universe.
That's one of the reasons for the protest. The EULA was scripted by ms and included with the pc bundle. The pc makers would not honor it. They insisted that the whole pc be returned, even though the EULA specifically states that the software product may be returned for a refund. It appears that if the EULA is enforceable to any extent, then ms will very likely be held accountable for the refunds. Can't wait to see what the various state attorneys general say about this issue.