It looks like a normal Desktop PC, though the EasiDock plugs into a laptop's PCMCIA card slot, using it as a highbandwidth bus
(1,250Mbps)
Hrmm. Is it me or does 1.2Gbps through PCMCIA seem lofty? I doubt highly that this device, or the laptop it's plugging into can handle that sort of throughput, especially through PCMCIA.
This was no crack. This was some really bad administrative habits inviting something like this to happen.
The person that left the default password on a publically accessible server should be canned.
At any job I've worked, something like this would get the preson responsible auto-canned for not making reasonable efforts to protect company data.
This is a special case, becasue the person who decided to implement a 'default password' in slashcode also works in the company where it is used. CmdrTaco also needs a good butt-kickin. Did feature lust could your judgement?
Also, the idea of storing the user database in clear text on a publically accessible server is also insane. Store nothing on publically accessible webservers.
I totally cringed when CmdrTaco decided to proclaim "No one would ever have gotten in if it wasn't for the default password".
OH MY GOD
I hope he takes a good look at his bliefs surrounding security. That's a very cocky and naive thing to say. I'd submit that someone who believes that enough to say that will most certainly get 'cracked' again.
Have a nice day:)
There are ways to bring down Cisco Switches using simple SNMP --whether you have community strings or not. They are IOS specific bugs.
When brought to Cisco's attention, it was ignored. Then, all of a sudden, Cisco 1700/2900/5k/5500/6000 series switches don't support bridge tables anymore.
There are other issues as well that I have identified, such as ISL trunks leaking un-encapsulated packets into a trunk, and certain plain packet header patterns (for example netbios browsing) triggering the multicast ISL interface (multicast, all interfaces on the trunk process it)to trigger Spanning-Tree recaluclations, which causes the interface to go dead for: 2 * maxforward_delay + hello_time. Unless of course you have portfast/nodefast enabled (Which is Cisco's *extension* of 802.1d/q) whereby when this happens, all ports on Vlan1 (all designated bridges) flood while spanning-tree is recalculated.
This basically turns your entire broadcast domain into one HUGE repeater. lol
There's more. Point is, statements like that, which are unfounded aren't much use to anyone.
You can't compare software to devices, or aparatus.
Most certainly the design of the razor is patented, and through that patent, only one sort of blade, with the proper attachment mechanism can be attached to the razor.
The blade, also being an aparatus with a very specific attachment mechanism, is patented.
Being lent a PC and net access by your employer is 'nice', but hardly a moral thing to do:P
..and what about privacy? What happens if our employment contract allows us own software we create on our own time and on our own PC? What happens if the PC is a company asset? What policies can/will companies enforce on their employees in order to take advantage of the offerings?
"You were logged as visiting a pr0n site using company equipment, you're fired"
Give your head a shake. Rue the day that I view my employer lending me gadgets a moral thing to do.
A minimum wage earning parking lot attendant receives more training on operating the arm than people receive training on how to raise children.
The attitude must exist in the first place in order for violent games to be acceptable.
We don't see games that glorify genocide or ways to effectively starve a nation because these aren't acceptable scenarios. Violence and killing is. Look at any/every news broadcast in continental north america: "3 dead.... 5 people killed... a massacre..." It's no wonder.
I have a three year old son who whips around on my computer better than most adults can. He plays games (racing games), and when he's old enough to distinguish acceptable behaviour in a game from acceptable real-life behaviour, he'll be playing whatever FPS is hot at the time.
Everyone likes to point the finger, it's easy to do. Remember this: When you point your finger at someone else, you're pointing three at yourself.
Everyone think 'crazy' thoughts, violent thoughts...thoughts that we would be embarassed to share for fear of being institutionalized. Anyone who denies this is a liar.
The difference is that the sane person stops short of acting upon, or voicing those thoughts. Why? Beacuse they know better. They know better becasue they were raised to know better.
"It's the video games.. it's the music.. it's the teachers... it's the school system --they are to blame for our children's behaviour"
Bull fucking shit. Raise your children properly and none of this happens.
Unix as a philosophy and the Legacy Myth
on
The End of Unix?
·
· Score: 2
I have often heard 'Unix is a Legacy system, old technology from the 60's and 70's.'
This is patently false. What Unix _is_, is a system of tools which have been refined for 30+ years. AFAIK, 'Legacy' should be used to describe something which is no longer developed or supported. At least this is the general use of the word.
New doesn't mean better, and in many cases, it can mean untested or unproven. Unix is proven technology. But above all it's a proven philosophy.
Call Unix whatever you like. Text-book Sys V, BSD, or clones like Linux. The underlying philosophy is largely the same. THIS is why Unix has been around for decades (besides techinal merrits).
In the philosophical sense, I doubt Unix is going to die, ever.
"DNSSEC - which is a public key infrastructure unto itself - is very complex. In our judgment, at the time, it was not ready for implementation and deployment. It followed that RFC 2137 was also not ready for implementation and deployment."
What this really means:
"We conducted a think-tank session that included the brightest minds in Microsoft Research Labs, including the famous team that invented the sybbloic link just in time for Windows2000. It was determined that patch-build-1,234,567 broke when we tried to implemt it becuase of inconsistencies between patch-122,239, and patch 569,496, which were, consequently patches for patch 1223,456, which patched patch 22,134. Surely this standard is wrong."
nnnext:
TSIG and TKEY alone do not solve the key distribution problem inherent in any secret key system. However, both mechanisms allow for extension, which permitted us to publish a third complementary draft, "GSS Algorithm for TSIG (GSS-TSIG)"."
This one is not as funny. Seems like they use IETF protocol protocol and process to their advantage, fulfilling process requirements while breaking the spirit of the guidelines.
nnnext:
"Microsoft would be happy to assist any vendors who wish to develop an independent, interoperable implementation."
No doubt. Maybe that's why your draft has been in since 1997 and noone outside of Microsoft is interested in going forward with it.
Ten years ago today the first major assault on online freedom came in the form of an unsigned search warrant.....
What is your logic here? How do you draw comparison between that event and the mythical 'fight for our online rights'? That event happened far before the 'net' was common knowledge, or a public venue for that matter.
"Fast forward ten years, and the only thing that's changed is who authorizes the raids: the MPAA and RIAA are hot on the heels of so-called pirates..."
How can you place software piracy raids and this event in the same philisophical boat? I don't get it.
"Our fight is an underground one - we're trying to save the freedom of the average consumer (both in the US and the world at large) against greedy corporations and they think we're the bad guys!"
Although I am a seething believer in free software, corporations can and will licence their products as they see fit. It's up to individuals to decide whether they accept the philosophy of bad business. We're never going to change the collective minds of those that are at the helm of big business. We have to lead by example, and they'll catch on if they're smart.
Attraction rather than promotion.
Current copyright laws suck. Most licence agreements suck too. Bottom line is we have a choice.. I exercise mine.
KDevelop can be used to develop anything from KDE apps to daemons. Personally, I have only used it for non-graphical applications, and I have found it to be quite good. The Class browser is excellent, and it certainly aided me in farmiliarizing myself with the code in an already in-progress game. (adonthell.linuxgames.com)
I am developing the combat engine in KDevelop, and I have found it first class.
I won't argue with your bulleted points, just the foul smelling bits at the end. I use vi extensively, and mostly run on a command line in Linux. To say that someone using a GUI to get a job done is 'not in the UNIX style' is hog wash.
Do you really think that working with your graphics card in text mode makes you a *real man*, and a true UNIX developer?
For those who are unaware, Student nets and dorms are typically placed onto the _worst_ segments in the entire network.
And another thing... I'm sooo sick of people thinking they have the amount of bandwidth that the port comes labeled as.
If you're plugged into a TX port, that does NOT mean that you have 100Mbps connectivity. Ever heard of cascading switches?
Take a group of 10 switches and arrange them like you would bowling pins. Say these switches have 64 ports each. The top switch in this network (student-net) is connected to the backbone via a single true TX fiber connection. Just for good measure, let's say it's FD. If there is any sort of port contention at all on this network, everyone in it is sharing a single 100Mbps connection to the backbone.
With 10 switches here, and 600 students, each student actually averages 100/600 = 0.1666Mbps. This is of course if the network is saturated, which it is most likely to be at night.
Not only this, but we're assuming here that network throughput is determined by octets/second.
This is a layman's way of measuring throughput, and in no way reflects reality. I could spend months arguing different ways of defining alpha in a bridged network, but let's just take a very general stab at it.
Typically, in generic terms, in a network of 600 nodes within a single broadcast domain, you could expect peak throughput of MAYBE 50Mbps.
Factor in all the wingates, multicast gamers, and fools who install win32, bind everything to the adapter and say 'IT WORKS!' and leave the configuration that way. netbeui, netbios client all configured within the workgroup 'Workgroup' spamming each other. I AM HERE. I AM HERE. WHO ARE YOU WHO ARE YOU.
Bottom line is I get upset by poeple who think "Hey, this is a 100-TX port... GUYS I am l337, I have 100Mbps to the internet"
The problem is probably mine, but I can't believe the sheer number of people (including professionals) who have absolutely NO IDEA how their network works, and how services on it affect the pipes.
Do you understand the implications of free software? Licencing something under the GPL implies unlimited technical changes. Hell, I could grab the source to a piece of free software, completely obfuscate and break it, and re-release it as something else.
Of course, no one will dare use it because it holds no merit against the 'better' original package.
If you ask me, the the SCSL is no better than the original QPL, which RMS also denounced. So why are java-heads willing to accept the SCSL? If anything, the SCSL has proven to be slimier than the QPL, because Sun has demonstrated their will with this whole Blackdown fiasco.
The licence may be the focus of this discussion, but the ill-sentiment I have for Sun is not entirely over the bad taste that the SCSL leaves in my mouth. The worst part is what Sun has demonstrated they _will_ do given the opportunity (blackdown) with little to no 'community' consultation.
I remember why I switched to linux. I was bored with OS/2 and i had heard quite a bit about this unix stuff and how powerful it was. I was curious. OS/2 was nice, but I wanted to learn more. I had used crappy operating systems for years (OS/2 much less than windows), and had come to accept all the quirks that 'all operating systems have'. I didn't know better. So I started using linux, and was blown away by what i could do with it, and how well thought out the thing was. As I learned more, repeatedly my mind was blown as I realized what was possible with a real OS. What intruiged me the most was the philosophy that presented itself in all the tools, and design philosophy of just about every piece of unix software i could get my hands on. Ultimately it was my thirst for knowledge that got me hooked. the more I learned, the more i liked what i saw. Now take average joe-bloe. Been using windows forever. Doesn't know anything but windows because according to him, windows is what came with the computer he bought, and he basically stuck to it because that's what he was fed. Words like stability, robustness, and configurability equate to hardware to these people. "Faster CPUs makes more robustness, if you buy good hardware then your system will be stable. Better not play with windows too much because I might break something." Fact is, this is all most people know, and what they concider the truth. They accept it as truth. Stick these people in linux (regardless of distro) and watch them hate it. They don't care that they can configure X in 100,000 different ways, and the thought of customizing something for themselves scares them. They want to hit the power button, and see what they are familiar with, windows. In the garbage that is windows, things are much simpler. It's a flat, single user system, and its closed. As terrible as we all know this design is, it caters to the moms and the pops. There is no need to promote linux to the home user. If he/she is the sort that would explore linux and enjoy it, then they must first be looking for better philosophy from their computing environs. It wasn't the eye candy of E, or the dozens of window managers, or the 800+ packages that comes on a distro that hooked me on linux. It was a question of philosophy. The rest was a bonus.
>The only "free licenses" that exist are the UC >Regents BSD and releasing to the public domain
That's hogwash. I concider the GPL free, and BSD liscence is also good. If you want to pick at straws, the only free liscence is no liscence at all.
By the way, what compiler do you use on your BSD box?
>There is a class of human, Stallman and Nader >among them, who bypass money as a means of >keeping score and get right to the heart of the >matter. They seek to self-aggrandize and accrue >as much power, within their limited sphere of >influence, as possible.
This is also bunk.
Explain how my liscencing something under the GPL gives Richard Stallman any real power.
>Any other discussion smacks disgustingly of >lawyers and pinhead-dancing angels.
Loss of control over the evolution of the software and revenue potential is the source of corporations' fears. What we are witnessing is the jockying by corporations to come up with the perfect 'get what we want from the free software community, retain rights and make all the money' licenses for their products.
I find this insulting to my intelligence, and to the collective intelligence of the very community that they attempt to tap while keeping their gold.
I have no pity for companies that do the license shuffle. This is what separates the greedy from the good.
It may be concidered a leap of faith to most corporate types, but that is what's required.
To the corporations:
If you want to reap the benefits of the bazaar, participate under the already proven methodology and ideology of the movement.
see: http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html
Contact successful OSS companies such as Redhat and ask them for advice on how best to give it all away and still make your money.
Ultimately it boils down to a company's true motives. Is your corporation opportunist or do you really buy into the movement? The truth is in your liscence, plain as day.
Just wait for the global directory.
on
Weaving The Web
·
· Score: 1
Just wait for the battle for the global directory comes into play. Which company's technology will hold the golbal directory? Will it be standards based, or is the current race for directory dominance going to decide who does what? Which consortium, group or government will hold the keys? Someoneone after all must manage the whole shabang.
Up to this point, most directory services have been local in scope, holding the HR, IT, asset management and public key/security information for corporations and government departments. That will change as the push for the extranet evolves.
Look at the Internet in terms of it's technological parts and you have several smallish battles for dominance. Who controls the bandwidth? Who can seize control the edges of continental divides? What protocols and languages will become the defacto standard? All three of these issues have had coverage lately, but I submit that they are small potatoes.
You can believe that the big boys are eyeing the global directory. It is still a ways off, but that's the big one. I'd bet that there will be very _real_ and deadly fight for peices of that pie. Let's hope that the powers that be are smart enough to agree that there must be open standards used, and that an independant, multinational group must be mandated with overseeing the thing. Even at that, I worry about the resolve of our political leaders, and the greediness of corporations.
I use Linux all day, and all night. I have used it exclusively for years.
The main resons I switched to linux:
-I got bored with OS/2
-I wanted a more stable and robust OS
-I wasn't learning anything new in OS/2
-Windows was not an option
-The Linux 'headspace' seemed a better academic endeavour, and I looked forward to expanding my horizons.
One other main reson why I joined the linux bandwagon was becasue The crowd was technically good, reason and logical thinking seemed to be the aura of the community. I'm not so sure that this is the case anymore.
The surge in linux popularity is bitter-sweet for me. While attention is always nice, I would rather ATTRACT users by exaple of a solid implementation, and sound thinking than PROMOTE the OS into the mainstream.
Lately I find myself saddened by the sheer ignorance of some Linux advocates, and I feel dirty by assiciation.
It may be time for me to move on to BSD for this very reason. It seems serene over there, and I get the impression that their development model may be superior to Linux's.
Linus and Alan maintain tight control over kernel development. The best code floats to the top and get implemented. This allows for the kernel to be as robust and as solid as it has proven itself to be.
BSD's approach encompases the entire OS, not just the kernel. I would have to assume that having tight control over the entire distrubution ensures that the tools are solid, and most bugs have been worked out before something is added, as the author points out. Surely this is where BSD's legendary stability must stem from.
Another point is the package management. RedHat and Debian both have good efforts under way, and I'm sure many days could be spent debating which is superior. I think they're probably both equally crippled because both distributions depend on the development cycles of developers that are not necessarily affiliated with one distribution or an other. Control is lost. The Linux distributions are placed at the mercy of seperate development teams, with different goals.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but by FreeBSD having tight control over the inclusion of core tools into the distribution, they can build a secure and stable distribution much more easily than can be done for Linux. Also, the issues of package dependancies, upgrades etc become exponentially more simple to handle. In this regard, I doubt FreeBSD can be touched by any Linux distro.
Obviously contributed software or applications is a different matter. I'm speaking of the core tools that form a distribution.
Hopefully the LSB can and will solve this problem. I really hope it's sooner than later.
I like Linux. More and more I dislike the self-devouring and ignorant behaviour of the ill-informed Linux advocate that spews propaganda which they detest in the 'other faction'.
Try as many Linux distros as you can, and try FreeBSD as well, and decide for yourself which you prefer. I'll be trying BSD real soon now, then I'll make my own decisions.
You managed to make some valid points, some hairbrained accusations based on as little fact as the article you so bravely flamed, all the while maintaining an aire of ignorance and arrogance that has also made the very same 'true linux users' sick.
You do not speak for me, and I am a 'real' linux user and developer.
Slashdot Mirror
Hrmm. Is it me or does 1.2Gbps through PCMCIA seem lofty? I doubt highly that this device, or the laptop it's plugging into can handle that sort of throughput, especially through PCMCIA.
The person that left the default password on a publically accessible server should be canned.
At any job I've worked, something like this would get the preson responsible auto-canned for not making reasonable efforts to protect company data.
This is a special case, becasue the person who decided to implement a 'default password' in slashcode also works in the company where it is used. CmdrTaco also needs a good butt-kickin. Did feature lust could your judgement?
Also, the idea of storing the user database in clear text on a publically accessible server is also insane. Store nothing on publically accessible webservers.
I totally cringed when CmdrTaco decided to proclaim "No one would ever have gotten in if it wasn't for the default password".
OH MY GOD
I hope he takes a good look at his bliefs surrounding security. That's a very cocky and naive thing to say. I'd submit that someone who believes that enough to say that will most certainly get 'cracked' again. Have a nice day :)
There are ways to bring down Cisco Switches using simple SNMP --whether you have community strings or not. They are IOS specific bugs.
When brought to Cisco's attention, it was ignored. Then, all of a sudden, Cisco 1700/2900/5k/5500/6000 series switches don't support bridge tables anymore.
There are other issues as well that I have identified, such as ISL trunks leaking un-encapsulated packets into a trunk, and certain plain packet header patterns (for example netbios browsing) triggering the multicast ISL interface (multicast, all interfaces on the trunk process it)to trigger Spanning-Tree recaluclations, which causes the interface to go dead for: 2 * maxforward_delay + hello_time. Unless of course you have portfast/nodefast enabled (Which is Cisco's *extension* of 802.1d/q) whereby when this happens, all ports on Vlan1 (all designated bridges) flood while spanning-tree is recalculated.
This basically turns your entire broadcast domain into one HUGE repeater. lol
There's more. Point is, statements like that, which are unfounded aren't much use to anyone.
Every OS has problems, and IOS is no exception.
Anonymous on purpose.
You can't compare software to devices, or aparatus.
Most certainly the design of the razor is patented, and through that patent, only one sort of blade, with the proper attachment mechanism can be attached to the razor.
The blade, also being an aparatus with a very specific attachment mechanism, is patented.
So, now we have the razor blade monopoly.
You've been studying Katz' work too closely.
You managed to piece together a wonderful collage of buzzwords, circular reasoning, and a brilliant Subject line that combined say exactly nothing.
The virtual world is a mirror or the real world?
What planet are you from again?
Being lent a PC and net access by your employer is 'nice', but hardly a moral thing to do :P
..and what about privacy? What happens if our employment contract allows us own software we create on our own time and on our own PC? What happens if the PC is a company asset? What policies can/will companies enforce on their employees in order to take advantage of the offerings?
"You were logged as visiting a pr0n site using company equipment, you're fired"
Give your head a shake. Rue the day that I view my employer lending me gadgets a moral thing to do.
Thus the candle hath singed the moth.
run tcpdump with the -p switch, which will not place the card in promiscuous mode. This is why you were experiencing problems.
This is all bullshit. Here's what the problem is:
A minimum wage earning parking lot attendant receives more training on operating the arm than people receive training on how to raise children.
The attitude must exist in the first place in order for violent games to be acceptable.
We don't see games that glorify genocide or ways to effectively starve a nation because these aren't acceptable scenarios. Violence and killing is. Look at any/every news broadcast in continental north america: "3 dead.... 5 people killed... a massacre..." It's no wonder.
I have a three year old son who whips around on my computer better than most adults can. He plays games (racing games), and when he's old enough to distinguish acceptable behaviour in a game from acceptable real-life behaviour, he'll be playing whatever FPS is hot at the time.
Everyone likes to point the finger, it's easy to do. Remember this: When you point your finger at someone else, you're pointing three at yourself.
Everyone think 'crazy' thoughts, violent thoughts...thoughts that we would be embarassed to share for fear of being institutionalized. Anyone who denies this is a liar.
The difference is that the sane person stops short of acting upon, or voicing those thoughts. Why? Beacuse they know better. They know better becasue they were raised to know better.
"It's the video games.. it's the music.. it's the teachers... it's the school system --they are to blame for our children's behaviour"
Bull fucking shit. Raise your children properly and none of this happens.
I have often heard 'Unix is a Legacy system, old technology from the 60's and 70's.'
This is patently false. What Unix _is_, is a system of tools which have been refined for 30+ years. AFAIK, 'Legacy' should be used to describe something which is no longer developed or supported. At least this is the general use of the word.
New doesn't mean better, and in many cases, it can mean untested or unproven. Unix is proven technology. But above all it's a proven philosophy.
Call Unix whatever you like. Text-book Sys V, BSD, or clones like Linux. The underlying philosophy is largely the same. THIS is why Unix has been around for decades (besides techinal merrits).
In the philosophical sense, I doubt Unix is going to die, ever.
"DNSSEC - which is a public key infrastructure unto itself - is very complex. In our judgment, at the time, it was not ready for implementation and deployment. It followed that RFC 2137 was also not ready for implementation and deployment."
What this really means:
"We conducted a think-tank session that included the brightest minds in Microsoft Research Labs, including the famous team that invented the sybbloic link just in time for Windows2000. It was determined that patch-build-1,234,567 broke when we tried to implemt it becuase of inconsistencies between patch-122,239, and patch 569,496, which were, consequently patches for patch 1223,456, which patched patch 22,134. Surely this standard is wrong."
nnnext:
TSIG and TKEY alone do not solve the key distribution problem inherent in any secret key system. However, both mechanisms allow for extension, which permitted us to publish a third complementary draft, "GSS Algorithm for TSIG (GSS-TSIG)"."
This one is not as funny. Seems like they use IETF protocol protocol and process to their advantage, fulfilling process requirements while breaking the spirit of the guidelines.
nnnext:
"Microsoft would be happy to assist any vendors who wish to develop an independent, interoperable implementation."
No doubt. Maybe that's why your draft has been in since 1997 and noone outside of Microsoft is interested in going forward with it.
Ten years ago today the first major assault on online freedom came in the form of an unsigned search warrant.....
What is your logic here? How do you draw comparison between that event and the mythical 'fight for our online rights'? That event happened far before the 'net' was common knowledge, or a public venue for that matter.
"Fast forward ten years, and the only thing that's changed is who authorizes the raids: the MPAA and RIAA are hot on the heels of so-called pirates..."
How can you place software piracy raids and this event in the same philisophical boat? I don't get it.
"Our fight is an underground one - we're trying to save the freedom of the average consumer (both in the US and the world at large) against greedy corporations and they think we're the bad guys!"
Although I am a seething believer in free software, corporations can and will licence their products as they see fit. It's up to individuals to decide whether they accept the philosophy of bad business. We're never going to change the collective minds of those that are at the helm of big business. We have to lead by example, and they'll catch on if they're smart.
Attraction rather than promotion.
Current copyright laws suck. Most licence agreements suck too. Bottom line is we have a choice.. I exercise mine.
KDevelop can be used to develop anything from KDE apps to daemons. Personally, I have only used it for non-graphical applications, and I have found it to be quite good. The Class browser is excellent, and it certainly aided me in farmiliarizing myself with the code in an already in-progress game. (adonthell.linuxgames.com)
I am developing the combat engine in KDevelop, and I have found it first class.
I won't argue with your bulleted points, just the foul smelling bits at the end. I use vi extensively, and mostly run on a command line in Linux. To say that someone using a GUI to get a job done is 'not in the UNIX style' is hog wash.
Do you really think that working with your graphics card in text mode makes you a *real man*, and a true UNIX developer?
Come on, you're smarter than that.
For those who are unaware, Student nets and dorms are typically placed onto the _worst_ segments in the entire network.
And another thing... I'm sooo sick of people thinking they have the amount of bandwidth that the port comes labeled as.
If you're plugged into a TX port, that does NOT mean that you have 100Mbps connectivity. Ever heard of cascading switches?
Take a group of 10 switches and arrange them like you would bowling pins. Say these switches have 64 ports each. The top switch in this network (student-net) is connected to the backbone via a single true TX fiber connection. Just for good measure, let's say it's FD. If there is any sort of port contention at all on this network, everyone in it is sharing a single 100Mbps connection to the backbone.
With 10 switches here, and 600 students, each student actually averages 100/600 = 0.1666Mbps.
This is of course if the network is saturated, which it is most likely to be at night.
Not only this, but we're assuming here that network throughput is determined by octets/second.
This is a layman's way of measuring throughput, and in no way reflects reality. I could spend months arguing different ways of defining alpha in a bridged network, but let's just take a very general stab at it.
Typically, in generic terms, in a network of 600 nodes within a single broadcast domain, you could expect peak throughput of MAYBE 50Mbps.
Factor in all the wingates, multicast gamers, and fools who install win32, bind everything to the adapter and say 'IT WORKS!' and leave the configuration that way. netbeui, netbios client all configured within the workgroup 'Workgroup' spamming each other. I AM HERE. I AM HERE. WHO ARE YOU WHO ARE YOU.
Bottom line is I get upset by poeple who think "Hey, this is a 100-TX port... GUYS I am l337, I have 100Mbps to the internet"
The problem is probably mine, but I can't believe the sheer number of people (including professionals) who have absolutely NO IDEA how their network works, and how services on it affect the pipes.
-rant over.
Do you understand the implications of free software? Licencing something under the GPL implies unlimited technical changes. Hell, I could grab the source to a piece of free software, completely obfuscate and break it, and re-release it as something else.
Of course, no one will dare use it because it holds no merit against the 'better' original package.
If you ask me, the the SCSL is no better than the original QPL, which RMS also denounced. So why are java-heads willing to accept the SCSL? If anything, the SCSL has proven to be slimier than the QPL, because Sun has demonstrated their will with this whole Blackdown fiasco.
The licence may be the focus of this discussion, but the ill-sentiment I have for Sun is not entirely over the bad taste that the SCSL leaves in my mouth. The worst part is what Sun has demonstrated they _will_ do given the opportunity (blackdown) with little to no 'community' consultation.
Sun COMMUNITY source licence.
My arse.
I have used several Distributions (and revisions of them).
I have _never_ experienced any distribution that I could not make do _exactly_ as I wanted.
If you have trouble with RedHat, use caldera.. I hear it's 'easier' for newbies.
I remember why I switched to linux. I was bored with OS/2 and i had heard quite a bit about this unix stuff and how powerful it was. I was curious. OS/2 was nice, but I wanted to learn more. I had used crappy operating systems for years (OS/2 much less than windows), and had come to accept all the quirks that 'all operating systems have'. I didn't know better. So I started using linux, and was blown away by what i could do with it, and how well thought out the thing was. As I learned more, repeatedly my mind was blown as I realized what was possible with a real OS. What intruiged me the most was the philosophy that presented itself in all the tools, and design philosophy of just about every piece of unix software i could get my hands on. Ultimately it was my thirst for knowledge that got me hooked. the more I learned, the more i liked what i saw. Now take average joe-bloe. Been using windows forever. Doesn't know anything but windows because according to him, windows is what came with the computer he bought, and he basically stuck to it because that's what he was fed. Words like stability, robustness, and configurability equate to hardware to these people. "Faster CPUs makes more robustness, if you buy good hardware then your system will be stable. Better not play with windows too much because I might break something." Fact is, this is all most people know, and what they concider the truth. They accept it as truth. Stick these people in linux (regardless of distro) and watch them hate it. They don't care that they can configure X in 100,000 different ways, and the thought of customizing something for themselves scares them. They want to hit the power button, and see what they are familiar with, windows. In the garbage that is windows, things are much simpler. It's a flat, single user system, and its closed. As terrible as we all know this design is, it caters to the moms and the pops. There is no need to promote linux to the home user. If he/she is the sort that would explore linux and enjoy it, then they must first be looking for better philosophy from their computing environs. It wasn't the eye candy of E, or the dozens of window managers, or the 800+ packages that comes on a distro that hooked me on linux. It was a question of philosophy. The rest was a bonus.
Interesting. I wonder what Hawking has to say about it? Read Hawking's lecture on warping time: http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/hawking/warp.html
>The only "free licenses" that exist are the UC >Regents BSD and releasing to the public domain
That's hogwash. I concider the GPL free, and BSD liscence is also good. If you want to pick at straws, the only free liscence is no liscence at all.
By the way, what compiler do you use on your BSD box?
>There is a class of human, Stallman and Nader >among them, who bypass money as a means of
>keeping score and get right to the heart of the >matter. They seek to self-aggrandize and accrue >as much power, within their limited sphere of >influence, as possible.
This is also bunk.
Explain how my liscencing something under the GPL gives Richard Stallman any real power.
>Any other discussion smacks disgustingly of >lawyers and pinhead-dancing angels.
Well, thank you very much.
From your point of view, I'm sure it does.
Loss of control over the evolution of the software and revenue potential is the source of corporations' fears. What we are witnessing is the jockying by corporations to come up with the perfect 'get what we want from the free software community, retain rights and make all the money' licenses for their products.
I find this insulting to my intelligence, and to the collective intelligence of the very community that they attempt to tap while keeping their gold.
I have no pity for companies that do the license shuffle. This is what separates the greedy from the good.
It may be concidered a leap of faith to most corporate types, but that is what's required.
To the corporations:
If you want to reap the benefits of the bazaar, participate under the already proven methodology and ideology of the movement.
see: http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html
Contact successful OSS companies such as Redhat and ask them for advice on how best to give it all away and still make your money.
Ultimately it boils down to a company's true motives. Is your corporation opportunist or do you really buy into the movement? The truth is in your liscence, plain as day.
Just wait for the battle for the global directory comes into play. Which company's technology will hold the golbal directory? Will it be standards based, or is the current race for directory dominance going to decide who does what? Which consortium, group or government will hold the keys? Someoneone after all must manage the whole shabang.
Up to this point, most directory services have been local in scope, holding the HR, IT, asset management and public key/security information for corporations and government departments. That will change as the push for the extranet evolves.
Look at the Internet in terms of it's technological parts and you have several smallish battles for dominance. Who controls the bandwidth? Who can seize control the edges of continental divides? What protocols and languages will become the defacto standard? All three of these issues have had coverage lately, but I submit that they are small potatoes.
You can believe that the big boys are eyeing the global directory. It is still a ways off, but that's the big one. I'd bet that there will be very _real_ and deadly fight for peices of that pie. Let's hope that the powers that be are smart enough to agree that there must be open standards used, and that an independant, multinational group must be mandated with overseeing the thing. Even at that, I worry about the resolve of our political leaders, and the greediness of corporations.
A well thought out reply, thank you.
I use Linux all day, and all night. I have used it exclusively for years.
The main resons I switched to linux:
-I got bored with OS/2
-I wanted a more stable and robust OS
-I wasn't learning anything new in OS/2
-Windows was not an option
-The Linux 'headspace' seemed a better academic endeavour, and I looked forward to expanding my horizons.
One other main reson why I joined the linux bandwagon was becasue The crowd was technically good, reason and logical thinking seemed to be the aura of the community. I'm not so sure that this is the case anymore.
The surge in linux popularity is bitter-sweet for me. While attention is always nice, I would rather ATTRACT users by exaple of a solid implementation, and sound thinking than PROMOTE the OS into the mainstream.
Lately I find myself saddened by the sheer ignorance of some Linux advocates, and I feel dirty by assiciation.
It may be time for me to move on to BSD for this very reason. It seems serene over there, and I get the impression that their development model may be superior to Linux's.
Linus and Alan maintain tight control over kernel development. The best code floats to the top and get implemented. This allows for the kernel to be as robust and as solid as it has proven itself to be.
BSD's approach encompases the entire OS, not just the kernel. I would have to assume that having tight control over the entire distrubution ensures that the tools are solid, and most bugs have been worked out before something is added, as the author points out. Surely this is where BSD's legendary stability must stem from.
Another point is the package management. RedHat and Debian both have good efforts under way, and I'm sure many days could be spent debating which is superior. I think they're probably both equally crippled because both distributions depend on the development cycles of developers that are not necessarily affiliated with one distribution or an other. Control is lost. The Linux distributions are placed at the mercy of seperate development teams, with different goals.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but by FreeBSD having tight control over the inclusion of core tools into the distribution, they can build a secure and stable distribution much more easily than can be done for Linux. Also, the issues of package dependancies, upgrades etc become exponentially more simple to handle. In this regard, I doubt FreeBSD can be touched by any Linux distro.
Obviously contributed software or applications is a different matter. I'm speaking of the core tools that form a distribution.
Hopefully the LSB can and will solve this problem. I really hope it's sooner than later.
I like Linux. More and more I dislike the self-devouring and ignorant behaviour of the ill-informed Linux advocate that spews propaganda which they detest in the 'other faction'.
Try as many Linux distros as you can, and try FreeBSD as well, and decide for yourself which you prefer. I'll be trying BSD real soon now, then I'll make my own decisions.
You managed to make some valid points, some hairbrained accusations based on as little fact as the article you so bravely flamed, all the while maintaining an aire of ignorance and arrogance that has also made the very same 'true linux users' sick.
You do not speak for me, and I am a 'real' linux user and developer.
The pot and the kettle.
Hey, why not check out the World Forge project. They could use some help from someone with good experience.
http://www.worldforge.org
Their alrticle does not not mention that they have decided on a license. Let's hope they do the right thing and adopt the GPL for it.