128MB PC133 modules go for $10 to $20 on ebay, and those are just the buy-it-now prices, it's less if you actually bid and win. I really don't see how losing something that costs $10 could be so upsetting to you that it would motivate you to post about it on slashdot, unless you have no income whatsoever.
That's not a great analogy. If you must use a car analogy, how about the following:
Suppose you have an engine with a burned valve. This means that on one cylinder there is little or no compression, and so that cylinder is just pulling in air/fuel and pushing it out unburned on each cycle, because good compression is required for ignition. In this case the cylinder is just dead weight: it contributes to frictional losses as the other cylinders have to move the piston up and down the cylinder against the rings and friction at the crank as they have to turn the connecting rod. It also contributes to pumping losses because it resists the flow of air having to suck and then push out each charge.
In short it's contributing zero power and costing a substantial amount of friction. If you were to simply drop the pan and remove the piston, connecting rod (and optionally the pushrods for that cylinder if it's an OHV engine) then you would cause the motor to run with somewhat more power and much better emissions. Naturally the harmonic vibrations are going to be horrific because the engine will no longer be balanced. So you can expect decreased life of the whole drivetrain and bearings because of this, but on an engine that's on its way out anyway removing a dead piston and its associated connecting rod (and disabling its valves, if possible) can result in a significant improvement in performance.
Someone asked if we had registrar-lock set. It's not clear to me what happened. Our understanding is that we had locks on all of our domains. However, when we looked, locks were off on panix.net and panix.org, which we own but don't normally use. It's not clear how that happened; dotster has yet to contact us with any information about, well, anything at all. They did answer a call this morning; they're apprently in the middle of an ice storm. All I was able to larn from them is that according to the person I talked to, they had no records of any transfer requests on our domain from today back through last October.
Uhh, that's what freeze plugs in the block are for. They are meant to be the weakest link and give way to expansion so that the block can never crack. They've been in cars for probably more than 50 years now.
Why yes. It sounds like torrent tracker sites, which host no files, being taken down for the crimes of their users.
You know what, that's 100% horseshit. I am so tired of the idea that "because a tracker doesn't host any actual infringing material per se it cannot possibly be in the wrong."
Well I tell you what. Why don't you just read this link, particularly the parts about contributory infringement and vicarious infringement and tell me what you think. This is the EFF talking, one of the best allies of peer-to-peer file sharing and they are still quite explicit with their advice. Hey, guess what, if you provide the site and facilities and know that there is massive copyright infringement occuring you are still guilty. It doesn't matter that you personally didn't actually host any directly infringing material.
Note that napster didn't host any actual mp3 files on their servers. They just served as a facilitator to connect individual users who shared the content directly between each other. And we all remember how well that defense went. And before you scream "but they were a company trying to make a profit from it", go read that link above and ponder on the difference between vicarious and contributory infringement. A conviction of the latter requires no financial gain on the part of ther operator.
And before you scream "that is only US law", remember that sites like lokitorrent.com are hosted in the US and thus subject to US laws.
It's very simple math. The basic factor is (1000/1024).
kB to kiB is a factor of (1000/1024) or 97.7% MB to MiB is a factor of (1000/1024)^2 or 95.4% GB to GiB is a factor of (1000/1024)^3 or 93.1% TB to TiB is a factor of (1000/1024)^4 or 90.9%... and so on.
So if you see a drive advertised as "500 GB" that means it's actually 93.1% of that measured in base-2, or 466 GiB (the unit your OS will report to you.)
Likewise if you want to measure in TB, a "0.5 TB" drive is equivalent to 0.455 TiB.
While they are being somewhat sleezy about it, you can't fault the drive manufacturers as they are using the technically correct defintion of MB, GB, etc. It's the Operating System and software that is saying "GB" but really meaning "GiB". But the "ibi" versions of the units sound dumb and look dumb when written so nobody does that. If you want to lay blame, put it on the OS/software, not the HD manufacturers.
Because BitTorrent was never designed for websites and would not work very well AT ALL for "relieving slashdottings." It's designed for very large files that take a long time to download. Bram said this in an interview more than a year ago. So please put an end to this "BT browser" crap.
That's a terrible analogy. Most of the electrical power dissipated in an incandescent bulb goes to heat and not light. I don't have the exact figures but it's somewhere on the order of 50 - 75%.
Furthermore, the design of parking lights is meant to make them visible from all angles. The antenna on voyager is directional and must be aimed at earth, otherwise there would be no chance of picking it up.
If you wanted to make a much better comparison, how about one of those LED flashlights. They generate hardly any heat, and their beam is very directional (although most of them still have a 20 to 30 degree viewing angle which is probably a lot wider than a high-gain directional antenna.)
Most LED lamps are in the hundreds-of-milliwatts range and yet can be seen at relatively long distances. If you somehow managed to find a LED flashlight that put out 8 watts of optical power, I bet it would be visible for miles. Put it behind optics that focus the beam down to arc-minutes, and get a humongous detector array of hundreds of gigantic dishes, and you too could probably see it from 90 AU away.
Incidently you can change this when you install Windows. Use a response file (google Microsoft's KB for winnt.sif) and specify the location and name of the profiles directory. Mine is "C:\Users". Also, you can install Windows into any directory you want using this technique.
To John H, parent poster: Ignore the people that bitch about stuff being where it's supposed to be. Tell them to take it up with MS.
The packages are not meant to stand alone. untarring a package by hand is not supported and will break your Cygwin distro in several ways. You cannot compare a cygwin.tar.bz2 package to a.rpm because the Cygwin packaging relies on setup.exe to handle dependencies, package tracking, and scripting. It was not designed to be a standalone package, so it's not relevent to compare it to.rpm. Cygwin packaging is a combination of the packages themselves and setup.exe. Your comparison is misleading, and that's what I was pointing out.
A package in Cygwin is a tarball, basically run from/. So you can download a Cygwin package with, say, your web browser, cd / in your cygwin install, tar -xzvf *thefile*, and that installs it. It's crap, it's nothing but crap. Dependency resolution? Don't know how they do it, really, unless the database they use to store packages also contains dependency information.
You obviously don't know enough about Cygwin packaging to comment here.
The dependency information IS contained in the setup.ini file (compressed as setup.bz2 for download) and the setup.exe program handles selecting dependent packages.
There are also postinstall and preremove scripts which must be run by setup.exe, which you omit from your simplistic description.
There is also a database of installed packages, and a cygcheck command that can tell you which package a particular file came from, the installed version of every package on the system, and even do an integrity check of each package.
It is NOT just a simple tarball extracted to the root, but that's what you might think if you never read the documentation.
92.9%? Three significant figures? Come on. The browser statistics are going to vary depending on the site they were taken from. There is no one "browser statistic" because it's different for each site. Different sites have vastly different percentages, because of different audiences. So you can't really say x% of the market is one thing, you have to qualify it by saying "x% of visitors to Y use Z"
No, of course using BitTorrent to share legal things is not illegal. Go read that page again. The first requirement for proving contributory infringement is that there must have been a direct infringement. Using BT to distribute linux distributions is not a direct infringement. Using BT to distribute movies and games IS.
Re:Keeping it simple: answer to all astroturf post
on
LokiTorrent vs. MPAA
·
· Score: 1
What we have here is more than downloading copies of movies or music. If copyright lasted only 20 years, I would honestly be fighting alongside the owners so that they could make a profit from their works. That is, if the artists actually owned the copyrights, rather than the corporations they signed rights over to.
Allow me to play Devil's Advocate here. Let's say that copyright lasted strictly 20 years and then the work goes straight to the public domain, no extensions.
How many torrents can you find on lokitorrent for things that would have expired copyright under this scenario? I bet there are some, but the VAST MAJORITY are not. Most things on most torrent sites are current movies (10 years old or newer), current games, current tv episodes, etc. BitTorrent is especially like this because swarms tend to last weeks/months and then die off, as compared to emule or fasttrack where stuff lingers on indefinitely because it uses the "share your whole HD" model.
If you took down the torrents from lokitorrent for things created in the last 20 years, you'd be left with barely a site. So then under this line of reasoning you would still be against the site, since even under your "Best case" copyright scenario the site is still a gigantic infringer.
hosting.torrent files is in no way illegal and therefor neither is lokitorrent
That is a complete crock of shit. If you really believe that, then you need to learn about how the law works. (The rest of this applies to US law because that is where lokitorrent servers are hosted, with layeredtech.)
Go read this excellent article by the EFF. Take special care to read the section on "Contributory Infringement." I'll quote below the requirements for proving someone has commited this offense. My comments are in italics.
Direct Infringement: There has been a direct infringement by someone. Clearly, there are many people using lokitorrent to make unauthorized copies of lots of things, so this is a CHECK.
Knowledge: The accused contributory infringer knew of the underlying direct infringement. This element can be satisfied by showing either that the contributory infringer actually knew about the infringing activity, or that he reasonably should have known given all the facts and circumstances. At a minimum, however, the contributory infringer must have some specific information about infringing activity--the mere fact that the system is capable of being used for infringement, by itself, is not enough. Lowkee cannot possibly argue that he is unaware that people are using his tracker to commit unauthorized infringement. Let's look at the top 5 torrents, generated by his own page: Half Life 2 PC WwW DivX-Es CoM, The Grudge kvcd, White Chicks, Blade 3, Exorcist The Beginning TS Xvid (POT)-DreamCD. These are all direct infringements. CHECK.
Material Contribution: The accused contributory infringer induced, caused, or materially contributed to the underlying direct infringement. Merely providing the "site and facilities" that make the direct infringement possible can be enough. He is most definitely providing the site and facilities, as that's how bittorrent trackers work. CHECK
You don't have to be a genius or a legal guru here to see that it should be rather obvious that his site passes all the tests to be found guilty of contributory infringement. Please don't sit there and parrot out that old tired line that "there's no copyrighted material on the site therefore it's legal." Just like the getaway man who drives the bank robbers is still guilty of aiding and abetting, so is lokitorrent guilty of contributory infringement.
Probably my closest call came when the Slashdot did a story about the Halloween/2004 display... and someone local decided to drive out and see the "wildly flashing lights" - read more about it here - but I live in a gated community. But it is a dinky gate (heck, even the pizza delivery guys can get through it) and if this person had walked just a 100' past the gate, he would have seen my house... nice lights... but not changing one iota - saved by the gate!
To the person that modded this Flamebait, I was not trying to be racist or anything. I was trying to point out that the "IPv4 space scarcity" is a myth, and that with todays current allocation procedures a US company faces the same documentation and justification guidelines that a Chinese company faces. The only reason that the US has so many more allocations is because back in the 80s when the internet was small/8s were handed out to companies that asked for it, and most of them were US companies or government organizations. There is no jingoism or nationality to it. It's a result of how allocations used to work and the situation is much different today.
How can you possibly call yourself "not a fanboy" with a straight face? The post above is the very definition of fanboy-ism: "X is the greatest! No other Ys or Zs can possibly compare to X! If you disagree that X is not the greatest then you obviously are dumb or ignorant and don't know what you're talking about." That is what your post sounds like to someone (me) that has never owned a console and doesn't play games at all (other than CoDUO on the PC.)
You can't possibly compare those legacy/8 allocations from the primordial days of the internet to todays modern allocation procedures. If today any of those organizations asked for/8s they would be laughed at. Apples and freeking oranges. The fact that the US has an astronomical amount of IP space allocated to it is due to the fact that most of those huge chunks were allocated way back in the early days of classful routing, before CIDR and aggregation. These days if you are in the US and you request netspace you go through the same justifaction and documentation procedure that someone in china goes through.
I don't dispute the fact that there are a lot of people in china and comparatively few assigned blocks. However, that doesn't mean there's a scarcity. There are oodles and oodles of unallocated ranges still left in IPv4 and if governments or corporations in APNIC were asking for netspace and could justify it, then they would be allocated it, or some of the reserved space would be assigned to APNIC. The fact that china's allocations are so small is a result of them not requesting them (and being able to justify those requests), not a result of scarcity. You have to also realize that while china has a huge population, the amount of people that have access to the internet is relatively low. You can't just say "look they have a billion people and only 50 million addresses allocated." If any chinese organization wants ip space they can get it, as long as it's jutifiable -- the same is true for any organization over the world today.
Well, there are already several 6-to-4 and 4-to-6 gateway sites. This one is one example. If there was a site that was only accessable through IPv6 you could use a service like that to access it over any IPv4 host.
Also, if you have an IPv6-capable host you can use a tunnel broker (such as Hurricane Electric's free service) to achieve connectivity to IPv6 sites over IPv4.
So you really don't need an IPv6-capable ISP to access IPv6 hosts, although it's cleaner that way of course.
As far as I understand it, the idea that there is a shortage of IPv4 addresses is really a myth. I read a paper that someone wrote that came to the conclusion that even with the current growth rate (exponential) that we would not run out of addresses for another 20 years or so.
I think the real problem is that these days the RIRs (such as ARIN and APNIC) require justification before allocating netblocks. That means you have to show either current usage need or plans for future expansion, or both. You can't just say, "I'd like a/16 please" and expect to get it it. So really I think the non-US countries like to say "netspace is limited" but what they really mean is "sure we can get all the netblocks we want but it requires some paperwork and justification and we're just bitter that old companies back in the 80s were handed out whole/8s for the asking."
By the way, here is the data I have that shows total number of IP addresses for all netblocks allocated to each country (top 10):
US 1,828,328,425 JP 117,486,311 GB 84,658,624 DE 69,438,200 AU 65,918,741 CA 64,257,591 CN 54,172,684 FR 45,387,299 NL 35,056,078 KR 34,084,629
Are you honestly trying to say that FreeBSD has more spyware-free software than windows? Because if you are, you have got to either be an idiot or not a windows user. I don't care what you think about Windows, it has SHITLOADS of software available. Even if lots of it recently has been bundled that still doesn't mean there are metric truckloads of it without. Just because this site only lists several dozen doesn't mean a damn thing, other than the fact that the site is new.
Slashdot Mirror
128MB PC133 modules go for $10 to $20 on ebay, and those are just the buy-it-now prices, it's less if you actually bid and win. I really don't see how losing something that costs $10 could be so upsetting to you that it would motivate you to post about it on slashdot, unless you have no income whatsoever.
That's not a great analogy. If you must use a car analogy, how about the following:
Suppose you have an engine with a burned valve. This means that on one cylinder there is little or no compression, and so that cylinder is just pulling in air/fuel and pushing it out unburned on each cycle, because good compression is required for ignition. In this case the cylinder is just dead weight: it contributes to frictional losses as the other cylinders have to move the piston up and down the cylinder against the rings and friction at the crank as they have to turn the connecting rod. It also contributes to pumping losses because it resists the flow of air having to suck and then push out each charge.
In short it's contributing zero power and costing a substantial amount of friction. If you were to simply drop the pan and remove the piston, connecting rod (and optionally the pushrods for that cylinder if it's an OHV engine) then you would cause the motor to run with somewhat more power and much better emissions. Naturally the harmonic vibrations are going to be horrific because the engine will no longer be balanced. So you can expect decreased life of the whole drivetrain and bearings because of this, but on an engine that's on its way out anyway removing a dead piston and its associated connecting rod (and disabling its valves, if possible) can result in a significant improvement in performance.
Uhh, that's what freeze plugs in the block are for. They are meant to be the weakest link and give way to expansion so that the block can never crack. They've been in cars for probably more than 50 years now.
You know what, that's 100% horseshit. I am so tired of the idea that "because a tracker doesn't host any actual infringing material per se it cannot possibly be in the wrong."
Well I tell you what. Why don't you just read this link, particularly the parts about contributory infringement and vicarious infringement and tell me what you think. This is the EFF talking, one of the best allies of peer-to-peer file sharing and they are still quite explicit with their advice. Hey, guess what, if you provide the site and facilities and know that there is massive copyright infringement occuring you are still guilty. It doesn't matter that you personally didn't actually host any directly infringing material.
Note that napster didn't host any actual mp3 files on their servers. They just served as a facilitator to connect individual users who shared the content directly between each other. And we all remember how well that defense went. And before you scream "but they were a company trying to make a profit from it", go read that link above and ponder on the difference between vicarious and contributory infringement. A conviction of the latter requires no financial gain on the part of ther operator.
And before you scream "that is only US law", remember that sites like lokitorrent.com are hosted in the US and thus subject to US laws.
It's very simple math. The basic factor is (1000/1024).
... and so on.
kB to kiB is a factor of (1000/1024) or 97.7%
MB to MiB is a factor of (1000/1024)^2 or 95.4%
GB to GiB is a factor of (1000/1024)^3 or 93.1%
TB to TiB is a factor of (1000/1024)^4 or 90.9%
So if you see a drive advertised as "500 GB" that means it's actually 93.1% of that measured in base-2, or 466 GiB (the unit your OS will report to you.)
Likewise if you want to measure in TB, a "0.5 TB" drive is equivalent to 0.455 TiB.
While they are being somewhat sleezy about it, you can't fault the drive manufacturers as they are using the technically correct defintion of MB, GB, etc. It's the Operating System and software that is saying "GB" but really meaning "GiB". But the "ibi" versions of the units sound dumb and look dumb when written so nobody does that. If you want to lay blame, put it on the OS/software, not the HD manufacturers.
Because BitTorrent was never designed for websites and would not work very well AT ALL for "relieving slashdottings." It's designed for very large files that take a long time to download. Bram said this in an interview more than a year ago. So please put an end to this "BT browser" crap.
Sooner than you think. Kodak announced a year ago that they were getting out of the traditional film camera business (but they are still manufacturing the film itself of course.)
Another good read on the topic is the piece by Zoe Williams in The Guardian titled The Final Irony.
That's a terrible analogy. Most of the electrical power dissipated in an incandescent bulb goes to heat and not light. I don't have the exact figures but it's somewhere on the order of 50 - 75%.
Furthermore, the design of parking lights is meant to make them visible from all angles. The antenna on voyager is directional and must be aimed at earth, otherwise there would be no chance of picking it up.
If you wanted to make a much better comparison, how about one of those LED flashlights. They generate hardly any heat, and their beam is very directional (although most of them still have a 20 to 30 degree viewing angle which is probably a lot wider than a high-gain directional antenna.)
Most LED lamps are in the hundreds-of-milliwatts range and yet can be seen at relatively long distances. If you somehow managed to find a LED flashlight that put out 8 watts of optical power, I bet it would be visible for miles. Put it behind optics that focus the beam down to arc-minutes, and get a humongous detector array of hundreds of gigantic dishes, and you too could probably see it from 90 AU away.
Incidently you can change this when you install Windows. Use a response file (google Microsoft's KB for winnt.sif) and specify the location and name of the profiles directory. Mine is "C:\Users". Also, you can install Windows into any directory you want using this technique.
To John H, parent poster: Ignore the people that bitch about stuff being where it's supposed to be. Tell them to take it up with MS.
The packages are not meant to stand alone. untarring a package by hand is not supported and will break your Cygwin distro in several ways. You cannot compare a cygwin .tar.bz2 package to a .rpm because the Cygwin packaging relies on setup.exe to handle dependencies, package tracking, and scripting. It was not designed to be a standalone package, so it's not relevent to compare it to .rpm. Cygwin packaging is a combination of the packages themselves and setup.exe. Your comparison is misleading, and that's what I was pointing out.
You obviously don't know enough about Cygwin packaging to comment here.
The dependency information IS contained in the setup.ini file (compressed as setup.bz2 for download) and the setup.exe program handles selecting dependent packages.
There are also postinstall and preremove scripts which must be run by setup.exe, which you omit from your simplistic description.
There is also a database of installed packages, and a cygcheck command that can tell you which package a particular file came from, the installed version of every package on the system, and even do an integrity check of each package.
It is NOT just a simple tarball extracted to the root, but that's what you might think if you never read the documentation.
92.9%? Three significant figures? Come on. The browser statistics are going to vary depending on the site they were taken from. There is no one "browser statistic" because it's different for each site. Different sites have vastly different percentages, because of different audiences. So you can't really say x% of the market is one thing, you have to qualify it by saying "x% of visitors to Y use Z"
No, of course using BitTorrent to share legal things is not illegal. Go read that page again. The first requirement for proving contributory infringement is that there must have been a direct infringement. Using BT to distribute linux distributions is not a direct infringement. Using BT to distribute movies and games IS.
Allow me to play Devil's Advocate here. Let's say that copyright lasted strictly 20 years and then the work goes straight to the public domain, no extensions.
How many torrents can you find on lokitorrent for things that would have expired copyright under this scenario? I bet there are some, but the VAST MAJORITY are not. Most things on most torrent sites are current movies (10 years old or newer), current games, current tv episodes, etc. BitTorrent is especially like this because swarms tend to last weeks/months and then die off, as compared to emule or fasttrack where stuff lingers on indefinitely because it uses the "share your whole HD" model.
If you took down the torrents from lokitorrent for things created in the last 20 years, you'd be left with barely a site. So then under this line of reasoning you would still be against the site, since even under your "Best case" copyright scenario the site is still a gigantic infringer.
That is a complete crock of shit. If you really believe that, then you need to learn about how the law works. (The rest of this applies to US law because that is where lokitorrent servers are hosted, with layeredtech.)
Go read this excellent article by the EFF. Take special care to read the section on "Contributory Infringement." I'll quote below the requirements for proving someone has commited this offense. My comments are in italics.
You don't have to be a genius or a legal guru here to see that it should be rather obvious that his site passes all the tests to be found guilty of contributory infringement. Please don't sit there and parrot out that old tired line that "there's no copyrighted material on the site therefore it's legal." Just like the getaway man who drives the bank robbers is still guilty of aiding and abetting, so is lokitorrent guilty of contributory infringement.
To the person that modded this Flamebait, I was not trying to be racist or anything. I was trying to point out that the "IPv4 space scarcity" is a myth, and that with todays current allocation procedures a US company faces the same documentation and justification guidelines that a Chinese company faces. The only reason that the US has so many more allocations is because back in the 80s when the internet was small /8s were handed out to companies that asked for it, and most of them were US companies or government organizations. There is no jingoism or nationality to it. It's a result of how allocations used to work and the situation is much different today.
How can you possibly call yourself "not a fanboy" with a straight face? The post above is the very definition of fanboy-ism: "X is the greatest! No other Ys or Zs can possibly compare to X! If you disagree that X is not the greatest then you obviously are dumb or ignorant and don't know what you're talking about." That is what your post sounds like to someone (me) that has never owned a console and doesn't play games at all (other than CoDUO on the PC.)
Yes, agree. I would much rather not see any piquepaille tripe whatsoever, and having it as a section would be ideal.
You can't possibly compare those legacy /8 allocations from the primordial days of the internet to todays modern allocation procedures. If today any of those organizations asked for /8s they would be laughed at. Apples and freeking oranges. The fact that the US has an astronomical amount of IP space allocated to it is due to the fact that most of those huge chunks were allocated way back in the early days of classful routing, before CIDR and aggregation. These days if you are in the US and you request netspace you go through the same justifaction and documentation procedure that someone in china goes through.
I don't dispute the fact that there are a lot of people in china and comparatively few assigned blocks. However, that doesn't mean there's a scarcity. There are oodles and oodles of unallocated ranges still left in IPv4 and if governments or corporations in APNIC were asking for netspace and could justify it, then they would be allocated it, or some of the reserved space would be assigned to APNIC. The fact that china's allocations are so small is a result of them not requesting them (and being able to justify those requests), not a result of scarcity. You have to also realize that while china has a huge population, the amount of people that have access to the internet is relatively low. You can't just say "look they have a billion people and only 50 million addresses allocated." If any chinese organization wants ip space they can get it, as long as it's jutifiable -- the same is true for any organization over the world today.
Well, there are already several 6-to-4 and 4-to-6 gateway sites. This one is one example. If there was a site that was only accessable through IPv6 you could use a service like that to access it over any IPv4 host.
Also, if you have an IPv6-capable host you can use a tunnel broker (such as Hurricane Electric's free service) to achieve connectivity to IPv6 sites over IPv4.
So you really don't need an IPv6-capable ISP to access IPv6 hosts, although it's cleaner that way of course.
As far as I understand it, the idea that there is a shortage of IPv4 addresses is really a myth. I read a paper that someone wrote that came to the conclusion that even with the current growth rate (exponential) that we would not run out of addresses for another 20 years or so.
/16 please" and expect to get it it. So really I think the non-US countries like to say "netspace is limited" but what they really mean is "sure we can get all the netblocks we want but it requires some paperwork and justification and we're just bitter that old companies back in the 80s were handed out whole /8s for the asking."
I think the real problem is that these days the RIRs (such as ARIN and APNIC) require justification before allocating netblocks. That means you have to show either current usage need or plans for future expansion, or both. You can't just say, "I'd like a
By the way, here is the data I have that shows total number of IP addresses for all netblocks allocated to each country (top 10):
US 1,828,328,425
JP 117,486,311
GB 84,658,624
DE 69,438,200
AU 65,918,741
CA 64,257,591
CN 54,172,684
FR 45,387,299
NL 35,056,078
KR 34,084,629
The source for these numbers was the aggregated data from http://ip-to-country.webhosting.info/
Are you honestly trying to say that FreeBSD has more spyware-free software than windows? Because if you are, you have got to either be an idiot or not a windows user. I don't care what you think about Windows, it has SHITLOADS of software available. Even if lots of it recently has been bundled that still doesn't mean there are metric truckloads of it without. Just because this site only lists several dozen doesn't mean a damn thing, other than the fact that the site is new.