So... If it occured within 10 light years, it might have caused a mass extinction. But it wasn't that close. It was 5,000 times that far away.
So, in other words, it's about the same as a fly terminating in a frog's fart on the other side of the world.
Meanwhile, there was a drive-by shooting 5 blocks from my house two weeks ago, a hostage situation with a woman armed with a knife two blocks from here this week, and the shooting and stabbing murders and a suicide just on the edge of town two days ago.
Bookmark this in the "looking for relevance" section.
Sounds to me like you're asking for two seperate things.
1) A Linux desktop distribution which can automount $HOME directories (from a central server?) on normal workstations with a fair amount of ease (in terms of configuration).
Answer: There's nothing that I know of that can do this "out of the box" so to speak, but it should be fairly trivial to do.
I'll make note that mounting a share on a Windows server to a Linux desktop seems to often result in the share mount dying - it's kind of messy without using automount, and I've not personally used automount much.
I can't speak for kerebos auth itself, as I'm not too familiar with that element...
Other than that, though, it should be relatively trivial to set automount up to mount a samba share using credentials provided by OpenLDAP or what have you. As you can mount SMB shares via fstab, it's not really an issue to jump up one step and use automount. I am, of course, assuming you'll be making a single "desktop deployment" image and not doing the antiquated thing and manually configuring each machine - that would be just dumb.
2) A Linux server distribution with OpenLDAP + Samba + Kerberos set up, out of the box, so that all you'd have to do would be populate the OpenLDAP server with username/password combinations.
There's nothing that does this which I'm aware of. That's why a company should hire competent people; maybe that's partially why no distro has done it - it's hard, and the distro people don't want to piss off the competent admins by making their skillset "outdated". But that's just a guess.
Another guess is that it's simply not a widely deployed combination. The organization I work for now has (only) several thousand NetPCs deployed in the field, and it's just an NT4 domain login with LDAP on the backend. Groupwise is used on the client side to tie into LDAP directly.
Another stick of memory, maybe? I mean, c'mon, you're running 8 (9?) year-old hardware there! I had a more powerful system in 1996 than that, and that's when hardware was still expensive. And you're trying to run a modern distribution on it?
192Mb of RAM hasn't been enough for at least 5 years for a modern desktop distro or operating system.
That, or you could get a lighter distribution/window manager: say, Debian Woody (hell, even Potato) with XFCE4 or icewm.
I call "bullshit" on your Win2k working "acceptably", though. If you're just using it for a web or email terminal for minor stuff, sure... otherwise: I don't think so. Windows 2000 is painful with even 256, and anyone in their right mind would back me up saying that that's the absolute mininum it should run with. 512M for WinXP.
Er, funny? Were you people even old enough to remember 1992?
Remember how he sent millions of computer programmers to labor on the collective farm system?
Yes, I do. Or rather, I live it. What, you think the hundreds of thousands of H1B workers that came over here simply decided to all go home? They filled the IT field labor vacuum faster than should have been possible, and essentially fucked over the IT industry when the people that went to college - en masse - for IT/CS came out and had no available jobs.
We're still recovering from that. The labor market expanded too quickly (largely in part due to a very real surplus of labor, in no small part due to H1B catering to the rich), and it's still deflating. If we'd simply waited nature's due course (ie, the course of people growing up and becoming adults), we'd have had no such boom and bust, the industry would be more mature with actual innovation (due to no bubble and misguided greed), and we'd have decent professional salaries and wages.
And how he used to speak eloquently about the noble plight of the lumpenproletariat?
What, don't tell me you don't recall all the socialist healthcare stuff Clinton put into place, or the restriction of civil liberties he signed into place?
There was a Law and Order: SVU episode recently on television (last week? two weeks ago? I lose track of time - I think it was the new episode of the week) that dealt with just this issue.
In it, a scummy lawyer posed for a sadistic, thrill-killer who used games as a justification for his deeds. The games weren't why he killed: he killed because he was a sadistic fuck with no soul. Games were just the scrapegoat because the media allowed for (and believed) it.
The overall theme was "personal responsibility". As in, the responsibility of both the people involved in the murder (they convicted the fucker) and the people that raised the issue of how much of it has to do with parents spending time with/raising their children properly. It was a very, very chilling ending for someone who is both a parent and someone that enjoys games.
Reactor grade plutonium isn't nearly as volatile as bomb plutonium. I wouldn't say this is such large concern, as it takes a good deal of energy/tech to create bomb grade shit out of reactor grade shit.
Aside from a dirty bomb, of course. Or something wholely unenthralling.
You don't own a copy of Windows if you're using anything after Win2k. You paid for a use license, most likely. Recall how you're not able to transfer use rights on MS software now?
I'm just waiting for it to get to the point where you can't use a product unless the product ID is registered centrally - aka what is done by companies that have MMORPGs. It won't matter if you've got a legit copy, or if you've got it installed on your system: you've got to pay for that license or be the only one with that product ID code.
And of course, that'll provide an ideal platform for Microsoft to make their operating system a "service", charging you $50/year (or more) to use it.
Why would a person try and use MS update if they didn't have a valid copy of Windows? Those updates won't do WINE itself any good.
Besides, it wasn't anything about not having a valid license. All it does is check for the existence of WINE. If WINE exists, it doesn't allow updates.
You'd be surprised how backwards this Midwest is. Truly.
It's not entirely common - I did paint it that way - but it does happen. You just learn which professors are going to end up treating you like a child, and don't take their courses. That's about all that can be done (and complain loudly to those that listen).
If IE is Windows and Windows is IE, why do they not only have seperate release cycles, but why is each subsequent version of IE available for different Windows versions?
Even Notepad, which is different for each Windows version, is not able to run on different Windows versions than the one it shipped with.
Let me get this straight. Because there's someone that is performing perfectly ethical and legal activities which disagree with the twisted gamer philosophy and political bent (IE, that this is wrong), we're having a smear campaign of sorts on slashdot, pointing out his legit company in the field which can now be DoSed and who knows what by those that are immature enough to bitch about something this trivial?
That sounds like "letter of the law" to me. Not only that, but wikipedia itself - not just its content - is under an open license. So the issue is moot.
I remember reading PC Magazine when I was 15, and I just gobbled up his blurbs about the new, shiny things that were coming out on the market. Then I stopped reading PC Mag for a couple years.
At 18 or so, I picked it up again and took a look. The Internet was becoming prevailant, and his stuff was swill. Pure nonsense, really. He was at least 6 months behind what the Internet (largely via slashdot) had already alerted me to what was going on, and going to happen. This was in 1998 or 1999.
I recognized him for what he was, then: a mis-placed journalist with an interest in technology who managed to catch the coattails of the IT explosion. He was marginally tech savvy in 1985, I imagine, but now it's rediculous how ill-informed he is. He was a mouthpiece for tech companies to large corporations to begin with, but now a person has to wonder where he fits in, what with the "new" corporate tech culture.
He's like the senior tech guy at the office that's been there for 30 years and knows nothing (maybe he still says things like "AMD processors aren't compatible with Pentiums!" or something similarly circa 1994) - but they won't fire him or get rid of him. They keep him around for laughs and because he's got a name for himself (whether the name is good or bad).
You're probably correct in both senses: your knowledge and discernment has increased, while he never had discernment and hasn't really increased in knowledge.
As serious evidence? No. But thanks for the commentary.
No, what it is telling of though, is the mindset at Google at the time of writing. This little insight is important now because it's quite possible that their end goal is to monopolize information in such a way as to extract their income from it.
As they've recently made copious amounts of money and gained incredible power, it's quite possible its gone to their heads. Let's not paint them as a humanitarian group just because we like them: they are a company, after all, and have the same potential for evil that Microsoft (or any large company or government) has and does demonstrate.
I read in an article about the new Army uniforms how they had infrared-light sensitive patches on their armbands for FoF identification. My first thought was, "this will be trouble."
This is why holistic folks have been keen on such natural remedies for years.
Isn't it a small mystery that the medical establishment claims that things like vitamin C and garlic don't help your body fight off colds and various other such things?
My grandfather has completely cured himself of Lyme's disease (something which essentially puts you on treatment for months at a time via damaging chemicals) three times and hepetitis A once, mainly by consuming copious amounts of vitamin C, garlic, and various other herbs. He also did it in a matter of days, versus weeks or months, as would be the case with medical nonsense. He's also had lymphatic cancer for the last two years, which usually kills a person very quickly even with "medical treatment" - which he hasn't had any of. He's no worse off now, seemingly, than 2 years ago, and you might even say there's been regression.
My mom had Crohn's disease when she was in high school, and managed to cure herself of it through copious amounts of, again, vitamin C mostly. (There were various other herbs and vitamins involved, but C was the main one). She had to get part of her bowels removed at the time, but all but recovered: there's no sign of it in her body now, not even in remission. In case you didn't know, Crohn's disease doesn't simply disappear; it's thought to be an autoimmune reaction. My mom's now 48, and it's quite uncommon for something like this to simply 'disappear' like this for 30 years. (Granted, she eats healthy food now, doesn't eat things like potato chips and beer, etc., so I don't doubt that helps.)
Yet the medical establishment still claims that C has a negligible effect on the health of the person taking it. They say this about every natural remedy which they have not yet figured out a means to produce a synthetic form of yet. That's all most thearapies are now: synthesized homeopathic remedies. It's pretty sick.
(Sorry, I don't have any links to such medical establishment-sponsored and rigged studies atm.)
It'd be nice for ISPs to instigate such a thing. I imagine it's around the corner.
on the other hand: can you imagine the draconian enforcement which would lead to roughly 20% (all Mac and Linux users) getting shut off (or forced to upgrade "business" grade service)?
Because disabling indexing doesn't change the actual performance of NTFS?
That's the first thing I do when I install Windows, btw. Disable the worthless indexing.
Having a dedicated swap partition does indeed provide performance increase. Instead of talking to the virtual memory through both the filesystem driver and disk driver, you have to only go through the disk driver. One less layer of abstraction to deal with, and in Windows, thats a big layer to fuck with.
Slashdot Mirror
So... If it occured within 10 light years, it might have caused a mass extinction. But it wasn't that close. It was 5,000 times that far away.
So, in other words, it's about the same as a fly terminating in a frog's fart on the other side of the world.
Meanwhile, there was a drive-by shooting 5 blocks from my house two weeks ago, a hostage situation with a woman armed with a knife two blocks from here this week, and the shooting and stabbing murders and a suicide just on the edge of town two days ago.
Bookmark this in the "looking for relevance" section.
Yeah, but... if I might be so bold (having been about 12 in 1992 and not being "into" computers) what the hell is it?
Sounds to me like you're asking for two seperate things.
1) A Linux desktop distribution which can automount $HOME directories (from a central server?) on normal workstations with a fair amount of ease (in terms of configuration).
Answer: There's nothing that I know of that can do this "out of the box" so to speak, but it should be fairly trivial to do.
I'll make note that mounting a share on a Windows server to a Linux desktop seems to often result in the share mount dying - it's kind of messy without using automount, and I've not personally used automount much.
I can't speak for kerebos auth itself, as I'm not too familiar with that element...
Other than that, though, it should be relatively trivial to set automount up to mount a samba share using credentials provided by OpenLDAP or what have you. As you can mount SMB shares via fstab, it's not really an issue to jump up one step and use automount. I am, of course, assuming you'll be making a single "desktop deployment" image and not doing the antiquated thing and manually configuring each machine - that would be just dumb.
2) A Linux server distribution with OpenLDAP + Samba + Kerberos set up, out of the box, so that all you'd have to do would be populate the OpenLDAP server with username/password combinations.
There's nothing that does this which I'm aware of. That's why a company should hire competent people; maybe that's partially why no distro has done it - it's hard, and the distro people don't want to piss off the competent admins by making their skillset "outdated". But that's just a guess.
Another guess is that it's simply not a widely deployed combination. The organization I work for now has (only) several thousand NetPCs deployed in the field, and it's just an NT4 domain login with LDAP on the backend. Groupwise is used on the client side to tie into LDAP directly.
Another stick of memory, maybe? I mean, c'mon, you're running 8 (9?) year-old hardware there! I had a more powerful system in 1996 than that, and that's when hardware was still expensive. And you're trying to run a modern distribution on it?
192Mb of RAM hasn't been enough for at least 5 years for a modern desktop distro or operating system.
That, or you could get a lighter distribution/window manager: say, Debian Woody (hell, even Potato) with XFCE4 or icewm.
I call "bullshit" on your Win2k working "acceptably", though. If you're just using it for a web or email terminal for minor stuff, sure... otherwise: I don't think so. Windows 2000 is painful with even 256, and anyone in their right mind would back me up saying that that's the absolute mininum it should run with. 512M for WinXP.
This might be corelary, but recently the linux kernel has gotten a slew of IBM Thinkpad centric modules added. I think they're in 2.6.9.
There's proper support for pretty much everything on a Thinkpad now (except for ACPI, though that might merely be a function of my X server).
Does it make anyone else violently angry that these guys would claim such things about the causes of not getting software patents?
Er, funny? Were you people even old enough to remember 1992?
Remember how he sent millions of computer programmers to labor on the collective farm system?
Yes, I do. Or rather, I live it. What, you think the hundreds of thousands of H1B workers that came over here simply decided to all go home? They filled the IT field labor vacuum faster than should have been possible, and essentially fucked over the IT industry when the people that went to college - en masse - for IT/CS came out and had no available jobs.
We're still recovering from that. The labor market expanded too quickly (largely in part due to a very real surplus of labor, in no small part due to H1B catering to the rich), and it's still deflating. If we'd simply waited nature's due course (ie, the course of people growing up and becoming adults), we'd have had no such boom and bust, the industry would be more mature with actual innovation (due to no bubble and misguided greed), and we'd have decent professional salaries and wages.
And how he used to speak eloquently about the noble plight of the lumpenproletariat?
What, don't tell me you don't recall all the socialist healthcare stuff Clinton put into place, or the restriction of civil liberties he signed into place?
There was a Law and Order: SVU episode recently on television (last week? two weeks ago? I lose track of time - I think it was the new episode of the week) that dealt with just this issue.
In it, a scummy lawyer posed for a sadistic, thrill-killer who used games as a justification for his deeds. The games weren't why he killed: he killed because he was a sadistic fuck with no soul. Games were just the scrapegoat because the media allowed for (and believed) it.
The overall theme was "personal responsibility". As in, the responsibility of both the people involved in the murder (they convicted the fucker) and the people that raised the issue of how much of it has to do with parents spending time with/raising their children properly. It was a very, very chilling ending for someone who is both a parent and someone that enjoys games.
Make a bomb, eh?
Reactor grade plutonium isn't nearly as volatile as bomb plutonium. I wouldn't say this is such large concern, as it takes a good deal of energy/tech to create bomb grade shit out of reactor grade shit.
Aside from a dirty bomb, of course. Or something wholely unenthralling.
You don't own a copy of Windows if you're using anything after Win2k. You paid for a use license, most likely. Recall how you're not able to transfer use rights on MS software now?
I'm just waiting for it to get to the point where you can't use a product unless the product ID is registered centrally - aka what is done by companies that have MMORPGs. It won't matter if you've got a legit copy, or if you've got it installed on your system: you've got to pay for that license or be the only one with that product ID code.
And of course, that'll provide an ideal platform for Microsoft to make their operating system a "service", charging you $50/year (or more) to use it.
Idiot.
Why would a person try and use MS update if they didn't have a valid copy of Windows? Those updates won't do WINE itself any good.
Besides, it wasn't anything about not having a valid license. All it does is check for the existence of WINE. If WINE exists, it doesn't allow updates.
That would be prostitution, for anyone that's wondering.
You won't be able to run Win9x notepad on an NT variant, or vice versa.
Here's my bet: use is free, but then they'll start charging for updates.
You'd be surprised how backwards this Midwest is. Truly.
It's not entirely common - I did paint it that way - but it does happen. You just learn which professors are going to end up treating you like a child, and don't take their courses. That's about all that can be done (and complain loudly to those that listen).
If IE is Windows and Windows is IE, why do they not only have seperate release cycles, but why is each subsequent version of IE available for different Windows versions?
Even Notepad, which is different for each Windows version, is not able to run on different Windows versions than the one it shipped with.
Let me get this straight. Because there's someone that is performing perfectly ethical and legal activities which disagree with the twisted gamer philosophy and political bent (IE, that this is wrong), we're having a smear campaign of sorts on slashdot, pointing out his legit company in the field which can now be DoSed and who knows what by those that are immature enough to bitch about something this trivial?
Urg. My head hurts.
If you didn't need AV anymore, it's not a waste of the AV nonsense - it's saving, as you don't need the AV anymore. Use your head here.
Corps pay for AV, often by the month. Why would they want to keep paying for it if they didn't need it anymore?
That sounds like "letter of the law" to me. Not only that, but wikipedia itself - not just its content - is under an open license. So the issue is moot.
I remember reading PC Magazine when I was 15, and I just gobbled up his blurbs about the new, shiny things that were coming out on the market. Then I stopped reading PC Mag for a couple years.
At 18 or so, I picked it up again and took a look. The Internet was becoming prevailant, and his stuff was swill. Pure nonsense, really. He was at least 6 months behind what the Internet (largely via slashdot) had already alerted me to what was going on, and going to happen. This was in 1998 or 1999.
I recognized him for what he was, then: a mis-placed journalist with an interest in technology who managed to catch the coattails of the IT explosion. He was marginally tech savvy in 1985, I imagine, but now it's rediculous how ill-informed he is. He was a mouthpiece for tech companies to large corporations to begin with, but now a person has to wonder where he fits in, what with the "new" corporate tech culture.
He's like the senior tech guy at the office that's been there for 30 years and knows nothing (maybe he still says things like "AMD processors aren't compatible with Pentiums!" or something similarly circa 1994) - but they won't fire him or get rid of him. They keep him around for laughs and because he's got a name for himself (whether the name is good or bad).
You're probably correct in both senses: your knowledge and discernment has increased, while he never had discernment and hasn't really increased in knowledge.
As serious evidence? No. But thanks for the commentary.
No, what it is telling of though, is the mindset at Google at the time of writing. This little insight is important now because it's quite possible that their end goal is to monopolize information in such a way as to extract their income from it.
As they've recently made copious amounts of money and gained incredible power, it's quite possible its gone to their heads. Let's not paint them as a humanitarian group just because we like them: they are a company, after all, and have the same potential for evil that Microsoft (or any large company or government) has and does demonstrate.
I read in an article about the new Army uniforms how they had infrared-light sensitive patches on their armbands for FoF identification. My first thought was, "this will be trouble."
This is why holistic folks have been keen on such natural remedies for years.
Isn't it a small mystery that the medical establishment claims that things like vitamin C and garlic don't help your body fight off colds and various other such things?
My grandfather has completely cured himself of Lyme's disease (something which essentially puts you on treatment for months at a time via damaging chemicals) three times and hepetitis A once, mainly by consuming copious amounts of vitamin C, garlic, and various other herbs. He also did it in a matter of days, versus weeks or months, as would be the case with medical nonsense. He's also had lymphatic cancer for the last two years, which usually kills a person very quickly even with "medical treatment" - which he hasn't had any of. He's no worse off now, seemingly, than 2 years ago, and you might even say there's been regression.
My mom had Crohn's disease when she was in high school, and managed to cure herself of it through copious amounts of, again, vitamin C mostly. (There were various other herbs and vitamins involved, but C was the main one). She had to get part of her bowels removed at the time, but all but recovered: there's no sign of it in her body now, not even in remission. In case you didn't know, Crohn's disease doesn't simply disappear; it's thought to be an autoimmune reaction. My mom's now 48, and it's quite uncommon for something like this to simply 'disappear' like this for 30 years. (Granted, she eats healthy food now, doesn't eat things like potato chips and beer, etc., so I don't doubt that helps.)
Yet the medical establishment still claims that C has a negligible effect on the health of the person taking it. They say this about every natural remedy which they have not yet figured out a means to produce a synthetic form of yet. That's all most thearapies are now: synthesized homeopathic remedies. It's pretty sick.
(Sorry, I don't have any links to such medical establishment-sponsored and rigged studies atm.)
It'd be nice for ISPs to instigate such a thing. I imagine it's around the corner.
on the other hand: can you imagine the draconian enforcement which would lead to roughly 20% (all Mac and Linux users) getting shut off (or forced to upgrade "business" grade service)?
I'd be very angry.
Because disabling indexing doesn't change the actual performance of NTFS?
That's the first thing I do when I install Windows, btw. Disable the worthless indexing.
Having a dedicated swap partition does indeed provide performance increase. Instead of talking to the virtual memory through both the filesystem driver and disk driver, you have to only go through the disk driver. One less layer of abstraction to deal with, and in Windows, thats a big layer to fuck with.
I can see why you posted anon.