At 23 he won the world championship road race. Later, he won the first (only?) million dollar bicycle race prize (actually, three races... The sponsor decided that the chances of a single rider winning all three was infintesimal, heh). They didn't count on Lance's iron will. He wasn't as skilled or as well trained as today, and he was far younger than the prime age for a Tour de France racer. Lance was also the first American to ever win a European Classic. He won two. He also won (at least once) the Tour du Pont, an intermediate length stage race. Those lasted about 10 days, if I recall, and included some serious mountains.
Again, this was all well before his prime and before his cancer. There were some who considered him an undisciplined hothead back then, yet his talent and will showed through. Lance doesn't need doping to win, especially since his coaching has improved and he's reached his prime racing years.
I have an earthlink.net account and a couple of weeks ago I was issued an IP address in the dreaded slashdot BANNED! file. Pity poor me, getting the big orange screen telling me about the terms of use and how, as a BANNED! IP addy, I was unable to even read them. Fortunately, the evil orange BANNED! page quoted me a few of the offenses that might have gotten 'my' IP banned. I must have spammed the input queue or posted a PWP (page widening post) or somesuch.
Of course, it wasn't me. It was some other Earthlink customer who, sometime in the past, was issued that same dynamic IP address and committed the unpardonable offense. That customer has moved on to a new IP, but/. never forgets.
It was hell. I spent *hours* unable to access/. -- can you imagine the suffering that such a fate would cause *you*??!
Eventually, I was issued a new IP address from earthlink and was back online as the ageless Sun Tzu once more. But I still live in fear that someday, perhaps when I least expect it, the evil orange BANNED! page will return to haunt me. This is the personal hell that I inhabit and it is here that I shall remain, until I get a clean static IP address of my very own. I live for that day. -- Send us your Linux System Administration articles
As a Sun system administrator and a military strategist on SST, I think they should call it, simply, Sun Tzu. I would take offense of use of the hyphen. heh. -- Send us your Linux Sysadmin Articles
1) Microsoft can use its market dominance to extend their.NET standard in ways that you can't foresee. No, that won't affect your software, but it *will* affect the installation base of Mono, and therefore, Linux in business.
2) Microsoft can continue to extend the.NET standard and use the DMCA to prevent open source developers from reverse engineering them. (Yes, I know there is a DMCA exception for RE, but if the exception were limitless, DMCA would mean nothing -- and I don't feel that lucky.)
3) Microsoft *will* have patent claims that cover parts of.NET. What do you think they intend to use them for?
The example of WINE has been brought up as an analogy. MS hasn't shut down WINE, how is Mono different? I see two obvious differences. First, WINE is too Windows-dependent to ever be a significant threat to MS. Its market penetration in business must be near zero. Therefore, Linux (in 'the enterprise') would suffer virtually no ill effects of losing it. Hence, MS ignores it. If WINE *were* hugely successful to the point that Linux would be severely damaged if WINE were suddenly patent-locked, would MS continue to ignore it?
I'm not sure MS has the key patents to cover (at least the original) key concepts of Windows -- I think MS only got serious about patenting everything about 10 years ago. If that is the case, the WINE example may not be such a solid patent case as more recent MS technologies.
I think there are enough ways, if the karma loss were worth it to MS, to shut down any work-alike of *any* non-trivial and recent MS technology.
I think that MS will continue to ignore Mono -- until it becomes inconvenient. I only hope that any MS action doesn't deal a major setback to Linux at the same time.
http://pyrll.ibm.com/rewardprograms/scobounty/reba teform.html is where I applied. I think they're paying quite generously for posts on message boards and even more if you have access to an authoritative-looking website. Now's your chance to use those 31337 h0x0ring sk1lz for big bux! -- Send us your Linux Sysadmin articles.
A related article sums an argument against beneficial viruses. Unauthorized intrusion is bad, no matter that the perpetrators _claim_ their are good. -- Send us your Linux Sysadmin articles.
1) The company probably either archived the code, sold it, or ignored it during the assets liquidation. Therefore, all you have is a _copy_ of the code. Sit on the copy until the copyright expires. 2) You are now in possession of _public_domain_ code -- and you are probably the _only_ person holding such code. 3) Make a _legal_ derived product from the public domain code and register the copyright to _your_ work. 4) Burn the original copy. 5) ?????? 6) Profit! -- Send us your Linux Sysadmin article.
I didn't think spiders and bots were officially counted in the employment rolls, but maybe that's just speciesism on the part of us humans. -- Check out our little bitty Linux Sysadmin Portal.
Unless one of the claims covers working on programs in one big file (tm) and saving off another copy with a new extension (1,2,3,4,5,...) with every significant change.
Heh, I knew my slackerly habits would pay off eventually!
Back when I wrote my tradewars for the web system, I didn't have no steenkin' PHP. I had to hand code it, along with the webserver, from scratch. Sure, it sucks, but we *liked* it!
This reminds me of the time I was trying to write a data storage system and accidently invented a combination compression and encryption algorithm far faster and more space-efficient than anything the world has ever known. Currently, it is one-way only... but when I get the decompression / decryption working, I'll be rich!!! Muahahahahahahahahaha!!!
Anti-virus companies have a huge conflict of interest in that they sell 'protection' against anonymously produced virus threats. These, and firewall producers, are precisely the same companies that benefit the most from malware and network-borne threats of all kinds.
I would think that they would be more careful about raising people's suspicions about their prior knowlege of absurdly fast propagating worms.
Maybe they are believers that 'any publicity is good publicity' -- even in their business.
Sun is the #1 Unix seller by revenue in the U.S. (as of recently, anyway... IBM may have overtaken them since). However, virtually all of their sales includes a rather expensive piece of hardware (or three...) and other, priced, Unix-specific Software licenses.
Therefore, to fairly compare Linux to Solaris, you would have to include all of the hardware that Linux runs on as well as all of the other software in that installation. Even free copies of Linux would produce some pretty impressive numbers when measured that way.
So, Sun does have a rationale for claiming #1 Unix -- and it's even better than the old SCO claim of #1 which worked like this: We sell more copies of Unix than Sun, et. al., so we're '#1'. Two copies of SCO Unix running on a PC is twice as many as one copy of Solaris running on a 1000-user Sun 10000. Linux? That's not Unix -- it ain't certified with the magic Unix label. Ergo, we're #1. Heh.
...But, rather, may have increased the rate of infection.
Most SQL Servers are, presumably, behind firewalls so a random number generator that generates numerically closer IP's would tend to spread behind firewalls far, far faster than a truly random one covering the entire IP address range.
Slashdot Mirror
I heard that the soylent green burgers that they serve at EA is a kind of environmentally-friendly vegetarian-based quarter pounder, right?
Here Lies Z-Seven
Promoted up to Heaven
But the bugs here stay
...on the problems with beneficial computer viruses.
At 23 he won the world championship road race. Later, he won the first (only?) million dollar bicycle race prize (actually, three races... The sponsor decided that the chances of a single rider winning all three was infintesimal, heh). They didn't count on Lance's iron will. He wasn't as skilled or as well trained as today, and he was far younger than the prime age for a Tour de France racer. Lance was also the first American to ever win a European Classic. He won two. He also won (at least once) the Tour du Pont, an intermediate length stage race. Those lasted about 10 days, if I recall, and included some serious mountains.
Again, this was all well before his prime and before his cancer. There were some who considered him an undisciplined hothead back then, yet his talent and will showed through. Lance doesn't need doping to win, especially since his coaching has improved and he's reached his prime racing years.
Go Lance!
I have an earthlink.net account and a couple of weeks ago I was issued an IP address in the dreaded slashdot BANNED! file. Pity poor me, getting the big orange screen telling me about the terms of use and how, as a BANNED! IP addy, I was unable to even read them. Fortunately, the evil orange BANNED! page quoted me a few of the offenses that might have gotten 'my' IP banned. I must have spammed the input queue or posted a PWP (page widening post) or somesuch.
/. never forgets.
/. -- can you imagine the suffering that such a fate would cause *you*??!
Of course, it wasn't me. It was some other Earthlink customer who, sometime in the past, was issued that same dynamic IP address and committed the unpardonable offense. That customer has moved on to a new IP, but
It was hell. I spent *hours* unable to access
Eventually, I was issued a new IP address from earthlink and was back online as the ageless Sun Tzu once more. But I still live in fear that someday, perhaps when I least expect it, the evil orange BANNED! page will return to haunt me. This is the personal hell that I inhabit and it is here that I shall remain, until I get a clean static IP address of my very own. I live for that day.
--
Send us your Linux System Administration articles
As a Sun system administrator and a military strategist on SST, I think they should call it, simply, Sun Tzu. I would take offense of use of the hyphen. heh.
--
Send us your Linux Sysadmin Articles
1) Microsoft can use its market dominance to extend their .NET standard in ways that you can't foresee. No, that won't affect your software, but it *will* affect the installation base of Mono, and therefore, Linux in business.
.NET standard and use the DMCA to prevent open source developers from reverse engineering them. (Yes, I know there is a DMCA exception for RE, but if the exception were limitless, DMCA would mean nothing -- and I don't feel that lucky.)
.NET. What do you think they intend to use them for?
;)
2) Microsoft can continue to extend the
3) Microsoft *will* have patent claims that cover parts of
The example of WINE has been brought up as an analogy. MS hasn't shut down WINE, how is Mono different? I see two obvious differences. First, WINE is too Windows-dependent to ever be a significant threat to MS. Its market penetration in business must be near zero. Therefore, Linux (in 'the enterprise') would suffer virtually no ill effects of losing it. Hence, MS ignores it. If WINE *were* hugely successful to the point that Linux would be severely damaged if WINE were suddenly patent-locked, would MS continue to ignore it?
I'm not sure MS has the key patents to cover (at least the original) key concepts of Windows -- I think MS only got serious about patenting everything about 10 years ago. If that is the case, the WINE example may not be such a solid patent case as more recent MS technologies.
I think there are enough ways, if the karma loss were worth it to MS, to shut down any work-alike of *any* non-trivial and recent MS technology.
I think that MS will continue to ignore Mono -- until it becomes inconvenient. I only hope that any MS action doesn't deal a major setback to Linux at the same time.
And, yes, I *am* paranoid.
This is proof that even without running network services and without a bunch of lusers with accounts on it, a mainframe still isn't secure.
;)
I can't wait to see what IBM's patch for this little security problem is, heh.
--
Send us your Linux Programming articles
The difference between Linux and Windows that the original poster was obviously referring to is this:
Linux consists of 99%+ functionality patches
Windows consists of 182%+(*) security patches, many of which, unfortunately, have security issues
(*) Totals exceed 100% due to previous patches getting patched for new security issues.
--
Send us your Linux programming articles
http://pyrll.ibm.com/rewardprograms/scobounty/reba teform.html is where I applied. I think they're paying quite generously for posts on message boards and even more if you have access to an authoritative-looking website. Now's your chance to use those 31337 h0x0ring sk1lz for big bux!
--
Send us your Linux Sysadmin articles.
A related article sums an argument against beneficial viruses. Unauthorized intrusion is bad, no matter that the perpetrators _claim_ their are good.
--
Send us your Linux Sysadmin articles.
1) The company probably either archived the code, sold it, or ignored it during the assets liquidation. Therefore, all you have is a _copy_ of the code. Sit on the copy until the copyright expires.
2) You are now in possession of _public_domain_ code -- and you are probably the _only_ person holding such code.
3) Make a _legal_ derived product from the public domain code and register the copyright to _your_ work.
4) Burn the original copy.
5) ??????
6) Profit!
--
Send us your Linux Sysadmin article.
I didn't think spiders and bots were officially counted in the employment rolls, but maybe that's just speciesism on the part of us humans.
--
Check out our little bitty Linux Sysadmin Portal.
...distributing linux. On May 3rd, 2003, this article about SCO's problem first went up.
It may be feasible to have micropayments down to as little as a penny per transaction based on the infamous web bug. Don't let the name scare you! ;)
Check out this article about the GPL implications of their republishing IBM's alegedly infringing code in their own version of Linux.
Heh, I knew my slackerly habits would pay off eventually!
Send us your Linux Sysadmin articles
Send us your Linux Sysadmin articles.
Wow! 2756 anonymous users online?! I wonder where they came from.
Send us your Linux Sysadmin articles.
Send us your Linux Sysadmin articles.
I would think that they would be more careful about raising people's suspicions about their prior knowlege of absurdly fast propagating worms.
Maybe they are believers that 'any publicity is good publicity' -- even in their business.
Send us your Linux Sysadmin articles!
Therefore, to fairly compare Linux to Solaris, you would have to include all of the hardware that Linux runs on as well as all of the other software in that installation. Even free copies of Linux would produce some pretty impressive numbers when measured that way.
So, Sun does have a rationale for claiming #1 Unix -- and it's even better than the old SCO claim of #1 which worked like this: We sell more copies of Unix than Sun, et. al., so we're '#1'. Two copies of SCO Unix running on a PC is twice as many as one copy of Solaris running on a 1000-user Sun 10000. Linux? That's not Unix -- it ain't certified with the magic Unix label. Ergo, we're #1. Heh.
Send us your Linux Sysadmin articles.
Send us your Linux Sysadmin articles.
Welcome back!
Send us your Linux Sysadmin articles.
Most SQL Servers are, presumably, behind firewalls so a random number generator that generates numerically closer IP's would tend to spread behind firewalls far, far faster than a truly random one covering the entire IP address range.
I think the 'bug' was deliberate.
Send us your Linux Sysadmin articles.