I used the wrong tool for the job, therefore it sucks.
Please explain what "tool" I should use to turn an old PC with a Nvidia video card into a file server underneath my desk at home?
From 1997 to 2010, I've used Linux and SAMBA. Every now and then, the installation got hosed. In the early days, it was compiling the kernel the wrong way. With Ubuntu, it was the video drive upgrade for the Nvidia card and happened so frequently that I had the installation steps memorized.
From 2010, I've used FreeNAS. A USB stick would go bad and hosed the installation from time to time. Formatting a new USB stick, installing FreeNAS and copying over the backup config file took five minutes.
Well, your original post said you didn't have a video card, so at that point you should've used Ubuntu Server or Debian or something else that doesn't require X.org. However, you used an old video card so you could get a GUI going. Fine. But after the second or third time a driver update broke it, you should've at that point began to decline the driver updates--you said it was a file server, right? You don't need the latest gfx drivers for that.
When I weigh the evidence, I have to put far more trust in the anti-systemd comments presenting real technical arguments, and no trust at all into the pro-systemd comments filled with insults, vitriol, and sometimes even gibberish.
I'm not exactly sure where you're getting this from. The "real technical arguments" are all lies (you can use syslogd with systemd, you can configure systemd to not use binary logs at all, there's still STDERR). Saying so is not "insults, vitriol," or "gibberish." Maybe if you actually tried it, you'd see so.
N.B. I'm not "pro-systemd" by any measure, it's just another set of tools I use, no different from the classic Unix utilities or X.org and what not. It's much more similar to launchd used in OS X than SysVinit was, so you'd likely feel right at home.
I can't wait to hear the howling when people upgrade and suddenly they can't even write to or read logs in any way. I'm dieing to see the reactions when their told that they have to rewrite every script and application that they've used fro the last few decades because some moron decide to freshen the init system.
Cheers!
FUD like this did a lot of damage to the free-software community a few years ago, when systemd was first being deployed by the major distros. Nowadays nobody believes it anymore.
I use Ubuntu MATE 15.10 with systemd, and I'm perfectly capable of reading my syslogs. My shell scripts all worked perfectly when I upgraded from 14.10. Never had any boot problems.
4) The DoD has been allowed to analyze the data in the telemetry and determined that it is just UI usage rates once the Cortana voice-search was disabled.
1) The DoD are getting a special spyware-free version of Windows 10. (Remember, even the standard Windows 10 Enterprise will pervasively spy on its users, despite what many Microsoft shills have flaunted.)
2) The DoD do not care that there is spyware in Windows 10, because Microsoft shares all the data with them anyway.
3) This deal was made behind closed doors months or years before Windows 10 was production ready, and as a result, nobody dared to check if Windows 10 would actually be a good product for the DoD.
I have noticed that Comcast in the DC area has done the opposite: they are now doing DPI to detect BitTorrent downloads of copyrighted materials and using HTML/ HTTP injections to serve notices.
Scary stuff. Would forcing your torrent client to transmit with encryption prevent Comcast from finding out what you're doing?
I'm a certified hater of Firefox, but I'd like to hear what Mozilla has to say about this. Firefox's security is reviewed by not only their security team, but also Debian, the Tor Project, Red Hat, and many others. I have a hard time believing the situation is really so bad.
I'm pretty sure if you recorded to connections from your MAC or Linux desktop, and didn't filter out normal expected traffic, you'd be APPALLED at the tracking taking place.
connections do not equal tracking.
Since my OS is open source, I can see exactly what information is being sent out. However, Microsoft does not disclose what information is being sent to 107 of the domains that Win10 contacts, nor do they explain why all of those domains are contacted even when you manually configure Win10 not to.
I'm not quite sure why you broke out into an inane babbling rant, but the rebuttal article on ZDNet is failed apologism because even the author admits he has no idea what information Microsoft is collecting. He's assuming (because he trusts MS, you see) that the data is anonymized and only used for this or that, but notice how many times he says "possibly", "could", etc.? It's all speculation.
You can't even listen to music on OS X or iPhone without the software contacting Apple.
I'm quite tired of this nonsense rebuttal. When you use an Apple application, it contacts Apple's servers to see if there are updates available--you can turn that off as well. In contrast, when do you even the most mundane things in Win10 (with the telemetry turned off, mind you), the OS contacts over 100 different domains: https://github.com/WindowsLies...
Why the fuck does Win10 contact telemetry.appex.bing.net, ad.doubleclick.net, and watson.live.com whenever you open the fucking Notepad?
They gave away at least a few billion dollars' worth of revenue when they gave away Windows 10 for free. So the kind of telemetry they are collecting is at least worth a few billion dollars. Anyone who says different is lying. There is no free lunch.
I would like to augment your point by commenting that Microsoft isn't just *giving* Win10 away, they're *foisting* it as hard as it can, likely breaking quite a few laws in the process.
So that means the profit they're expected to make off of people running Win10 must vastly exceed the cost of making Win10, AND the cost of fighting off all the lawsuits in the process of ramming Win10 onto peoples' computers. One could argue that perhaps they're expecting all that profit to come from people being exposed to the built-in advertisements and the Windows Store, or people so pleased with the OS that they run out and buy a Surface/Xbox/WinPhone, but does anybody really believe that?
Well, if I were some corporation with extremely valuable trade secrets, or some government with information that would endanger lives if leaked, and I just deployed Windows 10 and found out that it's a gigantic spying beacon for Microsoft, I would indeed panic.
Remember, Microsoft and their shills have been crying that all of the telemetry can be turned off in Windows 10 Enterprise edition (the edition that said corporations & governments would be deploying), but that was proved completely false.
Sure, traffic is probably encrypted, but since your system is encrypting it, surely there's a way to discover the keys and find out exactly what data is being sent.
I personally don't have either the time nor the kernel hacking skills to pull it off, but I'm sure somebody could.
Your system encrypts it with Microsoft's public key before it is send out. Microsoft accepts the information and decrypts it with their private key.
If you could know what the OS was doing with the info before it is encrypted, you could find out what's being sent out; but (to my knowledge) that's impossible to know.
Apparently it's some apologism for Windows 10, but an unbelievably poor one. "Oh no, no no! Please don't panic because Windows phones home to over 100 different servers even when you turn the telemetry off. It's probably, eh... nobody's quite sure, but I'm sure everything will be okay!"
You think the accountants and legal teams in Apple, IBM, Google, Red Hat, etc. are using Windows?
Maybe not the ones at Apple, but I totally believe the accountants and lawyers at the rest of them are using Windows. Maybe some MacOS too, but they're sure as shit not using Linux distros for their Desktop applications.
We haven't had a free market in operating systems in over 25 years, which is about the time frame that Bill Gates forced computer manufacturers to put only Windows on computers.
My favorite part of the article was when the writer said that it was unclear why Russia wouldn't want Windows on government computers. I almost laughed out loud. The writer actually phrased it in such a way as to imply that Russia would somehow be inflicting harm on itself by kicking Windows out.
Really? Bill Gates hold your family hostage so you couldn't build your own PC and load Linux or go out and buy a Mac? People have always had alternatives, they are just not as simple or cheap as buying the "Black Friday Special" at your local big box electronics store.
It's possible to have an unfree market without having a gun pointed to your head.
For Putin's government, I would say an OS designed to serve Putin's interest is probably a better alternative for Putin - and that's what we're discussing.
No, the grand parent stated:
Hopefully Russian computer scientists will focus on either making ReactOS a usable replacement (better for us in the West trying to dump Windows)
So a Putin sponsored ReactOS is declared as a better option for the West to move to from Windows. It is absurd, and it was duly and accurately called out as stupidity. Stupidty that got rated +5 insightfull no less.
ReactOS is open source. If Russia contributes to it, it helps everybody in the world that can access the source. The fact that it helps Putin does not mean it cannot help other people.
Of course, if Putin wanted to, the Russian government could make a closed-source fork of ReactOS, but that's obviously not what I was hoping for--hence why I started the statement with "hopefully".
I'm actually surprised more companies aren't actively wondering just how much Microsoft and others can be controlled by the US government.
It's probably because if you're a big enough player, Microsoft will let you go over any and all of the source code that it has. So if your people can't find an NSA backdoor in the Windows source, your people probably aren't going find one in any other OS's source.
Source code is meaningless if you don't compile the binaries yourself. AFAIK Microsoft has never allowed anybody to do so.
So the government can't switch away from Windows, because they need to be interoperable... with themselves? Well, that does seem like government logic, indeed. I'm so glad I pay taxes so that these virtuous and profoundly intelligent people can watch over my safety.
I'm not quite sure what is more ignorant here, not grasping the value of dozens of government agencies needing to be interoperable with themselves, or your complete lack of understanding just who the hell uses Windows on this planet, as if the majority of companies today are running fucking BSD or some shit.
A government can impose interoperability by mandating use of a single OS.
You're of course obviously right that Windows is the dominant desktop OS on the planet, but you're quite wrong if you think the average pleb is incapable of using a *nix. You think the accountants and legal teams in Apple, IBM, Google, Red Hat, etc. are using Windows?
Slashdot Mirror
I used the wrong tool for the job, therefore it sucks.
Please explain what "tool" I should use to turn an old PC with a Nvidia video card into a file server underneath my desk at home?
From 1997 to 2010, I've used Linux and SAMBA. Every now and then, the installation got hosed. In the early days, it was compiling the kernel the wrong way. With Ubuntu, it was the video drive upgrade for the Nvidia card and happened so frequently that I had the installation steps memorized.
From 2010, I've used FreeNAS. A USB stick would go bad and hosed the installation from time to time. Formatting a new USB stick, installing FreeNAS and copying over the backup config file took five minutes.
Well, your original post said you didn't have a video card, so at that point you should've used Ubuntu Server or Debian or something else that doesn't require X.org. However, you used an old video card so you could get a GUI going. Fine. But after the second or third time a driver update broke it, you should've at that point began to decline the driver updates--you said it was a file server, right? You don't need the latest gfx drivers for that.
Diff AC here.
When I weigh the evidence, I have to put far more trust in the anti-systemd comments presenting real technical arguments, and no trust at all into the pro-systemd comments filled with insults, vitriol, and sometimes even gibberish.
I'm not exactly sure where you're getting this from. The "real technical arguments" are all lies (you can use syslogd with systemd, you can configure systemd to not use binary logs at all, there's still STDERR). Saying so is not "insults, vitriol," or "gibberish." Maybe if you actually tried it, you'd see so.
N.B. I'm not "pro-systemd" by any measure, it's just another set of tools I use, no different from the classic Unix utilities or X.org and what not. It's much more similar to launchd used in OS X than SysVinit was, so you'd likely feel right at home.
It's also going to have systemd throughout.
I can't wait to hear the howling when people upgrade and suddenly they can't even write to or read logs in any way. I'm dieing to see the reactions when their told that they have to rewrite every script and application that they've used fro the last few decades because some moron decide to freshen the init system.
Cheers!
FUD like this did a lot of damage to the free-software community a few years ago, when systemd was first being deployed by the major distros. Nowadays nobody believes it anymore.
I use Ubuntu MATE 15.10 with systemd, and I'm perfectly capable of reading my syslogs. My shell scripts all worked perfectly when I upgraded from 14.10. Never had any boot problems.
Uber alles. Default in CentOs 7. Why ZFS? It's not like anyone uses woobuntu in serious environments.
Ubuntu is the biggest OS for enterprise cloud deployments in the world.
I used the wrong tool for the job, therefore it sucks.
bray
noun
1.
the loud, harsh cry of a donkey.
Sounds about right....
4) The DoD has been allowed to analyze the data in the telemetry and determined that it is just UI usage rates once the Cortana voice-search was disabled.
I wonder what the other 106 domains are for, then.
I love job security. Bring it on, Microsoft!
Rather akin to a paramedic cheering whenever there's a natural disaster....
1) The DoD are getting a special spyware-free version of Windows 10. (Remember, even the standard Windows 10 Enterprise will pervasively spy on its users, despite what many Microsoft shills have flaunted.)
2) The DoD do not care that there is spyware in Windows 10, because Microsoft shares all the data with them anyway.
3) This deal was made behind closed doors months or years before Windows 10 was production ready, and as a result, nobody dared to check if Windows 10 would actually be a good product for the DoD.
I have noticed that Comcast in the DC area has done the opposite: they are now doing DPI to detect BitTorrent downloads of copyrighted materials and using HTML/ HTTP injections to serve notices.
Scary stuff. Would forcing your torrent client to transmit with encryption prevent Comcast from finding out what you're doing?
I'm glad to see progress on ReactOS. Good job!
I'm a certified hater of Firefox, but I'd like to hear what Mozilla has to say about this. Firefox's security is reviewed by not only their security team, but also Debian, the Tor Project, Red Hat, and many others. I have a hard time believing the situation is really so bad.
I'm pretty sure if you recorded to connections from your MAC or Linux desktop, and didn't filter out normal expected traffic, you'd be APPALLED at the tracking taking place. connections do not equal tracking.
Since my OS is open source, I can see exactly what information is being sent out. However, Microsoft does not disclose what information is being sent to 107 of the domains that Win10 contacts, nor do they explain why all of those domains are contacted even when you manually configure Win10 not to.
I'm not quite sure why you broke out into an inane babbling rant, but the rebuttal article on ZDNet is failed apologism because even the author admits he has no idea what information Microsoft is collecting. He's assuming (because he trusts MS, you see) that the data is anonymized and only used for this or that, but notice how many times he says "possibly", "could", etc.? It's all speculation.
You can't even listen to music on OS X or iPhone without the software contacting Apple.
I'm quite tired of this nonsense rebuttal. When you use an Apple application, it contacts Apple's servers to see if there are updates available--you can turn that off as well. In contrast, when do you even the most mundane things in Win10 (with the telemetry turned off, mind you), the OS contacts over 100 different domains: https://github.com/WindowsLies...
Why the fuck does Win10 contact telemetry.appex.bing.net, ad.doubleclick.net, and watson.live.com whenever you open the fucking Notepad?
They gave away at least a few billion dollars' worth of revenue when they gave away Windows 10 for free. So the kind of telemetry they are collecting is at least worth a few billion dollars. Anyone who says different is lying. There is no free lunch.
I would like to augment your point by commenting that Microsoft isn't just *giving* Win10 away, they're *foisting* it as hard as it can, likely breaking quite a few laws in the process.
So that means the profit they're expected to make off of people running Win10 must vastly exceed the cost of making Win10, AND the cost of fighting off all the lawsuits in the process of ramming Win10 onto peoples' computers. One could argue that perhaps they're expecting all that profit to come from people being exposed to the built-in advertisements and the Windows Store, or people so pleased with the OS that they run out and buy a Surface/Xbox/WinPhone, but does anybody really believe that?
Well, if I were some corporation with extremely valuable trade secrets, or some government with information that would endanger lives if leaked, and I just deployed Windows 10 and found out that it's a gigantic spying beacon for Microsoft, I would indeed panic.
Remember, Microsoft and their shills have been crying that all of the telemetry can be turned off in Windows 10 Enterprise edition (the edition that said corporations & governments would be deploying), but that was proved completely false.
Sure, traffic is probably encrypted, but since your system is encrypting it, surely there's a way to discover the keys and find out exactly what data is being sent.
I personally don't have either the time nor the kernel hacking skills to pull it off, but I'm sure somebody could.
Your system encrypts it with Microsoft's public key before it is send out. Microsoft accepts the information and decrypts it with their private key.
If you could know what the OS was doing with the info before it is encrypted, you could find out what's being sent out; but (to my knowledge) that's impossible to know.
Apparently it's some apologism for Windows 10, but an unbelievably poor one. "Oh no, no no! Please don't panic because Windows phones home to over 100 different servers even when you turn the telemetry off. It's probably, eh... nobody's quite sure, but I'm sure everything will be okay!"
You think the accountants and legal teams in Apple, IBM, Google, Red Hat, etc. are using Windows?
Maybe not the ones at Apple, but I totally believe the accountants and lawyers at the rest of them are using Windows. Maybe some MacOS too, but they're sure as shit not using Linux distros for their Desktop applications.
Would you care to bet your life on that?
We haven't had a free market in operating systems in over 25 years, which is about the time frame that Bill Gates forced computer manufacturers to put only Windows on computers.
My favorite part of the article was when the writer said that it was unclear why Russia wouldn't want Windows on government computers. I almost laughed out loud. The writer actually phrased it in such a way as to imply that Russia would somehow be inflicting harm on itself by kicking Windows out.
Really? Bill Gates hold your family hostage so you couldn't build your own PC and load Linux or go out and buy a Mac? People have always had alternatives, they are just not as simple or cheap as buying the "Black Friday Special" at your local big box electronics store.
It's possible to have an unfree market without having a gun pointed to your head.
For Putin's government, I would say an OS designed to serve Putin's interest is probably a better alternative for Putin - and that's what we're discussing.
No, the grand parent stated: Hopefully Russian computer scientists will focus on either making ReactOS a usable replacement (better for us in the West trying to dump Windows)
So a Putin sponsored ReactOS is declared as a better option for the West to move to from Windows. It is absurd, and it was duly and accurately called out as stupidity. Stupidty that got rated +5 insightfull no less.
ReactOS is open source. If Russia contributes to it, it helps everybody in the world that can access the source. The fact that it helps Putin does not mean it cannot help other people.
Of course, if Putin wanted to, the Russian government could make a closed-source fork of ReactOS, but that's obviously not what I was hoping for--hence why I started the statement with "hopefully".
I'm actually surprised more companies aren't actively wondering just how much Microsoft and others can be controlled by the US government.
It's probably because if you're a big enough player, Microsoft will let you go over any and all of the source code that it has. So if your people can't find an NSA backdoor in the Windows source, your people probably aren't going find one in any other OS's source.
Source code is meaningless if you don't compile the binaries yourself. AFAIK Microsoft has never allowed anybody to do so.
And what state would that be?
So the government can't switch away from Windows, because they need to be interoperable... with themselves? Well, that does seem like government logic, indeed. I'm so glad I pay taxes so that these virtuous and profoundly intelligent people can watch over my safety.
I'm not quite sure what is more ignorant here, not grasping the value of dozens of government agencies needing to be interoperable with themselves, or your complete lack of understanding just who the hell uses Windows on this planet, as if the majority of companies today are running fucking BSD or some shit.
A government can impose interoperability by mandating use of a single OS.
You're of course obviously right that Windows is the dominant desktop OS on the planet, but you're quite wrong if you think the average pleb is incapable of using a *nix. You think the accountants and legal teams in Apple, IBM, Google, Red Hat, etc. are using Windows?