The government may have the resources to break strong encryption in real time, but even the largest ISP's do not. So maybe now the FreeS/WAN project no longer sound like tinfoil-hatted paranoiacs when they push opportunistic encryption at every node. Everything gets encrypted automatically and transparently when talking between two OE nodes, regardless of the protocol.
This was their goal, but hostility and forking ensued when most people really wanted to just have an IPsec implementation on Linux. OE is still a good idea, though, and that's what they're focusing on now.
The obvious design win would be if Linksys and Netgear built OE into their consumer grade firewall/routers. Then everyone would have it, not even know it, and when large site operators started deploying it on their network edges, massive amounts of crypto would start traversing the Internet, and no one would be bothered by it.
That's really the key to good system design: add complexity, but don't bother the end user -- it's not his problem.
Where before, ISO standardization was a fair and democratic process that usually resulted in international standards that made industries run smoothly and on an open level field... thanks to the actions of Microsoft, ISO standardization is now a process that can, with sufficient resources, be outright bought in order to protect and extend an international monopoly for years to come.
There's a word to describe the activity of making that kind of change. Microsoft uses this word to describe itself all the time.
Linux has evolved past the "you have to tinker with it to make it work" stage. Toss in an Ubuntu CD and you have a system so easy, so usable, so reliable, so superior to Windows that the only thing the incumbents have on their side is the momentum behind their incumbency.
It's easy to use. It gets its job done without calling to attention to itself.
But... we can rest assured that the power of a full blown unix system is under the hood -- when we need it.
Ok,so IPv6 works and is usable. Now what? None of the major web properties are yet on IPv6, nor are any of the major carrier networks that the users are connected to. The problem is that there is not yet any business case for anyone to be the first to migrate. It generates no revenue. Until there is an actual motive to move to IPv6, it's only interesting to geeks.
Hopefully, when the supply of IPv4 addresses runs out (in a little over two years), there will be a Chinese fire drill for everyone to migrate to IPv6 quickly. If this does not happen, things will get ugly. Address space will be bought and sold on the black market, ugly hacks will go into place to conserve space... it will really be a bad scene.
Sun still has an on-again, off-again relationship with open source. If they truly want to show that they are committed to open source, they would release ZFS under the GPL so that it can be integrated into Linux.
90%+ of average consumers don't have any clue whatsoever what "VHS" stands for, and couldn't care less.
And those who do, probably think it stands for "Video Home System" -- a backronym created by a bunch of marketing types.
An even smaller percentage know that it actually stands for "Vertical Helical Scan," a technical acronym which describes the physical tape format and transport.
I would like to use OpenID as a "single sign on" solution for a wide range of services. The problem I see right now is that it's only viable for web based services. Does the OpenID technology have a way (or is planning one) to authenticate when the client is something other than a web browser? I'm thinking things like IMAP/SMTP mail, console mode login (ssh/telnet), etc. etc.
No, he actually claims to be a part of the open source community. He works for Ximian (who call themselves "Novell" these days). But I wouldn't be surprised if he was secretly on the Microsoft payroll, because he has a long history of deliberately creating problems for us. He is basically the person responsible for creating the GNOME/KDE schism, singlehandedly setting the Linux desktop back by years while we developed two parallel frameworks and then a third framework for integrating them together. Then he started the Mono project, bringing.NET to Linux and helping Microsoft along in its efforts to damage Java. The Mono project, of course, is now a big proponent of Silverlight. Miguel is even on record telling the world that Microsoft OOXML is a "superb standard."
With people like that among us, we can self-destruct without any help from Ballmer.
Do you think MS will make a Siverlight for Linux? Most likely it will have to be done by Mono project and no doubt it will not be 100%
Well known Microsoft supporter Miguel de Icaza is already several steps ahead of you. The Moonlight project is exactly that. And no, I will not install it.
Keep in mind that Yahoo can deliver unlimited bandwidth much cheaper than a hosting company can. You have to keep in mind that Yahoo has an expansive network and they are doing settlement-free peering with all of the Tier 1 ISP's, as well as anyone else who happens to be hooked up to a common peering point. Hell, even at our regional hosting center we're connected to a peering point and we peer directly with Yahoo, bypassing the Internet.
The point is that all that bandwidth doesn't cost Yahoo nearly as much as a traditional hosting provider would have to pay for it.
Linux is bigger than Linus, and he's perfectly willing to admit that. FOSS is bigger than Linus Torvalds, or Richard Stallman, or any of the other luminaries whose names we hear bandied about from time to time. It's bigger than any of us, and that's the way it should be.
Linus never claimed to be the standard-bearer of a new era of computing. He never claimed to be the successor to Richard Stallman (or to Bill Gates, for that matter). He never claimed to be the chief architect of an open source operating system. He's a kernel developer. And a damn good one, too -- but at the end of the day, that's all he is, and all he claims to be. And he's fine with that.
And he knows that the job of a good piece of software is to get its job done without calling attention to itself. Linux does that admirably. It is unfortunately a lesson that Microsoft will never learn.
The OSS version of Zimbra is just that, Open Source. Whatever happens there should be no change in that status.
Unfortunately it's not true open source, as it has an obnoxious "badgeware" clause.
Zimbra users already seem to be sending out some feelers -- over at the Citadel project we've had quite a surge of new interest from people who are either bailing out of Zimbra or simply evaluating what other options they might have when Microsoft shuts them down. Citadel is end-to-end GPL code so it is a true safety net.
Don't forget they also own Zimbra, an OSS Outlook/Exchange competitor
Zimbra was never really an open source player to begin with. They have an open source crippleware version, partially for street cred and partially so they could help themselves to the postfix/mysql/cyrus underpinnings upon which they built their product.
Anyone who has deployed Zimbra knows that if you want the product to actually be useful you have to buy the closed-source "Network Edition." This is precisely what Microsoft would shut down. Microsoft is eager to kill Exchange competitors. They've done it before -- look at how they immediately shut down the now-defunct Hula project once they began pulling the strings at Novell.
If you want open source email and groupware, you should deploy open source email and groupware. The prime contender in this space right now is Citadel, which is 100 percent GPL. End to end. No exceptions, no tiers, no strings, no gimmicks. Similar in spirit to the Ubuntu Linux distribution, the project's very best work is made available to everyone on the same terms.
The push for ethanol is part of this whole green wacko thing, and as with most of the other plans currently being implemented, will eventually hurt us. The demand for crops to fuel ethanol manufacturing is already driving up the price of food. Now we have to compete with our cars for food! What good is it to be able to drive cheaply to the store if you can't afford to buy any food once you get there?
Listen, I don't mean to be rude here, but your question makes the assumption that you have the skill set to hold a manager level position. Have you considered that perhaps the reason you have been passed over for management positions is because those above you have considered it, but determined that your skill set is better suited to rank-and-file work? Not everyone is cut out for management, and it's a bad idea to automatically promote someone to management simply because of seniority. It requires a specific set of skills, and if you don't have those skills you can make your entire team perform poorly.
Think of how many times you call a company these days, and your call is routed (or possibly handled entirely) by voice recognition software. It is DEFINITELY in demand. People want it. It's just not down to the PC yet.
Actually, that's a perfect example. I hate those systems. I'd rather just press a key on the phone.
Offices full of people talking to their computers has been Bill Gates' wet dream for decades now. What will happen if open source gets there first?
Actually, the reason we're not there yet is because most people don't want it. Keyboards and mice are simply a better way to give instructions to your computer than speech recognition is. Could you imagine the clatter of a dozen or more people in close proximity chattering to their computers?
Since we handle email and IM within the same server framework, it shouldn't be too difficult to route IM's coming from a remote network through the existing spam filters.
Slashdot Mirror
The government may have the resources to break strong encryption in real time, but even the largest ISP's do not. So maybe now the FreeS/WAN project no longer sound like tinfoil-hatted paranoiacs when they push opportunistic encryption at every node. Everything gets encrypted automatically and transparently when talking between two OE nodes, regardless of the protocol.
This was their goal, but hostility and forking ensued when most people really wanted to just have an IPsec implementation on Linux. OE is still a good idea, though, and that's what they're focusing on now.
The obvious design win would be if Linksys and Netgear built OE into their consumer grade firewall/routers. Then everyone would have it, not even know it, and when large site operators started deploying it on their network edges, massive amounts of crypto would start traversing the Internet, and no one would be bothered by it.
That's really the key to good system design: add complexity, but don't bother the end user -- it's not his problem.
Nicely summarized. I've also seen it written as a single line: "VB makes the first 90% easy by making the last 10% impossible."
Where before, ISO standardization was a fair and democratic process that usually resulted in international standards that made industries run smoothly and on an open level field ... thanks to the actions of Microsoft, ISO standardization is now a process that can, with sufficient resources, be outright bought in order to protect and extend an international monopoly for years to come.
There's a word to describe the activity of making that kind of change. Microsoft uses this word to describe itself all the time.
The word is: innovation.
You seem to think that big wireless providers like Verizon will be open and well-behaved, simply because they are required to.
How naive.
Linux has evolved past the "you have to tinker with it to make it work" stage. Toss in an Ubuntu CD and you have a system so easy, so usable, so reliable, so superior to Windows that the only thing the incumbents have on their side is the momentum behind their incumbency.
It's easy to use. It gets its job done without calling to attention to itself.
But ... we can rest assured that the power of a full blown unix system is under the hood -- when we need it.
Ok,so IPv6 works and is usable. Now what? None of the major web properties are yet on IPv6, nor are any of the major carrier networks that the users are connected to. The problem is that there is not yet any business case for anyone to be the first to migrate. It generates no revenue. Until there is an actual motive to move to IPv6, it's only interesting to geeks.
... it will really be a bad scene.
Hopefully, when the supply of IPv4 addresses runs out (in a little over two years), there will be a Chinese fire drill for everyone to migrate to IPv6 quickly. If this does not happen, things will get ugly. Address space will be bought and sold on the black market, ugly hacks will go into place to conserve space
Sun still has an on-again, off-again relationship with open source. If they truly want to show that they are committed to open source, they would release ZFS under the GPL so that it can be integrated into Linux.
Microsoft has proven time and time again that they don't have the discipline to do a properly layered operating system.
When they had OS/2 available to them, they switched back to DOS and stuffed everything into Win16.
Then when they had the original NT microkernel available to them, they stuffed everything into the Win32 layer, where it didn't belong.
Do you really believe Microsoft when they say, again, "This time we're going to design it properly" ??
Only roaches, rats, and Steve Ballmer will live...
An even smaller percentage know that it actually stands for "Vertical Helical Scan," a technical acronym which describes the physical tape format and transport.
I would like to use OpenID as a "single sign on" solution for a wide range of services. The problem I see right now is that it's only viable for web based services. Does the OpenID technology have a way (or is planning one) to authenticate when the client is something other than a web browser? I'm thinking things like IMAP/SMTP mail, console mode login (ssh/telnet), etc. etc.
With people like that among us, we can self-destruct without any help from Ballmer.
Keep in mind that Yahoo can deliver unlimited bandwidth much cheaper than a hosting company can. You have to keep in mind that Yahoo has an expansive network and they are doing settlement-free peering with all of the Tier 1 ISP's, as well as anyone else who happens to be hooked up to a common peering point. Hell, even at our regional hosting center we're connected to a peering point and we peer directly with Yahoo, bypassing the Internet.
The point is that all that bandwidth doesn't cost Yahoo nearly as much as a traditional hosting provider would have to pay for it.
Linux is bigger than Linus, and he's perfectly willing to admit that. FOSS is bigger than Linus Torvalds, or Richard Stallman, or any of the other luminaries whose names we hear bandied about from time to time. It's bigger than any of us, and that's the way it should be.
Linus never claimed to be the standard-bearer of a new era of computing. He never claimed to be the successor to Richard Stallman (or to Bill Gates, for that matter). He never claimed to be the chief architect of an open source operating system. He's a kernel developer. And a damn good one, too -- but at the end of the day, that's all he is, and all he claims to be. And he's fine with that.
And he knows that the job of a good piece of software is to get its job done without calling attention to itself. Linux does that admirably. It is unfortunately a lesson that Microsoft will never learn.
Zimbra users already seem to be sending out some feelers -- over at the Citadel project we've had quite a surge of new interest from people who are either bailing out of Zimbra or simply evaluating what other options they might have when Microsoft shuts them down. Citadel is end-to-end GPL code so it is a true safety net.
Anyone who has deployed Zimbra knows that if you want the product to actually be useful you have to buy the closed-source "Network Edition." This is precisely what Microsoft would shut down. Microsoft is eager to kill Exchange competitors. They've done it before -- look at how they immediately shut down the now-defunct Hula project once they began pulling the strings at Novell.
If you want open source email and groupware, you should deploy open source email and groupware. The prime contender in this space right now is Citadel, which is 100 percent GPL. End to end. No exceptions, no tiers, no strings, no gimmicks. Similar in spirit to the Ubuntu Linux distribution, the project's very best work is made available to everyone on the same terms.
The push for ethanol is part of this whole green wacko thing, and as with most of the other plans currently being implemented, will eventually hurt us. The demand for crops to fuel ethanol manufacturing is already driving up the price of food. Now we have to compete with our cars for food! What good is it to be able to drive cheaply to the store if you can't afford to buy any food once you get there?
Listen, I don't mean to be rude here, but your question makes the assumption that you have the skill set to hold a manager level position. Have you considered that perhaps the reason you have been passed over for management positions is because those above you have considered it, but determined that your skill set is better suited to rank-and-file work? Not everyone is cut out for management, and it's a bad idea to automatically promote someone to management simply because of seniority. It requires a specific set of skills, and if you don't have those skills you can make your entire team perform poorly.
Offices full of people talking to their computers has been Bill Gates' wet dream for decades now. What will happen if open source gets there first?
Actually, the reason we're not there yet is because most people don't want it. Keyboards and mice are simply a better way to give instructions to your computer than speech recognition is. Could you imagine the clatter of a dozen or more people in close proximity chattering to their computers?