While DES is low security (only 56 bits), this chip allows you to change keys very fast, so Triple-DES (encrypt with one key, decrypt with a second, and reencrypt with the first or a third, depending) is possible.
What do you mean? A message gets encrypted and then cyphertext gets encrypted two mre times?
In any case, I don't really see the point of having these complecated symmetric algorithms. Consider this one:
Two boxes, say a sender and a receiver, each have a pair of RSA keys (pulic & private). To send something, a client makes up a string of random garbage (say 1024 bits in length) and encrypts outgoing data with it (so, in effect this is the key). The receiver decrypts the incoming data using the same string. RSA encryption is used to exchange the actual keys.
This encryption would be virtually bullet-proof. And very fast too, since it is a very simple algorithm. This makes me wonder why DES and other algorithms are even used...
Isn't DES a symmetric encryption? I remember seeing a table that listed different encryption algorithms. The only two asymmetric algorithms were RSA and some other which deals with elliptic curves. If DES is indeed symmetric, using it would kind of pointless. Can somebody clarify?
You all know that ID, and John Carmack in particular, is a large supporter of OSS. Nevertheless they keep their games proprietary. Why? Well, simple. IMHO, OSS and games don't mix.
Allow me to elaborate. OSS model works very well for software that can be maintained and improved *over time* by different people. An operating system and lots of utilities fall under this category. However, games are generally played for a (relatively) short time and then abandoned in favour of newer games. For example, ID released Doom code, but how many people are gonna play it now that Q1 and Q2 are out and Q3 is on its way?
With OSS, you give away the software for free and make money on support. Works great for operating systems. Doesn't work at all for games.
As for the game engine being free and the art & design proprietary - that's a valid point. But consider this: ID has sold Q1 and Q2 game engines to several other companies which then developed their own 3d shooters based on ID's engine. Do you think they'd be able to make money by selling the game engine had it been OSS? How many companies need support to go with it?
Wow! I didn't realize that Mindcraft tested the box with *four* 100Mb/s network cards. Unless my math is wrong, it's equivalent to almost 9 (*nine*) T3 pipes! Now, I'm no expert on the subject but what kind of a web site serves static pages over 9 T3 lines???
Thanks to C't for some more meaningful benchmarks. Oh, and don't even get me started on the reliability issue...
There is one more thing I wanted to see texted. I know that CGI on NT sucks badly, probably a way for Microsoft to promote ASP. Now how about some perl vs ASP benchmarks or something to that effect? They do mention in the article that the two are fundamentally different which makes the comparison meaningless. Can somebody comment on the subject? What about ASP vs. PHP?
Has anyone performed Linux vs. NT benchmarks with dynamic content? Many have said that it is much closer to real world. Now how about some numbers?
Re:RMS Never tried to run a company
on
RMS Responds
·
· Score: 1
Nevertheless, the money you get from selling free software is still a donation. No matter how you want to think about it, you are getting a donation whenever you "sell" something. It's not a particularly good business model for any company to get all the income from donations, unless it is a non-profit organization like FSF. I know, the counter-argument is that you can sell support, manuals, etc. but then 1) anybody else can do it, regardless of whether they are contributed code to the project or not, and 2) the people who have contributed code do not get paid. At least not directly. If the company pays them to write free software, then they get their salary from the support money.
This is pure FUD, albeit pro Linux FUD, it is FUD nonetheless. A more accurate statement may have been Linux doesn't crash near as often.
Well, I agree with you there, but consider this: my server (a Debian box) never crashed *at all*. And I mean *never*. My workstation did crash a couple of times -- but that was my own fault, I screwd up several things.
Very nice GUI. Definitely much more easier for beginners. The best thing about it is definitely the background installation!!! An excelent way to cut down on time required for installation. Besides, isn't multi-tasking what Linux is great at?;-) However, as others have pointed out, it requires X to work in order to install the system. This is not a big problem, since all video cards should work fine in VGA mode. But it does have a serious implication: it requires you to install X. Compare it to SuSE's YaST: it's a full-blown text mode install/admin tool, and thus it preserves the flexibility of not installing X. This is especially important since Caldera is targeting the server market. My server (a headless Debian box) doesn't have X installed. in fact the entire Linux installation fits in 90 Mb. I hope that in the future GUI admin tools will supplement, but not replace text-mode admin tools.
I'm running SuSE 6.1. I am generally satisfied with the distribution. It does indeed work much better then RedHat. Or rather, unlike RedHat, it actually works (whichever way you prefer...). From what I understand, the primary difference between SuSE 5.x and 6.x is that 6.x are glibc2-based, and 6.1 comes with kernel 2.2.5. That is not to say that SuSE is perfect. It does have some glitches. But my biggest complaint is that their tech support is non-existant. I tried to call them and every time I get an answering machine. I emailed them and have been waiting for response for 3 over weeks already.
I seem to remember that the famous halloween documents said M$ would use its marketing machine to try to deface Linux in particular and Open Source movement in general. More specifically, the documents said M$ would first run a few articles where they'd let Linux win, but then (and this is the key): ** the closer to release of win2k the more FUD about Linux **. Notice how this article talks about win2k...
Have you guys forgotten the Halloween Documents already???
The problem is *not* that they use a single OS, but that they use a *single-user* OS. Ever since I started using Linux, the concept of single-user OS seems totaly stupid to me, esp. in a company or government agency. It's kinda like running every single application as root. The key to defeating viruses is not in limiting the percentage of machines running a particular OS, but in limiting user's permissions. Not only is it an excelent way to get rid of any virus problem, but also a great way to prevent stupid users from doing stupid thing, subsequently cutting on support costs. This is guaranteed to solve 90% of the problems, and frequent backup will solve the remaining 10%.
I haven't heard of any Linux viruses, btw... I know there are troyans, but they are harmless unless ran by root.
Am I missing something or does NT4 really include IP masq? Didn't they say it will only be available in win2000?
Also, did anyone else notice that they were comparing Linux to NT4, win98 and (yet unreleased) win2000 at the same time? Win98 supports pnp better and NT4 supports RAID better... They didn't make clear *which* OS they were talking about. Last I checked NT didn't support USB, couldn't read FAT32, and had no pnp or power management support whatsoever.
As a former RedHat user, I can say with certainty that not only do they make shitty distributions, but also manage to convince everyone that Linux = RedHat. I totally agree with the article. We must put an end to it!
(Oh, and btw, great job SuSE and Debian -- I love them both!)
uh-huh. whatever. not from my experience. RedShit's Disk Druid killed my partition table *twice*. I've tried 5.0 (an alpha quality distro), 5.1, 5.2 and (briefly) 6.0. They all have been extremely misconfigured. OK, 6.0 is a bit better at it but I don't give a fuck -- I found two distributions that work: SuSE, I run it on my workstation, and Debian, I run it on my server.
GPL is not the answer to everything. It works better then other licences in some cases but fails in others. So Corel want to keep their apps private and there's nothing wrong with that. After all you can't force somebody to GPL their products just because you feel like it. I am willing to pay for them if they prove to be good. (And just to reiterate -- the current WP8 for Linux doesn't even come close to being a good app.)
You should give it a try some time. The damn thing kept screwing up and crashing. Took me the whole day to install this POS. For that matter even win95/98 is far from perfect. SuSE on the other hand installed smoothly and detected my hardware properly. You just can't compare the two.
Slashdot Mirror
While DES is low security (only 56 bits), this chip allows you to change keys very fast, so Triple-DES (encrypt with one key, decrypt with a second, and reencrypt with the first or a third, depending) is possible.
What do you mean? A message gets encrypted and then cyphertext gets encrypted two mre times?
In any case, I don't really see the point of having these complecated symmetric algorithms. Consider this one:
Two boxes, say a sender and a receiver, each have a pair of RSA keys (pulic & private). To send something, a client makes up a string of random garbage (say 1024 bits in length) and encrypts outgoing data with it (so, in effect this is the key). The receiver decrypts the incoming data using the same string. RSA encryption is used to exchange the actual keys.
This encryption would be virtually bullet-proof. And very fast too, since it is a very simple algorithm. This makes me wonder why DES and other algorithms are even used...
Isn't DES a symmetric encryption? I remember seeing a table that listed different encryption algorithms. The only two asymmetric algorithms were RSA and some other which deals with elliptic curves.
If DES is indeed symmetric, using it would kind of pointless. Can somebody clarify?
You all know that ID, and John Carmack in particular, is a large supporter of OSS. Nevertheless they keep their games proprietary. Why? Well, simple. IMHO, OSS and games don't mix.
Allow me to elaborate. OSS model works very well for software that can be maintained and improved *over time* by different people. An operating system and lots of utilities fall under this category. However, games are generally played for a (relatively) short time and then abandoned in favour of newer games. For example, ID released Doom code, but how many people are gonna play it now that Q1 and Q2 are out and Q3 is on its way?
With OSS, you give away the software for free and make money on support. Works great for operating systems. Doesn't work at all for games.
As for the game engine being free and the art & design proprietary - that's a valid point. But consider this: ID has sold Q1 and Q2 game engines to several other companies which then developed their own 3d shooters based on ID's engine. Do you think they'd be able to make money by selling the game engine had it been OSS? How many companies need support to go with it?
uhhh, last I checked NT didn't include any defrag utilities... The third-party utilities are available but nothing from Microsoft...
Wow! I didn't realize that Mindcraft tested the box with *four* 100Mb/s network cards. Unless my math is wrong, it's equivalent to almost 9 (*nine*) T3 pipes! Now, I'm no expert on the subject but what kind of a web site serves static pages over 9 T3 lines???
Thanks to C't for some more meaningful benchmarks. Oh, and don't even get me started on the reliability issue...
There is one more thing I wanted to see texted. I know that CGI on NT sucks badly, probably a way for Microsoft to promote ASP. Now how about some perl vs ASP benchmarks or something to that effect? They do mention in the article that the two are fundamentally different which makes the comparison meaningless. Can somebody comment on the subject? What about ASP vs. PHP?
where can I find it?
Has anyone performed Linux vs. NT benchmarks with dynamic content? Many have said that it is much closer to real world. Now how about some numbers?
Nevertheless, the money you get from selling free software is still a donation. No matter how you want to think about it, you are getting a donation whenever you "sell" something. It's not a particularly good business model for any company to get all the income from donations, unless it is a non-profit organization like FSF.
I know, the counter-argument is that you can sell support, manuals, etc. but then
1) anybody else can do it, regardless of whether they are contributed code to the project or not, and
2) the people who have contributed code do not get paid. At least not directly. If the company pays them to write free software, then they get their salary from the support money.
Well, I agree with you there, but consider this: my server (a Debian box) never crashed *at all*. And I mean *never*. My workstation did crash a couple of times -- but that was my own fault, I screwd up several things.
Very nice GUI. Definitely much more easier for beginners. The best thing about it is definitely the background installation!!! An excelent way to cut down on time required for installation. Besides, isn't multi-tasking what Linux is great at? ;-)
However, as others have pointed out, it requires X to work in order to install the system. This is not a big problem, since all video cards should work fine in VGA mode. But it does have a serious implication: it requires you to install X. Compare it to SuSE's YaST: it's a full-blown text mode install/admin tool, and thus it preserves the flexibility of not installing X. This is especially important since Caldera is targeting the server market. My server (a headless Debian box) doesn't have X installed. in fact the entire Linux installation fits in 90 Mb. I hope that in the future GUI admin tools will supplement, but not replace text-mode admin tools.
big oops. esp. if someone has > 8 gig HD.
don't worry. The difference is pretty obvious. Linux works. Linux doesn't crash. Linux is being worked on and improved as I'm typing it.
I'm wondering when the new KDE will be released, now that QT is out. Also, what new features will it have?
I'm running SuSE 6.1.
I am generally satisfied with the distribution. It does indeed work much better then RedHat. Or rather, unlike RedHat, it actually works (whichever way you prefer...). From what I understand, the primary difference between SuSE 5.x and 6.x is that 6.x are glibc2-based, and 6.1 comes with kernel 2.2.5.
That is not to say that SuSE is perfect. It does have some glitches. But my biggest complaint is that their tech support is non-existant. I tried to call them and every time I get an answering machine. I emailed them and have been waiting for response for 3 over weeks already.
I seem to remember that the famous halloween documents said M$ would use its marketing machine to try to deface Linux in particular and Open Source movement in general. More specifically, the documents said M$ would first run a few articles where they'd let Linux win, but then (and this is the key): ** the closer to release of win2k the more FUD about Linux **. Notice how this article talks about win2k...
Have you guys forgotten the Halloween Documents already???
Pardon my ignorance, but what exactly is it? I know it's a network management software of some sort but beyond that I'm clueless.
The problem is *not* that they use a single OS, but that they use a *single-user* OS. Ever since I started using Linux, the concept of single-user OS seems totaly stupid to me, esp. in a company or government agency. It's kinda like running every single application as root.
The key to defeating viruses is not in limiting the percentage of machines running a particular OS, but in limiting user's permissions. Not only is it an excelent way to get rid of any virus problem, but also a great way to prevent stupid users from doing stupid thing, subsequently cutting on support costs.
This is guaranteed to solve 90% of the problems, and frequent backup will solve the remaining 10%.
I haven't heard of any Linux viruses, btw... I know there are troyans, but they are harmless unless ran by root.
was he serious or sarcastic???
My guess is he actually was serious, since he is the same guy who claimed he created the internet...
IBM's assault on Micro$oft is not just limited to supporting Linux. IBM is testifying against M$ on the DOJ trial. Methinks M$ is in Deep Shit...
Am I missing something or does NT4 really include IP masq? Didn't they say it will only be available in win2000?
Also, did anyone else notice that they were comparing Linux to NT4, win98 and (yet unreleased) win2000 at the same time? Win98 supports pnp better and NT4 supports RAID better...
They didn't make clear *which* OS they were talking about. Last I checked NT didn't support USB, couldn't read FAT32, and had no pnp or power management support whatsoever.
As a former RedHat user, I can say with certainty that not only do they make shitty distributions, but also manage to convince everyone that Linux = RedHat. I totally agree with the article. We must put an end to it!
(Oh, and btw, great job SuSE and Debian -- I love them both!)
uh-huh. whatever. not from my experience. RedShit's Disk Druid killed my partition table *twice*. I've tried 5.0 (an alpha quality distro), 5.1, 5.2 and (briefly) 6.0. They all have been extremely misconfigured. OK, 6.0 is a bit better at it but I don't give a fuck -- I found two distributions that work: SuSE, I run it on my workstation, and Debian, I run it on my server.
piss off
GPL is not the answer to everything. It works better then other licences in some cases but fails in others. So Corel want to keep their apps private and there's nothing wrong with that. After all you can't force somebody to GPL their products just because you feel like it. I am willing to pay for them if they prove to be good. (And just to reiterate -- the current WP8 for Linux doesn't even come close to being a good app.)
You should give it a try some time. The damn thing kept screwing up and crashing. Took me the whole day to install this POS. For that matter even win95/98 is far from perfect. SuSE on the other hand installed smoothly and detected my hardware properly. You just can't compare the two.
Stop whining Taco. I'm pretty satisfied with the cable. I get speeds upwards of 100k/s and that's enough to surf the web and play Q2 with no lag.