Re:RIP Linux - '1984' achieved through stealth
on
SSSCA Editorials
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
Courtney Love on Piracy has a lot relevant to this Disney dream of 'content control'
*I can forsee that the SSSCA will be applied so that ISPs are forbidden from accepting connections from non-'trusted' client computers.
Why not, China is leading the way with Red Flag Linux designed to tie into the Great Firewall of China...
*'Trusted' computers would contain hardware-based digital certificates, so it would be easy for the ISP to determine if an open-source computer is trying to connect.
no, if the certificate is hardware based, there is no stopping the open system from using the hardware certificate.
*That's Linux gone in one fell swoop.
Next, the SSSCA will wipe out all independent software developers - 'trusted' OSs simply won't run software that doesn't have a digital license.
This would be like windows Xp not running Java, it would make use of alerts and other FUD that can be put into the OS.
*Digital licenses will only be available to approved companies, after passing a thorough security examination, and paying a fortune.
Trouble is the licenses would be generated by US export grade crypto, it can be cracked easily and quickly. This will increase trojan apps doing weird stuff.
*On trusted computers, programming tools will only be available to security-certified corporations. Any software written will have to pass an expensive security audit at source-level before being granted a release certificate (which would allow it to run on other people's PCs).
This sounds like MCSE or Sun Java certificates, basically it's a tax that says you're ok. These certificates aren't worth WIPOing your bottom on.
*Media creation tools, such as desktop publishers, audio/video editors etc will produce secure media files that will only be able to play on the computer on which they were created - or, for an extra license fee, up to 5 other designated computers. Licenses to create media for mass distribution will cost a mint, and require security clearance.
We all know about apple delaying quicktime 6 until MPEG 4 gets rid of the restrictive royalties, no publisher or editor will pay a tax to produce content. What was the First Amendment of the US constitution? Something about a free press? Licenses to publish is a communist idea anyway...
*Websites are next. Web browsers will only be able to access certified websites. Webmaster security certification will cost a fortune.
Again, the right to a free press makes this proposal unconstitutional. There is no need to register with the government or corporations to publish information in constitutional law.
*Email too - email clients will vet outgoing email messages through an 'Intellectual Property Clearance Server', which will scan the message's text against a huge database of copyrighted texts. So if an email contains more than a few words that happen to appear in the IP database, it won't get sent. The 'IP Clearance Servers' will also scan for phrases which are too controversial.
There was a 1982 hugo award short story that had this scenario in it, in the end Senator Bob Dole (well over 120) decided he wanted copyrights to finish after a few decades. The problem of the story was that artists had to check everything for clearance from a century ago, new art was dying.
"He loved Big Brother" -- last words of '1984' by George Orwell
"Freedom is the freedom to say that 2 + 2 = 4, when that is granted all else follows." 1984
Most blank CDs are for mixing music you own already, MP3 archives, porn archives (who doesn't backup porn onto secret CDs?) and system backups.
Warez is not worth the hassle of getting or backing up, so why argue in favor of taxes when nobody is losing money from blank discs? Napster and to a smaller extent Gnutella have increased CD sales because you don't have to wait until the record company pays off the radio company to hear new artists.
Actually it is piracy, the companies are forcing the artists of the gangplanks to make room for more profits in the distribution of the artist's works.
Courtney Love had a great article on record companies being the pirates
Consumers already have the right to make copies for backups, show to friends and reference from
The real question is why should people be taxed to backup their computer on CD or DVD if they already have that right and have paid for the products?
I want to know why I should have to pay a tax to make a digital copy of my content, why should I pay to record music I bought or video I produced?
Actually my exgirlfriend's uncle had a chicken farm, he has about 20k chickens laying eggs that are sold cheep at the local supermarket.
The main problem is the antibiotics they feed the barn chickens on. This is responsible for those antibiotic resistant bugs that go around the hospitals.
And consider how you as a consumer like to be feed this artificial crap by Disney in favor of a controlled barnyard information economy.
You already posted Mein Kampf in this topic
on
SSSCA Editorials
·
· Score: 0
Actually you did a better Jew Hating Troll from that Mein Kampf chapter, it looks better when it' s not all bold text on a simple hate subject.
Although I disagree with racism, I would agree that the isreali jews are the troublemakers. (one of my classmates was a israeli commando, he believes isreal is a racist state now.)
and you are seriously wrong, dipshit
on
SSSCA Editorials
·
· Score: 0
Here's from the article: > Can technologists figure out how to replicate the reliability of airplanes, telephones, watches and televisions in future versions of Windows and Linux, so that a mischievous 12-year-old half a world away can't erase a thousand far-flung hard drives?
This is a good question, but the problem is he doesn't understand the complexity of computer systems is greater than appliances. > Absolutely. In January Bill Gates sent a memo to all Microsoft employees declaring a new, overarching, even revolutionary mandate: Software must be reliable and "trustworthy."
The fact he takes the memo seriously is a significant point against his competance in technology issues. It's impossible for that many programmers to get it right regardless of how many billions they can throw at the problem. >This new focus is both welcome and worrisome, because the very steps needed to secure our computers and networks can be the steps that will deaden them to continued innovation and creative uses -- while opening them to more intrusive monitoring by mainstream technology manufacturers and content providers.
This goes completely against the standard microsoft principal of eliminating innovation and creativity while decreasing security and increasing intrusive monitoring and advertising. Don't believe me? Try installing windows XP and count how many times it wants you to sign up for a passport to hell. Try using XP for a day and see how many ads for microsoft services you find in the system. > Mr. Gates and the co-captains of his industry are producing blueprints for so-called "trusted" PC's. They will employ digital gatekeepers that act like the bouncers outside a nightclub, ensuring that only software that looks or behaves a certain way is allowed in. > The result will be more reliable computing -- and more control over the machine by the manufacturer or operating system maker, which essentially gives the bouncer her guest list.
Sure, I guess these are the same reliable certificates of trust that some hacker got issued in microsoft's name? > And as soon as there are limits on the software a PC can run, there will be limits on what PC users can do. That's exactly what executives like Mr. Eisner and Mr. Chernin want. They'd like software and hardware companies to build PC's to allow a publisher an exquisite level of control over a book or a song or a movie in the hands of a consumer.
This contravenes copyright laws in every western nation, basically they argue that a DVD is a software program not a recording. Just because a DVD has weak regional encoding and wimpy content encryption does not make the recording a software product. By this logic, I could record a radio station, encode it as an MP3 and call the MP3 a free software file under the GPL. I don't think they could argue for royalties on public domain information. > Trusted PC users might spend $1.95 for a single viewing of the latest Disney animated feature, or a single viewing of the latest Disney animated feature, or they might pay a similar amount for three listens of U2's most recent single. Security, stability, reliability -- and control.
Why would pay per view work as well on computers as on TV? You don't get security, stability or reliability on a computer like a TV. > Users may buy a trusted PC even if it won't show a digital video lent by a friend, because it will act less like a temperamental computer and more like a crash-free super-VCR -- like the just-released Microsoft X-box. Trust & microsoft in the same sentance? What planet is he on anyway? Will he ever visit earth? > But in the process of "improving" our PC's, the manufacturers and their partners will be able to determine what software will and won't be allowed to run, what we can and can't do with the information to which we're exposed, and what data about our online activities will be collected and sent to the manufacturer or content provider to assist in future marketing.
This is called "Windows", you can't run Java on XP unless you get an older JVM on XP. Passport is now tied into Windows and the product activation sequence sends off everything it knows about you. (It would tell Microsoft marketing what color underwear you're wearing if it could.) > Apart from manufacturers' desire not to define the uses of a PC too narrowly, the public interest in flexible computer platforms and open data exchange remains almost entirely absent from this debate.
In other words, nobody has heard about BSD or Linux commitments to free, flexible and open data. Send a fax or email to your local politician with reasons in favor of flexible systems. > Disney and its cohort are free to view PC's as delivery systems for Mickey Mouse and friends -- and to make their content available through broadband. But it's an entirely different matter to re-engineer the PC so it becomes simply another appliance.
Not really, Sony has the evilla internet appliance. It's nothing to retrofit existing or even obsolete technology like Be OS for content control. > The PC platform and the Internet to which it connects is the engine of the information revolution -- as important to our economy and culture as all the movies in Hollywood.
Actually, it's more important. Computer games alone make more than Hollywood does. Microsoft is the best example of how much money can be made from mediocre software. > A shift from open platforms to closed appliances may be inevitable, as our consumerist desire for trustworthy PC's dovetails with information providers' obsession with control. But we should beware the haste with which some would sacrifice flexibility for control. If we can't at least temper this taming of the chaotic PC, the victims will be competition, innovation and consumer freedom.
It happened when Windows 95 was released, netscape, Be, AOL, Apple, Sun, Oracle are all victims of an anti-competitive monopoly which is hostile to any innovation and cusumer choice.
Offtopic disscussion on metamoderation
on
SSSCA Editorials
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
I had metamoderation here on/. for a week until some moderator decided I was not a member of the/. linux party line. All you need is 0 karma, and few posts which have got positive moderations, especially if you got 2 or more positive moderations in 1 post.
I have only moderated on macslash, but that is only a few months of code behind/. anyway. Metamoderators don't take kindly to the/. party line moderators.I have metamodded down stupid moderations on simple 2 line me too posts.I've metamodded in favor of funny trolls, I've put linux trivia offtopic, I've metamodded up unpopular people and I've metamodded against "informative" moderations which weren't.
Moderation would be better if it didn't end up in the hands of the karma whores and linux zealots. I wouldn't pay to view this site until somebody gets some balance to the karma system.
This is comment 666 for user kiwipeso, karma -3, not willing to recite the karma whore mantra of "free software" as defined by Stallman.
So what if it's slightly offtopic, the topic is dealing with censorship anyway. (moderation is just censorship by the unwashed GNU hippie masses anyway...)
Why the hell does this Haaarvaad Genius* think that we should have some kind of thought police running our computer? I think microsoft has an antitrust trial for doing just that. Who wants this control? The easier it is to use a good, the more people buy it.
Why iss it that you haven't been moderated down by some linux zealot who doesn't like the truth of GNU being told ?
Yes, Stallman did dedicate his life to stealing AT&T crapware under the title GNU. Yes, Mono is stealing crapware from microsoft.
Why would Miguel de Whatever need to steal C# ? Java 1.4 SE and Java Enterprise are better and more widely accepted as a cross platform language. So why should any self respecting linux geek want to support microsoft.NET ? You're only setting yourself up for embrace, extend and extinguish... I suppose this is beyond the foresight of most linux zealots who only see critism of linux to be moderated down...
I know it happened about 6 years ago, I have the clipping somewhere... The US military is stupid, who else would pay more than $10k for a hammer or a toilet seat?
One things for sure, it gives the Blue Screen of Death a whole new meaning...
Although I'm 25, I'm a BSD developer who is no virgin. My ex girlfriend was also called Jolene. But she was a tall blonde with blue eyes and a couple of big tits. [maybe I should have moved up to her town]
Actually it's more like image utilities [the GIMP] for removing any geek girl or celebrity clothing (who here hasn't seen 7 of 9 naked ?) and stuff which is ripped off from some mediocre monopoly. AT&T Unix got GNUd by RMS,.NET has been MONOed and god only knows what other crapware is next...
How this is rated as flamebait or a troll is simply due to the preference for linux zealotry. I think it's time slashdot gets people who aren't virgin linux geeks to moderate. BTW, I'm into open source BSD because GNU won't be any good to make money from.
I've been under surveillance for 2 years now, they actually do look for or even block words like this. I've sent an email like that to the local echelon agency, they got shitty I knew the keywords. I've had emails blocked from the network with words like that, I know what I'm talking about. When you get secret service spying on you, then you are qualified to moderate me. Just don't give me your bad reasons for moderation.
If you intergrate any app into the system, it will appear to run faster. (but the system will be slower) Case in point, that linux web server which runs in the kernel runs faster than Apache, but the kernel runs slower because the server is always running.
I'm currently making a P2P protocol that is capable of letting people have P2P websites. (useful for modem users to serve websites) Bandwidth doubles every 12 months compared to processing doubling every 18 months.
I agree, who is the genius who put in stupid large ads and subscription to/. ? It's not like anyone is dumb enough to pay to see trolls or Katz...
I tought that was an official microsoft goal for Windows, see here. Quote by Marc Andreessen.
Re:'The Economist' is guilty of wishful thinking
on
Andreesen "Grows Up"
·
· Score: 0
What napster did was open up songs to getting heard before the distribution companies paid off radio companies. Napster actually increased sales of CDs by a significant amount just because nobody had to wait for radio to define popularity.
I suppose we should all be watching out if some jackass digs up crap from/. Personally, I think it's ok to post absolute crap on/. , watch porno or go on a Jihad against Bharne. It's your life and other people can get stuffed if they think your personal life has anything to do with your professional life.
Of course there are a lot of boring people, do you think all the linux zealots would be here on/. if they had a job?
This is just a completely gay idea, why does linux have to steal stuff from microsoft to get accepted anyway? Personally, I think RMS is right about this topic (for a change) who needs microsoft crapware to infect linux with even less innovation?
PGP is good enough to save the lives of political dissidents in africa, asia & south america from repressive governments reading their email. There are numerous examples of windows being used in life or death workplaces and failing the user. The US Navy once had to tow a Aircraft Carrier back to harbour just because Windows 95 died. What would happen if the Aircraft Carrier was in a warzone?
Slashdot Mirror
*I can forsee that the SSSCA will be applied so that ISPs are forbidden from accepting connections from non-'trusted' client computers.
Why not, China is leading the way with Red Flag Linux designed to tie into the Great Firewall of China...
*'Trusted' computers would contain hardware-based digital certificates, so it would be easy for the ISP to determine if an open-source computer is trying to connect.
no, if the certificate is hardware based, there is no stopping the open system from using the hardware certificate.
*That's Linux gone in one fell swoop. Next, the SSSCA will wipe out all independent software developers - 'trusted' OSs simply won't run software that doesn't have a digital license.
This would be like windows Xp not running Java, it would make use of alerts and other FUD that can be put into the OS.
*Digital licenses will only be available to approved companies, after passing a thorough security examination, and paying a fortune.
Trouble is the licenses would be generated by US export grade crypto, it can be cracked easily and quickly. This will increase trojan apps doing weird stuff.
*On trusted computers, programming tools will only be available to security-certified corporations. Any software written will have to pass an expensive security audit at source-level before being granted a release certificate (which would allow it to run on other people's PCs).
This sounds like MCSE or Sun Java certificates, basically it's a tax that says you're ok. These certificates aren't worth WIPOing your bottom on.
*Media creation tools, such as desktop publishers, audio/video editors etc will produce secure media files that will only be able to play on the computer on which they were created - or, for an extra license fee, up to 5 other designated computers. Licenses to create media for mass distribution will cost a mint, and require security clearance.
We all know about apple delaying quicktime 6 until MPEG 4 gets rid of the restrictive royalties, no publisher or editor will pay a tax to produce content.
What was the First Amendment of the US constitution? Something about a free press? Licenses to publish is a communist idea anyway...
*Websites are next. Web browsers will only be able to access certified websites. Webmaster security certification will cost a fortune.
Again, the right to a free press makes this proposal unconstitutional. There is no need to register with the government or corporations to publish information in constitutional law.
*Email too - email clients will vet outgoing email messages through an 'Intellectual Property Clearance Server', which will scan the message's text against a huge database of copyrighted texts. So if an email contains more than a few words that happen to appear in the IP database, it won't get sent. The 'IP Clearance Servers' will also scan for phrases which are too controversial.
There was a 1982 hugo award short story that had this scenario in it, in the end Senator Bob Dole (well over 120) decided he wanted copyrights to finish after a few decades.
The problem of the story was that artists had to check everything for clearance from a century ago, new art was dying.
"He loved Big Brother" -- last words of '1984' by George Orwell
"Freedom is the freedom to say that 2 + 2 = 4, when that is granted all else follows." 1984
Most blank CDs are for mixing music you own already, MP3 archives, porn archives (who doesn't backup porn onto secret CDs?) and system backups.
Warez is not worth the hassle of getting or backing up, so why argue in favor of taxes when nobody is losing money from blank discs?
Napster and to a smaller extent Gnutella have increased CD sales because you don't have to wait until the record company pays off the radio company to hear new artists.
Courtney Love had a great article on record companies being the pirates
Consumers already have the right to make copies for backups, show to friends and reference from
The real question is why should people be taxed to backup their computer on CD or DVD if they already have that right and have paid for the products?
I want to know why I should have to pay a tax to make a digital copy of my content, why should I pay to record music I bought or video I produced?
Actually my exgirlfriend's uncle had a chicken farm, he has about 20k chickens laying eggs that are sold cheep at the local supermarket.
The main problem is the antibiotics they feed the barn chickens on. This is responsible for those antibiotic resistant bugs that go around the hospitals.
And consider how you as a consumer like to be feed this artificial crap by Disney in favor of a controlled barnyard information economy.
All you need is the GIMP to make your favorite popstar go nude.
Actually you did a better Jew Hating Troll from that Mein Kampf chapter, it looks better when it' s not all bold text on a simple hate subject.
Although I disagree with racism, I would agree that the isreali jews are the troublemakers.
(one of my classmates was a israeli commando, he believes isreal is a racist state now.)
Here's from the article:
> Can technologists figure out how to replicate the reliability of airplanes, telephones, watches and televisions in future versions of Windows and Linux, so that a mischievous 12-year-old half a world away can't erase a thousand far-flung hard drives?
This is a good question, but the problem is he doesn't understand the complexity of computer systems is greater than appliances.
> Absolutely. In January Bill Gates sent a memo to all Microsoft employees declaring a new, overarching, even revolutionary mandate: Software must be reliable and "trustworthy."
The fact he takes the memo seriously is a significant point against his competance in technology issues. It's impossible for that many programmers to get it right regardless of how many billions they can throw at the problem.
>This new focus is both welcome and worrisome, because the very steps needed to secure our computers and networks can be the steps that will deaden them to continued innovation and creative uses -- while opening them to more intrusive monitoring by mainstream technology manufacturers and content providers.
This goes completely against the standard microsoft principal of eliminating innovation and creativity while decreasing security and increasing intrusive monitoring and advertising.
Don't believe me? Try installing windows XP and count how many times it wants you to sign up for a passport to hell. Try using XP for a day and see how many ads for microsoft services you find in the system.
> Mr. Gates and the co-captains of his industry are producing blueprints for so-called "trusted" PC's. They will employ digital gatekeepers that act like the bouncers outside a nightclub, ensuring that only software that looks or behaves a certain way is allowed in. > The result will be more reliable computing -- and more control over the machine by the manufacturer or operating system maker, which essentially gives the bouncer her guest list.
Sure, I guess these are the same reliable certificates of trust that some hacker got issued in microsoft's name?
> And as soon as there are limits on the software a PC can run, there will be limits on what PC users can do. That's exactly what executives like Mr. Eisner and Mr. Chernin want. They'd like software and hardware companies to build PC's to allow a publisher an exquisite level of control over a book or a song or a movie in the hands of a consumer.
This contravenes copyright laws in every western nation, basically they argue that a DVD is a software program not a recording.
Just because a DVD has weak regional encoding and wimpy content encryption does not make the recording a software product.
By this logic, I could record a radio station, encode it as an MP3 and call the MP3 a free software file under the GPL. I don't think they could argue for royalties on public domain information.
> Trusted PC users might spend $1.95 for a single viewing of the latest Disney animated feature, or a single viewing of the latest Disney animated feature, or they might pay a similar amount for three listens of U2's most recent single. Security, stability, reliability -- and control.
Why would pay per view work as well on computers as on TV? You don't get security, stability or reliability on a computer like a TV.
> Users may buy a trusted PC even if it won't show a digital video lent by a friend, because it will act less like a temperamental computer and more like a crash-free super-VCR -- like the just-released Microsoft X-box.
Trust & microsoft in the same sentance? What planet is he on anyway? Will he ever visit earth?
> But in the process of "improving" our PC's, the manufacturers and their partners will be able to determine what software will and won't be allowed to run, what we can and can't do with the information to which we're exposed, and what data about our online activities will be collected and sent to the manufacturer or content provider to assist in future marketing.
This is called "Windows", you can't run Java on XP unless you get an older JVM on XP. Passport is now tied into Windows and the product activation sequence sends off everything it knows about you.
(It would tell Microsoft marketing what color underwear you're wearing if it could.)
> Apart from manufacturers' desire not to define the uses of a PC too narrowly, the public interest in flexible computer platforms and open data exchange remains almost entirely absent from this debate.
In other words, nobody has heard about BSD or Linux commitments to free, flexible and open data. Send a fax or email to your local politician with reasons in favor of flexible systems.
> Disney and its cohort are free to view PC's as delivery systems for Mickey Mouse and friends -- and to make their content available through broadband. But it's an entirely different matter to re-engineer the PC so it becomes simply another appliance.
Not really, Sony has the evilla internet appliance. It's nothing to retrofit existing or even obsolete technology like Be OS for content control.
> The PC platform and the Internet to which it connects is the engine of the information revolution -- as important to our economy and culture as all the movies in Hollywood.
Actually, it's more important. Computer games alone make more than Hollywood does. Microsoft is the best example of how much money can be made from mediocre software.
> A shift from open platforms to closed appliances may be inevitable, as our consumerist desire for trustworthy PC's dovetails with information providers' obsession with control. But we should beware the haste with which some would sacrifice flexibility for control. If we can't at least temper this taming of the chaotic PC, the victims will be competition, innovation and consumer freedom.
It happened when Windows 95 was released, netscape, Be, AOL, Apple, Sun, Oracle are all victims of an anti-competitive monopoly which is hostile to any innovation and cusumer choice.
I had metamoderation here on /. for a week until some moderator decided I was not a member of the /. linux party line.
/. anyway. Metamoderators don't take kindly to the /. party line moderators.I have metamodded down stupid moderations on simple 2 line me too posts.I've metamodded in favor of funny trolls, I've put linux trivia offtopic, I've metamodded up unpopular people and I've metamodded against "informative" moderations which weren't.
All you need is 0 karma, and few posts which have got positive moderations, especially if you got 2 or more positive moderations in 1 post.
I have only moderated on macslash, but that is only a few months of code behind
Moderation would be better if it didn't end up in the hands of the karma whores and linux zealots. I wouldn't pay to view this site until somebody gets some balance to the karma system.
This is comment 666 for user kiwipeso, karma -3, not willing to recite the karma whore mantra of "free software" as defined by Stallman.
So what if it's slightly offtopic, the topic is dealing with censorship anyway. (moderation is just censorship by the unwashed GNU hippie masses anyway...)
Why the hell does this Haaarvaad Genius* think that we should have some kind of thought police running our computer?
I think microsoft has an antitrust trial for doing just that. Who wants this control? The easier it is to use a good, the more people buy it.
* = oxymoron, see interesting article by JonKatz.
I use Mac OS X also, but I'll fuck anything else if she's female...
Why iss it that you haven't been moderated down by some linux zealot who doesn't like the truth of GNU being told ?
.NET ? You're only setting yourself up for embrace, extend and extinguish...
Yes, Stallman did dedicate his life to stealing AT&T crapware under the title GNU. Yes, Mono is stealing crapware from microsoft.
Why would Miguel de Whatever need to steal C# ? Java 1.4 SE and Java Enterprise are better and more widely accepted as a cross platform language.
So why should any self respecting linux geek want to support microsoft
I suppose this is beyond the foresight of most linux zealots who only see critism of linux to be moderated down...
I know it happened about 6 years ago, I have the clipping somewhere... The US military is stupid, who else would pay more than $10k for a hammer or a toilet seat?
One things for sure, it gives the Blue Screen of Death a whole new meaning...
Although I'm 25, I'm a BSD developer who is no virgin. My ex girlfriend was also called Jolene.
.NET has been MONOed and god only knows what other crapware is next...
But she was a tall blonde with blue eyes and a couple of big tits. [maybe I should have moved up to her town]
Actually it's more like image utilities [the GIMP] for removing any geek girl or celebrity clothing (who here hasn't seen 7 of 9 naked ?) and stuff which is ripped off from some mediocre monopoly.
AT&T Unix got GNUd by RMS,
How this is rated as flamebait or a troll is simply due to the preference for linux zealotry. I think it's time slashdot gets people who aren't virgin linux geeks to moderate.
BTW, I'm into open source BSD because GNU won't be any good to make money from.
I've been under surveillance for 2 years now, they actually do look for or even block words like this.
I've sent an email like that to the local echelon agency, they got shitty I knew the keywords.
I've had emails blocked from the network with words like that, I know what I'm talking about.
When you get secret service spying on you, then you are qualified to moderate me. Just don't give me your bad reasons for moderation.
If you intergrate any app into the system, it will appear to run faster. (but the system will be slower)
/. ? It's not like anyone is dumb enough to pay to see trolls or Katz...
Case in point, that linux web server which runs in the kernel runs faster than Apache, but the kernel runs slower because the server is always running.
I'm currently making a P2P protocol that is capable of letting people have P2P websites. (useful for modem users to serve websites)
Bandwidth doubles every 12 months compared to processing doubling every 18 months.
I agree, who is the genius who put in stupid large ads and subscription to
What if your hair is red and spiky naturally?
I would have kept the Hummer, no way would I want a SUV.
Quote by Marc Andreessen.
What napster did was open up songs to getting heard before the distribution companies paid off radio companies.
Napster actually increased sales of CDs by a significant amount just because nobody had to wait for radio to define popularity.
Mr Andreessen wrote this almost 11 years ago.
I suppose we should all be watching out if some jackass digs up crap from /. /. , watch porno or go on a Jihad against Bharne.
/. if they had a job?
Personally, I think it's ok to post absolute crap on
It's your life and other people can get stuffed if they think your personal life has anything to do with your professional life.
Of course there are a lot of boring people, do you think all the linux zealots would be here on
This is just a completely gay idea, why does linux have to steal stuff from microsoft to get accepted anyway?
Personally, I think RMS is right about this topic (for a change) who needs microsoft crapware to infect linux with even less innovation?
BTW, you're now under surveillance :-*
Personally, I don't give a shit. I know how stupid they are...
Nevermind the high res version, you can see that as a trailer in the movies. If you have the DVD, you can access a special movie for Clone Wars.
PGP is good enough to save the lives of political dissidents in africa, asia & south america from repressive governments reading their email.
There are numerous examples of windows being used in life or death workplaces and failing the user.
The US Navy once had to tow a Aircraft Carrier back to harbour just because Windows 95 died. What would happen if the Aircraft Carrier was in a warzone?
Those companies are called ISPs or Gold Diggers.
Personally, I don't care about it. It's not like New Zealand has that many companies...