That's really unfortunate, because my primary computer at work is a Sun Ultra 1 running 6.2 and I absolutely love it. Once you take the hour or so to tie it down (change out wu-ftpd, close up inetd, install ssh, etc. etc.) it's pretty damn cool. Even X is pretty speedy on it. It's by far one of the best "work computers" I've ever used.
Oh, by the way, I'm also a Windows NT administrator.
Larry has been talking about this for years. He's an outspoken advocate of networking computing. That in and of itself is an understatement. Anyway, he would love nothing more than to move computing progress towards large centralized servers with thin clients connecting to it. To paraphrase Mr. Ellison, bits are electronic and thus shouldn't be packaged into boxes and instead should travel over the network. Also, it makes good sense for the use of Oracle in many aspects of thing clients with this model.
My personal opinions of Larry Ellison aside (I think he's an ass. I've seen him speak and done some research on him. He's just the kind of guy I wouldn't invite over to a barbecue. Ever.), I wish he would get off of his thin client high horse, get into the real world and actually start innovating instead of pushing an updated mainframe/timesharing model of computing that, while it might have it's place, currently makes no sense in the current market (lack of available bandwidth both to the home and on the "backbone" (what another crock), lack of consumer acceptance, limited choice of applications, etc.).
I'm sure he is and will continue to put a great deal of capital and personal effort into this project. This is America and I'm glad every man and woman with an idea, no madder how ignorant, has the chance to try it out.
But, Larry, you've tried this before and nobody has bit.
*sigh*
Some people never learn. Maybe his Fu dogs or pond goldfish made him do it.
I am aware the dictionary authors, including the OED, go to great lengths to justify any word inclusion or definition change. I do not question for a minute the dictionary author's ability to find those 12 references in 5 years! I am confident one could find many more than that, even.
Your argument for linguistic evolution is certainly well-founded and I am hard pressed to disagree with it. However, being the curmudgeon I am (and I'm only 23. Ugh!), I for some reason feel the need to bitch and complain about something I find dear to my heart.
Even saying that, I would agree that language does and will change to fit the current times, no matter now strange and obnoxious they may seem. I look forward to helping define that new language, in whatever seemingly insignificant way I can.
I admit that the hacker vs. cracker debate has been a mild amusement to me for many years (most notably after picking up a copy of the New Hacker's Dictionary in my local library back when I was in high school, but I digress). I've often wondered why news organizations insist after what I assume to be constant derision to use the same incorrect (at least in my opinion) definition of a malicious computer user.
While it is refreshing to see someone actually explain to us why they use the term, it is disheartening to see that at least the CBC will continue to use "hacker" to refer to script kiddies, inept programmers and other low-life scum. At the very least, it is food for thought and affords us all an opportunity to now make more educated arguments in the hacker vs. cracker debate. Now that we know why the news organizations choose to use the words they do, we can make more informed complaint letters to them as well as dictionary authors.
I've been very pleased with my Sony Digital Mavica FD91. Yeah, it doesn't use compact flash and yeah, you only get about 10 *good* pictures per diskette, but the pictures it does take rival most of the pictures other digital cameras take. It's super convenient, super easy to use and, except for lack of a hot mount for an extrnal flash (for really big rooms that are rather dark), I couldn't ask for more. The fact that you can mount it on a tripod makes it even more useful. Do some research, you'll find the sony's are in super hot demand (It's one of the few items on Ebay where you can recoup almost all of what you spent on it...). As an avid photographer, I couldn't be more pleased with mine!
Would you be so kind as to perhaps point to an online reference where this DoD paper might be found? I did a quick search on google and Fastweb and have yet to turn up anything.
An even better account of the evolution of the computer can be read in the book "Fire in the Valley: The Making of the Personal Computer" (Second Edition) by Paul Freiberger and Michael Swaine. It goes into great detail and gives a lot of interesting anecdotes and really explores not only the technology, but the personalities behind the computer revolution as well.
Netpliance is certainly going to be losing a lot on each machine at $99 and even $199 a pop. Exposure and attention is great. But the prospect of losing anywhere from $200 to $300 per unit is no way to run a business. Everybody likes something for nothing, and it would appear that Netpliance needs to rethink their business strategy just a little bit. Terms of Service is no way to do this, in my opinion, though.
I saw the film yesterday with a few other folks in a rather crowded theater. None of us came to see the film with any preconceived notions and most of us don't see enough television to really catch many of the advertisements for it.
What I can say is that all of us were rather impressed that the film was really quite decent. The acting was well above par most of the current Hollywood fair (most of us are actors, so we should have some idea what constitutes good and bad acting). The visual effects, while obviously computer enhanced, didn't look all that bad either. Thankfully, the scenes stuck more to science fact than science fiction. Some of the fact was in fact exaggerated, yes, but in all it seemed fairly correct.
As a side note, it was pleasant to see Gary Sinise in a leading role like this. Many of his roles are inexcusably forgettable. This one, however, will hopefully propel him towards the stardom that he just deserves.
Aside from some of the cliches (the rocket pendant, the footprint in the driveway, etc.), I found the movie to be a great way to blow a few bucks on a Sunday.
As a side note, I saw the movie in a DLP (Digital Light Processing) theater. Quite and experience! The quality was excellent and many times some of the original film artifacts could be seen. Yes, there was a little pixelation, but generally the visuals and sound were absolutely superb.
To all those panning it for lack of anything better to do, see it again. See it with an open mind and a child-like curiosity. Notice a lot of the details in the background and I believe you'll be pleasantly surprised.
Subject says it all. What do I theoretically get paid for? 40 or so... (I am salaried, after all, and am expected to "occassionally" put in more hours). I have to take sick days just to get things done at home. Sad...
"Computer Security Basics" by Deborah Russell & G.T. Gangemi, Sr. http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/csb/
"Computer Security Handbook" By Hutt, Arthur E. / Hoyt, Douglas B. / Bosworth, Seymour http://www1.fatbrain.com/asp/bookinfo/bookinfo.a sp?theisbn=0471019070
"Cryptography and Network Security: Principles and Practice, 2/e" by William Stallings http://vig.prenhall.com/acadbook/0,2581,01386901 70,00.html
"Hacker Proof: The Ultimate Guide to Network Security" By Lars Klander and Edward J. Renehan Renehan http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnIn quiry.asp?userid=686GAUD2CA&mscssid=9BBLV0 W1RRS12NQU001PQJ9WMNQ2B225&srefer=&isbn=188413355X (This book really isn't that good, though. Some errors and tends to be too general)
Of course, you could always find an electronic copy of the Orange book itself online. It's out there, I just don't have a URL handy.
I have to admit that this article brightened my day a bit. I'm glad that the guys in suits have enough common sense to see what LinuxOne is trying to be. Maybe there's hope for those business folk after all?
You obviously know little to nothing about what A1 security really means. Please try to find a good security book. Read it. Once you realize what a truly "secure" system entails, you might think again.
They aren't a dime a dozen for a reason.;)
Re:VA Linux S-1 filing greated with scepticism
on
LinuxOne At It Again?
·
· Score: 2
Those were quite a read! Even though they used Nevada to hide most of their chicanery, the many statements of risk outlined in the filing should give the potential investor in LinuxOne a good picture of how shoddy the company really is. i don't think we have much to worry about, ok?
This is a very valid criticism. It could be argued that Slashdot *is* the Slashdot crew. Yes, we the readers are very important, but without anything to read or comment on, of what value is this site? So, does Andover have insurance?
Not only is this an idea I've been hunkering over for a while, but I think it's one of the only ideas that will keep Slashdot on top. Let's face it, Slashdot has taken more criticism of late (well, over the past 12 months?) over lack of good content and crappy replies (to which moderation has, for the most part, helped to control). By moderating the incoming news stories, not only could you filter out the bogus stuff, but, by moderation, increase the number of stories relevant to the Slashdot readership.
Some might claim that Slashdot will then be in the control of the Moderators (of which I participate, if given the chance.) However, I argue that it would give Slashdot readers (of which I am an avid one) more control over what stories they see. Of course, the Slashdot crew would and should have ultimate control of what gets posted, but at least we'd have an opportunity to tell the crew, "Hey, this story is lame. It's not geek stuff. It's not news for nerds and it certainly doesn't matter."
You make an interesting point. The problem is, though, that many Unix shops (the small to medium sized ones at least) don't know what the lessons were from the first Worm. I'm only 23 and I learned about it through lore more than anything else. For everyone's sake, I hope you're not right, but I do believe that a good dose of prevention and education would be in order for most of us Sysadmins. Convincing management of this necessity, though, is almost impossible. With focus more on the hear and now as opposed keeping an eye out for potential problems, it's hard to keep abreast of security technologies
You make a very good point. It seems as though the closest thing that I've ever used that comes close to a BBS-like community is MUD (or one of it's variants). Peronsally, I used to be heavily involved in batmud (telnet batmud.bat.org). It's still a thriving community (with the required obnoxious personalities) and I hope to be able to have the time to play and/or socialize there again.
I admit that it's not the same as the traditional BBS. There are a few out there, and many that support some of my old favorites (door games (BRE, SRE, etc.). I sometimes yearn for the "old days" of my 14.4 and ANSI telecomm program, but then I realize, too, the benefits that the net has today.
As it is, Cleveland, Ohio, lost a landmark in online communities this fall when the Cleveland Freenet (owned and operated by my alma mater, Case Western Reserve University) was shutdown. The shutdown invoked scathing critcism and many flames directed toward both the President of the University (who was only in office for a few months) and the VP of IS (who was summarily fired a couple of months later). Still, even though the Freenet model was a trailblazing way of connecting people and allowing the "common folk" to explore this wonderous new thing called the Internet back in the early 90s, by even 1996 the system became so deprecated that it was becoming nothing more than an embarrassment and a money pit for the University. The "communities" that once thrived (including a very active local IRC, one that I still miss to this day and one which I can proudly say I found my current girlfriend of 3 years and potential wife on) were no longer active, except for a few strong holdouts by a stalwart few. In the place of the active lurkers and posters alike came the kiddy-porn mongers, the leechers and flamers. Granted, they were always there, but the ratio increased to a degree where it was no longer any "fun" to use it.
I feel like and old fogey when I reflect how things were in the late 80s and early 90s. People that didn't use BBSes will never truly understand the quaint charm they held and the sense of community they brought about. However, I can say for certain we'll be saying these same things about the Internet in 10 years. We'll be telling our children about how we used to have to type in "slashdot.org" this and "http://" that. I presume that the guts of the net will become so transparent we'll experience another great abstraction of the methodolgy in which we obtain and contribute information.
I've rambled enough. I need to mud...
My birthday is on odd day!
on
Happy Odd Day!
·
· Score: 2
What a coincidence. Everyone always told me I was odd.
Slashdot Mirror
That's really unfortunate, because my primary computer at work is a Sun Ultra 1 running 6.2 and I absolutely love it. Once you take the hour or so to tie it down (change out wu-ftpd, close up inetd, install ssh, etc. etc.) it's pretty damn cool. Even X is pretty speedy on it. It's by far one of the best "work computers" I've ever used.
Oh, by the way, I'm also a Windows NT administrator.
Too bad Red Hat dropped the ball.
Not the cheapest, but certainly one of the best registrars out there.
Larry has been talking about this for years. He's an outspoken advocate of networking computing. That in and of itself is an understatement. Anyway, he would love nothing more than to move computing progress towards large centralized servers with thin clients connecting to it. To paraphrase Mr. Ellison, bits are electronic and thus shouldn't be packaged into boxes and instead should travel over the network. Also, it makes good sense for the use of Oracle in many aspects of thing clients with this model.
My personal opinions of Larry Ellison aside (I think he's an ass. I've seen him speak and done some research on him. He's just the kind of guy I wouldn't invite over to a barbecue. Ever.), I wish he would get off of his thin client high horse, get into the real world and actually start innovating instead of pushing an updated mainframe/timesharing model of computing that, while it might have it's place, currently makes no sense in the current market (lack of available bandwidth both to the home and on the "backbone" (what another crock), lack of consumer acceptance, limited choice of applications, etc.).
I'm sure he is and will continue to put a great deal of capital and personal effort into this project. This is America and I'm glad every man and woman with an idea, no madder how ignorant, has the chance to try it out.
But, Larry, you've tried this before and nobody has bit.
*sigh*
Some people never learn. Maybe his Fu dogs or pond goldfish made him do it.
You make some good points.
I am aware the dictionary authors, including the OED, go to great lengths to justify any word inclusion or definition change. I do not question for a minute the dictionary author's ability to find those 12 references in 5 years! I am confident one could find many more than that, even.
Your argument for linguistic evolution is certainly well-founded and I am hard pressed to disagree with it. However, being the curmudgeon I am (and I'm only 23. Ugh!), I for some reason feel the need to bitch and complain about something I find dear to my heart.
Even saying that, I would agree that language does and will change to fit the current times, no matter now strange and obnoxious they may seem. I look forward to helping define that new language, in whatever seemingly insignificant way I can.
I admit that the hacker vs. cracker debate has been a mild amusement to me for many years (most notably after picking up a copy of the New Hacker's Dictionary in my local library back when I was in high school, but I digress). I've often wondered why news organizations insist after what I assume to be constant derision to use the same incorrect (at least in my opinion) definition of a malicious computer user.
While it is refreshing to see someone actually explain to us why they use the term, it is disheartening to see that at least the CBC will continue to use "hacker" to refer to script kiddies, inept programmers and other low-life scum. At the very least, it is food for thought and affords us all an opportunity to now make more educated arguments in the hacker vs. cracker debate. Now that we know why the news organizations choose to use the words they do, we can make more informed complaint letters to them as well as dictionary authors.
I've been very pleased with my Sony Digital Mavica FD91. Yeah, it doesn't use compact flash and yeah, you only get about 10 *good* pictures per diskette, but the pictures it does take rival most of the pictures other digital cameras take. It's super convenient, super easy to use and, except for lack of a hot mount for an extrnal flash (for really big rooms that are rather dark), I couldn't ask for more. The fact that you can mount it on a tripod makes it even more useful. Do some research, you'll find the sony's are in super hot demand (It's one of the few items on Ebay where you can recoup almost all of what you spent on it...). As an avid photographer, I couldn't be more pleased with mine!
Would you be so kind as to perhaps point to an online reference where this DoD paper might be found? I did a quick search on google and Fastweb and have yet to turn up anything.
I did a review of the book for the CWRULUG (Case Western Reserve University Linux Users Group).
Netpliance is certainly going to be losing a lot on each machine at $99 and even $199 a pop. Exposure and attention is great. But the prospect of losing anywhere from $200 to $300 per unit is no way to run a business. Everybody likes something for nothing, and it would appear that Netpliance needs to rethink their business strategy just a little bit. Terms of Service is no way to do this, in my opinion, though.
I saw the film yesterday with a few other folks in a rather crowded theater. None of us came to see the film with any preconceived notions and most of us don't see enough television to really catch many of the advertisements for it.
What I can say is that all of us were rather impressed that the film was really quite decent. The acting was well above par most of the current Hollywood fair (most of us are actors, so we should have some idea what constitutes good and bad acting). The visual effects, while obviously computer enhanced, didn't look all that bad either. Thankfully, the scenes stuck more to science fact than science fiction. Some of the fact was in fact exaggerated, yes, but in all it seemed fairly correct.
As a side note, it was pleasant to see Gary Sinise in a leading role like this. Many of his roles are inexcusably forgettable. This one, however, will hopefully propel him towards the stardom that he just deserves.
Aside from some of the cliches (the rocket pendant, the footprint in the driveway, etc.), I found the movie to be a great way to blow a few bucks on a Sunday.
As a side note, I saw the movie in a DLP (Digital Light Processing) theater. Quite and experience! The quality was excellent and many times some of the original film artifacts could be seen. Yes, there was a little pixelation, but generally the visuals and sound were absolutely superb.
To all those panning it for lack of anything better to do, see it again. See it with an open mind and a child-like curiosity. Notice a lot of the details in the background and I believe you'll be pleasantly surprised.
Numbers 8 and 9 certainly are different photographs. As to being the same baby, that's anyone's guess.
Subject says it all. What do I theoretically get paid for? 40 or so... (I am salaried, after all, and am expected to "occassionally" put in more hours). I have to take sick days just to get things done at home. Sad...
Fine then, here's some information:
a sp?theisbn=0471019070
1 70,00.html
n quiry.asp?userid=686GAUD2CA&mscssid=9BBLV0 W1RRS12NQU001PQJ9WMNQ2B225&srefer=&isbn=188413355X
"Computer Security Basics" by Deborah Russell & G.T. Gangemi, Sr.
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/csb/
"Computer Security Handbook" By Hutt, Arthur E. / Hoyt, Douglas B. / Bosworth, Seymour
http://www1.fatbrain.com/asp/bookinfo/bookinfo.
"Cryptography and Network Security: Principles and Practice, 2/e" by William Stallings
http://vig.prenhall.com/acadbook/0,2581,0138690
"Hacker Proof: The Ultimate Guide to Network Security" By Lars Klander and Edward J. Renehan
Renehan
http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnI
(This book really isn't that good, though. Some errors and tends to be too general)
Of course, you could always find an electronic copy of the Orange book itself online. It's out there, I just don't have a URL handy.
I have to admit that this article brightened my day a bit. I'm glad that the guys in suits have enough common sense to see what LinuxOne is trying to be. Maybe there's hope for those business folk after all?
;)
Nah.
You obviously know little to nothing about what A1 security really means. Please try to find a good security book. Read it. Once you realize what a truly "secure" system entails, you might think again.
;)
They aren't a dime a dozen for a reason.
Those were quite a read! Even though they used Nevada to hide most of their chicanery, the many statements of risk outlined in the filing should give the potential investor in LinuxOne a good picture of how shoddy the company really is. i don't think we have much to worry about, ok?
This is a very valid criticism. It could be argued that Slashdot *is* the Slashdot crew. Yes, we the readers are very important, but without anything to read or comment on, of what value is this site? So, does Andover have insurance?
Not only is this an idea I've been hunkering over for a while, but I think it's one of the only ideas that will keep Slashdot on top. Let's face it, Slashdot has taken more criticism of late (well, over the past 12 months?) over lack of good content and crappy replies (to which moderation has, for the most part, helped to control). By moderating the incoming news stories, not only could you filter out the bogus stuff, but, by moderation, increase the number of stories relevant to the Slashdot readership.
Some might claim that Slashdot will then be in the control of the Moderators (of which I participate, if given the chance.) However, I argue that it would give Slashdot readers (of which I am an avid one) more control over what stories they see. Of course, the Slashdot crew would and should have ultimate control of what gets posted, but at least we'd have an opportunity to tell the crew, "Hey, this story is lame. It's not geek stuff. It's not news for nerds and it certainly doesn't matter."
Nobody likes a smart ass! :P
You make an interesting point. The problem is, though, that many Unix shops (the small to medium sized ones at least) don't know what the lessons were from the first Worm. I'm only 23 and I learned about it through lore more than anything else. For everyone's sake, I hope you're not right, but I do believe that a good dose of prevention and education would be in order for most of us Sysadmins. Convincing management of this necessity, though, is almost impossible. With focus more on the hear and now as opposed keeping an eye out for potential problems, it's hard to keep abreast of security technologies
I quote, "Duke Nukem and Doom have been designed by 3D Realms Co." Last time I checked, Doom was designed by id Software.
Go figure.
Forget 2001: A Sex Odyssey because something like it ALREADY EXISTS!
Do a search on IMDB for "2069: A Sex Odyssey"
:)
I don't, "like 'em." I think their gauche and ugly.
You make a very good point. It seems as though the closest thing that I've ever used that comes close to a BBS-like community is MUD (or one of it's variants). Peronsally, I used to be heavily involved in batmud (telnet batmud.bat.org). It's still a thriving community (with the required obnoxious personalities) and I hope to be able to have the time to play and/or socialize there again.
I admit that it's not the same as the traditional BBS. There are a few out there, and many that support some of my old favorites (door games (BRE, SRE, etc.). I sometimes yearn for the "old days" of my 14.4 and ANSI telecomm program, but then I realize, too, the benefits that the net has today.
As it is, Cleveland, Ohio, lost a landmark in online communities this fall when the Cleveland Freenet (owned and operated by my alma mater, Case Western Reserve University) was shutdown. The shutdown invoked scathing critcism and many flames directed toward both the President of the University (who was only in office for a few months) and the VP of IS (who was summarily fired a couple of months later). Still, even though the Freenet model was a trailblazing way of connecting people and allowing the "common folk" to explore this wonderous new thing called the Internet back in the early 90s, by even 1996 the system became so deprecated that it was becoming nothing more than an embarrassment and a money pit for the University. The "communities" that once thrived (including a very active local IRC, one that I still miss to this day and one which I can proudly say I found my current girlfriend of 3 years and potential wife on) were no longer active, except for a few strong holdouts by a stalwart few. In the place of the active lurkers and posters alike came the kiddy-porn mongers, the leechers and flamers. Granted, they were always there, but the ratio increased to a degree where it was no longer any "fun" to use it.
I feel like and old fogey when I reflect how things were in the late 80s and early 90s. People that didn't use BBSes will never truly understand the quaint charm they held and the sense of community they brought about. However, I can say for certain we'll be saying these same things about the Internet in 10 years. We'll be telling our children about how we used to have to type in "slashdot.org" this and "http://" that. I presume that the guts of the net will become so transparent we'll experience another great abstraction of the methodolgy in which we obtain and contribute information.
I've rambled enough. I need to mud...
What a coincidence. Everyone always told me I was odd.
Happy 23rd to me! Yippee!