Interesting...did you use VS.NET 2003 before? Didn't you notice a huge slowdown when you started using 2005? I found that it was a terrible experience compared to the old version.
I read somewhere...don't remember where, that the Onyx gets smoked by Voodoo cards. So, I think the Onyx would be kind of a waste of money. Just beowulf some 486's together. It'll be much better. Not to mention, enterprise scalable.
I think services like this are really annoying. They are constantly incorrectly filled with "good" hosts and they hardly help prevent any spam, anyway. I especially hate ORBS, as I've had to deal with their crap on a consistent basis. Since any mail that goes through your host that has been through a bad relay causes you to get blocked, it really really sucks.
This is completely untrue. I get at least 3 portscan attacks per week from other home.com hosts alone, not to mention others. I think the idea of the cable modem just attracts a lot of shady l33t d00dz who like to sit around and run portscans all day since they have nothing better to do. I have to say, their service is really going downhill. It's almost to the point that I'd go back to dialup, since there are no other high speed options in my area.
I think Microsoft is gonna struggle in this industry. You can't exactly release chips with major bugs, and then just give people "service packs" to fix it. Maybe they'll come up with some sort of socket you can put your "service chip" in to fix bugs.:) Of course, that will actually cost money to distribute to customers.
Right on. If only it were real SGI's running IRIX, then all of the people could download it... Even though they don't even know what the fuck it is. Now where's the free IRIX version?:)
Why would they need to use a redirector? If there's code to put the redirector in the html, wouldn't that be all they need to collect a list of the links? Cutting and pasting to bypass the redirector won't help you there !:)
I think what he is referring to is the "end product". If I were to go out today and say, I would like to setup a Linux system and see how secure it is, I would probably choose something like Redhat, install it and evaluate it. With this in mind, there are plenty of security holes. Look at all the applications that come with Redhat. So, it isn't necessarily "Linux" that is insecure, but the distribution. Of course, how can you use Linux without a distribution?
Software which has the source code released to the public is usually a lot easier to find security holes in than the commercial software. Lets think about it like this... If you were a l33t hax0r, would you try and disassemble/debug a commercial binary-only program looking for vulnerabilities, which you might have trouble even getting ahold of in the first place, or would you just open up the.c file of a free program and look for stupid places where things like sprintf are used unsafely? I know what I'd do! That doesn't mean there are more holes in free software, just that they're easier to find.
He also has a good point in that things like Linux aren't developed to any particular standards. If you look at something like OpenBSD, they have sacrificed progress in things like device drivers, hardware support, and new features. As much as someone may say this isn't a "standard", it sure is in my opinion. They have done this so they can spend time doing exhaustive security audits to make sure the system is safe. With Linux, it seems that getting new features, hardware support, applications, etc. is more important. You could call this a standard too. And, this is why Linux is more popular, but if I'm putting together a multi-user server, I know which OS I'll choose.
The interface isn't at all ugly, it's just efficient. You may not be used to it, but once you get the hang of the controls it works far better than most 3d programs. It is actually one of the more intuitive programs I've used once you get used to it.
That's right. If you thought Gnome was easy to use, just wait till you try Indigo Magic. And I don't know what that comment about servers was supposed to mean, but can Linux scale to 512 processors in a single system image? I think not! As great as Linux might be, IRIX is far more friendly, scalable, stable,....etc etc. But, SGI does see Linux's place. It is needed for those hackers out there in need of a cheap operating system.
As far as blender is concerned, it runs much better on IRIX than Linux, simply due to the fact that it is natively accelerated by the hardware.
I think the parsing code is designed for IPv4, so it will only recognize a x.x.x.x as an ip, otherwise it tries a DNS lookup. If you setup an IPv6 name server, it might work.
ASU also has a satellite getting launched at Vandenburg AFB. You can check out the website at http://www.eas.asu.edu/~nasasg/a susat/asusat1.html. It's got lots of info on the design and stuff. The ground control software is written in Java and the development platform for that is Linux. Pretty cool project.
The point about PC's being "good enough" is a really good one. I remember when I used to get excited about newer, faster processors. Now it seems that anything above a P200 or so will do just fine for my needs. Ultra Wide SCSI really needs to get widely implemented though...IDE is too slow and unreliable.
The article does not say that they are merging. It even says that people from AT&T are saying it won't happen. What is this site coming to? Please read this stuff before posting it. Even if it does hint that this is a possibility, it doesn't even come close to saying anything like "Excite@HOME is restructuring its divisions to facilitate a merger with AOL." as mentioned in the post.
well, it depends what you're doing. If you want to reverse engineer an executable, it's basically going to be in assembler without any comments. So, if you're good with assembler, you might be able to derive something from it. If you are going to reverse engineer some sort of protocol, where you can sniff it, it's much more useful.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe the technical term is called "anecdote".
Uh..isn't Alltel entirely CDMA currently? I've never even heard of them having GSM.
Interesting...did you use VS.NET 2003 before? Didn't you notice a huge slowdown when you started using 2005? I found that it was a terrible experience compared to the old version.
I read somewhere...don't remember where, that the Onyx gets smoked by Voodoo cards. So, I think the Onyx would be kind of a waste of money. Just beowulf some 486's together. It'll be much better. Not to mention, enterprise scalable.
I think services like this are really annoying. They are constantly incorrectly filled with "good" hosts and they hardly help prevent any spam, anyway. I especially hate ORBS, as I've had to deal with their crap on a consistent basis. Since any mail that goes through your host that has been through a bad relay causes you to get blocked, it really really sucks.
This is completely untrue. I get at least 3 portscan attacks per week from other home.com hosts alone, not to mention others. I think the idea of the cable modem just attracts a lot of shady l33t d00dz who like to sit around and run portscans all day since they have nothing better to do. I have to say, their service is really going downhill. It's almost to the point that I'd go back to dialup, since there are no other high speed options in my area.
I think Microsoft is gonna struggle in this industry. You can't exactly release chips with major bugs, and then just give people "service packs" to fix it. Maybe they'll come up with some sort of socket you can put your "service chip" in to fix bugs. :) Of course, that will actually cost money to distribute to customers.
that sucks. if i was them i'd use something that is actually stable...maybe irix.
sucks. a language for trendy linux fucks. use perl or something, dammit.
Right on. If only it were real SGI's running IRIX, then all of the people could download it... Even though they don't even know what the fuck it is. Now where's the free IRIX version? :)
Yeah, mysql is faster with like two concurrent connections. So are flat files, but it doesn't make them better... your point?
Umm...yeah. Right.
yes, this is very cool. especially, considering redhat sucks so much. :)
No, there aren't.
actually, I'd suggest checking out blender, which is kind of fun...www.blender.nl (actually, it's not gnu, so i guess it must be completely worthless)
Why would they need to use a redirector? If there's code to put the redirector in the html, wouldn't that be all they need to collect a list of the links? Cutting and pasting to bypass the redirector won't help you there ! :)
Order the IDF/IDL CD's from SGI (or download the headers). Problem Fixed. No money spent. GCC still sucks, though.
I think what he is referring to is the "end product". If I were to go out today and say, I would like to setup a Linux system and see how secure it is, I would probably choose something like Redhat, install it and evaluate it. With this in mind, there are plenty of security holes. Look at all the applications that come with Redhat. So, it isn't necessarily "Linux" that is insecure, but the distribution. Of course, how can you use Linux without a distribution?
Software which has the source code released to the public is usually a lot easier to find security holes in than the commercial software. Lets think about it like this... If you were a l33t hax0r, would you try and disassemble/debug a commercial binary-only program looking for vulnerabilities, which you might have trouble even getting ahold of in the first place, or would you just open up the .c file of a free program and look for stupid places where things like sprintf are used unsafely? I know what I'd do! That doesn't mean there are more holes in free software, just that they're easier to find.
He also has a good point in that things like Linux aren't developed to any particular standards. If you look at something like OpenBSD, they have sacrificed progress in things like device drivers, hardware support, and new features. As much as someone may say this isn't a "standard", it sure is in my opinion. They have done this so they can spend time doing exhaustive security audits to make sure the system is safe. With Linux, it seems that getting new features, hardware support, applications, etc. is more important. You could call this a standard too. And, this is why Linux is more popular, but if I'm putting together a multi-user server, I know which OS I'll choose.
The interface isn't at all ugly, it's just efficient. You may not be used to it, but once you get the hang of the controls it works far better than most 3d programs. It is actually one of the more intuitive programs I've used once you get used to it.
That's right. If you thought Gnome was easy to use, just wait till you try Indigo Magic. And I don't know what that comment about servers was supposed to mean, but can Linux scale to 512 processors in a single system image? I think not! As great as Linux might be, IRIX is far more friendly, scalable, stable, ....etc etc. But, SGI does see Linux's place. It is needed for those hackers out there in need of a cheap operating system.
As far as blender is concerned, it runs much better on IRIX than Linux, simply due to the fact that it is natively accelerated by the hardware.
I think the parsing code is designed for IPv4, so it will only recognize a x.x.x.x as an ip, otherwise it tries a DNS lookup. If you setup an IPv6 name server, it might work.
ASU also has a satellite getting launched at Vandenburg AFB. You can check out the website at http://www.eas.asu.edu/~nasasg/a susat/asusat1.html. It's got lots of info on the design and stuff. The ground control software is written in Java and the development platform for that is Linux. Pretty cool project.
The point about PC's being "good enough" is a really good one. I remember when I used to get excited about newer, faster processors. Now it seems that anything above a P200 or so will do just fine for my needs. Ultra Wide SCSI really needs to get widely implemented though...IDE is too slow and unreliable.
The article does not say that they are merging. It even says that people from AT&T are saying it won't happen. What is this site coming to? Please read this stuff before posting it. Even if it does hint that this is a possibility, it doesn't even come close to saying anything like "Excite@HOME is restructuring its divisions to facilitate a merger with AOL." as mentioned in the post.
well, it depends what you're doing. If you want to reverse engineer an executable, it's basically going to be in assembler without any comments. So, if you're good with assembler, you might be able to derive something from it. If you are going to reverse engineer some sort of protocol, where you can sniff it, it's much more useful.