I think that for a personal server IIS will be the product of choice for small server in spite of its security problems simply because of its ease of use. My tiny server gets probed and scan by IIS servers ONLY, not Linux based (or even Windows based) Apache servers at all. The numbers say IIS in all it's versions will be the product that will get the bad name from security compromises. Frankly I am not worried about Linux gaining a bad rep. People who want to put of their own server will choose Win2000 w/IIS long before they will consider a Linux solution. Microsoft is doing Linux people a great favor with its ease of installation and hackers a favor it it ease of compromise.
To me if you believe the actions of your nation's enemies' in causing the deaths of your countrymen is an acceptable response to your nation's policies, in time of war, is treasonous speech, and therefore unprotected speech. Such speech also identifies the allies of terrorists. I fail to see why such speech gets a pass in time of war.
Political speech is protected speech. Irrespnsible speech is not. Telling us you are going to vote democrat because you do not ilke what has been done post 911 is okay, but telling the world you think the USA had it coming is not. Praying to your God is free speech, but praying to God as your money goes to terrorist organizations is treason
Oh my God! My rights are gone! Because of those terrible white republicans. Oh dear! They are the same guys that started the WTC bombing one, and we are to blame for this attack. Oh my! You are taking my 1st amendment rights from me! The US is to blame. Bush is to blame! Capitalism is to blame! Oh dear.
The government isn't surveilling everyone. Just anyone with munitions and an attitude.
That feeling of a long erosion i the realization that abunch of towelheaded crazies were trying to instill fear.
The best way to protect the USA is to provide economic oppotunities and to keep routes of trade open. Can't do either of those things under the threat of terrorism. That the US is increasing its problems with the world by respinding to terrorism with military force is just another subtle way of blaming the victim.
As I said in earlier posts. No one lost anything except maybe a career. And during that time this country was, as we found out, infiltrated by communist spies from the USSR. That was a real threat, not a 1st amendment problem, a high crime. I think the response to communist infiltration and indoctrination in US institutions was relatively mild, a few people lost their careers. They became a simple nameless worker, the way they wanted things to be. I am sorry. I don't see the problem here. You advocate a system which could take away your boss' stuff, you suffer the consequences, as those folks in the '50s did and should have I don't see the HUAC as being a bad thing then, and now ti could even help define where this nation should be in protecting its own interests.
Wrong. McCarthy was a bufoon, but the HCUA was congress' way of dealing with a real threat from communist infiltrations in government and in institutions. A lot of liberals decry things as McCarthyism, but I think the concept is sound. No one was detained, no one was beaten, no one was shot. The only bad thing that happened is a few people lost their careers. A damn sight less than the communists would have done were they in power.
You make this sound like a bad thing. US law provides for long term detention of suspects, especially non citizens, without trial if there is a reasonably fear that they will participate in an insurretion. And I am happy to hear that some people have been departed to their shithole countries without trial. Maybe you can jerk off in front of their native country's generalissimo about rights. Read the law: the government does NOT have to give due process to people who are not citizens of this country if they reasonable pose a security risk to the nation.
My question is why this hysteria? Why when 1000 people, mostly non citizens of this country, are causing people to behave this way? It's weird. It is as if the Sept. 11th attack never happened. You seem to think if Padilla and his Towelheadettes are given a public trial, the attacks against the US will stop. This nation is at war with these bastards. The rules which have applied e.g: 1) Blame the US for an attack against its citizens by Islamofscists. 2) Blame Israel for the attacks against it by Arab criminals 3) Republicans are all white fascists and we are heading for Nazi Germany aboard a cattle train 4) Democrats care and just want a just world 5) Blame the US. 6) Blame the US, etc (repeat as necessary)... These rules no longer apply. Do yourself a favor and stop identifying with Islamocriminals and stop bleating about your bloody rights. They are not being harmed.
You should also be aware of the great body of law concerning the 1st amendment. If you did you would realize the first amendment does not apply to criminal law. You are mixing sentiments. But that's okay. You have my permission to wallow in your abject ignorance of US Constitutional law. Just make sure Padilla cannot continue his activities, constructing bombs, etc...
Bin Laden's goal was to kill Americans and to cause terror. The only people going to jail are ragheads and jihadists who pose a potent threat to the USA.
Many may have been brainwashed for the passed 12 months about threats, and it may be hysterical, but there is nothing in the world more wrong and hysterical than liberals who will stump for the rights of a petty criminal who got caught playing jihaddist.
You know nothing stops the person with $100,000 from fronting for issues which affect the guy with $10. And since there are a lot more people with $10 than with $100,000, it balances out.
Why should the person with $100,000 has less of a say than a person with $10.00? SCOTUS was right in saying the money is speech. There is an awful lot of handwringing done on this board concerning campiagn reform, but guess what? Just such a law was passed, and chances are it will make the system worse not better. Money is only an equalizer, just as the internet is. I would rather have 10 people with $100,000 trying influence legislation than 100,000 people with $10. Why do you think this country has some of the most constrictive enviromental laws in the world? Is it because to 10 people with $100,000 had a say? No, it's because the 100,000 people with $10 had their way. And you don't see the 10 people saying the system is corrupt. They are starting new fights, as they should and as you should. You don't like the money that flows into politics? Organize against it, but if you lose, stop crying the system is corrupt. You fought the battle, you lost. Move on or start a new fight.
Do yourself a great favor. Chuck the commie politics and come back into the fold. Move the system where you want it to go. Stop saying to us about how corrupt the system is. Just becuase you lose doesn't mean you don't have a voice.
Actually Linux has all the tools necessary to ensure computing freedom and personal privacy. I am sorry Linux fanatics make you sick, but the cure for your sickness is to use Linux.
Never dealing with rsync, I can't comment on that part. What I can comment on is that I use tar as an adjunct to other backup activities. My backup needs are not as often as yours are apparently, thus the need for a snapshot isn't as great.
I use NFS mounted read/write from the backup machine, which is a dedicated backup storage machine and I keep it there 24/7. The main file server also mounts the backup machine but only once a week and then unmounted and only for the purpose of allowing testing of the backed up files. I do not test the tars at all, since the files are MS type files and I need the MS 'functionality' to fully check them. Both machines' NFS activities are regulated by cron and both are logged to ensure they are functioning. Now this network is not on the internet (and with the users I have it shouldn't be) so my security needs are far less than if those machines were on the internet.
Having said all this I have to say that rsync over SSH seems to be a nice solution if you want to backup files to a remote machine if you have just once machine with an internet interface of any kind. I have been wanting to have additional backup safety without using ftp on a remote box and I will look into that and without needing a CD burner on the backup server.
Most Linux fanatics don't care how configurable XP is.
I don't use Win, except 98 and then only for gaming; I NEVER use Win for email since it has more holes in its security than a whorehouse.
I use Linux on a desktop and it is rock solid, dependable, secure and as smooth as a MS sales pitch for its own, buggy, mal-adapted products.
Windows is clearly a toy and a media outlet even for Windows' select media (That is where they are going... I think...), whereas Linux will eventually become the machine of choice for the internet.
Your personal vitriol against market economics not only made right wingers look evil, it made you look evil as well.
I am so far to the right I make YOU look like a TV evangelist, and I know bad law when I see it and the DMCA is bad law.
That aside, it shouldn't take too much of a strain to see that not only corporations had input in this law, but so did the tech community, and as with anything in law, it is not so bad that it is not good for something. As I see it the DMCA has been rarely enforced in court, so little so, it has not been challenged in court. It's bad law and despite all your hear about how Evil Corporations(tm) want to make your life miserable (A your view of them already has made you miserable), they see it as bad law. Doesn'nt it occur to you that perhaps the Evil Corporations(tm) who were so gung ho about it, now see it as it should be seen, and wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole?
Take my advice: since you so hate market economics, countries like Cuba and Syria would love to have a commie such as yourself fronting for their economics policies. Jeeezuz!
Slashdot Mirror
I think that for a personal server IIS will be the product of choice for small server in spite of its security problems simply because of its ease of use. My tiny server gets probed and scan by IIS servers ONLY, not Linux based (or even Windows based) Apache servers at all. The numbers say IIS in all it's versions will be the product that will get the bad name from security compromises. Frankly I am not worried about Linux gaining a bad rep. People who want to put of their own server will choose Win2000 w/IIS long before they will consider a Linux solution. Microsoft is doing Linux people a great favor with its ease of installation and hackers a favor it it ease of compromise.
To me if you believe the actions of your nation's enemies' in causing the deaths of your countrymen is an acceptable response to your nation's policies, in time of war, is treasonous speech, and therefore unprotected speech. Such speech also identifies the allies of terrorists. I fail to see why such speech gets a pass in time of war.
Political speech is protected speech. Irrespnsible speech is not. Telling us you are going to vote democrat because you do not ilke what has been done post 911 is okay, but telling the world you think the USA had it coming is not. Praying to your God is free speech, but praying to God as your money goes to terrorist organizations is treason
Name ONE attack by the US government against the US...
Oh my God! My rights are gone! Because of those terrible white republicans. Oh dear! They are the same guys that started the WTC bombing one, and we are to blame for this attack. Oh my! You are taking my 1st amendment rights from me! The US is to blame. Bush is to blame! Capitalism is to blame! Oh dear.
The government isn't surveilling everyone. Just anyone with munitions and an attitude. That feeling of a long erosion i the realization that abunch of towelheaded crazies were trying to instill fear.
The best way to protect the USA is to provide economic oppotunities and to keep routes of trade open. Can't do either of those things under the threat of terrorism. That the US is increasing its problems with the world by respinding to terrorism with military force is just another subtle way of blaming the victim.
Those freedoms are being threatened by terrorist and domestic liberalism. Get your facts straight!
As I said in earlier posts. No one lost anything except maybe a career. And during that time this country was, as we found out, infiltrated by communist spies from the USSR. That was a real threat, not a 1st amendment problem, a high crime. I think the response to communist infiltration and indoctrination in US institutions was relatively mild, a few people lost their careers. They became a simple nameless worker, the way they wanted things to be. I am sorry. I don't see the problem here. You advocate a system which could take away your boss' stuff, you suffer the consequences, as those folks in the '50s did and should have I don't see the HUAC as being a bad thing then, and now ti could even help define where this nation should be in protecting its own interests.
Wrong. McCarthy was a bufoon, but the HCUA was congress' way of dealing with a real threat from communist infiltrations in government and in institutions. A lot of liberals decry things as McCarthyism, but I think the concept is sound. No one was detained, no one was beaten, no one was shot. The only bad thing that happened is a few people lost their careers. A damn sight less than the communists would have done were they in power.
You make this sound like a bad thing. US law provides for long term detention of suspects, especially non citizens, without trial if there is a reasonably fear that they will participate in an insurretion. And I am happy to hear that some people have been departed to their shithole countries without trial. Maybe you can jerk off in front of their native country's generalissimo about rights. Read the law: the government does NOT have to give due process to people who are not citizens of this country if they reasonable pose a security risk to the nation. My question is why this hysteria? Why when 1000 people, mostly non citizens of this country, are causing people to behave this way? It's weird. It is as if the Sept. 11th attack never happened. You seem to think if Padilla and his Towelheadettes are given a public trial, the attacks against the US will stop. This nation is at war with these bastards. The rules which have applied e.g: 1) Blame the US for an attack against its citizens by Islamofscists. 2) Blame Israel for the attacks against it by Arab criminals 3) Republicans are all white fascists and we are heading for Nazi Germany aboard a cattle train 4) Democrats care and just want a just world 5) Blame the US. 6) Blame the US, etc (repeat as necessary) ... These rules no longer apply. Do yourself a favor and stop identifying with Islamocriminals and stop bleating about your bloody rights. They are not being harmed.
You should also be aware of the great body of law concerning the 1st amendment. If you did you would realize the first amendment does not apply to criminal law. You are mixing sentiments. But that's okay. You have my permission to wallow in your abject ignorance of US Constitutional law. Just make sure Padilla cannot continue his activities, constructing bombs, etc...
Bin Laden's goal was to kill Americans and to cause terror. The only people going to jail are ragheads and jihadists who pose a potent threat to the USA.
Many may have been brainwashed for the passed 12 months about threats, and it may be hysterical, but there is nothing in the world more wrong and hysterical than liberals who will stump for the rights of a petty criminal who got caught playing jihaddist.
Many of this guy's view are repugnant to me, but certainly not warrenting this kind of attack
You know nothing stops the person with $100,000 from fronting for issues which affect the guy with $10. And since there are a lot more people with $10 than with $100,000, it balances out.
Why should the person with $100,000 has less of a say than a person with $10.00? SCOTUS was right in saying the money is speech. There is an awful lot of handwringing done on this board concerning campiagn reform, but guess what? Just such a law was passed, and chances are it will make the system worse not better. Money is only an equalizer, just as the internet is. I would rather have 10 people with $100,000 trying influence legislation than 100,000 people with $10. Why do you think this country has some of the most constrictive enviromental laws in the world? Is it because to 10 people with $100,000 had a say? No, it's because the 100,000 people with $10 had their way. And you don't see the 10 people saying the system is corrupt. They are starting new fights, as they should and as you should. You don't like the money that flows into politics? Organize against it, but if you lose, stop crying the system is corrupt. You fought the battle, you lost. Move on or start a new fight. Do yourself a great favor. Chuck the commie politics and come back into the fold. Move the system where you want it to go. Stop saying to us about how corrupt the system is. Just becuase you lose doesn't mean you don't have a voice.
Actually Linux has all the tools necessary to ensure computing freedom and personal privacy. I am sorry Linux fanatics make you sick, but the cure for your sickness is to use Linux.
Never dealing with rsync, I can't comment on that part. What I can comment on is that I use tar as an adjunct to other backup activities. My backup needs are not as often as yours are apparently, thus the need for a snapshot isn't as great. I use NFS mounted read/write from the backup machine, which is a dedicated backup storage machine and I keep it there 24/7. The main file server also mounts the backup machine but only once a week and then unmounted and only for the purpose of allowing testing of the backed up files. I do not test the tars at all, since the files are MS type files and I need the MS 'functionality' to fully check them. Both machines' NFS activities are regulated by cron and both are logged to ensure they are functioning. Now this network is not on the internet (and with the users I have it shouldn't be) so my security needs are far less than if those machines were on the internet. Having said all this I have to say that rsync over SSH seems to be a nice solution if you want to backup files to a remote machine if you have just once machine with an internet interface of any kind. I have been wanting to have additional backup safety without using ftp on a remote box and I will look into that and without needing a CD burner on the backup server.
I use tar to maintain critical daily backups. I am still pretty new to Linux, so does this essentially do the same thing?
Most Linux fanatics don't care how configurable XP is. I don't use Win, except 98 and then only for gaming; I NEVER use Win for email since it has more holes in its security than a whorehouse. I use Linux on a desktop and it is rock solid, dependable, secure and as smooth as a MS sales pitch for its own, buggy, mal-adapted products. Windows is clearly a toy and a media outlet even for Windows' select media (That is where they are going... I think...), whereas Linux will eventually become the machine of choice for the internet.
And we can call this committe the Central Comitte, or maybe the Politburo!
The only evil profits are the ones you say are evil.
Your personal vitriol against market economics not only made right wingers look evil, it made you look evil as well. I am so far to the right I make YOU look like a TV evangelist, and I know bad law when I see it and the DMCA is bad law. That aside, it shouldn't take too much of a strain to see that not only corporations had input in this law, but so did the tech community, and as with anything in law, it is not so bad that it is not good for something. As I see it the DMCA has been rarely enforced in court, so little so, it has not been challenged in court. It's bad law and despite all your hear about how Evil Corporations(tm) want to make your life miserable (A your view of them already has made you miserable), they see it as bad law. Doesn'nt it occur to you that perhaps the Evil Corporations(tm) who were so gung ho about it, now see it as it should be seen, and wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole? Take my advice: since you so hate market economics, countries like Cuba and Syria would love to have a commie such as yourself fronting for their economics policies. Jeeezuz!
Nice work so far. You all should be proud.