But the story will be the same as RBL lists for e-mail servers.
Also in the faq for the program, a dutch ISP can apply to be whitelisted.
What about people???
So how does this constitute locking down their customers?
So, do you really know who sent you virus??? Then, you are the only one on this world.
RBLs don't work (at least without constant help of admin). Reason? Some admins are incompetent and they allow spam without knowing. Company gets reported and blocked. But there are other people that do depend on communication with *Spammer-Company* and would allow their mail servers to process their messages. Even I had to whitelist such companies for at least 10 times.
In addition, do ISPs want virus spreading customers?
In addition, does customer wants ISP that's blocking him to get to the net? NO!
Imagine a little bit that you own a company and you depend on e-mail. Does this company want such ISP??? NO! I just imagine you running to the neighboor to send urgent mail, because you had worm and now you're blocked.
Truth is never present in single form. And sqeezing out *the* right words you can get completely different meaning. Of course no one will agree, but Ken Brown seems satisfied.
C'mon it's (:THE:) ^_- *TRUTH* ^_- by Kenneth Brown p.s. Don't tell anybody hat he was payed by M$
Hope you don't think I was serious about Pretenderle too. It would be a trip from one world of fiction to another.
Nope, they are writing the truth they wanna hear. They didn't lie, they just twisted truth and cut *WRONG* parts of sentences (At least to get to the truth they wanted to publish).
So who is going to step forward and write a book, of researched FACTS to counteract this work of FICTION?
Don't you think, that moderation bar goes higher with time. (take as population) Copying software is just becoming normal daily thing that no one cares about.
The only problem with humanity is that moderation is view in selfish view only. When persons job is at stake... Heeeeeeell NOOOO!
My attitude is just clean. Either it's free or commercial. Mine or others.
I sincerelly hope you don't write software with this attitude (at least not commercial, I do both GPL (out of love) and commercial (for my daily bread)). Believe me there's no difference, when your work is at question.
Not sure where you're getting this from, though I don't think it's hard to tell (your ass). Anything not heavily system dependent can easily be compiled on Windows using GCC/Cygwin or Mingw or what have you.
1. Out of the world. My bussiness allows me to see a lot of different machines.
2. My ass doesn't talk back so it would be hard to confirm understanding. I agree
3. Most of UI based software is based on KDE and Gnome. Except on Cygwin, I don't imagine being ported. Cygwin on another matter is just licking icecream trough the glass (like Wine).
4. Secondary ported applications never feel *AT HOME* on Windows. WM is just too different. Gimp for example plain sucks on Windows. And Gimp is my favorite pic_editor. Difference in WM is the one that makes it unusable (Not that port is bad).
Winamp is bad?
After 2.x, yes. Nullsoft sucks lately
ZoomPlayer is bad?
Comparing to mplayer it basically SUCKS. Like all video players on Windows. *Yeah, I know! Where do I get this from? All of my friends have installed movie players. And all have one Linux partition to watch movies in a decent manner. They all tryed BS,Zoom,Media... Players. And none was satisfactory enough. They all rather sacrificed 4GB for Linux and reboot for watching. Even though almost none of them doesn't use Linux
Girder is bad?
Girder screws when you have another remote. TV tuner, which forces him self to be *usable*. Drivers with tv tuners sometimes do that, you know.
PuTTY is bad?
Lack of support for X11 (on Windows), different codepages screw your terminal. Yeah, and Linux version I don't need. I already have terminal
Google toolbar is bad?
Yeah, definitly
There's plenty of good free Windows software out there
I agree but, you THE *expert* didn't point not even one that could be called good.
Hell, even I know better free software for Windows than those you named. At least more professional and usable.
Most of the software isn't ported. And Windows mostly has shareware. Quantity of freeware is very low, and as original poster said, mostly very bad quality.
Freeware software on Windows is either ported from Linux, made mutiplatform or bad.
Where the fuck did I mention copyright infringement (or you ment copying without permission, in that case, MY BAD)? That wasn't the case.
Agree with better terms. English is my fourth language so, yes thase are terms I had in mind.
p.s. So that's why most home Windows users preffer illegal M$Office instead of free OO.org? Because they don't directly harm anyone. I see your logic, yep, it prevails all other. This logic is so very dilbert.com
Maybe I just put it wrong. I always buy software just as music. Problem is only that people (in their minds) consider stealing a needle more problematic than to make illegal copy of some software.
Face it, apps are already here. God damn distro and every god damn compilable software. For 98% of linux users that means complete software up to the last one.
I've got AMD64, and everything is 64-bit.
It's just Windows and OSX lacking that support (I mean apps) and invalidating 64-bit options.
1. Yes, Linux users understand Copyright law better. (at least bigger percentage) 2. Linux was always independant in this matter. You get far more (legal FREE software) basic computer interactions covered from distro than you get out of Windows. 3. Even though there's free alternative tipical Windows user will rather use pirated one that he's more familiar with. 4. Linux users can't be related to problems 2 and 3 5. When tipical copy'n'install user switches to Linux, his mind doesn't change. He won't start buying products, except in case that he changed his mind (like you say, that you did) 6. Problems will start when copy'n'install users switch 7. There's got to be something wrong with this world. Stealing (no matter how little the material thing is) is condemed by general society, while pirating software is just a daily routine (no matter how expensive software is)
Snort just isn't ready for serious use in enterprise. Sounds silly, but... Too many false positives may very well lock network.
Here is a simpler case. On Port detectors. Why don't port detectors use iptables lock out of port scanners (or even better why it is not suggested).
Most of port scan detectors count actual SYN,FIN and other blocked TCP blocks which are marked as invalid on your firewall. Not even one of them doesn't take to account that some features are completely valid even though they are not. (here is the case: You're running ftp server, that means port 21 is open, does it really matters if SYN,FIN occurs on that port???) Secondary they don't take to account some stupidity. (You don't really care if one machine has scanned your port XXX (yes, your pr0n port) for 50 times), result was always the same. This should count as 1 and not as 50. With this relatively simple logic port scan detectors would exclude false positives in a very simple way. And you could be sure thatsomeone that scanned 50 ports (different and not public open) is really port scanner.
Now go to second level. Porscan detector is just one of many functions that snort provides. And even here there's many false positives.
Actualy I use Snort very differently. Redirected logs to my external processor and this processor excludes invalid information, after that reaction on firewall or server follows. That way was the only possible way to get fairly restrictive measures with not too many false positives.
Too many features might really mean to many false alerts (logs or mysql tables can get pretty crowded). But in any case it's usable to detect default signatures of attacks pretty well.
Should be used? Yes, except some functions should be disabled Should be remodeled? Yes
It has the same flaw as port scan attack detectors.
RH doesn't upgrade versions. They backport patches. Version of kernel stays the same in RH, the only number in version that changes are cumulative patch versions.
It was even/. topic for those who don't know.
p.s. I don't know who marked you insightful. He needs his brains checked more often
Yes, it does. Few newbie friends of mine were tempted by geeks like you. Guess what, everybody put back FC (and neither one of them finished the setup).
I had good laughs anyway. It is a viable desktop platform if you know what you do. In that case every *X is good on desktop for ME, except OSX. (I hate OSX, but that's my personal opinion and personal reasons)
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I did. RBLs for known virus offenders.
But the story will be the same as RBL lists for e-mail servers.
Also in the faq for the program, a dutch ISP can apply to be whitelisted.
What about people???
So how does this constitute locking down their customers?
So, do you really know who sent you virus??? Then, you are the only one on this world.
RBLs don't work (at least without constant help of admin). Reason? Some admins are incompetent and they allow spam without knowing. Company gets reported and blocked. But there are other people that do depend on communication with *Spammer-Company* and would allow their mail servers to process their messages. Even I had to whitelist such companies for at least 10 times.
In addition, do ISPs want virus spreading customers?
In addition, does customer wants ISP that's blocking him to get to the net? NO!
Imagine a little bit that you own a company and you depend on e-mail. Does this company want such ISP??? NO! I just imagine you running to the neighboor to send urgent mail, because you had worm and now you're blocked.
Are they going to lock out their customers??? They'll just loose bussiness.
Stupid idea!
IANAL.
Truth is never present in single form. And sqeezing out *the* right words you can get completely different meaning. Of course no one will agree, but Ken Brown seems satisfied.
C'mon it's (:THE:) ^_- *TRUTH* ^_- by Kenneth Brown
p.s. Don't tell anybody hat he was payed by M$
Hope you don't think I was serious about Pretenderle too. It would be a trip from one world of fiction to another.
So they are writing a book of lies...
Nope, they are writing the truth they wanna hear. They didn't lie, they just twisted truth and cut *WRONG* parts of sentences (At least to get to the truth they wanted to publish).
So who is going to step forward and write a book, of researched FACTS to counteract this work of FICTION?
Pretenderle????
Time to review Ellen Feiss and all the corresponding jokes???
Good question is if W3C specs will be enough for vector drawing app.
It even raises a good question.
Goal of Inkscape? Vector drawing or W3C compliant. Even Sodipodi had a lot of messages on this theme.
Best solution would be two SVG formats, W3C and another that implements features made impossible by SVG specs.
That's the *EXCUSE*????
Face it, start writing software for life and then repeat these words.
Personally, either free, bought or none.
moderately clean conscience
Don't you think, that moderation bar goes higher with time. (take as population) Copying software is just becoming normal daily thing that no one cares about.
The only problem with humanity is that moderation is view in selfish view only. When persons job is at stake... Heeeeeeell NOOOO!
My attitude is just clean. Either it's free or commercial. Mine or others.
I sincerelly hope you don't write software with this attitude (at least not commercial, I do both GPL (out of love) and commercial (for my daily bread)). Believe me there's no difference, when your work is at question.
Not sure where you're getting this from, though I don't think it's hard to tell (your ass). Anything not heavily system dependent can easily be compiled on Windows using GCC/Cygwin or Mingw or what have you.
1. Out of the world. My bussiness allows me to see a lot of different machines.
2. My ass doesn't talk back so it would be hard to confirm understanding. I agree
3. Most of UI based software is based on KDE and Gnome. Except on Cygwin, I don't imagine being ported. Cygwin on another matter is just licking icecream trough the glass (like Wine).
4. Secondary ported applications never feel *AT HOME* on Windows. WM is just too different. Gimp for example plain sucks on Windows. And Gimp is my favorite pic_editor. Difference in WM is the one that makes it unusable (Not that port is bad).
Winamp is bad?
After 2.x, yes. Nullsoft sucks lately
ZoomPlayer is bad?
Comparing to mplayer it basically SUCKS. Like all video players on Windows. *Yeah, I know! Where do I get this from? All of my friends have installed movie players. And all have one Linux partition to watch movies in a decent manner. They all tryed BS,Zoom,Media... Players. And none was satisfactory enough. They all rather sacrificed 4GB for Linux and reboot for watching. Even though almost none of them doesn't use Linux
Girder is bad?
Girder screws when you have another remote. TV tuner, which forces him self to be *usable*. Drivers with tv tuners sometimes do that, you know.
PuTTY is bad?
Lack of support for X11 (on Windows), different codepages screw your terminal. Yeah, and Linux version I don't need. I already have terminal
Google toolbar is bad?
Yeah, definitly
There's plenty of good free Windows software out there
I agree but, you THE *expert* didn't point not even one that could be called good.
Hell, even I know better free software for Windows than those you named. At least more professional and usable.
Nope, wouldn't agree.
Most of the software isn't ported. And Windows mostly has shareware. Quantity of freeware is very low, and as original poster said, mostly very bad quality.
Freeware software on Windows is either ported from Linux, made mutiplatform or bad.
Where the fuck did I mention copyright infringement (or you ment copying without permission, in that case, MY BAD)? That wasn't the case.
Agree with better terms. English is my fourth language so, yes thase are terms I had in mind.
p.s. So that's why most home Windows users preffer illegal M$Office instead of free OO.org? Because they don't directly harm anyone. I see your logic, yep, it prevails all other. This logic is so very dilbert.com
Nope, not contradicting.
Maybe I just put it wrong. I always buy software just as music. Problem is only that people (in their minds) consider stealing a needle more problematic than to make illegal copy of some software.
About 2.
Based on basic OS. Office, etc already exists on Linux when you install it. Why another?
Face it, apps are already here. God damn distro and every god damn compilable software. For 98% of linux users that means complete software up to the last one.
I've got AMD64, and everything is 64-bit.
It's just Windows and OSX lacking that support (I mean apps) and invalidating 64-bit options.
Now, be fair and be square.
1. Yes, Linux users understand Copyright law better. (at least bigger percentage)
2. Linux was always independant in this matter. You get far more (legal FREE software) basic computer interactions covered from distro than you get out of Windows.
3. Even though there's free alternative tipical Windows user will rather use pirated one that he's more familiar with.
4. Linux users can't be related to problems 2 and 3
5. When tipical copy'n'install user switches to Linux, his mind doesn't change. He won't start buying products, except in case that he changed his mind (like you say, that you did)
6. Problems will start when copy'n'install users switch
7. There's got to be something wrong with this world. Stealing (no matter how little the material thing is) is condemed by general society, while pirating software is just a daily routine (no matter how expensive software is)
Actualy, Macromedia sent letters to customers in form of:
Would you migrate???
Would you buy...???
I guess they got enough positive response to start making authoring tools. You can read press releases for your self on Macromedia
First version will be Wine based, probably Crossover, second is the native version.
I never said they should be removed. And exactly. Agree 110%:)
Read my other post, what did I think with my comment. It's right on top of the page "Re: It worked for me"
It's not the problem with working or not.
Snort just isn't ready for serious use in enterprise. Sounds silly, but... Too many false positives may very well lock network.
Here is a simpler case. On Port detectors.
Why don't port detectors use iptables lock out of port scanners (or even better why it is not suggested).
Most of port scan detectors count actual SYN,FIN and other blocked TCP blocks which are marked as invalid on your firewall. Not even one of them doesn't take to account that some features are completely valid even though they are not. (here is the case: You're running ftp server, that means port 21 is open, does it really matters if SYN,FIN occurs on that port???) Secondary they don't take to account some stupidity. (You don't really care if one machine has scanned your port XXX (yes, your pr0n port) for 50 times), result was always the same. This should count as 1 and not as 50. With this relatively simple logic port scan detectors would exclude false positives in a very simple way. And you could be sure thatsomeone that scanned 50 ports (different and not public open) is really port scanner.
Now go to second level. Porscan detector is just one of many functions that snort provides. And even here there's many false positives.
Actualy I use Snort very differently. Redirected logs to my external processor and this processor excludes invalid information, after that reaction on firewall or server follows. That way was the only possible way to get fairly restrictive measures with not too many false positives.
Too many features might really mean to many false alerts (logs or mysql tables can get pretty crowded). But in any case it's usable to detect default signatures of attacks pretty well.
Should be used? Yes, except some functions should be disabled
Should be remodeled? Yes
It has the same flaw as port scan attack detectors.
Quite contrary my dear Watson, patches can be traced in colective manner much easier.
RH doesn't upgrade versions. They backport patches. Version of kernel stays the same in RH, the only number in version that changes are cumulative patch versions.
/. topic for those who don't know.
It was even
p.s. I don't know who marked you insightful. He needs his brains checked more often
So, basically you like watching compiling
There is a little difference, while Linux distros have errors, there's a single error in Windows. Complete OS.
Yes, it does. Few newbie friends of mine were tempted by geeks like you. Guess what, everybody put back FC (and neither one of them finished the setup).
I had good laughs anyway. It is a viable desktop platform if you know what you do. In that case every *X is good on desktop for ME, except OSX. (I hate OSX, but that's my personal opinion and personal reasons)