The last 3 releases (3.14, 3.15 and 3.16) have all been named Shuffling Zombie Juror (with 3.13 being "One Giant Leap for Frogkind"), so I'm guessing Linus gave up on the nonsense release names or something. I was looking forward to new ones, but there haven't been any in a while.
I work for an ISP and we were running FreeBSD on our critical (and extremely active) recursive DNS servers and also route master machines (edge-level BGP/OSPF management routers, which are at the level right below the Cisco peer routers - those machines run Quagga). The first issues we started having had to do with random system lockups on the primary recursive DNS server (it appeared like the OS would stop the interrupt controller - pressing the power button on the machine would briefly reactivate the interrupts for about a second probably due to it trying to initiate a sleep mode). This happened on FreeBSD 7.1 and above. I went around in the FreeBSD mailing lists and saw a large discussion about it on there, with some die-hard FreeBSD fans fuming at the kernel devs since this kind of issue went completely unnoticed (was fixed in 8.0). Then I assumed that 8.0 would be fine, but we were building new route master machines with 8.0, and Quagga was having massive issues with the kernel (I tried building the latest Quagga code which didn't solve the issue) - so we had the choice of either dropping back to 7.0 for those machines or just jumping ship to Linux (Debian specifically, which is what most of our machines run anyway). We went with Linux (still have a few FreeBSD machines though), and all our problems disappeared. The machines in question were IBM x335 and x336 1U rackmount machines.
FreeBSD used to be the standard for high-performance networking systems, but they really need to get their act together and actually field-test things before deploying production code. The code isn't simply being used on some random person's toy box, it's being used in datacenters on critical infrastructure. Situations like this will make people immediately jump ship.
As long as the other crazies do nothing but walk around with picket signs of Heith Ledger's face as the Joker with a Hitler mustache painted on it, yes.
"(LPAC)— Advocates for a single-payer health care system are on an organizing drive across the country to try to get single-payer into the debate on health care reform. The LaRouche movement supports single-payer, but nothing will happen on it until the Obama Administration's Nazi health care policy is defeated and the HMOs are defeated." (http://www.larouchepac.com/node/10437)
Wrong. It gives people a financial incentive to reduce their carbon emissions if possible.
And it provides an incentive for massive corporations (and of course the federal government) to amass even more money and poser, by profiting off of everyone else. Take everyone's favorite guy Ken Lay of Enron for example, who was a huge proponent of carbon offsets - here's a tidbit of related stuff:
"There’s big money to be made in the carbon business. Enron and Lehman Brothers are two examples. Ken Lay became a celebrated corporate executive praised for his ‘21st century’ business visions. But Enron’s internal memos, leaked to reporters during its bankruptcy scandal, revealed other motivations. Christine MacDonald in her book, Green, Inc., notes that Lay had two meetings with President Bill Clinton and Vice-President Al Gore on a treaty capping carbon emissions. An internal Enron memo predicted this would ‘do more to promote Enron’s business than almost any other regulatory initiative outside of restructuring the energy and natural gas industries in Europe and the United States.’ MacDonald adds, “Enron also had plans for using its support among environmentalists, who cooed over Lay.”"
Nice flamebait - it's great seeing your ignorant leftist hatred showing itself for what it really is, and truly shows what kind of a person you are. As an independent conservative myself, you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about, and you're just babbling from a demented stereotypical leftist viewpoint on what conservatives are. Just mocking and slandering others without even slightly trying to understand them is only going to cause problems for yourself in the long run.
>Windows NT was designed to run on i386, MIPS, PPC and Alpha. Over the years, Microsoft discontinued >support for the various platforms - IIRC MIPS and Alpha ended with NT3.51 - PPC ended with NT4. NT5 >(aka - Windows 2000) was the first i386 only version of NT.
Almost correct - NT was originally designed for the Intel i860 cpu (codenamed N-Ten, which is where the NT acronym comes from). With the first release (3.1) it supported x86, MIPS, PPC and Alpha, and there was a SPARC port that never saw the light of day. NT 4.0 RTM had support for them all, but MIPS and PPC were dropped right after that (service packs were only available for x86 and Alpha). Alpha support continued up to NT 5.0 RC2, and support was dropped with the release of NT 5.0 RTM (Windows 2000) due to Compaq ending NT support for Alpha. The embedded variants of NT still have active ports for other architectures. I'm assuming that it's far less portable now than it used to be.
>Why don't you take O'Reilly's cock out of your mouth?
Nice demonstration of your "superior" intelligence. So if anyone disagrees with you in any way, you just revert to character assassination? Good job, retard.
>If Bill Maher/Michael Moore/Robert Greenwald come out for/against video games, should that make news on here?
If it did, people by the truckload would be lauding it as insightful. I'm addicted to computers (including types of Unix workstations, but not really games though), and I can fully understand what O'Reilly's trying to explain. Maybe a hardcore gamer losing his girlfriend over a stupid game really isn't such a good thing, or kids becoming so self-absorbed and selfish that they only care about what the latest tech trends are (ex. a teen having their parents buy them a $300 cell phone, an 80gig iPod, 4 video game systems, then spending entire days watching TV, playing games, etc). With me (on the losing a girlfriend issue), I would seriously never want my own obsessions to interfere with a relationship with a girl - a good analogy would be a girl with a TV obsession dissing you simply because she'd rather spend her whole day watching TV.
>You admit that spending is out of control, and you state that this is totally >against everything you stand for - and yet you still identify with a party that >is making a mockery of the name "Republican"? >If you can't even leave the party when it's pissing all over your politics, I'd >say you must have some kind of massive ego investment holding you in there...
It's best to stay in the party and try to fix it, then to completely leave and let it continue on it's course.
>Yeah, but just try telling a democrat that Clinton was just as willing to put an >end to our privacy as Bush, or telling a Republican that they're spending more >than the Democrats did last time around, and they will work themselves into a >hilarious snit. They have a massive ego investment in the idea that there's some >practical difference between the wings of the Ruling Party.
Well, government spending is currently out of control (and I can't stand it). And I'm a Republican. So where's my "massive ego investment" that supposedly blinds me to the truth? Now, it would be interesting to see a Democrat admit to Clinton's anti-privacy issues...
That's fairly ironic, since Lewis was a Creationist (read more of his writings to find out info on that), and he actively promoted it, including in his stories.
>The number of affected machines is going to be VERY low. Fixes for one of the flaws have been out since February. My distro updates itself every couple of days. I'm not worried.
When I worked as an intern/co-op at Argonne National Laboratory back in 2001-2002 (year and a half), I was heading a project comparing the installed lab-wide Cisco IDS systems with the open-source Snort IDS on a Linux testbed machine semi-running off the fiber backbone (spanning). We detected tons of exotic exploit attempts, and I'll never forget the worms that were trying to hit NT 3.51 boxes - the guy working with me said something like "does anybody even run NT3 anymore?". Some people still run it, but it's very rare.
>I would expect to see a huge demand for access to the primary Internet, and the new one would just sortof shrivel up and die.
Maybe they'll want to entirely develop a new protocol to use too (while refusing to use both IPv4 and 6). They'll probably end up with something similar to a routable version of NetBEUI - wouldn't that be utopia? haha
>And who did? Aliens? Certainly not the UN! I'm pretty sure it wasn't Russia, China, Japan, Mexico, South America, Canada, Europe, or Antartica. Maybe it was Santa Claus?
Maybe the Internet started as a vast secretive US government network... oh wait...;)
To this day I still can't think of a *single* product that Microsoft actually "invented" completely in-house. There are some software projects that I run that literally have no equivalent elsewhere (and I don't consider myself an inventor). At one time I thought that maybe Space Simulator was created by them entirely, but it was made by BAO of course.
Practically every product they have is the result of some other company's work (and those companies usually get bought out and merged with MS very quickly).
Even something as stupid as Microsoft Bob doesn't seem to have been invented by them, since there were "user-friendly" house-like interfaces before that; and usually shipped with computers like Packard Bells. From what I know, their entire Office suite is a collection of bought-out companies.
"The Guardian is reporting that the EU, obviously unimpressed with Linus Torvalds' and the OSDL's refusal to relinguish control of the Linux operating system, will be forming several comittees and forums with a mind to forcibly remove control of Linux from Torvalds and the OSDL." From the article: "Old allies in world politics, representatives from the UK and US sat just feet away from each other, but all looked straight ahead as Hendon explained the EU had decided to end Torvald's unilateral control of the Linux kernel and put in place a new body that would now develop this revolutionary operating system. The issue of who should control Linux had proved an extremely divisive issue, and for 11 days the world's governments traded blows. For the vast majority of people who use Linux, the only real concern is obtaining it. But with Linux now being essential to countries' basic infrastructures - the question of who has control has become critical."
This should bring a unique perspective to the situation. Taking into account that the Internet was originally a collection of US government and academic networks, was created and merged at the cost of US taxpayers, and that things like ICANN are private entities (of which the UN/EU want to take ownership over), this should be somewhat similar.
So the US creates the Internet through merging collections of government and academic networks, it then shares it's resources to the world (and the world quickly catches onto it), and then now non-elected, self-appointed "independent" groups want to "assume ownership" over ICANN and the DNS root servers? Considering that these resources are private property, and that countries control their own DNS hierarchies, there's one quote that comes to mind right away:
"In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property." - Carl Marx, The Communist Manifesto.
Just like when the Supreme Court recently ruled that local governments can seize private property such as homes for private development, these "independent" groups are now demanding the ability to seize private property at an international level.
This part's interesting too: "6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state." - Communist Manifesto
In this Internet issue, the "state" would refer to the globalist independent groups that are assuming the role of leaders of a global "state". Next we'll see these same organizations claiming that web servers and their content are all "global property" and not private.
"For them to demand to be given control of a system setup, funded, and run, by the original creators of the system is just absurd."
The UN might as well just demand to take over Linux lol. I can just hear it now: "Who cares about Torvalds? The 'developing' countries need it! It's now ours; we're relicensing it under the UNCS license - UN Closed Source" lol
Fracturing? lol. First of all, it's ISPs in multiple countries that control the majority of DNS and IP allocations, not ICANN or whatever. Have any of you actually managed DNS servers before? TLD servers only manage what their name implies - TOP LEVEL. Around 99% of DNS servers are not top level servers, and they also handle around 99% of all DNS traffic (correct me on this if I'm wrong). The funniest thing is this point: where did the Internet originate? In Europe? - the entire thing resulted from merging US academic networks with US government networks; so just like the people in here who would want to see the US destroyed (I noticed one post with a guy who said that nothing would really happen if the US just "disappeared" off the face of the Earth), did you ever think about what would happen if the US wasn't around to create the Internet? If someone disagrees with me, then they should easily agree with the wacky idea that Linus Torvalds should cease being the lead of the Linux kernel project - hey, he created it, he manages it, but why not turn control of it all over to the UN or something? lol.
And for those who would agree with that guy I mentioned, would you like it if the companies and organizations that own the oceanic fiber lines to shut them down, cutting off all communication between the US and every other country? Just like that one guy said - "If the US disappeared off the face of the earth tomorrow, there would be a brief hiccup and then it would be business as usual. After all, what is it we do for the world exactly, other than bully people?" lol. Basically the perfect response would be "ok, we'll ship you off to some random country in Europe, and then cut off the fiber lines connecting Europe to the US. Then I guess you'd get your wish, and be in utopia." - then you'll suddenly realize that you've lost access to over 80% of the entire Internet, including the cores. Or you could go the opposite direction, and make the IP allocation open to everyone; then you could have fun watching the entire Internet slowly come to a screeching halt, as everyone just sets up IP networks with any addresses, and everything starts conflicting. What about MAC address allocation? Who needs to control that? Why not just let everyone choose their own random MAC addresses when they get a new nic? lol
Btw, while we're on the topic of a UN-controlled Internet as some people have said, why not just go all the way and start a global ID system for every person? lol. Wouldn't that be lovely... sure.. whatever.
excerpts from the Communist Manifesto, by Karl Marx (http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manife sto.html):
"In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property. ...
"1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rent to public purpose. ...
"6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the State"
In this infrastructure model, information on each person is owned by the State for the "public" purpose (this is taken from more broad points made in the manifesto, but those listed above are just the basics).
In this sense, pedophiles will actually own (in the idea of public collective ownership) the information of these people, including kids. What better way to solve the problem? lol.
I can't believe AOL still charges $24/mo for their *dialup* service. That price hasn't changed in a long time. You can get a basic DSL service for about $30/mo around here lol.
Do any of you remember the music video to Buddy Holly by Weezer on the Win95 cd? I remember playing that video on WFW 3.11 (since I refused to upgrade to 95 for over a year) - and I still like 3.x lol. Man did I hate 95... (I used OS/2 around that time quite a bit too). That video was probably the only thing I liked about the 95 cd.
I still can't believe how horrible 95/98 and ME were. Hopefully they'll be considered as having the worst operating system design in history (they used some sort of hybrid overlay kernel).
Slashdot Mirror
The last 3 releases (3.14, 3.15 and 3.16) have all been named Shuffling Zombie Juror (with 3.13 being "One Giant Leap for Frogkind"), so I'm guessing Linus gave up on the nonsense release names or something. I was looking forward to new ones, but there haven't been any in a while.
I work for an ISP and we were running FreeBSD on our critical (and extremely active) recursive DNS servers and also route master machines (edge-level BGP/OSPF management routers, which are at the level right below the Cisco peer routers - those machines run Quagga). The first issues we started having had to do with random system lockups on the primary recursive DNS server (it appeared like the OS would stop the interrupt controller - pressing the power button on the machine would briefly reactivate the interrupts for about a second probably due to it trying to initiate a sleep mode). This happened on FreeBSD 7.1 and above. I went around in the FreeBSD mailing lists and saw a large discussion about it on there, with some die-hard FreeBSD fans fuming at the kernel devs since this kind of issue went completely unnoticed (was fixed in 8.0). Then I assumed that 8.0 would be fine, but we were building new route master machines with 8.0, and Quagga was having massive issues with the kernel (I tried building the latest Quagga code which didn't solve the issue) - so we had the choice of either dropping back to 7.0 for those machines or just jumping ship to Linux (Debian specifically, which is what most of our machines run anyway). We went with Linux (still have a few FreeBSD machines though), and all our problems disappeared. The machines in question were IBM x335 and x336 1U rackmount machines.
FreeBSD used to be the standard for high-performance networking systems, but they really need to get their act together and actually field-test things before deploying production code. The code isn't simply being used on some random person's toy box, it's being used in datacenters on critical infrastructure. Situations like this will make people immediately jump ship.
-eventhorizon
As long as the other crazies do nothing but walk around with picket signs of Heith Ledger's face as the Joker with a Hitler mustache painted on it, yes.
Those "other crazies" you're referring to are part of the psychotic LaRouche PAC, which is actually a leftist organization: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:A_touch_of_teh_crazee.jpg
"(LPAC)— Advocates for a single-payer health care system are on an organizing drive across the country to try to get single-payer into the debate on health care reform. The LaRouche movement supports single-payer, but nothing will happen on it until the Obama Administration's Nazi health care policy is defeated and the HMOs are defeated." (http://www.larouchepac.com/node/10437)
-eventhorizon
Wrong. It gives people a financial incentive to reduce their carbon emissions if possible.
And it provides an incentive for massive corporations (and of course the federal government) to amass even more money and poser, by profiting off of everyone else. Take everyone's favorite guy Ken Lay of Enron for example, who was a huge proponent of carbon offsets - here's a tidbit of related stuff:
"There’s big money to be made in the carbon business. Enron and Lehman Brothers are two examples. Ken Lay became a celebrated corporate executive praised for his ‘21st century’ business visions. But Enron’s internal memos, leaked to reporters during its bankruptcy scandal, revealed other motivations. Christine MacDonald in her book, Green, Inc., notes that Lay had two meetings with President Bill Clinton and Vice-President Al Gore on a treaty capping carbon emissions. An internal Enron memo predicted this would ‘do more to promote Enron’s business than almost any other regulatory initiative outside of restructuring the energy and natural gas industries in Europe and the United States.’ MacDonald adds, “Enron also had plans for using its support among environmentalists, who cooed over Lay.”"
http://www.carbonoffsetsdaily.com/global/the-rich-and-famous-and-carbon-offsets-3926.htm
-eventhorizon
Nice flamebait - it's great seeing your ignorant leftist hatred showing itself for what it really is, and truly shows what kind of a person you are. As an independent conservative myself, you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about, and you're just babbling from a demented stereotypical leftist viewpoint on what conservatives are. Just mocking and slandering others without even slightly trying to understand them is only going to cause problems for yourself in the long run.
>Windows NT was designed to run on i386, MIPS, PPC and Alpha. Over the years, Microsoft discontinued >support for the various platforms - IIRC MIPS and Alpha ended with NT3.51 - PPC ended with NT4. NT5 >(aka - Windows 2000) was the first i386 only version of NT.
Almost correct - NT was originally designed for the Intel i860 cpu (codenamed N-Ten, which is where the NT acronym comes from). With the first release (3.1) it supported x86, MIPS, PPC and Alpha, and there was a SPARC port that never saw the light of day. NT 4.0 RTM had support for them all, but MIPS and PPC were dropped right after that (service packs were only available for x86 and Alpha). Alpha support continued up to NT 5.0 RC2, and support was dropped with the release of NT 5.0 RTM (Windows 2000) due to Compaq ending NT support for Alpha. The embedded variants of NT still have active ports for other architectures. I'm assuming that it's far less portable now than it used to be.
-eventhorizon
>Why don't you take O'Reilly's cock out of your mouth?
Nice demonstration of your "superior" intelligence. So if anyone disagrees with you in any way, you just revert to character assassination? Good job, retard.
-eventhorizon
>If Bill Maher/Michael Moore/Robert Greenwald come out for/against video games, should that make news on here?
If it did, people by the truckload would be lauding it as insightful. I'm addicted to computers (including types of Unix workstations, but not really games though), and I can fully understand what O'Reilly's trying to explain. Maybe a hardcore gamer losing his girlfriend over a stupid game really isn't such a good thing, or kids becoming so self-absorbed and selfish that they only care about what the latest tech trends are (ex. a teen having their parents buy them a $300 cell phone, an 80gig iPod, 4 video game systems, then spending entire days watching TV, playing games, etc). With me (on the losing a girlfriend issue), I would seriously never want my own obsessions to interfere with a relationship with a girl - a good analogy would be a girl with a TV obsession dissing you simply because she'd rather spend her whole day watching TV.
-eventhorizon
>You admit that spending is out of control, and you state that this is totally >against everything you stand for - and yet you still identify with a party that >is making a mockery of the name "Republican"?
>If you can't even leave the party when it's pissing all over your politics, I'd >say you must have some kind of massive ego investment holding you in there...
It's best to stay in the party and try to fix it, then to completely leave and let it continue on it's course.
-eventhorizon
>Yeah, but just try telling a democrat that Clinton was just as willing to put an >end to our privacy as Bush, or telling a Republican that they're spending more >than the Democrats did last time around, and they will work themselves into a >hilarious snit. They have a massive ego investment in the idea that there's some >practical difference between the wings of the Ruling Party.
Well, government spending is currently out of control (and I can't stand it). And I'm a Republican. So where's my "massive ego investment" that supposedly blinds me to the truth? Now, it would be interesting to see a Democrat admit to Clinton's anti-privacy issues...
-eventhorizon
> or religious zealots who promote creationism
That's fairly ironic, since Lewis was a Creationist (read more of his writings to find out info on that), and he actively promoted it, including in his stories.
-eventhorizon
>The number of affected machines is going to be VERY low. Fixes for one of the flaws have been out since February. My distro updates itself every couple of days. I'm not worried.
When I worked as an intern/co-op at Argonne National Laboratory back in 2001-2002 (year and a half), I was heading a project comparing the installed lab-wide Cisco IDS systems with the open-source Snort IDS on a Linux testbed machine semi-running off the fiber backbone (spanning). We detected tons of exotic exploit attempts, and I'll never forget the worms that were trying to hit NT 3.51 boxes - the guy working with me said something like "does anybody even run NT3 anymore?". Some people still run it, but it's very rare.
-eventhorizon
>I would expect to see a huge demand for access to the primary Internet, and the new one would just sortof shrivel up and die.
Maybe they'll want to entirely develop a new protocol to use too (while refusing to use both IPv4 and 6). They'll probably end up with something similar to a routable version of NetBEUI - wouldn't that be utopia? haha
-eventhorizon
> I thought they actually made Excel?
I don't think they did (from what I know it was a small bought out company). I'd have to check info on this though.
-eventhorizon
>And who did? Aliens? Certainly not the UN! I'm pretty sure it wasn't Russia, China, Japan, Mexico, South America, Canada, Europe, or Antartica. Maybe it was Santa Claus?
;)
Maybe the Internet started as a vast secretive US government network... oh wait...
-eventhorizon
To this day I still can't think of a *single* product that Microsoft actually "invented" completely in-house. There are some software projects that I run that literally have no equivalent elsewhere (and I don't consider myself an inventor). At one time I thought that maybe Space Simulator was created by them entirely, but it was made by BAO of course.
Practically every product they have is the result of some other company's work (and those companies usually get bought out and merged with MS very quickly).
Even something as stupid as Microsoft Bob doesn't seem to have been invented by them, since there were "user-friendly" house-like interfaces before that; and usually shipped with computers like Packard Bells. From what I know, their entire Office suite is a collection of bought-out companies.
-eventhorizon
"The Guardian is reporting that the EU, obviously unimpressed with Linus Torvalds' and the OSDL's refusal to relinguish control of the Linux operating system, will be forming several comittees and forums with a mind to forcibly remove control of Linux from Torvalds and the OSDL." From the article: "Old allies in world politics, representatives from the UK and US sat just feet away from each other, but all looked straight ahead as Hendon explained the EU had decided to end Torvald's unilateral control of the Linux kernel and put in place a new body that would now develop this revolutionary operating system. The issue of who should control Linux had proved an extremely divisive issue, and for 11 days the world's governments traded blows. For the vast majority of people who use Linux, the only real concern is obtaining it. But with Linux now being essential to countries' basic infrastructures - the question of who has control has become critical."
This should bring a unique perspective to the situation. Taking into account that the Internet was originally a collection of US government and academic networks, was created and merged at the cost of US taxpayers, and that things like ICANN are private entities (of which the UN/EU want to take ownership over), this should be somewhat similar.
-eventhorizon
So the US creates the Internet through merging collections of government and academic networks, it then shares it's resources to the world (and the world quickly catches onto it), and then now non-elected, self-appointed "independent" groups want to "assume ownership" over ICANN and the DNS root servers? Considering that these resources are private property, and that countries control their own DNS hierarchies, there's one quote that comes to mind right away:
"In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property." - Carl Marx, The Communist Manifesto.
Just like when the Supreme Court recently ruled that local governments can seize private property such as homes for private development, these "independent" groups are now demanding the ability to seize private property at an international level.
This part's interesting too:
"6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state." - Communist Manifesto
In this Internet issue, the "state" would refer to the globalist independent groups that are assuming the role of leaders of a global "state".
Next we'll see these same organizations claiming that web servers and their content are all "global property" and not private.
-eventhorizon
"Get back in your box"
lol - yeah...
-eventhorizon
"For them to demand to be given control of a system setup, funded, and run, by the original creators of the system is just absurd."
The UN might as well just demand to take over Linux lol. I can just hear it now: "Who cares about Torvalds? The 'developing' countries need it! It's now ours; we're relicensing it under the UNCS license - UN Closed Source" lol
-eventhorizon
"If the US disappeared off the face of the earth tomorrow..."
"After all, what is it we do for the world"
lol are you homicidal or something?
-eventhorizon
Fracturing? lol. First of all, it's ISPs in multiple countries that control the majority of DNS and IP allocations, not ICANN or whatever. Have any of you actually managed DNS servers before? TLD servers only manage what their name implies - TOP LEVEL. Around 99% of DNS servers are not top level servers, and they also handle around 99% of all DNS traffic (correct me on this if I'm wrong). The funniest thing is this point: where did the Internet originate? In Europe? - the entire thing resulted from merging US academic networks with US government networks; so just like the people in here who would want to see the US destroyed (I noticed one post with a guy who said that nothing would really happen if the US just "disappeared" off the face of the Earth), did you ever think about what would happen if the US wasn't around to create the Internet? If someone disagrees with me, then they should easily agree with the wacky idea that Linus Torvalds should cease being the lead of the Linux kernel project - hey, he created it, he manages it, but why not turn control of it all over to the UN or something? lol.
And for those who would agree with that guy I mentioned, would you like it if the companies and organizations that own the oceanic fiber lines to shut them down, cutting off all communication between the US and every other country? Just like that one guy said - "If the US disappeared off the face of the earth tomorrow, there would be a brief hiccup and then it would be business as usual. After all, what is it we do for the world exactly, other than bully people?" lol. Basically the perfect response would be "ok, we'll ship you off to some random country in Europe, and then cut off the fiber lines connecting Europe to the US. Then I guess you'd get your wish, and be in utopia." - then you'll suddenly realize that you've lost access to over 80% of the entire Internet, including the cores. Or you could go the opposite direction, and make the IP allocation open to everyone; then you could have fun watching the entire Internet slowly come to a screeching halt, as everyone just sets up IP networks with any addresses, and everything starts conflicting. What about MAC address allocation? Who needs to control that? Why not just let everyone choose their own random MAC addresses when they get a new nic? lol
Btw, while we're on the topic of a UN-controlled Internet as some people have said, why not just go all the way and start a global ID system for every person? lol. Wouldn't that be lovely... sure.. whatever.
-eventhorizon
Just Marxist Socialism at work again...
e sto.html):
...
...
excerpts from the Communist Manifesto, by Karl Marx (http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manif
"In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.
"1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rent to public purpose.
"6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the State"
In this infrastructure model, information on each person is owned by the State for the "public" purpose (this is taken from more broad points made in the manifesto, but those listed above are just the basics).
In this sense, pedophiles will actually own (in the idea of public collective ownership) the information of these people, including kids. What better way to solve the problem? lol.
-eventhorizon
I can't believe AOL still charges $24/mo for their *dialup* service. That price hasn't changed in a long time. You can get a basic DSL service for about $30/mo around here lol.
-eventhorizon
Do any of you remember the music video to Buddy Holly by Weezer on the Win95 cd? I remember playing that video on WFW 3.11 (since I refused to upgrade to 95 for over a year) - and I still like 3.x lol. Man did I hate 95... (I used OS/2 around that time quite a bit too). That video was probably the only thing I liked about the 95 cd.
I still can't believe how horrible 95/98 and ME were. Hopefully they'll be considered as having the worst operating system design in history (they used some sort of hybrid overlay kernel).
-eventhorizon