This doesn't surprise me. Back when I was 18 and had long hair, a police man on horseback stopped me for allegedly being drunk when I was totally sober and didn't even have as much as a drink of beer in the last 24 hours or more. I told him I was sober and he said to me (lying) "I saw you stumble a block back."
Virginia Beach police in general tend to be overzealous; because it's the location of the state police acadamy a lot of their police officers are new to the job. I'm sorry to say that I don't trust the Virginia Beach police to not misuse this monitoring system.
What makes this particularly newsworthy? NetBSD has had such a list for ages
What makes this newsworthy is that FreeBSD development is venturing into the multiplatform realm tread previously only by NetBSD and to a lesser extent OpenBSD. Hence they are asking for more equipment to make ports of FreeBSD to - after being only on the Intel and Alpha platforms for years. This is quite newsworthy.
There has always been an element of the growing linux userbase that decides to move to a *BSD for various reasons
Yep, I did. Actually, I had originally wanted to run BSD as my first "distro", after running Linux kernel 0.99 (originally 0.95) on a 386 prior to having net access. The fact that an older version of FreeBSD didn't support my new 486's CD-ROM scared me away from it until recently though. Now I'm running FreeBSD 4.7-PRERELEASE on a P4 and am a happy camper.
The Linux camps attracts the bulk of new users to the Linux/BSD camp and some naturally spill over to the *BSDs. Is that a bad thing? Nope, its only natural. But it was the early Linux advocates and zealots who created the wake...
Actually, the early
UNIX users (including Berkely UNIX, aka BSD) who didn't want to pay $$$ to run UNIX on a PC are what created the wake - I know, I was there when Linux kernel 0.95 a fresh release; most of the early adopters were UNIX-literate people who had run UNIX before from work or in college.
It was later the GPL and the growing wake produced by early Linux that attacted the corporate interest in Free Unix after the BSDs lost it due to lawsuits and attitude problems.
The AT&T lawsuit is *old* news, it's been close to a decade since the settlement. Unfortunately the timing was bad, Linux was just starting to become useful at the same time that AT&T scared people from BSD. Of course, that lawsuit is no reason to block usage of BSD now; BSD since about '94 or thereabouts is based upon 4.4Lite which is, even according to AT&T's lawyers, completely unencumbered.
However, even though it has a great backbone in the form of an open BSD system, the truth is that it is doubtfull the apple folks will get the steam, hype, and generally market support that Linux is constantly getting lately.
[more explaining why Apple should switch to Linux from BSD deleted]
Linux is OK, but BSD itself is so compatable with Linux that not only do practically all sources recompile without changes, it even can run Linux binaries on the Intel (and maybe others) with almost no overhead in emulation. (Also on some other platforms it has similar binary emulation for the predominant Unix, like NetBSD on SGI platforms emulating Irix)
Why, other than the fact that "more people have heard of Linux", the crux of your argument, should they switch when the BSD API itself already (assuming they haven't made big changes that a simple switch to the Linux kernel wouldn't fix either) has the ability to run tons (well over 5,000 packages ported for FreeBSD) of Linux and Unix software with a simple recompile or, when neccesary for closed-source applications, emulation of Linux?
Since I'm now running FreeBSD, I am hesitent to call any platform dead;-), especially one that hasn't appeared yet. However, with Turbo Linux's near bankruptcy and Caldera's refashioning of itself as SCO it doesn't look like "United Linux" has an especially bright future. Though SuSE and perhaps Connectiva (famous for apt-get for RPM) are probably in good enough shape to get the product to market with or without their shaky partners.
YaST, SuSE's setup, configuration, and hardware detection tool, may not be GPL, but it includes source code; on the condition that you don't derive monetary gain from it.
Considering what SuSE has done for the community in supporting KDE developers, the -aa VM, and the Reiser file system, among other things, painting a picture of them being, in Stallmanist terms, "a parasite of the free software world" is unfair. It's noteworthy that when they were having financial difficulties before IBM's investment in them that during the layoffs they refused to lay off one developer.
People have different aesthetics of course, but I really like the look of windowmaker / blackbox / fluxbox -- esp. when set up with nice big labeled icons, I think it would be a great way to set up an internet cafe / public access station.
Clean, simple, resource-friendly...
I love the way Windowmaker looks as well, I use it. However, unfortunately the general public is used to Windows and probably would be very puzzled by the requirement to right-click on a desktop as opposed to a start button (aka K menu / Foot menu). Of course, if you plan to use old hardware for the workstations you might want to choose Windowmaker or *box at any event because of their lower resource requirements.
Atcually FVWM I think would be a good choice. You can give them a clank desktop with only a clock and I cons for Mozilla/Netscape, AIM/MSN/IRC/YahooMess, Office, whatever.
Click the icon and you get the app, make it easy to use. If you go with gnome or kde you can intimidate the computer illerate.
My comment was essentially a joke (though I used to use fvwm!) though as you point out there is an element of truth to it. It would make things less likely to be tampered with in a kind of security through obscurity sense and would be simple for the users to use at the expense of some eye candy. (Though I actually found fvwm configured as a motif clone reasonably attractive.)
As for the BSD Ports system, it has ZERO to offer in this situation despite being a wonderful system. The BSD ports setup pretty much requires source distribution and the target audience for LSB isn't interested in that.
FreeBSD doesn't have to compile source to download and install a package with it's dependencies. Use pkg_add -r, and you'll get binaries along with their dependencies in binary. I prefer most of the time to use the ports system, however, because I've got a fast CPU so compiling usually is fast enough for me.
FreeBSD is nice though, you can't go wrong with it unless you need:
SMP
Java
Linux threading seems to be better now
99% of Java works fine, I use it here without a problem. The big deal is that you have to download both Java source and Linux's Java for the libraries in order to install the BSD version, because Sun still hasn't officially approved binary distribution for FreeBSD yet due to HotSpot(tm) still being in beta condition. That should change soon though.
I'm certain they will blow past their stated release date [of 5.0] of Nov. 20. It could easily slip to feb. 2003 or beyond. Apparently it is very difficult to make new releases on time when you are a dying OS.
The Linux 2.4 kernel release was far more delayed than that, I don't see people saying it's dying.;-)
The reason why is necause the Slashdot editors ovbiously wait until the story is submitted by someone they know, or something with a cool-sounding handle, then they publish it. To hell with being first - it's all about being a favorite son.
I don't know about how the the 2 bogus release announcements for the previous release got out, but I posted my submission concerning this release when I saw the official announcement in the moderated freebsd-announce mailing list.
The secret to getting a story on slashdot is not being a "favorite son", it's to submit early, submit often, and don't whine when your story is rejected or scooped by someone else because that's what will happen to the majority of your submissions. BTW, thanks for the implied complement concerning my choice of handle.:-)
According to a previous Slashdot story, NetBSD version 1.6 is expected *very* soon, it's already at the release candidate stage, so perhaps you haven't avoided avoided downloading a version of BSD too soon either.:-)
Keep in mind however that even if you have download a version of FreeBSD (maybe the same is true for Net) too soon, you can cvsup to the latest -RELEASE or -STABLE without much of a hassle; and 5.0-CURRENT if you want to be on the alpha/beta version edge.(Since I'm tracking -STABLE I don't need to download anything to upgrade; I already am running a system similar to 4.6.2 if not somewhat more cutting edge.)
Hmm, *BSD is releasing new versions. It must not be "dead" after all.;-)
what about a march on Washington?
on
Mega-Geek March?
·
· Score: 1
A protest for free software usage in San Fransisco sounds good. However, considering MS's plans for the government to back trusted computing, making "open platforms" "a thing of the past" (Microsoft as quoted in the New York Times), and the goings on in the commerce department concerning rates for internet radio (we're almost too late on that issue), shouldn't we be organizing a march on Washington? Don't think we don't need one, the DMCA, software patents, and other government regulations restricting free software exist already and were passed only because there was no geek-bloc to resist them.
If you're currently a sysadmin in charge of some large corporate network, speak with your dollars, not with your slashdot. Try and talk your company into standardizing on a single platform. Here let me spec out a good standard...
Nvidia video (single unified driver = less driver headaches)
Nvidia may have a unified driver, but they are also closed source. This could cause problems with accelerated video if you want to use something that's not supported by nVidia inc., like FreeBSD for example. (Yes, I know that accelerated drivers for FreeBSD are being worked on, and the unaccelerated "nv" driver works fine, but as long as the drivers are closed source I wouldn't make nVidia cards a "standard"; though I wouldn't mind making it a *personal* choice should nVidia finally have 3D accceleration on FreeBSD.:-) )
planning on running GNU/Linux until I began studying at OSU, where I could get a legal copy of WinXP from a Microsoft club for $5. Of course, recent/. stories on EULA changes made me decide to use Win2k instead, and I bought a Like New copy through half.com.
Windows 2K also has the EULA changes in it's latest service pack, as does the Windows Media Player, so you didn't avoid the borg.;-) Actually, I think that price (free as in beer) is not, beyond a certain price range, a good gage about what kind of OS software one should use. I use FreeBSD (and like Linux too) because I like the power that *nix gives me rather than for whether or not it's priced the lowest. (Actually you can easily get *nix for $0 if that's what you want, but if you want me to spend all my time in Windows rather than *nix you'd have to not only offer a lower price, you'd have to pay *me*.;-) )
One comment in the Life After Redhat article stuck out. He loves FreeBSD and his systems are "upgraded once a week (all software)". Is this normal pratice? I still have SuSE 6.3 systems running.
He is serious, but that's because it is a simple and trouble-free process under BSD compared to what this would be like under an RPM-based Linux. Even kernel compilation is easier. It is possible to give a cvsup file a target to only make security updates (something that should be done for any system connected to the net) and do it less often, like when security annoucements are made, if that scares you.:-) Also what is updated can be any amount rather than the entire system. Example files and good documentation exists concerning the cvsup file used for this.
Personally I try to keep my entire system upgraded to -STABLE (rather than security-patches-only for -RELEASE or the bleeding edge of -CURRENT), and I manage to download all of the neccesary patches over a dialup modem.:-) Because I have a dialup modem I have to do it frequently though. I've never had any trouble from "cvsuping" yet, and it's so fast that like I said I do it over a 56K connection.
Stallman used the same propaganda technique-- and some others-- in his writings on "free" software. I put the word free in quotes there because what he means by "free software" and what the word "free" actually means are two very different things....
And associating the term "piracy", the capturing of ships on the high seas usually accompanied by violence, with copying of software, a form of usually petty theft at most rather than piracy, isn't also a use of misleading terminology?
What really bothers me-- what really leads me to think that he might actually be dangerous, subversive in the bad sense of the word-- is the way he presents his ideas so carefully. His message is so clearly meant to appeal to emotion at the expense of reason that it makes me wonder what it is he's trying to slip past me.
I'm a bit more worried about Microsoft's usage of the term "trusted computing" than Stallman's usage of the term "free software".
Does this offend you, or are you scared? You say you're irritated -- why? Because he doesn't play by "the rules of western society"? The same society which would decide arbitrarily what a man can and cannot ingest, inhale, or inject into his own body,
I think he is evidence for not ingesting LSD or inhaling marijhana. Not because his ability as an AI researcher has been impared, but if you read the entire interview he mentioned that he lost his job at NYU and now lives on social security for mental disability. Although, like any drug addict, he is in denial; it is clear that it could possibly be the reason why he is mentally ill now; because of abusing drugs that effect the chemicals in the brain in ways that we understand even less than AI.
I'd be more interested in a comparison of the three free BSD operating systems; I've been running NetBSD and OpenBSD for a couple of years now, but I've never installed FreeBSD. I've heard it's got something of a Linuxy bloat rather than the grim austerity of the Open and Net OSes... any comments from users? Might as well put _something_ useful in this wasted comments section.
Wasted comments section? It's not wasted if you want to read canned AC posts about BSD being dead.;-D
Seriously though, I haven't used OpenBSD, and have only used NetBSD via a shell account on someone else's boxen, but FreeBSD is a lot less bloated in it's initial install than all major Linux distributions. The main reason I chose it over NetBSD or OpenBSD is it's larger (in fact humongeous) ports selection - very useful since I use it primarily as a workstation. (Am I the only one that uses BSD as something besides only a server or firewall?) Most of ports is not installed by default however; though my system was even lighter than average since I installed using the 4.6 mini-ISO due to being a dialup user, which meant that I had to use ports to fetch X Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
Virginia Beach police in general tend to be overzealous; because it's the location of the state police acadamy a lot of their police officers are new to the job. I'm sorry to say that I don't trust the Virginia Beach police to not misuse this monitoring system.
If you can't donate hardware, donate your computer skills. The Junior Kernel hacker TODO list gives some examples of much-needed projects.
Linux is OK, but BSD itself is so compatable with Linux that not only do practically all sources recompile without changes, it even can run Linux binaries on the Intel (and maybe others) with almost no overhead in emulation. (Also on some other platforms it has similar binary emulation for the predominant Unix, like NetBSD on SGI platforms emulating Irix)
Why, other than the fact that "more people have heard of Linux", the crux of your argument, should they switch when the BSD API itself already (assuming they haven't made big changes that a simple switch to the Linux kernel wouldn't fix either) has the ability to run tons (well over 5,000 packages ported for FreeBSD) of Linux and Unix software with a simple recompile or, when neccesary for closed-source applications, emulation of Linux?
Since I'm now running FreeBSD, I am hesitent to call any platform dead ;-), especially one that hasn't appeared yet. However, with Turbo Linux's near bankruptcy and Caldera's refashioning of itself as SCO it doesn't look like "United Linux" has an especially bright future. Though SuSE and perhaps Connectiva (famous for apt-get for RPM) are probably in good enough shape to get the product to market with or without their shaky partners.
Considering what SuSE has done for the community in supporting KDE developers, the -aa VM, and the Reiser file system, among other things, painting a picture of them being, in Stallmanist terms, "a parasite of the free software world" is unfair. It's noteworthy that when they were having financial difficulties before IBM's investment in them that during the layoffs they refused to lay off one developer.
The secret to getting a story on slashdot is not being a "favorite son", it's to submit early, submit often, and don't whine when your story is rejected or scooped by someone else because that's what will happen to the majority of your submissions. BTW, thanks for the implied complement concerning my choice of handle. :-)
Keep in mind however that even if you have download a version of FreeBSD (maybe the same is true for Net) too soon, you can cvsup to the latest -RELEASE or -STABLE without much of a hassle; and 5.0-CURRENT if you want to be on the alpha/beta version edge.(Since I'm tracking -STABLE I don't need to download anything to upgrade; I already am running a system similar to 4.6.2 if not somewhat more cutting edge.)
Hmm, *BSD is releasing new versions. It must not be "dead" after all. ;-)
A protest for free software usage in San Fransisco sounds good. However, considering MS's plans for the government to back trusted computing, making "open platforms" "a thing of the past" (Microsoft as quoted in the New York Times), and the goings on in the commerce department concerning rates for internet radio (we're almost too late on that issue), shouldn't we be organizing a march on Washington? Don't think we don't need one, the DMCA, software patents, and other government regulations restricting free software exist already and were passed only because there was no geek-bloc to resist them.
"Emacs would make a good operating system; the only thing missing is a good editor." ;-)
Personally I try to keep my entire system upgraded to -STABLE (rather than security-patches-only for -RELEASE or the bleeding edge of -CURRENT), and I manage to download all of the neccesary patches over a dialup modem. :-) Because I have a dialup modem I have to do it frequently though. I've never had any trouble from "cvsuping" yet, and it's so fast that like I said I do it over a 56K connection.
My software firm is called "Plan B Software Labs". Hopefully this guy won't become too famous or I'll have to think up another name. ;-(
Wasted comments section? It's not wasted if you want to read canned AC posts about BSD being dead. ;-D
Seriously though, I haven't used OpenBSD, and have only used NetBSD via a shell account on someone else's boxen, but FreeBSD is a lot less bloated in it's initial install than all major Linux distributions. The main reason I chose it over NetBSD or OpenBSD is it's larger (in fact humongeous) ports selection - very useful since I use it primarily as a workstation. (Am I the only one that uses BSD as something besides only a server or firewall?) Most of ports is not installed by default however; though my system was even lighter than average since I installed using the 4.6 mini-ISO due to being a dialup user, which meant that I had to use ports to fetch X Windows.