I haven't searched the 400 plus previous replies, so this is probably a dupe. The Naval Electronics Laboratory Algol Compiler was popular with certain super-secret federal projects from about 1960 til I dunno when.
Are you going to ignore the obvious HUGE DIFFERENCE between the W2K restore and the RH install? Red Hat had to accomodate another OS. W2K didn't. In fact, I don't know that W2K can. Can it?
I could have just erased W2K completely from the drive before installing RH, but that wasn't my goal.
The point is that I gave RH the more difficult install. Don't claim there is bias in that.
Preloads are by far the largest part of Microsoft's customer base. Microsoft forces OEMs to provide restore CDs instead of providing regular CDs.
It is not Sony's fault. It is Microsoft's fault.
To say it is unfair to write about the only legal process available to a Sony customer to reinstall the OS is to say that Microsoft treats its customers unfairly.
Besides, 4 of of EULAs (including the one with the gag order) and 4 of the reboots came from the update process, which Sony has nothing at all to do with.
I'm sorry. I shouldn't have assumed that English was your native language. Ferris "outed himself" when he removed the cloak of anonymity on which the first report was based.
You seem tragically confused. This outing doesn't depend at all on what sort of reaction the mainstream press gives the story. That's a horse of a different color. It has to do with someone having the courage to say "I know this is true because I was there and I saw it happen. And I don't like it."
This is probably way too much for you to digest in a single session. Think about for a few days.
oh, my! I used OS/2! Goodness gracious, the horror! And I didn't print Microsoft's lies like most of the rest of the tres duh press. So that makes me a kook? Fine. It's critical thinking like yours that makes MS the success it is today.
This story was broken by a member of the Linux community. That would be Paul Ferris. It was written about by a member of the Linux community. That would be me. A petition to LT demanding accountability was put together by two other members of the Linux community. Read it for yourself on VARLinux.org.
Why hasn't there been more of an uproar? Maybe because up until Ferris stepped out of the shadow of anonymity. I've pondered that question myself, at http://www.pjprimer.com/porch/porch.2001.0730.html
But for any member of the MS monopoly mod squad to attack the Linux community's ethics regarding astroturfing is absurd. We have (had?) a bad apple. We outed him. Your nose is still behind Gates cheeks, and evidently you like it there.
In the windows world, similar stories were broken by outsiders: myself, the LA Times, a forum manager on Compuserve. Insiders, developers, those with their snouts to the MS teat and sucking on the food chain, never spoke out.
/. is about five months late on this benchmark. i guess they are under pressure from the money people to get content, so that drag this thing out again.
the point that linus and others have made about the pc week sanctioned tests is that it wasn't cheating on the benchmarks that flaw the results, it was cheating on the benchmark itself.
the benchmarks are designed to do one thing and one thing only, show NT's strengths against Linux's weaknesses. only idiots take these results to mean anything at all other than mindcraft has done it again. they are paid to make NT look good, and they do. they change the test parameters, the benchmark itself, depending on whether or not they are sliming novell, or sun, or linux.
the real question is why is/. visiting this slime again.
As an ex-spook, I can say that your description is not too far off from my (somewhat dated) experience. All the intelligence agencies you mention, and quite a few more, are actually consumers of NSA product.
They prefer to leave the headlines to the CIA and others so they can do their work in peace and quiet. Codebreakers are an odd lot and don't seem to have changed much since the days of the Enigma machine.
My guess is that all that's changed since my departure is that most traffic now goes over the internet instead of by radio. Oh, and the satellites can see and hear better too, naturally.
The Time article is dead wrong about Prodigy being the first. It barely even counts as a Pioneer. As the top of this thread points out, The Source (later swallowed by CompuServe) and CompuServe both predated Prodigy.
I think it will be a joint decision by Nicholas, myself, and IDG Books when we have enough good content to go to print. We would all like that to occur as soon as possible, but of course have no way of knowing when we will reach that point. I' ve been told that 90 days afterwards, the book will be available in printed form.
It will be available on the web in HTML format all during the development cycle. Nicholas and I will do rough edits, selection, rejection, folding, merging etc on the front lines. Then the text will be sent to IDG Books for their editing. Then we will work with the author(s) to resolve any issues raised by IDG Books. Then the text (be it a section or chapter or paragraph or modification of same) will be put up on the web site. Feedback received from folks reading the text will be incorporated in the same fashion.
I'm not sure what additional formats we will have online beyond HTML, but suggestions are welcome.
Well, he may or may not be an asset, but he is going to contribute. Why? Because it seems like a cool way to get good, current, Linux docs to a whole lot of people. Also because it is a good way to get people who can't contribute code to contribute in another way.
In my interview with Stallman a week or so ago at the Expo, he said that if a programmer came to him and volunteered his time to write free software, if Richard found out that he could also write documentation, he would beg him for documentation.
There is definitely a need. This idea could help meet that need. Of course, if it is restricted to people like yourself who have never made a mistake, it might take a little longer.
I'm glad it gives the posers something to sneer at, but probably everyone would be better off if they got off their butts and did something for someone else now and then.
Hey, programmers are people too. Some of us have a way with words, and some no have way.
I doubt that we will get many sections of chapters, let alone whole chapters, written by a single individual. It will be the voice of many people, some contributing just a sentence or a paragraph or a comment or a criticism or a correction.
Nick and I will do the preliminary editing, and we've had offers of assistance with that part of it too, but for style and uniformity and the like all will be shipped to IDG Book and gone over by their professional copy editors before it gets posted on the web site.
Everyone who contributes will get something. It may only be an autographed copy of the book, or it might be a check for $500, but everyone will get something back in addition to the opportunity to do something for the community.
Yes, the name of Steve Bartko was well known to OS/2 users. I wrote about it at www.pjprimer.com/jihad.html. Brock Meeks picked up the story again last year after the LA Times caught wind of the MS astroturf campaign. The Bill Diamond affair, also on CompuServe, was another example of the same thing, but received less publicity. The victim in the Diamond case was Novell Netware. Now it's AOL, although MS is protecting the identity of the employee this time. Sounds like the work of MS "research" to me. It's certainly nothing new, and for every one of these duplicitous dolts exposed to the light of day, just like cockroaches, there are hundreds and hundreds just out of sight. Never trust MS about anything. Ever. At all. Even when they tell the truth they are doing it to mislead you. See ya, Joe Barr aka Warthawg
Slashdot Mirror
I haven't searched the 400 plus previous replies, so this is probably a dupe. The Naval Electronics Laboratory Algol Compiler was popular with certain super-secret federal projects from about 1960 til I dunno when.
After all, the Swifties/Bush/Cheney have a 24 x 7 ad running. It's called Fox News.
Are you going to ignore the obvious HUGE DIFFERENCE between the W2K restore and the RH install? Red Hat had to accomodate another OS. W2K didn't. In fact, I don't know that W2K can. Can it?
I could have just erased W2K completely from the drive before installing RH, but that wasn't my goal.
The point is that I gave RH the more difficult install. Don't claim there is bias in that.
See ya,
Joe Barr
Preloads are by far the largest part of Microsoft's customer base. Microsoft forces OEMs to provide restore CDs instead of providing regular CDs.
It is not Sony's fault. It is Microsoft's fault.
To say it is unfair to write about the only legal process available to a Sony customer to reinstall the OS is to say that Microsoft treats its customers unfairly.
Besides, 4 of of EULAs (including the one with the gag order) and 4 of the reboots came from the update process, which Sony has nothing at all to do with.
See ya,
Joe Barr
I'm sorry. I shouldn't have assumed that English was your native language. Ferris "outed himself" when he removed the cloak of anonymity on which the first report was based.
You seem tragically confused. This outing doesn't depend at all on what sort of reaction the mainstream press gives the story. That's a horse of a different color. It has to do with someone having the courage to say "I know this is true because I was there and I saw it happen. And I don't like it."
This is probably way too much for you to digest in a single session. Think about for a few days.
See ya,
Joe Barr
Sheldon,
oh, my! I used OS/2! Goodness gracious, the horror! And I didn't print Microsoft's lies like most of the rest of the tres duh press. So that makes me a kook? Fine. It's critical thinking like yours that makes MS the success it is today.
See ya,
Joe Barr
Harsh criticism?
This story was broken by a member of the Linux community. That would be Paul Ferris. It was written about by a member of the Linux community. That would be me. A petition to LT demanding accountability was put together by two other members of the Linux community. Read it for yourself on VARLinux.org.
Why hasn't there been more of an uproar? Maybe because up until Ferris stepped out of the shadow of anonymity. I've pondered that question myself, at http://www.pjprimer.com/porch/porch.2001.0730.htm
But for any member of the MS monopoly mod squad to attack the Linux community's ethics regarding astroturfing is absurd. We have (had?) a bad apple. We outed him. Your nose is still behind Gates cheeks, and evidently you like it there.
In the windows world, similar stories were broken by outsiders: myself, the LA Times, a forum manager on Compuserve. Insiders, developers, those with their snouts to the MS teat and sucking on the food chain, never spoke out.
See ya,
Joe Barr
I couldn't help it. I liked the subject title.
/. is about five months late on this benchmark. i guess they are under pressure from the money people to get content, so that drag this thing out again.
the point that linus and others have made about the pc week sanctioned tests is that it wasn't cheating on the benchmarks that flaw the results, it was cheating on the benchmark itself.
the benchmarks are designed to do one thing and one thing only, show NT's strengths against Linux's weaknesses. only idiots take these results to mean anything at all other than mindcraft has done it again. they are paid to make NT look good, and they do. they change the test parameters, the benchmark itself, depending on whether or not they are sliming novell, or sun, or linux.
the real question is why is
As an ex-spook, I can say that your description is not too far off from my (somewhat dated) experience. All the intelligence agencies you mention, and quite a few more, are actually consumers of NSA product.
They prefer to leave the headlines to the CIA and others so they can do their work in peace and quiet. Codebreakers are an odd lot and don't seem to have changed much since the days of the Enigma machine.
My guess is that all that's changed since my departure is that most traffic now goes over the internet instead of by radio. Oh, and the satellites can see and hear better too, naturally.
See ya,
WaRtHaWg
The Time article is dead wrong about Prodigy being the first. It barely even counts as a Pioneer. As the top of this thread points out, The Source (later swallowed by CompuServe) and CompuServe both predated Prodigy.
AAF826
I think it will be a joint decision by Nicholas, myself, and IDG Books when we have enough good content to go to print. We would all like that to occur as soon as possible, but of course have no way of knowing when we will reach that point. I'
ve been told that 90 days afterwards, the book will be available in printed form.
It will be available on the web in HTML format all during the development cycle. Nicholas and I will do rough edits, selection, rejection, folding, merging etc on the front lines. Then the text will be sent to IDG Books for their editing. Then we will work with the author(s) to resolve any issues raised by IDG Books. Then the text (be it a section or chapter or paragraph or modification of same) will be put up on the web site. Feedback received from folks reading the text will be incorporated in the same fashion.
I'm not sure what additional formats we will have online beyond HTML, but suggestions are welcome.
See ya,
Joe Barr
aka WaRtHaWg
FSF and others are begging for documentation. If you can write, you can help.
See ya,
Joe Barr
aka WaRtHaWg
Well, he may or may not be an asset, but he is going to contribute. Why? Because it seems like a cool way to get good, current, Linux docs to a whole lot of people. Also because it is a good way to get people who can't contribute code to contribute in another way.
In my interview with Stallman a week or so ago at the Expo, he said that if a programmer came to him and volunteered his time to write free software, if Richard found out that he could also write documentation, he would beg him for documentation.
There is definitely a need. This idea could help meet that need. Of course, if it is restricted to people like yourself who have never made a mistake, it might take a little longer.
I'm glad it gives the posers something to sneer at, but probably everyone would be better off if they got off their butts and did something for someone else now and then.
See ya,
Joe Barr
aka WaRtHaWg
Hey, programmers are people too. Some of us have a way with words, and some no have way.
I doubt that we will get many sections of chapters, let alone whole chapters, written by a single individual. It will be the voice of many people, some contributing just a sentence or a paragraph or a comment or a criticism or a correction.
Nick and I will do the preliminary editing, and we've had offers of assistance with that part of it too, but for style and uniformity and the like all will be shipped to IDG Book and gone over by their professional copy editors before it gets posted on the web site.
Everyone who contributes will get something. It may only be an autographed copy of the book, or it might be a check for $500, but everyone will get something back in addition to the opportunity to do something for the community.
See ya,
Joe Barr
aka WaRtHaWg
Yes, the name of Steve Bartko was well known to OS/2 users. I wrote about it at www.pjprimer.com/jihad.html. Brock Meeks picked up the story again last year after the LA Times caught wind of the MS astroturf campaign. The Bill Diamond affair, also on CompuServe, was another example of the same thing, but received less publicity. The victim in the Diamond case was Novell Netware. Now it's AOL, although MS is protecting the identity of the employee this time. Sounds like the work of MS "research" to me. It's certainly nothing new, and for every one of these duplicitous dolts exposed to the light of day, just like cockroaches, there are hundreds and hundreds just out of sight. Never trust MS about anything. Ever. At all. Even when they tell the truth they are doing it to mislead you. See ya, Joe Barr aka Warthawg