You need the corporate version of Windows XP Professional. It does not
require activation. (Moderators, don't moderate this as a troll. It's true,
there is a corporate version that does not require activation.)
If things continue, think where they will go: 800 digits to do activation! If
you make a mistake, the EULA says MS can come around with whips.
It doesn't work to have proprietary software. It is becoming more of a way to
deliver hostility to honest people than a way to deliver a useful product.
Install Mandrake Linux. You boot from the CD. It asks you three questions (if
you are connected to a network), and everything works. It's stable.
Advantages of Free, Open Source Software:
There are no tricks to get you to spend more. There's no one to be your enemy
part of the time. When you try to get tech support, you can find people who
are helpful, not arrogant, as in the case of Microsoft and Symantec. Open
Office works very well and is less quirky than Microsoft Office. You don't
need to worry about licenses and possible lawsuits if you install too many
copies. There is no vulnerability of the week. There is no company
representative lying about competing software. There are no closed file
formats. There are no sneaky EULAs that change during security fixes, so that
you must agree to a different contract after you have already made the
decision to own the product. There are no security fixes that change the
settings of your software, so that the new settings are less secure. (MS in
case you haven't seen that one; it's Multiple Scuzziness.) With Open Source,
you don't have to be business partners with people whom you would avoid if you
saw them at a party.
On the other hand, proprietary software can be character building if you
survive. You can make a scientific sociological study of how some people, when
they get power, torture other people. And, when you arrive at the Pearly
Gates, Saint Peter will say, "Proprietary software user? You've already been
to Hell. Go directly into Heaven."
One thing you may not realize, since you are Canadian, is the depth of corruption of the U.S. government. The oil companies and the weapons makers and those who benefit financially from violence give money to government officials, and the government officials help the corrupters make more money. U.S. Senator John McCain, a Republican, has been talking about this for years. Here's just one New York Times article about the corruption: Bush Got $500,000 From Companies That Got Contracts, Study Finds.
The main point is that the U.S. government is the biggest researcher,
developer, manufacturer, and user of weapons of mass destruction.
Regarding Kuwait, the issue is that some people find it possible to live in
the world without fighting. Others believe that they are constantly finding
important reasons for violence. You said, "... wasn't the US "liberating"
Kuwait at this time"? Yes, but U.S. government representative April
Glaspie led Saddam Hussein to believe that the U.S. would not oppose an
invasion of Iraq. This followed many years of encouraging Saddam Hussein's
violence against Iran, and selling Saddam weapons. You can read about this if
you like: History surrounding the U.S. war with Iraq:
Four short stories.
For 58 years, the U.S. government has spent thousands of billions of dollars
intensively planning and executing modern war. If there were as much intense
planning for peace, a lot of "reasons" for violence would not exist. It has a
lot to do with how a country chooses to live in the world.
By some measures, the U.S. government is the most violent that has ever existed in the world.
The writer of this is an American who is very concerned about his government's participation in violence. In his opinion, a person doesn't really love his or her country unless he or she is willing to look at and understand areas where the country needs
improvement. The same principle applies elsewhere. A man doesn't really love his
wife if he turns his back when she is having serious, difficult-to-understand
problems. And, a person doesn't really love himself or herself unless he or she tries to understand and resolve his or her own inner conflict.
Strictly speaking, it is the U.S. government that is responsible for the violence, not the people of the United States. Very, very few Americans understand the facts presented here. There are many Americans who support violence, and who angrily reject these facts, but even those probably would not want their money being spent on violence if they fully understood the financial and social impact on their lives.
The U.S. government has directly killed about 3,000,000 people since the beginning of the Vietnam war. Most of those, an estimated more than 2,000,000, were in Vietnam, a very poor country that did not threaten the United States.
Historians say that the number of people indirectly killed by the U.S. government is at least another 3,000,000, for a total of 6,000,000. For example, U.S. bombing of Cambodia left that country destabilized, and the forces of violence controlled Cambodia for years after the U.S. bombing.
The U.S. government has bombed 24 countries in the 58 years since the Second World War. The list below includes only countries bombed, not countries in which the U.S. government was responsible for other violence. The list includes only violence since the Second World War, not the extensive violence before the war. Most U.S. citizens are surprised and skeptical when they see the list, so a few links have been provided to supporting information. For more information, try the Google search engine or see the links below.
Thanks for your post. You have added facts that we have all needed to understand this issue.
Maybe some who read this will want to re-consider.
on
ISPs for the Little Guy?
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
Sorry, I thought the point of my message would be clear. Someone wrote a
long article about why people should not host their own web sites. It's scary
to see all the reasons together. Unfortunately I'm working on something for a
customer, and I don't have the link easily available.
Powweb provides 650 email addresses.
Powweb provides control over DNS. I have run programs I've written on a Powweb server.
However, it is not clear to me if you could have complete control and run your
own DNS server on their computer. You must be able to provide a program that
runs under FreeBSD, the Powweb OS.
When all is considered, it is a huge hassle to run your own server, if you
want reliable operation and you aren't just using it for learning and testing.
Do you want to get out of bed at 3 AM when someone finds some vulnerability
that you didn't patch yet? If the answer is no, let the web hosting company do
the updates.
Maybe this reply is not of use to you, but I'm guessing that it will be of use
to many that read this Slashdot article. Comments must be written for
everyone, not just the original poster.
The functionality and the security updates all cost only $7.77 a month. Ping
times are low. 65 Gigs of transfer. One Gigabyte of storage.
I don't have any connection with Powweb other than as a customer. Here is
another of Powweb's customers, one of the largest sellers of contemporary art
in the world, a company with the odd name of The Real Mother Goose.
There are a lot of people who don't really believe a contract is valid until it has been tested in court. So, this is good. Let's test the GPL and finish passing that milestone. The GPL seems 100% solid to me.
I'm not evangelizing, I'm grieving. I would be happy with Microsoft if I thought they were going down the right path.
I predicted the fall of Novell, WordPerfect, Corel, Fifth Generation Systems, and PowerSoft long before they happened.
I talked extensively to the operations manager at Corel before the fall; he agreed; it was no secret to those who think about management.
I talked extensively on the telephone to the CEO of Fifth Generation Systems before the fall of that company. He didn't have enough technical knowledge to run a technically-oriented company.
In talking about the problems of Microsoft, I am just continuing with the same analytical principles.
It would be better if Microsoft didn't drag 400,000,000 people, including me, through a lot of problems.
Good points. However, will some of those who have already struggled through other changes decide that it is easier just to migrate to Linux?
.NET has not been with us long. If it needed improvement so much, why didn't they wait to release it until it was finished?
Maybe I'm not expressing this well, but I think Microsoft will lose people from the flock of the faithful. Product-churning may be profitable, but not if people decide they don't want to be churned.
Sorry. I was writing my Slashdot comment while I was supposed to be working, and I was a little too abbreviated.
At one time, Novell had 85% of the networking market. Now the company is still profitable, but much, much smaller. Part of the reason for the shrinkage was due to Novell's terrible abusiveness toward the consultants that supported its software. (In my opinion, it was terrible, that is. I still feel bad about the way I was treated.)
Actually, I have been hearing that Novell users are quite happy with its products at present.
If I remember correctly, Novell bought Word Perfect Corporation for $1,150,000,000 (yes, that's more than a billion dollars) and sold it 9 months later to Corel for $850,000,000 less. That is the most expensive single business decision I can remember.
Slashdot Mirror
You need the corporate version of Windows XP Professional. It does not require activation. (Moderators, don't moderate this as a troll. It's true, there is a corporate version that does not require activation.)
If things continue, think where they will go: 800 digits to do activation! If you make a mistake, the EULA says MS can come around with whips.
It doesn't work to have proprietary software. It is becoming more of a way to deliver hostility to honest people than a way to deliver a useful product.
Install Mandrake Linux. You boot from the CD. It asks you three questions (if you are connected to a network), and everything works. It's stable.
Advantages of Free, Open Source Software:
There are no tricks to get you to spend more. There's no one to be your enemy part of the time. When you try to get tech support, you can find people who are helpful, not arrogant, as in the case of Microsoft and Symantec. Open Office works very well and is less quirky than Microsoft Office. You don't need to worry about licenses and possible lawsuits if you install too many copies. There is no vulnerability of the week. There is no company representative lying about competing software. There are no closed file formats. There are no sneaky EULAs that change during security fixes, so that you must agree to a different contract after you have already made the decision to own the product. There are no security fixes that change the settings of your software, so that the new settings are less secure. (MS in case you haven't seen that one; it's Multiple Scuzziness.) With Open Source, you don't have to be business partners with people whom you would avoid if you saw them at a party.
On the other hand, proprietary software can be character building if you survive. You can make a scientific sociological study of how some people, when they get power, torture other people. And, when you arrive at the Pearly Gates, Saint Peter will say, "Proprietary software user? You've already been to Hell. Go directly into Heaven."
Symantec has a LONG history of releasing buggy software. That's why I don't buy anything from Symantec.
Whew!!!! Slashdot Halloween scare story!
9 ads on the page.
It is a breach of trust. The original page was available; why not link to that? If that is okay, what is next; will mirrors insert ads?
The money apparently does NOT go to help BSD, but goes to a private company; is that true?
Ads are good, in the right circumstances. Sneakiness is never good.
One thing you may not realize, since you are Canadian, is the depth of corruption of the U.S. government. The oil companies and the weapons makers and those who benefit financially from violence give money to government officials, and the government officials help the corrupters make more money. U.S. Senator John McCain, a Republican, has been talking about this for years. Here's just one New York Times article about the corruption: Bush Got $500,000 From Companies That Got Contracts, Study Finds.
The main point is that the U.S. government is the biggest researcher, developer, manufacturer, and user of weapons of mass destruction.
Regarding Kuwait, the issue is that some people find it possible to live in the world without fighting. Others believe that they are constantly finding important reasons for violence. You said, "... wasn't the US "liberating" Kuwait at this time"? Yes, but U.S. government representative April Glaspie led Saddam Hussein to believe that the U.S. would not oppose an invasion of Iraq. This followed many years of encouraging Saddam Hussein's violence against Iran, and selling Saddam weapons. You can read about this if you like: History surrounding the U.S. war with Iraq: Four short stories.
For 58 years, the U.S. government has spent thousands of billions of dollars intensively planning and executing modern war. If there were as much intense planning for peace, a lot of "reasons" for violence would not exist. It has a lot to do with how a country chooses to live in the world.
See my earlier post about this: By some measures, the U.S. government is the most violent that has ever existed in the world.
By some measures, the U.S. government is the most violent that has ever existed in the world.
The writer of this is an American who is very concerned about his government's participation in violence. In his opinion, a person doesn't really love his or her country unless he or she is willing to look at and understand areas where the country needs improvement. The same principle applies elsewhere. A man doesn't really love his wife if he turns his back when she is having serious, difficult-to-understand problems. And, a person doesn't really love himself or herself unless he or she tries to understand and resolve his or her own inner conflict.
Strictly speaking, it is the U.S. government that is responsible for the violence, not the people of the United States. Very, very few Americans understand the facts presented here. There are many Americans who support violence, and who angrily reject these facts, but even those probably would not want their money being spent on violence if they fully understood the financial and social impact on their lives.
The U.S. government has directly killed about 3,000,000 people since the beginning of the Vietnam war. Most of those, an estimated more than 2,000,000, were in Vietnam, a very poor country that did not threaten the United States.
Historians say that the number of people indirectly killed by the U.S. government is at least another 3,000,000, for a total of 6,000,000. For example, U.S. bombing of Cambodia left that country destabilized, and the forces of violence controlled Cambodia for years after the U.S. bombing.
The U.S. government has bombed 24 countries in the 58 years since the Second World War. The list below includes only countries bombed, not countries in which the U.S. government was responsible for other violence. The list includes only violence since the Second World War, not the extensive violence before the war. Most U.S. citizens are surprised and skeptical when they see the list, so a few links have been provided to supporting information. For more information, try the Google search engine or see the links below.
So it was a money-making scheme for Dan?
Why don't Slashdot editors catch this kind of thing?
I remember Vitamin A, also. It may be both.
The Slashdot story said, "... are pleased to announce the release of version 1.3.29 of the Apache HTTP Server ("Apache")."
However, that link references only a copy of the release info on a commercial bulletin board, BSDForums.org, that has plenty of advertisements.
The Slashdot story could have said, "... are pleased to announce the release of version 1.3.29 of the Apache HTTP Server ("Apache")", which is the official announcement on the apache.org site.
Mod parent up!!!! This is the most sensible comment I've found.
I thought the show was terrible. I reserved Smolen's book at the library. Thanks for the recommendation.
Wow, I accidentally got an on topic frost pist.
"... something important about the universe eludes our understanding..."
Exactly correct, but also unintentionally funny. I'm guessing something is more accurately 100,000,000 things.
"... pushed by some junky."
It is amazing to me that Slashdot commenters become extremely hostile if they don't like something someone else said.
Thanks for your post. You have added facts that we have all needed to understand this issue.
Sorry, I thought the point of my message would be clear. Someone wrote a long article about why people should not host their own web sites. It's scary to see all the reasons together. Unfortunately I'm working on something for a customer, and I don't have the link easily available.
Powweb provides 650 email addresses.
Powweb provides control over DNS. I have run programs I've written on a Powweb server. However, it is not clear to me if you could have complete control and run your own DNS server on their computer. You must be able to provide a program that runs under FreeBSD, the Powweb OS.
When all is considered, it is a huge hassle to run your own server, if you want reliable operation and you aren't just using it for learning and testing. Do you want to get out of bed at 3 AM when someone finds some vulnerability that you didn't patch yet? If the answer is no, let the web hosting company do the updates.
Maybe this reply is not of use to you, but I'm guessing that it will be of use to many that read this Slashdot article. Comments must be written for everyone, not just the original poster.
The functionality and the security updates all cost only $7.77 a month. Ping times are low. 65 Gigs of transfer. One Gigabyte of storage.
I don't have any connection with Powweb other than as a customer. Here is another of Powweb's customers, one of the largest sellers of contemporary art in the world, a company with the odd name of The Real Mother Goose.
For web serving, try Powweb. You can't run your own web server nearly as well. It's $7.77 a month.
There are a lot of people who don't really believe a contract is valid until it has been tested in court. So, this is good. Let's test the GPL and finish passing that milestone. The GPL seems 100% solid to me.
The fact that my original post was quickly modded up showed that I was only expressing what was in the mind of many people.
I'm not evangelizing, I'm grieving. I would be happy with Microsoft if I thought they were going down the right path.
I predicted the fall of Novell, WordPerfect, Corel, Fifth Generation Systems, and PowerSoft long before they happened. I talked extensively to the operations manager at Corel before the fall; he agreed; it was no secret to those who think about management. I talked extensively on the telephone to the CEO of Fifth Generation Systems before the fall of that company. He didn't have enough technical knowledge to run a technically-oriented company.
In talking about the problems of Microsoft, I am just continuing with the same analytical principles.
It would be better if Microsoft didn't drag 400,000,000 people, including me, through a lot of problems.
Good points. However, will some of those who have already struggled through other changes decide that it is easier just to migrate to Linux?
Maybe I'm not expressing this well, but I think Microsoft will lose people from the flock of the faithful. Product-churning may be profitable, but not if people decide they don't want to be churned.
Sorry. I was writing my Slashdot comment while I was supposed to be working, and I was a little too abbreviated.
At one time, Novell had 85% of the networking market. Now the company is still profitable, but much, much smaller. Part of the reason for the shrinkage was due to Novell's terrible abusiveness toward the consultants that supported its software. (In my opinion, it was terrible, that is. I still feel bad about the way I was treated.)
Actually, I have been hearing that Novell users are quite happy with its products at present.
If I remember correctly, Novell bought Word Perfect Corporation for $1,150,000,000 (yes, that's more than a billion dollars) and sold it 9 months later to Corel for $850,000,000 less. That is the most expensive single business decision I can remember.
Wow. Someone modded the parent comment "Troll". ???
Bill??? Was that you?