Anyone else getting a little annoyed that slashdot has no posted !3! articles pertaining to this? Its getting old REAL fast. Who cares, IIS has tons of bugs, so why post this. You don't post LINUX bugs, you dont post NT bugs. NO ONE CARES. Next Catz' is gunna do a From IIS's Mouth series about teens and how IIS destroyed their lives.
[00:11] i made diffs(esentially [00:11] <Slade> let me show you [00:11] <Palisade> right [00:12] <Slade> lets pretend that this is the quake source code [00:12] <Palisade> that means there is GPL'd code in there as well [00:12] <Slade> 12345 [00:12] <Slade> and thats the code needed to make quake run(its oversimplicfication i know) [00:12] <Slade> now iD owns the license on all that right? [00:13] <Slade> and the license they've granted is the GPL [00:13] <Palisade> ok [00:13] <Slade> with me so far? [00:13] <Slade> ok [00:13] <Slade> now.. if i make code thats 123945 [00:13] <Palisade> so you link in some modifications [00:13] <Slade> who owns the copywrite on the 9 [00:14] <Slade> i do right? [00:14] <Palisade> ok 9 is your modification, but by linking it it becomes a part of the whole [00:14] <Palisade> you own the copyright, but for you to be able to link it it must be GPL compatible license [00:14] <Slade> hang on [00:14] <Slade> you're jumping the gun [00:14] <Slade> keep with me [00:14] <Slade> ok [00:15] <Slade> so technically [00:15] <Slade> its ok for me to have that binary on my system right? [00:15] <Palisade> slade, you can make as many binaries as you want [00:15] <Slade> even if i say this code is everything against the principles of the GPL(hypathetically) [00:16] <Palisade> if you distribute that binary though you must provide the source code [00:16] <Slade> correct [00:16] <Palisade> and so you're saying you're just providing a patch and not the "actual" binary [00:16] <Palisade> right? [00:16] <Slade> i'm providing the [00:16] <Slade> diffrences between my code and the GPL code [00:17] <Palisade> literally you are the one who linked it, not the end user who applies the patch... [00:17] <Slade> who did i link it? [00:17] <Slade> err [00:17] <Slade> how [00:17] <Palisade> you had to compile the binary which you made a patch available for [00:18] <Palisade> therefore you had to link in your non-GPL'd code [00:18] <Slade> thats one way [00:18] <Slade> but i didnt distribute that binary [00:18] <Palisade> you distributed the binary in essence [00:19] <Palisade> just because a method was used that cut down it's size doesn't mean you didn't distribute it [00:19] <Slade> ok. lets go back to the code issue [00:19] <Slade> 123945 [00:19] <Slade> 12345 [00:19] <Palisade> otherwise people could use encryption or compression as an excuse to pirate... "well the binary isn't *exactly* the same" [00:19] <Slade> the dif is '9' right? [00:19] <Palisade> well the diff would be: [00:20] <Palisade> 123 [00:20] <Palisade> +9 [00:20] <Slade> byte[4]9 shift 1 [00:20] <Palisade> 45 [00:20] <Slade> yeah [00:20] <Slade> now i own the 9 [00:20] <Palisade> diff cuts code and places it in front of and behind the code you changed [00:20] <Palisade> or in this case the binary [00:21] <Slade> not the method i use [00:21] <Slade> if does it like this [00:21] <Slade> byte[4]9 shift 1 [00:21] <Palisade> is that how your patch was really made? [00:21] <Slade> in kindergarden basics, yes [00:21] <Palisade> so you didn't use diff? [00:21] <Slade> diff is gpl'd code [00:22] <Slade> and i cant find a good diff for win32:( [00:22] <Palisade> diff is a program [00:22] <Palisade> oh you're against using GPL'd programs? [00:22] <Slade> no [00:22] <Palisade> there is a commandline diff program available, i should find out the url for it [00:22] <Slade> but that would make part of my patch GPL [00:22] <Palisade> oh you were making it so the end user can just run a program that patches it, ok [00:22] <Slade> yeah windiff. but its buggy [00:22] <Slade> right [00:23] <Slade> point and click, win32 style;) [00:23] <Palisade> ok and no GPL'd code from the Quake 1 engine slipped into the patch at all? [00:23] <Palisade> just location jumps [00:23] <Slade> how could it have? [00:23] <Slade> if you notice [00:23] <Palisade> that reminds me i should write a nifty front-end to patch [00:23] <Slade> i released the source to 2.52 [00:23] <Slade> so 2.52 is perfectly legit [00:24] <Slade> under the GPL [00:24] <Palisade> did you write the patch program? [00:24] <Slade> nope. its shareware. under the general license 'you can use it all you want for as much as you want any way you want so long as you dont use it for commercial purposes' [00:24] <Palisade> slade, ok so we aren't really sure how it patches [00:25] <Slade> on their site [00:25] <Slade> they explained the method [00:25] <Palisade> slade, which means some GPL'd code from the q1 engine could be in there (or rather object code of that code) [00:25] <Palisade> ah [00:25] <Slade> i think its nasty compared to diffs [00:25] <Slade> but it works [00:26] <Palisade> mm [00:26] <Palisade> well it certainly must work well on binaries [00:26] <Slade> which is part of the reason i picked it [00:26] <Slade> no it doesnt:( [00:26] <Slade> it wouldnt even patch the GL server [00:26] <Slade> err client [00:26] <Slade> it failed its compare [00:27] <Slade> but that method is much cooler for binaries then diff [00:27] <Palisade> ah [00:27] <Slade> if they wrote the code right [00:27] <Palisade> ok so anyways, so assuming it doesn't insert any of the original code, just your modification and locations [00:27] * Slade nods. [00:28] <Palisade> in order to create the patch you had to link it... so literally you were the one who linked, not the end user who applies the patch [00:28] <Slade> i linked it, which is legal, so long as i dont distribute the GPL code [00:28] <Palisade> no [00:29] <Palisade> that's false logic... [00:29] <Slade> how so? [00:29] <Palisade> you see in order to actually provide the patch, you had to link the proprietary code with the GPL'd code [00:29] <Slade> correct [00:29] <Palisade> it doesn't matter what you do to it afterwards, compress it, encrypt it, rearrange it, diff it [00:30] <Palisade> in order to get it to the end user [00:30] <Palisade> you still had to link the incompatible licensed code together to create it [00:30] <Slade> correct [00:30] <Palisade> which is illegal [00:30] <Slade> not that i see [00:30] <Palisade> the license doesn't allow that [00:31] <Slade> what i see is its only illegal if the binary is distributed [00:31] <Palisade> as i said it doesn't matter how you want to obfuscate the resulting binary [00:31] <Slade> so you're saying that the patch is under the GPL [00:32] <Palisade> the fact that exact locations were calculated is exactly as if you had distributed the full executable [00:32] <Palisade> no i'm saying the patch violates the GPL [00:32] <Slade> how so? [00:32] <Slade> well let me ask you this [00:33] <Palisade> since it is proprietary code linked with GPL'd code [00:33] <Slade> are we both in agreement that the binary does not violate the GPL so long as its sitting on my own machine [00:33] <Palisade> slade, i'm not sure about that [00:33] <Slade> or is this the point we are arguing right now? [00:34] <Slade> from talking with Carmack, he said that was the hazy part [00:34] <Palisade> it is a pretty hazy part;) [00:34] <Slade> after i explained it [00:34] <Palisade> btw have you talked to gnu@gnu.org yet? [00:34] <Slade> and linux people cant really say anything about it without being hypocritical [00:34] <Palisade> slade, JC is under the misconception that you're going to release the source code later [00:35] <Slade> Palisade: i cleared that up and told him i wasnt [00:35] <Palisade> slade, ah what did he say? [00:37] <Slade> Palisade: Well I had told him that if he says the word I'll do it just as he says it. and he said it was kind of hazy so I removed the patches from the site until we could figure out more. I told him I had done that, he basically said ok. and we continued our conversation on other ways to make a more secure client [00:37] <Palisade> slade, ok, so you're waiting to hear back about that until you do anything further [00:38] <Slade> um. its not that. its basically we've gone on [00:38] <Slade> he wasnt to concerned about if it was a violation of the GPL or not. more that it didnt really matter because the situation was remided to his satisfaction [00:38] <Palisade> slade, i see where some people are getting upset of course, if we assume that you're wrong then of course that's why many are demanding the source... [00:39] <Palisade> slade, the problem seems to be that everyone is confused as to the details, on both sides... [00:39] <Slade> I'm not confused.:) [00:39] <Palisade> slade, you've gone on? [00:39] <Slade> yes. we're moving on to ql 2.54 [00:40] <Palisade> ok [00:40] <Palisade> so what's all the fuss about? [00:41] <Slade> people still want the source [00:41] <Palisade> slade, ah [00:41] <Palisade> slade, well... here's how i see it [00:41] <Palisade> slade, you made a mistake (or rather, decided not to bother with the proprietary patch and moved on, whichever way you want to look at it) [00:42] <Slade> the way i look at it is the copywrite holder was made happy by it being brought down for review [00:42] <Palisade> slade, and you stopped distributing the patch [00:42] <Palisade> slade, now since code 9 was yours [00:42] * Slade listens [00:43] <Palisade> slade, and you reversed your decision [00:44] <Palisade> slade, then the code is yours, the code is under a proprietary license, and you are no longer distributing it linked to the GPL code, then you have the right not to provide that code [00:44] * Slade nods. [00:46] <Slade> then whats the problem again?:) [00:46] <Palisade> no idea [00:46] * Slade chuckles. [00:46] <Palisade> well i think i have an idea [00:46] <Palisade> you see you pissed off a lot of people who really like the GPL [00:47] <Palisade> and so basically they've decided to hassle you about it and see if they can get you to release the code so they feel that they've won somehow [00:47] <Slade> thats the way i see it
Email me for the complete log if you really want it:-)
As a avid quake player, the source code release of Quake has almost destroyed the community. Through extensive monitoring of servers (which should exist anyways) most popular servers have a no cheating policy that includes instant bannishment. I respect the QuakeLives project, and its programmer, but I feel that Slade is destroying the community further. Mega TF, arguably the best quake mod out, is beginning to move towards QuakeLives only, a dependance that could kill both Mega TF, or regular Quake. The QuakeLives project is attempting to create a server that only THEIR client can connect to and monopolize the community. Slade has attempted to swindle his way around this multiple times, consitering making difs, or other such ideas, including this "click through" of giving up your rights. I wish slade would realize that there ARE ways to get past cheating, and they CAN include not breaking the law. I applaud Carmack for his protection of the community. Slade attacks the fact that no one is attempting to fix bugs, or make Quake better. I ask you, what has Slade done to fix bugs and make Quake better? He himself has closed the source of his tree, and isn't obiding by the wording, or the intent of the GPL.
urban:~# traceroute internettrafficreport.com traceroute to internettrafficreport.com (206.243.171.148), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 * * * 2 X.sover.net (207.136.197.X) 99.861 ms 93.994 ms 81.685 ms 3 cisco0.mont.sover.net (207.136.197.10) 87.635 ms 85.222 ms 84.66 ms 4 burl.ent-fr.sover.net (207.136.208.146) 90.562 ms 88.666 ms 83.527 ms 5 sl-gw6-nyc-5-0-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.171.197) 94.206 ms 94.772 ms 92.448 ms 6 sl-bb10-nyc-3-2.sprintlink.net (144.232.7.69) 98.256 ms 93.64 ms 88.565 ms 7 sl-gw9-nyc-8-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.7.94) 95.412 ms 92.838 ms 89.91 ms 8 * * * 9 * * *
There have been MANY times Apple has done stupid things.... They are moving toward a more standard design, and allowing more options on their systems. The new G4's are real nice machines.. PCI bus.. all the goodies.. No more substandard apple onboard video.. (not that ATI is the best.. but its a step forward).. The case is easy to work on.. (My 8100 has a little problem where you have to tear it half apart to add ram.. Its real fun..) I really wish Apple would look forward. MacOS is not the best thing since sliced, packaged cheese.. Allow legal competition (as apposed to reverse engineering..)
I also want to point out something someone below me brought up.. Whats with the throw it up, its good enough look... That must be the crappiest quality image on apple.com..
The text at the bottom, the disclaimer there, wraps horribly, the page lacks the advanced meta tags, RSAC, and html 4.0 complience that www.apple.com has. Did they just get some intern to do this?
They could have atleast gone through and checked it for english errors and inconsitancies.. they refer to it as "Linux", but then once near the bottom call it linux (no capital L)..
This is just my opinion.. feel free to flame me, others have.
I never claimed to be the PPC Guru.. Just from my recent observence, Apple seems to do little these days except utilize what they see fit. Why would it be so hard for them to release the specs for the G3/G4 and allow other operating systems they dont make to use their hardware? I mean come on.. Its decent hardware...
Apple is using this to simply exploit linux. They do very little from what I see to help other operating systems. BeOS does not support the macintosh G4's (G3's also..) because Apple wont help them &/or release specs to help them. They opensource parts of their OS X that they want to use in their operating system.. how convenient.. They have given little to the linux community... but filled their plate with the benefits of the free world.
I just installed MSSQL 7.0 a few days ago, it came with two default accounts:
Both are controlled by NT authentication, both are based on the Administrator password/login. You cant remotely login, because its NT auth [gotta login to the box, domain first]
Oh.. then theres SA, which has a password set.. hrrm.. word. [changes password]
This just in: Samsung has began a new program to help American's afford their new 288Mb Rambus DRAM. We have been informed that Samsung is taking "trade ins" of whole human appendages and key organs. They say that for an arm, or a leg, they will trade a single 288Mb RDRAM. For any major organ, 2 288Mb RDRAM, and for essentail organs, 4 288Mb RDRAM modules.
>The fact that both Windows 95/98 and NT/2000 >cannot be installed (fully, in NT's case) on any >partition except the PRIMARY partition is proof >positive.
I have both Windows 98SE and Windows 2000 Server RC3 installed on my ~8 gig primary partition [C:] without any problems. I just changed the registry in Windows 98 to use progra instead of progra~1. If you dont do this a FEW things dont work. [system info is the only thing that comes to mind]...
And we all know how it looks is more important than its function. BeOS is a useless OS. It supports maybe 5% of the hardware out there and unless you want to watch a teapot spin, has little function.
I paid $100 almost 5 months ago for my Diamond MX300, a VERY nice sound card. For $100 I would expect atleast SOME support, as apposed to my 50 cent OPL3-SAX that works flawlessly.. You were saying??
If [you] want a kewl [c]ommunity, use IRC instead!!! IRC is so[oo] m[u]ch better than lame ass web board[s]. [You] get t[he] benef[i]ts of [elite] warez [too]. (hehehehehehe). All [for] free!!!:-):-) If [you] want [to] join [our elite club, than come to] EFNET #1337 [one-three-three-seven] [to]day. [You] need pass an initiation test, say.. hacking a lame website.
So they just want you to do a (html)(title)hi(/title)(body)yo mom(/body)(/html) ? lol.... Llamas.. Stan "Myconid" Brinkerhoff
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone else getting a little annoyed that slashdot has no posted !3! articles pertaining to this? Its getting old REAL fast. Who cares, IIS has tons of bugs, so why post this. You don't post LINUX bugs, you dont post NT bugs. NO ONE CARES. Next Catz' is gunna do a From IIS's Mouth series about teens and how IIS destroyed their lives.
[00:11] i made diffs(esentially :( ;) :( ;) :) :)
:-)
[00:11] <Slade> let me show you
[00:11] <Palisade> right
[00:12] <Slade> lets pretend that this is the quake source code
[00:12] <Palisade> that means there is GPL'd code in there as well
[00:12] <Slade> 12345
[00:12] <Slade> and thats the code needed to make quake run(its oversimplicfication i know)
[00:12] <Slade> now iD owns the license on all that right?
[00:13] <Slade> and the license they've granted is the GPL
[00:13] <Palisade> ok
[00:13] <Slade> with me so far?
[00:13] <Slade> ok
[00:13] <Slade> now.. if i make code thats 123945
[00:13] <Palisade> so you link in some modifications
[00:13] <Slade> who owns the copywrite on the 9
[00:14] <Slade> i do right?
[00:14] <Palisade> ok 9 is your modification, but by linking it it becomes a part of the whole
[00:14] <Palisade> you own the copyright, but for you to be able to link it it must be GPL compatible license
[00:14] <Slade> hang on
[00:14] <Slade> you're jumping the gun
[00:14] <Slade> keep with me
[00:14] <Slade> ok
[00:15] <Slade> so technically
[00:15] <Slade> its ok for me to have that binary on my system right?
[00:15] <Palisade> slade, you can make as many binaries as you want
[00:15] <Slade> even if i say this code is everything against the principles of the GPL(hypathetically)
[00:16] <Palisade> if you distribute that binary though you must provide the source code
[00:16] <Slade> correct
[00:16] <Palisade> and so you're saying you're just providing a patch and not the "actual" binary
[00:16] <Palisade> right?
[00:16] <Slade> i'm providing the
[00:16] <Slade> diffrences between my code and the GPL code
[00:17] <Palisade> literally you are the one who linked it, not the end user who applies the patch...
[00:17] <Slade> who did i link it?
[00:17] <Slade> err
[00:17] <Slade> how
[00:17] <Palisade> you had to compile the binary which you made a patch available for
[00:18] <Palisade> therefore you had to link in your non-GPL'd code
[00:18] <Slade> thats one way
[00:18] <Slade> but i didnt distribute that binary
[00:18] <Palisade> you distributed the binary in essence
[00:19] <Palisade> just because a method was used that cut down it's size doesn't mean you didn't distribute it
[00:19] <Slade> ok. lets go back to the code issue
[00:19] <Slade> 123945
[00:19] <Slade> 12345
[00:19] <Palisade> otherwise people could use encryption or compression as an excuse to pirate... "well the binary isn't *exactly* the same"
[00:19] <Slade> the dif is '9' right?
[00:19] <Palisade> well the diff would be:
[00:20] <Palisade> 123
[00:20] <Palisade> +9
[00:20] <Slade> byte[4]9 shift 1
[00:20] <Palisade> 45
[00:20] <Slade> yeah
[00:20] <Slade> now i own the 9
[00:20] <Palisade> diff cuts code and places it in front of and behind the code you changed
[00:20] <Palisade> or in this case the binary
[00:21] <Slade> not the method i use
[00:21] <Slade> if does it like this
[00:21] <Slade> byte[4]9 shift 1
[00:21] <Palisade> is that how your patch was really made?
[00:21] <Slade> in kindergarden basics, yes
[00:21] <Palisade> so you didn't use diff?
[00:21] <Slade> diff is gpl'd code
[00:22] <Slade> and i cant find a good diff for win32
[00:22] <Palisade> diff is a program
[00:22] <Palisade> oh you're against using GPL'd programs?
[00:22] <Slade> no
[00:22] <Palisade> there is a commandline diff program available, i should find out the url for it
[00:22] <Slade> but that would make part of my patch GPL
[00:22] <Palisade> oh you were making it so the end user can just run a program that patches it, ok
[00:22] <Slade> yeah windiff. but its buggy
[00:22] <Slade> right
[00:23] <Slade> point and click, win32 style
[00:23] <Palisade> ok and no GPL'd code from the Quake 1 engine slipped into the patch at all?
[00:23] <Palisade> just location jumps
[00:23] <Slade> how could it have?
[00:23] <Slade> if you notice
[00:23] <Palisade> that reminds me i should write a nifty front-end to patch
[00:23] <Slade> i released the source to 2.52
[00:23] <Slade> so 2.52 is perfectly legit
[00:24] <Slade> under the GPL
[00:24] <Palisade> did you write the patch program?
[00:24] <Slade> nope. its shareware. under the general license 'you can use it all you want for as much as you want any way you want so long as you dont use it for commercial purposes'
[00:24] <Palisade> slade, ok so we aren't really sure how it patches
[00:25] <Slade> on their site
[00:25] <Slade> they explained the method
[00:25] <Palisade> slade, which means some GPL'd code from the q1 engine could be in there (or rather object code of that code)
[00:25] <Palisade> ah
[00:25] <Slade> i think its nasty compared to diffs
[00:25] <Slade> but it works
[00:26] <Palisade> mm
[00:26] <Palisade> well it certainly must work well on binaries
[00:26] <Slade> which is part of the reason i picked it
[00:26] <Slade> no it doesnt
[00:26] <Slade> it wouldnt even patch the GL server
[00:26] <Slade> err client
[00:26] <Slade> it failed its compare
[00:27] <Slade> but that method is much cooler for binaries then diff
[00:27] <Palisade> ah
[00:27] <Slade> if they wrote the code right
[00:27] <Palisade> ok so anyways, so assuming it doesn't insert any of the original code, just your modification and locations
[00:27] * Slade nods.
[00:28] <Palisade> in order to create the patch you had to link it... so literally you were the one who linked, not the end user who applies the patch
[00:28] <Slade> i linked it, which is legal, so long as i dont distribute the GPL code
[00:28] <Palisade> no
[00:29] <Palisade> that's false logic...
[00:29] <Slade> how so?
[00:29] <Palisade> you see in order to actually provide the patch, you had to link the proprietary code with the GPL'd code
[00:29] <Slade> correct
[00:29] <Palisade> it doesn't matter what you do to it afterwards, compress it, encrypt it, rearrange it, diff it
[00:30] <Palisade> in order to get it to the end user
[00:30] <Palisade> you still had to link the incompatible licensed code together to create it
[00:30] <Slade> correct
[00:30] <Palisade> which is illegal
[00:30] <Slade> not that i see
[00:30] <Palisade> the license doesn't allow that
[00:31] <Slade> what i see is its only illegal if the binary is distributed
[00:31] <Palisade> as i said it doesn't matter how you want to obfuscate the resulting binary
[00:31] <Slade> so you're saying that the patch is under the GPL
[00:32] <Palisade> the fact that exact locations were calculated is exactly as if you had distributed the full executable
[00:32] <Palisade> no i'm saying the patch violates the GPL
[00:32] <Slade> how so?
[00:32] <Slade> well let me ask you this
[00:33] <Palisade> since it is proprietary code linked with GPL'd code
[00:33] <Slade> are we both in agreement that the binary does not violate the GPL so long as its sitting on my own machine
[00:33] <Palisade> slade, i'm not sure about that
[00:33] <Slade> or is this the point we are arguing right now?
[00:34] <Slade> from talking with Carmack, he said that was the hazy part
[00:34] <Palisade> it is a pretty hazy part
[00:34] <Slade> after i explained it
[00:34] <Palisade> btw have you talked to gnu@gnu.org yet?
[00:34] <Slade> and linux people cant really say anything about it without being hypocritical
[00:34] <Palisade> slade, JC is under the misconception that you're going to release the source code later
[00:35] <Slade> Palisade: i cleared that up and told him i wasnt
[00:35] <Palisade> slade, ah what did he say?
[00:37] <Slade> Palisade: Well I had told him that if he says the word I'll do it just as he says it. and he said it was kind of hazy so I removed the patches from the site until we could figure out more. I told him I had done that, he basically said ok. and we continued our conversation on other ways to make a more secure client
[00:37] <Palisade> slade, ok, so you're waiting to hear back about that until you do anything further
[00:38] <Slade> um. its not that. its basically we've gone on
[00:38] <Slade> he wasnt to concerned about if it was a violation of the GPL or not. more that it didnt really matter because the situation was remided to his satisfaction
[00:38] <Palisade> slade, i see where some people are getting upset of course, if we assume that you're wrong then of course that's why many are demanding the source...
[00:39] <Palisade> slade, the problem seems to be that everyone is confused as to the details, on both sides...
[00:39] <Slade> I'm not confused.
[00:39] <Palisade> slade, you've gone on?
[00:39] <Slade> yes. we're moving on to ql 2.54
[00:40] <Palisade> ok
[00:40] <Palisade> so what's all the fuss about?
[00:41] <Slade> people still want the source
[00:41] <Palisade> slade, ah
[00:41] <Palisade> slade, well... here's how i see it
[00:41] <Palisade> slade, you made a mistake (or rather, decided not to bother with the proprietary patch and moved on, whichever way you want to look at it)
[00:42] <Slade> the way i look at it is the copywrite holder was made happy by it being brought down for review
[00:42] <Palisade> slade, and you stopped distributing the patch
[00:42] <Palisade> slade, now since code 9 was yours
[00:42] * Slade listens
[00:43] <Palisade> slade, and you reversed your decision
[00:44] <Palisade> slade, then the code is yours, the code is under a proprietary license, and you are no longer distributing it linked to the GPL code, then you have the right not to provide that code
[00:44] * Slade nods.
[00:46] <Slade> then whats the problem again?
[00:46] <Palisade> no idea
[00:46] * Slade chuckles.
[00:46] <Palisade> well i think i have an idea
[00:46] <Palisade> you see you pissed off a lot of people who really like the GPL
[00:47] <Palisade> and so basically they've decided to hassle you about it and see if they can get you to release the code so they feel that they've won somehow
[00:47] <Slade> thats the way i see it
Email me for the complete log if you really want it
As a avid quake player, the source code release of Quake has almost destroyed the community. Through extensive monitoring of servers (which should exist anyways) most popular servers have a no cheating policy that includes instant bannishment. I respect the QuakeLives project, and its programmer, but I feel that Slade is destroying the community further. Mega TF, arguably the best quake mod out, is beginning to move towards QuakeLives only, a dependance that could kill both Mega TF, or regular Quake. The QuakeLives project is attempting to create a server that only THEIR client can connect to and monopolize the community. Slade has attempted to swindle his way around this multiple times, consitering making difs, or other such ideas, including this "click through" of giving up your rights. I wish slade would realize that there ARE ways to get past cheating, and they CAN include not breaking the law. I applaud Carmack for his protection of the community. Slade attacks the fact that no one is attempting to fix bugs, or make Quake better. I ask you, what has Slade done to fix bugs and make Quake better? He himself has closed the source of his tree, and isn't obiding by the wording, or the intent of the GPL.
My 2 cents.
urban:~# traceroute internettrafficreport.com
:(
traceroute to internettrafficreport.com (206.243.171.148), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 * * *
2 X.sover.net (207.136.197.X) 99.861 ms 93.994 ms 81.685 ms
3 cisco0.mont.sover.net (207.136.197.10) 87.635 ms 85.222 ms 84.66 ms
4 burl.ent-fr.sover.net (207.136.208.146) 90.562 ms 88.666 ms 83.527 ms
5 sl-gw6-nyc-5-0-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.171.197) 94.206 ms 94.772 ms 92.448 ms
6 sl-bb10-nyc-3-2.sprintlink.net (144.232.7.69) 98.256 ms 93.64 ms 88.565 ms
7 sl-gw9-nyc-8-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.7.94) 95.412 ms 92.838 ms 89.91 ms
8 * * *
9 * * *
I wish I could.
There have been MANY times Apple has done stupid things.... They are moving toward a more standard design, and allowing more options on their systems. The new G4's are real nice machines.. PCI bus.. all the goodies.. No more substandard apple onboard video.. (not that ATI is the best.. but its a step forward).. The case is easy to work on.. (My 8100 has a little problem where you have to tear it half apart to add ram.. Its real fun..) I really wish Apple would look forward. MacOS is not the best thing since sliced, packaged cheese.. Allow legal competition (as apposed to reverse engineering..)
I also want to point out something someone below me brought up.. Whats with the throw it up, its good enough look... That must be the crappiest quality image on apple.com..
The text at the bottom, the disclaimer there, wraps horribly, the page lacks the advanced meta tags, RSAC, and html 4.0 complience that www.apple.com has. Did they just get some intern to do this?
They could have atleast gone through and checked it for english errors and inconsitancies.. they refer to it as "Linux", but then once near the bottom call it linux (no capital L)..
This is just my opinion.. feel free to flame me, others have.
I never claimed to be the PPC Guru.. Just from my recent observence, Apple seems to do little these days except utilize what they see fit. Why would it be so hard for them to release the specs for the G3/G4 and allow other operating systems they dont make to use their hardware? I mean come on.. Its decent hardware...
Apple is using this to simply exploit linux. They do very little from what I see to help other operating systems. BeOS does not support the macintosh G4's (G3's also..) because Apple wont help them &/or release specs to help them. They opensource parts of their OS X that they want to use in their operating system.. how convenient.. They have given little to the linux community... but filled their plate with the benefits of the free world.
Thanks apple!
:: coughs ::
::
Looks UUencoded
:: smirks and walks away
I just installed MSSQL 7.0 a few days ago, it came with two default accounts:
Both are controlled by NT authentication, both are based on the Administrator password/login. You cant remotely login, because its NT auth [gotta login to the box, domain first]
Oh.. then theres SA, which has a password set.. hrrm.. word. [changes password]
This is cute:
Moderation Totals:Funny=4, Overrated=1, Total=5.
Overrated ADDS to the score or something? word.
This just in:
Samsung has began a new program to help American's afford their new 288Mb Rambus DRAM. We have been informed that Samsung is taking "trade ins" of whole human appendages and key organs. They say that for an arm, or a leg, they will trade a single 288Mb RDRAM. For any major organ, 2 288Mb RDRAM, and for essentail organs, 4 288Mb RDRAM modules.
(Intermedia, now Charter)
Lol.. "Helicon Communications" here in Vermont just changed names to Charter... Its a global conspiracy..
Im sorry, I try not to do this .. but
lmfao...
Hehe.. good timing..
Sweet! Time to download the 3.3.x
The highpoint 366 udma/66 controller has a kernel patch and stuff available from highpoint-tech.com.. why not include thoes.. hehe :-)
I was gunna ask that myself..
Unless they have ever taken a math class in their life and realise 1-1 = Slashed 0 isnt true :-)
Benchmarking with BogoMIPS? Lol.. And show me a SMP K6..
And Celery's have full speed cache dude.. Troll!
Stan "Myconid" Brinkerhoff
>The fact that both Windows 95/98 and NT/2000 >cannot be installed (fully, in NT's case) on any >partition except the PRIMARY partition is proof >positive.
I have both Windows 98SE and Windows 2000 Server RC3 installed on my ~8 gig primary partition [C:] without any problems. I just changed the registry in Windows 98 to use progra instead of progra~1. If you dont do this a FEW things dont work. [system info is the only thing that comes to mind]...
Stan "Myconid" Brinkerhoff
And we all know how it looks is more important than its function. BeOS is a useless OS. It supports maybe 5% of the hardware out there and unless you want to watch a teapot spin, has little function.
My $.02
Stan "Myconid" Brinkerhoff
I paid $100 almost 5 months ago for my Diamond MX300, a VERY nice sound card. For $100 I would expect atleast SOME support, as apposed to my 50 cent OPL3-SAX that works flawlessly.. You were saying??
Stan "Myconid" Brinkerhoff
Which they aren't, if you read /. once and a while..
Stan "Myconid" Brinkerhoff
Ignorant attempt at a translation:
:-) :-) .. hacking a lame website.
If [you] want a kewl [c]ommunity, use IRC instead!!! IRC is so[oo] m[u]ch better than lame ass web board[s].
[You] get t[he] benef[i]ts of [elite] warez [too]. (hehehehehehe). All [for] free!!!
If [you] want [to] join [our elite club, than come to] EFNET #1337 [one-three-three-seven] [to]day. [You] need pass an initiation test, say
So they just want you to do a (html)(title)hi(/title)(body)yo mom(/body)(/html) ? lol.... Llamas..
Stan "Myconid" Brinkerhoff