Re:So you have to have a phone anyway with this?
on
VoIP for the Masses!
·
· Score: 1
How long have you had a phone line in your name? I don't know ANY local carriers (pacbell or other) who will give you "unlimited calling" without ringing up a long distance bill if you call outside your local area.
If you think by signing up for a basic land line you can make "unlimited calls" across the country or even most states you are in for a huge disappointment. This service merely leaves out the usual long distance service (such as AT&T, sprint, etc) who would charge you minutely rates for every call outside of your neighborhood.
Instead you pay a flat rate and don't need to worry about how much time you spend on the phone.
Don't be so sure redhat's less buggy. Redhat loves to put beta software on their distros, cares little for testing before implementing, and in conclusion i can only say one thing to prove the lack of care for decent OS on redhat's part: `grep linuxconf/etc/services`
Now after about 20 mins of re-configuratin and turning crap off, redhat MIGHT be secure.
Over the course of my years of slashdot reading, I have noticed that while many are quick to point out interesting tidbits on the negative aspects of OS's, Software, and Hardware. While these reviews and notes are useful, it seems that nothing is as unbiased as it might seem.
MS exploits often announced on here (yes i like to know about them) and in this case open's dev team mistakes are also what I consider news, however I cannot remember the last time anybody pointed out the dangers of RedHat. While every new version of a linux distro is waved about with great expectations and cheer, other OS's are actually being analyzed for the bad as well as the good. I won't say that nobody posts unbiased articles, and I will even admit that if every stupid needless redhat exploit were listed on slashdot, RedHat would look as bad as Windows. Almost every OS and piece of network software has exploits, and very VERY few developers ever get it right the first time. I just wonder why it's so easy to see all of the mistakes for software that we may not (choose/want to) use while pretending all those dozens of RedHat exploits we had to patch never really were a problem.
Those who even bothered to reply to this newsworthy post with openbsd-bashing, are the ignorant monkeys of the open source community and have obviously never really compared UNIX's in the server world.
Those who bothered to reply to this stating that C is the wrong language to code in bring up minor points and expect the code that drives the internet to change. C is small cpu load and if it turns out buggy, it is the developers fault. But to expect software developers who write based upon existing libraries and code concepts they have developed over decades of work to stop and try writing their apps in an experimental (and YES, pretty damn potentially exploitable itself being so new) language is just silly. PHP is "a modern language" and was just recently found exploitable despite years of development in the PHP arena. IMAGINE the chaos if the development language that your OS/net apps were written in was found to be buggy? To date I have not had to download a new version of gcc and recompile my OS/kern/3rd party apps due to a "C vulnerability". Using experimental non-prooven ( 10 years?) languages for OS/kern/apps is a pretty stupid risk.
Slashdot Mirror
How long have you had a phone line in your name? I don't know ANY local carriers (pacbell or other) who will give you "unlimited calling" without ringing up a long distance bill if you call outside your local area.
If you think by signing up for a basic land line you can make "unlimited calls" across the country or even most states you are in for a huge disappointment. This service merely leaves out the usual long distance service (such as AT&T, sprint, etc) who would charge you minutely rates for every call outside of your neighborhood.
Instead you pay a flat rate and don't need to worry about how much time you spend on the phone.
Don't be so sure redhat's less buggy. Redhat loves to put beta software on their distros, cares little for testing before implementing, and in conclusion i can only say one thing to prove the lack of care for decent OS on redhat's part: `grep linuxconf /etc/services`
Now after about 20 mins of re-configuratin and turning crap off, redhat MIGHT be secure.
Over the course of my years of slashdot reading, I have noticed that while many are quick to point out interesting tidbits on the negative aspects of OS's, Software, and Hardware. While these reviews and notes are useful, it seems that nothing is as unbiased as it might seem.
MS exploits often announced on here (yes i like to know about them) and in this case open's dev team mistakes are also what I consider news, however I cannot remember the last time anybody pointed out the dangers of RedHat. While every new version of a linux distro is waved about with great expectations and cheer, other OS's are actually being analyzed for the bad as well as the good. I won't say that nobody posts unbiased articles, and I will even admit that if every stupid needless redhat exploit were listed on slashdot, RedHat would look as bad as Windows. Almost every OS and piece of network software has exploits, and very VERY few developers ever get it right the first time. I just wonder why it's so easy to see all of the mistakes for software that we may not (choose/want to) use while pretending all those dozens of RedHat exploits we had to patch never really were a problem.
Those who even bothered to reply to this newsworthy post with openbsd-bashing, are the ignorant monkeys of the open source community and have obviously never really compared UNIX's in the server world.
Those who bothered to reply to this stating that C is the wrong language to code in bring up minor points and expect the code that drives the internet to change. C is small cpu load and if it turns out buggy, it is the developers fault. But to expect software developers who write based upon existing libraries and code concepts they have developed over decades of work to stop and try writing their apps in an experimental (and YES, pretty damn potentially exploitable itself being so new) language is just silly. PHP is "a modern language" and was just recently found exploitable despite years of development in the PHP arena. IMAGINE the chaos if the development language that your OS/net apps were written in was found to be buggy? To date I have not had to download a new version of gcc and recompile my OS/kern/3rd party apps due to a "C vulnerability". Using experimental non-prooven ( 10 years?) languages for OS/kern/apps is a pretty stupid risk.