>What interface are they using? Even the fastest SCSI can't provide 3GB/s!
They're using FC it said they've got 2 to 8 ports on one of their boxes, which makes it more than enough (one server, though, couldn't use up all this bandwidth).
>That was often where I'd turn off anything (insecure or otherwise) that I didn't want running.
That's what I'm saying - you _knew_ what you needed/could turn off. With your abilities, everyone could do that on Windows as well - instead of (RedHat's; I don't know on Mandrake) setup[ENTER], in Windows you type services.msc[ENTER], it's easy.
Average person stops worrying about network and service settings security once they see their browser can get on the Net.
And think of another thing - if MS closed everything by default, they'd have millions of people hating them for making it difficult to share files or figure out how to do this or that.
When I fiddle with my WLAN network settings in WinXP, there's a warning or information about security on almost every second dialog box (and I ignore it 'cause I can't be bothered to read that stuff). But, at least I wouldn't complain if I discovered I got hacked.
>>It's a bit hard to imagine a SOHO that needs a file server and doesn't have an ADSL gateway server/PC
>Beg pardon? I've been in this business for a while now, and I'm not even sure what an "ADSL gateway server/PC" is. I'd have to say that it's quite easy to imagine the absence of one, since I've never heard of one.
Dude, I don't know which "business" is that, but "ADSL gateway server" (or PC if you're short on cash) is described in every ADSL How-To's. Refer to "A typical SOHO Network Setup" at http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/DSL-HOWTO/appendix.h tml# AEN1801
>Google NDMP.... >NAS available somewhere on the Internet
>Windows was not originally designed with networking or security in mind,
Yes but that was Win9x
>on linux everything is optional, you don't need to have ANY services listening on the network..
Really? How do you connect to such _server_ to obtain services it provides? Telepathy?
A computer that isn't listening on any ports is most likely a workstation (still I can hardly imagine a workstation that's not listening to any ports - then the only way you can manage it is from local console with today's budgets and lack of manpower, managing clients one by one is hard to afford).
>A system which isn't listening on any ports is not gonna get remotely exploited
Sure, it's not gonna do anything at all. A powered off computer is even more secure.
Microsoft has reacted a bit too late, but they're going to get their stuff together. Linux has started off as a server-oriented OS, of course it's somewhat more secure.
Users, on the other hand, never fail to surprise - how many YEARS have passed since first worms in the wild have made headlines and since Microsoft and the media advised users to keep systems up-to-date and close unnecessary services?
Nothing's gonna save people from their own laziness and stupidity.
I'd split the blame like this: Microsoft 1%, Users 99%.
>which twit thought it would be a good idea to have ports open by default with services listening to whatever crap other computers might send
oh pleeze are you saying Microsoft opened secret ports about which they didn't know? the organization didn't have a security policy that mandated closing unnecessary services or they did not follow the policy (if it's really "unneccessary services" that screwed them up).
until a year ago Linux would ship with a bunch of services running by default, which woudn't usually matter (just remember sendmail's default - open relay). but any reasonable sysadmin (or organization) would either stop those services or block them on the firewall level.
It's a bit hard to imagine a SOHO that needs a file server and doesn't have an ADSL gateway server/PC, but if they really don't have one, then this thingie is definitively convenient.
Which leads us to the question asked by another poster - where to do you backup those 100 or so GB of data when you can't connect a tape drive to the widget? Of course, you need a PC/server to do that.
That is unless you do remote backup to IDC or don't mind to backup 1/Nth of data to each client in the office using scripts, or perhaps backup to 100 CD-ROM disks using CD-R attached to a desktop.
If I had 250GB of files, I'd at least consider RAID0 (and tape backup). Even it the data is all useless, it takes too much time to download it from the Net.
Of course - one can hardly watch six movies at the same time but I can imagine people watching six pr0n videos (or monitoring six news channels) at the same time (or two; one on each display that you may have). Or watching CNN video feed one one monitor, pr0n on the other and at the same time video conferencing with your girlfriend.
It can work in the sense that same files can be exported/shared via different protocols, but due to different ways how these protocols do locking and caching, it's not recommended (in theory it's possible that files would get corrupt).
BTW, I find this posting really stupid - what's the big deal? It takes 5 minutes to setup? Adding a 250GB HDD to existing Windows or Linux server also takes five minutes and it can be done and at a lower price. Windows OS with free SFU add on can share files to Windows, Linux (smb or NFS), UNIX (NFS), Macs (smb or NFS). And with AD you don't have to fsck with accounts and permissions. Linux, of course, can do the same. With NIS or winbind configuration you don't have to mess with accounts either, plus you can add this new HDD to a logical volume instead of creating yet another file share on the network.
Okay, you're right I forgot the category. But I'd also say systems manufacturer (Dell, HP, etc.) as the person/entitty who sold you the product should be the first line of support for diagnosing the issues. All software OEM agreements (including Linux, BIOS code, software utils, etc.) put the burden of support on h/w manufacturer and that's logical, I think - I mean, you shouldn't call Red Hat with "I turn my PC on and nothing comes up on the screen" if it's uncertain if your monitor is properly connected and/or powered on.
Noone said a) overtime isn't, at least sometimes, a consequence of bad mgmt or org (or both) b) people should overtime for free c) everyone enjoys overtiming
The thing is - you have your own views/values, the next guy doesn't give a damn - he'll work same hard/smart as you, but 12 hours a day. There's no way one can compete with such person without doing 12 (or better 13) hours a day.
Talk about brute force cracking - all other conditions being equal, s/he will do more or better and sooner or later s/he'll get promoted (or get a raise).
At this point people who don't want to work 12 hours a day (maybe they have a life outside work, maybe they like excercise, whatever) may want the government to legally ban/restrict overtime work. If this could be done worldwide, that'd be cool (still, people would cheat). Like this, it's just impossible and foolish. Instead of having some people work overtime, you get the whole company go bust because it can't compete with overseas rivals who do work overtime (say it's a labor-intensive business).
Usually (not always, not only) it's the Europeans laughing at the Americans, the Americans laughing at the Japanese (or Indians - name your bashed nation of the day), etc.
Then if you look at how badly countries are faring, the list reads upside down - Europe is doing worse and worse (unemployment, public debt, etc.), China and India are doing better and better every day.
"Getting by" is getting tough. Even dilligent folks like yourself will soon find out that 8 hours doesn't cut it any more. Or, another way to put it, in Asia, working dilligently 8 hours a day is "getting by". In couple of years, all places exposed to market forces will work by the same logic. Tough times, man.
>And, thanks to the address being posted on Slashdot, the lucky winner will get a special bonus: 100 spam e-mails a day!
Dude, I've been getting spam messages every day even though I haven't sent any messages yet. I guess that's because my @gmail.com is a dictionary word.
So this is to share with everyone that Gmail's got a spam problem... Woo hoo woo hoo!
Me too switched all RH to SuSE Pro... "It just works!"
Never tried to download Fedora (I haven't even been to their Web site) and have no interest whatsoever. SuSE has good quality distribution and I no, thank you, I'm not into fscking with my distribution, making custom kernels. Not any more. Now I just use applications, for which SuSE is perfect.
My 2nd choice was Debian but I never got to try it after I got my hands on SuSE.
On the server, though, I'm still runing RH (3 servers); true, security could be more up-to-date, but I'm thinking buying update service from Progeny. Ultimately these boxes will become SuSE or Debian servers one day...
After you mortgage your house and before you buy Google shares, put some money on the side for a small tent.
I plan to buy short. Not much, perhaps 1K, just in order to put my money where my mouth is.
Quality of Google search engine results is getting worse, the email thing hasn't really taken off (although bad publicity has) and most of their money in near term is expected to come from these two. They already have a huge market share in Web searches (not much more space to grow), so the Gmail must take off if they're go maintain fast growth in 2004.
There's nothing magical in Google technology and services. True, it's been a revolutionary product/service so far, but its technology is already mature. Due to ever increasing CPU, networking, clustering and storage technologies, in two-three year time, a smart startup will be able to catch up with their search engine size within 2-3 month time. It will take couple of talented guys like the Googlers (there are smart people out there who don't work for Google yet), a better search algorithm (reasonable expectation) and some money for storage and bandwidth (who wouldn't invest couple of millions in a company that wants to beat Gogle).
First, copyright issues won't be any different - one can imagine that nanofactories will have software that will charge royalties for things it churns out. And of course there will be "pirated" Benz cars (heh, heh - imagine dying in a car crash just because the car which you considered very safe was a fake with low crash resistance) and "warez" like they exist today.
Secondly, now most people want those things because they can't have them. I mean - why would someone want to own 10 different luxury cars everybody could have them? What's the point? From a practical standpoint, a 100 strong community could share a fleet of 120 luxury cars of all types rather than have each household spend time finding parking space for their 10 cars (while 80% of cars in the community would probably be overlaping in brand/color/type anyway)
You don't buy 90 kgs of apples in grocery store just because you can afford it (while a hungry kid in Sub-Saharan Africa perhaps would). On the contrary - because you know you can afford it any time, you probably never buy apples at all (my situation).
(Personally I think all that home-nano-factory stuff will be completely unneccessary except for food, because by that time virtual reality and custom-made dreams will allow people get everything they want without having to own "things")
And because of all these reasons, "value" of things that are expensive today will become next to zero (maybe space will become expensive, or perhaps there could be high disposal fees for destruction of all kinds of one-day wonder shit created by housholds with nano-factories).
Biggest issues will be of mental health - once everything is available at low cost, folks won't have to worry about rent and credit card debt. They will instead start doing drugs, endless virtual reality trips and other weird stuff. I bet that most people, given means and plenty of time, will do stupid rather than smart things.
>Ever tried getting support on an OEM copy of Windows? You can't.
Gezuz, what do you expect for 70 bucks? Buy SuSe Professional and it's the same thing. I don't know how much it costs to answer a support call (I guess about 10 bucks), but it's very reasonable not to get any phone and email support for OEM bundled software.
When I think of it, 99% of all problems belong to one of these categories: a) h/w driver problem (contact your h/w maker) b) config problem (read help files) c) known Windows issue (wait for automatic update) d) unique Windows issue (automatically submit crash report online) e) software updates (runs automatically) f) how-to (search microsoft.com, google.com or buy a book)
Unless I missed something major, it's evident that MS (and Linux vendors) shouldn't do any free personalized support for OEM versions of their software.
>As far as I can tell, they licensed some codecs and renamed/rebranded an open source project that already had the capability to play Windows Media.
That's correct. Now compare that with achievements of scum like Lindows guys who've been misusing both propietary ("Windows") and open source (ad artwork, see today's posting about that) stuff. Turbo Media Player is legal, it works and it's definitively going to help Linux adoption.
MPlayer (perhaps Xine too) may have legal problems because of that ability to play WMV streams:-)
So the idea is to: a) get rid of any possible incompatibility (guaranteed to work) b) get rid of any possible lawsuit (hassle free for Turbolinux partners/customers)
Actually in the article it does say since "the packaging" is tiny, CF target deployment would be homes and/or areas. There wouldn't be huge power plants based on the technology.
> it means you're all Linux users. What is that - guilt by association?
>how do you implement security patches and operating-system upgrades (much more frequent in Linux than in proprietary systems from Microsoft or Sun) on thousands of servers without causing disruption to service?
You don't implement any security patches and upgrades because those systems are used only by Web servers; it's not like some Web client will hack into their servers... You boot thousands of servers from NFS or such; you upgrade system images once a quarter, together with Google's own software.
>yet achieves 100 per cent uptime.
Uptime of what? Of www.google.com, using round-robin load balancing to several geographically dispersed data centers. What's the big deal about that? But I've seen 404 on www.google.com and the paid AdWords Admin Web is down quite often(anyone who ever used it knows what I'm talking about).
You still need a passport if you want to board a ship or train (or other means of transportation, including walking) that leaves the country you board it in.
Slashdot Mirror
>I don't have any ethical problem with it.
Sure, Mr. Anonymous Coward.
And obese geeks reporting live from their rooms lit with LEDs and pizza boxes in the background...
>What interface are they using? Even the fastest SCSI can't provide 3GB/s!
They're using FC it said they've got 2 to 8 ports on one of their boxes, which makes it more than enough (one server, though, couldn't use up all this bandwidth).
>That was often where I'd turn off anything (insecure or otherwise) that I didn't want running.
That's what I'm saying - you _knew_ what you needed/could turn off. With your abilities, everyone could do that on Windows as well - instead of (RedHat's; I don't know on Mandrake) setup[ENTER], in Windows you type services.msc[ENTER], it's easy.
Average person stops worrying about network and service settings security once they see their browser can get on the Net.
And think of another thing - if MS closed everything by default, they'd have millions of people hating them for making it difficult to share files or figure out how to do this or that.
When I fiddle with my WLAN network settings in WinXP, there's a warning or information about security on almost every second dialog box (and I ignore it 'cause I can't be bothered to read that stuff). But, at least I wouldn't complain if I discovered I got hacked.
>>It's a bit hard to imagine a SOHO that needs a file server and doesn't have an ADSL gateway server/PC
h tml# AEN1801
>Beg pardon? I've been in this business for a while now, and I'm not even sure what an "ADSL gateway server/PC" is. I'd have to say that it's quite easy to imagine the absence of one, since I've never heard of one.
Dude, I don't know which "business" is that, but "ADSL gateway server" (or PC if you're short on cash) is described in every ADSL How-To's. Refer to "A typical SOHO Network Setup" at
http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/DSL-HOWTO/appendix.
>Google NDMP....
>NAS available somewhere on the Internet
That is so funny!
I won't even comment on this.
>greatly simplify the installation and configuration of LTSP, which is currently quite complex.
What? You mean "quite simple"?
"Greatly simplify", I presume, stands for "tie up with Novell's proprietary stuff".
How much easier can it get?
Downloads at:
http://www.k12ltsp.org/download.html
>Windows was not originally designed with networking or security in mind,
Yes but that was Win9x
>on linux everything is optional, you don't need to have ANY services listening on the network..
Really? How do you connect to such _server_ to obtain services it provides? Telepathy?
A computer that isn't listening on any ports is most likely a workstation (still I can hardly imagine a workstation that's not listening to any ports - then the only way you can manage it is from local console with today's budgets and lack of manpower, managing clients one by one is hard to afford).
>A system which isn't listening on any ports is not gonna get remotely exploited
Sure, it's not gonna do anything at all.
A powered off computer is even more secure.
Microsoft has reacted a bit too late, but they're going to get their stuff together. Linux has started off as a server-oriented OS, of course it's somewhat more secure.
Users, on the other hand, never fail to surprise - how many YEARS have passed since first worms in the wild have made headlines and since Microsoft and the media advised users to keep systems up-to-date and close unnecessary services?
Nothing's gonna save people from their own laziness and stupidity.
I'd split the blame like this: Microsoft 1%, Users 99%.
>which twit thought it would be a good idea to have ports open by default with services listening to whatever crap other computers might send
oh pleeze are you saying Microsoft opened secret ports about which they didn't know? the organization didn't have a security policy that mandated closing unnecessary services or they did not follow the policy (if it's really "unneccessary services" that screwed them up).
until a year ago Linux would ship with a bunch of services running by default, which woudn't usually matter (just remember sendmail's default - open relay). but any reasonable sysadmin (or organization) would either stop those services or block them on the firewall level.
It's a bit hard to imagine a SOHO that needs a file server and doesn't have an ADSL gateway server/PC, but if they really don't have one, then this thingie is definitively convenient.
Which leads us to the question asked by another poster - where to do you backup those 100 or so GB of data when you can't connect a tape drive to the widget? Of course, you need a PC/server to do that.
That is unless you do remote backup to IDC or don't mind to backup 1/Nth of data to each client in the office using scripts, or perhaps backup to 100 CD-ROM disks using CD-R attached to a desktop.
If I had 250GB of files, I'd at least consider RAID0 (and tape backup). Even it the data is all useless, it takes too much time to download it from the Net.
Of course - one can hardly watch six movies at the same time but I can imagine people watching six pr0n videos (or monitoring six news channels) at the same time (or two; one on each display that you may have).
Or watching CNN video feed one one monitor, pr0n on the other and at the same time video conferencing with your girlfriend.
Build it and they will use it.
It can work in the sense that same files can be exported/shared via different protocols, but due to different ways how these protocols do locking and caching, it's not recommended (in theory it's possible that files would get corrupt).
BTW, I find this posting really stupid - what's the big deal?
It takes 5 minutes to setup? Adding a 250GB HDD to existing Windows or Linux server also takes five minutes and it can be done and at a lower price.
Windows OS with free SFU add on can share files to Windows, Linux (smb or NFS), UNIX (NFS), Macs (smb or NFS). And with AD you don't have to fsck with accounts and permissions.
Linux, of course, can do the same. With NIS or winbind configuration you don't have to mess with accounts either, plus you can add this new HDD to a logical volume instead of creating yet another file share on the network.
Okay, you're right I forgot the category.
But I'd also say systems manufacturer (Dell, HP, etc.) as the person/entitty who sold you the product should be the first line of support for diagnosing the issues.
All software OEM agreements (including Linux, BIOS code, software utils, etc.) put the burden of support on h/w manufacturer and that's logical, I think - I mean, you shouldn't call Red Hat with "I turn my PC on and nothing comes up on the screen" if it's uncertain if your monitor is properly connected and/or powered on.
Noone said
a) overtime isn't, at least sometimes, a consequence of bad mgmt or org (or both)
b) people should overtime for free
c) everyone enjoys overtiming
The thing is - you have your own views/values, the next guy doesn't give a damn - he'll work same hard/smart as you, but 12 hours a day. There's no way one can compete with such person without doing 12 (or better 13) hours a day.
Talk about brute force cracking - all other conditions being equal, s/he will do more or better and sooner or later s/he'll get promoted (or get a raise).
At this point people who don't want to work 12 hours a day (maybe they have a life outside work, maybe they like excercise, whatever) may want the government to legally ban/restrict overtime work.
If this could be done worldwide, that'd be cool (still, people would cheat). Like this, it's just impossible and foolish. Instead of having some people work overtime, you get the whole company go bust because it can't compete with overseas rivals who do work overtime (say it's a labor-intensive business).
Usually (not always, not only) it's the Europeans laughing at the Americans, the Americans laughing at the Japanese (or Indians - name your bashed nation of the day), etc.
Then if you look at how badly countries are faring, the list reads upside down - Europe is doing worse and worse (unemployment, public debt, etc.), China and India are doing better and better every day.
"Getting by" is getting tough.
Even dilligent folks like yourself will soon find out that 8 hours doesn't cut it any more.
Or, another way to put it, in Asia, working dilligently 8 hours a day is "getting by". In couple of years, all places exposed to market forces will work by the same logic. Tough times, man.
>And, thanks to the address being posted on Slashdot, the lucky winner will get a special bonus: 100 spam e-mails a day!
Dude, I've been getting spam messages every day even though I haven't sent any messages yet. I guess that's because my @gmail.com is a dictionary word.
So this is to share with everyone that Gmail's got a spam problem... Woo hoo woo hoo!
Me too switched all RH to SuSE Pro... "It just works!"
Never tried to download Fedora (I haven't even been to their Web site) and have no interest whatsoever. SuSE has good quality distribution and I no, thank you, I'm not into fscking with my distribution, making custom kernels. Not any more. Now I just use applications, for which SuSE is perfect.
My 2nd choice was Debian but I never got to try it after I got my hands on SuSE.
On the server, though, I'm still runing RH (3 servers); true, security could be more up-to-date, but I'm thinking buying update service from Progeny.
Ultimately these boxes will become SuSE or Debian servers one day...
After you mortgage your house and before you buy Google shares, put some money on the side for a small tent.
I plan to buy short. Not much, perhaps 1K, just in order to put my money where my mouth is.
Quality of Google search engine results is getting worse, the email thing hasn't really taken off (although bad publicity has) and most of their money in near term is expected to come from these two. They already have a huge market share in Web searches (not much more space to grow), so the Gmail must take off if they're go maintain fast growth in 2004.
There's nothing magical in Google technology and services. True, it's been a revolutionary product/service so far, but its technology is already mature. Due to ever increasing CPU, networking, clustering and storage technologies, in two-three year time, a smart startup will be able to catch up with their search engine size within 2-3 month time. It will take couple of talented guys like the Googlers (there are smart people out there who don't work for Google yet), a better search algorithm (reasonable expectation) and some money for storage and bandwidth (who wouldn't invest couple of millions in a company that wants to beat Gogle).
First, copyright issues won't be any different - one can imagine that nanofactories will have software that will charge royalties for things it churns out. And of course there will be "pirated" Benz cars (heh, heh - imagine dying in a car crash just because the car which you considered very safe was a fake with low crash resistance) and "warez" like they exist today.
Secondly, now most people want those things because they can't have them. I mean - why would someone want to own 10 different luxury cars everybody could have them? What's the point?
From a practical standpoint, a 100 strong community could share a fleet of 120 luxury cars of all types rather than have each household spend time finding parking space for their 10 cars (while 80% of cars in the community would probably be overlaping in brand/color/type anyway)
You don't buy 90 kgs of apples in grocery store just because you can afford it (while a hungry kid in Sub-Saharan Africa perhaps would).
On the contrary - because you know you can afford it any time, you probably never buy apples at all (my situation).
(Personally I think all that home-nano-factory stuff will be completely unneccessary except for food, because by that time virtual reality and custom-made dreams will allow people get everything they want without having to own "things")
And because of all these reasons, "value" of things that are expensive today will become next to zero (maybe space will become expensive, or perhaps there could be high disposal fees for destruction of all kinds of one-day wonder shit created by housholds with nano-factories).
Biggest issues will be of mental health - once everything is available at low cost, folks won't have to worry about rent and credit card debt. They will instead start doing drugs, endless virtual reality trips and other weird stuff. I bet that most people, given means and plenty of time, will do stupid rather than smart things.
> How does one use cp to copy a file between two HTTP servers, smart ass?
By adding an "s" just before "cp"
>Ever tried getting support on an OEM copy of Windows? You can't.
Gezuz, what do you expect for 70 bucks? Buy SuSe Professional and it's the same thing. I don't know how much it costs to answer a support call (I guess about 10 bucks), but it's very reasonable not to get any phone and email support for OEM bundled software.
When I think of it, 99% of all problems belong to one of these categories:
a) h/w driver problem (contact your h/w maker)
b) config problem (read help files)
c) known Windows issue (wait for automatic update)
d) unique Windows issue (automatically submit crash report online)
e) software updates (runs automatically)
f) how-to (search microsoft.com, google.com or buy a book)
Unless I missed something major, it's evident that MS (and Linux vendors) shouldn't do any free personalized support for OEM versions of their software.
>As far as I can tell, they licensed some codecs and renamed/rebranded an open source project that already had the capability to play Windows Media.
That's correct.
Now compare that with achievements of scum like Lindows guys who've been misusing both propietary ("Windows") and open source (ad artwork, see today's posting about that) stuff. Turbo Media Player is legal, it works and it's definitively going to help Linux adoption.
MPlayer (perhaps Xine too) may have legal problems because of that ability to play WMV streams :-)
So the idea is to:
a) get rid of any possible incompatibility (guaranteed to work)
b) get rid of any possible lawsuit
(hassle free for Turbolinux partners/customers)
Actually in the article it does say since "the packaging" is tiny, CF target deployment would be homes and/or areas. There wouldn't be huge power plants based on the technology.
>Would you like to give it a whirl? YES / NO
I hit NO.
Then it said the invitation would remain there for couple of days should I change my mind.
In other words, either Yes or No won't make it go away for couple of days.
Some comments on the linked article:
> it means you're all Linux users.
What is that - guilt by association?
>how do you implement security patches and operating-system upgrades (much more frequent in Linux than in proprietary systems from Microsoft or Sun) on thousands of servers without causing disruption to service?
You don't implement any security patches and upgrades because those systems are used only by Web servers; it's not like some Web client will hack into their servers... You boot thousands of servers from NFS or such; you upgrade system images once a quarter, together with Google's own software.
>yet achieves 100 per cent uptime.
Uptime of what? Of www.google.com, using round-robin load balancing to several geographically dispersed data centers. What's the big deal about that?
But I've seen 404 on www.google.com and the paid AdWords Admin Web is down quite often(anyone who ever used it knows what I'm talking about).
You still need a passport if you want to board a ship or train (or other means of transportation, including walking) that leaves the country you board it in.