Re:Why is this so hard?
on
Wartrapping?
·
· Score: 1
What an excellent scam!
1. Set up an access point in a panel van that allows 'credit card payment' for access. Give some nominal degree of bandwidth to 'the mark' so they aren't immediately suspicious. Heck, just relay some connectivity that YOUR system found.
2. Snag the numbers of the kind of clowns who would give their credit info out to such a machine.
Electrical Tape has no place in a professional electronics environment. It's gummy and unprofessional. Any assembly worth putting together should be properly insulated with Heat Shrink tubing.
Just say no when someone asks for electrical tape. Unless they're wearing coveralls and look like they're wiring outlets.
Red Hat charges for support, which includes a certain amount of hand holding for security updates and patches.
Does this make them culpable for people using their cheaper shrink-wrap box versions that don't include the same support as their higher end server products?
It's only been in the last several years that Linux shipped without "everything wide open by default."
Hell, I learned most of what I know about Networking because Slackware 2.x had all that stuff enabled and it was easy to Slack on a bunch of 386sx boxes I could afford back then and experiment. If all the services had been as tightly configured in the default back then I might have gotten discouraged and given up.
BTW: What 'profit center' does Red Hat Software have but the continual upgrades and support contracts they get because of security concerns on the part of their customer base??
You can STILL, in Windows 2000, do my old favorite DOS trick.
'call command call' typed at the command prompt gives you a new environment, in which none of your enviroment variables (path, prompt, etc.) are initialized. Followed by 'prompt $s' and a 'cls' and the C> prompt itself goes away. You can get back to exactly the environment you were in by simply typing 'exit' but do it to the unclued and they're sitting there at a blinking cursor and can only run internal commands and whatever commands are in the PWD.
Fun with annoying MS-DOS pranks.
(*It's actually a useful technique, because it allows you to blow away the environment and build one totally anew, and get right back to your normal enviroment with a single 'exit' command. I discovered this behavior on my own one day when I was fooling around with a program called 'ball' and noticed peculiar things about the reserved word 'call')
Hardware just sucks these days. In the old days you could have four floppy drives. The old IBM floppy controllers had the internal connector to which two floppy drives could be connected, and that big DB-37 connector on the card bracket for two more floppy drives.
If I remember correctly, back in those days adding a hard drive to DOS involved third party kludges. Built in hard drive support didn't appear until DOS 2.0.
He could order cds from cheapbytes for under $10 and have everything he needs.
Actually, for the purposes of most CS majors, they could do with a three year old Slackware CD**. heh. The Net Support staff should keep stuff like that around to hand out to whiners.
(** And that's generous, as we could make you use Minix instead. )
The NYT isn't in the business of interviewing scientists and high-end users. They interview someone who regular readers can relate to, and a 'search engine' company is someone like that.
This sort of attitude always bugs me. I don't mean this as a personal attack, but it often seems like a lot of people view 'education' as a balancing act. A contest of sorts. They're afraid to stop 'doing it' for even a short while, until they've done the whole course and can just quit. Unless you're just in school to get that wallpaper, it shouldn't be about cramming in the knowledge to get the marks. If you're forgetting the needed 'background material' perhaps you're involving yourself in a big expensive cram session, not an education. Just something to think about, coming from one of the annoying people who asked questions that won't be on Fridays test during lecture.
And what makes any of us think the Chinese wouldn't prefer to maintain the code themselves? They've got a hell of a lot of people to apply to the task.
Leave it to a bunch of Operating System junkies to get an OS running, only to use it to host another OS. It's like.... ummm.... that's not a true stress test of a machine, people.
I mean, sure back in the day (about 1996, I think) I ran Wine and Executor (a Macintosh emulator) simultaneously on my Linux box so I could simultaneously run the Windows and the Macintosh 'Neko' software toy (that little kitten that followed the mouse pointer around the screen) to see if the Mac Neko would fight the Windows Neco. It wasn't a stress test of anything in particular (the hardware was, if I recall a 486/33 machine). It was just geekedness.
To tell that their port is sufficient run something that puts a real load on the machine. Not just layers of OS.
The game companies would then produce games to run on specifically that $200 PC's flavor of Linux. Since there's no formal Binary Interface (ABI) for Linux, one will be defacto established by the AOL.
Are we all excited, and highly enthused, with the idea of AOL establishing the defacto binary interface for Linux? That would, by necessity, happen, you know. Games vendors aren't going to support 60 different variants of the C Library, nor should they be expected to.
I guess the short answer is that I use Linux because I just don't want to spend the time after installing *BSD to make it work and act like... Linux!
What a ridiculous tautology.
I use BSD because I don't want to have to spend the time after letting some Linux distro spew candy and BS onto my hard drive to make it work and act like UNIX.
The base NetBSD download is about 60 megs compressed. I download and install that and I've got a working base system to adapt to my needs. Plus, there's one distribution of NetBSD, I can install it on my Intel boxes, my Sparc boxes, on about any odd hardware I find, and the.dotfiles and config is virtually identical. Compare that to the 5-35 different 'distributions' of Linux available for each architecture.
Part of the beauty of the BSDs is they follow the bloody standards that have evolved over the last 30 years of UNIX. I can pick up any good Administration book and find the info I need to get the features I am concerned with up and running.
Slashdot Mirror
What an excellent scam!
1. Set up an access point in a panel van that allows 'credit card payment' for access. Give some nominal degree of bandwidth to 'the mark' so they aren't immediately suspicious. Heck, just relay some connectivity that YOUR system found.
2. Snag the numbers of the kind of clowns who would give their credit info out to such a machine.
3. Profit!
Paperclip jokes about Office are so 90's, dude. Microsoft itself made a big thing out of ridiculing the paperclip at the Office XP launch.
Mentioning a lifetime subscription in a discussion about a service that might be going away seems like bad timing.
I wonder if they sold a Lifetime subscription plan for those DiVX boxes at Circuit City?
Electrical Tape has no place in a professional electronics environment. It's gummy and unprofessional. Any assembly worth putting together should be properly insulated with Heat Shrink tubing.
Just say no when someone asks for electrical tape. Unless they're wearing coveralls and look like they're wiring outlets.
Red Hat charges for support, which includes a certain amount of hand holding for security updates and patches.
Does this make them culpable for people using their cheaper shrink-wrap box versions that don't include the same support as their higher end server products?
It's only been in the last several years that Linux shipped without "everything wide open by default."
Hell, I learned most of what I know about Networking because Slackware 2.x had all that stuff enabled and it was easy to Slack on a bunch of 386sx boxes I could afford back then and experiment. If all the services had been as tightly configured in the default back then I might have gotten discouraged and given up.
BTW: What 'profit center' does Red Hat Software have but the continual upgrades and support contracts they get because of security concerns on the part of their customer base??
That's just because this crowd is full of fucking noisy Athlon fanboys. And I mean FANs, boy. Lots and lots of fans.
Since I have Midnight Command running on my NT box, I suppose Stallman will demand somthing of that sort....
You can STILL, in Windows 2000, do my old favorite DOS trick.
'call command call' typed at the command prompt gives you a new environment, in which none of your enviroment variables (path, prompt, etc.) are initialized. Followed by 'prompt $s' and a 'cls' and the C> prompt itself goes away. You can get back to exactly the environment you were in by simply typing 'exit' but do it to the unclued and they're sitting there at a blinking cursor and can only run internal commands and whatever commands are in the PWD.
Fun with annoying MS-DOS pranks.
(*It's actually a useful technique, because it allows you to blow away the environment and build one totally anew, and get right back to your normal enviroment with a single 'exit' command. I discovered this behavior on my own one day when I was fooling around with a program called 'ball' and noticed peculiar things about the reserved word 'call')
Hardware just sucks these days. In the old days you could have four floppy drives. The old IBM floppy controllers had the internal connector to which two floppy drives could be connected, and that big DB-37 connector on the card bracket for two more floppy drives.
If I remember correctly, back in those days adding a hard drive to DOS involved third party kludges. Built in hard drive support didn't appear until DOS 2.0.
He could order cds from cheapbytes for under $10 and have everything he needs.
Actually, for the purposes of most CS majors, they could do with a three year old Slackware CD**. heh. The Net Support staff should keep stuff like that around to hand out to whiners.
(** And that's generous, as we could make you use Minix instead. )
The NYT isn't in the business of interviewing scientists and high-end users. They interview someone who regular readers can relate to, and a 'search engine' company is someone like that.
They've definitely cooked up a FUD article here.
This sort of attitude always bugs me. I don't mean this as a personal attack, but it often seems like a lot of people view 'education' as a balancing act. A contest of sorts.
They're afraid to stop 'doing it' for even a short while, until they've done the whole course and can just quit.
Unless you're just in school to get that wallpaper, it shouldn't be about cramming in the knowledge to get the marks. If you're forgetting the needed 'background material' perhaps you're involving yourself in a big expensive cram session, not an education.
Just something to think about, coming from one of the annoying people who asked questions that won't be on Fridays test during lecture.
What is the word for 'Fork' in Chinese?
And what makes any of us think the Chinese wouldn't prefer to maintain the code themselves? They've got a hell of a lot of people to apply to the task.
Leave it to a bunch of Operating System junkies to get an OS running, only to use it to host another OS. It's like.... ummm.... that's not a true stress test of a machine, people.
I mean, sure back in the day (about 1996, I think) I ran Wine and Executor (a Macintosh emulator) simultaneously on my Linux box so I could simultaneously run the Windows and the Macintosh 'Neko' software toy (that little kitten that followed the mouse pointer around the screen) to see if the Mac Neko would fight the Windows Neco. It wasn't a stress test of anything in particular (the hardware was, if I recall a 486/33 machine). It was just geekedness.
To tell that their port is sufficient run something that puts a real load on the machine. Not just layers of OS.
The game companies would then produce games to run on specifically that $200 PC's flavor of Linux. Since there's no formal Binary Interface (ABI) for Linux, one will be defacto established by the AOL.
Are we all excited, and highly enthused, with the idea of AOL establishing the defacto binary interface for Linux? That would, by necessity, happen, you know. Games vendors aren't going to support 60 different variants of the C Library, nor should they be expected to.
Actually, the BSD OSes have a substantially NON-GNU userland.
I'd consider switching if there were, oh, two or three brands of PPC-based motherboards to choose from. ATX form factor, please.
I guess the short answer is that I use Linux because I just don't want to spend the time after installing *BSD to make it work and act like... Linux!
.dotfiles and config is virtually identical. Compare that to the 5-35 different 'distributions' of Linux available for each architecture.
What a ridiculous tautology.
I use BSD because I don't want to have to spend the time after letting some Linux distro spew candy and BS onto my hard drive to make it work and act like UNIX.
The base NetBSD download is about 60 megs compressed. I download and install that and I've got a working base system to adapt to my needs. Plus, there's one distribution of NetBSD, I can install it on my Intel boxes, my Sparc boxes, on about any odd hardware I find, and the
Part of the beauty of the BSDs is they follow the bloody standards that have evolved over the last 30 years of UNIX. I can pick up any good Administration book and find the info I need to get the features I am concerned with up and running.
I think you mean Dell/GNU/HURD (at least when it's running on Dell hardware).
Or is that Steelcase/Dell/GNU/HURD? (if it's all set up on a Steelcase office desk)
They call NT admins 'boy', as in 'boy, go put more paper in the printer, 'kay?'
Not to be discriminatory. That's what 'sysadmins' are for too, for the most part.
The janitors of IT.
You're just referring to the few things our ancestors built that haven't fallen down.
Lots and lots of everything was build of stuff that's fallen down.
Lots of that stone stuff was built by slaves or other compulsory forms of labor.
I've written code for devices that use 400 KHz embedded controllers....
Yggdrasil called it 'LGX' for Linux/GNU/XWindow. I have the CD set and booklet for their first release over there on the shelf to prove it.
They wanted it to be a name of THEIR choosing, and I suspect they'd have claimed that name as a trademark if alternatives hadn't taken off.
Well, they put it in quotes, so it's just, er, paraphrasing.....