Why is such an obviously idiotic comment moderated up?
RMS requested that people acknowledge their operating systems as being essentially the GNU OS with a Linux kernel, hence "GNU/Linux" systems. He did not legally mandate that this be done.
The BSD license, on the other hand, legally mandated that Berkeley be credited in all advertising materials. Even your 3-line classified ad had to waste one of the lines crediting Berkeley.
If this is the case, then the name of the distribution is no longer "Red Hat." Theoretically, this would mean that Red Hat should start calling its own official boxed set the "Official Red Hat version of the Blah GNU/Linux system," while all others would be merely the Blah GNU/Linux system. As it stands now, they've given everybody the impression that "Red Hat" is the name of the GPL'd, freely redistributable distribution, not the name of their particular boxing of it.
I'd have to disagree with that assessment. I've found anti-alised fonts to be extremely useful, especially when you want to incorporate fonts into graphic design work. 9 point Verdana on my 800x600 monitor looks fine when anti-aliased =)
Are any of the real (read: original) Amiga people still with Amiga? Are Collas and/or his replacement longtime Amiga people, or were they brought in in the last few years? It'd be nice if they still had some of the original people around. What would really suck is if they make something completely unrelated to the Amiga but slap the "Amiga" name on it just for the hell of it (and because they own the rights to the name).
If both PKZIP and Gzip use the Lempel-Ziv algorithm, why can PKZIP compress multiple files into one archive, and then extract them all, or extract an individual file separately, while Gzip can only compress and extract a single file. If PKZIP can use LW to compress multiple files, why can Gzip only do one at a time? (yes, i know you can first tar your multiple files and gzip the tar file, but gzip is still only compressing one file, the tar file, and you can't extract the individual original files either...you have to un-gzip and then un-tar everything).
It refers to the difficulty in spoofing a TCP connection. Basically, to spoof a TCP connection, you need to take down the host you're pretending to be (usually with SYN flooding or something of that nature), and then sent TCP packets with that host's IP address as the origin. However, since the return packets will be going back to the disabled host, not to you (TCP spoofing is a "blind" attach), you need to guess the sequence numbers to put in the TCP packets, and if you guess wrong, the other side will discard them as being out of order or random garbage data, thus disconnecting you (if you even got the connection negotiated in the first place) and messing up your attack.
TCP sequence predition in nmap estimates the difficulty of guessing these TCP sequence numbers. In some OSs, such as Windows, it's a fixed increment between packets, so trivially easy to guess. In Linux, apparently, "random positive increments" are used, making it extremely difficult to guess the TCP sequence, thus making it extremely difficult to successfully spoof a TCP connection.
I've read some on Bugtraq recently about other weird things in Linux that will allow you to get a more accurate guess of the sequence numbers on a host that's otherwise idle (i think the id field in the IP packet increments by one each time or something of that nature). However, it's still not nearly as easy as Windows.
For a much more in-depth discussion, read daemon9's IP-Spoofing Demystified (Phrack Issue 48, Phile 14).
Ok, so that was a bad example. The point still holds though. Most FreeBSD programs have up-to-date manpages, while most Linux programs seem to be following gcc's lead in abandoning their man pages in favor of other types of documentation.
Unfortunately, Opera doesn't yet support PNG. Until it does, I'll be using JPGs and GIFs on my pages. When it does, I'll switch over. I'm not going to use crappy Netscape just so I can see some PNGs.
Yeah, but Linux doesn't keep its man pages updated (try doing a "man gcc" to see what they have to say about it). FreeBSD does. What good does RTFM do if the FM is out of date?
That's because, by definition, UID 0 is root. Some other UID may be called "root," and UID 0 may have a different name, but the UID 0 is still the superuser with all the "root" privilages. Read up on your UNIX specs.
Then the poster should've phrased it as "more x86 hardware support," which would be correct, rather than "more hardware support" in general, which is incorrect.
Well, the point isn't so much that they won't charge to license their patents, but that they can charge if they wanted to pursue the matter. Just because the world in general has gotten lucky once doesn't mean we should ignore the problem.
I know we're talking about graduate schools here, but CMU doesn't even have an undergraduate computer engineering program. Computer Science, sure, but no Computer Engineering, a major which most other top tech schools now offer. Any ideas why?
Re:A suggestion to prevent this kind of nonsense
on
911 Calls Linux
·
· Score: 2
Note the date on that link - July 09, 1999. After that date it was decided not to use Linux at all.
Re:A suggestion to prevent this kind of nonsense
on
911 Calls Linux
·
· Score: 2
Or Slashdot could hire a few more people and actually spend 2 minutes validating each story. The story summaries are often grossly wrong, giving me the impression that the submitter and/or poster didn't bother spending a few minutes to actually read the story being linked to. Not minor details being wrong either - major things.
There's also a bit too much bias, whether on purpose or not. For example, when Amiga announced its new OS would be a Linux/BeOS hybrid, slashdot reported it'd run Linux, while not mentioning BeOS at all. It turns out BeOS is the only OS that was correct in that statement (Linux is not being used), so the slashdot story was 100% wrong, compared to the 50% wrong of the story it linked to.
It's the same basic gameplay as Wolfenstein 3D, the Doom series, and the previous games in the Quake series. Graphics have obviously been improved. New weapons are added each time, and the physics models have improved. There's also some more range of movement, with stuff like crouching and jumping.
For a bug that cmdrtaco considers dangerous, this isn't the type of fast patching I'd expect. I always hear bragging that Linux fixes bugs in a few days of their discovery.
According to the bugtraq post about the bug, the discoverer contacted kernel developers in May. That was three months ago. After receiving little response, he posted to Bugtraq on July 31. Now, nearly a month later, the bug finally gets fixed.
Three month turn-around times for important bugfixes doesn't seem like anything to brag about.
Ok, I was right the first time, approximately 500 (slightly less, you're right at 460). Now where did i get that 600,000 number from?
*scratches head*
Re:2.0.38? What happened to the 2.2 tree?
on
Kernels Galore
·
· Score: 2
Well, 2.0.x was, until recently, the current stable tree. It's arguable that it still is, although 2.2.x seems to have finally gotten decent.
(before you flame me, yes, I realize that the 2.2.x tree is labeled "stable," and is officially has been considered the latest stable tree ever since 2.2.0 was released, but that's because the "stable" label is somewhat of a misnomer. "Not as buggy as 2.1.x, but not stable either" is what i'd consider it. 2.0.x is still the stable tree. Perhaps around now i'd consider moving to 2.2.x, but not 6 months ago.)
Slashdot Mirror
So then why do so many of them buy Quake and Civ:CTP?
Why is such an obviously idiotic comment moderated up?
RMS requested that people acknowledge their operating systems as being essentially the GNU OS with a Linux kernel, hence "GNU/Linux" systems. He did not legally mandate that this be done.
The BSD license, on the other hand, legally mandated that Berkeley be credited in all advertising materials. Even your 3-line classified ad had to waste one of the lines crediting Berkeley.
The difference should be obvious.
If this is the case, then the name of the distribution is no longer "Red Hat." Theoretically, this would mean that Red Hat should start calling its own official boxed set the "Official Red Hat version of the Blah GNU/Linux system," while all others would be merely the Blah GNU/Linux system. As it stands now, they've given everybody the impression that "Red Hat" is the name of the GPL'd, freely redistributable distribution, not the name of their particular boxing of it.
I'd have to disagree with that assessment. I've found anti-alised fonts to be extremely useful, especially when you want to incorporate fonts into graphic design work. 9 point Verdana on my 800x600 monitor looks fine when anti-aliased =)
Are any of the real (read: original) Amiga people still with Amiga? Are Collas and/or his replacement longtime Amiga people, or were they brought in in the last few years? It'd be nice if they still had some of the original people around. What would really suck is if they make something completely unrelated to the Amiga but slap the "Amiga" name on it just for the hell of it (and because they own the rights to the name).
If both PKZIP and Gzip use the Lempel-Ziv algorithm, why can PKZIP compress multiple files into one archive, and then extract them all, or extract an individual file separately, while Gzip can only compress and extract a single file. If PKZIP can use LW to compress multiple files, why can Gzip only do one at a time? (yes, i know you can first tar your multiple files and gzip the tar file, but gzip is still only compressing one file, the tar file, and you can't extract the individual original files either...you have to un-gzip and then un-tar everything).
So will this new setup mean we can finally get rid of those annoying CommentLimits of 25 comments per page?
It refers to the difficulty in spoofing a TCP connection. Basically, to spoof a TCP connection, you need to take down the host you're pretending to be (usually with SYN flooding or something of that nature), and then sent TCP packets with that host's IP address as the origin. However, since the return packets will be going back to the disabled host, not to you (TCP spoofing is a "blind" attach), you need to guess the sequence numbers to put in the TCP packets, and if you guess wrong, the other side will discard them as being out of order or random garbage data, thus disconnecting you (if you even got the connection negotiated in the first place) and messing up your attack.
TCP sequence predition in nmap estimates the difficulty of guessing these TCP sequence numbers. In some OSs, such as Windows, it's a fixed increment between packets, so trivially easy to guess. In Linux, apparently, "random positive increments" are used, making it extremely difficult to guess the TCP sequence, thus making it extremely difficult to successfully spoof a TCP connection.
I've read some on Bugtraq recently about other weird things in Linux that will allow you to get a more accurate guess of the sequence numbers on a host that's otherwise idle (i think the id field in the IP packet increments by one each time or something of that nature). However, it's still not nearly as easy as Windows.
For a much more in-depth discussion, read daemon9's IP-Spoofing Demystified (Phrack Issue 48, Phile 14).
Ok, so that was a bad example. The point still holds though. Most FreeBSD programs have up-to-date manpages, while most Linux programs seem to be following gcc's lead in abandoning their man pages in favor of other types of documentation.
Unfortunately, Opera doesn't yet support PNG. Until it does, I'll be using JPGs and GIFs on my pages. When it does, I'll switch over. I'm not going to use crappy Netscape just so I can see some PNGs.
Yeah, but Linux doesn't keep its man pages updated (try doing a "man gcc" to see what they have to say about it). FreeBSD does. What good does RTFM do if the FM is out of date?
That's because, by definition, UID 0 is root. Some other UID may be called "root," and UID 0 may have a different name, but the UID 0 is still the superuser with all the "root" privilages. Read up on your UNIX specs.
Then BSD isn't your only problem. You'll have to try to run your Linux box without any daemons. Have fun going without inetd.
Then the poster should've phrased it as "more x86 hardware support," which would be correct, rather than "more hardware support" in general, which is incorrect.
Now go get your USB scanner and cablemodem working in Linux and then come talk to me about it.
Well, the point isn't so much that they won't charge to license their patents, but that they can charge if they wanted to pursue the matter. Just because the world in general has gotten lucky once doesn't mean we should ignore the problem.
As Richard Stallman says, patent reform is not enough.
Also take a look at the League for Programming Freedom and freepatents.org.
I know we're talking about graduate schools here, but CMU doesn't even have an undergraduate computer engineering program. Computer Science, sure, but no Computer Engineering, a major which most other top tech schools now offer. Any ideas why?
Note the date on that link - July 09, 1999. After that date it was decided not to use Linux at all.
Or Slashdot could hire a few more people and actually spend 2 minutes validating each story. The story summaries are often grossly wrong, giving me the impression that the submitter and/or poster didn't bother spending a few minutes to actually read the story being linked to. Not minor details being wrong either - major things.
There's also a bit too much bias, whether on purpose or not. For example, when Amiga announced its new OS would be a Linux/BeOS hybrid, slashdot reported it'd run Linux, while not mentioning BeOS at all. It turns out BeOS is the only OS that was correct in that statement (Linux is not being used), so the slashdot story was 100% wrong, compared to the 50% wrong of the story it linked to.
Actually, Linux is not POSIX certified. There's some minor details I don't fully understand that make it not be POSIX compliant.
Quake 3 == Wolfenstein 3D 6
It's the same basic gameplay as Wolfenstein 3D, the Doom series, and the previous games in the Quake series. Graphics have obviously been improved. New weapons are added each time, and the physics models have improved. There's also some more range of movement, with stuff like crouching and jumping.
Overall, however, it's still the same game.
For a bug that cmdrtaco considers dangerous, this isn't the type of fast patching I'd expect. I always hear bragging that Linux fixes bugs in a few days of their discovery.
According to the bugtraq post about the bug, the discoverer contacted kernel developers in May. That was three months ago. After receiving little response, he posted to Bugtraq on July 31. Now, nearly a month later, the bug finally gets fixed.
Three month turn-around times for important bugfixes doesn't seem like anything to brag about.
Ok, I was right the first time, approximately 500 (slightly less, you're right at 460). Now where did i get that 600,000 number from?
*scratches head*
Well, 2.0.x was, until recently, the current stable tree. It's arguable that it still is, although 2.2.x seems to have finally gotten decent.
(before you flame me, yes, I realize that the 2.2.x tree is labeled "stable," and is officially has been considered the latest stable tree ever since 2.2.0 was released, but that's because the "stable" label is somewhat of a misnomer. "Not as buggy as 2.1.x, but not stable either" is what i'd consider it. 2.0.x is still the stable tree. Perhaps around now i'd consider moving to 2.2.x, but not 6 months ago.)