You're wrong. There are thousands of protesters spread in each ugly metro area (I reserve the nicer ones down south which lack urban slums) lying down in front of cars and otherwise pissing people off.
The American people see this just fine and hear their arguments. And reject them, by 70/30 margins.
Yer talking to the wall. As if anyone with an IQ above an oyster couldn't sniff the rank anti-Americanism in your post. You'd oppose any hegemon - maybe someday you'll be lucky enough to get a new one and find out what you are missing. You obviously aren't old enough to remember a bipolar world.
Maybe if this newfound obsession with ripping into the US will stop you lefty peacenik folks from hammering the Jews with your anti-Semitic bs every other day, it'll be worth it to endure your scorn. How about Sunday/Tuesday/Thursday is Israel, and Monday/Wednesday/Friday is the US. You can flagellate yourself on Saturday.
It's rather futile to expect the US to change its ways voluntarily.
If you study your link, you'll note that the largest differentials between US consumption and other nations are in two areas: automotive travel and home heating. Hell, if you got those in line, the US bar would start looking rather average.
I can think of a few reasons why this would be. First, Americans keep their houses hot. Not me personally - I like it at 60-65F - or even less- that's because i'm diabetic and always feeling hot anyway. I keep it above 60 for the benefit of others, else no one would stay in my house. But most people in the US keep it at 70 or 72. Europeans, on the other hand, seem to like it around 60. Big energy savings there, for sure.
Automobiles are woven into American culture - you could blame Eisenhower if you wanted, he was the one that blessed (or cursed) us with the Interstate highway system. While this is a fine system of roads, best in the world for such a large country (I personally like the Autobahns better - you can drive faster), it has created a culture of people who believe in their hearts it is their God-given right to drive from point A to point B, no matter how far removed. Whereas, in Europe, I note that the cars are smaller, and less prevalent. Trains and other mass transport are used far more.
Something that has been tried and failed before in the US is stuffing environmental regulation down the people's throats to the detriment of their day to day life. You wouldn't believe the bitching about low-flow toilets - i've heard dozens of people talk about keeping their old toilets so they don't have to use the shitty (no pun intended) new ones that don't flush properly.
Even the R-12 CFC reduction was done in such a way that there was no consumer impact. Sure, appliance repairmen and air conditioning/refrigeration manufacturers went through hell, but the general public never saw that. And for good reason.
What passes for an environmentalist in the US by and large is a soccer mom driving an SUV with a home room temperature that makes a decent greenhouse for her plants. Tell her she has to turn her thermostat down, can't build the summer house on the well-forested mountainside, and has to take the train, and watch how fast all pretense to environmentalism fades.
Kyoto was nixed because it would have impacted people's lives negatively and would have sealed the fate of any politician tied to them. Maybe Clinton would have been slick enough to stop himself from being taken down by it, but I can't think of anyone else who could have endured the backlash.
Say what you will about US politicians, they like getting re-elected. Moreover, I don't see the landscape changing appreciably in the short term.
Larry Ellison (and others) pushed the NC vision _vigorously_ for at least a couple years as the Microsoft antidote. It wasn't just thin client architecture, it was appliance-like network devices that was being foisted on industry as a lower cost, better performing concept. Unfortunately, the performance wasn't there, nor the applications.
Still, companies like IBM and Sun sunk millions and precious time into this vision which turned out to be stillborn. During this time frame, Microsoft solidified their hold on the desktop and further marginalized all other players.
To call this a simple miscalculation or approximation is ludicrous. Ellison, et al acted as an accessory the existing Microsoft monopoly. Giving this guy any more credence after that fiasco would be just silly.
Network computers in their current iteration require applications to be written to play to their strengths.
When I see applications being written to these constraints, i'll agree that the day of the NC has come. I haven't seen that yet - in fact, modern applications appear to be going to the other extreme.
Larry Ellison has about zero credibility. Remember "Network Computers" and how they were going to take over the world? Sure, Larry. There have been many other examples over the years. His crystal ball is more tarnished and cracked than Miss Cleo's.
Larry is just being a cheerleader because he sees economic benefit in the vision of a Microsoft-less future. He'd also like to see Bill Gates take a hit. That's it. No facts here, move along.
You people _really_ lack historical perspective, by and large.
Get a gun if you want to have clout, ideas are meaningless, representative republics are the same kind of opiate for the masses that religion once was.
The illusion of public control of its destiny is deceiving.
All the government has ever done in my life is take away, never give. Anything not protected by the Constitution (and some that are) are fair game.
By the time the situation is put aright by courts or legislation, years have passed. As Keynes said, in the long run, we're all dead. Therefore, get a gun. Learn how to use it.
The fact the military (or any other part of the government) sucks to work for is not the fault of the people who signed up at a recruiting station, or even the officers.
The fact the government sucks to work for is the fault of the civilian work force who have nowhere to go, are mostly near retirement plus a union to protect them. Additionally, this is the fault of the lawmakers who insist on mandating particular organizational structures that don't make much sense from the perspective of getting work done.
Everyone knows things aren't working right, but the solutions proferred are the equivalent of using a howitzer on a cockroach. They are big and painful and fix tiny problems, rather than the large ones that would have real benefits. These solutions are usually additions to the US Code, mandated by Congress. Congress cares about moving cash back to districts, not about actual government efficiency.
Other things are complete boondoggles. I won't waste your time explaining. You or I would not want our money spent this way, but it is.
Of course, the government employees by and large make sure that things move at as slow a pace as possible. Mostly because they don't understand the technology, but in some cases it is simply a power grab. Since civilian government employees in the military can't actually rise to command anything usually (military personnel are preferred), they try to find a nice niche and slow everything around them through the use of interminable meetings, deterring memos, influence with superiors, etc to enhance their personal power and prestige.
The solution is to hire everyone as a contractor probably - civilian government employees are a lazy bunch (with a few gems buried amongst the shit) and it's fairly clear that jobs are a patronage prize, at least the good ones. The professional military people are in the most part motivated, well culled for efficiency, and need no fixing.
At least you can hire/fire contractors rapidly. Just don't blame uniformed personnel for the actions of crappy lawmakers though.
The institutional ennui of colleges hardly prepares you for working for a fast moving company in someplace like New York.
I find people having to _unlearn_ bad habits more than demonstrating any good ones. The best hires I have ever made were former military personnel. There you learn some time and resource manaagement and how to navigate a bureaucracy.
College degrees are near-useless for identifying actual skill. All it signifies is that you had or borrowed the money to pay for the classes, and didn't drink or mud so much that you got tossed out. At some schools, it's even near-impossible to get thrown out.
The curriculum is outdated and in most cases concentrates on practical know-how when theory would be much more appropriate given the 5 year time lag between actual practice and curriculum. When I was in college (87-91) they were teaching Pascal on AT&T 3B2s when C was the dominant language. The AT&T boxen were even then relatively ancient.
I doubt it's much different in Europe, and my impression of qualitative skill from foreign offices of companies i've worked for doesn't say that things are much different in Europe or the Far East.
You obviously haven't been interviewing for long to not have already gotten this down, or haven't watched employee life cycles.
In closing, The overall best IT guy I ever saw was a guy with a GED and no college. I don't even bother interviewing people with advanced degrees much - they are usually useless in practice.
They're going to keep trying and keep succeeding in various places until such time as all right to use information technology by the home user are taken away.
The common idiot in the streets couldn't care less, so I can't see as anything can be done about it.
It's a losing battle. I haven't seen a single advocate who had a decent plan for mobilizing the public, which is what is going to be needed to defeat this crap once and for all.
We'd have to demonize the MPAA/RIAA types and make their motives suspect -to the general public- to gain any traction. I'm open to ideas.
This is the same argument the Soviets pulled out of their asses being represented here. Because the Sovs had a news media (completely government controlled), a Congress of sorts (completely under control of the CPSU), and opportunity for 'criticism' (only allowed in the context of Marxism-Leninism), they were the equivalent of a Western capitalist society in terms of liberty and quality of supplied information.
We knew that was bullshit then, but 20 years later we have forgotten and are apparently attempting to attach the same legitimacy that the Soviets craved to the one-dimensional party line foisted by Al-Jazeera. Just because they aren't Communists doesn't mean that they should be taken seriously. They are every bit as bad as any State-run media that has ever existed. Goebbels would have been proud.
I consider the Arabian peninsula and its environs the functional equivalent of the Soviet Empire. Divided? Sort of. Monolithic in culture and attitude? Pretty much. Totalitarian? Just about.
Have we gotten dumb? Did everyone forget? Societies lacking liberty will not have a free press. The drivel they put out is barely worth listening to, except maybe as an indicator of the monolithic thought within that totalitarian regime.
I'm not going to be an apologist for US media. They suck, but not because US CITIZENS embedded in US FORMATIONS are saying 'we'. Mainly because they'll dredge up any piece of horseshit that is negative about the war effort and slap it on US screens. Let's see Al-Jazeera try that though, putting up negative stuff about Saddam's prison camp of a nation. Yeah right, I thought so.
You should be ashamed of yourselves for giving them an ounce of credence.
Jerry Pournelle wrote a nice book about the early CP/M kit computer culture. The hacking nature of it would seem real familiar to those/.'ers steeped in Linux.
"The User's Guide to Small Computers"
If you can hunt down a copy, it has a lot of material about Adam Osborne and his company written from a current events perspective back in the early 80's.
I had a Kaypro 2+ (my first real comp, i'm 33) and it came with a copy of the Pournelle book. Very educational and a lot of fun. True, he still names his computers back then, but Chaos Manor was a lot more poignant and 'with it' in 1984 or so.
Britain and the Commonwealth were not required to enter the war by any signed treaty. But they declared war on Germany and Austria-Hungary nonetheless, pre-emptively.
Australian forces were prominent in the Gallipoli operation against the Dardanalles, for one.
I wonder how many older works are going to simply disappear due to fear of copyright infringement.
I feel quite certain that many books from the 30's and 40's are probably gone forever. No one has translated them into online form, and the bindings are cracking and the books are going into the trash.
I did some library cleaning in the early 80's and disposed of a treasure trove of books from this era under instructions from the military school I was getting an education from. The argument was "they are old and obsolete". Wish I could have saved them all.
There were 'hawks' and 'doves' during Vietnam, amongst the elite. The hawks viewed protesters as communist sympathizers (i.e. pretty much what the right thinks of them today). The doves looked at them more as misguided young people. Think Hubert Humphrey here.
In the end, most common folk had little sympathy for the protesters during Vietnam, as today. They're too wacky and weird to appeal to the mainstream, and then as now, they derive most of their sense of moral superiority by their close association with opinions voiced by foreign leaders. Hence, the appearance of being unpatriotic.
Having Jacques Chirac on your side isn't exactly guaranteed to endear you to the American public.
My opinion is that they generally make their own bed and I don't have a lot of sympathy for them. They can lie in it now. If they wanted to be popular they'd make their point in a more acceptable manner to the US public.
This is a perfect application of the First Amendment. The Dixie Chicks or Martin Sheen can say whatever antiwar drivel they want, and the US public can choose to not buy their stuff, and thereby hurt them economically. Or not. But the system works just fine.
God, I love this backup system. I've used it in three different places for various cross-platform backups.
Novell, NT/2k, Unices, etc etc. It just works. Of course, to truly use it right, you need a huge tape library. Huge = 5000 tapes, at one bank I was at. We had one in Manhattan and one in Jersey and a 100mbps link between. We'd backup to Jersey at night for instant disaster recovery preparation, and copy back to NYC during the day. We were even setting up a third automated tape library in Brooklyn for added redundancy.
ADSM client configs were a pain until you understood the software. It ISN'T a backup program like you are thinking. It's really a snapshot storage system, with configurable numbers of file copies kept in buffer, we had it set to 5 unique copies of each file. You can restore snapshots based on file dates, which is a nice feature, though you'd need to extend it beyond 5 copies to really gain the benefit.
Loved the stuff. Wish I could get it back - using crappy Veritas here.
Strongly recommended, the parent poster hit it on the head.
It is a concrete fact that that no MacOS based webserver has ever been hacked into in the history of the internet.
The MacOS running WebStar and other webservers as has never been exploited or defaced, and are are unbreakable based on historical evidence.
Okay, this is ludicrous. I ran Webster and other macintosh web servers in the 94-96 time range for a significant test prep company in NYC. They are just as insecure as any other web servers. The insecurity comes from the CGIs, not the static content. But who cares...programmer level or system level insecurity has the same result.
The claim is false - i've done this myself to prove a point.
Why is is hack proof? These reasons:
1> No command shell. No shell means no way to hook or intercept the flow of control with many various shell oriented tricks found in Unix or NT. Apple uses an object model for process to process communication that is heavily typed and "pipe-less"
Sure, Pre-OSX Macs have no CLI really, but does it make a difference if you can disable, DoS or take control of the system, even? Sure, they are configuration mistakes. You can make those with Apache/*nix or IIS/win32 too. I've seen Timbuktu installed with no firewalling and simple plaintext password protection of the most trivial kind. I've seen CGIs that allow system control of various sorts, put in place by the same type of people who love the ease of use of macintoshes. Security?
2> No Root user. All Mac developers know their code is always running at root. Nothing is higher (except undocumented microkernel stuff where you pass Gary Davidians birthday into certain registers and make a special call). By always being root there is no false sense of security, and programming is done carefully.
Sure, all Macintosh programming is done carefully as a result.
By your estimation, access controls are a complete waste. I'm sorry, this doesn't hold much water. I could use the same argument to state that Wintel boxes are better web servers. We all know how that pans out.
If all Macintosh programming was so excellent, those Type 1 errors where you have no choice but to restart would be a thing of the past, right? I still see them. Though I have to admit the car crash sound is better than a blue screen.
3> Pascal strings. ANSI C Strings are the number one way people exploit Linux and Wintel boxes. The Mac avoids C strings historically in most of all of its OS. In fact even its ROMs originally used Pascal strings. As you know Pascal strings (length prefixed) are faster than C (because they have the length delimiter in the front and do not have to endlessly hunt for NULL), but the side effect is less buffer exploits. Individual 3rd party products may use C stings and bind to ANSI libraries, but many do not. In case you are not aware of what a "pascal string" is, it usually has no null byte terminator.
Pascal strings have a single length byte and can't handle anything longer than 255 characters. Many http requests are going to be longer than that. Obviously, Webster and other Mac web servers aren't using those for everything, though admittedly the system calls require them in many cases. Your argument about this preventing buffer overflows is not very convincing as a result.
#4 must be a new feature because you could do just about anything cgi-wise with a macintosh in my days of futzing with them. Swiss cheese.
#5 - Applescript. Many CGIs used to use those as a control interface and obviously resource protections don't apply. They probably still do...
#6 - I fail to see how the Mac's zoned memory structure is any more protective than the hardware segmented memory protection of Intel (see Type 1 errors above), stack return addresses be damned. I'd be interested in any proof of this.
That is why the US Army gave up on MS IIS and got a Mac for a web server.
More like...the French intervention in the US Revolutionary War was not by the consent of the French people. It was the action of a monarch's paid army on a foreign adventure that few even paid much attention to. So the French then, as today, didn't really care much about it.
The bad French attitude comes from the eclipse of their national star and their sense of being a second-class power. Objectively, would you grant a UN Security Council veto to France (or Britain, for that matter) today? Nah, India would get it.
Slashdot Mirror
So get a USB hub. What's the big deal - it even makes things easier if you put it up on your desk.
Seems like a no-brainer. Take advantage of the new technology's features!
You're wrong. There are thousands of protesters spread in each ugly metro area (I reserve the nicer ones down south which lack urban slums) lying down in front of cars and otherwise pissing people off.
The American people see this just fine and hear their arguments. And reject them, by 70/30 margins.
Yer talking to the wall. As if anyone with an IQ above an oyster couldn't sniff the rank anti-Americanism in your post. You'd oppose any hegemon - maybe someday you'll be lucky enough to get a new one and find out what you are missing. You obviously aren't old enough to remember a bipolar world.
Maybe if this newfound obsession with ripping into the US will stop you lefty peacenik folks from hammering the Jews with your anti-Semitic bs every other day, it'll be worth it to endure your scorn.
How about Sunday/Tuesday/Thursday is Israel, and Monday/Wednesday/Friday is the US. You can flagellate yourself on Saturday.
It's rather futile to expect the US to change its ways voluntarily.
If you study your link, you'll note that the largest differentials between US consumption and other nations are in two areas: automotive travel and home heating. Hell, if you got those in line, the US bar would start looking rather average.
I can think of a few reasons why this would be. First, Americans keep their houses hot. Not me personally - I like it at 60-65F - or even less- that's because i'm diabetic and always feeling hot anyway. I keep it above 60 for the benefit of others, else no one would stay in my house. But most people in the US keep it at 70 or 72. Europeans, on the other hand, seem to like it around 60. Big energy savings there, for sure.
Automobiles are woven into American culture - you could blame Eisenhower if you wanted, he was the one that blessed (or cursed) us with the Interstate highway system. While this is a fine system of roads, best in the world for such a large country (I personally like the Autobahns better - you can drive faster), it has created a culture of people who believe in their hearts it is their God-given right to drive from point A to point B, no matter how far removed. Whereas, in Europe, I note that the cars are smaller, and less prevalent. Trains and other mass transport are used far more.
Something that has been tried and failed before in the US is stuffing environmental regulation down the people's throats to the detriment of their day to day life. You wouldn't believe the bitching about low-flow toilets - i've heard dozens of people talk about keeping their old toilets so they don't have to use the shitty (no pun intended) new ones that don't flush properly.
Even the R-12 CFC reduction was done in such a way that there was no consumer impact. Sure, appliance repairmen and air conditioning/refrigeration manufacturers went through hell, but the general public never saw that. And for good reason.
What passes for an environmentalist in the US by and large is a soccer mom driving an SUV with a home room temperature that makes a decent greenhouse for her plants. Tell her she has to turn her thermostat down, can't build the summer house on the well-forested mountainside, and has to take the train, and watch how fast all pretense to environmentalism fades.
Kyoto was nixed because it would have impacted people's lives negatively and would have sealed the fate of any politician tied to them. Maybe Clinton would have been slick enough to stop himself from being taken down by it, but I can't think of anyone else who could have endured the backlash.
Say what you will about US politicians, they like getting re-elected. Moreover, I don't see the landscape changing appreciably in the short term.
Larry Ellison (and others) pushed the NC vision _vigorously_ for at least a couple years as the Microsoft antidote. It wasn't just thin client architecture, it was appliance-like network devices that was being foisted on industry as a lower cost, better performing concept. Unfortunately, the performance wasn't there, nor the applications.
Still, companies like IBM and Sun sunk millions and precious time into this vision which turned out to be stillborn. During this time frame, Microsoft solidified their hold on the desktop and further marginalized all other players.
To call this a simple miscalculation or approximation is ludicrous. Ellison, et al acted as an accessory the existing Microsoft monopoly. Giving this guy any more credence after that fiasco would be just silly.
Network computers in their current iteration require applications to be written to play to their strengths.
When I see applications being written to these constraints, i'll agree that the day of the NC has come. I haven't seen that yet - in fact, modern applications appear to be going to the other extreme.
Larry Ellison has about zero credibility. Remember "Network Computers" and how they were going to take over the world? Sure, Larry. There have been many other examples over the years. His crystal ball is more tarnished and cracked than Miss Cleo's.
Larry is just being a cheerleader because he sees economic benefit in the vision of a Microsoft-less future. He'd also like to see Bill Gates take a hit. That's it. No facts here, move along.
You people _really_ lack historical perspective, by and large.
Get a gun if you want to have clout, ideas are meaningless, representative republics are the same kind of opiate for the masses that religion once was.
The illusion of public control of its destiny is deceiving.
All the government has ever done in my life is take away, never give. Anything not protected by the Constitution (and some that are) are fair game.
By the time the situation is put aright by courts or legislation, years have passed. As Keynes said, in the long run, we're all dead. Therefore, get a gun. Learn how to use it.
They'll move in troops and make you act like a paranoid like the rest of the country, trust me.
I hope I die soon. Then I don't have to watch the end of all of this.
The fact the military (or any other part of the government) sucks to work for is not the fault of the people who signed up at a recruiting station, or even the officers.
The fact the government sucks to work for is the fault of the civilian work force who have nowhere to go, are mostly near retirement plus a union to protect them. Additionally, this is the fault of the lawmakers who insist on mandating particular organizational structures that don't make much sense from the perspective of getting work done.
Everyone knows things aren't working right, but the solutions proferred are the equivalent of using a howitzer on a cockroach. They are big and painful and fix tiny problems, rather than the large ones that would have real benefits. These solutions are usually additions to the US Code, mandated by Congress. Congress cares about moving cash back to districts, not about actual government efficiency.
Other things are complete boondoggles. I won't waste your time explaining. You or I would not want our money spent this way, but it is.
Of course, the government employees by and large make sure that things move at as slow a pace as possible. Mostly because they don't understand the technology, but in some cases it is simply a power grab. Since civilian government employees in the military can't actually rise to command anything usually (military personnel are preferred), they try to find a nice niche and slow everything around them through the use of interminable meetings, deterring memos, influence with superiors, etc to enhance their personal power and prestige.
The solution is to hire everyone as a contractor probably - civilian government employees are a lazy bunch (with a few gems buried amongst the shit) and it's fairly clear that jobs are a patronage prize, at least the good ones. The professional military people are in the most part motivated, well culled for efficiency, and need no fixing.
At least you can hire/fire contractors rapidly. Just don't blame uniformed personnel for the actions of crappy lawmakers though.
The institutional ennui of colleges hardly prepares you for working for a fast moving company in someplace like New York.
I find people having to _unlearn_ bad habits more than demonstrating any good ones. The best hires I have ever made were former military personnel. There you learn some time and resource manaagement and how to navigate a bureaucracy.
Strange but true.
College degrees are near-useless for identifying actual skill. All it signifies is that you had or borrowed the money to pay for the classes, and didn't drink or mud so much that you got tossed out. At some schools, it's even near-impossible to get thrown out.
The curriculum is outdated and in most cases concentrates on practical know-how when theory would be much more appropriate given the 5 year time lag between actual practice and curriculum. When I was in college (87-91) they were teaching Pascal on AT&T 3B2s when C was the dominant language. The AT&T boxen were even then relatively ancient.
I doubt it's much different in Europe, and my impression of qualitative skill from foreign offices of companies i've worked for doesn't say that things are much different in Europe or the Far East.
You obviously haven't been interviewing for long to not have already gotten this down, or haven't watched employee life cycles.
In closing, The overall best IT guy I ever saw was a guy with a GED and no college. I don't even bother interviewing people with advanced degrees much - they are usually useless in practice.
They're going to keep trying and keep succeeding in various places until such time as all right to use information technology by the home user are taken away.
The common idiot in the streets couldn't care less, so I can't see as anything can be done about it.
It's a losing battle. I haven't seen a single advocate who had a decent plan for mobilizing the public, which is what is going to be needed to defeat this crap once and for all.
We'd have to demonize the MPAA/RIAA types and make their motives suspect -to the general public- to gain any traction. I'm open to ideas.
You could tell Pravda was bullshit from the start, ditto here.
Defending totalitarian propaganda with sophistry is pretty transparent.
It seems to be ok to shit on other people in German videos but not to show a Nazi symbol like a swastika, or to play violent video games.
Perhaps mutual erotic defecation is the wave of the future? I suggest a UN resolution.
Sweden isn't landlocked.
:b
It borders the Kattegat, Baltic Sea and Gulf of Bothnia, I believe.
So much for geography
This is the same argument the Soviets pulled out of their asses being represented here. Because the Sovs had a news media (completely government controlled), a Congress of sorts (completely under control of the CPSU), and opportunity for 'criticism' (only allowed in the context of Marxism-Leninism), they were the equivalent of a Western capitalist society in terms of liberty and quality of supplied information.
We knew that was bullshit then, but 20 years later we have forgotten and are apparently attempting to attach the same legitimacy that the Soviets craved to the one-dimensional party line foisted by Al-Jazeera. Just because they aren't Communists doesn't mean that they should be taken seriously. They are every bit as bad as any State-run media that has ever existed. Goebbels would have been proud.
I consider the Arabian peninsula and its environs the functional equivalent of the Soviet Empire. Divided? Sort of. Monolithic in culture and attitude? Pretty much. Totalitarian? Just about.
Have we gotten dumb? Did everyone forget? Societies lacking liberty will not have a free press. The drivel they put out is barely worth listening to, except maybe as an indicator of the monolithic thought within that totalitarian regime.
I'm not going to be an apologist for US media. They suck, but not because US CITIZENS embedded in US FORMATIONS are saying 'we'. Mainly because they'll dredge up any piece of horseshit that is negative about the war effort and slap it on US screens. Let's see Al-Jazeera try that though, putting up negative stuff about Saddam's prison camp of a nation. Yeah right, I thought so.
You should be ashamed of yourselves for giving them an ounce of credence.
Jerry Pournelle wrote a nice book about the early CP/M kit computer culture. The hacking nature of it would seem real familiar to those /.'ers steeped in Linux.
"The User's Guide to Small Computers"
If you can hunt down a copy, it has a lot of material about Adam Osborne and his company written from a current events perspective back in the early 80's.
I had a Kaypro 2+ (my first real comp, i'm 33) and it came with a copy of the Pournelle book. Very educational and a lot of fun. True, he still names his computers back then, but Chaos Manor was a lot more poignant and 'with it' in 1984 or so.
Try WWI.
Britain and the Commonwealth were not required to enter the war by any signed treaty. But they declared war on Germany and Austria-Hungary nonetheless, pre-emptively.
Australian forces were prominent in the Gallipoli operation against the Dardanalles, for one.
I manage a small infrastructure team (6 people). We take time out at lunch and at the end of the day (after 5) to play a couple maps of UT.
We name the bots after users we hate, or French presidents.
After 15 or 20 minutes of intense fragging, morale is restored.
I wonder how many older works are going to simply disappear due to fear of copyright infringement.
I feel quite certain that many books from the 30's and 40's are probably gone forever. No one has translated them into online form, and the bindings are cracking and the books are going into the trash.
I did some library cleaning in the early 80's and disposed of a treasure trove of books from this era under instructions from the military school I was getting an education from. The argument was "they are old and obsolete". Wish I could have saved them all.
I forgot, entertainment figures have a right to make lots of money. It's right there in the Constitution, right?
Just because you aren't in the majority doesn't make the system bad.
There were 'hawks' and 'doves' during Vietnam, amongst the elite. The hawks viewed protesters as communist sympathizers (i.e. pretty much what the right thinks of them today). The doves looked at them more as misguided young people. Think Hubert Humphrey here.
In the end, most common folk had little sympathy for the protesters during Vietnam, as today. They're too wacky and weird to appeal to the mainstream, and then as now, they derive most of their sense of moral superiority by their close association with opinions voiced by foreign leaders. Hence, the appearance of being unpatriotic.
Having Jacques Chirac on your side isn't exactly guaranteed to endear you to the American public.
My opinion is that they generally make their own bed and I don't have a lot of sympathy for them. They can lie in it now. If they wanted to be popular they'd make their point in a more acceptable manner to the US public.
This is a perfect application of the First Amendment. The Dixie Chicks or Martin Sheen can say whatever antiwar drivel they want, and the US public can choose to not buy their stuff, and thereby hurt them economically. Or not. But the system works just fine.
ADSM Rocks.
God, I love this backup system. I've used it in three different places for various cross-platform backups.
Novell, NT/2k, Unices, etc etc. It just works. Of course, to truly use it right, you need a huge tape library. Huge = 5000 tapes, at one bank I was at. We had one in Manhattan and one in Jersey and a 100mbps link between. We'd backup to Jersey at night for instant disaster recovery preparation, and copy back to NYC during the day. We were even setting up a third automated tape library in Brooklyn for added redundancy.
ADSM client configs were a pain until you understood the software. It ISN'T a backup program like you are thinking. It's really a snapshot storage system, with configurable numbers of file copies kept in buffer, we had it set to 5 unique copies of each file. You can restore snapshots based on file dates, which is a nice feature, though you'd need to extend it beyond 5 copies to really gain the benefit.
Loved the stuff. Wish I could get it back - using crappy Veritas here.
Strongly recommended, the parent poster hit it on the head.
It is a concrete fact that that no MacOS based webserver has ever been hacked into in the history of the internet.
The MacOS running WebStar and other webservers as has never been exploited or defaced, and are are unbreakable based on historical evidence.
Okay, this is ludicrous. I ran Webster and other macintosh web servers in the 94-96 time range for a significant test prep company in NYC. They are just as insecure as any other web servers. The insecurity comes from the CGIs, not the static content. But who cares...programmer level or system level insecurity has the same result.
The claim is false - i've done this myself to prove a point.
Why is is hack proof? These reasons :
1> No command shell. No shell means no way to hook or intercept the flow of control with many various shell oriented tricks found in Unix or NT. Apple uses an object model for process to process communication that is heavily typed and "pipe-less"
Sure, Pre-OSX Macs have no CLI really, but does it make a difference if you can disable, DoS or take control of the system, even? Sure, they are configuration mistakes. You can make those with Apache/*nix or IIS/win32 too. I've seen Timbuktu installed with no firewalling and simple plaintext password protection of the most trivial kind. I've seen CGIs that allow system control of various sorts, put in place by the same type of people who love the ease of use of macintoshes. Security?
2> No Root user. All Mac developers know their code is always running at root. Nothing is higher (except undocumented microkernel stuff where you pass Gary Davidians birthday into certain registers and make a special call). By always being root there is no false sense of security, and programming is done carefully.
Sure, all Macintosh programming is done carefully as a result.
By your estimation, access controls are a complete waste. I'm sorry, this doesn't hold much water. I could use the same argument to state that Wintel boxes are better web servers. We all know how that pans out.
If all Macintosh programming was so excellent, those Type 1 errors where you have no choice but to restart would be a thing of the past, right? I still see them. Though I have to admit the car crash sound is better than a blue screen.
3> Pascal strings. ANSI C Strings are the number one way people exploit Linux and Wintel boxes. The Mac avoids C strings historically in most of all of its OS. In fact even its ROMs originally used Pascal strings. As you know Pascal strings (length prefixed) are faster than C (because they have the length delimiter in the front and do not have to endlessly hunt for NULL), but the side effect is less buffer exploits. Individual 3rd party products may use C stings and bind to ANSI libraries, but many do not. In case you are not aware of what a "pascal string" is, it usually has no null byte terminator.
Pascal strings have a single length byte and can't handle anything longer than 255 characters. Many http requests are going to be longer than that. Obviously, Webster and other Mac web servers aren't using those for everything, though admittedly the system calls require them in many cases. Your argument about this preventing buffer overflows is not very convincing as a result.
#4 must be a new feature because you could do just about anything cgi-wise with a macintosh in my days of futzing with them. Swiss cheese.
#5 - Applescript. Many CGIs used to use those as a control interface and obviously resource protections don't apply. They probably still do...
#6 - I fail to see how the Mac's zoned memory structure is any more protective than the hardware segmented memory protection of Intel (see Type 1 errors above), stack return addresses be damned. I'd be interested in any proof of this.
That is why the US Army gave up on MS IIS and got a Mac for a web server.
Not at this bas
More like...the French intervention in the US Revolutionary War was not by the consent of the French people. It was the action of a monarch's paid army on a foreign adventure that few even paid much attention to. So the French then, as today, didn't really care much about it.
The bad French attitude comes from the eclipse of their national star and their sense of being a second-class power. Objectively, would you grant a UN Security Council veto to France (or Britain, for that matter) today? Nah, India would get it.
They know this too.