This service does not post the spammer's home address. There would be no way to do this unless they have billing info and access logs for every ISP in the world... and even that wouldn't cover it.
This just decodes headers for you, and weeds out the spoofed garbage. It's nifty, though.
Great... now that NVIDIA seems to be one of the leading 3D hardware providers to support Linux, who's gonna actually make the cards? STB? er.. no, 3dfx only. Diamond? Nope, they're an S3 shop. Guess that leaves Creative, and all of the taiwanese clone boards. For one, this means less competition for NVIDIA-based boards, so I assume that Creative will be free of some price pressures. Damn... wonder how long 'til Pepsico buys 'em all.
I've seen these too, and I wondered... what's up with putting "Red Hat" on the box? Is this a partnership with Red Hat? Seems that you couldn't call it "Red Hat" without their blessing... and maybe some cash flow?
I agree. This has been discussed a few times before, but I sincerely doubt that Red Hat is going out and making backroom Micro$oftian exclusive deals with commercial software companies. More likely, Metrowerks looked around, saw that Red Hat was the leading distro today, and decided that in order to minimize effort and maximize customers, they would "officially" support Red Hat. As the prior poster stated, it's likely that this will run just fine on other distros, especially those coming into line with the LSB.
Doesn't seem like that great of an argument, I guess. If your ISP sucks, why not find a decent ISP who uses a good MTA? Seems that allowing an individual to connect directly to your mail host is quite an open door to abuse... I know, it sucks... bah, I don't know. I'm just sick of spam.
p.s. I have no idea why this gets posted with a score of 2....
Unfortunately, this doesn't solve the problem... it just deletes it when it hits your inbox. It certainly does remove the major annoyance, but the problem is still there, clogging mail servers and using up bandwidth. And costing you money. I go back and forth - I let stuff come through for a while, put some notches in my spam-hunter belt, and then filter again when I can't stand it anymore.:-)
www.join.at points to www.rename.net, and they have a good anti-spam policy. I can't find a contact address, but there is a feedback form. Get this guy's link shut down. But BE NICE dammit, it's not rename.net's fault.
There are SO MANY good tools out there for sysadmins to block spam, if they'd just use them.
maps.vix.com has both the MAPS, a list of known offenders, and the DUL, a list of dial-up users from which direct mail should never be accepted. (Dial-up users should always go through their ISP's mail host...) www.orbs.org contains a list of insecure mail hosts which are often trespassed by spammers.
Blocking with these three lists would go a LONG ways towards reducing spam. If sysadmins would just use them... It's much harder to do as a user, unfortunately.
Check out this link for a posting history with this address... note, however, that even this is not proof that "alexgurry@intra.ru" is the originator. Sure does look like it, though.
It's perfectly justifiable not to release a free solution
Well... I hate to say it, but it is justifiable. It's their code - they choose the license. That's the way it goes. Would I prefer a free speech version? Sure. But I'm not going to yell at them for offering a product.
If Open Source is so lucrative, Why is it that Linus not only can't reveal the source he is working on, but can't even talk about what he does?
Damn... you mean if I write some GPL'd code, I'm bound by the GPL to reveal all details of every aspect of my professional life? This thing really is a strong license...
There's a file in the scripts directory called "patch-kernel" (or something similar... I always forget) which will automatically apply successive patches in the correct order. So if you're going from 2.2.5 to 2.2.10, you can just get all the patches (they can even be.gz'd I think) and run patch-kernel, and it'll bring you up to date.
Someone please correct me if I have a couple details wrong.:-)
I think that someone who spends 3 months writing the manual, then contacted the FSF and said "here it is! Pay me!" is not a very shrewd businessperson. Surely there would be arrangements made beforehand, perhaps a contract, based on the person's resume, ability, background, etc...
The email from RMS regarding the manual said that they would be willing to pay for the manual, but did not offer specifics. I am sure that there are lots of details which would need to be worked out before work began in earnest.
Hey, that's not too bad... if they've hired an outside company to do Y2K testing on 5.2 and 6.0, it sounds to me like the open source community is getting yet another benefit from Red Hat - third party verification of Y2K readiness of TONS of applications. Not that I expect them to find many problems.
I bet that outside company loves this particular job, too - "you mean we get ALL the source code to EVERYTHING? Whoohoo!":-)
I really wish that they had used Open IPO for their IPO> It would have fit in very nicely with the nature of Linux. Ah well. Maybe I'll buy some eventually.
You may also be interested to see what folks have to say about RHAT over at techstocks.com, here and here. (You might need to register to see these, not sure...)
Second: If you didn't know this already, then you are exactly the person that this "are you really sure?" safety net is designed for. Remove it at your own risk.
Oops, I may have cross-fired some neurons. Did a little checking, and found this:
"I found Richard's comments at the Open Source Developer's Day, where he called John Ousterhout a parasite because he now wants to build proprietary tools on top of tcl, a defining moment."--Tim O'Reilly
Sorry - the ol' memory's not what it used to be.:)
Ah, I hadn't seen that thread. Makes things a bit more clear... Thanks! People need to realize that this isn't an offer of $20k for somebody to hack up a HOWTO, they're talking about something on the order of an O'Reilly book...
Given RMS's attitude towards O'Reilly (didn't he call them "parasites?"), I'm not too surprised to see a "bidding war" for an author on this one. I didn't know the FSF had that kind of money for these things, though.
Seems to be no bad blood with Jim...
on
The Two LinuxHQs?
·
· Score: 3
On kernelnotes, Jim Pick says:
LinuxHQ.com back online! (and it's not this site)
The original creator of LinuxHQ has brought his original site back up (with a little bit of an explanation). I wish him luck!.:-)
From now on, this site will be called kernelnotes.org, and I will continue on with my plans for it. The content on this site will always be free, so I have no problems with anybody borrowing it, or enhancing it. I believe the two different sites can develop complementary (not competing) content for the Linux community.
I am glad that this little episode appears to be over. Please give me a few weeks to remove all the references to LinuxHQ in this site.
Now, I personally feel that the linuxhq.com thing was a fiasco, but I admire the diplomacy on the part of kernelnotes. An explanation from the linuxhq guy (Mark Evans) is here. He says he wants it to be better maintained, but I always thought it was well maintained. Well, whatever.
Slashdot Mirror
This service does not post the spammer's home address. There would be no way to do this unless they have billing info and access logs for every ISP in the world... and even that wouldn't cover it.
This just decodes headers for you, and weeds out the spoofed garbage. It's nifty, though.
... anyone have a copy of that video feed? :-)
Great... now that NVIDIA seems to be one of the leading 3D hardware providers to support Linux, who's gonna actually make the cards? STB? er.. no, 3dfx only. Diamond? Nope, they're an S3 shop. Guess that leaves Creative, and all of the taiwanese clone boards. For one, this means less competition for NVIDIA-based boards, so I assume that Creative will be free of some price pressures. Damn... wonder how long 'til Pepsico buys 'em all.
I've seen these too, and I wondered... what's up with putting "Red Hat" on the box? Is this a partnership with Red Hat? Seems that you couldn't call it "Red Hat" without their blessing... and maybe some cash flow?
I agree. This has been discussed a few times before, but I sincerely doubt that Red Hat is going out and making backroom Micro$oftian exclusive deals with commercial software companies. More likely, Metrowerks looked around, saw that Red Hat was the leading distro today, and decided that in order to minimize effort and maximize customers, they would "officially" support Red Hat. As the prior poster stated, it's likely that this will run just fine on other distros, especially those coming into line with the LSB.
Sesame street? Hm, I thought it was a young michael jackson...
p.s. I have no idea why this post defaulted to a score of two.
Doesn't seem like that great of an argument, I guess. If your ISP sucks, why not find a decent ISP who uses a good MTA? Seems that allowing an individual to connect directly to your mail host is quite an open door to abuse... I know, it sucks... bah, I don't know. I'm just sick of spam.
p.s. I have no idea why this gets posted with a score of 2....
Unfortunately, this doesn't solve the problem... it just deletes it when it hits your inbox. It certainly does remove the major annoyance, but the problem is still there, clogging mail servers and using up bandwidth. And costing you money. I go back and forth - I let stuff come through for a while, put some notches in my spam-hunter belt, and then filter again when I can't stand it anymore. :-)
www.join.at points to www.rename.net, and they have a good anti-spam policy. I can't find a contact address, but there is a feedback form. Get this guy's link shut down. But BE NICE dammit, it's not rename.net's fault.
www.orbs.org is a clearinghouse of info for open relays. Very good site.
There are SO MANY good tools out there for sysadmins to block spam, if they'd just use them.
maps.vix.com has both the MAPS, a list of known offenders, and the DUL, a list of dial-up users from which direct mail should never be accepted. (Dial-up users should always go through their ISP's mail host...) www.orbs.org contains a list of insecure mail hosts which are often trespassed by spammers.
Blocking with these three lists would go a LONG ways towards reducing spam. If sysadmins would just use them... It's much harder to do as a user, unfortunately.
Check out this link for a posting history with this address... note, however, that even this is not proof that "alexgurry@intra.ru" is the originator. Sure does look like it, though.
The loonies have left the gate, I'm sure. And this right after we read the Andover News bit about rabid slashdotters. *sigh*
Damn, I was just gonna quote that... but I'll re-quote just a bit:
"become software entrepreneurs by organizing groups of Viva Developers"
Wow... this sounds like Amway to me.... multi-level marketing crap.
Well... I hate to say it, but it is justifiable. It's their code - they choose the license. That's the way it goes. Would I prefer a free speech version? Sure. But I'm not going to yell at them for offering a product.
Damn... you mean if I write some GPL'd code, I'm bound by the GPL to reveal all details of every aspect of my professional life? This thing really is a strong license...
Duh.
There's a file in the scripts directory called "patch-kernel" (or something similar... I always forget) which will automatically apply successive patches in the correct order. So if you're going from 2.2.5 to 2.2.10, you can just get all the patches (they can even be .gz'd I think) and run patch-kernel, and it'll bring you up to date.
:-)
Someone please correct me if I have a couple details wrong.
I always wondered why pcmcia was installed by default... that one is very weird.
OTOH, all the people listing bugs/complaints here *really should* submit them to the Red Hat bug list, as well. That's how you make it better.
I think that someone who spends 3 months writing the manual, then contacted the FSF and said "here it is! Pay me!" is not a very shrewd businessperson. Surely there would be arrangements made beforehand, perhaps a contract, based on the person's resume, ability, background, etc...
The email from RMS regarding the manual said that they would be willing to pay for the manual, but did not offer specifics. I am sure that there are lots of details which would need to be worked out before work began in earnest.
Hey, that's not too bad... if they've hired an outside company to do Y2K testing on 5.2 and 6.0, it sounds to me like the open source community is getting yet another benefit from Red Hat - third party verification of Y2K readiness of TONS of applications. Not that I expect them to find many problems.
:-)
I bet that outside company loves this particular job, too - "you mean we get ALL the source code to EVERYTHING? Whoohoo!"
You may also be interested to see what folks have to say about RHAT over at techstocks.com, here and here. (You might need to register to see these, not sure...)
First: edit your /root/.bashrc to change this.
Second: If you didn't know this already, then you are exactly the person that this "are you really sure?" safety net is designed for. Remove it at your own risk.
Oops, I may have cross-fired some neurons. Did a little checking, and found this:
:)
"I found Richard's comments at the Open Source Developer's Day, where he called John Ousterhout a parasite because he now wants to build proprietary
tools on top of tcl, a defining moment."--Tim O'Reilly
Sorry - the ol' memory's not what it used to be.
Ah, I hadn't seen that thread. Makes things a bit more clear... Thanks! People need to realize that this isn't an offer of $20k for somebody to hack up a HOWTO, they're talking about something on the order of an O'Reilly book...
Given RMS's attitude towards O'Reilly (didn't he call them "parasites?"), I'm not too surprised to see a "bidding war" for an author on this one. I didn't know the FSF had that kind of money for these things, though.
Now, I personally feel that the linuxhq.com thing was a fiasco, but I admire the diplomacy on the part of kernelnotes. An explanation from the linuxhq guy (Mark Evans) is here. He says he wants it to be better maintained, but I always thought it was well maintained. Well, whatever.