I've considered it, since my aforementioned x86 RH9 box is literally 2 feet away from the Amiga on the same desk (and both tied into the LAN). However, to be honest, I've been using the repeated compile cycles to test out the hardware (nagging VM problems, apparently a few bad chips of RAM and a flakey external SCSI cable). So the long compile time is good for something.
Now that I have the HW debugged (for now), I'll try the cross-compile setup for future builds. Might be fun, and oughta be done about 10 times faster.
I use NetBSD, myself, because I prefer not to work with tantrum-spewing ranters. (It doesn't help that the platform I use with BSD--Amiga--is pretty retarded in OpenBSD but continues to struggle forward in NetBSD.) I also use Linux on an x86 server, because it works. I'm not sure what lil' Theo's on about. Code quality? OK, maybe. (Maybe not.) And if it runs, doesn't fall over, and is relatively secure (in a moderately robust multilayer security environment), abstract code quality is irrelevant.
Is the BSD core kernel better? I don't know; I like its incarnation on my Amiga, but every now and again I miss kernel modules rather than spending 8 hours recompiling/netbsd because I'm about to add a different network card. (It's an Amiga, remember... a 25 MHz 68030 Amiga. Yes, it's damn slow.)
Well, I'm ranting again. Not like De Raadt, of course. What the Hell did Forbes do, cage him and poke a stick at him until he started snarling?
Well, you shouldn't transmit sensitive data over hardware you don't trust.
Yeah, but GP comment seems to be arguing that we just need to lower our trust threshold a bit. Or bitch that we can't wander tha intarweb in the airport like we can at home--in our skivvs, sucking down a brewsky, scratching ourselves, FREE FROM FEAR.
Gosh, folks, you don't need to take any precautions using a public terminal that you wouldn't have to at home. Make sure some joker (or the Department of Justice) hasn't stuck a hardware keylogger on the machine. Check the system for spyware and trojansoft the best you can. Use encryption if you can. And if you can't be reasonably sure, meh... it's just your data integrity, is all.
I'm sorry, but the technological elite isn't going to be able to immunize you from the bad scary people out there. We can't solve those problems. Frankly, we cause those problems. (OK, we don't intentionally cause the problems, but bad people make use of our brilliant inventions to do bad things.)
I'm just bitterly disappointed that our technological elite still hasn't come through on flying cars, sex-appeal-in-a-pill, and faster-than-light spaceflight.
Adequate backups were lacking for networks that screen airline passengers...
"I'm sorry, Sir, you can't board. Our screening system is down."
"I've got a ticket. I've shown you my papers. You (and every RFID hacker within 50 feet of my entire path through this airport) have scrutinized my RFID passport. I've given my decilitre of blood for biometric screening. The plane is about to close door and push off. I'm returning home after 18 months dodging RPGs and Kalashnikov fire in Bagdhad, and I'm still in uniform. And you're telling me I can't board because you can't be sure I'm actually not bin Laden in extremely clever disguise?"
"No, Sir, I'm telling you that you can't board. Our screening system is down."
"This is unacceptable. Who is your supervisor?"
"That is classified. Please wait here. [whispers into radio: "Got another Gitmo client for ya."]
"So honesty compels me to point out: Dvorak has been predicting an Apple switch to Intel processors since at least 1984. Given the rate of change in the microprocessor industry since 1980, it was inevitable that if he kept at it long enough he would be right eventually."
Or in the immortal and anonymous words of some unknown sage, "Even the blind squirrel finds the nut sometimes."
In spite of the fanboi consensus, Apple hardware is not magical. The hardware itself offers precious little advantage over other commodity components, other than manufacturer-designed integration--just like Dell and HP. About the only non-commodity component in current Macs is the CPU, and we all know that's about to change.
So J. Random Luser isn't going to buy a $1000 Mac/x86 and a $400 Windows Longhorn package, particularly if burning OS X and loading Windows disqualifies you from Apple technical support and service. Which it probably would.
No, the only real advantage of Mac, regardless of processor, is integration between proprietary hardware (even if built up from commodity components) and OS X. So don't expect a swarm of switchers bringing their XP CDs.
Am I remembering right when I recall that MoFo is pretty much end-of-lifing the Suite? I use Suite 1.7.8, and have no desire or intention of switching to Firefox and Thunderbird.
Is the Moz community going to release a fix for Suite?
Re:$42.6 million grant from the Bill & Melinda
on
Photoshop for DNA
·
· Score: 1
geeks as the only ones doing gene manipulation the old way (by hand at the console).
Perhaps the best euphemism since "left-handed mousing." ROFLMAO.
I think the idea of petent is a selfish act. And every selfish act should be discouraged.
Outstanding. Stop being so selfish and hoarding your possessions. Give me your money and all you computer equipment.
Did you really mean "every", or did you mean "every, except for me."?
Possession of a patent, like possession of any property (intellectual or tangible) can be good or bad. Humanity isn't selfless enough for pure communism to ever work, so reasonably-constrained private ownership is a good alternative to rampant acquisition by force, which is the most likely alternative. (Take away social restraint, and what's left? Smash-and-grab, mostly.)
I understand that the final decision relative to making this "search for shared passwords" automatic was that it wasn't going to be. At that time.
Things change, including minds. That's why I wrote "if it occurs", not "when". I'm not completely convinced that all administrative players believe that this kind of database mining is actually bad, so I'm going to keep an ear open.
Those heading titles aren't the passwords themselves, just one member from the group. The original passwords are encrypted and unknown. These are users with the same hash.
Yes, and as such everyone in the same heading now knows the password for everyone else in the same heading. Given the high likelihood that many of the accounts are trolls, that means if innocent Wikipedian "you" happen to share a password with a troll, that troll knows it now. Lucky you.
they're mostly from trolls.
What, only "mostly"? Not a very strong assertion in the face of a potential privacy violation. C'mon, if you're gonna assert that you intend to "out" only the trolls, you need to stick to the story. Admitting that the list is "mostly" trolls is admitting that the list is "partially" innocents. Who have now been screwed.
As the page says, "all the accounts listed on this page have been created solely for the purpose of trolling."
Well, then, obviously there's no story. Silly us. The creator of the page says there's no innocents listed, therefore there are no innocents listed.
In related news, Microsoft Windows is the most secure server OS EVAR!!! MS's Marketing department sed so!
Only when that claim is disproven does the page become a worry.
No, in a sane world, the page is a worry until the counterclaim is positively proven: that there are demonstrably no innocent user IDs on the page.
Until then, I'm gonna watch that page and its automated incarnation (if it occurs) very carefully. I have been a moderately active Wikipedian up until now, but if I'm gonna get carpet-bombed just because I accidentally move in next door to a troll, I'll find someplace else to contribute.
Was it me, or did Ulrich sound distinctly like he was arguing for the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, at least until the perfection of New Free-Software Man and the inevitable rise of International Socialism^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h Software Freeism?
I philosophically support Free Software. (And no, I don't have to show you my Party Credentials.) But loose talk about purges of counterrevolutionary elements and collectivization of software development really freaks me out.
News flash: Communism rightly failed. Take Free Software down its path only if you want it to fail too.
Well, some neo-Stalinist Free Software chekist will probably downmod me. Is this how Leon Trotsky felt? (I mean, before he got the ice axe in the head.)
Keep Free Software FREE! Once you begin rounding up and interning the minorities, you are taking the first steps toward a new totalitarianism!
i honestly dont remember v1 being pre-installed anywhere...
Lucky. I'm still in counseling.
Actually, it was fun, in a sick sad way. It was 1987, I was airman in the US Air Force, using a Zenith Z248 (80286 processor and a WHOLE MEG OF RAM! W00T!). We didn't even realize it had "Windows" until we started pokin' around in DOS.
Great fun... start up 10 different copies of "clock". Windows would actually begin to lose time trying to keep the second hand on 10 different "analog clock" displays updated. Within about 5 minutes the clocks were varying degrees of behind, as much a 45 seconds behind on some of the displays. Sad. And the machine was so wedged that it had to be power cycled to come back.
I had already been toying with a Macintosh, and I was definitely not impressed with Microsoft. We never ran it again, but our superintendent wouldn't let us delete that waste of disk space because he had the peculiar idea that we were accountable for the actual software on the hard drive. I guess that's how they did it in his punch-card mainframe days, so I can't blame him.
You seem kinda worked up. It's interfering with your presentation.
In the second paragraph, you state the coffee-lap victim received third-degree burns. If the coffee really was 185 degree F, I could believe it. (Actually, I think you're actually being conservative. I just googled the ATLA Tap Water Burn Litigation Center which says that third-degree scalds can form in 1 second at 160 degrees. But these folks appear to be lawyers who sue people and organizations which "cause" hot-tap-water injuries, so take their scientific information with a "science as played out in court" grain of salt. A court of law isn't scientific peer-review, after all.)
Anyways, in the rest of your article, you refer only to first-degree burns. In particular, I find it hard to believe that first-degree burns would ever require skin grafts.
So I'm forced to conclude that (A) at least once in the rest of the article, you meant "third-degree", particular in reference to grafting; and (B) the energized tone of your writing, while sincere, probably interfered with your ability to proofread your writing.
Not trying to be pedantic, though I usually don't have to try too hard for that anyways, but your perfectly good point may have suffered by your presentation. Just so you know.
Slashdot Mirror
Now that I have the HW debugged (for now), I'll try the cross-compile setup for future builds. Might be fun, and oughta be done about 10 times faster.
I use NetBSD, myself, because I prefer not to work with tantrum-spewing ranters. (It doesn't help that the platform I use with BSD--Amiga--is pretty retarded in OpenBSD but continues to struggle forward in NetBSD.) I also use Linux on an x86 server, because it works. I'm not sure what lil' Theo's on about. Code quality? OK, maybe. (Maybe not.) And if it runs, doesn't fall over, and is relatively secure (in a moderately robust multilayer security environment), abstract code quality is irrelevant.
Is the BSD core kernel better? I don't know; I like its incarnation on my Amiga, but every now and again I miss kernel modules rather than spending 8 hours recompiling /netbsd because I'm about to add a different network card. (It's an Amiga, remember... a 25 MHz 68030 Amiga. Yes, it's damn slow.)
Well, I'm ranting again. Not like De Raadt, of course. What the Hell did Forbes do, cage him and poke a stick at him until he started snarling?
Sheesh.
Your sig is serendipitous in view of the subject. It's a funny ol' world, isn't it?
Chlorella!
Yes, I know I didn't close my pseudotags.
Look, no wrist braces.
And if those bastards try to make me take up gardening, I'll kill 'em.
You're buckin' to get downmodded, aren't you?
Yeah, but GP comment seems to be arguing that we just need to lower our trust threshold a bit. Or bitch that we can't wander tha intarweb in the airport like we can at home--in our skivvs, sucking down a brewsky, scratching ourselves, FREE FROM FEAR.
Gosh, folks, you don't need to take any precautions using a public terminal that you wouldn't have to at home. Make sure some joker (or the Department of Justice) hasn't stuck a hardware keylogger on the machine. Check the system for spyware and trojansoft the best you can. Use encryption if you can. And if you can't be reasonably sure, meh... it's just your data integrity, is all.
I'm sorry, but the technological elite isn't going to be able to immunize you from the bad scary people out there. We can't solve those problems. Frankly, we cause those problems. (OK, we don't intentionally cause the problems, but bad people make use of our brilliant inventions to do bad things.)
I'm just bitterly disappointed that our technological elite still hasn't come through on flying cars, sex-appeal-in-a-pill, and faster-than-light spaceflight.
It's a sick sad world when I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or sincere. Sigh.
"I'm sorry, Sir, you can't board. Our screening system is down."
"I've got a ticket. I've shown you my papers. You (and every RFID hacker within 50 feet of my entire path through this airport) have scrutinized my RFID passport. I've given my decilitre of blood for biometric screening. The plane is about to close door and push off. I'm returning home after 18 months dodging RPGs and Kalashnikov fire in Bagdhad, and I'm still in uniform. And you're telling me I can't board because you can't be sure I'm actually not bin Laden in extremely clever disguise?"
"No, Sir, I'm telling you that you can't board. Our screening system is down."
"This is unacceptable. Who is your supervisor?"
"That is classified. Please wait here. [whispers into radio: "Got another Gitmo client for ya."]
Why, yes, as a matter of fact, I am an anime otaku.
They can stand any damn place they like. Hands are detachable, given the right tools.
Or in the immortal and anonymous words of some unknown sage, "Even the blind squirrel finds the nut sometimes."
So J. Random Luser isn't going to buy a $1000 Mac/x86 and a $400 Windows Longhorn package, particularly if burning OS X and loading Windows disqualifies you from Apple technical support and service. Which it probably would.
No, the only real advantage of Mac, regardless of processor, is integration between proprietary hardware (even if built up from commodity components) and OS X. So don't expect a swarm of switchers bringing their XP CDs.
Is the Moz community going to release a fix for Suite?
Perhaps the best euphemism since "left-handed mousing." ROFLMAO.
"It's not an addiction, slugging back 4 fingers of gin as I get out of bed is just part of my daily routine!"
" Nothing for you to see here. Please move along. "
Outstanding. Stop being so selfish and hoarding your possessions. Give me your money and all you computer equipment.
Did you really mean "every", or did you mean "every, except for me."?
Possession of a patent, like possession of any property (intellectual or tangible) can be good or bad. Humanity isn't selfless enough for pure communism to ever work, so reasonably-constrained private ownership is a good alternative to rampant acquisition by force, which is the most likely alternative. (Take away social restraint, and what's left? Smash-and-grab, mostly.)
Things change, including minds. That's why I wrote "if it occurs", not "when". I'm not completely convinced that all administrative players believe that this kind of database mining is actually bad, so I'm going to keep an ear open.
Yes, and as such everyone in the same heading now knows the password for everyone else in the same heading. Given the high likelihood that many of the accounts are trolls, that means if innocent Wikipedian "you" happen to share a password with a troll, that troll knows it now. Lucky you.
they're mostly from trolls.
What, only "mostly"? Not a very strong assertion in the face of a potential privacy violation. C'mon, if you're gonna assert that you intend to "out" only the trolls, you need to stick to the story. Admitting that the list is "mostly" trolls is admitting that the list is "partially" innocents. Who have now been screwed.
As the page says, "all the accounts listed on this page have been created solely for the purpose of trolling."
Well, then, obviously there's no story. Silly us. The creator of the page says there's no innocents listed, therefore there are no innocents listed.
In related news, Microsoft Windows is the most secure server OS EVAR!!! MS's Marketing department sed so!
Only when that claim is disproven does the page become a worry.
No, in a sane world, the page is a worry until the counterclaim is positively proven: that there are demonstrably no innocent user IDs on the page.
Until then, I'm gonna watch that page and its automated incarnation (if it occurs) very carefully. I have been a moderately active Wikipedian up until now, but if I'm gonna get carpet-bombed just because I accidentally move in next door to a troll, I'll find someplace else to contribute.
I philosophically support Free Software. (And no, I don't have to show you my Party Credentials.) But loose talk about purges of counterrevolutionary elements and collectivization of software development really freaks me out.
News flash: Communism rightly failed. Take Free Software down its path only if you want it to fail too.
Well, some neo-Stalinist Free Software chekist will probably downmod me. Is this how Leon Trotsky felt? (I mean, before he got the ice axe in the head.)
Keep Free Software FREE! Once you begin rounding up and interning the minorities, you are taking the first steps toward a new totalitarianism!
Lucky. I'm still in counseling.
Actually, it was fun, in a sick sad way. It was 1987, I was airman in the US Air Force, using a Zenith Z248 (80286 processor and a WHOLE MEG OF RAM! W00T!). We didn't even realize it had "Windows" until we started pokin' around in DOS.
Great fun... start up 10 different copies of "clock". Windows would actually begin to lose time trying to keep the second hand on 10 different "analog clock" displays updated. Within about 5 minutes the clocks were varying degrees of behind, as much a 45 seconds behind on some of the displays. Sad. And the machine was so wedged that it had to be power cycled to come back.
I had already been toying with a Macintosh, and I was definitely not impressed with Microsoft. We never ran it again, but our superintendent wouldn't let us delete that waste of disk space because he had the peculiar idea that we were accountable for the actual software on the hard drive. I guess that's how they did it in his punch-card mainframe days, so I can't blame him.
Hmmm...I dunno. In this situation, I'd guess several pounds, post mortem.
In the second paragraph, you state the coffee-lap victim received third-degree burns. If the coffee really was 185 degree F, I could believe it. (Actually, I think you're actually being conservative. I just googled the ATLA Tap Water Burn Litigation Center which says that third-degree scalds can form in 1 second at 160 degrees. But these folks appear to be lawyers who sue people and organizations which "cause" hot-tap-water injuries, so take their scientific information with a "science as played out in court" grain of salt. A court of law isn't scientific peer-review, after all.)
Anyways, in the rest of your article, you refer only to first-degree burns. In particular, I find it hard to believe that first-degree burns would ever require skin grafts.
So I'm forced to conclude that (A) at least once in the rest of the article, you meant "third-degree", particular in reference to grafting; and (B) the energized tone of your writing, while sincere, probably interfered with your ability to proofread your writing.
Not trying to be pedantic, though I usually don't have to try too hard for that anyways, but your perfectly good point may have suffered by your presentation. Just so you know.
Discuss among yourselves....