Granted!:) In this economy, I shouldn't assume anything!
You also make a good point about the car::computer analogy, but you also illustrate another point you didn't intend to. Cars are simplistic pieces of equipment in comparison, and require very little skill to maintain. Computers on the other hand are not, and thus it is even more arrogant to equate computer illiteracy with a lack of intelligence.
You also make another point inadvertently...cars have a fairly consistent interface. Anyone can get into any car anywhere and drive it, if they started out in a Pontiac or a Citroen! Heck, even if you travel to another country where they drive backwards, you can still drive the cars. Souldn't computers?
unless they are such complete morons that they shouldn't be allowed within spitting distance of a computer...
It's offensively mindless ramblings like that that are a) keeping Linux out of majority desktop share and b) keeping the sterotype of the arrogant geek strong in the hearts and minds of millions.
Computers are not important enough to serve as the deciding factor of one's intelligence. I would argue that social skills are a much better yardstick, and by using it on your post above, I see that you shouldn't be allowed within spitting distance of another human being (loosly assuming that you are one yourself).
Computers are just pieces of equipment that some people understand, and some don't. Could you rebuild your car's engine from scratch, or do you take it to a mechanic? Does he make you feel like an imbecile because you don't know how to tune your own fuel injectors?
The norms need some kind of consistent interface, and Linux (or *nix in general) just doesn't provide that. Yes, they can click through a Redhat install (doubtful as one of the first things to do is partition the drive, and I can't see my mother doing that), but it'll be different enough from what they know. And, then, what if they want to install a new piece of software? Do they have GTK? Probably. QT? Again, good possibility. OCaml? Ahhh...I don't know...and they sure as hell aren't. (I know, not a toolkit, but an example). All they know is when RPM tells them they need it, they won't know how to get it. And, considering how well written 90% of the install docs are, they'll never find out.
No, it would be worse. I've worked in private companies before and the desire to appease "the boss" is even worse than it is in publicly traded companies. In the public companies, the ones you do the work for are a faceless mass that don't really only bother you more than once a year when they're in town for the shareholders meeting (at least at the peon level). In private companies, the ultimate authority in the company will regularly bother you in the bathroom. Besides, in a private company, there's more opportunity to ass-kiss with those in power, thus you end up with favoritism a lot faster. Deadlines are met not to satisfy the needs of the customer base, but to meet the needs of ONE customer who was promised an unrealistic deadline by a salesman who's chummy with the boss. "Nick's thinking you're not really being part of the team. He told his customer we'd have the product ready by the first of May, and by god we're going to not make Nick look like a liar are we?" "But, boss, the REAL deadline was supposed to be the first of next January." "Well, for Nick, I think we can cut it down that small amount." One would think, logically, that if someone owned a company, they'd do 100% everything they could to maximize their profitability. But, I long ago stopped applying logic to management and now just employ a "random-response generator". It makes the day more fun, kinda like a lottery. Will their response be equal to my "quick-pick"? Tune in at 7 to find out!
Would you believe that some people don't have administrative priveledges on their computers at work?
Well, then, there seems to be an obvious solution: fire your entire IT department. They're not doing their jobs. I've administered Exchange servers with Outlook clients for the last 6 years and NEVER ONCE did I have a virus outbreak. NEVER ONCE. Why? I did my job, which included making sure these babies were never even SEEN by the masses, let alone have a chance to infect their machines. It's really not that hard, people. Perhaps if you put your Linux CDs down long enough to learn how to use the systems you support, you'd figure it out, too!
Of course I do, because it is. It may not be the dominant SERVER on the 'net, but it sure as hell is the dominant CLIENT on the net. And, where did blaster attacks come from? Primarily clients...home users who barely can find the "on" button. Your ignorance is only outshone by your arrogance.
As for MASSIVE security holes, the RPC DCOM exploit was hardly MASSIVE. Had it been MASSIVE, it would have been discovered four years ago. Like most security exploits, it was a minor bug.
And, my argument was not the "windows is more prevelant, so hackers go after it more". Unlike you, I do not spout stale rhetoric. What I said was "Windows is more prevelant, so any bug is going to have wide-spread effect".
Why do you think Linux doesn't have these security holes?
You're an idiot if you don't believe Linux has these security holes. It does, just try reading the changelogs of the kernel, of apache, of ssh, of most of the apps you use. They're there. The simple fact is that Linux isn't as wide-spread as Windows, so when there's a hole in Windows, it's exploited on millions of boxes. When one is found in Linux, it affects a very small number, so no one cares. Once Linux becomes widespread, you'll start to see the same kinds of issues, because there will always be hackers. It will also be a lot worse, because Windows is easy to patch, and it still isn't done...Linux, OTOH hand will always be beyond the capabilities of my grandmother. At least with Windows Update, she can keep her computer moderately safe.
As for buggy code, fuck, dude...the one that was responsible for blaster affected W2K, which is just under four years old. I, for one, am not about to wait for four years of testing to ensure EVERY fucking bug is found. Linux is also not immune to bugs, there are plenty to be found if you just open your eyes. And, don't give me the stale rhetoric of "well, if one is found, it's patched within 24 hours", that might be true, but the patch for blaster was released a full month before the problem.
Nope, I fear the day that Linux becomes the dominant OS. Things will only be much, much worse. Especially with dumb-ass pricks like you who a) don't help people fix their machines, you just whine about "well, it's your own fault, grandma, you use windows!" and b) are ignorant of the flaws in this system you love so much. It makes you immeasurably more ignorant and naive then they are!
Agreed 100%. Our local Taco Bell had replaced people with kiosks that went "BOOOOONG" (wish I could convey how loud it really was). You then manually entered. We walked right out, and the store closed in 6 months. People don't want that crap.
No, but all it takes is one "genius" to figure out he can acces the whole Internet without the restrictions his company's IT department places on him by just setting up a modem and dialing his ISP. He doesn't understand that he's just opened up the whole network, made even worse so by the fact that all those now-unprotected machines can talk back to the hackers easier.
What happens when your company merges with another
I change the address ranges in my DHCP servers and go back to work a couple minutes later.
You end up going through how many layers of NAT? And what does this solve, other than breaking whole design philosophy of IP in the first place.
Philosophy tells you there might be a god, not where your packets went. Hardly an issue. I'm currently in the process of upgrading the software on my Linux router. I've got it running on another machine which stands between my personal machine, and the rest of my private network, which is then once again behind another NAT firewall. No problems here. Since I don't personally route every packet that leaves my machine, I couldn't give a flying rat-fuck how it gets to its destination.
Ever here of fixing the cause rather than the effect?
Yes, and that's what I'm suggesting. IP6 is just a bandaid, because in 10 years when even my penis has it's own IP address, we'll be back in the same boat. At that time the running gag won't be "they used to believe 640K was enough memory for a computer, then 2 megs, then 512 megs", it'll be "they used to think 100 billion addresses was enough, then 100 google".
Shame on them for not learning to just not be wasteful.
I play games online.:) But, I see what you're saying, game servers. Okay, but if that's the reason to move, too bad. "Boss, we need to spend the next few months and a ton of money upgrading every machine to IP6 'cause the gamers can't get to their servers."
Really? Huh and all this time I've been grabbing and sharing off of Kazaa on my machine behind a NAT router. Silly me, I must've imagined all that porn I downloaded. Man, do *I* have a sick imagination!:)
In a way, we're not talking about the Internet here. We're talking about a company's, or even an ISP's, private network which also has access to the Internet. Giving those machines puplic IPs is not only a waste of address space, but a security risk. Those that need to access the Internet don't need public IPs. Those that need the Internet to access them, do. Forcing the world into a MAJOR move to IP6 just because you consider NAT a "hack" is unreasonable. NAT works, and works well. There's nothing I can't do behind NAT that I can't do with a public IP (including VPN, that's just easier with a public). The correct solution is to not give Nancy-in-accounting's printer a public IP, or worse, have to force accounting to upgrade that printer because its hardware doesn't support IP6.
Agreed. In the last 5 companies I was an administrator, only one had public IPs on their machines. The company had bought a couple of class-Cs a few years back...then put them behind a natting firewall (no wonder they needed a new admin). There are very few reasons any company would need more than one or two public IPs. Okay, much larger companies will need more to cover a large range of campuses, but since the vast majority of companies are small/medium size (under 1000 employees), they're rare. As for phones needing a public IP, why? Hell, there's really no reason an ISP needs to give out public IPs, either. Well, maybe one: customers who have need of a VPN w/ their company. No problem, a lot of broadband ISPs already charge extra for the "right" to use this type of technology, force the issue by paying a little extra for an IP. It would also cut down on viruses and worms a little, as those machines can only really be hacked by people behind the same firewall now.
Okay, that was a bit of a ramblin' rant, but this really pisses me off. I'm tired of hearing how we're running out of addresses when the simple solution is to stop friggin' using them!
They have to, since they don't actually go after larger businesses, only the tiny, five-or-six-person mom and pop shops.
When I was unfairly let go from my previous employer, I decided to hit 'em hard by contacting the BSA. As I was the Network Manager, I could tell them about pretty much every piece of pirated software, and I did. I went to the BSA site and filled out a report documenting hundreds of missing licenses for MS Office, MS Exchange, a number of Adobe products, and a few from Macromedia (all of their big vendor companies). I even documented how Lotus SmartSuite is installed on about 300 computers, yet we only had 4 legal copies, not to mention all the small shareware-type shit (like SnagIt and WinZip) that was installed on almost every PC without one legal license in the place.
I documented the "plan" we had in case of audit...it seems you can refuse them entry the first time they drop by for a visit, but they come back later that day with sherrifs and a warrant to force the issue. More than enough time for use to ghost a pirated-clean image on all the machines (using a pirated copy of ghost, of course). We even went to the trouble to compile a list of every machine that had pirated software so we could quicly decide which ones would need ghosting first.
Finally, I documented the little utility one of the members of the IT staff was forced to write ("it's written, or you're out of a job") to bypass the licensing restrictions of MS Terminal Services. I even gave them a link to the company's website where they could download it (it was up there so the salesmen could get it at home).
And, what happened? Nothing. For three months I called every week to see what the status was, and was told each time that there was nothing new to report. It was in the hands of the member companies. Finally, I was told that one of the member companies had decided not to pursue.
When I asked why, I was told they didn't have a reason, but it could be because: "the member company may already be investigating or
negotiating with the company, the company may have some kind of site license, or the member company may have some other kind of relationship
with the company in question." None of these were the case (I still have contacts in the IT department).
No, the truth is, the BSA simply can't walk into a large company and tell 500 people to get off their machines for a day while they're audited. It's logistically impossible. So, they advertise lots and lots of threats, send out "truce" notices, and make a lot of people worry about nothing.
Ok, you and the other poster so miss the point. This isn't about social unrest or attempting to right wrongs. This is about some stoners bitching 'cause if they get caught with pot, they go to jail.
You know, I am so tired of this argument. Yes, there are a lot of people in jail for what other people consider "minor" "victimless" crimes (marijuana usage is usually the first one people scream about putting people in jail for). But, you know what? They still commited a crime. Regardless of whether you agree with a law or not, you don't break it, you change it. I don't think it should be illegal to shoot any corporate manager who suggests scheduling a meeting to discuss scheduling a meeting. That don't make it legal.
"Given all the time you're spending on your hobbies, you can't actually know what you're doing with Windows."
A-FUCKING-MEN! When I meet a Linux person who tells me time and time again that Windows crashes all the time, I have to wonder what is wrong with them. And you've summed it up in a nutshell. They spend so much of their time playing in Linux, and complaining that Windows doesn't work, that they don't bother to learn how to fix problems.
*WHINE* "But, you CAN'T fix problems on Windows, you don't have the source!"
Sure you fucking can, I do it all the time. I'll give you a clue. That bluescreen that you always joke is just a message to reboot your computer? That's an error message. Learn how to read the fucking thing, it tells you exactly what's wrong. If your XP machine crashes every three days, there's something wrong with you, not Windows. Everyone else is having no problems.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, only on weekends, and I only charge a quarter per. Wanna get in line??
I don't have a car you insensitive clod!
:) In this economy, I shouldn't assume anything!
Granted!
You also make a good point about the car::computer analogy, but you also illustrate another point you didn't intend to. Cars are simplistic pieces of equipment in comparison, and require very little skill to maintain. Computers on the other hand are not, and thus it is even more arrogant to equate computer illiteracy with a lack of intelligence.
You also make another point inadvertently...cars have a fairly consistent interface. Anyone can get into any car anywhere and drive it, if they started out in a Pontiac or a Citroen! Heck, even if you travel to another country where they drive backwards, you can still drive the cars. Souldn't computers?
I cannot get enough of people telling me that kind of thing! My ego needs to be fed! Hehehe. Seriously, much obliged!
unless they are such complete morons that they shouldn't be allowed within spitting distance of a computer...
It's offensively mindless ramblings like that that are a) keeping Linux out of majority desktop share and b) keeping the sterotype of the arrogant geek strong in the hearts and minds of millions.
Computers are not important enough to serve as the deciding factor of one's intelligence. I would argue that social skills are a much better yardstick, and by using it on your post above, I see that you shouldn't be allowed within spitting distance of another human being (loosly assuming that you are one yourself).
Computers are just pieces of equipment that some people understand, and some don't. Could you rebuild your car's engine from scratch, or do you take it to a mechanic? Does he make you feel like an imbecile because you don't know how to tune your own fuel injectors?
The norms need some kind of consistent interface, and Linux (or *nix in general) just doesn't provide that. Yes, they can click through a Redhat install (doubtful as one of the first things to do is partition the drive, and I can't see my mother doing that), but it'll be different enough from what they know. And, then, what if they want to install a new piece of software? Do they have GTK? Probably. QT? Again, good possibility. OCaml? Ahhh...I don't know...and they sure as hell aren't. (I know, not a toolkit, but an example). All they know is when RPM tells them they need it, they won't know how to get it. And, considering how well written 90% of the install docs are, they'll never find out.
No, it would be worse. I've worked in private companies before and the desire to appease "the boss" is even worse than it is in publicly traded companies. In the public companies, the ones you do the work for are a faceless mass that don't really only bother you more than once a year when they're in town for the shareholders meeting (at least at the peon level). In private companies, the ultimate authority in the company will regularly bother you in the bathroom. Besides, in a private company, there's more opportunity to ass-kiss with those in power, thus you end up with favoritism a lot faster. Deadlines are met not to satisfy the needs of the customer base, but to meet the needs of ONE customer who was promised an unrealistic deadline by a salesman who's chummy with the boss. "Nick's thinking you're not really being part of the team. He told his customer we'd have the product ready by the first of May, and by god we're going to not make Nick look like a liar are we?" "But, boss, the REAL deadline was supposed to be the first of next January." "Well, for Nick, I think we can cut it down that small amount." One would think, logically, that if someone owned a company, they'd do 100% everything they could to maximize their profitability. But, I long ago stopped applying logic to management and now just employ a "random-response generator". It makes the day more fun, kinda like a lottery. Will their response be equal to my "quick-pick"? Tune in at 7 to find out!
Would you believe that some people don't have administrative priveledges on their computers at work?
Well, then, there seems to be an obvious solution: fire your entire IT department. They're not doing their jobs. I've administered Exchange servers with Outlook clients for the last 6 years and NEVER ONCE did I have a virus outbreak. NEVER ONCE. Why? I did my job, which included making sure these babies were never even SEEN by the masses, let alone have a chance to infect their machines. It's really not that hard, people. Perhaps if you put your Linux CDs down long enough to learn how to use the systems you support, you'd figure it out, too!
Of course I do, because it is. It may not be the dominant SERVER on the 'net, but it sure as hell is the dominant CLIENT on the net. And, where did blaster attacks come from? Primarily clients...home users who barely can find the "on" button. Your ignorance is only outshone by your arrogance.
As for MASSIVE security holes, the RPC DCOM exploit was hardly MASSIVE. Had it been MASSIVE, it would have been discovered four years ago. Like most security exploits, it was a minor bug.
And, my argument was not the "windows is more prevelant, so hackers go after it more". Unlike you, I do not spout stale rhetoric. What I said was "Windows is more prevelant, so any bug is going to have wide-spread effect".
Why do you think Linux doesn't have these security holes?
You're an idiot if you don't believe Linux has these security holes. It does, just try reading the changelogs of the kernel, of apache, of ssh, of most of the apps you use. They're there. The simple fact is that Linux isn't as wide-spread as Windows, so when there's a hole in Windows, it's exploited on millions of boxes. When one is found in Linux, it affects a very small number, so no one cares. Once Linux becomes widespread, you'll start to see the same kinds of issues, because there will always be hackers. It will also be a lot worse, because Windows is easy to patch, and it still isn't done...Linux, OTOH hand will always be beyond the capabilities of my grandmother. At least with Windows Update, she can keep her computer moderately safe.
As for buggy code, fuck, dude...the one that was responsible for blaster affected W2K, which is just under four years old. I, for one, am not about to wait for four years of testing to ensure EVERY fucking bug is found. Linux is also not immune to bugs, there are plenty to be found if you just open your eyes. And, don't give me the stale rhetoric of "well, if one is found, it's patched within 24 hours", that might be true, but the patch for blaster was released a full month before the problem.
Nope, I fear the day that Linux becomes the dominant OS. Things will only be much, much worse. Especially with dumb-ass pricks like you who a) don't help people fix their machines, you just whine about "well, it's your own fault, grandma, you use windows!" and b) are ignorant of the flaws in this system you love so much. It makes you immeasurably more ignorant and naive then they are!
Oh yea! And what's going to happen when we run out of IPs for them all!?
Nicely done. Beautiful! Hillarious! Spectacular! Okay, it wasn't that funny, but I did LOL. :)
but I don't recall if anyone's suggested they stop producing CDs altogether.
I fall for this one all the time, too. You see the rest of your sentence needs to read: "because everyone has access to the Internet".
There are a lot of people who don't have this luxury item. Although........if they're the kind of people who buy even just one CD a month... :)
Agreed 100%. Our local Taco Bell had replaced people with kiosks that went "BOOOOONG" (wish I could convey how loud it really was). You then manually entered. We walked right out, and the store closed in 6 months. People don't want that crap.
These cases'll hit the courts, and the courts will end, once and for all, the legality of steali...er....downloading music.
OMFG! You really shouldn't have posted that anonymously. I thought the FP was great...that was hillarious!
Sure they can. I do it all the time.
No, but you get extra points for that fantastic sig. Best I've seen today!
NAT != firewall
No, but all it takes is one "genius" to figure out he can acces the whole Internet without the restrictions his company's IT department places on him by just setting up a modem and dialing his ISP. He doesn't understand that he's just opened up the whole network, made even worse so by the fact that all those now-unprotected machines can talk back to the hackers easier.
What happens when your company merges with another
I change the address ranges in my DHCP servers and go back to work a couple minutes later.
You end up going through how many layers of NAT? And what does this solve, other than breaking whole design philosophy of IP in the first place.
Philosophy tells you there might be a god, not where your packets went. Hardly an issue. I'm currently in the process of upgrading the software on my Linux router. I've got it running on another machine which stands between my personal machine, and the rest of my private network, which is then once again behind another NAT firewall. No problems here. Since I don't personally route every packet that leaves my machine, I couldn't give a flying rat-fuck how it gets to its destination.
Ever here of fixing the cause rather than the effect?
Yes, and that's what I'm suggesting. IP6 is just a bandaid, because in 10 years when even my penis has it's own IP address, we'll be back in the same boat. At that time the running gag won't be "they used to believe 640K was enough memory for a computer, then 2 megs, then 512 megs", it'll be "they used to think 100 billion addresses was enough, then 100 google".
Shame on them for not learning to just not be wasteful.
I play games online. :) But, I see what you're saying, game servers. Okay, but if that's the reason to move, too bad. "Boss, we need to spend the next few months and a ton of money upgrading every machine to IP6 'cause the gamers can't get to their servers."
especially peer-to-peer
Really? Huh and all this time I've been grabbing and sharing off of Kazaa on my machine behind a NAT router. Silly me, I must've imagined all that porn I downloaded. Man, do *I* have a sick imagination! :)
In a way, we're not talking about the Internet here. We're talking about a company's, or even an ISP's, private network which also has access to the Internet. Giving those machines puplic IPs is not only a waste of address space, but a security risk. Those that need to access the Internet don't need public IPs. Those that need the Internet to access them, do. Forcing the world into a MAJOR move to IP6 just because you consider NAT a "hack" is unreasonable. NAT works, and works well. There's nothing I can't do behind NAT that I can't do with a public IP (including VPN, that's just easier with a public). The correct solution is to not give Nancy-in-accounting's printer a public IP, or worse, have to force accounting to upgrade that printer because its hardware doesn't support IP6.
Shame on you for suggesting otherwise.
Agreed. In the last 5 companies I was an administrator, only one had public IPs on their machines. The company had bought a couple of class-Cs a few years back...then put them behind a natting firewall (no wonder they needed a new admin). There are very few reasons any company would need more than one or two public IPs. Okay, much larger companies will need more to cover a large range of campuses, but since the vast majority of companies are small/medium size (under 1000 employees), they're rare. As for phones needing a public IP, why? Hell, there's really no reason an ISP needs to give out public IPs, either. Well, maybe one: customers who have need of a VPN w/ their company. No problem, a lot of broadband ISPs already charge extra for the "right" to use this type of technology, force the issue by paying a little extra for an IP. It would also cut down on viruses and worms a little, as those machines can only really be hacked by people behind the same firewall now.
Okay, that was a bit of a ramblin' rant, but this really pisses me off. I'm tired of hearing how we're running out of addresses when the simple solution is to stop friggin' using them!
Imagine how clear the pr0n would look!
Someone had to say it....
They have to, since they don't actually go after larger businesses, only the tiny, five-or-six-person mom and pop shops.
When I was unfairly let go from my previous employer, I decided to hit 'em hard by contacting the BSA. As I was the Network Manager, I could tell them about pretty much every piece of pirated software, and I did. I went to the BSA site and filled out a report documenting hundreds of missing licenses for MS Office, MS Exchange, a number of Adobe products, and a few from Macromedia (all of their big vendor companies). I even documented how Lotus SmartSuite is installed on about 300 computers, yet we only had 4 legal copies, not to mention all the small shareware-type shit (like SnagIt and WinZip) that was installed on almost every PC without one legal license in the place.
I documented the "plan" we had in case of audit...it seems you can refuse them entry the first time they drop by for a visit, but they come back later that day with sherrifs and a warrant to force the issue. More than enough time for use to ghost a pirated-clean image on all the machines (using a pirated copy of ghost, of course). We even went to the trouble to compile a list of every machine that had pirated software so we could quicly decide which ones would need ghosting first.
Finally, I documented the little utility one of the members of the IT staff was forced to write ("it's written, or you're out of a job") to bypass the licensing restrictions of MS Terminal Services. I even gave them a link to the company's website where they could download it (it was up there so the salesmen could get it at home).
And, what happened? Nothing. For three months I called every week to see what the status was, and was told each time that there was nothing new to report. It was in the hands of the member companies. Finally, I was told that one of the member companies had decided not to pursue.
When I asked why, I was told they didn't have a reason, but it could be because: "the member company may already be investigating or negotiating with the company, the company may have some kind of site license, or the member company may have some other kind of relationship with the company in question." None of these were the case (I still have contacts in the IT department).
No, the truth is, the BSA simply can't walk into a large company and tell 500 people to get off their machines for a day while they're audited. It's logistically impossible. So, they advertise lots and lots of threats, send out "truce" notices, and make a lot of people worry about nothing.
Ok, you and the other poster so miss the point. This isn't about social unrest or attempting to right wrongs. This is about some stoners bitching 'cause if they get caught with pot, they go to jail.
You know, I am so tired of this argument. Yes, there are a lot of people in jail for what other people consider "minor" "victimless" crimes (marijuana usage is usually the first one people scream about putting people in jail for). But, you know what? They still commited a crime. Regardless of whether you agree with a law or not, you don't break it, you change it. I don't think it should be illegal to shoot any corporate manager who suggests scheduling a meeting to discuss scheduling a meeting. That don't make it legal.
"Given all the time you're spending on your hobbies, you can't actually know what you're doing with Windows."
A-FUCKING-MEN! When I meet a Linux person who tells me time and time again that Windows crashes all the time, I have to wonder what is wrong with them. And you've summed it up in a nutshell. They spend so much of their time playing in Linux, and complaining that Windows doesn't work, that they don't bother to learn how to fix problems.*WHINE* "But, you CAN'T fix problems on Windows, you don't have the source!"
Sure you fucking can, I do it all the time. I'll give you a clue. That bluescreen that you always joke is just a message to reboot your computer? That's an error message. Learn how to read the fucking thing, it tells you exactly what's wrong. If your XP machine crashes every three days, there's something wrong with you, not Windows. Everyone else is having no problems.