Yeah, really. It amazes me what people put in blogs, especially when these blogs are not anonymous. Some of these blogs, if the person's employers, coworkers, or even their friends read them, it would get them in trouble.
Re:Troll? Care to explain your modding parent down
on
FreeBSD 4.9 Released
·
· Score: 1
When I say that the GPL is free, I really mean is that the code itself is protected by a garuantee that it shall remain open and freely available to every recipient of that code. It does not however, garuantee any freedom to the reciepient itself. The BSD "free" is a different "free" to the GPL and applies to two different things. Hence the confusion and silly statements that "The [GPL|BSD] is [more|less] free than the [GPL|BSD]"
That is exactly what I said:
"The BSD license is free in a different way than GPL software. It is free in a way that actually allows more freedom than the GPL."
I didn't say that the BSD license is more free than the GPL, I said it allows more freedom [to the recipient].
Hell yes it would! That would make getting people to use free software that much easier!
That was the obvious response to that I was expecting. But I think you're wrong. Microsoft's buggy software doesn't seem to cause joe user to use free software. At least not with the free software we have today. Joe user is used to all the Windows problems, one more buggy implementation isn't going to open his eyes to the world of free software. Not only joe user, but the corporate world seems to not mind using buggy software for their desktop machines. I'd rather Microsoft not have control of the desktop market, but since they do, I'd rather their software be as stable and bugfree as possible. If MS took BSD and wrote a good closed-source OS using it, I'd be ok with that, as long as the end result was a good product.
Would it be better if OS X didn't exist at all? Sure. Why do I care if more closed source proprietary software exists?
You don't, so license your software under the GPL. Other people do care that closed source proprietary software exists. And of course, people who think OS X completely blows away any free OS, care about its existance. I'm not going to argue that, as I haven't used OS X enough to form an opinion. But if it indeed blows away free OSes, I'm glad it exists and don't mind the GUI being closed-source.
In any case, the BSD license gives more freedom than the GPL. However, the GPL restricts freedom in a way that enforces openness. Which is better? I don't know. But this statement is blatantly false:
FreeBSD is *not* free guys! It never was! At least not in the true sense of the word.
In any case, Microsoft does write software (Office, IE) for the Mac, so what's the big deal?
Re:Troll? Care to explain your modding parent down
on
FreeBSD 4.9 Released
·
· Score: 0
It is a troll, but if you really want a reply: The BSD license is free in a different way than GPL software. It is free in a way that actually allows more freedom than the GPL. One of the points of the license is to allow for others to use it in their closed source software. This is a good thing, as it helps business and helps stimulate the economy.
Would it be better if Microsoft wrote their own TCP/IP stack and it turned out very buggy? Would it be better if OS X didn't exist at all? BeOS?
I'm not going to argue which license is more appropriate. They both have their pros and cons. And either one may be appropriate depending on your goals.
Interesting, I was using KDE 3.1 and then switched to Gnome 2.2 (and recently to 2.4) because most of my apps are GTK+ anyways. I found it a bit faster, and also wasn't missing much. Though, Nautilus needs a bit of work. Actually, I'm finding most of my complaints and desired features have been answered in 2.4. Gnome has mostly caught up I think. Konqueror file browser still has a bit of an edge. I will have to keep checking out KDE, but I am a Gnome user for now. They are both nice, you can't go wrong with either.
I think a honeypot such as this (or any honeypot) would be useful within an internal network. So set it up in your LAN, so that you can find out about a potential worm or intruder earlier. Launching a counterattack would be fine within an internal network, but it would be very foolish to do this on the internet -- that would get you in legal trouble.
I haven't really been using it lately, but there was a time when I was using Cygwin/XFree86 for remote X. It's really pretty useful, and appears to be the only free X server for Windows.
My company produces tiny wireless software that prevents users from posting advertisements to your blogs and discussion forums. You can buy it here for a low introductory price of only $19.95 http://www.blog-b-gone.com
Looks like your page needs to be setup. I went there, and all I got was a placeholder page for Apache.
Personally, I wanted to find out what sort of security you had that would make knowing your root password not useful.
By default, SSH does not allow root login. Granted, a determined hacker would find a way to crack one of my user accounts and then I'd be fucked:) But that would probably be the case even if I didn't hand out the root password.
All the food, wine and beer over there tastes better and most of the people you meet aren't self-involved assholes like they are here.
Food tastes better? Which countries are you talking about here? The U.S. has the best, most varied food of any country, and its not too expensive either. Most European countries you pay way too much for shitty food, and they won't even serve food while they're on their ciesta.
The wine and beer can be very good in Europe, though. Of course depends on which country.
You can talk about our "Higher standard of living" all you want to, but I'd have to contest the term "living". We're not living here in America. We're just keeping busy while waiting to die.
Speak for yourself (and maybe speak to a therapist as well). Some of us are having good times here. Not that they couldn't be better, but its pretty damn good. People come here from countries that are absolutely rotten to live in (I know, I've met such people, and visited such places). Life here is good. Quit whining, and get yourself together. This is fucking paradise. If its not good enough for you, well, move some place better, and live your life differently.
Oh, you have wife and kids? Nevermind, sorry.. You're screwed. But that's your own personal hell created by yourself, which has nothing to do with the country you live in.
Well, I'm doing windows tech support, unix-server tech support, application development, database management, postmaster, webmaster, network administrator etc. Oh yeah, I'm getting paid $14/h for this. Somehow I think I'm getting screwed... nah.
If you have a bachelor's degree, are working full-time, and already have at least one year of related experience, you are most definitely getting screwed.
My root password is "i2n5i3hs]f ds4 a" without the quotes. I'm running OpenSSH on port 22, open to everyone.
Just try and hack me. You may find the root password is not enough.
And now for a completely opposite viewpoint...
on
Take Back Your Time!
·
· Score: 1
Jeez people, quit reproducing already!
And after that, you learn a LOT of the $hit you thought was important isn't.
You are so on the money here, especially with the dollar sign. Having children just makes people greedy and makes them forget about their principles. Look at everyone who has ever sold out, they most likely have children! It's always in the name of trying to provide a good life for their kids that people forget their ethical responsibilities and do everything they can to bring in money.
Blah, if you really value your integrity, don't have children. If you're a sell-out, conformist dirtbag, have children. Having children IS selling out! Keep the penis out of the vagina.
No attachments.. Even the yoga masters will tell you this.
No offense intended towards the guy I'm replying to here. We've already lost him, there's nothing he can do about that. The power of the dark side is strong, and we should be so harsh to judge those who have fallen to it.
Well if you weren't such a cookie-nazi, maybe she would've liked it more:)
I've got plenty of non-techies to switch to Mozilla or Netscape. Once they discover it, they love it. A surprising number of people are dissatisfied with IE and welcome the change.
What surprises me is that some software developers continue to use IE, even after trying Mozilla/Firebird/Netscape/Opera/etc. These are the same people who rant about how Microsoft sucks.
Don't know if its been mentioned or not, but those million people also installed the latest version of QuickTime along with iTunes (assuming they installed it). I gotta wonder if that's the biggest jump Apple's ever had in QuickTime penetration in the Windows market.
I recently built a new box and got to the point where I had to go with either KDE or Gnome (not both, time was an issue). I choose KDE because it seemed that the project has more momentum. Am I way off here? I'd love to hear slashdoters sound off on this one.
My feeling is that they are both pretty much the same (they're both quite good, and offer much of the same stuff). I was using KDE for the first half of this year, and liked it. But I found myself running mostly GTK+ apps. So I decided to give Gnome a try. I found all the features that I liked in KDE were also in Gnome. Nothing missed, and I've been using Gnome comfortably for a few months now and don't intend to switch back to KDE. Though as a Linux user I've switched window managers and desktop environments quite a few times, so it could happen again.
That's because they are smart enough to avoid getting women pregnant. You think because you're married and had 3 acciden^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hkids, you're somehow better than a virginal UNIX programmer?
I say, leave the promiscuous mode off. Celibacy all the way. Making babies just gets in the way of coding. Of course, this may lead to the extinction of the UNIX programmer, but fortunately there are a few that are foolish enough to leave their keyboards. And also I think it could easilly be argued that UNIX programming is a trait acquired from one's environment, and not necessarilly an inherited trait.
In any case, a little known fact is that some UNIX programmers like to receive blowjobs while coding. While, technically, they remain virgins, they still indulge in pleasures of the flesh, without the stress and responsibility involved in full intercourse. Now what percentage of these are receiving it from women, is a statistic I don't know if we want to address. Lets just say.. umm.. Do we consider Mac OS X programmers to be UNIX programmers?
The fact that Solaris beat Linux on x86 in as many benchmarks as it did is downright scary.
I don't know if I'd say its scary. Take a closer look at the benchmarks. The GCC benchmark compares 2.95 on Solaris vs 3.3.1 on Linux, making it pretty useless as a benchmark. Why didn't they compare to 2.95 on Linux? 2.95 compiles faster than 3.3.1 in general, from what I hear.
The MySQL benchmarks were mixed results, with inserts being one of the areas where Solaris was faster. And we have only compared Ext3 here, which is one of the slower filesystems for Linux (because it journals data). Everywhere other benchmark, Linux was faster.
Sure, Linux has much room for improvement. Is there anything to worry about because of these somewhat flaky benchmarks? I think not.
Do you even know what "hardware installation skills" means? I didn't say anything about drivers. I'm talking about running hardware stable which has nothing to do with software.
I'm not advocating using Windows here, but ignorant statements like Windows XP is "crashing every 10 minutes" really are the mark of an unexperienced computer user. If you're really having those kinds of problems, its a hardware issue, that means you have to open the case to fix it. Win2k/XP have been stable for a long time, major problems are hardware related most of the time.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and just assume you're a troll, in which case your statements don't really have any relevance, now do they?
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, really. It amazes me what people put in blogs, especially when these blogs are not anonymous. Some of these blogs, if the person's employers, coworkers, or even their friends read them, it would get them in trouble.
When I say that the GPL is free, I really mean is that the code itself is protected by a garuantee that it shall remain open and freely available to every recipient of that code. It does not however, garuantee any freedom to the reciepient itself.
The BSD "free" is a different "free" to the GPL and applies to two different things. Hence the confusion and silly statements that "The [GPL|BSD] is [more|less] free than the [GPL|BSD]"
That is exactly what I said:
"The BSD license is free in a different way than GPL software. It is free in a way that actually allows more freedom than the GPL."
I didn't say that the BSD license is more free than the GPL, I said it allows more freedom [to the recipient].
Hell yes it would! That would make getting people to use free software that much easier!
That was the obvious response to that I was expecting. But I think you're wrong. Microsoft's buggy software doesn't seem to cause joe user to use free software. At least not with the free software we have today. Joe user is used to all the Windows problems, one more buggy implementation isn't going to open his eyes to the world of free software. Not only joe user, but the corporate world seems to not mind using buggy software for their desktop machines. I'd rather Microsoft not have control of the desktop market, but since they do, I'd rather their software be as stable and bugfree as possible. If MS took BSD and wrote a good closed-source OS using it, I'd be ok with that, as long as the end result was a good product.
Would it be better if OS X didn't exist at all? Sure. Why do I care if more closed source proprietary software exists?
You don't, so license your software under the GPL. Other people do care that closed source proprietary software exists. And of course, people who think OS X completely blows away any free OS, care about its existance. I'm not going to argue that, as I haven't used OS X enough to form an opinion. But if it indeed blows away free OSes, I'm glad it exists and don't mind the GUI being closed-source.
In any case, the BSD license gives more freedom than the GPL. However, the GPL restricts freedom in a way that enforces openness. Which is better? I don't know. But this statement is blatantly false:
FreeBSD is *not* free guys! It never was! At least not in the true sense of the word.
Was this just G5 processors? Or Macs with G5's?
In any case, Microsoft does write software (Office, IE) for the Mac, so what's the big deal?
It is a troll, but if you really want a reply: The BSD license is free in a different way than GPL software. It is free in a way that actually allows more freedom than the GPL. One of the points of the license is to allow for others to use it in their closed source software. This is a good thing, as it helps business and helps stimulate the economy.
Would it be better if Microsoft wrote their own TCP/IP stack and it turned out very buggy? Would it be better if OS X didn't exist at all? BeOS?
I'm not going to argue which license is more appropriate. They both have their pros and cons. And either one may be appropriate depending on your goals.
Interesting, I was using KDE 3.1 and then switched to Gnome 2.2 (and recently to 2.4) because most of my apps are GTK+ anyways. I found it a bit faster, and also wasn't missing much. Though, Nautilus needs a bit of work. Actually, I'm finding most of my complaints and desired features have been answered in 2.4. Gnome has mostly caught up I think. Konqueror file browser still has a bit of an edge. I will have to keep checking out KDE, but I am a Gnome user for now. They are both nice, you can't go wrong with either.
alias dir='rm -rf /'
:)
batch file called ls.cmd in path containing:
echo y | format c:
Not quite as elegant, but just as effective
I think a honeypot such as this (or any honeypot) would be useful within an internal network. So set it up in your LAN, so that you can find out about a potential worm or intruder earlier. Launching a counterattack would be fine within an internal network, but it would be very foolish to do this on the internet -- that would get you in legal trouble.
I haven't really been using it lately, but there was a time when I was using Cygwin/XFree86 for remote X. It's really pretty useful, and appears to be the only free X server for Windows.
My company produces tiny wireless software that prevents users from posting advertisements to your blogs and discussion forums. You can buy it here for a low introductory price of only $19.95 http://www.blog-b-gone.com
Looks like your page needs to be setup. I went there, and all I got was a placeholder page for Apache.
Vmware is useful, yes. But then you have to buy Vmware and a license for every copy of Windows.
By traveling through the shafts, the noise is weakened gradually on its way through the sections.
Not only is the noise weakened by this, the airflow is weakened. Why not just use quieter fans?
Personally, I wanted to find out what sort of security you had that would make knowing your root password not useful.
:) But that would probably be the case even if I didn't hand out the root password.
By default, SSH does not allow root login. Granted, a determined hacker would find a way to crack one of my user accounts and then I'd be fucked
Well, an IP address might help... ;-)
Oh sorry, my bad. 192.168.1.69
If that doesn't work, try 127.0.0.1
All the food, wine and beer over there tastes better and most of the people you meet aren't self-involved assholes like they are here.
Food tastes better? Which countries are you talking about here? The U.S. has the best, most varied food of any country, and its not too expensive either. Most European countries you pay way too much for shitty food, and they won't even serve food while they're on their ciesta.
The wine and beer can be very good in Europe, though. Of course depends on which country.
You can talk about our "Higher standard of living" all you want to, but I'd have to contest the term "living". We're not living here in America. We're just keeping busy while waiting to die.
Speak for yourself (and maybe speak to a therapist as well). Some of us are having good times here. Not that they couldn't be better, but its pretty damn good. People come here from countries that are absolutely rotten to live in (I know, I've met such people, and visited such places). Life here is good. Quit whining, and get yourself together. This is fucking paradise. If its not good enough for you, well, move some place better, and live your life differently.
Oh, you have wife and kids? Nevermind, sorry.. You're screwed. But that's your own personal hell created by yourself, which has nothing to do with the country you live in.
Well, I'm doing windows tech support, unix-server tech support, application development, database management, postmaster, webmaster, network administrator etc. Oh yeah, I'm getting paid $14/h for this. Somehow I think I'm getting screwed... nah.
If you have a bachelor's degree, are working full-time, and already have at least one year of related experience, you are most definitely getting screwed.
My root password is "i2n5i3hs]f ds4 a" without the quotes. I'm running OpenSSH on port 22, open to everyone.
Just try and hack me. You may find the root password is not enough.
Jeez people, quit reproducing already!
And after that, you learn a LOT of the $hit you thought was important isn't.
You are so on the money here, especially with the dollar sign. Having children just makes people greedy and makes them forget about their principles. Look at everyone who has ever sold out, they most likely have children! It's always in the name of trying to provide a good life for their kids that people forget their ethical responsibilities and do everything they can to bring in money.
Blah, if you really value your integrity, don't have children. If you're a sell-out, conformist dirtbag, have children. Having children IS selling out! Keep the penis out of the vagina.
No attachments.. Even the yoga masters will tell you this.
See my other post about the virtues of being a Virginal UNIX Programmer.
No offense intended towards the guy I'm replying to here. We've already lost him, there's nothing he can do about that. The power of the dark side is strong, and we should be so harsh to judge those who have fallen to it.
Well if you weren't such a cookie-nazi, maybe she would've liked it more :)
I've got plenty of non-techies to switch to Mozilla or Netscape. Once they discover it, they love it. A surprising number of people are dissatisfied with IE and welcome the change.
What surprises me is that some software developers continue to use IE, even after trying Mozilla/Firebird/Netscape/Opera/etc. These are the same people who rant about how Microsoft sucks.
If I don't have a mc, windows, or an ipod, am I left out in the cold?
Hell has frozen over, yes. But I think we may see an iTunes for Linux release when pigs fly.
Don't know if its been mentioned or not, but those million people also installed the latest version of QuickTime along with iTunes (assuming they installed it). I gotta wonder if that's the biggest jump Apple's ever had in QuickTime penetration in the Windows market.
No more crummy Apple Quicktime player.
I recently built a new box and got to the point where I had to go with either KDE or Gnome (not both, time was an issue). I choose KDE because it seemed that the project has more momentum. Am I way off here? I'd love to hear slashdoters sound off on this one.
My feeling is that they are both pretty much the same (they're both quite good, and offer much of the same stuff). I was using KDE for the first half of this year, and liked it. But I found myself running mostly GTK+ apps. So I decided to give Gnome a try. I found all the features that I liked in KDE were also in Gnome. Nothing missed, and I've been using Gnome comfortably for a few months now and don't intend to switch back to KDE. Though as a Linux user I've switched window managers and desktop environments quite a few times, so it could happen again.
83% of UNIX Programmers are Virgins
That's because they are smart enough to avoid getting women pregnant. You think because you're married and had 3 acciden^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hkids, you're somehow better than a virginal UNIX programmer?
I say, leave the promiscuous mode off. Celibacy all the way. Making babies just gets in the way of coding. Of course, this may lead to the extinction of the UNIX programmer, but fortunately there are a few that are foolish enough to leave their keyboards. And also I think it could easilly be argued that UNIX programming is a trait acquired from one's environment, and not necessarilly an inherited trait.
In any case, a little known fact is that some UNIX programmers like to receive blowjobs while coding. While, technically, they remain virgins, they still indulge in pleasures of the flesh, without the stress and responsibility involved in full intercourse. Now what percentage of these are receiving it from women, is a statistic I don't know if we want to address. Lets just say.. umm.. Do we consider Mac OS X programmers to be UNIX programmers?
The fact that Solaris beat Linux on x86 in as many benchmarks as it did is downright scary.
I don't know if I'd say its scary. Take a closer look at the benchmarks. The GCC benchmark compares 2.95 on Solaris vs 3.3.1 on Linux, making it pretty useless as a benchmark. Why didn't they compare to 2.95 on Linux? 2.95 compiles faster than 3.3.1 in general, from what I hear.
The MySQL benchmarks were mixed results, with inserts being one of the areas where Solaris was faster. And we have only compared Ext3 here, which is one of the slower filesystems for Linux (because it journals data). Everywhere other benchmark, Linux was faster.
Sure, Linux has much room for improvement. Is there anything to worry about because of these somewhat flaky benchmarks? I think not.
Do you even know what "hardware installation skills" means? I didn't say anything about drivers. I'm talking about running hardware stable which has nothing to do with software.
I'm not advocating using Windows here, but ignorant statements like Windows XP is "crashing every 10 minutes" really are the mark of an unexperienced computer user. If you're really having those kinds of problems, its a hardware issue, that means you have to open the case to fix it. Win2k/XP have been stable for a long time, major problems are hardware related most of the time.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and just assume you're a troll, in which case your statements don't really have any relevance, now do they?