Next, the second amendment makes quite clear that its justification is the need for a "well-regulated militia." This amendment is the only one in the bill of rights to have a justification of any kind. Thus, the interpretation is different, even if it uses the term "the people."
Note that a militia is not under the direct authority of the U.S. Armed Forces. One could argue that the 2nd amendment does not explicitly guarantee individuals the right to bear arms, but it does explicitly give groups of citizens that right. Of course, those citizens have to stare their weapons somewhere.
In other words... I'm John Q. Public. And I'm a militia of one.
Finally, the U.S. military has incredible power.
All the more reason for the citizens to be able to defend themselves.
You're deluding yourself if your think a sub-machine gun will keep you alive in the event of a military coup.
I beg to differ. See my previous comment about being a militia of one.
The military and police will defend you in other significant scenarios.
Disclaimer: I have no end of gratitude and respect for joe who is overseas right now getting sh!t done. Having said that, I think you have a little too much faith in your local police and your state's notional guard. I've personally worked with guardsmen who haven't touched their 20-year old rifles in over a year. And I should trust someone like that to defend me? I've met guardsmen that I wouldn 't trust to load a water pistol without wetting themselves, let alone defend me. As far as police are concerned, I have a friend who was on the police force in my area. While he was in, it was a standard practice for each officer to not only carry a registered sidearm, but each one also carried what they called their "fire and forget" pistol. Each cop had an unregistered handgun, one that could never be traced back to them. I don't trust people like that to defend me, but I do feel a compelling need to be able to defend myself from them.
I can't think of any situation where gun-nut friendly laws would have a net benefit
I'm not saying that every citizen has a clear need to be walking around with a 50-cal. It would make life more interesting, but that's besides the point. The "gun nuts" cling to their weapons for the same reason so many slashdotters cling to the F-bomb. If I don't have the freedom to say "FUCKFUCKFUCKETYFUCKFUCK", then who's to say you have the freedom to say whatever's on your mind? The same is largely true of gun control: what the gun nuts fear is a state where the only people with firearms are the criminals and the police.
...without realizing that the viral nature of the GPL is going to screw their company.
I don't see how anyone's company is going to get screwed by them publishing the source code. Yes, linksys aka cisco may lose some customers in the form of those hobbyists and tech heads who choose to roll their own router+AP. It's not like it couldn't be done before, plus I think I'd shoot myself before running the linksys code on a machine I built from scratch. In either case, it's a non-issue... we're not talking about losing a lot of sales.
Sure, there's the possibility of someone else using the code to put out a similar product... as if the home networking market isn't already saturated as it is. An aspiring competitor would have to compete with the branding that linksys already has, not to mention the reputation and legal muscle of its sugar daddy in San Jose, just to be one more box on the shelf. Not to mention that such a startup would have to compete against the two biggest marketing juggernauts in IT, ie cisco and microsoft. I'm all for cation bordering on paranoia, but that's getting out of control. If linksys/cisco don't want the FSF hounding them, then they should show some appreciation for the people whose work they illegally profited from and adhereto the license to which they've already agreed.
I think the fact that record labels are making use of data harvested from p2p networks is a clear sign that the RIAA has given up whatever tenuous claim to moral high ground they may have had. If they are prosecuting downloaders while simultaneously profiting off of downloader data, that indicates that the lawsuits are just one more way for them to bring in extra cash. When you consider the poll in this month's Wired asking what it would take for users to stop downloading mp3's, only 11% said that a lawsuit from the RIAA would make them stop.
Contrary to popular belief, the RIAA has adopted a new business model: profiting off of downloaders while at the same time suing them for "lost sales". This is a business model that will scale, since only 11% of downloaders will stop downloading, no matter how many lawsuits the RIAA files. The DMCA plus a perpetual supply of defendants guarantee a study stream of supplmental income.
Actually I was confusing the most recent FL law with ERISA; I stand corrected. IANAL, so my recollection of the laws, both state and federal, that have been used to give loved ones the shaft while they've had medical care inflicted upon them is a little bit fuzzy.
D0lt. The purpose of that post was to take multiple courses of action ad absurdum. Or maybe posts like that should begin with a and end with a for the dim-witted?
I've pretty much grown use to shite like this from our legislature. When they're not too busy cutting money from education or giving HMO's a get-out-of-lawsuit-free card, they occasionally manage to do something I find surprising and refreshing, but no less assinine.
I think this law is fine, but I say reverse it: instead of levying a tax on private companies for their LANs, how about they levy a tax on themselves for every piece of copper and fiber in the state, county, and city government networks. Then they should take that money and invest it in supporting the bits of Florida's economy that aren't tourism or hospitality, and see how that works out.
Lemme get this straight... getting linux to run on a TRS-80 and form a beowulf cluster with a modded atari 2600 is slashdot material, but a linux-based PVR solution isn't?
The victims include the artists whose creativity gets no reward; governments who lose hundreds of millions of tax revenues; economies that are deprived of new investment; consumers who get less diversity and less choice; and record producers who are forced to reduce their artist rosters
Like any member of the RIAA gives a rat's ass about artists, creativity, governments, taxes, economies, consumers, diversity, or... oh wait. They might give a rat's ass about record producers.
I have two words to illustrate this point: boy bands. Any organization that gets some of the vanilla, mindless, over-produced, talentless, 2.5 minute pieces of crap out there onto the radio clearly desires to benefit no one but themselves.
There's one thing Sean Fanning, Bob Cringely, and everyone who has put forth an effort to do to the RIAA what they've done to use for decades all have in common. They are all simply agents of karmic justice.
IANASB (I'm not a stockbroker) but is there some avenue available to some subset of the general public (eg, the/. crowd) to use SCO's stance as a publically traded company against them and/or to our favor? A company has to file with the SEC once they've purchased more than 5% of a company's worth, but groups of individuals aren't under any such requirements are they? Any thoughts?
Sounds to me like Big Blue needs to get Jonny Cochrane up in here. Just someone please take him aside and say "Now look Mr. Cochrane, this time your client actually isn't guilty, mmk?"
Understatement of the year: "We're not exactly winning the Miss Congeniality contest"
What's funny is, McBride actually saved us the trouble and compared SCO to the MPAA and the RIAA for us. The difference is, the RIAA didn't give any MP3's away. McBride's argument is crap. U.S. copyright law may prevent a copyright holder from accidentally giving up their rights, but there's no excuse for violating the GPL when all of the code is right there.
And if that wasn't a total line of bullshit, how bout when McBride said "We don't wanna sue anybody"? For somebody who doesn't wanna sue anybody, they sure have an awful lot of lawyers going to work for them...
Line of bullshit #3: "The pull of linux is not the operating system, it's the ability to run unix on cheap intel hardware" Having worked on SCO machines and having worked on linux machines, I had to swallow my teeth when he dropped this one.
I wonder if McBride would do an Ask Slashdot interview? Lemme get my question in now:
"So tell me sir, how does it feel to have the absolute worst karma on the planet?"
There's a major difference here: two of the three vulnerabilities were in 2000 and NT as well as 2003. As long as NT4 has been around (since '96 IIRC) people are still finding bugs in it. They clearly know the software is crap, but they're still making new operating systems based on said crap, i. e. "Built on NT Technology".
Sounds kinda familiar actually:
"Listen, lad. I built this kingdom up from nothing. When I started here, all there was was swamp. Other kings said I was daft to build a castle on a swamp, but I built it all the same, just to show 'em. It sank into the swamp. So, I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So, I built a third one. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp, but the fourth one... stayed up! And that's what you're gonna get, lad: the strongest castle in these lands!"
But you see, making it illegal to have some information is better, 'cause it makes people easy to prosecute.
You're joking right? Information isn't classified to facilitate prosecution, it's classified because the information itelf is deemed potentially harmful. IMO, it should only be classified as a last resort, and only in cases where the general public doesn't need to know the info.
But look at something like cocaine. You'd be insane to keep it on your person in a lot of instances.
That's possession of an item, not knowledge of a piece of information. Big difference.
One of the bigger reasons it is illegal is due to the harm it can create. Now, look at the fact that a lot of various drugs, some that are possibly less harmful or not at all, are illegal too.
I don't see how drugs are relevant, but since you mentioned them, here's how drugs can apply to this discussion. Making cocaine is illegal, as are the sale, possession, and use of cocaine. Know what though? Information about the preparation and use of cocaine is perfectly legal. Wanna know how freely available that information is? Try googling for "make cocaine". Five of the first ten hits specifically deal with the preparation of cocaine.
"It shouldn't be illegal 'cause then only criminals will XXX."
That statement doesn't apply for all values of XXX. By taking something that I apply to gun control and to finormation classification and applying it to any crime out there, you're severely taking my words out of context. I will stand by that sentence though for any "crime" is something that is both potentially beneficial and potentially harmful, and regular citizens have a right or a need to do whatever XXX is.
In this case, if all information about the nations telecom infrastructure were to be classified, then pretty much every engineer at Verizon, Sprint, etc. will have to get either a secret or a TS clearance. Add to that everyone who works in a NOC that needs information about their ISP's circuits in order to do their job. Who's going to pay for the security investiagtions for all of these people? We are, one way or another. Are any of these guys going to store schematics or diagrams on their computers? Congratulations, they now get to go through the process of having those computers approved to store and process classified material.
Have you ever worked with classified information? I have, and it's a bitch and a half. Information should be classified as a last resort, not as a paranoid knee-jerk first resort.
But by classifiyng information that is publically available, you devalue the classification. There's a verizon switching facility across the street from the college where I work. I suppose the Dept. of HomeSec should put officer Barbrady out front saying "Move along, nothing to see here..."
I equate the classification of freely available information to gun control. If you make the information illegal, then you guarantee that only criminals will have the information. Here's an idea for the paranoid fucksticks at the DHS - instead of burying your heads in the sand, how about working on securing the infrastructure, rather than obscuring it? What's that, you're not sure which points would be the best ones to secure? Well, there's this grad student who's going to be looking for a job pretty soon...
But if my car is sitting in my driveway whilst I'm riding to work in someone else's car, then I'm saving wear and tear as well as gas for my car. There is the question of whether or not a day of no driving will save more wear and tear than is caused by driving with more people in the car on another day, but I guess to be on the upside of that equation you would just have to carpool with people lighter than you.
My point was, I'm sharing something that was sold to me, and the automotive industry is theoretically losing sales on the deal.
The problem with bands and their stance on p2p is this: Consumers, like women, find desperation unattractive. The harder you try to get me to buy your CD with one or two singles that have a catchy beat but little or no artistic value, the less likely I am to purchase your music.
It seems to me that there's a correlation between bands that pour their heart and soul into the music they make and bands that could care less how their music is experienced.
Carpooling results in less wear-and-tear on your vehicle, thus resulting in lost or delayed sales for the automotive industry. Plus, it means you use less gas, thus stealing money from Shell, Exxon, BP, etc.
It's only when you compare copyright laws to any other type of business ad nauseam that you can see how truly fux0red the system is.
Hey man if it works for you than knock yourself out. Myself, it seems to me that the fact that multiple people are making changes to the network 24/7 should make documentation that much more necessary, be it a visual diagram or some other form.
I'm going to hazard a guess that even in your environment there's still a spreadsheet or a databse or something you use to look up IP's by location and make sure you don't assign overlapping IP's right? If that's the case, and you haven't played with it yourself yet, you may want to take a look at Visio 2002 Enterprise. It uses SNMP queries to build an SQL database while automatically diagramming your network. I know you're a command line kinda guy, and that's my preferred way to work on routers too. But if you want something to help out any junior techs or to automate your diagrams for when you appease your management, you may want to check it out.
OK so for the moment I'll ignore the inadequacies of maintaining a large network without diagrams. Myself, I'm a visual person, so a diagram helps me visualize traffic flows etc. It's also useful for having a conversation with someone else about the network. But what do you do when (if) you bring in a consultant or a sales engineer, or if you hire someone new in your department? Do you just tell them to go nuts on your routers looking at routing tables, link state databases, and bgp tables? Myself, there's nothing I love more when I'm consulting than being brought into a network that has jack for documentation. It means that I'm getting at least two billable hours out of the deal just for documenting the network, or the segment that I'm working on. There's only one reason to keep inadequate documentation and do seat-of-your-pants networking like that, and that's to maintain your job security.
5 and 10 are natural numbers because we have ten fingers, ten toes, etc. I see two possibilities:
1. The guy who invented this numbering system lost three fingers during an accident involving a rope, a pully, and a large block of sun-dried mud-brick.
2. The aliens who taught it to the Incas had seven fingers.
Against my better judgement, I'll bite. You really do seem like you're trolling, but I have a few minutes to kill this morning. In fact, because I'm in such a good mood, I'll even explain why so many people are giving you flack in this thread, just in case you don't already know. Then I'll include a few reasons to consider a linux platform.
First, the flack: You're asking a robust community a very simple question to which you could easily get a plethora of answers. This is akin to asking every professor in the math department of a university what 2+2 is.
This is actually one of the more annoying characteristics of many (but not all) windows users, not to mention non-geeks in general: an overall lack of resourcefulness. You want the answers to all of life's questions handed to you. When something doesn't work, you steadfastly refuse to think beyond "I clicked here and it didn't work. I clicked here again, and it still didn't work. It must be broke!
For the record, the bullets that I'm copying and pasting from http://linux-newbie.sunsite.dk are from the first search result on a google search for "linux benefits". With that, here are a few reasons to consider a linux platform:
A modern, very stable, multi-user, multitasking environment
on your inexpensive PC hardware, at no (or almost no) monetary cost for
the software. Linux is a rich and powerful platform--don't think of it
as a "poor people" operating system. Out-of-box Linux has as much
capability as MS Windows NT with $5000 in software add-ons, is more stable,
and requires less powerful hardware for comparable tasks.
Standard platform. Linux is VERY standard--it is essentially a POSIX
compliant UNIX. (Yes, Linux is a best-of-the-breed UNIX. The word
"UNIX" is not used in conjunction with Linux because "UNIX" is a registered
trademark.) Linux includes all the UNIX standard tools and utilities.
Unsurpassed computing power, portability, and flexibility.
A Linux cluster recently (April 1999) beat a Cray supercomputer in a
standard benchmark. Linux is most popular on Intel-based PCs (price of the hardware), but it runs very well on numerous other hardware
platforms, from toy-like to mainframes. One distribution (Debian)
expresses the idea like this: "Linux, The Universal Operating System." Linux can be customized to perform almost any computing
task.
Advanced graphical user interface. Linux uses a standard, network-transparent
X-windowing system with a "window manager" (typically KDE or GNOME).
Dozens of excellent, free, general-interest desktop applications. This include a range of web browsers, email programs,
word processors, spreadsheets, bitmap and vector graphics programs, file
managers, audio players, CD writers, some games, etc.
Thousands of free applets, tools, and smaller programs. "Small
is beautiful" goes well with Linux philosophy. The small Linux tools
and applets often work in tandem to perform more complex tasks.
Hundreds of specialized applications built by researchers around
the world (astronomy, information technology, chemistry, physics, engineering,
linguistics, biology,...). In many fields, Linux seems like "the only"
operating system in existence (try to find out what your friend astronomer
runs on her computer). The software in this category is typically not
very easy to use, but if you want the power, it is the best software
that humanity has in these areas. Doubtful? Have a look at: http://SAL.KachinaTech.COM/Z/2/index.shtml
for examples.
Scores of top-of-the line commercial programs including all
the big databases (e.g., Oracle, Sybase, but no Microsoft's). Many
(most?) of these are offered free for developers and for personal
Again, slightly more appealing. But I can still think of no actual reason to do it.
Hey flamebait, you're posting on the wrong website.
You do it because you can. You do it to have the flexibility and granularity of a unix command prompt on a windows box. You do it for the satisfaction of figuring something out on your own and demonstrating your resourcefulness. You do it because there are some things you just don't learn until you force yourself to work with an OS with which you're unfamiliar.
Most importantly, you do it for fun... and of course profit.
That'd be nice. There have been several times when I've worked on a linksys router and could have really used an access list. Not a port filter, or a DMZ host, but a genuine bona fide access control list. If the 800-series cisco routers are any indication, they'll keep the web interface, but people who know what they're doing will be able to drop down to a command line. For added fun, I'd like to see them also support time-based access lists.
Slashdot Mirror
Note that a militia is not under the direct authority of the U.S. Armed Forces. One could argue that the 2nd amendment does not explicitly guarantee individuals the right to bear arms, but it does explicitly give groups of citizens that right. Of course, those citizens have to stare their weapons somewhere.
In other words... I'm John Q. Public. And I'm a militia of one.
All the more reason for the citizens to be able to defend themselves.
I beg to differ. See my previous comment about being a militia of one.
Disclaimer: I have no end of gratitude and respect for joe who is overseas right now getting sh!t done. Having said that, I think you have a little too much faith in your local police and your state's notional guard. I've personally worked with guardsmen who haven't touched their 20-year old rifles in over a year. And I should trust someone like that to defend me? I've met guardsmen that I wouldn 't trust to load a water pistol without wetting themselves, let alone defend me. As far as police are concerned, I have a friend who was on the police force in my area. While he was in, it was a standard practice for each officer to not only carry a registered sidearm, but each one also carried what they called their "fire and forget" pistol. Each cop had an unregistered handgun, one that could never be traced back to them. I don't trust people like that to defend me, but I do feel a compelling need to be able to defend myself from them.
I'm not saying that every citizen has a clear need to be walking around with a 50-cal. It would make life more interesting, but that's besides the point. The "gun nuts" cling to their weapons for the same reason so many slashdotters cling to the F-bomb. If I don't have the freedom to say "FUCKFUCKFUCKETYFUCKFUCK", then who's to say you have the freedom to say whatever's on your mind? The same is largely true of gun control: what the gun nuts fear is a state where the only people with firearms are the criminals and the police.
I don't see how anyone's company is going to get screwed by them publishing the source code. Yes, linksys aka cisco may lose some customers in the form of those hobbyists and tech heads who choose to roll their own router+AP. It's not like it couldn't be done before, plus I think I'd shoot myself before running the linksys code on a machine I built from scratch. In either case, it's a non-issue... we're not talking about losing a lot of sales.
Sure, there's the possibility of someone else using the code to put out a similar product... as if the home networking market isn't already saturated as it is. An aspiring competitor would have to compete with the branding that linksys already has, not to mention the reputation and legal muscle of its sugar daddy in San Jose, just to be one more box on the shelf. Not to mention that such a startup would have to compete against the two biggest marketing juggernauts in IT, ie cisco and microsoft. I'm all for cation bordering on paranoia, but that's getting out of control. If linksys/cisco don't want the FSF hounding them, then they should show some appreciation for the people whose work they illegally profited from and adhereto the license to which they've already agreed.
I think the fact that record labels are making use of data harvested from p2p networks is a clear sign that the RIAA has given up whatever tenuous claim to moral high ground they may have had. If they are prosecuting downloaders while simultaneously profiting off of downloader data, that indicates that the lawsuits are just one more way for them to bring in extra cash. When you consider the poll in this month's Wired asking what it would take for users to stop downloading mp3's, only 11% said that a lawsuit from the RIAA would make them stop.
Contrary to popular belief, the RIAA has adopted a new business model: profiting off of downloaders while at the same time suing them for "lost sales". This is a business model that will scale, since only 11% of downloaders will stop downloading, no matter how many lawsuits the RIAA files. The DMCA plus a perpetual supply of defendants guarantee a study stream of supplmental income.
D!cks.
Actually I was confusing the most recent FL law with ERISA; I stand corrected. IANAL, so my recollection of the laws, both state and federal, that have been used to give loved ones the shaft while they've had medical care inflicted upon them is a little bit fuzzy.
D0lt. The purpose of that post was to take multiple courses of action ad absurdum. Or maybe posts like that should begin with a and end with a for the dim-witted?
I've pretty much grown use to shite like this from our legislature. When they're not too busy cutting money from education or giving HMO's a get-out-of-lawsuit-free card, they occasionally manage to do something I find surprising and refreshing, but no less assinine.
I think this law is fine, but I say reverse it: instead of levying a tax on private companies for their LANs, how about they levy a tax on themselves for every piece of copper and fiber in the state, county, and city government networks. Then they should take that money and invest it in supporting the bits of Florida's economy that aren't tourism or hospitality, and see how that works out.
Fucktards.
Lemme get this straight... getting linux to run on a TRS-80 and form a beowulf cluster with a modded atari 2600 is slashdot material, but a linux-based PVR solution isn't?
And in related news, SCO filed an additional lawsuit against IBM today for IP infringement of their patent on flawed business models. More news at 5.
Like any member of the RIAA gives a rat's ass about artists, creativity, governments, taxes, economies, consumers, diversity, or... oh wait. They might give a rat's ass about record producers.
I have two words to illustrate this point: boy bands. Any organization that gets some of the vanilla, mindless, over-produced, talentless, 2.5 minute pieces of crap out there onto the radio clearly desires to benefit no one but themselves.
There's one thing Sean Fanning, Bob Cringely, and everyone who has put forth an effort to do to the RIAA what they've done to use for decades all have in common. They are all simply agents of karmic justice.IANASB (I'm not a stockbroker) but is there some avenue available to some subset of the general public (eg, the /. crowd) to use SCO's stance as a publically traded company against them and/or to our favor? A company has to file with the SEC once they've purchased more than 5% of a company's worth, but groups of individuals aren't under any such requirements are they? Any thoughts?
Sounds to me like Big Blue needs to get Jonny Cochrane up in here. Just someone please take him aside and say "Now look Mr. Cochrane, this time your client actually isn't guilty, mmk?"
Understatement of the year: "We're not exactly winning the Miss Congeniality contest"
What's funny is, McBride actually saved us the trouble and compared SCO to the MPAA and the RIAA for us. The difference is, the RIAA didn't give any MP3's away. McBride's argument is crap. U.S. copyright law may prevent a copyright holder from accidentally giving up their rights, but there's no excuse for violating the GPL when all of the code is right there.
And if that wasn't a total line of bullshit, how bout when McBride said "We don't wanna sue anybody"? For somebody who doesn't wanna sue anybody, they sure have an awful lot of lawyers going to work for them...
Line of bullshit #3: "The pull of linux is not the operating system, it's the ability to run unix on cheap intel hardware" Having worked on SCO machines and having worked on linux machines, I had to swallow my teeth when he dropped this one.
I wonder if McBride would do an Ask Slashdot interview? Lemme get my question in now:
There's a major difference here: two of the three vulnerabilities were in 2000 and NT as well as 2003. As long as NT4 has been around (since '96 IIRC) people are still finding bugs in it. They clearly know the software is crap, but they're still making new operating systems based on said crap, i. e. "Built on NT Technology".
Sounds kinda familiar actually:
"Listen, lad. I built this kingdom up from nothing. When I started here, all there was was swamp. Other kings said I was daft to build a castle on a swamp, but I built it all the same, just to show 'em. It sank into the swamp. So, I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So, I built a third one. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp, but the fourth one... stayed up! And that's what you're gonna get, lad: the strongest castle in these lands!"
In this case, if all information about the nations telecom infrastructure were to be classified, then pretty much every engineer at Verizon, Sprint, etc. will have to get either a secret or a TS clearance. Add to that everyone who works in a NOC that needs information about their ISP's circuits in order to do their job. Who's going to pay for the security investiagtions for all of these people? We are, one way or another. Are any of these guys going to store schematics or diagrams on their computers? Congratulations, they now get to go through the process of having those computers approved to store and process classified material.
Have you ever worked with classified information? I have, and it's a bitch and a half. Information should be classified as a last resort, not as a paranoid knee-jerk first resort.
But by classifiyng information that is publically available, you devalue the classification. There's a verizon switching facility across the street from the college where I work. I suppose the Dept. of HomeSec should put officer Barbrady out front saying "Move along, nothing to see here..."
I equate the classification of freely available information to gun control. If you make the information illegal, then you guarantee that only criminals will have the information. Here's an idea for the paranoid fucksticks at the DHS - instead of burying your heads in the sand, how about working on securing the infrastructure, rather than obscuring it? What's that, you're not sure which points would be the best ones to secure? Well, there's this grad student who's going to be looking for a job pretty soon...
But if my car is sitting in my driveway whilst I'm riding to work in someone else's car, then I'm saving wear and tear as well as gas for my car. There is the question of whether or not a day of no driving will save more wear and tear than is caused by driving with more people in the car on another day, but I guess to be on the upside of that equation you would just have to carpool with people lighter than you.
My point was, I'm sharing something that was sold to me, and the automotive industry is theoretically losing sales on the deal.
The problem with bands and their stance on p2p is this: Consumers, like women, find desperation unattractive. The harder you try to get me to buy your CD with one or two singles that have a catchy beat but little or no artistic value, the less likely I am to purchase your music.
It seems to me that there's a correlation between bands that pour their heart and soul into the music they make and bands that could care less how their music is experienced.For that matter, isn't carpooling a crime?
Carpooling results in less wear-and-tear on your vehicle, thus resulting in lost or delayed sales for the automotive industry. Plus, it means you use less gas, thus stealing money from Shell, Exxon, BP, etc.
It's only when you compare copyright laws to any other type of business ad nauseam that you can see how truly fux0red the system is.Hey man if it works for you than knock yourself out. Myself, it seems to me that the fact that multiple people are making changes to the network 24/7 should make documentation that much more necessary, be it a visual diagram or some other form.
I'm going to hazard a guess that even in your environment there's still a spreadsheet or a databse or something you use to look up IP's by location and make sure you don't assign overlapping IP's right? If that's the case, and you haven't played with it yourself yet, you may want to take a look at Visio 2002 Enterprise. It uses SNMP queries to build an SQL database while automatically diagramming your network. I know you're a command line kinda guy, and that's my preferred way to work on routers too. But if you want something to help out any junior techs or to automate your diagrams for when you appease your management, you may want to check it out.
Salud.
OK so for the moment I'll ignore the inadequacies of maintaining a large network without diagrams. Myself, I'm a visual person, so a diagram helps me visualize traffic flows etc. It's also useful for having a conversation with someone else about the network. But what do you do when (if) you bring in a consultant or a sales engineer, or if you hire someone new in your department? Do you just tell them to go nuts on your routers looking at routing tables, link state databases, and bgp tables? Myself, there's nothing I love more when I'm consulting than being brought into a network that has jack for documentation. It means that I'm getting at least two billable hours out of the deal just for documenting the network, or the segment that I'm working on. There's only one reason to keep inadequate documentation and do seat-of-your-pants networking like that, and that's to maintain your job security.
5 and 10 are natural numbers because we have ten fingers, ten toes, etc. I see two possibilities: 1. The guy who invented this numbering system lost three fingers during an accident involving a rope, a pully, and a large block of sun-dried mud-brick. 2. The aliens who taught it to the Incas had seven fingers.
Against my better judgement, I'll bite. You really do seem like you're trolling, but I have a few minutes to kill this morning. In fact, because I'm in such a good mood, I'll even explain why so many people are giving you flack in this thread, just in case you don't already know. Then I'll include a few reasons to consider a linux platform.
First, the flack: You're asking a robust community a very simple question to which you could easily get a plethora of answers. This is akin to asking every professor in the math department of a university what 2+2 is.
This is actually one of the more annoying characteristics of many (but not all) windows users, not to mention non-geeks in general: an overall lack of resourcefulness. You want the answers to all of life's questions handed to you. When something doesn't work, you steadfastly refuse to think beyond "I clicked here and it didn't work. I clicked here again, and it still didn't work. It must be broke!
For the record, the bullets that I'm copying and pasting from http://linux-newbie.sunsite.dk are from the first search result on a google search for "linux benefits". With that, here are a few reasons to consider a linux platform:
A modern, very stable, multi-user, multitasking environment on your inexpensive PC hardware, at no (or almost no) monetary cost for the software. Linux is a rich and powerful platform--don't think of it as a "poor people" operating system. Out-of-box Linux has as much capability as MS Windows NT with $5000 in software add-ons, is more stable, and requires less powerful hardware for comparable tasks.
Standard platform. Linux is VERY standard--it is essentially a POSIX compliant UNIX. (Yes, Linux is a best-of-the-breed UNIX. The word "UNIX" is not used in conjunction with Linux because "UNIX" is a registered trademark.) Linux includes all the UNIX standard tools and utilities.
Unsurpassed computing power, portability, and flexibility. A Linux cluster recently (April 1999) beat a Cray supercomputer in a standard benchmark. Linux is most popular on Intel-based PCs (price of the hardware), but it runs very well on numerous other hardware platforms, from toy-like to mainframes. One distribution (Debian) expresses the idea like this: "Linux, The Universal Operating System." Linux can be customized to perform almost any computing task.
Advanced graphical user interface. Linux uses a standard, network-transparent X-windowing system with a "window manager" (typically KDE or GNOME).
Dozens of excellent, free, general-interest desktop applications. This include a range of web browsers, email programs, word processors, spreadsheets, bitmap and vector graphics programs, file managers, audio players, CD writers, some games, etc.
Thousands of free applets, tools, and smaller programs. "Small is beautiful" goes well with Linux philosophy. The small Linux tools and applets often work in tandem to perform more complex tasks.
Hundreds of specialized applications built by researchers around the world (astronomy, information technology, chemistry, physics, engineering, linguistics, biology, ...). In many fields, Linux seems like "the only"
operating system in existence (try to find out what your friend astronomer
runs on her computer). The software in this category is typically not
very easy to use, but if you want the power, it is the best software
that humanity has in these areas. Doubtful? Have a look at: http://SAL.KachinaTech.COM/Z/2/index.shtml
for examples.
Scores of top-of-the line commercial programs including all the big databases (e.g., Oracle, Sybase, but no Microsoft's). Many (most?) of these are offered free for developers and for personal
Since I'm not a graphics guy and I don't play games, the switch was pretty easy for me
You don't play games?>> Infidel!
Again, slightly more appealing. But I can still think of no actual reason to do it.
Hey flamebait, you're posting on the wrong website.
You do it because you can. You do it to have the flexibility and granularity of a unix command prompt on a windows box. You do it for the satisfaction of figuring something out on your own and demonstrating your resourcefulness. You do it because there are some things you just don't learn until you force yourself to work with an OS with which you're unfamiliar.
Most importantly, you do it for fun... and of course profit.Schweet.