Alternatively, I could argue that I hate being inside all day and wish I could be out enjoying the sun or even working in it and not sitting here messing my back up for years to come [etc]
While I agree with you on your carpal tunnel, heart desease, and eye problems, how exactly does sitting in a chair all day hurt your back more than doing physical labor 7 days a week?
As some one who's done both and still does, I can honestly say that white collar work is not nearly as demanding as blue collar once you weigh in the pros and cons of both. Honestly, when was the last time you heard of anyone ever dying on the job while coding from the working conditions? When was the last time you or a co-worker was hospitalized from an injury suffered on the job?
Point is, every job has its ups and downs; you have to find one thatyou personally enjoy. But white collar jobs tend to have more ups and fewer downs than blue collar. You'll have a damn hard time convincing me otherwise.
I came into the field when I got tired of digging ditches and sweating my balls off for a living at $10/hr shortly after high school.
Dead on! Myself, I'm a network engineer and a hog farmer. I can't testify first-hand to what conditions were like in the late 90s for programmers, because at that time I was cutting all the pine trees off our property for pulp wood (everyone around us was getting pine beetles, so I figured if I was gonna loose the trees I might as well make some money off it). I think I averaged about $8 an hour for my work, after you count expenses for my saw, my truck, my trailor, my tractor, etc.
I'm also a born and raised hog farmer. Hearing some one bitch that he'll only make $35,000 this year as a programmer just strikes me as whining. What babies! If you want to talk about a market that's hit rock bottom, it's farming. These days, when I take a #1 hog to sale, I'm lucky to get $70 for it. It costs me just under $100 to raise one! This of course isn't sustainable. The few hogs I raise now are for personal consumption. The farrowing barn is empty.
Sometimes I wonder just how big a whimp these people are. They bitch and moan about poor working conditions in a cubicle that is both air conditioned, and quiet, all while other people in the world are slaving in the hot Georgia sun all day, digging ditches, cutting trees, raising cattle, paving roads, roofing houses, etc. Give me a break.
Perhaps Chirac realized (correctly) that a man's funeral should not be used to improve one's political position or as an international diplomatic event.
To begin with, that wasn't just any old man's funeral. That was a funeral for the former President of a country whom you are (suppossed) to be allied with. Attending a funeral is not going to improve anyone's political position, certainly not if they aren't invited to speak.
Imagine how the French or Germans would feel if President Bush was invited to attend a funeral for one of their great leaders, when he was already on European soil, and had no great matters to attend to. Hell, we're at war and President Bush attended the funeral. It took him away from things for pretty much the entire day I'm sure. I doubt it would have seriously inconveinced any of them to stay.
I guess the point I am trying to make is that paying respect for the dead, particularly of a man who had a great and positive effect on the entire world, may be seen by some cynics as a way to improve your social or political standing, but that the feelings of such cynics should not stop you from doing what is simply the right thing.
MO SysV init is much simpler to use and administer one you understand what it is doing. Since each daemon has its own startup and shutdown script, and since the order they are being executed in can be determined by a glance. It is also very easy to re-order daemon startups, and to start / stop/restart individual processes while the system is running through/etc/init.d. BSD style init does not have this benefit, and since everying is all mismached together it is also often quite cumbersome to manage dependancies.
Have you ever used Slackware? Seriously. I've used about every distro out there, most of the SysV init, and I can honestly say that BSD init is much simpler, more intuitive, and as a result easier to use. In saying that SysV init has a startup script for everything you're neglecting that BSD init does too. Look at rc.samba, rc.httpd, rc.portmap, etc.
Basically SvsV init works by having an absolute ton of symbolic links to each startup script. Init checks each of these links to see if that service should be started in that runlevel or not, and in what order they should be started. Not only does this contribute to long startup time by having to seek all over the drive to find these files, it's hell on the user to track down everything.
Don't want mysql to startup on boot? In SysV init you mave to rename six symbolic links to begin with the leter "K", and possibly reorder them. In BSD init, you just remove the executable permission from rc.mysql.
Want to change the order that your startup scripts run in? In SysV init have to make these changes for numerous sym links in six different directories (one for each runlevel). In BSD init, you just open two text files (one for boot up and one for shutdown) and move the blocks of text to where you want them.
Bottom line, BSD init is much simpler on the sysadmin. The only advantages I've ever seen in SysV init are the ability to:
A) Have each runlevel start things in a different order (also easily manageable in BSD init, if not as straight forward), and:
B) Allow automagical setup tools to make changes in system initialization (something a control freak hates).
Technical reasons haven't worked so far, but the justice system in America has a shot of at least reducing the SPAM problem.
How do you ask?
$100 fine for every SPAM e-mail reported.
But how exactly are you suppossed to find out who sent the SPAM?
That's the beauty of it all. We don't fine the spammer, we fine the company who's product was advertised in the spam.
Of course this opens up the possibility of say, sending out a few million spams for Windows XP. That would mean you'd have to construct a careful audit of the company whom you were investigating for illegal advertising via spam.
It's not perfect, but a few major corporations (most likely porn companies) receiving a nasty audit that runs up several million in spam damages and maybe even some things they should have claimed on their taxes and didn't should intimidate others into not spamming.
Once there, your DNS universe is gonna be a bit funny. You should map all.com,.net,.org and for that matter any "real" web request to a "Hello World!" webserver that explains that your WiFi link isn't offering a connection to the Internet, instead it's a one-of-a-kind location that's offering...
nah, DNS won't be a problem at all! it's simple. Your DHCP server never assigns a default gateway, so none of the machines on the network have an entry in their routing table to get out. They'll query the only DNS server available, and immediately find they can't reach that website, and give the "destination unreachable" message.
Now, if you do want to redirect everyone to a webpage that explains what you're about, take a look at NoCatAuth. It can do exactly this.
Re:SMP didn't make it more secure, so not a priori
on
SMP Now In OpenBSD HEAD
·
· Score: 2, Informative
SMP is a scalability issue
SMP is also a security issue, a negative one. Implimenting secure SMP is not an easy thing to do IIUC. Making sure that processes access memory in a secure way on a multi processor machine is difficult.
Don't want to sound like sour grapes here, but what jack-ass modded a score 5 Insightful post down as "Overrated" after an opening like I gave? Whoever it is, I challenge you to log on anonymously and reply to this telling the Slashdot community exactly why that post was "overrated". Perhaps it's because you simply have a personal like for spatial nautlius and I stepped on your toes?
You'll have to provide me with an argument as to why coding ablility might qualify or disqualify one's opinion as to how your files should be organized if you want me to understand this point of view.
I think you misunderstand me. I'm not saying I couldn't come up with better ideas, just that I can't do them. Since I can't do them, I don't think I have much right to tell these guys (none of whom work for me or receive any direct benefit from me) how to do their job (or hobby as the case may be).
I don't know about Music Folder idea either. His My Music folder sounds horribly disorganized, or maybe his collection is really small/limited to one genre. His directory structure should be Media/Music/Rock/80s/Singles/B-52s_Rock_Lobster.mp 3.
Well that depends of course. You may have a very large collection of many different types of music and thus need a directory structure to handle lots of things like that. Personally I'm going to give the guy a break here and assume that he thinks the file browser should understand that in the "My Music" folder it should assume all the files are music files and consult their ID3 tags. This would allow you to organize them by gennre, artist, etc without having a lot of deep directories.
That is pretty short sighted however. Checking the ID3 tags for 3000 songs is not going to be a quickly accomplished task no matter your system. The disk access time is just going to be too great.
Personally I have a/home/music directory (shared to a small group that don't all have access to my $HOME) that has two sub-directories in it, mp3/ and ogg/. I think it's obvious what's in those. Each of my files is named something like doc_watson-tom_dooley.ogg. I've got a list of the singer, and the song, and for me that's enough (I've only got three genres: country, western, and bluegrass).
I'm going to try to go easy on the GNOME developers here for the simple fact that I can't do a better job, largely because I don't code. I hate to run some one's name in the mud if I can't do any better, but it seems to me the GNOME developers have lost sight of what made people like GNOME.
Some people might like GNOME, but most do not. I do not like it because it is not configureable.
Does anyone remember the reasons GNOME can to be? One of course was to provide a truly free linux desktop as an alternative to KDE. The other was to make a very powerful and configurable desktop. In the GNOME 1.x days you could configure anything you wanted (which sometimes got you into trouble of course). Replacing the window manager was as simple as clicking an option in the preferences dialog.
In those days a lot of people really liked GNOME. We liked it because it was fast, and it was leaner than KDE. You could run GNOME on pretty much any modern (P5 or better) machine and have a full DE that was usable. In those days, KDE was simply too slow to run on a lot of commodity hardware. These days hardware is cheaper, but GNOME runs like ass. In most cases I find that KDE is noticeably faster (can't offer empirical evidence other than to say that is my perception).
Somewhere around GNOME 2 the development philosophy changed. The developers seem to care more about making this really dumbed down you-can-only-do-it-this-way GUI in the mistaken idea that this will both attract newbies, and make things easier on them. In reality GNOME now loads in more time than it takes me to wait out the dog days of summer. If it isn't fast, nobody is going to use it, certainly not newbies, who don't have a personal attatchment to your program.
These days it seems to me like the only people running GNOME are doing so from plain inertia and/or dislike of KDE.
Myself? I run XFCE, which is GTK+ based. I like many of the GNOME apps (Galeon is the best browser and Abiword is just a straight up fast WYSIWYG word processor, Eye of Gnome is a decent picture viewer), but running them on GNOME is an excersize in patience. There's really only one thing I liked about GNOME 2.6, the improved GTK+ save/open dialogue. This has long been needed in GTK+; it's a shame that the sluggishness of the desktop it was designed for and the idiocy of spatial nautilus overshadowed this important addition.
I've thought about this, and seen the way a lot of different people use their computers, and i've come to this conclusion why spatial mode is a really dumb thing to do. Spatial mode only helps you move or copy documents from one directory to another.
Users are basically divided into two groups: people who can find their files, and people who can't.
People who can find their files hate spatial nautilus because it just clutters up the screen without providing any real functionality. Sure it makes it easier to drag and drop files the few times you need to do it, but it makes navigation of the file system a complete bitch. These people don't want the hassel of working with twelve different windows.
People who can't find their files typically put every single one of their files regaurdless of content or file type into a single directory, "My Documents" or its equivilant. Since these people pretty much always save their files in this same place, they never benefiit from spatial nautlilus because they never have multiple places for their files. The only benefit of spatial mode is easier copying or moving of files from one directory to another, and since these people only use one directory, spatial mode means nothing to them.
businesses take [...] code that all people paid for, modify it, profit from selling the binaries of the derivative and (possibly) not disclosing their new source?
And this is a bad thing why? What is so inherently evil about businesses that they shouldn't be allowed to use a business model that uses some code developed by the government and then freely released to all? If they wish, they can take that public domain code, make changes, and release it GPL if they wish. You have the same option. Of course, the public domain code would always be public domain, and thus entirely free; nothing can change that.
The one and only purpose of the GPL is to ensure that derivative works (plugins, models and the like) get an open source license (in this case the GPL). Is netcat any less free because it's public domain? Is OpenBSD any less free because it's licensed under a BSD license that allows companies to make derivative works and indeed distribute the original code in a binary only license?
There's a half truth going around about the GPL being viral and somehow infecting code you don't want to. We all know that's bull, but it's based in this truth. If you want to base a product on GPL code, you have to release any of your additions and modifications under the GPL as well, meaning you are giving away your code to the public. That's the price you knowingly pay up front for using GPL code (thus it isn't viral since you choose to use the available code, but later don't want to pay the price).
If tas payers fund a government body that creates some code, why should they use a license that requires that anyone else release their changes freely? Did not those corporations that might want to use the code pay taxes as well? Public domain is the fairest way for everyone to play ball.
Well we don't exactly throw out the justice system because it's imperfect do we? Fact of the matter is sometimes some one is going to be wrongly convicted, so should we stop putting people in prison or taking their fingerprints because they might really be innocent?
People aren't thrown in jail because they are guilty, or kept out because they are innocent. People are punished under the law because a jury of their peers found them guilty in a (supposed to be) fair trial. Moreover, in America, criminal juries must reach a unanimous decision, else we have a mistrial and no verdict is found. It shouldn't be all that often that 12 jurers all reach the same guilty verdict concerning a man whom is innocent. I can't imagine coming up with a more fair system, or one more likely not to imprison innocent people (at the risk of letting guilty people go free).
Funnily, I don't seem to recall white, Christian BBS operators being rounded up at the time.
Funny, I don't seem to recall Christians in any country dancing in the streets and singing the praises of God when McVeigh blew up that building. Every group of people has a few nutcases, religions being no exception. It's what the group teaches and encourages that matters. If there's a group calling themselves Christian and encouraging people to go out and kill innocents in the name of God, I've no problem lumping them in with the Islamic terrorists; however, I will not lump all Christians nor all Muslims in that group, nor would I go around rounding up any and all Christians and Muslims.
From what I read of the article, the website this man worked on encouraged suicide bombing and other acts of terrorism. Note I have no read the site so I may be incorrect here (can't believe everything you read online you know). Whether you like the PATRIOT Act or not (I certainly don't), the fact is that it's the law of the land, and we have to abide by it. This law makes it illegal to offer expert advice to known terrorists. I'd say that's a good thing, one of the few I like of the PATRIOT Act. The trial is to determine if he violated this law, and the jury found that he did not violate this law, or rather, that his First Ammendment rights of free speech and/or freedom of the press trumped the PATRIOT Act's provision.
The Oklahoma City Bombing was a huge deal. They went around tracking down all kinds of people to determine their relationship and level of knowledge concerning the conspiracy. One thing i don't recall though, was a large scale of sympathy for McVeigh. I don't recall anyone in America running around saying that was a good thing and that we needed more bombers to fight back against the America government. If there had been plenty of those, I'm sure the government would have done something similar to what they've done here, and mind you, the outcome wasn't even all that bad.
Oh come on, you can come up with better drivel than that! You're not even thinking about it!
Picture this. A little boy is watching Barnie, and suddenly hard-core porn comes on. Or a little girl is watching Seasame Street and all of a sudden the scene switches to a raging gun battle where a guy's head gets blown off. I don't think you can blame people for being upset over that.
The Janet Jackson fiasco is the exact same way. People sat down to watch a sporting event that no one thought would be containing nudity. The little rating things in the corner of the screen don't say it includes nudity. At a football game you expect to see a football game and maybe hear some foul language that's kinda muffled. That's the worst anyone reasonably expects from a football game. Now all of a sudden it's halftime and there's an ugly chick with her tit hanging out. Totally inappropriate.
The FCC isn't saying you can't have any nudity on TV! Rather they are saying you put nudity on a TV show that millions of people around the world are watching without any warning that there might be objectionable material on this program. This is uncalled for, and you will pay a penalty. If you can't see the difference in that you're hopeless.
Good luck, I seriously hope you can pull it off. The problem with geeks is we can't ever agree on much of anything. We're all pretty much against insane copyright law, software patents, and companies raping the net, but beyond that you won't get any large number of geeks to agree on what to do about it, how to go about doing it even if they do agree, or what party to vote for.
Are you a paying member of the EFF? Do you write your Congressman as a member of any existing geek organization? Groups like the EFF have been around awhile. Why are they so under supported? If you've got answers to these questions, I've got ears to listen to 'em.
While not likely, it is entirely possible that some one else on your subnet had a misconfigured or spoofed MAC address that matched yours. This would create havoc on the transport layer. Ethernet doesn't go to an IP address, it goes to a MAC address. It only uses the IP address to determine what MAC it needs to send the packet to (either the destination, or a router in between).
Agreed. The OP was completely off-topic. We're talking about asteroids here, not nuclear weapons. Seems pretty clear to me he's just fishing for mod points from the overwhelmingly liberal audiance here on/.
Yes you can. The point is you can now easily do this with linux using a host of third party tools and native linux routing. No one ever said you couldn't do the same thing with windows or Mac OSX. Go back to your hole, troll.
Slashdot Mirror
While I agree with you on your carpal tunnel, heart desease, and eye problems, how exactly does sitting in a chair all day hurt your back more than doing physical labor 7 days a week?
As some one who's done both and still does, I can honestly say that white collar work is not nearly as demanding as blue collar once you weigh in the pros and cons of both. Honestly, when was the last time you heard of anyone ever dying on the job while coding from the working conditions? When was the last time you or a co-worker was hospitalized from an injury suffered on the job?
Point is, every job has its ups and downs; you have to find one thatyou personally enjoy. But white collar jobs tend to have more ups and fewer downs than blue collar. You'll have a damn hard time convincing me otherwise.
Dead on! Myself, I'm a network engineer and a hog farmer. I can't testify first-hand to what conditions were like in the late 90s for programmers, because at that time I was cutting all the pine trees off our property for pulp wood (everyone around us was getting pine beetles, so I figured if I was gonna loose the trees I might as well make some money off it). I think I averaged about $8 an hour for my work, after you count expenses for my saw, my truck, my trailor, my tractor, etc.
I'm also a born and raised hog farmer. Hearing some one bitch that he'll only make $35,000 this year as a programmer just strikes me as whining. What babies! If you want to talk about a market that's hit rock bottom, it's farming. These days, when I take a #1 hog to sale, I'm lucky to get $70 for it. It costs me just under $100 to raise one! This of course isn't sustainable. The few hogs I raise now are for personal consumption. The farrowing barn is empty.
Sometimes I wonder just how big a whimp these people are. They bitch and moan about poor working conditions in a cubicle that is both air conditioned, and quiet, all while other people in the world are slaving in the hot Georgia sun all day, digging ditches, cutting trees, raising cattle, paving roads, roofing houses, etc. Give me a break.
To begin with, that wasn't just any old man's funeral. That was a funeral for the former President of a country whom you are (suppossed) to be allied with. Attending a funeral is not going to improve anyone's political position, certainly not if they aren't invited to speak.
Imagine how the French or Germans would feel if President Bush was invited to attend a funeral for one of their great leaders, when he was already on European soil, and had no great matters to attend to. Hell, we're at war and President Bush attended the funeral. It took him away from things for pretty much the entire day I'm sure. I doubt it would have seriously inconveinced any of them to stay.
I guess the point I am trying to make is that paying respect for the dead, particularly of a man who had a great and positive effect on the entire world, may be seen by some cynics as a way to improve your social or political standing, but that the feelings of such cynics should not stop you from doing what is simply the right thing.
Oh really? From /etc/rc.d/rc.inet2...
From slashdot.org/Robots.txt
Disallow: article.pl
Have you ever used Slackware? Seriously. I've used about every distro out there, most of the SysV init, and I can honestly say that BSD init is much simpler, more intuitive, and as a result easier to use. In saying that SysV init has a startup script for everything you're neglecting that BSD init does too. Look at rc.samba, rc.httpd, rc.portmap, etc.
Basically SvsV init works by having an absolute ton of symbolic links to each startup script. Init checks each of these links to see if that service should be started in that runlevel or not, and in what order they should be started. Not only does this contribute to long startup time by having to seek all over the drive to find these files, it's hell on the user to track down everything.
Don't want mysql to startup on boot? In SysV init you mave to rename six symbolic links to begin with the leter "K", and possibly reorder them. In BSD init, you just remove the executable permission from rc.mysql.
Want to change the order that your startup scripts run in? In SysV init have to make these changes for numerous sym links in six different directories (one for each runlevel). In BSD init, you just open two text files (one for boot up and one for shutdown) and move the blocks of text to where you want them.
Bottom line, BSD init is much simpler on the sysadmin. The only advantages I've ever seen in SysV init are the ability to:
A) Have each runlevel start things in a different order (also easily manageable in BSD init, if not as straight forward), and:
B) Allow automagical setup tools to make changes in system initialization (something a control freak hates).
Technical reasons haven't worked so far, but the justice system in America has a shot of at least reducing the SPAM problem.
How do you ask?
$100 fine for every SPAM e-mail reported.
But how exactly are you suppossed to find out who sent the SPAM?
That's the beauty of it all. We don't fine the spammer, we fine the company who's product was advertised in the spam.
Of course this opens up the possibility of say, sending out a few million spams for Windows XP. That would mean you'd have to construct a careful audit of the company whom you were investigating for illegal advertising via spam.
It's not perfect, but a few major corporations (most likely porn companies) receiving a nasty audit that runs up several million in spam damages and maybe even some things they should have claimed on their taxes and didn't should intimidate others into not spamming.
nah, DNS won't be a problem at all! it's simple. Your DHCP server never assigns a default gateway, so none of the machines on the network have an entry in their routing table to get out. They'll query the only DNS server available, and immediately find they can't reach that website, and give the "destination unreachable" message.
Now, if you do want to redirect everyone to a webpage that explains what you're about, take a look at NoCatAuth. It can do exactly this.
SMP is also a security issue, a negative one. Implimenting secure SMP is not an easy thing to do IIUC. Making sure that processes access memory in a secure way on a multi processor machine is difficult.
Don't want to sound like sour grapes here, but what jack-ass modded a score 5 Insightful post down as "Overrated" after an opening like I gave? Whoever it is, I challenge you to log on anonymously and reply to this telling the Slashdot community exactly why that post was "overrated". Perhaps it's because you simply have a personal like for spatial nautlius and I stepped on your toes?
I think you misunderstand me. I'm not saying I couldn't come up with better ideas, just that I can't do them. Since I can't do them, I don't think I have much right to tell these guys (none of whom work for me or receive any direct benefit from me) how to do their job (or hobby as the case may be).
Well that depends of course. You may have a very large collection of many different types of music and thus need a directory structure to handle lots of things like that. Personally I'm going to give the guy a break here and assume that he thinks the file browser should understand that in the "My Music" folder it should assume all the files are music files and consult their ID3 tags. This would allow you to organize them by gennre, artist, etc without having a lot of deep directories.
That is pretty short sighted however. Checking the ID3 tags for 3000 songs is not going to be a quickly accomplished task no matter your system. The disk access time is just going to be too great.
Personally I have a /home/music directory (shared to a small group that don't all have access to my $HOME) that has two sub-directories in it, mp3/ and ogg/. I think it's obvious what's in those. Each of my files is named something like doc_watson-tom_dooley.ogg. I've got a list of the singer, and the song, and for me that's enough (I've only got three genres: country, western, and bluegrass).
I'm going to try to go easy on the GNOME developers here for the simple fact that I can't do a better job, largely because I don't code. I hate to run some one's name in the mud if I can't do any better, but it seems to me the GNOME developers have lost sight of what made people like GNOME.
Does anyone remember the reasons GNOME can to be? One of course was to provide a truly free linux desktop as an alternative to KDE. The other was to make a very powerful and configurable desktop. In the GNOME 1.x days you could configure anything you wanted (which sometimes got you into trouble of course). Replacing the window manager was as simple as clicking an option in the preferences dialog.
In those days a lot of people really liked GNOME. We liked it because it was fast, and it was leaner than KDE. You could run GNOME on pretty much any modern (P5 or better) machine and have a full DE that was usable. In those days, KDE was simply too slow to run on a lot of commodity hardware. These days hardware is cheaper, but GNOME runs like ass. In most cases I find that KDE is noticeably faster (can't offer empirical evidence other than to say that is my perception).
Somewhere around GNOME 2 the development philosophy changed. The developers seem to care more about making this really dumbed down you-can-only-do-it-this-way GUI in the mistaken idea that this will both attract newbies, and make things easier on them. In reality GNOME now loads in more time than it takes me to wait out the dog days of summer. If it isn't fast, nobody is going to use it, certainly not newbies, who don't have a personal attatchment to your program.
These days it seems to me like the only people running GNOME are doing so from plain inertia and/or dislike of KDE.
Myself? I run XFCE, which is GTK+ based. I like many of the GNOME apps (Galeon is the best browser and Abiword is just a straight up fast WYSIWYG word processor, Eye of Gnome is a decent picture viewer), but running them on GNOME is an excersize in patience. There's really only one thing I liked about GNOME 2.6, the improved GTK+ save/open dialogue. This has long been needed in GTK+; it's a shame that the sluggishness of the desktop it was designed for and the idiocy of spatial nautilus overshadowed this important addition.
Not to be contrary, but where exactly do you get at least 1,000,000,000,000 people?
I've decided to post this instead of mod.
I've thought about this, and seen the way a lot of different people use their computers, and i've come to this conclusion why spatial mode is a really dumb thing to do. Spatial mode only helps you move or copy documents from one directory to another.
Users are basically divided into two groups: people who can find their files, and people who can't.
People who can find their files hate spatial nautilus because it just clutters up the screen without providing any real functionality. Sure it makes it easier to drag and drop files the few times you need to do it, but it makes navigation of the file system a complete bitch. These people don't want the hassel of working with twelve different windows.
People who can't find their files typically put every single one of their files regaurdless of content or file type into a single directory, "My Documents" or its equivilant. Since these people pretty much always save their files in this same place, they never benefiit from spatial nautlilus because they never have multiple places for their files. The only benefit of spatial mode is easier copying or moving of files from one directory to another, and since these people only use one directory, spatial mode means nothing to them.
Yet another blind GPL fan boy.
And this is a bad thing why? What is so inherently evil about businesses that they shouldn't be allowed to use a business model that uses some code developed by the government and then freely released to all? If they wish, they can take that public domain code, make changes, and release it GPL if they wish. You have the same option. Of course, the public domain code would always be public domain, and thus entirely free; nothing can change that.
The one and only purpose of the GPL is to ensure that derivative works (plugins, models and the like) get an open source license (in this case the GPL). Is netcat any less free because it's public domain? Is OpenBSD any less free because it's licensed under a BSD license that allows companies to make derivative works and indeed distribute the original code in a binary only license?
There's a half truth going around about the GPL being viral and somehow infecting code you don't want to. We all know that's bull, but it's based in this truth. If you want to base a product on GPL code, you have to release any of your additions and modifications under the GPL as well, meaning you are giving away your code to the public. That's the price you knowingly pay up front for using GPL code (thus it isn't viral since you choose to use the available code, but later don't want to pay the price).
If tas payers fund a government body that creates some code, why should they use a license that requires that anyone else release their changes freely? Did not those corporations that might want to use the code pay taxes as well? Public domain is the fairest way for everyone to play ball.
Well we don't exactly throw out the justice system because it's imperfect do we? Fact of the matter is sometimes some one is going to be wrongly convicted, so should we stop putting people in prison or taking their fingerprints because they might really be innocent?
People aren't thrown in jail because they are guilty, or kept out because they are innocent. People are punished under the law because a jury of their peers found them guilty in a (supposed to be) fair trial. Moreover, in America, criminal juries must reach a unanimous decision, else we have a mistrial and no verdict is found. It shouldn't be all that often that 12 jurers all reach the same guilty verdict concerning a man whom is innocent. I can't imagine coming up with a more fair system, or one more likely not to imprison innocent people (at the risk of letting guilty people go free).
Funny, I don't seem to recall Christians in any country dancing in the streets and singing the praises of God when McVeigh blew up that building. Every group of people has a few nutcases, religions being no exception. It's what the group teaches and encourages that matters. If there's a group calling themselves Christian and encouraging people to go out and kill innocents in the name of God, I've no problem lumping them in with the Islamic terrorists; however, I will not lump all Christians nor all Muslims in that group, nor would I go around rounding up any and all Christians and Muslims.
From what I read of the article, the website this man worked on encouraged suicide bombing and other acts of terrorism. Note I have no read the site so I may be incorrect here (can't believe everything you read online you know). Whether you like the PATRIOT Act or not (I certainly don't), the fact is that it's the law of the land, and we have to abide by it. This law makes it illegal to offer expert advice to known terrorists. I'd say that's a good thing, one of the few I like of the PATRIOT Act. The trial is to determine if he violated this law, and the jury found that he did not violate this law, or rather, that his First Ammendment rights of free speech and/or freedom of the press trumped the PATRIOT Act's provision.
The Oklahoma City Bombing was a huge deal. They went around tracking down all kinds of people to determine their relationship and level of knowledge concerning the conspiracy. One thing i don't recall though, was a large scale of sympathy for McVeigh. I don't recall anyone in America running around saying that was a good thing and that we needed more bombers to fight back against the America government. If there had been plenty of those, I'm sure the government would have done something similar to what they've done here, and mind you, the outcome wasn't even all that bad.
Political and historical knowledge such as this is rare here on Slashdot. We need more of the same.
If you don't like it, don't watch it.
Oh come on, you can come up with better drivel than that! You're not even thinking about it!
Picture this. A little boy is watching Barnie, and suddenly hard-core porn comes on. Or a little girl is watching Seasame Street and all of a sudden the scene switches to a raging gun battle where a guy's head gets blown off. I don't think you can blame people for being upset over that.
The Janet Jackson fiasco is the exact same way. People sat down to watch a sporting event that no one thought would be containing nudity. The little rating things in the corner of the screen don't say it includes nudity. At a football game you expect to see a football game and maybe hear some foul language that's kinda muffled. That's the worst anyone reasonably expects from a football game. Now all of a sudden it's halftime and there's an ugly chick with her tit hanging out. Totally inappropriate.
The FCC isn't saying you can't have any nudity on TV! Rather they are saying you put nudity on a TV show that millions of people around the world are watching without any warning that there might be objectionable material on this program. This is uncalled for, and you will pay a penalty. If you can't see the difference in that you're hopeless.
Good luck, I seriously hope you can pull it off. The problem with geeks is we can't ever agree on much of anything. We're all pretty much against insane copyright law, software patents, and companies raping the net, but beyond that you won't get any large number of geeks to agree on what to do about it, how to go about doing it even if they do agree, or what party to vote for.
Are you a paying member of the EFF? Do you write your Congressman as a member of any existing geek organization? Groups like the EFF have been around awhile. Why are they so under supported? If you've got answers to these questions, I've got ears to listen to 'em.
While not likely, it is entirely possible that some one else on your subnet had a misconfigured or spoofed MAC address that matched yours. This would create havoc on the transport layer. Ethernet doesn't go to an IP address, it goes to a MAC address. It only uses the IP address to determine what MAC it needs to send the packet to (either the destination, or a router in between).
Agreed. The OP was completely off-topic. We're talking about asteroids here, not nuclear weapons. Seems pretty clear to me he's just fishing for mod points from the overwhelmingly liberal audiance here on /.
Yes you can. The point is you can now easily do this with linux using a host of third party tools and native linux routing. No one ever said you couldn't do the same thing with windows or Mac OSX. Go back to your hole, troll.