Well, if they're in range, it shouldn't be hard to find someone engaging in commercial "bluejacking", so we can beat the crap out of them in front of everyone.
Or is it the removal of testicles that we're out for? I can never remember what the punishment for spamming is...
What are you using it for? If it's just a firewall, it doesn't need SSH, Apache, sendmail, BIND, or anything else like that. If you're using it for a firewall, it needs nothing at all.
Everything has holes, because humans are falliable. Linux's holes are known, because we can at least look over the source and find them.
If you're going to put up a firewall, there are instructions available to remove everything you don't need. I suggest that you read them.
Besides, Linux "out of the box" is definitely more secure that Microsoft's OSes out of the box...
"SCO has essentially stipulated that they operate outside GPL; this newest action seems insignificant to me."
It does serve one very important distinction though. They are being overt, rather than covert or grey about it. This goes from being an incidental violation of the rules to a flagrant violation, which can change the way that their actions are interpretted in court if a case were to reach a damages ruling. It's one thing to accidently break the rules, or to not really follow them but keep your mouth shut, it's another to make a strong point of breaking the rules such that you force everyone to see it.
You're confusing Caldera Software for the Santa Cruz Operation. Xenix was written by the Santa Cruz Operation, or whatever they were called, back before that company as it was ceased to exist. Caldera is using a "doing business as" filing to operate as SCO.
It's one thing to experiment and end up going somewhere with it accidently, and it's another thing to research such directions in order to make vaccines and better treatments if one fears that one's enemies will attack with such, but creating something like this just seems stupid. Even if this particular agent doesn't strike humans, what's to say that the next one won't be capable?
We've use two nuclear weapons in the course of history, and we've never needed to use them again. I don't want us to use something worse. This definitely strikes me as worse, and a lot harder to store safely than even all of the nuclear weapons that we have.
Thing is, when one is hired, there is all kinds of paperwork to sign, at least one of which is some form of non-disclosure agreement. Usually things like what the company is doing are part of that. So, the guy even really talking about the purchase of a volume of Apple's computers could be interpretted quite easily as violating such an NDA. Adding a picture compounds matters.
When I worked in the corporate sector, my weblog had no mentioning of what I did at work, short of the kind of work that I did, which was QA testing. I didn't go into the workings of the products, or even the results of my QA testing. That was something that a competitor could theoretically use.
More like, 100% of the people who hear about the story are either Slashdotters who already hate Microsoft, or Apple nuts, who already hate Microsoft. Honestly, I don't really see what Microsoft did wrong in this particular instance. If the knowledge of them posessing the Apples is what the company took exception to having had spread, then they are within their rights to terminate someone who doesn't maintain company secrets.
I don't exactly care for Redmond's largest company myself, but for a change this is a reasonable business practice.
It also depends on what you collide with, though. Remember, most racing accidents are not perpendicular crashes. If they're into the wall, they're usually at an extreme angle, which is part of why it takes them a quarter of the track to stop. Even if they strike other cars first, they're all moving in approximately the same direction and speed, so the effects aren't nearly as extreme as could be with the available speeds.
That freeway that one may be driving 75 MPH on is designed as well as it could be, for the costs involved. There are still barriers that can be struck head on, barriers that do not move when collided with. Walls. Foliage. Signposts. These things do not cause the car to simply slow down a little and change direction, they cause the car to crush itself severely or tear apart. I don't care how well your car's passenger compartment is designed, striking a freeway pole at 75 MPH in a new car would be worse than in an older one, since the older one weighs more and will exert more force upon the pole, maybe even shearing the pole, while the new car will just crush or break apart.
New cars are designed to hit new cars. They're not designed to hit walls, pillars, or trees with more than moderate force. They're not designed to hit semi trucks. They're not designed to hit older cars. Thing is, we still have semi trucks, poles, walls, trees, and older cars out there to contend with.
A friend of mine was T-boned in her '70s Buick Riviera by some schmuck in a late model Accord. She walked away. Half of his car was found on the other side of hers. It did total her car, and she did have some minor injuries, but he had to be secured to a stretcher. He hit her on the driver's side, by the way, and the back half of his car tore free and flew over the top of hers to land on the other side. If the Riviera hadn't had it's pillared side caved in, I'd have recommended she have it fixed. I heard that she bought a Monte Carlo of the same era, probably trusting the mass to do a better job of keeping her alive than any crumple zone would.
power grid...
highway bridges...
railroads...
inland fuel delivery...
Probably countless others as well. Remember that barge/I-80 collision not too long ago? Imagine if that happened on a particularly busy holiday weekend. It wouldn't have the live coverage of an urban attack, but coordinated attacks on major interstate bridges would have quite an effect, since we rely on these bridges to get around. It would certainly affect trucking, which moves a good chunk of the goods that we use daily.
The recent problems with the fuel delivery pipeline to Phoenix proved that fuel delivery is very vulnerable to problems. People were panicking over it. They were attempting to fill every container they had with extra fuel, and if people had just kept buying gas like they normally had it probably wouldn't have been a problem. The populace itself caused the problem.
Railroads also do a lot of our long haul goods delivery, and I would imagine that it wouldn't be hard for that to be a problem. Heck, one person could probably drive around with the right tools, yanking spikes out of railroad ties, and cause a large scale catastrophie. We do send sensor cars over the railroad lines from time to time, but how long would it take for this to be a problem?
Much of our society is built on the honor system, assuming that people won't engage in civil disobedience. Also, we have rather severe penalties for those who break these pieces of infrastructure. Trouble is, terrorists have shown that they aren't concerned about personal ramifications. We'll just have to wait and see.
It's led to body movement several times recently, as people have come upon the latest SCO story and laughed so hard that they had to get up off of the floor, back into their chairs...
That, or they've become so annoyed that they've actually gone outside to do something.
There would have been nothing wrong with bluetooth
on
Is Bluetooth Dead?
·
· Score: 1
... if the devices that came out to use it had been cheap enough to catch on. But, with a mouse for laptop users coming in at $60, one can see why it didn't catch on. I would have really appreciated to have wireless connectivity for my laptop peripherals, but due to the potential for losing the devices, I'm not going to shell out that much money for it. The wire itself helps with security; it keeps things attached.
If bluetooth had been more widely supplied stock on desktop computers, and in cameras, PDAs, and the like, it might have made a difference. Again, I'm not going to pay $50 for a 'bluetooth base station' for the one or two bluetooth devices that I can find if I can just use USB, even with the cable mess, and maybe only have to buy a cheap USB hub.
If everything had adopted it within a year, or had inexpensive optional upgrades for it, I don't think we'd be discussing it's abandonment now.
"He was just trying to show that Linux is, in fact, just a human being."
As opposed to what? a set of conjoined twins? Someone with Parkinson's Disease?
I've never really understood the "<insert celebrity name here>'s my god" mentality. Yeah, Brent Spiner might have done a good job acting the part of Lt. Commander Data, or Mick Jagger might do a great job performing live, but other than seeing "stars" that are full of themselves, I don't see the reason for the groupieness.
David Andrews is friends with one of my friends' fathers, they invited me along to dinner once with them while he was in town. He's a cool guy to chat with, but he didn't come across as someone full of himself or looking to be instantly recognized everywhere. At another point, I met Newt Gingrich in a Denny's in Tempe, AZ, where he went to get a quiet meal apparently while taking a break from some convention that he was speaking at. He probably went to Denny's, of all places, to avoid getting into some dumb debate with lawyer-yuppies who tend to hang around the more expensive restaurants. The room wasn't noticeably affected by his presence.
Actors, Musicians, Politicians, and the like are just people. The only real difference is that they've done something or been somewhere at the right time to make news. I think that people who go out of their way to remain in the news even when they've done nothing to merit it are the most pathetic types out there. This is why Torvalds is cool. Because he doesn't come across as attempting to live to make headlines, actions of his that actually have ramifications make news.
My electric bill differences were much greater, but live in a desert, had several extraneous machines on, and was using triplehead xinerama on three older 17" monitors. At this point I'm down to my firewall, fileserver, and a friend's colocated computer as the machines that are always on, and I use my laptop for my computing. The electric bill has dropped about a third.
I can see why colocation facilities are popular, and if I had reliable enough hardware I'd probably do something like that too.
People are already beginning to become concerned with KaZaA's legality in light of the recent problems with the RIAA, and many are finding new filesharing networks. If they used Napster and figured out how to find KaZaA, they'll be able to find another like freenet or BitTorrent or something new that doesn't publish IP addresses, and the whole situation will start over again.
Once you give something to the public, taking it away isn't very practical, especially when the technical ability to 'give back' something that has been taken away exists among many talented people. It might not have been legitimate to start the initial P2P network sharing of music (though I'm not here to debate ethics), but it's been done, has been widely adopted, and is seen positively by music consumers. It's not going to go away when fifty million people want it.
If the RIAA wants to do something useful to preserve profit, they should provide lower quality versions of the tunes available for download. Three things that could be beneficial/changing for this:
It'll give people something to download and listen to, if their reason for being on P2P networks is to preview music before contemplating buying it. They get to hear it, and they might be willing to spend their hard-earned money for a better copy.
It'll put lots and lots of poorer quality mp3s on the filesharing networks, making piracy of the CD rips more difficult. If you can't download it and you really want it, buy it.
Lowering the price of CDs will cause consumers to actually preview and buy music "legitimately", rather than relying solely on mp3 downloads which can be awkward to play in cars and on larger stereos without a computer connection. Not everyone knows how to take mp3s and turn them into CDs.
The RIAA doesn't seem interested in doing this though, so the situation will continue in perpituity.
... but you can reasonably expect to sit down and have a beer with him after work if you're in the right city. Can you say the same about numbers one through four?
It's nice having people in the upper-levels of Linux kernel development who actually read and post to mailing lists...
...is that the FCC doesn't have to deal with "prevention of free speech", because the telephone is a regulated medium. The FCC can state that the telemarketting firms are not allowed to call people who are paying for telephone lines since the people didn't obtain their phone lines for someone else to use, but for they themselves to use. So, since the telemarketting firm isn't paying for the phone line, they can't legally call on it for unsolicited business purposes.
As far as "Free Speech" goes, they are fully entitled to get a billboard, print a publication, run an ad in a magazine or newspaper, the act of presentation isn't being stopped. The medium is already regulated and has been since inception.
"post a rant on slashdot. It's well known that the RIAA, MPAA, Microsoft, SCO, etc. read weblogs to find out what uninformed 12 year olds think of them, and change business practices accordingly."
So some twelve year old girl's rant about not having any boobs yet is what prompted the music industry to get Britney Spears a breast enlargement back in 1997 or so? Sheesh...
Slashdot Mirror
Well, if they're in range, it shouldn't be hard to find someone engaging in commercial "bluejacking", so we can beat the crap out of them in front of everyone.
Or is it the removal of testicles that we're out for? I can never remember what the punishment for spamming is...
What are you using it for? If it's just a firewall, it doesn't need SSH, Apache, sendmail, BIND, or anything else like that. If you're using it for a firewall, it needs nothing at all.
Everything has holes, because humans are falliable. Linux's holes are known, because we can at least look over the source and find them. If you're going to put up a firewall, there are instructions available to remove everything you don't need. I suggest that you read them.
Besides, Linux "out of the box" is definitely more secure that Microsoft's OSes out of the box...
"SCO has essentially stipulated that they operate outside GPL; this newest action seems insignificant to me."
It does serve one very important distinction though. They are being overt, rather than covert or grey about it. This goes from being an incidental violation of the rules to a flagrant violation, which can change the way that their actions are interpretted in court if a case were to reach a damages ruling. It's one thing to accidently break the rules, or to not really follow them but keep your mouth shut, it's another to make a strong point of breaking the rules such that you force everyone to see it.
You're confusing Caldera Software for the Santa Cruz Operation. Xenix was written by the Santa Cruz Operation, or whatever they were called, back before that company as it was ceased to exist. Caldera is using a "doing business as" filing to operate as SCO.
SCOX at Yahoo! Finance
That's where I look at it, anyway. The pretty pictures make it easy.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=SCOX&t=5d&l=on&z=m &q=l&c=">SCOX at Yahoo! Finance
That's where I look at it, anyway. The pretty pictures make it easy.
But, those contracts are specifically designed to work with copyright law. Thus as such, they're copyright enforcement.
It's one thing to experiment and end up going somewhere with it accidently, and it's another thing to research such directions in order to make vaccines and better treatments if one fears that one's enemies will attack with such, but creating something like this just seems stupid. Even if this particular agent doesn't strike humans, what's to say that the next one won't be capable?
We've use two nuclear weapons in the course of history, and we've never needed to use them again. I don't want us to use something worse. This definitely strikes me as worse, and a lot harder to store safely than even all of the nuclear weapons that we have.
Thing is, when one is hired, there is all kinds of paperwork to sign, at least one of which is some form of non-disclosure agreement. Usually things like what the company is doing are part of that. So, the guy even really talking about the purchase of a volume of Apple's computers could be interpretted quite easily as violating such an NDA. Adding a picture compounds matters.
When I worked in the corporate sector, my weblog had no mentioning of what I did at work, short of the kind of work that I did, which was QA testing. I didn't go into the workings of the products, or even the results of my QA testing. That was something that a competitor could theoretically use.
More like, 100% of the people who hear about the story are either Slashdotters who already hate Microsoft, or Apple nuts, who already hate Microsoft. Honestly, I don't really see what Microsoft did wrong in this particular instance. If the knowledge of them posessing the Apples is what the company took exception to having had spread, then they are within their rights to terminate someone who doesn't maintain company secrets.
I don't exactly care for Redmond's largest company myself, but for a change this is a reasonable business practice.
It also depends on what you collide with, though. Remember, most racing accidents are not perpendicular crashes. If they're into the wall, they're usually at an extreme angle, which is part of why it takes them a quarter of the track to stop. Even if they strike other cars first, they're all moving in approximately the same direction and speed, so the effects aren't nearly as extreme as could be with the available speeds.
That freeway that one may be driving 75 MPH on is designed as well as it could be, for the costs involved. There are still barriers that can be struck head on, barriers that do not move when collided with. Walls. Foliage. Signposts. These things do not cause the car to simply slow down a little and change direction, they cause the car to crush itself severely or tear apart. I don't care how well your car's passenger compartment is designed, striking a freeway pole at 75 MPH in a new car would be worse than in an older one, since the older one weighs more and will exert more force upon the pole, maybe even shearing the pole, while the new car will just crush or break apart.
New cars are designed to hit new cars. They're not designed to hit walls, pillars, or trees with more than moderate force. They're not designed to hit semi trucks. They're not designed to hit older cars. Thing is, we still have semi trucks, poles, walls, trees, and older cars out there to contend with.
A friend of mine was T-boned in her '70s Buick Riviera by some schmuck in a late model Accord. She walked away. Half of his car was found on the other side of hers. It did total her car, and she did have some minor injuries, but he had to be secured to a stretcher. He hit her on the driver's side, by the way, and the back half of his car tore free and flew over the top of hers to land on the other side. If the Riviera hadn't had it's pillared side caved in, I'd have recommended she have it fixed. I heard that she bought a Monte Carlo of the same era, probably trusting the mass to do a better job of keeping her alive than any crumple zone would.
"Sex is not a precondition to satisfaction."
Oh yeah? As Mick Jagger about that one, he'll have a different answer for you...
power grid...
highway bridges...
railroads...
inland fuel delivery...
Probably countless others as well. Remember that barge/I-80 collision not too long ago? Imagine if that happened on a particularly busy holiday weekend. It wouldn't have the live coverage of an urban attack, but coordinated attacks on major interstate bridges would have quite an effect, since we rely on these bridges to get around. It would certainly affect trucking, which moves a good chunk of the goods that we use daily.
The recent problems with the fuel delivery pipeline to Phoenix proved that fuel delivery is very vulnerable to problems. People were panicking over it. They were attempting to fill every container they had with extra fuel, and if people had just kept buying gas like they normally had it probably wouldn't have been a problem. The populace itself caused the problem.
Railroads also do a lot of our long haul goods delivery, and I would imagine that it wouldn't be hard for that to be a problem. Heck, one person could probably drive around with the right tools, yanking spikes out of railroad ties, and cause a large scale catastrophie. We do send sensor cars over the railroad lines from time to time, but how long would it take for this to be a problem?
Much of our society is built on the honor system, assuming that people won't engage in civil disobedience. Also, we have rather severe penalties for those who break these pieces of infrastructure. Trouble is, terrorists have shown that they aren't concerned about personal ramifications. We'll just have to wait and see.
It's led to body movement several times recently, as people have come upon the latest SCO story and laughed so hard that they had to get up off of the floor, back into their chairs...
That, or they've become so annoyed that they've actually gone outside to do something.
There are some starving children in China that could have made use of that unused insult potential!
"As opposed to geekidolrockstargod."
Buckaroo Bonzai surrenders...
*grin*
... if the devices that came out to use it had been cheap enough to catch on. But, with a mouse for laptop users coming in at $60, one can see why it didn't catch on. I would have really appreciated to have wireless connectivity for my laptop peripherals, but due to the potential for losing the devices, I'm not going to shell out that much money for it. The wire itself helps with security; it keeps things attached.
If bluetooth had been more widely supplied stock on desktop computers, and in cameras, PDAs, and the like, it might have made a difference. Again, I'm not going to pay $50 for a 'bluetooth base station' for the one or two bluetooth devices that I can find if I can just use USB, even with the cable mess, and maybe only have to buy a cheap USB hub.
If everything had adopted it within a year, or had inexpensive optional upgrades for it, I don't think we'd be discussing it's abandonment now.
"He was just trying to show that Linux is, in fact, just a human being."
As opposed to what? a set of conjoined twins? Someone with Parkinson's Disease?
I've never really understood the "<insert celebrity name here>'s my god" mentality. Yeah, Brent Spiner might have done a good job acting the part of Lt. Commander Data, or Mick Jagger might do a great job performing live, but other than seeing "stars" that are full of themselves, I don't see the reason for the groupieness.
David Andrews is friends with one of my friends' fathers, they invited me along to dinner once with them while he was in town. He's a cool guy to chat with, but he didn't come across as someone full of himself or looking to be instantly recognized everywhere. At another point, I met Newt Gingrich in a Denny's in Tempe, AZ, where he went to get a quiet meal apparently while taking a break from some convention that he was speaking at. He probably went to Denny's, of all places, to avoid getting into some dumb debate with lawyer-yuppies who tend to hang around the more expensive restaurants. The room wasn't noticeably affected by his presence.
Actors, Musicians, Politicians, and the like are just people. The only real difference is that they've done something or been somewhere at the right time to make news. I think that people who go out of their way to remain in the news even when they've done nothing to merit it are the most pathetic types out there. This is why Torvalds is cool. Because he doesn't come across as attempting to live to make headlines, actions of his that actually have ramifications make news.
My electric bill differences were much greater, but live in a desert, had several extraneous machines on, and was using triplehead xinerama on three older 17" monitors. At this point I'm down to my firewall, fileserver, and a friend's colocated computer as the machines that are always on, and I use my laptop for my computing. The electric bill has dropped about a third.
I can see why colocation facilities are popular, and if I had reliable enough hardware I'd probably do something like that too.
Once you give something to the public, taking it away isn't very practical, especially when the technical ability to 'give back' something that has been taken away exists among many talented people. It might not have been legitimate to start the initial P2P network sharing of music (though I'm not here to debate ethics), but it's been done, has been widely adopted, and is seen positively by music consumers. It's not going to go away when fifty million people want it.
If the RIAA wants to do something useful to preserve profit, they should provide lower quality versions of the tunes available for download. Three things that could be beneficial/changing for this:
- It'll give people something to download and listen to, if their reason for being on P2P networks is to preview music before contemplating buying it. They get to hear it, and they might be willing to spend their hard-earned money for a better copy.
- It'll put lots and lots of poorer quality mp3s on the filesharing networks, making piracy of the CD rips more difficult. If you can't download it and you really want it, buy it.
- Lowering the price of CDs will cause consumers to actually preview and buy music "legitimately", rather than relying solely on mp3 downloads which can be awkward to play in cars and on larger stereos without a computer connection. Not everyone knows how to take mp3s and turn them into CDs.
The RIAA doesn't seem interested in doing this though, so the situation will continue in perpituity.... but you can reasonably expect to sit down and have a beer with him after work if you're in the right city. Can you say the same about numbers one through four?
It's nice having people in the upper-levels of Linux kernel development who actually read and post to mailing lists...
- PDA
- watch
- USB memory device
- laser pointer
- pocket knife
- screwdriver
- pocket-multimeter
- television remote
Just pointing out some possible exceptions..."Damn those AC karma whores..."
Ah, give 'em a break. After being modded down -1 Troll eighty thousand times, one post getting modded up isn't a biggie... *g*
...is that the FCC doesn't have to deal with "prevention of free speech", because the telephone is a regulated medium. The FCC can state that the telemarketting firms are not allowed to call people who are paying for telephone lines since the people didn't obtain their phone lines for someone else to use, but for they themselves to use. So, since the telemarketting firm isn't paying for the phone line, they can't legally call on it for unsolicited business purposes.
As far as "Free Speech" goes, they are fully entitled to get a billboard, print a publication, run an ad in a magazine or newspaper, the act of presentation isn't being stopped. The medium is already regulated and has been since inception.
"post a rant on slashdot. It's well known that the RIAA, MPAA, Microsoft, SCO, etc. read weblogs to find out what uninformed 12 year olds think of them, and change business practices accordingly."
So some twelve year old girl's rant about not having any boobs yet is what prompted the music industry to get Britney Spears a breast enlargement back in 1997 or so? Sheesh...