Maybe you're just a home user and the entire scenario and this discussion doesn't apply to you.
Yes, I am a home user, and almost every thing I've got running is from my distro's repositories. However, I'm interested in the subject, and pay attention to what's going on. Sooner or later, I'm sure, there will be dangerous Linux malware in the wild, and I'll have to take precautions, and I'll want to be aware of it when the time comes. For right now, however, a home Linux box without any anti-virus is at least as safe as a Windows box that's got up-to-date anti-virus software running on it.
I have yet (in over a decade of tending windows and NT servers) had a single machine get infected.
A record to be proud of, indeed. Over that decade, how much time would you say you've spent installing, configuring and updating anti-virus and anti-malware software? I ask because I run Linux, and for me, the answer is "none."
Yes, but that's from a third party, not Fedora itself. Is there the equivalent for any other distro? I'm not saying there isn't, because I've not researched it.
NO other security-conscious application these days dares to publish anything but the latest security-patched version.
I, on the other hand, am inclined to think otherwise.
I don't think that anybody in their right mind would call Fedora Linux lacking in security, but if you were to download the install DVD for Fedora 11, the latest version, what you'd get is exactly what you'd have downloaded on the first day it was available. Then, after installation, you'd have to download all the updates needed to bring your system up to date. How is this different from what Microsoft does?
As others have posted, scams have been around for as long as there's been commerce. All this is, really, is more proof that P.T. Barnum was right: there's a sucker born every minute, and two to take him.
So do I. And our four cats combined have a smaller carbon footprint than one environmentalist. If we're really serious about reducing CO2 by getting rid of redundant organisms, I know what I'd be getting rid of...
Interesting. I did a bit of research (both on my box and on the net) and found nothing to substantiate this. However, when I tested it, it worked. Thank you. Live and learn...
Next time you go into your shell and do "sudo su - "
ROTFLMAO! You do realize, don't you, how redundant that is? If you have access to the root password (needed for "su -") there's no reason in the world for you to be using sudo. And, even if you did want to use sudo, why would you use it to switch user to root? Talk about doing things the hard way!
I think not. The OP didn't call anybody a nazi, or compare somebody to Hitler. He just pointed out how a nazi would probably view a video game based on WW II in Europe.
I was referring to the Station Fire only, because that's the one and only fire I mentioned. It didn't just happen, it was set, so you could reasonably consider its output man made if you want, and I wanted to make sure I understood you. Just to make sure there's no more misunderstanding, let me ask you this: do you consider the CO2 from a wild fire, brush fire or forest fire to be man made if the fire was caused by arson.
Let me get this right, because I ask of the fire was started by humans that means I believe all fires are started by humans?
No, of course it doesn't and I never said that it did. I was referring specifically to the Station Fire, which was, in fact, caused by arson. Part of the problem in Southern California, BTW, is the way brush-covered hills and mountains are found in the middle of major cities. Even if local residents don't oppose much-needed controlled burns, planning them and executing them safely is quite tricky. Not only that, clearing dead brush from public land is very expensive, and often gets neglected, especially when budgets are running out of money.
So let me get this straight: you feel that because it was caused by arson, all of the CO2 is human generated? OK, if that's how you feel, I'm not going to argue the point; after all, there are enough fires every year that aren't man-made spewing out at least as much CO2 overall as the Station Fire did. I used this one as an example only because I remember hearing the estimates at the time.
I don't know about anybody else, but I wasn't thinking in terms of dikes between islands; as you write, it's not exactly practical. I was thinking more in terms of seawalls around the islands they have. Done properly, basing them just off-shore (currently) you don't lose any of your land area, you gain slightly, and it's not that hard to raise them higher if needed.
There were reports at the time, that the recent Station Fire (the one that threatened Mount Wilson Observatory) put our more CO2 every two to three days as all the cars in the US do in a year. Of course, the AGW people either ignore or deny this because it doesn't fit their dogma.
The only case where you need these relays is if the Sun is between Mars and Earth (or close enough to a direct line to make a hash of radio communications between Mars and Earth)
The idea isn't exactly new, you know. George O. Smith wrote a series of stories about a relay station in the L4 point of Venus, The Venus Equilateral series, back in the '40s. It was a communications hub for the entire Solar System, and a hotbed of technological innovation. Great stories, still worth reading.
Why do people pine for this mythical "good old days" before all that pesky modern technology?
I don't, and not just because if we did, I'd be dead. If you'll read my post (and the one I'm replying to) you'll see that the OP was assuming that the straw couldn't be produced, harvested and transported without the use of fossil fuel, and I was pointing out that his assumption just isn't true.
3) I'd *imagine* that straw has a pretty good ratio of fossil fuels in -> energy out, but there still is going to be some input.
Why? If they're that determined to be self-sufficient, they can use horses instead of tractors on their farms. No need of fossil fuel at all if that's the way they go.
However, it is too dim to see with the naked eye (maybe just a splotch in a very dark sky).
Actually, a little research shows that its apparent magnitude is +4.4, making it easily visible on a clear night. In fact, it's one of the most distant objects bright enough to be a naked eye object. (I'd thought it the furthest, but apparently not; if anybody knows the actual record holder for this, I'd like to know.)
Problem with that is, I think it'll go up more than just a little, and we diabetics might be encouraged to use diet and exercise to moderate our blood sugar, or a different med altogether.
Don't care if it does, because I get mine from the VA, and I doubt they're going to charge more. And, I might add, sooner or later they'll admit that my Type II is related to the time I spent in Tonkin Gulf back in '72 (Agent Orange, anyone?) making it Service Connected, and all my meds and testing supplies will be free, just like my hearing aids and batteries are.
According to his latest column, he's tried it, but it's hard to say, as the issue is intermittent at best. He's thanked me, and I thank you because turning off a service you don't need can't hurt.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I am a home user, and almost every thing I've got running is from my distro's repositories. However, I'm interested in the subject, and pay attention to what's going on. Sooner or later, I'm sure, there will be dangerous Linux malware in the wild, and I'll have to take precautions, and I'll want to be aware of it when the time comes. For right now, however, a home Linux box without any anti-virus is at least as safe as a Windows box that's got up-to-date anti-virus software running on it.
A record to be proud of, indeed. Over that decade, how much time would you say you've spent installing, configuring and updating anti-virus and anti-malware software? I ask because I run Linux, and for me, the answer is "none."
Yes, but that's from a third party, not Fedora itself. Is there the equivalent for any other distro? I'm not saying there isn't, because I've not researched it.
I, on the other hand, am inclined to think otherwise.
I don't think that anybody in their right mind would call Fedora Linux lacking in security, but if you were to download the install DVD for Fedora 11, the latest version, what you'd get is exactly what you'd have downloaded on the first day it was available. Then, after installation, you'd have to download all the updates needed to bring your system up to date. How is this different from what Microsoft does?
As others have posted, scams have been around for as long as there's been commerce. All this is, really, is more proof that P.T. Barnum was right: there's a sucker born every minute, and two to take him.
So do I. And our four cats combined have a smaller carbon footprint than one environmentalist. If we're really serious about reducing CO2 by getting rid of redundant organisms, I know what I'd be getting rid of...
Interesting. I did a bit of research (both on my box and on the net) and found nothing to substantiate this. However, when I tested it, it worked. Thank you. Live and learn...
I tried, but got this:
bash: apt-get: command not found
AFAICT, Fedora 10 doesn't come with apt-get.
I think the above is the most fascinating typo I've seen in a long time. You are to be congratulated, sir.
ROTFLMAO! You do realize, don't you, how redundant that is? If you have access to the root password (needed for "su -") there's no reason in the world for you to be using sudo. And, even if you did want to use sudo, why would you use it to switch user to root? Talk about doing things the hard way!
I think not. The OP didn't call anybody a nazi, or compare somebody to Hitler. He just pointed out how a nazi would probably view a video game based on WW II in Europe.
I was referring to the Station Fire only, because that's the one and only fire I mentioned. It didn't just happen, it was set, so you could reasonably consider its output man made if you want, and I wanted to make sure I understood you. Just to make sure there's no more misunderstanding, let me ask you this: do you consider the CO2 from a wild fire, brush fire or forest fire to be man made if the fire was caused by arson.
No, of course it doesn't and I never said that it did. I was referring specifically to the Station Fire, which was, in fact, caused by arson. Part of the problem in Southern California, BTW, is the way brush-covered hills and mountains are found in the middle of major cities. Even if local residents don't oppose much-needed controlled burns, planning them and executing them safely is quite tricky. Not only that, clearing dead brush from public land is very expensive, and often gets neglected, especially when budgets are running out of money.
So let me get this straight: you feel that because it was caused by arson, all of the CO2 is human generated? OK, if that's how you feel, I'm not going to argue the point; after all, there are enough fires every year that aren't man-made spewing out at least as much CO2 overall as the Station Fire did. I used this one as an example only because I remember hearing the estimates at the time.
I don't know about anybody else, but I wasn't thinking in terms of dikes between islands; as you write, it's not exactly practical. I was thinking more in terms of seawalls around the islands they have. Done properly, basing them just off-shore (currently) you don't lose any of your land area, you gain slightly, and it's not that hard to raise them higher if needed.
There were reports at the time, that the recent Station Fire (the one that threatened Mount Wilson Observatory) put our more CO2 every two to three days as all the cars in the US do in a year. Of course, the AGW people either ignore or deny this because it doesn't fit their dogma.
The idea isn't exactly new, you know. George O. Smith wrote a series of stories about a relay station in the L4 point of Venus, The Venus Equilateral series, back in the '40s. It was a communications hub for the entire Solar System, and a hotbed of technological innovation. Great stories, still worth reading.
I don't, and not just because if we did, I'd be dead. If you'll read my post (and the one I'm replying to) you'll see that the OP was assuming that the straw couldn't be produced, harvested and transported without the use of fossil fuel, and I was pointing out that his assumption just isn't true.
Why? If they're that determined to be self-sufficient, they can use horses instead of tractors on their farms. No need of fossil fuel at all if that's the way they go.
That's right! There's noth8ing worse than naked pervs sitting in front of their computers watching surveillance tapes.
Actually, a little research shows that its apparent magnitude is +4.4, making it easily visible on a clear night. In fact, it's one of the most distant objects bright enough to be a naked eye object. (I'd thought it the furthest, but apparently not; if anybody knows the actual record holder for this, I'd like to know.)
OK, wise guy, what caused the Early Medieval Warm?
Don't care if it does, because I get mine from the VA, and I doubt they're going to charge more. And, I might add, sooner or later they'll admit that my Type II is related to the time I spent in Tonkin Gulf back in '72 (Agent Orange, anyone?) making it Service Connected, and all my meds and testing supplies will be free, just like my hearing aids and batteries are.
According to his latest column, he's tried it, but it's hard to say, as the issue is intermittent at best. He's thanked me, and I thank you because turning off a service you don't need can't hurt.