With 8 characters, you have over 20 million possibilities.. However, realistically memorable phrases under 8 characters is considerably less. Further, ones that fit a theme even more so..
Find a fiction element (movie, tv show, book, musician, songs, etc), and use character or element names from it.
Examples that easily scale to 4000 devices:
- Star wars: At an ISP I worked at, we used Star Wars. All Windows machines were named after elements from the Empire (of course), and all unixy systems were from the Rebels. Destroyer, AT-AT, Yoda, Obi, Dagobah, etc. There are literally tens of thousands of elements in the Star Wars universe to choose from.
- The Simpsons: At an unnamed enterprise class wireless provider, this is the de-facto naming convention. It truly has a limitless number of elements, with element combinations like lisassax (lisa's sax). Couple that with phrases "haveacow", and events "shotbrns"..
- Books by Stephen King: There just isnt a more prolific, and well known horror writer. Again, the elements make the naming convention robust.
As to your idea of including the function of the device, consider:
- Easier for bad guys to target which systems to attack - New recruits will STILL have the learning curve (ns is obviously name serving, and db is obviously database, but who would guess that ae is auth database because ad was taken by active directory!!) - Learning what each server is/does is BETTER for new admins anyways. Jumping in is not always a great thing, and having a solid memory connection to a server is DEEPLY helpful.
These are just based on my experience after 5 years in the industry. Personally, I name computers based on Piers Anthony's "Incarnations Of Immortality" although it wouldnt scale to 4000 elements.
There is something indescribably cool about being [root@evil root]#
> You were stupid to keep it Why? I love the client side piece, I hate the server side piece, and I can replace that.
Why should I return it?
>The fact that Blizzard's service does not meet your expectations has nothing to do with the right of bnetd developers to reverse engineer Blizzard IP and exist parasitically
Nope. It simply provides ME with the right to LOOK for alternatives. Thats my right as a consumer under FAIR USE laws.
>What you choose to connect to might be your choice Yes it is.
>but it's Blizzard's choice to kill bnetd - and bnetd, right now, are completely fucked. Doubly so since EFF stepped in, incompetent communists that they are. No, it is their choice to attempt to kill bnetd. And fail.
And the EFF beign incompetent?
I presume since you post as AC, you have a law practice that defends the rights of millions of computer users around the world -- SUCCESSFULLY -- pro bono in most cases..
Right?
I get to decide, according to the law.
on
EFF Takes Bnetd Case
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Nope. Wrong.
By law, as a consumer, once I purchase a product, I am entitled to FAIR USE.
Software "licensing" has NEVER been successfully upheld in court, and many argue that it goes entirely against the protections the law has traditionally given the consumer.
Further, the Blizzard licensing agreement does not in fact restrict me from playing my software with a third-party server software.
Not to mention, they didnt come after the END USER violating those terms of service! They came after programmers who offered them an alternative. Programmers not bound by those TOS/Licensing terms.
Bnetd doesnt HAVE to cause that problem. Blizzard can provide a very simple network request scheme to allow the Bnetd server to challeneg the cd-key.
Blizzard does NOT want that.
As such, it is a simple case of a software manufacturer who does NOT maintain their software (server-side) driving their customers to find alternatives.
As to playing the beta thru Bnetd violates the point of having an open beta?
It still exposes bugs on the client side, and BOY does Blizzard ever have PLENTY of those in EVERY release.
Its actually a good defense. If you take the time to read through the DMCA portion relating to interoperable programs you'd understand better.
No one stated that Diablo, etc. were Interoperable programs. That was directed at bnetd being interoperable. Since Bnetd is trying to interoperate (thru reverse engineering) with Blizzard software, the DMCA clearly states that they do not have to interoperate with ALL the functonality Blizzards' server provides.
Its a very sound defense using the very law you are attacked with to defend yourself.
As a paying customer, I demand value and satisfaction from my Blizzard software like Warcraft and Diablo2.
Since the Blizzard server is:
- SLOOOOW - Unreliable - Hacked all to hell - VERY buggy
I choose to have the ability to play my ALREADY PURCHASED SOFTWARE on a server of my choice. Just because Blizzard would prefer I didnt doesnt mean jack.
Your argument that Bnetd is punishing Blizzard for creating value is totally incorrect.
It punishes Blizzard for NOT creating value on the server side.
I rewarded them for their client side software. What I choose to connect to is *MY CHOICE*.
1. Severity - The issues that exist on Windows platforms are demonstratably larger. There is no administrator/root containment of priveldge (generally), and most of the security issues reported are indeed system-level, remote, and widespread.
2. Activeness - The common issues reported for Windows deployments are almost universally in use and actively being exploited BEFORE the report. Most *ix vulnerabilities are not being actively exploited (and definitely at a lower level of activity), and are generally patched to resolve the issue FAR quicker.
3. Openness - "Linux" has no control over the release of bug reports. Microsoft on the other hand, does, to a degree. They can actively "persue" the matter and encourage the bug reporter to remain quiet about it until they can respond. In some cases for MONTHS even for well established bug hunters like eEye, on very large vulnerabilities like UPNP.
In closing, there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. Sure, you can put whatever spin you want on it, and I think I have in this posting.
ONE thing needs to be clear, there are alot of bugs, and having many eyes isnt preventing them from happening on Linux.
No matter where you sit, its justification to yet again work diligently to reduce the number of potential bugs by secure programming techniques.
Just do what a large number of larger sites like Yahoo do, and ask the mirror list (currently over 100+ sites) to act as full mirrors, and round-robin the dns.
Further, make kernel.org alpha.kernel.org, and have alpha be the site everyone mirrors from, and restrict access to it to only core kernel developers.
> Its bloated
And you prefer Debian? Debian (whole) takes MULTIPLE CD's. Sorceror is LESS than a single CD.
> It'll be obsolete tommorow
Again, you prefer Debian, which is obsolete TODAY. Its a SOURCE BASED INSTALL, so, you can update every DAY if you want, from the very latest on the net. You can even set it to automagically do so from a cronjob!
I'm not saying Sorceror is better than Debian, but your arguments dont hold much water by themselves, and DEFINITELY not with Debian in the context.
With a single command that has command-line overrides, and a config file that is easily editable, a single command optimized-compile is entirely possible.
>Wouldn't it be more efficient to provide a couple of different binary packages for each package a'la mandrake (i586 and i486) ?
Yes and no.
If you take into account the LOST efficiency of the enduser not being able to compile their kernel (or glibc, or bash) with their optimizations, then no.
Things like being able to use 2.95.3 instead of 2.96, or being able to use stackguard. These are the beauties of a source-based distro.
Not to mention the architectures that the distro maker doesnt have hardware to test on, nor time to test on. PS/2 anyone?
So, no.
Plus, your argument puts the burden on the distro-maker to compile for all the different architectures, host them, and provide the bandwidth for all of that.
Sorceror (very wisely) has you download the majority of the distro from upstreams upon recasts.
>First they ask that your swap image be at least 1gb in size. I don't know about everyone else, but my linux partition is just 2gb so that's half of my disk already. I know, I know, these days everyone has 30, 40, and 60gb drives so it's not a big deal. Maybe it's just time for me to get more iron.
The problem behind that is that the 2.4 kernel series recommends double your ram in swap. Since ram is ultra-cheap, and the average computers have 256-512mb ram, voila, 1 gb.
>Anyways, the big feature this distro seems to be claiming is the automatic (and seamless updates).
And compiling from source, using the settings you prefer. And using upstreams sources generally.
>You can run this "sorcery update" command in a cron job at night and have a brand spanking new system the next morning. While this sounds like the cats meow, what if I don't want the latest and greatest?
Then dont run the sorcery update!!
>I personally don't to live on the bleeding edge and don't always want the lastest. Also, who decides what's the latest?
The upstream, actually.
>The latest beta?
No.
>Is it running the 2.4.17 kernel or something even newer?
2.4.17
>What version of KDE does it have?
Umm.. Dont know off teh top of my head, but it is probably listed on the site, at least the current ver #'s used to be.
All in all, they are fairly cutting edge, but you can always choose NOT to be. Just dont cast the latest version!
>which is covered by wire-tapping laws and is thus illegal
Actually, there is yet to be a court case establishing wireless snooping as wire-tapping. There is considerable reason to consider that it wont be, based on the rulings around private band (police), television, and radio. Same idea, slightly different use.
Odds are that since it isnt "tapping a wire" it wont be held to the same standard.
If during the course of your maintainership CML2 proves very successful (as I beleive it already has) would you consider using it instead of CML1?
Also, would you consider moving crypto into the main tree in the near future? Debian has, Redhat will "soon"..
Would you consider using bitkeeper, cvs, or even complete changelogs with proper attribution of WHICH merges took place?
And finally, would you consider FINALLY bringing kdb into the main kernel? Linus doesnt want it, but he doesnt want it because he doesnt see the value. He didnt say he banned it..
I have seen *seven* rounds of layoffs in the last year and a half here at the world headquarters for Worldcom. In that same period, they opened hiring nine times for the very positions that got laid off.
In other words, they strive to minimize costs by reducing the number of benefits-deriving employees.
As a stockholder, that might be nice, but as a potential employee, that is a warning sign NOT to work there.
I know several people that have gone to work there, been laid off, and then called for the SAME position not three months later.
You offer absolutely no evidence that consumer buying would be higher based on a lower price. In fact, to support those numbers, the average consumer would be buying TEN TIMES AS MANY CD's just due to price. Thats just not realistic.
Also consider that businesses aren't driven by total sales. Anything publicly sold (on the stock market) is driven by profit levels. By lowering the price per unit, they reduce profit levels to increase total sales.
Most economics professors would tell you that only generally happens in two situations: A business desperately needs to keep its market share against an aggressive/superior, or A business desperately needs to grow its market share to justify angel funding.
The music industry is nowhere near desperate. They have a full monopoly (at least 90% of sales I would imagine are fully in RIAA-member groups). When you have a full monopoly you dont cut profits to get increased sales.
You do everything you can to KEEP the sales you have, and MAXIMIZE profits.
And that's precisely what they are doing.
The lesson is you shouldnt post theories about economics without any knowledge nor support for your (non-traditional) concepts.
Not to mention, that with lower profits, a smaller cut ends up in the hands of the artists, who already get VERY little (beleive it or not).
And replying to site founders on their site as an AC is.. Noble?
Get a grip troll..
People do sneak in to movies to avoid paying for them. Sorry he didnt say "download the DivX" instead, mollifying your pitiful moral outrage over sneaking into a movie..
Maybe you arent geeky enough. In the Matrix, Morpheus calls Neo "The One" numerous times, alluding to an all powerful entity that can change the universe.
Perfect parrallel to Jet Li's "The One" in my humble opinion..
And of course, yes, they also used plot devices (kill all others and become insanely powerful) from Highlander.
Slashdot Mirror
In your example, if /mnt was part of the / partition, then df would show that usage.
Thus, the article's example is a little bit better.
Consider the namespace.
With 8 characters, you have over 20 million possibilities.. However, realistically memorable phrases under 8 characters is considerably less. Further, ones that fit a theme even more so..
Find a fiction element (movie, tv show, book, musician, songs, etc), and use character or element names from it.
Examples that easily scale to 4000 devices:
- Star wars: At an ISP I worked at, we used Star Wars. All Windows machines were named after elements from the Empire (of course), and all unixy systems were from the Rebels. Destroyer, AT-AT, Yoda, Obi, Dagobah, etc. There are literally tens of thousands of elements in the Star Wars universe to choose from.
- The Simpsons: At an unnamed enterprise class wireless provider, this is the de-facto naming convention. It truly has a limitless number of elements, with element combinations like lisassax (lisa's sax). Couple that with phrases "haveacow", and events "shotbrns"..
- Books by Stephen King: There just isnt a more prolific, and well known horror writer. Again, the elements make the naming convention robust.
As to your idea of including the function of the device, consider:
- Easier for bad guys to target which systems to attack
- New recruits will STILL have the learning curve (ns is obviously name serving, and db is obviously database, but who would guess that ae is auth database because ad was taken by active directory!!)
- Learning what each server is/does is BETTER for new admins anyways. Jumping in is not always a great thing, and having a solid memory connection to a server is DEEPLY helpful.
These are just based on my experience after 5 years in the industry. Personally, I name computers based on Piers Anthony's "Incarnations Of Immortality" although it wouldnt scale to 4000 elements.
There is something indescribably cool about being [root@evil root]#
> You were stupid to keep it
Why? I love the client side piece, I hate the server side piece, and I can replace that.
Why should I return it?
>The fact that Blizzard's service does not meet your expectations has nothing to do with the right of bnetd developers to reverse engineer Blizzard IP and exist parasitically
Nope. It simply provides ME with the right to LOOK for alternatives. Thats my right as a consumer under FAIR USE laws.
>What you choose to connect to might be your choice
Yes it is.
>but it's Blizzard's choice to kill bnetd - and bnetd, right now, are completely fucked. Doubly so since EFF stepped in, incompetent communists that they are.
No, it is their choice to attempt to kill bnetd. And fail.
And the EFF beign incompetent?
I presume since you post as AC, you have a law practice that defends the rights of millions of computer users around the world -- SUCCESSFULLY -- pro bono in most cases..
Right?
Nope. Wrong.
By law, as a consumer, once I purchase a product, I am entitled to FAIR USE.
Software "licensing" has NEVER been successfully upheld in court, and many argue that it goes entirely against the protections the law has traditionally given the consumer.
Further, the Blizzard licensing agreement does not in fact restrict me from playing my software with a third-party server software.
Not to mention, they didnt come after the END USER violating those terms of service! They came after programmers who offered them an alternative. Programmers not bound by those TOS/Licensing terms.
So, No. I get to decide what I do.
Its a concern, certainly.
Bnetd doesnt HAVE to cause that problem. Blizzard can provide a very simple network request scheme to allow the Bnetd server to challeneg the cd-key.
Blizzard does NOT want that.
As such, it is a simple case of a software manufacturer who does NOT maintain their software (server-side) driving their customers to find alternatives.
As to playing the beta thru Bnetd violates the point of having an open beta?
It still exposes bugs on the client side, and BOY does Blizzard ever have PLENTY of those in EVERY release.
Its actually a good defense. If you take the time to read through the DMCA portion relating to interoperable programs you'd understand better.
No one stated that Diablo, etc. were Interoperable programs. That was directed at bnetd being interoperable. Since Bnetd is trying to interoperate (thru reverse engineering) with Blizzard software, the DMCA clearly states that they do not have to interoperate with ALL the functonality Blizzards' server provides.
Its a very sound defense using the very law you are attacked with to defend yourself.
Incorrect.
As a paying customer, I demand value and satisfaction from my Blizzard software like Warcraft and Diablo2.
Since the Blizzard server is:
- SLOOOOW
- Unreliable
- Hacked all to hell
- VERY buggy
I choose to have the ability to play my ALREADY PURCHASED SOFTWARE on a server of my choice. Just because Blizzard would prefer I didnt doesnt mean jack.
Your argument that Bnetd is punishing Blizzard for creating value is totally incorrect.
It punishes Blizzard for NOT creating value on the server side.
I rewarded them for their client side software. What I choose to connect to is *MY CHOICE*.
And its entirely legal too..
But they are not listening to an externally accessible port, and thus are not REMOTELY COMPROMISABLE.
Okay, so do anyone know of a cheap place to get rackmount 1U's, like, with just a pentium, network card and cdrom?
:)
Take this idea, a cheap rackmount, a readonly boot medium, and you have a very very secure device.
Possibly the ultimate in security?
1. Severity - The issues that exist on Windows platforms are demonstratably larger. There is no administrator/root containment of priveldge (generally), and most of the security issues reported are indeed system-level, remote, and widespread.
2. Activeness - The common issues reported for Windows deployments are almost universally in use and actively being exploited BEFORE the report. Most *ix vulnerabilities are not being actively exploited (and definitely at a lower level of activity), and are generally patched to resolve the issue FAR quicker.
3. Openness - "Linux" has no control over the release of bug reports. Microsoft on the other hand, does, to a degree. They can actively "persue" the matter and encourage the bug reporter to remain quiet about it until they can respond. In some cases for MONTHS even for well established bug hunters like eEye, on very large vulnerabilities like UPNP.
In closing, there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. Sure, you can put whatever spin you want on it, and I think I have in this posting.
ONE thing needs to be clear, there are alot of bugs, and having many eyes isnt preventing them from happening on Linux.
No matter where you sit, its justification to yet again work diligently to reduce the number of potential bugs by secure programming techniques.
Just do what a large number of larger sites like Yahoo do, and ask the mirror list (currently over 100+ sites) to act as full mirrors, and round-robin the dns.
Further, make kernel.org alpha.kernel.org, and have alpha be the site everyone mirrors from, and restrict access to it to only core kernel developers.
Overnight, you'd have taken care of the problem.
It is out, downloadable, and runnable.
Perhaps if you clicked through, you might have seen that, troll-boy.
> Its bloated
And you prefer Debian? Debian (whole) takes MULTIPLE CD's. Sorceror is LESS than a single CD.
> It'll be obsolete tommorow
Again, you prefer Debian, which is obsolete TODAY. Its a SOURCE BASED INSTALL, so, you can update every DAY if you want, from the very latest on the net. You can even set it to automagically do so from a cronjob!
I'm not saying Sorceror is better than Debian, but your arguments dont hold much water by themselves, and DEFINITELY not with Debian in the context.
Wrong!
With a single command that has command-line overrides, and a config file that is easily editable, a single command optimized-compile is entirely possible.
>Wouldn't it be more efficient to provide a couple of different binary packages for each package a'la mandrake (i586 and i486) ?
Yes and no.
If you take into account the LOST efficiency of the enduser not being able to compile their kernel (or glibc, or bash) with their optimizations, then no.
Things like being able to use 2.95.3 instead of 2.96, or being able to use stackguard. These are the beauties of a source-based distro.
Not to mention the architectures that the distro maker doesnt have hardware to test on, nor time to test on. PS/2 anyone?
So, no.
Plus, your argument puts the burden on the distro-maker to compile for all the different architectures, host them, and provide the bandwidth for all of that.
Sorceror (very wisely) has you download the majority of the distro from upstreams upon recasts.
>First they ask that your swap image be at least 1gb in size. I don't know about everyone else, but my linux partition is just 2gb so that's half of my disk already. I know, I know, these days everyone has 30, 40, and 60gb drives so it's not a big deal. Maybe it's just time for me to get more iron.
The problem behind that is that the 2.4 kernel series recommends double your ram in swap. Since ram is ultra-cheap, and the average computers have 256-512mb ram, voila, 1 gb.
>Anyways, the big feature this distro seems to be claiming is the automatic (and seamless updates).
And compiling from source, using the settings you prefer. And using upstreams sources generally.
>You can run this "sorcery update" command in a cron job at night and have a brand spanking new system the next morning. While this sounds like the cats meow, what if I don't want the latest and greatest?
Then dont run the sorcery update!!
>I personally don't to live on the bleeding edge and don't always want the lastest. Also, who decides what's the latest?
The upstream, actually.
>The latest beta?
No.
>Is it running the 2.4.17 kernel or something even newer?
2.4.17
>What version of KDE does it have?
Umm.. Dont know off teh top of my head, but it is probably listed on the site, at least the current ver #'s used to be.
All in all, they are fairly cutting edge, but you can always choose NOT to be. Just dont cast the latest version!
>which is covered by wire-tapping laws and is thus illegal
Actually, there is yet to be a court case establishing wireless snooping as wire-tapping. There is considerable reason to consider that it wont be, based on the rulings around private band (police), television, and radio. Same idea, slightly different use.
Odds are that since it isnt "tapping a wire" it wont be held to the same standard.
If during the course of your maintainership CML2 proves very successful (as I beleive it already has) would you consider using it instead of CML1?
Also, would you consider moving crypto into the main tree in the near future? Debian has, Redhat will "soon"..
Would you consider using bitkeeper, cvs, or even complete changelogs with proper attribution of WHICH merges took place?
And finally, would you consider FINALLY bringing kdb into the main kernel? Linus doesnt want it, but he doesnt want it because he doesnt see the value. He didnt say he banned it..
I have seen *seven* rounds of layoffs in the last year and a half here at the world headquarters for Worldcom. In that same period, they opened hiring nine times for the very positions that got laid off.
In other words, they strive to minimize costs by reducing the number of benefits-deriving employees.
As a stockholder, that might be nice, but as a potential employee, that is a warning sign NOT to work there.
I know several people that have gone to work there, been laid off, and then called for the SAME position not three months later.
Its ridiculous.
You state "one person at 20, twenty at 10.."
You offer absolutely no evidence that consumer buying would be higher based on a lower price. In fact, to support those numbers, the average consumer would be buying TEN TIMES AS MANY CD's just due to price. Thats just not realistic.
Also consider that businesses aren't driven by total sales. Anything publicly sold (on the stock market) is driven by profit levels. By lowering the price per unit, they reduce profit levels to increase total sales.
Most economics professors would tell you that only generally happens in two situations: A business desperately needs to keep its market share against an aggressive/superior, or A business desperately needs to grow its market share to justify angel funding.
The music industry is nowhere near desperate. They have a full monopoly (at least 90% of sales I would imagine are fully in RIAA-member groups). When you have a full monopoly you dont cut profits to get increased sales.
You do everything you can to KEEP the sales you have, and MAXIMIZE profits.
And that's precisely what they are doing.
The lesson is you shouldnt post theories about economics without any knowledge nor support for your (non-traditional) concepts.
Not to mention, that with lower profits, a smaller cut ends up in the hands of the artists, who already get VERY little (beleive it or not).
EEEEYE! With his WEEE BEADY EYES!
Thinks he's so special..
And replying to site founders on their site as an AC is .. Noble?
Get a grip troll..
People do sneak in to movies to avoid paying for them. Sorry he didnt say "download the DivX" instead, mollifying your pitiful moral outrage over sneaking into a movie..
Maybe you arent geeky enough. In the Matrix, Morpheus calls Neo "The One" numerous times, alluding to an all powerful entity that can change the universe.
Perfect parrallel to Jet Li's "The One" in my humble opinion..
And of course, yes, they also used plot devices (kill all others and become insanely powerful) from Highlander.
THIS
Since you asked, and everyone else will want to know..
Here is some info on our new maintainer..
Marcelo works for Connectiva. He lives with "Rik". He looks like this.
His weblog is here.
His "homepage" area is here
And I gotta say.. impressive to get that level of responsibility at his age..