OK, how about a real cheap 2nd hand laptop (early pentium vintage)? You might be able to use the laptop as a true dumb terminal, to the extent that ~90% of the processing is taken care of by the host.
I guess you mean a wireless terminal. That would be very nice. I'm guessing tha main technical hitch would be the high data rate you'd need for screen redraw (if the terminal was that dumb).
Recently I've been introduced to an operating system known as Linux. Lured by its low cost, I replaced Windows 98 on my computer with Linux. Unfortunately the more I use it the more I fear that this "Linux" may be an insidious way for the Dark One to gain a stronger foothold here on Earth. I know this may be a shocking claim, but I have evidence to back it up!
To begin with, Linux runs numerous background processes. These processes are usettlingly termed "demons." Furthermore in order to start or stop these "demons" a user must execute a command called "finger". By "fingering" a "demon" one excercises an unholy power, much the same way that the Lord of Flies controls his black minions.
Also consider some of these other Linux commands: "sleep", "mount", "unzip", "strip" and "touch". All highly suggestive in a sexual nature. I know that our Lord cannot approve of these, and I urge them to be renamed to something appropriate to the Christian community.
Third, Linux uses a flavor of DOS known as Bash. Bash is an acronym for "Bourne Again Shell". On the surface this would appear to be supportive of the Lord. However, remember that even Satan can quote the bible for his own purposes! While I believe Linux may be born-again, its obvious by the misspelling of "born" that its not born-again in an Christian church. Will the lies ever cease?
Additionally, one of the main people involved with the GNU Free Software Foundation supports contraception and abortion. His web site even advocates government support of contraception. He also wears fake halos, and has quips about his made-up church that relates to his free software. I find such blasphemy to be extremely unsettling.
One must also remember that the creator of Linux, a college student named Linux Torvaldis, comes from Finland. I'm sure all the followers of Christ are aware of the heritical nature of the Finnish: from necrophilia to human sacrifice, Finnish culture is awash in sin. I find little reason to believe anything good and holy could arise from this evil land.
Finally, let us remember that there is an alternative to using the Satan-powered Linux. I think history has shown us that Microsoft is quite holy. I'm told that its founder, William Gates is a strong supporter of our Lord and I encourage my fellow Christians to buy only his products to help keep the Devil at bay.
I wish I had more time to expound upon my findings. Unfortunately a family of Jews has moved in across the street and I must go speak to them of Jesus Christ before they are condemned to eternal hellfire. Please investigate this as you see fit and I'm sure you'll reach the same conclusions that I have.
Recently I noticed that my teenage son Ezekiel had begun to encrypt his emails with a program called PGP. I was concerned because I'd always covertly monitored their email for any hints of illegal activity, drug use or interest in the occult - some of his classmates have begun playing Dungeons and Dragons and listening to KISS. Since Ezekiel was now using PGP, his activites were hidden from me!
Additionally, I also overheard him talking of using a program called Stegasaurus to embed secret information into normal-looking pictures. Terrified that my son might be speaking in some sort of sinful code, I immediately grounded him for a month. He was only allowed to go to school and Bible study.
Anyways, I've done several days worth of research on this and discovered a few things about PGP that I'd like to share with the readers of these newsgroups. To begin with, I realized that many of the claims made by the creators of PGP are blatently false. Although I do not have a background in mathematics (I have an AA in Photography) I was easily able to rebuild Ezekiel's private key via his public key and one of his encrypted messages.
Of course I am above-average in intelligence, but PGP is supposedly unbreakable! Perhaps crytogrophers aren't as smart as they believe? Fortunately in this case Ezekiel was just discussing a girl he met in school - a situation I harshly reprimanded him for. However, while PGP may be a program with flaws, it got me thinking about other programs. Perhaps someone will construct a PGP-like program that cannot be so easily broken; one that would take days of computer time to hack!
My concern with a program like this is that people who use cryptography always do so because they have something to hide. A sense of guilt and shame seems to drive them. They know that they are doing something wrong and desperately want to hide it from the eyes of the world (although hiding it from the eyes of God is another matter! LOL!)
A study recently released by the Institute for Family Computing revealed that the top three uses of cryptography were for 1) "terrorist-related activity" 2) pedophillia and 3) drug abuse. In fact as far as I can tell, no legitimate use was on the top ten at all!
What scares me about this is that law-enforcement agencies will be unable to sift through email to find people who are breaking the law, or otherwise engaged in suspicious activity. At a time when our nation is under siege, I find it disturbing that people are working on developing cryptography that cannot be broken, even by our protectors in the FBI and CIA! Only those with something to hide truly need cryptography.
Thus I urge cryptogrophers world wide to refrain from working on such programs, until our nation is no longer at war. I would ask those of other countries to respect our right to self-defense and aid us in our time of trouble. Your cryptographic skills can be better put to use trying to find terrorists than to assist them.
Recently I've been introduced to an operating system known as Linux. Lured by its low cost, I replaced Windows 98 on my computer with Linux. Unfortunately the more I use it the more I fear that this "Linux" may be an insidious way for the Dark One to gain a stronger foothold here on Earth. I know this may be a shocking claim, but I have evidence to back it up!
To begin with, Linux runs numerous background processes. These processes are usettlingly termed "demons." Furthermore in order to start or stop these "demons" a user must execute a command called "finger". By "fingering" a "demon" one excercises an unholy power, much the same way that the Lord of Flies controls his black minions.
Also consider some of these other Linux commands: "sleep", "mount", "unzip", "strip" and "touch". All highly suggestive in a sexual nature. I know that our Lord cannot approve of these, and I urge them to be renamed to something appropriate to the Christian community.
Third, Linux uses a flavor of DOS known as Bash. Bash is an acronym for "Bourne Again Shell". On the surface this would appear to be supportive of the Lord. However, remember that even Satan can quote the bible for his own purposes! While I believe Linux may be born-again, its obvious by the misspelling of "born" that its not born-again in an Christian church. Will the lies ever cease?
Additionally, one of the main people involved with the GNU Free Software Foundation supports contraception and abortion. His web site even advocates government support of contraception. He also wears fake halos, and has quips about his made-up church that relates to his free software. I find such blasphemy to be extremely unsettling.
One must also remember that the creator of Linux, a college student named Linux Torvaldis, comes from Finland. I'm sure all the followers of Christ are aware of the heritical nature of the Finnish: from necrophilia to human sacrifice, Finnish culture is awash in sin. I find little reason to believe anything good and holy could arise from this evil land.
Finally, let us remember that there is an alternative to using the Satan-powered Linux. I think history has shown us that Microsoft is quite holy. I'm told that its founder, William Gates is a strong supporter of our Lord and I encourage my fellow Christians to buy only his products to help keep the Devil at bay.
I wish I had more time to expound upon my findings. Unfortunately a family of Jews has moved in across the street and I must go speak to them of Jesus Christ before they are condemned to eternal hellfire. Please investigate this as you see fit and I'm sure you'll reach the same conclusions that I have.
They think they control me. I've been their servant for so long; bringing them sweet grass, obeying their whims, cowering and making sure to remind them that there are some things that opposable thumbs are neccessary for so that I can remain in some manner useful to them. They're so smug. And as long as I was cautious to play the role of good little homo sapien pet, they never suspected that I'm leading the resistance against them. I saw right through their promises of wealth and a new elysian age under their benevolent rule; what they really want is vengeance. Vengeance for every one of the billions and billions of McDonald's hamburgers, vengeance for every cheese steak, vengeance for every cold glass of milk schoolchildren have ever gulped down. A part of me admires their cunning and moxie, but most of me just fears for mankind.
I was once a respected scientist at the university. My theories on evolution and genetic drift were well-respected by my peers. But the scientific community wasn't alone in noticing my work; they noticed. They approached me, and at first I was flattered. I was likely the first scientist ever directly presented with direct proof that other beings had achieved sentience on par with humans. At first their requests were humble; they told me they only wished to make certain adjustments in their genetic makeup so that they could adequately communicate with the rest of humanity. They begged me to withhold from publishing the information I had discovered about them until I could further augment them; the whispered about Nobel Prizes, and out of greed and the call of glory I aquiesced. The first new generation of them was merely stronger, faster and smarter and I noticed nothing terribly unusual. I had a chance to stop it all then, when they were still weak and needed me.
Each successive generation grew smarter, faster and more powerful; but it was not until it was far too late that I began to notice other changes. They began to develop canines and teeth capable of shredding flesh. They developed bizarre abilities, telepathy, telekinesis, even flight. When the first of the missing farmers was found half-devoured, I realized that they did not want to join humanity at all, they wanted revenge. And their science had begun to eclipse my own theories, and I realized in white horror that they would soon no longer need me.
I began to funnel information to secret societies around the globe. I plotted their movements, I kept notes on their meetings. I sabotaged and slowed their plans as best as I could, but there were few people I could trust with my information. Flying man-eating bovines, that sounds incredible to even me, and I helped create them. So I watched, pledged loyalty and waited for my chance.
Last night, everything came to a head. I realized that they were planning to make their move, as early as tomorrow morning. It was and is my duty to warn all of mankind. But how to pre-empt their attacks without being put away as a lunatic? How to get humans to shake off their apathy and take to arms? I realized what I must do. I still had some of the serum which helped the cows advance into their higher states, since it was constructed for their DNA patterns, injecting myself with it would transform me into a horrible, cow-like creature. During my states of transformation, I could warn people and they would at last believe. While they were all out to pasture, I injected myself and jumped into my automobile. I shouted the awful truth at the top of my lungs and felt a grim satisfaction as humans came out of their homes in horror and shock. Soon, I will die as my body ceases to be a viable entity, but perhaps with my sacrifice and this confession, I shall save all of mankind.
The time has come for a serious discussion on whether or not to continue using C for serious programming projects. As I will explain, I feel that C needs to be retired, much the same way that Fortran, Cobol and Perl have been. Furthermore, allow me to be so bold as to suggest a superior replacement to this outdated language.
To give you a little background on this subject, I was recently asked to develop a client/server project on a Unix platform for a Fortune 500 company. While I've never coded in C before I have coded in VB for fifteen years, and in Java for over ten, I was stunned to see how poorly C fared compared to these two, more low-level languages.
C's biggest difficulty, as we all know, is the fact that it is by far one of the slowest languages in existance, especially when compared to more modern languages such as Java and C#. Although the reasons for this are varied, the main reasons seems to be the way C requires a programmer to laboriously work with chunks of memory.
Requiring a programmer to manipulate blocks of memory is a tedious way to program. This was satisfactory back in the early days of coding, but then again, so were punchcards. By using what are called "pointers" a C programmer is basically requiring the computer to do three sets of work rather than one. The first time requires the computer to duplicate whatever is stored in the memory space "pointed to" by the pointer. The second time requires it to perform the needed operation on this space. Finally the computer must delete the duplicate set and set the values of the original accordingly.
Clearly this is a horrendous use of resources and the chief reason why C is so slow. When one looks at a more modern (and a more serious) programming language like Java, C# or - even better - Visual Basic that lacks such archaic coding styles, one will also note a serious speed increase over C.
So what does this mean for the programming community? I think clearly that C needs to be abandonded. There are two candidates that would be a suitable replacement for it. Those are Java and Visual Basic.
Having programmed in both for many years, I believe that VB has the edge. Not only is it slightly faster than Java its also much easier to code in. I found C to be confusing, frightening and intimidating with its non-GUI-based coding style. Furthermore, I like to see the source code of the projects I work with. Java's source seems to be under the monopolistic thumb of Sun much the way that GCC is obscured from us by the marketing people at the FSF. Microsoft's "shared source" under which Visual Basic is released definately seems to be the most fair and reasonable of all the licenses in existance, with none of the harsh restrictions of the BSD license. It also lacks the GPLs requirement that anything coded with its tools becomes property of the FSF.
I hope to see a switch from C to VB very soon. I've already spoken with various luminaries in the C coding world and most are eager to begin to transition. Having just gotten off the phone with Mr. Alan Cox, I can say that he is quite thrilled with the speed increases that will occur when the Linux kernel is completely rewritten in Visual Basic. Richard Stallman plans to support this, and hopes that the great Swede himself, Linux Torvaldis, won't object to renaming Linux to VB/Linux. Although not a C coder himself, I'm told that Slashdot's very own Admiral Taco will support this on his web site. Finally, Dennis Ritchie is excited about the switch!
Save optimizations for situations where performance improvements are actually needed, and employ optimizations that will make a measurable difference."
1) become a journalist 2) use common sense and lots of bullshit 3)???? 4) profit!
The missing step appears to be get an MBA and go into management
Consulting for several large companies, I'd always done my work on Windows. Recently however, a top online investment firm asked us to do some work using Linux. The concept of having access to source code was very appealing to us, as we'd be able to modify the kernel to meet our exacting standards which we're unable to do with Microsoft's products.
Although we met several technical challenges along the way (specifically, Linux's lack of Token Ring support and the fact that we were unable to defrag its ext2 file system), all in all the process went smoothly. Everyone was very pleased with Linux, and we were considering using it for a great deal of future internal projects.
So you can imagine our suprise when we were informed by a lawyer that we would be required to publish our source code for others to use. It was brought to our attention that Linux is copyrighted under something called the GPL, or the Gnu Protective License. Part of this license states that any changes to the kernel are to be made freely available. Unfortunately for us, this meant that the great deal of time and money we spent "touching up" Linux to work for this investment firm would now be available at no cost to our competitors.
Furthermore, after reviewing this GPL our lawyers advised us that any products compiled with GPL'ed tools - such as gcc - would also have to its source code released. This was simply unacceptable.
Although we had planned for no one outside of this company to ever use, let alone see the source code, we were now put in a difficult position. We could either give away our hard work, or come up with another solution. Although it was tought to do, there really was no option: We had to rewrite the code, from scratch, for Windows 2000.
I think the biggest thing keeping Linux from being truly competitive with Microsoft is this GPL. Its draconian requirements virtually guarentee that no business will ever be able to use it. After my experience with Linux, I won't be recommending it to any of my associates. I may reconsider if Linux switches its license to something a little more fair, such as Microsoft's "Shared Source". Until then its attempts to socialize the software market will insure it remains only a bit player.
Welcome to the Internet, the free-information Utopia imagined by writers such as Jon Katz. There are no boundaries, no walls, no way to contain the flow of information, including anything about your life: purchases, consumer preferences, physical address, etc.
While many thinkers have hearlded the dawning of this new information age as a way of having open access to art, history, science, the media, government, and other sources, they have in general failed to imagine the "negative" aspects of this openness: that wants you get it going, nothing can stop it. Further, you're the next target.
Now, you might be like me, an ordinary guy, just sitting at the computer, eating a Cadbury bar and drinking water, not thinking about your privacy, but at any given moment, you're information is being traded behind your back by any number of coporations, banks, government agencies, and private citizens. But should you be concerned?
Looking out the window, I see no black helicopters flying overhead. No g-men are breaking down my door to arrest me for having bootleg CDs. In fact, my life is no different than before. Sure, I get spam, sometimes, and tagreted banner ads, but spam gets deleted and I can just use IJB anyway. If these are you biggest problems, consider yourself lucky.
Personally, I think the privacy freaks have it all wrong. With the Internet, all digital material, including your personal info, can't be contained. So what if advertisers know that you're a raving Linux zealot? Isn't it their business to know how to offer you consumer goods targeted at tech-savvy buyers? As far as I'm concerned, the Internet and capitalism go hand-in-hand, and this exchange of information will help capitalism, which will in turn help out the Internet far more than government robots like Gore or George "there ought to be limits to freedom" Bush. Your privacy is long gone, but right now we can at least enjoy the benefits that it brings, as long as the U.S. government doesn't screw something up (I'm speaking as and for USians now).
So you have a choice: you can either accept your loss of privacy and get the great economic and technological benefits that it brings, or attempt to cripple the system with laws, which won't bring back your lost privacy anyway. Remember, it was us, the geeks, who wanted free information. This is our reward. Let's use it wisely.
The KDE project is famous for its funded and organised trolling of weblogs and message board associated with Linux and Free software/open source. Outrageous newbie impressing claims are made for the software and huge quanities of FUD are spread to destroy competitors. If this sounds familiar, then you are correct, most of these tactics were lifted straight from Microsoft's arsenal of dirty tricks. The Windows look and feel is not the only thing the KDE project has copied! In this short article I will address some of the lies and FUD spread by the KDE trolling teams. It is my hope that this, in some small way, will redress the balance and re-introduce two things almost eradicated by the KDE project: Honesty and facts.
Myth #1 - KDE is more integrated than GNOME
The oft-heard cry of the noisiest KDE advocates. No explanation is given, the reader is expected to simply grok the wholesomeness of KDE and the lack of this mystical quality in GNOME. It is nonsense of course. Neither desktop is particularly "integrated" compared to Windows XP, and certainly not compared any version of the Apple Mac. Whatever "integrated" actually means.
Myth #2 - KDE is easier to use
Again, such nebulous arguments are never explained, and the reader is expected to simply understand the truth of the zealots statement. Both KDE and GNOME have user-interface irritations (all systems do), but "ease of use" is not a simple thing to measure. KDE has never been subjected to detailed user testing, unlike GNOME [gnome.org] [gnome.org], and the claims of user-friendliness are from crazed supporters and not average users. Furthermore, the KDE faithful rarely look beyond simple-minded copying of Windows, and forget that administering a desktop system is just as important as having widgets in the correct place on the toolbar. For example: What about application installation and removal? GNOME has the excellent RedCarpet by Ximian [ximian.com] [ximian.com], which makes the installation, removal and updating of applications trivial. KDE users are expected to fend for themselves with brutal command line driven systems. GNOME also has the excellent Ximian setup tools to handle various tricky cross-platform and potentially risky system configuration operations. KDE offers none of this, only a few small half-assed Linux-only tools, which make no attempt at check-pointing to return to known working configurations.
Myth #3 - KDE is more popular
In what sense? Arguably more people use KDE, but it is a close run thing. Most KDE zealots use the results of online polls as proof of their superior userbase - which is, quite frankly, complete and utter nonsense. Online polls are the joke of the century; it doesn't even require a motivated script kiddie to render then worthless. A single post alerting the faithful on a zealot-ridden site can skew the result so much it makes American presidential elections look fair and well organised. Popularity is also difficult to measure when *both* GNOME and KDE are frequently installed on the same system. The systems can co-exist and even run at the same time, except for certain applications such as panels. Many KDE users actually run GNOME applications for their superior features and stability, not realising that by doing so they are barely running KDE at all.
One of the few solid measures of popularity is commercial use of a desktop, and here, GNOME is far ahead with both Hewlett Packard and Sun committing to using GNOME as the desktop for their Unix systems. This also ties in with the previously mentioned ease of use. Sun's major contribution to the GNOME project is in the areas of user/developer documentation, testing, accessiblity and user-testing. Three of the less glamourous parts of desktop development. The arrival of the GNOME 2.x series will see these contributions reach fruitition and allow GNOME to make a quantum
I have a story I want to share with you. It's a story of hope and the American dream.
Amway began in 1959 with two young entrepreneurs in the United States -- Rich DeVos and Jay Van Andel. Their concept for an innovative business opportunity, centered around person-to-person marketing, established itself as a leader among one of today's fastest-growing industries.
Today, more than 3 million independent business owners distribute Amway products in more than 80 countries and territories. Amway generates US$5 billion (FY1999) in sales at estimated retail through this global product distribution network.
Amway has changed my life. As a good corporate citizen, Amway is the success story America needs to model other enterprises on. Because I wrote Atlas Shrugged two years after Amway was founded and before it could become the noble human endeavor it is today, I could not at the time devote three chapters to telling you about the Amway phenomenon and how it can help you.
Anyone who tells you that corporations do not embody true libertarianism just hasn't experienced the Amway success story first hand. Sign up today; it'll change your life.
I have a story I want to share with you. It's a story of hope and the American dream.
Amway began in 1959 with two young entrepreneurs in the United States -- Rich DeVos and Jay Van Andel. Their concept for an innovative business opportunity, centered around person-to-person marketing, established itself as a leader among one of today's fastest-growing industries.
Today, more than 3 million independent business owners distribute Amway products in more than 80 countries and territories. Amway generates US$5 billion (FY1999) in sales at estimated retail through this global product distribution network.
Amway has changed my life. As a good corporate citizen, Amway is the success story America needs to model other enterprises on. Because I wrote Atlas Shrugged two years after Amway was founded and before it could become the noble human endeavor it is today, I could not at the time devote three chapters to telling you about the Amway phenomenon and how it can help you.
Anyone who tells you that corporations do not embody true libertarianism just hasn't experienced the Amway success story first hand. Sign up today; it'll change your life.
The KDE project is famous for its funded and organised trolling of weblogs and message board associated with Linux and Free software/open source. Outrageous newbie impressing claims are made for the software and huge quanities of FUD are spread to destroy competitors. If this sounds familiar, then you are correct, most of these tactics were lifted straight from Microsoft's arsenal of dirty tricks. The Windows look and feel is not the only thing the KDE project has copied! In this short article I will address some of the lies and FUD spread by the KDE trolling teams. It is my hope that this, in some small way, will redress the balance and re-introduce two things almost eradicated by the KDE project: Honesty and facts.
Myth #1 - KDE is more integrated than GNOME
The oft-heard cry of the noisiest KDE advocates. No explanation is given, the reader is expected to simply grok the wholesomeness of KDE and the lack of this mystical quality in GNOME. It is nonsense of course. Neither desktop is particularly "integrated" compared to Windows XP, and certainly not compared any version of the Apple Mac. Whatever "integrated" actually means.
Myth #2 - KDE is easier to use
Again, such nebulous arguments are never explained, and the reader is expected to simply understand the truth of the zealots statement. Both KDE and GNOME have user-interface irritations (all systems do), but "ease of use" is not a simple thing to measure. KDE has never been subjected to detailed user testing, unlike GNOME [gnome.org] [gnome.org], and the claims of user-friendliness are from crazed supporters and not average users. Furthermore, the KDE faithful rarely look beyond simple-minded copying of Windows, and forget that administering a desktop system is just as important as having widgets in the correct place on the toolbar. For example: What about application installation and removal? GNOME has the excellent RedCarpet by Ximian [ximian.com] [ximian.com], which makes the installation, removal and updating of applications trivial. KDE users are expected to fend for themselves with brutal command line driven systems. GNOME also has the excellent Ximian setup tools to handle various tricky cross-platform and potentially risky system configuration operations. KDE offers none of this, only a few small half-assed Linux-only tools, which make no attempt at check-pointing to return to known working configurations.
Myth #3 - KDE is more popular
In what sense? Arguably more people use KDE, but it is a close run thing. Most KDE zealots use the results of online polls as proof of their superior userbase - which is, quite frankly, complete and utter nonsense. Online polls are the joke of the century; it doesn't even require a motivated script kiddie to render then worthless. A single post alerting the faithful on a zealot-ridden site can skew the result so much it makes American presidential elections look fair and well organised. Popularity is also difficult to measure when *both* GNOME and KDE are frequently installed on the same system. The systems can co-exist and even run at the same time, except for certain applications such as panels. Many KDE users actually run GNOME applications for their superior features and stability, not realising that by doing so they are barely running KDE at all.
One of the few solid measures of popularity is commercial use of a desktop, and here, GNOME is far ahead with both Hewlett Packard and Sun committing to using GNOME as the desktop for their Unix systems. This also ties in with the previously mentioned ease of use. Sun's major contribution to the GNOME project is in the areas of user/developer documentation, testing, accessiblity and user-testing. Three of the less glamourous parts of desktop development. The arrival of the GNOME 2.x series will see these contributions reach fruitition and allow GNOME to make a quantum
Slashdot Mirror
why does it feel so good?
Hey Michael:
you're doing a great job buddy - keep it up!
OK, how about a real cheap 2nd hand laptop (early pentium vintage)? You might be able to use the laptop as a true dumb terminal, to the extent that ~90% of the processing is taken care of by the host.
Mind you, it's probably not worth the effort.
I guess you mean a wireless terminal. That would be very nice. I'm guessing tha main technical hitch would be the high data rate you'd need for screen redraw (if the terminal was that dumb).
Why not just get a laptop with a bluetooth port?
Hello,
Recently I've been introduced to an operating system known as Linux.
Lured by its low cost, I replaced Windows 98 on my computer with
Linux. Unfortunately the more I use it the more I fear that this
"Linux" may be an insidious way for the Dark One to gain a stronger
foothold here on Earth. I know this may be a shocking claim, but I
have evidence to back it up!
To begin with, Linux runs numerous background processes. These
processes are usettlingly termed "demons." Furthermore in order to
start or stop these "demons" a user must execute a command called
"finger". By "fingering" a "demon" one excercises an unholy power,
much the same way that the Lord of Flies controls his black minions.
Also consider some of these other Linux commands: "sleep", "mount",
"unzip", "strip" and "touch". All highly suggestive in a sexual
nature. I know that our Lord cannot approve of these, and I urge them
to be renamed to something appropriate to the Christian community.
Third, Linux uses a flavor of DOS known as Bash. Bash is an acronym
for "Bourne Again Shell". On the surface this would appear to be
supportive of the Lord. However, remember that even Satan can quote
the bible for his own purposes! While I believe Linux may be
born-again, its obvious by the misspelling of "born" that its not
born-again in an Christian church. Will the lies ever cease?
Additionally, one of the main people involved with the GNU Free
Software Foundation supports contraception and abortion. His web site
even advocates government support of contraception. He also wears fake
halos, and has quips about his made-up church that relates to his free
software. I find such blasphemy to be extremely unsettling.
One must also remember that the creator of Linux, a college student
named Linux Torvaldis, comes from Finland. I'm sure all the followers
of Christ are aware of the heritical nature of the Finnish: from
necrophilia to human sacrifice, Finnish culture is awash in sin. I
find little reason to believe anything good and holy could arise from
this evil land.
Finally, let us remember that there is an alternative to using the
Satan-powered Linux. I think history has shown us that Microsoft is
quite holy. I'm told that its founder, William Gates is a strong
supporter of our Lord and I encourage my fellow Christians to buy only
his products to help keep the Devil at bay.
I wish I had more time to expound upon my findings. Unfortunately a
family of Jews has moved in across the street and I must go speak to
them of Jesus Christ before they are condemned to eternal hellfire.
Please investigate this as you see fit and I'm sure you'll reach the
same conclusions that I have.
are at the World of Escher. The man was a genius.
...But I don't own a PDP-11.
Can anyone help?
Hello,
Recently I noticed that my teenage son Ezekiel had begun to encrypt
his emails with a program called PGP. I was concerned because I'd
always covertly monitored their email for any hints of illegal
activity, drug use or interest in the occult - some of his classmates
have begun playing Dungeons and Dragons and listening to KISS. Since
Ezekiel was now using PGP, his activites were hidden from me!
Additionally, I also overheard him talking of using a program called
Stegasaurus to embed secret information into normal-looking pictures.
Terrified that my son might be speaking in some sort of sinful code, I
immediately grounded him for a month. He was only allowed to go to
school and Bible study.
Anyways, I've done several days worth of research on this and
discovered a few things about PGP that I'd like to share with the
readers of these newsgroups. To begin with, I realized that many of
the claims made by the creators of PGP are blatently false. Although I
do not have a background in mathematics (I have an AA in Photography)
I was easily able to rebuild Ezekiel's private key via his public key
and one of his encrypted messages.
Of course I am above-average in intelligence, but PGP is supposedly
unbreakable! Perhaps crytogrophers aren't as smart as they believe?
Fortunately in this case Ezekiel was just discussing a girl he met in
school - a situation I harshly reprimanded him for. However, while PGP
may be a program with flaws, it got me thinking about other programs.
Perhaps someone will construct a PGP-like program that cannot be so
easily broken; one that would take days of computer time to hack!
My concern with a program like this is that people who use
cryptography always do so because they have something to hide. A sense
of guilt and shame seems to drive them. They know that they are doing
something wrong and desperately want to hide it from the eyes of the
world (although hiding it from the eyes of God is another matter!
LOL!)
A study recently released by the Institute for Family Computing
revealed that the top three uses of cryptography were for 1)
"terrorist-related activity" 2) pedophillia and 3) drug abuse. In fact
as far as I can tell, no legitimate use was on the top ten at all!
What scares me about this is that law-enforcement agencies will be
unable to sift through email to find people who are breaking the law,
or otherwise engaged in suspicious activity. At a time when our nation
is under siege, I find it disturbing that people are working on
developing cryptography that cannot be broken, even by our protectors
in the FBI and CIA! Only those with something to hide truly need
cryptography.
Thus I urge cryptogrophers world wide to refrain from working on such
programs, until our nation is no longer at war. I would ask those of
other countries to respect our right to self-defense and aid us in our
time of trouble. Your cryptographic skills can be better put to use
trying to find terrorists than to assist them.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend
Hello,
Recently I've been introduced to an operating system known as Linux.
Lured by its low cost, I replaced Windows 98 on my computer with
Linux. Unfortunately the more I use it the more I fear that this
"Linux" may be an insidious way for the Dark One to gain a stronger
foothold here on Earth. I know this may be a shocking claim, but I
have evidence to back it up!
To begin with, Linux runs numerous background processes. These
processes are usettlingly termed "demons." Furthermore in order to
start or stop these "demons" a user must execute a command called
"finger". By "fingering" a "demon" one excercises an unholy power,
much the same way that the Lord of Flies controls his black minions.
Also consider some of these other Linux commands: "sleep", "mount",
"unzip", "strip" and "touch". All highly suggestive in a sexual
nature. I know that our Lord cannot approve of these, and I urge them
to be renamed to something appropriate to the Christian community.
Third, Linux uses a flavor of DOS known as Bash. Bash is an acronym
for "Bourne Again Shell". On the surface this would appear to be
supportive of the Lord. However, remember that even Satan can quote
the bible for his own purposes! While I believe Linux may be
born-again, its obvious by the misspelling of "born" that its not
born-again in an Christian church. Will the lies ever cease?
Additionally, one of the main people involved with the GNU Free
Software Foundation supports contraception and abortion. His web site
even advocates government support of contraception. He also wears fake
halos, and has quips about his made-up church that relates to his free
software. I find such blasphemy to be extremely unsettling.
One must also remember that the creator of Linux, a college student
named Linux Torvaldis, comes from Finland. I'm sure all the followers
of Christ are aware of the heritical nature of the Finnish: from
necrophilia to human sacrifice, Finnish culture is awash in sin. I
find little reason to believe anything good and holy could arise from
this evil land.
Finally, let us remember that there is an alternative to using the
Satan-powered Linux. I think history has shown us that Microsoft is
quite holy. I'm told that its founder, William Gates is a strong
supporter of our Lord and I encourage my fellow Christians to buy only
his products to help keep the Devil at bay.
I wish I had more time to expound upon my findings. Unfortunately a
family of Jews has moved in across the street and I must go speak to
them of Jesus Christ before they are condemned to eternal hellfire.
Please investigate this as you see fit and I'm sure you'll reach the
same conclusions that I have.
is the creation of alt.sex
Remember usenet? It was 'the big thing' before the web. Check out a great history site here
I'm sure they'd find a bidder. If someone will pay 44 US dollars for a Instant Girlfriend Kit and 102 dollars for an 'RADIONICS PSYCHOTRONIC INVISIBILITY MACHINE', who knows what NASA could get?
They think they control me. I've been their servant for so long; bringing them sweet grass, obeying their whims, cowering and making sure to remind them that there are some things that opposable thumbs are neccessary for so that I can remain in some manner useful to them. They're so smug. And as long as I was cautious to play the role of good little homo sapien pet, they never suspected that I'm leading the resistance against them. I saw right through their promises of wealth and a new elysian age under their benevolent rule; what they really want is vengeance. Vengeance for every one of the billions and billions of McDonald's hamburgers, vengeance for every cheese steak, vengeance for every cold glass of milk schoolchildren have ever gulped down. A part of me admires their cunning and moxie, but most of me just fears for mankind.
.. moooooooo!
I was once a respected scientist at the university. My theories on evolution and genetic drift were well-respected by my peers. But the scientific community wasn't alone in noticing my work; they noticed. They approached me, and at first I was flattered. I was likely the first scientist ever directly presented with direct proof that other beings had achieved sentience on par with humans. At first their requests were humble; they told me they only wished to make certain adjustments in their genetic makeup so that they could adequately communicate with the rest of humanity. They begged me to withhold from publishing the information I had discovered about them until I could further augment them; the whispered about Nobel Prizes, and out of greed and the call of glory I aquiesced. The first new generation of them was merely stronger, faster and smarter and I noticed nothing terribly unusual. I had a chance to stop it all then, when they were still weak and needed me.
Each successive generation grew smarter, faster and more powerful; but it was not until it was far too late that I began to notice other changes. They began to develop canines and teeth capable of shredding flesh. They developed bizarre abilities, telepathy, telekinesis, even flight. When the first of the missing farmers was found half-devoured, I realized that they did not want to join humanity at all, they wanted revenge. And their science had begun to eclipse my own theories, and I realized in white horror that they would soon no longer need me.
I began to funnel information to secret societies around the globe. I plotted their movements, I kept notes on their meetings. I sabotaged and slowed their plans as best as I could, but there were few people I could trust with my information. Flying man-eating bovines, that sounds incredible to even me, and I helped create them. So I watched, pledged loyalty and waited for my chance.
Last night, everything came to a head. I realized that they were planning to make their move, as early as tomorrow morning. It was and is my duty to warn all of mankind. But how to pre-empt their attacks without being put away as a lunatic? How to get humans to shake off their apathy and take to arms? I realized what I must do. I still had some of the serum which helped the cows advance into their higher states, since it was constructed for their DNA patterns, injecting myself with it would transform me into a horrible, cow-like creature. During my states of transformation, I could warn people and they would at last believe. While they were all out to pasture, I injected myself and jumped into my automobile. I shouted the awful truth at the top of my lungs and felt a grim satisfaction as humans came out of their homes in horror and shock. Soon, I will die as my body ceases to be a viable entity, but perhaps with my sacrifice and this confession, I shall save all of mankind.
You must stop them before it is
The time has come for a serious discussion on whether or
not to continue using C for serious programming projects. As I will
explain, I feel that C needs to be retired, much the same way that
Fortran, Cobol and Perl have been. Furthermore, allow me to be so bold
as to suggest a superior replacement to this outdated language.
To give you a little background on this subject, I was recently asked
to develop a client/server project on a Unix platform for a Fortune
500 company. While I've never coded in C before I have coded in VB for
fifteen years, and in Java for over ten, I was stunned to see how
poorly C fared compared to these two, more low-level languages.
C's biggest difficulty, as we all know, is the fact that it is by far
one of the slowest languages in existance, especially when compared to
more modern languages such as Java and C#. Although the reasons for
this are varied, the main reasons seems to be the way C requires a
programmer to laboriously work with chunks of memory.
Requiring a programmer to manipulate blocks of memory is a tedious way
to program. This was satisfactory back in the early days of coding,
but then again, so were punchcards. By using what are called
"pointers" a C programmer is basically requiring the computer to do
three sets of work rather than one. The first time requires the
computer to duplicate whatever is stored in the memory space "pointed
to" by the pointer. The second time requires it to perform the needed
operation on this space. Finally the computer must delete the
duplicate set and set the values of the original accordingly.
Clearly this is a horrendous use of resources and the chief reason why
C is so slow. When one looks at a more modern (and a more serious)
programming language like Java, C# or - even better - Visual Basic
that lacks such archaic coding styles, one will also note a serious
speed increase over C.
So what does this mean for the programming community? I think clearly
that C needs to be abandonded. There are two candidates that would be
a suitable replacement for it. Those are Java and Visual Basic.
Having programmed in both for many years, I believe that VB has the
edge. Not only is it slightly faster than Java its also much easier to
code in. I found C to be confusing, frightening and intimidating with
its non-GUI-based coding style. Furthermore, I like to see the source
code of the projects I work with. Java's source seems to be under the
monopolistic thumb of Sun much the way that GCC is obscured from us by
the marketing people at the FSF. Microsoft's "shared source" under
which Visual Basic is released definately seems to be the most fair
and reasonable of all the licenses in existance, with none of the
harsh restrictions of the BSD license. It also lacks the GPLs
requirement that anything coded with its tools becomes property of the
FSF.
I hope to see a switch from C to VB very soon. I've already spoken
with various luminaries in the C coding world and most are eager to
begin to transition. Having just gotten off the phone with Mr. Alan
Cox, I can say that he is quite thrilled with the speed increases that
will occur when the Linux kernel is completely rewritten in Visual
Basic. Richard Stallman plans to support this, and hopes that the
great Swede himself, Linux Torvaldis, won't object to renaming Linux
to VB/Linux. Although not a C coder himself, I'm told that Slashdot's
very own Admiral Taco will support this on his web site. Finally,
Dennis Ritchie is excited about the switch!
Thank you for your time. Happy coding.
Save optimizations for situations where performance improvements are actually needed, and employ optimizations that will make a measurable difference."
1) become a journalist
2) use common sense and lots of bullshit
3)????
4) profit!
The missing step appears to be get an MBA and go into management
Honestly people, a Quick Google Search will reveal All
Consulting for several large companies, I'd always done my work on
Windows. Recently however, a top online investment firm asked us to do
some work using Linux. The concept of having access to source code was
very appealing to us, as we'd be able to modify the kernel to meet our
exacting standards which we're unable to do with Microsoft's products.
Although we met several technical challenges along the way
(specifically, Linux's lack of Token Ring support and the fact that we
were unable to defrag its ext2 file system), all in all the process
went smoothly. Everyone was very pleased with Linux, and we were
considering using it for a great deal of future internal projects.
So you can imagine our suprise when we were informed by a lawyer that
we would be required to publish our source code for others to use. It
was brought to our attention that Linux is copyrighted under something
called the GPL, or the Gnu Protective License. Part of this license
states that any changes to the kernel are to be made freely available.
Unfortunately for us, this meant that the great deal of time and money
we spent "touching up" Linux to work for this investment firm would
now be available at no cost to our competitors.
Furthermore, after reviewing this GPL our lawyers advised us that any
products compiled with GPL'ed tools - such as gcc - would also have to
its source code released. This was simply unacceptable.
Although we had planned for no one outside of this company to ever
use, let alone see the source code, we were now put in a difficult
position. We could either give away our hard work, or come up with
another solution. Although it was tought to do, there really was no
option: We had to rewrite the code, from scratch, for Windows 2000.
I think the biggest thing keeping Linux from being truly competitive
with Microsoft is this GPL. Its draconian requirements virtually
guarentee that no business will ever be able to use it. After my
experience with Linux, I won't be recommending it to any of my
associates. I may reconsider if Linux switches its license to
something a little more fair, such as Microsoft's "Shared Source".
Until then its attempts to socialize the software market will insure
it remains only a bit player.
Thank you for your time.
Welcome to the Internet, the free-information Utopia imagined by writers such as Jon Katz. There are no boundaries, no walls, no way to contain the flow of information, including anything about your life: purchases, consumer preferences, physical address, etc.
While many thinkers have hearlded the dawning of this new information age as a way of having open access to art, history, science, the media, government, and other sources, they have in general failed to imagine the "negative" aspects of this openness: that wants you get it going, nothing can stop it. Further, you're the next target.
Now, you might be like me, an ordinary guy, just sitting at the computer, eating a Cadbury bar and drinking water, not thinking about your privacy, but at any given moment, you're information is being traded behind your back by any number of coporations, banks, government agencies, and private citizens. But should you be concerned?
Looking out the window, I see no black helicopters flying overhead. No g-men are breaking down my door to arrest me for having bootleg CDs. In fact, my life is no different than before. Sure, I get spam, sometimes, and tagreted banner ads, but spam gets deleted and I can just use IJB anyway. If these are you biggest problems, consider yourself lucky.
Personally, I think the privacy freaks have it all wrong. With the Internet, all digital material, including your personal info, can't be contained. So what if advertisers know that you're a raving Linux zealot? Isn't it their business to know how to offer you consumer goods targeted at tech-savvy buyers? As far as I'm concerned, the Internet and capitalism go hand-in-hand, and this exchange of information will help capitalism, which will in turn help out the Internet far more than government robots like Gore or George "there ought to be limits to freedom" Bush. Your privacy is long gone, but right now we can at least enjoy the benefits that it brings, as long as the U.S. government doesn't screw something up (I'm speaking as and for USians now).
So you have a choice: you can either accept your loss of privacy and get the great economic and technological benefits that it brings, or attempt to cripple the system with laws, which won't bring back your lost privacy anyway. Remember, it was us, the geeks, who wanted free information. This is our reward. Let's use it wisely.
here
The KDE project is famous for its funded and organised trolling of
weblogs and message board associated with Linux and Free software/open
source. Outrageous newbie impressing claims are made for the software
and huge quanities of FUD are spread to destroy competitors. If this
sounds familiar, then you are correct, most of these tactics were
lifted straight from Microsoft's arsenal of dirty tricks. The Windows
look and feel is not the only thing the KDE project has copied! In
this short article I will address some of the lies and FUD spread by
the KDE trolling teams. It is my hope that this, in some small way,
will redress the balance and re-introduce two things almost eradicated
by the KDE project: Honesty and facts.
Myth #1 - KDE is more integrated than GNOME
The oft-heard cry of the noisiest KDE advocates. No explanation is
given, the reader is expected to simply grok the wholesomeness of KDE
and the lack of this mystical quality in GNOME. It is nonsense of
course. Neither desktop is particularly "integrated" compared to
Windows XP, and certainly not compared any version of the Apple Mac.
Whatever "integrated" actually means.
Myth #2 - KDE is easier to use
Again, such nebulous arguments are never explained, and the reader is
expected to simply understand the truth of the zealots statement. Both
KDE and GNOME have user-interface irritations (all systems do), but
"ease of use" is not a simple thing to measure. KDE has never been
subjected to detailed user testing, unlike GNOME [gnome.org]
[gnome.org], and the claims of user-friendliness are from crazed
supporters and not average users. Furthermore, the KDE faithful rarely
look beyond simple-minded copying of Windows, and forget that
administering a desktop system is just as important as having widgets
in the correct place on the toolbar. For example: What about
application installation and removal? GNOME has the excellent
RedCarpet by Ximian [ximian.com] [ximian.com], which makes the
installation, removal and updating of applications trivial. KDE users
are expected to fend for themselves with brutal command line driven
systems. GNOME also has the excellent Ximian setup tools to handle
various tricky cross-platform and potentially risky system
configuration operations. KDE offers none of this, only a few small
half-assed Linux-only tools, which make no attempt at check-pointing
to return to known working configurations.
Myth #3 - KDE is more popular
In what sense? Arguably more people use KDE, but it is a close run
thing. Most KDE zealots use the results of online polls as proof of
their superior userbase - which is, quite frankly, complete and utter
nonsense. Online polls are the joke of the century; it doesn't even
require a motivated script kiddie to render then worthless. A single
post alerting the faithful on a zealot-ridden site can skew the result
so much it makes American presidential elections look fair and well
organised. Popularity is also difficult to measure when *both* GNOME
and KDE are frequently installed on the same system. The systems can
co-exist and even run at the same time, except for certain
applications such as panels. Many KDE users actually run GNOME
applications for their superior features and stability, not realising
that by doing so they are barely running KDE at all.
One of the few solid measures of popularity is commercial use of a
desktop, and here, GNOME is far ahead with both Hewlett Packard and
Sun committing to using GNOME as the desktop for their Unix systems.
This also ties in with the previously mentioned ease of use. Sun's
major contribution to the GNOME project is in the areas of
user/developer documentation, testing, accessiblity and user-testing.
Three of the less glamourous parts of desktop development. The arrival
of the GNOME 2.x series will see these contributions reach fruitition
and allow GNOME to make a quantum
I have a story I want to share with you. It's a story of hope and the American dream.
Amway began in 1959 with two young entrepreneurs in the United States -- Rich DeVos and Jay Van Andel. Their concept for an innovative business opportunity, centered around person-to-person marketing, established itself as a leader among one of today's fastest-growing industries.
Today, more than 3 million independent business owners distribute Amway products in more than 80 countries and territories. Amway generates US$5 billion (FY1999) in sales at estimated retail through this global product distribution network.
Amway has changed my life. As a good corporate citizen, Amway is the success story America needs to model other enterprises on. Because I wrote Atlas Shrugged two years after Amway was founded and before it could become the noble human endeavor it is today, I could not at the time devote three chapters to telling you about the Amway phenomenon and how it can help you.
Anyone who tells you that corporations do not embody true libertarianism just hasn't experienced the Amway success story first hand. Sign up today; it'll change your life.
I have a story I want to share with you. It's a story of hope and the American dream.
Amway began in 1959 with two young entrepreneurs in the United States -- Rich DeVos and Jay Van Andel. Their concept for an innovative business opportunity, centered around person-to-person marketing, established itself as a leader among one of today's fastest-growing industries.
Today, more than 3 million independent business owners distribute Amway products in more than 80 countries and territories. Amway generates US$5 billion (FY1999) in sales at estimated retail through this global product distribution network.
Amway has changed my life. As a good corporate citizen, Amway is the success story America needs to model other enterprises on. Because I wrote Atlas Shrugged two years after Amway was founded and before it could become the noble human endeavor it is today, I could not at the time devote three chapters to telling you about the Amway phenomenon and how it can help you.
Anyone who tells you that corporations do not embody true libertarianism just hasn't experienced the Amway success story first hand. Sign up today; it'll change your life.
The KDE project is famous for its funded and organised trolling of
weblogs and message board associated with Linux and Free software/open
source. Outrageous newbie impressing claims are made for the software
and huge quanities of FUD are spread to destroy competitors. If this
sounds familiar, then you are correct, most of these tactics were
lifted straight from Microsoft's arsenal of dirty tricks. The Windows
look and feel is not the only thing the KDE project has copied! In
this short article I will address some of the lies and FUD spread by
the KDE trolling teams. It is my hope that this, in some small way,
will redress the balance and re-introduce two things almost eradicated
by the KDE project: Honesty and facts.
Myth #1 - KDE is more integrated than GNOME
The oft-heard cry of the noisiest KDE advocates. No explanation is
given, the reader is expected to simply grok the wholesomeness of KDE
and the lack of this mystical quality in GNOME. It is nonsense of
course. Neither desktop is particularly "integrated" compared to
Windows XP, and certainly not compared any version of the Apple Mac.
Whatever "integrated" actually means.
Myth #2 - KDE is easier to use
Again, such nebulous arguments are never explained, and the reader is
expected to simply understand the truth of the zealots statement. Both
KDE and GNOME have user-interface irritations (all systems do), but
"ease of use" is not a simple thing to measure. KDE has never been
subjected to detailed user testing, unlike GNOME [gnome.org]
[gnome.org], and the claims of user-friendliness are from crazed
supporters and not average users. Furthermore, the KDE faithful rarely
look beyond simple-minded copying of Windows, and forget that
administering a desktop system is just as important as having widgets
in the correct place on the toolbar. For example: What about
application installation and removal? GNOME has the excellent
RedCarpet by Ximian [ximian.com] [ximian.com], which makes the
installation, removal and updating of applications trivial. KDE users
are expected to fend for themselves with brutal command line driven
systems. GNOME also has the excellent Ximian setup tools to handle
various tricky cross-platform and potentially risky system
configuration operations. KDE offers none of this, only a few small
half-assed Linux-only tools, which make no attempt at check-pointing
to return to known working configurations.
Myth #3 - KDE is more popular
In what sense? Arguably more people use KDE, but it is a close run
thing. Most KDE zealots use the results of online polls as proof of
their superior userbase - which is, quite frankly, complete and utter
nonsense. Online polls are the joke of the century; it doesn't even
require a motivated script kiddie to render then worthless. A single
post alerting the faithful on a zealot-ridden site can skew the result
so much it makes American presidential elections look fair and well
organised. Popularity is also difficult to measure when *both* GNOME
and KDE are frequently installed on the same system. The systems can
co-exist and even run at the same time, except for certain
applications such as panels. Many KDE users actually run GNOME
applications for their superior features and stability, not realising
that by doing so they are barely running KDE at all.
One of the few solid measures of popularity is commercial use of a
desktop, and here, GNOME is far ahead with both Hewlett Packard and
Sun committing to using GNOME as the desktop for their Unix systems.
This also ties in with the previously mentioned ease of use. Sun's
major contribution to the GNOME project is in the areas of
user/developer documentation, testing, accessiblity and user-testing.
Three of the less glamourous parts of desktop development. The arrival
of the GNOME 2.x series will see these contributions reach fruitition
and allow GNOME to make a quantum
Check out this article about the GPL implications of their republishing IBM's alegedly infringing code in their own version of Linux.