They should just ban all porn sites from using any cctld or gtld and force them to use a.sex or.xxx
And just who is "they"? And how are "they" going to control "all porn sites" - in the whole world?
Furrfu, people who can't be bothered to think even for a millisecond before making some dumb statement (and obviously without RingTFA) just piss me off sometimes.
I know about the Cathars, as well as the development of Christianity from a melding of Mithraism, Judaism and various mystery cults. I don't have any problem with you (or anyone else) having and living by any theology you want, nor do I have a problem with you (or anyone else) controlling what your children see - although I wonder how they can ever develop critical thinking skills if they are never exposed to alternate ideas, but I digress...
What I do have a problem with is you (or anyone else) trying to tell me or my children what we can and cannot see. I have a problem with anyone trying to impose hir moral or religious views on the rest of us.
It's ironic that, although the US was founded (in part) by religious zealots, the reason they came to this continent was to avoid the Church of England imposing its theology on them - and then their (spiritual) descendants want to do the same to the rest of us.
The current Administration has stated on several occasions that the US is a "Christian nation" - as I read the Constitution, we are most emphatically NOT a Christian (or Muslim, Hindu, Shinto, Buddhist, Santarian, Zoroastrian, Arian, etc, etc) nation. The US is (or should be, IMO) a secular nation - with tolerance for everyone's religious beliefs (or lack thereof).
I write the KillerApp. By $DEITY, it' so good that everyone (including Bill and Darl) want to include it in their system. I personally believe software should be free, so I release it under the GPL. This has the following consequences:
Bill, Darl, or anyone else can distribute the binary, as long as they also make the source available.
Anyone can modify the program and distribute their modifications as long as they also relaease it under the GPL. In this way, the KillerApp will always be free (as in speech) forever.
Had I released KillerApp under a BSD license, Bill or Darl could make a few changes to it and distribute the result under any terms they want - potntially making the new, improved KillerApp completely closed and proprietary. They might make megabucks by changing 10 lines of source code and selling the binary only. Is that fair to me, when I did most of the work originally? No - that's why I release under GPL.
The problem with the XFree86 1.1 license is that it imoses a requirement to give credit if someone chooses to distribute a binary build of their software. If, in fact, they explicitly exclude client programs linked to the XFree86 libraries, then I don't see a problem. If not, they are imposing a requirement on people who distribute my software (because, of course KillerApp links to libX.so) which I do not want to impose on them. That's why (unless the XFree86.org people explicitly state *in their license* that the "credits" clause does not apply to client programs) the new XFree86 license is incompatible with the GPL.
My second problem is the open-endedness. The suspensions of due process in the above cases were understood as temperary and were lifted as soon as the war was over. These days, presidents don't seem to declare war on things that can possibly be ended by a peace treat (drugs, poverty, terror, etc). Tell me, Mr Bush, is the war on terror going to be over before or after the war on drugs?
This bothers me, too. Only today, George Tenet in testimony before Congress said that even if Osama and other Al-Quaida leaders or captured or killed, terrorist organizations can still threaten US citizens and interests (paraphrased, but close to what he said).
In other words, we won't be able to relax our "vigilance" against terrorism until there are no more terrorists anywhere in the world who are opposed to US policies. In other words, never.
The problem is that we don't really have much of a lobby with congress. All we have are our votes. Most people don't bother to use their votes, then complain when the idiots who are elected into office pass laws they don't like. If you don't like the system, change it. Don't just sit there and complain about it.
The real problem is that even if everyone voted, it is the perceptions produced by political advertising that primarily influence who gets elected. And the advertising is always paid for by well-heeled special interests.
Just try calling one of your Senators and asking for a private, 30-minute meeting to discuss issues of importance to you. Unless you are a major contributor, forget it. The best you can do is get your views heard (by writing a letter) by some staffer, who will summarize the aggregate opinions for hir boss.
Only two things ever influence a politician's vote on any issue: the desires of hir major contibutors, and (only sometimes, and only if the spread is overwhelming) public opinion polls.
Here's an idea - every/.'er send me USD5, and I'll set up a "Geek PAC" and become a fulltime lobbyist. PayPal address available on request.
...a linux box configured by a seasoned admin setting up linux for the first time. (weeks later: "What, sendmail and portmapper are running? I didn't turn those on!")
Can any "seasoned admin" out there envision a scenario where the first command run after newly-installing a server isn't "ps -ef", followed by "lsof -i" or "netstat -a"? My $DEITY, doesn't _anyone_ check system configuration before deploying a server onto the Internet? How could it possibly take more than minutes to find out what services your box is running?
Just a clarification - SCOX filed a motion to amend their complaint to include the (bogus) copyright charges. Judge Wells does not have to grant that motion and, if she does grant it, it may or may not affect the contract-violation case.
In any case, since SCOX have now admitted in court that there are no "trade secrets" contributed by IBM into Linux, we can all cheer.
If the A/V software could be just a little smarter, or run the suspect Email through a header parser first, most of the problems would go away. The main problem occurs when the A/V software mindlessly bounces the message back to whoever is listed in the "From:" (or, possibly, "Reply-To:") header, rather than to the Postnmaster address of the last damned SMTP relay.
Is it too much to ask to parse the Received: headers and find out where the mail really came from, rather than blindly replying to a possibly-forged address?
all this time thinking its just horrible admins who dont know how to do their job, or are to lazy to do it right
Of course, all mail server software should ship/install with open relaying disabled by default. Every MTA I know of has some kind of configuration file or dialog, and the installer/admin should be aske explicitly if s/he wants to let anyone on the Internet send mail to anyone else on the Internet via hir server.
This is a problem with software (from OS's to everything else) - ALL SOFTWARE SHOULD BE SECURE BY DEFAULT - then someone has to make an explicit decision to make it less secure. How long is it going to be before vendors and OSS developers get this?
I've been using NIS+ in a mixed Solaris/Linux environment since RedHat 6.1 - had to get the nisplus tools and secure-RPC PAM modules from the SuSE folks, of course (look for nistools or nisplus and pam_unix2). I've used NIS+ on Solaris since it came out - yes, it can be a bit of a pain to set up, and I'd advise against trying to do any kind of deep hierarchical/replicated tree, but it does work very well (of course, Sun have announced end-of-life for NIS+ after Solaris 9, so I guess it'll be LDAP).
And, autofs does exactly what you're looking for. You will have to hack the autofs startup script (unles you get SuSE's) to recognize NIS+ automount maps, and AFAIK "direct" automount points don't work, but it's still cool - I use it for over 200 users every day.
Well there is Royal Crown Cola, or more simply RC. I'm pretty sure its main selling point is that it's cheaper than Coke or Pepsi. At one point RC also made many store brands for supermarkets and such, but I'm no sure if they do that any more.
I remember from growing up in SC, people referring to an "RC Cocacola" a a generic name for a cola drink.
Slashdot Mirror
And just who is "they"? And how are "they" going to control "all porn sites" - in the whole world?
Furrfu, people who can't be bothered to think even for a millisecond before making some dumb statement (and obviously without RingTFA) just piss me off sometimes.
What I do have a problem with is you (or anyone else) trying to tell me or my children what we can and cannot see. I have a problem with anyone trying to impose hir moral or religious views on the rest of us.
It's ironic that, although the US was founded (in part) by religious zealots, the reason they came to this continent was to avoid the Church of England imposing its theology on them - and then their (spiritual) descendants want to do the same to the rest of us. The current Administration has stated on several occasions that the US is a "Christian nation" - as I read the Constitution, we are most emphatically NOT a Christian (or Muslim, Hindu, Shinto, Buddhist, Santarian, Zoroastrian, Arian, etc, etc) nation. The US is (or should be, IMO) a secular nation - with tolerance for everyone's religious beliefs (or lack thereof).
OK. Let's try an example.
I write the KillerApp. By $DEITY, it' so good that everyone (including Bill and Darl) want to include it in their system. I personally believe software should be free, so I release it under the GPL. This has the following consequences:
Bill, Darl, or anyone else can distribute the binary, as long as they also make the source available.
Anyone can modify the program and distribute their modifications as long as they also relaease it under the GPL. In this way, the KillerApp will always be free (as in speech) forever.
Had I released KillerApp under a BSD license, Bill or Darl could make a few changes to it and distribute the result under any terms they want - potntially making the new, improved KillerApp completely closed and proprietary. They might make megabucks by changing 10 lines of source code and selling the binary only. Is that fair to me, when I did most of the work originally? No - that's why I release under GPL.
The problem with the XFree86 1.1 license is that it imoses a requirement to give credit if someone chooses to distribute a binary build of their software. If, in fact, they explicitly exclude client programs linked to the XFree86 libraries, then I don't see a problem. If not, they are imposing a requirement on people who distribute my software (because, of course KillerApp links to libX.so) which I do not want to impose on them. That's why (unless the XFree86.org people explicitly state *in their license* that the "credits" clause does not apply to client programs) the new XFree86 license is incompatible with the GPL.
This bothers me, too. Only today, George Tenet in testimony before Congress said that even if Osama and other Al-Quaida leaders or captured or killed, terrorist organizations can still threaten US citizens and interests (paraphrased, but close to what he said).
In other words, we won't be able to relax our "vigilance" against terrorism until there are no more terrorists anywhere in the world who are opposed to US policies. In other words, never.
OK, then, how do you spell "uneduated"?
The real problem is that even if everyone voted, it is the perceptions produced by political advertising that primarily influence who gets elected. And the advertising is always paid for by well-heeled special interests.
Just try calling one of your Senators and asking for a private, 30-minute meeting to discuss issues of importance to you. Unless you are a major contributor, forget it. The best you can do is get your views heard (by writing a letter) by some staffer, who will summarize the aggregate opinions for hir boss.
Only two things ever influence a politician's vote on any issue: the desires of hir major contibutors, and (only sometimes, and only if the spread is overwhelming) public opinion polls.
Here's an idea - every /.'er send me USD5, and I'll set up a "Geek PAC" and become a fulltime lobbyist. PayPal address available on request.
...a linux box configured by a seasoned admin setting up linux for the first time. (weeks later: "What, sendmail and portmapper are running? I didn't turn those on!")
Can any "seasoned admin" out there envision a scenario where the first command run after newly-installing a server isn't "ps -ef", followed by "lsof -i" or "netstat -a"? My $DEITY, doesn't _anyone_ check system configuration before deploying a server onto the Internet? How could it possibly take more than minutes to find out what services your box is running?
Furrfu.
In any case, since SCOX have now admitted in court that there are no "trade secrets" contributed by IBM into Linux, we can all cheer.
If the A/V software could be just a little smarter, or run the suspect Email through a header parser first, most of the problems would go away. The main problem occurs when the A/V software mindlessly bounces the message back to whoever is listed in the "From:" (or, possibly, "Reply-To:") header, rather than to the Postnmaster address of the last damned SMTP relay. Is it too much to ask to parse the Received: headers and find out where the mail really came from, rather than blindly replying to a possibly-forged address?
They could find me: Registered Linux Owner #324965
Still waiting for my letter, Darl!
Of course, all mail server software should ship/install with open relaying disabled by default. Every MTA I know of has some kind of configuration file or dialog, and the installer/admin should be aske explicitly if s/he wants to let anyone on the Internet send mail to anyone else on the Internet via hir server.
This is a problem with software (from OS's to everything else) - ALL SOFTWARE SHOULD BE SECURE BY DEFAULT - then someone has to make an explicit decision to make it less secure. How long is it going to be before vendors and OSS developers get this?
So use a web proxy...
Patent bilong CARGO!
Yeah, if you consider $5.6B in annual revenue "minimum wage"
I, for one, would gladly pay for the syringe!
And, autofs does exactly what you're looking for. You will have to hack the autofs startup script (unles you get SuSE's) to recognize NIS+ automount maps, and AFAIK "direct" automount points don't work, but it's still cool - I use it for over 200 users every day.
I remember from growing up in SC, people referring to an "RC Cocacola" a a generic name for a cola drink.
Mmmm...RC and Moon Pies...