Actually, you are quite correct, however for many of us who run Linux the ratio is more machines than users. Personally I have three linux machines at the house and a laptop I use for both work and pleasure as well as an unofficial Linux cluster under a co worker's desk at work that gives us better development server space than the company I work for officially provides! Thank goodness for Linux.
I write server side J2EE java and the lunux cluster I have outperforms the area I have been officially given on a Solaris server in the server room (this is not the fault of Solaris as I am using only a portion of this machine). If not for my Linux cluster my software would be months behind.
Anyhow, having been one of the first on the Linux list many years ago, it is incredable to me to see the numbers there still so low.
There are approximately 14,000 more users than machines as I looked at the counter several moments ago. So, my question is, are the other 14,000 users running linux on THEMSELVES perhaps? Linux powered humans, now that would be an awesome force to be reconned with!:)
To me, here is one of the most interesting parts of this interview:
Darl(21:50): It's reasonable, except when the comment codes are the same, the humor lines in the comment code are the same, and the typos in the comment code are the same, then you start getting beyond... Ya know, it was kind of like, I learned this one day at school... It becomes more of the... Those, to me, are really the DNA of the code here.
So, SCO can't show the code because that would be giving away their IP... ok, how about showing us the COMMENTS that are exact duplicates so we can track down the true original source of the comments? I am a software developer/architect and I can tell you that I have never seen code commented so well that someone could take the comment alone and recreat the code that went with it!
This sounds like a great idea! The SPF is a way to weed out spam WITHOUT government intervention. ANY government intervention on the internet is a BAD thing!
Here's another idea, what if ISP's charged by the piece for commercial email solicitations to be sent? I mean as a home user I am not allowed to run a web server. mail server, or ftp server. If I wish to do such things for commercial purposes I would need to pay for a commercial hookup. So, if the isp's were to charge even a few pennies per piece for solicitations to be sent via email (requiring a whole different class of metered account for the purpose) how long do you suppose it would take for spammers to realize that allowing people a legitimate opt out, remove me from your list option would be very financially benificial!
Spam is so predominant because it is completely free!!!
At slightly less than a buck a song, downloading online music is actually MORE expensive than buying the album in a store. Even given that fact, the conveinience of being able to shop and purchase my music at home on the spur of the moment after having listened to it on internet radio perhaps would still entice me. Also the thought that I would be able to purchase only those tracks I really wanted to listen to may be worth a bit more.
Given the current manifestations of the "legal" music download services however, there is no way I would touch most of them. Pay a monthly fee and then lose the right to listen if I stop my subscription? Give me a break. Pay for a song but I can only listen to it on my computer or on my computer and one or two alternate systems... no... I payed for it, I should be able to burn it to a cd,or take it with me while walking through the park on my portable mp3 player. I should be able to copy it to my desktop machine, linux OR windows in some truly portable standard media format. I should, in fact, be able to copy it to my work compouter, my home desktop, my laptop or any number of other places if it is conveinient for me to do so. It is MY music if I purchase it! I can do that today if I were to buy a cd in a store (well most cd's), though I have stopped all cd purchases until the RIAA gets there priorities straight as I am NOT going to help support their campaign to extort money out of 12 year old girls who live with their single mom in a housing project or a woman who doesn't even own a computer with an operating system that could run kazaa!
I believe in paying for what I want, a reasonable price for a reasonable value. I may be willing to pay a bit more for conveinience but not for added restrictions.
Ask the RIAA executives how much MORE they would be willing to pay for a car they could only drive on certain roads and even then only for as long as they paid the monthly fee, yes even after the car was completely and totally paid for!
What is going on is the congresspeople who voted for the bill so quickly are all ON the do-not-call list! THEY don't want to be disturbed. I think that those 8 who voted against should be restricted from adding their names to it.:)
Really and truly, is the do not call list going to cost telemarketing workers their jobs? Consider this, what sort of person puts their phone numbers on the do not call list. I think I am a typical person who has done so. I will not EVER buy a product from a telemarketer. Now, as far as looking at this from the telemarketer's point of view, I have actually increased his potential bottom line. He has one less guaranteed no to deal with. Abiding by the do not call list should reduce the percentage of no sale calls. So, even from the point of view of a telemarketing firm, would this not be a good thing?
In any sales related endeavor, if I can manage to get a pre targeted list of prospect who might actually be interested and if I can weed out those who responded in some fashion to something saying I am not interested in advance, I make MORE sales in the same amount of time. If I am compensated as a salesperson on a commission basis, I would think I would welcome this information!
I swear that this is the honest to goodness truth. My teenager (14) came home several months ago and told me most of the kids in his class did not know how many minutes were in an hour. Due mainly to the proliferation of digital timepieces apparently, when asking several of his friends how many minutes are in an hour, I got an instant response with no hesitation whatsoever of "59 minutes" my son laughing and his friends looking confused.... What exactly DO they teach in schools today?
We are pleased to see others taking a stand against the providing of links to illegal versions of copyrighted works. We agree wholeheartedly with your stand that providing search results to copyrighted material is a criminal act. As someone who obviously upholds our philosophy we KNOW that you will be all too happy to remove from any search results that your software provides any links to dowloads of copyrighted works such as music, movies, other software and the like.
I think it is great to attempt to allow people of any culture to FREELY use the internet. I wonder, now that the government is funding such a project for citizens of another country, are we now allowed to fund our own means to do the same and anonymously surf the web and use the resources of the internet free from prying eyes, the RIAA, major corporations and our own government?
I really do not believe that the Linux community at large is responsable for the DOS attacks against SCO, if indeed that is the true reason for their outage.
I would not put it past the SCO folks, morally, to attack their own site to cause FUD... BUT...
We ARE talking about a company who actually thought that changing a font to symbol was enough to keep the rest of the world from seeing what a portion of code said... I honestly do not believe that taken as a whole they are intelligent enough to actually manage a sucessful DOS attack even on their own boxes!
While I believe that both of these entities are doing things that are reprehensable I see a grave danger is the posts that try to equate what the RIAA is doing to the SCO FUD campaign.
SCO is using trumped up, untrue (at least until proven otherwise) press releases and obviously basing much of their arguement on code that is NOT theirs, that they DO NOT own copyright over and is in NO WAY a violation of their IP. Basically, put in simpler terms, they are lieing.
The RIAA is at least representing real copyright violations in some cases. Let's face it, though Jane Doe may be completely innocent, and certainly the RIAA has made gross mistakes in the recent past, no one, even here on/. can deny that there are those who use p2p file sharing software to basically aviod buying music.
SCO is using lies and deceit and running an extortion racket pure and simple, whether you believe that is to simply pump up their stock price or to extort money out of innocent end users of Linux, what they are doing is just plain wrong and should be illegal.
IMHO to even hint at a similarity between the RIAA suits and SCO almost, unintentionally lends credence to the SCO claims. There are those who feel that the RIAA has every right to persue those who share copywritten files. Whether you or I agree with their tactics is not the point, in part, the basis of their claims are legitmate to a much greater extent than anything SCO has uttered.
Please let us not confuse the two here especially amongst the knowlegeable!
The RIAA is using unconstitutional tactics to persue their cause and that is definitely something to be up in arms about and I support Jane Doe, whoever she is in the fight to uphold her constitutional rights. SCO is persuing an entirely bogus CAUSE in the first place so with them the cause itself is wrong.
Thanks for listening, we now return you to your regularly scheduled/. postings.
Please someone, correct me if I am wrong but, isn't Trolltech owned to a large extent by the Canopy Group, the same litigation happy group who are orchestrating the SCO stock scam?
I would be extreemly hesitant to adopt anything that relied even in part on technology even remotely controlled by this group of "litigation is a viable business model" buzzards!
I particularly like this section of the article...
The government argued that the message was incorrect, useful to would-be attackers, and was intentionally designed to give Tornado trouble.
Either the message was incorrect (which would render it useless to would be attackers), OR the message was CORRECT if indeed the message could be useful to would be attackers. I see a real contradiction in the government's arguement here (yes I know, big surprise eh?).
Does this mean that when Microsoft issues a report warning of a vulnerability in their software and exactly where it is and what the vulnerability can cause along with a security advisory that they are breaking the law?
This, IMHO sets a very dangerous precedent. It reminds me of another reuters article I read today concerning corporate whistle blowers having trouble continuing their careers in other companies after exposing illegal activity.
What would you tell a company who wanted to fix some IT related problem but wanted to do it "on the cheap"? Sometimes trying to fix something without professional help can be far more costly than hiring the professional to begin with. Think about the potential down time to your systems or surge damage to leaving this power outage waiting to happen in the state it is currently in, not to mention the fact that even if your company may not agree, YOUR human life is absolutely priceless!
In the words of an oil well firefighter during the first Gulf War (his name escapes me) when asked about his rates being so expensive... "If you think my professional rates are expensive, try hiring an amateur and see what it costs you!"
Does your company actually OWN the building, or lease it? If you are leasing the building, chances are your landlord is responsable for repairing such a hazard.
Support for the particular Linux distro is one thing, Support for Oracle Running on that distro is another thing all together.
At home I run the developer edition of the Oracle 9ias enterprise database as well as release 2 of the Oracle 9ias Application server. I have successfully installed to Red Hat (version 8.0 not Enterprise), Mandrake and also a Debian Distribution. At work we are running a development environment on Red Hat 8.0 and production using Solaris 8. Since we are using pure java and j2ee code our software runs flawlessly across the systems with no changes whatsoever, even considering the fact that some of the developers on the project run Windows systems on their desktops where they actually write some of the source code modules!
If you expect support from Oracle concerning an Oracle installation of any kind whatsoever on Red Hat Linux you best be using Enterprise and yes the support pricing is quite high compared to what most of us are used to running Linux over the years.
I would suggest running your most critical servers on Red Hat Enterprise and if you have supporting environments, perhaps a development or test environment, use Red Hat 8.0 (or even Debian or Mandrake) and save yourself some cash outlay in that way.
If you have the talent within your staff to self support I can attest to the fact that Oracle products run as advertised on Red Hat 7.3 and 8 (have not yet tried 9) using the install procedures Oracle outlines for use on Red Hat Enterprise, but as has already been pointed out, Oracle will not support installations with problems unless you have the Enterprise edition as your underlying Linux Distro.
I have read over and over again from time to time, in various forums and posts, including here on/. that there is no such thing as a perfectly secure OS so is Misrosoft really all that bad or is it just that they are the most popular OS in use?
There is one fundamental difference I would like to point out concerning Microsoft OS's vs Linux, BSD and other open source OS's:
1. With an open source OS those who find security holes and exploits can also patch them themselves since the source code is available. With closed source/proprietary OS software you are at the mercy of the OS Vendor (Microsoft) to provide the appropriate patches when a security hole is discovered.
2. You have to accept on blind faith that they knew what they were doing when they coded the patch and cross your fingers, hoping that the fix does not turn out to cause more problems than the hole reguarding the running of your system and sometimes essential third party software which you may depend on.
Yes, it is true that security holes have been found (and patched quickly) in Linux and other open source variants. The major difference, at least to me, is that I have access to both the original OS code containing the bug/hole/problem as well as the code for the patch that fixes it!
Yes I know that most/. readers already understand this!
Just my two cents worth here.
There are an aweful lot of people out there who are "end users" of the internet explorer web browser, so, by SCO's logic they can sue each and every person who has IE on their computer or offer them a "license" to protect from being sued!
I too doubt the existance of such a customer. BUT if they really do exist would you blame them for not wanting their name divulged? Can you hear the meetings and parties between execs of some of the fortune 500 companies.... "Hey, I got a bridge I'll seel you a license to!" If they do exist, I sure would like to know who they are, I need to stay away from their stock!
Personally I have alomost no faith in the justice system to do the right thing merely for the sake of "doing the right thing". If they do the right thing it will only be because the side defending the right thing has more money (IBM) so justice may prevail but certainly not because of our justice system. Can there really be any doubt in where the decisions made in our justice system come from? Big corporations, the RIAA, Disney, Oil Companies. As an added hurdle this case will be about technology issues, another huge stumbling block for our judicial system, our legislators, pretty much the majority of those in government office.
Please don't get me wrong, I still believe that the United States is one of the greatest countries on earth in which to live, but unless we recognize the erosion of our rights, of our privacy, of our freedoms and stand up and do something about it, it will not remain so forever. I for one do not want to have to explain to my grandchildren why the only people with the law on their side are those with the money and power to buy it!
Sorry for my rant...
Slashdot Mirror
I write server side J2EE java and the lunux cluster I have outperforms the area I have been officially given on a Solaris server in the server room (this is not the fault of Solaris as I am using only a portion of this machine). If not for my Linux cluster my software would be months behind.
Anyhow, having been one of the first on the Linux list many years ago, it is incredable to me to see the numbers there still so low.
Darl(21:50): It's reasonable, except when the comment codes are the same, the humor lines in the comment code are the same, and the typos in the comment code are the same, then you start getting beyond... Ya know, it was kind of like, I learned this one day at school ... It becomes more of the... Those, to me, are really the DNA of the code here.
So, SCO can't show the code because that would be giving away their IP... ok, how about showing us the COMMENTS that are exact duplicates so we can track down the true original source of the comments? I am a software developer/architect and I can tell you that I have never seen code commented so well that someone could take the comment alone and recreat the code that went with it!
Show us the comments Darl!
Does this mean that my toaster will be susceptable to viruses now?
Here's another idea, what if ISP's charged by the piece for commercial email solicitations to be sent? I mean as a home user I am not allowed to run a web server. mail server, or ftp server. If I wish to do such things for commercial purposes I would need to pay for a commercial hookup. So, if the isp's were to charge even a few pennies per piece for solicitations to be sent via email (requiring a whole different class of metered account for the purpose) how long do you suppose it would take for spammers to realize that allowing people a legitimate opt out, remove me from your list option would be very financially benificial!
Spam is so predominant because it is completely free!!!
Given the current manifestations of the "legal" music download services however, there is no way I would touch most of them. Pay a monthly fee and then lose the right to listen if I stop my subscription? Give me a break. Pay for a song but I can only listen to it on my computer or on my computer and one or two alternate systems... no... I payed for it, I should be able to burn it to a cd,or take it with me while walking through the park on my portable mp3 player. I should be able to copy it to my desktop machine, linux OR windows in some truly portable standard media format. I should, in fact, be able to copy it to my work compouter, my home desktop, my laptop or any number of other places if it is conveinient for me to do so. It is MY music if I purchase it! I can do that today if I were to buy a cd in a store (well most cd's), though I have stopped all cd purchases until the RIAA gets there priorities straight as I am NOT going to help support their campaign to extort money out of 12 year old girls who live with their single mom in a housing project or a woman who doesn't even own a computer with an operating system that could run kazaa!
I believe in paying for what I want, a reasonable price for a reasonable value. I may be willing to pay a bit more for conveinience but not for added restrictions.
Ask the RIAA executives how much MORE they would be willing to pay for a car they could only drive on certain roads and even then only for as long as they paid the monthly fee, yes even after the car was completely and totally paid for!
I swear that this is the honest to goodness truth. My teenager (14) came home several months ago and told me most of the kids in his class did not know how many minutes were in an hour. Due mainly to the proliferation of digital timepieces apparently, when asking several of his friends how many minutes are in an hour, I got an instant response with no hesitation whatsoever of "59 minutes" my son laughing and his friends looking confused.... What exactly DO they teach in schools today?
Shhhh... you'll wake the Microsoft.... Let them sleep!
To: Sharman Networks
To whom it may concern,
We are pleased to see others taking a stand against the providing of links to illegal versions of copyrighted works. We agree wholeheartedly with your stand that providing search results to copyrighted material is a criminal act. As someone who obviously upholds our philosophy we KNOW that you will be all too happy to remove from any search results that your software provides any links to dowloads of copyrighted works such as music, movies, other software and the like.
Thank you so much for proving our point!
IDIOTS!
Just a thought.
I would not put it past the SCO folks, morally, to attack their own site to cause FUD... BUT...
We ARE talking about a company who actually thought that changing a font to symbol was enough to keep the rest of the world from seeing what a portion of code said... I honestly do not believe that taken as a whole they are intelligent enough to actually manage a sucessful DOS attack even on their own boxes!
Just one man's opinion.
SCO is using trumped up, untrue (at least until proven otherwise) press releases and obviously basing much of their arguement on code that is NOT theirs, that they DO NOT own copyright over and is in NO WAY a violation of their IP. Basically, put in simpler terms, they are lieing.
The RIAA is at least representing real copyright violations in some cases. Let's face it, though Jane Doe may be completely innocent, and certainly the RIAA has made gross mistakes in the recent past, no one, even here on /. can deny that there are those who use p2p file sharing software to basically aviod buying music.
SCO is using lies and deceit and running an extortion racket pure and simple, whether you believe that is to simply pump up their stock price or to extort money out of innocent end users of Linux, what they are doing is just plain wrong and should be illegal.
IMHO to even hint at a similarity between the RIAA suits and SCO almost, unintentionally lends credence to the SCO claims. There are those who feel that the RIAA has every right to persue those who share copywritten files. Whether you or I agree with their tactics is not the point, in part, the basis of their claims are legitmate to a much greater extent than anything SCO has uttered.
Please let us not confuse the two here especially amongst the knowlegeable!
The RIAA is using unconstitutional tactics to persue their cause and that is definitely something to be up in arms about and I support Jane Doe, whoever she is in the fight to uphold her constitutional rights. SCO is persuing an entirely bogus CAUSE in the first place so with them the cause itself is wrong.
Thanks for listening, we now return you to your regularly scheduled /. postings.
I would be extreemly hesitant to adopt anything that relied even in part on technology even remotely controlled by this group of "litigation is a viable business model" buzzards!
Just my own humble opinion!
The Matrix is real... But I'm only visiting!
The government argued that the message was incorrect, useful to would-be attackers, and was intentionally designed to give Tornado trouble.
Either the message was incorrect (which would render it useless to would be attackers), OR the message was CORRECT if indeed the message could be useful to would be attackers. I see a real contradiction in the government's arguement here (yes I know, big surprise eh?).
Does this mean that when Microsoft issues a report warning of a vulnerability in their software and exactly where it is and what the vulnerability can cause along with a security advisory that they are breaking the law?
This, IMHO sets a very dangerous precedent. It reminds me of another reuters article I read today concerning corporate whistle blowers having trouble continuing their careers in other companies after exposing illegal activity.
The Matrix is real... but I'm only visiting!
The Matrix is real... but I'm only visiting!
In the words of an oil well firefighter during the first Gulf War (his name escapes me) when asked about his rates being so expensive... "If you think my professional rates are expensive, try hiring an amateur and see what it costs you!"
Does your company actually OWN the building, or lease it? If you are leasing the building, chances are your landlord is responsable for repairing such a hazard.
The Matrix is real... but I'm only visiting!
At home I run the developer edition of the Oracle 9ias enterprise database as well as release 2 of the Oracle 9ias Application server. I have successfully installed to Red Hat (version 8.0 not Enterprise), Mandrake and also a Debian Distribution. At work we are running a development environment on Red Hat 8.0 and production using Solaris 8. Since we are using pure java and j2ee code our software runs flawlessly across the systems with no changes whatsoever, even considering the fact that some of the developers on the project run Windows systems on their desktops where they actually write some of the source code modules!
If you expect support from Oracle concerning an Oracle installation of any kind whatsoever on Red Hat Linux you best be using Enterprise and yes the support pricing is quite high compared to what most of us are used to running Linux over the years.
I would suggest running your most critical servers on Red Hat Enterprise and if you have supporting environments, perhaps a development or test environment, use Red Hat 8.0 (or even Debian or Mandrake) and save yourself some cash outlay in that way.
If you have the talent within your staff to self support I can attest to the fact that Oracle products run as advertised on Red Hat 7.3 and 8 (have not yet tried 9) using the install procedures Oracle outlines for use on Red Hat Enterprise, but as has already been pointed out, Oracle will not support installations with problems unless you have the Enterprise edition as your underlying Linux Distro.
The Matrix is real... but I'm only visiting!
There is one fundamental difference I would like to point out concerning Microsoft OS's vs Linux, BSD and other open source OS's:
1. With an open source OS those who find security holes and exploits can also patch them themselves since the source code is available. With closed source/proprietary OS software you are at the mercy of the OS Vendor (Microsoft) to provide the appropriate patches when a security hole is discovered.
2. You have to accept on blind faith that they knew what they were doing when they coded the patch and cross your fingers, hoping that the fix does not turn out to cause more problems than the hole reguarding the running of your system and sometimes essential third party software which you may depend on.
Yes, it is true that security holes have been found (and patched quickly) in Linux and other open source variants. The major difference, at least to me, is that I have access to both the original OS code containing the bug/hole/problem as well as the code for the patch that fixes it!
Yes I know that most /. readers already understand this!
Just my two cents worth here.
The Matrix IS real but I'm only visiting!
Has anyone else noticed that microsoft.com is timing out tonight?
There are an aweful lot of people out there who are "end users" of the internet explorer web browser, so, by SCO's logic they can sue each and every person who has IE on their computer or offer them a "license" to protect from being sued!
I too doubt the existance of such a customer. BUT if they really do exist would you blame them for not wanting their name divulged? Can you hear the meetings and parties between execs of some of the fortune 500 companies.... "Hey, I got a bridge I'll seel you a license to!" If they do exist, I sure would like to know who they are, I need to stay away from their stock!
Personally I have alomost no faith in the justice system to do the right thing merely for the sake of "doing the right thing". If they do the right thing it will only be because the side defending the right thing has more money (IBM) so justice may prevail but certainly not because of our justice system. Can there really be any doubt in where the decisions made in our justice system come from? Big corporations, the RIAA, Disney, Oil Companies. As an added hurdle this case will be about technology issues, another huge stumbling block for our judicial system, our legislators, pretty much the majority of those in government office. Please don't get me wrong, I still believe that the United States is one of the greatest countries on earth in which to live, but unless we recognize the erosion of our rights, of our privacy, of our freedoms and stand up and do something about it, it will not remain so forever. I for one do not want to have to explain to my grandchildren why the only people with the law on their side are those with the money and power to buy it! Sorry for my rant...