Re:Suse x64 and 3ware RAID
on
Suse 9.1 Reviews?
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
"A brand new windows box put on the internet will start rebooting every sixty seconds without security precautions. "
But that is complete horsecrap.
When was the last time you TRIED putting a store-fresh Windows box online, especially if it wasn't running XP pro? It will almost certainly get hosed in less than five minutes - I've watched it happen.
-Ed
P.S. There's a down side when it doesn't happen, too: I do know a couple folks who put new machines online - usually on dialup - with no firewall, anti-virus or patching and survived day one. They therefore assume patching and anti-virus are all hype, and NEVER patch anything. Result: another zombie in the next round of worms.
P.P.S. I hate Windows, but I also know that Linux has a long way to come before your typical user can really be comfortable with it. As you said, Linux is designed to be secure, not easy. That said, never take your Windows box online without a firewall.
The theory goes that if you really didn't care about your karma, not at all, you wouldn't mention it.
That's exactly what I said - I don't care how HIGH it gets; I just don't want it to be down in the basement, because that means a lot of readers never see what I have to say.
It seems to be a really touchy issue with some of the folks who care a lot more than I do, so I'll avoid mentioning it from now on, okay?
Your only mistake is in assuming that users of Fedora and RH Enterprise are different people. In many cases they are the same.
Actually, that's not my assumption quite as much as my question (I admit, I worded my post to prompt a sizable reaction). More power to you for supporting a company that's helped you - really. I just doubt that the economics works out all that well on the bigger scale, when it comes to making Fedora a truly collaborative effort.
Eh, whatever. I frankly couldn't care less how high my karma goes; I have many better things to do than posting on/., which is why I'm on here so rarely. I just don't feel like getting modded into the basement, because I do like the ability to post and be heard occasionally.
If they do want to spend the bucks, that's fine too. But don't lie to us and tell us that Fedora is going to be part of the OSS community, and then not make it part of the community.
I suspect the real problem is just RH didn't have the infrastructure needed to have community development of Fedora.
Exactly.
I've got Fedora on my laptop, and we run RHEL on our servers at work. It's a nice mix because I want the latest and greatest on my laptop, and I want long-term support on servers. I don't want to wait a year and half between releases for my laptop, I want the 2.6 kernel as soon as it's reasonably stable. That's Fedora.
One has to ask oneself, here, why one really expects to be part of a community of open source developers when the project in question is run by a for-profit company and there are thousands of people who want to help and think they can.
What I'm saying is, with the decision to split Fedora from the core product lines, Red Hat essentially removed their own motive for expending huge amounts of time in evaluating user input, particularly user-submitted code.
It's simple economics: where's the money in it? "User loyalty," you say. Really? Aren't Fedora users the ones who don't need RH Enterprise or just don't want to pay for anything? Seems to me that they're the same ones who, if they convince an employer to go OSS, will also try to do it all themselves, to avoid "evil" licensing fees.
It seems to me that Red Hat is just looking out for number 1 by not spending huge amounts of time with non-paying users; even when those users have valid input, the time involved in building a trusted developer base makes it prohibitive.
See, the problem with that is that it would kill my client base. All the people who hired "no holds barred" SEO firms, get banned, then hire me, would do so no more.
1) Everybody be nice 2) Client base dries up 3) ???? 4) Profit!
You're kidding, right? I'll skip the redundant comments about transactions, etc, but I do have to comment on corruption and resource hogging. I have built numerous websites and client-server apps with MySQL. Despite the fact that some of these apps frequently add tens of thousands of records per minute, I have never experienced corruption (compared to SQL Server, which does corrupt at every chance) and have found that it uses far less resources than other RDBMS, to deliver results at least as fast.
<troll>Maybe you're just not building and optimizing your databases correctly, and PostGreSQL is making you look good...</troll>
My apologies, and thanks for the clarification. I hadn't "practiced" that response; I just took your comment to mean something other than you intended. That was my error; I thought you were making light of homelessness, not pointing out the irony.
Also, you're right - it's not tragic. Bad choice of words.
That's pretty tasteless. Most homeless people never aimed to be homeless, but they can't, realistically, get out of that condition, again. Try it sometime - give away your cash, credit cards, house, car, computer, phone, alarm clock... and see if you can get a steady job that pays you more than it costs to eat and replace your clothes as they wear out. It's not funny - it's tragic.
Not sure on that one, but I think most of my unemployed friends are willing to go about anywhere. I don't know that they're actively looking overseas, but they would probably be open to the idea.
Okay, yes, that's a different field. The point is, I know engineers, chemists, biologists, you name it, who can't find jobs (many of them with degrees from places like Harvard, Rice, MIT, Duke, etc, and many of them with multiple graduate degrees). It's not just IT.
It happens - I've been turned down for jobs, because people look at my education and think, "He's not going to be here in six months." I know Ph.D.'s who can't get work; my mom has two degrees from Vanderbilt and can't find work. It definitely happens...
Software breaking is definitely a problem, but how often does it really happen?
All the time! I've had patch installations crash the OS itself, not to mention various programs. The most recent patch (for the DCOM vulnerability) took down a mission-critical server for more than 24 hours a couple weeks ago. Such patches have disabled my modem and network card, messed up the sound and video, corrupted a driver for a floppy drive, and on and on. Microsoft not only releases beta-quality software as final products; they release alpha-quality patches.
I worked briefly as a spammer, but then lost my income as a result of an anti-spam hacker with a chip on his shoulder. Lets just say that it's not a pleasant experience. There's no use for vigilantes on the internet.
Good. You've wasted the time of millions of people. That's "not pleasant," either. Cry me a river.
Because you have to pump energy into the system to get any back out. At best, it would be a way to increase the efficiency of existing power generators (nuclear plants, solar panels, etc).
M$ has been sued into oblivion after major virus causes multiple bank failures or something
Quantum-based computing; today's encryption standards look pass, as 1 gigabyte keys become the standard (plus, you'll get your butt whooped at chess, regularly...)
Voice recognition - maybe...
Biometric security is standard
Hard drives entirely replaced by keychain drives, for all but server systems
Believe me, ratfynk, I hear you... I am a small business owner, myself - we get screwed. What I don't get is how it got to this point - Microsoft has never been so much better than everyone else, in so many ways, at one time, as to cause this kind of dominance. They may have had the better browser for a little while, but they lacked on graphics, sound, stability, etc, during that time... I just don't see how we got here.
First off, congratulations! Secondly, though, that's just the point: it is a $100 rock. This is what happens when somebody gets a monopoly - De Beers undersold everyone, then jacked the prices to the moon, and nobody bothered to try to stop them until they owned the market. In fact, most of their major execs can't set foot in the U.S. without getting arrested for racketeering, anti-trust violations of all stripes, etc...
Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Why does the American public - much less the American government - let itself be duped into using insecure, closed-source, and only half-functional software? It's not the money - the government has to stinking pay Bill Gates and crew for the privilege of using his junk. It's not the jobs - there would be other jobs out there (with RedHat, or Apple, or any of a dozen other OS makers) without MS. In fact, there would probably be more IT jobs than there are...
So why do we put up with it? Please, I'd love to hear ideas. I don't know of much of anything that the average bureaucrat, or military office, or CIA spook, or DOT drivers-license-tester can do on Windows/Office systems, that couldn't be done under Linux or FreeBSD. I really would love to know why, when Germany, India, and who knows how many other countries have ditched closed-source software for OSS, we can't do the same...
Slashdot Mirror
"A brand new windows box put on the internet will start rebooting every sixty seconds without security precautions. "
But that is complete horsecrap.
When was the last time you TRIED putting a store-fresh Windows box online, especially if it wasn't running XP pro? It will almost certainly get hosed in less than five minutes - I've watched it happen.
-Ed
P.S. There's a down side when it doesn't happen, too: I do know a couple folks who put new machines online - usually on dialup - with no firewall, anti-virus or patching and survived day one. They therefore assume patching and anti-virus are all hype, and NEVER patch anything. Result: another zombie in the next round of worms.
P.P.S. I hate Windows, but I also know that Linux has a long way to come before your typical user can really be comfortable with it. As you said, Linux is designed to be secure, not easy. That said, never take your Windows box online without a firewall.
P.P.P.S. Spell check, dude.
The theory goes that if you really didn't care about your karma, not at all, you wouldn't mention it.
That's exactly what I said - I don't care how HIGH it gets; I just don't want it to be down in the basement, because that means a lot of readers never see what I have to say.
It seems to be a really touchy issue with some of the folks who care a lot more than I do, so I'll avoid mentioning it from now on, okay?
-Ed
Your only mistake is in assuming that users of Fedora and RH Enterprise are different people. In many cases they are the same.
Actually, that's not my assumption quite as much as my question (I admit, I worded my post to prompt a sizable reaction). More power to you for supporting a company that's helped you - really. I just doubt that the economics works out all that well on the bigger scale, when it comes to making Fedora a truly collaborative effort.
-Ed
Eh, whatever. I frankly couldn't care less how high my karma goes; I have many better things to do than posting on /., which is why I'm on here so rarely. I just don't feel like getting modded into the basement, because I do like the ability to post and be heard occasionally.
-Ed
I suspect the real problem is just RH didn't have the infrastructure needed to have community development of Fedora.
Exactly.
I've got Fedora on my laptop, and we run RHEL on our servers at work. It's a nice mix because I want the latest and greatest on my laptop, and I want long-term support on servers. I don't want to wait a year and half between releases for my laptop, I want the 2.6 kernel as soon as it's reasonably stable. That's Fedora.
Good points. I wasn't thinking about it that way.
-Ed
One has to ask oneself, here, why one really expects to be part of a community of open source developers when the project in question is run by a for-profit company and there are thousands of people who want to help and think they can.
What I'm saying is, with the decision to split Fedora from the core product lines, Red Hat essentially removed their own motive for expending huge amounts of time in evaluating user input, particularly user-submitted code.
It's simple economics: where's the money in it? "User loyalty," you say. Really? Aren't Fedora users the ones who don't need RH Enterprise or just don't want to pay for anything? Seems to me that they're the same ones who, if they convince an employer to go OSS, will also try to do it all themselves, to avoid "evil" licensing fees.
It seems to me that Red Hat is just looking out for number 1 by not spending huge amounts of time with non-paying users; even when those users have valid input, the time involved in building a trusted developer base makes it prohibitive.
Comments?
-Ed
See, the problem with that is that it would kill my client base. All the people who hired "no holds barred" SEO firms, get banned, then hire me, would do so no more.
1) Everybody be nice
2) Client base dries up
3) ????
4) Profit!
The point is: drive our stock up, up, up! Then sell... and screw the little guy! Yeah, that's the ticket...
You're kidding, right? I'll skip the redundant comments about transactions, etc, but I do have to comment on corruption and resource hogging. I have built numerous websites and client-server apps with MySQL. Despite the fact that some of these apps frequently add tens of thousands of records per minute, I have never experienced corruption (compared to SQL Server, which does corrupt at every chance) and have found that it uses far less resources than other RDBMS, to deliver results at least as fast.
<troll>Maybe you're just not building and optimizing your databases correctly, and PostGreSQL is making you look good...</troll>
-Ed
My apologies, and thanks for the clarification. I hadn't "practiced" that response; I just took your comment to mean something other than you intended. That was my error; I thought you were making light of homelessness, not pointing out the irony.
Also, you're right - it's not tragic. Bad choice of words.
Again, my apologies.
-Ed
Actually, the letter 'o' is in Greek; it's called "omicron," as opposed to "omega."
Think before you post.
That's pretty tasteless. Most homeless people never aimed to be homeless, but they can't, realistically, get out of that condition, again. Try it sometime - give away your cash, credit cards, house, car, computer, phone, alarm clock... and see if you can get a steady job that pays you more than it costs to eat and replace your clothes as they wear out. It's not funny - it's tragic.
Not sure on that one, but I think most of my unemployed friends are willing to go about anywhere. I don't know that they're actively looking overseas, but they would probably be open to the idea.
Okay, yes, that's a different field. The point is, I know engineers, chemists, biologists, you name it, who can't find jobs (many of them with degrees from places like Harvard, Rice, MIT, Duke, etc, and many of them with multiple graduate degrees). It's not just IT.
It happens - I've been turned down for jobs, because people look at my education and think, "He's not going to be here in six months." I know Ph.D.'s who can't get work; my mom has two degrees from Vanderbilt and can't find work. It definitely happens...
Software breaking is definitely a problem, but how often does it really happen?
All the time! I've had patch installations crash the OS itself, not to mention various programs. The most recent patch (for the DCOM vulnerability) took down a mission-critical server for more than 24 hours a couple weeks ago. Such patches have disabled my modem and network card, messed up the sound and video, corrupted a driver for a floppy drive, and on and on. Microsoft not only releases beta-quality software as final products; they release alpha-quality patches.
Not a M$ fan,
Ed
I worked briefly as a spammer, but then lost my income as a result of an anti-spam hacker with a chip on his shoulder. Lets just say that it's not a pleasant experience. There's no use for vigilantes on the internet.
Good. You've wasted the time of millions of people. That's "not pleasant," either. Cry me a river.
Because you have to pump energy into the system to get any back out. At best, it would be a way to increase the efficiency of existing power generators (nuclear plants, solar panels, etc).
...so somebody get on MapQuest and find the SCO offices.
I give it another two.
Believe me, ratfynk, I hear you... I am a small business owner, myself - we get screwed. What I don't get is how it got to this point - Microsoft has never been so much better than everyone else, in so many ways, at one time, as to cause this kind of dominance. They may have had the better browser for a little while, but they lacked on graphics, sound, stability, etc, during that time... I just don't see how we got here.
First off, congratulations! Secondly, though, that's just the point: it is a $100 rock. This is what happens when somebody gets a monopoly - De Beers undersold everyone, then jacked the prices to the moon, and nobody bothered to try to stop them until they owned the market. In fact, most of their major execs can't set foot in the U.S. without getting arrested for racketeering, anti-trust violations of all stripes, etc...
Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Why does the American public - much less the American government - let itself be duped into using insecure, closed-source, and only half-functional software? It's not the money - the government has to stinking pay Bill Gates and crew for the privilege of using his junk. It's not the jobs - there would be other jobs out there (with RedHat, or Apple, or any of a dozen other OS makers) without MS. In fact, there would probably be more IT jobs than there are...
So why do we put up with it? Please, I'd love to hear ideas. I don't know of much of anything that the average bureaucrat, or military office, or CIA spook, or DOT drivers-license-tester can do on Windows/Office systems, that couldn't be done under Linux or FreeBSD. I really would love to know why, when Germany, India, and who knows how many other countries have ditched closed-source software for OSS, we can't do the same...
Any thoughts?