/. just melted the server this rant was on... So I guess Linux Zealots may be "terrorists" after all!
I can see the scene from here:
*sound of melted plastic bubbling from the crater that once was a web server*
User: Oh my gosh!! What happened to that server?? Admin: Your rant against the Linux Zealots was posted on Slashdot. User: Oooops. Admin: The server was slashdotted by 500,000 angry Slashdot readers. 45 seconds after the post. User: Oooops. Admin: (points silently to the spiky 5ft cluebat hanging on the wall behind his desk) User: Oooops? *loud thump* User: I told you so! Linux zealots are terrorists! Admin: Maybe, but I feel better now...
how viable it would be to run a cluster of various platforms, for example a couple of macPPC, x-86, and UltraSPARC computers running as a netBSD cluster. Would NetBSD be able to overcome these big platform differences?
Actually, yes. While I am not a specialist of NetBSD, it runs very well on all these machines -- I had a doubt about the UltraSPARC, then I read this.
The only thing that would be slightly different between these platforms would be the installation procedure, and even that procedure is fairly standardized.
Once the NetBSD system is installed,everything should work exactly in the same way over all these platforms -- the only difference would be the device names and the name assigned to the network interfaces.
Please note that this type of cluster has been attempted before and it seems to work very well, albeit much more slowly than a high-performance (all Opteron, for instance) cluster.
I hope they are not running their web site on this little thing, because their sites is already slashdotted... Gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "[Death|Demise] of the PDAs"... =)
a filesystem which, accoring to Microsoft, will open up a whole new world of information availability.... for virus writers, spammers and crackers, that is.
No, I am not trolling. I am not even being funny. If Microsoft cannot reasonably secure their OS, what makes you think they will be able to secure this new file system?
Think about the possibilities: no Admin password on this Windows 2020 box you just r00ted? No problem!! Just do the following SQL request and you'll find the password in plain text in this database table.
Oh, and while you are at it, just do this other SQL request to find all the documents marked "confidential" and this one to find the pr0n stashed away somewhere on the HDD.
Frankly, what did you expect from Forbes magazine? These people looooove closed-source companies making lots of $$$.
They also do not understand the business benefits of GPL: strong, stable, mature code that is freely modifiable and that will actuall ensure that your competitors will have to share whatever modifications and improvements they make to the code with you.
This is the basis for much "coopetition" between firms, which has produced some fairly advanced open standards. This is also why IBM is invested in Linux in such a big way.
Actually, I think this may have an interesting effect: it will get people (maybe even PHBs) interested in the work of the FSF. And maybe some will see though all the FUD and exclaim: "A 'free' operating system?! That's too good to be true!".
Besides, I do think the solution is, for Cisco, quite easy: release the Linksys/Broadcom code that is under GPL. Then, if they don't like the GPL, they can always either replace it or use a code that's under a different license (BSD).
If it takes "hit men" to enforce the GPL, then so be it! What makes it bad when these people enforce the GPL, and not when they "protect their Intellectual Property"? (think *cough* SCO *cough*)
... is that, overall, ext2fs seems to perform better than ext3fs. I know journaling is an important advantage of ext3fs, but isn't it more important (for some applications) to have better performances?
And, as many others have already pointed out, it would be nice to have a comparison of these file systems with the *BSDs FFS...
Windows email: Pegasus Mail or Sylpheed/Claws Windows antivirus: AVG antivirus Windows browser: Firebird Windows office: Open office + MS Word (ugh!) Windows editor: vim/Gvim Windows firewall: ZoneAlarm, Note Tab Windows ripper: CDEx Windows Multimedia: WinAmp3 Windows audio: Audacity Windows graphics: The Gimp, Iview32 Windows SSH: PuTTY Extra: Unix command-line tools for Windows.
Linux email: Sylpheed Linux antivirus: N/A Linux browser: Gaelon or Firebird Linux office: Open Office or Ted + PostGreSQL + GNUmeric +... Linux editor: vim/gvim Linux firewall: IPTables...;-) Linux GUI: XFCE Linux Multimedia: XMMS Linux Audio: Audacity Linux Graphics: The Gimp, Gnome Viewer Linux SSH: OpenSSH (what else?!):-)
Etc... etc... I could go on and on but most of the programs I use really are free software or freeware.
IBM has a patent portfolio large enough to fend off any patent lawsuits against Linux and other open source software. IBM is also one of the biggest supporters of Linux, so there is still hope that IBM won't leave us high and dry when the patent attacks on Linux begin.
Sorry, I disagree.
IBM is corporation. That means its primary goal is profit.
Linux is, for the moment, a source of profit for IBM, mainly for the hardware and the consulting arms of IBM.
If IBM managers think that Linux has ceased to be a source of profit, or even become a liablity for the company, they'll simply stop supporting Linux and switch to soemthing else.
Don't kid yourself: IBM is Linux's "friend" only because Linux has proved profitable and allows Big Blue not to depend too much on Microsoft.
And remember this, as well: IBM was a huge company when Bill Gates was still in his diapers. It has seen computing fads (mainframes, minicomputers, microcomputers, real-time, clusters, etc) come and go. And it is still in business. What makes you think this company is above the famous "embrace and extend"?
No, sorry, IBM support of Linux is self-serving at best and very temporary at worst.
In many countries in Europe, cell phones are simply forbidden in hospitals. They must be turned off, and (in the most extreme case) left at the entrance counter.
I fail to see why some people (nurses, health care workers) are allowed to use cell phones in a hospital, while most others are not.
Ban cell phones in hospitals, or at least require personnel to leave them switched off in their lockers, and the problem is solved... isn't it?
All very Orwellian and Big Brother, the whole experiment was brought to an end by the CIA sponsored coup d'etat on the September 11th, 1973.
Why is this "Orwellian and Big Brother[ish]"? You seem to forget that the "CIA sponsored coup" was actually a pretty bloody affair itself... More than 3000 people "disappeared" (tortured and fed to the fishes), some because they were just suspected of left-of-center sypathies.
"[...] It's wonderful to be able to examine the evidence," said Sarah Angliss, a composer and engineer who worked on the project.
Hmmm. Let me get this straight:
She is a woman.
She is an engineer.
She is a composer.
She works on seriously cool projects. Like the effect of infrasound on human behaviour.
I think I am in love... Will you marry me, Sarah? I just hope my wife is not reading this...;-)
Old hat!
on
Cracking GSM
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Hmmm. If I remember well, other Israeli crypto researchers, including Pr Shamir (of RSA fame, Rivest - Shamir - Adelman) mentioned a couple of years ago that GSM crypto could, theoretically, be cracked almost in real time by a (relatively) low-powered machine.
GSM specialists have known for a number of years now that GSM crypto was not that good. Interestingly enough, GSM crypto was designed by French 'military specialists', which has raised the usual (probably justified) suspicions of backdoors.
Sorry for not being able to produce more info, but I am sure other Slashdotters will have interesting links to supply...
As they say themselves, this was based on files downloaded from the Internet, which were probably designed in order to be viewed by the greatest number of people.
Hmmm... Then again, putting MS Office files on the Internet, instead of PDF of plain HTML probably means the user do not have enough computer knowledge to optimize said files. So, it's a good point.
On the other hand, I am surprised that the numbers for StarOffice are greater than the numbers for OpenOffice... How come?
Anyway, this is good news, and should be a valuable lesson for most people with PHBs... =)
Simply replying to the letter/emaim they received, and providing a clear, simple-to-understand and short description of the file should be enough to clear any and all misunderstanding.
Don't turn anthills into mountains, people. I am sure even the dumber PHB can understand that this file has nothing to do with "Pac Man"... Ooops... There goes another DMCA violation!!;-)
Is it me, or is this SCO thing looking more and more like a bad parody of a wrestling match??!!
"And, in the left corner, Red Hat is entering the ring, with his trademarked legal fund spandex and red fedora! SuSE is standing by, ready to lend a helping hand to his wrestling partner, while SCO's partner-in-crime, Microsoft is screaming 'HURT HIM!, HURT HIM!' to Darl McBride... But wait! Oh my Gosh! Red Hat has started a double-nuclear-powered screwdriver on both Darl McBride legs!! Wait!! Microsoft is trying to bite Red Hat butt while being severely pounded by 'Mein licenz ist GPL' SuSE!! It's a four way fight, people!"
Aaaaah... Saturday night wrestling... (lick lips in anticipation)...
Let's just hope that the good guys win! 10 to 1 on the little guy with the red hat!;-)
Intelligent Design violates the principle known as "Occam's Razor", which states that, given two plausible explanations for one phenomenon, the most simple explanation is the correct one.
"Intelligent Design" states that an intelligent creator was at the origin of the universe [some even say a purely semitic YHWH] and of all life. It can be construed as more complicated than a purely "naturalistic" vision, because it states that this all-knowing, all-powerful being is necessary for the universe to be created.
On the other hand, the "naturalistic" vision can be said to be "more simple" because it only requires parameters that are more limited and easier to prove (Singularity = Big Bang = Universe, Mutations = Evolution = Intelligent beings).
Therefore, I prefer the naturalistic version. In my experience, people who uphold the "Intelligent Design" theory are only using it to justify their own views of the world... as well as their own prejudices [nothing personal here].
At this point in time, I am not so sure that Intelligent Design or Creationism have anything going for them, except in the most fundamentalist circles.
So... How will the Universe end? Big Crunch, Dark & Cold, Equilibrium, Giant Black Holes, Act of God, or... what?
And, of course, how can you be so sure of that? [Add "You, Insensitive Clod!" to this last question for the humorous touch...]
Whatever theory you build today will only be validated in, what? A dozen billion years? More? So what makes you so sure you know the ned of the Universe today?
Please note: this is really a serious question. I am interested in the End of the Universe as we know it. Thanks for your answers!
Expert: Well... The market experts all seem to think attacking Iran is a bad idea, that staying in Iraq is a bad idea, and the probability that G.W. Bush will lose the 2004 election has reached 94.7%
Rumsfeld: All Right! They have told us exactly what the surrender cheese-eqting monkeys don't want us to do! Therefore, let's do it!! Iran, here we come -- let's blast some mullah back to Kingdom come!
Expert: But uh, sir...
Rumsfeld: Great work, Johnson! Keep an eye on those Frenchies and Arabs for us, and you'll get that nice little raise we talked about! Ah, who needs the CIA when you can have contrarian web sites to point the way at the best interests of the USA?!
[Donald Rumsfeld leaves the room with his entourage]
Slashdot Mirror
/. just melted the server this rant was on... So I guess Linux Zealots may be "terrorists" after all!
I can see the scene from here:
*sound of melted plastic bubbling from the crater that once was a web server*
User: Oh my gosh!! What happened to that server??
Admin: Your rant against the Linux Zealots was posted on Slashdot.
User: Oooops.
Admin: The server was slashdotted by 500,000 angry Slashdot readers. 45 seconds after the post.
User: Oooops.
Admin: (points silently to the spiky 5ft cluebat hanging on the wall behind his desk)
User: Oooops?
*loud thump*
User: I told you so! Linux zealots are terrorists!
Admin: Maybe, but I feel better now...
how viable it would be to run a cluster of various platforms, for example a couple of macPPC, x-86, and UltraSPARC computers running as a netBSD cluster. Would NetBSD be able to overcome these big platform differences?
,everything should work exactly in the same way over all these platforms -- the only difference would be the device names and the name assigned to the network interfaces.
Actually, yes. While I am not a specialist of NetBSD, it runs very well on all these machines -- I had a doubt about the UltraSPARC, then I read this.
The only thing that would be slightly different between these platforms would be the installation procedure, and even that procedure is fairly standardized.
Once the NetBSD system is installed
Please note that this type of cluster has been attempted before and it seems to work very well, albeit much more slowly than a high-performance (all Opteron, for instance) cluster.
I hope they are not running their web site on this little thing, because their sites is already slashdotted... Gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "[Death|Demise] of the PDAs"... =)
a filesystem which, accoring to Microsoft, will open up a whole new world of information availability. ... for virus writers, spammers and crackers, that is.
No, I am not trolling. I am not even being funny. If Microsoft cannot reasonably secure their OS, what makes you think they will be able to secure this new file system?
Think about the possibilities: no Admin password on this Windows 2020 box you just r00ted? No problem!! Just do the following SQL request and you'll find the password in plain text in this database table.
Oh, and while you are at it, just do this other SQL request to find all the documents marked "confidential" and this one to find the pr0n stashed away somewhere on the HDD.
It's going to be really ugly out there folks...
I still can't order OpenBSD 3.4 throught its web site. Unless I am mistaken, I think this announcement was a little bit premature...
Using a distributed P2P network? Isn't that what Freenet is all about? It also has the added bonus of offering strong encryption...
I fail to see what's new here, except the fact that it takes place in the USA.
Frankly, what did you expect from Forbes magazine? These people looooove closed-source companies making lots of $$$.
They also do not understand the business benefits of GPL: strong, stable, mature code that is freely modifiable and that will actuall ensure that your competitors will have to share whatever modifications and improvements they make to the code with you.
This is the basis for much "coopetition" between firms, which has produced some fairly advanced open standards. This is also why IBM is invested in Linux in such a big way.
Actually, I think this may have an interesting effect: it will get people (maybe even PHBs) interested in the work of the FSF. And maybe some will see though all the FUD and exclaim: "A 'free' operating system?! That's too good to be true!".
Besides, I do think the solution is, for Cisco, quite easy: release the Linksys/Broadcom code that is under GPL. Then, if they don't like the GPL, they can always either replace it or use a code that's under a different license (BSD).
If it takes "hit men" to enforce the GPL, then so be it! What makes it bad when these people enforce the GPL, and not when they "protect their Intellectual Property"? (think *cough* SCO *cough*)
Vim for best editor?? What are these guys smoking? Where is Emacs?
;-)
Oh wait... I already use vim all the time. Ahem. Never mind me, carry on...
(Said firmly tongue-in-cheek, of course! Feel free to mod me down, now)
... is that, overall, ext2fs seems to perform better than ext3fs. I know journaling is an important advantage of ext3fs, but isn't it more important (for some applications) to have better performances?
And, as many others have already pointed out, it would be nice to have a comparison of these file systems with the *BSDs FFS...
Any comment on this would be greatly appreciated!
Let's see...
... ;-) :-)
Here is what I use every day:
Windows email: Pegasus Mail or Sylpheed/Claws
Windows antivirus: AVG antivirus
Windows browser: Firebird
Windows office: Open office + MS Word (ugh!)
Windows editor: vim/Gvim
Windows firewall: ZoneAlarm, Note Tab
Windows ripper: CDEx
Windows Multimedia: WinAmp3
Windows audio: Audacity
Windows graphics: The Gimp, Iview32
Windows SSH: PuTTY
Extra: Unix command-line tools for Windows.
Linux email: Sylpheed
Linux antivirus: N/A
Linux browser: Gaelon or Firebird
Linux office: Open Office or Ted + PostGreSQL + GNUmeric +
Linux editor: vim/gvim
Linux firewall: IPTables...
Linux GUI: XFCE
Linux Multimedia: XMMS
Linux Audio: Audacity
Linux Graphics: The Gimp, Gnome Viewer
Linux SSH: OpenSSH (what else?!)
Etc... etc... I could go on and on but most of the programs I use really are free software or freeware.
On the other hand, this also confirms that SCO is spouting non-sense and has no legal basis for its suits, since:
I predict SCO is therefore going to be squashed by IBM, SGI, Red Hat etc. Good riddance.
IBM has a patent portfolio large enough to fend off any patent lawsuits against Linux and other open source software. IBM is also one of the biggest supporters of Linux, so there is still hope that IBM won't leave us high and dry when the patent attacks on Linux begin.
.
Sorry, I disagree.
IBM is corporation . That means its primary goal is profit
Linux is, for the moment, a source of profit for IBM, mainly for the hardware and the consulting arms of IBM.
If IBM managers think that Linux has ceased to be a source of profit, or even become a liablity for the company, they'll simply stop supporting Linux and switch to soemthing else.
Don't kid yourself: IBM is Linux's "friend" only because Linux has proved profitable and allows Big Blue not to depend too much on Microsoft.
And remember this, as well: IBM was a huge company when Bill Gates was still in his diapers. It has seen computing fads (mainframes, minicomputers, microcomputers, real-time, clusters, etc) come and go. And it is still in business. What makes you think this company is above the famous "embrace and extend"?
No, sorry, IBM support of Linux is self-serving at best and very temporary at worst.
In many countries in Europe, cell phones are simply forbidden in hospitals. They must be turned off, and (in the most extreme case) left at the entrance counter.
I fail to see why some people (nurses, health care workers) are allowed to use cell phones in a hospital, while most others are not.
Ban cell phones in hospitals, or at least require personnel to leave them switched off in their lockers, and the problem is solved... isn't it?
Hmph. At the risk of sounding like a leftie:
All very Orwellian and Big Brother, the whole experiment was brought to an end by the CIA sponsored coup d'etat on the September 11th, 1973.
Why is this "Orwellian and Big Brother[ish]"? You seem to forget that the "CIA sponsored coup" was actually a pretty bloody affair itself... More than 3000 people "disappeared" (tortured and fed to the fishes), some because they were just suspected of left-of-center sypathies.
But don't take my word for it, read the following:
Amnesty International 1, Amnesty International 2, Amnesty International 3, Human Rights Watch, and even this week's Economist, etc... I could go on, but you get my drift.
From the article:
"[...] It's wonderful to be able to examine the evidence," said Sarah Angliss, a composer and engineer who worked on the project.
Hmmm. Let me get this straight:
I think I am in love... Will you marry me, Sarah? I just hope my wife is not reading this...
Hmmm. If I remember well, other Israeli crypto researchers, including Pr Shamir (of RSA fame, Rivest - Shamir - Adelman) mentioned a couple of years ago that GSM crypto could, theoretically, be cracked almost in real time by a (relatively) low-powered machine.
GSM specialists have known for a number of years now that GSM crypto was not that good. Interestingly enough, GSM crypto was designed by French 'military specialists', which has raised the usual (probably justified) suspicions of backdoors.
Sorry for not being able to produce more info, but I am sure other Slashdotters will have interesting links to supply...
[Generic answer letter]
Dear SCO,
Thank you for your kind invoice. I believe the proper place for you to use it is by following instructions:
[insert goatse.cx pic here].
And this offer is final!
Best Regards, all the best to the SEC investigators that are knocking on your door right now, etc., etc.
Yours truly,
[Insert Linux user name here]
>;->
As they say themselves, this was based on files downloaded from the Internet, which were probably designed in order to be viewed by the greatest number of people.
Hmmm... Then again, putting MS Office files on the Internet, instead of PDF of plain HTML probably means the user do not have enough computer knowledge to optimize said files. So, it's a good point.
On the other hand, I am surprised that the numbers for StarOffice are greater than the numbers for OpenOffice... How come?
Anyway, this is good news, and should be a valuable lesson for most people with PHBs... =)
Sshhh... All the coders are at work...
Simply replying to the letter/emaim they received, and providing a clear, simple-to-understand and short description of the file should be enough to clear any and all misunderstanding.
;-)
Don't turn anthills into mountains, people. I am sure even the dumber PHB can understand that this file has nothing to do with "Pac Man"... Ooops... There goes another DMCA violation!!
Will you be back for "The Recall 2: Revenge of the Grays?" ;-)
Is it me, or is this SCO thing looking more and more like a bad parody of a wrestling match??!!
;-)
"And, in the left corner, Red Hat is entering the ring, with his trademarked legal fund spandex and red fedora! SuSE is standing by, ready to lend a helping hand to his wrestling partner, while SCO's partner-in-crime, Microsoft is screaming 'HURT HIM!, HURT HIM!' to Darl McBride... But wait! Oh my Gosh! Red Hat has started a double-nuclear-powered screwdriver on both Darl McBride legs!! Wait!! Microsoft is trying to bite Red Hat butt while being severely pounded by 'Mein licenz ist GPL' SuSE!! It's a four way fight, people!"
Aaaaah... Saturday night wrestling... (lick lips in anticipation)...
Let's just hope that the good guys win! 10 to 1 on the little guy with the red hat!
Intelligent Design violates the principle known as "Occam's Razor", which states that, given two plausible explanations for one phenomenon, the most simple explanation is the correct one.
"Intelligent Design" states that an intelligent creator was at the origin of the universe [some even say a purely semitic YHWH] and of all life. It can be construed as more complicated than a purely "naturalistic" vision, because it states that this all-knowing, all-powerful being is necessary for the universe to be created.
On the other hand, the "naturalistic" vision can be said to be "more simple" because it only requires parameters that are more limited and easier to prove (Singularity = Big Bang = Universe, Mutations = Evolution = Intelligent beings).
Therefore, I prefer the naturalistic version. In my experience, people who uphold the "Intelligent Design" theory are only using it to justify their own views of the world... as well as their own prejudices [nothing personal here].
At this point in time, I am not so sure that Intelligent Design or Creationism have anything going for them, except in the most fundamentalist circles.
(Just my US$ 0.02...)
So... How will the Universe end? Big Crunch, Dark & Cold, Equilibrium, Giant Black Holes, Act of God, or... what?
And, of course, how can you be so sure of that? [Add "You, Insensitive Clod!" to this last question for the humorous touch...]
Whatever theory you build today will only be validated in, what? A dozen billion years? More? So what makes you so sure you know the ned of the Universe today?
Please note: this is really a serious question. I am interested in the End of the Universe as we know it. Thanks for your answers!
Rumsfeld: How is it going?
Expert: Not very good.
Rumsfeld: What do you mean, "not very good"??
Expert: Well... The market experts all seem to think attacking Iran is a bad idea, that staying in Iraq is a bad idea, and the probability that G.W. Bush will lose the 2004 election has reached 94.7%
Rumsfeld: All Right! They have told us exactly what the surrender cheese-eqting monkeys don't want us to do! Therefore, let's do it!! Iran, here we come -- let's blast some mullah back to Kingdom come!
Expert: But uh, sir...
Rumsfeld: Great work, Johnson! Keep an eye on those Frenchies and Arabs for us, and you'll get that nice little raise we talked about! Ah, who needs the CIA when you can have contrarian web sites to point the way at the best interests of the USA?!
[Donald Rumsfeld leaves the room with his entourage]