Yeah, sure, and Linus is molesting little boys. Get real!
No doubt he is.
On the punishment note, the anti-trust laws are designed primarily to protect the people, punishments and justice bedamned. The interests of the consumers come FIRST in anti-trust. That's the whole basis for anti-trust. How is wrecking or punishing Microsoft helping the consumer ? If they screw up Windows and Office that sure as shit doesn't help me as an administrator, my workstation users, or myself at home. Where am I being protected ? By letting the government regulate the software on my computer like they regulate everything else ? Fuck a bunch of that.
A presidential candidate worthy of office, by the same logic, should have broad appeal across the whole nation, and not just play strongly on a single issue to isolated blocs of voters.
That is exactly what the electoral college promotes. How often does Rhode Island see the presidential canidates ? The candiates pick the states with the most electoral votes, and campaign the crap out of them. Look at Al Gore vs George Bush's state votes. If we exclude Florida, Bush has a massive number of states on his side, remember on the news, 95% of the US was painted red for George Bush. Yet Gore had California, New York, and several other New England states. That shows that although the "broad appeal" belonged to George Bush, the electorate belonged to Al Gore.
The guy that wrote this article is an idiot, who thinks he can trick laymen into agreeing with his arguements by analogies that do not make sense, and fuzzy headed logic. The TRUE reason the electoral college was implemented was that the early thinkers including Andrew Jackson, did not trust the intelligence (or lack thereof) of the common man.
But all the electoral college does is give some state's voters more powerful votes than mine, yet allow the majority vote of my state to invalidate whatever they decide anyway. It's an absolutely nonsensical system, and no amount of babbling about the World Series is going to change that.
And the most important reason why I hate the electoral college is this: I voted for George Bush, yet my "vote" went to Al Gore. Did I punch the wrong hole on my ballot ? I think not.
Setup an open test. But include FreeBSD and FreeBSD people. Don't make it a Linux is better than Microsoft, ignoring the fact that many claim FreeBSD is better than Linux in many ways. (Not my statement, simply relaying what others have said). And unlike certain previous BSD vs Linux benchmarks, I believe -STABLE should be used rather than -CURRENT.
I truly can't believe how many times there have been comparitive benchmarks and yet each time a different OS will win and people will cry and rage and flame over who cheated and who got paid for the results. This time, everyone get the same piece of hardware, like a Dell PowerEdge or IBM Netfinity, but one which has hardware supported by ALL of the OSes involved in the test. Have the Linux people setup the Linux box, the BSD people setup the BSD box, and get Microsoft people to setup the Win2k box. Then after the benchmarks are setup, agreed to, completed, and the results gathered, let there be no bitching, whining, crying, and otherwise making excuses for your OS's kernel, and how such and such is disabled by default, and the box wasn't tweaked right, and in the next version of the kernel we plan to have such-and-such hack job in place for a 500% speed increase that will allow our kernel to run the benchmark while computing pi and taking over the world simultainiously. Enough already. Run the damn benchmarks, having each group send their best people to configure the boxes. No "generic" "unbiased" people setting them up because people always say they are ignorant and didn't do the right thing. Let the OS zealots put their star OS programmers and designers up on the center stage. If Linus Torvalds himself configured the Linux server for the benchmark, who's going to bitch about how it was setup ? The same for FreeBSD. Have BSDi put up some real talent for the configuration of the box, and if they lose the benchmark "jihad" then so be it. All I'm saying is, I believe we CAN run a benchmark that no one can honestly bitch about. Sure people could still bitch, but they'd look like idiots and they'd have to slam their own "heros" in order to invalidate the tests.
Underrated: If Chewbacca Lived On Endor, You Must Love Slashdot
DUDE ! I don't get that with the Chewbacca defense ! Chewbacca did NOT live on Endor ! He lived on kyshnshshshshshs or something. The EWOKS lived on Endor. Geez.
If Chewbacca Lived On Endor, BSD is superior to Linux. If Jabba the Hutt licked Pricess Leia, BSD is superior to Linux. If you like StarWars, BSD is superior to Linux.
The day you have half the driver support, half the functionality of the API, and anything close to a GUI besides that piece of shit XFree86, then you can talk about a complex OS. Look at QNX. That's a frickin OS. Don't compare your OS to Windows when it's apples to oranges.
More of this "sure RedHat 7 has many bugs, but not as many as Microsoft !!!" bullshit
Maybe everyone needs to take a look at the Microsoft hating bullshit they've been spouting for YEARS. When Windows 2000 came out, every Linux kiddie on the block was talking about how it had something like 64000 known bugs or something. So everyone has fun with thier lame little names like MicroBug, MicroSloth, Micro$oft, Winblows, etc. Acting like the OpenSource process renders everything 100% bug free and shit, and then look. Every new point zero version of Red Hat has had the same fucking issues. And what do the Linux kiddies say ? Nothing. Maybe you hyprocrites need to look at your own OS of choice and realize that EVERYONE has bugs. I have no problem with Microsoft bashing as long as it's founded. But when you have the kettle calling the pot black, you need to back down a bit.
For reference, I'm a FreeBSD guy, not a big MCSE Microsoft whore. I just don't like all the fscking hyprocricy. Critisize Microsoft for something they alone are guilty for. If you make fun of something because it has bugs, and you don't understand that the bigger the project, the more the bugs, then you're exposing yourself as someone who doesn't know shit about programming.
Moderate this down if you must, I know it could be considered flame-bait, but consider what I've said here. I'm not trolling, I am challenging the Linux community to respond the same way to Red Hat as it did to Microsoft when Windows 2000 came out.
Re:Traffic analysis and secure messaging - thought
on
IRC Improvements
·
· Score: 1
Decentralized/peer to peer IRC ? Are you out of your mind ? Look at Gnutella.
Re:Language Sexual Orientation: A guide
on
IRC Improvements
·
· Score: 1
C is hetro.
C++ is bi, but prefers butch women.
PASCAL is a transvestite.
FORTRAN doesn't have an active sex life anymore.
Visual BASIC is gay, but pretends it isn't.
Perl is very clearly, gay and proud.
PLEASE MOD THAT UP. THAT'S TOTALLY FUNNY
Re:Where, Pray tell, is the Source?
on
IRC Improvements
·
· Score: 1
Now it's out, I hungrily go to their page, desperately seeking the sources, and find, lo and behold, them to be nonexistant.
Unstable code or not, the power behind IRC is the fact that if you don't like the way the community is looking, you can always find make your own.
I've spoken with Push, one of the admins, and he says the source isn't ready yet. Besides they've already explained what it is. Hybrid with stunnel and a slight mod for unencrypted connections. 99.99% of the source is known. Calm down and give em a little time before you berate them for not providing the source.
What is the point of ignoring people who aren't "secure"?
What if you don't wish to speak to people unless you know it's secure ? What's the point of having YOUR link to the server encrypted, if the guy you're talking to isn't encrypted ? The plaintext will flow to him and ruin the whole idea.
>Ok, but who guarantees me that the administrators of the IRC servers don't modify the ircd source so that they can listen on my conversations? After all, only the links are encrypted, but the ircd still gets to see all traffic in plaintext.
No shit genius. But are your conversations hidden from the ircd/admins on an unencrypted server ?! Your point affects all ircds, not just this one. Simply because this server doesn't answer one of the problems with irc, doesn't take anything from the validity of the OTHER problems that ARE answered by it. It's a step in the right direction.
Yes, but the question is, WHY are we talking about Linux here. Another problem where FreeBSD has already solved the problem, but now that the Linux community has discovered the problem, they'll throw in a hack job and say it's better than the BSD implementation as usual.
Re:Wow... a *BSD ported to x86, that's impressive.
on
Darwin Booting On x86
·
· Score: 1
"...almost [as] spread as linux..." ???
Don't you mean NetBSD?
NetBSD is running on around 30 different platforms, while FreeBSD is running on i386 & Alpha
Dude, I just about died laughing. Have a sense of humor, and for God's sake, mod this up. Some of the FUNNIEST things humans have ever thought up in the history of the planet have been in Slashdot's troll archives. Give the troll the respect he deserves for that huge ass story. At least give him a 1.
Yeah, ignorance is the key to stopping injustice. If we didn't talk about the bad things people do, people wouldn't do them because they wouldn't get any attention right ? Sure. Dream on. Or better yet, WAKE UP.
Attitudes such as yours sicken me.
"Ignorance is bliss"
"Good, look the other way, you'll never know what hit you."
It seems not too long ago everyone had a 28.8/33.6 or defunct 56k connection, and most businesses ran their sites of either a single or double T1. So they are supporting a load of 150kB to 300kB per second. Then along came cable modems and DSL, and now with my cable, I can take 300kB to 400kB per second off certain sites. That's more than enough to completely hog an entire T1's bandwidth. So are T1 bandwidth companies suffering from Cable and DSL users ? Did cable modems and DSL ruin the internet by giving people the power to send out a 500kb/50kB per second DoS ? It allows a cable modem user to easily packet off modems and even lesser DSLs. A few cable modems could easily take a T1. So did this broadband revolution cause mass DoSing can chaos. Well, perhaps at first. @Home cable modem users are banned from most EfNet servers, which shows how, in the beginning, there was a problem. But the internet grew up around it and now it's not that big of a problem. Most of the major DoS attacks don't come from Home Broadband Solutions. They come from rooted servers colocated in big places, like an Exodus IDS. It only takes a 14.4 modem connection to the internet to use a commonly available expoit on a huge ass server, and once you have root, you can start a 100 megabit+ ICMP flood, STILL using your 14.4 modem. The point is, most people don't DoS from home anymore. You get caught, people press charges, everything gets nasty. All of the major DoSing you are talking about is due to Trino and TFN setups on rooted servers. So your whole argument that 100mbit home connections would result in major site takedowns just doesn't hold water. I would certainly not packet off a 100mbit line going straight into my house. If I did, I would sit there and wait for the FBI to show up at my door. Give me a break. Things are going to move faster and faster. But an internet line isn't like Karate, where you have to "earn" the skills. You don't "earn" an internet connection, you buy it. I know plenty of companies that buy big internet connections and use them to spam the fuck out of everyone. Did they "earn" their connection, or did they buy it with cash ? Get a clue.
"Finally, in the x86 arena, only intel can support SMP currently "
That's entirely untrue. AMD Athlon processors support up to 14 (!) processors under SMP. The motherboards are still being tested, but they are coming soon to a theater near you. Basically, they're waiting for the new Athlons that are intended for the server market before introducing the board. But don't say only Intel can support SMP. Only Intel SMP motherboards are available. That's the truth. AMD Athlons support SMP better than Intel Pentium IIIs.
What are you talking about ? Surely you don't think that the FreeBSD TCP/IP implementation isn't up to the performance of NT or 2000. I've tested this several times since my work has both a FreeBSD 4.0-STABLE server and a Windows 2000 Server. The FreeBSD server will outperform Windows 2000 on FTP, HTTP, and for random I/O, Samba vs SMB, although (win)SMB will beat Samba sometimes using some apps, thats more about the development of Samba (I _love_ Samba). Anyways, as far as raw TCP/IP goes, I would NOT bet on Windows 2000, and CERTAINLY not NT4. Get a clue and research what you're talking about before you go and spout out a bunch of nonsensical grammerless bullshit. Thank you drive through.
(1) No reporting is required for exports of: (v) Any export made via free or anonymous download
That's all I wanted to hear. Now when I'm downloading NT SP6 High Encryption from work, where our IP addresses don't resolve, Microsoft won't tell me I'm a foriegner.:)
Anyone notice exactly how much the new Finder resembles IE/Explorer 5 ? Look at the new finder in the mirror, so the picture, file size, and date show up on the other side, as do the 3 buttons at the top left, and one button at the top right. In the mirror suddenly you have your picture and file stats on the right, one button on the top left, 3 buttons on the top right, and a row of big buttons/icons across the top. They even copied the new IE method of changing the current window to the new folder, rather than respawning another window for each new folder. How shameless. That's very original of Apple to switch them all bass ackwards before copying the IE format. Kinda like when you'd copy someone else's code but change the names of the functions and varibles in programming class.:)
Slashdot Mirror
No doubt he is.
On the punishment note, the anti-trust laws are designed primarily to protect the people, punishments and justice bedamned. The interests of the consumers come FIRST in anti-trust. That's the whole basis for anti-trust. How is wrecking or punishing Microsoft helping the consumer ? If they screw up Windows and Office that sure as shit doesn't help me as an administrator, my workstation users, or myself at home. Where am I being protected ? By letting the government regulate the software on my computer like they regulate everything else ? Fuck a bunch of that.
That is exactly what the electoral college promotes. How often does Rhode Island see the presidential canidates ? The candiates pick the states with the most electoral votes, and campaign the crap out of them. Look at Al Gore vs George Bush's state votes. If we exclude Florida, Bush has a massive number of states on his side, remember on the news, 95% of the US was painted red for George Bush. Yet Gore had California, New York, and several other New England states. That shows that although the "broad appeal" belonged to George Bush, the electorate belonged to Al Gore.
The guy that wrote this article is an idiot, who thinks he can trick laymen into agreeing with his arguements by analogies that do not make sense, and fuzzy headed logic. The TRUE reason the electoral college was implemented was that the early thinkers including Andrew Jackson, did not trust the intelligence (or lack thereof) of the common man.
But all the electoral college does is give some state's voters more powerful votes than mine, yet allow the majority vote of my state to invalidate whatever they decide anyway. It's an absolutely nonsensical system, and no amount of babbling about the World Series is going to change that.
And the most important reason why I hate the electoral college is this: I voted for George Bush, yet my "vote" went to Al Gore. Did I punch the wrong hole on my ballot ? I think not.
Setup an open test. But include FreeBSD and FreeBSD people. Don't make it a Linux is better than Microsoft, ignoring the fact that many claim FreeBSD is better than Linux in many ways. (Not my statement, simply relaying what others have said). And unlike certain previous BSD vs Linux benchmarks, I believe -STABLE should be used rather than -CURRENT.
I truly can't believe how many times there have been comparitive benchmarks and yet each time a different OS will win and people will cry and rage and flame over who cheated and who got paid for the results. This time, everyone get the same piece of hardware, like a Dell PowerEdge or IBM Netfinity, but one which has hardware supported by ALL of the OSes involved in the test. Have the Linux people setup the Linux box, the BSD people setup the BSD box, and get Microsoft people to setup the Win2k box. Then after the benchmarks are setup, agreed to, completed, and the results gathered, let there be no bitching, whining, crying, and otherwise making excuses for your OS's kernel, and how such and such is disabled by default, and the box wasn't tweaked right, and in the next version of the kernel we plan to have such-and-such hack job in place for a 500% speed increase that will allow our kernel to run the benchmark while computing pi and taking over the world simultainiously. Enough already. Run the damn benchmarks, having each group send their best people to configure the boxes. No "generic" "unbiased" people setting them up because people always say they are ignorant and didn't do the right thing. Let the OS zealots put their star OS programmers and designers up on the center stage. If Linus Torvalds himself configured the Linux server for the benchmark, who's going to bitch about how it was setup ? The same for FreeBSD. Have BSDi put up some real talent for the configuration of the box, and if they lose the benchmark "jihad" then so be it. All I'm saying is, I believe we CAN run a benchmark that no one can honestly bitch about. Sure people could still bitch, but they'd look like idiots and they'd have to slam their own "heros" in order to invalidate the tests.
So what am i to do?
Quit being an idiot and running this bullshit. Download FreeBSD 4.1.1-STABLE and have a nice day. Fuck all this gay shit.
Underrated: If Chewbacca Lived On Endor, You Must Love Slashdot
DUDE ! I don't get that with the Chewbacca defense ! Chewbacca did NOT live on Endor ! He lived on kyshnshshshshshs or something. The EWOKS lived on Endor. Geez.
If Chewbacca Lived On Endor, BSD is superior to Linux. If Jabba the Hutt licked Pricess Leia, BSD is superior to Linux. If you like StarWars, BSD is superior to Linux.
I thought it was called Brown Pants. As in the standard #freebsd Linux Lamer Cry:
"WAREZ MY BROWN PANTS LEENUX ?!"
My T-Shirt I got at DefCon 8 that says "Fuck RedHat", just went up in value :)
Far more than a Windows box ?
The day you have half the driver support, half the functionality of the API, and anything close to a GUI besides that piece of shit XFree86, then you can talk about a complex OS. Look at QNX. That's a frickin OS. Don't compare your OS to Windows when it's apples to oranges.
More of this "sure RedHat 7 has many bugs, but not as many as Microsoft !!!" bullshit
Maybe everyone needs to take a look at the Microsoft hating bullshit they've been spouting for YEARS. When Windows 2000 came out, every Linux kiddie on the block was talking about how it had something like 64000 known bugs or something. So everyone has fun with thier lame little names like MicroBug, MicroSloth, Micro$oft, Winblows, etc. Acting like the OpenSource process renders everything 100% bug free and shit, and then look. Every new point zero version of Red Hat has had the same fucking issues. And what do the Linux kiddies say ? Nothing. Maybe you hyprocrites need to look at your own OS of choice and realize that EVERYONE has bugs. I have no problem with Microsoft bashing as long as it's founded. But when you have the kettle calling the pot black, you need to back down a bit.
For reference, I'm a FreeBSD guy, not a big MCSE Microsoft whore. I just don't like all the fscking hyprocricy. Critisize Microsoft for something they alone are guilty for. If you make fun of something because it has bugs, and you don't understand that the bigger the project, the more the bugs, then you're exposing yourself as someone who doesn't know shit about programming.
Moderate this down if you must, I know it could be considered flame-bait, but consider what I've said here. I'm not trolling, I am challenging the Linux community to respond the same way to Red Hat as it did to Microsoft when Windows 2000 came out.
Decentralized/peer to peer IRC ? Are you out of your mind ? Look at Gnutella.
C is hetro.
C++ is bi, but prefers butch women.
PASCAL is a transvestite.
FORTRAN doesn't have an active sex life anymore.
Visual BASIC is gay, but pretends it isn't.
Perl is very clearly, gay and proud.
PLEASE MOD THAT UP. THAT'S TOTALLY FUNNY
Now it's out, I hungrily go to their page, desperately seeking the sources, and find, lo and behold, them to be nonexistant.
Unstable code or not, the power behind IRC is the fact that if you don't like the way the community is looking, you can always find make your own.
I've spoken with Push, one of the admins, and he says the source isn't ready yet. Besides they've already explained what it is. Hybrid with stunnel and a slight mod for unencrypted connections. 99.99% of the source is known. Calm down and give em a little time before you berate them for not providing the source.
What is the point of ignoring people who aren't "secure"?
What if you don't wish to speak to people unless you know it's secure ? What's the point of having YOUR link to the server encrypted, if the guy you're talking to isn't encrypted ? The plaintext will flow to him and ruin the whole idea.
>Ok, but who guarantees me that the administrators of the IRC servers don't modify the ircd source so that they can listen on my conversations? After all, only the links are encrypted, but the ircd still gets to see all traffic in plaintext. No shit genius. But are your conversations hidden from the ircd/admins on an unencrypted server ?! Your point affects all ircds, not just this one. Simply because this server doesn't answer one of the problems with irc, doesn't take anything from the validity of the OTHER problems that ARE answered by it. It's a step in the right direction.
Yes, but the question is, WHY are we talking about Linux here. Another problem where FreeBSD has already solved the problem, but now that the Linux community has discovered the problem, they'll throw in a hack job and say it's better than the BSD implementation as usual.
"...almost [as] spread as linux..." ???
Don't you mean NetBSD?
NetBSD is running on around 30 different platforms, while FreeBSD is running on i386 & Alpha
No kidding. "Almost as spread as Linux."
Can you say narrowminded ?
Dude, I just about died laughing. Have a sense of humor, and for God's sake, mod this up. Some of the FUNNIEST things humans have ever thought up in the history of the planet have been in Slashdot's troll archives. Give the troll the respect he deserves for that huge ass story. At least give him a 1.
I personally would give him a 5: Funny.
Attitudes such as yours sicken me.
"Ignorance is bliss" "Good, look the other way, you'll never know what hit you."
It seems not too long ago everyone had a 28.8/33.6 or defunct 56k connection, and most businesses ran their sites of either a single or double T1. So they are supporting a load of 150kB to 300kB per second. Then along came cable modems and DSL, and now with my cable, I can take 300kB to 400kB per second off certain sites. That's more than enough to completely hog an entire T1's bandwidth. So are T1 bandwidth companies suffering from Cable and DSL users ? Did cable modems and DSL ruin the internet by giving people the power to send out a 500kb/50kB per second DoS ? It allows a cable modem user to easily packet off modems and even lesser DSLs. A few cable modems could easily take a T1. So did this broadband revolution cause mass DoSing can chaos. Well, perhaps at first. @Home cable modem users are banned from most EfNet servers, which shows how, in the beginning, there was a problem. But the internet grew up around it and now it's not that big of a problem. Most of the major DoS attacks don't come from Home Broadband Solutions. They come from rooted servers colocated in big places, like an Exodus IDS. It only takes a 14.4 modem connection to the internet to use a commonly available expoit on a huge ass server, and once you have root, you can start a 100 megabit+ ICMP flood, STILL using your 14.4 modem. The point is, most people don't DoS from home anymore. You get caught, people press charges, everything gets nasty. All of the major DoSing you are talking about is due to Trino and TFN setups on rooted servers. So your whole argument that 100mbit home connections would result in major site takedowns just doesn't hold water. I would certainly not packet off a 100mbit line going straight into my house. If I did, I would sit there and wait for the FBI to show up at my door. Give me a break. Things are going to move faster and faster. But an internet line isn't like Karate, where you have to "earn" the skills. You don't "earn" an internet connection, you buy it. I know plenty of companies that buy big internet connections and use them to spam the fuck out of everyone. Did they "earn" their connection, or did they buy it with cash ? Get a clue.
"Finally, in the x86 arena, only intel can support SMP currently " That's entirely untrue. AMD Athlon processors support up to 14 (!) processors under SMP. The motherboards are still being tested, but they are coming soon to a theater near you. Basically, they're waiting for the new Athlons that are intended for the server market before introducing the board. But don't say only Intel can support SMP. Only Intel SMP motherboards are available. That's the truth. AMD Athlons support SMP better than Intel Pentium IIIs.
What are you talking about ? Surely you don't think that the FreeBSD TCP/IP implementation isn't up to the performance of NT or 2000. I've tested this several times since my work has both a FreeBSD 4.0-STABLE server and a Windows 2000 Server. The FreeBSD server will outperform Windows 2000 on FTP, HTTP, and for random I/O, Samba vs SMB, although (win)SMB will beat Samba sometimes using some apps, thats more about the development of Samba (I _love_ Samba). Anyways, as far as raw TCP/IP goes, I would NOT bet on Windows 2000, and CERTAINLY not NT4. Get a clue and research what you're talking about before you go and spout out a bunch of nonsensical grammerless bullshit. Thank you drive through.
OMFG, you fucking rule dude. After reading that other one I could barely breathe. Your post nearly killed me. LMAO
Jesus, man. You just made me choke and suck a sunflower seed down my throat. sigh. :)
(1) No reporting is required for exports of:
:)
(v) Any export made via free or anonymous download
That's all I wanted to hear. Now when I'm downloading NT SP6 High Encryption from work, where our IP addresses don't resolve, Microsoft won't tell me I'm a foriegner.
Anyone notice exactly how much the new Finder resembles IE/Explorer 5 ? Look at the new finder in the mirror, so the picture, file size, and date show up on the other side, as do the 3 buttons at the top left, and one button at the top right. In the mirror suddenly you have your picture and file stats on the right, one button on the top left, 3 buttons on the top right, and a row of big buttons/icons across the top. They even copied the new IE method of changing the current window to the new folder, rather than respawning another window for each new folder. How shameless. That's very original of Apple to switch them all bass ackwards before copying the IE format. Kinda like when you'd copy someone else's code but change the names of the functions and varibles in programming class. :)