Note that "alumni account" does not necessarily mean "accounts are not deactivated upon graduation/leaving". It can also mean keeping just e-mail, file/web space, and shell, with no rights to run software packages. It can also mean just e-mail forwarding from the old e-mail address and website redirecting from the old web page.
On that note, see if AFS is workable. It's not perfect*, but it does have good clients for Windows, Mac, and *nix, the ability to work from anywhere on the Internet, decent speeds on the local network, a fancy ACL system, and some amount of encryption.
*I've had problems recently when putting my laptop to sleep on one subnet, waking it up in another subnet (new IP), and trying to save a file that's already open.... but that's admittedly not a common situation. It works as well as a slightly-laggy local disk otherwise.
WebDAV is also a good option for Windows usage, although it's not as secure or customizable (AFS on Windows works like a mapped network drive).
I remember a time when there was a piece of software that allowed people to share multimedia files. It was great, you could post legal files that didn't have copyright issues and people could download them watch or listen to them....
I remember that too! I think it was called something like...Apache?
add a record "* IN A 127.0.0.1" (this isn't really NXDOMAIN, but it does prevent people from getting places:)).
It gets mighty confusing if you're running a web server locally. Like my Mac does. And I have taken it onto networks that like sending you to 127.0.0.1. And wondered why I was getting my own website.
There will come soft rains and the smell of the ground,
And swallows circling with their shimmering sound; And frogs in the pools singing at night,
And wild plum trees in tremulous white; Robins will wear their feathery fire,
Whistling their whims on a low fence-wire; And not one will know of the war, not one
Will care at last when it is done, Not one would mind, neither bird nor tree,
If mankind perished utterly; And Spring herself, when she woke at dawn
Would scarcely know that we were gone.
The handing down power within a dynasty certainly makes the extreme anti-American actions of the patriarch notable in the history of the current president.
So you're still not committed on the issue - if I say you were attacking George Bush, you say you weren't, and if I ask why you mentioned him, you say you were attacking him.
I mentioned him for context.
See, you switched positions again. Did you say "grandfather of the current president" just to mention who he was or because you wanted to imply something about George Bush?
Your jumping to defend Bush Jr from a nonexistent argument speaks of an irrational defensiveness about Bush Jr.
If you said that Osama bin Laden's mother ate babies, I'd tell you that's an irrelevant argument. Does that mean that I think Osama bin Laden is a good man, or that I'm a "worshipper" of him? No, it means I don't think criticizing his mother is either a logically sound way of criticizing him, nor that it's needed to say that bin Laden is an evil man.
Besides, you didn't even have an argument about "Bush Jr", if I read you right. You had an argument about Prescott Bush. I agree with that. Prescott Bush's eugenics reflect badly on Prescott Bush. Not on George Bush.
I have an irrational defensiveness about stupid arguments. I could care less if Prescott the Clown was a eugenicist and the grandfather of Bozo the Clown.
It seems you have an irrational offensiveness about Bush. I simply said, that argument makes no sense. I did not say, Bush is a great man. I did not say, stop attacking Bush. I all but implied, certainly you can find a better way to attack him.
Don't flatter yourself into thinking I looked up some Facebook profile, or care about whether you're a "Christian".
That's what I suspected. You jumped to a conclusion about my entire political view and personality based on one humorous retort.
Though people as insecure as you are about your Christianity have a conflicted relationship to worship, government, and their combination.
Where did I say or imply I'm insecure about my Christianity? I mentioned it because I had no idea how you got the idea I was a Bush-worshipper, and many Bush-bashers have the mistaken idea that all Christians support Bush.
Pointing out the big part his family has played in American racism isn't so much "digging up dirt" as it is telling the truth.
False dichotomy. The truth is not always relevant. I'm sure you had some evil ancestors within the past few generations - does that mean anything about you? Did you choose your ancestors or their evil deeds?
he doesn't care about White Christians like you
I'm not White, you insensitive clod.
stop defending him from arguments
I am not defending Bush. Bush is an evil, evil man. I just don't think that your insinuations about him were meaningful in the least. You are the equivalent of the Christian fundamentalists - your position has merits but your specific beliefs about it and your approach of convincing others will win absolutely no followers.
I'm still surprised you're so offended about a humorous post.
When I replied to comment on the continuing status of the history of American eugenics in which Prescott Bush looms so large, of course it was worth mentioning that the eugenics patriarch is also the current president's patriarch.
Why? For sheer curiosity, or because you were trying to insinuate something about the current president?
Except commentary on Bush worshippers like you
Why do you say that I'm a Bush worshipper? Did you Facebook me and see me mention that I was Christian, and jump to closed-minded conclusions? Or did you look at my comment history where I declaimed the actions of my government and misunderstand the word "worshipper"? Or did you do neither, thinking that anyone who knocks down a logical fallacy of yours must be partisan to the other side?
For the record, I believe the current president has done an absolutely immoral job with handling his responsibilities, wasted American money on personal power grabs, probably was not legally elected, etc.
your worst fear
is that thanks to Bush's mishandling of our country's security, the draft will become necessary in a few years (even if he has left office by then).
the skeletons in Bush Jr's closet
So you admit it. You wouldn't care about Prescott Bush except that he's convenient defamation for George Bush, Jr. I for one believe that the misdeeds of Bush in office are more than sufficient to condemn him, without resorting to digging up dirt about his family.
George Bush Jr's grandfather Prescott Bush... Prescott's law partner Tighe... Connecticut (Bush family home state)... Prescott's boss Averell Harriman
"I...am your father's...father's...law partner's...and home state's...and boss's...ad hominem." "So what does that make us?" "Absolutely nothing. Which is what your argument means!"
What we need is a large number of ISPs to get together and say, "We trust each other to deal with botnets." Then, with a single command, any trusted ISP within the network could instantly send a command to another ISP to shutdown a site or server that is running a botnet.
In 1919, a large number of countries got together and said, "We trust each other to deal with belligerence." Then, with a single command, any trusted country within the Leage of Nations could instantly send a command to another ISP to use its army to shutdown the site or country that is exhibiting belligerence.
Trouble is, when the commands actually came (anyone remember Haile Selassie and Italy pwning Ethiopia), nobody listened to them. And the US didn't want to sign a treaty obligating its armies to an extranational power.
And if you say, "oh, that's the League of Nations, it failed, try something like NATO," I will remind you that Bush tried to invoke NATO shortly after September 11th. I will also remind you that France is part of NATO.
Attachments are converted to.odf or.png, as appropriate.
There are many applications which require macros to be present in Word documents. If you translate the macros to ODF's format (does it even support macros?), you've gained nothing. If you don't, you've caused confusion for many customers. And as far as converting images, how do you ensure the buffer overflow (or worse, the WMF arbitrary-code loophole in the specification - this wasn't technically a bug in the parser) isn't present on the firewall itself? I would think a rooted client machine is much better than a rooted firewall.
No more "Web 2.0"; those sites just stop working.
There are quite a few Web 1.5 sites that critically depend on JS, Flash, Java, etc. Facebook loses a lot if you even have just a partial JS interpreter (and I have seen it happen), and Facebook's coding is arguably not 2.0. Yahoo passwords lose a lot of their security if you disable JS, because then you can't do any sort of key challenges - you have to send the password itself, HTTPS or not. Etc.
Web browsing to secure sites via SSL is only permitted if the site has a SSL cert that is a high-grade "we really know who this is" cert.
You have locked out many universities (MIT is a major one; OU and UL also come to mind) that do not feel like paying a 3rd-party commercial company to certify their identity when they can just pass out root certificates.
TCP port 80 is all you get outgoing. Incoming, forget it. UDP, forget it. If you want to message, use the phone.
Wonderful. No e-mail. No file sharing. No VPNs. No intranets. Web-only is fine for home users on AOL. Home users who do anything else, and corporate users, need other ports.
Your internet-café machines are far more usable than your "normal use" machines at this point.
The whole "they tell you what to think" rap...eh, not so much. I've listened to Howard for years, and point blank, it's entertainment.
I think that he's saying Mr. Stern isn't more than slightly entertaining, and the mere fact that he's a selling point of Sirius is in a way telling you what to think - that Howard Stern is a pinnacle of modern entertainment. He is most definitely not, in my opinion and presumably in GP's also. So the GP doesn't want to support a radio service that's telling him "Howard is entertaining, listen to him."
I have to wonder if there isn't going to be trouble with the FCC someday. With the car kit antenna attached, the Sirius transmitter is ridiculously powerful.
It's not just Sirius. This summer I traveled with a church group numbering six full-size vans. All of us could tune to the iPod transmitter in the first van. By the sixth van it got a little grainy, but you could still hear it.
And they also don't even attempt to verify that a person is a person (unlike facebook which uses an EDU email --OR-- a mobile phone text message).
Facebook's mobile phone verification, while good in execution, has a pretty bad vulnerability. Because they don't know how long an SMS will take to deliver, nor do they want to lock out users until the message comes through, they provide a period of one month in which you can create an account without verifying your humanness.
This means that anyone - including a shell script - can join a regional network for long enough to be useful.
Note that if you're on a regional network, by default your profile is shared with that network as much as it is with your (e.g.) college.
I was able to see a lot of people's profiles by logging out, creating a new (fake name) account, and not verifying a thing. Other than my IP address (and Tor, etc. obviate that) Facebook would have no way to know whom I was.
Come on, guys. Troll? RMS has been arrested twice because he has been mistaken for Osama Bin Laden... RMS has always been found to not be Osama Bin Laden.... is just one of the gems in this mess of meta-troll.
- Reinstitute christian or muslim moral values into the fabric of society.
I probably have been trolled(tm), but if this ever happens, I'd rather die. I'll keep my poor opinion of religion to myself.
Actually I think this is the best option. "Religious moral values" != "religion". If there's a social stigma against deadbeat dads (even unmarried, which traditional religion tends to ignore), and no social stigma against a mother saying "that guy fathered my baby and ran away", I think it would do a lot to make parents stay together.
I am graduate student... getting a divorce and I have a son....
If you're a grad student and you've spent enough time in the marriage to raise a son and get around to wanting a divorce....maybe you married too early?
I'm not reading the whole thing, but I skimmed the "what has changed" lines. To me it looks like they finally got sane and turned off services that weren't supposed to be on in the first place and were the vector for a lot of unneeded malware installations.
Maybe they should focus on getting decent broadband to mobile phones in the area of $20 a month before worrying about super-duper mobile phone websites.
$20 a month? Are you kidding me? Don't you have free WiFi most anywhere you go?
T-Mobile's SDA and MDA smartphones both have WiFi connectivity (as well as EDGE, if you choose to pay $30/month for it).
1) is tenuous, but you could say that people who really care about the music will buy a legal copy instead of downloading it from some random server, which is likely to have a poorly-digitized version of it. 2) For every song I share, you can already find it on the Internet. If it takes you a couple more seconds of searching, that's irrelevant to the case. 3) Some studies have shown that people are more likely to buy an entire CD or whatever after listening to the song online. The assumption that people would buy CDs if it weren't for these songs is merely "common sense" (supposedly), not anything rigorously justified.
More importantly:
4) I'm not making any profit. I don't care who takes the song from me. I don't notice it. If anything, it uses some of my bandwidth allotment. Google is most definitely hawking Book Search as a service they intend to profit from somehow.
So shouldn't sharing songs be more valid than Book Search?
Slashdot Mirror
Note that "alumni account" does not necessarily mean "accounts are not deactivated upon graduation/leaving". It can also mean keeping just e-mail, file/web space, and shell, with no rights to run software packages. It can also mean just e-mail forwarding from the old e-mail address and website redirecting from the old web page.
On that note, see if AFS is workable. It's not perfect*, but it does have good clients for Windows, Mac, and *nix, the ability to work from anywhere on the Internet, decent speeds on the local network, a fancy ACL system, and some amount of encryption.
*I've had problems recently when putting my laptop to sleep on one subnet, waking it up in another subnet (new IP), and trying to save a file that's already open.... but that's admittedly not a common situation. It works as well as a slightly-laggy local disk otherwise.
WebDAV is also a good option for Windows usage, although it's not as secure or customizable (AFS on Windows works like a mapped network drive).
I remember a time when there was a piece of software that allowed people to share multimedia files. It was great, you could post legal files that didn't have copyright issues and people could download them watch or listen to them....
I remember that too! I think it was called something like...Apache?
127.0.0.2 is, in any decent stack, also localhost. Actually 127/8 should all point to localhost, and is explicitly reserved for this use.
The IP-of-a-webserver is a decent approach, though. So long as said server has the rest of its ports explicitly closed, not stealthed.
add a record "* IN A 127.0.0.1" (this isn't really NXDOMAIN, but it does prevent people from getting places :)).
It gets mighty confusing if you're running a web server locally. Like my Mac does. And I have taken it onto networks that like sending you to 127.0.0.1. And wondered why I was getting my own website.
There will come soft rains and the smell of the ground,
And swallows circling with their shimmering sound;
And frogs in the pools singing at night,
And wild plum trees in tremulous white;
Robins will wear their feathery fire,
Whistling their whims on a low fence-wire;
And not one will know of the war, not one
Will care at last when it is done,
Not one would mind, neither bird nor tree,
If mankind perished utterly;
And Spring herself, when she woke at dawn
Would scarcely know that we were gone.
The handing down power within a dynasty certainly makes the extreme anti-American actions of the patriarch notable in the history of the current president.
So you're still not committed on the issue - if I say you were attacking George Bush, you say you weren't, and if I ask why you mentioned him, you say you were attacking him.
I mentioned him for context.
See, you switched positions again. Did you say "grandfather of the current president" just to mention who he was or because you wanted to imply something about George Bush?
Your jumping to defend Bush Jr from a nonexistent argument speaks of an irrational defensiveness about Bush Jr.
If you said that Osama bin Laden's mother ate babies, I'd tell you that's an irrelevant argument. Does that mean that I think Osama bin Laden is a good man, or that I'm a "worshipper" of him? No, it means I don't think criticizing his mother is either a logically sound way of criticizing him, nor that it's needed to say that bin Laden is an evil man.
Besides, you didn't even have an argument about "Bush Jr", if I read you right. You had an argument about Prescott Bush. I agree with that. Prescott Bush's eugenics reflect badly on Prescott Bush. Not on George Bush.
I have an irrational defensiveness about stupid arguments. I could care less if Prescott the Clown was a eugenicist and the grandfather of Bozo the Clown.
It seems you have an irrational offensiveness about Bush. I simply said, that argument makes no sense. I did not say, Bush is a great man. I did not say, stop attacking Bush. I all but implied, certainly you can find a better way to attack him.
Don't flatter yourself into thinking I looked up some Facebook profile, or care about whether you're a "Christian".
That's what I suspected. You jumped to a conclusion about my entire political view and personality based on one humorous retort.
Though people as insecure as you are about your Christianity have a conflicted relationship to worship, government, and their combination.
Where did I say or imply I'm insecure about my Christianity? I mentioned it because I had no idea how you got the idea I was a Bush-worshipper, and many Bush-bashers have the mistaken idea that all Christians support Bush.
Pointing out the big part his family has played in American racism isn't so much "digging up dirt" as it is telling the truth.
False dichotomy. The truth is not always relevant. I'm sure you had some evil ancestors within the past few generations - does that mean anything about you? Did you choose your ancestors or their evil deeds?
he doesn't care about White Christians like you
I'm not White, you insensitive clod.
stop defending him from arguments
I am not defending Bush. Bush is an evil, evil man. I just don't think that your insinuations about him were meaningful in the least. You are the equivalent of the Christian fundamentalists - your position has merits but your specific beliefs about it and your approach of convincing others will win absolutely no followers.
I'm still surprised you're so offended about a humorous post.
When I replied to comment on the continuing status of the history of American eugenics in which Prescott Bush looms so large, of course it was worth mentioning that the eugenics patriarch is also the current president's patriarch.
Why? For sheer curiosity, or because you were trying to insinuate something about the current president?
Except commentary on Bush worshippers like you
Why do you say that I'm a Bush worshipper? Did you Facebook me and see me mention that I was Christian, and jump to closed-minded conclusions? Or did you look at my comment history where I declaimed the actions of my government and misunderstand the word "worshipper"? Or did you do neither, thinking that anyone who knocks down a logical fallacy of yours must be partisan to the other side?
For the record, I believe the current president has done an absolutely immoral job with handling his responsibilities, wasted American money on personal power grabs, probably was not legally elected, etc.
your worst fear
is that thanks to Bush's mishandling of our country's security, the draft will become necessary in a few years (even if he has left office by then).
the skeletons in Bush Jr's closet
So you admit it. You wouldn't care about Prescott Bush except that he's convenient defamation for George Bush, Jr. I for one believe that the misdeeds of Bush in office are more than sufficient to condemn him, without resorting to digging up dirt about his family.
George Bush Jr's grandfather Prescott Bush ... Prescott's law partner Tighe ... Connecticut (Bush family home state) ... Prescott's boss Averell Harriman
"I...am your father's...father's...law partner's...and home state's...and boss's...ad hominem."
"So what does that make us?"
"Absolutely nothing. Which is what your argument means!"
What we need is a large number of ISPs to get together and say, "We trust each other to deal with botnets." Then, with a single command, any trusted ISP within the network could instantly send a command to another ISP to shutdown a site or server that is running a botnet.
In 1919, a large number of countries got together and said, "We trust each other to deal with belligerence." Then, with a single command, any trusted country within the Leage of Nations could instantly send a command to another ISP to use its army to shutdown the site or country that is exhibiting belligerence.
Trouble is, when the commands actually came (anyone remember Haile Selassie and Italy pwning Ethiopia), nobody listened to them. And the US didn't want to sign a treaty obligating its armies to an extranational power.
And if you say, "oh, that's the League of Nations, it failed, try something like NATO," I will remind you that Bush tried to invoke NATO shortly after September 11th. I will also remind you that France is part of NATO.
"Many customers" doesn't mean "you". Indeed you are an "exception", as am I.
There are quite a few Web 1.5 sites that critically depend on JS, Flash, Java, etc. Facebook loses a lot if you even have just a partial JS interpreter (and I have seen it happen), and Facebook's coding is arguably not 2.0. Yahoo passwords lose a lot of their security if you disable JS, because then you can't do any sort of key challenges - you have to send the password itself, HTTPS or not. Etc.
You have locked out many universities (MIT is a major one; OU and UL also come to mind) that do not feel like paying a 3rd-party commercial company to certify their identity when they can just pass out root certificates.
Wonderful. No e-mail. No file sharing. No VPNs. No intranets. Web-only is fine for home users on AOL. Home users who do anything else, and corporate users, need other ports.
Your internet-café machines are far more usable than your "normal use" machines at this point.
The whole "they tell you what to think" rap...eh, not so much. I've listened to Howard for years, and point blank, it's entertainment.
I think that he's saying Mr. Stern isn't more than slightly entertaining, and the mere fact that he's a selling point of Sirius is in a way telling you what to think - that Howard Stern is a pinnacle of modern entertainment. He is most definitely not, in my opinion and presumably in GP's also. So the GP doesn't want to support a radio service that's telling him "Howard is entertaining, listen to him."
I have to wonder if there isn't going to be trouble with the FCC someday. With the car kit antenna attached, the Sirius transmitter is ridiculously powerful.
It's not just Sirius. This summer I traveled with a church group numbering six full-size vans. All of us could tune to the iPod transmitter in the first van. By the sixth van it got a little grainy, but you could still hear it.
And they also don't even attempt to verify that a person is a person (unlike facebook which uses an EDU email --OR-- a mobile phone text message).
Facebook's mobile phone verification, while good in execution, has a pretty bad vulnerability. Because they don't know how long an SMS will take to deliver, nor do they want to lock out users until the message comes through, they provide a period of one month in which you can create an account without verifying your humanness.
This means that anyone - including a shell script - can join a regional network for long enough to be useful.
Note that if you're on a regional network, by default your profile is shared with that network as much as it is with your (e.g.) college.
I was able to see a lot of people's profiles by logging out, creating a new (fake name) account, and not verifying a thing. Other than my IP address (and Tor, etc. obviate that) Facebook would have no way to know whom I was.
Come on, guys. Troll? RMS has been arrested twice because he has been mistaken for Osama Bin Laden ... RMS has always been found to not be Osama Bin Laden .... is just one of the gems in this mess of meta-troll.
Actually I think this is the best option. "Religious moral values" != "religion". If there's a social stigma against deadbeat dads (even unmarried, which traditional religion tends to ignore), and no social stigma against a mother saying "that guy fathered my baby and ran away", I think it would do a lot to make parents stay together.
I will wait that the investigations are concluded and judgment is passed
Wondering why someone would kill his wife does not imply knowing that he did.
I am graduate student ... getting a divorce and I have a son ....
If you're a grad student and you've spent enough time in the marriage to raise a son and get around to wanting a divorce....maybe you married too early?
There are two ways to phrase that absolute, with greatly differing meaning.
Whoever is not against us is for us.
Either you're for us or against us.
You are either with us or you are against us.
But honestly, how many people would think that even if it wasn't posted on the front page?
I wouldn't. The state of the filesystem is secondary and I know that some enterprising developer will pick it up if need be.
I was wondering why some guy smart enough and sane enough to develop a filesystem would go and murder his wife.
I'm not reading the whole thing, but I skimmed the "what has changed" lines. To me it looks like they finally got sane and turned off services that weren't supposed to be on in the first place and were the vector for a lot of unneeded malware installations.
What exactly did they "degrade"?
Maybe they should focus on getting decent broadband to mobile phones in the area of $20 a month before worrying about super-duper mobile phone websites.
$20 a month? Are you kidding me? Don't you have free WiFi most anywhere you go?
T-Mobile's SDA and MDA smartphones both have WiFi connectivity (as well as EDGE, if you choose to pay $30/month for it).
Not very hard to recast it.
1) is tenuous, but you could say that people who really care about the music will buy a legal copy instead of downloading it from some random server, which is likely to have a poorly-digitized version of it.
2) For every song I share, you can already find it on the Internet. If it takes you a couple more seconds of searching, that's irrelevant to the case.
3) Some studies have shown that people are more likely to buy an entire CD or whatever after listening to the song online. The assumption that people would buy CDs if it weren't for these songs is merely "common sense" (supposedly), not anything rigorously justified.
More importantly:
4) I'm not making any profit. I don't care who takes the song from me. I don't notice it. If anything, it uses some of my bandwidth allotment. Google is most definitely hawking Book Search as a service they intend to profit from somehow.
So shouldn't sharing songs be more valid than Book Search?
I think you meant "England prevails."