Unfortunately, even we have to take a hit. Everyone who ran OpenSSH verison (???). Again, I forget the version, but it got everyone. That's OpenBSD's "Only one remote hole in the default install, in more than 8 years!"
On the contrary, this scheme allows for fair use and is quite possibly the most fair solution you could have:
If you have the original, you are free to make copies of it. Copy it all you want. If you have one of those copies, it stops right there. This would allow you dupe the media in question, store the original in safe place, and use the dupe in your day to day life. Should you loose it, pull out your safe original, make a new copy, lock up the original for safety.
It would also allow 2 people, say a man and wife (or whatever significant other grouping you perfer) to share the CD. IE, you buy the $NEWEST_COOLEST_CD and both you and your SO want to listen to it at the same time. Make a copy, give him/her the copy, you use the original. Again, this is fair use.
What this will stop, is the 'tape trading scene.' You can't just make a copy, pass it to your buddy, he makes a copy, passes it on to another buddy, repeat. This is NOT fair use.
Of course, I'm sure such a system could easily be abused.
Anything. Just run a lightweight window manager such as Blackbox, openbox, fluxbox, window manager, etc. Those are snappy on a 133 machine. Avoid the complete desktop environments or KDE and Gnome.
My gripe with the article is Mac OS X losing points because its firewall is not turned on by default. I fail to see how this is a major problem, as OS X has no services enabled by default. nmaping a brand new OS X install will return no open ports.
Oh no! No firewall enabled! Someone might be able to ping you!
While it may be true that the imperfections of analog may make it sound 'better,' saying that vinyl has a lower 'sample rate' than any digital platform is false. Analog has an infinite sample rate. For those playing at home, the sound wave on analog recording sound ways are curved, while digital sound waves are just steps representing that curved line. Eventually, no human can tell the difference the two, but at 16 bit 44.1 khz it is some what noticable.
Also, analog does have another bonus, which is related to the "spikes" above. When you push digital/solid state too hard, it clips, ie, that crappy loud pop/click noise. Analog, on the other hand, will just naturally compress--which is really great when you're looking for the 'wall of amp' sounds in hard rock/heavy metal. Max out the board and you have instant, music compression.
Sleep is kind of hit or miss on everything, so I won't even try to make a suggestion. Other than that, the only thing that is iffy is the airport extreme--broadcom isn't coming forward with documentation and etc to get that to work correctly. May be yellow dog linux supports it now, http://www.yellowdoglinux.com.
As far as the underlying apps/GUI, might I suggest checking out apples X11 app and run it in full screen mode? doing that, you can treat Aqua and X11 as different machines and switch between your Mac (Aqua) and you UNIX (X11) box with a keystroke and use whatever Window Manager/Desktop enviroment you want. The apps themselves can be gotten via fink or darwinports. Each can get you whatever UNIX tool you need. Fink is faster, being mostly binary based, but a little behind the times. (Panther support was lacking last I checked) Darwin ports is more up to date, but you'll be complining everything. nmap isn't so bad, but KDE....not so much;-)
I speak as someone who grewup on Macs--my first was an SE when I was 10 or so running System 6.0.7, so I've always loved my mac and how it worked
"And previous Mac OS versions reinforce the idea that the user is in charge, and gets to choose where he wants to put files, and what he wants to share."
Tough. Its a bad idea. get over it. the UNIX security model is far superior to the classic mac/windows security model.
Or do you also login as root on your other ( assuming you have them ) UNIX boxen to word process? if you do, you should be shot;-)
While not so old that I can remember much before Word 5.1, I do remember it quite well. For example:
On a PowerMac 6100 w/ 8megs of RAM running system 7.5 (on a side note, 5.1 would also run an SE with only 4megs of RAM)
Word 5.1 had a memory footprint of not more than 1 meg. It could be installed from 6 floppies and lanched in a few seconds.
Compare to Word 6.0, which had a memory footprint of not LESS than 4 megs, took 60 seconds! to launch. Also, they "improved" the indexing feature. This part I don't remember the specifics, but I believe that 5.1's feature was like 1000 entries, while 6.0's "super great new thing" was only 100 entries.
Mac people from them really do remember. Microsoft almost lost dominace in the Mac word processor department back then. 6.0 was a punchline to quite a few jokes, much like Windows ME is/was.
Artists do not make money playing concerts; promoters make money, bands break even.
Bands make their money selling CDs* and Official Merchandise. Think of the concerts as a comercial for the CD.
*They make money on volume sales. For a Major Label, the breakeven point for a band could be as high as 1.2 million; ie, they make dollar number on the 1.2 millionth +1 CD. Minor labels, the point could be as low as 100,000 CDs.
Software firewalls are actually okay, just not any windows ones. IP Tables/Chains, pf, and everything thing else are nothing but software firewalls. They're just better done.
Yes I do have the numbers. I'll dig out my copy of TCoaRP (see parent) when I get home. to quote the example.
Also, I may have been a little vague. Bands do get some money from the tour and may even turn a small profit, but monitarily sucessful tour breaks even--not counting CDs and merchandise sold while on tour.
Yeah, and really, playing live is what real bands actually enjoy. HOWEVER, rock and its subets of punk, metal, etc, doesn't tour to make money. The tour promoters and venue owners make the money from tours, not bands. From a money perspective, the tour is nothing more than a glorified info-mercial.
FACT: Bands make their money on CD and Merchandise sales.
A good book to read on the subject is "True Confessions of a Record Producer."
So with those numbers, will you admit that Apple does not over charge for their products? I mean, after all, if expenses + profit = revenue, then that makes the expenses what, roughly 1.9 billion?
This is not a true copy and paste. As I see it, selected text with the left button and then inserting it with the middle button DOES NOT copy and then paste, but inserts whatever is in the selection buffer.
A copy and paste copies what you have select into a clipboard.
While I do enjoy left select/middle click, it is not copy/paste and is missing some functionallity. For example, text doc 1 and 2. I want to replace some text in Doc 2 with the text from Doc 1. I would highlight the text I wish to copy, choose Copy and then go to Doc 2. Highlight the text to be replaced, and then paste and the old text is deleted and replaced with the new text. This is impossible to do with select/insert w/ middle click because as soon as you select the new text, THAT is what you'll be inserting.
Yes, yes, and yes. its like a multipart tool. You would use Samba for Windows connectivity and the native *Nix/MacOS protocols for Linux, *BSD, MacOS, and Classic MacOS. Users groups would be controlled by open directory. Again, via samba, the MacOS X server could be a PDC.
There are a couple points of note. First, MacOS X cannot do group policy. Nothing other than a Win2k server can--so it could be harder to lock down workstations if that is a goal. Second, MacOS X has a little bit of difficulty joining a Win2k domain (ie, a file server in a Win2k Domain). *BSD does not have nss, so Apple drew up a little " AD Integration" tool. Its a great concept and basically does what nss does, but it is still far from perfect*.
*=This is as far as I know--Apple's own forums tell of horror stories about the subject. I have not attempted to use AD Integration with Panther Server. I had a developer preview CD that I DID attempt AD integration, however, this was quite broken and there was no documentation. It was a developer release. It also wasn't very important. It way my home I'm-a-big-nerd-with-a-home-lab-that-has-too-many-O Ses-installed lab. Once I can afford a copy for home use, I'll know for certain.
While hardly a complete security measure, can we still use NAT under IPv6? Nothing personal, but even with a firewall and proxy, I NEVER EVER want to give machines, on my private LAN, which have NO need to be accessed from the outside world, a public IP.
What is the inherent problem with using closed source software?
Yes, I will admit, having a wonderful troubleshooting tool like the source code is ideal.
And yes, that might make your/our lives easier.
But why do people fly off the handle when a company doesn't release the source code and/or swear off said software until it is made open source?
Too often, people get so caught up with "Open source=Superior" or on the other side "Closed source=Superior".
to be a little cliche, why can't we just pick the best tool for the job/all get along?
I mean if solution X exists for problem Z, why don't you use it, closed or open source? We shouldn't ALWAYS try to reinvent the wheel.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately, even we have to take a hit. Everyone who ran OpenSSH verison (???). Again, I forget the version, but it got everyone. That's OpenBSD's "Only one remote hole in the default install, in more than 8 years!"
On the contrary, this scheme allows for fair use and is quite possibly the most fair solution you could have:
If you have the original, you are free to make copies of it. Copy it all you want. If you have one of those copies, it stops right there. This would allow you dupe the media in question, store the original in safe place, and use the dupe in your day to day life. Should you loose it, pull out your safe original, make a new copy, lock up the original for safety.
It would also allow 2 people, say a man and wife (or whatever significant other grouping you perfer) to share the CD. IE, you buy the $NEWEST_COOLEST_CD and both you and your SO want to listen to it at the same time. Make a copy, give him/her the copy, you use the original. Again, this is fair use.
What this will stop, is the 'tape trading scene.' You can't just make a copy, pass it to your buddy, he makes a copy, passes it on to another buddy, repeat. This is NOT fair use.
Of course, I'm sure such a system could easily be abused.
Anything. Just run a lightweight window manager such as Blackbox, openbox, fluxbox, window manager, etc. Those are snappy on a 133 machine. Avoid the complete desktop environments or KDE and Gnome.
My gripe with the article is Mac OS X losing points because its firewall is not turned on by default. I fail to see how this is a major problem, as OS X has no services enabled by default. nmaping a brand new OS X install will return no open ports.
Oh no! No firewall enabled! Someone might be able to ping you!
Also, analog does have another bonus, which is related to the "spikes" above. When you push digital/solid state too hard, it clips, ie, that crappy loud pop/click noise. Analog, on the other hand, will just naturally compress--which is really great when you're looking for the 'wall of amp' sounds in hard rock/heavy metal. Max out the board and you have instant, music compression.
Sleep is kind of hit or miss on everything, so I won't even try to make a suggestion. Other than that, the only thing that is iffy is the airport extreme--broadcom isn't coming forward with documentation and etc to get that to work correctly. May be yellow dog linux supports it now, http://www.yellowdoglinux.com.
;-)
As far as the underlying apps/GUI, might I suggest checking out apples X11 app and run it in full screen mode? doing that, you can treat Aqua and X11 as different machines and switch between your Mac (Aqua) and you UNIX (X11) box with a keystroke and use whatever Window Manager/Desktop enviroment you want. The apps themselves can be gotten via fink or darwinports. Each can get you whatever UNIX tool you need. Fink is faster, being mostly binary based, but a little behind the times. (Panther support was lacking last I checked) Darwin ports is more up to date, but you'll be complining everything. nmap isn't so bad, but KDE....not so much
I speak as someone who grewup on Macs--my first was an SE when I was 10 or so running System 6.0.7, so I've always loved my mac and how it worked
;-)
"And previous Mac OS versions reinforce the idea that the user is in charge, and gets to choose where he wants to put files, and what he wants to share."
Tough. Its a bad idea. get over it. the UNIX security model is far superior to the classic mac/windows security model.
Or do you also login as root on your other ( assuming you have them ) UNIX boxen to word process? if you do, you should be shot
I would like to disagree with you there.
While not so old that I can remember much before Word 5.1, I do remember it quite well. For example:
On a PowerMac 6100 w/ 8megs of RAM running system 7.5 (on a side note, 5.1 would also run an SE with only 4megs of RAM)
Word 5.1 had a memory footprint of not more than 1 meg. It could be installed from 6 floppies and lanched in a few seconds.
Compare to Word 6.0, which had a memory footprint of not LESS than 4 megs, took 60 seconds! to launch. Also, they "improved" the indexing feature. This part I don't remember the specifics, but I believe that 5.1's feature was like 1000 entries, while 6.0's "super great new thing" was only 100 entries.
Mac people from them really do remember. Microsoft almost lost dominace in the Mac word processor department back then. 6.0 was a punchline to quite a few jokes, much like Windows ME is/was.
Artists do not make money playing concerts; promoters make money, bands break even.
Bands make their money selling CDs* and Official Merchandise. Think of the concerts as a comercial for the CD.
*They make money on volume sales. For a Major Label, the breakeven point for a band could be as high as 1.2 million; ie, they make dollar number on the 1.2 millionth +1 CD. Minor labels, the point could be as low as 100,000 CDs.
Software firewalls are actually okay, just not any windows ones. IP Tables/Chains, pf, and everything thing else are nothing but software firewalls. They're just better done.
Yes I do have the numbers. I'll dig out my copy of TCoaRP (see parent) when I get home. to quote the example. Also, I may have been a little vague. Bands do get some money from the tour and may even turn a small profit, but monitarily sucessful tour breaks even--not counting CDs and merchandise sold while on tour.
Yeah, and really, playing live is what real bands actually enjoy. HOWEVER, rock and its subets of punk, metal, etc, doesn't tour to make money. The tour promoters and venue owners make the money from tours, not bands. From a money perspective, the tour is nothing more than a glorified info-mercial.
FACT: Bands make their money on CD and Merchandise sales.
A good book to read on the subject is "True Confessions of a Record Producer."
So with those numbers, will you admit that Apple does not over charge for their products? I mean, after all, if expenses + profit = revenue, then that makes the expenses what, roughly 1.9 billion?
Ie, the only thing that seperates Linux from Windows is that Linux is the Better high Hurdler while Windows has the Superior high jump.
now, from repeated training in the off season, Windows has lowered it Hurdle times while Linux has increased its vertical jump.
both have gained ground on each other.
imagine what a beowulf cluster of those babies could do? come on, admit it...someone had to say it.
A copy and paste copies what you have select into a clipboard.
While I do enjoy left select/middle click, it is not copy/paste and is missing some functionallity. For example, text doc 1 and 2. I want to replace some text in Doc 2 with the text from Doc 1. I would highlight the text I wish to copy, choose Copy and then go to Doc 2. Highlight the text to be replaced, and then paste and the old text is deleted and replaced with the new text. This is impossible to do with select/insert w/ middle click because as soon as you select the new text, THAT is what you'll be inserting.
There are a couple points of note. First, MacOS X cannot do group policy. Nothing other than a Win2k server can--so it could be harder to lock down workstations if that is a goal. Second, MacOS X has a little bit of difficulty joining a Win2k domain (ie, a file server in a Win2k Domain). *BSD does not have nss, so Apple drew up a little " AD Integration" tool. Its a great concept and basically does what nss does, but it is still far from perfect*.
*=This is as far as I know--Apple's own forums tell of horror stories about the subject. I have not attempted to use AD Integration with Panther Server. I had a developer preview CD that I DID attempt AD integration, however, this was quite broken and there was no documentation. It was a developer release. It also wasn't very important. It way my home I'm-a-big-nerd-with-a-home-lab-that-has-too-many-O Ses-installed lab. Once I can afford a copy for home use, I'll know for certain.
While hardly a complete security measure, can we still use NAT under IPv6? Nothing personal, but even with a firewall and proxy, I NEVER EVER want to give machines, on my private LAN, which have NO need to be accessed from the outside world, a public IP.
What is the inherent problem with using closed source software? Yes, I will admit, having a wonderful troubleshooting tool like the source code is ideal. And yes, that might make your/our lives easier. But why do people fly off the handle when a company doesn't release the source code and/or swear off said software until it is made open source? Too often, people get so caught up with "Open source=Superior" or on the other side "Closed source=Superior". to be a little cliche, why can't we just pick the best tool for the job/all get along? I mean if solution X exists for problem Z, why don't you use it, closed or open source? We shouldn't ALWAYS try to reinvent the wheel.