I think some slashdotters are arrogant. Comes with the territory, like it or not. But while there is a kernel of truth here, in true ZDnet form, this is more FUD than Fact.
I think it would be more accurate to say that many in the technical community are looking for the Right Thing, both in coding practice, and in social convention. This doesn't suprise anyone one bit - except people new to the way things work around here.
This is a grave threat to the OSS movement. One of it's central tenets isn't the mere release of source code to the public - but the rights to contribute to the source ->AND- make use of that code in a useful way independently of the creators, and without many restrictions.
Apple's license must be repealed or boycotted immediately. They have capitalized on a personality dispute to call this "open source" - we need to hold to our definition of it, and reject apple's interpretation. Eric, you're wrong - Debian and RMS, whom both authored the definition(s) of open source both agree this is not open source.
I urge everyone to boycott Apple's license. It does not meet the *community's* definition of what open source is. We need to signal that to them politely, but firmly.
And let's hope nobody else tries this for a long time after that...
Often times this isn't effective. How can you tell whom is accessing what? By IP address or MAC address? Remember that we're dealing with 20k users.. it's abit hard to manage that many people without some "hard" measures - such as a unbypassable proxy. What are the major concerns too? Just keeping crackers out, or censorship? Need more information!
The only solution I can see here is either to firewall everything off and force them to use that (it's not a pancea for all problems, but it'll keep outside attacks down) - as you do own the network bandwidth, right?
Or you can use a IP masqarading host and don't tell anyone you made the change. You can then transparently proxy everything about and keep outside connections.. outside.
You could also just take their boxen off the network unless they either maintain them themselves or let you -> ie, sudo access to RPM. Make sure to keep this very simple, and open if you do want to do this - the users will castigate you if you mess up and give them a broken package or make it more than trivial to upgrade.
Or simply deny access to any university resources from unsecured machines.
The only solution I can see here is either to firewall everything off and force them to use that (it's not a pancea for all problems, but it'll keep outside attacks down) - as you do own the network bandwidth, right? Or you can use a IP masqarading host and don't tell anyone you made the change. You can then transparently proxy everything about and keep outside connections.. outside. You could also just take their boxen off the network unless they either maintain them themselves or let you -> ie, sudo access to RPM. Make sure to keep this very simple, and open if you do want to do this - the users will castigate you if you mess up and give them a broken package or make it more than trivial to upgrade. Or simply deny access to any university resources from unsecured machines.
Login: slashdot_effect pass: slashdot be sure to send flames to the webmaster for having to "login" to view anything.
--
I'm so ashamed (I disagree)
on
RMS on APSL
·
· Score: 2
Sorry, but I don't buy it. The community has been quick to rip into any company that only does it "half-ass", if you would. If Apple didn't do it's homework and released an "open source" license, that wasn't open source - then they deserve to get some flames sent their way.
This is the way the technical community operates - by definition it evaluates, and judges, the technical merits of each issue in purely technical terms*!
Apple failed to create a true open-source license. And they just got plastered for doing so. Does that mean if they come back in a week and post a "real" OSS license we'll still flame them? Nope. It'll be as if the issue never existed.
If this bothers you, go find another field to be in, because this one ain't touchy-feely, and we don't take anything but the facts into account.
I have to admit - Microsoft has considerable gall. But Oracle did set themself up for this.. if it works.. they'll have major egg on their face. Reminds me of Steve Jobs proclaiming the G3 faster than the PII.
Sounds to me like they're trying to interlink the independent kernels together into a node to allow you to simply add computers to increase the processing power.
Such a system would be highly redundant, scaleable, and have a geek factor of about a billion (perhaps it's most important trait!). It could also be built at incredibly low cost.
But, more importantly - where can I buy one?:)
Ah, another thing I can say "NT can't do that!" to the microsoftian droids at work who think if NT can't do it, it is impossible.
Sorry, I don't buy it - Redhat is still pretty cool. And with the GPL, there's simply NO WAY they can ever "dominate" linux. they might be the de facto standard, even have majority market share - but unless they invent some proprietary "redhat-only" software, they can't ever have a monopoly.
And to redhat: If I see anything "redhat-only".. your distribution will go the way of the dodo.. and I'll rm -fr / faster than you can say "what was your username again?".
Subject says it all - ESR, with all his charismatic views, standing in the community, and generally good character, he missed one important point - what's the end result?
Sure, OSI may create some temporary gains, but at a long-term loss -
What good is the source if I can't modify it, hmm?
And I'm not sure I can trust the future of "open source" when you can't use the term without putting a (TM) at the end. Let's not even get into the issue of who owns that copyright - it seems to be a piss/ego contest, RMS included.
Truth be told - the GPL is the only way to go, even if you don't like the messenger.
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=6 ttl=42 time=642.4 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=7 ttl=42 time=594.3 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=8 ttl=42 time=610.6 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=9 ttl=42 time=618.4 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=10 ttl=42 time=641.7 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=11 ttl=42 time=738.1 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=12 ttl=42 time=525.8 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=13 ttl=42 time=691.5 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=14 ttl=42 time=778.1 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=15 ttl=42 time=632.8 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=16 ttl=42 time=654.1 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=17 ttl=42 time=736.0 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=18 ttl=42 time=622.7 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=19 ttl=42 time=688.5 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=20 ttl=42 time=656.6 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=21 ttl=42 time=582.3 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=22 ttl=42 time=598.5 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=23 ttl=42 time=645.1 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=24 ttl=42 time=687.4 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=25 ttl=42 time=690.4 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=26 ttl=42 time=695.8 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=27 ttl=42 time=573.7 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=28 ttl=42 time=607.2 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=29 ttl=42 time=545.0 ms64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=29 ttl=42 time=545.0 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=30 ttl=42 time=703.0 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=31 ttl=42 time=757.6 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=32 ttl=42 time=683.6 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=33 ttl=42 time=728.5 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=34 ttl=42 time=705.2 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=35 ttl=42 time=898.6 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=36 ttl=42 time=973.1 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=37 ttl=42 time=1056.3 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=38 ttl=42 time=1175.0 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=39 ttl=42 time=1047.4 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=40 ttl=42 time=1104.8 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=41 ttl=42 time=1103.2 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=42 ttl=42 time=1076.8 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=43 ttl=42 time=1066.4 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=44 ttl=42 time=918.2 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=45 ttl=42 time=1005.7 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=46 ttl=42 time=893.4 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=47 ttl=42 time=950.2 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=48 ttl=42 time=1109.2 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=49 ttl=42 time=1135.0 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=50 ttl=42 time=890.9 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=29 ttl=42 time=545.0 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=30 ttl=42 time=703.0 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=31 ttl=42 time=757.6 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=32 ttl=42 time=683.6 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=33 ttl=42 time=728.5 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=34 ttl=42 time=705.2 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=35 ttl=42 time=898.6 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=36 ttl=42 time=973.1 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=37 ttl=42 time=1056.3 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=38 ttl=42 time=1175.0 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=39 ttl=42 time=1047.4 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=40 ttl=42 time=1104.8 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=41 ttl=42 time=1103.2 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=42 ttl=42 time=1076.8 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=43 ttl=42 time=1066.4 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=44 ttl=42 time=918.2 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=45 ttl=42 time=1005.7 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=46 ttl=42 time=893.4 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=47 ttl=42 time=950.2 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=48 ttl=42 time=1109.2 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=49 ttl=42 time=1135.0 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=50 ttl=42 time=890.9 ms 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=35 ttl=42 time=898.6 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=36 ttl=42 time=973.1 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=37 ttl=42 time=1056.3 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=38 ttl=42 time=1175.0 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=39 ttl=42 time=1047.4 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=40 ttl=42 time=1104.8 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=41 ttl=42 time=1103.2 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=42 ttl=42 time=1076.8 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=43 ttl=42 time=1066.4 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=44 ttl=42 time=918.2 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=45 ttl=42 time=1005.7 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=46 ttl=42 time=893.4 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=47 ttl=42 time=950.2 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=48 ttl=42 time=1109.2 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=49 ttl=42 time=1135.0 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=50 ttl=42 time=890.9 ms 64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=51 ttl=42 time=1054.7 ms
This [slashdot] has gone from a wonderful experiment to a cesspool of bad comments and censorship of a much worse degree than usenet.
I think rob is getting a wakeup call here from something most of us on the 'net already know - anonymity means irresponsibility. You can find it spoken in different ways in different texts since books were first published - and it's still true today.
What's accelerating this plunge down faster than BillG's quality control is the censorship issue. I've been toggling my view to -1 to see what's being censored, and I'm dissapointed. For a site dedicated to "an open forum" - this ain't.
There are legitimate gripes in those censored messages. Entire threads - some with good topics completely unrelated to the original post. On usenet - we use kill files to block the provocateurs. But it's OUR choice to use them. And it's OUR choice to ignore those types of people whom we disagree with. You wouldn't catch me posting in a winnt advocacy group - it would be pointless! In much the same manner...
If you want an open forum - you MUST give us control over what we see, and say, and provide SOME level of responsibility.
This sounds more to me like a pissing contest over who gets to be famous for "founding the term". RMS had the idea first - but nobody likes him because he's a moral extremist. ESR is an affiable person, but he's seeming less and less about "hacking" and more and more about "corporitizing" hacking.
Fine. Let them have the media spotlight. Just gimme my gcc and the linux kernel, and I'll be happified.
Ever seen a rally? Most people head out in jeans, backpacks, signs of all sorts, yelling, shouting, talking...
generally it looks like a huge-moving party, with a few people @ the front organizing the whole thing. The point is to get people out there en masse as a SHOW OF SUPPORT.
As long as ESR didn't show up in a Thong, nobody cares!
It's all in good fun.
Now, go get your sorry head out of your butt and look around - what did YOU do today? hmm? complain? Anything else? No? then STFU!
One point - you're assuming people are computer illiterate. As literacy rises, so too does the ability to comprehend and use complex programs, such as linux, and it's suite of tools.
Slashdot Mirror
I think some slashdotters are arrogant. Comes with the territory, like it or not. But while there is a kernel of truth here, in true ZDnet form, this is more FUD than Fact.
I think it would be more accurate to say that many in the technical community are looking for the Right Thing, both in coding practice, and in social convention. This doesn't suprise anyone one bit - except people new to the way things work around here.
--
This is a grave threat to the OSS movement. One of it's central tenets isn't the mere release of source code to the public - but the rights to contribute to the source ->AND- make use of that code in a useful way independently of the creators, and without many restrictions.
Apple's license must be repealed or boycotted immediately. They have capitalized on a personality dispute to call this "open source" - we need to hold to our definition of it, and reject apple's interpretation. Eric, you're wrong - Debian and RMS, whom both authored the definition(s) of open source both agree this is not open source.
I urge everyone to boycott Apple's license. It does not meet the *community's* definition of what open source is. We need to signal that to them politely, but firmly.
And let's hope nobody else tries this for a long time after that...
--
Often times this isn't effective. How can you tell whom is accessing what? By IP address or MAC address? Remember that we're dealing with 20k users.. it's abit hard to manage that many people without some "hard" measures - such as a unbypassable proxy. What are the major concerns too? Just keeping crackers out, or censorship? Need more information!
--
The only solution I can see here is either to firewall everything off and force them to use that (it's not a pancea for all problems, but it'll keep outside attacks down) - as you do own the network bandwidth, right?
Or you can use a IP masqarading host and don't tell anyone you made the change. You can then transparently proxy everything about and keep outside connections.. outside.
You could also just take their boxen off the network unless they either maintain them themselves or let you -> ie, sudo access to RPM.
Make sure to keep this very simple, and open if you do want to do this - the users will castigate you if you mess up and give them a broken package or make it more than trivial to upgrade.
Or simply deny access to any university resources from unsecured machines.
--
The only solution I can see here is either to firewall everything off and force them to use that (it's not a pancea for all problems, but it'll keep outside attacks down) - as you do own the network bandwidth, right? Or you can use a IP masqarading host and don't tell anyone you made the change. You can then transparently proxy everything about and keep outside connections.. outside. You could also just take their boxen off the network unless they either maintain them themselves or let you -> ie, sudo access to RPM. Make sure to keep this very simple, and open if you do want to do this - the users will castigate you if you mess up and give them a broken package or make it more than trivial to upgrade. Or simply deny access to any university resources from unsecured machines.
--
Login: slashdot_effect pass: slashdot be sure to send flames to the webmaster for having to "login" to view anything.
--
Sorry, but I don't buy it. The community has been quick to rip into any company that only does it "half-ass", if you would. If Apple didn't do it's homework and released an "open source" license, that wasn't open source - then they deserve to get some flames sent their way.
This is the way the technical community operates - by definition it evaluates, and judges, the technical merits of each issue in purely technical terms*!
Apple failed to create a true open-source license. And they just got plastered for doing so. Does that mean if they come back in a week and post a "real" OSS license we'll still flame them? Nope. It'll be as if the issue never existed.
If this bothers you, go find another field to be in, because this one ain't touchy-feely, and we don't take anything but the facts into account.
--
I have to admit - Microsoft has considerable gall. But Oracle did set themself up for this.. if it works.. they'll have major egg on their face. Reminds me of Steve Jobs proclaiming the G3 faster than the PII.
--
You just summed up alot of stuff.. but does this essay answer any burning question? Or any question at all?
So RMS is a zealot. That's NEWS! So Linus is a coder.. I never would have guessed.
Ummm.. so?
--
ESR wrote the book (literally!) on this.
:/
Tell everyone to look at the Hacker Dictionary, volume II. Or view it online by looking for "jargon file".
'nuff said.
This is just more food for ZDNet to use.
--
any plans for a slashdot-to-mail gateway so we can
more intelligently utilize the comments feature?
--
Sounds to me like they're trying to interlink the independent kernels together into a node to allow you to simply add computers to increase the processing power.
Such a system would be highly redundant, scaleable, and have a geek factor of about a billion (perhaps it's most important trait!). It could also be built at incredibly low cost.
But, more importantly - where can I buy one?
Ah, another thing I can say "NT can't do that!" to the microsoftian droids at work who think if NT can't do it, it is impossible.
--
Sorry, I don't buy it - Redhat is still pretty cool. And with the GPL, there's simply NO WAY they can ever "dominate" linux. they might be the de facto standard, even have majority market share - but unless they invent some proprietary "redhat-only" software, they can't ever have a monopoly.
And to redhat: If I see anything "redhat-only".. your distribution will go the way of the dodo.. and I'll rm -fr / faster than you can say "what was your username again?".
--
Where can I send my resume? >:)
--
Subject says it all - ESR, with all his charismatic views, standing in the community, and generally good character, he missed one important point - what's the end result?
Sure, OSI may create some temporary gains, but at a long-term loss -
What good is the source if I can't modify it, hmm?
And I'm not sure I can trust the future of "open source" when you can't use the term without putting a (TM) at the end. Let's not even get into the issue of who owns that copyright - it seems to be a piss/ego contest, RMS included.
Truth be told - the GPL is the only way to go, even if you don't like the messenger.
Deal with it.
--
Is there a link/homepage for this?
--
Submitted my application.
Had to add the std. disclaimer though - no spam.
--
ROB! What are you thinking?!
MySQL might die horribly, but linux and apache will keep chugging along.
And I'd be happy for a few hours of silence from the ACs myself...
--
Not In My Back Yard.
Sorry, no source, no install on *my* kernel.
If not strictly for security reasons.
--
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=6 ttl=42 time=642.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=7 ttl=42 time=594.3 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=8 ttl=42 time=610.6 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=9 ttl=42 time=618.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=10 ttl=42 time=641.7 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=11 ttl=42 time=738.1 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=12 ttl=42 time=525.8 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=13 ttl=42 time=691.5 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=14 ttl=42 time=778.1 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=15 ttl=42 time=632.8 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=16 ttl=42 time=654.1 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=17 ttl=42 time=736.0 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=18 ttl=42 time=622.7 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=19 ttl=42 time=688.5 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=20 ttl=42 time=656.6 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=21 ttl=42 time=582.3 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=22 ttl=42 time=598.5 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=23 ttl=42 time=645.1 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=24 ttl=42 time=687.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=25 ttl=42 time=690.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=26 ttl=42 time=695.8 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=27 ttl=42 time=573.7 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=28 ttl=42 time=607.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=29 ttl=42 time=545.0 ms64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=29 ttl=42 time=545.0 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=30 ttl=42 time=703.0 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=31 ttl=42 time=757.6 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=32 ttl=42 time=683.6 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=33 ttl=42 time=728.5 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=34 ttl=42 time=705.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=35 ttl=42 time=898.6 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=36 ttl=42 time=973.1 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=37 ttl=42 time=1056.3 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=38 ttl=42 time=1175.0 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=39 ttl=42 time=1047.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=40 ttl=42 time=1104.8 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=41 ttl=42 time=1103.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=42 ttl=42 time=1076.8 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=43 ttl=42 time=1066.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=44 ttl=42 time=918.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=45 ttl=42 time=1005.7 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=46 ttl=42 time=893.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=47 ttl=42 time=950.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=48 ttl=42 time=1109.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=49 ttl=42 time=1135.0 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=50 ttl=42 time=890.9 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=29 ttl=42 time=545.0 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=30 ttl=42 time=703.0 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=31 ttl=42 time=757.6 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=32 ttl=42 time=683.6 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=33 ttl=42 time=728.5 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=34 ttl=42 time=705.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=35 ttl=42 time=898.6 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=36 ttl=42 time=973.1 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=37 ttl=42 time=1056.3 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=38 ttl=42 time=1175.0 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=39 ttl=42 time=1047.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=40 ttl=42 time=1104.8 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=41 ttl=42 time=1103.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=42 ttl=42 time=1076.8 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=43 ttl=42 time=1066.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=44 ttl=42 time=918.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=45 ttl=42 time=1005.7 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=46 ttl=42 time=893.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=47 ttl=42 time=950.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=48 ttl=42 time=1109.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=49 ttl=42 time=1135.0 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=50 ttl=42 time=890.9 ms
195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=35 ttl=42 time=898.6 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=36 ttl=42 time=973.1 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=37 ttl=42 time=1056.3 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=38 ttl=42 time=1175.0 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=39 ttl=42 time=1047.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=40 ttl=42 time=1104.8 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=41 ttl=42 time=1103.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=42 ttl=42 time=1076.8 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=43 ttl=42 time=1066.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=44 ttl=42 time=918.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=45 ttl=42 time=1005.7 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=46 ttl=42 time=893.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=47 ttl=42 time=950.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=48 ttl=42 time=1109.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=49 ttl=42 time=1135.0 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=50 ttl=42 time=890.9 ms
64 bytes from 195.139.236.69: icmp_seq=51 ttl=42 time=1054.7 ms
--
This [slashdot] has gone from a wonderful experiment to a cesspool of bad comments and censorship of a much worse degree than usenet.
I think rob is getting a wakeup call here from something most of us on the 'net already know - anonymity means irresponsibility. You can find it spoken in different ways in different texts since books were first published - and it's still true today.
What's accelerating this plunge down faster than BillG's quality control is the censorship issue. I've been toggling my view to -1 to see what's being censored, and I'm dissapointed. For a site dedicated to "an open forum" - this ain't.
There are legitimate gripes in those censored messages. Entire threads - some with good topics completely unrelated to the original post. On usenet - we use kill files to block the provocateurs. But it's OUR choice to use them. And it's OUR choice to ignore those types of people whom we disagree with. You wouldn't catch me posting in a winnt advocacy group - it would be pointless! In much the same manner...
If you want an open forum - you MUST give us control over what we see, and say, and provide SOME level of responsibility.
You've gotten us this far rob, don't let us down.
--
Sheesh! This is sad.
:/
That's a rip-off of the DEC Wars "trilogy" that you can find floating around at most UNIX humor sites.
Boo! Boo!
--
This sounds more to me like a pissing contest over who gets to be famous for "founding the term". RMS had the idea first - but nobody likes him because he's a moral extremist. ESR is an affiable person, but he's seeming less and less about "hacking" and more and more about "corporitizing" hacking.
Fine. Let them have the media spotlight. Just gimme my gcc and the linux kernel, and I'll be happified.
--
Ever seen a rally? Most people head out in jeans, backpacks, signs of all sorts, yelling, shouting, talking...
generally it looks like a huge-moving party, with a few people @ the front organizing the whole thing. The point is to get people out there en masse as a SHOW OF SUPPORT.
As long as ESR didn't show up in a Thong, nobody cares!
It's all in good fun.
Now, go get your sorry head out of your butt and look around - what did YOU do today? hmm? complain? Anything else? No? then STFU!
--
One point - you're assuming people are computer illiterate. As literacy rises, so too does the ability to comprehend and use complex programs, such as linux, and it's suite of tools.
'nuff said.
--