You can change this in your DHCP or IP configuration settings on your home router or PC. On my home network, for instance, my DD-WRT router isn't running a DNS server on it, and the DHCP static DNS settings are set for my Server 2008 box and the two OpenDNS resolvers. My Server 2008 box also has its forwarders set to OpenDNS.
That's probably more complicated than it needs to be, but better safe than sorry.
On Windows XP, 2000, and I think Vista, you can tell Windows to ignore the DNS server settings provided by DHCP by going into the IP properties for the connection and hard coding in the IP addresses under Local Area Connection Properties > Internet Protocol Properties > Use the Following DNS Server Addresses.
This can also be done under linux, but I don't know the particular commands for it.
Agreed. Cisco books are between $30 and $100 a piece, and he could have easily built a small lending library for his team while giving them OTJ training and a nice set of documentation in a wiki (and a hard copy). Within a year, he could have had a decently-trained staff to administer "his network."
I'm aware of that. However, if you read the article, item #14 calls for a "server" version of the windows desktop O/S as one of the three versions. It makes no sense, and I agree that the products are "too different" to actually fall under similar skus.
Why should there even be a server version of a desktop operating system? I can understand using a similar code base, but they should be distinctly separate and share technologies as needed.
He didn't abstain. To do that, he had to actually be in the Senate chamber that day. He was hundreds of miles away trying to make the case for a future job when he couldn't even make an effort to do his current job.
True...they aren't doing it to be altruistic, and it is a brilliant marketing move. Yet it doesn't change the fact that they are taking complicated digital pre-press files and converting them back into text to be distributed for free over the Internet.
Some of the books they've been doing this with are still available for purchase at my local Barnes and Noble in paperback form.
1. Copyright remains with the author or creator. In the event that there is more than one author or creator acting as a group, each shall have a share of copyright but cannot enter into exclusive agreements without the approval of the other holders.
2. Ownership of copyright cannot be transferred to a non-creator.
3. Fair Use and format shifting are consumer rights, and unreasonable restrictions on these rights shall be prohibited./P
I suggest you take a look at Baen Books. They're doing pretty well as a publisher, and they're one of the most liberal when it comes to copyright. They have an online library where they give away electronic copies of past author's works, and occasionally, they include an entire author's library on CD (and redistribution rights) with a book.
Eric Flint included such a CD with 1634: The Baltic War, and that series seems to be growing because of the publicity and freely available content.
You can still make money with books and other written media in the Internet age. Until recently, ebook readers weren't very good, and they're still not widespread. Printed books won't easily be replaced in the short or long term, providing a revenue stream to authors.
Unfortunately for the GP, there is no way to get rid of so-called "Intellectual Property." Copyright and Patents are needed to ensure that the developer gets his or her temporary monopoly on their life's work, as you put it. But it needs to be limited in such a way that it isn't controlled by some faceless entity like a corporation for life+75 or whatever it is up to now.
Trademarks are a different issue, and I don't see why they are a big deal. If you make a product, you have a right to register that name for a limited term to sell your wares. Yeah, it can be abused, but it is still necessary for commerce in the modern world.
What it will take to get this stopped is an innocent father or mother who is detained because they have a picture of their baby's first bath on the computer.
What's absurd these days is that parents are being investigated as child pornographers for baby bath pictures.
Its time to take it one step further than that. Don't just stop voting for the Republicans or Democrats, they won't get the message that people are pissed because voter turnout drops. They'll continue along happily doing the same things that they always do.
If you really want change, join one of the smaller parties and work to promote them. What hurts all the small parties is the lack of air (and face) time to communicate their positions. I bet if you ask most people, they won't know that there is a Libertarian, Green, Constitutional, and Socialist parties (to name a few) that will also be presenting presidential and congressional candidates.
The only way to get people to stop thinking that the two big parties are their only choices is to get the smaller parties to start getting their name out there.
The only possible law that could be passed to protect their antiquated business model would be a law that outlawed independant artists. The indies are basically recording artists who have told the RIAA labels to fuck off.
I disagree. There are a lot of things the RIAA can do to hurt consumers and "protect" their business model. One main thing is that they can buy laws or encourage treaties that enable customs agents and airport security types to search laptops for "infringing" IP and seize those that are suspected of having it without proof. Wasn't there a slashdot story about that a few days ago?
People downloading RIAA music isn't going to hurt the RIAA. People downloading indie music certainly will. The labels are no longer relevant to either the artist or the listener. The dinasaur can only thrash around in the tar pit for so long.
People buying indie music won't hurt the RIAA-members. They'll just try to sign those good acts to record contracts and try to make fat stacks of cash off of them. Unless enough teenage girls swear off pop music, they'll always have a market.
The labels are still relevant, but not as primary producers. If they change their business model to be more of a promotions/distribution/tour management business that leaves them out of the content creation process, they'll have evolved out of the tar-pit they're walking into.
There is no excuse for selling a CD for twenty dollars, when you can get a better quality CD from an indie band for five or ten. The RIAA labels are basing their pricing structure on the old, costly media that required incredibly expensive studios and duplication. Modern studios are quite inexpensive to build and rent, and duplication is a pittance. Every meduim sized or larger city has hundreds of talented poets, songwriters, and musicians. The RIAA's only hope is that you not realise that the dreck you hear on the radio is vastly inferior to what is being produced locally.
If people will buy it, there are plenty of reasons to sell a cd at $20 a pop. At that point, perceived quality is only important to the buyer.
Just because something is indie does not mean it is good. Just because an artist is commercial does not mean that it is bad. There are many crappy musicians and there are many good musicians, there status as indie or commercial has nothing to do with how good they are.
I've searched Myspace for some good country acts (that's the music I prefer to listen to). I've found a couple that were good, and I would be willing to buy their music on iTunes. I've also found some that weren't so good, and I avoided them.
As for modern studios being "inexpensive," how do you define that. I've looked at the prices of modern audio recording equipment, and its not cheap. Even used stuff is expensive. That doesn't include outfitting the room. I don't consider something like Garage Band to be a "modern studio," even though it can be used for laying down tracks.
The RIAA are getting stupider by the minute. It's high time they learned that people aren't going to take this shit sitting down for much longer.
The more the courts resist their moves, the more people will stand up for their rights.
The RIAA and their lawyers have one thing that most defendants don't have - bags of money to fund these suits. The goal isn't to win - those who fight the charges have shown that the RIAA doesn't have much of a leg to stand on - but to drag the cases to a settlement where they get some money.
I don't think they would give this up - even with a string of defeats, they will eventually find a friendly judge or get enough laws passed in their favor to protect their antiquated business model.
Why not? Apple broke compatibility with their previous versions of MacOS when making OS X. They just introduced an emulation layer to run older programs.
This shouldn't be a problem for Microsoft. They purchased a product called softgrid that does application virtualization. Adapt this into the operating system as part of an emulation layer, and you can clean up the old windows code base without breaking backwards compatibility.
What I mean is that he could replace some of his home machines with the laptops. Have a desktop serving up webpages and emails, acting as an FTP server, or handling DHCP and DNS? Need a media center front-end for an SD TV? Replace it with a laptop.
The only thing a laptop probably couldn't do better than an old desktop is serve up files.
Although newer laptops are more efficient than older laptops, older laptops are more efficient than many desktops.
I realize that you have already have a number of computers to play around with, but why not use these? Even if they are old and slow, they will still run Linux (or Windows 2000/XP/2003 if you prefer, just not as well). It will also save you a little on your monthly power bill.
Or you could ship a good one to me. I'll give it a very good home.
Slashdot Mirror
Dan Kaminski's website has a DNS checker on it.
You can change this in your DHCP or IP configuration settings on your home router or PC. On my home network, for instance, my DD-WRT router isn't running a DNS server on it, and the DHCP static DNS settings are set for my Server 2008 box and the two OpenDNS resolvers. My Server 2008 box also has its forwarders set to OpenDNS.
That's probably more complicated than it needs to be, but better safe than sorry.
On Windows XP, 2000, and I think Vista, you can tell Windows to ignore the DNS server settings provided by DHCP by going into the IP properties for the connection and hard coding in the IP addresses under Local Area Connection Properties > Internet Protocol Properties > Use the Following DNS Server Addresses.
This can also be done under linux, but I don't know the particular commands for it.
You don't need to switch to a new ISP if they haven't patched yet - just switch to a new DNS server such as OpenDNS.
Why? Because you're the exception to the rule or further along than most people in your age bracket?
Agreed. Cisco books are between $30 and $100 a piece, and he could have easily built a small lending library for his team while giving them OTJ training and a nice set of documentation in a wiki (and a hard copy). Within a year, he could have had a decently-trained staff to administer "his network."
Yeah..because they haven't had 10 years to fix any bugs in the designs.
I'm aware of that. However, if you read the article, item #14 calls for a "server" version of the windows desktop O/S as one of the three versions. It makes no sense, and I agree that the products are "too different" to actually fall under similar skus.
Why should there even be a server version of a desktop operating system? I can understand using a similar code base, but they should be distinctly separate and share technologies as needed.
He didn't abstain. To do that, he had to actually be in the Senate chamber that day. He was hundreds of miles away trying to make the case for a future job when he couldn't even make an effort to do his current job.
True...they aren't doing it to be altruistic, and it is a brilliant marketing move. Yet it doesn't change the fact that they are taking complicated digital pre-press files and converting them back into text to be distributed for free over the Internet.
Some of the books they've been doing this with are still available for purchase at my local Barnes and Noble in paperback form.
Yet somehow Baen Books does this with their free library.
Lets put this in terms that Slashdot folks will understand: Nintendo Wii.
1. Copyright remains with the author or creator. In the event that there is more than one author or creator acting as a group, each shall have a share of copyright but cannot enter into exclusive agreements without the approval of the other holders.
2. Ownership of copyright cannot be transferred to a non-creator.
3. Fair Use and format shifting are consumer rights, and unreasonable restrictions on these rights shall be prohibited./P
I suggest you take a look at Baen Books. They're doing pretty well as a publisher, and they're one of the most liberal when it comes to copyright. They have an online library where they give away electronic copies of past author's works, and occasionally, they include an entire author's library on CD (and redistribution rights) with a book.
Eric Flint included such a CD with 1634: The Baltic War, and that series seems to be growing because of the publicity and freely available content.
You can still make money with books and other written media in the Internet age. Until recently, ebook readers weren't very good, and they're still not widespread. Printed books won't easily be replaced in the short or long term, providing a revenue stream to authors.
Unfortunately for the GP, there is no way to get rid of so-called "Intellectual Property." Copyright and Patents are needed to ensure that the developer gets his or her temporary monopoly on their life's work, as you put it. But it needs to be limited in such a way that it isn't controlled by some faceless entity like a corporation for life+75 or whatever it is up to now.
Trademarks are a different issue, and I don't see why they are a big deal. If you make a product, you have a right to register that name for a limited term to sell your wares. Yeah, it can be abused, but it is still necessary for commerce in the modern world.
What it will take to get this stopped is an innocent father or mother who is detained because they have a picture of their baby's first bath on the computer.
What's absurd these days is that parents are being investigated as child pornographers for baby bath pictures.
Its time to take it one step further than that. Don't just stop voting for the Republicans or Democrats, they won't get the message that people are pissed because voter turnout drops. They'll continue along happily doing the same things that they always do.
If you really want change, join one of the smaller parties and work to promote them. What hurts all the small parties is the lack of air (and face) time to communicate their positions. I bet if you ask most people, they won't know that there is a Libertarian, Green, Constitutional, and Socialist parties (to name a few) that will also be presenting presidential and congressional candidates.
The only way to get people to stop thinking that the two big parties are their only choices is to get the smaller parties to start getting their name out there.
I disagree. There are a lot of things the RIAA can do to hurt consumers and "protect" their business model. One main thing is that they can buy laws or encourage treaties that enable customs agents and airport security types to search laptops for "infringing" IP and seize those that are suspected of having it without proof. Wasn't there a slashdot story about that a few days ago?
People downloading RIAA music isn't going to hurt the RIAA. People downloading indie music certainly will. The labels are no longer relevant to either the artist or the listener. The dinasaur can only thrash around in the tar pit for so long.People buying indie music won't hurt the RIAA-members. They'll just try to sign those good acts to record contracts and try to make fat stacks of cash off of them. Unless enough teenage girls swear off pop music, they'll always have a market.
The labels are still relevant, but not as primary producers. If they change their business model to be more of a promotions/distribution/tour management business that leaves them out of the content creation process, they'll have evolved out of the tar-pit they're walking into.
There is no excuse for selling a CD for twenty dollars, when you can get a better quality CD from an indie band for five or ten. The RIAA labels are basing their pricing structure on the old, costly media that required incredibly expensive studios and duplication. Modern studios are quite inexpensive to build and rent, and duplication is a pittance. Every meduim sized or larger city has hundreds of talented poets, songwriters, and musicians. The RIAA's only hope is that you not realise that the dreck you hear on the radio is vastly inferior to what is being produced locally.If people will buy it, there are plenty of reasons to sell a cd at $20 a pop. At that point, perceived quality is only important to the buyer.
Just because something is indie does not mean it is good. Just because an artist is commercial does not mean that it is bad. There are many crappy musicians and there are many good musicians, there status as indie or commercial has nothing to do with how good they are.
I've searched Myspace for some good country acts (that's the music I prefer to listen to). I've found a couple that were good, and I would be willing to buy their music on iTunes. I've also found some that weren't so good, and I avoided them.
As for modern studios being "inexpensive," how do you define that. I've looked at the prices of modern audio recording equipment, and its not cheap. Even used stuff is expensive. That doesn't include outfitting the room. I don't consider something like Garage Band to be a "modern studio," even though it can be used for laying down tracks.
The RIAA and their lawyers have one thing that most defendants don't have - bags of money to fund these suits. The goal isn't to win - those who fight the charges have shown that the RIAA doesn't have much of a leg to stand on - but to drag the cases to a settlement where they get some money.
I don't think they would give this up - even with a string of defeats, they will eventually find a friendly judge or get enough laws passed in their favor to protect their antiquated business model.
Why not? Apple broke compatibility with their previous versions of MacOS when making OS X. They just introduced an emulation layer to run older programs.
This shouldn't be a problem for Microsoft. They purchased a product called softgrid that does application virtualization. Adapt this into the operating system as part of an emulation layer, and you can clean up the old windows code base without breaking backwards compatibility.
If 42 is the answer, then what is the question?
Cool idea. I would love to do something like this at work using OpenNMS and a flat panel display.
What I mean is that he could replace some of his home machines with the laptops. Have a desktop serving up webpages and emails, acting as an FTP server, or handling DHCP and DNS? Need a media center front-end for an SD TV? Replace it with a laptop.
The only thing a laptop probably couldn't do better than an old desktop is serve up files.
Although newer laptops are more efficient than older laptops, older laptops are more efficient than many desktops.
I realize that you have already have a number of computers to play around with, but why not use these? Even if they are old and slow, they will still run Linux (or Windows 2000/XP/2003 if you prefer, just not as well). It will also save you a little on your monthly power bill.
Or you could ship a good one to me. I'll give it a very good home.
It works fairly well for calendars and meetings as well as email.