Totally OT: "Republic of Ireland" is not a country. Éire, or Ireland, is the name of the country you are thinking of. "Republic of Ireland" is a description of Éire, or Ireland, as per the Republic of Ireland Act 1949.
Err, where exactly is the source for this "open source" project? How about some screenshots, it's not as if the website is mega-stylish. A frontpage of/. does appear to be a bit premature for this project.
E-voting in the context does NOT meant internet voting. E-voting refers to Electronic Voting, i.e. the usual booths, voting centres etc., but with an electronic terminal and count.
Internet voting is about a million times nuttier than E-voting without a VVAT, and that in itself is pretty nuts.
The commission haven't had the time nor remit to do a full test of the system to declare it "safe" to use. This is why they call for a full review of the electoral system, and drop very heavy hints that using a VVAT would be important to the success of an e-voting system.
I think that a full review, including the end-to-end testing that they called for, would include a review of whether VVAT should be used, and that the system that is in place currently will not be passed by an independent commission.
The electronic voting system as proposed contained no such paper trail. This is precisely what the ICTE were campaigning for. There is nothing wrong with an electronic voting system without a VVAT (paper trail).
Electionic voting was introduced on a trial basis in 2 constituencies in the last election. The system has been flagged for review because of serious concerns regarding the testing and implementation of the system. The review also calls for a full independent review of the full voting system in Ireland (the commission had a limited terms of reference), and this will probably include a full review of VVAT - E-voting without a VVAT is ultimately flawed.
As "colmmacc" said elsewhere - We didn't have to trust the government before, why should we now? A VVAT would negate such concerns, while retaining the speed of electronic counts.
The worm propogated extremely quickly, and started generating UDP traffic to random hosts immediately.
Any large pooling of firewall logs would have logged the first handful slammer infected hosts spewing their packets out onto the net to random hosts. I simply do not believe Symantec when they say they somehow knew about this before the rest of the net did.
The folks at <a href="http://www.dshield.org"> Dshield</a> caught this within moments of it getting out onto the net, no?
LN, like they say themselves, provide business solutions.
If you think your state should provide edited copies of their court procedings, go and vote for somebody who'll put something like that in place, as opposed to those rabidly pro-business types who'll happily favour near monopoly free market solutions for ongoing campaign contributions.
I guess a searchable federal library is what you're looking for here.
Blades, some new storage options, some big iron, a graphics machine...
The rumour mills already knew about these well in advance;)
It'll be interesting to see what Sun do next: This product release was nothing special. Their direction regarding Linux might be a bit clearer next time around.
Note: As of 18:00 GMT, not all of the products have pages on sun.com
The one that stopped me switching to mutt a while ago was that it moved all the mail out of my spool file into its own 'inbox'.
...that happens if you press "y" when it asks you whether you want to move mail out of your.mailspool into your inbox. You can turn off that question in your.muttrc... There's probably a way to configure that, but people won't switch from Pine to mutt
readily if they have to configure mutt by hand first.
You only use applications that work exactly the way you want them to out of the box? Yikes.:)
Misconceptions? Exactly who had misinterpreted what the license meant?
This news story is bunk.
The headline may as well read... "Guy on the internet actually reads, understands license."
As the article said, it was in the FAQ. What's the big deal about?
Now, onto Pine. Pine is a woeful application, judging from how you're supposed to build it, it's
hilarious practice of mmap()ing your.mailspool, and in general it's a pain to configure well and get working with PGP etc. etc. While adminning a 600+ user shell box, I noticed that the only people who used and defended pine were people who were used to it. Fair enough, but mutt kicks pine's ass, and for all you "INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE" wierdos out there, ye now have another reason to move to the best email client I've used
(i.e. mutt).:)
Oh, I don't know. I'd kind of like to see this (ALSA) replace OSS as the UNIX standard.
Don't get me wrong, I didn't mean that there's nothing in Linux/BSD/whatever that shouldn't be in Solaris, but do you actually think Sun would copy and paste GPL'd code into the SunOS 5.9 source tree, compile and forget? Highly highly unlikely.
How about you actually read the page linked to in the headline of the story?
http://www.sun.com/solaris/source/
See, underneath the announcement that we're discussing it says "Get Solaris 8 Foundation Source"? Then underneath that it gives two methods - Option 1, downloading, or option 2, purchasing for $75 a media kit. Sheesh.
as a commerical software vendor with your source totally closed, you're able to integrate GPLed code without anyone knowing about it. I'd keep a close eye on Sun over the next 12 months.
What a joke. Firstly, check out http://www.sunsource.net. Secondly, check out Sun's contribution to the internet and Unix in general over the last 20 years. Thirdly, Solaris source code may not even be pulled from the publics eyes, good presumption there. Fourthly, Solaris source code will presumably still be available to third level institutions and Sun customers. And finally, Sun have got so many good engineers that the idea of Sun taking any of, say, Linux and integrating it into the Solaris kernel is a joke.
To be honest, compared to Debian it sucks. I have been told that Solaris is better than Linux for some things, but for everything I do, Debian is/was clearly superior.
Why on earth did you buy the Solaris source code if Solaris didn't even meet your requirements for an OS to run? Solaris isn't a great home OS anyway, but nothing'd run my Oracle DBs better...
Anybody with a clue'd download the source code anyway, and not pay Sun $75;)
Perhaps they're gearing up for a greater availability of Solaris 9 source code off www.sunsource.net...
The Solaris 8 source code forums weren't a great success. I'd have appreciated some notice about this though, this is the first that I've heard about this.
It's be a pity for Sun to completely pull out of making the source code available, but I did hear recently that they're suspending projects so as to make people available to work on projects that actually make money, what with no recruitment going on in SUNW at all, I guess some projects have to fall by the wayside.
Re:strange quote from the linux consultant...
on
Linux Is Going Down
·
· Score: 1
The E*500 range of servers from Sun also support hotswap CPUs.
Slashdot Mirror
Totally OT: "Republic of Ireland" is not a country. Éire, or Ireland, is the name of the country you are thinking of. "Republic of Ireland" is a description of Éire, or Ireland, as per the Republic of Ireland Act 1949.
Err, where exactly is the source for this "open source" project? How about some screenshots, it's not as if the website is mega-stylish. A frontpage of /. does appear to be a bit premature for this project.
> I was at the SGML '86 conference in Boston where
:)
> the XML initial draft was presented. That's less
> than ten years ago
1986 was 18 years ago.
I think he meant the SGML conference in Boston in 1996. Don't attribute to malice what can be easily attributed to typo
E-voting in the context does NOT meant internet voting. E-voting refers to Electronic Voting, i.e. the usual booths, voting centres etc., but with an electronic terminal and count.
Internet voting is about a million times nuttier than E-voting without a VVAT, and that in itself is pretty nuts.
It always amuses me to see how much more eloquently people from the UK write.
:P
Ireland is not part of the UK, and the poster of the story is from Ireland.
Correction - There is nothing wrong with an electronic voting system WITH VVAT. :)
The commission haven't had the time nor remit to do a full test of the system to declare it "safe" to use. This is why they call for a full review of the electoral system, and drop very heavy hints that using a VVAT would be important to the success of an e-voting system.
I think that a full review, including the end-to-end testing that they called for, would include a review of whether VVAT should be used, and that the system that is in place currently will not be passed by an independent commission.
The electronic voting system as proposed contained no such paper trail. This is precisely what the ICTE were campaigning for. There is nothing wrong with an electronic voting system without a VVAT (paper trail).
Electionic voting was introduced on a trial basis in 2 constituencies in the last election. The system has been flagged for review because of serious concerns regarding the testing and implementation of the system. The review also calls for a full independent review of the full voting system in Ireland (the commission had a limited terms of reference), and this will probably include a full review of VVAT - E-voting without a VVAT is ultimately flawed.
As "colmmacc" said elsewhere - We didn't have to trust the government before, why should we now? A VVAT would negate such concerns, while retaining the speed of electronic counts.
The worm propogated extremely quickly, and started generating UDP traffic to random hosts immediately.
h ire/index.xml">One</a>
a pphire/sapphire.html">Two</a>
Any large pooling of firewall logs would have logged the first handful slammer infected hosts spewing their packets out onto the net to random hosts. I simply do not believe Symantec when they say they somehow knew about this before the rest of the net did.
The folks at <a href="http://www.dshield.org"> Dshield</a> caught this within moments of it getting out onto the net, no?
Useful Slammer analysis links:
<a href="http://www.caida.org/analysis/security/sapp
<a href="http://www.caida.org/outreach/papers/2003/s
Cool, GYBE! ;)
LN, like they say themselves, provide business solutions.
If you think your state should provide edited
copies of their court procedings, go and vote for somebody who'll put something like that in place, as opposed to those rabidly pro-business types who'll happily favour near monopoly free market solutions for ongoing campaign contributions.
I guess a searchable federal library is what you're looking for here.
Sounds like it hasn't got much actual XP in it.
Surely not another book with a buzzword in the title that doesn't actually focus on the alledged subject at hand?!
Blades, some new storage options, some big iron, a graphics machine...
;)
The rumour mills already knew about these well in advance
It'll be interesting to see what Sun do next: This
product release was nothing special. Their direction
regarding Linux might be a bit clearer next time around.
Note: As of 18:00 GMT, not all of the products have pages on sun.com
Sun has released the project to the community (which I intrepret as dis-owning it)
Sun have dis-owned the StarOffice/OpenOffice project? Wow, that's big news, how did you deduce that?
Oh, and another thing, mutt ships with a file called Pine.rc with the Pine bindings defined.
The one that stopped me switching to mutt a while ago was that it moved all the mail out of my spool file into its own 'inbox'.
...that happens if you press "y" when it asks you whether you want to move mail out of your .mailspool into your inbox. You can turn off that question in your .muttrc...
:)
There's probably a way to configure that, but people won't switch from Pine to mutt readily if they have to configure mutt by hand first.
You only use applications that work exactly the way you want them to out of the box? Yikes.
Misconceptions? Exactly who had misinterpreted what the license meant?
.mailspool, and in general it's a pain to configure well and get working with PGP etc. etc. While adminning a 600+ user shell box, I noticed that the only people who used and defended pine were people who were used to it. Fair enough, but mutt kicks pine's ass, and for all you "INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE" wierdos out there, ye now have another reason to move to the best email client I've used
:)
This news story is bunk.
The headline may as well read... "Guy on the internet actually reads, understands license."
As the article said, it was in the FAQ. What's the big deal about?
Now, onto Pine. Pine is a woeful application, judging from how you're supposed to build it, it's
hilarious practice of mmap()ing your
(i.e. mutt).
Oh, I don't know. I'd kind of like to see this (ALSA) replace OSS as the UNIX standard.
Don't get me wrong, I didn't mean that there's nothing in Linux/BSD/whatever that shouldn't be in Solaris, but do you actually think Sun would copy and paste GPL'd code into the SunOS 5.9 source tree, compile and forget? Highly highly unlikely.
How about you actually read the page linked to in the headline of the story?
http://www.sun.com/solaris/source/
See, underneath the announcement that we're discussing it says "Get Solaris 8 Foundation Source"? Then underneath that it gives two methods - Option 1, downloading, or option 2, purchasing for $75 a media kit. Sheesh.
Media cost so high? I paid nothing to download the Solaris source code off Sun.com...
as a commerical software vendor with your source totally closed, you're able to integrate GPLed code without anyone knowing about it. I'd keep a close eye on Sun over the next 12 months.
What a joke. Firstly, check out http://www.sunsource.net. Secondly, check out Sun's contribution to the internet and Unix in general over the last 20 years. Thirdly, Solaris source code may not even be pulled from the publics eyes, good presumption there. Fourthly, Solaris source code will presumably still be available to third level institutions and Sun customers. And finally, Sun have got so many good engineers that the idea of Sun taking any of, say, Linux and integrating it into the Solaris kernel is a joke.
To be honest, compared to Debian it sucks. I have been told that Solaris is better than Linux for some things, but for everything I do, Debian is/was clearly superior. ;)
Why on earth did you buy the Solaris source code if Solaris didn't even meet your requirements for an OS to run? Solaris isn't a great home OS anyway, but nothing'd run my Oracle DBs better...
Anybody with a clue'd download the source code anyway, and not pay Sun $75
Perhaps they're gearing up for a greater availability of Solaris 9 source code off www.sunsource.net...
The Solaris 8 source code forums weren't a great success. I'd have appreciated some notice about this though, this is the first that I've heard about this.
It's be a pity for Sun to completely pull out of making the source code available, but I did hear recently that they're suspending projects so as to make people available to work on projects that actually make money, what with no recruitment going on in SUNW at all, I guess some projects have to fall by the wayside.
The E*500 range of servers from Sun also support hotswap CPUs.