And yet, Linux continues to be the same impossible-to-use monstrosity it has always been.
My wife and kid do fine with it, thank you very much, and we do a lot more with our computers than most folks I know.
It is truly fascinating how the open source community can stand there like deer in the headlights congratulating themselves on how their most powerful competitor is learning so much from them. Microsoft is now creating open standards, open formats, even open source applications - not one hundred percent of the time, but hey, they're doing it! They're starting to look more and more like us.
You are correct, not 100% of the time. In fact, not even 0.1% of the time. But if they open up at all, that's a good thing. It's not a competition in the traditional sense of snarfing up market. It's a competition to be Free, which is a win-win, always. If they become more Free, good. It's not like Free has to try to be less Free in order to 'compete'.
Hey, wait a minute. Why don't we look more like Microsoft? Where's our readily accessible documentation localised in dozens of languages?
Not necessary. We don't compete on their terms! But if you must, this will do...
Where's our reliable and knowledgeable tech support team?
Choose your interface. I like this. BTW, it is very difficult and unwieldy to get MS tech support (human, not website) for the average user. I have never heard anyone say, "Gee, MS tech support is so reliable, knowledgeable, and easy to use!"
Our software assurance subscription that actually sends a disc in the mail when there's an update?
1990 called, they want their software distribution model back!
apt-get update && apt-get upgrade
You know what really bugs me? That last one. I used to pay $4.95 a month for a quarterly package of three major Linux distributions. I liked that. So how come now I only get that from Microsoft?
Apples and oranges. MSDN releases are limited. Linux distributions are free to use as you please.
Honestly, people. Why is Microsoft getting so much better, while *we're* really starting to SUCK?
ROTFLMAO!! We continue to get better all the time, certainly at a faster rate than the 'competition'. I would know, I actually -use- Free software, instead of trolling about it.
And on a more pressing note, just look how much closer those headlights are getting! So how many seconds to *SPLAT*?
There is no splat. Free is pretty tough to make go away.
I think there is enough technical advice/insight on/. (if you've got a good BS filter) that it could be considered at least a grey area for a lot of folks in technical jobs. Many of the "Ask Slashdot" discussions provide the insight of experienced people.
Consider this discussion. If you were newly in a position like this, getting a feel for how other people have handled the situation would be useful.
Back on topic, I have always tried to resist efforts of mid-managers to rifle through the logs. It's time-consuming, often fruitless, and usually unfairly targeted. I'm a tech, not a cop, and I don't want to participate in witch-hunts.
If the site is blocked, no harm, no foul, the person only -attempted- to access the site. If they access an inappropriate site that is not blocked, I quietly start blocking that site. You should be regularly profiling your traffic anyway, anything that has a real impact on performance will show up. Stay ahead of the game and everyone benefits.
I do. In fact, I just loaned it to a friend yesterday. If you are trying to remove a shrubbery or building a patio, it beats the hell out of shovel alone!
You can have my pick-axe when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers...
I buy stuff from ITMS all the time, partly because I know that if worse came to worse I could always burn them all as CD audio files and then rip them into MP3 format.
I see this posted all the time, and I just don't get it.
You are taking file that I assume has been compressed by lossy compression (or are itunes AAC files lossless?). You then decode it to a wav file, then you compress it with another lossy compression.
It seems like it would sound like ass by the end of this process.
Certainly the mp3 that comes out of this byzantine process (burn, then re-rip, WTF?) doesn't sound as good as the original file that you purchased/licensed, which in turn wasn't ever as good as the original.
Are itunes AAC files so good that you can re-compress them and still want to listen to them?
I'm all for freedom, but I find it silly that different distros keep configuration files in different locations, use different init scripts, use different install methods, have varying level of compliance with the LSB, are focused on either Gnome or KDE predominately, etc.
It does make it more difficult for a large company to develop for a Linux crowd in general.
Only if they want to develop proprietary software for Linux.
If they provide the source, then whoever maintains the distro is the only one who has to worry about issues that you are fretting over.
That's the whole purpose of distros.
I'm all for freedom
I would argue that you are not. Otherwise, you wouldn't be rolling out this old canard...
Or, do you only favor results that support your ideology and decry all others as violations of the Constitution?
By ideology, do you mean political affiliation? If so, you're way off the mark. Both parties are seriously fucked up, because there are only two of them.
My "ideology" is laid out in the Constitution and its system of checks and balances. Those who act outside of the principles embodied in the Constitution, are the real traitors.
It just happens to be a Republican at the moment, I would be just as pissed if it were a Democrat.
Would you argue that the president's unilateral decision to ignore the FISA with regard to NSA wiretaps of US citizens was/is legal? I think he over-reached there.
In this case, in any event, Congress gave the president the authority to do what he's doing in Iraq, whether it's a war or not, whether you choose to call it that or not.
The issue at hand is not what we are doing in Iraq. It is about the president effectively saying that, since we are at "war", he no longer has to act in accordance with the Constitution (ie., warrantless monitoring of US citizens' phone calls).
And there is the rub. If you declare war, you can declare an end to the state of war. If you don't declare war, you run on "political expediency", and effectively you have a state of "war" without end.
I argue that Congress -did- abdicate their responsibility. It is not just their privelege to declare war, it is their responsibility to recognize the necessity and play their part. Then, yes, they get out of the way and let the CiC run the actual war.
By abdicating their responsibility to declare war, they have set us up for a constitutional crisis.
War declarations are not a prosaic artifact of the Constitution, they are a serious responsibility to be used as necessary.
When I tell people "torture is wrong," and I have to argue the point, that leaves a very surreal, bizarre, and uneasy feeling in the back of my mind for the rest of the day. No one cares.
I think you can blame Fox for this one. 24 did so much to put the idea into peoples' minds that we have to allow torture.
Every time the subject comes up, people ask, "what if it was necessary to prevent an impending attack?"
Never mind that that is a totally borderline case that has nothing to do with the routine involvement with torture (rendition, etc.) that the US has recently participated in.
If you think about it, you should realize that the vast majority of information obtained by torture is useless, especially if you actually want to legally prosecute someone.
This is exactly why a couple of European countries have had to let known terrorists go free. They had no way to prosecute without information that the US got under torture, and since it is embarrasing for the US, the US refused to provide the necessary information.
If the U.S is at war, I give the Commander and Chief great latitude in how it conducts that war
Constitutionally, only congress can declare war. Congress has not declared war.
I agree, if we -constitutionally- declare war, then the president has exceptional powers to prosecute that war.
But congress has abdicated their responsibility to declare war, so the president has engaged in an unprecedented, extraconstitutional, and arguably illegal consolidation of executive power.
Do I misunderstand, or is there are real advantage on running product X in one VM and product Y in another (or even second instance of product X)
Well, yes, it is a nice bandaid for some of the problems of bad software.
However, based on a previous attempt at a physical server consolidation, I can see a big advantage in that you can upgrade/reboot individual applications that live on the same physical machine as other applications without disrupting everything.
Also, it is easier to deploy an OS with specific settings (ie., security settings) in a consistant way.
I'll write the damn thing on a post-it note and attach it to the back of my monitor
You know, it's just as easy and more secure to put it in your wallet or wherever you keep your credit cards. That way there is at least a little physical security, and you'll know if it is compromised.
53 is easier to handle. Where I work, it is limited to local DNS servers doing lookups via a specific set of upstream DNS servers. Everything else on 53 is blocked.
DHCP points all workstations to the local DNS servers.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll bite...
And yet, Linux continues to be the same impossible-to-use monstrosity it has always been.
My wife and kid do fine with it, thank you very much, and we do a lot more with our computers than most folks I know.
It is truly fascinating how the open source community can stand there like deer in the headlights congratulating themselves on how their most powerful competitor is learning so much from them. Microsoft is now creating open standards, open formats, even open source applications - not one hundred percent of the time, but hey, they're doing it! They're starting to look more and more like us.
You are correct, not 100% of the time. In fact, not even 0.1% of the time. But if they open up at all, that's a good thing. It's not a competition in the traditional sense of snarfing up market. It's a competition to be Free, which is a win-win, always. If they become more Free, good. It's not like Free has to try to be less Free in order to 'compete'.
Hey, wait a minute. Why don't we look more like Microsoft? Where's our readily accessible documentation localised in dozens of languages?
Here.
Where's our toll-free licensing hotline?
Not necessary. We don't compete on their terms! But if you must, this will do...
Where's our reliable and knowledgeable tech support team?
Choose your interface. I like this. BTW, it is very difficult and unwieldy to get MS tech support (human, not website) for the average user. I have never heard anyone say, "Gee, MS tech support is so reliable, knowledgeable, and easy to use!"
Our software assurance subscription that actually sends a disc in the mail when there's an update?
1990 called, they want their software distribution model back!
apt-get update && apt-get upgrade
You know what really bugs me? That last one. I used to pay $4.95 a month for a quarterly package of three major Linux distributions. I liked that. So how come now I only get that from Microsoft?
Apples and oranges. MSDN releases are limited. Linux distributions are free to use as you please.
Honestly, people. Why is Microsoft getting so much better, while *we're* really starting to SUCK?
ROTFLMAO!! We continue to get better all the time, certainly at a faster rate than the 'competition'. I would know, I actually -use- Free software, instead of trolling about it.
And on a more pressing note, just look how much closer those headlights are getting! So how many seconds to *SPLAT*?
There is no splat. Free is pretty tough to make go away.
I think there is enough technical advice/insight on /. (if you've got a good BS filter) that it could be considered at least a grey area for a lot of folks in technical jobs. Many of the "Ask Slashdot" discussions provide the insight of experienced people.
Consider this discussion. If you were newly in a position like this, getting a feel for how other people have handled the situation would be useful.
Back on topic, I have always tried to resist efforts of mid-managers to rifle through the logs. It's time-consuming, often fruitless, and usually unfairly targeted. I'm a tech, not a cop, and I don't want to participate in witch-hunts.
If the site is blocked, no harm, no foul, the person only -attempted- to access the site. If they access an inappropriate site that is not blocked, I quietly start blocking that site. You should be regularly profiling your traffic anyway, anything that has a real impact on performance will show up. Stay ahead of the game and everyone benefits.
I do. In fact, I just loaned it to a friend yesterday. If you are trying to remove a shrubbery or building a patio, it beats the hell out of shovel alone!
You can have my pick-axe when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers...
I see this posted all the time, and I just don't get it.
You are taking file that I assume has been compressed by lossy compression (or are itunes AAC files lossless?). You then decode it to a wav file, then you compress it with another lossy compression.
It seems like it would sound like ass by the end of this process.
Certainly the mp3 that comes out of this byzantine process (burn, then re-rip, WTF?) doesn't sound as good as the original file that you purchased/licensed, which in turn wasn't ever as good as the original.
Are itunes AAC files so good that you can re-compress them and still want to listen to them?
If it's not much exercise, why do you get sweaty?
Only one catch, you have to trust the proxy not to make a copy of everything you do/transfer...
Tubal Ligation
I hope you know about this.
It's not ogg or flac, but it isn't DRM, either...
Where are the mod points when you need them?!
I'm all for freedom, but I find it silly that different distros keep configuration files in different locations, use different init scripts, use different install methods, have varying level of compliance with the LSB, are focused on either Gnome or KDE predominately, etc.
It does make it more difficult for a large company to develop for a Linux crowd in general.
Only if they want to develop proprietary software for Linux.
If they provide the source, then whoever maintains the distro is the only one who has to worry about issues that you are fretting over.
That's the whole purpose of distros.
I'm all for freedom
I would argue that you are not. Otherwise, you wouldn't be rolling out this old canard...
1) $0.22/track - Check
2) None - Check
3) See 1) - Check
4) Nope, sorry.
5) Maybe, I've seen extra tracks available for some albums...
6) Check
Check it out!
Or, do you only favor results that support your ideology and decry all others as violations of the Constitution?
By ideology, do you mean political affiliation? If so, you're way off the mark. Both parties are seriously fucked up, because there are only two of them.
My "ideology" is laid out in the Constitution and its system of checks and balances. Those who act outside of the principles embodied in the Constitution, are the real traitors.
It just happens to be a Republican at the moment, I would be just as pissed if it were a Democrat.
Would you argue that the president's unilateral decision to ignore the FISA with regard to NSA wiretaps of US citizens was/is legal? I think he over-reached there.
In this case, in any event, Congress gave the president the authority to do what he's doing in Iraq, whether it's a war or not, whether you choose to call it that or not.
The issue at hand is not what we are doing in Iraq. It is about the president effectively saying that, since we are at "war", he no longer has to act in accordance with the Constitution (ie., warrantless monitoring of US citizens' phone calls).
Wars end when when somebody is defeated.
And there is the rub. If you declare war, you can declare an end to the state of war. If you don't declare war, you run on "political expediency", and effectively you have a state of "war" without end.
I argue that Congress -did- abdicate their responsibility. It is not just their privelege to declare war, it is their responsibility to recognize the necessity and play their part. Then, yes, they get out of the way and let the CiC run the actual war.
By abdicating their responsibility to declare war, they have set us up for a constitutional crisis.
War declarations are not a prosaic artifact of the Constitution, they are a serious responsibility to be used as necessary.
I can only say, RTFM (where TFM==US Constitution).
When I tell people "torture is wrong," and I have to argue the point, that leaves a very surreal, bizarre, and uneasy feeling in the back of my mind for the rest of the day. No one cares.
I think you can blame Fox for this one. 24 did so much to put the idea into peoples' minds that we have to allow torture.
Every time the subject comes up, people ask, "what if it was necessary to prevent an impending attack?"
Never mind that that is a totally borderline case that has nothing to do with the routine involvement with torture (rendition, etc.) that the US has recently participated in.
If you think about it, you should realize that the vast majority of information obtained by torture is useless, especially if you actually want to legally prosecute someone.
This is exactly why a couple of European countries have had to let known terrorists go free. They had no way to prosecute without information that the US got under torture, and since it is embarrasing for the US, the US refused to provide the necessary information.
If the U.S is at war, I give the Commander and Chief great latitude in how it conducts that war
Constitutionally, only congress can declare war. Congress has not declared war.
I agree, if we -constitutionally- declare war, then the president has exceptional powers to prosecute that war.
But congress has abdicated their responsibility to declare war, so the president has engaged in an unprecedented, extraconstitutional, and arguably illegal consolidation of executive power.
Do I misunderstand, or is there are real advantage on running product X in one VM and product Y in another (or even second instance of product X)
Well, yes, it is a nice bandaid for some of the problems of bad software.
However, based on a previous attempt at a physical server consolidation, I can see a big advantage in that you can upgrade/reboot individual applications that live on the same physical machine as other applications without disrupting everything.
Also, it is easier to deploy an OS with specific settings (ie., security settings) in a consistant way.
I'll write the damn thing on a post-it note and attach it to the back of my monitor
You know, it's just as easy and more secure to put it in your wallet or wherever you keep your credit cards. That way there is at least a little physical security, and you'll know if it is compromised.
The methodology of the study takes this factor out of the equation.
Each person was tested 4 times: normal, cell in hand, hands-free, drunk.
No matter how good of a driver you are, driving while talking on the phone has pretty much the same effect as legally drunk.
Just like many people who have been drinking, the cell phone users did not believe themselves to be affected, the researchers found.
I always use my hands-free set...
If you read the fucking article, you would know that their results were the same, hands-free or not.
53 is easier to handle. Where I work, it is limited to local DNS servers doing lookups via a specific set of upstream DNS servers. Everything else on 53 is blocked.
DHCP points all workstations to the local DNS servers.
443 is your best bet.
I may wind up going with iTMS but would prefer unencumbered Mp3s
It doesn't sound like you have tried out emusic.
It may or may not be what you are looking for, but based on your post, it sounds like it is worth checking out...
As a Pixies fan they know I would pay through the nose to complete my collection.
sigh... Maybe you should look here