how 90% of the post to this thread are recent apple purchasers that feel the need to justify their expenditure to the masses. there's that little capitalist demon inside of you saying "you got screwed! your new $3000 purchase is going to be EOL'd!".
maybe if you'd spent $500 for that dell box, you wouldn't feel so bad.
1. a killer search engine... granted. how much better is it then the other search engines out there? would your life be any less rich if you had to use y! search? i could easily make due.
2. interesting mapping software. the 3d satellite images are very cool, but i've never used it for anything other than dinking around.
3. gmail, which i completely don't get. it's a decent web-based mail service. and it's great they give you 2 gig or whatever. but the app itself certainly isn't revolutionary. it's web based mail. and i'll never use it until it has an integrated calendar like y! does.
4. a hugely simple "portal" page. y! beats it hands down.
5. google news...? it's a news portal! so?
as far as i can tell, all google is doing is taking existing technologies and improving on them. that's good. they are doing good work. revolutionary? hardly.
i can honestly say i am sorry i got into software engineering, or high-tech in general. first, the high-tech job market is influenced by recessions more than any other industry. second, no matter what, it's susceptible to offshoring. if not now, then 5, 10 or 15 years down the road. it happend for IT. it's happening to development. third, you are highly tied to a particular locale. for me, it's silicon valley, and IMHO, SV is a crap hole place to consider spending the rest of my life.
i'm mainly talking about the grunt high-tech worker. for research, it's probably different.
i wish i would have pursued some other career. something that has a demand not only in a few overpriced locales, something more recession proof, and something that has a benefit to being local.
if your interest is productivity between your desktop and your PDA, windows is going to be a better platform. there exists many high-quality productity apps that make your palm and windows work together.
if your interest is to tinker, well, then ignore this.
is something i've always found amusing. great new company, great technology, real cutting edge. can you tell me anything about it? no. and oh yes, we are a startup so you'll have to take a pay cut. are you interested?
so, the fellow posting the question is probably not the unix guru type, or he wouldn't have posted the question. to suggest that someone of low level or even moderate technical level start maintaining a unix box with firewall software is overkill to say the least. consider the power you're sucking for two boxes vs. one. consider the complexity of configuring rules. consider the space required for another box in your house (a lot of us live in apts or condos). consider the cost of aquiring the physical box (okay, pretty cheap, but probably not free).
as long as you do not need to do anything fancy, the simplified firewalls on consumer-level routers work fine. i have ICMP echo turned off, and a few well-know ports open for apps. no problems.
if this doesn't fix it for him, clearly this guy has some larger problem than port scanning. let's no mislead him.
in a lot of ways,/.'s mod system is modeled on censorship. have a minority opinion? don't like ipods? have a pro-MSFT comment? you get mod'd down and nobody sees it. what you see on/. is based on popular opinion. if that's not censhorship, i don't know what is. it's a self-reinforcing system. if you feel a certain way about something, you come here. you mod down contrary opinions, and nobody sees them. the people that come back are the ones that agree with you, since they enjoy reading the same opinions that you do. reminds me of right-wing radio. you listen to have your beliefs re-enforced, not to learn new things.
if you don't believe it, consider how often you see contrary opinions. how often do you see a pro-MSFT, or anti-linux comment here? if you think it's because there aren't any vocal pro-MSFT geeks in the world, then i have a bridge to sell you.
uhhh what the heck are you talking about? censhorship has gotten steadily lower throughout history. you have more freedoms now than you could have had living in any other point in history.
the republic has always belonged to corrupt politicians and big business. the US was founded by business men trying to find a place to wreak havoc.
yes, there are ups and downs (see: patriot act). but the long term trend is towards less censhorship. that is across all nations.
our company produces a software product that is evaluated along with our competitors, by gartner... the magic quadrant and all that. we paid over $10k for a gartner consultant to spend ONE DAY with us and tell us about the shape of the industry. from what i can gather, there was very little truly useful information exchanged.
this consultant is the same fellow that will be reviewing our product later on in the year. it's not that out company is doing anything underhanded, that's just the way it works with them.
alt-keys only work with a limited number of menu items. consider your average "bookmarks" menu. it is most certainly slower to down-arrow to the item you want than clicking on it.
when i first read this post, i thought it was a joke. then i noticed that is was mod'd insightful. *sigh*. it seems pretty silly to be comparing the technical merits of buying music from itunes for $1 a song and illegally downloading it off of a p2p network. this decision is made on whether you feel like paying for your music and risking a lawsuit, not on ease of use, player integration, etc.
First, of course, the quality of the music is much better in AAC than the ripped mp3's you find online. Second, you don't get screwed by fake or misnamed files, truncated versions, or the whole other slew of crappy files you find through P2P.
you haven't used p2p for a while now. kazaa was full of garbage, but bittorrent and ed2k are not like that.
you forget at the time you're actually spending $1 per song
wow, you mut have a lot of disposable income to forget about a click costing you a dollar.
we're not talking about internet vs. traditional distribution. we are talking about illegal distribution vs. a purchase. artists, in general, will not support p2p because p2p is by FAR used to illegally distribute their music.
even with internet distribution, it won't be based on p2p. it will be store-based, like itunes, or one of the many other clones that exist.
not limited, but that's it's primary usage. no p2p solution is limited to illegal distribution of copyrighted media. did, or does that argument work for any other p2p solution?
any p2p solution is going to be used 1000 to 1 for illegal distribution. that's just humanity.
any (music) artist that is actually making money off copyrighted works would not be in favor of P2P. okay, there are a few artists that may not give a crap about money, but in general most people love money and would never support something that resulted in them having less money.
Is it just me, or does this sound like a PR unit leaking little bits of stuff over the months to the press in an effort to keep Longhorn in the news?
yes, it's just you. more like some nobody working at MSFT leaked it to technewsworld.com, and technewsworld.com having no real concept of technical news, released an article. the next phase was someone posted it to/., knowing how/. users love to bash MSFT, and knowing this would be a lame but effective excuse to do so.
also, LEAK is pretty strong. i seriously doubt MSFT gives a crap whether people know this or not.
maybe someone with more technical knowledge can correct me if i'm wrong... really, the purpose of this post is to educate myself.
if i am receiving packets, my system must know the address of that sender. that is TCP/IP. therefore, the sender can always be determined.
this business of adding hops between the sender and receiver is pointless. that is not going to protect you. if you have sender A, receiver B, and intermediary C that passes packets between A and B, C is for all intents and purposes the sender. C will get sued.
Most people aren't evil pirates, I just want to be able to play back music that I pay money for on whatever medium I want to.
wrong, people by and large are evil pirates. if illegal music distribution was a small problem, or was dwarfed by legal "backups", folks like sony wouldn't be putting so much effort into stopping it. don't flatter yourself, no one really cares if you make a copy of your CDs for use in your home. no one has ever had legal action brought against them for doing that, and they never will.
what you perhaps fail to understand is that you live in a society where laws are not made for individuals, but for the masses. by far, music duplication results in illegal music distribution, not legal backups. folks like sony, and the US government, are going to do whatever they can to stop music duplication. they don't care if it inconveniences the 0.0001% of people that are making legal backups.
i guess you've never worked in customer service. if you have to constantly confront customers, the employees are 1) spending valuable time either tracking how long folks have been sitting around and getting them to leave 2) risking physical confrontation with pissed-off weirdos, 3) risking a verbal confrontation that is just bad for business.
any p2p client has many legal uses. i can find an unlimited number of freely sharable files using ed2k network. empirical evidence shows that is irrelevant.
isn't it a little more serious that 1.0.3 had the flaw in the first place? who's fault is that? it seems a lot more reasonable that we should be reading how netscape / aol bashed mozilla for crappy coding.
Slashdot Mirror
i love it. someone says something pro, factual about windows, and it's flamebait. what a great system this is.
maybe if you'd spent $500 for that dell box, you wouldn't feel so bad.
1. a killer search engine ... granted. how much better is it then the other search engines out there? would your life be any less rich if you had to use y! search? i could easily make due.
2. interesting mapping software. the 3d satellite images are very cool, but i've never used it for anything other than dinking around.
3. gmail, which i completely don't get. it's a decent web-based mail service. and it's great they give you 2 gig or whatever. but the app itself certainly isn't revolutionary. it's web based mail. and i'll never use it until it has an integrated calendar like y! does.
4. a hugely simple "portal" page. y! beats it hands down.
5. google news ...? it's a news portal! so?
as far as i can tell, all google is doing is taking existing technologies and improving on them. that's good. they are doing good work. revolutionary? hardly.
i'm mainly talking about the grunt high-tech worker. for research, it's probably different.
i wish i would have pursued some other career. something that has a demand not only in a few overpriced locales, something more recession proof, and something that has a benefit to being local.
if your interest is to tinker, well, then ignore this.
is something i've always found amusing. great new company, great technology, real cutting edge. can you tell me anything about it? no. and oh yes, we are a startup so you'll have to take a pay cut. are you interested?
playing othello! the future is now my friends.
as long as you do not need to do anything fancy, the simplified firewalls on consumer-level routers work fine. i have ICMP echo turned off, and a few well-know ports open for apps. no problems.
if this doesn't fix it for him, clearly this guy has some larger problem than port scanning. let's no mislead him.
in a lot of ways, /.'s mod system is modeled on censorship. have a minority opinion? don't like ipods? have a pro-MSFT comment? you get mod'd down and nobody sees it. what you see on /. is based on popular opinion. if that's not censhorship, i don't know what is. it's a self-reinforcing system. if you feel a certain way about something, you come here. you mod down contrary opinions, and nobody sees them. the people that come back are the ones that agree with you, since they enjoy reading the same opinions that you do. reminds me of right-wing radio. you listen to have your beliefs re-enforced, not to learn new things.
if you don't believe it, consider how often you see contrary opinions. how often do you see a pro-MSFT, or anti-linux comment here? if you think it's because there aren't any vocal pro-MSFT geeks in the world, then i have a bridge to sell you.
the republic has always belonged to corrupt politicians and big business. the US was founded by business men trying to find a place to wreak havoc.
yes, there are ups and downs (see: patriot act). but the long term trend is towards less censhorship. that is across all nations.
this consultant is the same fellow that will be reviewing our product later on in the year. it's not that out company is doing anything underhanded, that's just the way it works with them.
alt-keys only work with a limited number of menu items. consider your average "bookmarks" menu. it is most certainly slower to down-arrow to the item you want than clicking on it.
when i first read this post, i thought it was a joke. then i noticed that is was mod'd insightful. *sigh*. it seems pretty silly to be comparing the technical merits of buying music from itunes for $1 a song and illegally downloading it off of a p2p network. this decision is made on whether you feel like paying for your music and risking a lawsuit, not on ease of use, player integration, etc.
First, of course, the quality of the music is much better in AAC than the ripped mp3's you find online. Second, you don't get screwed by fake or misnamed files, truncated versions, or the whole other slew of crappy files you find through P2P.
you haven't used p2p for a while now. kazaa was full of garbage, but bittorrent and ed2k are not like that.
you forget at the time you're actually spending $1 per song
wow, you mut have a lot of disposable income to forget about a click costing you a dollar.
if you are making money off of the copyrighted work, then you are taxed on that.
even with internet distribution, it won't be based on p2p. it will be store-based, like itunes, or one of the many other clones that exist.
any p2p solution is going to be used 1000 to 1 for illegal distribution. that's just humanity.
any (music) artist that is actually making money off copyrighted works would not be in favor of P2P. okay, there are a few artists that may not give a crap about money, but in general most people love money and would never support something that resulted in them having less money.
yes, it's just you. more like some nobody working at MSFT leaked it to technewsworld.com, and technewsworld.com having no real concept of technical news, released an article. the next phase was someone posted it to /., knowing how /. users love to bash MSFT, and knowing this would be a lame but effective excuse to do so.
also, LEAK is pretty strong. i seriously doubt MSFT gives a crap whether people know this or not.
if i am receiving packets, my system must know the address of that sender. that is TCP/IP. therefore, the sender can always be determined.
this business of adding hops between the sender and receiver is pointless. that is not going to protect you. if you have sender A, receiver B, and intermediary C that passes packets between A and B, C is for all intents and purposes the sender. C will get sued.
wrong, people by and large are evil pirates. if illegal music distribution was a small problem, or was dwarfed by legal "backups", folks like sony wouldn't be putting so much effort into stopping it. don't flatter yourself, no one really cares if you make a copy of your CDs for use in your home. no one has ever had legal action brought against them for doing that, and they never will.
what you perhaps fail to understand is that you live in a society where laws are not made for individuals, but for the masses. by far, music duplication results in illegal music distribution, not legal backups. folks like sony, and the US government, are going to do whatever they can to stop music duplication. they don't care if it inconveniences the 0.0001% of people that are making legal backups.
thereby readying their students to compete for those coveted administrative assistant positions.
i guess you've never worked in customer service. if you have to constantly confront customers, the employees are 1) spending valuable time either tracking how long folks have been sitting around and getting them to leave 2) risking physical confrontation with pissed-off weirdos, 3) risking a verbal confrontation that is just bad for business.
any p2p client has many legal uses. i can find an unlimited number of freely sharable files using ed2k network. empirical evidence shows that is irrelevant.
isn't it a little more serious that 1.0.3 had the flaw in the first place? who's fault is that? it seems a lot more reasonable that we should be reading how netscape / aol bashed mozilla for crappy coding.
don't flatter yourself. no one cares what is in your pants.