When somebody would install a big red button in the middle of a highway with a sign saying "pressing this button lets explode 1000 atomic bombs" and somebody would really stop and press the button, who would you blame: the one that installed the button or the one who pressed it?
Felix von Leitner wrote an excellent article about this general problem, unfortunately it's in German (use the fish for translations): http://www.fefe.de/iloveyou.html It's about the ILOVEYOU virus, but generally the same kind of problem.
This is so stupid. Writing worms and viruses is the only way to demonstrate security holes in Microsoft software. Normally, you would have to pay to do bug reports to Microsoft. So, the worms are not the worm writers' faults, but actually Microsoft, totally failing with its security and bug handling policy.
Darwin is more than just the kernel, it's also the non-graphical userland. Darwin's kernel is actually called "xnu". And Darwin is licensed under the Apple Public Source License, version 2, which is actually GPL-compatible. They even worked together with the FSF to ensure this.
You're a fucking revisionist. In National Socialist Germany, gun ownership was strictly forbidden, and illegal gun ownership was punished with immediately getting shot.
But I saw that too often, pro-gun advocates are usually liars, having either no idea of history and inventing historical "facts" that never were just to promote their opinions.
OK, then can you explain to me why the US were primarily searching for weapons of mass destruction and not Saddam himself? That's the same thing, only with a bigger "gun" (nuclear, biological or chemical weapons).
That's like everybody's pointing at each other with a gun all the time, so nobody's shooting because of the fear that all other could start shooting, too. The only thing that keeps people off from shooting is fear.
In contrast, in Austria (that's where I come from, but it's the same in all other EU countries), hardly anybody owns a gun, simply because nobody has to fear that he/she is shot by some criminal or a neighbour.
BTW: your spelling of Switzerland is basically correct, but since it's a name, the first letter must be a capital letter.
Muhahaha.The cops will have guns, too, which in turn shoot (or at least arrest) the outlaws.
Look at Europe (guns are not "outlawed" but generally it's not quite easy to get a gun owner's license since you have to pass very strict psychological tests), with a lot less guns, and a lot less violence on the street, and no stupid "let's keep guns legal and easy to acquire, so that I can shoot my neighbours and/or my family when I want to" shit.
And you think the discussion on the OpenBSD side was less biased? Well, I'll just show you some of the comments from misc@openbsd.org about the article:
"Because as Lars pointed out before, benchmarks are seldom little more than a great way to use numbers to prove your point. Especially coming from this overtly pro-linux, anti-openbsd in the flesh little devil Felix. The benchmarks he provides serve little more than to feed his pro-linux ego and no real interest in improving OpenBSD, and neither do your (collectively) rantings as to this being proof that OpenBSD is broken. [...] The intuitive way to meet this attitude is to benchmark now the security advantages of OpenBSD where it outperforms Linux."
"Leitner is a linux bigot, he's very anti-openbsd (obvious to anyone who's ever read his rantings), the tests shows OpenBSD in a bad light, draw your own conclusions."
"I have better things to do than testing networking performance of operating systems. I'm very busy already. I've chosen OpenBSD as my server OS, because security is my main concern. I like it a lot. So far, nothing I've read has convinced me to install something else. I took time however to discredit (rightfully I think) this guy's test, because it struck me as being very unjust."
"Theo could easily rewrite OpenBSD to thrash these other OSes, real things like multiprocessor support are a real drag for them, so OpenBSD could be heaps faster. But who cares how many binds/second can be done, this isn't real "work", so what does it prove?"
I especially like the last one.:-) It shows the real attitude of most OpenBSD fanboys. Later, in the newsgroup de.alt.sysadmin.recovery, Felix summarized what kind of emails he got from the different projects. Some of the Linux people found it interesting, FreeBSD seems to have been quite friendly too (a few asked about benchmarking 4.8), the NetBSD people immediately explained why the mmap benchmark measured a worst case situation in NetBSD, and immediately started improving NetBSD performance-wise. But about OpenBSD he wrote that he only got only two emails that were not insulting. Some people even explained to him that the 1024 cylinder limit he mentioned in the article doesn't exist (it does! I know one person that tried to fix it, but his patches were not taken because he used intel syntax instead of AT&T syntax in some assembler files), and some people said that OpenBSD doesn't crash as he described. So far, the crash could be reproduced and is in the OpenBSD bugtracking system.
AFAICR, only the FreeBSD port took all the GNU stuff. The guy who made it even ported the glibc to FreeBSD.
Anyway, at the point where I had to leave (lack of time), nobody really cared about licenses, as long as it's "free" (or what Debian considers to be free).
Re:Panther/Darwin contributions?
on
FreeBSD 4.9 Released
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Debian NetBSD/FreeBSD isn't about forking and putting NetBSD/FreeBSD under a new license. It is about putting NetBSD and FreeBSD into the "Debian scheme", with Debian installer and Debian package management. And I have to know it, since I was involved in that work for some time.
Well, one can make FreeBSD by forking the code and relicensing it under the GPL. Of course, copyright notices must be retained. Anyone interested in creating GNU/BSD?;-)
But that's exactly the view of most BSD developers. They usually call this "real freedom". Yes, that kind of freedom where you're a kind of slave for one or more companies.
You are so right. I'm from Austria, and here, voting works basically the same way as in the UK, with paper and pen. What I just can't understand why somebody would want to have some fancy voting machine (be it computer-controlled or not), if such simple technology as a sheet of paper and a pen would do it, too.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft acted grossly negligent by leaving a number of serious security flaws open and unfixed, and that was my point.
I'm not trolling.
When somebody would install a big red button in the middle of a highway with a sign saying "pressing this button lets explode 1000 atomic bombs" and somebody would really stop and press the button, who would you blame: the one that installed the button or the one who pressed it?
Felix von Leitner wrote an excellent article about this general problem, unfortunately it's in German (use the fish for translations):
http://www.fefe.de/iloveyou.html
It's about the ILOVEYOU virus, but generally the same kind of problem.
No, when you want to send a bug report to Microsoft, you actually have to pay so that it's not immediately dumped but actually looked at!
This is so stupid. Writing worms and viruses is the only way to demonstrate security holes in Microsoft software. Normally, you would have to pay to do bug reports to Microsoft. So, the worms are not the worm writers' faults, but actually Microsoft, totally failing with its security and bug handling policy.
Great! Thanks, you made my day! :-) If I had mod points, I would mod you up.
This is definitely the weirdest idea how to (ab)use IPv6 I've ever read.
But nobody does it because Windows "already ships with a webserver".
It has a monopoly on Windows web servers.
So what is the point?
The point is called "hack value". They do it simply because they _can_ do it, and nobody did it before them.
Darwin is more than just the kernel, it's also the non-graphical userland. Darwin's kernel is actually called "xnu". And Darwin is licensed under the Apple Public Source License, version 2, which is actually GPL-compatible. They even worked together with the FSF to ensure this.
Irrelevant. I guess you know the statistics how many people get shot every year in the countries you mentioned. QED.
Wasn't there a case in Switzerland where a man used his assault rifle to shoot half of the people of some local government dead?
Help improve police. In Europe, police is actually really effective. And I know that, because I saw them in action a few times, already.
In other European countries guns are outlawed, too, and the crime rate is a lot lower than in England. So what do you want to prove?
In the last year, most criminals in Europe didn't even use real guns but usually toy guns because real guns are so hard to get.
You're a fucking revisionist. In National Socialist Germany, gun ownership was strictly forbidden, and illegal gun ownership was punished with immediately getting shot.
But I saw that too often, pro-gun advocates are usually liars, having either no idea of history and inventing historical "facts" that never were just to promote their opinions.
OK, then can you explain to me why the US were primarily searching for weapons of mass destruction and not Saddam himself? That's the same thing, only with a bigger "gun" (nuclear, biological or chemical weapons).
That's like everybody's pointing at each other with a gun all the time, so nobody's shooting because of the fear that all other could start shooting, too. The only thing that keeps people off from shooting is fear.
In contrast, in Austria (that's where I come from, but it's the same in all other EU countries), hardly anybody owns a gun, simply because nobody has to fear that he/she is shot by some criminal or a neighbour.
BTW: your spelling of Switzerland is basically correct, but since it's a name, the first letter must be a capital letter.
Muhahaha.The cops will have guns, too, which in turn shoot (or at least arrest) the outlaws.
Look at Europe (guns are not "outlawed" but generally it's not quite easy to get a gun owner's license since you have to pass very strict psychological tests), with a lot less guns, and a lot less violence on the street, and no stupid "let's keep guns legal and easy to acquire, so that I can shoot my neighbours and/or my family when I want to" shit.
And you think the discussion on the OpenBSD side was less biased? Well, I'll just show you some of the comments from misc@openbsd.org about the article:
:-) It shows the real attitude of most OpenBSD fanboys. Later, in the newsgroup de.alt.sysadmin.recovery, Felix summarized what kind of emails he got from the different projects. Some of the Linux people found it interesting, FreeBSD seems to have been quite friendly too (a few asked about benchmarking 4.8), the NetBSD people immediately explained why the mmap benchmark measured a worst case situation in NetBSD, and immediately started improving NetBSD performance-wise. But about OpenBSD he wrote that he only got only two emails that were not insulting. Some people even explained to him that the 1024 cylinder limit he mentioned in the article doesn't exist (it does! I know one person that tried to fix it, but his patches were not taken because he used intel syntax instead of AT&T syntax in some assembler files), and some people said that OpenBSD doesn't crash as he described. So far, the crash could be reproduced and is in the OpenBSD bugtracking system.
"Because as Lars pointed out before, benchmarks are seldom little more than a great way to use numbers to prove your point. Especially coming from this overtly pro-linux, anti-openbsd in the flesh little devil Felix. The benchmarks he provides serve little more than to feed his
pro-linux ego and no real interest in improving OpenBSD, and neither do your (collectively) rantings as to this being proof that OpenBSD is broken. [...] The intuitive way to meet this attitude is to benchmark now the security advantages of OpenBSD where it outperforms Linux."
"Leitner is a linux bigot, he's very anti-openbsd (obvious to anyone who's ever read his rantings), the tests shows OpenBSD in a bad light, draw your own conclusions."
"I have better things to do than testing networking performance of operating systems. I'm very busy already. I've chosen OpenBSD as my server OS, because security is my main concern. I like it a lot. So far, nothing I've read has convinced me to install something else. I took time however to discredit (rightfully I think) this guy's test, because it struck me as being very unjust."
"Theo could easily rewrite OpenBSD to thrash these other OSes, real things like multiprocessor support are a real drag for them, so OpenBSD could be heaps faster. But who cares how many binds/second can be done, this isn't real "work", so what does it prove?"
I especially like the last one.
Why work on such esoteric stuff when we have tons of people sitting idle?
They can be our "smart detectors".
Now _that_ would definitely lower the unemployment rate!
AFAICR, only the FreeBSD port took all the GNU stuff. The guy who made it even ported the glibc to FreeBSD.
Anyway, at the point where I had to leave (lack of time), nobody really cared about licenses, as long as it's "free" (or what Debian considers to be free).
Debian NetBSD/FreeBSD isn't about forking and putting NetBSD/FreeBSD under a new license. It is about putting NetBSD and FreeBSD into the "Debian scheme", with Debian installer and Debian package management. And I have to know it, since I was involved in that work for some time.
Well, one can make FreeBSD by forking the code and relicensing it under the GPL. Of course, copyright notices must be retained. Anyone interested in creating GNU/BSD? ;-)
But that's exactly the view of most BSD developers. They usually call this "real freedom". Yes, that kind of freedom where you're a kind of slave for one or more companies.
You are so right. I'm from Austria, and here, voting works basically the same way as in the UK, with paper and pen. What I just can't understand why somebody would want to have some fancy voting machine (be it computer-controlled or not), if such simple technology as a sheet of paper and a pen would do it, too.