maybe it is time that Apache gets a GUI and setup wizard option.
Mandrake Linux 8.2 Download Edition has at least 3, plus at least 3 GUI or browser based management tools for Apache. A site that big - and made entirely of lookalike pages - wouldn't use them.
Two or three new CodeReds down the track, more people will understand that doing things without knowing what you're doing is bad. Some already have.
Lemmingtons: mothed inappropriate
on
March Netcraft survey
·
· Score: 3, Informative
All of [a] sudden a pictures of lemmings jumping off a cliff materialized in front of me.
Lemmings don't actually do that. Perhaps a flock of moths orbiting a bonfire... orbiting... orbiting... spiralling in... `we see the light, and that light is Microsoft'
FWIW, piranha don't get vicious until they're thoroughly starved, and there are several species of vegetarian Piranha.
Ironically, a large number of the websites were defaced shortly thereafter
The word you're looking for is `inevitably', as in `Inevitably, a large number of recently-IISed websites were defaced soon after the transition'.
Or possibly a better (at least more accurate) headline would be `Massive webserver defacements entailed by massive webserver HTTP header defacements' (specifically, the `Server' header).
Wouldn't the extra hardware for serving and managing that many IIS sites be a significant and inhibitory cost factor?
Punishing almost everyone does not count as effective enforcing.
A minor nit: they haven't actually been punished yet, just hauled offstage as it were.
Why should I stop doing my wrong deeds if I will just get punished like the really evil guy next door?
Several reasons. One of them is the `almost' from above: the aim of the game is to be part of that remnant. But the big issue is that people do what they do largely because of what you believe. As well as changing your behaviour, changing your beliefs gets you (to put it extremely crudely) credit points, because what you would do in a perfect environment is more important that what you have actually done, although it is also necessary, for justice, to account for what you have actually done. The price is high, but it is also already paid if you will accept it. BTW, if you're the sort of person who chases `credit points' then you're almost certainly not the sort of person who actually gets them. Life's like that.
I suggest you starting reading geology books written by people who actually study the rocks
Done. And Dad is a mining engineer, plus two of his brothers are geologists, one of them world-famous, and two of my neighbours are geologists as well.
It's been known for 200 years that the geological pattern does not fit a worldwide flood.
No, it's been supposed by various people throughout history that the earth is either old or new, and facts bent to fit their agendas.
However, time has passed and observations have been made. Mechanisms for laying down rocks, particularly in lots of layers, have been observed both in the wild and in laboratories, operating on a scale of seconds-to-hours rather than megayears.
Mechanisms for each step of fossilisation have also been observed, and need not take long.
Self-arranging oxygen varves take care of ice cores, and dendrochronology operates to show features consistent with large-scale flooding (e.g. Yellowstone fossil trees grew contemporaneously at different levels, were laid down sans roots and branches and bark).
Hot Deep Biosphere experiments show that oil and gas are formed today, in quantities compatible with a short history, and that organic flood deposits are prone to absorbing and retaining them as they diffuse.
Well speciated fossils, including very many `impossible' samples (out of sequence, reversed sequence, polystrate, fresh organic material, etc) are compatible with a flood, not gradual deposition, as are thick homogeneous deposits, especially of either uniformly granular or discretely sorted substances such as gravel, and deposits laid out over a very wide area.
I don't think we need delve into consistent flood legends and other social support, or look at the many assumptions that go into isotopic dating (or the plentiful examples of exaggerated ages that result), but I'm happy to if you are. (-:
Go read the book of Job
The "Look apon my works, ye mighty, and despair" argument, eh?
No, the `were you there?' argument. Eyewitness accounts surely amount to more than speculation does.
the charred remains of 48 people found nearby that were the result of a panicked attempt to appease the sun gods.
Really, it was a crowd of supporters for one of Dr Gerard K O'Niell's forerunners. They gathered to watch their antenna array light up with microwaves converted and retransmitted from their moon-based solar power station, and the beam arrived a lot more focussed than it should have been and also slightly off target... (-:
Speaking of technology gone wrong, hasn't the absence of AC posts made today's stories a lot shorter? Or is this the (H)GSB we kept hearing about? Or both.
I wonder how many "sciantists" you could get to sign a "anti-evolution" petition.
We're seeing typoes on some otherwise quite respectable sites recently, so this isn't as obvious an incompetence indicator as it once was. Sad, really.
Regardless of typoes and propaganda sites, there are at least 25,000 card-carrying scientists in the USA alone who reckon that evolution is a non-starter.
Evolution is only one of a very large number of sacred cows which should be on the conveyor-belt headed towards the mincer. As textbooks still occasionally hawk the centuries-ago-disproven ontogeny-recapitulates-phylogeny lie, so they also still tell us that aeroplanes stay up because of the Bernoulli principle (and so they fly upside-down how...?), and that oil is formed from the compressed bodies of dinosaurs (and so the domes are refilling themselves how...?).
Aside from the fact that many of them are also raving loonies, and aside from observing the many honest scientists I know, I'm occasionally tempted to agree with the concensus-reality crowd's view of science, ie, that all scientific conclusions are based on ideological assumptions so of course the answers will fit same ideologies. As with many things in life, it seems to have a thread of truth running through it, but not nearly enough to make the whole deal worth taking aboard.
So I settle for a general air of skepticism and tossing the odd spanner into the works. (-:
You can remove core parts of the OS and the OS has no problem. I was about to say, `WMP and MSN aren't core parts of Windows' and then it suddenly hit me: they are core parts of the Windows business. This is like discussing theology with a Mormon: you and they are saying the same words, agreeing with each other, and meaning completely different things.
The consequences are obvious: the plaintiffs are asking Microsoft to remove - or at least make obviously optional - certain components which are clearly not vital to the functioning of the OS as an OS. The Microserfs are seeing the plaintiffs asking them to remove components which are clearly vital to their business model (embrace and extend: the spiderweb gambit). The plaintiffs have no feel for why the Microserfs are so upset (because from their POV the components are non-essential), and the Microserfs think the plaintiffs are only trying to put them out of business (because from their POV the components are essential).
Anyway... from a pragmatic POV, WMP, MSN and even Exploder are not core parts of the OS. Replacing Exploder with Konqueror and showing that to the judge would be good clean fun.
The core parts of the OS that I most like to remove are WIN.COM and COMMAND.COM; the application that I like to uninstall them with is diskdrake.
All MS has to do is add these things to the Remove Windows Components.
In my case, that involves shipping an X server and enough of a POSIX environment to run diskdrake. Microsoft may balk at this. (-:
The easiest way to achieve that is to require their OEMs to ship with both Windows and a recent version of Mandrake installed. Words like `choke', `apoplexy' and `freak out' don't even begin to describe what Ballmer and Gates would do in response to that as a proposal...
they didn't mean paintable in the traditional can-and-brush sense, but in a controlled laboratory they can apply it in a liquid state to manufactured panels and/or materials.
Someone will find a way. If your driveway does basically nothing all day, would you pay, say, $3000 to have it and your roof sprayed and hooked up to your synchronous inverter, to save you $500 a year in electricity bills?
I think the vandals will start using it when it has storage and spray-on LEDs included. The spray-on LEDs are already done, storage could be an issue. Maybe super-capacitors backing each solar nodule...? It would cause a revolution in the bubble printer ink industry as well. Wouldn't you pay more for ink that went into a photonic frenzy when it got warm or was exposed to light? A bit for self-organisation and you could have blinking ink, or even ripples or marquees...
BTW, the biggest fly in the ointment for T(H)GSB is that everyone will clock on to see if it's working. People are like that. There will be record-breaking hit counts on that day. (-:
could someone please explain what "free-range" plastic is?
There's a pop-hole at the end of the factory, which the plastics product can nip out through for a breath of relatively fresh air, some sunshine, and a bit of a peck and a scratch. Free-range eggs work the same way, the little blighters are always getting out through the mesh fencing because of their streamlined shape.
Here's a soundless-bite from the abstract in case you think I'm kidding:
Thomas Gold
U.S.G.S. Professional Paper 1570, The Future of Energy Gases, 1993
Modern information re-directs attention to the theories of a non-biological, primeval origin. Among this information is the prominence of hydrocarbons-gases, liquids and solids-on many other bodies of the solar system, as well as in interstellar space. Advances in high-pressure thermodynamics have shown that the pressure-temperature regime of the Earth would allow hydrocarbon molecules to be formed and to survive between the surface and a depth of 100 to 300 km. Outgassing from such depth would bring up other gases present in trace amounts in the rocks, thus accounting for the well known association of hydrocarbons with helium. Recent discoveries of the widespread presence of bacterial life at depth point to this as the origin of the biological content of petroleum.
You'll be pleased to discover that an awful lot of other stuff you `know' is completely wrong. (-:
For another example: most modern aircraft, notably jetliners and military aircraft don't rely on the Bernoulli effect (you know, the faster-air-lower-pressure-over-wing thing you're taught in science classes at school) to fly. Think about it: if Bernoulli kept aeroplanes in the air, how could you fly one upside down? (-:
It's a shame he's corrupt and doesn't care to do any practical enforcing, then.
If you count resurfacing the entire planet as `not practical', then I guess you could be onto something. To make that assignation, though, you'd have to ignore an awful lot of physical geology.
As to the `corrupt' - in whose opinion? Yours? Go read the book of Job and think about it before replying.
Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest - Cactus Ed Abbey
Ironic that God's view of things kind of parallels this.
Judah wanted a king to lead them instead of God, and they also refused to deal with God directly for their spiritual needs, therefore raising a need for intermediary priests (Aaron and then the Levites) for this purpose.
When it comes down to fundamentals, both priests and kings were raised by Atheism diluting Theism. I guess that makes `positive atheism' a perpetual self-employment program - albeit not normally a Latin-based one - exactly like the assumption-based preisthoods that they in principle oppose.
"Yes, Mary? I am going to e-mail you a tarball...What?...No, it's OK, you won't have to get your fingers dirty. Now upen up a shell...yes, that little thingy that looks like a TV. Now type tar -xzvf....What? No, that's xz...as in zebra...vf. Yes...that's right."
I click on the tarfile (or a ZIP file, for that matter, only it doesn't compress as well as gzip or bzip2) in my Konqueror window, and it pops up a GUI archive manager. The same thing happens in Nautilus. And has done for years.
A manager would call it an archive file anyway. Or even a ZIPfile, out of habit.
Do you even use this software you speak so authoritatively for?
Ah, yes, that would explain why cdrecord operates IDE CD burners through the/dev/sgN (SCSI) device nodes...
I also have a USB scanner which uses SCSI packets layered in PartPort (IEEE-1284) packets layered in USB packets because doing it with a string of converter chips was apparently cheaper than doing it properly.
I've been tracking all the crap that MS has done since the original IBM PC / Apple ][ days, and Wordstar was king (anyone remember Visicalc on the Apple?).
Yah, I remember Visicalc on the Apple. And this point is worth noting: even running under an emulator, it absolutely leaves Excel choking in its dust for speed on twin 1.2GHz CPUs... (-:
I also remember MultiPlan, and why Microsoft killed it.
FWIW, Word sucked up until about version 5, then began to be quite useable (albeit a little crashy and with all of those bugs you mentioned), then between about 5.5 and 6.01a seemd to do all right modulo the viruses. After that, it was just more bloat for very little extra functionality (except on the Mac, where it was a case of removing deliberately-installed hobbles which MS inflicted on Macs for not being owned by Bill).
I've been using SO5.2 extensively for interoperating with MS-Office, and no problems. The poster who wrote about Word-XP (Word 10?) docs being readable by Word-97 (AKA Word 8) is full of it. One of the things I use SO5.2 for is inhaling Word2000 docs and making them readable by Word97; the `Save As...' type-WordXX feature in the later MS-Words seems a bit hit and miss.
Slashdot Mirror
Mandrake Linux 8.2 Download Edition has at least 3, plus at least 3 GUI or browser based management tools for Apache. A site that big - and made entirely of lookalike pages - wouldn't use them.
Two or three new CodeReds down the track, more people will understand that doing things without knowing what you're doing is bad. Some already have.
Lemmings don't actually do that. Perhaps a flock of moths orbiting a bonfire... orbiting... orbiting... spiralling in... `we see the light, and that light is Microsoft'
FWIW, piranha don't get vicious until they're thoroughly starved, and there are several species of vegetarian Piranha.
Or were, until somebody noticed that many somebodies noticed.
IMHO, it would be cool to replace their homepage with:
<head><title>I dare you to type deltree
<body bgcolor="#000000">
<form action=./ method=post>
<h1 color="#00ff00">C:\> <input type=text></h1>
</form>
</body></head>
SANS seems to be off-air as at now. Perhaps there is a lesson in that, or perhaps they just moved to IIS?
Easier than reposting it would be understanding it yourself.
The word you're looking for is `inevitably', as in `Inevitably, a large number of recently-IISed websites were defaced soon after the transition'.
Or possibly a better (at least more accurate) headline would be `Massive webserver defacements entailed by massive webserver HTTP header defacements' (specifically, the `Server' header).
Wouldn't the extra hardware for serving and managing that many IIS sites be a significant and inhibitory cost factor?
A minor nit: they haven't actually been punished yet, just hauled offstage as it were.
Several reasons. One of them is the `almost' from above: the aim of the game is to be part of that remnant. But the big issue is that people do what they do largely because of what you believe. As well as changing your behaviour, changing your beliefs gets you (to put it extremely crudely) credit points, because what you would do in a perfect environment is more important that what you have actually done, although it is also necessary, for justice, to account for what you have actually done. The price is high, but it is also already paid if you will accept it. BTW, if you're the sort of person who chases `credit points' then you're almost certainly not the sort of person who actually gets them. Life's like that.
Done. And Dad is a mining engineer, plus two of his brothers are geologists, one of them world-famous, and two of my neighbours are geologists as well.
No, it's been supposed by various people throughout history that the earth is either old or new, and facts bent to fit their agendas.
However, time has passed and observations have been made. Mechanisms for laying down rocks, particularly in lots of layers, have been observed both in the wild and in laboratories, operating on a scale of seconds-to-hours rather than megayears.
Mechanisms for each step of fossilisation have also been observed, and need not take long.
Self-arranging oxygen varves take care of ice cores, and dendrochronology operates to show features consistent with large-scale flooding (e.g. Yellowstone fossil trees grew contemporaneously at different levels, were laid down sans roots and branches and bark).
Hot Deep Biosphere experiments show that oil and gas are formed today, in quantities compatible with a short history, and that organic flood deposits are prone to absorbing and retaining them as they diffuse.
Well speciated fossils, including very many `impossible' samples (out of sequence, reversed sequence, polystrate, fresh organic material, etc) are compatible with a flood, not gradual deposition, as are thick homogeneous deposits, especially of either uniformly granular or discretely sorted substances such as gravel, and deposits laid out over a very wide area.
I don't think we need delve into consistent flood legends and other social support, or look at the many assumptions that go into isotopic dating (or the plentiful examples of exaggerated ages that result), but I'm happy to if you are. (-:
No, the `were you there?' argument. Eyewitness accounts surely amount to more than speculation does.
It's also possible to do sideways, like this. This 'plane is not being held up by Bernoulli. (-:
The more recent achievements built upon earlier accomplishments.
.
W r o n g
Really, it was a crowd of supporters for one of Dr Gerard K O'Niell's forerunners. They gathered to watch their antenna array light up with microwaves converted and retransmitted from their moon-based solar power station, and the beam arrived a lot more focussed than it should have been and also slightly off target... (-:
Speaking of technology gone wrong, hasn't the absence of AC posts made today's stories a lot shorter? Or is this the (H)GSB we kept hearing about? Or both.
Good point. Are these methane-fixers you're talking about?
We're seeing typoes on some otherwise quite respectable sites recently, so this isn't as obvious an incompetence indicator as it once was. Sad, really.
Regardless of typoes and propaganda sites, there are at least 25,000 card-carrying scientists in the USA alone who reckon that evolution is a non-starter.
Evolution is only one of a very large number of sacred cows which should be on the conveyor-belt headed towards the mincer. As textbooks still occasionally hawk the centuries-ago-disproven ontogeny-recapitulates-phylogeny lie, so they also still tell us that aeroplanes stay up because of the Bernoulli principle (and so they fly upside-down how...?), and that oil is formed from the compressed bodies of dinosaurs (and so the domes are refilling themselves how...?).
Aside from the fact that many of them are also raving loonies, and aside from observing the many honest scientists I know, I'm occasionally tempted to agree with the concensus-reality crowd's view of science, ie, that all scientific conclusions are based on ideological assumptions so of course the answers will fit same ideologies. As with many things in life, it seems to have a thread of truth running through it, but not nearly enough to make the whole deal worth taking aboard.
So I settle for a general air of skepticism and tossing the odd spanner into the works. (-:
Really? Are you sure? This is Slashdot we're posting on...
Someone will find a way. If your driveway does basically nothing all day, would you pay, say, $3000 to have it and your roof sprayed and hooked up to your synchronous inverter, to save you $500 a year in electricity bills?
I think the vandals will start using it when it has storage and spray-on LEDs included. The spray-on LEDs are already done, storage could be an issue. Maybe super-capacitors backing each solar nodule...? It would cause a revolution in the bubble printer ink industry as well. Wouldn't you pay more for ink that went into a photonic frenzy when it got warm or was exposed to light? A bit for self-organisation and you could have blinking ink, or even ripples or marquees...
BTW, the biggest fly in the ointment for T(H)GSB is that everyone will clock on to see if it's working. People are like that. There will be record-breaking hit counts on that day. (-:
There's a pop-hole at the end of the factory, which the plastics product can nip out through for a breath of relatively fresh air, some sunshine, and a bit of a peck and a scratch. Free-range eggs work the same way, the little blighters are always getting out through the mesh fencing because of their streamlined shape.
This wouldn't be the Internet if there wasn't at least some dissenting opinion around. (-: This from a Professor Emeritus at Cornell.
Here's a soundless-bite from the abstract in case you think I'm kidding:
You'll be pleased to discover that an awful lot of other stuff you `know' is completely wrong. (-:
For another example: most modern aircraft, notably jetliners and military aircraft don't rely on the Bernoulli effect (you know, the faster-air-lower-pressure-over-wing thing you're taught in science classes at school) to fly. Think about it: if Bernoulli kept aeroplanes in the air, how could you fly one upside down? (-:
Are you interested in a few other foundation-shakers for you knowledge base? There are plenty of them around! (-:
If you count resurfacing the entire planet as `not practical', then I guess you could be onto something. To make that assignation, though, you'd have to ignore an awful lot of physical geology.
As to the `corrupt' - in whose opinion? Yours? Go read the book of Job and think about it before replying.
Sad but true. That's exactly what would happen.
Ironic that God's view of things kind of parallels this.
Judah wanted a king to lead them instead of God, and they also refused to deal with God directly for their spiritual needs, therefore raising a need for intermediary priests (Aaron and then the Levites) for this purpose.
When it comes down to fundamentals, both priests and kings were raised by Atheism diluting Theism. I guess that makes `positive atheism' a perpetual self-employment program - albeit not normally a Latin-based one - exactly like the assumption-based preisthoods that they in principle oppose.
Have you had enough irony in your diet today? (-:
I click on the tarfile (or a ZIP file, for that matter, only it doesn't compress as well as gzip or bzip2) in my Konqueror window, and it pops up a GUI archive manager. The same thing happens in Nautilus. And has done for years.
A manager would call it an archive file anyway. Or even a ZIPfile, out of habit.
Do you even use this software you speak so authoritatively for?
Ah, yes, that would explain why cdrecord operates IDE CD burners through the
I also have a USB scanner which uses SCSI packets layered in PartPort (IEEE-1284) packets layered in USB packets because doing it with a string of converter chips was apparently cheaper than doing it properly.
Yah, I remember Visicalc on the Apple. And this point is worth noting: even running under an emulator, it absolutely leaves Excel choking in its dust for speed on twin 1.2GHz CPUs... (-:
I also remember MultiPlan, and why Microsoft killed it.
FWIW, Word sucked up until about version 5, then began to be quite useable (albeit a little crashy and with all of those bugs you mentioned), then between about 5.5 and 6.01a seemd to do all right modulo the viruses. After that, it was just more bloat for very little extra functionality (except on the Mac, where it was a case of removing deliberately-installed hobbles which MS inflicted on Macs for not being owned by Bill).
I've been using SO5.2 extensively for interoperating with MS-Office, and no problems. The poster who wrote about Word-XP (Word 10?) docs being readable by Word-97 (AKA Word 8) is full of it. One of the things I use SO5.2 for is inhaling Word2000 docs and making them readable by Word97; the `Save As...' type-WordXX feature in the later MS-Words seems a bit hit and miss.
You really shouldn't roll out the red carpet like that. (-:0
What do you expect? Everyone has to take a leak a sometime...