"Carnivore was dropped because, as of two years ago, the available tools met the necessary privacy standards, as Prof. Kerr noted in his article about the PATRIOT Act published at the time."
Does this mean that instead of using a more privacy friendly tool (i never though i'll use this expression on carnivore) is NOT needed any more because of the patriot act? That's just plain scary. It's like saying "oh, instead of catching one guilty guy with good surveillance method, we just blanket-search 10'000 and we'll find our criminal that way". I hope i'm not correct with this interpetation.
Not really. There was a discussion about 2.7 lately (revisiting the issue which occured at last summer) but people seemed to have a consensus to stick with 2.6.x and -mm for a while still before starting 2.7. About 2.8+, i don't think there was any time(line|frame). I guess 2.7+ is heavily dependant on developers wanting to incorporate new stuff in the kernel which would break things. That situation just didn't occur yet.
It's not like you were forced to watch it. If you think it's bad then don't watch it. If you hear from your friends that it got better, you can start watching it again. It's not something you would lose.
There are large sections of code that havent been touched since 1.x releases. Linux frankly runs for shit on anything other than x86, despite all the claims of all the different systems it runs on. Too much PC specific cruft.
Actually i'm not totally convinced. I didn't see LKML full of complaints neither developers saying "we should do something about it now". PC specific "cruft" can be disabled or is disabled by default on non-x86. It would be interesting to do a diffstat from 1.x up until today's kernel, with statistics. If i cannot find any source that has done it before i might do it even. THEN we can talk about the age of code. The last change to 1.3 has been made on 20-Mar-2003 15:02 according to kernel.org. I wouldn't call that 10 years old neither.
Well, this may be true for season 1-2, but the end of 3rd season until the last episode i've seen (4x10) was great. They improved a LOT on the show since they started it. In season 1-2, T'pol was the 'thing' for a lot of fans, but since then the show gained momentum and started to rock. I enjoyed that they extended the storyline on the timetravel stuff and the Zindi parts were awesome. Its one of the 3-4 series i can actually watch without getting bored.
"Rewrite", to a programmer, doesn't mean to throw everything out and start from scratch, either. It means rethink some the design. Reevaluate why feature X was done the way it was, and if that's stillt he best way to do it. Make sure it's still relevant for modern hardware, and make sure it will still be relevant for tomorrows hardware.
MSFT is doing this with Longhorn. The hardware evolves, why shouldn't the software that runs on it?
...And linux is doing this with odd releases(2.1, 2.3, 2.5) and now with -mm while keeping 2.6 around. Did you ever look at LKML? You could see tons of discussions about what and how should be done.
That's something made me laugh this week. NO, the code isn't 10 years old. One of the core developers said this week that the kernel is getting 4mb of patches every week. Now, lets compute a bit:
# du -hs/usr/src/linux-2.6.7
290M linux-2.6.7
# bc
(...snip...)
290/4
72
This would assume that in a little bit over 1 year, the kernel is totally replaced. I know its logically flawed, but it means in my interpretation that there is no obsolete code in the kernel that would be >10 years old, or maybe with a few exceptions. I think it's safe to assume that most parts of the kernel aren't older than 2-3 years. Your logic is flawed.
Personally i think the kernel is perfectly good without a rewrite.
Legal issues shouldn't be a consideration neither, since SCO-code in the linux kernel is something in one class with Santa Claus. Linus stated on multiple occasions that he doesn't believe sco code could be in the kernel. I don't have evidence who generates those rumours, but i got a hunch it's from the SCO,Microsoft side of the barricade.
Re:Trojans = SPAM, so why won't SpamCop et al play
on
Verizon vs. Europe
·
· Score: 1
I feel like pulling out the form why your solution combatting spam won't work, though i'll spare everyone from that. Do you know that 99% of the ISPs never reply to anything sent to abuse@*? To be honest, in most cases they don't have the infrastructure for that, but the fact is a fact, they aren't replying. And even if they would reply, would they do anything? ISPs need to change first by enforcing stricter rules on them.
I couldn't quote the letter by word when he explained what you feel an incosistency but if you accept my interpretation of it, he said that his view about total openness may be a bit extreme SO he suggested this compromise between full embargo(vendor-sec) and total openness to strike a healthy balance.
I just want to point out aswell that the reason why Linus doesn't want to do with anything with vendor-sec is politics.
I have to point out on a sidenote though, but it seems to fit here that Andres Salomon started a new patchset, the "-as".
"Hi,
I'm announcing a new kernel tree; -as. The goal of this tree is to form
a stable base for vendors/distributors to use for their kernels. In
order to do this, I intend to include only security fixes and obvious
bugfixes, from various sources. I do not intend to include driver
updates, large subsystem fixes, cleanups, and so on. Basically, this is
what I'd want 2.6.10.1 to contain."
Well to be honest 99% of the patches are okay even if developed in 5 days. I think it needs even less time, considered two big advantages: there is the source and there is the documented exploit. 5 days should be more than enough for the best kernel hackers in the world to fix a hole which is most likely trivial to fix but was hard to spot. And anyway, they don't NEED to fix it in 5 days, they NEED to disclose information after 5 days.
IF someone would have linked to the full discussion, it would have turned out that he suggested a 5 working day embargo on the disclosure MAX. They say and i think i have to agree, that it's enough time for vendors to catch up. Anything more just makes the problem worse. They will disclose everything after that embargo of course. There are a lot of good ideas and views and Linus refined his opinion more than once so it would be good to read the original discussion and not react based on the submitter's pick.
Just to note, im reading LKML for over a year now and i read most of the mail about this thread aswell.
They have very little of this type of crime because EVERYONE has a gun.
First, the simple fact is not true that everyone has a gun, second, do you know that in Europe for example the only place there are guns is: a.) police/military b.) organized crime (mafia) murders c.) bank robberies.
Common people and citizens have NO guns. Burglars have no guns. The whole mentality is different. Owning a gun according to experiences doesn't solve but causes problems.
Well, there was worse here in Europe afaik. Danone sold yoghurts in advertisement that if someone buys their products 1/100th of the product's price goes for charity. Im sick of things like this. Fair business practice? Scam.
I have to say im happy about java going down, but about perl, i feel quite the opposite. mod_perl is still the best tool for me - thanks to the flexibility - not php.
I've been running this debian sid(unstable) installation for 2.5 years now, since the time my old hdd gave it in. It is most of the time stable, and as some people were telling, the only difference between stable and unstable is that unstable isn't verified to be stable, most of the time you won't have problems with it. From the things i use on this desktop the only thing which was bugging me for a while was when they broke a library which made mplayer broken (it didn't play movies, just shown a grey frame afair). That issue took 2 weeks to be fixed...I found everything to be working correctly and stable, my desktop has around 60 days uptime since the last kernel upgrade. I use it quite much and well, although to keep it stable may require a bit higher knowledge of apt-get or dpkg or just know where to look (debian.org) it is very stable. I considered gentoo aswell after i have been made aware of it's existence, which was around 1.5 years ago and i think, personally, that the performance upgrade it gives isn't worth the compile time on my machine when upgrading ~200 packages.
Actually this is not funny and i don't think it was intended to be funny, there are a lot of people without no proper education on the internet getting hooked on it these days. Im not thinking about the CS/IT level education they should be given, but some basic safety education which should be given to them...i would make it complimentary but let's stop chasing red herrings for a second, i would be very happy if they would at least offer it, offer basic safety education with a new internet subscription.
Let's bring this one more step ahead. You don't need to eat anything but bread and water either. Anyone can tell you that that it's not vital for your life, or that intellectual food is almost as vital as material food. This is all about relativity as most things. To use the same expression as you did, you don't have the RIGHT to tell what another person NEEDS.
However, we can tell one thing: many people's opinion is that sharing intellectual property is justified by the high price on they are "legally" available or by some other moral reasons. My personal opinion is that using very high profit ratios on "intellectual property" is morally unsupportable. That's why i will not get over it. Would you be so happy if for example someone would cartel the food industry and make everything except bread and water available only on high prices and crush every cheap food providers based on obsolete laws? After all, bread and water is perfectly appropriate in supporting your life. To summarize it, my point is that i don't think the level how much you need a thing has to do with the price. Your model is a primitive one, not because it's too simple, but because it leaves out important factors, like relativity, fairness and the core meaning of your civil rights, like the right to own property and free will. It seems hard to understand for the first time why does it collide with the insane profit chasing, but i'll try to explain my reasoning: when the government wants you or the companies protected by the government in some way want you to pay for something an unreasonable price which is commonly said to be unreasonable, then your choice shouldn't be buying or not buying it. Your choice should be aswell being able to convince the other party to listen to reason. You can not really do that atm, only indirectly with using the second choice, as in not buying the intellectual property but "pirating it". I have to say, yes, its the responsibility of the ones who "pirate" it aswell, but more of the responsibility is at the companies and the government not doing anything reasonable to resolve the situation. Remember, peace cannot be kept by force, only by understanding.
Slashdot Mirror
"Carnivore was dropped because, as of two years ago, the available tools met the necessary privacy standards, as Prof. Kerr noted in his article about the PATRIOT Act published at the time."
Does this mean that instead of using a more privacy friendly tool (i never though i'll use this expression on carnivore) is NOT needed any more because of the patriot act? That's just plain scary. It's like saying "oh, instead of catching one guilty guy with good surveillance method, we just blanket-search 10'000 and we'll find our criminal that way". I hope i'm not correct with this interpetation.
Not really. There was a discussion about 2.7 lately (revisiting the issue which occured at last summer) but people seemed to have a consensus to stick with 2.6.x and -mm for a while still before starting 2.7. About 2.8+, i don't think there was any time(line|frame). I guess 2.7+ is heavily dependant on developers wanting to incorporate new stuff in the kernel which would break things. That situation just didn't occur yet.
a day ago or something? Please editors be more careful!
It's not like you were forced to watch it. If you think it's bad then don't watch it. If you hear from your friends that it got better, you can start watching it again. It's not something you would lose.
There are large sections of code that havent been touched since 1.x releases. Linux frankly runs for shit on anything other than x86, despite all the claims of all the different systems it runs on. Too much PC specific cruft.
Actually i'm not totally convinced. I didn't see LKML full of complaints neither developers saying "we should do something about it now". PC specific "cruft" can be disabled or is disabled by default on non-x86. It would be interesting to do a diffstat from 1.x up until today's kernel, with statistics. If i cannot find any source that has done it before i might do it even. THEN we can talk about the age of code. The last change to 1.3 has been made on 20-Mar-2003 15:02 according to kernel.org. I wouldn't call that 10 years old neither.
Well, this may be true for season 1-2, but the end of 3rd season until the last episode i've seen (4x10) was great. They improved a LOT on the show since they started it. In season 1-2, T'pol was the 'thing' for a lot of fans, but since then the show gained momentum and started to rock. I enjoyed that they extended the storyline on the timetravel stuff and the Zindi parts were awesome. Its one of the 3-4 series i can actually watch without getting bored.
"Rewrite", to a programmer, doesn't mean to throw everything out and start from scratch, either. It means rethink some the design. Reevaluate why feature X was done the way it was, and if that's stillt he best way to do it. Make sure it's still relevant for modern hardware, and make sure it will still be relevant for tomorrows hardware.
...And linux is doing this with odd releases(2.1, 2.3, 2.5) and now with -mm while keeping 2.6 around. Did you ever look at LKML? You could see tons of discussions about what and how should be done.
MSFT is doing this with Longhorn. The hardware evolves, why shouldn't the software that runs on it?
Ah, this explains. Her latest reports i can remember of were heavily criticised by Groklaw and with that she lost all credibility. She did such poor job on even lieing that it was painful even to read.
That's something made me laugh this week. NO, the code isn't 10 years old. One of the core developers said this week that the kernel is getting 4mb of patches every week. Now, lets compute a bit:
/usr/src/linux-2.6.7
# du -hs
290M linux-2.6.7
# bc
(...snip...)
290/4
72
This would assume that in a little bit over 1 year, the kernel is totally replaced. I know its logically flawed, but it means in my interpretation that there is no obsolete code in the kernel that would be >10 years old, or maybe with a few exceptions. I think it's safe to assume that most parts of the kernel aren't older than 2-3 years. Your logic is flawed.
Personally i think the kernel is perfectly good without a rewrite.
Legal issues shouldn't be a consideration neither, since SCO-code in the linux kernel is something in one class with Santa Claus. Linus stated on multiple occasions that he doesn't believe sco code could be in the kernel. I don't have evidence who generates those rumours, but i got a hunch it's from the SCO,Microsoft side of the barricade.
I feel like pulling out the form why your solution combatting spam won't work, though i'll spare everyone from that. Do you know that 99% of the ISPs never reply to anything sent to abuse@*? To be honest, in most cases they don't have the infrastructure for that, but the fact is a fact, they aren't replying. And even if they would reply, would they do anything? ISPs need to change first by enforcing stricter rules on them.
Make a cell phone out of bubblegum-paper (which works through cell phone blocking).
Disclaimer: I agree with parent.
Yeah, sure he writes code. Often referred as "bugs". They have to sell updates somehow haven't they?
/If you can't decide if its flamebait, troll or funny, don't moderate./
I couldn't quote the letter by word when he explained what you feel an incosistency but if you accept my interpretation of it, he said that his view about total openness may be a bit extreme SO he suggested this compromise between full embargo(vendor-sec) and total openness to strike a healthy balance.
I just want to point out aswell that the reason why Linus doesn't want to do with anything with vendor-sec is politics.
I have to point out on a sidenote though, but it seems to fit here that Andres Salomon started a new patchset, the "-as".
"Hi,
I'm announcing a new kernel tree; -as. The goal of this tree is to form a stable base for vendors/distributors to use for their kernels. In order to do this, I intend to include only security fixes and obvious bugfixes, from various sources. I do not intend to include driver updates, large subsystem fixes, cleanups, and so on. Basically, this is what I'd want 2.6.10.1 to contain."
Well to be honest 99% of the patches are okay even if developed in 5 days. I think it needs even less time, considered two big advantages: there is the source and there is the documented exploit. 5 days should be more than enough for the best kernel hackers in the world to fix a hole which is most likely trivial to fix but was hard to spot. And anyway, they don't NEED to fix it in 5 days, they NEED to disclose information after 5 days.
IF someone would have linked to the full discussion, it would have turned out that he suggested a 5 working day embargo on the disclosure MAX. They say and i think i have to agree, that it's enough time for vendors to catch up. Anything more just makes the problem worse. They will disclose everything after that embargo of course. There are a lot of good ideas and views and Linus refined his opinion more than once so it would be good to read the original discussion and not react based on the submitter's pick.
Just to note, im reading LKML for over a year now and i read most of the mail about this thread aswell.
Common people and citizens have NO guns. Burglars have no guns. The whole mentality is different. Owning a gun according to experiences doesn't solve but causes problems.
>Space is cheap, CPU cycles aren't.
You're wrong. It depends on your priorities.
Well, there was worse here in Europe afaik. Danone sold yoghurts in advertisement that if someone buys their products 1/100th of the product's price goes for charity. Im sick of things like this. Fair business practice? Scam.
Not necessarily, those who are still in business can just happen to be lucky and/or more talented.
I have to say im happy about java going down, but about perl, i feel quite the opposite. mod_perl is still the best tool for me - thanks to the flexibility - not php.
Baldur's Gate
Just another useless survey - imo. And the facts are telling that 60% still didn't hear about blogs.
I've been running this debian sid(unstable) installation for 2.5 years now, since the time my old hdd gave it in. It is most of the time stable, and as some people were telling, the only difference between stable and unstable is that unstable isn't verified to be stable, most of the time you won't have problems with it. From the things i use on this desktop the only thing which was bugging me for a while was when they broke a library which made mplayer broken (it didn't play movies, just shown a grey frame afair). That issue took 2 weeks to be fixed...I found everything to be working correctly and stable, my desktop has around 60 days uptime since the last kernel upgrade. I use it quite much and well, although to keep it stable may require a bit higher knowledge of apt-get or dpkg or just know where to look (debian.org) it is very stable. I considered gentoo aswell after i have been made aware of it's existence, which was around 1.5 years ago and i think, personally, that the performance upgrade it gives isn't worth the compile time on my machine when upgrading ~200 packages.
Actually this is not funny and i don't think it was intended to be funny, there are a lot of people without no proper education on the internet getting hooked on it these days. Im not thinking about the CS/IT level education they should be given, but some basic safety education which should be given to them...i would make it complimentary but let's stop chasing red herrings for a second, i would be very happy if they would at least offer it, offer basic safety education with a new internet subscription.
Let's bring this one more step ahead. You don't need to eat anything but bread and water either. Anyone can tell you that that it's not vital for your life, or that intellectual food is almost as vital as material food. This is all about relativity as most things. To use the same expression as you did, you don't have the RIGHT to tell what another person NEEDS.
However, we can tell one thing: many people's opinion is that sharing intellectual property is justified by the high price on they are "legally" available or by some other moral reasons. My personal opinion is that using very high profit ratios on "intellectual property" is morally unsupportable. That's why i will not get over it. Would you be so happy if for example someone would cartel the food industry and make everything except bread and water available only on high prices and crush every cheap food providers based on obsolete laws? After all, bread and water is perfectly appropriate in supporting your life. To summarize it, my point is that i don't think the level how much you need a thing has to do with the price. Your model is a primitive one, not because it's too simple, but because it leaves out important factors, like relativity, fairness and the core meaning of your civil rights, like the right to own property and free will. It seems hard to understand for the first time why does it collide with the insane profit chasing, but i'll try to explain my reasoning: when the government wants you or the companies protected by the government in some way want you to pay for something an unreasonable price which is commonly said to be unreasonable, then your choice shouldn't be buying or not buying it. Your choice should be aswell being able to convince the other party to listen to reason. You can not really do that atm, only indirectly with using the second choice, as in not buying the intellectual property but "pirating it". I have to say, yes, its the responsibility of the ones who "pirate" it aswell, but more of the responsibility is at the companies and the government not doing anything reasonable to resolve the situation. Remember, peace cannot be kept by force, only by understanding.