Sure Gnome is pretty, but it runs like a pig compared to CDE on the hardware at my site, not to mention a variety of other shortcomings. Some people prefer functional and fast to pretty and hip. (And clutter??) Of course, for those that want to do so, CDE can also be customized, but few people bother.
About the only thing I really consider important about Gnome at the moment is the associated libraries since you need them for an increasing amount of software. Otherwise....
As to why they still ship it, CDE is still THE standard Unix desktop for commercial Unix (note: Unix, not *nix). More vendors are starting to make Gnome available, but they are picking different versions.
CDE will no doubt pass from the scene like OpenLook is / has, but it will be years in coming.
Maybe you need to read that again. Maybe you should start with this paragraph (I added some boldface to help make the meaning clearer):
We
need alternative forms of distribution too. I'm not saying publishers suck, although I do believe that in many cases. [laughter] If the plane went down who would care about the marketing guys? We need another way of getting games out there and in players' hands. If any of you bought half life 2 at Wal-Mart, please just leave the room. Has everyone bought Bioware's online modules? JUST BUY THEM, OK, even if you don't have the original games! We HAVE to get games into gamers' hands. So I'm not saying publishers are evil.. if we do all this and go direct to our consumers with games funded some OTHER way than EA or whoever.. we'll keep more of the money.. we have to find someone to pay for it and find a buyer after. We need Sundances. Independent Film Channel. Equivalents of those. Just try to find some way of funding your stuff that doesn't come from a publisher.
They are saying the need new ways to distribute the games so the developers get more of the money, not that the games should be pirated and the developers therefore get less money.
You are suggesting that a hacker will get this patch from the government, probably breaking some espionage laws along the way, identify the vulnderability, develop an exploit, and then write and release a virus within a month. That would be one busy cracker with a what is likely to be a short career. It would also most likely be a Federal case with the usual penalty increases. There are some things the Feds just don't fool around with.
Or were you suggesting that the government was going to release viruses?
Second, if you read the Coulter piece, you no doubt noticed that she "outed" a number of journalists and media figures that use aliases. So, there is nothing odd there.
Third, every White House calls on people known to ask friendly questions. No set ups required, and probably no surer way to make yourself fee important by being called on for questions at the White House.
Fourth, regarding the Plame affair, the New York Times seems to be singing a different tune these days as to it being "illegal". I wonder why?
Fifth, if Gannon isn't a "journalist", and you think he shouldn't have gotten a press pass after going through the checks, then you are saying that the White House should pick and choose who it considers to be journalists. Isn't that a comforting thought? Some blogs dwarf the readership of even major city news papers. Where is the cut-off?
You seem to be riding the band wagon to try and turn the presence of a marginal gay journalist asking friendly questions at White House press briefings into a major scandal. I think that you are in for a long, slow, bumpy, and ultimately disapointing ride. I guess you have to play the cards you're delt.
You will find a far better explaination of what is going on in this case here. I recommend that you read it and then go back through your questions and assumptions.
Sure, conspiracies do exist, but not everything is a "conspiracy". Of course, I would love to know what the real meat to this one is, if it really is a "conspiracy". Let me guess what you think: gay porn prostitutes conspire against Democrats with Christian Right hardline administration to ask occasional softball questions at press conferences.... news organizations being forced to carry right-wing gay-porn hardline Christian pro-prostitute spin to further their agenda due to it being only questions allowed to be asked at press conferences. Whoo hoo! There is something after all!!
Hmmm. Or maybe it is: Loser with a web site feels important from being admitted on a "day press pass" and being called upon due to being known for asking softball questions? Loser admitted to press conferences on same alias basis as Larry King and on the same journalistic basis as the Schlepville Iowa Gazette.
Hmmm.... Which is it?.... Which is it? I guess only time will tell.
Considering the kind of stuff that gets glossed over in the American media (Jeff Gannon, anyone? You may not even know who he is because the media has so thoroughly ignored the issue)
The "Jeff Gannon story" isn't being "glossed over", it is being covered. It just doesn't get a lot of front page coverage because there isn't much of a "there" there. It is a little weird, and sordid, but not much to get whipped up over as a serious issue. It is candy for the conspiracy buffs, but not much else.
One: Minimizing your configuration to have only what you need is a basic security principle. Software that isn't installed doesn't have to be patched, configured, audited, and otherwise watched. This is more important considered in light of item two.
Two: You should use good security practices on all systems / devices to establish a defense in depth. You are begging for trouble if your entire security plan is: use a firewall. All it takes for your maximum software machine to be owned is for a new exploit to come out that your firewall doesn't block, or a trojan that you let through. That may not happen often, but it does happen.
If you don't use it or need it, get rid of it, and then patch, properly configure, maintain, and audit the rest.
No more surprising than is the current lack of a "slave" line item in Labor Department statistics.
Dropping that at the time was controversial too. In retrospect most people agree that it was the right decision, although there are still a few hold-outs.
Things are a litte more complex than that little blurb in the article suggests. Saddam's interest in archaeology tended to be self-serving, such has when Saddam rebuilt Babylon:
In 1982, Saddam's workers began reconstructing Babylon's most imposing building, the 600-room palace of King Nebuchadnezzar II. Archaeologists were horrified. Many said that to rebuild on top of ancient artifacts does not preserve history, but disfigures it. The original bricks, which rise two or three feet from the ground, bear ancient inscriptions praising Nebuchadnezzar. Above these, Saddam Hussein's workers laid more than 60-million sand-colored bricks inscribed with the words, "In the era of Saddam Hussein, protector of Iraq, who rebuilt civilization and rebuilt Babylon." The new bricks began to crack after only ten years.
The problems in Iraq aren't new. Many of the problems in Iraq date back to at least Saddams invasion of Kuwait and the 1991 Gulf War.
Prior to the Persian Gulf War, archaeologists working in Iraq were forced to close down excavations when Iraq's August invasion of Kuwait made the situation to dangerous to continue....
And following the war, looting of archaeological sites increased dramatically as Iraq's impoverished citizens used sometimes desperate means to make money in light of the economic sanctions placed on Iraq by the western world.
...In early February 1991, for example, Saddam parked MiG fighter jets at a Babylonian ziggurat at Ur to deter coalition forces from disabling them during the Gulf War. By Nineveh, the ancient capital of the Assyrian empire, he built air bases and weapons factories. According to archaeological scholars from the University of Chicago, an 80-foot mound containing many ruins of ancient Nineveh also housed an oil storage tank. During the Iran-Iraq war, Saddam used the site for anti-aircraft batteries because it was the most elevated spot in the area....
In contrast, at the height of the bombing campaign the Pentagon produced aerial photographs of the Al-Basrah mosque. They showed clearly that the Iraqis had destroyed the mosque for propaganda purposes. While coalition forces had bombed a target some 100 yards away, leaving the mosque unscathed, Iraqi engineers sliced off the dome in the hope of duping journalists that the U.S. had been responsible for the destruction.
The desecrations of burial grounds in Iraq aren't anything new. They happened to burial groundsafter the first Gulf War too.
The looting of the museums was also overstated as well.
FWIW: In Afghanistan, the Taliban was destroying priceless cultural artifiacts as being anti-Islamic. The US intervention in Afghanistan stopped that, and the new government is committed to preserving such artifacts.
Unless the agreement denied SCO the ability to develop and sell new technology the answer is Sun paid for SCOs implementation of the UDI drivers, a new technology. Sun bought them to cut time and costs in improving hardware support for Solaris X86 after they almost killed it and it was badly out of date.
It's a 60 year old design, not a 60 year old aircraft at the moment.
I meant that they would be ~ 80 (+/-10) years old when they left service, not that they were 80 now. Sorry.
I've read the same story about the leak.
By the time they are retired the B-52 will have been an amazing success.
Too bad we don't have anything with the bomb bay of the B-36 though.
If it is the Sun license they used before when they opened the source (SCSL?) and you have to agree to it and the conditions in a somewhat more formal way, there probably isn't any big deal.
If it is the GPL / BSD license, there probably is an issue.
That would be nice if the US recognised the group as prisoners of war. Instead they coined the term 'Illegal combatants', basically negating all rights under the Geneva convention, including the right to an attorney.
Geneva Convention rights are only automatic for certain categories of combatants. Some don't qualify at all (spies & mercenaries under Protocol I), and others must meet certain qualifications. In Afghanistan and Iraq there is a mixture of people who are automatically covered, some that might qualify, and others that don't qualify. That is a reflection of both the type of conflict and of the people who choose to fight against the US and its allies. There is no right to an attorney under the Geneva Convention unless there is a judicial action against the prisoner for a crime. Fighting in a war is not necessarily a crime, especially if it is done as part of the armed forces of a state. You are confusing war with law enforcement. An actual prisoner of war, under the terms of the treaty, can be held until the end of hostilities without trial as there is no crime, only acts of war. You might want to read the terms of the treaty some time as you will see that there are many right granted soldiers that make no sense for terrorists, such as a soldier has the right to be paid a monthly salary by the enemy nation that holds him captive (article 60).
With the latest prisoner 'scandals' the US military has been involved in, I also somehow doubt they are following some of the other guidelines laid down by the Geneva convention, like not torturing prisoners.
The scandals were largely the product of about 30 rogue soldiers who had already been discovered and investigated before the scandal and pictures were widely reported in the press. The are now facing courts martial. One is already in prison, and another was recently sentenced to 8 years in prison. More will be joining them.
Good thing we found those missle parts, they could be dangerous. I also like the large amount of evidence I could find backing this claim up. Oh, and I prefer the evidence given by the Unicef report to the bulshit propoganda as why Saddam is completely at fault for the starvation. I would appreciate if you replied with the source of these facts.
Here are some sources regarding the quite shocking Oil for Food scandal, which shows the crumbling of the sanctions regime, and the source for some of the obstructionism and pro-Saddam advocacy in the international community. UN looked away as regime stole oil-for-food cash:
By conservative estimates, 250,000 children died from 1991 to 1996. But during those five years, Saddam refused offers to sell his oil and import humanitarian goods under UN supervision, gambling that images of starving babies would break the will of the international community.
By 1996 he was allowed to sell oil to clients of his choice provided that the income went into a UN account to be spent on food and medicine.
Saddam siphoned 10 cents off every barrel of oil leaving the country and a further 10 per cent "kickback" from every shipment of food or medicine to reach Iraq.
The scam - under which Saddam would bribe officials with vouchers entitling the bearer to a certain amount of oil on the open market - had brought in the equivalent of £11 billion for his regime, the US Congress has been told.
That has been taken as further proof that the UN sanctions regime was crumbling - and that Saddam had acquired the financial muscle needed to pursue his aim of acquiring weapons of mass destruction.
Next we need to wait and see if SCO treats Sun just like IBM under their contract.
They won't and can't because Sun has paid huge amounts of money ($100,000,000+) since they first licensed Unix. In 1994 they paid Novell, then the keeper of the Unix kingdom, $82,000,000 for a paid-up license. As far as I know, Sun is unique in that regard.
Sun's license is one of several it has signed since 1994 with the various owners of the Unix System V source code, of which SCO is the latest, said John Loiacono, the vice president of Sun's Operating Platforms group. The most recent license, signed in February, "licensed several hundred drivers to connect, essentially, peripheral devices to the operating system," he said....
... Because Sun purchased strong intellectual property (IP) rights with this and the various other Unix System V licenses it has signed with SCO over the past decade, it can now indemnify users of its Solaris x86 against lawsuits, Loiacono said. "I have a different license than what IBM purchased. I wanted complete ownership of my IP, so I bought IP rights outright," he said.
Sun paid for Uniform Driver Interface driver technology and drivers from SCO for Solaris X86. They were trying to revive Solaris X86 after almost killing it and creating an uproar among their customers. Paying for that driver technology gave them quick and easy access to an important technology to make Solaris X86 more competitive in the future. They saved considerable time by buying a working System V Unix implementation of those drivers to incorporate into their System V Unix implementation. Using UDI drivers lets them easily leverage drivers written to the UDI spec for other oerating systems for their own operating system. Incorporating UDI technology into Solaris X86 made it a better product that will be more competitive in the future, will cut costs, and make more hardware available for it. I don't see any mystery in why they would be interested in it.
Microsoft paid almost double that and yet MS doesn't even have a real UNIX OS product
Although it seems pretty likely they... "overpaid"... Microsoft does have have a Unix product: Microsoft Services for Unix. It gives you a unix layer on Windows 2000, 2003, or XP. It's free. It's useful: csh, ksh, perl, gcc, awk, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
I pick CDE, and I'm not alone.
Sure Gnome is pretty, but it runs like a pig compared to CDE on the hardware at my site, not to mention a variety of other shortcomings. Some people prefer functional and fast to pretty and hip. (And clutter??) Of course, for those that want to do so, CDE can also be customized, but few people bother.
About the only thing I really consider important about Gnome at the moment is the associated libraries since you need them for an increasing amount of software. Otherwise....
As to why they still ship it, CDE is still THE standard Unix desktop for commercial Unix (note: Unix, not *nix). More vendors are starting to make Gnome available, but they are picking different versions.
CDE will no doubt pass from the scene like OpenLook is / has, but it will be years in coming.
What? People run Windows on big iron?
Yes, they do. You just need the right type of hardware, and the Datacenter edition of Windows.
Maybe you need to read that again. Maybe you should start with this paragraph (I added some boldface to help make the meaning clearer):
They are saying the need new ways to distribute the games so the developers get more of the money, not that the games should be pirated and the developers therefore get less money.
It is likely to be a very long time.
You are suggesting that a hacker will get this patch from the government, probably breaking some espionage laws along the way, identify the vulnderability, develop an exploit, and then write and release a virus within a month. That would be one busy cracker with a what is likely to be a short career. It would also most likely be a Federal case with the usual penalty increases. There are some things the Feds just don't fool around with.
Or were you suggesting that the government was going to release viruses?
I find either scenario unlikely.
...give me a break!
A break? Sure! I'll even throw in a few clues.
First, Gannon had to submit to the same security checks as everybody else.
Second, if you read the Coulter piece, you no doubt noticed that she "outed" a number of journalists and media figures that use aliases. So, there is nothing odd there.
Third, every White House calls on people known to ask friendly questions. No set ups required, and probably no surer way to make yourself fee important by being called on for questions at the White House.
Fourth, regarding the Plame affair, the New York Times seems to be singing a different tune these days as to it being "illegal". I wonder why?
Fifth, if Gannon isn't a "journalist", and you think he shouldn't have gotten a press pass after going through the checks, then you are saying that the White House should pick and choose who it considers to be journalists. Isn't that a comforting thought? Some blogs dwarf the readership of even major city news papers. Where is the cut-off?
You seem to be riding the band wagon to try and turn the presence of a marginal gay journalist asking friendly questions at White House press briefings into a major scandal. I think that you are in for a long, slow, bumpy, and ultimately disapointing ride. I guess you have to play the cards you're delt.
You will find a far better explaination of what is going on in this case here. I recommend that you read it and then go back through your questions and assumptions.
Sure, conspiracies do exist, but not everything is a "conspiracy". Of course, I would love to know what the real meat to this one is, if it really is a "conspiracy". Let me guess what you think: gay porn prostitutes conspire against Democrats with Christian Right hardline administration to ask occasional softball questions at press conferences.... news organizations being forced to carry right-wing gay-porn hardline Christian pro-prostitute spin to further their agenda due to it being only questions allowed to be asked at press conferences. Whoo hoo! There is something after all!!
Hmmm. Or maybe it is: Loser with a web site feels important from being admitted on a "day press pass" and being called upon due to being known for asking softball questions? Loser admitted to press conferences on same alias basis as Larry King and on the same journalistic basis as the Schlepville Iowa Gazette.
Hmmm.... Which is it?
Any law restricting free speech will be eventually be used in ways that limit essential liberty. Child porn laws will be used to censor the net,
Laws against child porn will be used to remove child porn from the net. Surely you can't belive that real child porn is a part of "essential liberty".
after the unfolding Dark Ages in the U.S.
Thanks for the best laught I've had all day. If the US is growing dark, here is where the light is going.
Considering the kind of stuff that gets glossed over in the American media (Jeff Gannon, anyone? You may not even know who he is because the media has so thoroughly ignored the issue)
The "Jeff Gannon story" isn't being "glossed over", it is being covered. It just doesn't get a lot of front page coverage because there isn't much of a "there" there. It is a little weird, and sordid, but not much to get whipped up over as a serious issue. It is candy for the conspiracy buffs, but not much else.
Right. And the next thing you know, Der Spiegel will be asking, "Could George W. Bush Be Right?" That will be the day.
At the expense of shops who were using no computer at all. Or abacuses.
:(
I would laugh if the situation weren't so serious for my company. We are on the verge of a disaster.
Chisembop manual sales have been flat for 5 years.
Adding machine sales are down 38%.
Calculator sales are down 52%, including the newest hand held models.
Slide rule sales are down 79%.
Analytical engine sales are down 93%.
Tabulator sales are down 98%.
Our abacus miniaturization project is running into problems with prior art by a "major" competitor.
To top it off, our hope for a Multitronic breakthrough appears to have dangerous side effects after four models that were outright failures.
Unless we can pump up our mentat outsourcing service, or complete development of our Make me a Rainman! kit, we're doomed! Doomed I tell you!
But for your desktop machine, who cares?
Everybody should for two reasons:
One: Minimizing your configuration to have only what you need is a basic security principle. Software that isn't installed doesn't have to be patched, configured, audited, and otherwise watched. This is more important considered in light of item two.
Two: You should use good security practices on all systems / devices to establish a defense in depth. You are begging for trouble if your entire security plan is: use a firewall. All it takes for your maximum software machine to be owned is for a new exploit to come out that your firewall doesn't block, or a trojan that you let through. That may not happen often, but it does happen.
If you don't use it or need it, get rid of it, and then patch, properly configure, maintain, and audit the rest.
WIth a name like that, I expect to see pictures of him eating those Cell processors, and describing how they taste.
So Clarice... should I tell you what I do with that nice cell processor server? Hmm?
I calculate their atomic quiver... with java beans, and a nice chianti DB.
We've been overdue for the annual Timecube reference on Slashdot.
No more surprising than is the current lack of a "slave" line item in Labor Department statistics.
Dropping that at the time was controversial too. In retrospect most people agree that it was the right decision, although there are still a few hold-outs.
Things are a litte more complex than that little blurb in the article suggests. Saddam's interest in archaeology tended to be self-serving, such has when Saddam rebuilt Babylon:
The problems in Iraq aren't new. Many of the problems in Iraq date back to at least Saddams invasion of Kuwait and the 1991 Gulf War.
Saddam's military made a practice of stationing military units by antiquities to protect them from attack. There are many recorded instances, including these gems:
The desecrations of burial grounds in Iraq aren't anything new. They happened to burial groundsafter the first Gulf War too.
The looting of the museums was also overstated as well.
FWIW: In Afghanistan, the Taliban was destroying priceless cultural artifiacts as being anti-Islamic. The US intervention in Afghanistan stopped that, and the new government is committed to preserving such artifacts.
just what Sun was licensing and why.
Unless the agreement denied SCO the ability to develop and sell new technology the answer is Sun paid for SCOs implementation of the UDI drivers, a new technology. Sun bought them to cut time and costs in improving hardware support for Solaris X86 after they almost killed it and it was badly out of date.
There isn't any mystery here.
It's a 60 year old design, not a 60 year old aircraft at the moment. I meant that they would be ~ 80 (+/-10) years old when they left service, not that they were 80 now. Sorry. I've read the same story about the leak. By the time they are retired the B-52 will have been an amazing success. Too bad we don't have anything with the bomb bay of the B-36 though.
Good thing.
Now they should be set for another 20 to 40 years, along with the rest of the B-52H inventory.
Staggering to think that 80 year old bombers are currently what the US plans for the future.
The important question is, what would Mach 10 be in warp speed?
Release the docking bay clamps.
It all depends upon the license they use.
If it is the Sun license they used before when they opened the source (SCSL?) and you have to agree to it and the conditions in a somewhat more formal way, there probably isn't any big deal.
If it is the GPL / BSD license, there probably is an issue.
Either way I expect we'll find out in six months.
Geneva Convention rights are only automatic for certain categories of combatants. Some don't qualify at all (spies & mercenaries under Protocol I), and others must meet certain qualifications. In Afghanistan and Iraq there is a mixture of people who are automatically covered, some that might qualify, and others that don't qualify. That is a reflection of both the type of conflict and of the people who choose to fight against the US and its allies. There is no right to an attorney under the Geneva Convention unless there is a judicial action against the prisoner for a crime. Fighting in a war is not necessarily a crime, especially if it is done as part of the armed forces of a state. You are confusing war with law enforcement. An actual prisoner of war, under the terms of the treaty, can be held until the end of hostilities without trial as there is no crime, only acts of war. You might want to read the terms of the treaty some time as you will see that there are many right granted soldiers that make no sense for terrorists, such as a soldier has the right to be paid a monthly salary by the enemy nation that holds him captive (article 60).
With the latest prisoner 'scandals' the US military has been involved in, I also somehow doubt they are following some of the other guidelines laid down by the Geneva convention, like not torturing prisoners.
The scandals were largely the product of about 30 rogue soldiers who had already been discovered and investigated before the scandal and pictures were widely reported in the press. The are now facing courts martial. One is already in prison, and another was recently sentenced to 8 years in prison. More will be joining them.
Good thing we found those missle parts, they could be dangerous. I also like the large amount of evidence I could find backing this claim up. Oh, and I prefer the evidence given by the Unicef report to the bulshit propoganda as why Saddam is completely at fault for the starvation. I would appreciate if you replied with the source of these facts.
Here are some sources regarding the quite shocking Oil for Food scandal, which shows the crumbling of the sanctions regime, and the source for some of the obstructionism and pro-Saddam advocacy in the international community. UN looked away as regime stole oil-for-food cash
Tyrant's oil-for-food scam raised £11bn, along with a choice quote:
And here is another good source
They won't and can't because Sun has paid huge amounts of money ($100,000,000+) since they first licensed Unix. In 1994 they paid Novell, then the keeper of the Unix kingdom, $82,000,000 for a paid-up license. As far as I know, Sun is unique in that regard.
Sun paid for Uniform Driver Interface driver technology and drivers from SCO for Solaris X86. They were trying to revive Solaris X86 after almost killing it and creating an uproar among their customers. Paying for that driver technology gave them quick and easy access to an important technology to make Solaris X86 more competitive in the future. They saved considerable time by buying a working System V Unix implementation of those drivers to incorporate into their System V Unix implementation. Using UDI drivers lets them easily leverage drivers written to the UDI spec for other oerating systems for their own operating system. Incorporating UDI technology into Solaris X86 made it a better product that will be more competitive in the future, will cut costs, and make more hardware available for it. I don't see any mystery in why they would be interested in it.
Microsoft paid almost double that and yet MS doesn't even have a real UNIX OS product
... "overpaid" ... Microsoft does have have a Unix product: Microsoft Services for Unix. It gives you a unix layer on Windows 2000, 2003, or XP. It's free. It's useful: csh, ksh, perl, gcc, awk, etc.
Although it seems pretty likely they