Actually ebay does their own auditing as well. Go search for something like hardcore preteen sex pictures or something along the lines. It may be initially posted but they'll pull it down themselves.
Most of us use cars to go from Point A to Point B. Obviously there will be some bad seeds who use cars to facilitate killing but not in large quantities. And certainly not enough in so much as to require us to, as you put it, resort back to walking from place to place.
Sure a few people are trading non-copyrighted music on Napster but the majority of us are knowingly trading copyrighted material.
Whether or not the actual storage of illegal music is on napster servers, or user computers, is immaterial to this argument. The real question is does the napster service knowingly facilitate the illegal distrobution of copyrighted materials through their service, and to what extent should they be required to fulfill their responsibilities under the law.
I would like to see someone argue to me that ebay should be allowed to list auctions for cocaine or nuclear materials because they're only "listing" and not involved with the actual transfer. That is utter bullshit; by that logic Osama Bin Ladin, or Moammar Khaddafi, aren't responsible for american deaths just because "they werent involved in the actions, they only indirectly facilitated what happened." Try and make a loophole through that and you end up justifying more than you want to eh?
If you want realistic discussion lets be realistic, we all know what napster is about. It's obvious that anytime napster wants, they can go through their servers and find listings of copyrighted materials by the thousands. So, to answer the first question; yes, they are knowingly facilitating the download of illegal material.
The real argument here is: what should napster be required to do to comply with copyright restrictions? _That_ is what i'm interested in hearing argued here. Should they be required to set up a system for copyright holders to request listings removed? Or should it be more restrictive where they are required to compare song names with a database of copyrighted songs? I havent heard much discussed beyond this.
I use napster, and I pirate software, but I would never make such foolish arguments for such selfish reasons. I'm sick of these discussions about pirating and how stupid the RIAA is. Maybe the RIAA is stupid, but they have the law on their side. Why not discuss the merits of copyright law instead?
In a sane world, our trade policy would have the goal of helping local people in developing nations set up their own industries, instead of helping the owners of Nike increase their profits.
Our government doesn't touch Nike's corporate decisions. That's a private sector thing there bud not a government problem.
Jonah Peretti turned Nike's corporate creativity against itself in a stand against third-world exploitation labor.
Yes these kids in third world countries aren't making as much as we would be making shoes but what other jobs can they get out there? Although it may seem like chump change for us, it allows them to feed their families.
You're right. He doesn't mention it because it was an article written primarily for newbies and PHB's.
If you're firewalling a 1Mbps Internet link, there are many nanoseconds between packets. With 1KB per packet, there are only 100 packets per second at most (1Mbps/1Kbps/10bits-per-byte). Not much computer time is needed for this type of processing.
You might wanna check out ipf or ipfw for stateless firewalling. They've been around a while longer.
O'Reilly not providing a FreeBSD book -- you ask, "Shouldn't they"? I think the major reason they haven't is they deem the usage volume of FreeBSD much less then would be necessary for a title regarding it to be a financial success.
O'Reilly has at least two FreeBSD books in the works at the moment.
Much of the current FreeBSD printed documentation is of poor quality.
Ah even more unsubstantiated FUD. The printed FreeBSD documentation is quite excellent. The only nuance is that many places still carry the OLD 3.x documents. So your statement was incorrect. A more accurate statement would be that some printed FreeBSD documentation is slightly out-of-date.
If printed manuals aren't your bag, just print yourself out the man pages which are technically excellent and quite complete.
This book isn't designed for someone who already has umpteen years experience with UNIX as is but as a way for MS people to get into UNIX (FreeBSD specifically). Tim M. even made a point that this was his target audience for this book. He talked about his experiences coming off as a UNIX bigot. NT/W2K admin's who don't care that you have a degree from Berkeley making $200,000 a year working for Sun.
Right, go watch NBC and be in the "mainstream". Go watch the anti-hussein Minute of Hate. George Bernard Shaw said it best with "Reasonable men change with the world. Unreasonable expect the world to change for them; therefore, unreasonable men change the world."
Since Linus really has the final say on what goes in or remains left out, is it time to go to a more Republic-like model? Most people will freak out at this thought but I think its way past due for Linux. ulinux has different ideas than SparcLinux and AlphaLinux which is different from BettyLinux and BarneyLinux (me obscure? never!) A core team or core group could hold the reigns a bit more.
The myth of the "liberal" media is as stale as Rush Limbaugh's underpants. It's as dated as Donahue.
Just the other day on 60 Minutes, Mike Wallace did a story on a Sheriff in New Mexico. Not once did he give air time of anyone remotely sentient. He included liberal drones who said that this sheriff won't be stopped until he is six feet under. Such childish name calling. And that's just what it ended with. Not once was anyone interviewed backing this sheriff who was hard on crime. Now imagine the flak that would occur if Bill O'Reilly said that about Herr Clinton. He would be crucified! And how can you say that's not liberal?
I also recall a time just before I started watching Fox News during Gore's Un-Constitutional Coup attempt. It was also right before Scalia and the Supreme Court stepped in. The FUD attempted to be spread by the commi-crats was that the Supreme Court ruling MUST be unanimous. I believe Peggy Noonan was on there to refute this claim but then the CBS anchor said "Well I don't recall the Republicans being for the people during the civil rights era." WTF?!
Another incident I recall with that robot, Mike Wallace, was during the feminization of our Military Academies. There was a feminist Air Force 2nd lieutenant and a male Master Sargeant. He asked the Master Sargeant if the only reason he opposed women in the military was because he is a chauvenistic pig. Yeah, I don't see anything wrong there.
And another time with Al Gump going on the mass propaganda of NBC's Today Show. He just made nigger-rigged appeal to the ignorant soccer moms about how "every vote should count." So reminiscient of Josef Gerbils.
Yeah, I see nothing even remotely "liberal" in the media. Oh, and for the record; O'Reilly is more of a libertarian than a conservative. The most conservative anchor on Fox News is Neil Cavuto even if he has a big head:)
Re:What is wrong with US DSL?
on
DSL Woes
·
· Score: 2
In the US, we believe in free market systems. Let all the entreprenuers go at it and hopefully the best product (companies) will emerge. Once an oligopoly starts to emerge, government regulatory stuff kicks in usually leveling the playing field. Thus we get to work out most of the kinks before something becomes heavily deployed. Now compare this with the European way: standards from the get-go. Sure there's much greater interopability but if its fubar'd (which is almost always is); everyone gets screwed. Just look at Europe's backing of ISO and ISDN to get a picture.
You obviously have no clue about the PSTN and NANP do you? North American Numbering Plan (NANP) affects not only the United States but also Canucks...er..Canada. The American and Canadian phone system is one in the same (basically). Both use Mu-Law (so does Japan), interconnected primary CO's, area codes, etc. Thus there is nothing fundamentally flawed with the American DSL implementation, we just have more people and a higher demand than Canadians do. Therefore, more can go wrong.
Please leave your Anti-American Canadian bigotry at the door.
Your definition of convential is askew as well. The convential one liner people use to sum up Germany's loss in WW1 would be "They lost because of being over-militarized." Rather than they lost because they weren't militarized enough. Unfortunately, society rewards mediocrity. People love being a rebel conformist rather than thinking for themselves.
Do you remember when Dennis Miller had a late night talk show? It was cancelled. Do you know why? Not because of bad ratings. It was because they couldn't sell ad time. Corporations didn't want to buy ad time because the demographic that watched Dennis Miller's show was too intelligent. The general viewer of that show was too well informed and was not as likely to be influenced by slick advertising, so it was not worth it to run commercials during his show.
Your boyfriend, Dennis Miller, still has a late night talk show. It's on HBO.
I wouldn't really follow the teachings of Herr Miller as strictly as you do. He's just another pseudo-intellectual attacking those who dislike conventional wisdom.
Its funny the way that everytime someone on Slashdot says something which is not completely neo-liberal they get attacked for being a socialist, or a Marxist.
Where did the retro-liberals go for there to be a need for "neo" liberals? Its akin to using words like paradox and proactive; those are words stupid people use to sound important.
The notion for instance that large corporations should have some degree of accoutability can be seen in many ideologies, including for instance Keynsianism, which was the a commonly held believe even in the US for a while.
The ideas that Maynard Keynes popularized are still around. Ever heard of demand side economics?
Now if you read the article objectively, you'd notice the many contradictions from the author.
"FreeBSD was a peaceful home, but a little too boring, too staid. Linux is where the action was, where major progress was being made. There's no doubt that if you're looking for excitement and innovation, Linux is the place to be."
Yet, he claims "Since stability was paramount" as justification for not using the most aggressive optimization during compilation as well as refererences to the "patched together" feel of Linux.
From here, its hard for me to swallow the irony of praising the maturity and polish of *BSD and then going on to talk about these wonderful "NEW" things his gentoo distribution will have.
The one thing I don't like about FreeBSD is its use of the UFS filesystem. While UFS is more reliable and rugged than ext2, it's also mind-numbingly slow. It's possible to use a special UFS extension called soft updates, which is able to speed up the filesystem by aggregating IO operations into bigger chunks. While soft updates improves UFS tremendously, I can't say that UFS really outperforms ext2 in any way. Of course, it's more reliable, so FreeBSD ends up beating Linux in the filesystem war. Again, at least this is true when comparing older Linux 2.2 distributions to FreeBSD.
Indeed, this problem has been discussed times and times again: comparing ext2 in async mode (the default) and ffs in sync mode (the default) is comparing apples and oranges. You just have to see the results after a crash. The best comparison is with ffs in async mode, which shows no speed difference, or with softupdates, which is still more secure. The slowest filesystem I know is ext2 in sync mode: it syncs everything (while ffs syncs only metadata), so tar xf takes hours. Softupdates is hardly a special extention now-a-days; Not only is it more reliable, it can handle files bigger than 2GB:)
Now, if you talk about the future, when is coming the fsck-free version of soft-updates? I've seen it announced for 5.0. After all reiserFS was only introduced in 2.4.1:-) By the way, I've seen a while ago a post on slashdot by a guy who was actually just intending to do that for Linux: fsck free softupdates, because this would be faster than a journaling file system!
I'm rambling I suppose but it's clear he's on the band-wagon.
Popularity is really not a good reason to choose something. Windows is a lot more popular than Linux. It has more users, more commercial programs, more programmers, certifications, and possibly books, training courses, and any number of other things. It doesn't make it any better, really, now does it? Yes, there are more Linux users than FreeBSD users. It doesn't really make that much of a difference.
You may consider the general community as a reason to choose something. You'll find your trolls in all of course. Some prefer the more "less talk, more code" and skill-driven attitude of NetBSD, or maybe the very weird culture that I enjoy in FreeBSD - a balanced "Let's try to do things right, and that means staying up to date, not falling behind but not living too close to the edge, copying ideas from other people's stuff, writing our own, and having fun while we're doing it" kind of attitude. I've had bad experiences with some online Linux communities, and with some online FreeBSD communities, and with some... - their choice in operating system doesn't seem to indicate they'll be nice or nasty people. In my experience, people just "are", and there're many more things that form the person than simple OS choice.
Well, I look at it this way. I can walk into any bookstore and get an O'Reilly book detailing how to write drivers for Linux, another explaining Linux internals in detail, yet more describing for newbies how to install same. There are wonderful distributions like Debian and (well, at least when they can make a release that allows you to get the kernel to compile) RedHat, etc etc etc. On the daemon front, I've seen books available by mail, none in the bookstores. There's certainly a lot less in terms of choice.
Don't obfuscate quantity for quality. Sure when I go to Borders, I see about 5x the number of books on Linux; but all but two or three of them are on "Debian for Dummies" or "Red Hat Unleashed". They aren't really technical. I can't read Debian for Dummies and understand how Linux handles those new fangled zero-copy sockets. Now there are the couple of Linux kernel books but there is also the 4.4BSD red book. It explains the whole OS! Not just the kernel. If you've ever read the needs to be updated Complete FreeBSD by Greg Lehey it's like a happy medium between r33t k3rn37 d00dz and "How to tie your shoes the Linux way."
Popularity is really not a good reason to choose something. Windows is a lot more popular than Linux. It has more users, more commercial programs, more programmers, certifications, and possibly books, training courses, and any number of other things. It doesn't make it any better, really, now does it? Yes, there are more Linux users than FreeBSD users. It doesn't really make that much of a difference.
But doesnt Linux support more arch's than bsd cause it only sounds like bsd supports i386 and alpha's. Now linux on the other hand supports lots more plus the GPL is alot better than the BSD license in my opinion. Just my 2 cents.
You're wrong. NetBSD runs on over 30 Platforms! From now on, go read before you post.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually ebay does their own auditing as well. Go search for something like hardcore preteen sex pictures or something along the lines. It may be initially posted but they'll pull it down themselves.
Time to ditch my 4 year archive for all of alt.binaries.
Most of us use cars to go from Point A to Point B. Obviously there will be some bad seeds who use cars to facilitate killing but not in large quantities. And certainly not enough in so much as to require us to, as you put it, resort back to walking from place to place.
Sure a few people are trading non-copyrighted music on Napster but the majority of us are knowingly trading copyrighted material.
I would like to see someone argue to me that ebay should be allowed to list auctions for cocaine or nuclear materials because they're only "listing" and not involved with the actual transfer. That is utter bullshit; by that logic Osama Bin Ladin, or Moammar Khaddafi, aren't responsible for american deaths just because "they werent involved in the actions, they only indirectly facilitated what happened." Try and make a loophole through that and you end up justifying more than you want to eh?
If you want realistic discussion lets be realistic, we all know what napster is about. It's obvious that anytime napster wants, they can go through their servers and find listings of copyrighted materials by the thousands. So, to answer the first question; yes, they are knowingly facilitating the download of illegal material.
The real argument here is: what should napster be required to do to comply with copyright restrictions? _That_ is what i'm interested in hearing argued here. Should they be required to set up a system for copyright holders to request listings removed? Or should it be more restrictive where they are required to compare song names with a database of copyrighted songs? I havent heard much discussed beyond this.
I use napster, and I pirate software, but I would never make such foolish arguments for such selfish reasons. I'm sick of these discussions about pirating and how stupid the RIAA is. Maybe the RIAA is stupid, but they have the law on their side. Why not discuss the merits of copyright law instead?
Our government doesn't touch Nike's corporate decisions. That's a private sector thing there bud not a government problem.
Yes these kids in third world countries aren't making as much as we would be making shoes but what other jobs can they get out there? Although it may seem like chump change for us, it allows them to feed their families.
It may be politically incorrect but its true.
Whats your point? I want a big mac and two dozen chicks in tight shorts. It ain't gonna happen any time soon.
If you're firewalling a 1Mbps Internet link, there are many nanoseconds between packets. With 1KB per packet, there are only 100 packets per second at most (1Mbps/1Kbps/10bits-per-byte). Not much computer time is needed for this type of processing.
You might wanna check out ipf or ipfw for stateless firewalling. They've been around a while longer.
I guess man pages are no longer official.
O'Reilly has at least two FreeBSD books in the works at the moment.
Much of the current FreeBSD printed documentation is of poor quality.
Ah even more unsubstantiated FUD. The printed FreeBSD documentation is quite excellent. The only nuance is that many places still carry the OLD 3.x documents. So your statement was incorrect. A more accurate statement would be that some printed FreeBSD documentation is slightly out-of-date.
If printed manuals aren't your bag, just print yourself out the man pages which are technically excellent and quite complete.
This book isn't designed for someone who already has umpteen years experience with UNIX as is but as a way for MS people to get into UNIX (FreeBSD specifically). Tim M. even made a point that this was his target audience for this book. He talked about his experiences coming off as a UNIX bigot. NT/W2K admin's who don't care that you have a degree from Berkeley making $200,000 a year working for Sun.
Right, go watch NBC and be in the "mainstream". Go watch the anti-hussein Minute of Hate. George Bernard Shaw said it best with "Reasonable men change with the world. Unreasonable expect the world to change for them; therefore, unreasonable men change the world."
Since Linus really has the final say on what goes in or remains left out, is it time to go to a more Republic-like model? Most people will freak out at this thought but I think its way past due for Linux. ulinux has different ideas than SparcLinux and AlphaLinux which is different from BettyLinux and BarneyLinux (me obscure? never!) A core team or core group could hold the reigns a bit more.
Just the other day on 60 Minutes, Mike Wallace did a story on a Sheriff in New Mexico. Not once did he give air time of anyone remotely sentient. He included liberal drones who said that this sheriff won't be stopped until he is six feet under. Such childish name calling. And that's just what it ended with. Not once was anyone interviewed backing this sheriff who was hard on crime. Now imagine the flak that would occur if Bill O'Reilly said that about Herr Clinton. He would be crucified! And how can you say that's not liberal?
I also recall a time just before I started watching Fox News during Gore's Un-Constitutional Coup attempt. It was also right before Scalia and the Supreme Court stepped in. The FUD attempted to be spread by the commi-crats was that the Supreme Court ruling MUST be unanimous. I believe Peggy Noonan was on there to refute this claim but then the CBS anchor said "Well I don't recall the Republicans being for the people during the civil rights era." WTF?!
Another incident I recall with that robot, Mike Wallace, was during the feminization of our Military Academies. There was a feminist Air Force 2nd lieutenant and a male Master Sargeant. He asked the Master Sargeant if the only reason he opposed women in the military was because he is a chauvenistic pig. Yeah, I don't see anything wrong there.
And another time with Al Gump going on the mass propaganda of NBC's Today Show. He just made nigger-rigged appeal to the ignorant soccer moms about how "every vote should count." So reminiscient of Josef Gerbils.
Yeah, I see nothing even remotely "liberal" in the media. Oh, and for the record; O'Reilly is more of a libertarian than a conservative. The most conservative anchor on Fox News is Neil Cavuto even if he has a big head :)
You obviously have no clue about the PSTN and NANP do you? North American Numbering Plan (NANP) affects not only the United States but also Canucks...er..Canada. The American and Canadian phone system is one in the same (basically). Both use Mu-Law (so does Japan), interconnected primary CO's, area codes, etc. Thus there is nothing fundamentally flawed with the American DSL implementation, we just have more people and a higher demand than Canadians do. Therefore, more can go wrong.
Please leave your Anti-American Canadian bigotry at the door.
Your definition of convential is askew as well. The convential one liner people use to sum up Germany's loss in WW1 would be "They lost because of being over-militarized." Rather than they lost because they weren't militarized enough. Unfortunately, society rewards mediocrity. People love being a rebel conformist rather than thinking for themselves.
Your boyfriend, Dennis Miller, still has a late night talk show. It's on HBO.
I wouldn't really follow the teachings of Herr Miller as strictly as you do. He's just another pseudo-intellectual attacking those who dislike conventional wisdom.
Where did the retro-liberals go for there to be a need for "neo" liberals? Its akin to using words like paradox and proactive; those are words stupid people use to sound important.
The notion for instance that large corporations should have some degree of accoutability can be seen in many ideologies, including for instance Keynsianism, which was the a commonly held believe even in the US for a while.
The ideas that Maynard Keynes popularized are still around. Ever heard of demand side economics?
"FreeBSD was a peaceful home, but a little too boring, too staid. Linux is where the action was, where major progress was being made. There's no doubt that if you're looking for excitement and innovation, Linux is the place to be."
Yet, he claims "Since stability was paramount" as justification for not using the most aggressive optimization during compilation as well as refererences to the "patched together" feel of Linux.
From here, its hard for me to swallow the irony of praising the maturity and polish of *BSD and then going on to talk about these wonderful "NEW" things his gentoo distribution will have.
The one thing I don't like about FreeBSD is its use of the UFS filesystem. While UFS is more reliable and rugged than ext2, it's also mind-numbingly slow. It's possible to use a special UFS extension called soft updates, which is able to speed up the filesystem by aggregating IO operations into bigger chunks. While soft updates improves UFS tremendously, I can't say that UFS really outperforms ext2 in any way. Of course, it's more reliable, so FreeBSD ends up beating Linux in the filesystem war. Again, at least this is true when comparing older Linux 2.2 distributions to FreeBSD.
Indeed, this problem has been discussed times and times again: comparing ext2 in async mode (the default) and ffs in sync mode (the default) is comparing apples and oranges. You just have to see the results after a crash. The best comparison is with ffs in async mode, which shows no speed difference, or with softupdates, which is still more secure. The slowest filesystem I know is ext2 in sync mode: it syncs everything (while ffs syncs only metadata), so tar xf takes hours. Softupdates is hardly a special extention now-a-days; Not only is it more reliable, it can handle files bigger than 2GB :)
Now, if you talk about the future, when is coming the fsck-free version of soft-updates? I've seen it announced for 5.0. After all reiserFS was only introduced in 2.4.1 :-) By the way, I've seen a while ago a post on slashdot by a guy who was actually just intending to do that for Linux: fsck free softupdates, because this would be faster than a journaling file system!
I'm rambling I suppose but it's clear he's on the band-wagon.
You can do many of the things mentioned (and more!) with /stand/sysinstall.
Sure can, go read about mergemaster.
You may consider the general community as a reason to choose something. You'll find your trolls in all of course. Some prefer the more "less talk, more code" and skill-driven attitude of NetBSD, or maybe the very weird culture that I enjoy in FreeBSD - a balanced "Let's try to do things right, and that means staying up to date, not falling behind but not living too close to the edge, copying ideas from other people's stuff, writing our own, and having fun while we're doing it" kind of attitude. I've had bad experiences with some online Linux communities, and with some online FreeBSD communities, and with some ... - their choice in operating system doesn't seem to indicate they'll be nice or nasty people. In my experience, people just "are", and there're many more things that form the person than simple OS choice.
Don't obfuscate quantity for quality. Sure when I go to Borders, I see about 5x the number of books on Linux; but all but two or three of them are on "Debian for Dummies" or "Red Hat Unleashed". They aren't really technical. I can't read Debian for Dummies and understand how Linux handles those new fangled zero-copy sockets. Now there are the couple of Linux kernel books but there is also the 4.4BSD red book. It explains the whole OS! Not just the kernel. If you've ever read the needs to be updated Complete FreeBSD by Greg Lehey it's like a happy medium between r33t k3rn37 d00dz and "How to tie your shoes the Linux way."
Popularity is really not a good reason to choose something. Windows is a lot more popular than Linux. It has more users, more commercial programs, more programmers, certifications, and possibly books, training courses, and any number of other things. It doesn't make it any better, really, now does it? Yes, there are more Linux users than FreeBSD users. It doesn't really make that much of a difference.
So? Whatcha want? A cookie? I doubt you contributed anything to make that a reality.
Now if you have been following the FreeBSD 5.0 branch you'd realize that FreeBSD's SMP is going to be far superior to Linux's. FreeBSD 5.0 SMP
You're wrong. NetBSD runs on over 30 Platforms! From now on, go read before you post.