OpenSSL is not the child of OpenBSD, nor a cousin of OpenSSH. OpenSSL is an independant project.
OpenSSH is a baby of openBSD, and OpenSSH depends on OpenSSL.
The Eliptic curve stuff was donated to OpenSSH team, not the OpenSSL group. So dreaming about this in your ssl accelerated card of the future is a bit silly. However, if openSSH team open sources the tech, and that tech is under bsd lisence, then maybe it will work its way down into the chip makers crypto designes.
objects to toss instead
on
Skydriving
·
· Score: 2
Hrm.... could donate a Xerox document station, or how about an old Tandy main frame computer. No parachute needed! Just toss em out, and I'll wash my hands of it all. Just don't tell my boss!;)
Seriously though, if they can toss out a bus, they can toss anything. Why not a toss a bunch of/. trolls with no parachute... mabe throw a few parachues out seperate, but not as may as the trolls, and see how gets to the chutes and lives.
Oh wait, it probably not cool to throw people out of a plane, they probably have to sign papers, and tossing people out of a plane is probably consider to be not kool in some states, even if they are trolls. darn... silly technicalities. oh well.
Respectfully, I was in my mind thinking about parot, and the future of perl in the next few years. I'm not a perl monger, but I do entertain those folks, and study their lore. I failled to convey that, and I suck..... I know! In regards to linking to libs that may or may not be threadsafe, your absolutly correct. So then begs the question, where is the best place to link to 3rd party libs? In the apache module, or as an apache module? Does it really matter in a threaded environment? I guess in the realm of pre-processing, it might mater a significant amount?
I'm currently in the planning stages, architecture, and what not; for an apache module. I've been reading the api, and getting an idea of what does what.
I'm not going to parley, or bait you, or start a flame war with a person I respect, if your who I suspect you are? But I will say this: Apache2 is going to exist in the world after http1.1, with a more diverse user-agent environment on the horizon.... things need to change in many respects. Apache2 is so much more capable than our current perception of what an apache module is now. I suspect it will be at least a few years before we break our old mold.
Pre-forking, threading, foo, bar, mish, mash... blah..
In the final analysis, all the major apache 1.3 modules will never work corrects, to the point where code for one works well in the other, and vice-versa. The sad truth is that, like the Apache 1.x, the modules will slowly creep to replace the CGI's, and that took a few years to happen, and mainly with mod_perl replacing perl CGI's.
yeah, that might suck donkies, but its the sad way of human nature. WE simply want to make it like we used to have it in 1.3, and whatever. This it will never be again. Totally new modules should be writen, and used by the upcoming generation of coders, those whom are not corrupted by what we older folks have become used to. I'm 26 btw.
For example, the syntax of php is very good, and so are many of its ways of structuring things. But php itself needs to be thrown away as it stands now. Perl cannot speak of good syntax, it is simply one of the ugliest, yet most usefull languages there ever was. Yet mod_perl has a good chance of remaining viable on Apache2. This is what confuses most folks, because they don't understand how something to them, the elegant code they write, could not work well in another environment. And when your apache module becomes a place that itself is a launch pad for other modules, then what? For example, in php... most folks like to have mysql as a module, or GD, or whatever. However, now you have to wonder that in Apache2, that mysql could be a direct module to Apache2 itself , and php, or perl, just share the common thread. Do you suppose that php, or perl could be writen in a way to share their connections to MySQL, no... probably not going to play nice like that.
People just have to get past the notion that their development environment is just plain bad. The people at the Apache foundation knew it, and probably expected this sort of crap, why they want to mess things up in the next relase to confound the module writer is beyond me.
The bsd distro's do ship it by default, in the portage (aka/usr/ports). However, if you mean 'installed by default', then we are talking a whole nother story. Apache2 is not suitable to be installed in any base Operating Environment. That is to say, your just serving up static web pages, and that might be fine for a budding 17 year old that thinks static pages, with a ripped-off html, and some stolen java-script... is kewl, then maybe. But that just isn't going to cut it in the world of men, and professional web designers, not to mention thsoe who do release engineering for FreeBSD.;)
Maybe I'm just way up in the technical clouds here, or not? The way I see it is that this might be a "theft of service". However, the modem is the evidence, not the seized computers. What did the FBI do exactly, the article is unclear: did the FBI seize all the computational devices in the home (aka calculators, computers), or where they loooking for modified cable modems? The way to uncap a cable modem is to upload a new rom-image via tftp. The cable modem is then at the control of the modems' owner. Clearly modifing ones own personal property is 'fair useage' of the equipment. It is the networkign equipment that should be confiscated, not the computers.
The seizure of PC's in this day and age is paramount to cutting off a criminals hand. Especially if the person is an 'at home worker', or telecommuter. Now I will say that a tele-commuter shouldn't be taking risks on their connection like that, unless they want to start driving to work.
The ISP's must be confused to think that the customers must be responsible to manage the network usage for their own. THis is an issues that shoudl be solved on the ISP side of things.... as in they should shape their own packets, and not relly on the public to shape their traffic. Honsetly, saying a person is breaking the law just because the IPS doesn't understand how this simply thing to do is done is not the fault of the end-user. br.
Clearly this case(s) won't hold up in court. There is no serivce aggreement that can prevent a owner of property from doing as they wish with said property. And if the ISP is capable of monitoring the bandwidth, they are capable of shaping the bandwidth just liek any other firewall, or filter does. If a user exceeds their prescribed bandwidth usage for a give time slice, then increase their rates, like a long distance company, or simply prevent anymore forwarding of packets for the remaindure of the time-slice (normally one month).
Who cares what the government logs, when all you simply do is encipher all your traffic to trusted hosts. With anonymous Proxy services being easy to use and setup... more people will simply take notice that they exist, and begin to use them. Some people might even resort to paying a premium to under the counter internet service from their Broadband having friends Finux server. I wonder if this legislation takes into consideration that IP6 can travel right atop of traditional ip4, and can trick out attempts to monitor top level protocols, like email. Besides, you opt out of the monitoring by simply opting out of your providers email facilities. Other forms of message passing exist, and are in use by motivated people.
The USA is the top internet using place on the planet, and Europe is no doubt second, with Asia/Pac being third. So how the USA officials plan to effectively monitor the data required is interesting. Logically one is left to wonder how well the USA carnivore system is working these days, and its sister Echelon. To resort to forcing these ISP to log data on behalf of the government officials seems very controversial. Almost as if the government is passing on the burden of Carnivore on the backs of the struggling ISP's in America. The interesting thing is: who is to prevent the ISP from simply not logging all the data the government officials claim to require? How would they be able to prove the ISP otherwise?
Funny how the mind works, at first glance I thought I read Silicon Bridge (like Silicon Waffers, etc). Not until I clciked-thru to the article did I finally realize is was Sicilian, as in the island off Italy. Builting a bridge out of Silicon would be something to read about. Oh well....
Well.... I have to give you some support. Apple'ism used to be cool once.... until the lack of reality faded away. I admit that the processor design is nice... Altivec (or whatever) is nice... the RISC design was at one time actually innovative. Not anymore, and the internals of pre OS 10 systems is abysmal. but Apple zealots are fools! I think mark twain said it best:
"Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt"
Every time a Mac zealot appears.... think of the wise words above. That being said, I can clearly differentiate the old school, from the new school. OS 10 is actually really nice, and the shift in desktop to server side is a positive shift. The people that really get aggravating is the desktop publishing people who simply refuse to get on with life and use real tools for animation.
As a former Be employee, I know the depth of how low Apple is willing to sink to in order to achieve its goals. Be Inc was practically a ex-Apple employee refugee camp. Apple is finally set on the right course, and all the old Apple zealots are finding themselves discarded by their own former camp. So if they could just do everybody a favor, and fade away into posterity.
This looks like a step in the right direction for Linux acceptance in the professional server market.
Only somebody with zero Unix, and hardly any linux would say such a stament. The fact is that SUN doesn't give a damn about Linux, it jsut wants the exposer... Suns strategy is to Maintain Solaris 9 for the server environment, and deligate a Linux kernel for the desktop space. And don't let the word "Linux" fool you either... Linux is a kernel program, not an Operating Environment. So yes, Sun plans to sell Solaris 9 in the server space, and sell solaris with a linux kernel (possibly) for the Intel x86 systems on the network. It is possible SUn may make a distro of Sol9+linux for Sparc too, but who really cares. Most of the stuff that would make me want to use Linux on a Sparc box is now a default feature in Sol9.
The big mess Sun got into when they anounced they were dropping Solaris 9 for x86 ARCH wasn't such a suprise to me, considerign they have for a year now been say they are going to develop their own Linux distro to handle that segment of users. I wish people would wake up and pay attention. This is such old news!
actually... now that I take the time to spider their site.. I can find many things having issue, not just this product. It appears that the Creative web team must be messing with the image path, or system there in. It seems to mainly be the images.
For some reason the link I posted above doesn't work for me now, but when I click here I get to the site. But it doesn't have the "buy now" button, and the drop-down menu for the single or two-fer deal. However, many other pages don't have that image, and the ones that do have it all seem to have a different face to the image... like the price is $99, or $45 on others. So my guess is they ahve to recreate the button whent he price changes... however, that does't explain the other issues the site is having with the other images on the site.
Anyways, I'm glad that I got to purchase mine, and that I can confirm they are in transite. I did get mine after, like two days, the slashdot article. I got 2 kits of 2 each, 4 in all for under $40 USD.
Nothing wrong with the linkage to the VoIP, it has not been removed from their production web site. I ordered my 4 units days after the initial/. post!
http://www.americas.creative.com/products/produc t. asp?maincategory=7&category=&product=203&nav=spec
So if you can see that link then it proves them wrong! Unless they have run out of stock, they seem to be still selling units.
For me.... I need to have my favorit lava lamp going. Some atmospheric drum and bass for the ambiance. Soft lighting, with a gental colour temp (aka not flourecent). My Herman Miller Aon chair, my Bush desk.... and 68 degrees faranheight. Oh and did I mention this groove period must either be at the first 3 hours after I wake up, or the last hour 1/2 before know must go to bed. Seems the mind is most creative at the extream ends of the day.
We Americans would love to convince ourselves that we, rather Charles Babbage, invented the computer. The British have Allan Turing, and a Postal Inspector for their first computer, or so they like to think. However, the fact is that the first computer was invented by Konrad Zuse (1910-1995) at the age of 28 (1938). Konrad was unfortunately living under a Nazi Dictatorship at the time. Turing was brilliant, and Zuse probably didn't hold a candle to Turing. However, I have to step in and make sure the bogus headline here on Slashdot does not perpetuate the silly myth. Konrad Zuse is the father of computing!
Obviously the magic tab button does something, oh gosh.. but what? Such a calaiber, to teach Microsoft junkies the way of the TAB key... oh mysterious TAB key... what do you do? And why bother, since giving a crash cource on Unix to Microsoft junkies they would likely not be using a shell where the all might tab key does anything other than tab. Uh.. am I missing something, or is this yet another BASH hooked persons who really don't know unix... considering your more likely going to teach a newbie a more standard shell like the korn shell of the simple sh shell. So they can actualyl do some work on real unix. Never teach a newbi on bash, it a bad idea... cuz they flounder on real unix where they have real shells, or rather they have old shells. Word to the wise.;)
One thing I hate about these supposed hardware sites is the lack of kernel compile times. Lets face it GCC is the best benchmark tool ever made. Period the end, indisputable... you cannot argue that! Anyways... I sure would like to see a real benchmark site one of these days. I'm sure they exist, but I don't' see those listed on/. very much. I did notice the raid chip doesn't support level 5, but does support 0+1 raid.. and that actual faster, but more expensive to get into. Oh well... I guess we should all expect to replace our old serial keyboards with the new serial keyboards (aka USB, etc..). My SGI boxes at work all have USB terminal connects... when will the rest of the hardware world catch up?
lol.... I actually know what your talking about... and yes.. I have read GEB... I took a psychology class or two before I dropped out. Anyways, what is so "self descriptive" about the text? I'd like to hear what somebody, who doesn't know me personally, has to say about what I write. Well, from a psyc perspective anyways.
BTW- I wouldn't totally disagree with you, just curious. I know that I probably fullfill my own prophecy from time to time, but I didn't think I was describing myself each time I talk about other people.
Well, the guy is most certainly smarter than me. I do respect him. However, rant is rant, despite the velvet on the emperor's robe. The whole text is nothing more than a rant, and conjecture. I hope his thesis papers are not written this way. It is sad when people, with good intentions, discredit themselves in this way. People don't know what they don't know. and nobody knows anything about Brilliant's sneak-ware. For him to create a thought-experiment of what he believes to be true(or false), and rant about it, doesn't afford him any credibility. So until he actually disassembles the Kazza sneakware, there is nothing to write about. The only good part of the text is his questions to ask about Kazza. The rest is hot air.
I took the time to read the linkage, but was very disapointed at the substance..... This was nothing more than a rant from a disgruntled college student. Obviously he is more emotional, and passionat than he was logical, and compelling. The arguments he raises have little weight, or simply state the obvious. There was zero information about anything pratical, just conjecture, theory, and a bunch of what-if's. The person who wrote the rant is nothing more than a Teachers aid, at Berkley... he is not anybody worth listening to, at least not until he gets his degree, and a few more years of wisdom.
I think everyone can aggree that Brilliant's sleeper software is dubious at best, a straight up violation of law at the worst. However, this persons rant doesn't help anybody.
It can slice, it can dice, it can keep track of your credentials across your heterogeneous environment. It can be a repository of key-pairs, a DNS cache, an address book, or a database of your favorite mp3's. However, the most common use of LDAP is for your HOST files, and your PASSWD database. NIS cannot do that, it only has a single domain. You have to write scripts to sync the various NIS domains, or use NIS+. NIS+ can handle multiple domains (aka authentication realms) but cost money, and is a bit more complex. Besides, Sun Microsystems is dropping development of NIS. Another item of interest is using an SQL server as the authentication core. For example, ProFTP can use MySQL to authenticate. Since you can have a centralized DB communicate over SSL, this can be done relatively securely on Unix. Microsoft is the wildcard. They are a closed system, and getting at the sources (aka the PAM like things) is not easy. However, this is when LDAP comes into play. Since Microsoft dropped their crappy NT4 domain structure in favor of Active Directory (LDAP). Samba + OpenLDAP can be configured on a Unix box to sync up with active directory, or it can be made to host the active directory, and push the mess out to the NT authentication realm.
Slashdot Mirror
OpenSSL is not the child of OpenBSD, nor a cousin of OpenSSH. OpenSSL is an independant project.
OpenSSH is a baby of openBSD, and OpenSSH depends on OpenSSL.
The Eliptic curve stuff was donated to OpenSSH team, not the OpenSSL group. So dreaming about this in your ssl accelerated card of the future is a bit silly. However, if openSSH team open sources the tech, and that tech is under bsd lisence, then maybe it will work its way down into the chip makers crypto designes.
Hrm.... could donate a Xerox document station, or how about an old Tandy main frame computer. No parachute needed! Just toss em out, and I'll wash my hands of it all. Just don't tell my boss! ;)
/. trolls with no parachute... mabe throw a few parachues out seperate, but not as may as the trolls, and see how gets to the chutes and lives.
Seriously though, if they can toss out a bus, they can toss anything. Why not a toss a bunch of
Oh wait, it probably not cool to throw people out of a plane, they probably have to sign papers, and tossing people out of a plane is probably consider to be not kool in some states, even if they are trolls. darn... silly technicalities. oh well.
Respectfully, I was in my mind thinking about parot, and the future of perl in the next few years. I'm not a perl monger, but I do entertain those folks, and study their lore. I failled to convey that, and I suck..... I know! In regards to linking to libs that may or may not be threadsafe, your absolutly correct. So then begs the question, where is the best place to link to 3rd party libs? In the apache module, or as an apache module? Does it really matter in a threaded environment? I guess in the realm of pre-processing, it might mater a significant amount?
I'm currently in the planning stages, architecture, and what not; for an apache module. I've been reading the api, and getting an idea of what does what.
I'm not going to parley, or bait you, or start a flame war with a person I respect, if your who I suspect you are? But I will say this: Apache2 is going to exist in the world after http1.1, with a more diverse user-agent environment on the horizon.... things need to change in many respects. Apache2 is so much more capable than our current perception of what an apache module is now. I suspect it will be at least a few years before we break our old mold.
Pre-forking, threading, foo, bar, mish, mash... blah..
In the final analysis, all the major apache 1.3 modules will never work corrects, to the point where code for one works well in the other, and vice-versa. The sad truth is that, like the Apache 1.x, the modules will slowly creep to replace the CGI's, and that took a few years to happen, and mainly with mod_perl replacing perl CGI's.
yeah, that might suck donkies, but its the sad way of human nature. WE simply want to make it like we used to have it in 1.3, and whatever. This it will never be again. Totally new modules should be writen, and used by the upcoming generation of coders, those whom are not corrupted by what we older folks have become used to. I'm 26 btw.
For example, the syntax of php is very good, and so are many of its ways of structuring things. But php itself needs to be thrown away as it stands now. Perl cannot speak of good syntax, it is simply one of the ugliest, yet most usefull languages there ever was. Yet mod_perl has a good chance of remaining viable on Apache2. This is what confuses most folks, because they don't understand how something to them, the elegant code they write, could not work well in another environment. And when your apache module becomes a place that itself is a launch pad for other modules, then what? For example, in php... most folks like to have mysql as a module, or GD, or whatever. However, now you have to wonder that in Apache2, that mysql could be a direct module to Apache2 itself , and php, or perl, just share the common thread. Do you suppose that php, or perl could be writen in a way to share their connections to MySQL, no... probably not going to play nice like that.
People just have to get past the notion that their development environment is just plain bad. The people at the Apache foundation knew it, and probably expected this sort of crap, why they want to mess things up in the next relase to confound the module writer is beyond me.
The bsd distro's do ship it by default, in the portage (aka /usr/ports). However, if you mean 'installed by default', then we are talking a whole nother story. Apache2 is not suitable to be installed in any base Operating Environment. That is to say, your just serving up static web pages, and that might be fine for a budding 17 year old that thinks static pages, with a ripped-off html, and some stolen java-script... is kewl, then maybe. But that just isn't going to cut it in the world of men, and professional web designers, not to mention thsoe who do release engineering for FreeBSD. ;)
Maybe I'm just way up in the technical clouds here, or not? The way I see it is that this might be a "theft of service". However, the modem is the evidence, not the seized computers. What did the FBI do exactly, the article is unclear: did the FBI seize all the computational devices in the home (aka calculators, computers), or where they loooking for modified cable modems? The way to uncap a cable modem is to upload a new rom-image via tftp. The cable modem is then at the control of the modems' owner. Clearly modifing ones own personal property is 'fair useage' of the equipment. It is the networkign equipment that should be confiscated, not the computers.
The seizure of PC's in this day and age is paramount to cutting off a criminals hand. Especially if the person is an 'at home worker', or telecommuter. Now I will say that a tele-commuter shouldn't be taking risks on their connection like that, unless they want to start driving to work.
The ISP's must be confused to think that the customers must be responsible to manage the network usage for their own. THis is an issues that shoudl be solved on the ISP side of things.... as in they should shape their own packets, and not relly on the public to shape their traffic. Honsetly, saying a person is breaking the law just because the IPS doesn't understand how this simply thing to do is done is not the fault of the end-user.
br.
Clearly this case(s) won't hold up in court. There is no serivce aggreement that can prevent a owner of property from doing as they wish with said property. And if the ISP is capable of monitoring the bandwidth, they are capable of shaping the bandwidth just liek any other firewall, or filter does. If a user exceeds their prescribed bandwidth usage for a give time slice, then increase their rates, like a long distance company, or simply prevent anymore forwarding of packets for the remaindure of the time-slice (normally one month).
Who cares what the government logs, when all you simply do is encipher all your traffic to trusted hosts. With anonymous Proxy services being easy to use and setup... more people will simply take notice that they exist, and begin to use them. Some people might even resort to paying a premium to under the counter internet service from their Broadband having friends Finux server. I wonder if this legislation takes into consideration that IP6 can travel right atop of traditional ip4, and can trick out attempts to monitor top level protocols, like email. Besides, you opt out of the monitoring by simply opting out of your providers email facilities. Other forms of message passing exist, and are in use by motivated people.
The USA is the top internet using place on the planet, and Europe is no doubt second, with Asia/Pac being third. So how the USA officials plan to effectively monitor the data required is interesting. Logically one is left to wonder how well the USA carnivore system is working these days, and its sister Echelon. To resort to forcing these ISP to log data on behalf of the government officials seems very controversial. Almost as if the government is passing on the burden of Carnivore on the backs of the struggling ISP's in America. The interesting thing is: who is to prevent the ISP from simply not logging all the data the government officials claim to require? How would they be able to prove the ISP otherwise?
The Matrix Reloaded will be released next May
Part three The Matrix Revolutions is also in production and will be released in December 2000
Wasn't the year 2000 like a few years ago?
Funny how the mind works, at first glance I thought I read Silicon Bridge (like Silicon Waffers, etc). Not until I clciked-thru to the article did I finally realize is was Sicilian, as in the island off Italy. Builting a bridge out of Silicon would be something to read about. Oh well....
Well.... I have to give you some support. Apple'ism used to be cool once.... until the lack of reality faded away. I admit that the processor design is nice... Altivec (or whatever) is nice... the RISC design was at one time actually innovative. Not anymore, and the internals of pre OS 10 systems is abysmal. but Apple zealots are fools! I think mark twain said it best :
"Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt"
Every time a Mac zealot appears.... think of the wise words above. That being said, I can clearly differentiate the old school, from the new school. OS 10 is actually really nice, and the shift in desktop to server side is a positive shift. The people that really get aggravating is the desktop publishing people who simply refuse to get on with life and use real tools for animation.
As a former Be employee, I know the depth of how low Apple is willing to sink to in order to achieve its goals. Be Inc was practically a ex-Apple employee refugee camp. Apple is finally set on the right course, and all the old Apple zealots are finding themselves discarded by their own former camp. So if they could just do everybody a favor, and fade away into posterity.
This looks like a step in the right direction for Linux acceptance in the professional server market.
Only somebody with zero Unix, and hardly any linux would say such a stament. The fact is that SUN doesn't give a damn about Linux, it jsut wants the exposer... Suns strategy is to Maintain Solaris 9 for the server environment, and deligate a Linux kernel for the desktop space. And don't let the word "Linux" fool you either... Linux is a kernel program, not an Operating Environment. So yes, Sun plans to sell Solaris 9 in the server space, and sell solaris with a linux kernel (possibly) for the Intel x86 systems on the network. It is possible SUn may make a distro of Sol9+linux for Sparc too, but who really cares. Most of the stuff that would make me want to use Linux on a Sparc box is now a default feature in Sol9.
The big mess Sun got into when they anounced they were dropping Solaris 9 for x86 ARCH wasn't such a suprise to me, considerign they have for a year now been say they are going to develop their own Linux distro to handle that segment of users. I wish people would wake up and pay attention. This is such old news!
actually... now that I take the time to spider their site.. I can find many things having issue, not just this product. It appears that the Creative web team must be messing with the image path, or system there in. It seems to mainly be the images.
For some reason the link I posted above doesn't work for me now, but when I click here I get to the site. But it doesn't have the "buy now" button, and the drop-down menu for the single or two-fer deal. However, many other pages don't have that image, and the ones that do have it all seem to have a different face to the image... like the price is $99, or $45 on others. So my guess is they ahve to recreate the button whent he price changes... however, that does't explain the other issues the site is having with the other images on the site.
Anyways, I'm glad that I got to purchase mine, and that I can confirm they are in transite. I did get mine after, like two days, the slashdot article. I got 2 kits of 2 each, 4 in all for under $40 USD.
Nothing wrong with the linkage to the VoIP, it has not been removed from their production web site. I ordered my 4 units days after the initial /. post!
c t. asp?maincategory=7&category=&product=203&nav=spec
http://www.americas.creative.com/products/produ
So if you can see that link then it proves them wrong! Unless they have run out of stock, they seem to be still selling units.
For me.... I need to have my favorit lava lamp going. Some atmospheric drum and bass for the ambiance. Soft lighting, with a gental colour temp (aka not flourecent). My Herman Miller Aon chair, my Bush desk.... and 68 degrees faranheight. Oh and did I mention this groove period must either be at the first 3 hours after I wake up, or the last hour 1/2 before know must go to bed. Seems the mind is most creative at the extream ends of the day.
We Americans would love to convince ourselves that we, rather Charles Babbage, invented the computer. The British have Allan Turing, and a Postal Inspector for their first computer, or so they like to think. However, the fact is that the first computer was invented by Konrad Zuse (1910-1995) at the age of 28 (1938). Konrad was unfortunately living under a Nazi Dictatorship at the time. Turing was brilliant, and Zuse probably didn't hold a candle to Turing. However, I have to step in and make sure the bogus headline here on Slashdot does not perpetuate the silly myth. Konrad Zuse is the father of computing!
yeah... you might have to post a sign at the front door saying your being video taped.
I wonder how hard it would be to trawl the cache for the good stuff?
Obviously the magic tab button does something, oh gosh.. but what? Such a calaiber, to teach Microsoft junkies the way of the TAB key... oh mysterious TAB key... what do you do? And why bother, since giving a crash cource on Unix to Microsoft junkies they would likely not be using a shell where the all might tab key does anything other than tab. Uh.. am I missing something, or is this yet another BASH hooked persons who really don't know unix... considering your more likely going to teach a newbie a more standard shell like the korn shell of the simple sh shell. So they can actualyl do some work on real unix. Never teach a newbi on bash, it a bad idea... cuz they flounder on real unix where they have real shells, or rather they have old shells. Word to the wise. ;)
One thing I hate about these supposed hardware sites is the lack of kernel compile times. Lets face it GCC is the best benchmark tool ever made. Period the end, indisputable... you cannot argue that! Anyways... I sure would like to see a real benchmark site one of these days. I'm sure they exist, but I don't' see those listed on /. very much. I did notice the raid chip doesn't support level 5, but does support 0+1 raid.. and that actual faster, but more expensive to get into. Oh well... I guess we should all expect to replace our old serial keyboards with the new serial keyboards (aka USB, etc..). My SGI boxes at work all have USB terminal connects... when will the rest of the hardware world catch up?
That is true.... but I don't doubt his smarts... in fact.. I bet he is very smart.. just a bit to passionate about the issue.
Thank you... exactly... your so correct. I think you jsut found a new fan..
lol.... I actually know what your talking about... and yes.. I have read GEB... I took a psychology class or two before I dropped out. Anyways, what is so "self descriptive" about the text? I'd like to hear what somebody, who doesn't know me personally, has to say about what I write. Well, from a psyc perspective anyways.
BTW- I wouldn't totally disagree with you, just curious. I know that I probably fullfill my own prophecy from time to time, but I didn't think I was describing myself each time I talk about other people.
Well, the guy is most certainly smarter than me. I do respect him. However, rant is rant, despite the velvet on the emperor's robe. The whole text is nothing more than a rant, and conjecture. I hope his thesis papers are not written this way. It is sad when people, with good intentions, discredit themselves in this way. People don't know what they don't know. and nobody knows anything about Brilliant's sneak-ware. For him to create a thought-experiment of what he believes to be true(or false), and rant about it, doesn't afford him any credibility. So until he actually disassembles the Kazza sneakware, there is nothing to write about. The only good part of the text is his questions to ask about Kazza. The rest is hot air.
I took the time to read the linkage, but was very disapointed at the substance..... This was nothing more than a rant from a disgruntled college student. Obviously he is more emotional, and passionat than he was logical, and compelling. The arguments he raises have little weight, or simply state the obvious. There was zero information about anything pratical, just conjecture, theory, and a bunch of what-if's. The person who wrote the rant is nothing more than a Teachers aid, at Berkley... he is not anybody worth listening to, at least not until he gets his degree, and a few more years of wisdom.
I think everyone can aggree that Brilliant's sleeper software is dubious at best, a straight up violation of law at the worst. However, this persons rant doesn't help anybody.
It can slice, it can dice, it can keep track of your credentials across your heterogeneous environment. It can be a repository of key-pairs, a DNS cache, an address book, or a database of your favorite mp3's. However, the most common use of LDAP is for your HOST files, and your PASSWD database. NIS cannot do that, it only has a single domain. You have to write scripts to sync the various NIS domains, or use NIS+. NIS+ can handle multiple domains (aka authentication realms) but cost money, and is a bit more complex. Besides, Sun Microsystems is dropping development of NIS. Another item of interest is using an SQL server as the authentication core. For example, ProFTP can use MySQL to authenticate. Since you can have a centralized DB communicate over SSL, this can be done relatively securely on Unix. Microsoft is the wildcard. They are a closed system, and getting at the sources (aka the PAM like things) is not easy. However, this is when LDAP comes into play. Since Microsoft dropped their crappy NT4 domain structure in favor of Active Directory (LDAP). Samba + OpenLDAP can be configured on a Unix box to sync up with active directory, or it can be made to host the active directory, and push the mess out to the NT authentication realm.