Compromise an ftp server, gain root through any typical userland insecurity. This is a common occurence. Happened to me once.
I bet it would be rather easy to steal a user's password by snooping an ftp server's line. Does ftp transmit passwords in clear text like telnet? Yeah, real secure.
How can there be any security when people can't stop using things like ftp and windows 98? There can't. So fuck it. Nevermind.
how many supercomputer we build. We'll still be wasting cycles processing the first few nanoseconds of nuclear explotions on them or trying to find more oil or money or WMDs. The last thing we care about is the environment we all have to live in.
I wonder how rich we'll be when it finally hits us that irrepairable damage has been caused to our environment? I hope we're really rich so we can afford to buy a new Earth. Cuz we might need one by then.
It was the ftp server that was compromised. It was insecure. I've never known ftp to be secure. Even ssh and cvs have their problems, but ftp is notorious for these types of breakins. It should not run with root access, it should run in a chroot jail, and it should never be off the DMZ if you intend to use it for production, just like a DNS server. It should never be trusted. If you set it up differently you're just asking for trouble.
Why aren't ssh/scp, cvs, or http perfectly good protocols to use for this type of service? Again, why do we still use ftp? What does it offer that the others don't?
Isn't it ironic that its illegal to grow the plant the constitution was written on? Doesn't that strike anyone as odd, given how much Americans love to profess their freedom?
Well, I would start with roads and vehicles. These things are far more dangerous than hand guns to society. And they're not even protected by the constitution, which should make it easy to make them illegal. Plus driving is a privelege, not a right. We have the technology to transport everything without roads. And the project would create so many new jobs and improve public transportation, not to mention save lives. More lives than can be saved by destroying every firearm in the nation.
In fact, more people kill themselves with hand guns than shoot eachother. Darwinism in action. Anyway, statistics show that more people die from either transportation or accident related injuries than guns, including all the suicides.
This is why I think its ignorant of us to reinterpret the constitution taking into consideration modern technology and society from a parental perspective. We want to make it safe for the children. But that will never be. And in the process we're losing our freedoms. One right after the other. I think this is what the founders were attempting to prevent, the loss of freedom, not the loss of life.
Oh come on, Microsoft isn't that bad. They really do like their competitors, even though its hard for them to show it sometimes. Really. Give them another chance. I mean, its Microsoft. They love us.;)
It sure does feel like armageddon lately, though, doesn't it? Don't know what I'd do without things like Linux, the internet, and those Bill of Rights. Probably be blissfully ignorant like everyone else.:P
Don't do that. How will we make the RIAA and MPAA spend all their money and go bankrupt if we get rid of these laws that make them want to sue everyone and their kitten?
Make more copyright laws like the DMCA and more encrypted P2P nets.. encourage sharing large amount of data, its even better if the data contains nothing usable but tip off any type of automated crawling system, and play the RIAA/MPAA's game until they lose. They can't sue everyone, but I wanna see them try.
You're right, your interpretation does make more sense when you put it that way. And here I thought this country was based on things like freedom and justice. It was based on capitalism and nationalism like everyting before it, huh? The militia, or military, is for the state and not to secure the freedom of the people.
Oh well. Maybe they'll get it right next time.
But I don't understand something. Why would they want the public to have the right to keep and bear arms if their only concern was defense from exnternal forces? Wouldn't a state armed military be more appropriate? There wouldn't even been a need for this right at all. Why was it amended to the Bill of Rights if it was not intended to protect the people from the government? What does the Bill of Rights do for us? Does it grant us freedom or does it supply laws and rules and guidelines for us to follow?
The alternative is for us to allow the population to explode while we give up capitalism, money and control for freedom and the expectation that everyone help do their part to take care of everyone else. And be as efficient as possible to avoid any serious problems, like lack of food. Its very important that we have a clear understanding of what people need to survive and when they must have it, etc. Computers can be used to manage the info because people can't be expected to remember all of it.
But we gotta get on the same page and decide once and for all that we care about each and every one of these people. Or we might as well let them fend for themselves.
I want a live CD that has the option to run off a RAM drive, update itself by downloading the source files on the web, compile, install, etc. Then has the option of burning the whole updated OS back to another live CD for further propogation.
Another idea would be to have a distro that scans all the systems on your subnet and offers you a nice GUI to supply passwords so it can use to hack, steal their apps, use their bandwidth, and make them your bitches, etc.
I rather enjoy the thought of hostile operating systems that take what they want and give nothing in return.
Exactly. There aren't enough jobs to go around, and we're unwilling to make more or to provide for eveyone, so in the end we'd end up starving when we couldn't work to make money. We'd probably die at 70 or 80 anyway, unless we were rich.
This bring about a new form of social class. A class that is priveleged to live a much longer life than those in poverty.
If something like this happened I would expect the poor people to have yet another bloody revolution and chop off a bunch more people's heads. We seem to enjoy this more than progress.
Real progress? Learning what "to love" really means. It ain't sex, folks, although that does make more people. Its caring for those people and taking care of them when they are incapable of taking care of themselves. And then its hoping that if we give then freedom and the right environment that they will love and help take care of us when they are able. It isn't capitalism, working for an honest buck, or anything else that will save us.
Love is our only chance, if this technology prolifterates. But I think we'll turn to war, some serious wars with serious weaponry, before that'll happen.
Miguel was not arguing that shared libraries suck; rather that Unix sucks because it doesn't use them enough, and every app reinvents the wheel.
Duh. I'm arguing that he then went and reinvented the wheel and made it a really ugly wheel that's difficult to use. But I guess it does work for some people. And so does UNIX for others.
Why reinvent the wheel if you're not going to do it the right way the first time? Don't we have enough wheels already?
GNOME vs. KDE and Mozilla vs. KHTML are perfect examples of what I'm talking about. There are ways to do it right and use shared libraries, and there are other ways to make a mess of things.
I dunno, why do I even attempt to explain it? It doesn't matter, I'll just use the easy training wheels.
Well, the easiest answer is GNU is not UNIX. Perhaps that's what it means. I always thought the UNIX philosophy was keep it simply, stupid, and only use open standards and protocols, if possible.
Make everything small, easy and well documented. But this does not mean each applications is limitted to 50 lines of code. It just means if you have an application it should not call on 50 libraries to pop up a window or make function calls like myFunkyFunction_GTK++--::_GNOME_blahBlahBLAH(). Again, keep it simple, stupid.
I think sometimes I just like calling people stupid.:)
Then I think there should be a distinction between UNIX and GNU/Linux here. Sharing of more than binary algorithms via pipes is possible when all the libraries are open and available.
But Miguel's 'Unix sucks' talk makes me question why he'd use so many different libraries to develope applications like evolution, if they suck so much. Isn't what sucks the dependency nightmare we've created out of GNOME? That could have been prevented if we used pipes instead of shared libraries and morons who don't understand forwards and backwards compatibility, system libraries, etc.
I think there is no singular UNIX philosophy anymore with all this confusion and diversity. Do whatever you want and hope nobody bitches about how bad it sucks, is my philosophy. Oh, and keep it simple, stupid, and try to learn from the masters, y'know, the guys who designed this system 30 years ago. Not the punk kid who thinks he knows it all.
did the same thing in Europe, accusing some Linux distrobution of pirating Micrsoft Office, because it had office in the name somewhere. They even stated in their letter that Microsoft was aware of the piracy had authority over the software in question. The letter even stately quick clearly the name of the file was some openoffice rpm, but that didn't stop it from being sent.
They don't read these legal letters and I think we should be able to sue them for fraudulent claims of copyright ownership. They are clearly abusing their power and should be punished, very harshly, IMO.
Re:Techies, Slashdotters, and voting
on
The "Techie" Vote?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Why do you think the 2nd amendment exists?
I'll tell you.
Its so that technology is in the hands of the people and not the state. That's the whole point. Its doesn't matter how powerful the technology gets, it must be in the hands of the public. Taking it away from the people is taking away their ability to secure their freedom. Certainly you must understand this.
Do you think a gun was less deadly in the 1800s? They still killed with lethal force.
I think they were very clear about what they meant. I just think you either never understood it to begin with or don't care. And you're probably affraid of guns.
Guns are tools. Nothing to be affraid of, but people..
Now Americans, on the other hand, on average, are unstable people who don't love eachother. So handing them WMDs might be a bad thing. But if we had educated them properly and not lied to them every step of the way, manipulating them to be good workers, then perhaps we wouldn't have to be so scared of our neighbor.
Its not my fault you're all dumb and like to shoot eachother. But it is your fault we're losing the freedoms this country was founded on.
What do you think is more important? Your life or the freedom hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, have died for?
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, yeah I'd recommend people stop using email or ftp.
You are not advising people to stop running web servers because IIS is insecure?
No, but I would stop running IIS because IIS is insecure, same goes for all Microsoft products. Who really wants to support a monopoly anyway?
Why did I mention chroots and DMZ and stuff?
Compromise an ftp server, gain root through any typical userland insecurity. This is a common occurence. Happened to me once.
I bet it would be rather easy to steal a user's password by snooping an ftp server's line. Does ftp transmit passwords in clear text like telnet? Yeah, real secure.
How can there be any security when people can't stop using things like ftp and windows 98? There can't. So fuck it. Nevermind.
how many supercomputer we build. We'll still be wasting cycles processing the first few nanoseconds of nuclear explotions on them or trying to find more oil or money or WMDs. The last thing we care about is the environment we all have to live in.
I wonder how rich we'll be when it finally hits us that irrepairable damage has been caused to our environment? I hope we're really rich so we can afford to buy a new Earth. Cuz we might need one by then.
It was the ftp server that was compromised. It was insecure. I've never known ftp to be secure. Even ssh and cvs have their problems, but ftp is notorious for these types of breakins. It should not run with root access, it should run in a chroot jail, and it should never be off the DMZ if you intend to use it for production, just like a DNS server. It should never be trusted. If you set it up differently you're just asking for trouble.
Why aren't ssh/scp, cvs, or http perfectly good protocols to use for this type of service? Again, why do we still use ftp? What does it offer that the others don't?
Why do we still use ftp?
Isn't it ironic that its illegal to grow the plant the constitution was written on? Doesn't that strike anyone as odd, given how much Americans love to profess their freedom?
Well, I would start with roads and vehicles. These things are far more dangerous than hand guns to society. And they're not even protected by the constitution, which should make it easy to make them illegal. Plus driving is a privelege, not a right. We have the technology to transport everything without roads. And the project would create so many new jobs and improve public transportation, not to mention save lives. More lives than can be saved by destroying every firearm in the nation.
In fact, more people kill themselves with hand guns than shoot eachother. Darwinism in action. Anyway, statistics show that more people die from either transportation or accident related injuries than guns, including all the suicides.
This is why I think its ignorant of us to reinterpret the constitution taking into consideration modern technology and society from a parental perspective. We want to make it safe for the children. But that will never be. And in the process we're losing our freedoms. One right after the other. I think this is what the founders were attempting to prevent, the loss of freedom, not the loss of life.
Oh come on, Microsoft isn't that bad. They really do like their competitors, even though its hard for them to show it sometimes. Really. Give them another chance. I mean, its Microsoft. They love us. ;)
Thanks for cheering me up. :)
:P
It sure does feel like armageddon lately, though, doesn't it? Don't know what I'd do without things like Linux, the internet, and those Bill of Rights. Probably be blissfully ignorant like everyone else.
Don't do that. How will we make the RIAA and MPAA spend all their money and go bankrupt if we get rid of these laws that make them want to sue everyone and their kitten?
Make more copyright laws like the DMCA and more encrypted P2P nets.. encourage sharing large amount of data, its even better if the data contains nothing usable but tip off any type of automated crawling system, and play the RIAA/MPAA's game until they lose. They can't sue everyone, but I wanna see them try.
Haha! That's a classic. :)
You're right, your interpretation does make more sense when you put it that way. And here I thought this country was based on things like freedom and justice. It was based on capitalism and nationalism like everyting before it, huh? The militia, or military, is for the state and not to secure the freedom of the people.
Oh well. Maybe they'll get it right next time.
But I don't understand something. Why would they want the public to have the right to keep and bear arms if their only concern was defense from exnternal forces? Wouldn't a state armed military be more appropriate? There wouldn't even been a need for this right at all. Why was it amended to the Bill of Rights if it was not intended to protect the people from the government? What does the Bill of Rights do for us? Does it grant us freedom or does it supply laws and rules and guidelines for us to follow?
Now I'm confused. Thanks a lot.
it'd be such a hellish existance you would WANT to die.
What and 9/11, Iraq, WMDs, terrorists, with us/against us, SCO, Microsoft, DMCA, DRM, PATRIOTism, etc. is not hellish enough for you?
I want to die and I'm not even 30 yet. I want to live free or die. Whatever you can deal with.
The alternative is for us to allow the population to explode while we give up capitalism, money and control for freedom and the expectation that everyone help do their part to take care of everyone else. And be as efficient as possible to avoid any serious problems, like lack of food. Its very important that we have a clear understanding of what people need to survive and when they must have it, etc. Computers can be used to manage the info because people can't be expected to remember all of it.
But we gotta get on the same page and decide once and for all that we care about each and every one of these people. Or we might as well let them fend for themselves.
I want a live CD that has the option to run off a RAM drive, update itself by downloading the source files on the web, compile, install, etc. Then has the option of burning the whole updated OS back to another live CD for further propogation.
Another idea would be to have a distro that scans all the systems on your subnet and offers you a nice GUI to supply passwords so it can use to hack, steal their apps, use their bandwidth, and make them your bitches, etc.
I rather enjoy the thought of hostile operating systems that take what they want and give nothing in return.
Besides all of that, I just want the cybernetic implants that make me one hell of a killing machine. Think of it. We could be playing UT for REAL!!! :)
Exactly. There aren't enough jobs to go around, and we're unwilling to make more or to provide for eveyone, so in the end we'd end up starving when we couldn't work to make money. We'd probably die at 70 or 80 anyway, unless we were rich.
This bring about a new form of social class. A class that is priveleged to live a much longer life than those in poverty.
If something like this happened I would expect the poor people to have yet another bloody revolution and chop off a bunch more people's heads. We seem to enjoy this more than progress.
Real progress? Learning what "to love" really means. It ain't sex, folks, although that does make more people. Its caring for those people and taking care of them when they are incapable of taking care of themselves. And then its hoping that if we give then freedom and the right environment that they will love and help take care of us when they are able. It isn't capitalism, working for an honest buck, or anything else that will save us.
Love is our only chance, if this technology prolifterates. But I think we'll turn to war, some serious wars with serious weaponry, before that'll happen.
Miguel was not arguing that shared libraries suck; rather that Unix sucks because it doesn't use them enough, and every app reinvents the wheel.
Duh. I'm arguing that he then went and reinvented the wheel and made it a really ugly wheel that's difficult to use. But I guess it does work for some people. And so does UNIX for others.
Why reinvent the wheel if you're not going to do it the right way the first time? Don't we have enough wheels already?
GNOME vs. KDE and Mozilla vs. KHTML are perfect examples of what I'm talking about. There are ways to do it right and use shared libraries, and there are other ways to make a mess of things.
I dunno, why do I even attempt to explain it? It doesn't matter, I'll just use the easy training wheels.
Well, the easiest answer is GNU is not UNIX. Perhaps that's what it means. I always thought the UNIX philosophy was keep it simply, stupid, and only use open standards and protocols, if possible.
:)
Make everything small, easy and well documented. But this does not mean each applications is limitted to 50 lines of code. It just means if you have an application it should not call on 50 libraries to pop up a window or make function calls like myFunkyFunction_GTK++--::_GNOME_blahBlahBLAH(). Again, keep it simple, stupid.
I think sometimes I just like calling people stupid.
Then I think there should be a distinction between UNIX and GNU/Linux here. Sharing of more than binary algorithms via pipes is possible when all the libraries are open and available.
But Miguel's 'Unix sucks' talk makes me question why he'd use so many different libraries to develope applications like evolution, if they suck so much. Isn't what sucks the dependency nightmare we've created out of GNOME? That could have been prevented if we used pipes instead of shared libraries and morons who don't understand forwards and backwards compatibility, system libraries, etc.
I think there is no singular UNIX philosophy anymore with all this confusion and diversity. Do whatever you want and hope nobody bitches about how bad it sucks, is my philosophy. Oh, and keep it simple, stupid, and try to learn from the masters, y'know, the guys who designed this system 30 years ago. Not the punk kid who thinks he knows it all.
your revolutionary interpretation...
And just who were the founding fathers? Empirialists?
This is very clear to any intelligent human being. But I can't speak for you.
did the same thing in Europe, accusing some Linux distrobution of pirating Micrsoft Office, because it had office in the name somewhere. They even stated in their letter that Microsoft was aware of the piracy had authority over the software in question. The letter even stately quick clearly the name of the file was some openoffice rpm, but that didn't stop it from being sent.
They don't read these legal letters and I think we should be able to sue them for fraudulent claims of copyright ownership. They are clearly abusing their power and should be punished, very harshly, IMO.
Why do you think the 2nd amendment exists?
I'll tell you.
Its so that technology is in the hands of the people and not the state. That's the whole point. Its doesn't matter how powerful the technology gets, it must be in the hands of the public. Taking it away from the people is taking away their ability to secure their freedom. Certainly you must understand this.
Do you think a gun was less deadly in the 1800s? They still killed with lethal force.
I think they were very clear about what they meant. I just think you either never understood it to begin with or don't care. And you're probably affraid of guns.
Guns are tools. Nothing to be affraid of, but people..
Now Americans, on the other hand, on average, are unstable people who don't love eachother. So handing them WMDs might be a bad thing. But if we had educated them properly and not lied to them every step of the way, manipulating them to be good workers, then perhaps we wouldn't have to be so scared of our neighbor.
Its not my fault you're all dumb and like to shoot eachother. But it is your fault we're losing the freedoms this country was founded on.
What do you think is more important? Your life or the freedom hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, have died for?
"I just wanted to say LOVE YOU SAN!! billy gates. You make possible.."
:)
Awww, that's so sweet. Its a love letter.