Mundie and Rosen are scumbags. We don't need to give them exposure at our conferences to know that they are scumbags. Their intentions and the means they intend to use to achieve them are clear from many other forums (fora?). Furthermore, they lie all the time anyhow. It's just a waste of our time and space to have them speak at our conventions. And the truly ignorant might see that we entertain these swine as some sort of endorsement.
On the other hand, it is cool that the Linux Device Driver book was GPL'd - or does that just mean it wasn't selling? I just got totally disillusionsed w/ Tim O'Reilly last summer, watching him glad-hand with Allchin and his bullshit, then inviting Mundie to OpenSource.
Having Hillary Rosen speak at the P2P conference is so absurd. It's as if Craig Mundie (of Microsoft) were allowed to speak at the O'Reilly Open Source Conference.
Oh. He was. I think I see a pattern here and it sucks.
Wow, that's enough karma to make you an official "Kool Kid" (tm)! Your opinions sure count now!
No, moron, it means that I don't have to whore for points. Your mommy should have pointed that out to you when she read you the article to which you replied.
Whoa, you're really trolling for karma, aren't you?
BZZZT! Thanx for playing.
Does no good. I hit 50 a few weeks go back. I've 'gained' 5 points in moderation in the last week, but my Karma count stays at 50 - which is how the system is designed to work.
Guess I was just restating the obvious, for the 3 people here who don't 'get' Open Source.
Also, I think this is cool!.
Re:Someone doesnt understand the reason for a clus
on
One-Machine Linux Cluster
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Someone doesnt understand the reason for a cluster
I think that was whoever wrote the headline. This doesn't buy you what a cluster buys you, which is more MIPS and RAM working on the same problem. This buys you multiple relatively independent environments on one machine. Hence the reference in the/. article to hosting companies. This is like the Sandinavian ISP that replaced a bunch of Sun boxen with a much smaller number of larger IBM mainframes. The mainframes run IBM's VM (stands for Virtual Machine), which is roughly analogous to the "root-kernel" dicussed in the linked-to articles, then runs many independent copies of Linux under VM. Each user gets his own copy of Linux to screwup^H^H^H^H^H^H^H do as wishes with. VM 'fools' the copies of Linux into thinking they each have their own machine. Here we have Linux replacing VM, so now a Free product can do some of this (assuming it works, which, being brand new, I wouldn't bet my income on. But I'll bet it will work well soon.), though not all: VM lets you run multiple OS's on the box, which this doesn't. But it does a lot - separate root logins/passwords and process lists for the 'vurtual Linuxen', for example.
...one programmer scratches an itch and we all get a possibly incredibly useful utility. (And yes, I know Linux is actually Free [being GPL'd], rather than just Open Source - but Free is a subset of Open Source and Open Source lets this happen.) Try that in Windows - nyahh!
and no court in the land has convicted him of a crime here.
Beg pardon? Is this some Bullshit "corporate veil" argument? His company has been found guilty, guilty, guilty of illegally abusing its monopoly status.
Weren't the emails urging/plotting Netscape's demise from Bill G?
The fish rots from the head down and this fish is VERY rotten. The fact that this guy lies each and every time he speaks in public on any subject tells me all I need to know. If he wasn't doing anything wrong, he wouldn't have to lie about it.
(Moderators: this is like 4 levels down. I know it's off topic, but there are better areas to vent your ire.)
It's hopeless. I've marked stuff "OT" in the title and still been modded down for off-topic. There are some very slow folks getting mod points these days.
For someone with a username of fanatic, you seem to have actually spent some time comming up possible solutions,
Most of these (or maybe all) are not original with me, just given as an example.
I saw something about 3 outside auditors.
Not sure that's enough. Plus, whoever it is will have to have some technical savvy. Many auditors lack that.
The real problem will be determining exactly what needs to be public, and what Microsoft has a right to keep private.
The problem is that MS is notorious for having undocumented API calls that give them advantage. If it's callable from a program, it gets documented, I'd say. If it hurts MS, so much the better. They are guilty until proven innocent.
7) Microsoft may not meddle in the the legislative processes....
This is simply the prohibition of free speech.
Yes it is. Individuals who are convicted felons lose the right to vote and to bear arms. This is a reasonable prohibition for a corporation which is a convicted felon. MS has proven time and again that they have no business influencing the legislative system. They have behaved in bad faith so often, it clearly is part of the corporate culture. (And while I'm at it, just what is Bill Gates's problem, anyhow. He's already the richest and one of the most powerful men on earth. Why is he willing to lie, cheat, steal for more? Are the jokes about the name of his company true?)
I do agree that some of my points need work and you had some good suggestions - I'm not trying to be belligerent. But MS is BAD and they need to be slapped down HARD. And if it costs them some or most of their stock value or market share, well, that's actually a good thing. (Guess I'm a fanatic after all.)
Here is a list of states suing microsoft (courtesy of Microsoft's "freedom to Innovate Network"):
California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, New York, Ohio, Utah, Washington, D.C., West Virginia, Wisconsin
Here's what I sent to the Attorney General in my state:
"
I believe that any settlement that would have a chance of restoring competition to the computer industry would require at least the following:
1) All terms must be enforced by a non-Microsoft party with full access to all Microsoft resources, including source code. Microsoft cannot be trusted to voluntarily comply with any agreement.
2) All communication protocols used by all microsoft products must be fully documented. Such documents must be made available to any and all parties for any reason. Microsoft is not allowed to change their protocols until 90 days after documentation of such changes are made available to any parties requesting them.
3) The previous term must also apply to all Microsoft APIs (Application Programming Interfaces).
4) Microsoft may not keep agreements secret. In particular, the terms of the current OEM agreements, currently protected as "trade secrets" must be disclosed.
5) Microsoft may not use agreements with Computer OEMs to restrict in any way the addition of other software to the computers, along with Microsoft products. In particular, OEMs are not to be prohibited from selling "dual-boot" systems,
where the system can be booted into Windows or into some other operating system, such as Linux or a form of BSD or BeOS.
6) Microsoft may not use their licensing terms to stop users or developers from using Open Source software or Free Software.
7) Microsoft may not meddle in the the legislative processes of Fderal, State or local governemnts or bodies that make recommendations to them, with their work on UCITA being a prime model of behaviour that is prohibited to them as a
monopoly.
"
Witnesses stated that this Red Cross station exploded much more strongly than expected, implying that there was more there than wheat and blankets. Other sources state that the Taliban, have started using mosques, hospitals and NGO properties to hide in and store arms, to avoid bombing.
MAPS' site has information on how to configure your Internet routers to use the RBL to block all IP traffic from RBL-listed networks.
Oops. Yes, it does. I didn't see this last time I was there, but I guess I didn't scroll down far enough in their doc.
Still seems like overkill, especially since there is no apparent notification to any enduser as to why this happening, (whereas with sendmail, you can choose for the sender to get back some sort of more-or-less informative message), but it definitely would block outbound access to websites.
The safesurf release keeps talking about blocking websites based on MAPS. This would require firewall software that would have to match every outbound IP packet, or at least every outbound http session request, to the MAPS database. To use the MAPS database in realtime, the firewall would have to send an extra DNS query to MAPS (a DNS query that no normal application would use, other than email MTA configured to use MAPS), therefore requiring it to be custom firewall software. For a large ISP this would need to be a monstrous piece of gear. I just don't believe it. Yes they may be having their outbound email stopped by MAPS, but inbound access to their websites? Seems very unlikely.
It seems like the primary... use for mod_perl is to avoid the overhead associated with loading modules.
Even if you don't use modules (which would be silly, roughly comparable to not using sub-routines), you still incurr the penalty of loading and compiling your scripts each time they run if you don't use mod_perl. Also, mod_perl gives you amazing control over how the requests are interpreted and responded to. But even if it it didn't, a 5 or 6 to 1 improvement in requests/second (which is what I saw just by using mod_perl to run the script, with little of no optimization) is nothing to sneeze at.
It's very useful. For example, you can scan your network for machines running given servers, then launch exploits agains all those that are running, as a double check to find unpatched srervers. Since MS installs servers by default on damn near everything*, without advising the installer, this is the ONLY to be sure your not running unpatched servers. My organization found numerous vulnerable machines this way, even though we thought we had this nailed down.
*(example: Visio 2000 installs MSDE, a form of SQL server, vunerable. CiscoWorks 4.2 (getting old, now) installs IIS vulnerable.)
it would help. The last NT4 service pack was 6a, and that was in 1999
Wholly intentional, I'm sure. MS want to push everyone to W2k and XP, where the vendor lock-in is much greater due to the authentication protocols used. Plus, no vendor, even a good one, wants to support more versions than they have to.
We write a java program that goes into your system and cracks all the security.
If the security is built into the hardware rom code, the odds of any software overcoming it are not good. The odds of java - with it's 'sandbox' execution and security model - being able to do this are probably zero.
(note to moderators: for somethig to be insightful, it should at least be possible.)
Sorry, I don't buy his bullshit. He's a pig and his views do NOT deserve equal time. This being America, you're entitled to your opinion, even though it's wrong;)
The Taliban is not the legitimate government of Afghanistan. We are at war with the pig bin Laden, the Taliban and Al-Qaeda (and whoever else we feel like when we get pissed:) )
If we're using cruise missiles, the dope on them is that they can be targetted (and expected) to hit specific buildings. Using this kind of smart munitions can help minimize (but not eliminate) civilian casualties.
Here's another point: we target terrorists (and their supporters) and hit innocents by mistake. Pigs like bin Laden targets innocents from the git-go. I happen to think that that is a significant difference. I do concede that that is small consolation for those caught in the crossfire, but this is war and bad shit happens in a war.
Say, hypotethically, that bin laden targeted a specific person/group he knew were somewhere in WTC/Pentagon that day
Nice try, but bin Laden has been quoted saying ALL americans are guilty, whether in the military or just taxpayers. His manuals state that the goal is to unseat the govenments of non-believers and replace with Islamic regimes.
And say he was after someone specifically at WTC. He could have just had his trained monkeys waltz in with a suitcase full of C4 - he didn't have to wipe out both towers, at least one of which had a DAYCARE CENTER (and yes, I DO have to shout).
Guess what - this is WAR. Innocent people get killed in a war. It sucks, but it happens. I predict we'll do better on a percentage basis BY FAR than the Islamic extremists have so far.
The ACLU maintain that flying airliners full of pople into buildings full of people is a constitutionally protected form of expression
Some 'dream team' of scumbag lawyers can argue that the entire FBI/CIA/DIA/NSA is biased because one agant used the expression sandn***er 10 years ago.
bin Laden spew his hateful bullshit with an international audience provided by CNN and CourtTV.
bin Laden gets to appeal for 10 years, while running operations from his cell, which is incidentally better furnished than his current hole in the Afgan mountains OR
he actually gets off on some technicality.
Great idea.
No thanx. "Wanted dead or dead" is the way to go this time. And let's not forget the lieutenants, suppliers, etc. This is much more than just one guy or one organization. This will be a continuing effort on into the indefinite future. We willl need a permanent Department of Anti-Terrorism, and much of what it does will not be pretty.
Slashdot Mirror
Mundie and Rosen are scumbags. We don't need to give them exposure at our conferences to know that they are scumbags. Their intentions and the means they intend to use to achieve them are clear from many other forums (fora?). Furthermore, they lie all the time anyhow. It's just a waste of our time and space to have them speak at our conventions. And the truly ignorant might see that we entertain these swine as some sort of endorsement.
On the other hand, it is cool that the Linux Device Driver book was GPL'd - or does that just mean it wasn't selling? I just got totally disillusionsed w/ Tim O'Reilly last summer, watching him glad-hand with Allchin and his bullshit, then inviting Mundie to OpenSource.
Having Hillary Rosen speak at the P2P conference is so absurd. It's as if Craig Mundie (of Microsoft) were allowed to speak at the O'Reilly Open Source Conference.
Oh. He was. I think I see a pattern here and it sucks.
Wow, that's enough karma to make you an official "Kool Kid" (tm)! Your opinions sure count now!
No, moron, it means that I don't have to whore for points. Your mommy should have pointed that out to you when she read you the article to which you replied.
Whoa, you're really trolling for karma, aren't you?
BZZZT! Thanx for playing.
Does no good. I hit 50 a few weeks go back. I've 'gained' 5 points in moderation in the last week, but my Karma count stays at 50 - which is how the system is designed to work.
Guess I was just restating the obvious, for the 3 people here who don't 'get' Open Source.
Also, I think this is cool!.
Someone doesnt understand the reason for a cluster
/. article to hosting companies. This is like the Sandinavian ISP that replaced a bunch of Sun boxen with a much smaller number of larger IBM mainframes. The mainframes run IBM's VM (stands for Virtual Machine), which is roughly analogous to the "root-kernel" dicussed in the linked-to articles, then runs many independent copies of Linux under VM. Each user gets his own copy of Linux to screwup^H^H^H^H^H^H^H do as wishes with. VM 'fools' the copies of Linux into thinking they each have their own machine. Here we have Linux replacing VM, so now a Free product can do some of this (assuming it works, which, being brand new, I wouldn't bet my income on. But I'll bet it will work well soon.), though not all: VM lets you run multiple OS's on the box, which this doesn't. But it does a lot - separate root logins/passwords and process lists for the 'vurtual Linuxen', for example.
I think that was whoever wrote the headline. This doesn't buy you what a cluster buys you, which is more MIPS and RAM working on the same problem. This buys you multiple relatively independent environments on one machine. Hence the reference in the
...one programmer scratches an itch and we all get a possibly incredibly useful utility. (And yes, I know Linux is actually Free [being GPL'd], rather than just Open Source - but Free is a subset of Open Source and Open Source lets this happen.) Try that in Windows - nyahh!
and no court in the land has convicted him of a crime here.
Beg pardon? Is this some Bullshit "corporate veil" argument? His company has been found guilty, guilty, guilty of illegally abusing its monopoly status.
Weren't the emails urging/plotting Netscape's demise from Bill G?
The fish rots from the head down and this fish is VERY rotten. The fact that this guy lies each and every time he speaks in public on any subject tells me all I need to know. If he wasn't doing anything wrong, he wouldn't have to lie about it.
(Moderators: this is like 4 levels down. I know it's off topic, but there are better areas to vent your ire.)
It's hopeless. I've marked stuff "OT" in the title and still been modded down for off-topic. There are some very slow folks getting mod points these days.
For someone with a username of fanatic, you seem to have actually spent some time comming up possible solutions,
Most of these (or maybe all) are not original with me, just given as an example.
I saw something about 3 outside auditors.
Not sure that's enough. Plus, whoever it is will have to have some technical savvy. Many auditors lack that.
The real problem will be determining exactly what needs to be public, and what Microsoft has a right to keep private.
The problem is that MS is notorious for having undocumented API calls that give them advantage. If it's callable from a program, it gets documented, I'd say. If it hurts MS, so much the better. They are guilty until proven innocent.
7) Microsoft may not meddle in the the legislative processes....
This is simply the prohibition of free speech.
Yes it is. Individuals who are convicted felons lose the right to vote and to bear arms. This is a reasonable prohibition for a corporation which is a convicted felon. MS has proven time and again that they have no business influencing the legislative system. They have behaved in bad faith so often, it clearly is part of the corporate culture. (And while I'm at it, just what is Bill Gates's problem, anyhow. He's already the richest and one of the most powerful men on earth. Why is he willing to lie, cheat, steal for more? Are the jokes about the name of his company true?)
I do agree that some of my points need work and you had some good suggestions - I'm not trying to be belligerent. But MS is BAD and they need to be slapped down HARD. And if it costs them some or most of their stock value or market share, well, that's actually a good thing. (Guess I'm a fanatic after all.)
Here is a list of states suing microsoft (courtesy of Microsoft's "freedom to Innovate Network"):
California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, New York, Ohio, Utah, Washington, D.C., West Virginia, Wisconsin
Here's what I sent to the Attorney General in my state:
"
I believe that any settlement that would have a chance of restoring competition to the computer industry would require at least the following:
1) All terms must be enforced by a non-Microsoft party with full access to all Microsoft resources, including source code. Microsoft cannot be trusted to voluntarily comply with any agreement.
2) All communication protocols used by all microsoft products must be fully documented. Such documents must be made available to any and all parties for any reason. Microsoft is not allowed to change their protocols until 90 days after documentation of such changes are made available to any parties requesting them.
3) The previous term must also apply to all Microsoft APIs (Application Programming Interfaces).
4) Microsoft may not keep agreements secret. In particular, the terms of the current OEM agreements, currently protected as "trade secrets" must be disclosed.
5) Microsoft may not use agreements with Computer OEMs to restrict in any way the addition of other software to the computers, along with Microsoft products. In particular, OEMs are not to be prohibited from selling "dual-boot" systems,
where the system can be booted into Windows or into some other operating system, such as Linux or a form of BSD or BeOS.
6) Microsoft may not use their licensing terms to stop users or developers from using Open Source software or Free Software.
7) Microsoft may not meddle in the the legislative processes of Fderal, State or local governemnts or bodies that make recommendations to them, with their work on UCITA being a prime model of behaviour that is prohibited to them as a
monopoly.
"
Witnesses stated that this Red Cross station exploded much more strongly than expected, implying that there was more there than wheat and blankets. Other sources state that the Taliban, have started using mosques, hospitals and NGO properties to hide in and store arms, to avoid bombing.
MAPS' site has information on how to configure your Internet routers to use the RBL to block all IP traffic from RBL-listed networks.
Oops. Yes, it does. I didn't see this last time I was there, but I guess I didn't scroll down far enough in their doc.
Still seems like overkill, especially since there is no apparent notification to any enduser as to why this happening, (whereas with sendmail, you can choose for the sender to get back some sort of more-or-less informative message), but it definitely would block outbound access to websites.
The safesurf release keeps talking about blocking websites based on MAPS. This would require firewall software that would have to match every outbound IP packet, or at least every outbound http session request, to the MAPS database. To use the MAPS database in realtime, the firewall would have to send an extra DNS query to MAPS (a DNS query that no normal application would use, other than email MTA configured to use MAPS), therefore requiring it to be custom firewall software. For a large ISP this would need to be a monstrous piece of gear. I just don't believe it. Yes they may be having their outbound email stopped by MAPS, but inbound access to their websites? Seems very unlikely.
As the first Governor in the union to sign UCITA, Gilmore is a certified shit. I don't trust ANYTHING this jerk says.
It seems like the primary ... use for mod_perl is to avoid the overhead associated with loading modules.
Even if you don't use modules (which would be silly, roughly comparable to not using sub-routines), you still incurr the penalty of loading and compiling your scripts each time they run if you don't use mod_perl. Also, mod_perl gives you amazing control over how the requests are interpreted and responded to. But even if it it didn't, a 5 or 6 to 1 improvement in requests/second (which is what I saw just by using mod_perl to run the script, with little of no optimization) is nothing to sneeze at.
but is an exploit REALLY necessary?
It's very useful. For example, you can scan your network for machines running given servers, then launch exploits agains all those that are running, as a double check to find unpatched srervers. Since MS installs servers by default on damn near everything*, without advising the installer, this is the ONLY to be sure your not running unpatched servers. My organization found numerous vulnerable machines this way, even though we thought we had this nailed down.
*(example: Visio 2000 installs MSDE, a form of SQL server, vunerable. CiscoWorks 4.2 (getting old, now) installs IIS vulnerable.)
it would help. The last NT4 service pack was 6a, and that was in 1999
Wholly intentional, I'm sure. MS want to push everyone to W2k and XP, where the vendor lock-in is much greater due to the authentication protocols used. Plus, no vendor, even a good one, wants to support more versions than they have to.
We write a java program that goes into your system and cracks all the security.
If the security is built into the hardware rom code, the odds of any software overcoming it are not good. The odds of java - with it's 'sandbox' execution and security model - being able to do this are probably zero.
(note to moderators: for somethig to be insightful, it should at least be possible.)
you are a dipshit. Even if you're right, you're still a dipshit.
bin Laden is in war with all americans,
;)
Sorry, I don't buy his bullshit. He's a pig and his views do NOT deserve equal time. This being America, you're entitled to your opinion, even though it's wrong
If Afghanistan is in war with the US,
The Taliban is not the legitimate government of Afghanistan. We are at war with the pig bin Laden, the Taliban and Al-Qaeda (and whoever else we feel like when we get pissed:) )
If we're using cruise missiles, the dope on them is that they can be targetted (and expected) to hit specific buildings. Using this kind of smart munitions can help minimize (but not eliminate) civilian casualties.
Here's another point: we target terrorists (and their supporters) and hit innocents by mistake. Pigs like bin Laden targets innocents from the git-go. I happen to think that that is a significant difference. I do concede that that is small consolation for those caught in the crossfire, but this is war and bad shit happens in a war.
Say, hypotethically, that bin laden targeted a specific person/group he knew were somewhere in WTC/Pentagon that day
Nice try, but bin Laden has been quoted saying ALL americans are guilty, whether in the military or just taxpayers. His manuals state that the goal is to unseat the govenments of non-believers and replace with Islamic regimes.
And say he was after someone specifically at WTC. He could have just had his trained monkeys waltz in with a suitcase full of C4 - he didn't have to wipe out both towers, at least one of which had a DAYCARE CENTER (and yes, I DO have to shout).
Guess what - this is WAR. Innocent people get killed in a war. It sucks, but it happens. I predict we'll do better on a percentage basis BY FAR than the Islamic extremists have so far.
Where do they find morons to design websites that DON'T WORK without flash? Dipshits.
...or is securityfocus.com one of the slowest, ugliest websites anywhere?
Great idea.
No thanx. "Wanted dead or dead" is the way to go this time. And let's not forget the lieutenants, suppliers, etc. This is much more than just one guy or one organization. This will be a continuing effort on into the indefinite future. We willl need a permanent Department of Anti-Terrorism, and much of what it does will not be pretty.