This bug exists in the sendmail 8.9.3 that ships with Solaris 8. It tries the AAAA record first, and if there is an older BIND serving the domain, it will answer with a SERVFAIL if it does not have some other RR for that name. The correct response is an empty one. So mail bounces quite often, until you install sendmail from source.
This happens whether or not the Solaris host has any IPv6 interfaces, and regardless of the settings in nsswitch.conf for the ipnodes namespace.
I don't want to put a new system into place that creates the next Network Solutions.
Don't worry. The responsibility belongs to the current Network Solutions, er, I mean VeriSign Global Registry. That's why DNSSEC is about as useful as tits on a boar hog. Exactly nothing has been done to set up the PKI required to make DNSSEC useful, and it looks like exactly the same will be done for the forseeable future.
My guess is that ordinary DNS and IPv4 will be still operating the vast majority of the Internet for the next ten years, at the very least.
What is a nondramatic musical work? Does this bill legalize uploading My Name Is to MyMP3, but not Die Walkyrie or West Side Story? What does this distinction between dramatic and nondramatic mean?
Why are video recordings not included in the provisions of this bill? Surely this is the next medium to undergo the Internet distribution trial-by-fire. "Flickster" is just around the corner (cf. whois flickster.com).
It also fails to address the Napster situation as it exists today. Surely the law does not consider an individual offering MP3s on Napster to be a transmitting organization. Napster itself is certainly not the transmitting organization, nor is the request to transmit sent to, or even through, them. Using the terms from the bill, Napster only offers a directory of individuals willing to transmit works, as everyone knows.
This bill doesn't seem very useful to me, and may prove to be a distraction from the larger issues.
You totally miss the point. If taxpayer money is being used to fund the computer and the access, then the government has every right to dictate what acceptable use of that resource is.
No, you totally miss the point. It's not the government's money, it's ours. WE are the taxpayers, not Uncle Sam. You think it's good government to confiscate money from citizens forcibly, and use that money against them? Vote for one of the two parties in last night's debates, then.
School and library funded computers should be used for research purposes, and using filtering software to do that is a reasonable approach. (Common sense should also come into it -- a
student should be able to request the filter be disbaled to reach a site normally blocked if there
is a good reason behind it.)
Yeah, you'd think so, wouldn't you. The problem is that the impulse to filter does not come from common sense, it comes from fear and ignorance and a need to pander to some constituency. Students have been barred from the school library for pointing out that appropriate material has been inappropriately blocked. Students that understand how ineffective and counterproductive the filters are are seen as "hackers" and are banned from all access.
If that isn't government sponsored censorship, then what is?
Public access, moreso than private access, should not be filtered whatsoever.
Then they'll come home and ask you about it, then what are you going to say?
Whatever you think is appropriate. What would you say if they came home and asked you about something they heard from a classmate?
I remember seeing this piece of software that could actually block images based on the amount of skin tones in it. It truly was a remarkable piece of software. It wasn't able to block everything, but it got most of the more raunchy images.
It is not "truly remarkable" at all, it is fatally flawed, and indiscriminately blocks images of non-pornographic material, while happily passing many hard core images. One independent test found that blocking images at random was just as effective as this "truly remarkable" software.
This topic has been raging for several years now, and it is not likely to go away. And remember: for every
person who claims it is a violation of their First Amendment rights, there is a parent who has the
constitutional right to expect that their child won't be exposed to "inappropriate material" at school or at
the library.
There is no such right enumerated in the Constitution. On the contrary, the 1st Amendment can be construed as to forclose the parent's right to censor what the child sees at school, not the other way around.
Name.space has no charter, no fscking idea what to do with all the TLDs their users have created. It's one thing to advocate anarchy. It's quite another to implement it - name.space is an example of what can go wrong.
I think the Usenet model is more workable. Members choose what new top levels will exist by vote, much the same way newsgroups are created. There is also room for a DNS equivalent of the alt. hierarchy. Name.space might fill that role.
"3.Point out the benefits of a legally licensed, preinstalled operating system. Customers have the original CD so they can reload the software."
Ummmm..... no, they no longer get the original CD, remember, Bill?
Wonder if you could point out this page to your OEM dealer when they refuse to provide anything other than a machine-specific restore disk. Nah. Redmond has never been required to make sense or be consistent before, why start now?
With the online retailers, we must discuss the need to properly notify consumers outside the region 1 territories that the disc may not play in their player before the disc is purchased. The customer dissatisfaction and returns risk is significant if this is not done.
It seems that they are worried this might result in an avalanche of returns if the dealers fail to warn customers. I think it's within our power to make that a reality. What would they do if a whole slew of people bought "The Patriot" and returned it, claiming it displayed a message telling them their player wasn't compatible? Is the dealer going to come to your house to see for himself? Hmmmm... Might get really interesting if you go through several DVDs trying to get one that will play.
No. Commercially recorded popular music is for wankers. It all sucks. They should pay ME to listen to that crap. Good riddance to Napster, the RIAA and everyone else involved with this tripe.
If you'd just shut up and smoke a fatty, you wouldn't need the speed to cope with the stress. Speed is for the kids who think they need to keep up with the world. Pot is for the grownups who know the world needs to slow down just a tad.
We don't have the energy to drive two operating systems.
Microsoft manages to drive W2K, WinCe, W9.x
Microsoft doesn't develop hardware (of any significance). They are a software company. There is little to compare with Sun.
IBM manages to drive OS/390, Linux, Windows, AIX, OS/400
There are many people who would argue that IBM is not nearly as focused as Sun, to IBM's detriment.
SGI manages to drive Irix, Windows, Linux
That is debatable. SGI is a hardware company desperately looking for something to throw on its boxes to expand its marketshare beyond high-end graphics professionals.
HP manages to drive HP/UX, Windows, Linux
Same comment as for IBM.
Compaq manages to drive Tru64, Linux, Windows, VMS (or is VMS dead yet?)
VMS is not dead, it's just restin'. Compaq is following in the path of IBM and HP. They want to be everything to everyone.
Why does Sun not have the energy to drive more than one operating system when its competition does?
One of Sun's strengths is their focus on their hardware - everything the company does is part of a strategy to sell more SPARCs. If supporting Linux would detract from their efforts to sell more SPARCs, they will balk at doing it.
Actually, I've heard the comment from more than one Sun rep that they couldn't care less what you run on your Ultrasparcs, so long as you keep buying them. Sun is primarily a hardware company, like Apple. The OS is there because they couldn't sell the boxes without it. Not that the OS is an afterthought, no way. But they see it as part of the strategy to sell hardware.
I'll bet that no one has ever been busted by Sun for running Solaris multi-user on SPARC hardware while having only the two-user desktop license that comes with every new system -- especially if they're a dot-com (or dot-org - hint hint:). Maybe someone has been busted for using Solaris x86 this way, but not on a SPARC. No way will they piss off a hardware customer with that kind of stunt.
Driver is called "banshee.o". Web site says it supports Banshees and Voodoo3 (?!?). No mention of Voodoo2 or SLI. No other supported video card has 3D support. Ummm... guess the Quake and Unreal ports included with the thing aren't going to be all that and a bag of potato chips.
Slashdot Mirror
Tried it? I rely on it when all else fails and I can't get a customer's domain information changed any other way!
Yes.
Have the registrars announced any kind of plan or timeline for implementing it?
No.
So its use is restricted to your private LAN, where you are your own certificate authority.
This happens whether or not the Solaris host has any IPv6 interfaces, and regardless of the settings in nsswitch.conf for the ipnodes namespace.
Don't worry. The responsibility belongs to the current Network Solutions, er, I mean VeriSign Global Registry. That's why DNSSEC is about as useful as tits on a boar hog. Exactly nothing has been done to set up the PKI required to make DNSSEC useful, and it looks like exactly the same will be done for the forseeable future.
My guess is that ordinary DNS and IPv4 will be still operating the vast majority of the Internet for the next ten years, at the very least.
DNS does not work like that. Do you by any chance operate the .CA TLD servers? You have about the same understanding of DNS as does .CA.
Why are video recordings not included in the provisions of this bill? Surely this is the next medium to undergo the Internet distribution trial-by-fire. "Flickster" is just around the corner (cf. whois flickster.com).
It also fails to address the Napster situation as it exists today. Surely the law does not consider an individual offering MP3s on Napster to be a transmitting organization. Napster itself is certainly not the transmitting organization, nor is the request to transmit sent to, or even through, them. Using the terms from the bill, Napster only offers a directory of individuals willing to transmit works, as everyone knows.
This bill doesn't seem very useful to me, and may prove to be a distraction from the larger issues.
Who is sponsoring the sponsors?
I'm with you 100% on the idea of a TLD expressly for the excercise of Fair Use rights.
I propose that .FU would be the perfect name for this new TLD.
UNIX is an ad-hoc standard invented by an industry consortium to halt progress and lock-in customer base (paraphrasing Dan Bernstein).
No, you totally miss the point. It's not the government's money, it's ours. WE are the taxpayers, not Uncle Sam. You think it's good government to confiscate money from citizens forcibly, and use that money against them? Vote for one of the two parties in last night's debates, then.
School and library funded computers should be used for research purposes, and using filtering software to do that is a reasonable approach. (Common sense should also come into it -- a student should be able to request the filter be disbaled to reach a site normally blocked if there is a good reason behind it.)
Yeah, you'd think so, wouldn't you. The problem is that the impulse to filter does not come from common sense, it comes from fear and ignorance and a need to pander to some constituency. Students have been barred from the school library for pointing out that appropriate material has been inappropriately blocked. Students that understand how ineffective and counterproductive the filters are are seen as "hackers" and are banned from all access.
If that isn't government sponsored censorship, then what is?
Public access, moreso than private access, should not be filtered whatsoever.
Then they'll come home and ask you about it, then what are you going to say?
Whatever you think is appropriate. What would you say if they came home and asked you about something they heard from a classmate?
I remember seeing this piece of software that could actually block images based on the amount of skin tones in it. It truly was a remarkable piece of software. It wasn't able to block everything, but it got most of the more raunchy images.
It is not "truly remarkable" at all, it is fatally flawed, and indiscriminately blocks images of non-pornographic material, while happily passing many hard core images. One independent test found that blocking images at random was just as effective as this "truly remarkable" software.
There is no such right enumerated in the Constitution. On the contrary, the 1st Amendment can be construed as to forclose the parent's right to censor what the child sees at school, not the other way around.
I think the Usenet model is more workable. Members choose what new top levels will exist by vote, much the same way newsgroups are created. There is also room for a DNS equivalent of the alt. hierarchy. Name.space might fill that role.
No, a diamond is not organic. It is the presence of the carbon-hydrogen bond that identifies a molecule as organic.
Ummmm..... no, they no longer get the original CD, remember, Bill?
Wonder if you could point out this page to your OEM dealer when they refuse to provide anything other than a machine-specific restore disk. Nah. Redmond has never been required to make sense or be consistent before, why start now?
With the online retailers, we must discuss the need to properly notify consumers outside the region 1 territories that the disc may not play in their player before the disc is purchased. The customer dissatisfaction and returns risk is significant if this is not done.
It seems that they are worried this might result in an avalanche of returns if the dealers fail to warn customers. I think it's within our power to make that a reality. What would they do if a whole slew of people bought "The Patriot" and returned it, claiming it displayed a message telling them their player wasn't compatible? Is the dealer going to come to your house to see for himself? Hmmmm... Might get really interesting if you go through several DVDs trying to get one that will play.
Found it. Search for "group publishing system". Here's the link. US Patent #6,088,702.
Keep your steenking mits off my steenking buds, bud!!
No. Commercially recorded popular music is for wankers. It all sucks. They should pay ME to listen to that crap. Good riddance to Napster, the RIAA and everyone else involved with this tripe.
CHILL! It's all good.
We don't have the energy to drive two operating systems.
Microsoft doesn't develop hardware (of any significance). They are a software company. There is little to compare with Sun.
There are many people who would argue that IBM is not nearly as focused as Sun, to IBM's detriment.
That is debatable. SGI is a hardware company desperately looking for something to throw on its boxes to expand its marketshare beyond high-end graphics professionals.
Same comment as for IBM.
- Compaq manages to drive Tru64, Linux, Windows, VMS (or is VMS dead yet?)
VMS is not dead, it's just restin'. Compaq is following in the path of IBM and HP. They want to be everything to everyone.Why does Sun not have the energy to drive more than one operating system when its competition does?
One of Sun's strengths is their focus on their hardware - everything the company does is part of a strategy to sell more SPARCs. If supporting Linux would detract from their efforts to sell more SPARCs, they will balk at doing it.
I'll bet that no one has ever been busted by Sun for running Solaris multi-user on SPARC hardware while having only the two-user desktop license that comes with every new system -- especially if they're a dot-com (or dot-org - hint hint :). Maybe someone has been busted for using Solaris x86 this way, but not on a SPARC. No way will they piss off a hardware customer with that kind of stunt.
I agree - Linux does not scale up as well as Solaris. Slashdot is proof. :)
Oh yes, you're so right. We can't have any fooling around with Guiness records, why, people might think they don't have to take it seriously...
Driver is called "banshee.o". Web site says it supports Banshees and Voodoo3 (?!?). No mention of Voodoo2 or SLI. No other supported video card has 3D support. Ummm... guess the Quake and Unreal ports included with the thing aren't going to be all that and a bag of potato chips.
Back to the future, I guess. :)