User: adric

Re:Look at this nonsense.

On: LinuxOne Releases a Product

FWIW, Linus has blessed closed-source kernel modules.

That's a bit misleading, actually. Linus allows closed-source modules, but has definately not blessed them. In fact, he has specifically indicated that NO consideration will be given to binary compatibility for such modules... in other words, any kernel update has the potential to break them, and it's entirely up to the vendor to ensure that they're kept up to date.
---

Re:Content Neutrality threatened by Naive Marketer

On: Lycos: Can't Get There From Here

Someone might also want to inform our good friends over at Google about this.

It is hard to justify "worst operating system" coming up with www.microsoft.com. Especially when I think only the word operating is on the page.

If memory serves, Google is actually finding that text on other pages which contain links to Microsoft, rather than on the target page itself.
---

depends on your area

On: Cable vs. DSL, Explained

The choice is fairly easy in my area... there's a single ISP offering ADSL, and cable-modems aren't available. Tough, eh?

While the actual performance of my ADSL connection has been outstanding, I REALLY want another provider (cable or DSL, I really don't care) to come into the area to help drive the prices down... at the moment the monthly charge is $60 for 256/64, or $100 for 384/384 (and the phone co. charges an additional $30-50). To top that off, the phone co. charges $339 for the installation (fortunately, I came in during the introductory "no installation charge" phase). OUCH!
---

Re:Coolness

On: Rumors of Liberalized US Crypto Policy

Now, only if Netscape put out a new 128-bit version of their browser...I'm using the 4.08 Navigator standalone and I swear it's buggy as hell.

Take a look at Fortify... it adds 128-bit encryption support into most (domestic) versions of Navigator. Seems to work quite well.
---

Re:New Advertising slogan?

On: Network Solutions E-Mail Security Alert

Network Solutions...we're the "duh" in dot com!

Nah. More like we're the "duh" in stupenduhs (and yes, I know it's not really spelled that way :-)
---

Re:not too exciting

On: Physical-layer Ethernet Encryption

Possibly. But then I'd expect it to sound more like optimized for Windows 2000 or possibly designed for Windows 2000, rather than feature available only for...

But I've been wrong before :-)
---

not too exciting

On: Physical-layer Ethernet Encryption

Security features are for use in PC applications running the Microsoft Windows 2000 operating system only. Too bad it leaves Linux, *BSD, etc. out in the cold (assuming that we'd actually want to use it, but that's a different issue).
---

Re:I want to patent "Idiots"

On: German Law Firm claims Linux Trademark

Not even the merest hint of a chance... there's WWWAAAYYY to much prior art.
---