And of course the space between 'cv' and 'sroot' looks somewhat silly and I have no idea how that got there. Then again, this way I am not distributing evil illegal software.:-)
Honestly, the worst virus we have now simply delete a few files, corrupts some Jpegs, or maybe emails itself to others. How are we going to stop this monolith when it tries to blow us all up without an ultra-dangerous virus?
Somewhere aboard the mothership of an alien invasion fleet headed for earth:
Important Alien: "Finally we have arrived. Prepare our fighters for launch!"
Not-so-important Alien: "Umm, sir? Remember that big JPEG showing all our attack plans?"
IA: "Yes? What about it?"
NSIA: "Well, I cant find it anymore... Ever since I looked at those mails telling me how to Conquer Worlds Fast And Pick Up Antarean Chicks."
IA: "Well, you made a backup of such an important file of course?"
I suddenly get this weird mental image of an ad... A white hallway, a fallen robe with some burn marks, a familiar shadow on the wall... And the words "Its a Sony"
A way to transmit data and store it in a publically accessible way anonymously on an anonymous network of servers or equivalent in multiple countries...with no control over the servers contents by their owners (i.e. theyre not responsible for whats on the servers and cant remove the data on them..mostly text of course)
This might be an interesting cryptographic challenge: To create a kind of encrypted database that can be read by everyone, but which has all records encrypted based on many records so nothing, once added, can be removed without permanently damaging everything.
A mimimal anonymous network thats off limits to anyone but individuals...no companies allowed (and hence no advertising)...that also runs encapsulated on the global internet. Something like what fidonet used to be.
Running your (well, our) own TLD (like.gnu or.foo:) might be good for this. It wouldnt break anything already existing, we just have to get our local systems to resolve that TLD via a specific adress. Just enforce strict non-profit use and go hard after domain grabbing.
You think the world went through midnight without problems? Wrong!
Actually, you are all dead already and this (a world where net access still works) is just your personal paradise where you have been placed. To demonstrate my point of being in geek paradise, watch for flying cars etc. coming this century.:)
Re:ahh but what about crack dot com?
on
Quake 1 GPL'ed
·
· Score: 2
Well, there is still a significant different between an illegal copy of the sources appearing on some FTP servers and an official, free for everyone, GPL release... For example to a games developer the warezed version (I think that the right term here) would only be good to take a quick look at and see how a certain thing was done while now you can really do anything you want with it.
With this legit version id are giving something away that they charged about 1M$ not too long ago. Good karma for them and I again feel nice about buying Quake 3 instead of getting it in some illegal way.
In the article, it says that those genes not present in the most simple bacteria of all were "not essential to life". Actually, if you consider that the DNA codes just encode chemicals you end up with defining life as a more and more simple chemical reaction.
The problem here is where you draw the border of the reaction being life. If you scale everything down that much to the most simple processes you cant apply the standard set of rules (Eats, Farts and what not) but you will have one guy saying that if you take away chemical X its not "life" anymore while the other says that the definition still applies.
In simplified techspeak: We all would probably agree that a single transistor would not be designated a computer. But as the circuitry gets more and more complicated (working too; not just stuffing random bits together) where can you discern between it being a computer and not.
So, will this be able to grant us any particular insights? We will learn the exact functions of some groups of DNA code. But we will not learn what parts make up "life" because everyone has different views of that anyway.
> Could holograms lead to a false sense of security? Would money imprinted with holograms be ultimately secure?
Here in Germany, the most recent edition of larger banknotes already got holograms on them. They are not pasted on the paper but woven into there somehow, so if you just pasted holographic foil on there you would notice it at the first touch.
This article (in german) tells us that "the head of technical commitee 41, Michael Wheatley (IBM), possibly wants to continue with the standardization of Java even without Sun's support.
So this says, through a finite amount of configuration work, you can get NT to a set amount of security. This doesnt even tell you whether it would be remotely feasible to do this.
Also, I am curious how NT fulfills the auditing requirements... How the hell can I find out what user deleted a certain file? Perhaps I am just stupid, but I never saw any hidden option to log absolutely everything on the system. (Something like a journalling file system comes to my mind here)
Well, if you think IE is the best browser then use that.
I for one like the fact that Mozilla isnt being rushed out of the door just to win the game of version numbers.
And when you speak of how "They had a working version of Mozilla months ago." I would really love to have the milestone number for that as I think we have been trying out different stuff then. Sure, they are hard at work, but creating such a huge thing as Mozilla will take its time. Especially if you dont want it to crash all the time.
Would I use NT in a world where NT was cheap, fast, stable and adhering to open standards? Add a good command line interface to it and you can bet that I would, but I fear that is not the world that we live in.
I dont use Linux because I am anti-mainstream but because it fullfills my demands to an OS.
Internet Explorer, for example, started as a loss leader. You simply can't seperate the browser and expect it to stay viable. It has to stay with the operating system.
Viable? Well, there were giving it away for free before, right? So the only financial gain for Microsoft is to gain market share through all ways possible, even if not legal, to push the people offering content to use the (expensive) proprietary Microsoft mechanisms. Of course an Internet Explorer Inc. would go straight downhill. But give that company all other MS pure internet products (IIS etc) and you have a company that will either rise or fall out of its own merit. (I suppose it will be the latter, but thats the laws of the market for you)
These smaller companies would duke it out for a while, and eventually one would come out on top.
Like when IBM was slowed by the government and MS arose? Yes, a new player will come after Microsoft. And I hope that one will be stopped from gobbling up the entire market as well.
I'm also opposed to Microsoft being forced to open their source code. Why? Because this != the code being under GPL/pick your favorite license. In the same vein, open source != free.
Yes. But this way, competitors could do what only Microsoft can do now (and does alot to give their products an unfair advantage), namely using all those hidden interface functions to get the most out of the OS.
Give it enough time, and Linux, MacOS, or, most likely, something else will take away Microsoft's monopoly. It's happenned before (IBM),
Free software cant be threatened by whatever marketing tactics as it doesnt have to make profits, which is a good thing. But other commercial software companies shouldnt have to be kicked in the dirt by big Bill either. Lowering Microsofts monopoly power will help making the market a better place for everyone again.
I dont think avoiding the legal issues of customizing Java through this would be a primary motivation, as after all Sun can just go after Rational then if they think R. are violating the Java licenses. Or am I missing something there?
No one forces you to use YaST for everything. I use SuSE and find myself almost exclusively using YaST for installing new packages. You still can mess with configuration files the traditional way (which I prefer too), but if you dont want that you use the GUI.
There is no point in making a system intentionally hard to use. Its not a problem to have something that is hard to configure, but you also shouldnt cry "Waa, its not special anymore" if you neighbor can start using it too. Using a cool and stable OS shouldnt be a priviledge but something available to everyone.
And of course those who know what they do will always be able to get more out of their system no matter how many functions the GUI supports.:)
There will always be commercial software, but remember that even if software companies do not go open source; having a vast variety of choices for Unix desktop software can only help getting more users there. If you dont want to pay for the software you want to use, there is still lots of other good software you can use.
Choice is good, even if one of the choices is non-GPL. After all, you dont have to pick it but others might prefer that. (No, not that I would. But I also know that some people actually feel more comfortable with payware)
Their primary concern is whether it will hit on UK territory? I may be wrong, but as far as I know a meteor hitting earth can either be too small to detect in advance (at least without enough warning time to do anything), or - if its bigger - it doesnt matter too much whether it actually drops on the UK or somewhere else.
Anyway, it sounds like a nice job to apply for... You can blurt out all bullshit you want, and if you actually go wrong there wont be anyone left to blame you.:-)
Well, actually if I could really get that chance (and if the "OS" there wouldnt be hardcoded) I would *love* to toy with that; which only proves the point...:-)
You'd think that if they have a machine that does nothing but control the installation of software to the new units, they would not do much other stuff on there, so I would be really interested in how they managed to get a virus on there. Unless of course they stuff their new PCs with copies of Win2000 that they warezed off the net.
Slashdot Mirror
And of course the space between 'cv' and 'sroot' looks somewhat silly and I have no idea how that got there. Then again, this way I am not distributing evil illegal software. :-)
cvs -d:pserver:anonymous@cvs.bnetd.sourceforge.net:/cv sroot/bnetd login
cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anonymous@cvs.bnetd.sourceforge.net:/cv sroot/bnetd co bnetd
OK, thats without the Warcraft 3 changes but who cares for that?
Somewhere aboard the mothership of an alien invasion fleet headed for earth:
Important Alien: "Finally we have arrived. Prepare our fighters for launch!"
Not-so-important Alien: "Umm, sir? Remember that big JPEG showing all our attack plans?"
IA: "Yes? What about it?"
NSIA: "Well, I cant find it anymore... Ever since I looked at those mails telling me how to Conquer Worlds Fast And Pick Up Antarean Chicks."
IA: "Well, you made a backup of such an important file of course?"
NSIA: "Umm..."
There is a place called Flathead Valley? Seen any white houses there recently?
We'll have to settle for tech groupies who trade sexual favors for processor time. Quick, somebody port breasts to linux!
So xeyes isnt a good enough emulation in your opinion? Heathen!
No, PCS isnt 1900-GSM. Its just that some providers start using 1900-GSM in the US now in addition to the (sadly) still dominant PCS system.
I'd love to have a Sony lightsaber, myself..
I suddenly get this weird mental image of an ad... A white hallway, a fallen robe with some burn marks, a familiar shadow on the wall... And the words "Its a Sony"
A way to transmit data and store it in a publically accessible way anonymously on an anonymous network of servers or equivalent in multiple countries...with no control over the servers contents by their owners (i.e. theyre not responsible for whats on the servers and cant remove the data on them..mostly text of course)
.gnu or .foo :) might be good for this. It wouldnt break anything already existing, we just have to get our local systems to resolve that TLD via a specific adress. Just enforce strict non-profit use and go hard after domain grabbing.
This might be an interesting cryptographic challenge: To create a kind of encrypted database that can be read by everyone, but which has all records encrypted based on many records so nothing, once added, can be removed without permanently damaging everything.
A mimimal anonymous network thats off limits to anyone but individuals...no companies allowed (and hence no advertising)...that also runs encapsulated on the global internet. Something like what fidonet used to be.
Running your (well, our) own TLD (like
You think the world went through midnight without problems? Wrong!
:)
Actually, you are all dead already and this (a world where net access still works) is just your personal paradise where you have been placed. To demonstrate my point of being in geek paradise, watch for flying cars etc. coming this century.
Well, there is still a significant different between an illegal copy of the sources appearing on some FTP servers and an official, free for everyone, GPL release... For example to a games developer the warezed version (I think that the right term here) would only be good to take a quick look at and see how a certain thing was done while now you can really do anything you want with it.
With this legit version id are giving something away that they charged about 1M$ not too long ago. Good karma for them and I again feel nice about buying Quake 3 instead of getting it in some illegal way.
In the article, it says that those genes not present in the most simple bacteria of all were "not essential to life". Actually, if you consider that the DNA codes just encode chemicals you end up with defining life as a more and more simple chemical reaction.
The problem here is where you draw the border of the reaction being life. If you scale everything down that much to the most simple processes you cant apply the standard set of rules (Eats, Farts and what not) but you will have one guy saying that if you take away chemical X its not "life" anymore while the other says that the definition still applies.
In simplified techspeak: We all would probably agree that a single transistor would not be designated a computer. But as the circuitry gets more and more complicated (working too; not just stuffing random bits together) where can you discern between it being a computer and not.
So, will this be able to grant us any particular insights? We will learn the exact functions of some groups of DNA code. But we will not learn what parts make up "life" because everyone has different views of that anyway.
> Could holograms lead to a false sense of security? Would money imprinted with holograms be ultimately secure?
Here in Germany, the most recent edition of larger banknotes already got holograms on them. They are not pasted on the paper but woven into there somehow, so if you just pasted holographic foil on there you would notice it at the first touch.
This article (in german) tells us that "the head of technical commitee 41, Michael Wheatley (IBM), possibly wants to continue with the standardization of Java even without Sun's support.
So this says, through a finite amount of configuration work, you can get NT to a set amount of security. This doesnt even tell you whether it would be remotely feasible to do this.
Also, I am curious how NT fulfills the auditing requirements... How the hell can I find out what user deleted a certain file? Perhaps I am just stupid, but I never saw any hidden option to log absolutely everything on the system. (Something like a journalling file system comes to my mind here)
Well, if you think IE is the best browser then use that.
I for one like the fact that Mozilla isnt being rushed out of the door just to win the game of version numbers.
And when you speak of how "They had a working version of Mozilla months ago." I would really love to have the milestone number for that as I think we have been trying out different stuff then. Sure, they are hard at work, but creating such a huge thing as Mozilla will take its time. Especially if you dont want it to crash all the time.
How about "Bill's Redmond Computer Br(e)aking" then?
Would I use NT in a world where NT was cheap, fast, stable and adhering to open standards? Add a good command line interface to it and you can bet that I would, but I fear that is not the world that we live in.
I dont use Linux because I am anti-mainstream but because it fullfills my demands to an OS.
Internet Explorer, for example, started as a loss leader. You simply can't seperate the browser and expect it to stay viable. It has to stay with the operating system.
Viable? Well, there were giving it away for free before, right? So the only financial gain for Microsoft is to gain market share through all ways possible, even if not legal, to push the people offering content to use the (expensive) proprietary Microsoft mechanisms. Of course an Internet Explorer Inc. would go straight downhill. But give that company all other MS pure internet products (IIS etc) and you have a company that will either rise or fall out of its own merit. (I suppose it will be the latter, but thats the laws of the market for you)
These smaller companies would duke it out for a while, and eventually one would come out on top.
Like when IBM was slowed by the government and MS arose? Yes, a new player will come after Microsoft. And I hope that one will be stopped from gobbling up the entire market as well.
I'm also opposed to Microsoft being forced to open their source code. Why? Because this != the code being under GPL/pick your favorite license. In the same vein, open source != free.
Yes. But this way, competitors could do what only Microsoft can do now (and does alot to give their products an unfair advantage), namely using all those hidden interface functions to get the most out of the OS.
Give it enough time, and Linux, MacOS, or, most likely, something else will take away Microsoft's monopoly. It's happenned before (IBM),
Free software cant be threatened by whatever marketing tactics as it doesnt have to make profits, which is a good thing. But other commercial software companies shouldnt have to be kicked in the dirt by big Bill either. Lowering Microsofts monopoly power will help making the market a better place for everyone again.
I dont think avoiding the legal issues of customizing Java through this would be a primary motivation, as after all Sun can just go after Rational then if they think R. are violating the Java licenses. Or am I missing something there?
No one forces you to use YaST for everything. I use SuSE and find myself almost exclusively using YaST for installing new packages. You still can mess with configuration files the traditional way (which I prefer too), but if you dont want that you use the GUI.
:)
There is no point in making a system intentionally hard to use. Its not a problem to have something that is hard to configure, but you also shouldnt cry "Waa, its not special anymore" if you neighbor can start using it too. Using a cool and stable OS shouldnt be a priviledge but something available to everyone.
And of course those who know what they do will always be able to get more out of their system no matter how many functions the GUI supports.
There will always be commercial software, but remember that even if software companies do not go open source; having a vast variety of choices for Unix desktop software can only help getting more users there. If you dont want to pay for the software you want to use, there is still lots of other good software you can use.
Choice is good, even if one of the choices is non-GPL. After all, you dont have to pick it but others might prefer that. (No, not that I would. But I also know that some people actually feel more comfortable with payware)
Their primary concern is whether it will hit on UK territory? I may be wrong, but as far as I know a meteor hitting earth can either be too small to detect in advance (at least without enough warning time to do anything), or - if its bigger - it doesnt matter too much whether it actually drops on the UK or somewhere else.
:-)
Anyway, it sounds like a nice job to apply for... You can blurt out all bullshit you want, and if you actually go wrong there wont be anyone left to blame you.
Well, actually if I could really get that chance (and if the "OS" there wouldnt be hardcoded) I would *love* to toy with that; which only proves the point... :-)
> 5) If anybody's been tempted by circumstance to go Darth Vader, it's him.
"Sorry Obi-Wan, but my plans for world domination are more important than this jedi crap."
And if you listen closely to Vaders breathing you will also hear secret messages about the new class of star destroyers coming soon.
You'd think that if they have a machine that does nothing but control the installation of software to the new units, they would not do much other stuff on there, so I would be really interested in how they managed to get a virus on there. Unless of course they stuff their new PCs with copies of Win2000 that they warezed off the net.