Linux-Advocacy Digest #801, Volume #28 Fri, 1 Sep 00 14:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: businesses are psychopaths ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: businesses are psychopaths ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: How low can they go...?
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: How low can they go...?
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Nothing like a SECURE database, is there Bill?
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform (Eric Remy)
Re: HOTMAIL Hacked? (abraxas)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: businesses are psychopaths
Date: 1 Sep 2000 17:05:33 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The difference in behaviour between a psychopath with a long view
>> and a normal person is minimal.
>
>Criminal psychopaths
Changing the subject again are we?
>>"Good" corporations have a long view.
>The only good corporations are cooperatives
And your proof of this is? Oh yes, by your definition of what
a "good" corporation is combined with anecdotal evidence.
Sorry, while I heartily approve of cooperatives and would be most
interested in seeing a small-medium country going to a free-market
communist model (loosely, all capital must be owned by the workers
but market forces are allowed to determine sales of products)
there are many corporations that provide value to the consumer
while not screwing over their workers.
Depending on your definitions and whether you allow the occasional
mistake (people are usually allowed to make mistakes) the majority
of corporations may or may not make that grade.
I suggest that you consider that many people who are happy with their
lot in life are not brainwashed but rather don't care enough about
what you percieve as grave injustices to let it get in the way
of being generally happy.
Are they still being exploited? No doubt, but if the exploitee doesn't
care much and is living a decent life ...
Get rid of the absolutes and the rhetoric and you might be surprised
by how much I agree with the substance of your views of businesses.
But I rather doubt you are interested in that.
>> >Rather, I define the word
>>
>> Narrowly, ignoring the fact that humans are irrational and therefore
>> their self-interest is not definable by Spock.
>
>On the contrary, one could easily argue that it is in people's
>self-interest to /become/ Spock ...
One could easily argue that it is people's self-interest to be
immune to all diseases.
Robert
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: businesses are psychopaths
Date: 1 Sep 2000 17:06:56 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> VMS, MVS, OS/2, ... what?
>
>Just for you, I'll say that I want it to run on the 80x86, StrongARM,
>Alpha and SPARC.
Do you think you will have a serious market across all of those
architectures(sp?) ?
Robert
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 13:06:03 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >david raoul derbes wrote:
> [...]
> >> them, at present, comes out of public school budgets (so far as I
> >> know.)
> >
> >So what?
> >
> >If 25% of the kids leave the public schools through vouchers,
> >then exactly what is wrong with the public schools having their
> >budger reduced by 25%
>
> Dammit, I though I killfiled you. Ker-PLONK.
Translation: don't bother Max with logical arguments.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 17:12:31 GMT
On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 15:10:15 GMT, James A. Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>
>> >
>> >Likewise, Apple's marketshare would have been loads bigger had they gone
>> >for volume instead of margin. But they didn't. in teh early days (Win
>>
>> Then why didn't Commodore or Atari clean up?
>>
>
>Better marketing.
We're buying technology, not television commercials.
Not that your comment actually substantiates the claim
that any superior advertising was going on. One can not
even infer that ANY advertising was going on from your
rebuttal.
>
>> For any actual characteristic, at any time in the history of WinDOS
>> there have been competing products that were superior to WinDOS in
>> one or all characteristics of merit.
>>
>> >1.x, 2.x) MS didn't dominate anything other than DOS. It was only with
>> >Windows 3.0 that they leaped forward. And there was a fair bit of time
>> >for other vendors to respond; they didn't.
>>
>> Actually, the original consent decree against Microsoft contradicts
>> this nasty bit of historical revisionism.
>>
>> Competing OS and system vendors never had to merely compete against
>> what Microsoft was doing but what the entire collection of 3rd party
>> vendors associated with Microsoft was doing and the compatibility
>> issues that kept that entire cabal working for Microsoft.
>>
>
>Try again. Lotus 1-2-3 and WordPerfect were the dominant spreadsheet
>and doc software prior to Windows. MS was getting killed in that
>space. Then they introduced Windows, and Lotus (and WordPerfect)
Nope. Amipro wiped the floor with any version of msword prior
to the release of win32. In some respects it didn't catch up
until version 9. The same is true of Wordperfect.
>basically ignored Windows, preferring to ship DOS versions. Go back and
>look at PC Magazine articles of the day.
I don't have to, I lived it.
>
>
>> --
>> Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
>>
>
>Gee, you mean like Mac and AppleWorks (which my father uses)?
>Or Linux and StarOffice (which is free)?
The mac is all but extinct from conventional retail outlets
and the existence of a nearly 20 year old worldwide volunteer
effort does not validate the health, well being, and easy
entry into the microcomputer systems software market.
Both of these rather quite soundly refute it.
>
>You can use other stuff - what bothers you is that most people choose
>not to, for reasons of inertia. MS won by making Windows the successful
...a barrier to entry "its gotta be DOS compatible" with
Microsoft owning the DOS-compatible rails.
>successor to DOS, and then being the first to have apps on it. The
>other vendors of the day ignored Windows for too long, and lost.
No, you're just rewritting history.
[deletia]
It the early 90's, corporations liked the idea of 'one vendor'
much in the way they jumped at IBM previously. I've met very
few people ever that could articulate just what it is that they
find so much better about msoffice beyond the perception that
everyone else is using it.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E.
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:20:55 -0300
[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
>
> On Fri, 1 Sep 2000 01:04:55 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Said Donovan Rebbechi in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >> >On Thu, 31 Aug 2000 17:17:48 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >>The rest of that response was:
> >> >>--------------
> >> >>We are not lawyers, we are developers, and we do not want to sue people.
> >> >>On the other hand I cannot guarantee that we will never sue the Harmony
> >> >>project. Who knows what will happen in the future. If e.g. some Redmond
> >> >>based company starts pumping funding into Harmony to "embrace and
> >extend"
> >> >>Qt we might consider suing.
> >> >>--------------
> >> >>
> >> >>All in all, what Carl Thompson asked was to the effect, is it true you
> >would
> >> >>sue anyone who made another toolkit that could be used as a dropin
> >> >>replacement for QT? Eirik Eng's answer was not responsive to the
> >question
> >> >>asked.
> >> >
> >> >It was sufficiently responive IMO.
> >>
> >> I agree. And he certainly didn't even seem to threaten those who would
> >> clone QT, but merely those who would try to inhibit competition.
> >
> >But also fails to mention that they would not take action against
> >cloners--leaving a lingering fear of litigation, uncertainty if the act of
>
> Also, it's well within Troll's capacity to merely not make statements
> that might serve to chill the atmosphere around a free QT clone. The
> fact that they always retain the right to sue is trivial. They retain
> that regardless of the statement of their intent. So merely restating
> the obvious is gratuitious.
Not if they are asked. What should they do? Ignore the question?
> So, to view such threats of litigation lightly is unwarranted.
>
> >cloning Qt would be safe or not, doubt as to the intent of Troll Tech in
> >this matter. The effect to limit or eliminate the desire to directly
> >compete with Troll Tech by developing a competing drop in replacement for
> >Qt. What large company do we know of that has employed such tactics?
> >
> >Could you explain how Eirik' response addressed Carl's concern?
> >
> >
> >> >It isn't clear that you can "license" an API specification, so it's not
> >clear
> >> >that your requirement is even legally binding. The reason they kept their
> >> >mouths relatively shut was for fear of saying something stupid.
> >>
> >> Like what he just said. Apparently, he doesn't get the idea of what is
> >> meant by the concept "free market competition", any more than most of
> >> the Microsoft defenders do.
> >
> >Attention pronoun confusion, who is the :he" in "...he doesn't get..."?
> >
> >> The second one, at least, is nightmarish. The first one might as well
> >> be "GPL QT", which is begging the question, I'm afraid, though its a
> >> suggestion I'd support, if I could figure out how TT can still make
> >> money. I can't, off the top of my head, but the same goes for me. I
>
> The GPL wouldn't harm TT. Infact it would rather protect it. The
> GPL prevents others from arbitrarily assilimilating a particular
> bit of sourcecode and profiting from it as if it were there own.
Read Qt position on the subject. It's in linuxtoday's archives.
TT's legal counsel has suggested that the GPL would not prevent
development of proprietary closed source software based on Qt.
> THIS is primarily what a commercial entity such as Troll would
> seek to avoid. This could ensure that ultimate control of the
> core standard could rest in the community without allowing ANY
> commercial entity to even use the GPL version of QT as a shared
> library without 'giving away the farm'.
The TT lawyers said different, apparently.
> This would force those that are interested in creating commercial
> products to buy Troll's QT under their other commercial licences.
Not, according to their lawyers.
> This is one of the most absurd aspects of this situation.
Yes, if you don't know what you are talking about.
> >> think maybe the guys at TT could, though, if they tried a little harder,
> >> but I'm just guessing, really.
> >
> >They were not meant to be the ways that Eirik should have answered, they
> >were meant to be examples of how the question be Carl could have been
> >answered to remove any lingering doubt as to Troll Tech's intention to
> >*anyone* (not just the Harmony project) that would want to clone or replace
> >Qt with a competing implementation.
> >
> >The argument that Troll Tech is made up of programmers and not lawers so
> >they could not address the question properly without causing themself legal
> >trouble in the future is foolish. Troll Tech is an organization in
> >business, as such, if they have legal concerns such as this question, they
> >should seek legal advice for the wording of their response. A response that
> >could settle the question and protect their rights.
> >
> >
> >> So what's so special about QT, anyway? Doesn't it haven *any*
> >> competitive merits, other than being 'done' and easily available? I
> >> mean, its gotta do *something* well, right?
> >
> >So far it appears to me, that in this case, all it had going for it to be
> >selected for use with KDE is that it was available and the original KDE
> >developers liked it enough to use it over developing their own.
> >
> >The only reason that it has not been "cloned" is that pesky doubt of
> >possible litigation that, so far as I know, had never been settled one way
> >or the other--a version of FUD in action.
>
> Matthias pretty much says so in the current Linux Gazzette.
Details? Not of the reasons to use Qt, but of what Matthias says
about the reasons for not cloning Qt.
> They weren't interested in building the underlying infastructure
> and were quite willing to put it on top of commercial product.
Who said we weren't?
> Had the situation, in terms of immediate cost, favored motif 2, I
> am sure they would have used that instead.
Had motif 2 been under a licensing/cost situation where we would have
found it usable, and had it been a toolkit we enjoyed using, why
wouldn't we use it? That's trivial.
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 17:16:17 GMT
On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 15:12:15 GMT, James A. Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>
>> In other words "building a national phone network" is not a
>> barrier to market entry? Sorry, but those that actually make
>> those kinds of decisions have dissagreed with you for over a
>> century now.
>
>And because of those mutton heads, I'm still stuck with a governmentally
>protected RBOC monopoly. MS is starting to see real competition due to
>a change in the market - they won the earlier battle (DOS --> Windows),
>but are in the process of losing the next one (Wireless clients and
>internet servers).
No, MS is beginning to see real competition because people
have begun to FORSAKE the market alltogether.
[deletia]
Those markets that are causing problems for Microsoft are the
one's where people are abandoning the notion that it is a good
idea for one company to own the interfaces. This is especially
true for wireless clients where the older market players see
the abandonment of owned interfaces in terms of their own
immediate survival.
These changes don't imply that Microsoft should not be divested
of any control of shared interfaces that serve to act as
"essential facilities" for the rest of their market segment.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E.
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:29:30 -0300
[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
>
> Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Oh, come on, for something about harmony, I'd go to the harmony mailing
> > list
> > archives, it's not too big a guess :-)
>
> What about if someone did not know that harmony was involved in the
> citation?
Harmony being the only attempt ever to clone Qt?
> What is someone does not know the location of harmony's archives
> or even of the exitance of the harmony mailing list? What if someone had
> never before heard of the harmony project? Just because locating the
> message was easy and its location was obvious to you, does not mean that it
> was for everyone.
Of course not. That's why when you obviously didn't find it, I did
it for you! It's not like I resisted to do so, is it?
Come on, I replied to a post that gave even LESS information! Jedi had
just said "there were legal threats"!
> Put youself in the place of someone trying to locate the source for a
> fragment of a quotation without know its full context or where or why it was
> made. Consider this quotation: "...this oasis, must have been an
> important site at one time, a site of conquest and reconquest..." Where
> would you look for it and in what context would you imagine it was made and
> who long would it take you to locate it?
Well, we had a much narrower universe here, and I did provide
the context without even being asked twice. It's done, let's move
forward.
> I do thank you for posting the URL of the message.
You're welcome.
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Nothing like a SECURE database, is there Bill?
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 17:21:44 GMT
On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 15:06:55 GMT, Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>> On 31 Aug 2000 10:44:51 GMT, Steve Mading
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >: Steve Mading wrote:
>> >:>
>> >:> It seems to me that in this type of situation, the installer
>> >:> should generate a random, but usable, password from some very
>> >:> simple scheme, ("Roll a d46, 1-26 equals A-Z, 27-36 equals 0-9,
>> >:> and 37-46 is the punctiation marks above the numbers", repeat for
>> >:> 8 characters). Then it could tell you what this password is during
>> >:> the installation program. Is there any product out there that
>> >:> uses this technique?
>> >
>> >: Why dod that?
>> >: JUST PROMPT THE ADMIN FOR A PASSWORD.
>> >
>> >I assume from this you are also implying, "...and refuse
>>
>> Nope. The end user should still be able to shoot themselves
>> in the foot if they really want too. Oracle has already lived
>> up to it's responsibilities by walking the novice admin through
>> the process of changing the default passwords.
>>
>Which two previous posters (myself and someone else)have already
>pointed out that Oracle DON'T do on either NT or Linux. So Oracle have
They should.
They whole point of the shiny happy installer is dealing
with admins that aren't yet capable of manually creating
a db and loading in all the necessary sql scripts.
>half lived up to their responsibility. Responsibility must also be
>borne by the admin to be familiar enough with the software to know what
>should be changed after a default install. Presumably they know enough
>to say create a new database (a change from the default), so they
>should be reasonably expected to change the password as well...
...if they're recreating a database from scratch, sure.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 17:25:48 GMT
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000 09:44:19 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> Oh, come on, for something about harmony, I'd go to the harmony mailing
>> list
>> archives, it's not too big a guess :-)
...where you would see them discussing an alliance with RMS
to ensure that when the jackboots from Troll come they don't
get all squashed...
>
>What about if someone did not know that harmony was involved in the
>citation? What is someone does not know the location of harmony's archives
>or even of the exitance of the harmony mailing list? What if someone had
...sounds like Roberto...
[deletia]
The accessability of the commercial QT code leaves much fertile
ground for lawyerly abuse on the part of Troll.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E.
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:37:45 -0300
[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
>
> On Fri, 1 Sep 2000 09:44:19 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >> Oh, come on, for something about harmony, I'd go to the harmony mailing
> >> list archives, it's not too big a guess :-)
>
> ...where you would see them discussing an alliance with RMS
> to ensure that when the jackboots from Troll come they don't
> get all squashed...
Any references? You know, I did read a fair amount of the archives
looking for the reference I provided, and saw nothing like that.
> >What about if someone did not know that harmony was involved in the
> >citation? What is someone does not know the location of harmony's archives
> >or even of the exitance of the harmony mailing list? What if someone had
>
> ...sounds like Roberto...
Are you saying I didn't knew harmony was involved in the citation,
didn't knew the harmony archives location, or didn't knew the existance
of the harmony mailing list? Because all three are obviously false.
> [deletia]
>
> The accessability of the commercial QT code leaves much fertile
> ground for lawyerly abuse on the part of Troll.
I suppose you prefer closed code.
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
------------------------------
From: Eric Remy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 13:30:43 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Eric Remy wrote:
>>
>>
>> You're confusing things. MacOS has no equivalent to the Task Manager in
>> NT/W2K. The app list you can tear off from the application menu is the
>> equivalent of the Windows task bar. The Task Manager does far more than
>> than application tear-off, quite a bit of which is not even possible in
>> MacOS. (MacOS has no idea of priorities, for example, and so can't have
>> functionality to set them.)
>
>Check out Peek-A-Boo
>
>http://clarkwoodsoftware.com/peekaboo/
>
>It lets you monitor CPU useage for your processes, kill processes, set
>priorities for the processes, and more.
Have it. A fairly nice little app. It, along with ApplWindows, should
have been bundled with MacOS years ago.
Its idea of "adjusting priorities" is a hack though. (And the help file
even admits that.) It's not adjusting a priority within MacOS- it's
adjusting how often an app asks for CPU. (PeekaBoo, of course, can't do
anything else since MacOS doesn't understand priority.) This doesn't
always help: for example, adjusting SETI@home's priority to low doesn't
help the noticeable delays in user interface speed when it's running in
the background on my G3.
And, of course, you can't drag+drop to apps listed in PeekaBoo, which
was the original point of confusion.
--
Eric Remy. Chemistry Learning Center Director, Virginia Tech
"I don't like (quantum mechanics), | How many errors can
and I'm sorry I ever had anything | you find in my X-Face?
to do with it."- Erwin Schrodinger |
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: HOTMAIL Hacked?
Date: 1 Sep 2000 17:31:13 GMT
Joseph T. Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> :> These types of things are not usually a hacking of the site itself so much
> :> as a hacking of the DNS entries. We would have read about any such major
> :> hack, so it was likely a DNS hack.
> :>
>
> : Which are still the direct responsibility of the site itself. If you cannot
> : protect yourself against such 'hacks', you need to be doing something else.
>
>
> How could Hotmail possibly be blamed for the content of DNS server
> entries all over the world when it has no knowledge or control of any
> of them???? (You *do* know how DNS works, right?)
>
Yes I do...Do you?
If it had only been one (or possibly a very small handful) of DNS servers
that had been tainted by this attack, you would have a point. However, it was
many, many more than that, suggesting that the change was made on a slightly
'larger scale' than was originally suggested in this thread.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
