Hackers, Lamers and Script Kiddies

[jtmckinley]

First thanks for shutting down the script kiddies VAX, good job.

On the other hand, Linux is not a "toy", it's in use in enterprise systems all over the world from embedded systems to mainframes. I'm not trying to start a flame war, but all of Google runs on Linux and it's certainly one of the most heavily used sites in existence and I don't think I've ever seen Google go down, maybe it has, but I use it every day and it works very well. Amazon is now on Linux as well.

[VAXman(Admin)]

Originally Posted by jtmckinley

First thanks for shutting down the script kiddies VAX, good job.

Thanks.

Originally Posted by jtmckinley

On the other hand, Linux is not a "toy", it's in use in enterprise systems all over the world from embedded systems to mainframes. I'm not trying to start a flame war, but all of Google runs on Linux and it's certainly one of the most heavily used sites in existence and I don't think I've ever seen Google go down, maybe it has, but I use it every day and it works very well. Amazon is now on Linux as well.

Market penetration/application (quantity) does not correlate into quality. McDonald's, by that metric, would be the best food in the universe. We can argue in another thread.

The all or nothing security model wherein one gains all by a shared password is not security nor secure. Such mistakes were made in early OSs -- you know, the ones that existed before Billzebub Gates invented the computer and Al Gore invented the internet -- and more secure follow-ons were born out of the knowledge of those early mistakes. Layer upon that CRapache and then a gazillion lines of obfuscated scripts written by 14 yr. olds patting themselves on the back that what they've created is so cool that the application of sound software engineering principles would be unwarranted and sully their creative juju.

Those reading this need to google "security by/through obscurity". It
is considered a "non-principle" is real security engineering but it is an accept principle in these aforementioned cliques.

NO CODE whatsoever should run on my systems unless I say it should run. Case closed. The problem is trying to explain to people that it doesn't have to be any other way is difficult because they haven't seen it any other way. It's like explaining the color orange to somebody blind from birth. There are concepts out there as revolutionary and evolutionary as the view of the world from Archimedes to Newton and Newton to Einstein.

[jtmckinley]

Originally Posted by VAXman

Market penetration/application (quantity) does not correlate into quality. McDonald's, by that metric, would be the best food in the universe. We can argue in another thread.

I wasn't referring to market penetration, Linux is still relatively low on that metric, but site user load does matter, not only is it a measure of scalability, but with the number of users likely trying to hack google and amazon, it does demonstrate that Linux can be made robust, even if the standard ubuntu or fedora or whatever distro isn't terribly robust "out of the box". I'd be willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that both google and amazon use their own distros.

Originally Posted by VAXman

Layer upon that CRapache and then a gazillion lines of obfuscated scripts written by 14 yr. olds patting themselves on the back that what they've created is so cool that the application of sound software engineering principles would be unwarranted and sully their creative juju.

Well Crapache, as you call it, is also used to serve many high volume sites (maybe more than any other HTTP server) and can be made robust, but probably not by using scripts/configs made by 14 year olds, same as above.

Originally Posted by VAXman

NO CODE whatsoever should run on my systems unless I say it should run. Case closed. The problem is trying to explain to people that it doesn't have to be any other way is difficult because they haven't seen it any other way. It's like explaining the color orange to somebody blind from birth. There are concepts out there as revolutionary and evolutionary as the view of the world from Archimedes to Newton and Newton to Einstein.

OK, no argument there, but in case you aren't already aware, you can not only compile your own linux kernel and disable anything you don't want, but you can in fact create your own linux distribution so that you know exactly what is running and/or installed on the box. You can even compile the whole distro from source if you want so you can set all the make parameters. It's a lot of work and I doubt you have the time or inclination (I considered doing it once but decided I didn't want to deal with it), but in case you are interested here's a couple links that describe how to do it:

http://www.informationweek.com/news/...questid=170220

http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/

There are other HOWTOs as well, a google search for "roll your own linux distro" will yield many, but the infoweek one describes using an existing distro to start. Linux From Scratch is the whole enchilada and is referenced by the infoweek article also. Another option is BSD which builds from source by default and is the base of OS X IIRC, maybe you'd prefer that. I dunno if it's really worth it to roll your own, there are good distros out there that can be made secure, we use SUSE for our servers at work I think, but it is an option.

Not trying to make more work for ya bro, I really appreciate what you do for us on the Moon, just passing along the info.

[Rick and Roll]

Originally Posted by VAXman

and Al Gore invented the internet

There always been a few misnomers that have bothered me. One is the fact that the 2nd Amendment gives you the right to bear arms (it does not, however, the right has been legislated throught time and is valid).

It's sad how things like this have been passed on throughout time as fact.

I have always been an Al Gore fan. Even though no politician is perfect, and most are not even close, I have admired his positions. I always thought this statement was wrong - I can't believe someone would be as stupid as to say something so blatantly false, and it turns out he never did. I'd never checked before, and I finally decided to.

Follow these links and you will see how the words were taken out of context. Agreed, the context is somewhat self-serving, but I don't believe most of what politicians say anyway.

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

http://www.sethf.com/gore/

Before you say I selectively picked these links, bear in mind that the first page when I googled it all defended the misquote.

Same thing happens to a lot of Bush quotes too. So while I appreciate your hard work and and generally find the politics/Microsoft bashing amusing (although a bit tiresome), you have to agree that this is just a false label to hang.

Of course, if you still want to quote him as such, go for it - everyone else does. they're not smart enough to think for themselves, they just quote what they hear as fact, to get a laugh. F'in hardy har har.

[VAXman(Admin)]

Originally Posted by Rick and Roll

There always been a few misnomers that have bothered me. One is the fact that the 2nd Amendment gives you the right to bear arms (it does not, however, the right has been legislated throught time and is valid).

Recent SCOTUS decision upheld the right to keep and bear arms. There has not been an opinion handed down yet regarding the regulation thereof.

Originally Posted by Rick and Roll

I have always been an Al Gore fan. Even though no politician is perfect, and most are not even close, I have admired his positions. I always thought this statement was wrong - I can't believe someone would be as stupid as to say something so blatantly false, and it turns out he never did. I'd never checked before, and I finally decided to.

Follow these links and you will see how the words were taken out of context. Agreed, the context is somewhat self-serving, but I don't believe most of what politicians say anyway.

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

We all know what he said. Al Gore is an egomaniacal histrionic idiot.

Originally Posted by Al Gore

During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.

Right from your link and the transcript of the Wolf Blitzer interview. No level of revisionist history will change it... save for perhaps usenet alt.history.revisionism.

Sorry, but by 1991 the internet was well established. I had an email address as early as 1983.

The earliest RFC for the "internet" is dated 1969. Vint Cerf (one of the true father's of the internet) wrote his first RFC (RFC 13) in 1969.

1976 DEC released the 4 PLA LSI-11 which enjoyed widespread employment as one of the first packet switches (routers) for most of the internet. IIRC, Al Gore was elected for his first term in the House in 1976. Does Al drive a DeLorean with a flux capacitor?

ARPAnet, MILnet, NSFnet... all existed before Al Gore.

in 1987 I was managing an entire class B subnet of the internet.

What Al Gore did -- well, congress -- was to open the door for AOL and others after we (the US) were bested by CIX creating Endless September. This post is dated: 5338 Sept. 1993

Originally Posted by Rick and Roll

Before you say I selectively picked these links, bear in mind that the first page when I googled it all defended the misquote.

Same thing happens to a lot of Bush quotes too. So while I appreciate your hard work and and generally find the politics/Microsoft bashing amusing (although a bit tiresome), you have to agree that this is just a false label to hang.

So what? Nothing false. He said it!

Originally Posted by Rick and Roll

Of course, if you still want to quote him as such, go for it - everyone else does. they're not smart enough to think for themselves, they just quote what they hear as fact, to get a laugh. F'in hardy har har.

You've completely missed the humor. Al Gore tried to usurp a claim upon something he had nothing to do with and those, like myself, who had and have been developing, managing and using the internet before his statement, find it humorous to be sardonic.

[Methem]

Originally Posted by VAXman

The earliest RFC for the "internet" is dated 1969. Vint Cerf (one of the true father's of the internet) wrote his first RFC (RFC 13) in 1969.

Also the year when the first ever messages were exchanged over ARPANET.

For historical curiosity: http://www.cs.ucla.edu/~lk/first_words.html


-Methem

[Rick and Roll]

Originally Posted by Methem

Also the year when the first ever messages were exchanged over ARPANET.

For historical curiosity: http://www.cs.ucla.edu/~lk/first_words.html


-Methem

They've come a long way since using canaries (see the bottom of the link). Now I hear it's seagulls.

[progdirjim(Admin)]

Originally Posted by Rick and Roll

I have always been an Al Gore fan. Even though no politician is perfect, and most are not even close, I have admired his positions. I always thought this statement was wrong - I can't believe someone would be as stupid as to say something so blatantly false, and it turns out he never did. I'd never checked before, and I finally decided to.

Follow these links and you will see how the words were taken out of context. Agreed, the context is somewhat self-serving, but I don't believe most of what politicians say anyway.

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

http://www.sethf.com/gore/

Before you say I selectively picked these links, bear in mind that the first page when I googled it all defended the misquote.

OK, since we're already having this discussion.

I cannot fathom how snopes can say "false", then print a QUOTE from Al Gore that says (again I QUOTE) "I took the initiative in creating the internet." Huh? Al Gore said he created the internet. That is not an opinion, an interpretation, or supposition. It is a fact. Saying that he didn't mean it that way IS an interpretation, and it may even be accurate. I don't know or care. But he did say it.

I am not going to go into my opinions on Al Gore, as that is probably TOO far down the politics path. (And I don't mean to censor any topics - if people want to discuss politics, go ahead.... )

And for the record, his science on "global warming" is suspect at best. We may be experiencing global warming, but we do not have enough understanding of the macro picture of climatic variations to say so with certainty. Anyone who says we do has a political agenda. I don't go on about this a lot, even though as a scientist it drives me nuts, since most of the things people are suggesting be done to combat it are probably good things anyway.

there.

[Rick and Roll]

I closed off my end of the discussion a few posts ago by copying the original thread....and subsequently some outside of the Moon things have happened that will divert me away from a meaningful discussion.

Hopefully at some point we'll see each other and maybe even discuss some of this, but I'm not up for it now...just don't have the time...thanks for replying though.