ru.linux

 
 - RU.LINUX ---------------------------------------------------------------------
 From : Sergey Lentsov                       2:4615/71.10   26 Apr 2001  17:11:44
 To : All
 Subject : URL: http://lwn.net/2001/0426/letters.php3
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 

    [1][LWN Logo] 
    
                                [2]Click Here 
    [LWN.net]
    
    Sections:
     [3]Main page
     [4]Security
     [5]Kernel
     [6]Distributions
     [7]On the Desktop
     [8]Development
     [9]Commerce
     [10]Linux in the news
     [11]Announcements
     [12]Linux History
     Letters
    [13]All in one big page
    
    See also: [14]last week's Letters page.
    
 Letters to the editor
 
    Letters to the editor should be sent to [15]letters@lwn.net.
    Preference will be given to letters which are short, to the point, and
    well written. If you want your email address "anti-spammed" in some
    way please be sure to let us know. We do not have a policy against
    anonymous letters, but we will be reluctant to include them.
    April 26, 2001
    
    
 From:    Rainer Weikusat <weikusat@mail.uni-mainz.de>
 To:      letters@lwn.net
 Subject: Thieves 'r' us
 Date:    21 Apr 2001 13:09:19 +0200
         Technologies that empower people don't discriminate between
         good uses and bad. So if we build constraints into our
         computer systems that prevent infringement, we're also making
         it impossible for users to engage in all sorts of lawful
         copying.
 
 Why does nobody 'get that' that's exactly what the entertainment
 industry probably wants: _Prohibit lawful copying_. 'Infringement'
 will be done by your friendly Hongkong-based clonemaker anyway.
 
 --
 SIGSTOP
 
    
 From:    FB <fbochicchio@galactica.it>
 To:      letters@lwn.net
 Subject: About the new italian law on news publishing
 Date:    Thu, 19 Apr 2001 22:42:45 +0200
 Dear LWN editors,
 
 I am a constant reader of your net magazine, and usually find your coverage
 of linux-related news quite precise and informative.
 
 I am also among the 35000 people that signed the petition against the new
 italian law on news publishing; therefore I was pleased that LWN reported
 this italian misadventure in the front page of the last issue.
 
 While the coverage of this item was generally good, considering that it
 was strictly (and unfortunately tipical) italian, in my opinion you
 should have avoided the final comment about italian politics.
 
 The way you put it ( or at least the way I read it ) it seems that the
 approval of the law is somehow related to the fact that the new Italian
 Prime Minister could be the owner of the major private italian TV network.
 
 While I may share some of the expressed concerns, like the fact that the
 future italian prime minister may have too much power over the italian
 media, this is unrelated with the approval of the law: the law was voted by
 both gouvernment parties and opposition parties (except a couple of small
 ones), and the current gouvernment, which prepared the law, is opposed by
 the party lead by Mr. Berlusconi ( the TV network owner ).
 
 The reason behind the law is, IMO, that few in Italy percieve the
 revolutionary potential of the Net ( and of these fews, some are maybe
 scared by it ).
 
 Regards.
 Francesco Bochicchio
 
    
 From:    Gary Shears
 To:      letters@lwn.net
 Subject: backdoors in open source
 Date:    Thu, 19 Apr 2001 10:13:46 -0500
 
 Regarding these paragraphs on your This Week in Linux History page for
 April 19, 2001.
 
 > Webmasters all over the world are going to be pulling all-nighters and
 > tearing their hair out over this one. That is, webmasters who are unlucky
 > enough to work for bosses who bought Microsoft. At the over 60% of sites
 > running the open-source Apache webserver, webmasters will be kicking back
 > and smiling -- because they know that Apache will *never* have a back door
 > like this one.
 >
 > "Never" was, perhaps, a bit strong. There have been a couple of "back
 > door" issues with free software recently, but they tend to be the sort of
 > exception that provies the rule. Consider, for example, the back door
 > found in InterBase shortly after the code was released.
 
 I can't agree completely with your assessment that 'never' was too strong a
 word to use, especially given the example you cite. The backdoor in
 Interbase was put in place when the product was proprietary, and was
 discovered after the code was released, and only because the code was
 released.  Yes, it is possible that a back door can be placed in open
 source code. However, it is highly unlikely that it would go unnoticed and
 uncorrected for six years, as was the case with Interbase. If I recall
 correctly, tcpwrapper was trojaned several years ago. This was discovered
 and corrected within hours.  Also, a backdoor such as the one in Interbase
 (a hardcoded user and password, to allow two parts of the program to
 communicate) would never have passed muster in the open source world. It's
 just poor programming practice.  I believe that such a backdoor will
 *never* enter the apache tree.
 
 Gary Shears
    
 From:    Mark Christensen <mchristensen@HTEC.com>
 To:      "'letters@lwn.net'" <letters@lwn.net>
 Subject: Google data
 Date:    Mon, 23 Apr 2001 12:02:08 -0400
 
 Though I don't attribute much significance to the fact that SourceForge has
 more references on the internet than Beer -- at least as cataloged by Google
 -- your report did get me thinking.
 
 What can we really learn about the state of the free software world from
 looking at Google's data?
 
 So I did a couple of Free Software/ Open Source searches and tabulated the
 data.
 
 172,000 "Free Software" AND "Open Source"
 1,410,000       "Free Software"
 2,430,000       "Open Source"
 3,120,000       Beer
 3,570,000       SourceForge
 36,500,000      Linux
 38,600,000      Porn
 53,100,000      Software
 
 The first thing I noticed is that the references to free software and open
 source combined are an order of magnitude less than the references to Linux.
 This seems to indicate a significant disparity between the popularity of
 Linux and any knowledge of the philosophies behind the movement that created
 it.
 
 Another thing to notice is that only a small number of page include
 references to both RMS's "Free Software," and ESR's "Open Source."
 Moreover, almost twice as many pages use the Open Source designation
 exclusively. This seems to indicate that there is some real disagreement
 about which term to use, and the Open source people seem to have been a
 somewhat more effective in advocating their particular rhetoric, and
 associated philosophy.
 
 Another somewhat surprising piece of information is that Linux trails only
 slightly behind Porn in number of page references on Google.
 
 I'm not sure we should take any of this data too seriously, but it is
 interesting to think about what we could learn from this kind of data.
 
 I once was part of a cultural anthropology project which analyzed writings
 on bathroom walls.  We broke the data down into a variety of categories, and
 then by the gender, economic status, and age of the author.  It's surprising
 what we learned about gender and class differences in the US from this
 relatively simple study.  I'm sure some motivated college students with more
 free time and energy could pull some really interesting data out of the
 Google statistics.
 
 Yours
 Mark
 
    
 From:    George M. Sipe
 To:      editor@lwn.net
 Subject: applications available on Linux
 Date:    Thu, 19 Apr 2001 21:30:31 -0400
 
 Your On The Desktop piece this week bemoaned the lack of adequate tax
 preparation software for Linux.  For many users, this is certainly true
 of available native software.  However there are good alternatives in
 Windows software running under Win4Lin or VMware.
 
 I run Linux 24 hours/day and have done so for many years.  In the past I
 had to reboot to Windows to run applications which simply did not have
 acceptable Linux counterparts.  This was not convenient and interfered
 with various functions I run under Linux - but there just wasn't a
 reasonable option.  Some years back I bought Wabi and it helped, but it was
 limited.  I have tried wine but it is even more limited (but improving).
 
 Win4Lin (which I use) and VMware (which I understand to also be quite
 good) solve this problem.  These are enablers for Linux on the desktop.
 Most people are not willing to boot back and forth and since Linux
 currently can't do everything they need, Linux is not be used.
 
 These products do not get nearly the attention they deserve in the Linux
 community.  I assume that is because (1) they are commercial and (2) they
 implicitly acknowledge the continuing need for at least some Windows
 software.  That's a shame, because they greatly expand the application
 base and are also an excellent bridge to Linux for Windows users.
 
    
 From:    "M Clasquin" <CLASQM@unisa.ac.za>
 To:      <letters@lwn.net>
 Subject: M Carling wrote:
 Date:    Tue, 24 Apr 2001 11:45:03 +0200
 
 M Carling wrote:
 
 >Bonobos and humans are the only mammals that can mate face to face.
 Not so, porcupines have also evolved this ability, though their motives are
 painfully obvious ...
 
    
    
                                                                          
    
    [16]Eklektix, Inc. Linux powered! Copyright Л 2001 [17]Eklektix, Inc.,
    all rights reserved
    Linux (R) is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds
 
 References
 
    1. http://lwn.net/
    2. http://ads.tucows.com/click.ng/pageid=pageid=132-000-001-001
    3. http://lwn.net/2001/0426/
    4. http://lwn.net/2001/0426/security.php3
    5. http://lwn.net/2001/0426/kernel.php3
    6. http://lwn.net/2001/0426/dists.php3
    7. http://lwn.net/2001/0426/desktop.php3
    8. http://lwn.net/2001/0426/devel.php3
    9. http://lwn.net/2001/0426/commerce.php3
   10. http://lwn.net/2001/0426/press.php3
   11. http://lwn.net/2001/0426/announce.php3
   12. http://lwn.net/2001/0426/history.php3
   13. http://lwn.net/2001/0426/bigpage.php3
   14. http://lwn.net/2001/0419/letters.php3
   15. mailto:letters@lwn.net
   16. http://www.eklektix.com/
   17. http://www.eklektix.com/
 
 --- ifmail v.2.14.os7-aks1
  * Origin: Unknown (2:4615/71.10@fidonet)
 
 

Вернуться к списку тем, сортированных по: возрастание даты  уменьшение даты  тема  автор