FTA: "Cisco is going to release, under the BSD license, an H.264 stack, and build it into binary modules compiled for all popular or feasibly supportable platforms, which can be loaded into any application (including Firefox)."

From your comment: ..."since it lacks copyleft provisions to actually make the source open."

Looks like the source will be open, since they are releasing the stack under the BSD license. Looks like people will be able to do anything they want with it, including making baby mulchers, angel summoning portals, and *gasp* video player implementations. Oh, HORRORS, people might not submit their code back to Cisco after attributing their source to them (as simply doing so will allow people to find, oh, I don't know, the source that Cisco is offering for free under a BSD license?).

The only issue is with the fact that Cisco is having to provide a shield using the BSD license between MPEG LA and the rest of the world, while paying a hefty licensing fee for the privilege. However, using a BSD license means they cannot have any unreasonable hold over the source once it is out in the open. If anything, Cisco is a good guy in this (god, did I just say that?).

and I really like it. However, I found it more by luck than it finding me (cubieboard).

If the folks in the EU want Americans to use their services:
1- Advertise in the US. I haven't seen many ads for VPN, secure email, cloud services, etc, on the media I read in the US.
2- Be cost effective. No, $15-$20USD for an email account isn't cost effective. I run my own VPS with SSL for about the same cost in the US, and I could probably do that more cheaply. There are other services based out of the EU that I've looked at, and they have all been more costly than I could justify to myself or my boss.
3- Most Americans wanting that extra warm feeling of security away from snooping need to have the limitations of the local regulations clearly spelled out to them. I have no idea what jurisdictional differences there are between Norway, Switzerland, and Monaco. I know what they are in the US, and am familiar with some of the limitations of our neighbor states. Likewise, I wouldn't expect anyone coming from outside the US to know what our limitations are, but typically US businesses have a very clear Terms of Service that lays all of that out. Most EU based service providers I've looked at do not spell things out very clearly in terms of jurisdictional limitations, etc.
4- Unfortunately, because of US geographical limits, we 'Muricans also don't speak many more languages than just US English, which makes it even more difficult.

Oh, that is interesting. Jeremy Scahill was one of Amy Goodman's star interns at Democracy Now!, and is the kind of person who would work very well within the kind of journalism that Greenwald does.

As far as leaving the Guardian is concerned, the British government came in and literally smashed computers in the Guardian's own offices over Greenwald's work- having some organizational separation between Greenwald might be a good thing.

Ok, I stand corrected then. Somebody, please take away my mod points!

From the OpenSSH FAQ- http://openssh.org/donations.html
"OpenSSH has no wealthy sponsors, nor a business model. In fact, no Commercial Unix or Linux vendor has ever given our project a cent. Naturally, the OpenSSH project requires funds to operate -- particularly so that our team members can meet in person once in a while (at OpenBSD hackathons) to design new ideas."

From the OpenSSH Security page- If you wish to report a security issue in OpenSSH, please contact the private developers list openssh@openssh.com.

A way of ensuring that bugs are proactively found in essential projects like this *isn't* to muddy the development process by establishing a separate security reporting structure, it is to fully fund the one that already exists and works very well. Google rakes in BILLIONS and can't annually fund one developer's worth of money to a project like OpenSSH as a tax deductible donation or written off as R&D? Really?

Absolutely. I've switched back to OpenBSD running Windowmaker to get away from all of the broken abstraction layers I've been having to deal with for several years under other OS's.

You missed the part with the patches and ssl/tls/dso already built in to the default install, which is for people who don't want to let go of Apache. They also have Apache 2 packages that don't come as part of the default install (kind of like people have to do with Linux). And the fact that they also ship patched Nginx as part of the default install.

Oh, and they are responsible for a number of security fixups, applications, and feature sets that a lot of people take for granted on a daily basis. Do they ship teh shiney desktop? No. That isn't their focus, and it isn't their focus to install spyware by default either.

Well, in terms of having onboard sata on an itty bitty board, I could go with a cubieboard for $49-$69, depending upon features desired. It is about the size of a beagleboard, and runs an ARM A10.

If I wanted faster for less money, I could go with an Asus fanless series board, and have more configurability.

The only thing I can see this board competing with is Jetway, which already is within this price point.

You do understand that the idea of prepping for a zombie apocalypse is an allegorical exercise, right? The biggest danger during any large scale disaster isn't the disaster itself, but in how masses of people react to it.

And this is why I keep wondering why people say "Stop using Paypal!". It isn't as if they have a choice on which payment options are offered by Indiegogo. If anybody deserves complaints in this regard, it is Indiegogo for continuing to use an abusive payment service.

Have to second the recommendation. I play minecraft with my kid when I am out of town. We either meet on public servers, or have family time on our own world.

Lockheed does a lot more than just aviation design, and it is also fairly typical for government contractors to sub out work to outside companies, especially if the top tier contractor doesn't have the internal expertise or can't pay the expertise enough to join Lockheed.

My SSID is o_0 , for similar reasons...

Admin had built an application server using the basic dimension guidelines set out in the class he had taken. Notably, the issue had nothing to do with the disk whatsoever. This was about five years ago.

RHEL support got onto the system, did a df, saw the disk dimensions and stated to him that the drive layout wasn't in a supportable layout according to their installation specifications. Call back once it is. *click*. No feedback on what would be an acceptable layout, or anything else. Another admin called in, got the same response, plus they said it must be an issue with the hardware vendor. Called a third time, with both admins on the line, and the same response. RHEL simply didn't want to help out, give useful information, or anything else.

Turned out it was an init script error. I could have seen RHEL support punting at that point, but they never even looked that far into it.

The problem I have with RHEL's (and many other vendors' support, SuSE included) is that they do very well when the issue is clearly defined, they can follow a simple call script in a binder, and you never deviate from that. The problem is that our admins never have to call for those issues. How I rate whether support is any good is when the support doesn't come from a binder.

And I wasn't giving SuSE props for having outstanding support. Their saving grace is that you can pay them to say that CentOS is "supported", because some clients require OS vendor support contracts even if you don't use them. RHEL doesn't "support" CentOS, period. I find that a bit of a detractor, considering there is about 1 line of one file in /etc separating the two distributions from binary compatible operation. It is their choice, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

For the record, I personally haven't called vendor support for a linux issue in over a decade. I've submitted bugs, or additional documentation on bugs, on several occasions but that isn't a support issue. That is me doing their QA work for them, and I won't pay for the privilege of doing that. Prior to that, I'd never gotten a fix for issues I submitted, just an advisement to "wait for the next major release, it might be fixed then". Maybe RHEL has stepped it up in the past couple of years, but I've gone beyond depending up on them or any other Linux OS vendor.

Provided that RedHat will actually support it. We have sent people to the training, set up equipment to the standard *their certified instructors taught* us, and then had support hang up on us because our disk setup wasn't according to RHEL support's standard- which apparently has nothing to do with what you learn in their certified classes. WTF?

Cisco doesn't do this. Even EMC doesn't do this. But RedHat did do this, several times. RedHat support also did a lot of the whole "it must be the hardware vendor" routine. That is why we moved off of RHEL to CentOS- better patch support, more packages, and no bill for support that we haven't been able to use. I haven't run into an issue on CentOS that I couldn't solve or work around with access to their bugtracker. Same can't be said for my experience with RHEL.

If I were to pay for RHEL or CentOS support, I would sooner pay SuSE https://www.suse.com/products/expandedsupport/frequently-asked-questions/#faq21