Two words: port knocking.

You may laugh but it hides you from casual attackers pretty definitively. IOW, bot net brute forcers no longer clog up my auth log.

Facebook is, in the long run, far, far more destructive than 4chan.

If you're baffled I'll give you a hint: On 4chan everything posted is gone in at most hours, or it was screencapped and might exist forever... but is still anonymous. In order to fuck yourself over you have to knowingly enter personal information on a sight *everyone knows* is a seedy place.

Facebook, on the other hand, promotes a variety of character-destroying vices, such as most of the "games", encourages anti-social behavior worse than any high school I've ever heard of, and records each and every thought, picture and mistake, combined with identifying information, forever.

In 20 years the shit I do on 4chan today will be as forgotten as it will be by tomorrow, but anything I might put on Facebook today will be part of a permanent record of my character, no matter how much I might change, and will be used against me in any way it can by any enemies I might make.

Yes, 4chan is safer and better for children than Facebook! All the same, I would not let a child younger than 10 have unmonitored access to /b/, but of course I would not let a child less than 18 have unmonitored access to the hell-hole that is Facebook, either.

People *should* experience this pain. Maybe that will teach them not to **rent** software and not to trust software-as-a-service. If you let your save file and the entire game be stored on someone else's computer, especially at their expense, sooner or later you will lose access to it or have it (mis)used by another party. It's better that people wake up to this sooner rather than later, and if it takes having years of effort poured into a time-sink game to make people start thinking that maybe, just maybe, there's a reason to not give away their data, then that's *good*.

If you can't control it *you do not own it*. Learn to love Free software, learn to love the AGPL and learn to love *open* services you can, if necessary, host yourself or, at the least, pay multiple parties to host for you.

And stop using facebook! If you think *this* is bad, just wait for when that behemoth starts to fall.

If the alternative isn't GNOME or XFce but instead "just" a window manager, then KDE is indeed far more resource-intensive than the alternatives.

Compare your stripped-down KDE with fvwm2, e16 or twm. Go ahead and leave out your launcher, desktop and everything: compare *just* kwin. It's far, far heavier.

When you need "Just a WM" it's better to avoid the DE-focused WMs.

This is why I *do* torrent. I'm perfectly happy to buy when someone will sell me what I want, but when they won't *I'm going to get it anyway*, let the anti-consumer business beware. If what I want is a video I own and can watch whenever and wherever, and keep in my personal archive, then I'm going to get it no matter what laws they buy or technical restrictions they try to enforce. There's nothing immoral about having it your way and I'm going to continue to vote with my economic feet by not buying from those who won't sell me what I want. They can adapt and profit or go out of business, it's all the same to me.

Just because it will never happen doesn't mean it wouldn't be good for society.

I was going to say this, too. Dorkness Rising captures the feel and some of the fun of playing D&D in an easy to consume 1.5 hour movie format. Some things are easier understood by experiencing them instead of having them merely explained, but in case you can't convince someone to play cold you can give them this vicarious experience.

If you haven't seen this movie and you read slashdot, you need to.

A tip of the hat to you, sir, for the only genuinely funny comment posted to this story thus-far.

Sure I can. It's an engineering problem they opted to solve in the worst possible way: Not solve it at all. I blame people for being lazy.

While I agree with your sentiment your poor grasp of the facts harms the argument you are making by making you appear to be an ignorant fool.

Debian has not "Handled updated and major upgrades flawlessly for decades," Debian has only handled this for *years*. Debian has not yet reached its 20th anniversary, and apt did not exist at its founding (much less in a flawless form).

You cannot have a host that started on potato in the mid 1990s because potato was released in 2000. The only "Mid '90s" Debian releases were Buzz and Rexx. I don't consider the release of Bo in 1997 to be "mid" enough, I count it as "late" 90s.

Nevertheless, I have personally experienced what you experience: A system installed as potato that is still running today using the current stable. Debian's package system, package manager, policy and culture contribute to a high quality system where updates work smoothly and do not require reboots.

That whooshing sound is the point passing far above your head. Look up! Maybe you can still get a glimpse of it.

Oh yes, plus one million insightfuls to you, sir.

I quit a job over this kind of thing. What it comes down to is that they either hired you for your expertise and respect it or they don't, and if they don't someone else will. No matter where I go I'm constantly fighting the what/how battle: You tell me what, I decide how. Mostly there is no problem with this if I begin with a non-confrontational explanation of why it has to be that way.

You could say the same thing about GNOME3. UX wonks should be kept out of the final UI decision, period. They know how to be wonky but are too narrowly focused to be trusted.

The idea is sound, the implementation is lousy.

Since when is the "right to be held accountable" a "right"? This is a clear attack on anonymity, as is the glaring omission of a right to anonymity from the list of bullet points!

I fail to see how most of the things listed have anything to do with the internet. Equality, Association and Privacy are rights we have anyway, so they should already apply to the internet as with everywhere else.

I like that he's got "Sharing" in there and I think I understand why, but we already have freedom of speech and I don't see how this is any more than that.

The bullet on Property is worrying at best. We already have a right to property, are we now trying to codify additional rights for the ill conceived notion of "Intellectual Property"? Is this supposed to imply DRM requirements as a matter of law for all digital "property"? I don't see that this can lead anywhere good.

So yeah, nice idea but horrible details which are either due to innocent misunderstanding or a veiled ulterior motive. Given the source, I'm guessing that the language here is something that some unknown corporate masters thought would be good for them and not something people who know anything about the internet told him would be a good idea.

olvwm is not just "quite old," it has a UI that only a mother could love... twm is far nicer.