I was just wondering if anyone has ever tried AntiX.
Right now, I've got a complete /home/ directory backup happening of
the BBS system. Once that is completed, I will probably have the
system down for awhile, so that I can install the new distro. It
I was just wondering if anyone has ever tried AntiX.
Right now, I've got a complete /home/ directory backup happening of the BBS system. Once that is completed, I will probably have the system down for awhile, so that I can install the new distro. It probably won't
happen until tomorrow some time though, as I don't think I'll be able to stay awake long enough tonight to complete this task... :) My butt's already dragging on the ground...
On 02-22-19 20:48, Black Panther wrote to All <=-
Hi All,
I know this topic will generate some discussions... :)
Umm, silly question time: If this is the BBS machine, why do you need
X?
On 02-23-19 01:24, Fireball wrote to Black Panther <=-
I generally don't run a X on servers. It takes valuable resources and
can cause issues. My favorite server distro is CentOS, followed by old school Debian. Both are pretty solid for servers.
On 02-23-19 21:15, Avon wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Umm, silly question time: If this is the BBS machine, why do you need
X?
Silly answer time: cause it marks the spot.
[runs away]
On 23 Feb 2019 at 06:49p, Vk3jed pondered and said...
Umm, silly question time: If this is the BBS machine, why do you nee X?
Silly answer time: cause it marks the spot.
[runs away]
I was just wondering if anyone has ever tried AntiX.
X? I'd run without X. :)
Umm, silly question time: If this is the BBS machine, why do you nee X?
Silly answer time: cause it marks the spot.
[runs away]
can cause issues. My favorite server distro is CentOS, followed by ol school Debian. Both are pretty solid for servers.
My first preference these days is Debian, though I'm happy to use
CentOS, if required for a particular application.
Black Panther wrote to All <=-
Lately, I've been having some issues with the system that is running Castle Rock BBS. Originally, it was Ubuntu running Unity, then Gnome,
but I was having some issues with Gnome, and the resources is was
using. I then changed the environment to Mate, and that seemed to be running smoothly until this week. I have and to cold boot the system
twice in the last 4 days, as I could do nothing to regain any type of control of the it. One time, I couldn't even get the screen saver to
turn off, and the other, I could only move the mouse...
You could when you install the new distro, put the home directory on it's own partition (or disk), then you can reinstall distros and just not format the home partition, but set it up to mount on /home each time.
apam wrote to Black Panther <=-
I was just wondering if anyone has ever tried AntiX.
I have, but it was a while ago. It wasn't too bad I thought.
You could when you install the new distro, put the home directory on
it's own partition (or disk), then you can reinstall distros and just
not format the home partition, but set it up to mount on /home each
time.
toofargone wrote to Black Panther <=-
Have you thought about Gentoo? If you want minimal then you only need compile what you want and only include support for what you need...
Fireball wrote to Black Panther <=-
On 22 Feb 2019, Black Panther said the following...
I was just wondering if anyone has ever tried AntiX.
Nope, but I'll look at it...
I generally don't run a X on servers. It takes valuable resources and
can cause issues. My favorite server distro is CentOS, followed by old school Debian. Both are pretty solid for servers.
Vk3jed wrote to Black Panther <=-
Umm, silly question time: If this is the BBS machine, why do you need
X? I'd run without X. :)
Avon wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Umm, silly question time: If this is the BBS machine, why do you need
X?
Silly answer time: cause it marks the spot.
Vk3jed wrote to Avon <=-
Umm, silly question time: If this is the BBS machine, why do you need
X?
Silly answer time: cause it marks the spot.
[runs away]
Haha, I'm probably the last person in here that you'd get away with running away from! :D I like a good sprint race too! :D
On 02-23-19 22:05, nathanael wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I was thinking the same thing, but wasn't going to ask.
X? I'd run without X. :)
More to the point, why does a distro called anti-X have X?
On 02-23-19 10:13, Fireball wrote to Vk3jed <=-
CentOS 7 has a nice set of repositories that I can use newer compilers
on it. It comes with gcc/g++ 4.8.x, but with the scl repository, I can install and use gcc/g++ 7.x without having to change system level libraries.
I ran into an issue where trying to upgrade from Debian 8 to Debian 9
on an OpenVZ VPS would fail because the OpenVZ shared host kernel is really old (2.x), and I'd end up with a franken distro. I ran into an issue where simply running "apt-get upgrade" on an Ubuntu 16.x distro broke the VPS.
If I can ever convert everything to KVM VPSes, I'd prefer that much
more because it doesn't share the system host kernel. Right now, I'm
not financially able to.
On 02-23-19 12:47, Black Panther wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Vk3jed wrote to Black Panther <=-
Umm, silly question time: If this is the BBS machine, why do you need
X? I'd run without X. :)
I would, but I do use that system for other things. It just makes it easier for me... :)
...and it's not a silly question. :)
On 02-23-19 12:47, Black Panther wrote to Vk3jed <=-
[runs away]
Haha, I'm probably the last person in here that you'd get away with running away from! :D I like a good sprint race too! :D
I think Avon's got a bit of a lead on you though... ;)
Black Panther wrote to All <=-
So, I've been thinking about changing to something a bit different. I
was looking at some of the light-weight distros available, and stumbled across one called AntiX, which is Debian based.
MeaTLoTioN wrote to Black Panther <=-
I use Ubuntu 18.04 LTS desktop version, but I don't use gnome desktop,
I use i3-gaps window manager which I personally find awesome. It is perfect for what I need.
I remember having to fiddle around on CentOS 6 to do this, but I could
do it without having to make massive changes to the system.
I ran into an issue where trying to upgrade from Debian 8 to Debian 9 on an OpenVZ VPS would fail because the OpenVZ shared host kernel is really old (2.x), and I'd end up with a franken distro. I ran into an issue where simply running "apt-get upgrade" on an Ubuntu 16.x distro broke the VPS.
That is a bit of a corner case though. Once you're stuck with a particular kernel, upgrades are problematic.
If I can ever convert everything to KVM VPSes, I'd prefer that much more because it doesn't share the system host kernel. Right now, I'm not financially able to.
Bummer, KVM would be a better way.
On 02-24-19 15:46, Fireball wrote to Vk3jed <=-
There are similar repos in CentOS 6. I don't have to make huge changes
to CentOS 7, just add a couple of repos and BAM, upgraded compilers,
PHP7, and project level MariaDB.
This is true, but OpenVZ is used by every VPS hosting company. I'm
going to guess it's because it's cheap and requires less resources? The corner is pretty big.
If I can ever convert everything to KVM VPSes, I'd prefer that much more because it doesn't share the system host kernel. Right now, I'm not financially able to.
Bummer, KVM would be a better way.
Yes, yes it would. One of these days, I'd like to setup a colocated
server with KVM, where I can deploy what I need and not worry about
more monthly costs. It's been a goal for a long time, just haven't had
the funds to do it.
Vk3jed wrote to Fireball <=-
On 02-24-19 15:46, Fireball wrote to Vk3jed <=-
This is true, but OpenVZ is used by every VPS hosting company. I'm
going to guess it's because it's cheap and requires less resources? The corner is pretty big.
I think mine is using KVM nowadays.
If I can ever convert everything to KVM VPSes, I'd prefer that much more because it doesn't share the system host kernel. Right now, I'm not financially able to.
Bummer, KVM would be a better way.
Yes, yes it would. One of these days, I'd like to setup a colocated
server with KVM, where I can deploy what I need and not worry about
more monthly costs. It's been a goal for a long time, just haven't had
the funds to do it.
Hmm, you got a data centre? I'd imagine there's still be monthly costs for rack space, etc.
That's not a bad idea. It would save a lot of headaches later on, if I
did change distros again... Thank you.
On 02-25-19 20:06, Fireball wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I think mine is using KVM nowadays.
Nice! I'm really not sure why KVM tends to be more expensive.
Hmm, you got a data centre? I'd imagine there's still be monthly costs for rack space, etc.
There usually are fees and such associated with it, and it depends on
the data center. I know people at 2 of the major ISP's in town. I could see if any of them know if they will colo a server. Not that I have the money right now, but it'd be good to know.
I think mine is using KVM nowadays.
Nice! I'm really not sure why KVM tends to be more expensive.
Dunno. Helps to know the guy running it. :D
Hmm, you got a data centre? I'd imagine there's still be monthly cos for rack space, etc.
There usually are fees and such associated with it, and it depends on the data center. I know people at 2 of the major ISP's in town. I cou see if any of them know if they will colo a server. Not that I have t money right now, but it'd be good to know.
Yeah, there's going to be fees, but no idea how much.
I did a little research. Both KVM and OpenVZ are FLOSS. So I'm
guessing the price difference is in the hardware requirements and/or support contracts.
On 02-26-19 16:42, Fireball wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I did a little research. Both KVM and OpenVZ are FLOSS. So I'm guessing the price difference is in the hardware requirements and/or support contracts.
Yeah, there's going to be fees, but no idea how much.
I've seen them as low as $20USD/mo, but that was also low bandwidth and slower connections. I can rent a baremetal server for around $35USD,
with multiple IPv4 addresses, 8GB RAM and like 100GB SSD. I'd do it,
but it's more than double the price of my current VPSes, and I'd have
to deal with migration. lol! Perhaps when I'm back on my feet, I'll
look at either colo or renting again.
Hello Fireball!
I did a little research. Both KVM and OpenVZ are FLOSS. So I'm guessing the price difference is in the hardware requirements and/or support contracts.
KVM is hardware virtulation, so can run win based os's, as is like
running the real thing. It can also run other os's (Ie: FreeBSD).
OpenVZ is no longer supported, but can only run linux vm's, and uses the hosts's kernel.
I'd imagine OpenVZ would save some RAM and maybe processing with its shared kernel model. KVM would require each guest environment to be complete and separate. That's my best guess, based on my understanding
of the technologies. But from a guest sysadmin PoV, I'd prever KVM for most purposes, so I have a truly independent environment. Being tied to
a specfic kernel can sometimes be an issue, and I have had package management issues on OpenVZ VPSs in the past, because I couldn't change the kernel to a version that worked with something else I wanted to run.
I've seen them as low as $20USD/mo, but that was also low bandwidth a slower connections. I can rent a baremetal server for around $35USD, with multiple IPv4 addresses, 8GB RAM and like 100GB SSD. I'd do it, but it's more than double the price of my current VPSes, and I'd have to deal with migration. lol! Perhaps when I'm back on my feet, I'll look at either colo or renting again.
Doesn't sound too bad, especially if you can sublease VPSs from your
colo to recover some revenue, or if you can fully utilise it. IOW, way overkill for a BBS LOL. :)
additional VPS with another. I could bring them all under one server, probably using docker or KVM, and still have some room left for subleasing some VM's to help recoup costs.
I have thought of doing this for some time now, but then I think about support. I guess if you setup an online online, ticketed support type system.
I'm not saying I'd put it up for anyone to buy a VPS, but I'd offer a decent service to a select few for a decent price. Chances are, I'd know these people, and they'd be able to contact me offline if there was something
I have an entire homelab setup with a 24-core, 128GB RAM (hoping to get that up to 256GB!), 20TB VM system running VMWare ESXi. Right now I am using next to no resources on it. I brought all my stuff "back in
house" after the pipe to my house got so reliable and fast enough (1GB
up and 250GB down) that I saw no reason to go on paying a 3rd party anymore (though, to be fair, my stuff is non-critical).
That's it, I'm moving to St. Louis! lol! That's a hella setup man! We can't even get reliable cable Internet here in Amarillo, and it's generally much slower than most other places I've lived.
On 02-27-19 10:14, Fireball wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I installed an Ubuntu 16.x VPS with OpenVZ. Doing an "apt-get update"
then "apt-get upgrade" broke the installation. I couldn't even ssh into
it after that. I deleted the VPS, and replaced it with CentOS 7. Thankfully that one still works with the OpenVZ kernel.
It'd be way overkill for 1 BBS, yes. I have 8 VPS's with one host, and
an additional VPS with another. I could bring them all under one
server, probably using docker or KVM, and still have some room left for subleasing some VM's to help recoup costs.
It might be fun once I get to that point. :)
Very surprising. Isn't that AT&T territory? No fiber installs of any sort?
We have Charter Spectrum up here -- and they have been pretty rock solid. Constantly investing in the network it seems.
On a side note, my next homelab project is to setup an in-home VOIP system. We run an whole-house Airbnb and I'd like to get a private PBX setup for it so that our "guests" could do some magic by just picking up the phone (i.e., press "0" for the "front desk" which would be my
phone). Figure if I can get it setup with my homelab then I could
figure out how to VM/container it and then install it in the Airbnb.
AT&T is crap around here. Fiber? Naw, they're still after DSL installs. lol! I think some parts of the city are covered by U-verse, but it's still not all covered. The cable company is Suddenlink, which we affectionately call Suddenunlink. When it's working, it's really slow. It used to be better, so I wonder what happened.
My VPS has run the gamut of virtualisation. I'm sure it's now KVM, but
in the past it has been on OpenVZ, VMware and at least one other virtualisation solution. :)
Sounds like going co-lo is a good option for you. :)
Dmxrob wrote to Fireball <=-
It amazes me in this day and age how far behind we are with
broadband deployments in parts of the country. Even when costs
for deployments continue to decline.
It amazes me in this day and age how far behind we are with
broadband deployments in parts of the country. Even when costs
for deployments continue to decline.
It's like anything else. If there is no profitable return on it,
why would the broadband company do it? If there are only a
handful of potential customers in a large open rural area, it
simply is not a smart business decision. Makes sense if you think
about it that way...
Dmxrob wrote to Dan Clough <=-
It amazes me in this day and age how far behind we are with
broadband deployments in parts of the country. Even when costs
for deployments continue to decline.
It's like anything else. If there is no profitable return on it,
why would the broadband company do it? If there are only a
handful of potential customers in a large open rural area, it
simply is not a smart business decision. Makes sense if you think
about it that way...
If we took that same approach with water, sewer, electric and
telephone then we'd be stuck in the 1800s still. Broadband is as important as electricity nowadays.
Ummmm, no, it isn't. Not for most people (residentially) anyway.
It amazes me in this day and age how far behind we are with broadband deployments in parts of the country. Even when costs for deployments continue to decline.
If we took that same approach with water, sewer, electric and telephone then we'd be stuck in the 1800s still. Broadband is as important as electricity nowadays.
Dmxrob wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Ummmm, no, it isn't. Not for most people (residentially) anyway.
Yeah, we call those areas of the country "dead and dying" for a
reason. When people grow up, they leave and never come back.
Even in the middle of nowhere Missouri, when Anheuser-Busch
wanted to open their Clydesdale ranch, they stated that it had to
have fiber-optic connectivity (and they got it).
Recent broadband advancements in Africa are turning that country
around dramatically in terms of economy and opportunity.
The people "who want it no other way" are typically older,
retired people who are living in the past. The same people who
will vote against any advancement in society or culture because
"that's not how we have done it".
No company is coming to an area without broadband access.
No young adult is going to stay in an area without it.
No community is going to flourish without it.
That's just the facts of life. This isn't 1992 and dial-up AOL
isn't "good enough".
dmxrob = BBSing from St. Louis, Missouri since 1988
On 02-28-19 11:44, Fireball wrote to Vk3jed <=-
That wouldn't have been Virtuozzo? I've had one of those before. I've
run the gamut myself. I believe my last Windows VPS was KVM though.
Sounds like going co-lo is a good option for you. :)
Colo, or renting. Renting, if it breaks, they fix it. lol! Colo, I'd
have to either get someone to go there and fix the server, go there and fix it myself, or have the DC ship it to me and I fix it, and ship it back, and then there are parts to be ordered. Renting might be a better option. :)
On 02-28-19 11:44, Dan Clough wrote to Dmxrob <=-
Dmxrob wrote to Fireball <=-
It amazes me in this day and age how far behind we are with
broadband deployments in parts of the country. Even when costs
for deployments continue to decline.
It's like anything else. If there is no profitable return on it,
why would the broadband company do it? If there are only a
handful of potential customers in a large open rural area, it
simply is not a smart business decision. Makes sense if you think
about it that way...
Not to mention the fact that for the better part of a century the telcos were given a monopoly over a nationwide infrastructure.
Assuming that's true, you'd think you would be old enough to
understand things better. Oh well. Carry on.
The advantages of a government built network. At least the decisions made are not purely commercial in nature.
Yeah, we call those areas of the country "dead and dying" for a reason. When people grow up, they leave and never come back.
"We"? You mean "you", I guess. You must have spent your whole
life in a city and don't know much about anything else.
LOL! "Living in the past". Again, you don't know much about
rural folks, apparently. That's OK though. Believe it or not,
not everyone in the country is looking to change the way they
live. They're happy the way they are, and successful in their own
Hahaha! I don't think AOL even exists any more, does it? You over-estimate the importance of the internet to many people.
On 02-28-19 23:32, Dmxrob wrote to Vk3jed <=-
The advantages of a government built network. At least the decisions made are not purely commercial in nature.
Amen. The "common good". Sometimes government can be a part of the solution.
Vk3jed wrote to Dan Clough <=-
It amazes me in this day and age how far behind we are with
broadband deployments in parts of the country. Even when costs
for deployments continue to decline.
It's like anything else. If there is no profitable return on it,
why would the broadband company do it? If there are only a
handful of potential customers in a large open rural area, it
simply is not a smart business decision. Makes sense if you think
about it that way...
The advantages of a government built network. At least the
decisions made are not purely commercial in nature.
Dmxrob wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Assuming that's true, you'd think you would be old enough to
understand things better. Oh well. Carry on.
I will indeed. Enjoying my fiber to the house and my choice of 3
different providers who are offering the service.
g00r00 wrote to Dan Clough <=-
"We"? You mean "you", I guess. You must have spent your whole
life in a city and don't know much about anything else.
I think its generally accepted that many rural areas are
struggling quite a bit and its not an exclusive opinion of
progressives. Our current president campaigned on that fact, and
this administration is about as far away from progressive as you
can get.
Maybe you live in a rural utopia,
but the area where I went to
college has been hit pretty hard. The only thing keeping it from
being a complete nightmare is the college itself because the
students bring in money.
There just aren't many jobs in the area outside of Walmart and
restaurants and there are tons of dead retail spaces falling
apart all over town. It wasn't like that in the 90s but
manufacturing has moved out.
LOL! "Living in the past". Again, you don't know much about
rural folks, apparently. That's OK though. Believe it or not,
not everyone in the country is looking to change the way they
live. They're happy the way they are, and successful in their own
Of course there is nothing wrong with living on your own land and
being happy about what you're doing if you have the means to do
so. But will your grandchildren be able to survive living the
same way?
Where do the jobs come from in a small coal mining town in 30
years if they vote against a renewable energy plant coming to
town today? The coal is gone, now what? What do they do to get
money to survive?
Hahaha! I don't think AOL even exists any more, does it? You over-estimate the importance of the internet to many people.
You've used the words "many" and "most" in your post here. Do
you mean "many people in extremely rural areas?" If anything I
think we have an over dependency on the Internet at this point.
Over 90% of the population lives in urban areas, and I think very
few people in urban people under the age of say 60 would think
the Internet is not important to them.
Many of us require access
to e-mail at the least and a mobile device just to do our jobs,
let alone a million other ways we use it every single day (people
are literally addicted to social media).
Agreed, though thre's this infatuation with private enterprise these days. But government can screw it up too lol.
There are VAST stretches of land in the US that have NONE of the
above services, for exactly the reason I gave above. My family
owns large areas of property in New England, most of it is
"un-improved" and we intend to keep it that way. Some of it does
have telephone lines, but certainly no cell coverage. Yes, there
are people who still turn on kerosene lamps at night, heat/cook
with a woodstove, and go out to the Outhouse for bathroom breaks.
I know many folks that live that way, and they'd not have it any
other way.
Dmxrob wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
However, that monopoly also gave us Universal Service - which meant
that no matter where you wear, telephone service would be made
available.
g00r00 wrote to Dan Clough <=-
I think its generally accepted that many rural areas are struggling
quite a bit and its not an exclusive opinion of progressives. Our
current president campaigned on that fact, and this administration is about as far away from progressive as you can get.
Maybe you live in a rural utopia, but the area where I went to college
has been hit pretty hard. The only thing keeping it from being a
complete nightmare is the college itself because the students bring in money.
nristen wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Ah, some days that sounds so inviting... leave all the technology
behind.
I spent a week fixing things at my family's cabin in a remote area of
the Sierra Nevada mountains - fixing some plumbing, doing cleanup work
and splitting firewood. With no cell coverage and a land line. I bought newspapers. Didn't hear about memes or status updates. Kept a paper journal. It was wonderful.
I think its generally accepted that many rural areas are struggling
quite a bit and its not an exclusive opinion of progressives. Our
current president campaigned on that fact, and this administration is about as far away from progressive as you can get.
Maybe you live in a rural utopia, but the area where I went to college
has been hit pretty hard. The only thing keeping it from being a
complete nightmare is the college itself because the students bring in money.
Outside of the US, similar exoduses are happening. The UK is giving
away farms to people willing to move to towns that have seen population drops as kids grow up, move away and don't come back.
Outside of the US, similar exoduses are happening. The UK is giving
away farms to people willing to move to towns that have seen
population drops as kids grow up, move away and don't come back.
Interesting... I would jump at a chance like that.
nristen wrote to Dan Clough <=-
There are VAST stretches of land in the US that have NONE of the
above services, for exactly the reason I gave above. My family
owns large areas of property in New England, most of it is
"un-improved" and we intend to keep it that way. Some of it does
have telephone lines, but certainly no cell coverage. Yes, there
are people who still turn on kerosene lamps at night, heat/cook
with a woodstove, and go out to the Outhouse for bathroom breaks.
I know many folks that live that way, and they'd not have it any
other way.
Ah, some days that sounds so inviting... leave all the technology
behind.
I recently watched Mutiny on the Bounty and afterwards, I looked up the island of Pitcairn to see what I could find out about it online. They
No argument from me on any of that, but that isn't really what we
were talking about... It was that people "need" broadband access
to survive/prosper. I maintain that not EVERYONE does.
I don't. But I have, and know people who do.
Yes, a common thing these days. But again, that is not being
caused by lack of broadband internet access.
"manufacturing" and related issues. It was simply a claim that
not everyone must have broadband access to the internet in order
to be happy and prosper. That's all.
I think that percentage is not as high as that, but I completely
agree (again) with your statement regarding the importance of the internet to *URBAN* people. I never said otherwise in previous
post(s).
Yep, and I am one of those people. I was simply trying to point
out that not everybody is one of those people.
Have a good one!
Outside of the US, similar exoduses are happening. The UK is giving away farms to people willing to move to towns that have seen population drops as kids grow up, move away and don't come back.
On 03-01-19 08:34, Dan Clough wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Perhaps, but government control of some things can be a slippery
slope as well. Not sure I'd want the government controlling my
access to the internet, and content filtering, and.... such.
On 03-01-19 09:03, Dmxrob wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I know here in the USA we went from a "let's help everyone for the
common good" society to a "I got mine, screw you" society.
g00r00 wrote to Dan Clough <=-
No argument from me on any of that, but that isn't really what we
were talking about... It was that people "need" broadband access
to survive/prosper. I maintain that not EVERYONE does.
Gotcha. I jumped in a little late on this so I didn't read how
the conversation started. Of course not everyone does, I agree
with that.
I don't. But I have, and know people who do.
Yep there certainly are some rural areas that for some reason are
doing well. Unfortunately not the area that I have ties with, and
I don't really see a solution to the problems there. :(
Yes, a common thing these days. But again, that is not being
caused by lack of broadband internet access.
Probably not often at least but I could see some companies
needing to be able to adapt and get an online presence to
survive. If they didn't have that infrastructure they would be
forced to go somewhere else. Although I think if that was going
to happen to an established company it already would have by now.
"manufacturing" and related issues. It was simply a claim that
not everyone must have broadband access to the internet in order
to be happy and prosper. That's all.
Well thats certainly true. Especially of the older generations.
Kids that grow up only on Internet would probably lose their
minds if they lost it lol.
It makes my head spin to realize there is an entire grown
generation of young adults who never lived without the Internet
in their pocket, let alone Microwaves, mobile phones, and so on.
I worry that we're going to end up with a generation of socially
inept people because they're taught only how to interact with
people online anonymously with no consequences.
Although my
parents probably said the same thing about my generation and the
music we listened to ruining us so who knows.
I think that percentage is not as high as that, but I completely
agree (again) with your statement regarding the importance of the
internet to *URBAN* people. I never said otherwise in previous
post(s).
Yep I just wasn't sure if you meant many people meaning everyone
across our population, or just rural people. Understood.
As far as population, its kind of interesting to think about it
and I started reading Wikipedia. There is a chart there that
lists every state and the percentage of people who are considered
urban and it seems like 90% could be pretty close.
My metro area where I live has about 10 times the population of
the entire state of Wyoming crammed into an area a fraction of
the size of the state. It kind of makes me want to drive through
Wyoming someday to see the contrast in population.
Yep, and I am one of those people. I was simply trying to point
out that not everybody is one of those people.
Agreed. I have to think that those that aren't trapped online
are a dying breed though. I'm not even really active on social
media but I somehow still find my way to be stuck in this online
world with BBSes!
Vk3jed wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Perhaps, but government control of some things can be a slippery
slope as well. Not sure I'd want the government controlling my
access to the internet, and content filtering, and.... such.
Good points, but government providing infrasture for private
companies to sell service on shouldn't be too controversial.
Suddenlink. They are the worst of the worst. Where we have our airbnb property at is Suddenlink and they are just pure crap. There we have to use AT&T DSL (no fiber yet).
It amazes me in this day and age how far behind we are with broadband deployments in parts of the country. Even when costs for deployments continue to decline.
It amazes me in this day and age how far behind we are with broadband deployments in parts of the country. Even when costs for deployments continue to decline.
Hey, removing net neutrality was supposed to drive INNOVATION and NEXT-GENERATION networking!
Yeah, we call those areas of the country "dead and dying" for a reason. When people grow up, they leave and never come back.
"We"? You mean "you", I guess. You must have spent your whole
life in a city and don't know much about anything else.
The people "who want it no other way" are typically older,
retired people who are living in the past. The same people who
will vote against any advancement in society or culture because "that's not how we have done it".
LOL! "Living in the past". Again, you don't know much about
rural folks, apparently. That's OK though. Believe it or not,
not everyone in the country is looking to change the way they
live. They're happy the way they are, and successful in their own
ways. Might be different than what city-boys and "progressives"
think, but that's OK too.
No company is coming to an area without broadband access.
Not everywhere is looking (or wanting) a company to come.
No young adult is going to stay in an area without it.
You might be wrong about that.
No community is going to flourish without it.
Definitely wrong about that. Small town and rural areas are
flourishing as we speak.
That's just the facts of life. This isn't 1992 and dial-up AOL
isn't "good enough".
Hahaha! I don't think AOL even exists any more, does it? You over-estimate the importance of the internet to many people.
dmxrob = BBSing from St. Louis, Missouri since 1988
Assuming that's true, you'd think you would be old enough to
understand things better. Oh well. Carry on.
Plus, there would likely be some "good ole boy network" stuff
going on. Price/bid fixing and the like. My preference is to
just keep the government out of it and let the private enterprise
system work it's magic. :)
Fireball wrote to Dan Clough <=-
I've lived in rural areas where you can't get broadband of any
sort. It really sucked. Yeah, maybe that's my opinion, but I'm
not the only one who thinks that way.
I'm sorry, but even the farmers in my neck of the woods
"Amarillo, TX) see a need for a proper Internet connection. They
use it daily to do business. We have a couple of wireless ISP's
here who saw the opportunity to provide WIMAX/LTE Internet
service to those farmers and more rural folks that cable/phone
shrugged at.
This reminds me of the little town South of here called Canyon,
TX. Walmart wanted to build a Super Center in town there, and the
town said no, despite the fact that it's a college town. Well,
Walmart bought some land just outside of the city limits and
built anyway. They can't do business without broadband, probably
fiber. Not only did they bring more jobs for the locals, but they
also brought broadband to the people living in the areas around
them.
Hostly, I've been using BBSes since at least 1989, and I'd have
to agree with dmxrob on a lot of what he said. Understanding
something based on ones life experiences should always be taken
into account. Just because he sees things differently from you
doesn't mean either of you are wrong. You formed you opinions on
your life experiences, and he formed his opinion based on his
life experiences, just like me. We're all right, to some extent.
I think there are some young people who are ok never having an
Internet connection, never going to college, and taking on the
family business, but I also know that many young people leave
these rural areas and don't come back because they wish to grow
beyond their roots. There's very little incentive to stay rural,
outside of tradition.
Dmxrob wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Plus, there would likely be some "good ole boy network" stuff
going on. Price/bid fixing and the like. My preference is to
just keep the government out of it and let the private enterprise
system work it's magic. :)
And there isn't in private enterprise?
AT&T, as an example, tried their damndest to make sure they would
be the only provider of Internet where I live. It wasn't until
our local government fought them tooth and nail, and won that
battle, that we got mass fiber expansion by other companies as
well as a fiber network run by the city that is far lower in cost
and much more reliable than anything AT&T has delivered.
On 03-02-19 08:32, Dan Clough wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Provided that's all they (govt) did, sure. I would worry that
they would want to maintain some kind of "oversight" or control
content. That's the issue, right there. Kinda like how China
(and others) regulate what their citizens are allowed to see.
Plus, there would likely be some "good ole boy network" stuff
going on. Price/bid fixing and the like. My preference is to
just keep the government out of it and let the private enterprise
system work it's magic. :)
On 03-02-19 11:04, Fireball wrote to Dan Clough <=-
I'm sorry, but even the farmers in my neck of the woods "Amarillo, TX)
see a need for a proper Internet connection. They use it daily to do business. We have a couple of wireless ISP's here who saw the
opportunity to provide WIMAX/LTE Internet service to those farmers and more rural folks that cable/phone shrugged at.
Hostly, I've been using BBSes since at least 1989, and I'd have to
agree with dmxrob on a lot of what he said. Understanding something
based on ones life experiences should always be taken into account.
Just because he sees things differently from you doesn't mean either of you are wrong. You formed you opinions on your life experiences, and he formed his opinion based on his life experiences, just like me. We're
all right, to some extent.
I think there are some young people who are ok never having an Internet connection, never going to college, and taking on the family business,
but I also know that many young people leave these rural areas and
don't come back because they wish to grow beyond their roots. There's
very little incentive to stay rural, outside of tradition.
On 03-02-19 11:19, Dmxrob wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Re: Re: Linux Distros
By: Dan Clough to Vk3jed on Sat Mar 02 2019 08:32 am
Plus, there would likely be some "good ole boy network" stuff
going on. Price/bid fixing and the like. My preference is to
just keep the government out of it and let the private enterprise
system work it's magic. :)
And there isn't in private enterprise?
AT&T, as an example, tried their damndest to make sure they would be
the only provider of Internet where I live. It wasn't until our local government fought them tooth and nail, and won that battle, that we got mass fiber expansion by other companies as well as a fiber network run
by the city that is far lower in cost and much more reliable than
anything AT&T has delivered.
On 03-02-19 12:03, Dan Clough wrote to Fireball <=-
Again a Good Thing. Somehow I feel like my original point in all
of this has gotten lost... I am not against increasing access for
all people, by any means. My original claim was that some people
CAN and DO live without it, and are perfectly happy with that
arrangement.
Australian farmers also make extensive use of the Internet these days, so
On 03-03-19 13:26, nathanael wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Australian farmers also make extensive use of the Internet these days, so
I've been to some of those farms in places like Coober Pedy and
Kingoonya. You gotta plan a weekend trip just to visit your neighbors around there. How do they get Internet?
Not to mention the fact that for the better part of a century the telco were given a monopoly over a nationwide infrastructure.
However, that monopoly also gave us Universal Service - which meant that no matter where you wear, telephone service would be made available.
no matter where you wear, telephone service would be made available.
Fireball wrote to Dmxrob <=-
They need to do the same with real broadband Internet if they wish to
keep their monopolies. It's become as necessary today as the telephone
was from its roll out until telcos decided it's not important to have a land-line anymore. Otherwise, we need independents who have pole and conduit access to provide competition. As it is now, any independents
are basically contractors for the company who has the monopoly in the locale.
Yes, that would suck, for me too. You are certainly not the only
one who thinks that way. My whole point to this debate was that
there *ARE* people for which that is not a concern. Some people
don't need or want to use the internet. Granted, that group of
people is relatively small, and probably shrinking, but they do
exist.
Again a Good Thing. Somehow I feel like my original point in all
of this has gotten lost... I am not against increasing access for
all people, by any means. My original claim was that some people
CAN and DO live without it, and are perfectly happy with that arrangement.
On 03-07-19 12:17, Fireball wrote to Dan Clough <=-
The point that there are *some* people who can and do live without the Internet isn't really all that valid when it comes to building out a network. In the grander scheme of things, the Internet has become a
basic utility. On the larger scale, this group is a very small
minority, and regardless of their interest in the service, it should be
at least offered in the are they live.
The telcos don't have to give everyone a direct fibre connection - that will get uneconomic fast in rural areas.
On 03-08-19 12:45, Dmxrob wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Replace fiber with "electricity" and this same argument was used back
in the 1910's and 20's before people had enough of that nonsense and
the TVA and other rural providers came long.
The Millionaire wrote to All <=-
There are so many Linux distros out there. How do you know which
one to use?
On 01-12-20 19:24, The Millionaire wrote to All <=-
There are so many Linux distros out there. How do you know which one to use?
There are so many Linux distros out there. How do you know which one to use?
https://distrotest.net/
//ToTAL
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: ToTAL LoST BBS (21:4/136)
Cool site! Thanks for the share. Maybe next there will be a mysticbbs
test site server.
The Millionaire wrote to All <=-
There are so many Linux distros out there. How do you know which
one to use?
The Millionaire wrote to All <=-
There are so many Linux distros out there. How do you know which one to use?
There used to be a website called linuxcentral.com. They sold linux CDs for US$1, plus shipping (IIRC). I ordered a bunch of those CDs from them... back before I had proper internet where I could download images easily... and tried them out until I found one that was easy to install and that worked on my hardware.
Blue White wrote to The Millionaire <=-
There used to be a website called linuxcentral.com. They sold linux
CDs for US$1, plus shipping (IIRC).
There are so many Linux distros out there. How do you know which one to use?
The Millionaire wrote to All <=-
There are so many Linux distros out there. How do you know which one to use?
Sysop: | echicken |
---|---|
Location: | Toronto, Ontario |
Users: | 2,224 |
Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
Uptime: | 11:32:34 |
Calls: | 14,143 |
Files: | 295 |
Messages: | 551,273 |