Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Schneier On Full Disclosure

Posted by Hemos on from the interesting-reading dept.

Bruce let me know that he's written a piece on ZDNet (original home of the for the Window of Exposure idea is on Counterpane ? ) about the problems of not following full disclosure. Very well written and does a great job of summarizing why full disclosure works. The original piece from Culp @ Microsoft is also available, along with the PowerPoint that they did.

8 of 232 comments (clear)

  1. Errors.. by roguerez · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    Bruce left me know that he's written a piece on ZDNet (original home of the for the Window of Exposure idea is on Counterpane?) about the problems of not following full disclosure. Very well written [and does a great job of summarizing why full disclosure works. The original piece from Culp @ Microsoft is also availible, along with the PowerPoint that they did.

    That's at least two spelling errors I could catch, and the style as a whole sucks.

    I recommend spending at least 10 seconds on writing a Slashdot post.

    1. Re:Errors.. by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      Bruce left me know that he's
      He's. Contraction. [he is], [he] possessive.


      Which is it? "he is written"? And don't say "He has", that's not a contraction!


      Now let's discuss your dangling participle...:-P

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    2. Re:Errors.. by Multiple+Sanchez · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      What are you talking about?

      who's = who is or who has
      you're = you are
      it's = it is or it has
      they're = they are

      Am I loopy? Anyone who hasn't taken elementary school English shouldn't be part of this argument, non?

    3. Re:Errors.. by Paul+Komarek · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      You're fine. Never use an apostrophe with a possessive pronoun like "its". The original guy is whacked. I've never been completely comfortable with "it's" for "it has" in written language. I'm really uncomfortable with "who's" in written language. Obviously both are spoken.

      -Paul Komarek

    4. Re:Errors.. by Pyrrus · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      we understand what he was trying to say.
      nit picking to that degree isn't nessicary, so
      please shut the fuck up.

  2. Anal retention by Multiple+Sanchez · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    On a site where 9999 out of 10000 submissions get rejected, I can understand submitters not double-checking their spelling every time. On the other hand, ./ posts, what, 20 or so stories a day? Let the poster give it a once-over.

    Even better, I heard there is "spell-checking" software in development somewhere. If it's GPL'ed, maybe Rob will stick it into the next slash release? This is just off the top of my head.

    1. Re:Anal retention by ichimunki · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Spell checking would have only caught one of the two spelling errors in the article posting. Maybe someday computers will be good with natural language, but not yet. Until such time, I suggest we all learn to communicate in Perl, which (for a computer language) is as close to a natural language as I've seen (often messy, too many ways to say the same thing, style differences can result in unintelligibility, etc etc).

      --
      I do not have a signature
  3. Re:MS has made a big mistake by nider · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    ooh, I'm an idiot. That hurts, mr. Anonymous Coward.