Slashdot Mirror


Slashback: OpenDocuments, RFID Passports, Firefox Celebration

Slashback tonight brings updates and continuations of recent Slashdot stories including a continuation of the Massachusetts document format debate, a response from the US State Department on RFID passports, a unique celebration of Firefox's 100 millionth download, and more.

Politics still muddying the water of the MA OpenDocument debate. The Commonwealth's Secretary of State William Galvin says he has "grave concerns" about the switch and told secretary of administration and finance Thomas Trimarco that "we will not be participating." Galvin is considered one of the strong candidates to run as a rival candidate for next year's gubernatorial race against incumbent Mitt Romney who supports the switch.

RFID passports still the best option. The US State Department released a final ruling on the issue of RFID technology to be included in all US passports after October 2006 which also contained some of the reasoning behind their move. Other technologies were apparently looked at and discarded due to the difficulty of implementation and several security measures have apparently been taken to try and placate the opposition.

Firefox fans at Oregon State celebrate 100 million downloads. CNet has a pictorial about a local OSU LUG that had a few interesting ways to celebrate the recent big numbers on the Firefox downloads page. Happy to show their support students both painted a giant Firefox logo and launched a weather balloon, I can't think of any better way to say congratulations.

DrDOS didn't really break, it just reverted. The FreeDOS folks have an update on their webpage stating that DrDOS 8.1 no longer exists and all links on the DrDOS webpage apparently point to DrDOS 7.03. There were some negative reactions to the release or 8.1 stating that it included software that it shouldn't have so for now the "band-aid" fix appears to be in place.

Flexbeta takes a look at Flock. Noting the roots of Flock in Mozilla's Firefox browser, the folks over at Flexbeta take a quick look at the additional functionality offered by this newcomer. This comes with the recent news that Flock has also decided to open source their browser. Looks like this Firefox offspring is fighting hard for some recognition of its own.

iTunes continues to take over the world. With the recent release of iTunes Australia and Apple's continued growth in the industry a recent announcement brings us "Standford on iTunes". This new service will give alumni and the general public access to a wide range of Stanford-specific digital audio content.

197 comments

  1. A note on OpenDocument... by oldosadmin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The new OpenDocument Fellowship is working with a petition to get Microsoft to implement the format. SIGN IT! http://www.opendocumentfellowship.org/petition/

    --
    Jay | http://oldos.org
    1. Re:A note on OpenDocument... by Bellum+Aeternus · · Score: 2, Insightful
      MS isn't a government institution, you can't just petition them into doing something. They'll only do it if it something that will improve their bottom line. So far, they haven't felt that open standards do that. Perhaps, they'll see the error of their ways - but a petition won't make MS do anything.

      Just thought I'd point out the obvious.

      --
      - I voted for Nintendo and against Bush
    2. Re:A note on OpenDocument... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:A note on OpenDocument... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    4. Re:A note on OpenDocument... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhh.. Why would I want to sign that?

      I'm not planning to buy Microsoft crap whether they support OpenDocument or not.

    5. Re:A note on OpenDocument... by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > The new OpenDocument Fellowship is working with a petition
      > to get Microsoft to implement the format.

      Petitions are meaningless. Nobody pays them any heed. You really want Microsoft (or anyone else) to do something? Write them. Personally. Preferably on business letterhead, in Microsoft's case. That's *MUCH* more likely to have an impact than signing any petition. In all history I am not aware of a single documented instance of anyone being presented with a petition, seeing how many people signed it, and, as a result, changing their mind and doing as it suggests where they previously were planning otherwise. The primary effect of a petition is to make the people who are collecting the signatures feel placated, feel as if they are "doing" something. A secondary effect is to waste the time of the people doing the signing.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    6. Re:A note on OpenDocument... by n0d3 · · Score: 1

      Do NOT sign that.

      First off, let them rot in their own ... yeah, well that and secondly, a third party is allready developing OpenDocument format as a plugin. (Was on shlashdot a little while ago)

      If they are going to support it nativly people still won't have to switch : )

  2. Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million downloads by Maow · · Score: 3, Interesting
    100 million downloads is a good thing, but what exactly does it mean?

    For example, I've downloaded 10 myself - I'm sure many others have too.

    There's no way to compare these numbers to the main competition (IE), so I'm not celebrating much myself.

    ps First Post!?!

  3. OSU Celebration by mctk · · Score: 5, Funny
    I can't think of any better way to say congratulations.
    Seriously? Man, you're not planning my birthday party.
    --
    Paul Grosfield - the quicker picker upper.
    1. Re:OSU Celebration by fatboyslack · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ha Gold. Man I never have mod points when required.

      (to keep on topic)

      You're right, it was a nice way to celebrate, but I think something a bit more flashy that to grab media attention would have been good.... something to get the attention of Fox News. I'm seeing scantily clad ladies with a guy in a fox outfit releasing a hundred doves.... or maybe scantiliy clad ladies with fox masks.

      I'd better get back to work.

      --
      Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself. -- Leo Tolstoy
    2. Re:OSU Celebration by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Funny

      or maybe scantiliy clad ladies with fox masks.

      ...on fire.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:OSU Celebration by fatboyslack · · Score: 2, Funny

      Careful, someone in TV land will hear you and before you know it -

      Wham!

      We have another shite television program.

      --
      Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself. -- Leo Tolstoy
    4. Re:OSU Celebration by SillySlashdotName · · Score: 1

      "I'd buy THAT for a dollar!!"

      --
      Acts of massive stupidity are almost never covered by warranty. --me.
    5. Re:OSU Celebration by animale · · Score: 1


      Whoa. Obscure Robocop reference. Nicely done!

      --
      _____ Computers are so complicated... I thought I never learn how. Then I found out there was Free Pornography on them.
  4. Too much controversy. by CyricZ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Indeed, if there's one thing that we can learn from this whole OpenDocument debacle, it's that we should instead use LaTeX and plaintext.

    Plaintext emails and memos work just fine. LaTeX is fantastic for more complex documents. And you can even output PDFs of documents, if you really want to make viewing easy and exact.

    These new technologies seem to bring nothing but problems, especially when the existing formats work so well.

    --
    Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
    1. Re:Too much controversy. by TWX · · Score: 1

      What if I want to use Rich Text? What if I want to use PostScript? What about HTML?

      Admittedly, I'm not necessarily in favor of creating more standards when there are existing ones that are throughly adequate, but if "they" can create one standard that everyone's needs will be met by, that works cross-platform and across the board, then I'll endorse that if it actually works. I've seen too many headaches with MS-Works, Appleworks, Lotus WordPro, and Microsoft Word writing to formats that the others can't read.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:Too much controversy. by CyricZ · · Score: 2, Informative

      Then you generate RTF, PS or HTML files from the LaTeX source. It works like a charm.

      Indeed, it'd be great if they could come up with something better. But it seems that they can't. That's why they're running into so many problems. Indeed, being able to read the various formats is a problem, especially when they're some proprietary binary format. That's why using plaintext, LaTeX and PDF files works so well: they're well documented, non-obfuscated, and are easily transmittable.

      --
      Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
    3. Re:Too much controversy. by laughingcoyote · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Parent is not a troll, I get stuff in HTML and .doc and .rtf all the time that uses no formatting at all that couldn't be done in plaintext. (Line breaks, and...that's about it.) It's silly, it wastes bandwidth, it wastes space, and it wastes time. Even most of the posts I see here, despite the fact HTML is usable, make use of nothing but good old text and line breaks. Most of the correspondence I receive is the same. I do encourage people to send me stuff in plaintext unless they really need the formatting capability, and then to send it in OpenDocument.

      --
      To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
    4. Re:Too much controversy. by Jambon · · Score: 3, Funny
      Indeed, if there's one thing that we can learn from this whole OpenDocument debacle, it's that we should instead use LaTeX and plaintext.

      And while were at it, let's all go back to doing everything from the command line! This whole WYSIWYG thing is waaay to complicated.

      These new technologies seem to bring nothing but problems, especially when the existing formats work so well.

      Which is exactly why I'm sticking to parchment and carrier pigeons. These new technologies mess up everything. Sure, instant messaging is a bitch, but at least there are no worries about different protocols!

      Seriously, consider the fact that grandma has to use this.

    5. Re:Too much controversy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CyricZ, I think I speak for the majority of /., when I say FOR THE LOVE OF GOD STOP SAYING 'INDEED.'

    6. Re:Too much controversy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      This is the minimum of what's needed in an office suite,
      • Spreadsheets, graphs, presentations, OpenDocument has it. LaTeX fails it.
      • a single-file container format so exchange is easy. OpenDocument has it. HTML and LaTeX fails it;
      • a user interface that regular users can migrate to. OpenDocument has it. HTML has it. LaTeX fails it;
      • macro language (admitedly not standardised in OpenDocument). OpenDocument has it. LaTeX fails it;
      • integration with other office formats such as OleDB datasources. OpenDocument has it. LaTeX fails.
      The people willing to forsake all that are 1% of people. You're in the 1%. This isn't a topic you understand, you're out of touch with regular users, and please don't talk about it.
    7. Re:Too much controversy. by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you should try to be more calm. Indeed, your prescription medication should come in handy in this respect.

    8. Re:Too much controversy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      But you don't make me angry like CyricZ. You're not some Star Trek nerd trying to sound medieval, you can pull "indeed" off indeed with flair,

      What I'm trying to say is that I love you.

    9. Re:Too much controversy. by Noksagt · · Score: 3, Informative
      This is the minimum of what's needed in an office suite
      Right--you are arguing different philosophies. LaTeX could certainly be part of some monolithic Office Suite, but it is already very good at what it does. It may even be better than you give it credit for.
      Spreadsheets
      See the EMACS file as a proof of concept. Something similar could be written in TeX.
      graphs
      PSTricks & other packages let you add graphs which are generated on the fly.
      presentations
      I actually like LaTeX Beamer quite a bit--the PDF presentations are fantastic.

      Does LaTeX excel at any of these? Probably not. But why not do, as others do, and choose tools which DO excel at them.
      a single-file container format so exchange is easy. OpenDocument has it. HTML and LaTeX fails it;
      Just zip the needed files together, as OpenDoc does....
      * a user interface that regular users can migrate to. OpenDocument has it. HTML has it. LaTeX fails it;
      These are file formats. Not interfaces. There are friendly HTML and LaTeX authoring tools.
      * macro language (admitedly not standardised in OpenDocument). OpenDocument has it. LaTeX fails it;
      This is laughable. LaTeX is VERY scriptable.
      * integration with other office formats such as OleDB datasources. OpenDocument has it. LaTeX fails.
      No, again--the programs that grok OpenDoc have it. Not the format itself. There are LaTeX tools which can pull data from a database.
    10. Re:Too much controversy. by Saanvik · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Where's the OpenDocument debacle? Sounds like a state is having issues defining what document format they want to use, but it's not an OpenDocument debacle.

      I'm all for using plain text a lot more, but using LaTeX as the only other format is foolish. Don't get me wrong, I love TeX, but it should, like Postscript/PDF be used for page layout, not for authoring content that is meant to be shared between individuals or applications.

      We should use semantic markup to describe what the pieces of a document mean, not how they should look on the page, and then convert to TeX, Postscript, PCL, XSL FO, HTML, whatever, to create your output.

      OpenDocument is the closest thing I've seen to a generic document model that can be used for common office documents (faxes, letters, proposals, etc.), and since it's XML, I can use XSLT to transform to or from it, something that you can't do with a page markup definition languages like Postscript or TeX.

      [An aside: yes, yes, yes, I know you can create HTML, RTF, etc. from TeX and Postscript, and that's been a great help to me in the past, but the output is really not very usable except for layout, and you can't round trip the document, so you haven't really gained anything from the transformation. If you're trying to move from one layout-centric document type to another, whether it's between Word and LaTeX or whatever, it's often smarter to convert plain text and then mark them back up in your new format rather than use a converter. The result is always much better and it usually takes less time.]

    11. Re:Too much controversy. by CyricZ · · Score: 1

      I've never actually watched an episode of Star Trek. Indeed, that is unusual around here.

      --
      Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
    12. Re:Too much controversy. by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 1

      George W. Bush can use MS Word. He can also use OpenOffice.org. I doubt he'll be able to use LaTeX without training.

      Do you want to be one of the people involved in teaching Bush to use LaTeX? And remember that not just Bush but every government employee and elected official has to learn it, if it becomes a federal standard. (Replace President with Governor, etc., if only Massachusetts adopts it.)

      LaTeX is a good format only because it forces the user to think about how they're styling their document. And most of the time people don't want to think about it - they just want to start typing and then drag some margins or set some fonts if necessary. For example, I still haven't figured out a clean way (other than running metafont a few times) to print flyers in large size with LaTeX - I tried once or twice, gave up, and typed and printed the thing from Word in half a minute.

      LaTeX is a format, not an editor. The format gains its advantage mainly if people work with it. If you come up with a WYSIWYG LaTeX editor that works like Word, then a) you lose the advantage of LaTeX as a plan-based instead of a design-based format (think old HTML with <h1> and modern editor HTML with endless <font> tags), and b) you'll get better results - more reliable storage - in OpenDocument or MS Office .doc than in LaTeX.

      LaTeX is a great format, but it isn't in the running because it doesn't have the same philosophy as .doc, .sxw, even .wpd, etc.

    13. Re:Too much controversy. by Thing+1 · · Score: 3, Funny
      Back in 1994, Steve Remondini was the head of IT (then MIS) at Citrix Systems. He sent an email to every employee, telling them that they need to delete items from their inboxes because the server was too full (Exchange, one of the older versions).

      The punch line? He sent it as an attachment, in .DOC format. The fucker took around 256 KB to send an email which contained under 1 KB of content.

      He was fired not very long thereafter. I remember one manager kept stating about him, "He spends too much travel time" (he was down the long hall and around the corner, and never picked up the phone, instead insisting on showing up in Scott's office and badgering him).

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    14. Re:Too much controversy. by rco3 · · Score: 1

      Grandma has to use this? OK. LyX should do her fine.

      "LaTeX" is not synonymous with "command line".

      --

      Ce n'est pas un vrai mouvement de robot!
    15. Re:Too much controversy. by iabervon · · Score: 1

      Actually, the problem with TeX is that it's hopelessly insecure; it is a programming language with no security model, giving arbitrary file access, with no support for sandboxing, or even code signing. It incidentally has optimized support for string constants and a library with a great layout engine. But the only reason it isn't banned as a security hole is that people don't generally accept LaTeX documents from other people, but rather have them written into PDF or PS.

    16. Re:Too much controversy. by alan_dershowitz · · Score: 1

      Presumably XML was chosen for opendocument because they wanted more flexibility than a only a typesetting language provided. With XML as the medium, theoretically any XML data source could be rendered to opendocument using a stylesheet, and any XML content could be embedded and parsed using the same parser. This is at least one level more functionality than LaTeX by itself provides. I don't see serious problems with XML except for some people's irrational fear of it.

    17. Re:Too much controversy. by UtucXul · · Score: 1
      George W. Bush can use MS Word. He can also use OpenOffice.org. I doubt he'll be able to use LaTeX without training.
      Have you ever watched a truely novice user use MS Word? Or even worse tried to teach it to them? It isn't pretty. Don't be fooled, even those pretty GUI based word processors have learning curves. It is just that most of us have seen things like them for so long we forget about it. And, I've been able to give LaTeX advice and help troubleshoot LaTeX stuff by email and IM. Try doing that with a wordprocessor ('Where did you click?' and so on).
    18. Re:Too much controversy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      This is laughable. LaTeX is VERY scriptable.
      It's not even slightly scriptable. It's a file format. LaTeX doesn't have a macro format for dynamic changes as you edit it or embedded spreadsheets. OpenDocument does.
      These are file formats. Not interfaces. There are friendly HTML and LaTeX authoring tools.
      Lets see the best LaTeX authoring tool. Go on - link to a screenshot of your best editor. The one you expect users to use.

      Abiword's about the best, but it makes poor LaTeX, it that can't integrate with spreadsheets or other formats, it's crashy and has font-layout bugs. In 6 months I'll have another look (as I always do) but it's not there yet.

      LaTeX could certainly be part of some monolithic Office Suite, but it is already very good at what it does.
      It could be part of it, in the same way DocBook could be a part of it. But LaTeX doesn't have good software surrouding it - where "good" is defined as mass market word processing software.

      Remember, mass market word processing software is the topic. We need office suite software for a whole government - LaTeX isn't ready for anything more than geeks.

      See the EMACS file as a proof of concept. Something similar could be written in TeX.
      Working software with soon-to-be ISO standards vs a proof of concept.
      PSTricks & other packages let you add graphs which are generated on the fly.
      And users insert these graphs in the way they're accustomed to, right? ;)
      I actually like LaTeX Beamer quite a bit--the PDF presentations are fantastic.
      OpenOffice.org does PDF presentations, and Flash presentations too.
      Does LaTeX excel at any of these? Probably not. But why not do, as others do, and choose tools which DO excel at them.
      Good idea. Lets use OpenOffice.org.
      Just zip the needed files together, as OpenDoc does....
      There's no agreed container format for LaTeX today, or even a defacto standard. A standardisation effort would take 6 months at least. What you're suggesting is that people unzip the files, edit them, zip them up, and send, as opposed to sending.

      Look- these are simple things that users want and there's no technical reason why it shouldn't happen and you're brushing off by telling them to manually follow a process the software chould do for them.

      LaTeX just isn't mature enough to have pretenses of being something for anything more than 1% of users. That's ok, it has it's niche, but it's for geeks, not for government workers.

      No, again--the programs that grok OpenDoc have it. Not the format itself. There are LaTeX tools which can pull data from a database.
      I don't think you've used datasources in an office package before... I'm talking live database updates -- what LaTeX tool has that?
    19. Re:Too much controversy. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I frequently write things in word, and then paste them into something else. Word is a really nice editor for document-style... er, documents. On the other hand, I often use HTML so that I can have a little formatting, and view it anywhere. Unless you use crap HTML (e.g. lots of font tags instead of CSS) then I don't really see the problem. We can afford to waste a few bytes. The word doc example is the really valid one, although if you write a word doc, then select its contents and paste them into a new doc, the file ends up being little larger than a RTF or properly formatted HTML file would be. The real problem with DOC is all the crap that is saved in there that doesn't need to be there.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    20. Re:Too much controversy. by Coryoth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Before we start, I agree with you entirely: LaTeX is a silly option as any sort of replacement for OpenDocument formats, and the person who suggested it was a fool. I ought to clear up a few points however. ...presentations, OpenDocument has it. LaTeX fails it.

      LaTeX actually does exceptionally good presentations if you actually know how to use it. There are some packages out there to help, or you can simply roll your own to get the best results. In fact LaTeX offers something no Office suite I've ever seen does: the ability to have a single document that is both the presentation and the full paper report at the mere toggle a switch.

      I think the biggest problem is that the basic LaTeX slides package sucks (it was designed for OHP transparencies) and some of the other presentation pakages are a little underwhelming in terms of visual flair. In practice it is quite easy to quickly design "templates" (in practice documentclasses) that look as good or better than anything I've seen PowerPoint produce - I've even written the better part of a GUI tool to let you drag and drop images and text to design one - but it takes a little know how which, apparently, most LaTeX presenters don't have.

      LaTeX represents a damn fine solution to the issue of presentations, especially when you are doing one as a summary of more detailed paper report.

      macro language (admitedly not standardised in OpenDocument). OpenDocument has it. LaTeX fails it;

      What exactly do you think TeX is? TeX is a macro language. It may not have the "live updates" that you seem to have in mind, but that more to do with the compilation step rather than any lack of macro capability of TeX's part. Run TeX again and you'll get all your updates/changes magically propogating through.

      Jedidiah.

    21. Re:Too much controversy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm.. guess I don't know so much about LaTeX. Thanks for the post, fellow NZer :)

    22. Re:Too much controversy. by Noksagt · · Score: 1

      This is laughable. LaTeX is VERY scriptable.

      It's not even slightly scriptable. It's a file format.

      That's funny. TeX is a Turing complete language. You can have interactive programs (like makebst). Every single one of my files does something differently (by design) if the target format is PS or PDF. I have definitions that can be replaced right-up-until compile-time.

      LaTeX doesn't have a macro format for dynamic changes as you edit it or embedded spreadsheets. OpenDocument does.

      Once again, this is just divergent philosophies; OpenDocument doesn't (yet) have definitions about how to typeset documents through different filters. As an XML format, I hope & expect these tools to be built. Why typeset DocBook XML & not OpenDocument?

      LaTeX could certainly be part of some monolithic Office Suite, but it is already very good at what it does.

      It could be part of it, in the same way DocBook could be a part of it.

      Or the same way OpenDocument is part of it...

      But LaTeX doesn't have good software surrouding it - where "good" is defined as mass market word processing software.

      Neiter are there barriers for this software.

      Remember, mass market word processing software is the topic. We need office suite software for a whole government - LaTeX isn't ready for anything more than geeks.

      Whatever. I work with people who manage to typeset beautiful documents without knowing any code. They use Scientific Workplace or LyX or even XML formats.

      Working software with soon-to-be ISO standards vs a proof of concept.

      My point was about the flexibility of the file format. The software does work.

      And users insert these graphs in the way they're accustomed to, right? ;)

      Sure--any TeX editor has a file menu command to insert a jpg/png/pdf image.

      OpenOffice.org does PDF presentations, and Flash presentations too.

      The PDF presentations done by OO.o's Impress aren't in the same league. The LaTeX presentations can have movies, working links (including auto-generated Outlines and updated per-slide tables of contents) & transition effects. It also allows you to edit the metadata. Of any of the OO.o apps, Impress has the longest way to go.

      Does LaTeX excel at any of these? Probably not. But why not do, as others do, and choose tools which DO excel at them.

      Good idea. Lets use OpenOffice.org.

      Because OO.o excels at NONE of them, with the possible exception of Writer (though I prefer AbiWord for most things other than complicated MS Office files). Gnumeric is a FAR better spreadsheet than Calc; Inkscape better than Draw. Impress is "O.K.," but only because ALL of the alternatives suck.

      Look- these are simple things that users want and there's no technical reason why it shouldn't happen and you're brushing off by telling them to manually follow a process the software chould do for them.

      Absolutely not. I am saying that the FILE FORMAT (which you protested against) does nothing to prevent this. OpenDocument does nothing to enforce good applications either. I appreciate both file formats. They are both flexible enough and good tools exist for both.

      LaTeX just isn't mature enough to have pretenses of being something for anything more than 1% of users.

      No. Your can make an argument that the existing tools don't appeal to a broad enough customer base. But the file format itself is mature. And there are both powerful tools for hardcore geeks & GUIs which make it easy (though they are probably aesthetically unpleasing (ugly)) for everyone else.

      I don't think you've used datasources in an office package before...

    23. Re:Too much controversy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, so no screenshots of what people could use (because you know it's awfully motif) and the most you've got is that nothing prevents software being written. lol.

    24. Re:Too much controversy. by zsau · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with Motif?

      --
      Look out!
    25. Re:Too much controversy. by civilizedINTENSITY · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "Spreadsheets, graphs, presentations" are areas where LaTeX excells. I like to use gnumeric to layout my data, and gnumeric or (heavy lifting) octave for calculations, but then saving from gnumeric to latex gives infinte control of presentation. For highschool quality reports, sure, print from the spreadsheet. For anything real (try to publish to a peer reviewed journal using .doc!) use latex. For graphs, use R. It is exceptional. But again, tie it all together in latex.
       
      a single-file container format so exchange is easy which means you want a built in tarball roller? Not a bad idea. Anybody want to add a button to Kile's File/Save?

      user interface that regular users can migrate to which requires you define "regular users". I agree that for highschool, and even lower division work, office products are fine. Business, all technical users, and upper division students should be able to use better tools. (Try KDE's Kile.)

      macro language!!! *snort* Do you have any clue what latex even *is*? Have you heard of TeX? Did you know that LaTeX is a set of macros?

      integration with other office formats is good to great for gnumeric and abiword, OpenOffice, and KOffice. Try selecting the "save as" button. It works :-)
       
      So unless by "regular users" you mean grandmas who have trouble sending email, or people who just want to write a quick letter, I think you underestimate LaTeX.

    26. Re:Too much controversy. by StressedEd · · Score: 2, Informative
      ...giving arbitrary file access,...

      This was a concern of mine for a project that I started researching, which would have accepted source files from the web and compiled them (I still want to take it further but havn't got the time).

      The most obvious problems are commands like \input, allowing files to be read, which could be disasterous (e.g. \input{/etc/passwd}).

      Potentially worse is \write18, which allows you to write a file..

      All is not lost however, after asking a suitably enlightened TeXnician, Thomas Esser (the te in teTeX), one just has to specify the appropriate options in texmf.cnf to restrict file access, both read and write.

      For example

      shell_escape = f
      openout_any = p
      openin_any = p
      In this manner one can put restrictions on what TeX can do in the manner of sandboxing. It's fairly rudimentary but certainly effective!

      ..it is a programming language with no security model..

      I'm not convinced this is the responsibility of the language, should this not be an issue with the platform, for example languages such as C++, FORTRAN 90 etc say nothing about "security", whereas the Java platform does.

      ...or even code signing...

      I'm not sure code-signing is helpful (this is a general statement) as it doesn't prevent something bad being done, just who you trust to do it!

      With other constraints such as memory usage and cpu time (from the shell), you can make TeX suprisingly bullet proof. One of it's advantages in this respect is that it is a straightforward, linear and deterministic system.

      --
      Be nice to people on the way up. You will meet them again on your way down!
    27. Re:Too much controversy. by Peter+La+Casse · · Score: 1

      It's clear to me that LaTeX is much too fun to be widely adopted as a word processor replacement. Creating LaTeX documents in vi is almost as fun as programming itself, and having fun is not a priority in today's cutthroat business world.

    28. Re:Too much controversy. by Noksagt · · Score: 1
      And you can't defend your statement that the FILE FORMAT is bad? You don't even mention XSLT transformations of XML, or that TeX is TOO scriptable (which can allow for insecure documents).

      I didn't post screenshots because I thought we were arguing file formats, rather than applications. But perhaps you stopped arguing file formats when you realized that TeX was certainly powerful enough to be the backend for documents. Similarly, you stopped arguing about (X)HTML when you realized that there were apps which people would almost universally agree were both easy and versatile (though I didn't even mention the spreadsheets & presentation software available for the format or that javascript allows most of the scriptability and dynamic content that you crave). I feel you have no arguments against the file formats because you don't understand the file formats.

      But, if it makes you feel better, here's what my peers used (most were mentioned in my post, but I hadn't linked them for you & apparently you can't use a search engine):

      None of these apps are Motif based (which allows native widgets anyway). LyX used to be, but now uses XForms and Qt, with a GTK interface in development). Easiest/best looking apps are probably SWP and LyX, depending on your platform.
    29. Re:Too much controversy. by Coryoth · · Score: 1

      ...which means you want a built in tarball roller? Not a bad idea. Anybody want to add a button to Kile's File/Save?

      Okay done. Well, it's not in the File/Save, but automatically archiving a project into tar.gz format at the click of a button has been available for a while.

      Jedidiah.

    30. Re:Too much controversy. by GileadGreene · · Score: 1

      The problem with LaTeX as a presentation generator is that good presentations in many fields (i.e. not math) are as much graphics as text, and LaTeX just isn't all that convenient to use for such presentations. Things like Powerpoint and Impress allow graphics to be dropped in, visually resized on the fly, cropped as necessary, visually arranged into a coherent layout, and combined with the built-in drawing tools. I suppose one could get a similar effect by using Draw, or some other drawing program, to combine and layout the graphics, and then exporting as a single graphic to include in LaTeX. But this is a bit of pain compared to just dragging and dropping. What might be nice is a LyX-like tool that allows a wysiwyg approach to slide layout, but emits LaTeX as the end result.

    31. Re:Too much controversy. by landaker · · Score: 1

      For anything real (try to publish to a peer reviewed journal using .doc!) use latex.

      Well, I really *wish* you were right about this, but unfortunately, most genuinely reputable[1] peer reviewed journals outside of math and sciences demand .doc format. And sadly, some scientific and engineering journals are starting to ask for it as well.

      On a different note, I love LaTeX, but I wish it had better support for Unicode. I know there is some support for it, but last time I tried, it wasn't great...

      [1] (You can argue, and I agree, that if they were really reputable, they wouldn't ask for .doc; but they are at least respected in their field.)

    32. Re:Too much controversy. by Coryoth · · Score: 1

      To be perfectly honest I've been thinking about going the reverse direction - I agree LaTeX just doesn't do drawing well. I think it might be easier and more productive to, say, build a presentation builder out of inkscape and simply have SVG or PDF presentations. One day I might even get around to seeing whether that can be done.

      Jedidiah.

    33. Re:Too much controversy. by GileadGreene · · Score: 1
      I agree that building up from a drawing program may be a better approach. IMHO good slides are a visual aid to an oratory, not a collection of bullet points. At least, that's the ideal I aspire to - I don't often manage to get there :-( Anyway, returning to my point: since slides are a visual aid, they are better developed with a program suited to visual design, rather than one suited to textual design.

      The problem is that many people try to design slides that can be both presented orally, and understood in isolation. I understand why, because I often try to read slide presentations myself, and get irritated when tehre's lots of missing detail. Realistically, that's where I see the value of your combined report/slide approach. OTOH Powerpoint and Impress already support a "notes" area for generating slide based handouts. But it hardly ever gets used. (Note to self - must use the notes area more often...)

    34. Re:Too much controversy. by dajak · · Score: 1

      But the only reason it isn't banned as a security hole is that people don't generally accept LaTeX documents from other people, but rather have them written into PDF or PS.

      I have published my work with many different publishers, and we also have an in-house publishing business. I nearly never encounter a publisher that does not accept LaTeX, and internally we first make TeX out of other formats to produce the camera-ready.

      Submitting a PDF is unfortunately not good enough if the submission is to part of a larger work. I agree that theoretically this is a huge security risk, but we never encounter malicious LaTeX. I suppose the primary reason is that it is harder to hide macros beneath the surface of the document, and LaTeX users are more likely to know that the code is malicious. Secondly, it is less interesting to write malicious code for a platform with a small market share. Third, everbody using LaTeX knows that LaTeX using people and companies are good guys. Fourth, we get it from the author and know where he lives.

      Running someone else's LaTeX is similar to compiling and running unseen code downloaded from some website. I do that regularly with open source code. The difference with word docs is that I can read the LaTeX without running it automatically if I want too. XML is potentially better than LaTeX (XSL:FO works nicely for typesetting), but usually hard to read and edit in a text editor compared to LaTeX. Publishers nowadays often have dedicated XML pipelines for predictable stuff like legislation, but very few publishers ask their authors to send their input in some XML format.

    35. Re:Too much controversy. by Mike+Markley · · Score: 1

      So build it into the damn MUA. I bet your grandma doesn't know a lick of HTML or CSS, much less how to create reasonable, well-formed, and standards-compliant documents using those technologies. Regardless, I'm sure she manages just fine when she wants to change the font color or drag & drop a photo into an email, and she probably couldn't care less how the text and image data is encoded. I doubt she'd notice if the MUA turned it into a cpio archive, compressed it, base64ed it, and injected it into a UUCP gateway, as long as the recipient could actually read it.

    36. Re:Too much controversy. by PostItNote · · Score: 1

      LaTeX presentations look awesome if you use http://latex-beamer.sourceforge.net/

      I highly recommend it.

    37. Re:Too much controversy. by Coryoth · · Score: 1

      Seen it, used it, and I prefer to write my own.

      Jedidiah.

    38. Re:Too much controversy. by iabervon · · Score: 1

      I bet those publishers don't accept unsolicited book proposals in LaTeX, though, even if it's a sample chapter or something. Or, at least, they probably shouldn't.

      LaTeX is great for publication (including documents to be edited), but most business use of documents these days is communication with untrusted parties, so it's not really suitable as a format for document exchange.

      I'd really like a LaTeX with TeX's layout engine, but without the Turing-complete and output-enabled scripting language accessible to documents. Really, all the exciting stuff should be in documentclasses and packages, and the particular document should be straightforward data (which includes calling some things, of course, but only the reasonable ones).

    39. Re:Too much controversy. by dajak · · Score: 1

      I'd really like a LaTeX with TeX's layout engine, but without the Turing-complete and output-enabled scripting language accessible to documents. Really, all the exciting stuff should be in documentclasses and packages, and the particular document should be straightforward data (which includes calling some things, of course, but only the reasonable ones).

      I agree. Usually LaTeX documents only call packages that you already have, so you link the document with your own packages. There is no good reason for allowing the full scripting language in the document.

      Doesn't a similar risk potentially exist with XSLT processors that allow multiple output documents?

    40. Re:Too much controversy. by civilizedINTENSITY · · Score: 1

      And yes it is true, my first degree was in Physics and I've had a lot of graduate Math exposure along the way. So my take on journal requirements would tend to reflect those experiences. I've heard that Chemistry also requires LaTeX for peer reviewed journals. Nobody I know knows anybody who knows the soft sciences' requirements (they do have journals, yes?) God alone knows what Engineers do or use ;-)

  5. About ODF, Mass. by GreyWolf3000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The Commonwealth's Secretary of State William Galvin says he has "grave concerns" about the switch and told secretary of administration and finance Thomas Trimarco that "we will not be participating." Galvin is considered one of the strong candidates to run as a rival candidate for next year's gubernatorial race against incumbent Mitt Romney who supports the switch

    I hardly think this will be a big issue in the election for Massachusetts voters, but if it becomes one, this will be a huge way to get non-techies to identify problems with the Microsoft monopoly. If this issue somehow becomes a big (if not the biggest) factor in this election, we can expect ODF to come up in elections all over the place.

    --
    Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
    1. Re:About ODF, Mass. by max+born · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Be interesting to see if William Galvin receives any campaign finance contributions from Microsoft when he runs.

      If he does, I trust you'll do your duty as a citizen and enlighten the electorate with a few well written letters to the editors of the major Mass. newspapers. Ordinary folks may not know about ODF but they'll certainly know corruption when they see it.

      Peace

    2. Re:About ODF, Mass. by CyricZ · · Score: 1

      Some document format that 99.9% of the population doesn't care about will not become that big of an issue. That's especially true when you consider that there are far more major issues at hand, such as taxation and education. Even in a far more enlightened state like Massachusetts, issues like those far exceed what word processor the state government decides to use.

      --
      Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
    3. Re:About ODF, Mass. by techno-vampire · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Ordinary folks may not know about ODF but they'll certainly know corruption when they see it.

      Yes, and they won't care. Massachusetts has long been known for having the best politicians money can buy.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    4. Re:About ODF, Mass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just can't shut up, you fucking crackwhore, can you?

  6. RFID justification is BS by Dr.+Zowie · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I read the text of the passport release earlier, and they claim to have addressed the privacy concerns but really haven't. The biggest problem is that a criminal could very easily grab all of your identity information without your knowledge. They assert that (I'm paraphrasing) "since the chip has no internal power source, it can't broadcast your identity". But that is a canard -- anyone who wants to read out your identity can simply use the same high-gain antenna to beam power your way as to pick up your passport's readout. Of course the protocols will be discovered -- at least by the people you don't want reading your passport.

    All the more reason to stick your passport in the microwave with your new shirts from Wal-Mart.

    Meanwhile, bop on over to www.house.gov and send a quick note of outrage to your representative!

    1. Re:RFID justification is BS by CyricZ · · Score: 1

      Will your reps actually do anything? Do any of them have the guts to stand up to this? Are they capable of saying, "This is not in the best interest of freedom. This will not prevent terrorism. This is a bad idea."

      --
      Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
    2. Re:RFID justification is BS by TWX · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Supposedly they've come up with a cover that is effectively a Faraday cage. When the passport is closed it will severely impede RFID operation. If it works then it'd be much more effective for someone to come out in front of you with a knife and mug you for your passport than it would be to try to overpower the defenses built into the passport cover.

      As far as I'm concerned, making it 'hard enough' to where it's more cost effective to resort to old fashioned brute force is just as good as not putting it in.

      I'm not advocating in favor of this particular device either, but I'll admit that I'm kind of surprised that passports have been the way that they are for so incredibly long, when they're easily forged, easily modified, and probably fairly easily fraudulently applied for.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    3. Re:RFID justification is BS by temojen · · Score: 1

      Also it doesn't seem to solve anything that a cryptographically signed credit card sized CD (including a signed picture of the passport holder) wouldn't (or a mini USB flash device). We have the technology to make a completely open standards based passport system that any country can cheaply and safely read and generate their own (signed with their own keys).

      But noone's listening because (Insert proprietary vendor conspiracy theory here.)

    4. Re:RFID justification is BS by Main+Gauche · · Score: 1

      "As far as I'm concerned, making it 'hard enough' to where it's more cost effective to resort to old fashioned brute force is just as good as not putting it in."

      In principle, I agree. This probably isn't as big an issue as some think. But when you read some of the comments in the article, it is clear that the people making the decisions don't even understand most of the basics of what's going on. For instance, from TFA...

      "Other comments suggested that the passport data should be
      encrypted. The passport data on the chip does not require encryption in
      order to be secure and protected. It is the same data that is visually
      displayed on the passport data page."


      Um, wasn't skimming the issue? Sigh.

    5. Re:RFID justification is BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you carry it in a cigarrette case, or in a carrier lined with aluminum foil. Faraday wins again. And did you note the cover and spine will be made of material that acts like such a cage when the passport is closed?

      High gain antennas mean squat when working against a faraday cage.

      Thats why your cell phone reception sucks when you're in a all-metal elevator. Your mileage may vary though, some elevators seem to be near perfect faraday cages, others with fans in the roofs seem to give some weak signal... :)

    6. Re:RFID justification is BS by Daengbo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My gf just renewed her passport in Thailand and got one of theire brand new "ePassports," which includes RFID. Although there are a million privacy adn security issues, her main interest was that it is so much prettier than her last one...

    7. Re:RFID justification is BS by jfengel · · Score: 1

      Of more interest to me is their assertion that "The chip will not contain home addresses, social security numbers, or other information that might facilitate identity theft."

      Without a doubt, people will be able to read your RFID off this thing. They're lying if they say otherwise. They claim to be able to reduce the effective range to 10 cm, but even if that were true it would still be sniffed by a guy bumping into you in a crowd.

      I think that the critical concern is, what's on it and how would it be used? If it's nothing more than your picture and biometric ID info, that is in a sense public information already: it's easy to take your picture; you leave your fingerprints everywhere, etc. Your iris scan is marginally more private but I wouldn't trust my life to that. If there are passwords on it, it had better be a one-way cryptosystem and they'd better make sure it's a damn good one.

      But even if this thing stored a mini-CD rather than an RFID tag, I'd be concerned if it contained real identity-theft information. Your passport can always be stolen, and even returned without your notice.

      So if they expect the uniqueness of the RFID tag to be some security, they're stupid. But I think the intent is to just make it convenient for them to bring up your picture and other ID info to be checked against your actual features (e.g. checking the picture to see if it looks like you, checking the results of the iris scan, checking to see if your PIN/password guess matches, etc.)

      The ability to mass-swipe passport data without the owner's awareness does open up a new line of attack, where they can steal many passports until they find one that matches themselves closely enough, especially if they can disable the parts of it that they can't easily fake. Proper digital signing of the data would help with that.

      There's also the fact that you're now broadcasting that you're an American, but one's accent and skin color do that pretty effectively already.

      So my biggest concern is not that the info is broadcast but what info it is they're broadcasting. They're promising that it won't be the kind of info used in identity theft. These days identity theft is so trivial that it hardly requires them to broadcast your SSN, but aside from that it sounds like they've promised to make it no worse.

      If anything, it may help. The prevalence of identity theft means that we need to make our identities a lot more secure. Biometrics are far from perfect; I prefer password-protected private keys. But whatever is chosen, two-factor or three-factor identification is going to be necessary in the near future.

      I'd campaign to have all the data locked against a password that you have memorized, but there are problems with that if you forget your own password. So I'm undecided on that.

    8. Re:RFID justification is BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just wanted to back up your comment. A few weeks ago I found myself at dinner with a guy who was working for a company trying to secure a patent on something related to RFID passports. I mentioned the same thing - why can't somebody just sit outside the airport with a high gain antenna, snatching the passport data of random people? He said that the new passport covers were going to be shielded, so that you could only effectively read the tag if it were opened.

      He also said that, while the data in the tag is also printed right on the passport, his company's version was encrypted so as to hinder casual, remote reception.

      Anyway, just throwing this out there.

    9. Re:RFID justification is BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The more people that are enabled to steal your "identity" (meaning pretend to be you when they commit fraud) the more privacy you will have, since nobody will be able to accurately track you electronically.

    10. Re:RFID justification is BS by gpw213 · · Score: 1
      Without a doubt, people will be able to read your RFID off this thing. They're lying if they say otherwise. They claim to be able to reduce the effective range to 10 cm, but even if that were true it would still be sniffed by a guy bumping into you in a crowd.

      From the article:

      The Department will also implement Basic Access Control (BAC) to mitigate further any potential threat of skimming or eavesdropping. BAC recently has been adopted as a best practice by the ICAO New Technologies Working Group and will soon be formally added to the ICAO specifications. BAC utilizes a form of Personal Identification Number (PIN) that must be physically read in order to unlock the data on the chip. In this case, the PIN will be derived from the printed characters from the second line of data on the Machine-Readable Zone that is visibly printed on the passport data page. The BAC also results in the communication between the chip and the reader being encrypted, providing further protection.

      So no, they can not read the contents unless they have physically opened the passport and read off the PIN number. And if they have managed to do that, they already have your data:

      The passport data on the chip does not require encryption in order to be secure and protected. It is the same data that is visually displayed on the passport data page.

      The ability to mass-swipe passport data without the owner's awareness does open up a new line of attack, where they can steal many passports until they find one that matches themselves closely enough, especially if they can disable the parts of it that they can't easily fake. Proper digital signing of the data would help with that.

      Again, from the article:

      Finally, the chip will contain coding to prevent any digital data from being altered or removed as well as the chip's unique ID number. This coding will be in the form of a high strength digital signature.

      There's also the fact that you're now broadcasting that you're an American, but one's accent and skin color do that pretty effectively already.

      Since they are implementing international standards for this, merely having an electronic passport should not identify you as an American. Presumably, other countries will be distributing them as well.

      When I first read about RFIDs going into passports, I was very much opposed to the idea. However, I found this article reassuring. They really do seem to have taken the security objections seriously, and are taking reasonable steps. In particular, I like that format is seems to be open, and given that the PIN code is printed on the passport, one could conceivably verify just what is and is not stored on the RFID chip.

      --
      However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. -- Winston Churchill
    11. Re:RFID justification is BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bruce Schneier described a problem that worried a lot of people...a terrorist bomb that reads the RFID chips remotely, and explodes when there are lots of Americans in the vicinity.

      Note that it doesn't have to read all the details, it just has to be able to tell when there are American passports nearby.

    12. Re:RFID justification is BS by swillden · · Score: 1

      Um, wasn't skimming the issue? Sigh.

      Umm, you need to read the rest of the paragraph. You quoted:

      Other comments suggested that the passport data should be encrypted. The passport data on the chip does not require encryption in order to be secure and protected. It is the same data that is visually displayed on the passport data page.

      But the paragraph goes on to say:

      Instead of encrypting data, BAC will permit an encrypted communication session with the reader that will provide a similar protection while not requiring administrative key control issues.

      This addresses skimming exactly. The data on the chip does not need to be encrypted, because in order to get the data off the chip an attacker has three options:

      1. Physically crack open the chip to get the data. That's pointless because opening up the chip requires first obtaining physical access to the passport, at which point it's easier to just read the printed text.
      2. Open an RF communication session with the chip to get the data. The chip won't talk until the BAC process is performed, and performing that requires data printed inside the passport, which requires first obtaining physical access to the passport...
      3. Eavesdrop on an RF communication session established between a reader that has performed the BAC process. But that data is encrypted with session keys established in the BAC.
      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    13. Re:RFID justification is BS by swillden · · Score: 1

      anyone who wants to read out your identity can simply use the same high-gain antenna to beam power your way as to pick up your passport's readout

      No, they can't. For two reasons:

      First, as another poster has mentioned, the cover of the passport is shielded. When the passport is closed, the chip can't function. So, just keep it closed and you're safe.

      Second, even if the shielding somehow didn't work (passport fell open in a purse or something?), the chip won't talk to the attacker until the attacker performs a cryptographic authentication process (Basic Access Control, or BAC) which requires a key that is derived from data printed on the inside of the passport. So, to perform the attack you describe, the attacker first has to get hold of your passport and read the printed data... at which point he has no reason to bother with the RF-based complications.

      The first proposal from the State dept was stupid and irresponsible. It implemented no security at all, even though the proper security techniques had already been defined and documented in the ICAO specification and reviewed by capable security professionals and cryptographers. They knew *how* to secure the chips, they just didn't want to bother. After the firestorm of negative response they got, they chose to do what they should have done in the first place, which is implement BAC. They were also forced to implement the tinfoil cover, which is redundant but not such a bad idea.

      All the more reason to stick your passport in the microwave with your new shirts from Wal-Mart.

      Be careful with that... from the summary at the top of the document:

      The rule defines ``electronic passport,'' includes a damaged electronic chip as an additional basis for possible invalidation of a passport

      Having a passport with a fried RFID may cause you significant hassles when you're trying to get home from an overseas trip. And there's really no point.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  7. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by char1iecha1k · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This may sound dumb but....

    If you assume that this happens with all software, then you just have to assume total downloads is an arbitary figure and use it to compare with other downloads?

  8. come on... by mscnln · · Score: 5, Funny

    Standford engineers have discovered...
    "Standford on iTunes"


    It appears ScuttleMonkey didn't just make a typo, but just has no clue that it is actually Stanford not Standford...

    1. Re:come on... by The+Amazing+Fish+Boy · · Score: 1

      It appears ScuttleMonkey didn't just make a typo, but just has no clue that it is actually Stanford not Standford...

      Yeah! Sir Stanford Fleming must be spinning in his grave!

    2. Re:come on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly you are unaware of Standford's excellent Compluter Science program.

    3. Re:come on... by bhsx · · Score: 1

      It appears ScuttleMonkey didn't just make a typo, but just has no clue that it is actually Stanford not Standford...

      It's also the second time today!

      --
      put the what in the where?
  9. RTFL by oldosadmin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Read the link.

    Quote: Microsoft has stated that they will support the OpenDocument format in MS Office if there is customer demand:

    http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=200510161 05739574

    The purpose of this petition is to quantify the customer demand for OpenDocument support. EndQuote

    --
    Jay | http://oldos.org
    1. Re:RTFL by Quixote · · Score: 1
      Quote: Microsoft has stated that they will support the OpenDocument format in MS Office if there is customer demand:

      What do you expect them to say? "We will support the OpenDocument format when we bloody well feel like it, and when we think it'll make us tons of money" ?

    2. Re:RTFL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One day the news reports MS will support ODF, the next day they won't. See Microsoft denies preparations to support OpenDoc in Office 12 http://www.tgdaily.com/2005/10/26/microsoft_denies _odf_for_office_12/

      "I can only show you the door. You're the one that has to walk through it."

    3. Re:RTFL by SillySlashdotName · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Point one, petition signatures do not equate to customer demand. Note the word 'customer'. I.e., the claim is that, if enough CUSTOMERS request the feature, then a future version MIGHT contain the requested feature.

      Point two. The state of Massachusetts IS a current customer, and IS demanding this 'feature' and Microsoft is, so far, refusing to include it in any future version. So much for claims of "...will support the OpenDocument format in MS Office if there is customer demand."

      Once their claim has been PROVEN FALSE, additional appeals based on that claim (as in this petition) are doomed from the start.

      --
      Acts of massive stupidity are almost never covered by warranty. --me.
  10. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by CyricZ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This comes up every time such stats are mentioned.

    First of all, they don't track downloads via the update feature of Firefox.

    Second, while you've downloaded it ten times, there are many businesses and schools who have installed it on hundreds of workstations from a single download. So it may be one of those things that balances out in the end.

    And finally, it's not so much about the exact number. It's about the general magnitude of the number. Even if they're 10 million downloads off either way, that's still an impressive number of people to reach.

    --
    Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
  11. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by Carnildo · · Score: 3, Funny

    It means somewhere between 1 and 99,999,991 users.

    --
    "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
  12. My law school is on iTunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    American University's Washington College of Law has several podcasts on iTunes now including one with most of the big panels and speakers.

  13. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by netkid91 · · Score: 1

    But also there is people(companies, school(s,districs), etc...) who download onto the network and install from there, or put it on the next ghost image, so I'd say there is still other things beside multi-copy downloads that affect the numbers... Anyways 100 million downloads period is still a amazing mark, and a lot of bandwith gone by too :P

    --
    NO~, I read Slashdot because I think it's stupid.....
  14. I definitly like Flock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I definitely like Flock because it is a convergence of so many things I do on my home PC once I get home from work. By adding "FoxyTunes" to control my audio player, the only reason I have to usually leave the browser window is for instant messaging purposes. The one sticking point has been extensions for Flock. So I found a page that details how to disassemble the XPI and "make them compatible" with Flock. It's certainly worth a read. The only downside to flock is that it fairly bloated but that is the price we pay for all this integration.

    -----
    High Resolution Automobile Picture Gallery

  15. Would it be possible... by mymaxx · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For Flock to not open source their browser? By basing it on Firefox, doesn't the Mozilla Public License require that the changes to the source be distributed?

    1. Re:Would it be possible... by ikkonoishi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not to mention the fact that every single feature they mentioned is included in the version 1.5 betas.

      Perhaps the blog editor and the rss viewer isn't there, but all the other things they were cooing over as differences between firefox and flock were all default 1.5 behaviour.

    2. Re:Would it be possible... by Fluffy_Kitten · · Score: 0

      Actually Firefox is triple lisensed, The MPL, The GPL, and The LGPL are all firefox possible lisenses, so it could be closed source under the LGPL

      --
      People who have no sig are cool
    3. Re:Would it be possible... by stuuf · · Score: 1

      Not exactly. The LGPL allows you to use the software as a library and link it with proprietary applications, but changes to the program itself are still governed the same way as the original GPL.

      --

      Everyone is born right-handed; only the greatest overcome it

  16. re Firefox by Daevad · · Score: 1

    I celebrated by taking an old PC out in the driveway, putting a fox plushie on top of it and setting it in fire. That's what I call a Firefox!

    1. Re:re Firefox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real way to celebrate would be to catch a fox and set it on fire. Now thats a real Fire Fox.(or fox on fire)

  17. For people living in Massachussets by JavaTHut · · Score: 1

    So, I live in Boston and am an American citizen. Does anyone know of a site that lays out very clearly who I need to write to, what I need to tell them and who I need to keep in mind come voting time?

    1. Re:For people living in Massachussets by Jaywalk · · Score: 2, Informative
      Greeting fellow, err, Massachusan? Whatever.

      If you really want to get involved, according to Groklaw the meeting Monday, October 31, in Boston, at the State House, room A1, from 1 to 5 that's open to the public. If you can't make that kind of commitment, Mass.gov. One useful page is this one which lets you type in your city and find out which state congress critters are yours. They're the ones who want your vote next time around. We also already know that Romney is in favor of ODF and Galvin (who wants to run for Romney's job) is against it, so writing them won't hurt either.

      As for what to write I'd suggest you be nice, be brief and use your own words. That's more effective than just cranking out form letters. Let them know what you think and that you're paying attention.

      --
      ===== Murphy's Law is recursive. =====
    2. Re:For people living in Massachussets by B4L1STA · · Score: 1

      Looks like the mass.gov site has been /.'d ...

      But that's OK becasue they're running Apache on Red Hat.

    3. Re:For people living in Massachussets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hear throwing tea in the harbour worked well once ...

  18. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by fatboyslack · · Score: 1

    I'd be responsible for about 20 of those...

    Any time that a friend asks for IT help of any kind, the first thing I do is d/l firefox, eradicate the links to IE, and tell them to use that instead.... even if the 'IT help' request had nothing to do with IE or the 'net.

    I've even started doing it on other peoples PC's at work.

    Sure IE has improved of late, but that appears to have been only due to the increased interest in the foxy lady.

    And to think that ten years ago I was one of the biggest MS fanboys out there.

    --
    Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself. -- Leo Tolstoy
  19. Technology Fetish by LostBurner · · Score: 1

    I read about the RFID passports. Seems like an unecessary use of technology. "Computers and electronics will make us safer!" Paper passports work fine; why not have a barcode and scanner if you want to scan it quickly?

    1. Re:Technology Fetish by TWX · · Score: 1

      I'd imagine that part of the argument made in favor of the RFID passport is that it would be more difficult to forge. This doesn't mean that it's actually true, but if a new passport design were difficult-to-impossible to forge then the utility of it for verifying identity would be improved greatly for international travel.

      I got to hear a crypto presentation from a guy whose working on high-end crypto smart cards that are basically small computers that handle crypto. They are designed to be interfaced to, rather than read, and they would expire. They would reply and initiate challenges back and forth to verify veracity. The problem is that a central authority would be responsible for issuing them and maintaining hash tables for verification purposes.

      We'll have to see what happens.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:Technology Fetish by temojen · · Score: 1

      Barcodes don't pack enough info, so the host country would have to have access to the US passport database to be able to verify the validity of a passport.

    3. Re:Technology Fetish by temojen · · Score: 1

      Why not just use a read-only medium like a CD or a mini-USB flash disk with a signed public certificate including the owner's picture? It doesn't need any fancy electronics to authenticate, the public key cryptosystem does that.

  20. you're a mess by Internet_Communist · · Score: 1

    "Recreational hazard: One group member shows the downside that comes with using their chosen artistic medium (temporary paint made from a mixture of corn starch, food coloring, Kool-Aid, and water)."

    You COULD have just painted the firefox logo with sidewalk chalk, but nooo, you had to be fancy and now look what you've done!

    --

    If you don't want someone to copy something, don't give it to anyone.
  21. Your sig by temojen · · Score: 1

    But what the US is doing is more akin to:

    USE="freedom" emerge -uDp world

  22. Huh? by sH4RD · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This comes with the recent news that Flock has also decided to open source their browser.

    They had a choice?

    --
    WASTE - The Secure P2P
    1. Re:Huh? by dveditz · · Score: 1
      [Paraphrasing] Flock had a choice not to open source their browser?

      Of course they had a choice. Netscape 8 is not open source even though it's built on Mozilla code, and Safari is not open source even though it's built on KHTML.

  23. No Funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "The Commonwealth's Secretary of State William Galvin says he has "grave concerns" about the switch and told secretary of administration and finance Thomas Trimarco that "we will not be participating."

    Perhaps one should find out more about his election finances, dollars to dognuts a big chunk will be coming out of some slick people from Redmond, or their cronies, with no way to really trace it. Gates and company learned alot from the Sco fiasco, in future the paper trail will not be so transparent!

  24. Wait.....Confused by parties.... by jabster · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hold on....The Democrats are opposed to ODF.....supporting a big business....thought....only.....Republicans....did that....

    Damn. This must be Bush's fault somehow....

    -john

    --
    Slashdot: you'll not find a more wretched collection of villainy and disreputable types...
    1. Re:Wait.....Confused by parties.... by LGagnon · · Score: 1

      The Democrats have been agreeing with and working with the Republican party for decades now. Why do you think no third party can get into power?

    2. Re:Wait.....Confused by parties.... by killjoe · · Score: 0, Troll

      How many democrats objected when the bush DOJ slapped MS on the wrist with a wet noodle? When it comes to sucking up to big money both democrats and republicans pucker up. It's just that democrats once in a great while attempt to do something for normal people and the republicans fight them when they do that.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    3. Re:Wait.....Confused by parties.... by domsol · · Score: 0, Troll
      Hold on....The Democrats are opposed to ODF.....supporting a big business....thought....only.....Republicans....did that....


      Trust me, Massachusetts politics are no way that simple.

      ... and I'll bet that Reilly (2006 [[D] gov front-runner) and Patrick ([D] progressive candidate) will support OpenDocument wholeheartedly. There's a reason that Galvin's moniker is "The Prince of Darkness".

      --
      > My comment can be quoted whenever, wherever, so long as you bloody well provide attribution! >
  25. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by NoGuffCheck · · Score: 2, Funny

    100 million downloads is a good thing, but what exactly does it mean?

    Well I didnt download it the other 999,999,990 times, so I gues it means that firefox kick ass!

    --
    serenity now!
  26. Oops Someone dosn't have a clue by jfmiller · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Pacheco expressed his concern that OpenDocument would not be usable by people with disabilities, and his committee is holding a hearing at the State House to discuss the format. However, it's not clear whether Pacheco's moves will have any effect.

    If he thinks that the closed format of MSOffice is usable by people with disabilities he has another thought coming.

    JFMILLER

    --
    Strive to make your client happy, not necessarly give them what they ask for
    1. Re:Oops Someone dosn't have a clue by torrents · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure if you're using MS office you qualify as a disabled person.

      --
      Get your torrents...
    2. Re:Oops Someone dosn't have a clue by cnelzie · · Score: 1

      Seriously, where the hell did he come up with that idea?

          Is it because he has seen someone use JAWS (A program for blind people to use PCs through voice commands) and only happened to see them use it with MSOffic? ...or is he thinking that the crappy Voice Recognition software that is part of MSOffice and not in OpenOffice, StarOffice and other OpenDocument Office Suites make MSOffice 'teh bestest' for disabled people?

      --
      If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
  27. 100 million downloads? I guess numbers do lie by deep_zeus · · Score: 1

    I'm a happy Firefox camper, but I've dl'ed at least 6 versions (relatively new adopter :(), so I guess the milestone is symbolic. Symbolic or not, it's pretty impressive. Now if only they can stop it from choking on a certain crop of sportsline.com's sinister pop-unders. Evil knows and loves evil because I.E. displays them without a glitch.

    --
    To quote Walter Neff, the evil hero in "Double Indemnity", "Do I laugh now, or wait 'til it gets funny?"
    1. Re:100 million downloads? I guess numbers do lie by chrisgeleven · · Score: 1

      You of course have to factor in a company that downloads say one copy and uses it for hundreds (maybe even thousands) of deployments.

      In the end, it all probably evens out.

    2. Re:100 million downloads? I guess numbers do lie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why avant will always be better then firefox, it has the same good added features but still displays pages correctly because its based on IE.

    3. Re:100 million downloads? I guess numbers do lie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But they don't count people who get it from apt-get or other repositories, AFAIK, so it could be far greater.

    4. Re:100 million downloads? I guess numbers do lie by TinyManCan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      By displays pages correctly you mean "Is broken in the same ways IE is."

  28. RFID are so cheap now... 0.5 cents a piece! by Lord+Satri · · Score: 1

    RFID tags are so cheap (or rather, will soon be, read below), I'm really seeing a flood coming, not only for passports, for anything the human mind can imagine!

    Taken from http://slashgisrs.org/
    MobileMag have a small article about a 100% organic matter RFID chip developed in Korea, costing only 0.5 cents. From the article: The new RFID Tag chip is able to function on the 30 kHz frequency by only using 100% organic compounds and an inkjet printer. By cutting down the price considerably it will allow for thee mass production through the printing process. The chip can also be printed on any paper, plastic and wood standard.

  29. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by dtfinch · · Score: 1

    We've downloaded about 50 total (Do they count downloads of nightly builds?) but installed it on about 30 systems. I've heard some people say they've downloaded one and installed it on hundreds, but I'm sure most of them have really downloaded it more than a couple times.

  30. DrDOS rolled _everything_ back by dtfinch · · Score: 2, Funny

    Even their website says "Copyright 2004" and their latest news item is dated 2003. Or has their site always been like that?

    1. Re:DrDOS rolled _everything_ back by Jim+Hall · · Score: 1

      No, that all happened quite suddenly on 10/25. DR-DOS 8.1 no longer exists, so the problem appears to have been solved. All the links on DRDOS.com now point to DR-DOS 7.03 when you try to click on DR-DOS. Looks like they've pulled DR-DOS 8.1 completely and rolled back to their old version. No mention of DR-DOS 8.0 or DR-DOS 8.1. Probably the easiest way for them to do all that very quickly was to roll back the web site to some old version.

  31. also smudge-able by davidwr · · Score: 1

    You can pack 64KB into printed media but it might take several passport pages to do so. Remember the "dot strips" in the back of computer magazines in the mid-1980s? Scan them in to get your shareware.

    Smudging and dirt could be a problem as could speed.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  32. Passports get tinfoil hats - no, really by davidwr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    From the RFID passport link in the main article:

    Based on that testing, the Department, in cooperation with the GPO,
    will include an anti-skimming material in the front cover and spine of
    the electronic passport that will mitigate the threat of skimming from
    distances beyond the ten centimeters prescribed by the ISO 14443
    technology, as long as the passport book is closed or nearly closed.
            The Department will also implement Basic Access Control (BAC) to
    mitigate further any potential threat of skimming or eavesdropping. BAC
    recently has been adopted as a best practice by the ICAO New
    Technologies Working Group and will soon be formally added to the ICAO
    specifications. BAC utilizes a form of Personal Identification Number
    (PIN) that must be physically read in order to unlock the data on the
    chip. In this case, the PIN will be derived from the printed characters
    from the second line of data on the Machine-Readable Zone that is
    visibly printed on the passport data page. The BAC also results in the
    communication between the chip and the reader being encrypted,
    providing further protection.


    There you have it - with an off-the-shelf reader you have to be within inches OR trick the user into opening the book, AND you have to type or scan in the encryption code.

    This won't stop dishonest border guards from hiding a 2nd reader under their jacket and memorizing the secret codes, but it will stop the guy sitting in the row behind you on the airplane.

    Now who was the wise guy who said only North Koreans needed RFID-enabled passports?

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:Passports get tinfoil hats - no, really by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > There you have it - with an off-the-shelf reader you have to be
      > within inches OR trick the user into opening the book...

      Whereas with a home-brew high-power reader they will have to be within 10 feet instead of 30.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    2. Re:Passports get tinfoil hats - no, really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      RFID tags tested submerged in water, OK.

      OK, these are large, active transponder mechanisms 8 3/4 x 2 3/4 x 15/16. about the size of an industrial flourescent ballast.

      http://www.eis.army.mil/AIT/Contracts/rfid/rfid_6h .asp

    3. Re:Passports get tinfoil hats - no, really by ikkonoishi · · Score: 1

      No they will have to be actually inside of the passport book. With the book closed the outer coating would act as a Faraday cage blocking all electromagnetic signals.

  33. Re:i downloadeded it serveral tirmse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I ares knowing of the engrish. glrad irm n3t the olry on3.

  34. Re:i downloadeded it serveral tirmse by BOOTSTRAPS · · Score: 0

    all your base.

    --
    (\(\
    (^.^)
    (")")
    Saving sig aborted.
    Reason: Your subject looks too much like ascii art
  35. File Conversion by Noksagt · · Score: 1
    Then you generate RTF, PS or HTML files from the LaTeX source. It works like a charm.
    I'm a LaTeX fan. But post-process XML file formats with XSLT works FAR better than the LaTeX tools. DocBook XML converted to RTF/HTML look a lot better than starting from LaTeX in many cases. I wish that OpenDoc would leverage this more--using (as the DocBook people do) TeX to typeset nice PDFs. I also wish they were more hand-hackable, but I'd take a GOOD authoring tool which was well-adopted & had enough functionality. OpenDoc is close, but I'll use LaTeX until then.
    Indeed, being able to read the various formats is a problem, especially when they're some proprietary binary format. That's why using plaintext, LaTeX and PDF files works so well: they're well documented, non-obfuscated, and are easily transmittable.
    So is OpenDoc.
  36. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wow...that is original. Get over it, not every stat needs explaining.

  37. How have we learned this again? by Noksagt · · Score: 1

    I suspect that OpenDocument adoption is more wide-spread than LaTeX adoption, mostly because OO.o groks both that and MS Word format (the de facto standard).

    So the real lesson is that you need to make tools that are good enough & people won't care about the technical merits of the file format. So long as they can work with other people & use their old documents, they won't moan too much.

  38. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by damiam · · Score: 1

    Not even that; the number of downloads gives you no concrete information at all about the number of users. There could be zero users or billions (most likely not more than 6 billion or so, though).

    --
    It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  39. Define "customers" by Z34107 · · Score: 1

    You realize that the vast majority of people who use Open Office (namely, all of them) will never be Microsoft customers? In fact, many of them want Microsoft dead. How are they customers? And how is their demand "customer demand?"

    --
    DATABASE WOW WOW
    1. Re:Define "customers" by michaeltoe · · Score: 1

      If Massachusetts switches to OpenDocument format for all their government documents, then the only way Microsoft can keep those "customers" is by supporting that same format. Right now they're hoping Massachusetts will somehow back out, or people just won't honor the new format. If not, they've got little choice.

    2. Re:Define "customers" by SillySlashdotName · · Score: 1

      As I posted above this subthread, Massachusetts IS a current (and potential future) customer, and Microsoft is, so far, refusing to include a (reasonable, in my opinion) support of a non-propriatary format.

      Nothing I have seen so far says that the ODF has to be the ONLY format supported (so Microsoft can keep offering .doc for anyone who wants it).

      I am amazed that Microsoft can think that they can dictate terms to the government - even a state government.

      Microsoft: We are a monopoly, and you WILL buy our product because you have no choice!
      Massachusetts: We will not buy your product if it does not meet our needs.
      Microsoft: WAAAA! That's not fair!!!

      --
      Acts of massive stupidity are almost never covered by warranty. --me.
  40. Petition form rejects valid e-mail addresses by tepples · · Score: 1

    When I tried signing the petition, it didn't appear to accept e-mail addresses whose local part (that is, everything before the @) contains a plus sign ('+'). Even though RFC 2822 section 3.4.1 states that plus signs are valid characters in a local part, I get "Error - could not process the submission - Email is invalid." I reported this to the webmaster.

    1. Re:Petition form rejects valid e-mail addresses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah that sucks. It's pandemic of email forms. Somebody should start a real webmaster education program. plusisok.org? I'm guilty of tolerating it too much, and issuing a script on the mailserver to add a _ where the + goes, without usually writing a complaint email to the webmaster.

  41. Who will patent Passport Protectors? by davidwr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The built-in RFID leak-protection mechanism is a good start but it's not nearly enough for the Truly Paranoid [TM].

    Who will be the first to try to patent a passport wallet made out of aluminum foil?

    Who will trademark the name Passport Protector [TM]?

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  42. It's OpenDocument, not OpenDoc. by CyricZ · · Score: 1

    You should be careful to call the more recent, XML-based format "OpenDocument", rather than "OpenDoc".

    OpenDoc was a software component system developed in the early-to-mid 1990s by Apple, in response to OLE.

    --
    Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
  43. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by Bogtha · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Second, while you've downloaded it ten times, there are many businesses and schools who have installed it on hundreds of workstations from a single download. So it may be one of those things that balances out in the end.

    No. If you have x unknown amount of additional downloads that shouldn't be counted, and y number of installations that weren't counted, then the odds of x - y = 0 (the hypothesis that it "balances out in the end") seems extremely unlikely.

    Why is there this fascination with using all kinds of contorted non-logic to try and derive statistics from data that just can't support it? If you don't have the facts, the right thing to do is hold your hands up and say "I don't know", and the wrong thing to do is say "well because we don't know how many we undercount by and how many we overcount by, we'll just sweep logic under the rug and pretend that it "balances out".

    --
    Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
  44. SCHOOL PROFESSORS PLEASE SIGN! by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    You can specify the number of your students. Maximum number of customers is 599 via web form. 600 up you must contact the webmaster.

  45. Please don't misquote me. by CyricZ · · Score: 1

    Let's look at my exact quote, shall we?

    So it may be one of those things that balances out in the end.

    Notice the use of the word may. That suggests that it is possible, but not guaranteed. And of course it's not true statistics. That's obvious to anyone. When you consider that we don't have very good data, it's pointless to try to apply formal statistical methods. Either way the results will not be of a high quality.

    However, we do have these two "forces" that are counteracting each other. As such, the effects of each are diminished somewhat, even if we do not know the exact magnitude of each, or exactly how much they cancel. The point is that the effect of multiple downloads from individuals is mitigated somewhat by multiple installations from a single download by businesses/schools.

    --
    Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
    1. Re:Please don't misquote me. by mobets · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm betting that it also doesn't count all of the installs from verious Linux venders. Auto-updated Redhat, gentoo, ...

      --

      It was me, I did it, I moved your cheese
    2. Re:Please don't misquote me. by cakesy · · Score: 1

      Good point.

      Of course this counter should only display INDETERMINATE.

      In fact all counters can produce errors of this sort, so they should all display INDETERMINATE.

      As a matter of fact, every counter in the entire world could have the same sort of errors, even clocks are not 100% correct, so every counter of any sort should simply display INDETERMINATE.

      I mean if you can't guarantee 100% accuracy, then there is not point in even attempting to measure anything.

      You should feel happy, you have made the world a better place.

    3. Re:Please don't misquote me. by Bogtha · · Score: 1

      Notice the use of the word may. That suggests that it is possible, but not guaranteed.

      If somebody told you that the world may be run by alien lizards, you'd write him off as a crank, right? Even though he said "may"? Because entertaining the notion seriously just because it's theoretically possible would be pretty stupid? Sorry, you don't escape reason by prepending "may" to your claims.

      However, we do have these two "forces" that are counteracting each other. As such, the effects of each are diminished somewhat, even if we do not know the exact magnitude of each, or exactly how much they cancel.

      And if somebody pointed out that wearing sunblock diminished the effects of a nuclear explosion occurring four feet in front of you, they'd be correct too. Without knowing how diminished the effects are, it's still useless to look at such numbers.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    4. Re:Please don't misquote me. by clear_thought_05 · · Score: 1

      Does prefixing the word "may" to any assertion make it any more valid? How incredible absurd.

      And your "2 forces" argument is completely useless. How can you tell which force mitigates which side?

    5. Re:Please don't misquote me. by CyricZ · · Score: 1

      It's quite simple, indeed.

      A single user downloading multiple copies of Firefox increases the downloads/users ratio.

      A business/school/distro allowing multiple users to use one download of Firefox decreases the downloads/users ratio.

      It's not too difficult to understand the effect each situation (ie. "force") has on the number of downloads. We do not know the magnitudes of such effects, but we do know the "direction".

      --
      Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
  46. FlexBeta likes ads by MilenCent · · Score: 1

    And how! Four annoying ads at the bottom of the page, a Google Ad sidebar, those green underline ad links, and three more pages left to click through. Someone's getting paid for *this* Slashdotting....

  47. DRDos? by Angelox · · Score: 0

    DRDOS Inc. includes FreeDOS and other software in DR-DOS 8.1 for $45!

    Are these people crazy? is there someone left in the world that's hard-up enough and will pay $45 for DOS?

    I can see FreeDos as a hobby. I did have a lot of fun in those days- But pay $45 for FREEDOS?

    1. Re:DRDos? by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      Of course, you've seen how they're now selling DR-DOS 7.03 for $35, right?

      The ironic part is that their $35 DR-DOS 7.03 is legally available for free (well, for personal use only), at least in a three-disk version that lacks Personal Netware, because Lineo decided to make it available for free.

    2. Re:DRDos? by Jim+Hall · · Score: 1

      Are these people crazy? is there someone left in the world that's hard-up enough and will pay $45 for DOS?

      Remember, the people they are selling DR-DOS to aren't just end-users like you and me. I imagine most of their users are companies that sell some embedded solution that runs on top of DOS. There are lots of companies that use FreeDOS to run an embedded application, and I would guess there are lots more that use DR-DOS to run a similar embedded DOS app.

  48. Three letters: X, M, L. by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Hah! As if Microsoft would even THINK ABOUT LaTeX. Look, Microsoft is struggling against (or is it US who are struggling against Microsoft for?) OpenDocument. LaTeX isn't even in their radar screen.

    Besides, you forgot the reason for OpenDocument to exist: Inter-operability. And you also forgot its power: XML.
    Anyone with an XML parser can read opendocument. But to read LaTeX, you need a complicated parser.

    OpenDocument can be transformed into HTML with an XSLT template automatically. Heck, you could render OpenDocument with Internet Explorer! (With the appropriate XSL stylesheet, of course)
    Also, any XML can be transformed into PDF via XSL:FO.
    You could put a bunch of OpenDocument files and index them from with a simple program that supports XML.

    The point of OpenDocument is that it's EASY to handle. The EZPublish content management system ALREADY supports importing and exporting of OpenDocument files. Heck, there's even a C++ IDE that can export the sourcefiles (syntax-highlighted) to OpenDocument.

    I don't care how much you're fond of LaTeX. Is it powerful? Yes. But is it popular? Is it easy to implement?

    Sorry, but I think you're stuck a few years behind.

  49. That's not good enough by LeonGeeste · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think a good idea would be for them to truly find out how many people are using it. Make it so that when you download it, you have to state how many people it's for. And to make that accurate, you should have to give your SSN or whatever your country's national ID number is, and the ID number of everyone who you claim will use it. Then they can strike any duplicates. To make sure people don't give it away and distort the number, they could make the file encrypted such that it will only run if you register it. To confirm you're not using someone else's number, they could set up centers at DMV's (Department of Motor Vehicles) where you can verify that it's you before you can register it (and they'd have computers you'd use to register your copy).

    To prevent people from compiling it on their own, they could close the source so that you can only run it through the official installer and only that would be counted in the tallies. To verify transparency, they should put all the names and ID numbers in a central database that everyone can access so that independent agencies can verify the names and contact people to be sure they're actually using it. This could all be funded by selling the contact information in the database to direct marketing organizations (the legitimate ones, not the ones who harass you).

    This is the only way to get an accurate, scientific count of the true number of users.

    --
    Rank my idea: http://www.sinceslicedbread.com/node/531
    1. Re:That's not good enough by CyricZ · · Score: 3, Funny

      What if you just give them one of your testes or ovaries when you first download Firefox? If you download it again, then they'll crush your ovary/testicle. If you stop using Firefox, then you can request your organ back. When they want a fairly accurate count of Firefox users, all they have to do is count the number of ovaries and testes that they have.

      --
      Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
    2. Re:That's not good enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sounds like a good idea. But, I have downloaded Firefox for one computer at work, and two at home. My wife also uses it at home.

      Could she donate an ovary to make up for the extra teste?

    3. Re:That's not good enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nonsense.

      The simplest way is to hand it out and use a hand counter as you do so. Of course, this means people have to go to a specific point to get Firefox, and take a load of floppy disks with them.

      To mitigate this problem I envisage several manual distribution centres, perhaps one each in:

      San Francisco
      New York
      London
      Bombay
      Tokyo
      Shanghai
      Sidney

      Then no- one will be more than about a thousand miles from a distributor.

      I see the distributors as guys very similar to street newspaper sellers, hanging around on the corner with a laptop in one hand and a counter in the other. Perhaps they could wear a sandwich board to defray expenses?

      This streamlined international distribution network could be recruited from the tramps who you find in every big city. See - social awareness as well!

    4. Re:That's not good enough by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1
      What if you just give them one of your testes or ovaries when you first download Firefox?

      I guess we won't be seeing Firefox commercials starring Lance Armstrong any time soon.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  50. Why RFID? by sasha328 · · Score: 1

    I mean in Australia, we've had magnetic strips on the passports for a while. All they do at customs is scan through a "card reader". There is no need to embed an RFID in the passport and worry about people reading it from a distance.

    1. Re:Why RFID? by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      doesn't someone have to check that the person matches the passport picture?

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  51. DING DING DING! by Trigun · · Score: 1

    There it is!

    Open Documents and MS version of XML are really about one thing: Data Mining. Why should you have to write a document, then a spreadsheet, then combine the two, when you can just specify a data source in the document in the first place. Then, take that data, and using the magic of XML, put it on the web. Take the data from the web, put it on your phone. Change it on your phone, and the document updates itself.

    XML is really only a middleware. The magic happens behind the scenes. Think of XML as a language, like english. You might speak German, Bob from Accounting might speak Arabic, and Jonie from HR might speak Swahili. You can't get anything done, unless two of you learn the other ones language, or you all start speaking english. Except in this case, English is well documented, carefully laid out, and makes sense. Microsoft's Version would be more like Egyptian heiroglyphics, but we don't have a Rosetta stone (yet).

    The big question is who is going to provide the common language. Microsoft wants it to be them, so everyone speaks Microsoft, or more to the point, only Microsoftians can be in on the conversation. Open Document Format means that everyone can learn, and that's all it takes.

  52. money by zogger · · Score: 1

    That is one of the issues there, not only an open document standard that could be read far into the future,by any citizen, using any OS, but weaning the state off of the regular large sums checks (i.e; tax money) they continually ship to MS for absolutely no other reasons other than inertia and intellectual apathy.

  53. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by ztirffritz · · Score: 1

    For every person like you, there is a person like me. I've downloaded it 8 times (for each version since...Phoenix?). I've installed it 80+ times though. Every computer on my network has it.

    --
    Why doesn't anything interesting happen when I have mod points?
  54. Firefox, Flock and Flexbeta by hackwrench · · Score: 3, Informative

    I always use the latest nightly build so I don't know how they count that.

    I notice that the Flexbeta review is not comparing Flock to the latest nightly builds of Firefox because some features the latest nightly builds have that are similar to Flock's are missing from the screenshots. They are giving Flock credit for features Flock may have inherited from the Firefox codebase.

  55. Big "Kidnap Me" Sign by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    RFID's in passports are one of the dumbest anti-terrorism ideas to make it past the drawing board. It has already been demonstrated that so-called "short-range" RFID tags can be read up to 70 feet away with easily attainable current technology, the tools will only get more sensitive as time passes.

    The "anti-skimming material" that the Dept of State references will make it harder to get exact bits off the RFID, but it sure won't stop someone from being able to at least tell if you have one of these RFID passports in your pocket.

    Carrying your passport around with you (as you are required to do in most foreign countries) will be the equivalent of wearing a big sign on your back that says, "Get Your Grudge On! Kidnap Me! I'm an American!"

    Short of sending hundreds of legit blank passports directly to Osama, I can't think of a passport plan likely to enable more terrorism than this cockamamie scheme.

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  56. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by acebone · · Score: 0

    One of my friends has neglected to download several copies of Firefox, I'm sure that many others do the same. This might make things add up in the end ?

    --
    Check out my PHP Url Validator
  57. Missing the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you guys are all missing the point. The e-Passports are being introduced to stop fraud not terrorism. The chips have the data on the front of the passport and a copy of your facial image. This is then digitally signed. The customs operator can then check the signature is still valid and that the face etc. still match.

    1. Re:Missing the point by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      I think you guys are all missing the point. The e-Passports are being introduced to stop fraud not terrorism.

      And why is "fraud" such a big problem? Because terrorists use fraudulent ID to secretly enter the country.

      Regular illegals just sneak in over the border when no one is looking, and of course, terrorists would never do that...

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  58. Educate by pinkocommie · · Score: 1

    As trite as this may sound, making a lot of polite noise explaining the issues to both the senator mentioned in the article and the secretary of state would be a good thing. Also email any Democratic action committee or PAC or the MA party itself detailing how this affects you and how this may cause you to switch party affiliations / question the core democratic values. I just sent out multiple letters and urge you to do the same Senator MARC R. PACHECO Marc.Pacheco@state.ma.us Secretary of State William Francis Galvin cis@sec.state.ma.us

  59. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by J0nne · · Score: 1

    So what,
    there's lots of people that download it through P2P (bittorrent, G2, ed2k, ...) that don't get counted. Sneakernet and copying the installer over LANs doesn't get counted either, and there are countless mirrors too.

    I think it's undercounted, not inflated.

    Anyway, download numbers don't really matter, it's usage share that matters. As there's probably a sizeable fraction of those downloads that get uninstalled right away.

  60. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by Fred_A · · Score: 1

    It means that it's likely that some people somewhere use Firefox.

    --

    May contain traces of nut.
    Made from the freshest electrons.
  61. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by cakesy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Good point.

    Of course this counter should only display INDETERMINATE.

    In fact all counters can produce errors of this sort, so they should all display INDETERMINATE.

    As a matter of fact, every counter in the entire world could have the same sort of errors, even clocks are not 100% correct, so every counter of any sort should simply display INDETERMINATE.

    I mean if you can't guarantee 100% accuracy, then there is not point in even attempting to measure anything.

    You should feel happy, you have made the world a better place.

    (accidently posted this to someone who wasn't a moron)

  62. Flexing what? by althalusprime · · Score: 1

    The people at flex beta neglected to realize that most of the differences in the Flock options panel have to do with Flock being based on the Firefox 1.5b2 release, not the 1.0.7 version. Obviously someone is not as diehard a fox fan as they would like us to think.

  63. .doc in 1994? by jesterzog · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The punch line? He sent it as an attachment, in .DOC format.

    This probably isn't very relevant -- I presume what you mean is that he sent it as a Microsoft Word document. Back in 1994 I remember that the .DOC format was more well known for being plain ASCII text --- it was a common extension for electronic software user manuals everywhere.

    Somewhere along the line, Microsoft decided to make it the default extension for Microsoft Word. I'm not sure if it was used in Word for DOS, but Word for Windows certainly became much more popular than the DOS one had ever been for all sorts of reasons. One of them was perhaps that shortly after Word for Windows was released, wherever it was installed, people who double-clicked on a .doc file in Windows would then be opening it on Word... never mind that it was plain ASCII text.

  64. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by Bogtha · · Score: 1

    I mean if you can't guarantee 100% accuracy, then there is not point in even attempting to measure anything.

    There's a difference between a) knowing that you are wrong, and not even having the slightest idea how much you are wrong by, and not even having the slightest idea in which direction you are wrong - and b) measuring something to some degree of accuracy and having a good idea of how close you are to the real number. Most measurements fall into the latter category. I am not arguing against them. I am arguing against measurements of the former type.

    (accidently posted this to someone who wasn't a moron)

    You misrepresent my argument and can't even hit reply properly, and you are calling me a moron?

    --
    Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
  65. "we will not be participating." by Strolls · · Score: 1

    I've read the Betanews & Boston Globe articles, and really can't make any sense of them. My understanding was that the Massachusetts state government was planning to switch to the OpenDocument format, yet here's this William F. Galvin saying "we will not be participating". Is Galvin not part of the Massachusetts state government? Could someone clarify for the benefit of someone not familiar with the US political system.

    1. Re:"we will not be participating." by rfc1394 · · Score: 1
      My understanding was that the Massachusetts state government was planning to switch to the OpenDocument format, yet here's this William F. Galvin saying "we will not be participating".
      Basically, the department that provides IT services to state agencies is setting this policy, and state agencies that either use them or are required to follow their requirements would then do so.
      Is Galvin not part of the Massachusetts state government? Could someone clarify for the benefit of someone not familiar with the US political system.
      It is, of course, politics in action. The Office of Secretary of State in most U.S. States is usually a constitutional officer under that state's constitution, and as such, can conceivably set its own standards on what it wants to do, since a constitutional officer probably can't be required to act according to rules set by a mere state-chartered agency or department such as whatever Massachusetts has set up. Galvin probably thinks he can get more mileage out of this, is afraid of the consequences of angering Microsoft, or wants to curry favor with them. (Or he's ignorant of the issues involved, a point probably extremely likely.)
      --
      The lessons of history teach us - if they teach us anything - that nobody learns the lessons that history teaches us.
    2. Re:"we will not be participating." by Strolls · · Score: 1
      The Office of Secretary of State in most U.S. States is usually a constitutional officer under that state's constitution
      Well that was clear! So he's an elected official? I can understand that their office would have a lot of independence, especially in the US. In the UK Members of Parliament have an autonomous budget for only one or two secretarial staff - all other staff in the government are civil servants and subject to civil service management & guidelines. (Well, that's traditionally the case, anyway - in these days of spin-doctoring I wonder how many are politically-affiliated "consultants" paid for miscellaneously?)

      Stroller.

  66. TeX is too powerful to be a document backend by roystgnr · · Score: 1

    Of the editors you've listed, let me use the one I've used before as an example:

    LyX is not a TeX editor. LyX is a .lyx editor which renders its output by exporting to .tex and which has a limited (of three files I'm currently working on, it completely failed to load two, and failed to load the images of the third) ability to import .tex files. Why is this ability limited? Not because TeX "isn't powerful enough" - ASCII isn't powerful, and I'm sure LyX imports .txt files just fine. It's not limited because LyX writers are lazy or don't care, surely - they obviously think that feature is important enough to include, and if it worked with any .tex file they wouldn't have needed to invent their own .lyx file format in the first place.

    I suspect TeX import is limited for the same reason that other programs' abilities to converse with the user are limited: because despite attempts like LyX and Clippy, dealing perfectly with input as widely variable as a complex .tex file or colloquial human speech would practically be artificial intelligence. I'm not saying the OpenDocument or MS Office file formats are simple, of course, but at least their Turing-complete syntax is limited to separate macros rather than being scatterable throughout the document.

  67. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by kevin+lyda · · Score: 1

    I've never downloaded it and yet it's installed on every computer I own. I know several other people this is true of as well. Essentially everyone who uses a modern linux distro uses firefox and I bet a vast majority never download it.

    The OpenCD and similar projects probably do the same for many windows users.

    And lastly corporate users usually have a central location for getting software. I highly doubt a company that requires firefox would have all their users download it.

    --
    US Citizen living abroad? Register to vote!
  68. RFID is a good idea by pointbeing · · Score: 1
    I'm the RFID guy for the federal agency where I work - assuming they're using passive tags they've got a range of ~3m (reliably, about one meter). All one would have to do is encrypt the data on the RFID tag and there'd be no reason to sniff tags.

    The Faraday cage is also a good idea.

    --
    we see things not as as they are, but as we are.
    -- anais nin
    1. Re:RFID is a good idea by The+Cookie+Monster · · Score: 1

      Not all nefarious uses of RFID tags in passports require being able to read the contents of it. Easy identification of Americans for kidnapping in foreign countries, landmines that go off when an American walks past etc.

      The safety of this will come down to how effective a faraday cage the passport cover really is in the face of high-powered readers - it's not a complete enclosure.

    2. Re:RFID is a good idea by pointbeing · · Score: 1
      Couple of very interesting points ;-)

      Within reason I'd think a 'high-powered reader' probably wouldn't make much difference if the tag was invisible to a normal reader - passive RFID tags are 'powered' by reflected energy.

      I found your example of the roadside bomb fascinating - and one I hadn't considered. However, whatever one used to hide the IED would also interfere with RFID data transfer - and we're talking about something that pretty much has to be close-range.

      But you're right - there are quite a few security concerns. It's not cost effective for the gummint to create a custom solution, so you can pretty much be assured that any passport RFID solution is gonna use COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) products. If that's the case there may not be any way to tell the difference between a passport and a box of cornflakes without actually reading the tag.

      Anyway, thanks for the food for thought this morning. It was a great topic to bat around with my morning coffee ;-)

      --
      we see things not as as they are, but as we are.
      -- anais nin
    3. Re:RFID is a good idea by The+Cookie+Monster · · Score: 1
      By hight powered, I meant the reader is directing a lot of power in the direction of the RFID.

      Based on that testing, the Department, in cooperation with the GPO,
      will include an anti-skimming material in the front cover and spine of
      the electronic passport that will mitigate the threat of skimming from
      distances beyond the ten centimeters prescribed by the ISO 14443
      technology, as long as the passport book is closed or nearly closed.
      Note they chose the word mitigate, my understanding is that electric fields and EM radiation such as RF have an inverse squared relationship with distance, so if it's readable by a normal reader at 10cm, then a reader supplying 100 times the watts will induce enough power from a meter away, and 400 times the watts will induce enough power from 2 meters away. Parabolic antennas and transmitters could aid this in certain applications.

      On the bright side, any sort of land mine would need a power source, making them harder to hide (clipped onto power poles etc), parabolic antennas wouldn't be suitable for that application, and if it ever became a reality then americans would just start carrying their passports in little passport wallets that are a full faraday cage.
  69. Electronic Petitions are worthless by C0deM0nkey · · Score: 1
    PLEASE read about internet petitions and their relevance at Snopes.com - it relates to online petitions in a political context, it is certainly opinion, but it is well-reasoned and equally valid in this context.

    A few things to consider:

    Online "petitions" like this are meaningless - anyone could sit down and throw together a long list of names and no one would know whether they were accurate or not. Sending a list of names to someone you are trying to influence is irrelevant - any individual who makes policy based upon an online and un-verifiable list of names should not be in a decision-making role.

    If you want to effect change, do the following:

    1. Write the decision-maker, in ink, on paper. Inundate them with snail mail; it has a visual impact - email is easy to ignore.
    2. Call the decision-maker on the phone; tie up his business line and he is likely to take notice.
    3. Sign a petition, in ink. Online petitions are worthless for the reasons given above. If you want to initiate an online petition, form a lobby, accumulate a membership and write or speak on behalf of your members in lieu of an online petition.
  70. Re:Rosetta Stone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, there is a Rosetta stone for Microsoft XML - unfortunately, you have to make a blood oath to the dark powers in order to make use of it. Or something like that. . .

  71. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Using the number of downloads to measure popularity of a product is like using software lines of code (SLOC) to measure productivity of a developer. Looking closely at these numbers and the individual cases will reveal that these numbers are not accurate measures. On the other hand, when taken over a long term and with appropriate statistical analysis, the SLOC has been used to predict costs and time involved in implementing new software features, products, and enhancements.

    Call it a paradox of the universe, but using low-quality metrics as a predictor for the future is better than making a wild guess with no metrics. This works because while x-y=0 may be false, if x-y=b within a given margin, you can still use this information as a good predictor.

  72. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by Maow · · Score: 1
    not every stat needs explaining.

    Thanks, Einstein, but 96.94% do require explainin'.

  73. Re:Electronic Petitions are full of worth by oldosadmin · · Score: 1

    Hey, just wanted to make a point: This isn't for political, or "you have to do X because Y people signed" deal. This is meant to get a rough estimate of people who use/would use MS if they supported OpenDoucment. We are keeping a list of all people with >500 computers, and manually confirming all large submissions. It's going to be more reliable than your average.

    --
    Jay | http://oldos.org
  74. Re:Electronic Petitions are full of worth by C0deM0nkey · · Score: 1
    We are keeping a list of all people with >500 computers, and manually confirming all large submissions. It's going to be more reliable than your average.

    I would say you are acting more like a lobby, which is probably going to prove more valuable than the average online petition - I still have my doubts about whether anyone will take a list, unsigned either digitally (via PGP or its ilk) or manually, seriously but I commend you for your effort and wish you good luck.

  75. Re:Firefox fans ... celebrate 100 million download by Bogtha · · Score: 1

    using low-quality metrics as a predictor for the future is better than making a wild guess with no metrics.

    And doing neither by admitting that you don't know is best of all. Bad information is worse than no information at all, because at least when you don't have any information, you know you don't have any information, and you don't mislead others into thinking that you have good information.

    This works because while x-y=0 may be false, if x-y=b within a given margin, you can still use this information as a good predictor.

    That's just it, this data has a completely unknown and unknowable error margin. While the point you make is valid, it simply doesn't apply to this data.

    --
    Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha