That's a pretty crappy test criteria-- limiting the input to 128kbit/sec-- for those of us itnerested in achieving as-close-to-CD-as-possible performance from our compressed music.
I assume 128 kbit/sec was chosen because (a) limiting the tests to a single bitrate simplifies the testing enormously, and (b) 128 kbit/sec is the most common bitrate used, thanks to the misleading claims that MP3 at 128 kbit/sec is "CD quality".
Yes, it would be nice to have tests at 192 or 256 kbit/sec. It would also be nice to have tests at 96 or 64 kbit/sec to see which codec does best in low-bandwidth situations. But 128 kbit/sec tests are valid too. (If anything, this slants the test towards Vorbis enormously, since 128 kbit/sec MP3 sounds like crap even with a good encoder, while 128 kbit/sec Vorbis sounds pretty good.)
Basically: don't assume that you are the target audience of every test.
LAME is, by far and away, the best I have heard yet
Samba has no Null Session support. Samba does not send out lists of users (the equivalent of/etc/passwd under shadowing) like NT does. It is very difficult to break into a Linux box through SMB networking.
This is true, but in addition to the superior security, I find that simply as a user I prefer the way Samba works. When I browse a Windows machine's list of shares, I see everything -- even shares that I'm not allowed to access. I can only find out which ones I can use by trying to access them and seeing which ones succeed. With Samba, by contrast, I find that I can only see the shares that I am allowed to access. One might say that the the signal-to-noise ratio is better with Samba, since you aren't shown things that aren't relevant to you.
I like this sentence from the sans.org article: "Sendmail has a large number of vulnerabilities and must be regularly updated and patched." One might go further and suggest that switching to another mail transport is the best solution. On my small site, I use exim; other people like postfix or qmail.
I was using Galeon for a while, but it seemed that with every release, Mozilla's GUI got a bit faster and Galeon's got a bit slower. I finally ran out of patience with the whole thing of having to wait for a new Galeon before I could upgrade Mozilla, and now I just use Mozilla. Also, I'm much happier with Mozilla once I finally figured out how to change its menu and dialog fonts to match the rest of my desktop. (I still wish Mozilla didn't have its own theme engine. It uses GTK already; why not just use the current GTK theme?)
A "white hat worm" of this sort could be made, but its deployment would be just as illegal as the original "black hat worm" it was created to fight. You're still making unauthorized use of someone else's computer. It doesn't matter that you have good intentions. And what if a bug in your code crashes some machines? How do you prove it wasn't intentional, and that your "white hat worm" isn't really a "black hat worm" in disguise?
Not in this case, because a safe copy of diff (executed from a read-only floppy made at the time the system was first built) said that there were no differences between the installed copies of ls, top, and ps and the copies on the RedHat 6.2 CD.
The problem is that you don't know what they're doing with your system.
A co-worker of mine discovered earlier this year that his Red Hat workstation had been rooted. They had taken over an infrequently used user-level account and were using it to run an IRC server with which to coordinate automated DDOS attacks. So his machine wasn't seeing a whole lot of traffic, nor was it, itself, damaged, but it was being used to cause a lot of trouble for other people.
Interestingly, also, apparently some kernel patches had been applied, because commands like "top", "ps -ef", and "ls/proc" did not show the IRC server process, which nevertheless was there if you knew very specifically what to look for.
But how many people actually know if the size() method in the vector class in whatever library they use (e.g. Java, C++, etc) actually use lazy evaluation or overeager evaluation?
Well, in C++ at least, the vector class's definition requires that accessors such as size() have constant time execution. I'm not sure how many C++ programmers could have told you that, though.
Yeah, I didn't want to sign up with Big Brother's Universal ID system either. I never liked tattoos, especially on the forehead. At first, I hated it. But then I started discovering all the wonderful things it let me do. Whole new vistas opened up before me. Now I don't have to carry a wallet anymore. Whenever I need to prove my identity, or charge something to any of my credit cards or debit accounts, I just do the old Kung-Fu thing and slam my forehead down on the sensor. The first time I did that, I got a little carried away and actually broke the poor thing. Gave myself quite a headache too. So now I take it a little easier. Yeah, I know in theory every fact about my life, including my current GPS position, is on file on a server up in Washington State, but I've gotten used to it. Life is just so much easier now that I've got The Mark.
Don't worry. You may not like the idea now, but you'll be one of Us soon.
No, Galeon displays everything beautifully for me. I'm using Galeon 0.11 with Mozilla 0.9.1 on Debian Sid (unstable).
Given that Galeon is just using Mozilla's rendering engine, I'm not sure how it could be introducing rendering problems of its own (other than, say, ROT13'ing all the HTML before letting Gecko see it).
I tried compiling myself, but gcc, f77, kylix, and every other compiler I could find said I had syntax errors. Do you know what language people are written in?
Of course, IE 7.0 will have yet another wonderful feature that edits out any negative reference to Microsoft, or favorable reference to non-Microsoft software. So your "IE sucks, get Mozilla" page will be helpfully rewritten as an innocuous 404 error. After all, even members of Congress think censorware is a great idea, so how can you blame Microsoft, the great Innovators, from taking the idea to the next level?
Yes, you're right. MBCS strings can't easily be scanned backwards because it's a little tricky to figure out whether the preceding byte is the trailing half of a double-byte character, but that's not true of UTF-8, which guarantees that the leading byte of a character will never have its high bit set, while all other bytes will. So when scanning backwards through a string, you just back up your pointer until you find a byte with a cleared high bit, and that's the start of the preceding character.
UCS-2 is not the only form of Unicode, and it's well known that 64k characters isn't enough. Besides, why should ordinary ISO-8859 (Latin-1) text be doubled in size by making every character 16 bits? UTF-8 is a much better solution, and it is good enough. Granted, string handling with variable-length characters is a bit of a pain (especially if you're used to assuming that a buffer of N bytes is long enough for a string of N characters, or you want to scan the string backwards), but it's the best solution we've got. It's the recommended encoding for XML documents, and is used today in web browsers (check out that "Always send URLs as UTF-8" option in Internet Explorer).
It is a shame that there are so many different Unicode encodings. I think we ought to just standardize on UTF-8.
Bad move there, threatening the life of the President of the United States. I expect that any minute now, the Secret Service will be knocking on your door to take you into custody. At your trial, the one nasty sentence in your comment (the one following the phrase "into this:") will be presented as evidence against you (though without the trailing question mark), and the context will be inadmissible because context is not relevant to the crime for which you will be on trial. I hope you like anal sex; I think you'll be getting a lot of it.
The first thing to do is replace those with safe alternatives (strncpy, strncat, snprintf)
Of course, just robotically changing strcpy to strncpy doesn't fix anything, since strncpy does not null-terminate the copy if the source is longer than the destination buffer. By contrast, strncat does guarantee that the destination buffer will have a null terminator.
There is a fundamental problem at the root of this, which is that the C standard library is hideously irregular, and the C language itself is not meant to be "safe". It's an okay language for writing hardware drivers and other low-level system components, but a safer, more abstract language would be a better choice for applications.
The only time I ever had wrist problems from computer use was just after an "ergonomics expert" "corrected" my workstation setup. I put it back the way it had been previously, and the pain went away. So I think I'll just leave it the way it is, whether OSHA likes it or not.
.ogg files are Ogg Vorbis audio files. Ogg Vorbis is conceptually similar to mp3, in that it compresses audio data by discarding "inaudible" material, but is a different algorithm, and thus not covered by the mp3 patents. It is open-source, also. OV's designers claim that it should scale to low bitrates better than mp3, and should provide at least equal, possibly better, sound quality at similar bit rates. I listen to both mp3 and OV using WinAmp (there is a decoder plug-in for WinAmp at the OV site, and one for XMMS also for Linux users), and I don't really hear a significant difference, but I like the patent-free, open-source nature of OV, so I think I will be using it instead of mp3 for my own CD ripping.
I work outside of Chicago as a software engineer for 40-45 hours a week and paid overtime. Sure, I'm not pulling down 100K+ like some of you 80-hour folks...
Well, I make over $100k as a software engineer and rarely work more than 45 hours a week. What am I doing right that you're not?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, it would be nice to have tests at 192 or 256 kbit/sec. It would also be nice to have tests at 96 or 64 kbit/sec to see which codec does best in low-bandwidth situations. But 128 kbit/sec tests are valid too. (If anything, this slants the test towards Vorbis enormously, since 128 kbit/sec MP3 sounds like crap even with a good encoder, while 128 kbit/sec Vorbis sounds pretty good.)
Basically: don't assume that you are the target audience of every test.
For MP3, sure. I prefer Vorbis.This is true, but in addition to the superior security, I find that simply as a user I prefer the way Samba works. When I browse a Windows machine's list of shares, I see everything -- even shares that I'm not allowed to access. I can only find out which ones I can use by trying to access them and seeing which ones succeed. With Samba, by contrast, I find that I can only see the shares that I am allowed to access. One might say that the the signal-to-noise ratio is better with Samba, since you aren't shown things that aren't relevant to you.
I like this sentence from the sans.org article: "Sendmail has a large number of vulnerabilities and must be regularly updated and patched." One might go further and suggest that switching to another mail transport is the best solution. On my small site, I use exim; other people like postfix or qmail.
I was using Galeon for a while, but it seemed that with every release, Mozilla's GUI got a bit faster and Galeon's got a bit slower. I finally ran out of patience with the whole thing of having to wait for a new Galeon before I could upgrade Mozilla, and now I just use Mozilla. Also, I'm much happier with Mozilla once I finally figured out how to change its menu and dialog fonts to match the rest of my desktop. (I still wish Mozilla didn't have its own theme engine. It uses GTK already; why not just use the current GTK theme?)
Using, presumably, the calculus of intentionality...
A "white hat worm" of this sort could be made, but its deployment would be just as illegal as the original "black hat worm" it was created to fight. You're still making unauthorized use of someone else's computer. It doesn't matter that you have good intentions. And what if a bug in your code crashes some machines? How do you prove it wasn't intentional, and that your "white hat worm" isn't really a "black hat worm" in disguise?
Right, but in 2.77 they'll be including it by default. You'll get Vorbis support simply by installing Winamp. No need to download a separate plugin.
In fact, the word from Nullsoft is that they have an Ogg Vorbis plugin that will be included in Winamp 2.77.
Not in this case, because a safe copy of diff (executed from a read-only floppy made at the time the system was first built) said that there were no differences between the installed copies of ls, top, and ps and the copies on the RedHat 6.2 CD.
A co-worker of mine discovered earlier this year that his Red Hat workstation had been rooted. They had taken over an infrequently used user-level account and were using it to run an IRC server with which to coordinate automated DDOS attacks. So his machine wasn't seeing a whole lot of traffic, nor was it, itself, damaged, but it was being used to cause a lot of trouble for other people.
Interestingly, also, apparently some kernel patches had been applied, because commands like "top", "ps -ef", and "ls /proc" did not show the IRC server process, which nevertheless was there if you knew very specifically what to look for.
mov ax,4C00h
int 21h
which in turn is an MS-DOS call to terminate the current process, returning an exit code of zero.
So what's your point?
Don't worry. You may not like the idea now, but you'll be one of Us soon.
No, Galeon displays everything beautifully for me. I'm using Galeon 0.11 with Mozilla 0.9.1 on Debian Sid (unstable).
Given that Galeon is just using Mozilla's rendering engine, I'm not sure how it could be introducing rendering problems of its own (other than, say, ROT13'ing all the HTML before letting Gecko see it).
I tried compiling myself, but gcc, f77, kylix, and every other compiler I could find said I had syntax errors. Do you know what language people are written in?
Of course, IE 7.0 will have yet another wonderful feature that edits out any negative reference to Microsoft, or favorable reference to non-Microsoft software. So your "IE sucks, get Mozilla" page will be helpfully rewritten as an innocuous 404 error. After all, even members of Congress think censorware is a great idea, so how can you blame Microsoft, the great Innovators, from taking the idea to the next level?
Yes, you're right. MBCS strings can't easily be scanned backwards because it's a little tricky to figure out whether the preceding byte is the trailing half of a double-byte character, but that's not true of UTF-8, which guarantees that the leading byte of a character will never have its high bit set, while all other bytes will. So when scanning backwards through a string, you just back up your pointer until you find a byte with a cleared high bit, and that's the start of the preceding character.
If you're going to troll, at least make an account for it. Posting at 0 doesn't do you much good.
No, because the aliens are all so technologically and socially advanced that they've standardized on Esperanto.
It is a shame that there are so many different Unicode encodings. I think we ought to just standardize on UTF-8.
Bad move there, threatening the life of the President of the United States. I expect that any minute now, the Secret Service will be knocking on your door to take you into custody. At your trial, the one nasty sentence in your comment (the one following the phrase "into this:") will be presented as evidence against you (though without the trailing question mark), and the context will be inadmissible because context is not relevant to the crime for which you will be on trial. I hope you like anal sex; I think you'll be getting a lot of it.
There is a fundamental problem at the root of this, which is that the C standard library is hideously irregular, and the C language itself is not meant to be "safe". It's an okay language for writing hardware drivers and other low-level system components, but a safer, more abstract language would be a better choice for applications.
The only time I ever had wrist problems from computer use was just after an "ergonomics expert" "corrected" my workstation setup. I put it back the way it had been previously, and the pain went away. So I think I'll just leave it the way it is, whether OSHA likes it or not.
.ogg files are Ogg Vorbis audio files. Ogg Vorbis is conceptually similar to mp3, in that it compresses audio data by discarding "inaudible" material, but is a different algorithm, and thus not covered by the mp3 patents. It is open-source, also. OV's designers claim that it should scale to low bitrates better than mp3, and should provide at least equal, possibly better, sound quality at similar bit rates. I listen to both mp3 and OV using WinAmp (there is a decoder plug-in for WinAmp at the OV site, and one for XMMS also for Linux users), and I don't really hear a significant difference, but I like the patent-free, open-source nature of OV, so I think I will be using it instead of mp3 for my own CD ripping.