The "anti-malware" should have built secure hashes of every program and configuration file. This should have been kept under a public crypto key, and the key to actually *update* that database should be keyed with a passphrase or key (usb, floppy, whatever) that only our erstwhile user knows/has. Or, a fingerprint (like on my T43 laptop).
When the "tech" added, or modified ANYTHING in the system, the user should then be alerted as to what was changed and when. Also, the "tech" should have to describe WHY the change was made.
Basic stuff. Not expensive -- after all, doesn't the anti-malware software ALREADY check file? Rather, I suspect that it doesn't work this way.
Actually, the tech shouldn't have root access, either, but I am probably pushing things here. After all, it would be easy enough to just replace files on the hard drive directly. Still, can't regenerate the secure hashes file (without breaking public key crypto, or be really persistent at password guessing).
Like I said, simple and basic stuff. Class action stuff, potentially (if *I* used Windows and it didn't do these things, I would be pissed. However, XP sort of excluded itself, by its "phone home" policy. I simply wasn't ALLOWED to use it for the longest time, and now I really don't know much about it).
Ok, let's start with the OS. JCL (Job Control Language) is an art unto itself.//GENCUST3 JOB//COPCUST3 EXEC PGM=IEBGENER,REGION=4096K//SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=*//SYSIN DD DUMMY//SYSUT1 DD DSN=CUST52,DISP=SHR//SYSUT2 DD DSN=CUST53,DISP=OLD,// UNIT=SYSALLDA,// VOL=SER=CES001
(My bad, if it's not kosher JCL -- it's been a while). Ok, that would be "cp CUST52 CUST53" on most Unix boxes, approximately. And this is the language you will deal with to compile your programs, link them, run them, Editing? Again, you will find it strange. But, you will probably be using Xedit, and not punch cards. The language? Ties back into this stuff with a certain intimacy.
Sure, take a week. I'll wait.
After this, you will discover that there were databases that were NOT relational. Then, tackle CICS. And wait till you discover that this stuff isn't even ASCII! Figure you'll have to learn about sort orders again. Perhaps your (1 week) time estimate is a bit off. To become productive, I'd give it 2 years. Only 100 times longer than your estimate.
After all, the Tripwire program (Kim and Spafford) was created in 1992. That would have been in the Windows 3.1 era. Windows 98 doesn't include it (My wife uses that product), but it should be a standard part (or option) in later versions. I always presumed that it (or its underlying concept) is a standard part of "anti-malware" software. I do have an instance of Windows XP SP2 running, and it complains ON EACH BOOT of missing an approved anti-malware program. Mind you, since I don't run anti-malware, or a firewall, the XP instance is run in an isolated virtual container.
Of course she didn't trust the technician; why didn't she apply the obvious measures?
Don't the commercial anti-malware programs or Windows incorporate this protection?
Now, it would be difficult to defend against boot-sector attacks (I was reading an article on Microsoft Vista, and it's defense against this -- also ref./. and its recent article on the subject), but that would take considerably more skill than the typical PC jockey has. Typical prevention of this would be (at least with the COMMERICIAL anti-malware programs), should be a boot and scan from CD-ROM. Something easily mentioned in the anti-malware instructions (Note that my Windows 98 CD doesn't boot; a boot floppy is required, making this defense difficult in THAT environment. But, like I said, I *know* Windows 98 doesn't offer this protection. Windows XP? Certainly should, but with the warning about not running anti-malware, maybe it defers this function to external software. Which is ok, after all Tripwire is external software for Unix as well).
I have a hard time actually believing that Windows could be such a security clusterfuck, that a vendor default installation could suffer from problems like this.
About the only thing I can say is: Class-action suit hammer time! This is SO basic -- it's like seatbelts.
Of course we are -- the idea is new, inspired by reports of data theft. Obviously the organization is small; doesn't have a security officer for such matters. No real thought of security before, so someone who is not qualified (self admitted) has been made responsible.
The good news? Its Vista, the security is there -- "bitlocker" and that can make use of tpm chips. Recommendation? Use it, but PUSH ALL SECURITY QUESTIONS TO MICROSOFT.
The last point is critical. Say something like "Vista comes with *insert blurb* claimed to *blurb*, and it is support with the standard Microsoft *blurb*". Fill in the blanks, as appropriate. Next, try not to get involved in the implementation at all.
So we agree - good. I guess I just wasn't clear on what a "crazy zealot" was. Thanks for clarifying.
And I am glad that we can take the idea "Linux is good, because it is important enough to keep vendors honest" home. Maybe I'll make that my sig (I'll have to mull it over).
So, you think it would have been fixed if there had not been angry, almost rabid, users? You know, the ones you refer to as "crazy zealots"?
I don't believe so. I believe the issue would have been ignored, and Linux would have been patched in some obscene manner to "work around" the issue. Giving a bad reputation to Linux; "it doesn't work -- what kind of fucking shit is THIS?". Hurting the reputations of many developers.
Sometimes, the only sane response is to be angry and rabid.
Was it a bug? Was it deliberate? Who knows. That debate is still open. What IS important is that there is at least ONE open source OS with the clout to keep vendors honest.
Ok, I understand, they are smooth 'n all -- oh, you mean there are no USABILITY issues. Gotchya. And... wrong.
Example: Someone (my wife) using Windows 98. Really. With universal usb storage driver. Buys her sister an ipod and a CD to rip (audio book). The ipod is the little one with no display, 1gb of memory, cheap. Really, its a destructo audio book player. Limited instructions, maybe she missed the part about "itunes" but I don't think it was in the instructions!
Anyway, the CD is ripped onto the computer, and the ipod is plugged in. It shows up as a mass storage device. She copies the rip to the device, and charges. However, the ipod won't stay on! She RETURNS the ipod to the store as defective. The service guy says "Um, you need this application called iTunes" - Of course it is not supplied with the ipod. Too cheap to put a mini-cd in the packaging!
iTunes doesn't work with Windows 98. XP, maybe (I don't know). Fortunately, GtkPod is available for Linux (which we also use).
Let's break it down -
The ipod needs custom software, YET responds as a USB mass storage device - this is good design? Apple doesn't put a cheap CD into the box with the software - come on, that's just bad - now an internet connection is REQUIRED. iTunes doesn't work with Windows 98. Ok, I'll grant you this. The ipod doesn't stay turned on if there is no magic itunes stuff on it. It has a nifty color changing led and all, but that isn't used to display any sort of distinguishing error - you have to KNOW the magic to get it to go.
And you think Apple doesn't have jagged edges... I would imagine that iTunes probably comes with the Mac computer, so it is probably seamless 'n all. But the chutzpah! I should spend $600 so a $50 product works?
It's a two-cut - short in the front, long in the back...
GIF in the front, ZIP (JAR) in the back. Just append them. It's an old stego trick. Of course we can hide the "zip" part as well -- append a block of zero to the end of the file.:
$ cat Chess_knight_icon.png a.zip >a.png $ file a.png a.png: PNG image data, 21 x 21, 4-bit colormap, non-interlaced $ unzip -v a.png Archive: a.png warning [a.png]: 257 extra bytes at beginning or within zipfile
(attempting to process anyway)..listing elided to bypass junk filter..
See? It even works with PNG format! Now, a warning - zip will search for a valid zip header from the end of the file, so to hide the fact that its a zip file (for stego), you have to jam in a lot of random crap at the end.
IE7 ignores "content-type", and uses its best guess. My guess? "facebook" (whatever) accepts the file as an image, because of the GIF stuff in the front. It shouldn't even care about the extension, so "jar" may even be ok (haven't tried this at all, play with it).
When IE gets the reference to download a "jar" from facebook, it does it -- and blithely ignores the "content-type image/gif". It looks at it -- its a ZIP, probably jar, and... bobs you uncle. I know IE7 ignores content-type text/plain - feed it something that smells like html, and it renders. Which makes display of text documents with htmly stuff kind of tough.
The GPL license does not in any way have anything to do with "developer freedom".
Also, the end user does NOT have to agree with the GPL in order to use software licensed under it. "Accept", in this case, has the same meaning as "Do Not Accept".
The only thing is the reuse of code, or the creation of derivative works. Ordinarily, a developer has NO SUCH RIGHT. If code is licensed with the GPL, there is such a right, but there is also an obligation.
The developer STILL has the right not to use the code.
If you want "developer freedom", use BSD, or, possibly, just assign the work to the public domain.
I do like your use of the words "GNUtard" and "Freetard".
However, Copyright is an interesting "Right". For example:
\ int factorial(int n)
if (n = 2)
2;
else
n * factorial(n - 1);
There you go, a factorial function in Scheme (gambit-c, to be precise). I could grant you no right to use this sequence (default), the right to use it in an unlimited way, or the right to use it with restrictions...
PS. You have the right to use it any damn way you want. I declare it "public domain".
Both GNU and Microsoft grant rights with restrictions. In Microsofts case, the restrictions have ranged from the "ordinary" (thou shalt not distribute any library, except specific binaries which MS shall specify), to the "strange" (thou shalt not produce a competitive product with the supplied material; or thou shalt not publish benchmarking results of this code). It hasn't been particularly clear WHAT the damn restrictions were in some cases. Microsoft may be replaced by other vendors -- I am just in a mood to pick on Microsoft these days.
The GPL? At least its clear -- the code is supplied in source. You may USE this source any damn way you want. If you DISTRIBUTE the source, or something derived from it, you are obligated to publish the source or derivative source. Simple.
New one to me. I like it, although I am not a "Freetard". My actual title is "Solaris Solutions Architect". Which does tend to highlight my bias.
As to the "support" -- that would be NFS server and NIS server support only. No client support in either of those "howtos". All I want is the standard NIS automount maps, autofs, and nfs. Can I have it please? NFS client support is possible -- Beame & Whiteside, etc. As is (limited) server support. NFS server is more difficult, given the lack of the "inode" concept in Windows.
After all, both Solaris and Linux can sign-in using a NIS passwd map; indeed, the same one. They can both read automount maps -- older versions of Linux didn't support direct maps (only indirect), which was a problem -- Windows XP (can't speak to Vista) doesn't support any of this. Microsoft best practices is to publish the map to a Windows Server (but this is only a 7 machine network).
As to X11 support, why not? The Windows API can be mapped into X; or this can be done at the driver layer (which would be actually easier). A small modification to the Windowing system itself would then allow remoting Windows applications to X servers. Instead, we get proprietary stuff. Why? Note that an X server can be efficiently mapped to the Windows API (ref Hummingbird, etc.).
But this should be academic. Why isn't Windows source generally available? Then NIS signon could be grafted in, and autofs integrated. Wait a minute -- there are organizations that would actually PAY for these features. Even if Windows is NOT source available, which is the case, these things should be readily available on the market. Why aren't they? Best answer (unfortunately) involves conspiracy.
Of course that's true. I fully expect that Microsoft hires passionate, qualified people.
But that doesn't change things. Microsoft is still a monopoly, and has to operate under monopoly strictures. Microsoft still doesn't support basic protocols like NIS, NFS and X-11. Microsoft forked 3D development. Microsoft did bundling arrangements. Microsoft did lock out other software. Microsoft did steal software.
Why? Because they could. Monopoly is truly a lovely thing. Did those passionate, qualified people directly involve themselves in these activities? Maybe not. Doesn't matter, they are still voluntarily employed at this company. This company that SPECIFICALLY stated plans to destroy FOSS.
What has to happen? Just joining the Apache consortium isn't enough to create trust now -- Microsoft has to become more supportive of FOSS -- than it's competition.
Who is competitive? Let's take Solaris (operating system), Java (platform), OpenOffice (desktop). In other words, Microsoft has to become as supportive of FOSS as SUN. As a start (SUN is not a monopoly).
"Computer Science isn't a Science, and it's not about Computers".
It's not a science because the scientific method doesn't apply; math is also not a science. It's not about computers; indeed it is impossible to build the general Turing Machine -- you can't make an infinite tape.
The EXPECTED behavior of that command is to upgrade to the latest version of the Firefox that is installed. I guess that "--dist-upgrade-mode" may allow that.
However, there is no "upgrade" path here -- these are separate major versions.
Imagining that there IS such a thing will either (1) produce the effect known as "rpm hell" or (2) break working systems.
To give you an "easier" example -- I have a lot of scheme code compiled with gambit-c. These are MUCH more important than "Firefox", because its MY CODE. Some may use system libraries. Please guarantee that upgrading Firefox will NOT break these applications!
Note that the only solution to this problem is "frozen" systems, with branching updates for security at each level.
Or, Ubuntu. Simply because if you don't include the development tools, you generally won't get into this problem. Personally? I like the Fedora approach.
Sorry, some people aren't getting the joke. (you got an "Insightful" mod?). Obviously didn't notice the use of the words "sublime" and "ridiculous" in your last sentence -- that was the tell...
So, I have to hit them over the head - mkv video native support? Of course, mkv is a COMPLETELY OPEN format. Native support is in (most) open OSs by default. Native 64 bit software? If you have the source, rebuild it. Multithreading word processor? Of absolutely no benefit.
Similar things happen with Windows -- and are usually addressed by gurus (hopefully in an article, so the rest of us benefit).
The "meme" has to go around. In your case - try Alt-F7 and move the dialog up.
In general, you are right. This stuff is not documented (or poorly documented). With the eeepc, it is likely that the "meme" will go around, and the problem will be considered solved. Not by a software change. Software for the eeepc will be JUDGED on how well the dialogs fit, sure, but the solution for the bad apps will be Alt-F7. And every eeepc user will (eventually) "just know" how this works.
Making for platform lock-in. The claim will be: It Just Works.
coco2 + os-9. But... os-9 was available separately, and could be run on any compatible system.
apple ][. But... the firmware (it had no "OS") was not sold separately. Nothing prevented me from buying the Apple ][, removing the ROMs, and putting them into another system.
etc. (I am not going to take EACH case apart, just enough for you to get the idea).
OS X *is* available for purchase as a separate product. The case rests on (1) EULA, and (2) Copyright. EULA is quite weak here. Copyright is stronger (since a copy of the product must be made in order to use it). Sane copyright law mentions this case. From Canadian Copyright Law, which I am more familiar with:
" 3. (1) For the purposes of this Act, "copyright", in relation to a work, means the sole right to produce or reproduce the work or any substantial part thereof in any material form whatever, to perform the work or any substantial part thereof in public or, if the work is unpublished, to publish the work or any substantial part thereof, and includes the sole right... (h) in the case of a computer program that can be reproduced in the ordinary course of its use, other than by a reproduction during its execution in conjunction with a machine, device or computer, to rent out the computer program, "
which means I cannot rent out the program, or reproduce it, but to copy it into RAM or hard disk for execution is allowed. Of course if you DON'T have such a clause, the simple copying of the program to facilitate its use may need to be authorized by the Copyright holder (Apple).
Simple approach -- keep copies of install media of application and os. Create vmware machine, and install on that. Copy OS library files off, and create environment on modern OS.
Oldest Linux I have: yggdrasil. Oldest libraries I have running: Redhat 6.2
Now, I haven't tried installing yggdrasil into vmware (yet), but Redhat 6.2 is just fine. You can leave the whole mess in vmware (and, for business use, I would recommend it), but for personal "grins", copy the relevant files and try running on a modern version.
Windows back compatibility? How far back do you want to go?
Wrong - try MS Bookshelf 92. Most of the "technologies" touted for that time period are now broken. Even when implemented by Microsoft. I wonder if "MS Bob" works (I doubt it). Most other shell extensions of that era no longer work.
So we know the window of compatibility is less than 16 years.
Maybe the "era of compatibility" extends back to Windows 95... I don't know (and, really, don't care much). Windows users probably have a much better idea than I do.
The XV overlay feature of your X server does the same thing -- a key color is replaced with video. You can, of course CHANGE the key color (default is actually visible in the nVidia driver): I use R=0 B=1 G=0 which is close to black. It's the XV_COLORKEY property. Try setting it to pure black or white, and put a terminal window on top of the video -- lovely effect.
Just guessing that it is mixer loopback. But, not being a Windows (tm) user, I don't know. I would have assumed that a "stereo/mono mix option" would be a 5.1/7.1 down-mix.
Please clarify (no, I am not going to turn in my "geek" designation -- I am just a Solaris/Linux user).
So its 676GB of usable storage. As you can see, I am running low... and want to upgrade.
But, like a full backup, it takes a LOT of time to back this up. It's 100mb ethernet, 10Mb/s (best case). 2 minutes per gigabyte, 22 hours at full tilt. Adding reasonable "slush", we are talking 30 or more hours to load the data into a new array.
Which is a problem that (in theory) should be faced by any user of 250GB or greater drives. Puts your drives out of commission for too long. My solution? Vital (not replaceable) data gets backed up, the rest just relies on RAID. I USE my array, and cannot afford that sort of downtime. (also, I haven't seen a USB link that is reliable enough for this task:( And, I want to run MD5 hashes on the files to ensure that they are copied without corruption, adding 30% to the total time). When I deploy my new array, it will be in a brand new system, and I have a script that creates links for all media files (movies, ISOs, tv shows, audio files) back to the original storage. This takes under an hour (simply iterating the directory of the RAID is fast)
[root@ganymede raid]# time find . | wc -l
115961
real 1m19.454s user 0m1.310s sys 0m3.480s [root@ganymede raid]#
After the deployment of the new array (scheduled for a few hours every night), links are replaced by the actual files. This process takes several weeks, after which the old array can be "retired". Since it isn't much good, it gets to be the "primary" backup for important files (those that are locally synchronized every night).
I have to run through this process (or similar) every two years. I know that not many computer users do this; so I suspect that drive capacity has become a bit of a numbers game (oh look, mine is bigger than yours!) in the last couple of years. Either that, or a lot of people are REALLY going to have problems in a couple of years.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's the thing. .NET *is* the sandbox. You can't put the sandbox in the sandbox.
Did you read my post?
The "anti-malware" should have built secure hashes of every program and configuration file. This should have been kept under a public crypto key, and the key to actually *update* that database should be keyed with a passphrase or key (usb, floppy, whatever) that only our erstwhile user knows/has. Or, a fingerprint (like on my T43 laptop).
When the "tech" added, or modified ANYTHING in the system, the user should then be alerted as to what was changed and when. Also, the "tech" should have to describe WHY the change was made.
Basic stuff. Not expensive -- after all, doesn't the anti-malware software ALREADY check file? Rather, I suspect that it doesn't work this way.
Actually, the tech shouldn't have root access, either, but I am probably pushing things here. After all, it would be easy enough to just replace files on the hard drive directly. Still, can't regenerate the secure hashes file (without breaking public key crypto, or be really persistent at password guessing).
Like I said, simple and basic stuff. Class action stuff, potentially (if *I* used Windows and it didn't do these things, I would be pissed. However, XP sort of excluded itself, by its "phone home" policy. I simply wasn't ALLOWED to use it for the longest time, and now I really don't know much about it).
"up and running...in under a week"
Ok, let's start with the OS. JCL (Job Control Language) is an art unto itself. //GENCUST3 JOB //COPCUST3 EXEC PGM=IEBGENER,REGION=4096K //SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=* //SYSIN DD DUMMY //SYSUT1 DD DSN=CUST52,DISP=SHR //SYSUT2 DD DSN=CUST53,DISP=OLD, // UNIT=SYSALLDA, // VOL=SER=CES001
(My bad, if it's not kosher JCL -- it's been a while). Ok, that would be "cp CUST52 CUST53" on most Unix boxes, approximately. And this is the language you will deal with to compile your programs, link them, run them, Editing? Again, you will find it strange. But, you will probably be using Xedit, and not punch cards. The language? Ties back into this stuff with a certain intimacy.
Sure, take a week. I'll wait.
After this, you will discover that there were databases that were NOT relational. Then, tackle CICS. And wait till you discover that this stuff isn't even ASCII! Figure you'll have to learn about sort orders again. Perhaps your (1 week) time estimate is a bit off. To become productive, I'd give it 2 years. Only 100 times longer than your estimate.
To preface this: I am not a Windows (tm) user.
After all, the Tripwire program (Kim and Spafford) was created in 1992. That would have been in the Windows 3.1 era. Windows 98 doesn't include it (My wife uses that product), but it should be a standard part (or option) in later versions. I always presumed that it (or its underlying concept) is a standard part of "anti-malware" software. I do have an instance of Windows XP SP2 running, and it complains ON EACH BOOT of missing an approved anti-malware program. Mind you, since I don't run anti-malware, or a firewall, the XP instance is run in an isolated virtual container.
Of course she didn't trust the technician; why didn't she apply the obvious measures?
Don't the commercial anti-malware programs or Windows incorporate this protection?
Now, it would be difficult to defend against boot-sector attacks (I was reading an article on Microsoft Vista, and it's defense against this -- also ref. /. and its recent article on the subject), but that would take considerably more skill than the typical PC jockey has. Typical prevention of this would be (at least with the COMMERICIAL anti-malware programs), should be a boot and scan from CD-ROM. Something easily mentioned in the anti-malware instructions (Note that my Windows 98 CD doesn't boot; a boot floppy is required, making this defense difficult in THAT environment. But, like I said, I *know* Windows 98 doesn't offer this protection. Windows XP? Certainly should, but with the warning about not running anti-malware, maybe it defers this function to external software. Which is ok, after all Tripwire is external software for Unix as well).
I have a hard time actually believing that Windows could be such a security clusterfuck, that a vendor default installation could suffer from problems like this.
About the only thing I can say is: Class-action suit hammer time! This is SO basic -- it's like seatbelts.
"not privy to"
Of course we are -- the idea is new, inspired by reports of data theft. Obviously the organization is small; doesn't have a security officer for such matters. No real thought of security before, so someone who is not qualified (self admitted) has been made responsible.
The good news? Its Vista, the security is there -- "bitlocker" and that can make use of tpm chips. Recommendation? Use it, but PUSH ALL SECURITY QUESTIONS TO MICROSOFT.
The last point is critical. Say something like "Vista comes with *insert blurb* claimed to *blurb*, and it is support with the standard Microsoft *blurb*". Fill in the blanks, as appropriate. Next, try not to get involved in the implementation at all.
Next?
So we agree - good. I guess I just wasn't clear on what a "crazy zealot" was. Thanks for clarifying.
And I am glad that we can take the idea "Linux is good, because it is important enough to keep vendors honest" home. Maybe I'll make that my sig (I'll have to mull it over).
So, you think it would have been fixed if there had not been angry, almost rabid, users? You know, the ones you refer to as "crazy zealots"?
I don't believe so. I believe the issue would have been ignored, and Linux would have been patched in some obscene manner to "work around" the issue. Giving a bad reputation to Linux; "it doesn't work -- what kind of fucking shit is THIS?". Hurting the reputations of many developers.
Sometimes, the only sane response is to be angry and rabid.
Was it a bug? Was it deliberate? Who knows. That debate is still open. What IS important is that there is at least ONE open source OS with the clout to keep vendors honest.
Apple products no jagged edges? What the fuck?
Ok, I understand, they are smooth 'n all -- oh, you mean there are no USABILITY issues. Gotchya. And... wrong.
Example: Someone (my wife) using Windows 98. Really. With universal usb storage driver. Buys her sister an ipod and a CD to rip (audio book). The ipod is the little one with no display, 1gb of memory, cheap. Really, its a destructo audio book player. Limited instructions, maybe she missed the part about "itunes" but I don't think it was in the instructions!
Anyway, the CD is ripped onto the computer, and the ipod is plugged in. It shows up as a mass storage device. She copies the rip to the device, and charges. However, the ipod won't stay on! She RETURNS the ipod to the store as defective. The service guy says "Um, you need this application called iTunes" - Of course it is not supplied with the ipod. Too cheap to put a mini-cd in the packaging!
iTunes doesn't work with Windows 98. XP, maybe (I don't know). Fortunately, GtkPod is available for Linux (which we also use).
Let's break it down -
The ipod needs custom software, YET responds as a USB mass storage device - this is good design?
Apple doesn't put a cheap CD into the box with the software - come on, that's just bad - now an internet connection is REQUIRED.
iTunes doesn't work with Windows 98. Ok, I'll grant you this.
The ipod doesn't stay turned on if there is no magic itunes stuff on it. It has a nifty color changing led and all, but that isn't used to display any sort of distinguishing error - you have to KNOW the magic to get it to go.
And you think Apple doesn't have jagged edges... I would imagine that iTunes probably comes with the Mac computer, so it is probably seamless 'n all. But the chutzpah! I should spend $600 so a $50 product works?
It's a two-cut - short in the front, long in the back...
GIF in the front, ZIP (JAR) in the back. Just append them. It's an old stego trick. Of course we can hide the "zip" part as well -- append a block of zero to the end of the file.:
$ cat Chess_knight_icon.png a.zip >a.png ..listing elided to bypass junk filter..
$ file a.png
a.png: PNG image data, 21 x 21, 4-bit colormap, non-interlaced
$ unzip -v a.png
Archive: a.png
warning [a.png]: 257 extra bytes at beginning or within zipfile
(attempting to process anyway)
See? It even works with PNG format! Now, a warning - zip will search for a valid zip header from the end of the file, so to hide
the fact that its a zip file (for stego), you have to jam in a lot of random crap at the end.
IE7 ignores "content-type", and uses its best guess. My guess? "facebook" (whatever) accepts the file as an image, because of the GIF stuff in the front. It shouldn't even care about the extension, so "jar" may even be ok (haven't tried this at all, play with it).
When IE gets the reference to download a "jar" from facebook, it does it -- and blithely ignores the "content-type image/gif". It looks at it -- its a ZIP, probably jar, and... bobs you uncle. I know IE7 ignores content-type text/plain - feed it something that smells like html, and it renders. Which makes display of text documents with htmly stuff kind of tough.
Just a guess.
The GPL license does not in any way have anything to do with "developer freedom".
Also, the end user does NOT have to agree with the GPL in order to use software licensed under it. "Accept", in this case, has the same meaning as "Do Not Accept".
The only thing is the reuse of code, or the creation of derivative works. Ordinarily, a developer has NO SUCH RIGHT. If code is licensed with the GPL, there is such a right, but there is also an obligation.
The developer STILL has the right not to use the code.
If you want "developer freedom", use BSD, or, possibly, just assign the work to the public domain.
I do like your use of the words "GNUtard" and "Freetard".
However, Copyright is an interesting "Right". For example:
\ int factorial(int n)
if (n = 2)
2;
else
n * factorial(n - 1);
There you go, a factorial function in Scheme (gambit-c, to be precise). I could grant you no right to use this sequence (default), the right to use it in an unlimited way, or the right to use it with restrictions...
PS. You have the right to use it any damn way you want. I declare it "public domain".
Both GNU and Microsoft grant rights with restrictions. In Microsofts case, the restrictions have ranged from the "ordinary" (thou shalt not distribute any library, except specific binaries which MS shall specify), to the "strange" (thou shalt not produce a competitive product with the supplied material; or thou shalt not publish benchmarking results of this code). It hasn't been particularly clear WHAT the damn restrictions were in some cases. Microsoft may be replaced by other vendors -- I am just in a mood to pick on Microsoft these days.
The GPL? At least its clear -- the code is supplied in source. You may USE this source any damn way you want. If you DISTRIBUTE the source, or something derived from it, you are obligated to publish the source or derivative source. Simple.
"Fucking Freetard"
New one to me. I like it, although I am not a "Freetard". My actual title is "Solaris Solutions Architect". Which does tend to highlight my bias.
As to the "support" -- that would be NFS server and NIS server support only. No client support in either of those "howtos". All I want is the standard NIS automount maps, autofs, and nfs. Can I have it please? NFS client support is possible -- Beame & Whiteside, etc. As is (limited) server support. NFS server is more difficult, given the lack of the "inode" concept in Windows.
After all, both Solaris and Linux can sign-in using a NIS passwd map; indeed, the same one. They can both read automount maps -- older versions of Linux didn't support direct maps (only indirect), which was a problem -- Windows XP (can't speak to Vista) doesn't support any of this. Microsoft best practices is to publish the map to a Windows Server (but this is only a 7 machine network).
As to X11 support, why not? The Windows API can be mapped into X; or this can be done at the driver layer (which would be actually easier). A small modification to the Windowing system itself would then allow remoting Windows applications to X servers. Instead, we get proprietary stuff. Why? Note that an X server can be efficiently mapped to the Windows API (ref Hummingbird, etc.).
But this should be academic. Why isn't Windows source generally available? Then NIS signon could be grafted in, and autofs integrated. Wait a minute -- there are organizations that would actually PAY for these features. Even if Windows is NOT source available, which is the case, these things should be readily available on the market. Why aren't they? Best answer (unfortunately) involves conspiracy.
Go on, flame away, you know you want to...
Of course that's true. I fully expect that Microsoft hires passionate, qualified people.
But that doesn't change things. Microsoft is still a monopoly, and has to operate under monopoly strictures. Microsoft still doesn't support basic protocols like NIS, NFS and X-11. Microsoft forked 3D development. Microsoft did bundling arrangements. Microsoft did lock out other software. Microsoft did steal software.
Why? Because they could. Monopoly is truly a lovely thing. Did those passionate, qualified people directly involve themselves in these activities? Maybe not. Doesn't matter, they are still voluntarily employed at this company. This company that SPECIFICALLY stated plans to destroy FOSS.
What has to happen? Just joining the Apache consortium isn't enough to create trust now -- Microsoft has to become more supportive of FOSS -- than it's competition.
Who is competitive? Let's take Solaris (operating system), Java (platform), OpenOffice (desktop). In other words, Microsoft has to become as supportive of FOSS as SUN. As a start (SUN is not a monopoly).
Discuss.
I like Harvey's (UC Berkley) quote:
"Computer Science isn't a Science, and it's not about Computers".
It's not a science because the scientific method doesn't apply; math is also not a science. It's not about computers; indeed it is impossible to build the general Turing Machine -- you can't make an infinite tape.
Oh... my... God...
The EXPECTED behavior of that command is to upgrade to the latest version of the Firefox that is installed. I guess that "--dist-upgrade-mode" may allow that.
However, there is no "upgrade" path here -- these are separate major versions.
Imagining that there IS such a thing will either (1) produce the effect known as "rpm hell" or (2) break working systems.
To give you an "easier" example -- I have a lot of scheme code compiled with gambit-c. These are MUCH more important than "Firefox", because its MY CODE. Some may use system libraries. Please guarantee that upgrading Firefox will NOT break these applications!
Note that the only solution to this problem is "frozen" systems, with branching updates for security at each level.
Or, Ubuntu. Simply because if you don't include the development tools, you generally won't get into this problem. Personally? I like the Fedora approach.
Sorry, some people aren't getting the joke. (you got an "Insightful" mod?). Obviously didn't notice the use of the words "sublime" and "ridiculous" in your last sentence -- that was the tell...
So, I have to hit them over the head -
mkv video native support? Of course, mkv is a COMPLETELY OPEN format. Native support is in (most) open OSs by default.
Native 64 bit software? If you have the source, rebuild it.
Multithreading word processor? Of absolutely no benefit.
Similar things happen with Windows -- and are usually addressed by gurus (hopefully in an article, so the rest of us benefit).
The "meme" has to go around. In your case - try Alt-F7 and move the dialog up.
In general, you are right. This stuff is not documented (or poorly documented). With the eeepc, it is likely that the "meme" will go around, and the problem will be considered solved. Not by a software change. Software for the eeepc will be JUDGED on how well the dialogs fit, sure, but the solution for the bad apps will be Alt-F7. And every eeepc user will (eventually) "just know" how this works.
Making for platform lock-in. The claim will be: It Just Works.
Please continue the idea
coco2 + os-9. But... os-9 was available separately, and could be run on any compatible system.
apple ][. But... the firmware (it had no "OS") was not sold separately. Nothing prevented me from buying the Apple ][, removing the ROMs, and putting them into another system.
etc. (I am not going to take EACH case apart, just enough for you to get the idea).
OS X *is* available for purchase as a separate product. The case rests on (1) EULA, and (2) Copyright. EULA is quite weak here. Copyright is stronger (since a copy of the product must be made in order to use it). Sane copyright law mentions this case. From Canadian Copyright Law, which I am more familiar with:
" ...
3. (1) For the purposes of this Act, "copyright", in relation to a work, means the sole right to produce or reproduce the work or any substantial part thereof in any material form whatever, to perform the work or any substantial part thereof in public or, if the work is unpublished, to publish the work or any substantial part thereof, and includes the sole right
(h) in the case of a computer program that can be reproduced in the ordinary course of its use, other than by a reproduction during its execution in conjunction with a machine, device or computer, to rent out the computer program,
"
which means I cannot rent out the program, or reproduce it, but to copy it into RAM or hard disk for execution is allowed. Of course if you DON'T have such a clause, the simple copying of the program to facilitate its use may need to be authorized by the Copyright holder (Apple).
2560x1920, 4 bytes per pixel, 2x oversample X and Y, needs 78MB
2 screens for double buffering, 156MB
1 screen for off-screen rendering, 234MB.
Giving the equivalent of 24 screens worth of textures in 2 GB.
Nope, still overkill: I would imagine that a 512MB card would be a bit stressed (just a bit light on textures), but workable.
Still, build it and they (may) come...
Simple approach -- keep copies of install media of application and os. Create vmware machine, and install on that. Copy OS library files off, and create environment on modern OS.
Oldest Linux I have: yggdrasil. Oldest libraries I have running: Redhat 6.2
Now, I haven't tried installing yggdrasil into vmware (yet), but Redhat 6.2 is just fine. You can leave the whole mess in vmware (and, for business use, I would recommend it), but for personal "grins", copy the relevant files and try running on a modern version.
Hell, I didn't mention Linux, you did. And yes, *I* can run old Linux software. I also know (as do you), how to run back-level BSD stuff.
But I can't run my old Windows software. Take it as a data point. I don't know whether it's good or bad, like I said "just sayin'".
Windows back compatibility? How far back do you want to go?
Wrong - try MS Bookshelf 92. Most of the "technologies" touted for that time period are now broken. Even when implemented by Microsoft. I wonder if "MS Bob" works (I doubt it). Most other shell extensions of that era no longer work.
So we know the window of compatibility is less than 16 years.
Maybe the "era of compatibility" extends back to Windows 95... I don't know (and, really, don't care much). Windows users probably have a much better idea than I do.
Just sayin'
If you WANT the "Apple GUI experience", get an Apple.
I use Gnome. I find it perfectly usable.
Huh...
The XV overlay feature of your X server does the same thing -- a key color is replaced with video. You can, of course CHANGE the key color (default is actually visible in the nVidia driver): I use R=0 B=1 G=0 which is close to black. It's the XV_COLORKEY property. Try setting it to pure black or white, and put a terminal window on top of the video -- lovely effect.
How is this superior, when it's the same?
What is a "stereo mix option"?
Just guessing that it is mixer loopback. But, not being a Windows (tm) user, I don't know. I would have assumed that a "stereo/mono mix option" would be a 5.1/7.1 down-mix.
Please clarify (no, I am not going to turn in my "geek" designation -- I am just a Solaris/Linux user).
True, but upgrading is tough...
I use 4x250GB drives in a RAID-5 configuration.
[fred@jupiter fred]$ df -h /dev/hda2 73G 23G 47G 33% / /dev/hda1 101M 15M 81M 16% /boot /dev/shm /home/fred /imports/mail
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
none 62M 0 62M 0%
ganymede:/raid/home/fred
676G 556G 93G 86%
ganymede:/raid/mail 676G 556G 93G 86%
[fred@jupiter fred]$
So its 676GB of usable storage. As you can see, I am running low... and want to upgrade.
But, like a full backup, it takes a LOT of time to back this up. It's 100mb ethernet, 10Mb/s (best case). 2 minutes per gigabyte, 22 hours at full tilt. Adding reasonable "slush", we are talking 30 or more hours to load the data into a new array.
Which is a problem that (in theory) should be faced by any user of 250GB or greater drives. Puts your drives out of commission for too long. My solution? Vital (not replaceable) data gets backed up, the rest just relies on RAID. I USE my array, and cannot afford that sort of downtime. (also, I haven't seen a USB link that is reliable enough for this task :( And, I want to run MD5 hashes on the files to ensure that they are copied without corruption, adding 30% to the total time). When I deploy my new array, it will be in a brand new system, and I have a script that creates links for all media files (movies, ISOs, tv shows, audio files) back to the original storage. This takes under an hour (simply iterating the directory of the RAID is fast)
[root@ganymede raid]# time find . | wc -l
115961
real 1m19.454s
user 0m1.310s
sys 0m3.480s
[root@ganymede raid]#
After the deployment of the new array (scheduled for a few hours every night), links are replaced by the actual files. This process takes several weeks, after which the old array can be "retired". Since it isn't much good, it gets to be the "primary" backup for important files (those that are locally synchronized every night).
I have to run through this process (or similar) every two years. I know that not many computer users do this; so I suspect that drive capacity has become a bit of a numbers game (oh look, mine is bigger than yours!) in the last couple of years. Either that, or a lot of people are REALLY going to have problems in a couple of years.