If it is an IBM mainframe app, or an app for a different mainframe who followed IBMs lead, or an app for a PC written by a mainframe programmer, it would likely be 31 bits. Mainframes have been 32 bit systems since the late '60s.
Now I comprehend what he is trying to say and I recognize the benefit of open source software.
While both those may be true, if the later is derived from the former, then the former is not true. RMS promotes Free Software, not Open Source Software.
Do you want to beable to do something in one place, or do you want to install it on the server, once? The later might accomplish the former, but is not the only way to do so. When I say "push out to the desktop" I dont mean, you go around to all the desktops and install it, I mean that that just happens. It could just happen when ever the user runs it - or the updated it - the first time. Or it is forced on them when they log in. Or it is pushed out in the middle of the night.
But as I said; with approiate enviroment vars, command line options, you could have it installed on one network share, with user prefs somewhere else.
Dont know about the full suite, but with Firefox, you can pass in a bunch of args, enviroment varriables to make a "private" install.. (ie, self contained on a USB memory stick). At school, since I dont have a memory stick, and my ~ isnt big enough for FF to be installed, I install it on each workstation I log into. With a hacked up version of someones memory-stick "private" install.bat, I use the program I installed to C:, with my settings, plugins, etc installed in H:... Using the same functionality, what you describe could also work.
But as the anonymous coward points out, an MSI would work, too. But a MSI alone, I dont think would be enough, you would also need some management system to push it around. MS-SMS might only work with MSIs (I dont know), but ZENWorks doesnt, you can snapshot any arbitraty install for distribution.
There are two ways to deploy software on a network. If you have exactly one computer, install it directly. If you have two or more computers, then you should be using something like ZENWorks, or SMS on Windows, or NFS, RPM+{red carpet, yum, bash} on Linux. The question isnt how many computers are on the network, it is realy a question of how many OSs are on the network; there is finite work requierd per-OS, but per-Desktop should take zero admin time.
The fact that there are multiple pieces of software is not necessaraly a bad thing... Any given upgrad would effect less things then an upgrade of a monolitic system. In general, I dont think you can say small components or a monolithic system is better; I wouldnt even want to guess at which is better for Moz v FF/TB.
In Nova Scotia, any commercial work, and any other work of more then 4 drops, requires a building permit, and a licensed installer. When this came out, oh 4 years ago, licensed installer == licensed electrician. They have progressively been moving towards a data/voice trade designation, distinct from being an electrician, but this has yet to turn into, say, a (multi-)year course at the community collages.
The issue of licensing (or rather, properly done jobs) isn't so much with electricity, but with plenum/non-plenum, punching holes through firewalls, etc. I don't know the local regs, but the TIA structured cabling specs do have some very specific grounding requirements...
For a "terrorist" attack, you dont realy need to have percision guidance.
IIRC, the Nazi V1 and V2 rockets had piss poor navigational abilities. On a 500 mile flight path, they had accuaracy of about 5miles. Which is compleatly unacceptable if you are trying to take out a tank, or even a very large building. But, since London is more then 5mi accross, they hit something. They were very scary. Londoners were scared, possibly even to the point of being terrified.
While I doubt that you could go down to your local university library and get plans for a V1, I think it is within the reach of just about anyone to build a rocket of V1 capabilities in 2004.
Marshall was released in 1983, after a (new) witness came forward. This is about 10 years before DNA profiling was even thought about, 15 years before it became useful/accurate/cheap. In the inquiry into the actions of the police and crown prosecutors, it became clear that his case was not an accident, with the parties all acting in good faith. I don't think that they had any specific evidence to the contrary, but circumstantial evidence, combined with him being a Native American (to be fair, also well known to the police) was all the investigation they needed.
We dont need to worry about writing secure systems, becasue only bad people will attack us regardless of how secure the systems are.
Right.
Security is about layers. Every layer should be built with security in mind. Lets take a walk down memory lane...
The Internet was initially a collection of sites who were all friends. Only "honourable" people had access, so security wasn't much of an issue. So things like the r* UNIX tools were created. Systems were not built with security in mind, because security was not a problem. As the internet becomes larget, with more access, security becomes more problematic. The Morris worm wasent even a directed attack, but an experiement gone bad. But directed attacks started to happen. Sendmail started its bug-of-the-month club. The Internet/Unix/C communities started thinking about security, and eventually things got better. (not perfect, but better).
The Microsoft community (that is, MS reared programmers, not to mention (some of) MSFT itself) attitude is "how dare you attack our systems?! We dont need to worry about security, because the problem is with the attacker, not with us!" And things are bad. Exploits are discoverd and exploited by the bad guys as frequently as they are published on sites like bugtraq.
Notice a pattern? Good.
The problem here is blistfull ignorance. The Internet/Unix community of the 80s had a good excuse, nothing comparable came before them. The MS community does not. Security is Job #1. Unfortunatly, as you have proven, the pattern breaks down at the most important step "learn from your mistakes".
Indeed.. Id say, except for drivers, that the average call rate (?) of kernel functions is significantly higher then those of apps. If you have the ReiserFS module loaded, you have a reason, and you're calling it all day long. How often is some obscure function in Word called? The most obscure function of the Linux (or XP) kernel is called more often then the most obscure function of, say, Word.
Extreemly. But this is/., so ST is never off topic...
The catch phrase was "Wagon train to the stars". Defining "sci-fi" as a story that would fall apart if the science was removed, perhaps only half of ST episodes would qualify. It was an action/adventure, set in space... By using naval style ranks, termonolgy, traditions, etc, it lowered the learning curve for action/adventure fans to become ST fans...
When environmentalists are rambling on about how man is destroying nature, how that compares to what nature does itself. Like, we may be causing global warming, and that might be causing extinctions, isn't there a semi-regular ice age cycle? Isn't nature taking out the week links all on its own? The ozone layer just didn't spontaneously form, wont the processes that put it there in the first place repair it? Im not advocating that we don't try to reduce what we do, but nature seems to be able to fuck itself up all on its own.. Could we get some perspective here?
Slashdot Mirror
If it is an IBM mainframe app, or an app for a different mainframe who followed IBMs lead, or an app for a PC written by a mainframe programmer, it would likely be 31 bits. Mainframes have been 32 bit systems since the late '60s.
To clarify, only in Quebec does this sign law exist.
Something far, far more scarry:
Warning: Made in a produiction enviroment where Visual Basic programmers are present!
While both those may be true, if the later is derived from the former, then the former is not true. RMS promotes Free Software, not Open Source Software.
I beleive that Emma Watson has displaced the Olsen twins as the top "When will they be legal?" FAQ on alt.binaries.pictures.nude.celebrities.fake....
I saw it last Monday. Im still waiting for something to happen.
Given how SF doesnt host any of the files, (or at least, public non-mirrors are well hidden), I would say, ya, bandwidth isnt much of a problem.
Go look up what the G in GTK+ stands for, and get back to us.
Do you want to beable to do something in one place, or do you want to install it on the server, once? The later might accomplish the former, but is not the only way to do so. When I say "push out to the desktop" I dont mean, you go around to all the desktops and install it, I mean that that just happens. It could just happen when ever the user runs it - or the updated it - the first time. Or it is forced on them when they log in. Or it is pushed out in the middle of the night.
But as I said; with approiate enviroment vars, command line options, you could have it installed on one network share, with user prefs somewhere else.
Dont know about the full suite, but with Firefox, you can pass in a bunch of args, enviroment varriables to make a "private" install.. (ie, self contained on a USB memory stick). At school, since I dont have a memory stick, and my ~ isnt big enough for FF to be installed, I install it on each workstation I log into. With a hacked up version of someones memory-stick "private" install .bat, I use the program I installed to C:, with my settings, plugins, etc installed in H:... Using the same functionality, what you describe could also work.
But as the anonymous coward points out, an MSI would work, too. But a MSI alone, I dont think would be enough, you would also need some management system to push it around. MS-SMS might only work with MSIs (I dont know), but ZENWorks doesnt, you can snapshot any arbitraty install for distribution.
There are two ways to deploy software on a network. If you have exactly one computer, install it directly. If you have two or more computers, then you should be using something like ZENWorks, or SMS on Windows, or NFS, RPM+{red carpet, yum, bash} on Linux. The question isnt how many computers are on the network, it is realy a question of how many OSs are on the network; there is finite work requierd per-OS, but per-Desktop should take zero admin time.
The fact that there are multiple pieces of software is not necessaraly a bad thing... Any given upgrad would effect less things then an upgrade of a monolitic system. In general, I dont think you can say small components or a monolithic system is better; I wouldnt even want to guess at which is better for Moz v FF/TB.
Now that you mention it...
In Nova Scotia, any commercial work, and any other work of more then 4 drops, requires a building permit, and a licensed installer. When this came out, oh 4 years ago, licensed installer == licensed electrician. They have progressively been moving towards a data/voice trade designation, distinct from being an electrician, but this has yet to turn into, say, a (multi-)year course at the community collages.
The issue of licensing (or rather, properly done jobs) isn't so much with electricity, but with plenum/non-plenum, punching holes through firewalls, etc. I don't know the local regs, but the TIA structured cabling specs do have some very specific grounding requirements...
You might be forced to start your career by running laps in Quantico, VA.
For a "terrorist" attack, you dont realy need to have percision guidance.
IIRC, the Nazi V1 and V2 rockets had piss poor navigational abilities. On a 500 mile flight path, they had accuaracy of about 5miles. Which is compleatly unacceptable if you are trying to take out a tank, or even a very large building. But, since London is more then 5mi accross, they hit something. They were very scary. Londoners were scared, possibly even to the point of being terrified.
While I doubt that you could go down to your local university library and get plans for a V1, I think it is within the reach of just about anyone to build a rocket of V1 capabilities in 2004.
Marshall was released in 1983, after a (new) witness came forward. This is about 10 years before DNA profiling was even thought about, 15 years before it became useful/accurate/cheap. In the inquiry into the actions of the police and crown prosecutors, it became clear that his case was not an accident, with the parties all acting in good faith. I don't think that they had any specific evidence to the contrary, but circumstantial evidence, combined with him being a Native American (to be fair, also well known to the police) was all the investigation they needed.
If they diddnt kill one rat to patch the heart of another, they would have the same number of rats, while saving a hell of a lot of effort.
The phrase you are looking for is "English Common Law".
We dont need to worry about writing secure systems, becasue only bad people will attack us regardless of how secure the systems are.
Right.
Security is about layers. Every layer should be built with security in mind. Lets take a walk down memory lane...
The Internet was initially a collection of sites who were all friends. Only "honourable" people had access, so security wasn't much of an issue. So things like the r* UNIX tools were created. Systems were not built with security in mind, because security was not a problem. As the internet becomes larget, with more access, security becomes more problematic. The Morris worm wasent even a directed attack, but an experiement gone bad. But directed attacks started to happen. Sendmail started its bug-of-the-month club. The Internet/Unix/C communities started thinking about security, and eventually things got better. (not perfect, but better).
The Microsoft community (that is, MS reared programmers, not to mention (some of) MSFT itself) attitude is "how dare you attack our systems?! We dont need to worry about security, because the problem is with the attacker, not with us!" And things are bad. Exploits are discoverd and exploited by the bad guys as frequently as they are published on sites like bugtraq.
Notice a pattern? Good.
The problem here is blistfull ignorance. The Internet/Unix community of the 80s had a good excuse, nothing comparable came before them. The MS community does not. Security is Job #1. Unfortunatly, as you have proven, the pattern breaks down at the most important step "learn from your mistakes".
Indeed.. Id say, except for drivers, that the average call rate (?) of kernel functions is significantly higher then those of apps. If you have the ReiserFS module loaded, you have a reason, and you're calling it all day long. How often is some obscure function in Word called? The most obscure function of the Linux (or XP) kernel is called more often then the most obscure function of, say, Word.
Popular things are attacked more, and the quanity of attacks is the casue of exploits. Hmm.. Want to explain IIS/Apache to me then?
"pretty clever little language" is the understatement of the year. The entire UI of the browser that I am using now is done in javascript.
But does it run NetBSD?
Extreemly. But this is /., so ST is never off topic...
The catch phrase was "Wagon train to the stars". Defining "sci-fi" as a story that would fall apart if the science was removed, perhaps only half of ST episodes would qualify. It was an action/adventure, set in space... By using naval style ranks, termonolgy, traditions, etc, it lowered the learning curve for action/adventure fans to become ST fans...
Indeed. The naval analogies were specificly desigined to allow the unbathed masses relate to a sci fi show.
When environmentalists are rambling on about how man is destroying nature, how that compares to what nature does itself. Like, we may be causing global warming, and that might be causing extinctions, isn't there a semi-regular ice age cycle? Isn't nature taking out the week links all on its own? The ozone layer just didn't spontaneously form, wont the processes that put it there in the first place repair it? Im not advocating that we don't try to reduce what we do, but nature seems to be able to fuck itself up all on its own.. Could we get some perspective here?