IIRC, Gates DIDN'T say he doesn't UNDERSTAND email, just that he didn't use it himself...
Not sure, however, whether he meant he doesn't use it specifically for classified/ sensitive info, or whether he simply meant that whilst email is circulated with his credentials in the "From" line, it's one of his army (no pun intended here... it's probably quite literal in this case!) of secretaries who has authored it using delegated access to his mailbox.
Having said that, if it's the latter, this does open up a minefield of possibilities with a subordinate with delegated access using this priviledge to pursue their own agenda...
Just my $0.04 (At current exchange rates, my £0.02 is worth more than your $0.02)
I can see where your analogy is going, and kudos for the obligatory automotive reference, but the comparison is flawed (not that they aren't all flawed in some way, but particularly here).
When you buy a car, you can fill it up with gas pretty-much anywhere. The profits on the sale of the gas DON'T go to the vehicle manufacturers.
With printers, particularly inkjets, the inflated cost of the cartridges is used as an income stream, and part of the justification (if you can call it that) for the inflation of the prices is that it is used to recoup the "losses" made on the capital costs of the printer in the first place.
Additionally, you're not tied into a small subset of available providers in the automotive fuel market. A pump nozzle at an Esso filling station will fit in the same vehicles as one from BP, Texaco, etc. The lock-in effect just isn't there.
Or are you suggesting that the gas-tank be a user-replaceable sealed unit that is not trivial to re-fill? In light of the hazards associated with gasoline (or LPG for those of you with vehicles that use it) relative to the hazards of... erm... ink(?!?) I really don't think that idea will fly.
Now... were you to modify the analogy to refer to a car battery (adding the requirement for the purposes of the analogy that the batteries be non-rechargeable and/or the alternators be removed) then the analogy falls slightly closer in line with the situation under discussion, but is still not a perfect analogy as there remain numerous suppliers of batteries on the market (at least, that's the case here in the UK).
Off-topic I know, but on the subject of the Stones, I always thought "I can't get no satisfaction" would have been a better choice for the Win95 ads than "Start me up"... unless they meant "Start me up... wait for me to crash... return to step 1"
And before anyone flames me as a Mac/Linux/BSD fanboy... I've never used a NON MS OS on a desktop PC in my life (well... not since my old Amstrad CPC464, but computers that boot from tape don't count IMHO)...
So, let me get this straight... You're saying applications and executables as basic and intrinsic as notepad/textpad should be separated out from the OS and sold orprovided as free downloads as being the only way in which you would consider MSFT to be acting ethically? If this is the case, how far do you take it? Are you suggesting MSFT remove the ability to extract filed from.cab files due to the fact Winzip et al offer an alternative and it is anti-competetive to bundle this?
Granted this is a poor analogy, as Winzip and it's compatriots do more than just.cab files, but then you've got Zip-file support built into Windows as well, are you saying that should be withdrawn?
I can see arguments of this type going even further, but I'll stop here for fear of appearing a troll/flamebait (and if you think that was my intention when i started this... sorry to disappoint you!).
Another point I have yet to see mentioned in this discussion, if MSFT removed from Windows everything that could be provided on top of the basic windows kernel by competitors and marketed/offered these removed components separately, joe average (and let's face it, this makes up probably 80+% of their userbase) would have to spend 2-3 months trying to understand all of the possible combinations available to him before even venturing into the store to buy a PC, as a pared down OS without all the current bangs and whistles would be effectively useless to them. Not to mentio the fact that if each bolt-on that is currently provided as part of the core-OS were marketed as a paid-for bolt-on, a usable PC would cost considerably more than it does at present.
The status quo also makes support easier. If someone calls a helpdesk and says they have a WinXP PC and they are having a problem doing X, pointing them in the direction of a fix is made (generally) easier as you know what is bundled and where the files for each sub-element are installed (short of hacks, tweaks and general buggering about that a basic user wouldn't have the faintest idea it was POSSIBLE to do, let-alone how!).
As a side-note, MSFT are now producing a scaled down version of Vista (although IIRC it is only available in what they refer to as the "Developing countries", as if there isn't anyone in the allegedly developed world who would benefit from such!) without Media Player (and, I think, a couple of other things too), so at least MS have a product with it unbundled that they can mass-produce and ship if a competing media player provider were to take them to court, win and actually have the decision enforced (yes, like the rest of you, I too can see SATAN lacing up his ice skates and getting ready for a quick game of hockey in the formerly fiery pits!).
No "Grammar Genius" involved... As previously stated, I'm comparatively new to coding, so couldn't be sure whether it was a mistype (I thought it could be, but you never can be 100%). Hence the question...
For all I know, it could have been a function of some description that I have yet to encounter.
Had I been wanting to pick holes in someone's grammar, I, as with apparently many of the posters here (yourself included???), would take advantage of the "Post Anonymously" checkbox.
Glad to see that/. is, as ever, a truly welcoming environment to those of us seeking to learn...
I second the sig line I have seen on a number of posts, a "-1 Sarcasmnotappreciated" mod would probably be beneficial (although possibly overused if implemented...)!
Sorry if this seems a bit daft, I'll admit up front that I'm comparatively new to coding, but I'm damned if I can tell just by looking at it what "dereferenePointer(p)" does...
I assume it is the opposite of "referenePointer(p)", but WTF is referene... I've encountered many functions descriptively named after verbs describing what they do, but this is a verb I don't seem to have encountered either in code or elsewhere...
Maybe I'm missing something, but if the driver is only transferring packets for scanning from the network path, how is this going to capture a virus that is brought in on CD/DVD/USB/Whatever??? If the virus comes in over something other than the network, I can't see this device doing much good, short of every single file you open being accessed over a mapped drive on \\localhost...
Having said this, I haven't got round to reading TFA yet, so this may be handled via an alternative filter driver in place that was omitted from the summary.
Having said this, this could be something to consider for a pure AV solution. IO Filter driver redirects all files on opening via this device to scan for viruses??? Might already be a viable solution already in production, but haven't seen it as yet, but off-loading the cpu-intensive virus-scanning onto dedicated, optimised processing hardware could be a noticeable performance boost...
Before I launch into this, I ought to caveat what I'm about to type by making it clear that I'm a layman with regard to pretty much every aspect of the article's proposed technology, but based on the discussion so far I have stumbled across another issue I haven't seen mentioned so far (or at least, if it has been mentioned, I perhaps ought to get my eye test updated...).
As we already know (some of us from painful experience, just ask anyone who fell foul of "Lightning never strikes the same spot twice", etc.), reality and statistical probability don't always meet all that effectively...
It's already been stated that over a 1km line, you'd be looking at an approximate transfer rate of a pathetically low 2Kbaud (IIRC), and this will drop as the distance increases, but (and I'm guessing here) that figure will be based on that old friend "statistical probability"...
Bearing in mind the above, you just KNOW some poor b*$#a~d will end up with a situation where more than 90% of the time both ends are using the same value resistor.
I know that consequently it also means someone incredibly lucky will end up in the inverse situation of practically NEVER matching and in the process getting a much higher rate of transmission, but the potential for transmission speed degradation, particularly when the theoretical mean speed is this low, could make this decidedly unattractive to some (most?) potential adopters...
Just a hunch, but I assumed that the Shadukar was referring to the posters being the ones who ought to have trouble sleeping, not the CMs... could be wrong though...
TEMPEST will allow you to see an (albeit rather fuzzy) image of what is on the target's display. I may have entirely misunderstood the underlying technologies (or they may have moved on significantly since I was last involved in the field) but I don't recall TEMPEST being a Two-way street. It may replace the view-only mode of apps like VNC, but I don't see it entirely displacing them due to the lack of ability to actually CONTROL the target.
Now if you were to couple it with [insert your choice of malware here], that may be another matter.
I would also second that (third it, if you will...).
A few years ago I was working as a Tech Support Engineer (... well... technically, I was the entire IT support team!) when I encountered this little gem.
We (a medium sized secondary school in the UK) had 2 buildings, about 1km apart. I had a call from a teacher in our English dept one morning asking me to come over and refill the paper in their printer. Not really in the mood for a 2km round trip when I already had plenty to do that day, I simply gave the relevant instructions (pull out paper tray, put paper in, make sure it doesn't go above red line and slide the tray back in), thinking this would be well within the capabilities of someone who teaches English Literature.
Ten minutes later, I get another call from the same department, to say it's still not printing.
What do I find when I get there? They had followed my instructions to the letter and had therefore ommitted the step I thought didn't need stating (take the paper OUT OF THE PLASTIC WRAPPER!!!).
A couple of weeks later, the same initial request presented itself. This time, I repeated the instructions from before, but included the missing step.
When I heard nothing for about an hour, I assumed they'd figured it all out. BIG mistake. I get a cal saying they have a paper jam.
When I get there, the printer is telling me there is a jam in the paper tray. When I try to remove the tray, however, it doesn't budge... at all!
I ask the teacher who'd called what EXACTLY they'd done when re-filling it.
With a VERY sheepish look, she informs me that there had only been about 50 sheets left in the ream, and it was no-where near reaching the red line in the tray, so they'd put a hard-back dictionary into the drive under the paper to bring it up to the red line. 50 sheets later, the printer tries to load a hardback disctionary into a paper path designed for paper of a maximum weight of 110gsm and jams up so badly I had to dismantle pretty much the entire printer to remove it.
The moral of the story... for every idiot-proof system, there is AT LEAST one system-proof idiot!
The other little gem was when I caught the head of our maths dept trying desperately to get a eCommerce website to accept his credit card details on the machine in the staff lounge by repeatedly sliding his credit card in and out of the floppy drive, faster and faster, wiping it, trying again, blowing the drive (I assume to try to dislodge any dust). Eventually he went to phone me only to notice I was already in the room and asked why I'd disabled the ability to read credit cards on ALL computers, not just those in the student labs?!?
I may not have the background some of the previous posters on here do, but over the years I have learned to classify users into categories A, B & C when interacting with them.
Class A: Users who know their stuff. They're tech-savvy, trustworthy, but most importantly know their limitations. When they have a problem, they will fix it themselves if they KNOW exactly how to fix it, if not, they will call the helpdesk and explain symptons, suspected cause, any diagnosis steps they have taken and anything else that may help.
Class C: Users who are IT-Phobic. Anything goes even slightly wrong and they call the helpdesk. They never touch anything they haven't had at least a month's intensive training on (and for some individuals, this includes equipment as simple to use as a photocopier)! these users are hard work, but ultimately harmless as they will never have the confidence to fiddle with anything that could screw things up for others. As an example, I once had to educate a user who couldn't work out why his printer wasn't printing after adding paper (I had to explain, whilst holding back tears of laughter, that the wrapper needs to be removed from the ream of paper before putting it in the drawer!).
Class B: These are the grey area of users who have an interest in IT, like to fiddle, refuse to read a manual and when their fiddling to correct a problem they've encountered does make things worse, when they finally admit defeat and call the helpdesk, they deny fiddling at all and cause the Techs no end of grief looking over their shoulders and saying things like "shouldn't you be doing it this way?..." because that's the way they've seen someone do something different in the past and they don't understand the same fix won't correct all possible bugs.
Needless to say, I rather like the Class A's, and Class B's can be OK once you've gotten over the frustration of telling them everything about two-dozen times. Class B users, however, are dangerous and it is for these people that a lot of IT departments have to lock down machines and audit on a regular basis. Class A's won't install what they aren't supposed to, and Class C's wouldn't know how/dare to try.
Having said this, I think the whole point of the article may have been to remind us all that even from a security and lockdown point of view, "an idiot-proof system is no match for a system-proof idiot"!
I do sympathise with a lot of the middle managers, etc. who are trying to circumvent IT depts because IT are just blindly saying NO without analysing the request for new software. I have a background in IT, but don't currently work in an IT department. At the moment, I am in a sort of hybrid position where I am (unofficially) supporting the front-line users I work with and am utilised as a point of contact with the IT department as I can re-word requests in a common language and can translate and identify bulls#1t when IT use it in their responses. Unfortunately, rather than seeing me as an ally, I am seen by the IT department as an enemy!
Slashdot Mirror
IIRC, Gates DIDN'T say he doesn't UNDERSTAND email, just that he didn't use it himself...
Not sure, however, whether he meant he doesn't use it specifically for classified/ sensitive info, or whether he simply meant that whilst email is circulated with his credentials in the "From" line, it's one of his army (no pun intended here... it's probably quite literal in this case!) of secretaries who has authored it using delegated access to his mailbox.
Having said that, if it's the latter, this does open up a minefield of possibilities with a subordinate with delegated access using this priviledge to pursue their own agenda...
Just my $0.04 (At current exchange rates, my £0.02 is worth more than your $0.02)
I can see where your analogy is going, and kudos for the obligatory automotive reference, but the comparison is flawed (not that they aren't all flawed in some way, but particularly here).
When you buy a car, you can fill it up with gas pretty-much anywhere. The profits on the sale of the gas DON'T go to the vehicle manufacturers.
With printers, particularly inkjets, the inflated cost of the cartridges is used as an income stream, and part of the justification (if you can call it that) for the inflation of the prices is that it is used to recoup the "losses" made on the capital costs of the printer in the first place.
Additionally, you're not tied into a small subset of available providers in the automotive fuel market. A pump nozzle at an Esso filling station will fit in the same vehicles as one from BP, Texaco, etc. The lock-in effect just isn't there.
Or are you suggesting that the gas-tank be a user-replaceable sealed unit that is not trivial to re-fill? In light of the hazards associated with gasoline (or LPG for those of you with vehicles that use it) relative to the hazards of... erm... ink(?!?) I really don't think that idea will fly.
Now... were you to modify the analogy to refer to a car battery (adding the requirement for the purposes of the analogy that the batteries be non-rechargeable and/or the alternators be removed) then the analogy falls slightly closer in line with the situation under discussion, but is still not a perfect analogy as there remain numerous suppliers of batteries on the market (at least, that's the case here in the UK).
Off-topic I know, but on the subject of the Stones, I always thought "I can't get no satisfaction" would have been a better choice for the Win95 ads than "Start me up"... unless they meant "Start me up... wait for me to crash... return to step 1"
And before anyone flames me as a Mac/Linux/BSD fanboy... I've never used a NON MS OS on a desktop PC in my life (well... not since my old Amstrad CPC464, but computers that boot from tape don't count IMHO)...
So, let me get this straight... You're saying applications and executables as basic and intrinsic as notepad/textpad should be separated out from the OS and sold orprovided as free downloads as being the only way in which you would consider MSFT to be acting ethically? If this is the case, how far do you take it? Are you suggesting MSFT remove the ability to extract filed from .cab files due to the fact Winzip et al offer an alternative and it is anti-competetive to bundle this?
.cab files, but then you've got Zip-file support built into Windows as well, are you saying that should be withdrawn?
Granted this is a poor analogy, as Winzip and it's compatriots do more than just
I can see arguments of this type going even further, but I'll stop here for fear of appearing a troll/flamebait (and if you think that was my intention when i started this... sorry to disappoint you!).
Another point I have yet to see mentioned in this discussion, if MSFT removed from Windows everything that could be provided on top of the basic windows kernel by competitors and marketed/offered these removed components separately, joe average (and let's face it, this makes up probably 80+% of their userbase) would have to spend 2-3 months trying to understand all of the possible combinations available to him before even venturing into the store to buy a PC, as a pared down OS without all the current bangs and whistles would be effectively useless to them. Not to mentio the fact that if each bolt-on that is currently provided as part of the core-OS were marketed as a paid-for bolt-on, a usable PC would cost considerably more than it does at present.
The status quo also makes support easier. If someone calls a helpdesk and says they have a WinXP PC and they are having a problem doing X, pointing them in the direction of a fix is made (generally) easier as you know what is bundled and where the files for each sub-element are installed (short of hacks, tweaks and general buggering about that a basic user wouldn't have the faintest idea it was POSSIBLE to do, let-alone how!).
As a side-note, MSFT are now producing a scaled down version of Vista (although IIRC it is only available in what they refer to as the "Developing countries", as if there isn't anyone in the allegedly developed world who would benefit from such!) without Media Player (and, I think, a couple of other things too), so at least MS have a product with it unbundled that they can mass-produce and ship if a competing media player provider were to take them to court, win and actually have the decision enforced (yes, like the rest of you, I too can see SATAN lacing up his ice skates and getting ready for a quick game of hockey in the formerly fiery pits!).
No "Grammar Genius" involved... As previously stated, I'm comparatively new to coding, so couldn't be sure whether it was a mistype (I thought it could be, but you never can be 100%). Hence the question...
/. is, as ever, a truly welcoming environment to those of us seeking to learn...
For all I know, it could have been a function of some description that I have yet to encounter.
Had I been wanting to pick holes in someone's grammar, I, as with apparently many of the posters here (yourself included???), would take advantage of the "Post Anonymously" checkbox.
Glad to see that
I second the sig line I have seen on a number of posts, a "-1 Sarcasmnotappreciated" mod would probably be beneficial (although possibly overused if implemented...)!
Sorry if this seems a bit daft, I'll admit up front that I'm comparatively new to coding, but I'm damned if I can tell just by looking at it what "dereferenePointer(p)" does...
I assume it is the opposite of "referenePointer(p)", but WTF is referene... I've encountered many functions descriptively named after verbs describing what they do, but this is a verb I don't seem to have encountered either in code or elsewhere...
Maybe I'm missing something, but if the driver is only transferring packets for scanning from the network path, how is this going to capture a virus that is brought in on CD/DVD/USB/Whatever??? If the virus comes in over something other than the network, I can't see this device doing much good, short of every single file you open being accessed over a mapped drive on \\localhost...
Having said this, I haven't got round to reading TFA yet, so this may be handled via an alternative filter driver in place that was omitted from the summary.
Having said this, this could be something to consider for a pure AV solution. IO Filter driver redirects all files on opening via this device to scan for viruses??? Might already be a viable solution already in production, but haven't seen it as yet, but off-loading the cpu-intensive virus-scanning onto dedicated, optimised processing hardware could be a noticeable performance boost...
Before I launch into this, I ought to caveat what I'm about to type by making it clear that I'm a layman with regard to pretty much every aspect of the article's proposed technology, but based on the discussion so far I have stumbled across another issue I haven't seen mentioned so far (or at least, if it has been mentioned, I perhaps ought to get my eye test updated...).
As we already know (some of us from painful experience, just ask anyone who fell foul of "Lightning never strikes the same spot twice", etc.), reality and statistical probability don't always meet all that effectively...
It's already been stated that over a 1km line, you'd be looking at an approximate transfer rate of a pathetically low 2Kbaud (IIRC), and this will drop as the distance increases, but (and I'm guessing here) that figure will be based on that old friend "statistical probability"...
Bearing in mind the above, you just KNOW some poor b*$#a~d will end up with a situation where more than 90% of the time both ends are using the same value resistor.
I know that consequently it also means someone incredibly lucky will end up in the inverse situation of practically NEVER matching and in the process getting a much higher rate of transmission, but the potential for transmission speed degradation, particularly when the theoretical mean speed is this low, could make this decidedly unattractive to some (most?) potential adopters...
Just a hunch, but I assumed that the Shadukar was referring to the posters being the ones who ought to have trouble sleeping, not the CMs... could be wrong though...
TEMPEST will allow you to see an (albeit rather fuzzy) image of what is on the target's display. I may have entirely misunderstood the underlying technologies (or they may have moved on significantly since I was last involved in the field) but I don't recall TEMPEST being a Two-way street. It may replace the view-only mode of apps like VNC, but I don't see it entirely displacing them due to the lack of ability to actually CONTROL the target.
Now if you were to couple it with [insert your choice of malware here], that may be another matter.
I would also second that (third it, if you will...).
A few years ago I was working as a Tech Support Engineer (... well... technically, I was the entire IT support team!) when I encountered this little gem.
We (a medium sized secondary school in the UK) had 2 buildings, about 1km apart. I had a call from a teacher in our English dept one morning asking me to come over and refill the paper in their printer. Not really in the mood for a 2km round trip when I already had plenty to do that day, I simply gave the relevant instructions (pull out paper tray, put paper in, make sure it doesn't go above red line and slide the tray back in), thinking this would be well within the capabilities of someone who teaches English Literature.
Ten minutes later, I get another call from the same department, to say it's still not printing.
What do I find when I get there? They had followed my instructions to the letter and had therefore ommitted the step I thought didn't need stating (take the paper OUT OF THE PLASTIC WRAPPER!!!).
A couple of weeks later, the same initial request presented itself. This time, I repeated the instructions from before, but included the missing step.
When I heard nothing for about an hour, I assumed they'd figured it all out. BIG mistake. I get a cal saying they have a paper jam.
When I get there, the printer is telling me there is a jam in the paper tray. When I try to remove the tray, however, it doesn't budge... at all!
I ask the teacher who'd called what EXACTLY they'd done when re-filling it.
With a VERY sheepish look, she informs me that there had only been about 50 sheets left in the ream, and it was no-where near reaching the red line in the tray, so they'd put a hard-back dictionary into the drive under the paper to bring it up to the red line. 50 sheets later, the printer tries to load a hardback disctionary into a paper path designed for paper of a maximum weight of 110gsm and jams up so badly I had to dismantle pretty much the entire printer to remove it.
The moral of the story... for every idiot-proof system, there is AT LEAST one system-proof idiot!
The other little gem was when I caught the head of our maths dept trying desperately to get a eCommerce website to accept his credit card details on the machine in the staff lounge by repeatedly sliding his credit card in and out of the floppy drive, faster and faster, wiping it, trying again, blowing the drive (I assume to try to dislodge any dust). Eventually he went to phone me only to notice I was already in the room and asked why I'd disabled the ability to read credit cards on ALL computers, not just those in the student labs?!?
Probably not the best of ideas in Hospitals... what about doctors/surgeons with pagers?
I may not have the background some of the previous posters on here do, but over the years I have learned to classify users into categories A, B & C when interacting with them.
Class A: Users who know their stuff. They're tech-savvy, trustworthy, but most importantly know their limitations. When they have a problem, they will fix it themselves if they KNOW exactly how to fix it, if not, they will call the helpdesk and explain symptons, suspected cause, any diagnosis steps they have taken and anything else that may help.
Class C: Users who are IT-Phobic. Anything goes even slightly wrong and they call the helpdesk. They never touch anything they haven't had at least a month's intensive training on (and for some individuals, this includes equipment as simple to use as a photocopier)! these users are hard work, but ultimately harmless as they will never have the confidence to fiddle with anything that could screw things up for others. As an example, I once had to educate a user who couldn't work out why his printer wasn't printing after adding paper (I had to explain, whilst holding back tears of laughter, that the wrapper needs to be removed from the ream of paper before putting it in the drawer!).
Class B: These are the grey area of users who have an interest in IT, like to fiddle, refuse to read a manual and when their fiddling to correct a problem they've encountered does make things worse, when they finally admit defeat and call the helpdesk, they deny fiddling at all and cause the Techs no end of grief looking over their shoulders and saying things like "shouldn't you be doing it this way?..." because that's the way they've seen someone do something different in the past and they don't understand the same fix won't correct all possible bugs.
Needless to say, I rather like the Class A's, and Class B's can be OK once you've gotten over the frustration of telling them everything about two-dozen times. Class B users, however, are dangerous and it is for these people that a lot of IT departments have to lock down machines and audit on a regular basis. Class A's won't install what they aren't supposed to, and Class C's wouldn't know how/dare to try.
Having said this, I think the whole point of the article may have been to remind us all that even from a security and lockdown point of view, "an idiot-proof system is no match for a system-proof idiot"!
I do sympathise with a lot of the middle managers, etc. who are trying to circumvent IT depts because IT are just blindly saying NO without analysing the request for new software. I have a background in IT, but don't currently work in an IT department. At the moment, I am in a sort of hybrid position where I am (unofficially) supporting the front-line users I work with and am utilised as a point of contact with the IT department as I can re-word requests in a common language and can translate and identify bulls#1t when IT use it in their responses. Unfortunately, rather than seeing me as an ally, I am seen by the IT department as an enemy!