It's only an assumption if there is no evidence to base the decision off of. If "Cockhead C" knows that Bob has a history of such behavior, then your point is moot. This has been more cleverly quoted as "Assume makes and ass out of u and me".
The Windows Key is called the Meta key in Ubuntu. It is available to be bound at will. Alt+F2 has been the standard in linux for a long time to open the run dialog. As AC said, its much easier to hit, I use Right Thumb + Middle Finger (rather than index finger). Hitting Meta+R throws my typing off for a moment.
If you really really need Win+R in Ubuntu, go to your top tool bar "System->Prefernces->Keyboard Shortcuts", scroll down the list to find "Show the panel run application dialog" and change it from Alt+F2 to Meta+R.
Install updates? Reboot. Install Drivers? Reboot. Install Antivirus? Reboot. Change your hostname? Reboot. Install a CD/DVD burning program? Reboot. Computer lagging like crazy after having some apps in Adobe CS 3 open? Reboot.
Why isn't shut down and start up time important again?
By the way, the definition of the word install doesn't include "infrequent workload". When you have to install Windows Vista a few times to make ghost images, the install time starts to add up on you. The OS footprint will make saving a ghost image and restoring it an equal burden.
Abcd1234 is right, saying "Install linux!" to anyone is like saying "Install Windows!". Do you mean XP (home, Pro, etc) or Vista (home, business, ultimate, etc), perhaps Server (Standard, you get the point).
Most Linux Distro (the ones I know of anyway) have a server and a desktop edition. The only difference between these is usually that one comes with GUI (or a desktop as most would call it) and the other does not. These titles pretty clearly state what you get. This is done for the user, because technically they are the exact same thing. One just comes pre-installed with more packages than the other. If I were so inclined, I could install server edition and later install the packages that would make it desktop edition via the package manager.
Lets not even mention Linux though, this is about Windows.
Just citing off the top of my head, a difference between Windows XP home and Pro, you cannot run a group policy editor, and you cannot manage permissions for files (unless you use cacls or icacls via command line). Remote connections to your disks or desktop are severely limited, and I'm sure there are many other things as well. This isn't just a matter of some application not being included. Some of the applications and/or services have simply been restricted.
I'm not saying these are bad things, most users are better off not being able to touch file permissions via the gui anyways. My point is, how in the world are you supposed to know that from the name? It would be better off called "Windows XP limited networking and filesystem management edition" The problem with these complicated changes to the OS, is that there is no easy way to explain the differences via the title, short of describing the extent to which they are gimped... but who in their right mind would call their software gimp?! *cough*;)
Off the inter-tubes, we do already have laws that forbid abusive behavior in relation to criminal activity. Harassing someone in real life can get you slapped with a restraining order. Harassing someone for money or property, can get you slapped with extortion, etc.
IMO, this legislation is going in the right direction, but must be refined. In its current state, it really isn't acceptable.
a 100Kbps masked DDoS for a approx. 14.6 hours straight would take up 5GiB of bandwidth.
Its a small amount of bandwidth that most people wouldn't even notice the attack. After 14ish hours, BAM, internet shuts off, or they are raking in additional charges from their ISP.
I'm currently using TimeWarner in San Diego, CA. I'll be canceling my internet service with them and letting them know that this move in Beaumont is the reason for my leaving. SpeakEasy it is!
They were on the roads, driving 45 in the fast lane with their left blinker on, now they're leading our companies! Great, lets hope to retire them someday!
Too many people who think they know better than the end-users, and too much work being done by lots of people on different, competing projects. Sounds like your talking about Windows to me.
This fork is just another proof (and WTH is with that "premier multi-protocol instant messaging client" remark? Nobody uses that on Windows and Mac OS X). I've worked in two completely unrelated IT businesses that use these clients as *the* real-time communication method between the staff. When email is just too inconvenient, or to throw a quick link at a co-worker.
Your declarations are just flat out wrong. This is one of the things that make OSS great. When Microsoft does something like, oh lets says *change the entire layout of the GUI for a mainstream application like Office*, no one is allowed to fork it and restore a easier to use GUI.
Please, in the future, when referring to such a large group of users via words like "anyone, noone, etc" look a little further past your monkey sphere.
No unix using a non-encrypted file system is secure if you have physical access to the machine...Why would you assume it's any different with Windows?
I'd just boot knoppix and mount the partition. There, I have access to all the files. That goes for windows AND unix/linux.
If you really depend on the password for anything other than stopping casual or remote access, you're just fooling yourself. Did you miss the part about the decrypting of the passwords? Linux can be made secure from local attack (sledgehammer proof?), this story basically says that Windows has back doors built in just waiting to be found or simply used.
Back in the days of 28.8K and 56K modem dominance, I used to do everything I could to trim down my site. Before uploading my html, I would remove every character that didn't *have* to be there for it to render properly. Meaning I had a single line html page, heh. Also, my images were trimmed down to be as lossy as possible without losing a noticeable amount of quality. I was not satisfied if my page with html, images, css, and js at a combined size of greater than 300K... which was still a nice long wait for a modem user. I haven't designed a site in years now... a lot of the care in site design seems to have been lost is all I can say.
The only thing anti-virus companies need to sell their product is the fear or threat of a virus. I suppose they believe there is more money in the fear mongering business than legitimate business. They may be right, I don't pretend to know. Having a virus scanner is pretty much a mindset in a windows environment. Even Windows Security Center will whine and complain if you don't have one (until you shoot it in the services.msc if you know what I mean).
Take for example, Network Intrusion Detection Systems. They are supposed to be set up *before* an intrusion takes place. Even if there is no history of previous intrusion, they validate that your network is actually secure. History should have shown us by now that the majority of hax0rs want not only get in your system, but remain their as silently and as long as possible. Thus, a detection system is needed.
An anti-virus companies selling pitch might be "How do you know you don't have a virus, if you don't have a virus scanner?". I am not an advocate for AV software, I'm just saying it as I see it.
I think you've replied to my comment without checking who my comment was in reply to. Here is a quote from the parent of this thread in which I was replying to. I suppose the newish layout of slashdot does make it more difficult to track a thread, I suppose I'll have to quote everyone I reply to from now on to avoid this sort of confusion in the future.
Attacking Negroponte, attacking Microsoft, attacking Adobe, attacking everyone. But nothing positive at all. Because "free" software people would rather see the entire world on Windows than give up even a tiny bit of their own idealogical self-righteousness. And that's why Linux will never be more than a curiosity on the desktop outside of the group that define themselves as geeks.
That objection is rediculous when you looking at the global share of mass market OS.
There is no intelligible reason to believe that a significant fraction of the billion or so Windows users on the desktop know or care about the user agent - and even less reason to believe that would edit - forge - an agent without having the faintest notion of what the consequences might be. Let me try and put this in form of a simple analogy. Lets say I have 30,000 (websites) blind people randomly allocated throughout the U.S (internet). Now, I have specific buildings (website) where they distribute certain rewards (content) for having you visit them, the catch being you must provide them with your age (user agent). Certain buildings (websites) have taken it upon themselves to provide more rewards (content) for being less than 40 in age (using IE). Now based on the results of collecting this data, my organization states that 80% of people are less than 40 years old, 12% are between 40-50, and 8% are 50+.
Website Statistics blindly accept whatever the user tells them. Additionally, you have no clue where the stats are coming from, you are blindly accepting data from an unidentified source as well. You can rely on data sources like this if you like, but I won't.
I don't know that this is the only reason. As someone who plays video games on the computer, wide screens increase my field of view in the virtual environments which allows me have greater time to react to events which I normally would not see for another second to split second. That second of reaction can be the difference between victory and "You die... Wonotobo takes all your possessions."
In the work place, I personally have no use for widescreens, however, engineers, graphics designer and web devs may also have a use for this. I know they usually have tons of tools and panes open and all over the place... the more space, the better.
It seems somewhat an uninformed approach to rely on these web-based stats.
Not even taking into consideration that browser type and OS enumeration can be easily blocked and/or forged. And that KDE users have this capability installed by default in their browser, or that Firefox users most downloaded add-ons have this capability as well. NoScript among the most popular in addition to UserAgent being less popular.
Lets take into consideration which sites these stats come from. Anyone have a list? I don't see this information provided on their site.
These points are all highly debatable. I could reasonably argue that New York city also has the highest percentage of people who are frustrated with jay-walkers. Most city's who don't have this high concentration of jay-walking and traffic are far more likely to dismiss the law, as it is not an important issue at all.
Assuming that your 56% number is correct, and referencing census.gov for some estimated population numbers. The estimated population of NYC in 2006 is roughly 19,306,183.
What you're saying to us is that ~10,811,462, nearly 11 million people oppose stricter enforcement of jay-walking laws. Thank you for showing how many U.S. citizens in a single city oppose this.
I predict no. The internet's main problem is between the monitor and keyboard;-) The only thing between my keyboard and monitor is my wrist pad. Which I have displaced because I need more space for my bowl of yummy delicious pasta. I'll thank you to stop making such erroneous claims directed at my wrist pad and focus on this world's real problem... thats right, manbearpig! I'm super serial!
Slashdot Mirror
It's only an assumption if there is no evidence to base the decision off of. If "Cockhead C" knows that Bob has a history of such behavior, then your point is moot. This has been more cleverly quoted as "Assume makes and ass out of u and me".
The Windows Key is called the Meta key in Ubuntu. It is available to be bound at will. Alt+F2 has been the standard in linux for a long time to open the run dialog. As AC said, its much easier to hit, I use Right Thumb + Middle Finger (rather than index finger). Hitting Meta+R throws my typing off for a moment.
If you really really need Win+R in Ubuntu, go to your top tool bar "System->Prefernces->Keyboard Shortcuts", scroll down the list to find "Show the panel run application dialog" and change it from Alt+F2 to Meta+R.
Install updates? Reboot. Install Drivers? Reboot. Install Antivirus? Reboot. Change your hostname? Reboot. Install a CD/DVD burning program? Reboot. Computer lagging like crazy after having some apps in Adobe CS 3 open? Reboot.
Why isn't shut down and start up time important again?
By the way, the definition of the word install doesn't include "infrequent workload". When you have to install Windows Vista a few times to make ghost images, the install time starts to add up on you. The OS footprint will make saving a ghost image and restoring it an equal burden.
Abcd1234 is right, saying "Install linux!" to anyone is like saying "Install Windows!". Do you mean XP (home, Pro, etc) or Vista (home, business, ultimate, etc), perhaps Server (Standard, you get the point).
Most Linux Distro (the ones I know of anyway) have a server and a desktop edition. The only difference between these is usually that one comes with GUI (or a desktop as most would call it) and the other does not. These titles pretty clearly state what you get. This is done for the user, because technically they are the exact same thing. One just comes pre-installed with more packages than the other. If I were so inclined, I could install server edition and later install the packages that would make it desktop edition via the package manager.
Lets not even mention Linux though, this is about Windows.
Just citing off the top of my head, a difference between Windows XP home and Pro, you cannot run a group policy editor, and you cannot manage permissions for files (unless you use cacls or icacls via command line). Remote connections to your disks or desktop are severely limited, and I'm sure there are many other things as well. This isn't just a matter of some application not being included. Some of the applications and/or services have simply been restricted.
I'm not saying these are bad things, most users are better off not being able to touch file permissions via the gui anyways. My point is, how in the world are you supposed to know that from the name? It would be better off called "Windows XP limited networking and filesystem management edition" The problem with these complicated changes to the OS, is that there is no easy way to explain the differences via the title, short of describing the extent to which they are gimped... but who in their right mind would call their software gimp?! *cough* ;)
Off the inter-tubes, we do already have laws that forbid abusive behavior in relation to criminal activity. Harassing someone in real life can get you slapped with a restraining order. Harassing someone for money or property, can get you slapped with extortion, etc.
IMO, this legislation is going in the right direction, but must be refined. In its current state, it really isn't acceptable.
a 100Kbps masked DDoS for a approx. 14.6 hours straight would take up 5GiB of bandwidth.
Its a small amount of bandwidth that most people wouldn't even notice the attack. After 14ish hours, BAM, internet shuts off, or they are raking in additional charges from their ISP.
I'm currently using TimeWarner in San Diego, CA. I'll be canceling my internet service with them and letting them know that this move in Beaumont is the reason for my leaving. SpeakEasy it is!
Has anyone tried eating the fungus yet? Perhaps it and the bananas do not taste very different.
They were on the roads, driving 45 in the fast lane with their left blinker on, now they're leading our companies! Great, lets hope to retire them someday!
*ducks*
AHHHH! Anything but the cane! *cowers*
If the computer boots to the point where GRUB errors can be received, its not bricked.
You may want to boot a Ubuntu disc and run ``sudo update-grub''.
Your declarations are just flat out wrong. This is one of the things that make OSS great. When Microsoft does something like, oh lets says *change the entire layout of the GUI for a mainstream application like Office*, no one is allowed to fork it and restore a easier to use GUI.
Please, in the future, when referring to such a large group of users via words like "anyone, noone, etc" look a little further past your monkey sphere.
I'd just boot knoppix and mount the partition. There, I have access to all the files. That goes for windows AND unix/linux.
If you really depend on the password for anything other than stopping casual or remote access, you're just fooling yourself. Did you miss the part about the decrypting of the passwords? Linux can be made secure from local attack (sledgehammer proof?), this story basically says that Windows has back doors built in just waiting to be found or simply used.
Yep, didn't used to have my own server back then though... my first sites were back on geocities, hehe.
Blasphemy! Now respect thy neighbor and stone his child to death!
Back in the days of 28.8K and 56K modem dominance, I used to do everything I could to trim down my site. Before uploading my html, I would remove every character that didn't *have* to be there for it to render properly. Meaning I had a single line html page, heh. Also, my images were trimmed down to be as lossy as possible without losing a noticeable amount of quality. I was not satisfied if my page with html, images, css, and js at a combined size of greater than 300K... which was still a nice long wait for a modem user. I haven't designed a site in years now... a lot of the care in site design seems to have been lost is all I can say.
The only thing anti-virus companies need to sell their product is the fear or threat of a virus. I suppose they believe there is more money in the fear mongering business than legitimate business. They may be right, I don't pretend to know. Having a virus scanner is pretty much a mindset in a windows environment. Even Windows Security Center will whine and complain if you don't have one (until you shoot it in the services.msc if you know what I mean).
Take for example, Network Intrusion Detection Systems. They are supposed to be set up *before* an intrusion takes place. Even if there is no history of previous intrusion, they validate that your network is actually secure. History should have shown us by now that the majority of hax0rs want not only get in your system, but remain their as silently and as long as possible. Thus, a detection system is needed.
An anti-virus companies selling pitch might be "How do you know you don't have a virus, if you don't have a virus scanner?". I am not an advocate for AV software, I'm just saying it as I see it.
If there is indeed anything positive to say about this at all, please by all means, say it. Other wise, all you are doing is trolling.
There is no intelligible reason to believe that a significant fraction of the billion or so Windows users on the desktop know or care about the user agent - and even less reason to believe that would edit - forge - an agent without having the faintest notion of what the consequences might be. Let me try and put this in form of a simple analogy. Lets say I have 30,000 (websites) blind people randomly allocated throughout the U.S (internet). Now, I have specific buildings (website) where they distribute certain rewards (content) for having you visit them, the catch being you must provide them with your age (user agent). Certain buildings (websites) have taken it upon themselves to provide more rewards (content) for being less than 40 in age (using IE). Now based on the results of collecting this data, my organization states that 80% of people are less than 40 years old, 12% are between 40-50, and 8% are 50+.
Website Statistics blindly accept whatever the user tells them. Additionally, you have no clue where the stats are coming from, you are blindly accepting data from an unidentified source as well. You can rely on data sources like this if you like, but I won't.
I don't know that this is the only reason. As someone who plays video games on the computer, wide screens increase my field of view in the virtual environments which allows me have greater time to react to events which I normally would not see for another second to split second. That second of reaction can be the difference between victory and "You die... Wonotobo takes all your possessions."
In the work place, I personally have no use for widescreens, however, engineers, graphics designer and web devs may also have a use for this. I know they usually have tons of tools and panes open and all over the place... the more space, the better.
It seems somewhat an uninformed approach to rely on these web-based stats.
Not even taking into consideration that browser type and OS enumeration can be easily blocked and/or forged. And that KDE users have this capability installed by default in their browser, or that Firefox users most downloaded add-ons have this capability as well. NoScript among the most popular in addition to UserAgent being less popular.
Lets take into consideration which sites these stats come from. Anyone have a list? I don't see this information provided on their site.
These points are all highly debatable. I could reasonably argue that New York city also has the highest percentage of people who are frustrated with jay-walkers. Most city's who don't have this high concentration of jay-walking and traffic are far more likely to dismiss the law, as it is not an important issue at all.
"So! For once the rich white man is in control!"
Assuming that your 56% number is correct, and referencing census.gov for some estimated population numbers. The estimated population of NYC in 2006 is roughly 19,306,183. What you're saying to us is that ~10,811,462, nearly 11 million people oppose stricter enforcement of jay-walking laws. Thank you for showing how many U.S. citizens in a single city oppose this.