As a longtime Mac user and a fan of Apple products in general, I'd like to congratulate the winner of this contest. Too many Mac users now seem lost in willful ignorance of the fact that tasteful, thoughtful design alone doesn't render a system bulletproof. Thus, I applaud any honest efforts to increase the public awareness that yes, shit-happening potential exists, even on a Mac.
(I said honest efforts. That guy who claimed the AirPort hack is still a raging tool.)
Another point to emphasize—and which, curiously, seems always to be overlooked on Slashdot—is that an uninvited guest doesn't need root to ruin your day. As long as he or she can rm -rf ~, or better yet, yank all your most intimate personal documents and send them flying across the internets, root's just gravy. So let's not pretend this Safari vuln is harmless.
Really though, how on earth are you supposed to guard against attack through vectors not yet publicly known, without either (a) suffering a crippled functionality, or (b) being badgered into clicking "Continue" out of habit? The best approach I've seen is the one adopted by Google's anti-phishing plugin (and for those of us who can't stand Firefox, Leopard can't come soon enough). It's intuitive, unobtrusive, and cuts straight to the heart of the problem: making sure you're visiting the wholesome, trustworthy site you think you're visiting.
But even with the Google phish alarm installed, if you make one little mistake—if you step out of line for just a second—you could be hosed. Or what if someone figures out how to inject an attack on a "safe" bulletin board? You're hosed. Hell, maybe someday Google blows it like a Taco Bell restaurant inspector. Hosed.
So can it even be done, this cake thing, with the eating? Or is our best hope to just pray to Jobs the Mac never becomes mainstream enough to attract attention from the big-league black hats?
"Note for mods/admins why does the person have an account?? (and an unbanned ip??)"
Good grief, lighten up. Most people would laugh at themselves after being the victim of an innocent prank like this. But hey, Wikipedia is serious business, yeah?
I'm pointing out that you don't have to be a hippie to regret the social costs of automobile use over more "sustainable" modes of transportation. You miserable little shitstain.
Nah, I'm no hippie. Fuck the environment; I just want livable streets, a shorter commute, and to breathe clean air instead of carcinogenic particulate matter. It just so happens that some of the means to achieve these goals align with what the hippies want, too.
Just reread the OP, and I still have no idea where you're getting that interpretation. Unless you're of the mindset that letting everyone in inner-city neighborhoods succumb to violent crime would be no great loss, because they're all "other gang members" anyway (your exact words).
Perhaps you misread the OP, but that seems unlikely given that you just referenced it directly. It's disturbing enough that you would automatically equate inner-city resident with gang member.
Forcing? What if we just prefer to use other sites? Look, Safari (for example) has trouble rendering some sites. But these tend to be sites no self-respecting Mac user would ever care to visit. Sites like www.start.com, a Microsoft property rotten with the trademark Microsoft aesthetic. Or spreadsheets.google.com—how many real Mac users would rather use a spreadsheet than a purpose-built Cocoa app? And as for www.bananarepublic.com, give me a break. We're so over beige.
My point, seriously, if I even have one, is this: I've never even seen a site Safari won't render, or at least not a site I'd bother opening Firefox or Camino to visit. The sites I care about most tend to be run by people with Mac-compatible tastes. You won't find me visiting windowsupdate.com.
Oh, agreed completely. If I seemed to be minimizing the importance of these results, or of Einstein's contributions to physics for that matter, I apologize—I probably could have written more clearly. These results are important because they confirm Einstein's model is a better description of our perceptions of reality. Should these perceptions grow more exact or change otherwise in the future, which doubtless they will, we'll need an updated model to account for the discrepancies.
In that light, Einstein didn't prove Newton wrong. Classical mechanics remains the most useful way for us to model many everyday phenomena. General relativity gives us a much more broadly applicable description of the universe, but if that fact alone makes Newton wrong, Einstein's going to be proven wrong too.
Re:How about the route to Canada and Continental U
on
The World's Longest Tunnel
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Why would you want to go all the way with a road, of all things? Cars are great for undirected travel in dense environments brimming with potential pickup and dropoff points, which is precisely what travel along the coast from Alaska to California is not. For this sort of thing, rail is far more efficient and convenient; plus, you're not stuck behind the wheel of your Hummer the whole ride down. Should the passing scenery out your panoramic windows in your passenger train car get boring, you can take a day off at a train stop to rent a Vespa or a snowmobile, or just go hiking.
Frankly, the last thing America needs this century is to further perpetuate a backwards transportation policy that has bound us to oil, a marriage that hurts us economically, environmentally, and politically the longer we continue. I'm reassured that Canada has shown better judgment, and I trust those floppy-headed lumberjacks won't be laying asphalt all over the coast anytime soon.
Hahaha, yeah! Because the targets of violence are criminals too!
Except they aren't. Your comment only makes sense, even tongue-in-cheek, if you consider those who live and work in close physical proximity to these "urban criminals" of yours, criminal themselves. And what could be behind such an attitude, I wonder? Hmm?
I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. In addition, during this file transfer, Safari will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even Pages.app is straining to keep up as I type this.
I don't think anyone's concerned about proving Einstein absolutely right or absolutely wrong—if you look at it in those terms, any theory is bound to be proved "wrong," eventually, in that it'll fail for some ever-increasing standard of precision. What's news here is that we can now trust Einstein's equations to predict our measured reality within that cited "1%," confirming that general relativity is a pretty damn useful model. But that doesn't mean it won't be supplanted next year by something even more useful.
Arrgh. Not to argue with your overall sentiment, but I don't know how helpful it is to state categorically that this "proves Einstein correct." All the experiment shows, indeed all any experiment can show, is that his model turns out to be useful in predicting events in the world as we understand it. It's like saying Galileo's drop tower experiment would have "proved" Newton's laws correct—true enough for its time, but with the benefit of more accurate measurements and a broader philosophical inquisition, not nearly the complete picture as we know it today.
Those aren't Mac users. If you find yourself needing to run Windows, and I can't even imagine why (no Mac port of Dweebinator 2000, perhaps?), then you're what I would consider a PC user in denial.
Yeah, sure we've heard most everything before, but guess what? That comment was so uninsightful, so painfully boring and unoriginal, that it sticks out as an especially useless contribution to the discussion—and, yes, an especially redundant one.
Look, the so-called reality is that moderation means whatever the moderators want it to mean. I thought we were over the whole age of reason, age of progress bullshit; I hate to say it, grandpa, but your enlightenment values died with modernity, and if you can't cope, maybe you ought to have died as well.
You've never used Windows before, but for some reason you're concerned about being unable to run Windows in future? Why?
I mean, speaking for myself, I've never felt the need or desire to run Windows in my life. So I'm having trouble understanding why someone else in my situation—someone who (ostensibly) doesn't care about Windows—would give two shits about XP becoming unavailable for purchase. What am I missing here?
Who died and left you king of moderation? Maybe this shit is redundant because we've heard it a million times before, indeed felt for decades and decades, and even bothering to mention it anymore only reveals how much of a latecomer you really are to awareness of Microsoft's signature mediocrity. Fucking snore.
Slashdot Mirror
As a longtime Mac user and a fan of Apple products in general, I'd like to congratulate the winner of this contest. Too many Mac users now seem lost in willful ignorance of the fact that tasteful, thoughtful design alone doesn't render a system bulletproof. Thus, I applaud any honest efforts to increase the public awareness that yes, shit-happening potential exists, even on a Mac.
(I said honest efforts. That guy who claimed the AirPort hack is still a raging tool.)
Another point to emphasize—and which, curiously, seems always to be overlooked on Slashdot—is that an uninvited guest doesn't need root to ruin your day. As long as he or she can rm -rf ~, or better yet, yank all your most intimate personal documents and send them flying across the internets, root's just gravy. So let's not pretend this Safari vuln is harmless.
Really though, how on earth are you supposed to guard against attack through vectors not yet publicly known, without either (a) suffering a crippled functionality, or (b) being badgered into clicking "Continue" out of habit? The best approach I've seen is the one adopted by Google's anti-phishing plugin (and for those of us who can't stand Firefox, Leopard can't come soon enough). It's intuitive, unobtrusive, and cuts straight to the heart of the problem: making sure you're visiting the wholesome, trustworthy site you think you're visiting.
But even with the Google phish alarm installed, if you make one little mistake—if you step out of line for just a second—you could be hosed. Or what if someone figures out how to inject an attack on a "safe" bulletin board? You're hosed. Hell, maybe someday Google blows it like a Taco Bell restaurant inspector. Hosed.
So can it even be done, this cake thing, with the eating? Or is our best hope to just pray to Jobs the Mac never becomes mainstream enough to attract attention from the big-league black hats?
Finished cleaning out the grease pans early tonight, did we, Mr. Summers?
"Note for mods/admins why does the person have an account?? (and an unbanned ip??)"
Good grief, lighten up. Most people would laugh at themselves after being the victim of an innocent prank like this. But hey, Wikipedia is serious business, yeah?
Thank you. I was starting to wonder if I'd gone mad.
I'm pointing out that you don't have to be a hippie to regret the social costs of automobile use over more "sustainable" modes of transportation. You miserable little shitstain.
Nah, I'm no hippie. Fuck the environment; I just want livable streets, a shorter commute, and to breathe clean air instead of carcinogenic particulate matter. It just so happens that some of the means to achieve these goals align with what the hippies want, too.
Just reread the OP, and I still have no idea where you're getting that interpretation. Unless you're of the mindset that letting everyone in inner-city neighborhoods succumb to violent crime would be no great loss, because they're all "other gang members" anyway (your exact words).
Perhaps you misread the OP, but that seems unlikely given that you just referenced it directly. It's disturbing enough that you would automatically equate inner-city resident with gang member.
Forcing? What if we just prefer to use other sites? Look, Safari (for example) has trouble rendering some sites. But these tend to be sites no self-respecting Mac user would ever care to visit. Sites like www.start.com, a Microsoft property rotten with the trademark Microsoft aesthetic. Or spreadsheets.google.com—how many real Mac users would rather use a spreadsheet than a purpose-built Cocoa app? And as for www.bananarepublic.com, give me a break. We're so over beige.
My point, seriously, if I even have one, is this: I've never even seen a site Safari won't render, or at least not a site I'd bother opening Firefox or Camino to visit. The sites I care about most tend to be run by people with Mac-compatible tastes. You won't find me visiting windowsupdate.com.
Oh, agreed completely. If I seemed to be minimizing the importance of these results, or of Einstein's contributions to physics for that matter, I apologize—I probably could have written more clearly. These results are important because they confirm Einstein's model is a better description of our perceptions of reality. Should these perceptions grow more exact or change otherwise in the future, which doubtless they will, we'll need an updated model to account for the discrepancies.
In that light, Einstein didn't prove Newton wrong. Classical mechanics remains the most useful way for us to model many everyday phenomena. General relativity gives us a much more broadly applicable description of the universe, but if that fact alone makes Newton wrong, Einstein's going to be proven wrong too.
Why would you want to go all the way with a road, of all things? Cars are great for undirected travel in dense environments brimming with potential pickup and dropoff points, which is precisely what travel along the coast from Alaska to California is not. For this sort of thing, rail is far more efficient and convenient; plus, you're not stuck behind the wheel of your Hummer the whole ride down. Should the passing scenery out your panoramic windows in your passenger train car get boring, you can take a day off at a train stop to rent a Vespa or a snowmobile, or just go hiking.
Frankly, the last thing America needs this century is to further perpetuate a backwards transportation policy that has bound us to oil, a marriage that hurts us economically, environmentally, and politically the longer we continue. I'm reassured that Canada has shown better judgment, and I trust those floppy-headed lumberjacks won't be laying asphalt all over the coast anytime soon.
Yes. I also seem to recall a Mythbusters segment that arrived at the same conclusion.
Hahaha, yeah! Because the targets of violence are criminals too!
Except they aren't. Your comment only makes sense, even tongue-in-cheek, if you consider those who live and work in close physical proximity to these "urban criminals" of yours, criminal themselves. And what could be behind such an attitude, I wonder? Hmm?
Good grief, you're disgusting.
Sigh.
I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. In addition, during this file transfer, Safari will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even Pages.app is straining to keep up as I type this.
I don't think anyone's concerned about proving Einstein absolutely right or absolutely wrong—if you look at it in those terms, any theory is bound to be proved "wrong," eventually, in that it'll fail for some ever-increasing standard of precision. What's news here is that we can now trust Einstein's equations to predict our measured reality within that cited "1%," confirming that general relativity is a pretty damn useful model. But that doesn't mean it won't be supplanted next year by something even more useful.
My God, man, platinum, not beige. Don't let them hear you call it beige.
Arrgh. Not to argue with your overall sentiment, but I don't know how helpful it is to state categorically that this "proves Einstein correct." All the experiment shows, indeed all any experiment can show, is that his model turns out to be useful in predicting events in the world as we understand it. It's like saying Galileo's drop tower experiment would have "proved" Newton's laws correct—true enough for its time, but with the benefit of more accurate measurements and a broader philosophical inquisition, not nearly the complete picture as we know it today.
Those aren't Mac users. If you find yourself needing to run Windows, and I can't even imagine why (no Mac port of Dweebinator 2000, perhaps?), then you're what I would consider a PC user in denial.
Yeah, sure we've heard most everything before, but guess what? That comment was so uninsightful, so painfully boring and unoriginal, that it sticks out as an especially useless contribution to the discussion—and, yes, an especially redundant one.
Look, the so-called reality is that moderation means whatever the moderators want it to mean. I thought we were over the whole age of reason, age of progress bullshit; I hate to say it, grandpa, but your enlightenment values died with modernity, and if you can't cope, maybe you ought to have died as well.
You've never used Windows before, but for some reason you're concerned about being unable to run Windows in future? Why?
I mean, speaking for myself, I've never felt the need or desire to run Windows in my life. So I'm having trouble understanding why someone else in my situation—someone who (ostensibly) doesn't care about Windows—would give two shits about XP becoming unavailable for purchase. What am I missing here?
Who died and left you king of moderation? Maybe this shit is redundant because we've heard it a million times before, indeed felt for decades and decades, and even bothering to mention it anymore only reveals how much of a latecomer you really are to awareness of Microsoft's signature mediocrity. Fucking snore.