A nanny state cares for the people. That means you get tax percentages that increase with loan, so for example: -Up to your first 1000 dollars, you pay 2% -Then over the next 500 dollars you pay 5% -Then over the next 500 dollars you pay 10% -Etc...
And then the more you earn; themore you pay. So when your kid wants to do compsci at a university, the largest part of it will be paid by the tax dollars so that your kid can go to school, even if you're broke. And if you need a new heart when you're old and you don't have a lot of money; you'll get one because everyone is forced to pay insurance and when nobody can pay for it, they'll get compensated with tax money.
And so if you go to Las Vegas and rent a hotel, you won't see an 80yo woman, strugling to type on that new fancy computer, just because she has to keep doing checkin shit because she has no money and you'll be waiting one hour for your reservation.
Now THAT is a nanny state. What you think it means is a bossy state where the government decides how you need to pay, what you can wear, how you must act.
Well Ron Paul is against anything government that's not in the spirit of the founded america. In a certain way that is against what I would like. However there are a couple of points I'd like to make, starting with that example: 1. Ron is for racial harmony; 2. Ron believes that an act that forces every movie to hire a so called "Excuse nigger" is not exactly making the industry willing to improve harmoney and instead make a black action hero movie. Let's face it; how many ideal war propaganda black action hero movies are there, appart from a vampire slayer trilogy? Ron's only calling for a better thing like making sure the government actually inproves harmony instead of forcing it down racist bosses throats, that still make the racist bosses racist.
A better example would be a government institution that everybody can go to if one feels he/she is being treated unfairly. That would be a much better way to do it. But then again that bill does destroy the possibility of being racist in regards to loan, which is good.
And what's kind of funny is that all americans are proud of their so called 'freedom', which they actually don't have. You'd be amazed at certain laws in place today.
And then there is corruption and things like going to war with terrorists, while your country can't even afford it and the thing about the federal bank that pours billions into the economy, greating a bubble, making people with stocks (bought with their partly paid of houses) think they are rich so they spend more, making the economy even worse, etc.
I think that this so called idiot is the only hope that your country has, because if your country doesn't work out these most basic things, what you'll end up with is a cycle in which democrats build up stuff that they can't afford to keep for 8 years, then 8 years of "we're sick and tired of this shit so we're going to vote republican", so the republicans can destroy most of government for eight years, than people get fed up with their stupid shit, so they vote democrats again, etc. etc. etc.
You get shit moving from A to B and back again, for infinity. And nothing serious is being done about anything because you have two parties that only work against each other.
If democrats want to do A then they must give back B to republicans, then republicans want A but in order to do that they must hand over B back to the democrats.
Meanwhile, who's fixing the fscking debt? Obama actually breaks this problem by trying to have a middleground solution, but then that's not what both parties want and it's drama all over again.
TLDR: you're country needs an idiot to pull itself out of an idiotic situation.
Nanny state: state that cares for its people. We actually call it that way in school (more or less). Freely stranslated you can read it as "caring state", which we take pride in, mostly.
Well we have a problem here. A republic can only work for so long after which it fails. You can't punish a republic if there is no democracy. Look at China for example; they get shit done, but at what price?
People in charge need to be in charge only for so long... After about 8 years they're starting to forget where they came from and get a dictator disorder; they actualy think that what they're doing is what's best for the people, while it is not. Look at Sadam for example... He did do what he thought was good to a certain extent; you can't deny that he kept people from waging wars with eachother. He also made less casualties of crap than the Iraqi war did when America came around ("America, fuck yeah. Here to save the motherfucking day, yeah!").
Again, the least worse form, read least worse, remains capitalism.
The "OMG NANNY STATE" was a remark at the people's reaction to what was good for them. I'm not claiming that Obama is so great (although he is much better than any person elected after JFK). If I'd live in the US I would vote for Ron Paul (because he's the only sane, yet sorta popular guy), if that makes you happier... But Google Wikipedia for "The Netherlands" and simply look at the statistics of a nanny state. People in the US would probably fall of their chair when they hear that we pay about 30% taxes for everything, but then again you can't simply get "FIRED!" and be unemployed for four years, nor do you see crippled people walking down the streets that can't afford a new hip, while there are enough hospitals around to fix you up.
"Kicking specials kids" is for the specialy delusional people like you, who live in a dream, but actually have brains. I'm guessing you were raised in a certain way that made you think that you shouldn't care for anyone other than your own kind. That's perfectly normal in the days where meeting a differently thinking group could cause death or steal you food, but that's not the right way to think around a place like/. and in the current times. Stop being biased and be amazed at the world that opens up to you.
And it does so because there is no democratic government tamplate for: 1. Bring the capitalism; 2. Regulate it in such way that most profit can be gained from doing what's really needed (although we start to see this with tax cuts for less carbondioxide vehicles); 3. (Probably he most important point:) hand out tax money to people that want to start a business that's good for society and while you're at it: don't fscking own it and hand it a monopoly/unfair advantage.
What we really should do is use the least worse variant of governing (capitalism) and iron out the quirks.
But then almost the entire US starts screaming "OMG ME NOT WANT NANNY STATE OMFG!!!!1111 one one eleven"
One can only get a software patent if hardware is involved.
For example: you can't patent using an float calculation, but you can patent float calculation inside a GPU and framebuffer when nobody but you (or your company) has been engaged in researching it. (AMD has been sued for that and lost).
Walking on two legs has been done before by other, so no patent for you. Walking on two legs in a computer program can't be patented either, because there is no hardware involved that you invented or thought up that nobody used before.
What you could patent is a software program that aids a soldier who had his legs blown of during war, in walking, by having the software run on a processor that analyses with a 3D camera (depth values and speed) where to place the next step and then steer some robot legs, so someone can walk forward, without realy thinking about it.
But then you'd have a useful invention, even if software and robot legs have already been invented before.
So do you want to write of such inventions? Or where do you draw the line (patenting a link on the Windows 98 CDRom to go to a Microsoft website)? And based on what, how do you decide what is wrong and what is right?
Talk to a server farm when Intel is putting money in the development of Coreboot and we'll talk.
For now AMD is superior, because a server reboot requires about 1/100th of the time that it takes an Intel CPU farm to get back up due to horrible BIOSes. The more motherboards you have, the longer it takes due to serialized bootup. Ouch... Massive ouch...
Downtime versus marginable CPU speed... And less cores...
Well aside from code injecting cmd.exe (or faking to be the official cmd.exe) with a non-elevated process?:P (cmd.exe can run in admin mode while not requiring UAC prompt)
No what I meant was that all API's essentially get handled by NT in kernel mode (syscalls) that do root stuff for you without requiring root acces. There are no API's that simply say "Oh you want to make malware not require UAC? Use this ->" (that I'm aware of).
So there are API's enough for you to write a user privilaged app, but Microsoft probably didn't meant to require a third party registry cleaner, so touching this kind of niche stuff makes the user get poked by UAC no matter what you do (like Microsoft want you to be able to).
(I make mistakes sometimes; I'm just a human being:P)
I dissagree. Plan 9 from Bell Labs (I mistakenly typed System 9), can in any way be seen as a successor to UNIX, due to the distributed nature of the OS itself (this task here, IO tasks there, etc) and NT itself can be distributed. For example a server dealing with specific IO, a workstation specific task ran at a server with a big network filesystem with rights (active directory), etc.
But that's not all there is to it. Of course UNIX has been the best due to its very nature for networking, but there are more things that make NT stand out. Take for example its object orientated nature with inherritence and modular design (microkernel, full with servers in kernel mode) with a power usage module/server and a security module/server, propper HAL, etc.
Of course there is the GNU/HURD, which surprisingly makes big strives forward now, that greatly improves how we could think about UNIX, but that hasn't ever stabilized, ever, yet. So I think that for now, NT still takes the crown. That doesn't mean that its implementation is good at everything; for example the latency in this sucker is realy high (2ms at best, but probably much higher if you don't tweak it to death), and although it can handle load pretty well, UNIX implementations takes the crown in (semi) realtime networking.
You grow two brain cells and don't put all the money that you own into a stupid game?
If, as a result, you do get bankrupt, can't buy perty clothes and nobody wants to mate with you? I'd say let evolution sort 'em out... That way the problem will take care of its own...
Hell... the avarage IQ will go up. I bet we're totaly screwed if that happens...
So the point of all of this is that you should sign the executable with an XML file to have just user rights, figure API routines for stuff that you can't do with user rights alone (like registry changes and IO). You'll find out that in most cases you still can't perform these root things with API calls, but that there are API's that tell you to do the same thing differently that doesn't invoke admin rights. Ofcourse the API itself is probably root executed, but performs IO for you that puts stuff in healthy places, give you registry alternatives, etc.
No, the real problem with Microsoft was that they were ahead of everything and everyone. Ahead in R&D and marketshare.
For example the NT architecture is way better than UNIX by realy fscking far, where up to the kernel is distributed in terms of computing (System9, hello?). The tablet? Microsoft had it on the shelves (as opposed to the Xerox tablet that never saw the light of day).
So Microsoft didn't need to make their products more appealing to people (in terms of UI fancy stuff and usability), just more enabling (like the digital office where Office suites and Exchange stuff realy is king). So the security? Just make it a litle bit better for marketing because, well... they are going to buy our product anyway.
If I had my business like that, I would do the same, just for the money, with no risks.
So what did Apple need to do? What could they do? Luckily Steve (who is a good business guy), started looking not at what they could come up with (obviously less), but what they could differentiate themselves with ("Think different") and so they started looking at what actually sucked about PC's and made their own PC's exactly unlike the suckiness of the competition. Actually there was no competition because they made something totally different anyway. Even the name 'PC' was changed to 'Mac' (Personal Computer, Mah Computer yo), even though it is exactly a PC.
So now that Microsoft is starting to see that their asses are getting kicked, they see that they need to work on other areas now. Like Bill Gates said "We need to innovate". That's exactly what Microsoft is doing, at their rediculous slow pace, still. Their awesome R&D is still not anywhere to be found...
So that's why Apple succeded and Microsoft failed. Not because of any stupid "People wanted this that and thus"-crap, because it's bullshit.
If an application doesn't label itself as UAC aware (like explained in the article (link) below) it is virtualised/sandboxed, and thus resources are not accesible and prompt admin rights constantly. Or in another case you can make an elivated thread (root/admin rights thread) and let your app thread inherit the rights, but this also requires the UAC to ask the user "Do you wanna do this?".
In order to bypass this, you first need to define that you actualy are making a UAC aware app, just so that UAC knows "Hey, this developper knows what he's doing, I'll leave him alone". You do this by making a small XLM manifest.
Then, when UAC knows that you're (at least trying to) make a correct privilaged app, your app isn't virtualised and prompting, unles you decide to make some serious fscked up changes to the system, let's say the Program Files folder. By doing so you are ignoring NT6.x's design principles. (NT6.0 == Vista, NT6.1 == 7) and the UAC will still punish you for this. In order to make a change to a config file for example (Doom 3), you should ask an API "Store this to wherever it needs to be stored", by invoking a Common AppData path call (CSIDL, now depricated by KNOWNFOLDERID so check MSDN!).
UAC isn't realy a security thing and wasn't designed like that. You can compare it with Android: it shuts down unresponsive apps without asking (no seperate GUI thread if you will), so that developpers would pay attention to responsiveness.
Microsoft made UAC just like that, but then for security, to annoy users, just so that developpers would use safe code paths to make sure that these irritation messages aren't popping up in their apps.
That said, if you use an app developped by a propper developper, these messages won't bug you, ever. There are API routines to call that will poke NT modules to do root routines in a way that's deemed secure by Microsoft.
Well you got this billion-trillion-gazillion dollar company that hires the best of the best people to make a million/billion dollar costing platform with some realy serious security that nobody is supposed to break.
And a single guy, doing some hobby hacking, can beat that. It's like chess. He is superior. He won.
That's why. And now he's showing the world that he is smarter than the guys who even gone so far as too make the CPU burn its own key. It's like sport, for nerds.
Do like I did: "My computer has xyz problems." -"OK I'll fix." *Three fixes later...* "My computers is broken again" -"Sigh! OK you either are going to learn how to properly use Windows and install it yourself, or I'm installing Ubuntu on that thing, because you obviously can't ask me to take 3 hours on a monthly basis to fix the problems that you create everytime you use it." *installing Ubuntu*
Never ever heard anything about a virus ever again. Pentium 4 still runs like a champion, can do YouTube, Facebook, music, MP3 player management, YouTube downloads, etc. Everytime she wants do to something I'll tell her to google it. If she doesn't understand then I'll simply say "Well maybe computers aren't for you. You could always buy a Mac". Either way that's not my problem.
We should not alter DNA after birth, but if you're married to someone and both your RNA will highly likely result in realy problematic DNA for your child, you could opt for lab altering if you realy want a child together, instead of adoption.
This must be tight to some realy, realy strict regulation under which no mission creep could possibly happen to an organisation. One of the items in the regulation must be growing a test-DNA sample in a lab (sounds crazy) to the point where it can be determined wether the DNA will result in a healthy child. Then proceed with real pregnancy. There should also be a realy strictly specification for problematic deceases, like only inheritable decauses and later on maybe mental pain (girls baldness at teen age or something).
Please don't give me that "OMG life must not be killed crap", because without a working, self-aware brain, there is not life (except in plant form).
We could state that it's for stripping away diseases. If done correctly, like with medicine testing and aproval regulations, but for gene removal/altering, it could be done. But with great power comes great responsability; you have to do it right or you will suffer the consiquences.
But then again we also feared for all out nuclear war and it never happened, even though we have enough nukes and countries to blow the moon to shreds...
I surely don't hope the fear for this kinda stuff wears of like all new unknows stuff wears of. Before you know it you have to have ideal kids that are all almost genetically the same. Then you get the same weaknesses.
You strip difference out of the equation and your human defense goes down still.
But using this genetic stuff to entirely strip away disease is good. You just have to make sure you can replace the rock-solid system with your inteligence. It could be a bumpy ride and a silent killer if you try to make everything perfect...
Correlation is not causation. People need geological advantages. The places that weren't good enough to build proper societies were the places where the black people lived.
Energy seems to spark propper societies. For example the Egyption society erupted from flowing water and fish. But what do you do when you live somewhere in the middle of Africa? You spend the entire day walking for food. You're too bored so what do you do? You spend the remaining day fucking. Fucking means spreading HIV. So then you lost all hope.
But then what? Some people from all over the world start claiming you land, but if you're lucky enough you get to be transported as a slave to America and still don't get enough respect to be hired. So you have no money, no education.
When communicating with people, you communicate with words. You can talk to them or type. You don't record a fscking home video everytime you interact.
Now what makes a computer more usefull then to tell it what to fscking do, instead of pointing at shit with a cursor?
I can go to a terminal, tell it what to do, how to do it and on what to do it, in that order.
Slashdot Mirror
A nany state is not a bossy state.
A nanny state cares for the people. That means you get tax percentages that increase with loan, so for example:
-Up to your first 1000 dollars, you pay 2%
-Then over the next 500 dollars you pay 5%
-Then over the next 500 dollars you pay 10%
-Etc...
And then the more you earn; themore you pay. So when your kid wants to do compsci at a university, the largest part of it will be paid by the tax dollars so that your kid can go to school, even if you're broke. And if you need a new heart when you're old and you don't have a lot of money; you'll get one because everyone is forced to pay insurance and when nobody can pay for it, they'll get compensated with tax money.
And so if you go to Las Vegas and rent a hotel, you won't see an 80yo woman, strugling to type on that new fancy computer, just because she has to keep doing checkin shit because she has no money and you'll be waiting one hour for your reservation.
Now THAT is a nanny state. What you think it means is a bossy state where the government decides how you need to pay, what you can wear, how you must act.
Well Ron Paul is against anything government that's not in the spirit of the founded america. In a certain way that is against what I would like. However there are a couple of points I'd like to make, starting with that example:
1. Ron is for racial harmony;
2. Ron believes that an act that forces every movie to hire a so called "Excuse nigger" is not exactly making the industry willing to improve harmoney and instead make a black action hero movie. Let's face it; how many ideal war propaganda black action hero movies are there, appart from a vampire slayer trilogy? Ron's only calling for a better thing like making sure the government actually inproves harmony instead of forcing it down racist bosses throats, that still make the racist bosses racist.
A better example would be a government institution that everybody can go to if one feels he/she is being treated unfairly. That would be a much better way to do it. But then again that bill does destroy the possibility of being racist in regards to loan, which is good.
And what's kind of funny is that all americans are proud of their so called 'freedom', which they actually don't have. You'd be amazed at certain laws in place today.
And then there is corruption and things like going to war with terrorists, while your country can't even afford it and the thing about the federal bank that pours billions into the economy, greating a bubble, making people with stocks (bought with their partly paid of houses) think they are rich so they spend more, making the economy even worse, etc.
I think that this so called idiot is the only hope that your country has, because if your country doesn't work out these most basic things, what you'll end up with is a cycle in which democrats build up stuff that they can't afford to keep for 8 years, then 8 years of "we're sick and tired of this shit so we're going to vote republican", so the republicans can destroy most of government for eight years, than people get fed up with their stupid shit, so they vote democrats again, etc. etc. etc.
You get shit moving from A to B and back again, for infinity. And nothing serious is being done about anything because you have two parties that only work against each other.
If democrats want to do A then they must give back B to republicans, then republicans want A but in order to do that they must hand over B back to the democrats.
Meanwhile, who's fixing the fscking debt? Obama actually breaks this problem by trying to have a middleground solution, but then that's not what both parties want and it's drama all over again.
TLDR: you're country needs an idiot to pull itself out of an idiotic situation.
Nanny state: state that cares for its people. We actually call it that way in school (more or less). Freely stranslated you can read it as "caring state", which we take pride in, mostly.
Well we have a problem here. A republic can only work for so long after which it fails. You can't punish a republic if there is no democracy. Look at China for example; they get shit done, but at what price?
People in charge need to be in charge only for so long... After about 8 years they're starting to forget where they came from and get a dictator disorder; they actualy think that what they're doing is what's best for the people, while it is not. Look at Sadam for example... He did do what he thought was good to a certain extent; you can't deny that he kept people from waging wars with eachother. He also made less casualties of crap than the Iraqi war did when America came around ("America, fuck yeah. Here to save the motherfucking day, yeah!").
Again, the least worse form, read least worse, remains capitalism.
The "OMG NANNY STATE" was a remark at the people's reaction to what was good for them. I'm not claiming that Obama is so great (although he is much better than any person elected after JFK). If I'd live in the US I would vote for Ron Paul (because he's the only sane, yet sorta popular guy), if that makes you happier... But Google Wikipedia for "The Netherlands" and simply look at the statistics of a nanny state. People in the US would probably fall of their chair when they hear that we pay about 30% taxes for everything, but then again you can't simply get "FIRED!" and be unemployed for four years, nor do you see crippled people walking down the streets that can't afford a new hip, while there are enough hospitals around to fix you up.
"Kicking specials kids" is for the specialy delusional people like you, who live in a dream, but actually have brains. I'm guessing you were raised in a certain way that made you think that you shouldn't care for anyone other than your own kind. That's perfectly normal in the days where meeting a differently thinking group could cause death or steal you food, but that's not the right way to think around a place like /. and in the current times. Stop being biased and be amazed at the world that opens up to you.
You can start working for Microsoft. I heared they were looking for good PR in case Windows 8 throws a Vista...
And it does so because there is no democratic government tamplate for:
1. Bring the capitalism;
2. Regulate it in such way that most profit can be gained from doing what's really needed (although we start to see this with tax cuts for less carbondioxide vehicles);
3. (Probably he most important point:) hand out tax money to people that want to start a business that's good for society and while you're at it: don't fscking own it and hand it a monopoly/unfair advantage.
What we really should do is use the least worse variant of governing (capitalism) and iron out the quirks.
But then almost the entire US starts screaming "OMG ME NOT WANT NANNY STATE OMFG!!!!1111 one one eleven"
I suppose you all get what you deserve...
http://www.coreboot.org/Supported_Motherboards#Servers
One can only get a software patent if hardware is involved.
For example: you can't patent using an float calculation, but you can patent float calculation inside a GPU and framebuffer when nobody but you (or your company) has been engaged in researching it. (AMD has been sued for that and lost).
Walking on two legs has been done before by other, so no patent for you. Walking on two legs in a computer program can't be patented either, because there is no hardware involved that you invented or thought up that nobody used before.
What you could patent is a software program that aids a soldier who had his legs blown of during war, in walking, by having the software run on a processor that analyses with a 3D camera (depth values and speed) where to place the next step and then steer some robot legs, so someone can walk forward, without realy thinking about it.
But then you'd have a useful invention, even if software and robot legs have already been invented before.
So do you want to write of such inventions? Or where do you draw the line (patenting a link on the Windows 98 CDRom to go to a Microsoft website)? And based on what, how do you decide what is wrong and what is right?
Talk to a server farm when Intel is putting money in the development of Coreboot and we'll talk.
For now AMD is superior, because a server reboot requires about 1/100th of the time that it takes an Intel CPU farm to get back up due to horrible BIOSes. The more motherboards you have, the longer it takes due to serialized bootup. Ouch... Massive ouch...
Downtime versus marginable CPU speed... And less cores...
Well I guess we are both wrong, given that Xerox used the term personal computer in 1972 for the Alto computer.
Well aside from code injecting cmd.exe (or faking to be the official cmd.exe) with a non-elevated process? :P (cmd.exe can run in admin mode while not requiring UAC prompt)
No what I meant was that all API's essentially get handled by NT in kernel mode (syscalls) that do root stuff for you without requiring root acces. There are no API's that simply say "Oh you want to make malware not require UAC? Use this ->" (that I'm aware of).
So there are API's enough for you to write a user privilaged app, but Microsoft probably didn't meant to require a third party registry cleaner, so touching this kind of niche stuff makes the user get poked by UAC no matter what you do (like Microsoft want you to be able to).
(I make mistakes sometimes; I'm just a human being :P)
I dissagree. Plan 9 from Bell Labs (I mistakenly typed System 9), can in any way be seen as a successor to UNIX, due to the distributed nature of the OS itself (this task here, IO tasks there, etc) and NT itself can be distributed. For example a server dealing with specific IO, a workstation specific task ran at a server with a big network filesystem with rights (active directory), etc.
But that's not all there is to it. Of course UNIX has been the best due to its very nature for networking, but there are more things that make NT stand out. Take for example its object orientated nature with inherritence and modular design (microkernel, full with servers in kernel mode) with a power usage module/server and a security module/server, propper HAL, etc.
Of course there is the GNU/HURD, which surprisingly makes big strives forward now, that greatly improves how we could think about UNIX, but that hasn't ever stabilized, ever, yet. So I think that for now, NT still takes the crown. That doesn't mean that its implementation is good at everything; for example the latency in this sucker is realy high (2ms at best, but probably much higher if you don't tweak it to death), and although it can handle load pretty well, UNIX implementations takes the crown in (semi) realtime networking.
You grow two brain cells and don't put all the money that you own into a stupid game?
If, as a result, you do get bankrupt, can't buy perty clothes and nobody wants to mate with you? I'd say let evolution sort 'em out... That way the problem will take care of its own...
Hell... the avarage IQ will go up. I bet we're totaly screwed if that happens...
So the point of all of this is that you should sign the executable with an XML file to have just user rights, figure API routines for stuff that you can't do with user rights alone (like registry changes and IO). You'll find out that in most cases you still can't perform these root things with API calls, but that there are API's that tell you to do the same thing differently that doesn't invoke admin rights. Ofcourse the API itself is probably root executed, but performs IO for you that puts stuff in healthy places, give you registry alternatives, etc.
No, the real problem with Microsoft was that they were ahead of everything and everyone. Ahead in R&D and marketshare.
For example the NT architecture is way better than UNIX by realy fscking far, where up to the kernel is distributed in terms of computing (System9, hello?). The tablet? Microsoft had it on the shelves (as opposed to the Xerox tablet that never saw the light of day).
So Microsoft didn't need to make their products more appealing to people (in terms of UI fancy stuff and usability), just more enabling (like the digital office where Office suites and Exchange stuff realy is king). So the security? Just make it a litle bit better for marketing because, well... they are going to buy our product anyway.
If I had my business like that, I would do the same, just for the money, with no risks.
So what did Apple need to do? What could they do? Luckily Steve (who is a good business guy), started looking not at what they could come up with (obviously less), but what they could differentiate themselves with ("Think different") and so they started looking at what actually sucked about PC's and made their own PC's exactly unlike the suckiness of the competition. Actually there was no competition because they made something totally different anyway. Even the name 'PC' was changed to 'Mac' (Personal Computer, Mah Computer yo), even though it is exactly a PC.
So now that Microsoft is starting to see that their asses are getting kicked, they see that they need to work on other areas now. Like Bill Gates said "We need to innovate". That's exactly what Microsoft is doing, at their rediculous slow pace, still. Their awesome R&D is still not anywhere to be found...
So that's why Apple succeded and Microsoft failed. Not because of any stupid "People wanted this that and thus"-crap, because it's bullshit.
XML, oops...
Of course :)
If an application doesn't label itself as UAC aware (like explained in the article (link) below) it is virtualised/sandboxed, and thus resources are not accesible and prompt admin rights constantly. Or in another case you can make an elivated thread (root/admin rights thread) and let your app thread inherit the rights, but this also requires the UAC to ask the user "Do you wanna do this?".
In order to bypass this, you first need to define that you actualy are making a UAC aware app, just so that UAC knows "Hey, this developper knows what he's doing, I'll leave him alone". You do this by making a small XLM manifest.
Then, when UAC knows that you're (at least trying to) make a correct privilaged app, your app isn't virtualised and prompting, unles you decide to make some serious fscked up changes to the system, let's say the Program Files folder. By doing so you are ignoring NT6.x's design principles. (NT6.0 == Vista, NT6.1 == 7) and the UAC will still punish you for this. In order to make a change to a config file for example (Doom 3), you should ask an API "Store this to wherever it needs to be stored", by invoking a Common AppData path call (CSIDL, now depricated by KNOWNFOLDERID so check MSDN!).
And so on... Link: http://www.codeproject.com/KB/vista-security/MakingAppsUACAware.aspx
UAC isn't realy a security thing and wasn't designed like that. You can compare it with Android: it shuts down unresponsive apps without asking (no seperate GUI thread if you will), so that developpers would pay attention to responsiveness.
Microsoft made UAC just like that, but then for security, to annoy users, just so that developpers would use safe code paths to make sure that these irritation messages aren't popping up in their apps.
That said, if you use an app developped by a propper developper, these messages won't bug you, ever. There are API routines to call that will poke NT modules to do root routines in a way that's deemed secure by Microsoft.
Well you got this billion-trillion-gazillion dollar company that hires the best of the best people to make a million/billion dollar costing platform with some realy serious security that nobody is supposed to break.
And a single guy, doing some hobby hacking, can beat that. It's like chess. He is superior. He won.
That's why. And now he's showing the world that he is smarter than the guys who even gone so far as too make the CPU burn its own key. It's like sport, for nerds.
Do like I did:
"My computer has xyz problems."
-"OK I'll fix."
*Three fixes later...*
"My computers is broken again"
-"Sigh! OK you either are going to learn how to properly use Windows and install it yourself, or I'm installing Ubuntu on that thing, because you obviously can't ask me to take 3 hours on a monthly basis to fix the problems that you create everytime you use it."
*installing Ubuntu*
Never ever heard anything about a virus ever again. Pentium 4 still runs like a champion, can do YouTube, Facebook, music, MP3 player management, YouTube downloads, etc. Everytime she wants do to something I'll tell her to google it. If she doesn't understand then I'll simply say "Well maybe computers aren't for you. You could always buy a Mac". Either way that's not my problem.
We should not alter DNA after birth, but if you're married to someone and both your RNA will highly likely result in realy problematic DNA for your child, you could opt for lab altering if you realy want a child together, instead of adoption.
This must be tight to some realy, realy strict regulation under which no mission creep could possibly happen to an organisation. One of the items in the regulation must be growing a test-DNA sample in a lab (sounds crazy) to the point where it can be determined wether the DNA will result in a healthy child. Then proceed with real pregnancy. There should also be a realy strictly specification for problematic deceases, like only inheritable decauses and later on maybe mental pain (girls baldness at teen age or something).
Please don't give me that "OMG life must not be killed crap", because without a working, self-aware brain, there is not life (except in plant form).
We could state that it's for stripping away diseases. If done correctly, like with medicine testing and aproval regulations, but for gene removal/altering, it could be done. But with great power comes great responsability; you have to do it right or you will suffer the consiquences.
But then again we also feared for all out nuclear war and it never happened, even though we have enough nukes and countries to blow the moon to shreds...
I surely don't hope the fear for this kinda stuff wears of like all new unknows stuff wears of. Before you know it you have to have ideal kids that are all almost genetically the same. Then you get the same weaknesses.
You strip difference out of the equation and your human defense goes down still.
But using this genetic stuff to entirely strip away disease is good. You just have to make sure you can replace the rock-solid system with your inteligence. It could be a bumpy ride and a silent killer if you try to make everything perfect...
Correlation is not causation. People need geological advantages. The places that weren't good enough to build proper societies were the places where the black people lived.
Energy seems to spark propper societies. For example the Egyption society erupted from flowing water and fish. But what do you do when you live somewhere in the middle of Africa? You spend the entire day walking for food. You're too bored so what do you do? You spend the remaining day fucking. Fucking means spreading HIV. So then you lost all hope.
But then what? Some people from all over the world start claiming you land, but if you're lucky enough you get to be transported as a slave to America and still don't get enough respect to be hired. So you have no money, no education.
But sure it must be a black gene or something....
When communicating with people, you communicate with words. You can talk to them or type. You don't record a fscking home video everytime you interact.
Now what makes a computer more usefull then to tell it what to fscking do, instead of pointing at shit with a cursor?
I can go to a terminal, tell it what to do, how to do it and on what to do it, in that order.