Porting this to linux seems to be a good idea, but the inherent problem is your business model. Who is your target audience? Are you targeting corporations such as lokisoft who will use your compiler to port/create games for linux? (side note- the lokisoft page is down, i dunno if that is a fluke, if i have the wrong URL, or if they've packed up and left)
The problem is that if you target corp.'s like loki, you may not be able to sell enough units, or whatever, to justify the cost of porting. These linux gaming companies seem to fold faster than omlettes at waffle house.
If on the other hand, you just ported it and released it at random into the linux/OSS community, you would be doing the community a favor, and independant cells of programmers could attempt to port/write games for linux.
The problem with this solution is also the cost: If you release it open source for linux, you would be somewhat of a hero, or philanthropist, to the OSS community; however, you may not be able to justify the cost of porting it, if your idea is to make money by porting to linux.
I guess it depends on what time frame you think you can port it to linux in - if it would take you and your team an extra two days of programming, it may be worth it, as both a PR move and a gift to the OSS community. However, if it will take extra months of coding, just bear in mind that philanthropy doesn't pay bills.
Don't mean to be cynical, but you have to consider each decision as it relates to the almighty dollar.
It sounds as if you're doing fantastic work, though, keep it up.
My compaq AC adapter (presario 1700 series) isn't one of the ones recalled, but i wish it was. 1/2 the time it doesn't make solid contact with the notebook, and the battery runs down while it appears to be plugged in. You have to wiggle it to get it to work.
Don't forget to tell newbies to bring headphones/earphones. While your set of klipsch promedia speakers may be cool, we don't need to hear explosions at gut-ratteling volumes times 20.
what really throws a wrench into the mix is Tow Trucks.
If you do something wrong, like place your car in the incorrect parking lot, the tow company will legally steal it. Isn't this where we're going with windows XP? Install it in the wrong place and they'll make it so it wont work, or something.
I'm not sure exactly how it figures in, but there you go.
What i want to know is what exactly is meant by "de-centralized network". I want to find the p2p file sharing client that if i take 4 computers and hook them up, not connected to the internet, in a local network, the file sharing will work like a charm. I say that because on the college campus where i reside, they've blocked morpheus. I want something that will use the local connection, even if the gateway has a filter on it.
This to me was part of the beauty of napster - napster was never blocked on campus (i'd imagine they blocked morpheus because people were trading not only mp3's but movies, music videos, etc) but the best part of napster was you set your ping time to That's what i want in a client.
I do not think it is ethical that microsoft is allowed, as a corporation to release insecure software over and over. I mean, you'd think that once they figured out that it was insecure, they'd fix it next go-round, right? Yeah, well....
What i was trying to bring to people's minds for a second is that this might not be the fault of the programmers, but of the administration. For example: When's the next major dot release of the linux kernel comming out? No one knows for sure, cause technically no one's up against a deadline, as a generalized statement about open source. When no one is paying you to write code, you get it done when you get it done, and done right. When someone is paying your paycheck and matching your 401k, you get it done when they want it done, tested or not. I mean, it may have a hole, but you gotta feed your kids, right?
So what i just want people to be careful about is not to say that M$ programming sucks, or that they employ lazy programmers, or that they don't have any idea what they're doing. Their instructions are "get it done, and make it pretty, and get it done two days ago".
They were negligent when they created software and technologies that are so easily exploited.
This isn't a microsoft abuse. I can go down the street to bob's lawn care and get materials to create a car bomb. Does that mean that Scott's Turf Builder is responsible for my actions? Microsoft creates a product (outlook) that checks email. It checks email, and fairly well, and in a way that is easy to understand and simple to use.
This is simple applied economics, supply and demand. There are more windows users out there than anything else, by alot. And the average windows user does not know as much about how their computer works as the average *nix user, again, by a lot. To bring the supply and demand into it, it is easier to write code for windows, there are far more windows boxen, and the users know less about the inner workings - therefore more time is spent by hackers/scriptkiddies learning exploits and writing viruses. If linux was the world's premier operating system, and my mother used KMail or Pine, i'm sure the k|dd|3z would be writing exploits for that.
Now, i don't pretend to say that Microsoft makes a superior product. It is definately less secure. However, there's a world of difference between a windows user who may, sometime in the lifespan of his computer, go to www.windowsupdate.com and download patches, and Bruce Perens using apt-get update on a daily basis. You can't reasonably hold microsoft responsible for the upkeep and mantinence of literally millions of desktop computers in the united states alone. Nor can you fault them for releasing a product that is not "hack-proof", as, to my knowledge, no such product exists.
To listen to CNN and some of the posts by the slashdot crowd, you would think that Microsoft created Windows solely for the purpose of propagating the Code Red Worm. Let's not forget the simple fact that somewhere, someone wrote that bug, and they wrote it for the platform that would allow it to do the most damage, and that platform is windows.
Now, if you're gonna criticize microsoft, put your money where your mouth is, and write your own operating system, and get it on the desktop of 97% of the computer users in the united states, and have it impervious to viruses. Or be logical, and talk to people about linux. Educate them that there's something better out there, more secure, crashes less. Put debian on your mom's box, teach her Opera. Use the line i saw on someone's.sig here - "Frustrated? Don't throw your computers out the window, throw the windows out of your computer!"
thank god not everyone listens to tool, rage against the machine.
This is why i listen to punk music. What does tool charge for concert tickets? Like 50 bucks. That's rediculous. I just can't bring myself to believe that someone who says "we do it for the fans" and charges that for tickets is serious.
For the most part, punk bands understand if you download their stuff off of Morpheus and listen to it. Usually people that become fans cause of shows and bootleg'd music will buy the CD's to support the band. There's certainly none of this copy protected bullshit.
Check on prices for punk shows - hardly ever more than $20. In fact, one weekend i saw Less than Jake/ New found glory/ the teen idols/ anti-flag 3 times for less than 50 bucks. These people are serious about doing it for the fans - LTJ is broke as shit. That's the kind of music i want - people who do it for the love of the show, who tour 250+ dates a year, who sell CD's for $5 at shows. Its raw culture.
I, too, am a musician. My band recorded our CD, burned 1000 copies of it ourselves, and gave it away for free. I don't want your money. I just want you to like our music.
You can keep your rage against the machine, tool, korn, limp bizkit, incubus, whatever.
dude come on now, what if there are 2 moderations on your meta-moderation page that *are* unfair. That, to me, is the entire purpose of the MM page. You look at a series of comments, most of them are fair, but some are unfair, and with the number of moderators out there, there's bound to be a percentage of alterrior motives at work.
I just tell it like i see it, and if there's a comment that i feel that my personal judgement comes into play too heavily to decide without personal influence, i just leave it neutral. But if its an unfair moderation, i.e. off topic for something that is only slightly off topic (and that's kind of the spirit of slashdot, discussing topics and tangents) then i mod it unfair.
Re:Only on Slashdot...
on
Dorm Storm?
·
· Score: 3, Informative
It's because here on slashdot, people know: Offer free tech support once, and you're forever branded as the tech support guy, and you do tech support for free. If they need help, they go to you cause you're free.
Well...
Usually i give katz a chance, read the article, and attempt not to flame...
But its getting rediculous. According to Katz, AOL/Time warner is out to get EVERYONE. Come on jon, just accept things for what they are. As far as threatning SeanBaby, I've been reading sean baby for 4 months now. I don't see it going anywhere. Its probably more threatning to slashdot it, as they probably have a bandwidth cap on the server.
someone mod my parent up.
funniest comment i've seen in days.
Re:I made an assumption about the reader...
on
Breaking Windows
·
· Score: 1
I see your point of view, and let me clarify a few things:
I do not think it is ethical that microsoft is allowed, as a corporation to release insecure software over and over. I mean, you'd think that once they figured out that it was insecure, they'd fix it next go-round, right? Yeah, well....
What i was trying to bring to people's minds for a second is that this might not be the fault of the programmers, but of the administration. For example: When's the next major dot release of the linux kernel comming out? No one knows for sure, cause technically no one's up against a deadline, as a generalized statement about open source. When no one is paying you to write code, you get it done when you get it done, and done right. When someone is paying your paycheck and matching your 401k, you get it done when they want it done, tested or not. I mean, it may have a hole, but you gotta feed your kids, right?
All that to say hold Microsoft as a corporation liable for the holes, as a business practice, not the programmers as lazy. To bring it full circle, I believe that many of the problems with Microsoft deal with the issues in the book that started this thread - internal competition, etc.
The other thing i meant, with the last paragraph of my post, was that I like to focus on the posative side of things. Don't tell people why microsoft sucks, tell them what makes *NIX better. People relations is the way to change people's minds. Granted, linux is becomming more user friendly, but its still not idiot friendly. We need more "linux is rad" and less "microsoft sucks". Saying M$ sucks (besides being reduntant) leaves the person you're talking to with no alternative. I work in a compuer sales field, and as such, come into contact with lots of people who complain about windows. I help them as i can, but sometimes, if i think the user is "ready", i reccomend Linux to them ("well if you're gonna be buying a new one, why not put linux on the old one. Its only $20.") When you explain to people that there is a thriving linux community willing to help them for free, in addition to countless newsgroups and message boards and no end of documentation on how to do... well anything, it usually shocks them. Most people aren't use to getting free help for windows.
Well, i don't know if i accomplished anything w/ this post, but there it is. I've had about two too many nyquill, i'm gonna go read a book and stuff.
~Z
Re:Bad things really do happen.
on
Breaking Windows
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Microsoft really is abusive. Microsoft's abusiveness costs billions of dollars in lost time. For example, Microsoft releases software with poor security. Right now the Code Red II worm and the SirCam virus are causing huge amounts of damage. These both exploit Microsoft security weaknesses.
This isn't a microsoft abuse. I can go down the street to bob's lawn care and get materials to create a car bomb. Does that mean that Scott's Turf Builder is responsible for my actions? Microsoft creates a product (outlook) that checks email. It checks email, and fairly well, and in a way that is easy to understand and simple to use.
This is simple applied economics, supply and demand. There are more windows users out there than anything else, by alot. And the average windows user does not know as much about how their computer works as the average *nix user, again, by a lot. To bring the supply and demand into it, it is easier to write code for windows, there are far more windows boxen, and the users know less about the inner workings - therefore more time is spent by hackers/scriptkiddies learning exploits and writing viruses. If linux was the world's premier operating system, and my mother used KMail or Pine, i'm sure the k|dd|3z would be writing exploits for that.
Now, i don't pretend to say that Microsoft makes a superior product. It is definately less secure. However, there's a world of difference between a windows user who may, sometime in the lifespan of his computer, go to www.windowsupdate.com and download patches, and Bruce Perens using apt-get update on a daily basis. You can't reasonably hold microsoft responsible for the upkeep and mantinence of literally millions of desktop computers in the united states alone. Nor can you fault them for releasing a product that is not "hack-proof", as, to my knowledge, no such product exists.
To listen to CNN and some of the posts by the slashdot crowd, you would think that Microsoft created Windows solely for the purpose of propagating the Code Red Worm. Let's not forget the simple fact that somewhere, someone wrote that bug, and they wrote it for the platform that would allow it to do the most damage, and that platform is windows.
Now, if you're gonna criticize microsoft, put your money where your mouth is, and write your own operating system, and get it on the desktop of 97% of the computer users in the united states, and have it impervious to viruses. Or be logical, and talk to people about linux. Educate them that there's something better out there, more secure, crashes less. Put debian on your mom's box, teach her Opera. Use the line i saw on someone's.sig here - "Frustrated? Don't throw your computers out the window, throw the windows out of your computer!"
..if the proper privacy and security issues can be addressed.
The inherant problem with this technology, however, is that in order to have a secure, single sign on, somewhere there has to be a database, accessable to the internet in some fashion, which has the username, password, and private information of whoever wishes to use it. There's just no way to get around that. And no matter what platform this system is running, there will be never ending attempts to bring it down or r00t it.
Plus, i don't like the idea of my private information being the property of a corporation.
For christ's sake. The P4 is using pc800 RDRAM and a 400 mhz FSB. (100X4) The athalon is only running a 200mhz FSB and PC 133 SDRAM!!!
I mean, lets be realistic, here, folks. The P4 has a 600 mhz clock speed, 667 mhz ram clock speed, and 200 mhz front side bus advantage. on pricewatch, the P4 1.7Ghz $326, 128MB PC800 is $44, and a P4 Mobo is $115. By comparison, a 1.33Ghz Athalon is $120, 128MB of DDR is $17, and DDR boards are $94.
P4 = $485, Athalon = $231 Add to the other advantages the $254 price advantage (more than double).
Anyone say the test is fair, or that the P4 is a good deal?
The architecture inherently provides for rugged and secure communications. Each radio - including the user modem connection - spreads its transmissions over 162 channels (each of which is 160 KHz wide) that are randomly selected using unique sequences; sequential data transfers never occur on the same channel. Called Frequency-Hopping Spread Spectrum (FHSS), this random technique makes it extremely difficult to monitor the signals to or from any particular radio. ...... Metricom provides RSA's patented RC-4 encryption capabilities that further ensure privacy for connections established between any two points on the Ricochet network. This data encryption makes the data streams moving over the network far more secure than typical wired, telephone-based connections.
Our radios use a military originated spread spectrum technique to send data. This technique makes it inherently difficult to tap into any data stream a user transmits. To further ensure privacy, we will optionally encrypt all the data sent to your gateway. The modem and the gateway use Diffie-Hellman key exchange to negotiate a session key. This key is renegotiated periodically. This session key is used to encrypt the data between the gateway and the modem with RSA's RC-4 encryption. We use up to 256 bits of key length to encrypt the data stream. This encryption is too strong to be exported out of the country.
/me has no beef with 256 bit encryption. They've been working on RC5-64 for how long?
For comparison purposes, if you want to build a wireless 802.11b lan, and you want to do it with stuff you can buy from a major retailer, you're gonna need:
Sony has secretly tested Cactus by treating several thousand CDs sold recently in the Czech Republic and Slovakia, but the system was not set to cause damage on this occasion.
I think that this paragraph in the article bothers me. If the system is set to cause damage, someone had to set it to do that, which means somewhere in the algorithm, someone changed CauseDamage=0; to CauseDamage=1;
Mabey its just a typo - cause if it can be set to cause damage, then they're knowingly selling a defective product.
Slashdot Mirror
its all about legends of the red dragon. bbs doors brought people together in a way no one could imagine.
People were all about playing a game with people they didn't know in real life.
and it was all about flirting with the girl in the bar, in LORD. best game ever.
I'm drunk, and going to bed now.
I dont have anythng else to say.
beer.
Porting this to linux seems to be a good idea, but the inherent problem is your business model. Who is your target audience? Are you targeting corporations such as lokisoft who will use your compiler to port/create games for linux?
(side note- the lokisoft page is down, i dunno if that is a fluke, if i have the wrong URL, or if they've packed up and left)
The problem is that if you target corp.'s like loki, you may not be able to sell enough units, or whatever, to justify the cost of porting. These linux gaming companies seem to fold faster than omlettes at waffle house.
If on the other hand, you just ported it and released it at random into the linux/OSS community, you would be doing the community a favor, and independant cells of programmers could attempt to port/write games for linux.
The problem with this solution is also the cost: If you release it open source for linux, you would be somewhat of a hero, or philanthropist, to the OSS community; however, you may not be able to justify the cost of porting it, if your idea is to make money by porting to linux.
I guess it depends on what time frame you think you can port it to linux in - if it would take you and your team an extra two days of programming, it may be worth it, as both a PR move and a gift to the OSS community. However, if it will take extra months of coding, just bear in mind that philanthropy doesn't pay bills.
Don't mean to be cynical, but you have to consider each decision as it relates to the almighty dollar.
It sounds as if you're doing fantastic work, though, keep it up.
My compaq AC adapter (presario 1700 series) isn't one of the ones recalled, but i wish it was. 1/2 the time it doesn't make solid contact with the notebook, and the battery runs down while it appears to be plugged in. You have to wiggle it to get it to work.
~William Dunn
Don't forget to tell newbies to bring headphones/earphones. While your set of klipsch promedia speakers may be cool, we don't need to hear explosions at gut-ratteling volumes times 20.
what really throws a wrench into the mix is Tow Trucks.
If you do something wrong, like place your car in the incorrect parking lot, the tow company will legally steal it. Isn't this where we're going with windows XP? Install it in the wrong place and they'll make it so it wont work, or something.
I'm not sure exactly how it figures in, but there you go.
What i want to know is what exactly is meant by "de-centralized network". I want to find the p2p file sharing client that if i take 4 computers and hook them up, not connected to the internet, in a local network, the file sharing will work like a charm. I say that because on the college campus where i reside, they've blocked morpheus. I want something that will use the local connection, even if the gateway has a filter on it.
This to me was part of the beauty of napster - napster was never blocked on campus (i'd imagine they blocked morpheus because people were trading not only mp3's but movies, music videos, etc) but the best part of napster was you set your ping time to
That's what i want in a client.
I do not think it is ethical that microsoft is allowed, as a corporation to release insecure software over and over. I mean, you'd think that once they figured out that it was insecure, they'd fix it next go-round, right? Yeah, well....
What i was trying to bring to people's minds for a second is that this might not be the fault of the programmers, but of the administration. For example: When's the next major dot release of the linux kernel comming out? No one knows for sure, cause technically no one's up against a deadline, as a generalized statement about open source. When no one is paying you to write code, you get it done when you get it done, and done right. When someone is paying your paycheck and matching your 401k, you get it done when they want it done, tested or not. I mean, it may have a hole, but you gotta feed your kids, right?
So what i just want people to be careful about is not to say that M$ programming sucks, or that they employ lazy programmers, or that they don't have any idea what they're doing. Their instructions are "get it done, and make it pretty, and get it done two days ago".
They were negligent when they created software and technologies that are so easily exploited.
.sig here - "Frustrated? Don't throw your computers out the window, throw the windows out of your computer!"
This isn't a microsoft abuse. I can go down the street to bob's lawn care and get materials to create a car bomb. Does that mean that Scott's Turf Builder is responsible for my actions? Microsoft creates a product (outlook) that checks email. It checks email, and fairly well, and in a way that is easy to understand and simple to use.
This is simple applied economics, supply and demand. There are more windows users out there than anything else, by alot. And the average windows user does not know as much about how their computer works as the average *nix user, again, by a lot. To bring the supply and demand into it, it is easier to write code for windows, there are far more windows boxen, and the users know less about the inner workings - therefore more time is spent by hackers/scriptkiddies learning exploits and writing viruses. If linux was the world's premier operating system, and my mother used KMail or Pine, i'm sure the k|dd|3z would be writing exploits for that.
Now, i don't pretend to say that Microsoft makes a superior product. It is definately less secure. However, there's a world of difference between a windows user who may, sometime in the lifespan of his computer, go to www.windowsupdate.com and download patches, and Bruce Perens using apt-get update on a daily basis. You can't reasonably hold microsoft responsible for the upkeep and mantinence of literally millions of desktop computers in the united states alone. Nor can you fault them for releasing a product that is not "hack-proof", as, to my knowledge, no such product exists.
To listen to CNN and some of the posts by the slashdot crowd, you would think that Microsoft created Windows solely for the purpose of propagating the Code Red Worm. Let's not forget the simple fact that somewhere, someone wrote that bug, and they wrote it for the platform that would allow it to do the most damage, and that platform is windows.
Now, if you're gonna criticize microsoft, put your money where your mouth is, and write your own operating system, and get it on the desktop of 97% of the computer users in the united states, and have it impervious to viruses. Or be logical, and talk to people about linux. Educate them that there's something better out there, more secure, crashes less. Put debian on your mom's box, teach her Opera. Use the line i saw on someone's
Less bitching, more solutions.
~z
...let the Feds also participate and infiltrate the groups, as they currently do with pedophile rings
I'm not sure i feel comfortable with you comparing Islam to pedophile rings.
Islam Way uses slash. Good work.
thank god not everyone listens to tool, rage against the machine.
This is why i listen to punk music. What does tool charge for concert tickets? Like 50 bucks. That's rediculous. I just can't bring myself to believe that someone who says "we do it for the fans" and charges that for tickets is serious.
For the most part, punk bands understand if you download their stuff off of Morpheus and listen to it. Usually people that become fans cause of shows and bootleg'd music will buy the CD's to support the band. There's certainly none of this copy protected bullshit.
Check on prices for punk shows - hardly ever more than $20. In fact, one weekend i saw Less than Jake/ New found glory/ the teen idols/ anti-flag 3 times for less than 50 bucks. These people are serious about doing it for the fans - LTJ is broke as shit. That's the kind of music i want - people who do it for the love of the show, who tour 250+ dates a year, who sell CD's for $5 at shows. Its raw culture.
I, too, am a musician. My band recorded our CD, burned 1000 copies of it ourselves, and gave it away for free. I don't want your money. I just want you to like our music.
You can keep your rage against the machine, tool, korn, limp bizkit, incubus, whatever.
dude come on now, what if there are 2 moderations on your meta-moderation page that *are* unfair. That, to me, is the entire purpose of the MM page. You look at a series of comments, most of them are fair, but some are unfair, and with the number of moderators out there, there's bound to be a percentage of alterrior motives at work.
I just tell it like i see it, and if there's a comment that i feel that my personal judgement comes into play too heavily to decide without personal influence, i just leave it neutral. But if its an unfair moderation, i.e. off topic for something that is only slightly off topic (and that's kind of the spirit of slashdot, discussing topics and tangents) then i mod it unfair.
It's because here on slashdot, people know: Offer free tech support once, and you're forever branded as the tech support guy, and you do tech support for free. If they need help, they go to you cause you're free.
Well...
Usually i give katz a chance, read the article, and attempt not to flame...
But its getting rediculous. According to Katz, AOL/Time warner is out to get EVERYONE. Come on jon, just accept things for what they are. As far as threatning SeanBaby, I've been reading sean baby for 4 months now. I don't see it going anywhere. Its probably more threatning to slashdot it, as they probably have a bandwidth cap on the server.
Well, good work katz.
~zero
someone mod my parent up. funniest comment i've seen in days.
I see your point of view, and let me clarify a few things:
... well anything, it usually shocks them. Most people aren't use to getting free help for windows.
I do not think it is ethical that microsoft is allowed, as a corporation to release insecure software over and over. I mean, you'd think that once they figured out that it was insecure, they'd fix it next go-round, right? Yeah, well....
What i was trying to bring to people's minds for a second is that this might not be the fault of the programmers, but of the administration. For example: When's the next major dot release of the linux kernel comming out? No one knows for sure, cause technically no one's up against a deadline, as a generalized statement about open source. When no one is paying you to write code, you get it done when you get it done, and done right. When someone is paying your paycheck and matching your 401k, you get it done when they want it done, tested or not. I mean, it may have a hole, but you gotta feed your kids, right?
All that to say hold Microsoft as a corporation liable for the holes, as a business practice, not the programmers as lazy. To bring it full circle, I believe that many of the problems with Microsoft deal with the issues in the book that started this thread - internal competition, etc.
The other thing i meant, with the last paragraph of my post, was that I like to focus on the posative side of things. Don't tell people why microsoft sucks, tell them what makes *NIX better. People relations is the way to change people's minds. Granted, linux is becomming more user friendly, but its still not idiot friendly. We need more "linux is rad" and less "microsoft sucks". Saying M$ sucks (besides being reduntant) leaves the person you're talking to with no alternative. I work in a compuer sales field, and as such, come into contact with lots of people who complain about windows. I help them as i can, but sometimes, if i think the user is "ready", i reccomend Linux to them ("well if you're gonna be buying a new one, why not put linux on the old one. Its only $20.") When you explain to people that there is a thriving linux community willing to help them for free, in addition to countless newsgroups and message boards and no end of documentation on how to do
Well, i don't know if i accomplished anything w/ this post, but there it is. I've had about two too many nyquill, i'm gonna go read a book and stuff.
~Z
Microsoft really is abusive. Microsoft's abusiveness costs billions of dollars in lost time. For example, Microsoft releases software with poor security. Right now the Code Red II worm and the SirCam virus are causing huge amounts of damage. These both exploit Microsoft security weaknesses.
.sig here - "Frustrated? Don't throw your computers out the window, throw the windows out of your computer!"
This isn't a microsoft abuse. I can go down the street to bob's lawn care and get materials to create a car bomb. Does that mean that Scott's Turf Builder is responsible for my actions? Microsoft creates a product (outlook) that checks email. It checks email, and fairly well, and in a way that is easy to understand and simple to use.
This is simple applied economics, supply and demand. There are more windows users out there than anything else, by alot. And the average windows user does not know as much about how their computer works as the average *nix user, again, by a lot. To bring the supply and demand into it, it is easier to write code for windows, there are far more windows boxen, and the users know less about the inner workings - therefore more time is spent by hackers/scriptkiddies learning exploits and writing viruses. If linux was the world's premier operating system, and my mother used KMail or Pine, i'm sure the k|dd|3z would be writing exploits for that.
Now, i don't pretend to say that Microsoft makes a superior product. It is definately less secure. However, there's a world of difference between a windows user who may, sometime in the lifespan of his computer, go to www.windowsupdate.com and download patches, and Bruce Perens using apt-get update on a daily basis. You can't reasonably hold microsoft responsible for the upkeep and mantinence of literally millions of desktop computers in the united states alone. Nor can you fault them for releasing a product that is not "hack-proof", as, to my knowledge, no such product exists.
To listen to CNN and some of the posts by the slashdot crowd, you would think that Microsoft created Windows solely for the purpose of propagating the Code Red Worm. Let's not forget the simple fact that somewhere, someone wrote that bug, and they wrote it for the platform that would allow it to do the most damage, and that platform is windows.
Now, if you're gonna criticize microsoft, put your money where your mouth is, and write your own operating system, and get it on the desktop of 97% of the computer users in the united states, and have it impervious to viruses. Or be logical, and talk to people about linux. Educate them that there's something better out there, more secure, crashes less. Put debian on your mom's box, teach her Opera. Use the line i saw on someone's
Less bitching, more solutions.
~z
..if the proper privacy and security issues can be addressed.
The inherant problem with this technology, however, is that in order to have a secure, single sign on, somewhere there has to be a database, accessable to the internet in some fashion, which has the username, password, and private information of whoever wishes to use it. There's just no way to get around that. And no matter what platform this system is running, there will be never ending attempts to bring it down or r00t it.
Plus, i don't like the idea of my private information being the property of a corporation.
~z
I'd read it, but
Wordpad has caused an error in
MSWRD832.CNV.
Wordpad will now close.
AND... If i continue to exiperence problems, i should try restarting my computer.
That's comforting.
~z
In addition to that, LOOK AT THE RAM SPEED!
For christ's sake. The P4 is using pc800 RDRAM and a 400 mhz FSB. (100X4) The athalon is only running a 200mhz FSB and PC 133 SDRAM!!!
I mean, lets be realistic, here, folks. The P4 has a 600 mhz clock speed, 667 mhz ram clock speed, and 200 mhz front side bus advantage.
on pricewatch, the P4 1.7Ghz $326, 128MB PC800 is $44, and a P4 Mobo is $115.
By comparison, a 1.33Ghz Athalon is $120, 128MB of DDR is $17, and DDR boards are $94.
P4 = $485, Athalon = $231
Add to the other advantages the $254 price advantage (more than double).
Anyone say the test is fair, or that the P4 is a good deal?
me either.
~z
From the metricom security site:
The architecture inherently provides for rugged and secure communications. Each radio - including the user modem connection - spreads its transmissions over 162 channels (each of which is 160 KHz wide) that are randomly selected using unique sequences; sequential data transfers never occur on the same channel. Called Frequency-Hopping Spread Spectrum (FHSS), this random technique makes it extremely difficult to monitor the signals to or from any particular radio.
......
Metricom provides RSA's patented RC-4 encryption capabilities that further ensure privacy for connections established between any two points on the Ricochet network. This data encryption makes the data streams moving over the network far more secure than typical wired, telephone-based connections. Our radios use a military originated spread spectrum technique to send data. This technique makes it inherently difficult to tap into any data stream a user transmits. To further ensure privacy, we will optionally encrypt all the data sent to your gateway. The modem and the gateway use Diffie-Hellman key exchange to negotiate a session key. This key is renegotiated periodically. This session key is used to encrypt the data between the gateway and the modem with RSA's RC-4 encryption. We use up to 256 bits of key length to encrypt the data stream. This encryption is too strong to be exported out of the country.
~zero
For comparison purposes, if you want to build a wireless 802.11b lan, and you want to do it with stuff you can buy from a major retailer, you're gonna need:
one of these. - $250
at least two of these. - $130 each.
so, we're up to $510, as a reference point, as to what an 802.11b network costs.
~z
Sony has secretly tested Cactus by treating several thousand CDs sold recently in the Czech Republic and Slovakia, but the system was not set to cause damage on this occasion.
I think that this paragraph in the article bothers me. If the system is set to cause damage, someone had to set it to do that, which means somewhere in the algorithm, someone changed
CauseDamage=0; to CauseDamage=1;
Mabey its just a typo - cause if it can be set to cause damage, then they're knowingly selling a defective product.
~z
PI IS THREE!!
froin laven, i didn't think i'd have to use that.
yeah, you'll be hearing from my lawyer
i patented the phrase "patent troll"(patent pending)
aargh, its late.. bed.