Can we make sure that others are not infringing on the GPL using this
No.
or am I grasping at straws here?
Yes.
OK, now to be a little more helpful;)
Trusted computing requires that the binaries be signed by a trusted signer. For example, Company A is a trusted signer, and Product B is GPL. Company A can take Product B, modify it to their heart's content, and publish it as their own. As long as they sign it, the computer will run it. The computer has no notion of license, just signed or unsigned.
Dammit...you're right. I should have thought of that, since we just had problems with a computer mistakenly set up to use a proxy that didn't exist.
I was thinking of IP-level blocking, not application-level blocking. Of course, this only prevents HTTP-based sites. There's still FTP, NNTP, IRC, etc.
Looks like Prof. Moglen is the rational face of the FSF. He is able to explain things without ranting "Proprietary software is evil" and "Linux is really GNU/Linux" (although the word "Linux" never appeared in the article, so it's possible that he'd say it). He didn't object to the use of the phrase "open source".
Why don't we let the good Professor be the public face of the FSF and banish the zealots to a sound-proof box?
In this case, the software is probably on the actual workstations. Once the IP packet leaves the computer, there's no way for routers, firewalls, or other blocking systems to determine whether you asked for slashdot.org, 66.35.250.150, 0x42.0x23.0xFA.0x96, or 1109654166. They're all equivalent in the IP header.
However, couldn't I still connect with 0102.043.0372.01 (66.35.250.1 in base 8)?
No, that wouldn't work. By the time the IP address gets out of your computer, it's no longer a set of four 8-bit numbers, but a single 32-bit number. So the routers that are blocking the address just have to match up the IP address in the header, as a single 32-bit number, or more likely as a masked 32-bit number (network instead of host).
The parent isn't talking about receiving spam. He's talking about spam being sent with his own account as the sending address. The abuse of the parent's address is the fact that he is listed as the return address, not the recipient address.
The error is generated by the sending mailserver, not the receiving mailserver. The sender is told already when sending wether the destination address is valid, so once your mailserver has said OK, it is already too late.
Not true. The error is generated by the receiving mailserver, which is why bounce messages all have different formats, even if you use the same outgoing server. Besides, if bounce messages had to be created during the initial contact, relaying wouldn't work.
For example, my college received all email on one system, then relayed it to the appropriate department's mailserver (behind the firewall). So the college would always accept the message, then forward it to the department server, which would then create the bounce.
However, none of this would work anyway, because a bounce is only useful if the spammer actually receives it, which they don't because they use fake email addresses.
I don't know how those ones work. My wife has only used the lab-based ones. Possibly because of air flow from the tank. I'll have to ask her and get back to you.
As long as you remain plugged into the lab's air supply, the circulation of fresh, cool air prevents you from fogging up. If they unplug (eg to move from one room to another), they still fog up (slowly), but they clear up again once you plug in.
I don't know if you know how the system works (I didn't until she explained it). Basically you're plugged into a large air pump, which keeps the suits inflated and keeps the air circulating. The lab has a negative air pressure relative to the rest of the building, and the suit has a positive air pressure relative to the lab, to ensure that anything nasty in the lab stays in the lab;)
Actually, we have an agreement. I don't bring my work home with me, and she won't bring her work home with her. I was very happy to agree to that.
Actually, she hasn't actually worked with the virus yet. She's sequenced the RNA of Ebola Reston, but she wasn't cleared to enter the Level 4 lab until last week. Now is when I can start worrying;)
I usually get "You work with computers. Can you fix my problem with ?" Usually I end up completely lost and lose them even more.
Actually, my favorite is when my boss asks me why there's no link to do on . As if, because I'm a programmer, I know the inner workings of the minds of every webmaster in existance.
Anyone in Winnipeg looking for a slightly cynical Unix/Java programmer? I'll even do Windows. Just not VB.
Nothing in the movies is ever represented properly. Face it. Who would watch a cop show if 95% of it was patrolling the streets issuing parking tickets?
Most people have some idea of what a cop is. They know what the army does. They can identify a firefighter in uniform nine times out of ten.
Outside of the computer industry, nobody knows what a programmer is. They don't know that there's more to computers than Windows, so why should they know about computers?
One portrayal that annoys my wife and me is the portrayal of people in chemical/microbiological suits. The suits always look good on the actors. My wife works in one (she studies ebola). It's a big blue vinyl bag. Not form-fitting. It tends to make you look like the Stay-Puft Marshmallow man. It's uncomfortable. You have to shout to be heard in them.
So remember, programmers are not the only groups misrepresented. We're probably not the most misrepresented group. Next time you watch a show that includes any real-life profession, ask yourself how close they are to reality. Then complain about programmers being misrepresented.
When you're initializing a driver, it's generally easier to do something like this:
int driver_init() { if (!init_step_1()) goto error_1; if (!init_step_2()) goto error_2; if (!init_step_3()) goto error_3; return success; error_3: cleanup_step_2(); error_2: cleanup_step_1(); error_1: return failure; }
Because you can't just exit a failure with half-initialized resources that won't be freed automatically on exit ('cause it won't exit until you shut down).
Dammit, <ecode> killed my indents. Anybody know how to prevent that?
Similar, except that the JSP spec actually mandates that the JSP be translated into an actual servlet (a Java class adhering to the Servlet API) to simplify debugging. There may be an intermediate form in PHP and ASP (I'd be surprised if there wasn't), but AFAIK JSP is the only one to have the intermediate form specified.
If you're using JSP, then yes, you'll have to run Java on the server. However, JSP was just an example. If you write a plugin to PHP, you won't need to run Java.
As for the C++ interfaces, I believe that you can interface C++ directly to Java, but I'm not positive. However, you can write some wrapper code to put a C interface in front of the C++ interface, then connect your script to the C interface. As I said, it may not be pretty, but it can be done.
If you need to work in C and only C (for example, your embedded system doesn't have room for a PHP interpreter or for java), there may be systems that translate from a template into C code. This is how JSP works - it translates from a JSP template to a Java servlet to Java bytecode. It should be possible to write a similar system for C, but I don't know if it exists.
You need to be careful when Googling your applicants. Remember that there are multiple John Smiths out there. Also, be sure that the article posted in John Smith's name is the real John Smith. If he's managed to annoy a troll on Usenet, there's a possibility that this troll may post inflammatory messages using John's email address, so you'll think that John's being immature when it's actually the troll.
Servlets are small Java programs that are mapped to a directory on the website (like/administration/). They're compiled and placed into the classpath, and then the server executes them in the JVM when a request is made.
Yes, servlets exist, but I feel that they are closer to CGI than to template- or content-based languages. In order to create any output, you still have to use a print()-like function (haven't done much with Servlets, so I can't remember the actual method used here).
However, a JSP is automatically preprocessed into a servlet before it's compiled into bytecode, so it actually is a halfway point;)
Of course, the Perl method is similar to what is presented in the article. The majority of the script handles programming, while the content is embedded within the script and sent out using some sort of print statement.
You could, for example, use JSP and write a taglib that calls the C interface using RMI. Or the equivalent for whatever your server is capable of running.
Remember, the reason that most libraries give a C interface is that most other languages can talk to C. It may not be pretty and it may not be easy, but if you can access it in C, you can almost always access it in another language.
No, CGI is between the server and its subprocesses. The connection between your browser and the server is HTTP, and the connection between the server and scripts is CGI.
I think CGI also refers only to those programs that the server calls directly passing headers in a certain format. While the script may be written in any language, they tend to be written in a language that is primarily a programming language (Perl, C, Python, etc) rather than a content-oriented language (ASP, JSP, PHP, etc).
JSP usually runs as a separate server that may be contacted by the web server, but is also capable of answering web requests by itself. ASP and PHP are run in the same process space as the web server, and thus can spare the overhead of spawning a new script interpreter for every request. All of these languages are content-oriented, meaning that the scripting code is embedded in the document, rather than having the document embedded in the code.
After that, a statistician entered. He looked at the garbage can, left the room, and returned with two more garbage cans. He then lit the two new cans. When the psychologists asked why he did this, he replied "I needed a larger sample set."
Slashdot Mirror
66.35.250.150 -> 0x42.0x23.0xFA.0x96 -> 0x4223FA96 -> 1109654166
OK, now to be a little more helpful ;)
Trusted computing requires that the binaries be signed by a trusted signer. For example, Company A is a trusted signer, and Product B is GPL. Company A can take Product B, modify it to their heart's content, and publish it as their own. As long as they sign it, the computer will run it. The computer has no notion of license, just signed or unsigned.
I was thinking of IP-level blocking, not application-level blocking. Of course, this only prevents HTTP-based sites. There's still FTP, NNTP, IRC, etc.
Why don't we let the good Professor be the public face of the FSF and banish the zealots to a sound-proof box?
I asked my wife this morning. She confirmed my earlier reply - it is the air circulation from the compressed-air tanks (similar to SCUBA tanks).
In this case, the software is probably on the actual workstations. Once the IP packet leaves the computer, there's no way for routers, firewalls, or other blocking systems to determine whether you asked for slashdot.org, 66.35.250.150, 0x42.0x23.0xFA.0x96, or 1109654166. They're all equivalent in the IP header.
The parent isn't talking about receiving spam. He's talking about spam being sent with his own account as the sending address. The abuse of the parent's address is the fact that he is listed as the return address, not the recipient address.
For example, my college received all email on one system, then relayed it to the appropriate department's mailserver (behind the firewall). So the college would always accept the message, then forward it to the department server, which would then create the bounce.
However, none of this would work anyway, because a bounce is only useful if the spammer actually receives it, which they don't because they use fake email addresses.
I don't know how those ones work. My wife has only used the lab-based ones. Possibly because of air flow from the tank. I'll have to ask her and get back to you.
As long as you remain plugged into the lab's air supply, the circulation of fresh, cool air prevents you from fogging up. If they unplug (eg to move from one room to another), they still fog up (slowly), but they clear up again once you plug in.
I don't know if you know how the system works (I didn't until she explained it). Basically you're plugged into a large air pump, which keeps the suits inflated and keeps the air circulating. The lab has a negative air pressure relative to the rest of the building, and the suit has a positive air pressure relative to the lab, to ensure that anything nasty in the lab stays in the lab ;)
Actually, we have an agreement. I don't bring my work home with me, and she won't bring her work home with her. I was very happy to agree to that.
Actually, she hasn't actually worked with the virus yet. She's sequenced the RNA of Ebola Reston, but she wasn't cleared to enter the Level 4 lab until last week. Now is when I can start worrying ;)
Actually, my favorite is when my boss asks me why there's no link to do on . As if, because I'm a programmer, I know the inner workings of the minds of every webmaster in existance.
Anyone in Winnipeg looking for a slightly cynical Unix/Java programmer? I'll even do Windows. Just not VB.
Try a twenty-step initialization. Or one that isn't completely linear. You'll learn to appreciate goto.
Most people have some idea of what a cop is. They know what the army does. They can identify a firefighter in uniform nine times out of ten.
Outside of the computer industry, nobody knows what a programmer is. They don't know that there's more to computers than Windows, so why should they know about computers?
One portrayal that annoys my wife and me is the portrayal of people in chemical/microbiological suits. The suits always look good on the actors. My wife works in one (she studies ebola). It's a big blue vinyl bag. Not form-fitting. It tends to make you look like the Stay-Puft Marshmallow man. It's uncomfortable. You have to shout to be heard in them.
So remember, programmers are not the only groups misrepresented. We're probably not the most misrepresented group. Next time you watch a show that includes any real-life profession, ask yourself how close they are to reality. Then complain about programmers being misrepresented.
Dammit, <ecode> killed my indents. Anybody know how to prevent that?
Similar, except that the JSP spec actually mandates that the JSP be translated into an actual servlet (a Java class adhering to the Servlet API) to simplify debugging. There may be an intermediate form in PHP and ASP (I'd be surprised if there wasn't), but AFAIK JSP is the only one to have the intermediate form specified.
As for the C++ interfaces, I believe that you can interface C++ directly to Java, but I'm not positive. However, you can write some wrapper code to put a C interface in front of the C++ interface, then connect your script to the C interface. As I said, it may not be pretty, but it can be done.
If you need to work in C and only C (for example, your embedded system doesn't have room for a PHP interpreter or for java), there may be systems that translate from a template into C code. This is how JSP works - it translates from a JSP template to a Java servlet to Java bytecode. It should be possible to write a similar system for C, but I don't know if it exists.
You need to be careful when Googling your applicants. Remember that there are multiple John Smiths out there. Also, be sure that the article posted in John Smith's name is the real John Smith. If he's managed to annoy a troll on Usenet, there's a possibility that this troll may post inflammatory messages using John's email address, so you'll think that John's being immature when it's actually the troll.
However, a JSP is automatically preprocessed into a servlet before it's compiled into bytecode, so it actually is a halfway point ;)
Of course, the Perl method is similar to what is presented in the article. The majority of the script handles programming, while the content is embedded within the script and sent out using some sort of print statement.
Remember, the reason that most libraries give a C interface is that most other languages can talk to C. It may not be pretty and it may not be easy, but if you can access it in C, you can almost always access it in another language.
I think CGI also refers only to those programs that the server calls directly passing headers in a certain format. While the script may be written in any language, they tend to be written in a language that is primarily a programming language (Perl, C, Python, etc) rather than a content-oriented language (ASP, JSP, PHP, etc).
JSP usually runs as a separate server that may be contacted by the web server, but is also capable of answering web requests by itself. ASP and PHP are run in the same process space as the web server, and thus can spare the overhead of spawning a new script interpreter for every request. All of these languages are content-oriented, meaning that the scripting code is embedded in the document, rather than having the document embedded in the code.
Hopefully I haven't confused matters even more ;)
After that, a statistician entered. He looked at the garbage can, left the room, and returned with two more garbage cans. He then lit the two new cans. When the psychologists asked why he did this, he replied "I needed a larger sample set."