Before SSH existed, you could connect to X servers remotely the same as now. It just wasn't secure: anyone in the middle could see everything you were doing as well as hijack your session. Plus it was a mess of dealing with magic cookies and configurations. The SSH X forwarding makes it easier and encrypts the session making it secure.
Mark my words...this fool will be making decisions which will utterly confound both major parties. The only thing I can't determine is whether they'll strip his flesh like a school of piranhas or end up following him off the cliff of common sense.:-)
Are you saying we should start calling Obama by the name Jefferson Smith? I guess someone should warn him about Jim Taylor and the Willard Creek Dam.
Easy. On Windows, create a shortcut to it on the Desktop, or just have the executable on the Desktop. User can just drag a video file onto it, a Window pops up telling them the time left, and when it's done an Ogg Theora video file is dropped in the same directory as the original video, and with the same name (but with.ogv). No need to break out the command line.
Just like you don't have to trust your ISP when you log into your bank's website, with end-to-end IM encryption it doesn't matter who is hosting your IM service. They can't read or tamper with the IMs in the first place (if you manage keys correctly).
To see this in action use Google's Jabber server, tell Google to log your messages, and then use pidgin-encryption or otr. The logs will look like garbage.
He didn't know any of this, because he only heard it from somebody else (who probably didn't know what they were talking about), and subsequently blew it out of proportion.
Actually, it sounds like you only heard this from somebody else (who probably didn't know what they were talking about), and subsequently blew it out of proportion. He doesn't claim it contains non-free software, but that it suggests non-free software, which is true. To quote from his e-mail to the OpenBSD-misc mailing list,
From what I have heard, OpenBSD does not contain non-free software
(though I am not sure whether it contains any non-free firmware
blobs). However, its ports system does suggest non-free programs, or
at least so I was told when I looked for some BSD variant that I could
recommend. I therefore exercise my freedom of speech by not including
OpenBSD in the list of systems that I recommend to the public.
Sounds like he understood the issue well, and if you know about his philosophy, its extremely clear why he won't recommend OpenBSD. By doing so, he would recommend the ports system that suggests the use of non-free software, and by recommending it he will implicitly also suggest the non-free software.
And to clear things up, OpenBSD does not contain non-free blobs in the kernel, and they even themed their 3.9 release on this issue. Because the emphasis is on security, they did so for primarily for security reasons. In a sense, the OpenBSD kernel really is more free than the Linux kernel you get with most distributions, as many distributions include non-free binary blobs with the kernel (including Ubuntu). To push this point through,
The fact that OpenBSD is not a variant of GNU is not ethically
important. If OpenBSD did not suggest non-free programs, I would
recommend it along with the free GNU/Linux distros.
It is entirely about the ports system. Other than that, he's all for it. In fact, I doubt you will find him telling people not to use OpenBSD, but rather warning them to be careful with the ports system.
You don't have to agree with him, but at least get the facts right about his argument.
I don't get cable television, nor do I own any television at all. However, when my fiance brought her TV over so she could play her XBox at my apartment, out of curiosity I plugged it into the cable outlet to see if anything was there. Yup, I get free basic cable. Camcast need not worry, though, as I am still not interested in it even when it's free.
That would remove using Twitter through TOR, so no more anonymous twittering. How important is it be anonymous on Twitter? I have never used Twitter myself, so I can't say. If I did, having the option to be anonymous might be appealing to me, though.
Just being the devil's advocate here. What if the headlights can't be turned back on once they have been switched off, and so the owner of the car left the lights on so he could use them again soon?
Or a more realistic case, you see someone left their car running by itself and decide to be "nice" by going in and shutting the engine off. Then it turns out the alternator was shot and the owner was leaving the car running until he could get it to the car garage to be fixed. Now he needs to find a jump or a tow.
In either case I would only go as far as to inform the car's owner of the situation, if possible. More information is almost always better than less information, and more information won't mess up the car. I would rather make my own decisions about my car than some stranger.
Oh, man. Mentioning AIM punters brings back the old memories of being a script kiddie myself. I had a nice collection of those things as a kid.
I remember finding out about an exploit where IMing someone a certain 5 digits followed by a semicolon instantly crashed their client. I would go into one of the chat rooms, make grandiose false claims (such claiming to be a "super genius"), and then use it on anyone who disagreed with me. A moment or so after I would do it, everyone would see my target silently wink out of the chat room. The client locked up and froze before even showing the IM window I had sent, so the victim had no idea what was going on.
Letting an idiot 12-year old wield that power was like throwing gasoline on a fire.
As several people have already said, I don't know why you think PHP is missing the "static" keyword. PHP supports static function variables as well as the static properties and methods of OO.
This isn't the same static the parent post was talking about, which is the static PHP actually doesn't have. I explain it here.
Some of the responses to your post claim that there is a static keyword in PHP, which is true in the OO sense. But this is not the static you were talking about: there are actually two of them.
In C, the static keyword serves two different purposes depending on the context. A static variable inside of a function means the variable is not allocated on the call stack, but rather in the static (hence the name) data segment of memory. This is handy for preserving values across different calls of the function, but also responsible for making many functions non-reentrant. It's almost global variable because the variable is bound for the entire life of the process. This is exactly what the static keyword in OO languages do. The variable is not stored on the heap with the object, but in a static segment shared by all instances of the object, and also allowing it to be accessed without an instance of the object.
The second meaning of static, which is what you are talking about, is really a directive to the linker. When the keyword is applied to a global variable, it tells the linker to not link the variable to any other global variables outside the source file (no external linking), even if the variables share the same name. This allows files to also act as namespaces, and lets C programmers hack away with few naming collisions. PHP does not have this version of static and, as you said, requires classes to make these namespaces.
Exactly this would be my suggestion. I have found that computers from about 2000 or older are completely unable to run, say Ubuntu, in any usable fashion, even with a switch to XFCE from Gnome. I have put OpenBSD on these kinds machines and, excepting memory hogs like Firefox, they are really speedy.
However, the OPs laptop isn't really that old (4 or 5 years I would guess). 512MB of memory is enough for Ubuntu. Anything with at least 256MB of memory will do fine, however you can't run some really heavy applications like Eclipse or Azureus (and in some cases OpenOffice) with less than 512MB.
For a moment I was wondering how such obvious spam got modded up. The "100% free" thing set off my mental
spam/advertising filter, and I almost was not even aware of your post due to banner blindness.
Slashdot Mirror
Before SSH existed, you could connect to X servers remotely the same as now. It just wasn't secure: anyone in the middle could see everything you were doing as well as hijack your session. Plus it was a mess of dealing with magic cookies and configurations. The SSH X forwarding makes it easier and encrypts the session making it secure.
They would be female frog-man Michael Crichtons of course.
This idea sounds really awesome now.
Mark my words...this fool will be making decisions which will utterly confound both major parties. The only thing I can't determine is whether they'll strip his flesh like a school of piranhas or end up following him off the cliff of common sense. :-)
Are you saying we should start calling Obama by the name Jefferson Smith? I guess someone should warn him about Jim Taylor and the Willard Creek Dam.
Made in His image!
Easy. On Windows, create a shortcut to it on the Desktop, or just have the executable on the Desktop. User can just drag a video file onto it, a Window pops up telling them the time left, and when it's done an Ogg Theora video file is dropped in the same directory as the original video, and with the same name (but with .ogv). No need to break out the command line.
"While the graphics may seem primitive by today's standards, today's gameplay seems primitive by NetHack standards."
(Found that quote here.)
Apparently, drinking from ... unorthodox sources is one such solution to basic nutrition.
The dev team thinks of everything.
Just like you don't have to trust your ISP when you log into your bank's website, with end-to-end IM encryption it doesn't matter who is hosting your IM service. They can't read or tamper with the IMs in the first place (if you manage keys correctly).
To see this in action use Google's Jabber server, tell Google to log your messages, and then use pidgin-encryption or otr. The logs will look like garbage.
He didn't know any of this, because he only heard it from somebody else (who probably didn't know what they were talking about), and subsequently blew it out of proportion.
Actually, it sounds like you only heard this from somebody else (who probably didn't know what they were talking about), and subsequently blew it out of proportion. He doesn't claim it contains non-free software, but that it suggests non-free software, which is true. To quote from his e-mail to the OpenBSD-misc mailing list,
From what I have heard, OpenBSD does not contain non-free software (though I am not sure whether it contains any non-free firmware blobs). However, its ports system does suggest non-free programs, or at least so I was told when I looked for some BSD variant that I could recommend. I therefore exercise my freedom of speech by not including OpenBSD in the list of systems that I recommend to the public.
Sounds like he understood the issue well, and if you know about his philosophy, its extremely clear why he won't recommend OpenBSD. By doing so, he would recommend the ports system that suggests the use of non-free software, and by recommending it he will implicitly also suggest the non-free software.
And to clear things up, OpenBSD does not contain non-free blobs in the kernel, and they even themed their 3.9 release on this issue. Because the emphasis is on security, they did so for primarily for security reasons. In a sense, the OpenBSD kernel really is more free than the Linux kernel you get with most distributions, as many distributions include non-free binary blobs with the kernel (including Ubuntu). To push this point through,
The fact that OpenBSD is not a variant of GNU is not ethically important. If OpenBSD did not suggest non-free programs, I would recommend it along with the free GNU/Linux distros.
It is entirely about the ports system. Other than that, he's all for it. In fact, I doubt you will find him telling people not to use OpenBSD, but rather warning them to be careful with the ports system.
You don't have to agree with him, but at least get the facts right about his argument.
Its a big ass table
There. Fixed that for you.
I don't get cable television, nor do I own any television at all. However, when my fiance brought her TV over so she could play her XBox at my apartment, out of curiosity I plugged it into the cable outlet to see if anything was there. Yup, I get free basic cable. Camcast need not worry, though, as I am still not interested in it even when it's free.
That would remove using Twitter through TOR, so no more anonymous twittering. How important is it be anonymous on Twitter? I have never used Twitter myself, so I can't say. If I did, having the option to be anonymous might be appealing to me, though.
Australia We seem to be the Guinea Pigs for half these retarded plans.
Don't you mean New Guinea Pigs?
Just being the devil's advocate here. What if the headlights can't be turned back on once they have been switched off, and so the owner of the car left the lights on so he could use them again soon?
Or a more realistic case, you see someone left their car running by itself and decide to be "nice" by going in and shutting the engine off. Then it turns out the alternator was shot and the owner was leaving the car running until he could get it to the car garage to be fixed. Now he needs to find a jump or a tow.
In either case I would only go as far as to inform the car's owner of the situation, if possible. More information is almost always better than less information, and more information won't mess up the car. I would rather make my own decisions about my car than some stranger.
Oh, man. Mentioning AIM punters brings back the old memories of being a script kiddie myself. I had a nice collection of those things as a kid.
I remember finding out about an exploit where IMing someone a certain 5 digits followed by a semicolon instantly crashed their client. I would go into one of the chat rooms, make grandiose false claims (such claiming to be a "super genius"), and then use it on anyone who disagreed with me. A moment or so after I would do it, everyone would see my target silently wink out of the chat room. The client locked up and froze before even showing the IM window I had sent, so the victim had no idea what was going on.
Letting an idiot 12-year old wield that power was like throwing gasoline on a fire.
As several people have already said, I don't know why you think PHP is missing the "static" keyword. PHP supports static function variables as well as the static properties and methods of OO.
This isn't the same static the parent post was talking about, which is the static PHP actually doesn't have. I explain it here.
Where can I find this list? It would be nice to have. I am sure some of them are in my Adblock filter already.
This isn't the same static the parent post was talking about, which is the static PHP actually doesn't have. I explain it here.
This isn't the same static the parent post was talking about, which is the static PHP actually doesn't have. I explain it here.
This isn't the same static the parent post was talking about, which is the static PHP actually doesn't have. I explain it here.
Oops, meant to post this thing up one level.
Some of the responses to your post claim that there is a static keyword in PHP, which is true in the OO sense. But this is not the static you were talking about: there are actually two of them.
In C, the static keyword serves two different purposes depending on the context. A static variable inside of a function means the variable is not allocated on the call stack, but rather in the static (hence the name) data segment of memory. This is handy for preserving values across different calls of the function, but also responsible for making many functions non-reentrant. It's almost global variable because the variable is bound for the entire life of the process. This is exactly what the static keyword in OO languages do. The variable is not stored on the heap with the object, but in a static segment shared by all instances of the object, and also allowing it to be accessed without an instance of the object.
The second meaning of static, which is what you are talking about, is really a directive to the linker. When the keyword is applied to a global variable, it tells the linker to not link the variable to any other global variables outside the source file (no external linking), even if the variables share the same name. This allows files to also act as namespaces, and lets C programmers hack away with few naming collisions. PHP does not have this version of static and, as you said, requires classes to make these namespaces.
Exactly this would be my suggestion. I have found that computers from about 2000 or older are completely unable to run, say Ubuntu, in any usable fashion, even with a switch to XFCE from Gnome. I have put OpenBSD on these kinds machines and, excepting memory hogs like Firefox, they are really speedy.
However, the OPs laptop isn't really that old (4 or 5 years I would guess). 512MB of memory is enough for Ubuntu. Anything with at least 256MB of memory will do fine, however you can't run some really heavy applications like Eclipse or Azureus (and in some cases OpenOffice) with less than 512MB.
For a moment I was wondering how such obvious spam got modded up. The "100% free" thing set off my mental spam/advertising filter, and I almost was not even aware of your post due to banner blindness.
But now I see it is entirely relevant.
Read the Constitution. Read what the Founders wrote, read what they were trying to achieve,
To hell with the shapeshifters.