>It's that half step ahead that will keep PCs out there as gaming hardware. They
>will always have the advantage of being able to try out new hardware ideas sooner
>than the "standard" consoles will. They will also be able to support many alternate
>hardware options that the consoles can't.
Total and utter bullshit. This is precisly the crap that has turned me off on PC gaming. PC gaming and PC gamers have little or interest in supporting older hardware with their "you need rush out and get the latest hardware" to run the latest crappy release of some lame PC game with pretty graphics.
Re:This is berlin without the complications?
on
XFree & Rendering
·
· Score: 1
>The Berling Consortium has all these neat little features (blending,
>rotations, AA-fonts..), but no one ever pays attention to them...
For a very good reason. They're walking the same road the Amiga designers did with their approach to the Amiga graphics subsytem. Very pretty and cool to look at untill you realized it was a one-way ticket to a dead end. Berlin isn't either backward compatable with anything but itself right? No thanks.
>What will this achieve? Nothing. They will earn the enmity of the public and will
>lose any good will they have earned recently.
>Steve Jobs, it is time for you to step down. You are clearly a power hungry zealot
>who has served his purpose. Give Apple back to the people.
I disagree. I hope it shuts down some of these rumor sites that run this crap for no other reason than to generate banner ad revenue. As an Amiga owner I can tell you from my Amiga experiances, these sites don't generate a lot of good will. Ask the Amiga userbase. The people who pointed out that the majority of the stories that came out of the Amiga rumor mill just didn't make any sense got flamed big time by the rumor mongers. And when the rumors in fact turned out to misleading as hell, the people who posted the rumors got flamed back with interest. T
> This is a valid concern, if the digital signatures are used for the >vote itself. If, however, the signatures were used for a petition >process in order to get an issue onto a paper ballot, then, assuming >the issue was passed on the paper ballot, it wouldn't matter how many >fake digital signatures appeared on the petition.
You guys are ducking the issue. If the Digital Signatures used for a petition were declared fraudulent/tainted by a court and the petition itself thrown out on this basis, any vote based as a result of that petition would most likely also be ruled invalid by the court and the whole process ordered to be held over again.
>it is still the electoral equivalent of a write-in victory; this is >particularly true in states where the legislature can turn around and >place measures on the ballot themselves as a way of avoiding >politically uncomfortable decisions. >My opinion only, IANAL.
Not so fast. Voting using Digital Signatures most certainly would not be considered the electoral equivalent of a write-in vote simply because a write-in vote stills boils down to "one person,one vote" No matter what the advocates Digital Signatures claim, there's no way of ensuring this via electronic voting.
>Again, for those who do have the network access, how hard would it be >to get multiple varying digital signatures? Is it as easy as getting >multiple email accounts?
Watch as a lot of laws that happen to get passed by the use Digital Signatures get thrown out by the courts because of this very issue. In other words, Voting+Digital Signatures=Voting fraud lawsuits....
>BTW, I am not a Microsoft supporter. I use Linux. I am not saying that >C# is necessarily good, but it is no where near as bad as everyone >here seems to think.
You'll be singing a diffrent song when the Script Kiddies nail you and your servers with a virus created with C#.....
>Looks this may be a windows only tool, sad to say. I should have >guessed that MS would do something like this. Creating a language >standard then patenting it, I think that would put a crimp in any >competition in the compiler market..
Of course this may be a windows only tool. Who's going to waste their time trying port this Microsoft-insprired crap to a non-Windows plaform? The inherent virus risk to other platforms alone makes porting not worth the hassle.
>"enables developers to quickly build a wide range of applications for >the new Microsoft.NET platform" >Ahh, so that's what it's for. >It's sorta like, Visual C++ lets you make apps for Windows.
Yep. The Script Kiddies and Wannbe Crackers are going to have a field day with this stuff.
Can't you just see the apps floating around on M$.NET asking for subscription info and other goodies?
>I believe that he meant not leveraging one over the other, but >leveraging the benefits of a JFS on Linux over other, less-capable >OSes. What does one do in a predominantly Linux environment? The >ideal, after all, is world domination:-)
Basically use the JFS you're the most familar with.
>My criticism of Linux is that, in a case like the JFS, it fails to >leverage the commercial entities who have a lot to offer -- SGI and >IBM. It was just several months ago that SGI seemed strongly+ >interested in moving it's JFS to Linux. IBM has made similar >offerrings, as I recall.
What a dumb criticism. There is no reason why Linux should leverage SGI's JFS over IBM's JFS. If you are operating primarily in a SGI enviroment use the SGI JFS. If operating in a IBM enviroment use the IBM JFS.
>development, I'm afraid there is probably nothing to be done, other >than resolve issues on a case by case basis. And what pray, tell is wrong with this?
>Including ReiserFS is a bad idea pure and simple. Ext3fs should be the >default. >Could you take a few seconds of your precious time and explain us why >? >I guess not. You're probably trolling...
Can you explain why support for ReiserFS should be placed into the kernel when people working on the kernel don't want it there?
>I think it's good that MS really understands the power and potential >of then net. And as a final trolling thought.... Why didn't you Linux >developer's do this first? It isn't a novell idea.
We're too busy laughing. Want to wager on how long it'll be before some script kiddie running a M$ OS brings this whole Microsoft house of cards tumbing down?
>The Internet has profound implications for the notion of "intellectual >property". Many laws are not at all enforceable anymore, and most >people cannot convince themselves that there is any harm in freely >copying information
Exactly. What the RIAA and MPAA and their various supporter seem to have forgotten and is going to learn the hard way is that most laws can't be enforced if you run around calling people theives and pirates, anymore than the RedNecks in the south could stop the civil rights movement in the south by having the cops sic their attack dogs on the protesters.
>is accepted as a standard. 1. A good number of people who've posted >comments have said "No problem, I'll just provide false info!" That >may be legal now, but it's unlikely to be legal in five years.
And just how are you going to prove that the info provided was false if it looks like a legit customer name, a legit mailing address and so on and so forth? You've got *DEAD PEOPLE* voting in elections dude.......
>ever go to the supermarket and use your "shoppers club" card? >Every single instance of a club that saves you a nominal amount of >money does so in order for them to better market their products to >YOU. You save some money so you will spend much more later.
Whoever said that "shopper's club card" was in my real name? Joke's on them. They're busily tracking the purchases of someone who doesn't exist. All the personal history on that card is bogus.
>Btw, this is somewhat offtopic, but I found a trogen/worm on Gnutella >the other day as a VBS file. (I was looking for Evengelion stuff, >honest!). I put the source (It's a Visual Basic Script) on my >webserver if you want to check it out.
And this affects people running the gnutella clones on linux,bsd or mac in what way? God how I wish you so-called "Security Experts" who are only familar with windows,msdos batch files and windows viruses would just shut up.
>Gnutella is a non anonymous system >Freenet sort of helps, but no crypto. >I wonder how long it'll take till someone >hacks a better anonymous system. >Say with rings of trust, and HEAVY crypto.
You'll most likely see this get incorperated into Gnutella-net by the people involved with creating the Gnutella clones.
>I cannot imagine how with gnutella they could get anything but your ip >address. So even if they went through the trouble to get name to go >with hundreds of thousands of ip addresses, which is too costly. Who >would they complain too? Gnutella has no head, or it has thousands of >heads. Either way there is no master control switch to turn off. Just >the courts.
And if someone using Gnutella is connecting to an ISP using a dial-up connection, you can very easily run the risk of sueing the wrong person by basing a suit on a IP-only address say a day or so later.
Slashdot Mirror
>It's that half step ahead that will keep PCs out there as gaming hardware. They
>will always have the advantage of being able to try out new hardware ideas sooner
>than the "standard" consoles will. They will also be able to support many alternate
>hardware options that the consoles can't.
Total and utter bullshit. This is precisly the crap that has turned me off on PC gaming. PC gaming and PC gamers have little or interest in supporting older hardware with their "you need rush out and get the latest hardware" to run the latest crappy release of some lame PC game with pretty graphics.
>The Berling Consortium has all these neat little features (blending,
>rotations, AA-fonts..), but no one ever pays attention to them...
For a very good reason. They're walking the same road the Amiga designers did with their approach to the Amiga graphics subsytem. Very pretty and cool to look at untill you realized it was a one-way ticket to a dead end. Berlin isn't either backward compatable with anything but itself right? No thanks.
>What will this achieve? Nothing. They will earn the enmity of the public and will
>lose any good will they have earned recently.
>Steve Jobs, it is time for you to step down. You are clearly a power hungry zealot
>who has served his purpose. Give Apple back to the people.
I disagree. I hope it shuts down some of these rumor sites that run this crap for no other reason than to generate banner ad revenue. As an Amiga owner I can tell you from my Amiga experiances, these sites don't generate a lot of good will. Ask the Amiga userbase. The people who pointed out that the majority of the stories that came out of the Amiga rumor mill just didn't make any sense got flamed big time by the rumor mongers. And when the rumors in fact turned out to misleading as hell, the people who posted the rumors got flamed back with interest. T
> This is a valid concern, if the digital signatures are used for the
>vote itself. If, however, the signatures were used for a petition
>process in order to get an issue onto a paper ballot, then, assuming
>the issue was passed on the paper ballot, it wouldn't matter how many
>fake digital signatures appeared on the petition.
You guys are ducking the issue. If the Digital Signatures used for a petition were declared fraudulent/tainted by a court and the petition itself thrown out on this basis, any vote based as a result of that petition would most likely also be ruled invalid by the court and the whole process ordered to be held over again.
>it is still the electoral equivalent of a write-in victory; this is
>particularly true in states where the legislature can turn around and
>place measures on the ballot themselves as a way of avoiding
>politically uncomfortable decisions.
>My opinion only, IANAL.
Not so fast. Voting using Digital Signatures most certainly would not be considered the electoral equivalent of a write-in vote simply because a write-in vote stills boils down to "one person,one vote" No matter what the advocates Digital Signatures claim, there's no way of ensuring this via electronic voting.
>Again, for those who do have the network access, how hard would it be
>to get multiple varying digital signatures? Is it as easy as getting
>multiple email accounts?
Watch as a lot of laws that happen to get passed by the use Digital Signatures get thrown out by the courts because of this very issue. In other words, Voting+Digital Signatures=Voting fraud lawsuits....
>The internal MS geeks probably have a Linux version of IE allready =).
>regards,
And who cares?
>BTW, I am not a Microsoft supporter. I use Linux. I am not saying that
>C# is necessarily good, but it is no where near as bad as everyone
>here seems to think.
You'll be singing a diffrent song when the Script Kiddies nail you and your servers with a virus created with C#.....
>Looks this may be a windows only tool, sad to say. I should have
>guessed that MS would do something like this. Creating a language
>standard then patenting it, I think that would put a crimp in any
>competition in the compiler market..
Of course this may be a windows only tool. Who's going to waste their time trying port this Microsoft-insprired crap to a non-Windows plaform? The inherent virus risk to other platforms alone makes porting not worth the hassle.
>"enables developers to quickly build a wide range of applications for .NET platform"
>the new Microsoft
>Ahh, so that's what it's for.
>It's sorta like, Visual C++ lets you make apps for Windows.
Yep. The Script Kiddies and Wannbe Crackers are going to have a field day with this stuff.
Can't you just see the apps floating around on M$.NET asking for subscription info and other goodies?
>Remember ActiveX? That was supposed to kill Java too.
>Look how well _it_ did.
Oh come on. ActiveX is a nice script kiddie hacking tool....
>I believe that he meant not leveraging one over the other, but
>leveraging the benefits of a JFS on Linux over other, less-capable
>OSes. What does one do in a predominantly Linux environment? The
>ideal, after all, is world domination:-)
Basically use the JFS you're the most familar with.
>My criticism of Linux is that, in a case like the JFS, it fails to
>leverage the commercial entities who have a lot to offer -- SGI and
>IBM. It was just several months ago that SGI seemed strongly+
>interested in moving it's JFS to Linux. IBM has made similar
>offerrings, as I recall.
What a dumb criticism. There is no reason why Linux should leverage SGI's JFS over IBM's JFS. If you are operating primarily in a SGI enviroment use the SGI JFS. If operating in a IBM enviroment use the IBM JFS.
>development, I'm afraid there is probably nothing to be done, other
>than resolve issues on a case by case basis.
And what pray, tell is wrong with this?
>Including ReiserFS is a bad idea pure and simple. Ext3fs should be the
>default.
>Could you take a few seconds of your precious time and explain us why
>?
>I guess not. You're probably trolling...
Can you explain why support for ReiserFS should be placed into the kernel when people working on the kernel don't want it there?
>I think it's good that MS really understands the power and potential
>of then net. And as a final trolling thought.... Why didn't you Linux
>developer's do this first? It isn't a novell idea.
We're too busy laughing. Want to wager on how long it'll be before some script kiddie running a M$ OS brings this whole Microsoft house of cards tumbing down?
>The Internet has profound implications for the notion of "intellectual
>property". Many laws are not at all enforceable anymore, and most
>people cannot convince themselves that there is any harm in freely
>copying information
Exactly. What the RIAA and MPAA and their various supporter seem to have forgotten and is going to learn the hard way is that most laws can't be enforced if you run around calling people theives and pirates, anymore than the RedNecks in the south could stop the civil rights movement in the south by having the cops sic their attack dogs on the protesters.
>is accepted as a standard. 1. A good number of people who've posted
>comments have said "No problem, I'll just provide false info!" That
>may be legal now, but it's unlikely to be legal in five years.
And just how are you going to prove that the info provided was false if it looks like a legit customer name, a legit mailing address and so on and so forth? You've got *DEAD PEOPLE* voting in elections dude.......
>And no, I don't work for the W3C, but I've been researching P3P for
>awhile now and feel this story post was unfairly presented.
Of course you would, Astroturfer. No big surprise here.
>ever go to the supermarket and use your "shoppers club" card?
>Every single instance of a club that saves you a nominal amount of
>money does so in order for them to better market their products to
>YOU. You save some money so you will spend much more later.
Whoever said that "shopper's club card" was in my real name? Joke's on them. They're busily tracking the purchases of someone who doesn't exist. All the personal history on that card is bogus.
>That works really well until you try to order something or do anything
>else which requires your real identity.
Like what? I have *NO* intention of ever purchasing anything or paying any bills whatsoever via the internet.
>I'm well aware of potential consequences (I read privacy policies),
>and I still fill them out.
Because you're an idoit, don't make the mistake of assumimg everyone else is...
>Btw, this is somewhat offtopic, but I found a trogen/worm on Gnutella
>the other day as a VBS file. (I was looking for Evengelion stuff,
>honest!). I put the source (It's a Visual Basic Script) on my
>webserver if you want to check it out.
And this affects people running the gnutella clones on linux,bsd or mac in what way? God how I wish you so-called "Security Experts" who are only familar with windows,msdos batch files and windows viruses would just shut up.
>Gnutella is a non anonymous system
>Freenet sort of helps, but no crypto.
>I wonder how long it'll take till someone
>hacks a better anonymous system.
>Say with rings of trust, and HEAVY crypto.
You'll most likely see this get incorperated into Gnutella-net by the people involved with creating the Gnutella clones.
>I cannot imagine how with gnutella they could get anything but your ip
>address. So even if they went through the trouble to get name to go
>with hundreds of thousands of ip addresses, which is too costly. Who
>would they complain too? Gnutella has no head, or it has thousands of
>heads. Either way there is no master control switch to turn off. Just
>the courts.
And if someone using Gnutella is connecting to an ISP using a dial-up connection, you can very easily run the risk of sueing the wrong person by basing a suit on a IP-only address say a day or so later.