But hes clearly talking about a desktop not a server. And TFA you linked to says that the servers (which are inherently less secure than a desktop due to be attacked to the intertubes) are being hit by phishing attacks on dumb admins, even if you get the root password for a desktop, a default Ubuntu install wont be running anything that would let you in anyway ( AFAIK i may be wrong on the last point).
The fact the boxes get compromised by phishing surely means that these arnt automated attacks and are the specific attacks the GP mentioned.
nah if the chain has 10 people running at 99.99 youd get 99.9 at worst, but if 1 weak link is running at 99.9 then thats what youd get. The chain excuse doesnt really work as you just add the down times and if each link is down minutes (as in 99.99%) then the system would be down hours ( like 99.9%), you only move up 1 decimal place ( so outages of a day mean that 1 or more of the links is only at 99.9% or less
I hope your company is the norm, as you'd get a stupidly small amount of downtime as if T1a & T1b are up 99.9% (and the chance of them going down is unrelated) you'd be up 99.9999% of the time, or down 31 seconds a year?
i suppose it comes down to how many less competent links there are in the chain.
p.s your sig only applies to "american" libertarianism, in the rest of the world it means "a social system based on naivety and hoping for the innate goodness of man" (pretty much anarco-comunism, as compared to the american usage anarco-capitalism )
both have their usages, but IMO the only way to get more people into libraries is to accept that people who are out enjoy talking to their friends. It makes a lot more sense to have quiet areas for those that wish to work, that to keep a lot of people out of the libraries by insisting on silence. My friends often used to do their work in the union pub instead of the union library because you get the work done faster if you can communicate without whispering even if it means you don't have the text book ( most text books are 1 week only and cost £20+ ). I hate silence so im in and out of my library as fast as i can.
OFC libraries will survive tho, they just need to adapt to a bit. Libraries here (in the UK) could easily fill the void left by big stupid American coffee companies, and provide a place for educated discussion.
while you have a point your maths is horribly flawed. Assuming a 5 link chain, if we let them get away with 4 nines, theyd be down about 4hours a year ( with 5 nines its 25min ). to get the scale of outages that people really get either youd need about 30-40 people in the chain ( all too stupid to have a redundancy for any other layer), or more likely, each step is only up 99.9%.
Where does the assumption that it would cost more for a better system is only partially true, if the companies were more competent (e.g ISPs had a deal with another ISPs to cover for it the 0.1% of the time theyre down) or there were multiple routes to the backbone (even if the alternate routes were slower)). 99.99% or even 99.999% would cost very little more, its just a matter of competance.
Yes, it is. People who use Windows, when using Linux, are going to respond exactly the same way to problems - by rebooting. I used windows as a kid from 10-18, i know nothing about coding, i know little about linux (to this day). As soon as i switched i found that my crashes were less sever, ctrl-alt-bkspace, hell event alt+print scrn+k isnt a system reboot. Once i moved a a laptop which had wireless problems, i used modrpobe to 'restart' drivers, since going to uni ive had a few problems with a cisco module that i dont know how to fix, but instead of restarting as windows users have to, if i have a problem i 'restart' my networking stuff. Ive now used likes for about 2 years and only restart when my system crashes (ive managed to mess something up with power management).
No, they do it because it's a simple step for the ignorant end user to understand. Who mentioned end users? hes talking about installing software. On linux i simply install a program and run it, under windows that wasn't what happened.
You are conflating knowledgable end users with typical end users. This is at best naive and at worst deliberately deceptive. Your conflating software actions and end user action, (by critical shared library i assume he means libqt or whatever flashes up during upgrades) the system will sort all of this out not me, the user just clicks update, then after the update the system runs the newer software. You don't even need to close the software being updated in most cases.
Exactly. Now, again, why do you think they're going to treat computers any differently ? Because a server shouldn't NEED to be rebooted to get stuff working, the only time i need to reboot my desktop is when the kernel gets upgraded, and people are working on that!
Not done much work with NFS then, I take it ? Or services that have long timeout periods and don't die nicely ? I dont know anything about NFS or services, but why would either of these need anything but the network stack/process restarting?
The fact that you even need to ask disqualifies you from any useful input to this discussion. Fucking hell. People hit the rest button on their PCs because the monitor power-saving kicked in and for dozens of other reasons that aren't even that good. Theres a difference between being stupid and having an operating system that needs you to restart. I doubt a server has ever gone down because the monitor power-savig kicked in, but ive seen desktops trashed by a windows update so image servers have done the same.
Linux also makes a lot more assumptions about its users (and "users" in this sense reaches from Grandma to software developers) What assumptions? that if you might want to not reboot? that you want a stable system? If you WANT to reboot to fix a problem, go for it but you shouldn't have to.
If you don't need 24/7 uptime, then either scheduled machine reboots (eg: for patching) are irrelevant, or brief outages are acceptable. again why? why should you NEED to reboot? scheduling for patching is surely a dangerous game to play? "sorry we cant patch the vulnerable version of sever.exe until as we dont have an opening in out patching schedule till next tuseday". While kernel* / windows vulnerabilities do require a restart, why should anything else?
wierdly for the 1st time in months, while writing this ive had to run " sudo modprobe -r bcm43xx ; sudo modprobe bcm43xx"
*I lie in waiting for the project to rollover kernels to be end user usable.
why would you want a market leading OS when you can have a technologically leading OS? Only the big companies want market share, the linus(es) and jwz(s?) just want to make the best OS that can be made, who cares if anybody uses it?!
So what could FOSS learn? Nothing! what could OSS learn? maybe
By the way, what do you mean "crashing Adept"? If you mean "you got an error", I don't know, but if you mean "Adept actually crashed, and I got a bomb symbol and everything", you can always open up a Konsole and type "sudo apt-get install lazarus
Not even a bomb symbol sometimes, adpet-manager on kubuntu is quite unstable, i either drop to command line: aptitude (does all the dependancy solving and cleaning for you) or apt-get (is faster) or in previous installs i simply installed synaptic as searching for software seams alot easier there.
South park pisses me off with it's "never understand the issues and never dig deeper" libertarian attitude towards life.
Its like they were trying to be funny or something! They can clearly play the 'Stewart defense' And i hope you mean the libertarian as in the world usage not the American usage, i find their shows to be more taking the piss with a liberal POV than anything else tho.
Its always hard to judge an episode of SP i find about 75% have some sort of point but 35% are just there for the "WTF, they got this on TV?"
I find family guy funny if i catch it but would never set out to watch it (read, D/l), i find american dad much funnier, well playd manatees!
The difference is that if something CAN be done on a linux system it CAN be done by you, but here they're hiding stuff that CAN be done. It doesn't matter on this particular case but the comments admit there is a hidden API, hell its coming from guys that took khtml and used horrible commit tactics to cause a fork (novel got so much stick for the graphics stuff they did that they did properly open it up in the end, but everybody ignores that apple made horrible commits (like an entire product cycle)).
Erm, so your saying non apple apps should always be one release behind? that's not much better than the MS policy. Sure they shouldn't depend on it, you mark it unstable and then let them decide, either that or you keep a rolling API over a reasonable timescale (there are many reasons linux hasn't taken off, but you cant blame the unstable API).
"Ah.. how can we screw all those 3rd party application makers?"
"Actually its more like, how do we keep people on our os?...Ah we stop them using cross platform apps" Im not sating this is the case, but that's what Microsoft did, and once somebody switches to mac osx it would be useful to lock them into using apple apps so they don't switch to an alternative!Ever wondered why safari was ported to windows but not to freeBSD/Linux, which would have been much easier? I wouldn't put it past mac os x to try the same tricks to keep thier user, as windows does, especially as if you switch to mac you show that your willing to 'learn'* a new OS.
*I say 'learn' because using a preinstalled windows/linux/mac box is pretty much point, for most users.
On a more serious note, they should work on polishing up everything instead of trying to expand right now. The only expansion they need to do is get more hardware functioning.
Agreed, i reckon it should be 50% bug fixing, 20% tweaking, 20% hardware fixing, 10% new features! But then again that's likely to stagnate and stop development, but i completely agree that new features arn't really needed maybe finishing what they're started 1) use upstart instead of having it in legacy mode 2) use splashy instead of usplash
apart from that the only improvements i can think of are manly to do with setting features up (e.g having a compiz plugin installer or automated scripts to do the 'cool' stuff people show off on the forums).
p.s Its a shame the site died as id like to check they made their scope clear, too many times have i seen suggestions of a new program or an improvement to another program.
were talking about Firefox3 here nor FF2, then wow, ive really seen a big improvement. I found that FF3 will use memory, but it will use it efficiently so if it uses too much its my OS not my program to blame!
why not? if it sees you have a couple of gigs FREE, what harm is there in using it? its down to the OS to tell the software how much ram it can use not the program to avoid improving performance because it should be 'light', there are plenty of light browsers out there ( for example elinks). If your OS is telling firefox it can use more ram than you want it too then criticize your OS. I remember reading how to limit firefox's memory usage under linux, im sure the same thing will be available for the alternatives.
Firefox doesn't NEED to use all your ram, i ran firefox fine for months on a 256MB system but it will if its available.
p.s im on a gig system now and firefox is using 100MB so the chances of it eating 2GB are slim
with the announcement of the features last night the following topics were beaten to death already: Why use FreeBSD? (why not?) FreeBSD is dead! (clearly its not) FreeBSD is not dead! yahoo use freeBSD (nobody cares) FreeBSD vs Linux (ooh flame ware, but then everybody realized that it doesnt matter some people prefer FreeBSD for stability & the fact its all integrated, some people prefer linux because it has lots of flashy features & there are loads of projects to add extra features to it ( but they're not integrated and don't always play well together)!)
please go about your business there's nothing to spam about here!
Also 90% of firefox's memory 'bloat' came from its aggressive caching. Who cares about memory usage, memory is cheap if you cant afford 100MB, you should probably go back to links anyway, its saves on CPU usage, and upgrading your CPU to handle the latest web browser well (say IE7) is going to set you back abit more. Whats the point in having a gig in your system if applications arnt going to use it because it would be called bloat the setting have always been tweak able to reduce the memory usage, hell compile it with -Os and tweak the settings im sure 90% of the 'bloat' will disappear FF3 comes with a few memory fixes that probably fix most of whats left.
*on a side not Ive experienced 2 bugs on this page in FF3b3 which i didn't see when i was using FF3b2, i hope the streamlined code isn't buggier code.
whats the opera extension (o wait you dont have any:P) that makes it as fast as FF3 ?
OK for once i actually decide TRFA, not only does it turn out to be contentless, and basically 12 pages of "dress smart", but the website was a complete mess:
1st it ran in a background tab, so when i got round to reading it all it showed was a list of different slideshows It took me about 5 slides to see the pause button The time spent on each slider was far too short, (i could barely read the slide let alone think about it) The presentation didnt fit on the 1st visible page meaning for every slide, i had to scroll down to see the actual content (and i have a fairly minimal browser(40px) + window manager(13px), dread to think how much people on vista+ie7 could see) The adverts around the page meant that every slider moved the navigation elements around. The entire page was very cluttered.
The content, is basically "dress smart at work", has been riped apart for many reasons: 1)If your a geek, YTF do you want to be in the boardroom ( if you want $$$, YTF are you a geek) 2)If you work for a good company they value performance above presentation (tbh most companies suck tho) 3)If you work for a bad company the GTFO and find a good company (easier said than done, there are too many boardroom types and not enough demand for workers) 4)Women care about looks too, if they're slags. (maybe not slags, but quality = care about looks ^-1) 5)girls with pig-tails are hawt!!! (ok so i made this 1 up, but w/e floats your boat)
but MENSA tests are easy to read and easy to learn for, if anything a bot net would soon outperform us. A better alternative IMO would be not to tell the bot if its passed failed ( using 2 * 3/4 letter CAPATCHA would mean that the bot wont know it passed unless it passes both). Or delaying they could delay retries (possibly browser string/test related, so IE7 takes 40 secs, but googlebot takes 30hrs and a honeypot could be quicker but log that the account is probably spam) and watch IPs to slow them down, 2 mins average per account will at least slow them down.
Re:i work with OCR/ICR technology
on
Gmail CAPTCHA Cracked
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
It doesnt say that its humans reading them, just that a page rehosts the bmp images. Im confused as to where the bots work. Im suprised that phishers dont use thier victims to crack CAPTCHAs.
Slashdot Mirror
Surely, you just turn the chipset off until they launch a browser? i don't get how a turned off chipset wastes batteries.
But hes clearly talking about a desktop not a server. And TFA you linked to says that the servers (which are inherently less secure than a desktop due to be attacked to the intertubes) are being hit by phishing attacks on dumb admins, even if you get the root password for a desktop, a default Ubuntu install wont be running anything that would let you in anyway ( AFAIK i may be wrong on the last point).
The fact the boxes get compromised by phishing surely means that these arnt automated attacks and are the specific attacks the GP mentioned.
nah if the chain has 10 people running at 99.99 youd get 99.9 at worst, but if 1 weak link is running at 99.9 then thats what youd get. The chain excuse doesnt really work as you just add the down times and if each link is down minutes (as in 99.99%) then the system would be down hours ( like 99.9%), you only move up 1 decimal place ( so outages of a day mean that 1 or more of the links is only at 99.9% or less
I hope your company is the norm, as you'd get a stupidly small amount of downtime as if T1a & T1b are up 99.9% (and the chance of them going down is unrelated) you'd be up 99.9999% of the time, or down 31 seconds a year?
i suppose it comes down to how many less competent links there are in the chain.
we've finally hit the 640k limit!
p.s your sig only applies to "american" libertarianism, in the rest of the world it means "a social system based on naivety and hoping for the innate goodness of man" (pretty much anarco-comunism, as compared to the american usage anarco-capitalism )
both have their usages, but IMO the only way to get more people into libraries is to accept that people who are out enjoy talking to their friends. It makes a lot more sense to have quiet areas for those that wish to work, that to keep a lot of people out of the libraries by insisting on silence. My friends often used to do their work in the union pub instead of the union library because you get the work done faster if you can communicate without whispering even if it means you don't have the text book ( most text books are 1 week only and cost £20+ ). I hate silence so im in and out of my library as fast as i can.
OFC libraries will survive tho, they just need to adapt to a bit.
Libraries here (in the UK) could easily fill the void left by big stupid American coffee companies, and provide a place for educated discussion.
while you have a point your maths is horribly flawed. Assuming a 5 link chain, if we let them get away with 4 nines, theyd be down about 4hours a year ( with 5 nines its 25min ). to get the scale of outages that people really get either youd need about 30-40 people in the chain ( all too stupid to have a redundancy for any other layer), or more likely, each step is only up 99.9%.
Where does the assumption that it would cost more for a better system is only partially true, if the companies were more competent (e.g ISPs had a deal with another ISPs to cover for it the 0.1% of the time theyre down) or there were multiple routes to the backbone (even if the alternate routes were slower)). 99.99% or even 99.999% would cost very little more, its just a matter of competance.
wierdly for the 1st time in months, while writing this ive had to run " sudo modprobe -r bcm43xx ; sudo modprobe bcm43xx"
*I lie in waiting for the project to rollover kernels to be end user usable.
why would you want a market leading OS when you can have a technologically leading OS?
Only the big companies want market share, the linus(es) and jwz(s?) just want to make the best OS that can be made, who cares if anybody uses it?!
So what could FOSS learn? Nothing! what could OSS learn? maybe
Not even a bomb symbol sometimes, adpet-manager on kubuntu is quite unstable, i either drop to command line:
aptitude (does all the dependancy solving and cleaning for you)
or apt-get (is faster)
or in previous installs i simply installed synaptic as searching for software seams alot easier there.
Its like they were trying to be funny or something! They can clearly play the 'Stewart defense'
And i hope you mean the libertarian as in the world usage not the American usage, i find their shows to be more taking the piss with a liberal POV than anything else tho.
Its always hard to judge an episode of SP i find about 75% have some sort of point but 35% are just there for the "WTF, they got this on TV?"
I find family guy funny if i catch it but would never set out to watch it (read, D/l), i find american dad much funnier, well playd manatees!
The difference is that if something CAN be done on a linux system it CAN be done by you, but here they're hiding stuff that CAN be done.
It doesn't matter on this particular case but the comments admit there is a hidden API, hell its coming from guys that took khtml and used horrible commit tactics to cause a fork (novel got so much stick for the graphics stuff they did that they did properly open it up in the end, but everybody ignores that apple made horrible commits (like an entire product cycle)).
Sure they shouldn't depend on it, you mark it unstable and then let them decide, either that or you keep a rolling API over a reasonable timescale (there are many reasons linux hasn't taken off, but you cant blame the unstable API).
"Actually its more like, how do we keep people on our os?...Ah we stop them using cross platform apps"
Im not sating this is the case, but that's what Microsoft did, and once somebody switches to mac osx it would be useful to lock them into using apple apps so they don't switch to an alternative!Ever wondered why safari was ported to windows but not to freeBSD/Linux, which would have been much easier? I wouldn't put it past mac os x to try the same tricks to keep thier user, as windows does, especially as if you switch to mac you show that your willing to 'learn'* a new OS.
*I say 'learn' because using a preinstalled windows/linux/mac box is pretty much point, for most users.
che != hitler by a long shot!
Agreed, i reckon it should be 50% bug fixing, 20% tweaking, 20% hardware fixing, 10% new features! But then again that's likely to stagnate and stop development, but i completely agree that new features arn't really needed maybe finishing what they're started
1) use upstart instead of having it in legacy mode
2) use splashy instead of usplash
apart from that the only improvements i can think of are manly to do with setting features up (e.g having a compiz plugin installer or automated scripts to do the 'cool' stuff people show off on the forums).
p.s Its a shame the site died as id like to check they made their scope clear, too many times have i seen suggestions of a new program or an improvement to another program.
were talking about Firefox3 here nor FF2, then wow, ive really seen a big improvement.
I found that FF3 will use memory, but it will use it efficiently so if it uses too much its my OS not my program to blame!
Idle isnt idle if your on a page that does more than html (e.g slashdot), but 7% does seam abit high.
In fact im fed up of it resolving IP addresses if i wanted to go 66.249.91.99 id type it myself!
I wouldn't say that, we have Opera,konqueror,galleon,Epiphany,links,etc...IE, if anything we have the most competition.
I do agree that firefox sucks on linux tho, although i have to give FF3 some credit for improving this.
why not? if it sees you have a couple of gigs FREE, what harm is there in using it?
its down to the OS to tell the software how much ram it can use not the program to avoid improving performance because it should be 'light', there are plenty of light browsers out there ( for example elinks). If your OS is telling firefox it can use more ram than you want it too then criticize your OS. I remember reading how to limit firefox's memory usage under linux, im sure the same thing will be available for the alternatives.
Firefox doesn't NEED to use all your ram, i ran firefox fine for months on a 256MB system but it will if its available.
p.s im on a gig system now and firefox is using 100MB so the chances of it eating 2GB are slim
with the announcement of the features last night the following topics were beaten to death already:
Why use FreeBSD? (why not?)
FreeBSD is dead! (clearly its not)
FreeBSD is not dead!
yahoo use freeBSD (nobody cares)
FreeBSD vs Linux (ooh flame ware, but then everybody realized that it doesnt matter some people prefer FreeBSD for stability & the fact its all integrated, some people prefer linux because it has lots of flashy features & there are loads of projects to add extra features to it ( but they're not integrated and don't always play well together)!)
please go about your business there's nothing to spam about here!
Also
:P) that makes it as fast as FF3 ?
90% of firefox's memory 'bloat' came from its aggressive caching.
Who cares about memory usage, memory is cheap if you cant afford 100MB, you should probably go back to links anyway, its saves on CPU usage, and upgrading your CPU to handle the latest web browser well (say IE7) is going to set you back abit more.
Whats the point in having a gig in your system if applications arnt going to use it because it would be called bloat
the setting have always been tweak able to reduce the memory usage, hell compile it with -Os and tweak the settings im sure 90% of the 'bloat' will disappear
FF3 comes with a few memory fixes that probably fix most of whats left.
*on a side not Ive experienced 2 bugs on this page in FF3b3 which i didn't see when i was using FF3b2, i hope the streamlined code isn't buggier code.
whats the opera extension (o wait you dont have any
OK for once i actually decide TRFA, not only does it turn out to be contentless, and basically 12 pages of "dress smart", but the website was a complete mess:
1st it ran in a background tab, so when i got round to reading it all it showed was a list of different slideshows
It took me about 5 slides to see the pause button
The time spent on each slider was far too short, (i could barely read the slide let alone think about it)
The presentation didnt fit on the 1st visible page meaning for every slide, i had to scroll down to see the actual content (and i have a fairly minimal browser(40px) + window manager(13px), dread to think how much people on vista+ie7 could see)
The adverts around the page meant that every slider moved the navigation elements around.
The entire page was very cluttered.
The content, is basically "dress smart at work", has been riped apart for many reasons:
1)If your a geek, YTF do you want to be in the boardroom ( if you want $$$, YTF are you a geek)
2)If you work for a good company they value performance above presentation (tbh most companies suck tho)
3)If you work for a bad company the GTFO and find a good company (easier said than done, there are too many boardroom types and not enough demand for workers)
4)Women care about looks too, if they're slags. (maybe not slags, but quality = care about looks ^-1)
5)girls with pig-tails are hawt!!! (ok so i made this 1 up, but w/e floats your boat)
but MENSA tests are easy to read and easy to learn for, if anything a bot net would soon outperform us. A better alternative IMO would be not to tell the bot if its passed failed ( using 2 * 3/4 letter CAPATCHA would mean that the bot wont know it passed unless it passes both). Or delaying they could delay retries (possibly browser string/test related, so IE7 takes 40 secs, but googlebot takes 30hrs and a honeypot could be quicker but log that the account is probably spam) and watch IPs to slow them down, 2 mins average per account will at least slow them down.
It doesnt say that its humans reading them, just that a page rehosts the bmp images. Im confused as to where the bots work. Im suprised that phishers dont use thier victims to crack CAPTCHAs.