Qmail was in beta in 1996, so we'll say it's twelve years old...
Did I just say this? Let's try that again with 10 years old. Maybe you CAN accuse me of "new math" now. If we plug in the right age for Qmail, it actually comes out to 0.9 times as dangerous, using Google logic, and still wins, but just by a nose.
Okay, you're right. Qmail and Postfix have been around longer than I thought. Let's throw in some real numbers then.
Sendmail is a derivative of Delivermail, which was originally released in 1979, so we'll say Sendmail is 27 years old.
Qmail was in beta in 1996, so we'll say it's twelve years old, or around 0.44 as old as Sendmail, so the original poster's Google logic suggests it's therefore around 0.75 times as dangerous as Sendmail.
Postfix was released in 1998, which makes it eight years old, or somewhere around 0.3 as old as Sendmail, so the original poster's Google logic suggests it's therefore around 1.7 times as dangerous as Sendmail.
So by this logic, Qmail *does* win, but come on. The original point of my post, that ascertaining the security of a product on the number of Google matches you get for its name followed by "exploit" is ridiculous.
As everyone who follows the Slackware changelog, new packages were available yesterday.
What exactly does this sentence mean? Or are you just one of those Slashdot writers who thinks that the more words he includes in his sentences, the smarter he will be perceived to be?
Results 1 - 10 of about 18,000,000 for linux exploit.
We've been struggling with Linux exploits since its birth, too. Shall we "drop the turkey" every time a new Linux exploit pops up, too, or should we acknowledge that it's a complicated piece of software whose security generally improves as it matures? I thought so.
Oh, and just for good measure...
Results 1 - 10 of about 203,000 for qmail exploit. Results 1 - 10 of about 283,000 for postfix exploit.
I note that those queries generate about 1/3 and about 1/2 as many results, respectively, for products that have existed for about 1/10 as long as sendmail. By your ridiculously flawed "Google logic", qmail and postfix are far more dangerous "turkeys" than sendmail.
Using sendmail is anomalous to asking for trouble.
This sentence alone shows what an idiot you are. Go look up anomalous and then come back.
Back? Okay, good. Let's move on.
We still use sendmail because it meets our needs and because to those of us who actually know how to use it, it is less of a pain in the ass than your "better" alternatives. Sendmail had a whole slew of security problems many years ago before alternatives were even available, but in recent years, it has really not notably more security issues than any of the other options.
Face the facts here. Qmail and Postfix certainly have their uses, and are both excellent MTAs, but neither is "way better" than Sendmail for all installations. We each have our own requirements, and Sendmail meets those requirements for a lot of my installations.
Laptop desks is one such accessory and are plentiful on the market, but very few are practical and even less are large enough to enjoy.
You got it right the first time. What happened the second time?
Less is for uncountable quantities (less grain, less snow, etc.). Few is for countable quantities (few students, few grammar nazis, etc.). Fewer are large enough to enjoy.
Needless to say the Silverstone ST30NF 300W PSU got the job done efficiently and quietly...
Needless to say? Then why did you write a review about it? Or were you just padding your remarks with random babble to bring the word count up and to try to make yourself sound smart and competent?
Please, leave the verbiage to people who know how to do it, and just get right to the point.
Why would a civilian go to space?
The ultimate thrill ride?
Yeah, that's part of it, but not most of it. Most of it is wanting to fulfill a lifelong dream and wanting to help advance human spaceflight, even if it means taking a risk. Every NASA astronaut is fulfilling a lifelong dream, advancing spaceflight, and taking a risk, too. I don't see a whole lot of difference except that they are admittedly doing it for science and we're doing it partly for entertainment. I doubt you'll find a NASA astronaut who says it isn't entertaining, though.
We're a good 50-100 years from any realistic scenario, if at all.
You're probably right that we are (at least) 50-100 years from the Kubrick scenario you describe, and that's exactly why it's important that a few people be interested in helping usher the industry through this "unrealistic"--as you'd apparently describe it--adolescence. As another response to your post noted, the early aviation industry was similar, and a few people who had the money and the guts helped jumpstart an industry we now take for granted and rely on. There is no reason we cannot do the same with the space travel industry.
...there's just no good reason for civilians to be in space.
There is one way I can see an Amazon-branded player/service work, and that is for Amazon to pair digital downloads with physical purchases, at least optionally.
We are all impatient when we buy a new CD. We want to hear the music right now. For a lot of people, this means stealing a copy of the music to hear in the interim. Unfortunately for the industry, for a lot more, it means stealing the music outright and never paying for it.
So what if Amazon let me buy a CD on their site and then immediately download all the tracks to my Amazon-branded player, and then a few days later, the physical disc arrived in the mail for me to add to my collection, at which point I could erase the digital copy from my player, or just leave it there and continue to listen to that copy, secure in the knowledge that I have a physical copy, with artwork, securely stored at home?
The ability to buy online and listen instantly *coupled* with the ability to own a physical CD copy of something is the one thing every digital download service thusfar has failed to deliver and is the one reason I don't use any of them. I have an iPod, but I've never bought a single track from iTMS. I still buy CDs and rip them to mp3 to fill my iPod, and yes, sometimes I P2P a copy of something I've just bought, because I want to hear it without waiting for it to arrive.
If Amazon provided this kind of service, paired with a high quality, functional Amazon-branded player, I would seriously consider dumping my iPod for their player. I don't see any other program being successful for them.
You're saying that data recovery of journaling filesystems is worse than that of non-journaling ones?
I did say on a badly damaged filesystem. Simple filesystems tend to write files out in larger contiguous segments, which makes them worlds easier to recover when something utterly trashes your filesystem.
Yes, for typical day-to-day power loss type filesystem damage, journaling is great, but if I'm having to try to recover data from a filesystem that's lost 50% of its bits, I want it to be ext2 or fat.
If you're looking for a filesystem to archive things indefinitely, avoid exotic new kids on the block with limited OS support and even more limited toolkit support.
You want a filesystem you'll be able to read at any point in the future and, should the worst happen, one which you'll have a reasonable chance of being able to recover.
ext2 and fat32 tend to write files in nice large chunks and there are lots and lots of recovery tools for damaged filesystems. Journaled filesystems like to put little pieces all over the place, and recovery of a badly damaged filesystem is next to hopeless.
There is no call for a complex filesystem just because you want to store large files. ext2 (and to some extent fat32) will do just fine, and you'll be glad for them someday in the future when something breaks.
You responded as if I were persecuting you with the comment, "don't even being [sic] to accuse me of not remembering". Sorry you feel that I was.
No, I reacted as if you were you were accusing me of not remembering having chosen to be homosexual, which you did. I was merely noting that, as a member of an oft-persecuted sexual minority, I probably remember my psychosexual development a lot better than you remember yours, eidetic memory or not.
People can choose - even this day years after they've entrenched themselves in it... It's simply what you *think* brings you happiness...
This is sort of right, and sort of bullshit. I'll address the right part first...
The human mind is nothing more than an electrochemical computer, the dualists are full of crap, and there is no god. With those facts posited, it is certainly easy to say that whatever makes the brain fire off the happy juice is what makes it happy. It is also true that the brain can be trained to like almost anything, no matter how offensive or ridiculous, which goes a long way toward explaining organised religion and coffee drinkers.
However, it's also bullshit. Most of what trains our brains to like and dislike is a melange of genetic programming and subconscious effects of culture and environment. Neither one of these is easily controlled, and therefore their effects cannot be called choices.
I will fully agree with you that the gay person can, if he truly wishes, program himself to be at least somewhat more happy with a straight lifestyle and that the straight person can do the opposite. The extent to which each individual can accomplish this varies, and in many cases it would be a disaster. But this is indeed a choice he could make. Growing up and discovering he is gay, however, is absolutely not a choice. The distinction between these two ways of arriving at a sexual orientation is a very important one, and one which you seem to have missed.
You don't remember it, but the thoughts came and may have been passed off as insignificant...
So nice that you know more about my brain than I do. Trust me, I remember in painful detail what it is like to grow up a gay teen. What you experienced sounds like very typical sexual development of a heterosexual. What I experienced was, unfortunately, all too typical of being gay. Don't even begin to accuse me of not remembering my thoughts, not remembering wanting not to be who I am (got over that one, thank goodness), wishing I could be like I saw my friends were, and hating myself for what I was. I remember every single day of it.
Results 1 - 10 of about 93 for hactavist. Results 1 - 10 of about 187,000 for hactivist. Results 1 - 10 of about 204,000 for hacktivist.
Personally, I'm partial to hacktivist, but take your pick of the last two. TFA spells it the second way. The way the headline spells it is definitely not right.
If Adobe figured out some way to lock down Photoshop so that it couldn't be pirated as commonly as it is currently.
Does Adobe even really care? Most everyone who uses Photoshop professionally pays for it (and it's obviously priced for that market). Photoshop probably owes some of its ubiquity in the professional graphics world to its wide availability for piracy.
The fact that pirated Photoshop lives on millions of personal computers owned by people who honestly would never pay the price Adobe is asking for it (mine included, I admit) is costing Adobe very little revenue while giving them huge amounts of exposure, which amounts to free advertising.
For the sake of their stockholders, they publicly mind, but I think the lack of any real attempt to prevent its piracy speaks a lot to how they truly feel about it.
You have no idea how much time I've wasted with the Internet Relay Chat chat. If I only had a nickel from the Automated Teller Machine machine for every day I've wasted...
Why does someone else's decision about their own sexuality have to be contraversial?
Decision? I don't remember deiciding whether to be straight or gay. It was kind of just there. I never came to some fork in the road, paused for a moment, and then said, "Heck, I think I'll like wang."
Ah, the fabled list of Core Duo/Solo errata. Given that such a list is typical of every processor, and previous Slashdot discussion has noted that the Core Duo/Solo errata list actually shorter than most, it almost seems irrelevant...
I've never seen it spelt like that before. Tires? Is that what you're talking about?
You nitwit. Tyre is the British (and therefore more defensible as correct) spelling of what the United States spells tire. Need a crowbar to help dislodge that clodhopper from your mouth?
Because some of us who rarely read comments (this obviously is an exception) would like to know the article was wrong. I usually read only the front page, and only look at comments on stories that particularly interest me.
The bolded Update let me know the original story was wrong, whereas had the blurb merely disappeared, I would not have noticed and may have continued the Digg/Slashdot/now Ars too (?) tradition of spouting unsubstantiated bullshit to anyone who would listen.
Slashdot Mirror
Qmail was in beta in 1996, so we'll say it's twelve years old...
Did I just say this? Let's try that again with 10 years old. Maybe you CAN accuse me of "new math" now. If we plug in the right age for Qmail, it actually comes out to 0.9 times as dangerous, using Google logic, and still wins, but just by a nose.
Okay, you're right. Qmail and Postfix have been around longer than I thought. Let's throw in some real numbers then.
Sendmail is a derivative of Delivermail, which was originally released in 1979, so we'll say Sendmail is 27 years old.
Qmail was in beta in 1996, so we'll say it's twelve years old, or around 0.44 as old as Sendmail, so the original poster's Google logic suggests it's therefore around 0.75 times as dangerous as Sendmail.
Postfix was released in 1998, which makes it eight years old, or somewhere around 0.3 as old as Sendmail, so the original poster's Google logic suggests it's therefore around 1.7 times as dangerous as Sendmail.
So by this logic, Qmail *does* win, but come on. The original point of my post, that ascertaining the security of a product on the number of Google matches you get for its name followed by "exploit" is ridiculous.
As everyone who follows the Slackware changelog, new packages were available yesterday.
What exactly does this sentence mean? Or are you just one of those Slashdot writers who thinks that the more words he includes in his sentences, the smarter he will be perceived to be?
Results 1 - 10 of about 18,000,000 for linux exploit.
We've been struggling with Linux exploits since its birth, too. Shall we "drop the turkey" every time a new Linux exploit pops up, too, or should we acknowledge that it's a complicated piece of software whose security generally improves as it matures? I thought so.
Oh, and just for good measure...
Results 1 - 10 of about 203,000 for qmail exploit.
Results 1 - 10 of about 283,000 for postfix exploit.
I note that those queries generate about 1/3 and about 1/2 as many results, respectively, for products that have existed for about 1/10 as long as sendmail. By your ridiculously flawed "Google logic", qmail and postfix are far more dangerous "turkeys" than sendmail.
Using sendmail is anomalous to asking for trouble.
This sentence alone shows what an idiot you are. Go look up anomalous and then come back.
Back? Okay, good. Let's move on.
We still use sendmail because it meets our needs and because to those of us who actually know how to use it, it is less of a pain in the ass than your "better" alternatives. Sendmail had a whole slew of security problems many years ago before alternatives were even available, but in recent years, it has really not notably more security issues than any of the other options.
Face the facts here. Qmail and Postfix certainly have their uses, and are both excellent MTAs, but neither is "way better" than Sendmail for all installations. We each have our own requirements, and Sendmail meets those requirements for a lot of my installations.
Laptop desks is one such accessory and are plentiful on the market, but very few are practical and even less are large enough to enjoy.
You got it right the first time. What happened the second time?
Less is for uncountable quantities (less grain, less snow, etc.). Few is for countable quantities (few students, few grammar nazis, etc.). Fewer are large enough to enjoy.
Needless to say the Silverstone ST30NF 300W PSU got the job done efficiently and quietly...
Needless to say? Then why did you write a review about it? Or were you just padding your remarks with random babble to bring the word count up and to try to make yourself sound smart and competent?
Please, leave the verbiage to people who know how to do it, and just get right to the point.
Why would a civilian go to space? The ultimate thrill ride?
...there's just no good reason for civilians to be in space.
Yeah, that's part of it, but not most of it. Most of it is wanting to fulfill a lifelong dream and wanting to help advance human spaceflight, even if it means taking a risk. Every NASA astronaut is fulfilling a lifelong dream, advancing spaceflight, and taking a risk, too. I don't see a whole lot of difference except that they are admittedly doing it for science and we're doing it partly for entertainment. I doubt you'll find a NASA astronaut who says it isn't entertaining, though.
We're a good 50-100 years from any realistic scenario, if at all.
You're probably right that we are (at least) 50-100 years from the Kubrick scenario you describe, and that's exactly why it's important that a few people be interested in helping usher the industry through this "unrealistic"--as you'd apparently describe it--adolescence. As another response to your post noted, the early aviation industry was similar, and a few people who had the money and the guts helped jumpstart an industry we now take for granted and rely on. There is no reason we cannot do the same with the space travel industry.
Yes there is. It's because we can.
Branson's got my money. What are you doing to help make your Kubrickian vision a reality?
why?
Because we can.
There is one way I can see an Amazon-branded player/service work, and that is for Amazon to pair digital downloads with physical purchases, at least optionally.
We are all impatient when we buy a new CD. We want to hear the music right now. For a lot of people, this means stealing a copy of the music to hear in the interim. Unfortunately for the industry, for a lot more, it means stealing the music outright and never paying for it.
So what if Amazon let me buy a CD on their site and then immediately download all the tracks to my Amazon-branded player, and then a few days later, the physical disc arrived in the mail for me to add to my collection, at which point I could erase the digital copy from my player, or just leave it there and continue to listen to that copy, secure in the knowledge that I have a physical copy, with artwork, securely stored at home?
The ability to buy online and listen instantly *coupled* with the ability to own a physical CD copy of something is the one thing every digital download service thusfar has failed to deliver and is the one reason I don't use any of them. I have an iPod, but I've never bought a single track from iTMS. I still buy CDs and rip them to mp3 to fill my iPod, and yes, sometimes I P2P a copy of something I've just bought, because I want to hear it without waiting for it to arrive.
If Amazon provided this kind of service, paired with a high quality, functional Amazon-branded player, I would seriously consider dumping my iPod for their player. I don't see any other program being successful for them.
You're saying that data recovery of journaling filesystems is worse than that of non-journaling ones?
I did say on a badly damaged filesystem. Simple filesystems tend to write files out in larger contiguous segments, which makes them worlds easier to recover when something utterly trashes your filesystem.
Yes, for typical day-to-day power loss type filesystem damage, journaling is great, but if I'm having to try to recover data from a filesystem that's lost 50% of its bits, I want it to be ext2 or fat.
If you're looking for a filesystem to archive things indefinitely, avoid exotic new kids on the block with limited OS support and even more limited toolkit support.
You want a filesystem you'll be able to read at any point in the future and, should the worst happen, one which you'll have a reasonable chance of being able to recover.
ext2 and fat32 tend to write files in nice large chunks and there are lots and lots of recovery tools for damaged filesystems. Journaled filesystems like to put little pieces all over the place, and recovery of a badly damaged filesystem is next to hopeless.
There is no call for a complex filesystem just because you want to store large files. ext2 (and to some extent fat32) will do just fine, and you'll be glad for them someday in the future when something breaks.
You responded as if I were persecuting you with the comment, "don't even being [sic] to accuse me of not remembering". Sorry you feel that I was.
No, I reacted as if you were you were accusing me of not remembering having chosen to be homosexual, which you did. I was merely noting that, as a member of an oft-persecuted sexual minority, I probably remember my psychosexual development a lot better than you remember yours, eidetic memory or not.
People can choose - even this day years after they've entrenched themselves in it... It's simply what you *think* brings you happiness...
This is sort of right, and sort of bullshit. I'll address the right part first...
The human mind is nothing more than an electrochemical computer, the dualists are full of crap, and there is no god. With those facts posited, it is certainly easy to say that whatever makes the brain fire off the happy juice is what makes it happy. It is also true that the brain can be trained to like almost anything, no matter how offensive or ridiculous, which goes a long way toward explaining organised religion and coffee drinkers.
However, it's also bullshit. Most of what trains our brains to like and dislike is a melange of genetic programming and subconscious effects of culture and environment. Neither one of these is easily controlled, and therefore their effects cannot be called choices.
I will fully agree with you that the gay person can, if he truly wishes, program himself to be at least somewhat more happy with a straight lifestyle and that the straight person can do the opposite. The extent to which each individual can accomplish this varies, and in many cases it would be a disaster. But this is indeed a choice he could make. Growing up and discovering he is gay, however, is absolutely not a choice. The distinction between these two ways of arriving at a sexual orientation is a very important one, and one which you seem to have missed.
You don't remember it, but the thoughts came and may have been passed off as insignificant...
So nice that you know more about my brain than I do. Trust me, I remember in painful detail what it is like to grow up a gay teen. What you experienced sounds like very typical sexual development of a heterosexual. What I experienced was, unfortunately, all too typical of being gay. Don't even begin to accuse me of not remembering my thoughts, not remembering wanting not to be who I am (got over that one, thank goodness), wishing I could be like I saw my friends were, and hating myself for what I was. I remember every single day of it.
Spelling courtesy of Google:
Results 1 - 10 of about 93 for hactavist.
Results 1 - 10 of about 187,000 for hactivist.
Results 1 - 10 of about 204,000 for hacktivist.
Personally, I'm partial to hacktivist, but take your pick of the last two. TFA spells it the second way. The way the headline spells it is definitely not right.
And here I was looking forward to being Bobby.
If Adobe figured out some way to lock down Photoshop so that it couldn't be pirated as commonly as it is currently.
Does Adobe even really care? Most everyone who uses Photoshop professionally pays for it (and it's obviously priced for that market). Photoshop probably owes some of its ubiquity in the professional graphics world to its wide availability for piracy.
The fact that pirated Photoshop lives on millions of personal computers owned by people who honestly would never pay the price Adobe is asking for it (mine included, I admit) is costing Adobe very little revenue while giving them huge amounts of exposure, which amounts to free advertising.
For the sake of their stockholders, they publicly mind, but I think the lack of any real attempt to prevent its piracy speaks a lot to how they truly feel about it.
...and a feature-rich IRC chat client.
You have no idea how much time I've wasted with the Internet Relay Chat chat. If I only had a nickel from the Automated Teller Machine machine for every day I've wasted...
Why does someone else's decision about their own sexuality have to be contraversial?
Decision? I don't remember deiciding whether to be straight or gay. It was kind of just there. I never came to some fork in the road, paused for a moment, and then said, "Heck, I think I'll like wang."
When did you decide?
Here I go talking to myself...
Ah, the fabled list of Core Duo/Solo errata. Given that such a list is typical of every processor, and previous Slashdot discussion has noted that the Core Duo/Solo errata list actually shorter than most, it almost seems irrelevant...
*shrug*
Bricking a computer by flashing unsupported code into the part of the computer responsible for making it boot is not a hardware bug. It is a user bug.
Or did I miss a memo somewhere?
- Have a sense of humour.
- Be prepared for snide responses to anything you post.
- Realise that Europeans never justify their irrational behaviour.
I've never seen it spelt like that before. Tires? Is that what you're talking about?
You nitwit. Tyre is the British (and therefore more defensible as correct) spelling of what the United States spells tire. Need a crowbar to help dislodge that clodhopper from your mouth?
Because some of us who rarely read comments (this obviously is an exception) would like to know the article was wrong. I usually read only the front page, and only look at comments on stories that particularly interest me.
The bolded Update let me know the original story was wrong, whereas had the blurb merely disappeared, I would not have noticed and may have continued the Digg/Slashdot/now Ars too (?) tradition of spouting unsubstantiated bullshit to anyone who would listen.
Alive is alive, which he'll be and you won't be. Who's the dumb one now?