While it is never said directly, the implication is that the network was a in bad shape to begin with, and when this guy started doing whatever he was doing, it just pushed things over the edge
Makes a lot of sense actually. I've been doing a bit of a campaign for a while to have a seperate domain or the ability to connect my test machines (in complete isolation of course) to only each other and maintain my OWN PDC... of course no one thinks this is a good idea, but some of the tests I need to run can bog down when the network's busy, and they of course are not helping the rest of the network be happy.
Our network's reasonable, but people should give software folks what they need, not force them to work under the constraints the sales folks do (for example).
Sure, we have to respect the 'rules' when joining the normal network for email and such, but testing of network applications should almost be on a smaller completely isolated network (to prevent dragging down the whole system when an automated test goes awry).
Infinite loops don't just happen to stupid people;). Anyone can get too tired to realise they're sending a billion packets a second because they reversed a conditional or something.
I know a developer who had to leave one job because the IT folks didn't understand why he couldn't develop windows services without admin equivalence on his local machine (duh).
Middlesex, England, GBR. Well, 2 out of 3 isn't bad but not exactly something to get worried about. Wonder why it thought Middlesex though
I got concerned seeing this too, however, since the information is not anywhere stored on this system (having recently moved from a completely different province and city), my guess is they do some kind of whois on the network info? So, no big deal there if that's the case.. They're just trying to make people paranoid.
Those who understand TCP/IP aren't afraid of 'giving out your IP address -- oh no!!', the clipboard stuff etc. Is easily turned off if you disable EVERYTHING in the regular internet zone and use trusted sites.. slashdot or others that I know are added, otherwise, I have a few annoying pop-ups (you're not running activex.. you sure you wanted to turn it off) get triggered when a trusted site is using ads.
Big deal. The ads were just as annoying as the ActiveX warnings;).
One step further by ANY browser maker would be to not give me grief about my choices (something Microsoft fails miserably at, if I turned it off, assuming I'm intelligent and silently disable the damn thing).
Apart from the known issues with IE, outlook, and IIS, what is insecure in Windows?
Huh?
Ok, seeing as anything on Windows can be built such that it RUNS IE code, you can't actually fix the security holes in windows if you don't have the ability to remove IE. Period.
Until we can remove all IE.dlls so that no application can run this insecure code, how can we possibly secure windows? It's just not possible.
Ok, so it can't even out-perform low end Radeon boards, and they're 'one upping' and beating someone to the punch??
Ok, so now it's thin, but it still is a crappy product in general.. gg SiS.
Sorry, try building one that works properly with OpenGL (i.e. doesn't lock up while playing OpenGL games like about 70% of their boards do), or provide a Linux driver.. heck, then we'd have something to be impressed about.
Sorry, that is trollish, but I think they've got a long way to go to restore consumer confidence in a product that's been as bad as theirs for as long as it has.
Leadership and a bunch of intelligent ambitious developers are all you need.
They don't have to be the best developers on the planet IMHO, just competent. I work for a company where the leadership has gone from a vapourware touting salesman, to a still slightly too ready to believe that the developers are all wrong, because now the major powerhouse is the support/customer service organization.
What really would have helped was STRONG capable development management. None of the people I work with are stupid, they've just been made to believe they are for so long, some of them have bought into it.
They badly want to rearchitect core products, but are continually dragged in several directions through mismangement.
Anyone is capable of brilliance, but they need an opportunity to fend off the naysayers while they accomplish it;)
However, their store is private property. They can ask you to leave any time they want, for any reason
A business that is open to the public is not a private place..;)
If I go to your house and get drunk and fall off the steps breaking my leg and sue you, you won't have to pay me as much as if you're the owner of a public bar.
That's why the above poster is correct, you can't open a whites only store or have a sign that says, open for business unless your a n*****.
The largest problem with this, however, is that by "buying nothing!" you're not helping the weak economy in our country. We need to stimulate the economy so people have more confidence in buying items, and helping to climb out of recession. Everyone sitting on their cash isn't helping, contrary to what you may think. I'm not advocating blowing your entire check, but by all means, do your Christmas/holiday shopping. We all cry about how we can't find jobs, and how pitiful the economy is, but these little protests aren't helping the situation any.
The point of this protest is to not be duped about saving a few pennies one day a year, and excercising your right to choice as a consumer (a protest against maddened consumerism not all consumerism).
The fact is that big business should not dictate when we shop. Once you're worn out from fighting through throngs of people being assholes to each other, your JUDGEMENT suffers, therefore you could end up buying crap you don't need in the 'frenzy'.
The protest is about not falling for that game, not suggesting we never spend a penny.
This has nothing to do with the US or any economy it's about conusmer choice -- if M$ had a 'black friday' sale, would you see the duplicity there? Extend that reasoning, and you'll see why you've missed the point of the protest completely.;)
Then they're definitely dead to me. Their product seems slow and bloated as is compared to Winzip.
And I still like the idea that *nix considers this a necessity of any real OS and it comes WITH the OS anyway.
Paying 20 bucks to register Winzip is a symptom of being on Windows maybe, but at least when helping someone out with computer problems, I can go download a 'trial version' of Winzip for them.
Re:Real World Design Patterns
on
Design Patterns
·
· Score: 1
My god, you've been tapping the phones at our shop haven't you?:)
One of the flaws with antitrust law is that once a monopoly is allowed to reach a certain critical mass, it becomes immune to antitrust laws. MS is well beyond that level. Antitrust laws simply do not apply to it.
How big was AT&T when it was broken up in the 70's? Did they not have that critical mass?
That said I'm now going to say its not "right-wing Christians" that are producing or mandating censorware. The people who are doing that corporations which after they develop a technology they come on TV screaming "protect the children" which insites some people, including some Christians to demand it. If censorware is legislated then certain companies make lots of money. So it all comes down to money.
Oops. I now feel bad about using the phrase 'overfunded religious zealots' in another reply. You're absolutely correct, it's corporate not religious interests that are selling the technology.
I am glad to see that there are people who are capable of both an open mind and respect freedom of speech and religious views, just because some folks aren't, doesn't mean I shouldn't choose my words more carefully;). Sorry.
Heh, well while this was for some reason modded as insightful (doubtless by moderators who misunderstood the article as well), there is no money earmarked for anti-censorship in the United States.
The article is about CHINA's censoring of the Internet, and technology that circumvents that...
Ummm.. anyway, I agree with your ideas, unfortunately, they are not coming to bear in the nation which extols its 'right to freedom speech'. Sad really. I think someone has to get some money behind constitutional matter quickly before these overfunded religious zealots destroy what freedoms we have left in this part of the World..
Logic, common sense, and science are shoved aside in favor of mysterious edicts derived from fear, lack of knowledge, New Age mumbo-jumbo, and superstition. Welcome to America, 2002
I've had to learn not to point out to stewardesses (ok that's the old guy term what the hell are they called today?), that you can't ever 'turn off' a Palm device. The power switch just puts it into a suspended state. The deer caught in the headlights look was amusing once or twice tho;).
I'd like to see how my palm pilot could possibly interfere with any airline equipment, in fact, we should insist that they demonstrate that their equipment isn't that bloody frail, I don't fancy putting my life in their hands if they can't build better gear than that:P
What is there to "deal" with about people talking on phones? Do you also have to "deal" with people talking to the person next to them?
You obviously don't listen to many people talk on cellphones in public places. Their volume increases in direct proportion to the ambient noise.
Some of them are VERY irritating and disrespectful to those around them. I'm not talking about your average considerate cell user (who probably can live being 2 hours away from the phone), it's the 'cellaholic' who is always busy trying to sound 'important' talking VERY loudly in airport lobbies.
Believe me, because of 'people' like that, there is plenty to 'deal with'. People talking to others on planes tend not to broadcast like these clowns do. Also, what happens if their ears pop and they can't hear themselves? They'll yell louder into their damn phone.
Hmm.. Guess it's a pet peeve of mine, however, I find that as I'm sitting annoyed by their banal chatter that the more irritating they tend to be volume wise, the more mundane the actual things that they are talking about are.
They can survive for 2 bloody hours off the phone, it builds character:)
I'd love to be rich enough to be able to choose what I do for a living. Sadly, most of us aren't. The bank doesn't give a rat's ass that you're laid off or fired because of ethical reasons, you still owe for the mortgage payment.
I agree in THEORY with this idea, try practicing when you have real financial obligations. Doesn't work too well.;)
Governments exist to protect the people, not to forward corporate interests. I'm so sick and tired of companies using legal bull shit to protect their business model. Why don't we have bloody subsidies for horse shoers?
Unfortunately, politicians receive these 'campaign contributions' not from 'the people', but from corporations.
Remove the ability for corporations to contribute to their campaign funds, and then you may see the type of Government that the founding fathers envisioned, that actually does represent 'the people', rather than coroporate interests..
Not being a huge online gamer I cannot say with 100% confidence, but I doubt that the majority of gamers using this system want to cheat.
I agree, that is just the problem, the non-cheaters won't find out how to defeat it, the cheaters will. Even then, only a small percentage of those cheaters even know what a MAC address is.
Unfortunately, there are now a few groups of dedicated dorks that will have one or two actually knowledgeable people that will work it out, then publish a 'how to defeat the anti-cheat' and then they'll all know.
or they think they don't have one because they use Windows
MAC Addresses have been configurable and visible long before Linus wrote line 1 of Linux. Just because we have a lot of second rate network cards on the market that don't bother to expose this in their driver, doesn't mean that good ones don't do this, or this is somehow a Windows issue.
Every 3Com card I've ever owned had a utility for changing them (some Novell networks were configured to require unique addys or restrict logins to a pool of MAC addys), in fact at one time pretty much all the cards had the utility for DOS..
Joe user doesn't need to care about it, but it doesn't mean it's not available to those who have the knowledge even under Windows...
If this were testicular cancer screening, it would be covered...
That's nonsense. The media hasn't mentioned in any significant way testicular cancer in the last 10 years, compared to what it has regarding breast cancer.
Canada hasn't run out and got new testicular cancer machines on the scale of the new breast cancer screening machines it has purchased in droves in recent years (ok, no machine is required to screen for testicular cancer that I know of), but the point is money is being spent.
The government just doesn't want to be sued, and made a decision not to pay for one little test, has anyone declared it conclusive or useful? No. The media caught wind of it and is doing its job, making us debate it.
In fact, many victims of testicular cancer die silently, because there is no vast government sponsored and paid for education campaign teaching about early screening, etc. as there is for breast cancer.
Basically, what they are implying that this could lead to is the situation where a major security flaw can be disclosed to the entire world, except for the US, because of the DMCA. The obvious upshot of that is that every man and his dog outside of the US could have access to the knowledge required to shaft servers in the US, and the sysadmins in the US can't do a thing about it because of the DMCA.
Which exactly contradicts the type of reasoning that restricted export of 128 bit encryption to the potential enemies of the US (like the UK, we know those evil bastards were up to no good with that tecnology - joke).
You can't improve security without the ability to disclose fully potential vulnerabilities, openly and without fear of reprisal from a government too technically ignorant to understand what they just passed as law.
If the contract really contains a clause which is breaking a law, I don't think it's legally binding. I'm not sure how far the 'legality of object' concept extends, i.e. if it voids the whole contract or not.
In Canada, and I believe we got the concept from US law, you can't make a legally binding contract for an illegal act.
You can't contract and be bound to sell marijuanna for example, the 'object' of the contract is not legal, so the law does not compel you to honour the contract.
In theory anyway, it could mean the whole EULA is not worth the 'paper' its written on.. not sure.
No, that's a good point, however, you should not be rewarded in school by writing this way by getting passing grades.
I graded entry level college papers part time as a stundent, and shuddered at the grammar/spelling, etc. We have to learn to communicate correctly at some point in our lives. Slang is fine in casual contexts, but you're not going to learn the screwed up Grammar of English if someone doesn't teach you some day.
Access killer you're looking for on Linux is called Kylix
Kylix is a heck of a lot more than Access for Linux. Kylix is a port of Delphi. It would be more accurate to say VB for Linux, but then Delphi is more powerful than VB or Access (VBA). Kylix/Delphi is more akin to VisualC++, but uses Pascal rather than C/C++... That's why there's more of a learning curve, it's not necessarily designed for end user development whereas Access is.
Slashdot Mirror
While it is never said directly, the implication is that the network was a in bad shape to begin with, and when this guy started doing whatever he was doing, it just pushed things over the edge
;). Anyone can get too tired to realise they're sending a billion packets a second because they reversed a conditional or something.
Makes a lot of sense actually. I've been doing a bit of a campaign for a while to have a seperate domain or the ability to connect my test machines (in complete isolation of course) to only each other and maintain my OWN PDC... of course no one thinks this is a good idea, but some of the tests I need to run can bog down when the network's busy, and they of course are not helping the rest of the network be happy.
Our network's reasonable, but people should give software folks what they need, not force them to work under the constraints the sales folks do (for example).
Sure, we have to respect the 'rules' when joining the normal network for email and such, but testing of network applications should almost be on a smaller completely isolated network (to prevent dragging down the whole system when an automated test goes awry).
Infinite loops don't just happen to stupid people
I know a developer who had to leave one job because the IT folks didn't understand why he couldn't develop windows services without admin equivalence on his local machine (duh).
Middlesex, England, GBR. Well, 2 out of 3 isn't bad but not exactly something to get worried about. Wonder why it thought Middlesex though
;).
I got concerned seeing this too, however, since the information is not anywhere stored on this system (having recently moved from a completely different province and city), my guess is they do some kind of whois on the network info? So, no big deal there if that's the case.. They're just trying to make people paranoid.
Those who understand TCP/IP aren't afraid of 'giving out your IP address -- oh no!!', the clipboard stuff etc. Is easily turned off if you disable EVERYTHING in the regular internet zone and use trusted sites.. slashdot or others that I know are added, otherwise, I have a few annoying pop-ups (you're not running activex.. you sure you wanted to turn it off) get triggered when a trusted site is using ads.
Big deal. The ads were just as annoying as the ActiveX warnings
One step further by ANY browser maker would be to not give me grief about my choices (something Microsoft fails miserably at, if I turned it off, assuming I'm intelligent and silently disable the damn thing).
Apart from the known issues with IE, outlook, and IIS, what is insecure in Windows?
.dlls so that no application can run this insecure code, how can we possibly secure windows? It's just not possible.
Huh?
Ok, seeing as anything on Windows can be built such that it RUNS IE code, you can't actually fix the security holes in windows if you don't have the ability to remove IE. Period.
Until we can remove all IE
Ok, so it can't even out-perform low end Radeon boards, and they're 'one upping' and beating someone to the punch??
Ok, so now it's thin, but it still is a crappy product in general.. gg SiS.
Sorry, try building one that works properly with OpenGL (i.e. doesn't lock up while playing OpenGL games like about 70% of their boards do), or provide a Linux driver.. heck, then we'd have something to be impressed about.
Sorry, that is trollish, but I think they've got a long way to go to restore consumer confidence in a product that's been as bad as theirs for as long as it has.
Isn't that done so the Karma-poor can repeatedly post the link to get a few '+5 Informative's under their belt??
Leadership and a bunch of intelligent ambitious developers are all you need.
;)
They don't have to be the best developers on the planet IMHO, just competent. I work for a company where the leadership has gone from a vapourware touting salesman, to a still slightly too ready to believe that the developers are all wrong, because now the major powerhouse is the support/customer service organization.
What really would have helped was STRONG capable development management. None of the people I work with are stupid, they've just been made to believe they are for so long, some of them have bought into it.
They badly want to rearchitect core products, but are continually dragged in several directions through mismangement.
Anyone is capable of brilliance, but they need an opportunity to fend off the naysayers while they accomplish it
However, their store is private property. They can ask you to leave any time they want, for any reason
.. ;)
A business that is open to the public is not a private place
If I go to your house and get drunk and fall off the steps breaking my leg and sue you, you won't have to pay me as much as if you're the owner of a public bar.
That's why the above poster is correct, you can't open a whites only store or have a sign that says, open for business unless your a n*****.
The largest problem with this, however, is that by "buying nothing!" you're not helping the weak economy in our country. We need to stimulate the economy so people have more confidence in buying items, and helping to climb out of recession. Everyone sitting on their cash isn't helping, contrary to what you may think. I'm not advocating blowing your entire check, but by all means, do your Christmas/holiday shopping. We all cry about how we can't find jobs, and how pitiful the economy is, but these little protests aren't helping the situation any.
;)
The point of this protest is to not be duped about saving a few pennies one day a year, and excercising your right to choice as a consumer (a protest against maddened consumerism not all consumerism).
The fact is that big business should not dictate when we shop. Once you're worn out from fighting through throngs of people being assholes to each other, your JUDGEMENT suffers, therefore you could end up buying crap you don't need in the 'frenzy'.
The protest is about not falling for that game, not suggesting we never spend a penny.
This has nothing to do with the US or any economy it's about conusmer choice -- if M$ had a 'black friday' sale, would you see the duplicity there? Extend that reasoning, and you'll see why you've missed the point of the protest completely.
Professional users like backwards compatibility, and incremental changes. That is something UNIX and Linux provides.
Unless you keep up with gcc versions.. binary incompatibilities anyone? I was somewhat surprised by that move and in general that's true..
PKWare no longer sells its products as shareware.
Then they're definitely dead to me. Their product seems slow and bloated as is compared to Winzip.
And I still like the idea that *nix considers this a necessity of any real OS and it comes WITH the OS anyway.
Paying 20 bucks to register Winzip is a symptom of being on Windows maybe, but at least when helping someone out with computer problems, I can go download a 'trial version' of Winzip for them.
My god, you've been tapping the phones at our shop haven't you? :)
One of the flaws with antitrust law is that once a monopoly is allowed to reach a certain critical mass, it becomes immune to antitrust laws. MS is well beyond that level. Antitrust laws simply do not apply to it.
How big was AT&T when it was broken up in the 70's? Did they not have that critical mass?
Just curious..
That said I'm now going to say its not "right-wing Christians" that are producing or mandating censorware. The people who are doing that corporations which after they develop a technology they come on TV screaming "protect the children" which insites some people, including some Christians to demand it. If censorware is legislated then certain companies make lots of money. So it all comes down to money.
;). Sorry.
Oops. I now feel bad about using the phrase 'overfunded religious zealots' in another reply. You're absolutely correct, it's corporate not religious interests that are selling the technology.
I am glad to see that there are people who are capable of both an open mind and respect freedom of speech and religious views, just because some folks aren't, doesn't mean I shouldn't choose my words more carefully
Heh, well while this was for some reason modded as insightful (doubtless by moderators who misunderstood the article as well), there is no money earmarked for anti-censorship in the United States.
The article is about CHINA's censoring of the Internet, and technology that circumvents that...
Ummm.. anyway, I agree with your ideas, unfortunately, they are not coming to bear in the nation which extols its 'right to freedom speech'. Sad really. I think someone has to get some money behind constitutional matter quickly before these overfunded religious zealots destroy what freedoms we have left in this part of the World..
Logic, common sense, and science are shoved aside in favor of mysterious edicts derived from fear, lack of knowledge, New Age mumbo-jumbo, and superstition. Welcome to America, 2002
;).
:P
I've had to learn not to point out to stewardesses (ok that's the old guy term what the hell are they called today?), that you can't ever 'turn off' a Palm device. The power switch just puts it into a suspended state. The deer caught in the headlights look was amusing once or twice tho
I'd like to see how my palm pilot could possibly interfere with any airline equipment, in fact, we should insist that they demonstrate that their equipment isn't that bloody frail, I don't fancy putting my life in their hands if they can't build better gear than that
What is there to "deal" with about people talking on phones? Do you also have to "deal" with people talking to the person next to them?
:)
You obviously don't listen to many people talk on cellphones in public places. Their volume increases in direct proportion to the ambient noise.
Some of them are VERY irritating and disrespectful to those around them. I'm not talking about your average considerate cell user (who probably can live being 2 hours away from the phone), it's the 'cellaholic' who is always busy trying to sound 'important' talking VERY loudly in airport lobbies.
Believe me, because of 'people' like that, there is plenty to 'deal with'. People talking to others on planes tend not to broadcast like these clowns do. Also, what happens if their ears pop and they can't hear themselves? They'll yell louder into their damn phone.
Hmm.. Guess it's a pet peeve of mine, however, I find that as I'm sitting annoyed by their banal chatter that the more irritating they tend to be volume wise, the more mundane the actual things that they are talking about are.
They can survive for 2 bloody hours off the phone, it builds character
I'd love to be rich enough to be able to choose what I do for a living. Sadly, most of us aren't. The bank doesn't give a rat's ass that you're laid off or fired because of ethical reasons, you still owe for the mortgage payment.
;)
I agree in THEORY with this idea, try practicing when you have real financial obligations. Doesn't work too well.
Governments exist to protect the people, not to forward corporate interests. I'm so sick and tired of companies using legal bull shit to protect their business model. Why don't we have bloody subsidies for horse shoers?
Unfortunately, politicians receive these 'campaign contributions' not from 'the people', but from corporations.
Remove the ability for corporations to contribute to their campaign funds, and then you may see the type of Government that the founding fathers envisioned, that actually does represent 'the people', rather than coroporate interests..
Not being a huge online gamer I cannot say with 100% confidence, but I doubt that the majority of gamers using this system want to cheat.
I agree, that is just the problem, the non-cheaters won't find out how to defeat it, the cheaters will. Even then, only a small percentage of those cheaters even know what a MAC address is.
Unfortunately, there are now a few groups of dedicated dorks that will have one or two actually knowledgeable people that will work it out, then publish a 'how to defeat the anti-cheat' and then they'll all know.
or they think they don't have one because they use Windows
MAC Addresses have been configurable and visible long before Linus wrote line 1 of Linux. Just because we have a lot of second rate network cards on the market that don't bother to expose this in their driver, doesn't mean that good ones don't do this, or this is somehow a Windows issue.
Every 3Com card I've ever owned had a utility for changing them (some Novell networks were configured to require unique addys or restrict logins to a pool of MAC addys), in fact at one time pretty much all the cards had the utility for DOS..
Joe user doesn't need to care about it, but it doesn't mean it's not available to those who have the knowledge even under Windows...
If this were testicular cancer screening, it would be covered...
That's nonsense. The media hasn't mentioned in any significant way testicular cancer in the last 10 years, compared to what it has regarding breast cancer.
Canada hasn't run out and got new testicular cancer machines on the scale of the new breast cancer screening machines it has purchased in droves in recent years (ok, no machine is required to screen for testicular cancer that I know of), but the point is money is being spent.
The government just doesn't want to be sued, and made a decision not to pay for one little test, has anyone declared it conclusive or useful? No. The media caught wind of it and is doing its job, making us debate it.
In fact, many victims of testicular cancer die silently, because there is no vast government sponsored and paid for education campaign teaching about early screening, etc. as there is for breast cancer.
Basically, what they are implying that this could lead to is the situation where a major security flaw can be disclosed to the entire world, except for the US, because of the DMCA. The obvious upshot of that is that every man and his dog outside of the US could have access to the knowledge required to shaft servers in the US, and the sysadmins in the US can't do a thing about it because of the DMCA.
Which exactly contradicts the type of reasoning that restricted export of 128 bit encryption to the potential enemies of the US (like the UK, we know those evil bastards were up to no good with that tecnology - joke).
You can't improve security without the ability to disclose fully potential vulnerabilities, openly and without fear of reprisal from a government too technically ignorant to understand what they just passed as law.
Good one US congress...
If the contract really contains a clause which is breaking a law, I don't think it's legally binding. I'm not sure how far the 'legality of object' concept extends, i.e. if it voids the whole contract or not.
In Canada, and I believe we got the concept from US law, you can't make a legally binding contract for an illegal act.
You can't contract and be bound to sell marijuanna for example, the 'object' of the contract is not legal, so the law does not compel you to honour the contract.
In theory anyway, it could mean the whole EULA is not worth the 'paper' its written on.. not sure.
No, that's a good point, however, you should not be rewarded in school by writing this way by getting passing grades.
I graded entry level college papers part time as a stundent, and shuddered at the grammar/spelling, etc. We have to learn to communicate correctly at some point in our lives. Slang is fine in casual contexts, but you're not going to learn the screwed up Grammar of English if someone doesn't teach you some day.
"Neither country has any say in what the other's laws are."
Right, and that's why a Russian Programmer was arrested in the US for breaking US law in russia.
Give me a break. No one has a say in the US's law, but the US judcial system sure thinks it has a say in everyone else's.
I wish it really worked as you suggest, however, reality is proving otherwise consistently...
Access killer you're looking for on Linux is called Kylix
Kylix is a heck of a lot more than Access for Linux. Kylix is a port of Delphi. It would be more accurate to say VB for Linux, but then Delphi is more powerful than VB or Access (VBA). Kylix/Delphi is more akin to VisualC++, but uses Pascal rather than C/C++... That's why there's more of a learning curve, it's not necessarily designed for end user development whereas Access is.