A cursory Google search will show that not only is the term well-defined, but it has an excellent Wikipedia article.
And it is illegal in New Hampshire.
Please try to make at least a basic attempt to understand political science terms before dismissing them. (I, for instance, learned what a push poll is in Political Science 111.)
Maybe the judge doesn't want Slashdot, Facebook Twitter, Myspace,...
to have an effect on the outcome of the case?
Which sounds reasonable to me. I'm no fan of the RIAA, but this place is an absolute zoo. Just look at the Pirate Bay trial. They make all bittorrent junkies look like a bunch of immature half-wits.
This is actually encouraging. It suggests that MS might be adopting a reasonable development schedule, instead of making overpriced monolithic updates every 5 years.
Of course, I switched to Ubuntu 2 years ago, but it's the thought that counts.
Yeah. Really, I have pirated a grand total of one album in my life, and that was because I couldn't obtain it except on E-bay, and I'm not paying top dollar for a degraded 5-year-old CD.
I listen to certain indie radio stations that aren't too commercial. NPR in Minnesota actually rounds out the usual news NPR + classical NPR with indie NPR, which kind of shows how rock 'n roll has arrived as a cultural institution. Furthermore, if I want to evaluate an album, MySpace is an excellent option.
Your understanding of human nature is myopic to say the least.
Humans want people they like to do well. They want people they don't like to do poorly.
Thus, I refuse to pay $20 for an album I'm going to listen to a few times and then discard. On the other hand, I listen to an album several times, and still like it, I'm going to buy a copy, because I want more where that came from.
That's not gonna happen if I don't buy this album. It's simple cause and effect, and anyone with two eyes and two ears knows that's how the music industry is currently functioning, despite the RIAA's protests.
The same applys to movies. I don't want disposable, mass market crap. I want priceless art, and when I see it, I pay for it.
He was talking about anti-security regulations. Like regulations requiring that software go through a several year government testing phase before it can be adopted, placing them horribly out of date.
Every machine in the LoC is using IE6, because they designed some proprietary crap 8 or 9 years ago that would be too expensive to upgrade to an infinitely more secure Firefox or even IE8-based system.
On the other hand, those were the most sandboxed terminals in the world, probably safe even with IE6 (there was some McAffee kiosk control system running that looked pretty hardened.)
Actually, the article specifically suggests that Adobe needs to improve its automatic update system, not remove it.
Foxit is getting pretty widely used, and it will be especially vulnerable if it lacks a mechanism to update itself automatically.
Convenience != good architecture.
I'm not sure who are more dangerous, those that don't update because they don't know what updates are, or those that don't update because they're too paranoid about corporations whose software they already use to allow that software to be patched against demonstrated security issues.
That said, Adobe is bloated. It just has nothing to do with running all the time in the background and prompting for updates, but just with generally shitty programming. Anything used for a significant portion of web traffic needs to have a mechanism to automatically retrieve updates, especially if the user is to lazy make sure that their system is up to date and secure.
Unions have a stake in their company, and no reason to do this sort of thing unless they actually have been laid off, or have taken an unfair pay cut, which is more likely to happen to non-unionized employees.
I have no problem with experimentation, but we're talking about a system that has functioned for millenia, and you want wholesale conversion after a few decades of testing?
In terms of our crops, we should have century-long pilot programs where we evaluate the long-term evolutionary results of our meddling. The current method allows no room for failure.
I know that's hard for people to swallow in an age when we expect evolution to take off at the speed of light, but we should be wary of outright replacing a functional system without reasonable testing.
Not really. Water is a fixed commodity. Though there is a lot of it, there is not an infinite supply, and it is therefore subtractive. If you use 10,000 gallons of water, it inherently prevents anyone else from using that 10,000 gallons of water, and it is irrelevant when you use them.
In the case of computers, it is entirely possible to use an amount of data in excess of what everyone else is using, and yet still not deprive anyone of their bandwidth, by using it when no one else is using it.
They need to stop dicking around and use the sort of pricing structure that has worked excellently in the cellphone industry, where you pay by the minute during peak times (whenever that may be) and you do not pay a dime during non-peak times. I'd be happy to pay by the gigabyte during peak hours, and have an unlimited reserve otherwise.
If I ever write a book, you can damn well bet I won't sanction distribution in Britain.
International law is an absolute clusterfuck, especially where IP is concerned. There's really not much to be done. Of course, it would be nice to get rid of region coding and other such bull, but it's here to stay.
The real first step in exploring the stars will be re-evaluating what it means to be human. This article assumes that our descendants will be flesh-and-blood, with all of the weaknesses that that entails. But why should we bind our offspring to the ancient, easily-corrupted, and not so easily amended DNA that we ourselves use, when we could give them minds of silicon and arms of steel which fold up in an instant to sleep for the journey from star to star? Or better still, why not send a simple automaton, and transmit its brain at the speed of light? Human is as human does, I suppose, and the human era will quickly draw to a close if we decide that human must mean flesh and blood.
But it's only implemented in FF3, so it's quite useful for setting up an invisible box to tell Firefox users to upgrade to FF3 (Since there are people still using it about.
(Honestly, though, I have a span on my site with style="opacity:0;" telling users to upgrade their browser to the latest version of Firefox, Opera, Safari, or Chrome. They've only recently switched over from -moz-opacity, so this works excellently.)
Obviously it can perform fast, but it isn't going to last too long. Maybe flash is cheap enough that its limited read/write cycles aren't a serious issue, but this thing is going to chew up flash like no one's business.
I do like that my school's eldest beowulf cluster is now completely obsolete though, costing as much power as a few space heaters and processing as much data as a cluster of iPhones.
Google's url eats up enough that most urls scroll out of the url box at my resolution. It's also an unparsable mess to my eye.
And the real problem in any event is the frame. If the focus defaulted to the page, it would be fine. Why would I want to scroll down in Google's frame.
Actually, that should be fairly easy to code out a firefox extension for.
But no, it's bad site design. There should be an option to not have the frames.
This can only mean that there were enough successful attempts at guessing people's weak passwords in the last round that our unknown perpetrators found it worthwhile to start another round.
There's no reason to assume this has any significant returns. I'd assume, rather, that the botnet herders occasionally find themselves with nothing better to do, so they just run this stuff in idle cycles. No real logic to it, they just have a botnet that isn't currently useful for anything else. And a.0001% chance of getting something is better than 0%, since it costs them very little if they've already written the requisite brute-force code.
Actually, we had a meeting where we agreed that ToS's are by nature BS. We didn't invite anyone over 30, so I don't know if you missed the memo or just weren't invited.
There are no infected PC's. The only thing 'infected' was people's twitter statuses, and now that the exploit was patched, there is no virus, since the code was executed by the server, not by the individual computer.
My mother bought a USB SD-card reader that does not implement the USB mass-storage device class, and only works with drivers custom-written for Windows. It's barely worth reverse-engineering, since I'd rather just buy USB mass-storage device implementing hardware. However, for the average user, this sort of thing is a significant problem.
Obviously, the hardware installed in the device will have drivers.
Perhaps, though, I should have said closed-source programs, since proprietary x86 binaries are probably an insurmountable problem on ARM.
If a couple guys with consumer hardware managed 80%, I can't imagine that a decent team of engineers couldn't manage 100% with a custom build that clocks in at under $3000.
Slashdot Mirror
Why would you pay money for something that could take over your computer when you could just pirate it yourself (with the same obvious risks.)
He specifically mentioned the Sony Root kit, which was installed by otherwise innocuous, mass-produced CD's.
A cursory Google search will show that not only is the term well-defined, but it has an excellent Wikipedia article.
And it is illegal in New Hampshire.
Please try to make at least a basic attempt to understand political science terms before dismissing them. (I, for instance, learned what a push poll is in Political Science 111.)
Maybe the judge doesn't want Slashdot, Facebook Twitter, Myspace, ...
to have an effect on the outcome of the case?
Which sounds reasonable to me. I'm no fan of the RIAA, but this place is an absolute zoo. Just look at the Pirate Bay trial. They make all bittorrent junkies look like a bunch of immature half-wits.
Oh wait...
This is actually encouraging. It suggests that MS might be adopting a reasonable development schedule, instead of making overpriced monolithic updates every 5 years.
Of course, I switched to Ubuntu 2 years ago, but it's the thought that counts.
Yeah. Really, I have pirated a grand total of one album in my life, and that was because I couldn't obtain it except on E-bay, and I'm not paying top dollar for a degraded 5-year-old CD.
I listen to certain indie radio stations that aren't too commercial. NPR in Minnesota actually rounds out the usual news NPR + classical NPR with indie NPR, which kind of shows how rock 'n roll has arrived as a cultural institution. Furthermore, if I want to evaluate an album, MySpace is an excellent option.
Your understanding of human nature is myopic to say the least.
Humans want people they like to do well. They want people they don't like to do poorly.
Thus, I refuse to pay $20 for an album I'm going to listen to a few times and then discard. On the other hand, I listen to an album several times, and still like it, I'm going to buy a copy, because I want more where that came from.
That's not gonna happen if I don't buy this album. It's simple cause and effect, and anyone with two eyes and two ears knows that's how the music industry is currently functioning, despite the RIAA's protests.
The same applys to movies. I don't want disposable, mass market crap. I want priceless art, and when I see it, I pay for it.
He was talking about anti-security regulations. Like regulations requiring that software go through a several year government testing phase before it can be adopted, placing them horribly out of date.
Every machine in the LoC is using IE6, because they designed some proprietary crap 8 or 9 years ago that would be too expensive to upgrade to an infinitely more secure Firefox or even IE8-based system.
On the other hand, those were the most sandboxed terminals in the world, probably safe even with IE6 (there was some McAffee kiosk control system running that looked pretty hardened.)
Actually, the article specifically suggests that Adobe needs to improve its automatic update system, not remove it.
Foxit is getting pretty widely used, and it will be especially vulnerable if it lacks a mechanism to update itself automatically.
Convenience != good architecture.
I'm not sure who are more dangerous, those that don't update because they don't know what updates are, or those that don't update because they're too paranoid about corporations whose software they already use to allow that software to be patched against demonstrated security issues.
That said, Adobe is bloated. It just has nothing to do with running all the time in the background and prompting for updates, but just with generally shitty programming. Anything used for a significant portion of web traffic needs to have a mechanism to automatically retrieve updates, especially if the user is to lazy make sure that their system is up to date and secure.
Unions have a stake in their company, and no reason to do this sort of thing unless they actually have been laid off, or have taken an unfair pay cut, which is more likely to happen to non-unionized employees.
I have no problem with experimentation, but we're talking about a system that has functioned for millenia, and you want wholesale conversion after a few decades of testing?
In terms of our crops, we should have century-long pilot programs where we evaluate the long-term evolutionary results of our meddling. The current method allows no room for failure.
I know that's hard for people to swallow in an age when we expect evolution to take off at the speed of light, but we should be wary of outright replacing a functional system without reasonable testing.
Not really. Water is a fixed commodity. Though there is a lot of it, there is not an infinite supply, and it is therefore subtractive. If you use 10,000 gallons of water, it inherently prevents anyone else from using that 10,000 gallons of water, and it is irrelevant when you use them.
In the case of computers, it is entirely possible to use an amount of data in excess of what everyone else is using, and yet still not deprive anyone of their bandwidth, by using it when no one else is using it.
They need to stop dicking around and use the sort of pricing structure that has worked excellently in the cellphone industry, where you pay by the minute during peak times (whenever that may be) and you do not pay a dime during non-peak times. I'd be happy to pay by the gigabyte during peak hours, and have an unlimited reserve otherwise.
Incidentally, I just discovered that Alan Turing was gay while reading up for class.
Seems like there's potential for some sort of a Turing-Queen tribute concert.
Though perhaps this suffices.
How are Facebook or Twitter anarcho-syndicalism?
Sure, if they'd purported to put out a best practices guide for Slashdot, IRC, or Usenet, I'd laugh my ass off.
But Facebook? Facebook is exactly the sort of closed, AOL-style walled garden Telstra would like the whole 'net to be.
If I ever write a book, you can damn well bet I won't sanction distribution in Britain.
International law is an absolute clusterfuck, especially where IP is concerned. There's really not much to be done. Of course, it would be nice to get rid of region coding and other such bull, but it's here to stay.
The real first step in exploring the stars will be re-evaluating what it means to be human. This article assumes that our descendants will be flesh-and-blood, with all of the weaknesses that that entails. But why should we bind our offspring to the ancient, easily-corrupted, and not so easily amended DNA that we ourselves use, when we could give them minds of silicon and arms of steel which fold up in an instant to sleep for the journey from star to star? Or better still, why not send a simple automaton, and transmit its brain at the speed of light? Human is as human does, I suppose, and the human era will quickly draw to a close if we decide that human must mean flesh and blood.
It's Firefox,Chrome, Safari.
But it's only implemented in FF3, so it's quite useful for setting up an invisible box to tell Firefox users to upgrade to FF3 (Since there are people still using it about.
(Honestly, though, I have a span on my site with style="opacity:0;" telling users to upgrade their browser to the latest version of Firefox, Opera, Safari, or Chrome. They've only recently switched over from -moz-opacity, so this works excellently.)
Obviously it can perform fast, but it isn't going to last too long. Maybe flash is cheap enough that its limited read/write cycles aren't a serious issue, but this thing is going to chew up flash like no one's business.
I do like that my school's eldest beowulf cluster is now completely obsolete though, costing as much power as a few space heaters and processing as much data as a cluster of iPhones.
Google's url eats up enough that most urls scroll out of the url box at my resolution. It's also an unparsable mess to my eye.
And the real problem in any event is the frame. If the focus defaulted to the page, it would be fine. Why would I want to scroll down in Google's frame.
Actually, that should be fairly easy to code out a firefox extension for.
But no, it's bad site design. There should be an option to not have the frames.
There's no reason to assume this has any significant returns. I'd assume, rather, that the botnet herders occasionally find themselves with nothing better to do, so they just run this stuff in idle cycles. No real logic to it, they just have a botnet that isn't currently useful for anything else. And a .0001% chance of getting something is better than 0%, since it costs them very little if they've already written the requisite brute-force code.
Actually, we had a meeting where we agreed that ToS's are by nature BS. We didn't invite anyone over 30, so I don't know if you missed the memo or just weren't invited.
There are no infected PC's. The only thing 'infected' was people's twitter statuses, and now that the exploit was patched, there is no virus, since the code was executed by the server, not by the individual computer.
This sounds pretty harmless.
I'm sure there are plenty of top-secret spy plane sightings and god knows what else buried in the mounds of UFO bullshit.
Good look separating the worthwhile from the shit though.
My mother bought a USB SD-card reader that does not implement the USB mass-storage device class, and only works with drivers custom-written for Windows. It's barely worth reverse-engineering, since I'd rather just buy USB mass-storage device implementing hardware. However, for the average user, this sort of thing is a significant problem.
Obviously, the hardware installed in the device will have drivers.
Perhaps, though, I should have said closed-source programs, since proprietary x86 binaries are probably an insurmountable problem on ARM.
If a couple guys with consumer hardware managed 80%, I can't imagine that a decent team of engineers couldn't manage 100% with a custom build that clocks in at under $3000.