On the flip side, I wonder how badly the range of these battery powered cars will be affected if the weather is really hot and I have the air-conditioning on at full blast.
In cold climates you'd often need appropriate clothing to survive outside the car anyway.
Whereas in hot places, without airconditioning the car inside can be like a "greenhouse" and be hotter than outside.
Yeah I agree. Many of Harrison Ford's Han Solo lines were more "Han Solo"ish than the original lines by George Lucas.
Sometimes a little humility goes a long way. Sometimes the other person is actually right.
But no, when I watched Phantom Menace it seemed like the actors had just read their lines for the second or third time, and George says "OK that's enough, let's go make more dresses for Amidala", and the actors and everyone else just went "Yes Sir!", rather than: "Uh George, we have to do that again, that sucked".
Seeing it was just like seeing someone do the first or second round of his presentation ( some nice graphics, but blah). It usually takes a fair number of goes till the presenter says "forget the slide, let me tell you a story"...
Despite that, that article isn't really that useful in practice (it's useful for perspective). Yes some people don't have names (or names someone can type in repeatably), but they are unlikely to be the sorts posting on web forums (e.g. they are unlikely to be your users in most cases).
To make your usb drive less likely to become a carrier you could create a directory called autorun.inf in your usb drive, then put dummy stuff in that directory. Then make the directory and its contents all read only+system+hidden.
If you use NTFS like I do, you can also set the permissions and ownership to be very restrictive.
While that's not foolproof, most malware writers won't bother handling this unless it becomes a common case.
Some crappy stuff may not be able to handle this. But so far it works for me.
No. When an OS deletes stuff, most drives do not know you've deleted stuff on the drive. All they know is the OS has said: "Write this on to that block".
The drives do not know that the newly written block means that a huge bunch of other blocks are no longer in use.
To take the extreme case, say you write to the entire drive and deleted the partition, the drive doesn't know anything about partitions - it just knows you've overwritten a few blocks, it doesn't know that almost all the blocks in the entire drive are now unused. So an SSD drive may assume that all that data is still wanted (and yes in some cases the FBI may want the data around even though the user might not;) ).
I'd personally be worried about how buggy the current TRIM implementations are. Because any bugs in TRIM will be rather insidious. Imagine if they get "trimming a deleted partition" wrong on a drive with multiple partitions. You wouldn't notice anything wrong at first.
> I know that under FreeBSD and Linux applications are expected to run with the provided resources unless they're specifically run as root or similar.
DEP and ASLR are all about making it harder for stuff like say Mozilla to be pwned. Not really about resources.
You can force DEP to be on for everything on Windows: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/875352#5 But if your favourite app crashes badly, hope you know how to exclude it.
The trouble is if Mozilla is pwned, and runs "arbitrary code of the attacker's choice", that code can do anything that user account can do, and access anything that user account can access. This is true for FreeBSD, Linux and Windows.
Just because I run a browser doesn't mean I want to allow it full access to whatever my account can access/do.
Windows Vista and Windows 7 actually sandbox IE, so in fact Windows is one up on most major Linux distros in that respect.
I've seen the default apparmor template for firefox on ubuntu. 1) It's not enabled by default, and 2) Even if you enable it, it doesn't really help if you want security, you have to modify the template if you want to protect all your nonbrowser-related files from a pwned browser instance.
It's already been the user's choice since WinXP SP2. The deal is, 1) you cannot turn it on by default because many apps will break. 2) most users are ignorant, they wouldn't know about the choice, understand the choice, or figure out what to do if stuff doesn't work and how to exclude them if desirable.
If you are logged on as an administrator, you can manually configure DEP to switch between the OptIn and OptOut policies by using the Data Execution Prevention tab in System Properties. The following procedure describes how to manually configure DEP on the computer:
1. Click Start, click Run, type sysdm.cpl, and then click OK. [or press winkey + pause/break]
2. On the Advanced tab, under Performance, click Settings.
3. On the Data Execution Prevention tab, use one of the following procedures:
* Click Turn on DEP for essential Windows programs and services only to select the OptIn policy.
* Click Turn on DEP for all programs and services except those I select to select the OptOut policy, and then click Add to add the programs that you do not want to use the DEP feature.
4. Click OK two times.
Most of the windows users who don't know about it, shouldn't be touching it. The rest who know about it, know what to do with it.
Thing is the malware bunch aren't targeting the latter.
He's very good at math. He's not very good at accepting prizes. Champion race horses are very good at winning races. They're not very good at accepting million dollar prizes.
People like Ball have tried to convince him to accept the prize (without success). But if you have looked at his history you would know that he was going to refuse the prize and keep refusing it. Shouldn't be surprised when mathematicians like him say "No", they mean "No".
So sitting down and talking to Perelman about the prize _AGAIN_ is just going to annoy him more. He is not interested in money, or fame, and he has made his opinions on that rather clear. To keep on about it is just not respecting him.
They'd do more good if they'd just regularly sneak money to his mother or whoever he's living with at the time.
Lastly, go ahead and be as snarky or ignorant or stupid as you want.
Uh, I do read the articles. Maybe you don't read them the way I do. I recommend you never expose stuff with such a poor security track record to the world. The flaws were so bad that 2 years isn't enough time for me to be sure that the people involved in that product have really learned from their mistakes. Not just fix flaws others point out- but actually do things right.
Maybe they have finally got RDP right. But I'm not going to bet my systems on that, or recommend others to.
Anyway, if you or others still want/have to use it "exposed", I suggest changing the port to something else, so at least the normal automated stuff won't hit it.
I don't think he sees the world the way you and most other people do (including the Clay institute bunch).
To me this is the actual problem - trying to give 1 million dollars to Perelman is like giving a million dollars in $1 notes directly to a champion race horse.
The people trying to do that are just being very stupid. What's the race horse going to do with a million dollar bills? They are just wasting their time and annoying the horse.
If you genuinely want to benefit the race horse you use your brains and figure out how to use the 1 million dollars to help the horse in a different way.
The last I know, he's living with his mother and sister[1] who aren't very well off, but probably are supporting him. So go figure...
I think you (and they) do not understand Perelman, his mind does not work like that. They should stop annoying him by trying to give him the money.
A better way to give Grigory Perelman 1 million dollars is to give a monthly allowance to whoever happens to be supporting him (and doing a good enough job of it).
Maybe they could secretly[1] give the money to his mom and sister (maybe a small lump sum in addition to the monthly allowance). They were/are supporting him[2].
He does not seem to be the sort of guy who can take good care of himself. I suspect that the people taking care of him allow him to focus on stuff like math, otherwise he might not be healthy enough to do so (or even alive).
I didn't know I was supposed to give a full summary. It was just an example of why they have certain lines.
Dell targets a far wider range of customers than Apple. If you don't like or can't handle choice, you certainly shouldn't go for Dell. Or you should delegate the task to someone else.
Dell allows lots of customization and they've done that since the early days when Michael Dell started the company. It's part of what Dell is about. HP and IBM don't allow as much online customization. I don't really care so much whether it's "Optiplex" or whatever, it's the specs and stuff they put inside that matters.
FWIW, I personally build my own desktops for home use (as I mentioned the parts inside are more important than the logo on the outside;) ), but if I have to buy stuff for work or other people, Dell really isn't so bad - they're not great but they are typically "average" for reliability and quality. I've had more negative experiences with HP - DOA rates were like 1 in 7 at one time (HP servers didn't DOA much, but they tried to be too clever with BIOS and proprietary crap). For servers I actually prefer IBM.
Inspiron: home stuff Vostro: cheap business laptops (boring designs and colours) Latitude: "big corporation" laptops that will keep the same hardware AND supply the same parts and models for years, so companies can roll out the same disk images/OS/software - no worries that the hardware will change and not be supported, no drivers etc.
XPS: more eXPenSive higher performance stuff:). Alienware: for rich gamers who can't be bothered to build their own rigs.
Naturally it's simpler for Apple: Apple doesn't have a product for the high performance gamer market, nor do they intend to keep selling the same model for years. Apple doesn't care as much about backward compatibility.
Claiming to do? So the Red Cross was not formed, or worse than nothing? And the orphanages, hospitals and schools were worse than nothing? Those buildings and organizations are there, the good works are and were done. There's plenty of evidence those exist, even if you don't think God exists.
Many of the top schools in the muslim country I live in were founded by missionaries or other christians. Many of them left their home countries, to come to a poor country, set up and run schools/hospitals. They lived the rest of their lives here. And on average their students/patients seem to think they were a net positive- so much so that even the muslim alumni of those schools were rather sad/upset when the Government demolished some of them for various reasons (development etc).
You may think they're a bunch of delusional people. But if their "delusion" causes them to do more good than harm than they otherwise would, I'd say they and what they do are not worse than nothing.
As for Mother Theresa being an overall net negative. If you live that long and do a lot of stuff, I'm sure you do a lot of wrong things along with the good things. If the same percentage of people followed her on the topic of contraception, also followed her about doing good, I find it rather hard to believe that she'd be a net negative. It seems unfair to put the bulk of the blame on her for the acts of those who did a lot of picking and choosing on what to listen.
If I make a list of 100 things to do and one of them is "don't use contraception", and say the 99 include stuff like "no sex outside of marriage". It's pretty silly to say to blame me for the consequences.
That's a bit like blaming a sky diving instructor for "jump out of the plane", when you ignore the other 99 things related to stuff like how to pack and use a parachute:).
As for the negative social effects you mention. There have been very many famous Christian scientists - their "delusions" did not seem to prevent them from doing great scientific work. The Church might have got in the way from time to time, but that is more of a flaw of the Church than with the "delusion". I'd find it hard to believe that that sort of thing wouldn't happen just because atheists were running the show - because most of it was due to politics. And once you get enough people around, you will end up with politics. Just look at what corporations do. You may think you have a great idea, but if the CEO thinks it's not in line with the company's goals, you're going to have big problems.
There's nothing about the lack or presence of religion that prevents Dilbert-like stuff or worse, from happening.
My point is whether it is better or not (statistically etc).
Slashdot Mirror
I suggest storing the hydrogen around long carbon chains. It's been done for a very long time. :)
On the flip side, I wonder how badly the range of these battery powered cars will be affected if the weather is really hot and I have the air-conditioning on at full blast.
In cold climates you'd often need appropriate clothing to survive outside the car anyway.
Whereas in hot places, without airconditioning the car inside can be like a "greenhouse" and be hotter than outside.
So what you need is a hydrocarbon powered electric motor car.
I've been waiting for a while. Is there any good news from the hydrocarbon fuel cell front?
Yeah I agree. Many of Harrison Ford's Han Solo lines were more "Han Solo"ish than the original lines by George Lucas.
Sometimes a little humility goes a long way. Sometimes the other person is actually right.
But no, when I watched Phantom Menace it seemed like the actors had just read their lines for the second or third time, and George says "OK that's enough, let's go make more dresses for Amidala", and the actors and everyone else just went "Yes Sir!", rather than: "Uh George, we have to do that again, that sucked".
Seeing it was just like seeing someone do the first or second round of his presentation ( some nice graphics, but blah). It usually takes a fair number of goes till the presenter says "forget the slide, let me tell you a story"...
Yeah, but though they mention reflexes, in the abstract they don't mention testing for reflexes. Maybe they did in the actual study.
IMO, "shorter attention spans, a greater likelihood of breaking rules and taking risks" can also increase the chances of traffic accidents.
Requiring a "real" First and Last Name is stupid. Not all countries have that convention.
Requiring a name is not. Most people have at least one name, or they can come up with one.
I think this recent article is relevant:
http://developers.slashdot.org/story/10/06/17/2347257/Falsehoods-Programmers-Believe-About-Names?from=rss
http://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-names/
Despite that, that article isn't really that useful in practice (it's useful for perspective). Yes some people don't have names (or names someone can type in repeatably), but they are unlikely to be the sorts posting on web forums (e.g. they are unlikely to be your users in most cases).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16332418
Only one study though.
To make your usb drive less likely to become a carrier you could create a directory called autorun.inf in your usb drive, then put dummy stuff in that directory. Then make the directory and its contents all read only+system+hidden.
If you use NTFS like I do, you can also set the permissions and ownership to be very restrictive.
While that's not foolproof, most malware writers won't bother handling this unless it becomes a common case.
Some crappy stuff may not be able to handle this. But so far it works for me.
> According to the article they're more than happy to let anyone take your money and walk.
HSBC: The world's local piggy bank.
In some countries there are limits to Honda's ability to not honour your warranty just because you modify your Honda car.
An espresso machine on the dash may void any promises Honda made on their airbags, but it might not void any on Honda's engines.
No. When an OS deletes stuff, most drives do not know you've deleted stuff on the drive. All they know is the OS has said: "Write this on to that block".
The drives do not know that the newly written block means that a huge bunch of other blocks are no longer in use.
To take the extreme case, say you write to the entire drive and deleted the partition, the drive doesn't know anything about partitions - it just knows you've overwritten a few blocks, it doesn't know that almost all the blocks in the entire drive are now unused. So an SSD drive may assume that all that data is still wanted (and yes in some cases the FBI may want the data around even though the user might not ;) ).
I'd personally be worried about how buggy the current TRIM implementations are. Because any bugs in TRIM will be rather insidious. Imagine if they get "trimming a deleted partition" wrong on a drive with multiple partitions. You wouldn't notice anything wrong at first.
> I know that under FreeBSD and Linux applications are expected to run with the provided resources unless they're specifically run as root or similar.
DEP and ASLR are all about making it harder for stuff like say Mozilla to be pwned. Not really about resources.
You can force DEP to be on for everything on Windows: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/875352#5
But if your favourite app crashes badly, hope you know how to exclude it.
The trouble is if Mozilla is pwned, and runs "arbitrary code of the attacker's choice", that code can do anything that user account can do, and access anything that user account can access. This is true for FreeBSD, Linux and Windows.
Just because I run a browser doesn't mean I want to allow it full access to whatever my account can access/do.
Windows Vista and Windows 7 actually sandbox IE, so in fact Windows is one up on most major Linux distros in that respect.
I've seen the default apparmor template for firefox on ubuntu. 1) It's not enabled by default, and 2) Even if you enable it, it doesn't really help if you want security, you have to modify the template if you want to protect all your nonbrowser-related files from a pwned browser instance.
It's already been the user's choice since WinXP SP2. The deal is, 1) you cannot turn it on by default because many apps will break. 2) most users are ignorant, they wouldn't know about the choice, understand the choice, or figure out what to do if stuff doesn't work and how to exclude them if desirable.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/875352#5
If you are logged on as an administrator, you can manually configure DEP to switch between the OptIn and OptOut policies by using the Data Execution Prevention tab in System Properties. The following procedure describes how to manually configure DEP on the computer:
1. Click Start, click Run, type sysdm.cpl, and then click OK. [or press winkey + pause/break]
2. On the Advanced tab, under Performance, click Settings.
3. On the Data Execution Prevention tab, use one of the following procedures:
* Click Turn on DEP for essential Windows programs and services only to select the OptIn policy.
* Click Turn on DEP for all programs and services except those I select to select the OptOut policy, and then click Add to add the programs that you do not want to use the DEP feature.
4. Click OK two times.
Most of the windows users who don't know about it, shouldn't be touching it. The rest who know about it, know what to do with it.
Thing is the malware bunch aren't targeting the latter.
He's very good at math. He's not very good at accepting prizes. Champion race horses are very good at winning races. They're not very good at accepting million dollar prizes.
People like Ball have tried to convince him to accept the prize (without success). But if you have looked at his history you would know that he was going to refuse the prize and keep refusing it. Shouldn't be surprised when mathematicians like him say "No", they mean "No".
So sitting down and talking to Perelman about the prize _AGAIN_ is just going to annoy him more. He is not interested in money, or fame, and he has made his opinions on that rather clear. To keep on about it is just not respecting him.
They'd do more good if they'd just regularly sneak money to his mother or whoever he's living with at the time.
Lastly, go ahead and be as snarky or ignorant or stupid as you want.
Where? Which part? All I see is: "IN RDP version 6.0 the man-in-the-middle-attack is no longer possible!".
All that shows is RDP 6 is not as terribly broken as the previous versions. To me it certainly doesn't show that RDP 6 is pretty secure.
"Car 6.0's steering wheel doesn't come off anymore!" doesn't mean that Car 6.0 is pretty safe.
RDP's abysmal security track record doesn't give me confidence that they've finally got "enough things" right.
Uh, I do read the articles. Maybe you don't read them the way I do. I recommend you never expose stuff with such a poor security track record to the world. The flaws were so bad that 2 years isn't enough time for me to be sure that the people involved in that product have really learned from their mistakes. Not just fix flaws others point out- but actually do things right.
Maybe they have finally got RDP right. But I'm not going to bet my systems on that, or recommend others to.
Anyway, if you or others still want/have to use it "exposed", I suggest changing the port to something else, so at least the normal automated stuff won't hit it.
I don't think he sees the world the way you and most other people do (including the Clay institute bunch).
To me this is the actual problem - trying to give 1 million dollars to Perelman is like giving a million dollars in $1 notes directly to a champion race horse.
The people trying to do that are just being very stupid. What's the race horse going to do with a million dollar bills? They are just wasting their time and annoying the horse.
If you genuinely want to benefit the race horse you use your brains and figure out how to use the 1 million dollars to help the horse in a different way.
The last I know, he's living with his mother and sister[1] who aren't very well off, but probably are supporting him. So go figure...
[1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/23/grigory-perelman-rejects-1m-dollars
I think you (and they) do not understand Perelman, his mind does not work like that. They should stop annoying him by trying to give him the money.
A better way to give Grigory Perelman 1 million dollars is to give a monthly allowance to whoever happens to be supporting him (and doing a good enough job of it).
Maybe they could secretly[1] give the money to his mom and sister (maybe a small lump sum in addition to the monthly allowance). They were/are supporting him[2].
He does not seem to be the sort of guy who can take good care of himself. I suspect that the people taking care of him allow him to focus on stuff like math, otherwise he might not be healthy enough to do so (or even alive).
[1] He may not take it well if he knew.
[2] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1526782/Worlds-top-maths-genius-jobless-and-living-with-mother.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/23/grigory-perelman-rejects-1m-dollars
The old one may be using Infineon: http://www.phonewreck.com/2009/06/19/iphone-3gs-teardown-and-analysis/
But the iPhone 4 seems to use Skyworks: http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPhone-4-Teardown/3130/2
Opening up RDP to the world isn't a good idea:
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&q=%22remote+desktop%22+vulnerability+site%3Amicrosoft.com&btnG=Search
http://louwrentius.blogspot.com/2008/11/did-you-know-that-rdp-is-s-secure-as.html
http://secunia.com/advisories/15605/
I didn't know I was supposed to give a full summary. It was just an example of why they have certain lines.
;) ), but if I have to buy stuff for work or other people, Dell really isn't so bad - they're not great but they are typically "average" for reliability and quality. I've had more negative experiences with HP - DOA rates were like 1 in 7 at one time (HP servers didn't DOA much, but they tried to be too clever with BIOS and proprietary crap). For servers I actually prefer IBM.
Dell targets a far wider range of customers than Apple. If you don't like or can't handle choice, you certainly shouldn't go for Dell. Or you should delegate the task to someone else.
Dell allows lots of customization and they've done that since the early days when Michael Dell started the company. It's part of what Dell is about. HP and IBM don't allow as much online customization. I don't really care so much whether it's "Optiplex" or whatever, it's the specs and stuff they put inside that matters.
FWIW, I personally build my own desktops for home use (as I mentioned the parts inside are more important than the logo on the outside
> The ones who don't care to learn more, of course, don't matter in the long run.
They do in a democracy, assuming that they can vote and do.
tortoisesvn works with word documents. It can diff them.
The feature has been around for years.
This feature is why I'm using svn at work instead of say bzr, hg or git. Because "work" uses lots of Microsoft stuff.
For Dell:
:).
Inspiron: home stuff
Vostro: cheap business laptops (boring designs and colours)
Latitude: "big corporation" laptops that will keep the same hardware AND supply the same parts and models for years, so companies can roll out the same disk images/OS/software - no worries that the hardware will change and not be supported, no drivers etc.
XPS: more eXPenSive higher performance stuff
Alienware: for rich gamers who can't be bothered to build their own rigs.
Naturally it's simpler for Apple: Apple doesn't have a product for the high performance gamer market, nor do they intend to keep selling the same model for years. Apple doesn't care as much about backward compatibility.
Claiming to do? So the Red Cross was not formed, or worse than nothing? And the orphanages, hospitals and schools were worse than nothing? Those buildings and organizations are there, the good works are and were done. There's plenty of evidence those exist, even if you don't think God exists.
:).
Many of the top schools in the muslim country I live in were founded by missionaries or other christians. Many of them left their home countries, to come to a poor country, set up and run schools/hospitals. They lived the rest of their lives here. And on average their students/patients seem to think they were a net positive- so much so that even the muslim alumni of those schools were rather sad/upset when the Government demolished some of them for various reasons (development etc).
You may think they're a bunch of delusional people. But if their "delusion" causes them to do more good than harm than they otherwise would, I'd say they and what they do are not worse than nothing.
As for Mother Theresa being an overall net negative. If you live that long and do a lot of stuff, I'm sure you do a lot of wrong things along with the good things. If the same percentage of people followed her on the topic of contraception, also followed her about doing good, I find it rather hard to believe that she'd be a net negative. It seems unfair to put the bulk of the blame on her for the acts of those who did a lot of picking and choosing on what to listen.
If I make a list of 100 things to do and one of them is "don't use contraception", and say the 99 include stuff like "no sex outside of marriage". It's pretty silly to say to blame me for the consequences.
That's a bit like blaming a sky diving instructor for "jump out of the plane", when you ignore the other 99 things related to stuff like how to pack and use a parachute
As for the negative social effects you mention. There have been very many famous Christian scientists - their "delusions" did not seem to prevent them from doing great scientific work. The Church might have got in the way from time to time, but that is more of a flaw of the Church than with the "delusion". I'd find it hard to believe that that sort of thing wouldn't happen just because atheists were running the show - because most of it was due to politics. And once you get enough people around, you will end up with politics. Just look at what corporations do. You may think you have a great idea, but if the CEO thinks it's not in line with the company's goals, you're going to have big problems.
There's nothing about the lack or presence of religion that prevents Dilbert-like stuff or worse, from happening.
My point is whether it is better or not (statistically etc).