One of the biggest uses of SCO is running web servers.
Are you serious? Not implying that you're wrong, but where did you get this info? I've never heard this before.
As somebody that's had the misfortune to have had to work with SCO Unix to keep a roof over my head, I seriously doubt that anybody stupid enough to use this sh*t as a web-server, is likely going to see sense when a/.er writes to them explaining the error of their ways.
Given Microsoft's past history, I wouldn't say that it was beyond the bounds of possibility that they would add some 'enhancements' that enabled their Virtual PC to work in a more integrated way with their OS and that, purely as an unfortunate side-effect, those enhancements meant that Linux would no longer work under Virtual PC.
I'm also wondering if Tex from RedVersusBlue counts. Technically, she looks exactly the same as the guys but, from the way she sounds, she's gotta be sexy out of that armour.
TCP timestamp: Fixes CAN-2003-0882 where the TCP timestamp is initialized with a constant number. This could allow a person to discover how long the system has been up based upon the ID in TCP packets.
Why is revealing the uptime of a system considered to be a security vulnerability?
In the news this week, down in Florida (I think - too lazy to google for a link), was a report about the huge demand for security cameras to watch over child-minders, following a case where some parents used a covert camera to watch their child-minder, and got some footage of the child being shaken. Seems to me that this would be an ideal application for the X10 camera.
I think that the point is that, yes you can copy the text (by hand, OCR, or whatever), but when you do that, you remove the headers, and thus any association with the original sender. Headers can provide legal evidence of sender and recipient, and can prove a chain of communication existed. This is as much a plausible deniability tool, as it is a secrecy tool.
Microsoft has been burned a few times in court cases due to emails. That wouldn't have happened if either the emails themselves had automatically become unreadable due to expiry, or if it was simply the text of the email, without the incriminating headers. Without the headers, the text of the email is just hearsay.
what research is there in non-Von Neumann architectures?
Take a look at TTA. Probably the coolest computer architecture ever. Processors designed to be so simple that they don't even have an instruction set. I read about this concept years ago, in Byte, but the idea has never really made it out of academia.
IIRC, it was originally intended for massively parallel computing (possibly as a backend for Lisp programs), which it was suitable for because it increases the granularity of operations.
Apple did this/does this with the iPod. Unfortunately, they chose the same optimistic approach as the drive manufacturers. For my iPod (one of the original 5GB models), they advertised it as being able to hold 100 CDs of music. That's only true if you assume that CDs, on average, only hold 10 songs. Most CDs nowadays have a lot more songs than that. I rip my CDs at 160Kbps, like a lot of other people. To get 100 of my CDs onto my iPod, I'd have to either use a lower bit rate for the MP3s, or stick to CDs that only have 10 songs on them.
So, IMHO, it's not the system that's at fault, it's the companies doing the selling that are misusing the system, in order to mislead potential buyers.
And then there's the TalkBack stuff that's been in Netscape/Mozilla for aeons....
They actually mention that in the patent and claim that Microsoft has no idea what data is sent with that.
ICBATRTP (I Can't Be Arsed To Read The Patent), but how can they can they claim that they have no idea what data is sent from an open-source application?
Ask slashdot...
on
NYT on RFID
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Dear Slashdot,
Following some advice that I read on a popular website, I attempted to microwave my couch. In the subsequent house fire, I lost many of my prized possessions, and my microwave oven was damaged beyond repair.
Do I have recourse to legal action in this matter?
To be honest, the info I have about Harriers is from half-remembered documentaries, and the books that I read as a kid.
My father was in the air force, and my main memories of Harriers is of the absolutely deafening roar as they took off (especially when doing it vertically), and the steady supply of massive ball-bearings as a result of the regular crashes. With a few of those puppies, any kid could be a marble king.
IIRC the Harrier has always been delicate, when transitioning from vertical to horizontal flight. In the early days of its development, this coupled with tendency to roll under shear (I think) conditions, resulted in a number of accidents where it seemed to skid sideways into the ground. I think that this was a problem for a lot of the early Harrier pilots. In a documentary, I saw one of the original test pilots talking about it. There was also some pretty good footage where the pilot struggled to correct before ejecting.
I'm not sure, but maybe a way to ease this, that they found, was to exhaust some engine gases across the underside of the wings' trailing edges. I might be getting confused with some other aircraft, though.
The point that I was trying to make, maybe not particularly well, is that the customers break even (if you ignore the fact that they put a lot of hard work into getting this result), and the lawyers, yet again, make a tidy packet.
Another reply to my original post pointed out that, if it wasn't for the lawyers, the customers wouldn't have got anything at all. I agree with that point, but I think that a world in which that is true is seriously skewed against the interests of the common Joe. The legal system (not just of the US - I'm a UKian and our legal system sucks as well) is run by the lawyers, for the lawyers. As far as I am concerned, lawyers are bottom feeders that don't care whether they're sucking a mega-billion corporation or a penniless fool dry, as long as they get to suck them dry, and are protected and encouraged to do so by the 'judicial' system that they operate within.
Sorry about the rant, but my all-too-real experience of how bad and how greedy lawyers can be has left me with very little tolerance for those who try the justify their actions.
Uses 80% of your CPU/RAM, as in Google only uses 20% of your CPU/RAM because it's written in C/C++? How does the language that a search engine is written in, if you are accessing it from a browser, affect in any way the CPU/RAM usage on your computer? Granted, it would be possible to run this locally, but my take on it is that it's being aimed at search-farms that are (or will be) the equivalent of Google, or Yahoo, or whatever.
I consider myself to be a serious programmer, and I use Java. I started in the industry using C, progressed to C++, and have used professionally (amongst other languages) x86 assembler and 68k assembler. I made the transition to Java when I moved onto developing enterprising applications for one of the largest merchant banks in the world. For scalable enterprise solutions, Java makes a lot of sense.
Also, I think that by any reasonable definition of the word, Mitch Kapor and Tim O'Reilly could be considered 'serious' programmers.
Slashdot Mirror
One of the biggest uses of SCO is running web servers.
/.er writes to them explaining the error of their ways.
Are you serious? Not implying that you're wrong, but where did you get this info? I've never heard this before.
As somebody that's had the misfortune to have had to work with SCO Unix to keep a roof over my head, I seriously doubt that anybody stupid enough to use this sh*t as a web-server, is likely going to see sense when a
Given Microsoft's past history, I wouldn't say that it was beyond the bounds of possibility that they would add some 'enhancements' that enabled their Virtual PC to work in a more integrated way with their OS and that, purely as an unfortunate side-effect, those enhancements meant that Linux would no longer work under Virtual PC.
It looks more like an object oriented Pascal
Agree. The first thing that I thought of, looking at the source, was the unholy atrocity, sometimes referred to as Modula 5.
Ooh, careful.
I'm also wondering if Tex from RedVersusBlue counts. Technically, she looks exactly the same as the guys but, from the way she sounds, she's gotta be sexy out of that armour.
I think I've got a Halo chick thing going on.
Cortana: the thinking cyborg's digital crumpet.
TCP timestamp: Fixes CAN-2003-0882 where the TCP timestamp is
initialized with a constant number. This could allow a person to
discover how long the system has been up based upon the ID in TCP
packets.
Why is revealing the uptime of a system considered to be a security vulnerability?
I think that it was a joke. Last time that I looked, the little 'u' was on the same key as the big 'U', on most keyboards.
I'm not really into sigs, but if I was, Never anderestimate the atter stapdity of a manafactarer would be my new one. I've got the giggles now.
Absolutely agree.
In the news this week, down in Florida (I think - too lazy to google for a link), was a report about the huge demand for security cameras to watch over child-minders, following a case where some parents used a covert camera to watch their child-minder, and got some footage of the child being shaken. Seems to me that this would be an ideal application for the X10 camera.
I think that the point is that, yes you can copy the text (by hand, OCR, or whatever), but when you do that, you remove the headers, and thus any association with the original sender. Headers can provide legal evidence of sender and recipient, and can prove a chain of communication existed. This is as much a plausible deniability tool, as it is a secrecy tool.
Microsoft has been burned a few times in court cases due to emails. That wouldn't have happened if either the emails themselves had automatically become unreadable due to expiry, or if it was simply the text of the email, without the incriminating headers. Without the headers, the text of the email is just hearsay.
16-bit or 32-bit?
what research is there in non-Von Neumann architectures?
Take a look at TTA. Probably the coolest computer architecture ever. Processors designed to be so simple that they don't even have an instruction set. I read about this concept years ago, in Byte, but the idea has never really made it out of academia.
IIRC, it was originally intended for massively parallel computing (possibly as a backend for Lisp programs), which it was suitable for because it increases the granularity of operations.
Apple did this/does this with the iPod. Unfortunately, they chose the same optimistic approach as the drive manufacturers. For my iPod (one of the original 5GB models), they advertised it as being able to hold 100 CDs of music. That's only true if you assume that CDs, on average, only hold 10 songs. Most CDs nowadays have a lot more songs than that. I rip my CDs at 160Kbps, like a lot of other people. To get 100 of my CDs onto my iPod, I'd have to either use a lower bit rate for the MP3s, or stick to CDs that only have 10 songs on them.
So, IMHO, it's not the system that's at fault, it's the companies doing the selling that are misusing the system, in order to mislead potential buyers.
And then there's the TalkBack stuff that's been in Netscape/Mozilla for aeons....
They actually mention that in the patent and claim that Microsoft has no idea what data is sent with that.
ICBATRTP (I Can't Be Arsed To Read The Patent), but how can they can they claim that they have no idea what data is sent from an open-source application?
I thought that it was funny. I thought that it was on ontopic. I thought that it wasn't possible to moderate and post on the same discussion thread.
You need to lighten up a little.
Dear Slashdot,
Following some advice that I read on a popular website, I attempted to microwave my couch. In the subsequent house fire, I lost many of my prized possessions, and my microwave oven was damaged beyond repair.
Do I have recourse to legal action in this matter?
Big coffee can, huh?
That doesn't look like an ATM. It's got a slot that's labelled along the lines of, "Insert Cash Here".
Then again, maybe I've been using them wrong, all these years.
You're not crazy. What's your address?
How did you manage to not have the domain for the url in square brackets?
To be honest, the info I have about Harriers is from half-remembered documentaries, and the books that I read as a kid.
My father was in the air force, and my main memories of Harriers is of the absolutely deafening roar as they took off (especially when doing it vertically), and the steady supply of massive ball-bearings as a result of the regular crashes. With a few of those puppies, any kid could be a marble king.
IIRC the Harrier has always been delicate, when transitioning from vertical to horizontal flight. In the early days of its development, this coupled with tendency to roll under shear (I think) conditions, resulted in a number of accidents where it seemed to skid sideways into the ground. I think that this was a problem for a lot of the early Harrier pilots. In a documentary, I saw one of the original test pilots talking about it. There was also some pretty good footage where the pilot struggled to correct before ejecting.
I'm not sure, but maybe a way to ease this, that they found, was to exhaust some engine gases across the underside of the wings' trailing edges. I might be getting confused with some other aircraft, though.
I don't think that works. At least, it didn't for me. I had to change the shell using netinfo.
I've been using zsh (on OSX at home, and FreeBSD at work) for a year now.
The point that I was trying to make, maybe not particularly well, is that the customers break even (if you ignore the fact that they put a lot of hard work into getting this result), and the lawyers, yet again, make a tidy packet.
Another reply to my original post pointed out that, if it wasn't for the lawyers, the customers wouldn't have got anything at all. I agree with that point, but I think that a world in which that is true is seriously skewed against the interests of the common Joe. The legal system (not just of the US - I'm a UKian and our legal system sucks as well) is run by the lawyers, for the lawyers. As far as I am concerned, lawyers are bottom feeders that don't care whether they're sucking a mega-billion corporation or a penniless fool dry, as long as they get to suck them dry, and are protected and encouraged to do so by the 'judicial' system that they operate within.
Sorry about the rant, but my all-too-real experience of how bad and how greedy lawyers can be has left me with very little tolerance for those who try the justify their actions.
So, the customers get their money back, and the legal weasels get $350,000. That seems like par for the course, nowadays.
Uses 80% of your CPU/RAM, as in Google only uses 20% of your CPU/RAM because it's written in C/C++? How does the language that a search engine is written in, if you are accessing it from a browser, affect in any way the CPU/RAM usage on your computer? Granted, it would be possible to run this locally, but my take on it is that it's being aimed at search-farms that are (or will be) the equivalent of Google, or Yahoo, or whatever.
I consider myself to be a serious programmer, and I use Java. I started in the industry using C, progressed to C++, and have used professionally (amongst other languages) x86 assembler and 68k assembler. I made the transition to Java when I moved onto developing enterprising applications for one of the largest merchant banks in the world. For scalable enterprise solutions, Java makes a lot of sense.
Also, I think that by any reasonable definition of the word, Mitch Kapor and Tim O'Reilly could be considered 'serious' programmers.