30m? Record shortest time to compromise for an unpatched Windows computer at the University of Alberta used to be four seconds. In 2003. Now, it is under one second.
It's probably not reasonable to expect an unpatched Windows machine would survive more than a very few minutes.
Don't do it. For the love of bob, don't do it. Make sure your computer is behind a firewall and only then should you connect. The first thing you should do is get all the latest security updates for Windows. NOTHING ELSE. NO WEB BROWSING at this point.
Once that install/reboot cycle is complete, grab the latest updates for your antivirus and antispyware system. For extra security, make sure you perform a complete scan for viruses and spyware after all the updates are complete.
Once that install/reboot cycle is complete, update the rest of your applications.
Under no circumstances should you attempt this without being behind a secure firewall. Even if you are, you still have to be very very careful (hence, no web browsing until your computer is up to date on Windows and antivirus updates).
That's not what MD5 sums are used for. TCP/IP already has packet integrity. MD5 sums are indeed used to make sure you don't have a malware-filled ISO. The trick is that you grab the MD5 sum from a trusted source, then you can grab the ISO image from any mirror site. Assuming MD5 is safe (obviously not the case), you know your downloaded ISO is exactly the same as the one distributed from the central repository.
I'm not sure I can agree with you here. LSB specifies RPM as the standard.
In the end, I find a central repository incredibly convenient when I am an end-user. When I am a developer (that is, developing my own software), the central repository is a pain in the behind.
Well, if you say Windows installer, couldn't you also say RPM is the standard because it is part of the linux filesystem standard? Over 99% of the applications I install (on Ubuntu), I just grab from the central repository. Compare this to Windows. Some have a nice installer, though not necessarily the Windows installer. Others require unpacking and _then_ running. etc. etc.
The uninstall procedures are indeed more standardised, any counterarguments would simply be the occasional program that refuses to uninstall that way.
Notepad may be standard but wordpad is also installed standard. And many computers also ship with word processing software in Windows.
Windows has succeeded without a standard way to install programs, a standard way to uninstall programs (though progress has been made on this front), and without a standard text editor.
Now, this doesn't necessarily dispute your claim. What Linux needs may be substantially different to what Windows needs. But still.
It always bugs me that you write UPDATE and INSERT totally differently. I'd much rather see them essentially the same (update obviously would need a WHERE clause). Not a big deal, I admit, but it makes my life harder.
Fundamentally, though, what we need is much better interfaces to our applications. Having to convert C++ data into some format appropriate for SQL and back again is a pain in the behind. Every existing interface between the two that I've seen is crap. Heck, most of the C++ interfaces don't even let you use the std::string type. What are we, back in 1995? Forget vectors and maps, or the fancy boost multiindexed templates. Anyway, these really aren't problems for SQL to solve. And yes, there are object-oriented databases and the like. But relational databases are still pretty much universal. I just mention it because it is a pain in the behind.
No, nobody special. I figure this way, when people search on his name on Google, this conversation will come up. George Gillespie, the guy who promised to pay me money he owed me and never bothered to do so. I do not advise you do business with him if you are in Edmonton, Alberta or the surrounding area. It turns out he lost a similar court case some time before which is actually now used as precedence in Alberta courts.
No doubt. Of course, the guy was consistently claiming he DID have assets and capital, and had investors all lined up. More fool me for believing George Gillespie.
The suit was filed in Alberta small claims court (actually, I think, "Provincial Court of Queen's Bench). Alberta has a limit of $20,000 Canadian.
In the end, I hired a lawyer to go after the company, at which point the company signed a statement saying they had no assets (clearly a lie, or the assets had been illegally transferred), no income, and no outgoing cash flow (this latter was provably a lie as well).
My lawyer advised that it wasn't worth pursuing. If you still don't believe me, let me know and I'll try to dig up the case number to prove I'm telling the truth.
Apparently, yes, because they haven't scheduled the dual-core processors until late 2007, in other words more than a year later. And will they be able to produce the chips in sufficient quantity should Apple go with them? Not in 2007, you can be sure.
Well, late 2007 is two years away, and I was talking about the dual-core models. The question of the day, though, is when the company would be able to ship these IN BULK. Do you really think they'll be shipping the dual-core models by the end of 2007 in sufficient quantities for all of Apple's laptops?
Disclaimer: I'm in Canada. Our use of 'college' and 'university' may be different to your usage.
Well, all the local community colleges around here offer introduction to programming classes as well but the vast majority of them simply don't teach you anything about the theory. In fact, the only ones that DO teach you more than the absolute minimum theory are the ones that count as university credit.
In fact, that's probably a good way to approach this. Does the course count as university credit? If not, it is useless for this particular person. If it does count as university credit, it may have some value.
Hardly. These chips aren't due out for two or three YEARS. Let's assume for the sake of argument that they ship IN BULK in two and a half years, an obviously optimistic estimate. Should Apple be satisfied with dual-core 2 Ghz laptops in the spring of 2008? I certainly hope not. While the power usage is sweet, we are looking at less than a 20% increase in speed (assuming you can safely compare clock speeds which, as we know from Intel and AMD, is not a good assumption) for a single core over that time. Even with dual core, that's pretty pathetic.
Now, if these chips were shipping in bulk TODAY and were able to be ramped up to 3 or 4 Ghz over the next six to twelve months, then maybe Apple might start regretting moving away from the G4 and G5 CPUs. That is, it'd be a toss-up at that point. As it is, this is far too little too late for Apple's laptops.
Of course, this rests on the assumption that Apple cares about processing power.
I'm not at all sure that is the right approach. This person wants to learn the principles of programming. Community colleges, in my experience, specifically DO NOT teach you the underlying theory, they just teach you the syntax of that particular language.
Slashdot Mirror
30m? Record shortest time to compromise for an unpatched Windows computer at the University of Alberta used to be four seconds. In 2003. Now, it is under one second.
It's probably not reasonable to expect an unpatched Windows machine would survive more than a very few minutes.
Don't do it. For the love of bob, don't do it. Make sure your computer is behind a firewall and only then should you connect. The first thing you should do is get all the latest security updates for Windows. NOTHING ELSE. NO WEB BROWSING at this point.
Once that install/reboot cycle is complete, grab the latest updates for your antivirus and antispyware system. For extra security, make sure you perform a complete scan for viruses and spyware after all the updates are complete.
Once that install/reboot cycle is complete, update the rest of your applications.
Under no circumstances should you attempt this without being behind a secure firewall. Even if you are, you still have to be very very careful (hence, no web browsing until your computer is up to date on Windows and antivirus updates).
You'd still only get paid for two weeks, or however much notice you were legally entitled to give.
Sure, I'm all for this. A minimum of 25 cents per song. A maximum of, what, 99 cents? Yeap, that would work for me.
They didn't mention the maximum price they were planning to charge but I assume this is just an oversight.
That's not what MD5 sums are used for. TCP/IP already has packet integrity. MD5 sums are indeed used to make sure you don't have a malware-filled ISO. The trick is that you grab the MD5 sum from a trusted source, then you can grab the ISO image from any mirror site. Assuming MD5 is safe (obviously not the case), you know your downloaded ISO is exactly the same as the one distributed from the central repository.
I'm not sure I can agree with you here. LSB specifies RPM as the standard.
In the end, I find a central repository incredibly convenient when I am an end-user. When I am a developer (that is, developing my own software), the central repository is a pain in the behind.
Well, if you say Windows installer, couldn't you also say RPM is the standard because it is part of the linux filesystem standard? Over 99% of the applications I install (on Ubuntu), I just grab from the central repository. Compare this to Windows. Some have a nice installer, though not necessarily the Windows installer. Others require unpacking and _then_ running. etc. etc.
The uninstall procedures are indeed more standardised, any counterarguments would simply be the occasional program that refuses to uninstall that way.
Notepad may be standard but wordpad is also installed standard. And many computers also ship with word processing software in Windows.
Windows has succeeded without a standard way to install programs, a standard way to uninstall programs (though progress has been made on this front), and without a standard text editor.
Now, this doesn't necessarily dispute your claim. What Linux needs may be substantially different to what Windows needs. But still.
It always bugs me that you write UPDATE and INSERT totally differently. I'd much rather see them essentially the same (update obviously would need a WHERE clause). Not a big deal, I admit, but it makes my life harder.
Fundamentally, though, what we need is much better interfaces to our applications. Having to convert C++ data into some format appropriate for SQL and back again is a pain in the behind. Every existing interface between the two that I've seen is crap. Heck, most of the C++ interfaces don't even let you use the std::string type. What are we, back in 1995? Forget vectors and maps, or the fancy boost multiindexed templates. Anyway, these really aren't problems for SQL to solve. And yes, there are object-oriented databases and the like. But relational databases are still pretty much universal. I just mention it because it is a pain in the behind.
No, nobody special. I figure this way, when people search on his name on Google, this conversation will come up. George Gillespie, the guy who promised to pay me money he owed me and never bothered to do so. I do not advise you do business with him if you are in Edmonton, Alberta or the surrounding area. It turns out he lost a similar court case some time before which is actually now used as precedence in Alberta courts.
The guy whose company it was, who promised me over and over again that he'd pay me.
No doubt. Of course, the guy was consistently claiming he DID have assets and capital, and had investors all lined up. More fool me for believing George Gillespie.
The suit was filed in Alberta small claims court (actually, I think, "Provincial Court of Queen's Bench). Alberta has a limit of $20,000 Canadian.
In the end, I hired a lawyer to go after the company, at which point the company signed a statement saying they had no assets (clearly a lie, or the assets had been illegally transferred), no income, and no outgoing cash flow (this latter was provably a lie as well).
My lawyer advised that it wasn't worth pursuing. If you still don't believe me, let me know and I'll try to dig up the case number to prove I'm telling the truth.
It was against a company. But a company whose books were a mess and whose assets were carefully (and illegally) hidden.
Yeah, right. I won a small-claims court case for $14,000. Debt collectors weren't the _least_ bit interested in it, not for any percentage.
Would I then need to buy a separate copy to run on my laptop? Yuck!
Your laptop is clearly defective. Why aren't you returning it?
You are right, I was misreading quad core as dual core.
I still don't think this would make much difference even if Apple had known about this last spring. But it isn't as bad as I had initially thought.
He certainly seems to think he wants to learn principles first.
Apparently, yes, because they haven't scheduled the dual-core processors until late 2007, in other words more than a year later. And will they be able to produce the chips in sufficient quantity should Apple go with them? Not in 2007, you can be sure.
Well, late 2007 is two years away, and I was talking about the dual-core models. The question of the day, though, is when the company would be able to ship these IN BULK. Do you really think they'll be shipping the dual-core models by the end of 2007 in sufficient quantities for all of Apple's laptops?
Disclaimer: I'm in Canada. Our use of 'college' and 'university' may be different to your usage.
Well, all the local community colleges around here offer introduction to programming classes as well but the vast majority of them simply don't teach you anything about the theory. In fact, the only ones that DO teach you more than the absolute minimum theory are the ones that count as university credit.
In fact, that's probably a good way to approach this. Does the course count as university credit? If not, it is useless for this particular person. If it does count as university credit, it may have some value.
Hardly. These chips aren't due out for two or three YEARS. Let's assume for the sake of argument that they ship IN BULK in two and a half years, an obviously optimistic estimate. Should Apple be satisfied with dual-core 2 Ghz laptops in the spring of 2008? I certainly hope not. While the power usage is sweet, we are looking at less than a 20% increase in speed (assuming you can safely compare clock speeds which, as we know from Intel and AMD, is not a good assumption) for a single core over that time. Even with dual core, that's pretty pathetic.
Now, if these chips were shipping in bulk TODAY and were able to be ramped up to 3 or 4 Ghz over the next six to twelve months, then maybe Apple might start regretting moving away from the G4 and G5 CPUs. That is, it'd be a toss-up at that point. As it is, this is far too little too late for Apple's laptops.
Of course, this rests on the assumption that Apple cares about processing power.
I'm not at all sure that is the right approach. This person wants to learn the principles of programming. Community colleges, in my experience, specifically DO NOT teach you the underlying theory, they just teach you the syntax of that particular language.
Did you not bother to read the announcement? MySQL has stored procedures. It also has views, triggers, and many more features added in MySQL 5.0.