Bull... I ran Debian on a 760 in -96 and RedHat on a 600 in -98 Both without any install problems at all. Sure, if I wanted to use the built in modem on the 600 I had to download a driver from IBM.
No, I don't think I am important enough to eclipse RMS. What I do say is, when he goes of on a rant tune him out rather than start a rant of your own on the subject of RMS's rant. That way we can focus on the important thoughts of Mr. Stallman, rather than sifting through hundreds of "RMS is a communist" type posts.
The works of RMS has very positively affected my profesion over the last 15-16 years. We all have a lot that we owe him thanx. But when he goes of on a rant on how bad everything that is not crafted precisely after his mind I tend to phase him out, and so should the rest of you.
In the matter of the Motif "Open Source" he has a few points but he draws way to farfetched conclusions! I share his hope that Motif will be less restricted, but I do not see how I can not legally use Motif on my RedHat box.
This is the woman who lost track of a billion dollars. Actually, this is the woman with the thankless task of cleaning up after Pettigrew, who missplaced the $1B. As well as cleaning up the staff who helped him and then covered it up.
At least we are officially aware of the government keeping a database about us. I can approximate two lists of government databases in other countries... Number of countries that does not have a similar database 0 Number of countries where people are officially aware about this database 0
With the introduction of the CD the average price jumped 35-50% even though the total cost of producing,distributing and selling a CD is 3-5% lower than the old 12" vinyls... And we are supposed to cry over pirates...
Out of those 5 bazillion software packages approximately 1.88495556 bazillion are installed with default passwords and 0.31415926 bazillion are installed with no password at all the rest require you to set a password.
I agree that the day when most programs require setting of passwords, one not doing so is a software defect. Until that day, it is a nice feature if the package requires password setting, but not doing so is not a bug.
No, it is not a software problem. The problem is that the default password was left in place.
I agree that it is a nice feature when the software will not let me go on without setting a new password. However, far from every software does that so the security risk is in fact the user.
The day that all and every program requires password setting on install it becomes a software problem.
Only it's not a backdoor, it's a default password. Therefore the source code is not at all relevant in this case. Anyone with a copy of the manual could find out that you must change the default password.
The security problem is not the software but the administrator of a WEB site that installs software without setting administrator passwords that only he knows.
Up until recently most software had a default superuser password (or even no password...)
Anyone that does not set administrator and superuser passwords is a security risk himself, not the software itself. Now, recognizing that a majority of users are inept at best it is a smart thing if the software forces setting passwords.
The issue here is not wether or not the code is open source. The issue is when a security bug is discovered by the Mozilla team should the tell the world before they have a fix for the bug. If you find the bug by all means fix it or post the bug (or ignore, or exploit:-)
Now, that is a very valid argument that I can wholeheartedly buy. I still argue that public disclosure to get the bug fixed is invalid. (That was the statement that I replied to.)
It should be openly published. Nobody can know for sure that they are the first to discover the bug.
That would be the reason to quitely pass it along to the main developers By posting the problem widely, you are only alerting the bad guys (should they have missed it). Once the developers know about the problem, rest assured, there will be a fix out very soon. Now if the software in distress is not open source, the situation is different. The likes M$ ain't likely so post a fix unless they have a compelling reason to do so. Public embarrasment and/or lawsuits are the only really compelling reasons for them... Now, Mozilla is open source, so if there is a problem, tell them, or fix the bug yourself and post the fix. If the Mozilla team finds a bug, they can tell the developers (them self;-) fix the bug and post the fix.
I'm afraid that you are wrong... The HTTP pipe is there while loading the page and the cookie does get sent back. (and again if you click on the ad...)
There is a simple solution to the banner ad problem (GIF's and cookies) I use Internet Junkbuster witch is OSS. IJB home I can specify domains that are banned as well as regular expressions to ban anything from a site. I do not see anything from doubleclick, blockstackers etc. That keeps my privacy as well as speed up my page loading...
Slashdot Mirror
there are much better architectures available now.
And what does that have to do with anything? There were better architectures available before IBM released the PC.
Bull...
I ran Debian on a 760 in -96 and RedHat on a 600 in -98 Both without any install problems at all.
Sure, if I wanted to use the built in modem on the 600 I had to download a driver from IBM.
No, I don't think I am important enough to eclipse RMS. What I do say is, when he goes of on a rant tune him out rather than start a rant of your own on the subject of RMS's rant. That way we can focus on the important thoughts of Mr. Stallman, rather than sifting through hundreds of "RMS is a communist" type posts.
The works of RMS has very positively affected my profesion over the last 15-16 years.
We all have a lot that we owe him thanx. But when he goes of on a rant on how bad everything that is not crafted precisely after his mind I tend to phase him out, and so should the rest of you.
In the matter of the Motif "Open Source" he has a few points but he draws way to farfetched conclusions! I share his hope that Motif will be less restricted, but I do not see how I can not legally use Motif on my RedHat box.
...really big high tech centres such as Toronto and Ottawa in Ontario, Canada.
A lot of senior developers. We let the newbies slave :-)
This is the woman who lost track of a billion dollars.
Actually, this is the woman with the thankless task of cleaning up after Pettigrew, who missplaced the $1B. As well as cleaning up the staff who helped him and then covered it up.
Amen to that
At least we are officially aware of the government keeping a database about us.
I can approximate two lists of government databases in other countries...
Number of countries that does not have a similar database 0
Number of countries where people are officially aware about this database 0
Pls read!
would be one of the first
is not the same as the first
With the introduction of the CD the average price jumped 35-50% even though the total cost of producing,distributing and selling a CD is 3-5% lower than the old 12" vinyls...
And we are supposed to cry over pirates...
Whaddayamean inferior? Bigger must be better! :-)
How could it otherwise be that M$ OS gets bigger and everyone keeps buying the upgrade
Out of those 5 bazillion software packages approximately 1.88495556 bazillion are installed with default passwords and 0.31415926 bazillion are installed with no password at all the rest require you to set a password.
I agree that the day when most programs require setting of passwords, one not doing so is a software defect. Until that day, it is a nice feature if the package requires password setting, but not doing so is not a bug.
No, it is not a software problem. The problem is that the default password was left in place.
I agree that it is a nice feature when the software will not let me go on without setting a new password. However, far from every software does that so the security risk is in fact the user.
The day that all and every program requires password setting on install it becomes a software problem.
Only it's not a backdoor, it's a default password. Therefore the source code is not at all relevant in this case. Anyone with a copy of the manual could find out that you must change the default password.
The security problem is not the software but the administrator of a WEB site that installs software without setting administrator passwords that only he knows.
Lemme see... the fact that people are not setting a administrator or superuser password is a software problem???
Up until recently most software had a default superuser password (or even no password...)
Anyone that does not set administrator and superuser passwords is a security risk himself, not the software itself. Now, recognizing that a majority of users are inept at best it is a smart thing if the software forces setting passwords.
Not soon enough :-)
However, you can always set threshold to 1.
Bzzzt WRONG.
I can at least....
The issue here is not wether or not the code is open source. The issue is when a security bug is discovered by the Mozilla team should the tell the world before they have a fix for the bug. :-)
If you find the bug by all means fix it or post the bug (or ignore, or exploit
Now, that is a very valid argument that I can wholeheartedly buy.
I still argue that public disclosure to get the bug fixed is invalid. (That was the statement that I replied to.)
It should be openly published. Nobody can know for sure that they are the first to discover the bug.
;-) fix the bug and post the fix.
That would be the reason to quitely pass it along to the main developers By posting the problem widely, you are only alerting the bad guys (should they have missed it). Once the developers know about the problem, rest assured, there will be a fix out very soon.
Now if the software in distress is not open source, the situation is different. The likes M$ ain't likely so post a fix unless they have a compelling reason to do so. Public embarrasment and/or lawsuits are the only really compelling reasons for them...
Now, Mozilla is open source, so if there is a problem, tell them, or fix the bug yourself and post the fix. If the Mozilla team finds a bug, they can tell the developers (them self
I'm afraid that you are wrong... The HTTP pipe is there while loading the page and the cookie does get sent back. (and again if you click on the ad...)
There is a simple solution to the banner ad problem (GIF's and cookies)
I use Internet Junkbuster witch is OSS. IJB home I can specify domains that are banned as well as regular expressions to ban anything from a site.
I do not see anything from doubleclick, blockstackers etc. That keeps my privacy as well as speed up my page loading...
Or you can do 8 hours worth in 5 or 6...
BTW Linux and GNU was the ultimate telecommute