While I largely agree that movies at the high-end of the budgetary scale are ridiculously expensive, HD resolution on a cinema screen simply isn't going to cut it.
Well, if it's any consolation, pretty much all the spam I get (~1000/day) is for products or services from American companies, so you're at least causing it to be generated, even if it's not actually originating from machines on US soil.
The problem isn't that the permissions are too fine-grained (in fact, that's non-sensical). You can add users to groups and set group-wide permissions on files just as you can with Linux/Unix.
The problem is that most Windows software shops never bothered to learn to do it that way. That's mostly because Windows 9x didn't support user permissions at all, so while a lot of professional/business apps run fine as a normal user, most home software (including the vast majority of games) demand write access to areas they shouldn't, assuming that you'll have permission.
On a modern Windows, there's absolutely no excuse for it. While you *can* set very fine-grained access permissions, there's no need to, and it's no excuse for not doing things properly. It's perfectly possible to only worry about read, write and execute just as you would under a Unix-like system. The problem is with ignorant/lazy third party developers, although MS must share some of the blame for that too.
I would suggest escalating the matter - write Valve a proper letter, on paper, explaining the situation, explaining that you're not happy, and asking them what they intend to do about it. Be polite, but firm - you're losing out through no fault of your own. Assuming this is down to someone stealing your CD key, you can't be the first person it's happened to, so they must have a process in place to deal with it. You say you have the DVD, case and receipt, so you can easily prove that you're licenced.
Either that, or you can just bitch pointlessly here; it's your call.
The odd thing is that those kids who do extreme things are the ones who do best in real life. I should know, I didn't as a kid and I am very mediocre in my adult life.
Well, you clearly didn't spend your time studying statistics...
Actually, it says "everyone who's bought CDs then ripped them to mp3/ogg/whatever and played them on their PC or personal music player has been breaking the law. Previously we've been ignoring that; now, however, we want to make it clear that it's ok and should be legal."
Basically, it sounds like they finally want a fair use-type clause introduced into UK copyright law. It's going to feel weird at first, no longer being a criminal just because I like to listen to music on my commute (on my iRiver) and at work, but don't like carrying CDs around with me.
Unfortunately I think a successful troll is just as good for/. as it is for Dvorak's employers, so there's little incentive for them to change. Slashdot is supported by sponsorship, subscriptions and advertising. The more interesting or inciteful a story is, the more ad impressions it will generate.
While flooding the site with trollish articles would likely be counterproductive (as people would probably leave), the odd one here and there to drive up ad impressions can't hurt.
Troll, huh? One fairly major part of the whole Web 2.0 buzz is AJAX. AJAX (at least as it's usually implemented) relies on the XMLHttpRequest object, which was created by MS.
Now it's true that noone really used it for a long time, partly because it was only implemented by IE. It's also true that you can simulate asynchronous requests using hidden frames (something my company did back in 99), but that also never really took off (and probably won't now).
I think it's fair to say that MS were ahead of everyone else. I think it's also fair to say that they completely squandered their lead, sitting on a technology that they didn't have the vision to use to the full.
I don't think that linux is just less of a target because it has less users; it is more secure because you hardly ever run as super-user.
That's a choice, though. You can choose to run XP as a normal user account too. Some third party software developers make this hard, it's true, but it can be done. Where I work, we have 2 dozen locked-down laptops in a secure room running XP to which users do not get admin access. So far, after a few initial teething problems, it's been fine. There has been talk of extending the "no local admin" rule across the entire company (which wouldn't go down well, but that's another matter).
Similarly, you can choose to run Linux as root all the time. I suspect that a lot of people may well end up doing just that, should the masses ever start migrating. Either that, or they'll become conditioned to entering the root password whenever prompted.
Do you have any links for the Javascript and DRM viruses? I'm aware of an exploit whereby the browser scrollbar was overlaid with a draggable image, use of which triggered a drag/drop download, but that's not a virus. I'm also aware of the Sony rootkit fiasco, but that's neither a virus nor truly MS's fault...
I've seen "web developer" used to describe people with all sorts of skillsets, from those who know a bit of HTML, CSS and some Javascript and maybe a little Flash, through people with ASP/PHP/JSP skills right through to more "traditional" programmers who just happen to be working on client-server apps with web front-ends.
How on earth are we supposed to advise on potential career moves when we basically have no idea what the guy's skills are?
For example, I've known several self-professed web developers who knew purely interface tech - HTML, CSS, Javascript and not a lot else. On the other hand, I've spent 7 years working for a web agency, and as the mood takes me do consider myself a "web developer" at times. I have some HTML and Javascript, a minute amount of CSS, some ASP, lots of JSP and Java, SQL, PL/SQL, C, C++, C#, a little Perl, a little VBScript, some FORTRAN from my Physics days, Windows and Linux to "power user" type level, some Solaris, a bunch of assorted methodologies, applications and technologies, etc - even a smattering of DirectX. I'm not trying to make myself out as some sort of uber-geek (far from it), just illustrating the breadth that the title "web developer" can cover.
Lastly, what are you doing to market yourself?
To be honest, if he puts as much effort into his career and marketing himself as he did into this submission, it's little wonder he's in his current situation. I'm not trying to be mean, but it's called "work" for a reason.
(And perhaps I'm being unfair, and there are mitigating factors that we don't know about - but that's pretty much my point; we don't know enough to even begin to give advice, simply because we haven't been told enough.)
I've lived in London for the last 12 years, and various parts of England for the 19 years of my life before that, and trust me, almost no-one calls it soccer here.
A more likely scenario would be to name a file, "cute.jpg.exe" and giving it an image icon. Windows hides extensions by default, so all the user would see is a file that looks like an image with a tempting title to click on.
See now, that would probably work, but what I don't understand is why.
You say yourself that by default, Windows hides the extension, so all they'll see is "cute.jpg" (the.exe extension being hidden).
The thing is, that'll probably be the only file they've ever seen with an extension. And that doesn't ring any alarm bells?
Makes me wonder if the whole thing is necessary, and how many people you'd get with a file called "malware.exe" or "virus.exe"...
Can Windows admins prevent executable access to any area a user can write to
I've only had a very, very quick play with this on my own machine, but it appears to be possible. Windows has a "Read and Execute" permission that can be set on directories, which is independent of the "Read" permission. I just created a directory, removed my "Read and Execute" permission, and dropped an exe and a pdf in it.
I can't execute the exe, but I can still read the pdf.
As to how practical it would be to apply this to all user-readable areas, and whether or not you could have it apply to user-mountable devices, I don't know, but so far it's not impossible.
For a purely habitual addiction - whether it be sex, gaming, work or anything else without a direct chemical impact - you can only provide the counselling.
You think you can't become addicted to neurotransmitters? You do realise that people who become addicted to exercise are addicted to the endorphin high, right?
Just because you're not explicitly shovelling drugs into your system doesn't mean they're not in there.
Root isn't disabled, you just don't get the opportunity to set a password.
So unless they used sudo to run SIGGRAPH, the system should be safe.
Sure, the *system* is safe - but all of those confidential documents that you work on aren't. They're vulnerable to being emailed and/or trashed along with the rest of your files.
I don't really use the program, but I know there's the checkbox to "Acquire licenses for music I rip myself" or something like that that's enabled by default.
Actually, it's "Automatically acquire licences for protected content". It applies to content that you somehow obtain that's protected (ie already DRMed), not to music you rip yourself.
The CD ripping functionality in WMP defaults to unprotected, fixed-rate WMA, with options (in WMP 10) for VBR WMA, lossless WMA and mp3. I've no idea how they compare, as I never use it, I use CDex. (That's one reason I know what the defaults are - I've never touched those settings) I do remember that the mp3 ripping options are pretty basic unless you buy a plugin (but then mp3 is a licensable technology).
then you guess where to put a number above the line.
Well, that's not the way I was taught it. I was taught that you look at each number in turn, "picking up" the next one as necessary.
Eg, in your example you'd look at 2. Does 123 go into 2? No. Now look at 24. Test again - no. Now 247. Test again - yes, twice, with (247 - (2*123)=)1 left over, so write "2" above the 7. Now you have that 1, and a 2 to make 12. Test again, no. Write a "0" above the 2 and move on. Now you have 123. Test again - yes, once. Write a "1" above the 3.
That gives you 201, with nothing left over. If there was a remainder, and you wanted the answer as a decimal, you carried on, appending 0s as required. (We generally didn't, if memory serves)
The point is that there's no guess work involved. It's a systematic method based on inspection. Compare this with the OP's stated method, which is literally a series of guesses with no real method involved, other than that you increase or lower the guess as required. If there was some logic involved, I'd accept that perhaps it's an iterative method, but that's not apparent from the given example.
Slashdot Mirror
While I largely agree that movies at the high-end of the budgetary scale are ridiculously expensive, HD resolution on a cinema screen simply isn't going to cut it.
So, you click the control, and it works. I'm not sure I see the "royal screw up" to be honest.
Quiet you fool, my daughter might hear you!
Well, if it's any consolation, pretty much all the spam I get (~1000/day) is for products or services from American companies, so you're at least causing it to be generated, even if it's not actually originating from machines on US soil.
The Rainbow Warrior?
Yes, it was a travesty by all accounts, but talk about ancient history. Are you seriously going to blame that on the current administration?
The problem isn't that the permissions are too fine-grained (in fact, that's non-sensical). You can add users to groups and set group-wide permissions on files just as you can with Linux/Unix.
The problem is that most Windows software shops never bothered to learn to do it that way. That's mostly because Windows 9x didn't support user permissions at all, so while a lot of professional/business apps run fine as a normal user, most home software (including the vast majority of games) demand write access to areas they shouldn't, assuming that you'll have permission.
On a modern Windows, there's absolutely no excuse for it. While you *can* set very fine-grained access permissions, there's no need to, and it's no excuse for not doing things properly. It's perfectly possible to only worry about read, write and execute just as you would under a Unix-like system. The problem is with ignorant/lazy third party developers, although MS must share some of the blame for that too.
I would suggest escalating the matter - write Valve a proper letter, on paper, explaining the situation, explaining that you're not happy, and asking them what they intend to do about it. Be polite, but firm - you're losing out through no fault of your own. Assuming this is down to someone stealing your CD key, you can't be the first person it's happened to, so they must have a process in place to deal with it. You say you have the DVD, case and receipt, so you can easily prove that you're licenced.
Either that, or you can just bitch pointlessly here; it's your call.
The odd thing is that those kids who do extreme things are the ones who do best in real life. I should know, I didn't as a kid and I am very mediocre in my adult life.
Well, you clearly didn't spend your time studying statistics...
Actually, it says "everyone who's bought CDs then ripped them to mp3/ogg/whatever and played them on their PC or personal music player has been breaking the law. Previously we've been ignoring that; now, however, we want to make it clear that it's ok and should be legal."
Basically, it sounds like they finally want a fair use-type clause introduced into UK copyright law. It's going to feel weird at first, no longer being a criminal just because I like to listen to music on my commute (on my iRiver) and at work, but don't like carrying CDs around with me.
Rethinking a strategy does not necessarily imply abandoning it.
Unfortunately I think a successful troll is just as good for /. as it is for Dvorak's employers, so there's little incentive for them to change.
Slashdot is supported by sponsorship, subscriptions and advertising. The more interesting or inciteful a story is, the more ad impressions it will generate.
While flooding the site with trollish articles would likely be counterproductive (as people would probably leave), the odd one here and there to drive up ad impressions can't hurt.
(Why yes, I am cynical)
Troll, huh? One fairly major part of the whole Web 2.0 buzz is AJAX. AJAX (at least as it's usually implemented) relies on the XMLHttpRequest object, which was created by MS.
Now it's true that noone really used it for a long time, partly because it was only implemented by IE. It's also true that you can simulate asynchronous requests using hidden frames (something my company did back in 99), but that also never really took off (and probably won't now).
I think it's fair to say that MS were ahead of everyone else. I think it's also fair to say that they completely squandered their lead, sitting on a technology that they didn't have the vision to use to the full.
I don't think that linux is just less of a target because it has less users; it is more secure because you hardly ever run as super-user.
That's a choice, though. You can choose to run XP as a normal user account too. Some third party software developers make this hard, it's true, but it can be done. Where I work, we have 2 dozen locked-down laptops in a secure room running XP to which users do not get admin access. So far, after a few initial teething problems, it's been fine. There has been talk of extending the "no local admin" rule across the entire company (which wouldn't go down well, but that's another matter).
Similarly, you can choose to run Linux as root all the time. I suspect that a lot of people may well end up doing just that, should the masses ever start migrating. Either that, or they'll become conditioned to entering the root password whenever prompted.
Do you have any links for the Javascript and DRM viruses? I'm aware of an exploit whereby the browser scrollbar was overlaid with a draggable image, use of which triggered a drag/drop download, but that's not a virus. I'm also aware of the Sony rootkit fiasco, but that's neither a virus nor truly MS's fault...
I have to wonder. What is your skill set?
I was wondering along those lines too.
I've seen "web developer" used to describe people with all sorts of skillsets, from those who know a bit of HTML, CSS and some Javascript and maybe a little Flash, through people with ASP/PHP/JSP skills right through to more "traditional" programmers who just happen to be working on client-server apps with web front-ends.
How on earth are we supposed to advise on potential career moves when we basically have no idea what the guy's skills are?
For example, I've known several self-professed web developers who knew purely interface tech - HTML, CSS, Javascript and not a lot else. On the other hand, I've spent 7 years working for a web agency, and as the mood takes me do consider myself a "web developer" at times. I have some HTML and Javascript, a minute amount of CSS, some ASP, lots of JSP and Java, SQL, PL/SQL, C, C++, C#, a little Perl, a little VBScript, some FORTRAN from my Physics days, Windows and Linux to "power user" type level, some Solaris, a bunch of assorted methodologies, applications and technologies, etc - even a smattering of DirectX. I'm not trying to make myself out as some sort of uber-geek (far from it), just illustrating the breadth that the title "web developer" can cover.
Lastly, what are you doing to market yourself?
To be honest, if he puts as much effort into his career and marketing himself as he did into this submission, it's little wonder he's in his current situation. I'm not trying to be mean, but it's called "work" for a reason.
(And perhaps I'm being unfair, and there are mitigating factors that we don't know about - but that's pretty much my point; we don't know enough to even begin to give advice, simply because we haven't been told enough.)
So Nicholas Cugnot owns my car?
Cool, he can make the repayments on it then.
I've lived in London for the last 12 years, and various parts of England for the 19 years of my life before that, and trust me, almost no-one calls it soccer here.
A more likely scenario would be to name a file, "cute.jpg.exe" and giving it an image icon. Windows hides extensions by default, so all the user would see is a file that looks like an image with a tempting title to click on.
.exe extension being hidden).
See now, that would probably work, but what I don't understand is why.
You say yourself that by default, Windows hides the extension, so all they'll see is "cute.jpg" (the
The thing is, that'll probably be the only file they've ever seen with an extension. And that doesn't ring any alarm bells?
Makes me wonder if the whole thing is necessary, and how many people you'd get with a file called "malware.exe" or "virus.exe"...
Can Windows admins prevent executable access to any area a user can write to
I've only had a very, very quick play with this on my own machine, but it appears to be possible. Windows has a "Read and Execute" permission that can be set on directories, which is independent of the "Read" permission. I just created a directory, removed my "Read and Execute" permission, and dropped an exe and a pdf in it.
I can't execute the exe, but I can still read the pdf.
As to how practical it would be to apply this to all user-readable areas, and whether or not you could have it apply to user-mountable devices, I don't know, but so far it's not impossible.
Well, as Mo is a Quake addict, it's going to have to be either the Elder Gods or Quad Dammage surely...
For a purely habitual addiction - whether it be sex, gaming, work or anything else without a direct chemical impact - you can only provide the counselling.
You think you can't become addicted to neurotransmitters? You do realise that people who become addicted to exercise are addicted to the endorphin high, right?
Just because you're not explicitly shovelling drugs into your system doesn't mean they're not in there.
Root isn't disabled, you just don't get the opportunity to set a password.
So unless they used sudo to run SIGGRAPH, the system should be safe.
Sure, the *system* is safe - but all of those confidential documents that you work on aren't. They're vulnerable to being emailed and/or trashed along with the rest of your files.
Or does this maxim just apply to Africa?
I think you'll generally find that it applies to any area that:
1) has an average standard of living lower than the speaker is used to
2) is not where the speaker currently lives
I don't really use the program, but I know there's the checkbox to "Acquire licenses for music I rip myself" or something like that that's enabled by default.
Actually, it's "Automatically acquire licences for protected content". It applies to content that you somehow obtain that's protected (ie already DRMed), not to music you rip yourself.
The CD ripping functionality in WMP defaults to unprotected, fixed-rate WMA, with options (in WMP 10) for VBR WMA, lossless WMA and mp3. I've no idea how they compare, as I never use it, I use CDex. (That's one reason I know what the defaults are - I've never touched those settings) I do remember that the mp3 ripping options are pretty basic unless you buy a plugin (but then mp3 is a licensable technology).
then you guess where to put a number above the line.
Well, that's not the way I was taught it. I was taught that you look at each number in turn, "picking up" the next one as necessary.
Eg, in your example you'd look at 2. Does 123 go into 2? No.
Now look at 24. Test again - no.
Now 247. Test again - yes, twice, with (247 - (2*123)=)1 left over, so write "2" above the 7.
Now you have that 1, and a 2 to make 12. Test again, no. Write a "0" above the 2 and move on.
Now you have 123. Test again - yes, once. Write a "1" above the 3.
That gives you 201, with nothing left over. If there was a remainder, and you wanted the answer as a decimal, you carried on, appending 0s as required. (We generally didn't, if memory serves)
The point is that there's no guess work involved. It's a systematic method based on inspection. Compare this with the OP's stated method, which is literally a series of guesses with no real method involved, other than that you increase or lower the guess as required. If there was some logic involved, I'd accept that perhaps it's an iterative method, but that's not apparent from the given example.