Supermount worked just fine in Mandrake 7.0, 7.1, 7.2 and 8.0.
Of course I can mount/dev/cdrom (or, thanks to being too lazy to undo supermount's changes to my fstab, mount -t iso9660/dev/cdrom/mnt/cdrom), but it was nice to be able to just slap in a CD and have it auto-mounted for me. That's about the only thing I miss from Windows.
Apparently, it's as a result of some dock-worker misspelling the word "aluminium" as "aluminum" on the side of a crate full of the stuff when it was shipped to the US for the first time.
At least, that's what I was told.
Cheers,
Tim
Re:Red Hat 7.2 vs. Mandrake 8.1...
on
Red Hat 7.2 Released
·
· Score: 2, Offtopic
Well, I've not used RedHat since about 5.2 or 6, so I can't comment on that, but I did install Mandrake 8.1 on both my home and work machines a couple of weeks ago. (Upgrading from 8.0)
I almost wish I hadn't. Supermount doesn't seem to want to work anymore, no matter what I try, and X on my work machine locks up about twice a week.
If I had the time, I'd probably go back to 8.0, at least at work, but I'm a little too busy for a reinstall now (the upgrade was performed at a weekend, when I was in to make up for missed time (damn that guilt...))
Not to mention that, as of 8i at least, Oracle doesn't have a bool type, and I'm not entirely sure about text either - certainly, we always use varchar2 or clob.
</geek>
Sorry - I develop (web) apps using Oracle dbs for a living:-)
Personally, I'm just happy that I can walk around Brixton at 3am without worrying that I'm going to be shot.
Wow. I admit that I haven't been to Brixton in a few years, but last time I went, you couldn't walk around there at 3pm and not worry a little about being shot:-)
No, they don't. But many, many daemons and other long-lived processes run as root.
A quick scan of the processes on my machine right now shows kdm, X, kppp, pppd, cupsd and a few others.
On our production servers at work, resin runs as root - I have been reliably informed that it has to (at least, I assume our systems team are reliable - they were rather upset when two of us demonstrated ftping a file onto the server that allowed arbitrary commands to be run:) ).
Just because there's no-one sat at the machine, launnching xterms and applications as root, doesn't mean that there isn't a whole bunch of stuff running as root. A single buffer overrun exploit in a network-aware daemon running as root, and your machine is wide open, if you're not behind a firewall.
What if the US government gets weird and refused to give up the back door once the crisis is over?
"What if"? Why would they?
Why would they give up such a valuable advantage in the fight against <insert current object of villification>? Terrorists, drug smugglers/dealers, criminals, communisits, dissidents - all have had war declared on them at some point, by some country or other, and all could benefit from the unrestricted use of strong crypto.
Even if the war against terrorism is won, this legislation would stay in place, to aid the war against the next great evil.
What if a trusted party today becomes an untrusted party in the future?
That's exactly the problem I have with this, and all privacy-limiting developments. Here in the UK, as I'm sure you're aware, we have more than our fair share of CCTV cameras on the streets. Every argument in favour of them seems to revolve around the same core assumptions:
1) They help cut crime, thus making everyone safer
2) You can trust the Police and the Government
I have to agree, up to a point. They do cut crime, at least in the covered areas, and I can trust the police and government, now. How do I know I'll still be able to trust them in 20 years time?
I don't. I just have to hope that I will be able to, because the way things are going, if I can't, I'm going to be in serious trouble. The same is true in this case - if legislation like this is passed now, it makes a future rogue government's job all the easier.
What about the huge delpoyed base of strong crypto?
That's easy. It would become illegal to use it.
If the agency monitoring communications (NSA, MI5, KGB, whoever wherever you are) acquired a message that they could not read, you'd be arrested, and ordered to decrypt it. (There is already provision for pretty much this to happen in UK law, thanks to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Bill)
At best, on proving that it's an innocent message, you'd get a slapped wrist and threats of bad things happening if you continued to use strong crypto. At worst, you'd do time just for using crypto they couldn't break.
That's exactly what I'd have done in his position - made the world think that I was out of touch, with a primitive communications infrastructure at best.
Appear to be less of a threat than you are, and you get left alone, and can choose your battles. Appear to be gaining in power, knowledge and skill, and someone will have a go at taking you out for their own good.
I'm not saying that that's the case here; just that that's what I'd do (and I'm no crimincal mastermind:) )
That's not quite true; I am currently sat in an office pretty much in the centre of London (spitting distance from Trafalgar Square).
Canary Wharf and the London Stock Exchange have been evacuated, there are rumours of Heathrow (the nearest large airport) being shut down, and I'd be surprised if most of the City (the financial district, and original City of London) hasn't been evacuated, but the rest of us are still here.
(Of course, there's nothing nearby worth targetting, unless you really hate the theatre, or shops - Oxford Street is very close by, though...)
Coincidently, it's my birthday today; guess I won't be forgetting this one in a hurry.
In the past, Microsoft and Intel have worked together to produce software and hardware that complement each other.
This can go beyond merely understanding the best way to structure an executable, or tips and tricks for hand-coding assembler.
On the one hand, Intel could say to MS "we'd really like to push this new instruction set that we've come up with", so MS say "okay, we'll build support for it into the next DirectX release".
Alternatively, MS could say "we'd really like to get into the streaming multimedia market, could you help us out?"
The upshot is that Intel gets support for their latest, expensive features at the OS level, whilst MS get hardware-level optimization for apps they want to write. Wrap the exact details in an NDA or two, and bingo - Windows runs better on Intel hardware, and Intel hardware runs Windows better. (ie Linux on Intel, and Windows on AMD just aren't as good)
Yes, the whole point is that you can run any OS on any hardware, but sometimes it pays to have a little help.
The only trouble with gesture-based control is that it's generally quicker and easier to hit a hot key combination.
For example, in Black and White, I've found that, when I'm in a hurry at least, hitting "m" on the keyboard is easier than tracing out the shape of an "m" with the mouse. Of course, that may be because I'm generally fighting with the terrain and a shifting viewpoint at the time...
Actually, on mine, it is games that really "spank" my system.
A compile can take 10 seconds or 10 minutes - it really doesn't matter. If it's 10 seconds, I'll wait. If it's ten minutes, I'll read/. or go get a coffee.
On the other hand, if a game is running at less then about 40 frames a second, I'll quit it and go do something else instead.
I do agree up to a point, though - it's not just military installations that have more demanding apps running than games. For the vast majority of home users, however, he does have a point.
There is nothing wrong with selling value added extensions, as long as they aren't violating the lisence on the original body of code.
Of course, if you own the copyright on that code, then you are free to relicence it any way you see fit.
You can't change the terms of the licence by which I acquired my copy, but you can make it available from you exclusively under its new terms.
Of course, if the original licence was GPL-like, then you can't stop me from redistributing my version (although you are free to ask me to stop, you can't force me to)
That's just the same under Windows, where any program requires that you also install all the dlls that it requires.
You can think of the GUI "part" of Windows as being like KDE or Gnome. If you wanted to run a different Win32 GUI, but still run software written for Microsoft's GUI, you'd still have to have all the dlls installed for that one too. Of course, there isn't an alternative GUI/desktop shell and set of libraries, so that situation doesn't happen under Windows.
That's just the way software is written these days - you put useful, reusable chunks of code in libraries, and install them once on the machine, rather than as part of every application that requires them.
It increases app start up times a little (as these files have to be loaded and linked agaisnt), but decreases disk usage and promotes code reuse, which, as a programmer, I consider to be a Very Good Thing Indeed.
Well, on my measely little P3 450 with 256meg of RAM, I can't, except when CodeInsight pops up for the first time on a class. Then, it's slow. (And yes, I can type fast:) )
If you're really having problems with typing in JBuilder on your machine, I'd say it demonstrates an underlying problem with your machine, not with JBuilder or Java.
However, even by claiming to have broken the encryption, he's placing himself at risk of being investigated, and possibly detained and questioned should he ever visit the US. (If I were to publicly announce that I had commited a crime, I would expect the authorities to take interest in me.)
After all, IPs can be spoofed, so if I trace a Virus e-mail back to the alledged sender and it comes up at an address at McAffee
That only really applies to the sort of people who are usually already clued-up enough to have some idea of what is and isn't real.
The average user has no idea what an IP address is, what spoofing one means, or how to find out who owns one.
What we need is some kind of identification verification procedure online...I'm all for tying real-life identities to online personas because it would mean accountability for actions
It would also mean the possibility for invasion of privacy on a staggering scale. In real life, I could get you arrested for following me around wherever I go, noting down who I speak to, what I look at, etc. Why should it be any different online? Just because I might commit a crime, that it would be harder to catch me for?
There will always be ways to circumvent any sort of identity scheme, if you know how to and want to badly enough. At best, all it'd do would be to remove any last vestage of privacy online for ordinary people, and let you catch the sort of criminals who aren't going to be bright enough to commit any serious crimes anyway. At worst, it would allow people to frame others much more easily, by using their identity to commit crimes online.
Part of the problem with worms isn't just the malicious acts that they perpetrate, it's the bandwidth that they use.
A particularly virulent worm can bring servers and routers to their knees just propagating itself. That's before it even gets the chance to do any of its intended damage. (Remember Melissa, or The Great Internet Worm?)
Add to this very real concern the fact that striking back in this way, no matter the good intentions, is almost certainly illegal, and the whole idea is a definite no-no.
(Yes, it does have a certain appeal - but so do many other things that are bad ideas, too)
True, but spending $700 on chairs when perfectly acceptable ones can be had for a fraction of that price
a) wastes money that could be better spent elsewhere; and
b) indicates the sort of attitude towards money that should have had investors running for cover
Slashdot Mirror
Supermount worked just fine in Mandrake 7.0, 7.1, 7.2 and 8.0.
/dev/cdrom (or, thanks to being too lazy to undo supermount's changes to my fstab, mount -t iso9660 /dev/cdrom /mnt/cdrom), but it was nice to be able to just slap in a CD and have it auto-mounted for me. That's about the only thing I miss from Windows.
Of course I can mount
Cheers,
Tim
Apparently, it's as a result of some dock-worker misspelling the word "aluminium" as "aluminum" on the side of a crate full of the stuff when it was shipped to the US for the first time.
At least, that's what I was told.
Cheers,
Tim
Well, I've not used RedHat since about 5.2 or 6, so I can't comment on that, but I did install Mandrake 8.1 on both my home and work machines a couple of weeks ago. (Upgrading from 8.0)
I almost wish I hadn't. Supermount doesn't seem to want to work anymore, no matter what I try, and X on my work machine locks up about twice a week.
If I had the time, I'd probably go back to 8.0, at least at work, but I'm a little too busy for a reinstall now (the upgrade was performed at a weekend, when I was in to make up for missed time (damn that guilt...))
Cheers,
Tim
Not to mention that, as of 8i at least, Oracle doesn't have a bool type, and I'm not entirely sure about text either - certainly, we always use varchar2 or clob.
</geek>
Sorry - I develop (web) apps using Oracle dbs for a living
Cheers,
Tim
Personally, I'm just happy that I can walk around Brixton at 3am without worrying that I'm going to be shot.
:-)
Wow. I admit that I haven't been to Brixton in a few years, but last time I went, you couldn't walk around there at 3pm and not worry a little about being shot
Cheers,
Tim
You're waiting for the GeForce 4 before upgrading again?!
I'm holding out for the GeForce 4 to bring the price of the GeForce 3 down to upgrade to from my TNT2Ultra!
Cheers,
Tim
It would be fair enogh, K5 seemed to be getting sick of him :)
Cheers,
Tim
No one runs *nix as root.
:) ).
No, they don't. But many, many daemons and other long-lived processes run as root.
A quick scan of the processes on my machine right now shows kdm, X, kppp, pppd, cupsd and a few others.
On our production servers at work, resin runs as root - I have been reliably informed that it has to (at least, I assume our systems team are reliable - they were rather upset when two of us demonstrated ftping a file onto the server that allowed arbitrary commands to be run
Just because there's no-one sat at the machine, launnching xterms and applications as root, doesn't mean that there isn't a whole bunch of stuff running as root. A single buffer overrun exploit in a network-aware daemon running as root, and your machine is wide open, if you're not behind a firewall.
Cheers,
Tim
What if the US government gets weird and refused to give up the back door once the crisis is over?
"What if"? Why would they?
Why would they give up such a valuable advantage in the fight against <insert current object of villification>? Terrorists, drug smugglers/dealers, criminals, communisits, dissidents - all have had war declared on them at some point, by some country or other, and all could benefit from the unrestricted use of strong crypto.
Even if the war against terrorism is won, this legislation would stay in place, to aid the war against the next great evil.
What if a trusted party today becomes an untrusted party in the future?
That's exactly the problem I have with this, and all privacy-limiting developments. Here in the UK, as I'm sure you're aware, we have more than our fair share of CCTV cameras on the streets. Every argument in favour of them seems to revolve around the same core assumptions:
1) They help cut crime, thus making everyone safer
2) You can trust the Police and the Government
I have to agree, up to a point. They do cut crime, at least in the covered areas, and I can trust the police and government, now. How do I know I'll still be able to trust them in 20 years time?
I don't. I just have to hope that I will be able to, because the way things are going, if I can't, I'm going to be in serious trouble. The same is true in this case - if legislation like this is passed now, it makes a future rogue government's job all the easier.
What about the huge delpoyed base of strong crypto?
That's easy. It would become illegal to use it.
If the agency monitoring communications (NSA, MI5, KGB, whoever wherever you are) acquired a message that they could not read, you'd be arrested, and ordered to decrypt it. (There is already provision for pretty much this to happen in UK law, thanks to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Bill)
At best, on proving that it's an innocent message, you'd get a slapped wrist and threats of bad things happening if you continued to use strong crypto. At worst, you'd do time just for using crypto they couldn't break.
Cheers,
Tim
That's exactly what I'd have done in his position - made the world think that I was out of touch, with a primitive communications infrastructure at best.
:) )
Appear to be less of a threat than you are, and you get left alone, and can choose your battles. Appear to be gaining in power, knowledge and skill, and someone will have a go at taking you out for their own good.
I'm not saying that that's the case here; just that that's what I'd do (and I'm no crimincal mastermind
Cheers,
Tim
That's not quite true; I am currently sat in an office pretty much in the centre of London (spitting distance from Trafalgar Square).
Canary Wharf and the London Stock Exchange have been evacuated, there are rumours of Heathrow (the nearest large airport) being shut down, and I'd be surprised if most of the City (the financial district, and original City of London) hasn't been evacuated, but the rest of us are still here.
(Of course, there's nothing nearby worth targetting, unless you really hate the theatre, or shops - Oxford Street is very close by, though...)
Coincidently, it's my birthday today; guess I won't be forgetting this one in a hurry.
Cheers,
Tim
In the past, Microsoft and Intel have worked together to produce software and hardware that complement each other.
This can go beyond merely understanding the best way to structure an executable, or tips and tricks for hand-coding assembler.
On the one hand, Intel could say to MS "we'd really like to push this new instruction set that we've come up with", so MS say "okay, we'll build support for it into the next DirectX release".
Alternatively, MS could say "we'd really like to get into the streaming multimedia market, could you help us out?"
The upshot is that Intel gets support for their latest, expensive features at the OS level, whilst MS get hardware-level optimization for apps they want to write. Wrap the exact details in an NDA or two, and bingo - Windows runs better on Intel hardware, and Intel hardware runs Windows better. (ie Linux on Intel, and Windows on AMD just aren't as good)
Yes, the whole point is that you can run any OS on any hardware, but sometimes it pays to have a little help.
Cheers,
Tim
The only trouble with gesture-based control is that it's generally quicker and easier to hit a hot key combination.
For example, in Black and White, I've found that, when I'm in a hurry at least, hitting "m" on the keyboard is easier than tracing out the shape of an "m" with the mouse. Of course, that may be because I'm generally fighting with the terrain and a shifting viewpoint at the time...
Cheers,
Tim
Game designers know that clarity of interface is more important than the ability to sort a contact list by last letter of their middle name.
No.
Clarity of interface is nothng, if all it does is serve to illustrate that I cannot do what I want to do.
A balance must be struck between clarity, and utility.
Cheers,
Tim
Actually, on mine, it is games that really "spank" my system.
/. or go get a coffee.
A compile can take 10 seconds or 10 minutes - it really doesn't matter. If it's 10 seconds, I'll wait. If it's ten minutes, I'll read
On the other hand, if a game is running at less then about 40 frames a second, I'll quit it and go do something else instead.
I do agree up to a point, though - it's not just military installations that have more demanding apps running than games. For the vast majority of home users, however, he does have a point.
Cheers,
Tim
But of course, now that time and length and all those can be measured using some scientific method rather than some physical method
Damn, is Physics no longer a science?
Guess I'd better turn in my science degree then...
Cheers,
Tim
There is nothing wrong with selling value added extensions, as long as they aren't violating the lisence on the original body of code.
Of course, if you own the copyright on that code, then you are free to relicence it any way you see fit.
You can't change the terms of the licence by which I acquired my copy, but you can make it available from you exclusively under its new terms.
Of course, if the original licence was GPL-like, then you can't stop me from redistributing my version (although you are free to ask me to stop, you can't force me to)
Cheers,
Tim
That's just the same under Windows, where any program requires that you also install all the dlls that it requires.
You can think of the GUI "part" of Windows as being like KDE or Gnome. If you wanted to run a different Win32 GUI, but still run software written for Microsoft's GUI, you'd still have to have all the dlls installed for that one too. Of course, there isn't an alternative GUI/desktop shell and set of libraries, so that situation doesn't happen under Windows.
That's just the way software is written these days - you put useful, reusable chunks of code in libraries, and install them once on the machine, rather than as part of every application that requires them.
It increases app start up times a little (as these files have to be loaded and linked agaisnt), but decreases disk usage and promotes code reuse, which, as a programmer, I consider to be a Very Good Thing Indeed.
Cheers,
Tim
Well, on my measely little P3 450 with 256meg of RAM, I can't, except when CodeInsight pops up for the first time on a class. Then, it's slow. (And yes, I can type fast :) )
If you're really having problems with typing in JBuilder on your machine, I'd say it demonstrates an underlying problem with your machine, not with JBuilder or Java.
Cheers,
Tim
Tell that to Sklyarov.
However, even by claiming to have broken the encryption, he's placing himself at risk of being investigated, and possibly detained and questioned should he ever visit the US. (If I were to publicly announce that I had commited a crime, I would expect the authorities to take interest in me.)
Cheers,
Tim
After all, IPs can be spoofed, so if I trace a Virus e-mail back to the alledged sender and it comes up at an address at McAffee
That only really applies to the sort of people who are usually already clued-up enough to have some idea of what is and isn't real.
The average user has no idea what an IP address is, what spoofing one means, or how to find out who owns one.
What we need is some kind of identification verification procedure online...I'm all for tying real-life identities to online personas because it would mean accountability for actions
It would also mean the possibility for invasion of privacy on a staggering scale. In real life, I could get you arrested for following me around wherever I go, noting down who I speak to, what I look at, etc. Why should it be any different online? Just because I might commit a crime, that it would be harder to catch me for?
There will always be ways to circumvent any sort of identity scheme, if you know how to and want to badly enough. At best, all it'd do would be to remove any last vestage of privacy online for ordinary people, and let you catch the sort of criminals who aren't going to be bright enough to commit any serious crimes anyway. At worst, it would allow people to frame others much more easily, by using their identity to commit crimes online.
Cheers,
Tim
I only hope that Sklyarov (not to mention his family and friends) shares your sentiments.
This probably is the only way to get the DMCA amended, but it's not really fair that it involves a foreign national.
Cheers,
Tim
For that matter, all three original films were better than The Phantom Menace... :)
Cheers,
Tim
A good idea? Absolutely not.
Part of the problem with worms isn't just the malicious acts that they perpetrate, it's the bandwidth that they use.
A particularly virulent worm can bring servers and routers to their knees just propagating itself. That's before it even gets the chance to do any of its intended damage. (Remember Melissa, or The Great Internet Worm?)
Add to this very real concern the fact that striking back in this way, no matter the good intentions, is almost certainly illegal, and the whole idea is a definite no-no.
(Yes, it does have a certain appeal - but so do many other things that are bad ideas, too)
Cheers,
Tim
True, but spending $700 on chairs when perfectly acceptable ones can be had for a fraction of that price
a) wastes money that could be better spent elsewhere; and
b) indicates the sort of attitude towards money that should have had investors running for cover
Cheers,
Tim