Most of the people who suddenly downloaded the update were probably already using a prior version of Firefox. I would seriously doubt that this represents anything like 1 million new users.
I have a t-shirt announcing, proudly, 5 million copies of a company's flagship product shipping -- over the span of 4 years. We had a party and press releases, and a few folks recieved nice bonuses.
I think 1 million in 4 days even from current users is impressive.
When a user registers, give them read-only access to the forums for a few days or more--possibly with the option for access immediately if they make a donation ($1?).
By putting in a grace period, you are zapping the enthusiasm of potential postive contributors.
Making it harder for everyone to post not only impacts everyone and it is a bonus for the trolls; there are fewer competing posts.
In the worst case, you can put a delay on the posts of new participants; allow them to write a message, though don't post it till a moderator gives it a thumbs up/down. If the post is off-topic, follow the advice I've given in the other thread; move but never remove any message.
I ran corporate BBS systems and online forums in the late 80s to early 90s. Before that, I was active in bulletin board systems from the early 80s. In that time, I learned what has served me well on the Internet;
Many people don't understand that they are being asses; the other people are abstractions and not individuals. When you fight them, they take it as an amusing annoyance and are energized to poke you with a stick that much more.
Because of that, you do not want to give them a reason to feel 'wronged';
Never ban anyone.
Never remove a post.
Trust others to figure out the truth by themselves.
The reason why is that you always want everyone to see you as impartial and fair. If you remove or ban something/someone, you are saying that the other view has merit. By not attacking anyone -- even when they are clearly attempting to thwart what you do -- you allow your visitiors to judge.
Keep in mind that the oposite of love isn't hate -- it's apathy . Deal with the trolls apathetically, and they will not feel wanted...you will become booring to them since you offer nothing to attack.
Since you have a focused community, consider granting a moderation priviledge to a select group of frequent visitors. This is not the same as Slashdot since you can pick and choose from the smaller group, and the moderators would only be able to do one thing;
Move the post to another forum.
Once moved, a place marker would be used at the location of the original message or thread with a note saying 'Message moved to the ???? forum' and optionally a link titled 'Click here to view this message/thread'.
If you don't have a catch-all forum, create one to 'dump' the off topic posts. Important:
Do not shove the off topic forum out of view -- keep it in the first block of forums.
Give the new forum a non-insulting even moderately interesting title; 'Rants and raves', 'The lounge', 'Anything goes' or 'Other topics' not "Off topic".
One bonus of this method is that when your regular members do something rude or in bad taste, there is a way to deal with them that you do not control; your visitors control it.
Given that XP isn't just Win2K SP5 but is in fact Win2K with an awful lot of extra chrome tacked on, it was never going to be more stable to begin with.
If XP isn't stable now, maybe they shouldn't have added all that extra chrome in the first place? (If that is even the reason for the stability problems; I'm not convinced!)
Virus/trojan detectors give false positives all the time.
Yanking a program you know about out just because one of these programs says it is bad isn't smart...though I've felt like choking a few admins who took any report as 100% valid.
Looking at processors like these, they're aimed at the server market.
Yes, though only in a specific way. The lag on most servers isn't CPU it's disk I/O. Having so many cores on the same package would make short work of some calculations though mostly for financial, military, nuclear, other sciences.
In a typical company, more CPU girth is wasted unless you find a new application for it; server-side execution of client programs (Sun's own Java Desktop Linux distribution) and server consolidation come to mind. This may require a management change as much as a server room change.
Situation: If you type in an address in Firefox -- about:plugins, yahoo.com (with or without http:// and www.) -- and hit enter, nothing happens.
That's right the *enter key* is ignored.
Also happens for the search field.
Details: Windows 98 system. RC1 and other recient 9.x releases. Firefox was removed and reinstalled multiple times to avoid this. Works fine on all other systems I've encountered (Win XP, 2000, and Fedora Linux). I found one person who also experienced this, though they were planing the uninstall/reinistall tactic and did not report the results.
Or how about something reasonable like deleting the software that the user was trying to pirate?
I don't think he'd have faced a lot of criticism if the software's reaction was that mild. However, he might have caught a lot of heat if it happened accidentally with a legit user.
How does software know that the data being handled is illegal. (Exception: Unless it is the software program deleting itself. That would be smart because the user with a paid/valid copy could correct the problem easily enough.)
It's not over for Microsoft's efforts...though it's very close to being over. The important section that points this out -- with highlighted text -- is below;
3) On the issue of ignoring patent claims, the working group has at least rough consensus that the patent claims should not be ignored. Additionally, there is at least rough consensus that the participants of the working group cannot accurately describe the specific claims of the patent application. This stems from the fact that the patent application is not publicly available. Given this, it is the opinion of the co-chairs that MARID should not undertake work on alternate algorithms reasonably thought to be covered by the patent application. We do feel that future changes regarding the patent claim or its associated license could significantly change the consensus of the working group, and at such a time it would be appropriate to consider new work of this type.
They aren't saying that the Microsoft patent (or any patent) is bad...they are saying that it can't be publically reviewed or is not clear enough to make a decision.
This does give Microsoft some wiggle room if they want to 'clarify' what they mean...and in the course of that, possibly elminate the problems they originally introduced.
Microsoft has a choice to either correct the mistakes (by 'clarifying' them) or what they contributed with patent encumberences will not be accepted.
Quake III has been ported to the Mac. Quake (not III) has been ported to Linux on Mac hardware. I don't think Quake III for Linux has been ported to Linux on Mac hardware. (Could be wrong!)
Because of that, running an x86 Quake III (Linux or Windows) on OSX or MacOS on Mac hardware is a real trick. I'd like to see it.
I'm waiting for IE's rendering engine to be ported, possibly with some help from Wine.
Wine would drop to debug mode when an IE defect were exploited since Wine doesn't support these specific defects or can't map them to Unix/Linux resources. I don't know about you, but I'd go nuts restarting the browser every 5 seconds.
Why? I'm a better cook than most of the women I've dated. In fact, most can barely cook anything too complex or if they don't follow strict and basic directions.
Cooking is a set of suggestions with only a few rules -- and most of the rules are generic techniques.
It took me a few years to convince one girlfriend to improvise. Early on, she'd be quite annoyed if I dropped items from the list of ingredients or added new ones...let alone not aollowing the exact measurements.
I can tell you, alternate streams would be a mean vector to spread a virus on.
Yep. The only drawback for the black hats is that this is NTFS-specific. I wonder if any of the good guys have researched this?
Just like the file name extentions have been abused so throughly for years. That's very annoying to me, btw. Why rely on a file extention to tell anything about executing or loading a file in an app? The contents should be the arbitrator; if it has a zip header (or trailer), it's a zip file...if it uses low ASCII characters, it's a text file. If it has a executible header, it's a program.
I guess the world of tomorrow doesn't support Mozilla/FireFox. I can't view the page.
Worked fine for me. (Running Firefox preview release 1.0 NF under Linux)
Ran the videos, watched the flash, changed the 'themes'...no issues with the site.
I even installed the Windows version of the game under the current release of Wine and it installed and ran fine...till it asked for the login information. Checking back with the site, they say that DirectX is required (not surprised) so I'm not going to bother getting an ID.
Man pages answer the 'how' question. They do not answer the 'what' or 'why' questions.
Because of that, if you don't know what you need -- let alone what command likely does the job -- the man pages will not help one bit.
When in doubt, I first search online to see what other people use and how they do it. After that point, I consult the man pages to see what the syntax means so that I don't nuke or dammage anything. I doubt that I'm alone in this practice (from novices through to true gurus (you know, the modest ones)).
Tip: Use the info command instead of man. I've found it is a good bridge between man and Google and often is all I need.
Who would you like to run your network folks? Scary...
Re:yet another worthless article about IPv6
on
An Introduction to IPv6
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
As for the shortages, you think that it's a good idea to have scarcity in the IP market just so people will be encouraged to run NAT? I think its presumptious of you to force conditions on me, personally I'd love to have IPs for each machine in my house, but I can't because IP addresses are hard to come by.
Spliting public addresses (Internet routable) and private addresses (non-Internet routable) addresses from each other is a good idea. NAT is the main way to do that.
As a system administrator, you probably know that your networking equipment is aware of this public/private split, and that this makes your job of configuring everything easier and more secure.
As a system administrator, you know how to route ports from different machines through 1 IP. You pick gear that can do the work for you, so having 1 port isn't much of an issue.
So, as a system administrator...why do I have to even mention this?
...or maybe I'm just too used to the *nix/Linux/BSD/... way of doing things. (Just secured an XP-based system using these methods, so it can be done under Windows if not as easily.)
The question I have is;
Why did anything have to be added to Windows to block these devices?
If you run a network that you want secured, and you know about these devices, why not either set permissions on the devices or yank support for USB beyond keyboards, mice, and other harmless devices? Why add anything ? Removing support and/or restricting access using the existing permissions settings seems to be a better plan.
While that's interesting to me (comment below), you do know that "hansreiser" is likely Hans Reiser who wrote the Reiser file system? He does know a wee bit about what he's talking about and probably doesn't find it interesting.
Now, to my comment on NTFS: If the $DATA stream is the only one that is reported on, creating other streams seems like an ideal way to hide things. This can be for good or evil uses...though how would a normal person check for the evil or unauthorized ones?
Slashdot Mirror
I have a t-shirt announcing, proudly, 5 million copies of a company's flagship product shipping -- over the span of 4 years. We had a party and press releases, and a few folks recieved nice bonuses.
I think 1 million in 4 days even from current users is impressive.
By putting in a grace period, you are zapping the enthusiasm of potential postive contributors.
Making it harder for everyone to post not only impacts everyone and it is a bonus for the trolls; there are fewer competing posts.
I've made a comment in another thread on one way to reduce the impact of trolls.
In the worst case, you can put a delay on the posts of new participants; allow them to write a message, though don't post it till a moderator gives it a thumbs up/down. If the post is off-topic, follow the advice I've given in the other thread; move but never remove any message.
I ran corporate BBS systems and online forums in the late 80s to early 90s. Before that, I was active in bulletin board systems from the early 80s. In that time, I learned what has served me well on the Internet;
Many people don't understand that they are being asses; the other people are abstractions and not individuals. When you fight them, they take it as an amusing annoyance and are energized to poke you with a stick that much more.
Because of that, you do not want to give them a reason to feel 'wronged';
Never ban anyone.
Never remove a post.
Trust others to figure out the truth by themselves.
The reason why is that you always want everyone to see you as impartial and fair. If you remove or ban something/someone, you are saying that the other view has merit. By not attacking anyone -- even when they are clearly attempting to thwart what you do -- you allow your visitiors to judge.
Keep in mind that the oposite of love isn't hate -- it's apathy . Deal with the trolls apathetically, and they will not feel wanted...you will become booring to them since you offer nothing to attack.
Since you have a focused community, consider granting a moderation priviledge to a select group of frequent visitors. This is not the same as Slashdot since you can pick and choose from the smaller group, and the moderators would only be able to do one thing;
Move the post to another forum.
Once moved, a place marker would be used at the location of the original message or thread with a note saying 'Message moved to the ???? forum' and optionally a link titled 'Click here to view this message/thread'.
If you don't have a catch-all forum, create one to 'dump' the off topic posts. Important:
Do not shove the off topic forum out of view -- keep it in the first block of forums.
Give the new forum a non-insulting even moderately interesting title; 'Rants and raves', 'The lounge', 'Anything goes' or 'Other topics' not "Off topic".
One bonus of this method is that when your regular members do something rude or in bad taste, there is a way to deal with them that you do not control; your visitors control it.
How about send out spam, and anyone who responds...act out the final scene of Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back!
Shouldn't cost 6 figures -- I'm sure we could get folks to join in for free!
IT was MY POST that was STOLEN!
Well, I'm glad that people like it the second time around. Would be good if I got credit up front!
Windows NT came out in 1993.
Windows XP came out in 2001.
It is now late 2004.
Windows XP is the latest in a chain of operating systems starting with Windows NT.
If XP isn't stable now, maybe they shouldn't have added all that extra chrome in the first place? (If that is even the reason for the stability problems; I'm not convinced!)
Yanking a program you know about out just because one of these programs says it is bad isn't smart...though I've felt like choking a few admins who took any report as 100% valid.
That said, is this stupidity or malace?
I've had no problem with my parents (both almost 70). Here's what I did;
A bonus was pointing out that popup blocking is included.
Nope -- unless one is being loaded at boot time. I've removed Firefox, reinstalled it, *rebooted*, and the enter key is ignored.
Yes, though only in a specific way. The lag on most servers isn't CPU it's disk I/O. Having so many cores on the same package would make short work of some calculations though mostly for financial, military, nuclear, other sciences.
In a typical company, more CPU girth is wasted unless you find a new application for it; server-side execution of client programs (Sun's own Java Desktop Linux distribution) and server consolidation come to mind. This may require a management change as much as a server room change.
Situation: If you type in an address in Firefox -- about:plugins, yahoo.com (with or without http:// and www.) -- and hit enter, nothing happens.
That's right the *enter key* is ignored.
Also happens for the search field.
Details: Windows 98 system. RC1 and other recient 9.x releases. Firefox was removed and reinstalled multiple times to avoid this. Works fine on all other systems I've encountered (Win XP, 2000, and Fedora Linux). I found one person who also experienced this, though they were planing the uninstall/reinistall tactic and did not report the results.
I don't think he'd have faced a lot of criticism if the software's reaction was that mild. However, he might have caught a lot of heat if it happened accidentally with a legit user.
How does software know that the data being handled is illegal. (Exception: Unless it is the software program deleting itself. That would be smart because the user with a paid/valid copy could correct the problem easily enough.)
It's not over for Microsoft's efforts...though it's very close to being over. The important section that points this out -- with highlighted text -- is below;
They aren't saying that the Microsoft patent (or any patent) is bad...they are saying that it can't be publically reviewed or is not clear enough to make a decision.
This does give Microsoft some wiggle room if they want to 'clarify' what they mean...and in the course of that, possibly elminate the problems they originally introduced.
Microsoft has a choice to either correct the mistakes (by 'clarifying' them) or what they contributed with patent encumberences will not be accepted.
Quake III has been ported to the Mac. Quake (not III) has been ported to Linux on Mac hardware. I don't think Quake III for Linux has been ported to Linux on Mac hardware. (Could be wrong!)
Because of that, running an x86 Quake III (Linux or Windows) on OSX or MacOS on Mac hardware is a real trick. I'd like to see it.
Wine would drop to debug mode when an IE defect were exploited since Wine doesn't support these specific defects or can't map them to Unix/Linux resources. I don't know about you, but I'd go nuts restarting the browser every 5 seconds.
That 32MB flash should be usable to boot the machine nearly instantly; no need to suspend/hibernate to save battery life.
I wonder what the Opie and OpenZaurus folks think about the Pepper Pad 2?
Compared to a Zaurus, this is a good upgrade.
- 3. Do whatever she says.
Why? I'm a better cook than most of the women I've dated. In fact, most can barely cook anything too complex or if they don't follow strict and basic directions.Cooking is a set of suggestions with only a few rules -- and most of the rules are generic techniques.
It took me a few years to convince one girlfriend to improvise. Early on, she'd be quite annoyed if I dropped items from the list of ingredients or added new ones...let alone not aollowing the exact measurements.
Yep. The only drawback for the black hats is that this is NTFS-specific. I wonder if any of the good guys have researched this?
Just like the file name extentions have been abused so throughly for years. That's very annoying to me, btw. Why rely on a file extention to tell anything about executing or loading a file in an app? The contents should be the arbitrator; if it has a zip header (or trailer), it's a zip file...if it uses low ASCII characters, it's a text file. If it has a executible header, it's a program.
Worked fine for me. (Running Firefox preview release 1.0 NF under Linux)
Ran the videos, watched the flash, changed the 'themes'...no issues with the site.
I even installed the Windows version of the game under the current release of Wine and it installed and ran fine...till it asked for the login information. Checking back with the site, they say that DirectX is required (not surprised) so I'm not going to bother getting an ID.
Because of that, if you don't know what you need -- let alone what command likely does the job -- the man pages will not help one bit.
When in doubt, I first search online to see what other people use and how they do it. After that point, I consult the man pages to see what the syntax means so that I don't nuke or dammage anything. I doubt that I'm alone in this practice (from novices through to true gurus (you know, the modest ones)).
Tip: Use the info command instead of man. I've found it is a good bridge between man and Google and often is all I need.
The person I was commenting on was modded up.
Who would you like to run your network folks? Scary...
Spliting public addresses (Internet routable) and private addresses (non-Internet routable) addresses from each other is a good idea. NAT is the main way to do that.
As a system administrator, you probably know that your networking equipment is aware of this public/private split, and that this makes your job of configuring everything easier and more secure.
As a system administrator, you know how to route ports from different machines through 1 IP. You pick gear that can do the work for you, so having 1 port isn't much of an issue.
So, as a system administrator...why do I have to even mention this?
The question I have is;
If you run a network that you want secured, and you know about these devices, why not either set permissions on the devices or yank support for USB beyond keyboards, mice, and other harmless devices? Why add anything ? Removing support and/or restricting access using the existing permissions settings seems to be a better plan.
Now, to my comment on NTFS: If the $DATA stream is the only one that is reported on, creating other streams seems like an ideal way to hide things. This can be for good or evil uses...though how would a normal person check for the evil or unauthorized ones?