In fact, it's even more "free" because you can make closed-source programs with it (even if it means paying someone) while you don't have that option at all with just the GPL.
Erm...no, no it is not. The GPL libraries do not prevent you from making closed source programs if you link to them. As for the GPLed apps based on QT or any other libs, the licence of the libs don't impact them in any way -- and if you are the copyright holder on all the code, you can make it closed at any time...you can't demand people who have the GPLed code do the same, though. See Tux Racer as an example (open branch is still there, though closed branch came afterward).
I don't mean to troll, I really am curious. I hear many people on slashdot harp on the benefits of OSS in one breath, and then complain about their jobs in the next. Wouldn't it make sense for these people to get a job writing software and getting paid for it, instead of writing high quality software for free and then earning money doing something they hate?
Who says we're harping about the open source parts? Try getting paid to deal with MS Access one-off DBs all day long! Reuse of OSS and using better processes/procedures are two ways to stop this madness and still get paid. Not everything is roll-your-own.
Writing free (as in beer) software for home users I can understand. But CRM and Accounting software saves companies thousands of dollars in labor costs. If his company is going to be making money with your software, doesn't it make sense that you should get a kickback?
Who says you can't charge for OSS? Most coding is customization or one-off applications anyway.
Keep in mind that once you create a program, it can be duplicated easily and does not expire from overuse or neglect. Over time, the trend is to eliminate the closed source parts since there is no reason to pay for from scratch new development when most code does not get stale and only requires a minimal amount of tending.
OSS CRM might not be there now for everyone, though there is little reason to use the closed options for many (not all) companies besides a security blanket.
Since everything will be computerized, many jobs now can be broadly dumped in the "computer industry" category -- though to do so is an error.
Most tasks just happen to use computers and software, though the industry itself might be banking, health care, financial, insurance, government (various), or any variety of business that aren't producing computerized tech for anyone except themselves. These jobs are users of computers and software, they are not in the industry.
At one point, I sort of assumed that anybody could sit down and figure out a computer if they got past the intimidation factor and just took time to understand the basic paradigm by which things happen. I don't think that anymore -- instead, I've glommed onto the more cynical viewpoint that many people reach a certain age beyond which they're just basically incapable of picking up new things.
I don't think most people are incapable, though there are a few that are dense. (For the true morons, back away slowly and smile alot. Don't deal with them on any level; it's just not worth it.)
The basics of computers and software are easy to learn, and most people can understand them in a short period of time -- though few people have any interest in knowing the basics, so they don't pay attention.
Add to that the insane variety of objects that are computerized and the common themes in them are easily missed.
"Some interesting (and rather frightening) news over at Space.com tells that the Earth is growing around the equator due to the fact that ice in the Antarctic (and other areas) is melting at an alarming rate."
Me to Earth: Hey pudgy! Getting a little wide around the middle, eh? Too much fat? Too many carbs? Either way, too many calories. Maybe a no-sun diet? Ever think of that? Do us both a favor and don't have a coronary!
How is java less lock-in than,NET? Both are closed products with free alternatives. Java has Kaffe, lots of small jvm's and classpath -.NET has Mono.
While in general I agree -- the core implementations of both are closed source -- the two are entirely different when motivations come around.
Sun: Motivated to create a Java developer base and sell related goods on various platforms.
Microsoft: Motivated to create a C# developer base and sell related goods on Microsoft platforms (Windows NT and Windows CE lines).
While I don't entirely trust Sun, they have a much better history when it comes to trustworthyness.
All that said, the.Gnu and Mono projects are damn important. They are also doing a difficult task on an unreliable (and fluid) 'standard'^.
(^ - Standard sadly means "What's popular" to most people...they are wrong, though that's how they think of it. Ex: Windows and Word are 'standards'. )
Last week, after looking at what was comming in for my domain, I suspected that the whole virus was a ruse for spamming. Along with the mydoom virus, a few different viri showed up...1/2 sent to addresses that have only recieved spam in the past. Over the past few days, my spam load has doubled.
While this is not a clear indication that the spammers sent Mydoom and other viri around the same time, it is mighty curious.
Postini Inc., a security company that cleanses E-mail before it reaches corporate networks, said Friday it had intercepted more than 12.5 million copies of MyDoom and its variant since the original virus was launched last Monday. In the first 24 hours of the attack, Postini intercepted 3.5 million copies of the virus. On Friday, the company reported an infection rate of 1 in 24 E-mails.
They missed a couple...or there are variations or new viri out there attempting to sneek under the radar. (Postini works fairly well for mail filtering when you are on the road.)
Yes, I know that. There's nothing special about that keyboard combination, though. Another combination could be used just as easily...and there's no real security benifit from using it.
Re:What they didn't include in the article
on
SCO Offline
·
· Score: 1
"It's also possible the attack against SCO is just a smokescreen to misdirect attention away from the backdoor component in the virus - which is most likely included in order to facilitate sending of spam email messages."
That would make sense. I've gotten the virus on email accounts that only received spam -- no legit mail -- over the past few years, plus bogus accounts I've not seen in use before. (I have a domain name that only I use.)
Re:How did this virus spread so easily?
on
SCO Offline
·
· Score: 1
Instead, how about acknowleging that some times dangerous things are possible, and that, having done the dangerous thing once and gotten burned by it, the user should learn to NOT DO THE DANGEROUS THING ANYMORE.
Either way, Phil Wherry was right; "The lack of distinction between executable files and data is the first problem. Windows differentiates between data files and programs through file naming convention; the mere construction of a filename is sufficient to get the operating system to attempt to run it if the user should happen to click on it within the GUI."
If the environment encourages casual mistakes or even hides the danger signs from view -- for experts and nubies alike -- that is a serious issue. Microsoft needs to fix this design defect; no excuses.
The first x86 computer I owned -- an 8086 lugable -- had a keyboard that linked directly to the CPU and no virtualization hardware. Pressing CTRL-ALT-DEL was handy on that system, and over time moving on to 286s, and 386s it still had a function till both the hardware and the operating systems started to trap it. At that point, CTRL-ALT-DEL stopped being a reliable override and started to become a function of software.
When Windows NT came out, touting that it supported MIPS and Alpha processors, the system boards for those chips did not have even a hint of this original hardware design. I thought that it was reasonable to drop support for that keyboard combination entirely on the software side, and special case trap it for any of the remaining hardware under x86. Drop it as a historic oddity and move on.
Instead, it was retained as a "security" feature in the NT line for logging in to a machine and locking the machine as if there were something special about pressing CTRL-ALT-DEL on all hardware -- if the keyboard even had those keys or they mapped to anything resembling the hardware on Windows NT came out, touting that it supported MIPS and Alpha processors, the system boards for those chips did not have even a hint of this original hardware design. I thought that it was reasonable to drop support for that entirely on the software side, and special case trap it for any of the remaining hardware under x86.an x86!
This alone was a big red flag to me that Microsoft didn't get it. Add to it the heavy x86 virtualization used on the other hardware and it was clear MS wasn't entirely serious about portability let alone real security.
With that, can anyone give a good reason to keep CTRL-ALT-DEL around for any function except as an old-time legacy habit for DOS/Windows users? Is there a technical reason why that combo is more valuable? I can't think of one...
I'll help, and give advice, though if my advice is ignored and they run into problems I'm *NOT* fixing what could have been easily prevented. As a service, I even send out periodic email messages as friendly reminders to IE users in the family that they should update unless they are using Mozilla or Firebird. I won't fix those systems in either case though they have been warned!
I understand. Maybe you could run BSD on the 486, or cut out services on Windows to get it working?
VNC works for me mainly because my Linux laptop is just that; mine. The test system is the company's, so I use the monitor from it and the keyboard just for comfort, and VNC to view the now headless Windows machine.
(I'd use BSD with few complaints if that were on my laptop -- or desktops -- instead of Linux.)
I've been using FreeBSD/KDE at work as a desktop for about two years now. Now I'm being forced to use Windows 2000 to get my work done. I've never really used Windows extensively except as a cheap ass program launcher for games. Now after three workdays of using as a work environment I've lost three millimeters of hairline. I'm absolutely dumbfounded that people put up with Windows in the business workplace.
You don't have to abandon *BSD. Use VNC and a second Windows system. That way, you can use Windows-specific apps and still keep your sanity. I do this from Linux to support custom VB/Access programs -- a tourture enough as it is.
Agreed. The skill level needed for good administration of either Windows (NT branch) -OR unix-like systems such as Linux are about the same. It's just;
* Easier to screw it up under Windows.
* Harder to find the obscure parts of Windows by guessing; it's all "special sauce" below a certian level.
* Harder to find a good Windows admin since the basics are so simple and most stop at the basics!
Slashdot Mirror
Erm...no, no it is not. The GPL libraries do not prevent you from making closed source programs if you link to them. As for the GPLed apps based on QT or any other libs, the licence of the libs don't impact them in any way -- and if you are the copyright holder on all the code, you can make it closed at any time...you can't demand people who have the GPLed code do the same, though. See Tux Racer as an example (open branch is still there, though closed branch came afterward).
Who says we're harping about the open source parts? Try getting paid to deal with MS Access one-off DBs all day long! Reuse of OSS and using better processes/procedures are two ways to stop this madness and still get paid. Not everything is roll-your-own.
Who says you can't charge for OSS? Most coding is customization or one-off applications anyway.
Keep in mind that once you create a program, it can be duplicated easily and does not expire from overuse or neglect. Over time, the trend is to eliminate the closed source parts since there is no reason to pay for from scratch new development when most code does not get stale and only requires a minimal amount of tending.
OSS CRM might not be there now for everyone, though there is little reason to use the closed options for many (not all) companies besides a security blanket.
Since everything will be computerized, many jobs now can be broadly dumped in the "computer industry" category -- though to do so is an error.
Most tasks just happen to use computers and software, though the industry itself might be banking, health care, financial, insurance, government (various), or any variety of business that aren't producing computerized tech for anyone except themselves. These jobs are users of computers and software, they are not in the industry.
It is our jobs to make it easy to use. Be it as a programmer, a sysadm, or a help desk person. The end goal is to get the end user to use the product.
"The" computer industry? Our job? I'm thinking you don't quite realize what most people do.
I don't think most people are incapable, though there are a few that are dense. (For the true morons, back away slowly and smile alot. Don't deal with them on any level; it's just not worth it.)
The basics of computers and software are easy to learn, and most people can understand them in a short period of time -- though few people have any interest in knowing the basics, so they don't pay attention.
Add to that the insane variety of objects that are computerized and the common themes in them are easily missed.
I say I'm a proctologist. Men don't want to talk to you, and women see you as a steady source of income!
(Just kidding...I'm sure proctologists get dumb and annoying questions too; I have no interest in learning what those are.)
Hell, I could buy the spam lists...the spammers keep trying to sell me them all the time!
Me to Earth: Hey pudgy! Getting a little wide around the middle, eh? Too much fat? Too many carbs? Either way, too many calories. Maybe a no-sun diet? Ever think of that? Do us both a favor and don't have a coronary!
While in general I agree -- the core implementations of both are closed source -- the two are entirely different when motivations come around.
Sun: Motivated to create a Java developer base and sell related goods on various platforms.
Microsoft: Motivated to create a C# developer base and sell related goods on Microsoft platforms (Windows NT and Windows CE lines).
While I don't entirely trust Sun, they have a much better history when it comes to trustworthyness.
All that said, the .Gnu and Mono projects are damn important. They are also doing a difficult task on an unreliable (and fluid) 'standard'^.
While this is not a clear indication that the spammers sent Mydoom and other viri around the same time, it is mighty curious.
So, how many old watches do you have?
Are the watches you have common of the era that it was made, or were they made to last (and are the exception)?
Do many analog watches support syncing to atomic clocks?
They missed a couple...or there are variations or new viri out there attempting to sneek under the radar. (Postini works fairly well for mail filtering when you are on the road.)
Yes, I know that. There's nothing special about that keyboard combination, though. Another combination could be used just as easily...and there's no real security benifit from using it.
That would make sense. I've gotten the virus on email accounts that only received spam -- no legit mail -- over the past few years, plus bogus accounts I've not seen in use before. (I have a domain name that only I use.)
Either way, Phil Wherry was right; "The lack of distinction between executable files and data is the first problem. Windows differentiates between data files and programs through file naming convention; the mere construction of a filename is sufficient to get the operating system to attempt to run it if the user should happen to click on it within the GUI."
If the environment encourages casual mistakes or even hides the danger signs from view -- for experts and nubies alike -- that is a serious issue. Microsoft needs to fix this design defect; no excuses.
ctrl-alt-del is hard to type, hard to mistype, so why insist that it be used by novice and expert, making both familiar with this?
When Windows NT came out, touting that it supported MIPS and Alpha processors, the system boards for those chips did not have even a hint of this original hardware design. I thought that it was reasonable to drop support for that keyboard combination entirely on the software side, and special case trap it for any of the remaining hardware under x86. Drop it as a historic oddity and move on.
Instead, it was retained as a "security" feature in the NT line for logging in to a machine and locking the machine as if there were something special about pressing CTRL-ALT-DEL on all hardware -- if the keyboard even had those keys or they mapped to anything resembling the hardware on Windows NT came out, touting that it supported MIPS and Alpha processors, the system boards for those chips did not have even a hint of this original hardware design. I thought that it was reasonable to drop support for that entirely on the software side, and special case trap it for any of the remaining hardware under x86.an x86!
This alone was a big red flag to me that Microsoft didn't get it. Add to it the heavy x86 virtualization used on the other hardware and it was clear MS wasn't entirely serious about portability let alone real security.
With that, can anyone give a good reason to keep CTRL-ALT-DEL around for any function except as an old-time legacy habit for DOS/Windows users? Is there a technical reason why that combo is more valuable? I can't think of one...
I'll help, and give advice, though if my advice is ignored and they run into problems I'm *NOT* fixing what could have been easily prevented. As a service, I even send out periodic email messages as friendly reminders to IE users in the family that they should update unless they are using Mozilla or Firebird. I won't fix those systems in either case though they have been warned!
VNC works for me mainly because my Linux laptop is just that; mine. The test system is the company's, so I use the monitor from it and the keyboard just for comfort, and VNC to view the now headless Windows machine.
(I'd use BSD with few complaints if that were on my laptop -- or desktops -- instead of Linux.)
You don't have to abandon *BSD. Use VNC and a second Windows system. That way, you can use Windows-specific apps and still keep your sanity. I do this from Linux to support custom VB/Access programs -- a tourture enough as it is.
* Easier to screw it up under Windows.
* Harder to find the obscure parts of Windows by guessing; it's all "special sauce" below a certian level.
* Harder to find a good Windows admin since the basics are so simple and most stop at the basics!
Who modded this up? It's 90% hooey!
*BLINK* So, Bash can be compared to BSD and Solaris? Will the wonders ever stop!?!?!?!
[incredulous mode]
British Empire???? Bill Gates; damn foreigner!