Cowards tend to never follow up, anyway. Drive-by comments. Further, you don't even know if you're talking to the same one if they do seem to be following up.
Further, Coward posts are far more likely to contain nothing but fr1st post and racist remarks. For this reason, some people ignore ACs automatically.
Don't be a 2nd class citizen in the standing room with the rabble. Register.
Hint: The top methods are by sending email or IMs, infecting files on fileshares, or making connections to other computers on the network. Do you need admin access for any of that? Noop.
Thanks for sharing your uninformed opinion, though. Try to be informed before you speak up next time, though.
If a user runs an application as that user (not admin), the app can destroy all the user's data and spread to other systems. The same is true for malware running as administrator.
You seem to think an administrator account on a PC should also have admin privileges to a backup system? That's just a bad idea, whether the user of the PC runs as admin or not.
Wow, you replied to me three times, ferociously called names, and stated absolutely nothing to support your points in any post. That's probably the saddest thing I've ever seen. Reading your other comments, it seems you have severe anger issues and a serious lack of understanding of operating systems.
Your post was mostly incoherent. Please proofread so we can understand you.
I think you might have called me (personally?) a "fucking idiot." If that is the case, I respect a man who is willing to hide behind his computer and call people names. That takes real strength.
You didn't do ANYTHING to refute anything I said, however.
You're plain old incorrect about reading comprehension, though. I score top marks in that category. I just don't give a crap about ACs enough to read their posts thoroughly.
If we define intelligence as "able to use reasoning to achieve a goal" then an AI, then whether or not an AI kills itself depends on the goal.
If the goal is "keep Americans alive" and the AI controls defensive systems, it may reason to kill all other nations. If the goal is "stop other nations from killing Americans" then it may reason to kill Americans so that other nations don't get the chance.
I think some of the scientists quoted are just silly. Of course an AI with military capabilities might try to kill humanity! It just depends on what its goals are.
You don't understand, Mr. Coward. The mobile style is declared as such. The client decides which style to use (mobile or not). No UA sniffing is involved.
You are right. Sudo doesn't help much at all on a single-user linux desktop, either. You could still accidentally wipe all your data. You could still execute destructive viral malware, all without using sudo. The system files protected by UAC and the sudo security model are the least important files on the machine.
Think about mobile devices and screen readers. Such devices can easily display/read the header div, followed by the content div, followed by the footer div, followed by the menu div.
Now think about nested tables. How could this software reformat or reinterpret the layout to meet its requirements? Not so easily, that's for sure.
I've been looking into Flex development, but I was not aware it was crippleware. This is quite interesting. Perhaps I should instead keep my focus on improving my AJAX skills. Thanks for sharing.
The idea is to prevent the malware running at all.
No, it isn't. UAC puts a big scary warning before malware uses administrator privileges. It does not warn about or prevent malware from executing with the privileges of a normal user.
You overgeneralized about UAC, and you completely misstated my comments.
UAC is intended to prevent malware from harming the user. The idea is that malware running as a normal user (not as an administrator) can't harm the user or spread to other users. That's an absolutely false assumption--one which has its roots in the multi-user servers of yore, not the single-user desktops of today.
Today, malware running as a normal user can both spread and destroy all data on a system which the user values. When UAC deployment is common, malware authors will simply adjust their software so that it doesn't trigger UAC. No significant security benefit; large associated cost.
Did you read all the way to the end of my post? Because most machines do not use this "feature," it can screw up much existing malware. But as soon as the feature becomes standard, it will be a worthless expense. The mistake you are making is that you are forgetting that the data, not the system files, is all that matters to the end user.
That's not scary, and it has nothing to do with "corporations." It's just how your brain reads: it looks at the shape of words and phrases, rather than the individaul lettres. If it finds a match to the shape, that's what you read--unless you are paying particulraly close attnetion.
You need to look up how slashdot's moderation system works before you make dumb comments. It takes three moderators to make a comment +5. I'm pretty sure there are more than three users of slashdot other than yourself.
After you educate yourself on how the moderation system works, you may continue to make dumb comments.
For a single-user system (the majority of Windows desktops), it doesn't matter whether or not the user is an Administrator, at least from a security perspective. What threats are you protecting against by subjecting users to extra authentication buttons when installing apps? The only thing the single user really cares about is his own data! Malware running with his (non-administratior) access can destroy his data just as well as malware running as administrator. With either permission, the malware can spread via sockets, file infections, or web access.
This obsession with UAC on single-user desktop systems is simply misguided. Yes, some existing malware may break if it runs with non-admin privileges. But once non-admin becomes common, malware authors will just stop presupposing admin access when coding.
Swilver wants to use NoScript to remove javascript from his web pages. 1998 was an era when javascript was only used for "stupid browser tricks", as opposed to today, when javascript is essential to the functionality of a large percentage of web resources. He's living in the past.
Slashdot Mirror
... and do you update this envelope every 90 days when the password changes?
You amuse me. I bet everyone loves you, as easily as you call names. Buzz off, kid.
No, that's not what I said. My point was that once UAC is ubiquitous, it won't prevent malware from destroying data or from spreading.
You're one of the least skilled trolls I've seen on slashdot, by the way. But you put a lot of effort into it! Keep going.
You're an interesting guy. Every post calls names. None contain information. How old are you, kid?
Cowards tend to never follow up, anyway. Drive-by comments. Further, you don't even know if you're talking to the same one if they do seem to be following up.
Further, Coward posts are far more likely to contain nothing but fr1st post and racist remarks. For this reason, some people ignore ACs automatically.
Don't be a 2nd class citizen in the standing room with the rabble. Register.
Sounds like you don't know how malware is spread.
Hint: The top methods are by sending email or IMs, infecting files on fileshares, or making connections to other computers on the network. Do you need admin access for any of that? Noop.
Thanks for sharing your uninformed opinion, though. Try to be informed before you speak up next time, though.
If a user runs an application as that user (not admin), the app can destroy all the user's data and spread to other systems. The same is true for malware running as administrator.
You seem to think an administrator account on a PC should also have admin privileges to a backup system? That's just a bad idea, whether the user of the PC runs as admin or not.
Wow, you replied to me three times, ferociously called names, and stated absolutely nothing to support your points in any post. That's probably the saddest thing I've ever seen. Reading your other comments, it seems you have severe anger issues and a serious lack of understanding of operating systems.
Your post was mostly incoherent. Please proofread so we can understand you.
I think you might have called me (personally?) a "fucking idiot." If that is the case, I respect a man who is willing to hide behind his computer and call people names. That takes real strength.
You didn't do ANYTHING to refute anything I said, however.
Pardon me, Ms. Coward.
You're plain old incorrect about reading comprehension, though. I score top marks in that category. I just don't give a crap about ACs enough to read their posts thoroughly.
If we define intelligence as "able to use reasoning to achieve a goal" then an AI, then whether or not an AI kills itself depends on the goal.
If the goal is "keep Americans alive" and the AI controls defensive systems, it may reason to kill all other nations. If the goal is "stop other nations from killing Americans" then it may reason to kill Americans so that other nations don't get the chance.
I think some of the scientists quoted are just silly. Of course an AI with military capabilities might try to kill humanity! It just depends on what its goals are.
too many != every last one
You don't understand, Mr. Coward. The mobile style is declared as such. The client decides which style to use (mobile or not). No UA sniffing is involved.
Yep. It's spending and campaign contribution data I want to see side by side.
You are right. Sudo doesn't help much at all on a single-user linux desktop, either. You could still accidentally wipe all your data. You could still execute destructive viral malware, all without using sudo. The system files protected by UAC and the sudo security model are the least important files on the machine.
Think about mobile devices and screen readers. Such devices can easily display/read the header div, followed by the content div, followed by the footer div, followed by the menu div.
Now think about nested tables. How could this software reformat or reinterpret the layout to meet its requirements? Not so easily, that's for sure.
I've been looking into Flex development, but I was not aware it was crippleware. This is quite interesting. Perhaps I should instead keep my focus on improving my AJAX skills. Thanks for sharing.
No, it isn't. UAC puts a big scary warning before malware uses administrator privileges. It does not warn about or prevent malware from executing with the privileges of a normal user.
You overgeneralized about UAC, and you completely misstated my comments.
UAC is intended to prevent malware from harming the user. The idea is that malware running as a normal user (not as an administrator) can't harm the user or spread to other users. That's an absolutely false assumption--one which has its roots in the multi-user servers of yore, not the single-user desktops of today.
Today, malware running as a normal user can both spread and destroy all data on a system which the user values. When UAC deployment is common, malware authors will simply adjust their software so that it doesn't trigger UAC. No significant security benefit; large associated cost.
Did you read all the way to the end of my post? Because most machines do not use this "feature," it can screw up much existing malware. But as soon as the feature becomes standard, it will be a worthless expense. The mistake you are making is that you are forgetting that the data, not the system files, is all that matters to the end user.
That's not scary, and it has nothing to do with "corporations." It's just how your brain reads: it looks at the shape of words and phrases, rather than the individaul lettres. If it finds a match to the shape, that's what you read--unless you are paying particulraly close attnetion.
No, he chose to break his university's policy and was punished for that.
You need to look up how slashdot's moderation system works before you make dumb comments. It takes three moderators to make a comment +5. I'm pretty sure there are more than three users of slashdot other than yourself.
After you educate yourself on how the moderation system works, you may continue to make dumb comments.
For a single-user system (the majority of Windows desktops), it doesn't matter whether or not the user is an Administrator, at least from a security perspective. What threats are you protecting against by subjecting users to extra authentication buttons when installing apps? The only thing the single user really cares about is his own data! Malware running with his (non-administratior) access can destroy his data just as well as malware running as administrator. With either permission, the malware can spread via sockets, file infections, or web access.
This obsession with UAC on single-user desktop systems is simply misguided. Yes, some existing malware may break if it runs with non-admin privileges. But once non-admin becomes common, malware authors will just stop presupposing admin access when coding.
Swilver wants to use NoScript to remove javascript from his web pages. 1998 was an era when javascript was only used for "stupid browser tricks", as opposed to today, when javascript is essential to the functionality of a large percentage of web resources. He's living in the past.