Re:I don't agree with the article
on
A Better Finder?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Well I'm not saying I am going to "abandon OS X" (and I don't think the article writer is?) but the point is... it could be so much better, you know? (at least for me) OS X would be *perfect* if on top of the new UNIX innards there was a "classic" theme where OS X acted exactly like the old macOS. I'm not saying I'll never switch to the existing OS X/Aqua UI, but I certainly miss the old MacOS.
yes, I dual-boot my Macs and I still use OS9. Am looking warily at the new generation of machines that won't boot OS9, although apparently there are some indications that special ROM files are available to Apple service providers that would allow OS9 bootability even on those not "officially" OS9 bootable.
Re:Evil bit support
on
A Better Finder?
·
· Score: 5, Informative
I guess I shoulda made this more clear in my initial submission.
I think the primary thing that the old MacOS had that the current one doesn't, is good handling of file metadata. I think most people who come from a Windows/x86 background don't really understand how magical it is to have a file system that, for example, can allow for different files of essentially the same "file type" yet be launched by different apps (file "creator" and file "type" tags exist).
This was discussed in Ars Technica quite a while back, as well:
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/01q3/metadata/met ad ata-1.html
And, this "other thing" I'm talking about is a (properly) spatial finder.
No way to tell if it's really "impossible" to do it, or just "nobody in MS team can see a way to do it" (I'm not going to suggest that MS isn't interested in keeping NT4 useable in order to drive people to upgrade and pay more $$; however I do find it interesting that they've refused to roll up all their post SP6a + SRP patches into one easy-to-apply package). MS does not have a monopoly on smart people. It does have a monopoly on the source code... Anyone wonder if the source was available someone would have piped up and said "no, you CAN fix it by..." ?
I think Mystery Men had problems with pacing - some of the jokes just didn't work properly - but Janeane Garofalo was amazing, and... The Sphinx!!! Oh my god... "sometimes True Courage is when you run away". When it came out in the cinemas my friends were spouting Sphynxisms for weeks. Near the end fo the film I was laughing so hard I cried
The problem with Dark City was that it starts off great but meanders off towards the end into a very meaningless (and really quite crappily done) special-effects "battle" where basically you have these two guys leaning angrily (I kid you not. leaning forward while looking angry) at each other while things blow up and you've got all sorts of CG "ripple" effects here and there. The William Hurt character was totally wasted. The movie would have been great with an extra, say, half-hour of plot development or so. I felt very disappointed with it when I walked out of the cinema because it could have been so much better. Insofar as "underappreciated" is concerned, I think it was more "wasted opportunity" instead. one wonders if the director had had his arm twisted to make a shortened movie or whatnot that made Generic Evil Movie Execs happy. ?
"Powerleap" probably refers to the device sold by the company, that allows you to mount certain proc types on motherboards that wouldn't accept them otherwise, either because of different pinouts or whatever reason (IIRC even one where the voltages were different?), within certain limits (I don't think they sell anything that allows you to plug an 486 into a Socket A slot:-).
And that's how it all begins. You have academic staff being rated more for how much they publish than how much they teach; how much time do they have, really, to *teach* their assigned students, much less grade their assignments and papers? When grading their papers, how much time do they really have to pursue all the references etc.?
I had one professor who would randomly check up on various references in papers submitted to him (the joys of statistical sampling:-). You did NOT want to be one who gets an email saying something along the lines of "I've never heard of this. Show me. "
Knowing that there's some (realistic) percentage of being found out, presumably most people would be careful - but nonetheless since he cannot possibly check EVERYTHING, some people will be tempted to try their luck. At least some (most?) will get away with it. And for those who know their profs won't be hunting down everything... what's to stop them?
And like most crimes, you just keep doing it and doing it... until (if) you get caught (I don't think Winona Ryder's *only* "shoplifting experience" was the one she went to trial for). So presumably at least a percentage of those doing scientific research had had undergrad + postgrad experiences of "getting away with it". Could get to be a habit.
Heck, if even reusing *faked* graphs in multiple papers can be gotten-away-with....
You're forgetting about "rules of engagement". Sometimes even if you know *where* the enemy is, you can't shoot until they shoot first.
This setup (assuming it really works the way it's advertised, and there isn't some "detail" they didn't bother to announce) would basically cover all your bases - whereas in the past you'd have to worry about taking damage just because you simply couldn't shoot first (and be the "instigator" of whatever shootout occurs), this time you can sit back and wait.
(Well the new US policy when it comes to (suspected?) Al-Qaeda members if there's a Predator overhead doesn't seem very "sit and wait", but that's a separate issue)
If we don't know where the shells are coming from, what's the chances that this system will be able to realistically identify a genuine incoming round, activate (from idle) and reliably shoot it down in time? We're not getting the first couple of rounds, and after that, our existing counterbattery systems will be silencing the enemy artillery.
If we do know where they're coming from (and we damn well should, given what we spend on reccetech), then why aren't we pasting them with our existing overwhelming air superiority and artillery?
Actually, I don't think that's quite right. Having WEP on is "better" than not having it on, but the problem with WEP is that even with it on, with airsnort and enough traffic, the thing can be broken quite speedily. That's the whole point of the various papers published (e.g. by the CMU people) - WEP isn't "private" at all, provided someone out there WANTS to listen. Granted once you turn it on, assuming there's any other networks in range, anyone trying to "break in" will probably go for the low-hanging fruit.
But what I want to say is, the other way of looking at what you say is this - if the manufacturers all ship with WEP on by default, the people using it would be lulled into a -false sense of security.
(And if the manufacturers ship with WEP by default, then there'd be quite a few people leaving them on with the default keys... yet another problem).
Question for all the people talking about wireless:
are there any *cheap* implementations of per-user-per-session key generation setups, or are you thinking of changing WEP keys every time you figure the total amount of traffic you've broadcast has reached a usable amount for airsnort to crack? (you've got to be kidding, right?)
I know Cisco has LEAP, I don't think their setup will be cheap (correct me if I'm wrong?).
Doe Lucent/WaveLAN/Agere/Orinoco have an equivalent per-user-per-session setup?
Anyways, I think if you've got a house that wireless can't cover with a single base station, then you really shouldn't worry about the trifling cost of a couple of access points (or, for that matter, some expensive Cisco LEAP setup:-)
(I'm taking it it's not some kind of out-on-the-bayou ranch, since HomePNA and whatnot wouldn't work there either).
It takes quite a few walls to block off 802.11, and unless your house is nuclear-strike-resistant, you really shouldn't have transmission problems. Why don't you borrow a base station from a friend to test?
One of the irritating things about Apple is their naming conventions, or lack thereof.
There are, if I recall correctly, 5 separate types of machines called "Powerbook G3". They decided to make things slightly better by calling some of them "PowerBook G3 Series" later, but within that grouping there are architectural differences as well (i.e. I'm not just talking about things like CPU speed and/or minor component changes).
This also explains why they have things like "PowerMac G3" vs "PowerMac G3 (Blue and White)".
There are articles on their information base where they ask you to look at the ports you have, etc. etc., to exactly what machine you actually have. Imagine their tech support calls. ("I have a PowerBook G3" "Which one?" "huh? It says PowerBook G3 on the label" "hang on while I transfer you to someone else, because I swore the next time I had to talk someone through which keys they had on their keyboard, I'd quit").
So, basically, there ARE iBooks that have IR ports. Just not the "marble"/"icebook" ones you see on sale now.
most of the answers go round "tech", which I have something to say about too, but first thing I've got to say is: practically, IR port locations may prevent you from "communicating via IR" anyway. Think about it. There's no "standard" for IR port locations. IBM T-series have their IR port on the left, below the palm rest and next to the headphone jack. Not everyone can "sit opposite each other on the train and communicate" even if they had full IR. This is NOT a trivial problem -- this one time I had to share files via IR with a friend sitting on the same bench, and BOTH of us had ports on the same left side of the machine. Think about how that works out. We were two bloody uncomfortable people for a bloody long time while our bloody large file transferred, let me tell you that.
Cables have their practical problems too, of course (esp. if you're sitting "opposite each other on the train" and don't want either (a) some kid try to use it as a skipping rope or (b) some big guy tripping on the cable and deciding to break your laptops).
And, if you're sitting on the same bench side by side, having the ports on the BACK of the machine doesn't really help either.
Re: cables - all Macs since around 1999 (before, actually, but I'm not sure exactly when; if it's colourful and/or has white on it anywhere it should be safe:-) will have built-in ethernet that won't need crossed cables - they'll auto-detect whether you're plugged in to a hub or directly to another machine. They'll also auto-assign themselves a 169.x.x.x IP address (whether or not you're using OS X or not), so you'll at least be able to ping each other.
That leads on to the next question - what do you mean by "communicate"? File transfer? Network gaming? It's not all the same thing. You bring up the example of your phone, but quite frankly, those are completely different issues. Are you going to transfer a PDF file to your phone? (Assuming it's not a semi-PDA, I'm guessing the answer is no). Some IR links are just file-sharing links, while some links are "full networks". Does a phone that can be used by your laptop as a wireless modem count as "communicating"? That's more a "(purpose-built?) feature" than "communication".
IR is slowly getting retired, I believe, thanks to all the radio-wireless (since IR is "wireless" after all:-) systems that are coming up, primarily because of the line-of-sight/placement practical problems (not to mention screwy lighting messing up the transfers and/or comparatively low speed limits in today's world).
Because there is no "business opp". You're saying that you can deliver a distribution "just for your Dell!!" or something like that? The point is, whoever's already bought that Dell has _already_ paid for Windows. Most of the other posts - and if you go to their website and take a look for yourself you'll find this out firsthand too - there's no way to buy a Dell without an OS on it.
The first major legal action against Microsoft that I recall involved the way they forced OEMs to pay a licence for Windows for every machine they shipped - the point being that since the manufacturers had already paid for Windows, they weren't going to have another OS on that machine. Trying to start a business based on persuading someone who's already paid for Windows to buy your distribution doesn't sound like something you're going to be able to attract a lot of funding for.
Dell is, more so than any other manufacturer I believe, perhaps what you could call the "distribution arm" of Microsoft (and Intel).
In any case there's really nothing too majorly different for Dell machines - if they were customising so much in such a way (as opposed to just slapping commodity parts together), they wouldn't have the kind of profits they have.
... and I'll say that I've never heard of that magazine.
Just as not *all* Americans are SUV-driving, shotgun-wielding, cowboy-hat-and-flannel-shirt wearing beer drinkers, not all Asian sysadmins touch the DontBlameSendmail config option. We have our share of not-even-halfway-to-halfway-competent fellows trying to set up web servers that subsequently get hijacked, we have our share of management PHBs printing out emails in order to read them, we've got crackers making use of school terminals trying to break into sites with rootkits (check out the Project Honeynet incidents) etc. etc. We've also got capable sysadmins, IETF members(e.g. look at RFC 2822) etc. etc. .
I'll say now that (a) Singapore did not "sit out" the whole.com bubble (although obviously not quite as caught up in it as the US), and (b) "savoixmagazine" doesn't seem entirely what you could call a "big player" in the local market (though who knows in the future, what with the infamy they're accruing from this incident?:-). Correspondingly, perhaps their admin side isn't so clued in as to be able to properly guard against incidents like this occurring.
Some people are thinking of/already blocking off "all Asian mail". Well, I think if you step back and look at it, it's just another part of the fallout from the whole dotcom bubble. For the past few years, just as much as in the US (perhaps more?), you've got endless news reports, profiles, etc. etc. of all the "dotcom billions" being made and waiting to be made... people who make less in a year than an average American makes in a month aren't going to be able to resist. They may not have the chutzpah to imagine they'll become the next Bill Gates, but hey, you don't really need ALL of 50 billion do you? I'm continually stunned by the willingness of people who really don't know anything trying to set up technology businesses. Is it any wonder if you've got penetrated/crap servers everywhere?
Anyways this looks to me like an "error" as opposed to an open-relay-allowing-for-spam issue; plenty of people make mistakes although in this case the "price" in terms of wasted bandwith/time/etc. is high. It won't be the last time, either.
Slashdot Mirror
Well I'm not saying I am going to "abandon OS X" (and I don't think the article writer is?) but the point is... it could be so much better, you know? (at least for me) OS X would be *perfect* if on top of the new UNIX innards there was a "classic" theme where OS X acted exactly like the old macOS. I'm not saying I'll never switch to the existing OS X/Aqua UI, but I certainly miss the old MacOS.
yes, I dual-boot my Macs and I still use OS9. Am looking warily at the new generation of machines that won't boot OS9, although apparently there are some indications that special ROM files are available to Apple service providers that would allow OS9 bootability even on those not "officially" OS9 bootable.
I guess I shoulda made this more clear in my initial submission.
t ad ata-1.html
I think the primary thing that the old MacOS had that the current one doesn't, is good handling of file metadata. I think most people who come from a Windows/x86 background don't really understand how magical it is to have a file system that, for example, can allow for different files of essentially the same "file type" yet be launched by different apps (file "creator" and file "type" tags exist).
This was discussed in Ars Technica quite a while back, as well:
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/01q3/metadata/me
And, this "other thing" I'm talking about is a (properly) spatial finder.
No way to tell if it's really "impossible" to do it, or just "nobody in MS team can see a way to do it" (I'm not going to suggest that MS isn't interested in keeping NT4 useable in order to drive people to upgrade and pay more $$; however I do find it interesting that they've refused to roll up all their post SP6a + SRP patches into one easy-to-apply package). MS does not have a monopoly on smart people. It does have a monopoly on the source code... Anyone wonder if the source was available someone would have piped up and said "no, you CAN fix it by ..." ?
I think Mystery Men had problems with pacing - some of the jokes just didn't work properly - but Janeane Garofalo was amazing, and... The Sphinx!!! Oh my god... "sometimes True Courage is when you run away". When it came out in the cinemas my friends were spouting Sphynxisms for weeks. Near the end fo the film I was laughing so hard I cried
I'm not sure it can be really considered "underappreciated" when there are plenty of true fans of the movie out there (including, for example, you :-)
The problem with Dark City was that it starts off great but meanders off towards the end into a very meaningless (and really quite crappily done) special-effects "battle" where basically you have these two guys leaning angrily (I kid you not. leaning forward while looking angry) at each other while things blow up and you've got all sorts of CG "ripple" effects here and there. The William Hurt character was totally wasted. The movie would have been great with an extra, say, half-hour of plot development or so. I felt very disappointed with it when I walked out of the cinema because it could have been so much better. Insofar as "underappreciated" is concerned, I think it was more "wasted opportunity" instead. one wonders if the director had had his arm twisted to make a shortened movie or whatnot that made Generic Evil Movie Execs happy. ?
It could have been beautiful.
Everybody be warned, though - this is a very SAD film. Don't watch it if you don't want to feel down at the end. But worth watching.
although with "powerleap", whatever that is
:-).
"Powerleap" probably refers to the device sold by the company, that allows you to mount certain proc types on motherboards that wouldn't accept them otherwise, either because of different pinouts or whatever reason (IIRC even one where the voltages were different?), within certain limits (I don't think they sell anything that allows you to plug an 486 into a Socket A slot
And that's how it all begins. You have academic staff being rated more for how much they publish than how much they teach; how much time do they have, really, to *teach* their assigned students, much less grade their assignments and papers? When grading their papers, how much time do they really have to pursue all the references etc.?
:-). You did NOT want to be one who gets an email saying something along the lines of "I've never heard of this. Show me. "
.
I had one professor who would randomly check up on various references in papers submitted to him (the joys of statistical sampling
Knowing that there's some (realistic) percentage of being found out, presumably most people would be careful - but nonetheless since he cannot possibly check EVERYTHING, some people will be tempted to try their luck. At least some (most?) will get away with it. And for those who know their profs won't be hunting down everything... what's to stop them?
And like most crimes, you just keep doing it and doing it... until (if) you get caught (I don't think Winona Ryder's *only* "shoplifting experience" was the one she went to trial for). So presumably at least a percentage of those doing scientific research had had undergrad + postgrad experiences of "getting away with it". Could get to be a habit.
Heck, if even reusing *faked* graphs in multiple papers can be gotten-away-with...
You're forgetting about "rules of engagement". Sometimes even if you know *where* the enemy is, you can't shoot until they shoot first.
This setup (assuming it really works the way it's advertised, and there isn't some "detail" they didn't bother to announce) would basically cover all your bases - whereas in the past you'd have to worry about taking damage just because you simply couldn't shoot first (and be the "instigator" of whatever shootout occurs), this time you can sit back and wait.
(Well the new US policy when it comes to (suspected?) Al-Qaeda members if there's a Predator overhead doesn't seem very "sit and wait", but that's a separate issue)
If we don't know where the shells are coming from, what's the chances that this system will be able to realistically identify a genuine incoming round, activate (from idle) and reliably shoot it down in time? We're not getting the first couple of rounds, and after that, our existing counterbattery systems will be silencing the enemy artillery.
If we do know where they're coming from (and we damn well should, given what we spend on reccetech), then why aren't we pasting them with our existing overwhelming air superiority and artillery?
Actually, I don't think that's quite right. Having WEP on is "better" than not having it on, but the problem with WEP is that even with it on, with airsnort and enough traffic, the thing can be broken quite speedily. That's the whole point of the various papers published (e.g. by the CMU people) - WEP isn't "private" at all, provided someone out there WANTS to listen. Granted once you turn it on, assuming there's any other networks in range, anyone trying to "break in" will probably go for the low-hanging fruit.
But what I want to say is, the other way of looking at what you say is this - if the manufacturers all ship with WEP on by default, the people using it would be lulled into a -false sense of security.
(And if the manufacturers ship with WEP by default, then there'd be quite a few people leaving them on with the default keys... yet another problem).
BeOS' default browser, NetPositive, would give error messages in haikus (Japanese poetry-form):
c m.wpi.edu/mirror/acmTshirt_code_haiku s/images/haiku_back_72dpi.jpg
The code was willing
It considered your request,
But the chips were weak
http://www.beosbible.com/toc.html
http://www.a
another example of how much more class they had than the current gang, and what a loss their demise was.
Follow up: how secure are the powerline-based setups? Would other people on the same power grid be able to sniff your packets?
Question for all the people talking about wireless:
are there any *cheap* implementations of per-user-per-session key generation setups, or are you thinking of changing WEP keys every time you figure the total amount of traffic you've broadcast has reached a usable amount for airsnort to crack? (you've got to be kidding, right?)
I know Cisco has LEAP, I don't think their setup will be cheap (correct me if I'm wrong?).
Doe Lucent/WaveLAN/Agere/Orinoco have an equivalent per-user-per-session setup?
Anyways, I think if you've got a house that wireless can't cover with a single base station, then you really shouldn't worry about the trifling cost of a couple of access points (or, for that matter, some expensive Cisco LEAP setup
(I'm taking it it's not some kind of out-on-the-bayou ranch, since HomePNA and whatnot wouldn't work there either).
It takes quite a few walls to block off 802.11, and unless your house is nuclear-strike-resistant, you really shouldn't have transmission problems. Why don't you borrow a base station from a friend to test?
One of the irritating things about Apple is their naming conventions, or lack thereof.
There are, if I recall correctly, 5 separate types of machines called "Powerbook G3". They decided to make things slightly better by calling some of them "PowerBook G3 Series" later, but within that grouping there are architectural differences as well (i.e. I'm not just talking about things like CPU speed and/or minor component changes).
This also explains why they have things like "PowerMac G3" vs "PowerMac G3 (Blue and White)".
There are articles on their information base where they ask you to look at the ports you have, etc. etc., to exactly what machine you actually have. Imagine their tech support calls. ("I have a PowerBook G3" "Which one?" "huh? It says PowerBook G3 on the label" "hang on while I transfer you to someone else, because I swore the next time I had to talk someone through which keys they had on their keyboard, I'd quit").
So, basically, there ARE iBooks that have IR ports. Just not the "marble"/"icebook" ones you see on sale now.
most of the answers go round "tech", which I have something to say about too, but first thing I've got to say is: practically, IR port locations may prevent you from "communicating via IR" anyway. Think about it. There's no "standard" for IR port locations. IBM T-series have their IR port on the left, below the palm rest and next to the headphone jack. Not everyone can "sit opposite each other on the train and communicate" even if they had full IR. This is NOT a trivial problem -- this one time I had to share files via IR with a friend sitting on the same bench, and BOTH of us had ports on the same left side of the machine. Think about how that works out. We were two bloody uncomfortable people for a bloody long time while our bloody large file transferred, let me tell you that.
:-) will have built-in ethernet that won't need crossed cables - they'll auto-detect whether you're plugged in to a hub or directly to another machine. They'll also auto-assign themselves a 169.x.x.x IP address (whether or not you're using OS X or not), so you'll at least be able to ping each other.
:-) systems that are coming up, primarily because of the line-of-sight/placement practical problems (not to mention screwy lighting messing up the transfers and/or comparatively low speed limits in today's world).
Cables have their practical problems too, of course (esp. if you're sitting "opposite each other on the train" and don't want either (a) some kid try to use it as a skipping rope or (b) some big guy tripping on the cable and deciding to break your laptops).
And, if you're sitting on the same bench side by side, having the ports on the BACK of the machine doesn't really help either.
Re: cables - all Macs since around 1999 (before, actually, but I'm not sure exactly when; if it's colourful and/or has white on it anywhere it should be safe
That leads on to the next question - what do you mean by "communicate"? File transfer? Network gaming? It's not all the same thing. You bring up the example of your phone, but quite frankly, those are completely different issues. Are you going to transfer a PDF file to your phone? (Assuming it's not a semi-PDA, I'm guessing the answer is no). Some IR links are just file-sharing links, while some links are "full networks". Does a phone that can be used by your laptop as a wireless modem count as "communicating"? That's more a "(purpose-built?) feature" than "communication".
IR is slowly getting retired, I believe, thanks to all the radio-wireless (since IR is "wireless" after all
I think the only real option is 802.11b/a/g.
somebody mod this up!!!
Because there is no "business opp". You're saying that you can deliver a distribution "just for your Dell!!" or something like that? The point is, whoever's already bought that Dell has _already_ paid for Windows. Most of the other posts - and if you go to their website and take a look for yourself you'll find this out firsthand too - there's no way to buy a Dell without an OS on it.
The first major legal action against Microsoft that I recall involved the way they forced OEMs to pay a licence for Windows for every machine they shipped - the point being that since the manufacturers had already paid for Windows, they weren't going to have another OS on that machine. Trying to start a business based on persuading someone who's already paid for Windows to buy your distribution doesn't sound like something you're going to be able to attract a lot of funding for.
Dell is, more so than any other manufacturer I believe, perhaps what you could call the "distribution arm" of Microsoft (and Intel).
In any case there's really nothing too majorly different for Dell machines - if they were customising so much in such a way (as opposed to just slapping commodity parts together), they wouldn't have the kind of profits they have.
... and I'll say that I've never heard of that magazine.
.com bubble (although obviously not quite as caught up in it as the US), and (b) "savoixmagazine" doesn't seem entirely what you could call a "big player" in the local market (though who knows in the future, what with the infamy they're accruing from this incident? :-). Correspondingly, perhaps their admin side isn't so clued in as to be able to properly guard against incidents like this occurring.
Just as not *all* Americans are SUV-driving, shotgun-wielding, cowboy-hat-and-flannel-shirt wearing beer drinkers, not all Asian sysadmins touch the DontBlameSendmail config option. We have our share of not-even-halfway-to-halfway-competent fellows trying to set up web servers that subsequently get hijacked, we have our share of management PHBs printing out emails in order to read them, we've got crackers making use of school terminals trying to break into sites with rootkits (check out the Project Honeynet incidents) etc. etc. We've also got capable sysadmins, IETF members(e.g. look at RFC 2822) etc. etc. .
I'll say now that (a) Singapore did not "sit out" the whole
Some people are thinking of/already blocking off "all Asian mail". Well, I think if you step back and look at it, it's just another part of the fallout from the whole dotcom bubble. For the past few years, just as much as in the US (perhaps more?), you've got endless news reports, profiles, etc. etc. of all the "dotcom billions" being made and waiting to be made... people who make less in a year than an average American makes in a month aren't going to be able to resist. They may not have the chutzpah to imagine they'll become the next Bill Gates, but hey, you don't really need ALL of 50 billion do you? I'm continually stunned by the willingness of people who really don't know anything trying to set up technology businesses. Is it any wonder if you've got penetrated/crap servers everywhere?
Anyways this looks to me like an "error" as opposed to an open-relay-allowing-for-spam issue; plenty of people make mistakes although in this case the "price" in terms of wasted bandwith/time/etc. is high. It won't be the last time, either.