If "only one vulnerability or hole has been found in its software" means anything aside from "only one remote hole in the default install" (your suggested substitution), then it is completely meaningless.
If you are discussing non default configurations, there are infinite holes in all operating systems. For example, there is the non-default remote-root vulnerability when I set all my passwords to "PASSWORD".
I assume there were specific non-default remote roots you were thinking of, but still.
Um. The amount of actual dollars and the GDP are unrelated.
Plus, I'm sure the RIAA would be satisfied if he gave them all the dollars in the world, all the euros, all the yen, and all the gold. That would still be shy of $97 trillion.
Although now the article's been updated to indicate a decimal error: It's $97 billion. That way the RIAA could pay for the reconstruction of Iraq, and we wouldn't need help from the UN.
Re:Source won't help decrypt the files
on
Open Source DRM
·
· Score: 1
It's not that the encryption is easy to break. It isn't. This system would still require that *one* person legally decrypts the file. What they do with it after it is decrypted is where open source would (and should) fall on its face.
Um. The person receiving the xemacs frame uses xauth to prevent their X server from getting hijacked. How does xauth change the abilities of the client process on the X client?
Re:Source won't help decrypt the files
on
Open Source DRM
·
· Score: 2, Informative
DRM is supposed to protect you from a malicious person that already has the proper keys. Until the decryption is handled by "trusted" hardware (TCPA), yes, having access to the source & the key would let you defeat the DRM.
Re:another thinly veiled attempt to make money
on
Open Source DRM
·
· Score: 1
I think that their commercial license is only required if you would like to distribute binaries under a non-FSF license. Distribution of binaries under the GPL looks ok. Users would, of course, be able to request your source, modify it so that they can defeat the DRM, and republish your media to their heart's content.
Until TCPA arrives, GPLed DRM technology serves no purpose.
Everyone forgets Rosalind Franklin. She was the first person to actually physically see the molecule. Watson and Crick would have been nowhere without her.
Re:What about Terrasoft? Can't their machines run
on
Beige Box Apple Clone?
·
· Score: 1
No, MacOS can't run on a briQ... but Linux and MacOnLinux can.
What generation do you think that is? If you're implying that it's people younger than you, I'll point out: We don't watch the news.
Re:Not as far fetched as it would seem
on
AI in Sci-Fi
·
· Score: 1
Not necessarily. Many AI researchers (idiots on/. notwithstanding) are perfectly interested in the Turing test as a test for sentience. Not a modified Turing test. It doesn't just have to trick somebody, as/.ers seem to think.
But once something passes the Turing test regularly, who are we to say it isn't sentient? The "behavior of attachment and obsession" of humans could just as easily have been artificially and explicitly programmed by millions of years of evolution.
Once something acts just like humans... we have no moral basis for deciding that it is not as good as human (aside from religious convictions). The human brain (and human consciousness) is a collaboration of many semi-intelligent, semi-conscious processes. No magic.
So. What would I do? Well. Whatever I was designed to do.
NEWSFLASH! There are infinitely many numbers in the universe! Current research held thaat numbers only went up to a few hundred trillion, but scientists have recently discovered that numbers continue FOREVER!...
Wow. You just disproved my theory that everyone with a userid under 10,000 is worth reading.
The reason to obscure it was so that he could post the answers, and you could do the problem without knowing the answers ahead of time. Think of it like a "For the answers, flip to page 31337."
Using your firewall to block port 135 is fine, unless you actually need RPC for something useful. In that case, I'd say that a firewall that discards all malformed packets (more complicated) is in order.
If you're doing something useful with RPC, and you are not doing it behind a firewall (that discards all RPC packets), then you are dumb like bricks. RPC isn't something you want to be doing via the internet, afaik.
All their enterprise customers might be annoyed, but this should never affect them. If some bank has NT4 machines outside of a firewall or even many NT4 servers and clients with no firewall between them, their IT department needs to be lined up and shot.
Slashdot Mirror
The mirror was slashdotted first.
I know this because I immediately right clicked both links and made new windows. Then I realized: "I'm being an asshole..."
Neither will Microsoft.
(I realize I'm being an idiot for replying to an AC flame.)
If "only one vulnerability or hole has been found in its software" means anything aside from "only one remote hole in the default install" (your suggested substitution), then it is completely meaningless.
If you are discussing non default configurations, there are infinite holes in all operating systems. For example, there is the non-default remote-root vulnerability when I set all my passwords to "PASSWORD".
I assume there were specific non-default remote roots you were thinking of, but still.
Looks like SGI will be hooking them up.
Ha! We know you're not from LA! Or California either! San Jose is ~500 miles from Los Angeles.
Good job! You have correctly identified the reason that this joke is funny!
Um. The amount of actual dollars and the GDP are unrelated.
Plus, I'm sure the RIAA would be satisfied if he gave them all the dollars in the world, all the euros, all the yen, and all the gold. That would still be shy of $97 trillion.
Although now the article's been updated to indicate a decimal error: It's $97 billion. That way the RIAA could pay for the reconstruction of Iraq, and we wouldn't need help from the UN.
It's not that the encryption is easy to break. It isn't. This system would still require that *one* person legally decrypts the file. What they do with it after it is decrypted is where open source would (and should) fall on its face.
TCPA doesn't have this problem.
I'm sorry, how on earth could you use screen+vim to get these features?
Even if two people *see* the screen at the same time, and can input, there's still only one point of focus in the document, no?
Um. The person receiving the xemacs frame uses xauth to prevent their X server from getting hijacked. How does xauth change the abilities of the client process on the X client?
DRM is supposed to protect you from a malicious person that already has the proper keys. Until the decryption is handled by "trusted" hardware (TCPA), yes, having access to the source & the key would let you defeat the DRM.
I think that their commercial license is only required if you would like to distribute binaries under a non-FSF license. Distribution of binaries under the GPL looks ok. Users would, of course, be able to request your source, modify it so that they can defeat the DRM, and republish your media to their heart's content.
Until TCPA arrives, GPLed DRM technology serves no purpose.
Everyone forgets Rosalind Franklin. She was the first person to actually physically see the molecule. Watson and Crick would have been nowhere without her.
No, MacOS can't run on a briQ... but Linux and MacOnLinux can.
Some electrical engineers have explained very eloquently on /. why car caps are a complete waste of your money. Use google.
congrats to the 10-second sound bite generation
What generation do you think that is? If you're implying that it's people younger than you, I'll point out: We don't watch the news.
Not necessarily. Many AI researchers (idiots on /. notwithstanding) are perfectly interested in the Turing test as a test for sentience. Not a modified Turing test. It doesn't just have to trick somebody, as /.ers seem to think.
But once something passes the Turing test regularly, who are we to say it isn't sentient? The "behavior of attachment and obsession" of humans could just as easily have been artificially and explicitly programmed by millions of years of evolution.
Once something acts just like humans... we have no moral basis for deciding that it is not as good as human (aside from religious convictions). The human brain (and human consciousness) is a collaboration of many semi-intelligent, semi-conscious processes. No magic.
So. What would I do? Well. Whatever I was designed to do.
NEWSFLASH! There are infinitely many numbers in the universe! Current research held thaat numbers only went up to a few hundred trillion, but scientists have recently discovered that numbers continue FOREVER! ...
Wow. You just disproved my theory that everyone with a userid under 10,000 is worth reading.
Everything is soluble, given enough water.
What would YOU do?
Whatever I was designed to want to do...
Wide-open WIFI would also be illegal.
The reason to obscure it was so that he could post the answers, and you could do the problem without knowing the answers ahead of time. Think of it like a "For the answers, flip to page 31337."
Using your firewall to block port 135 is fine, unless you actually need RPC for something useful. In that case, I'd say that a firewall that discards all malformed packets (more complicated) is in order.
If you're doing something useful with RPC, and you are not doing it behind a firewall (that discards all RPC packets), then you are dumb like bricks. RPC isn't something you want to be doing via the internet, afaik.
All their enterprise customers might be annoyed, but this should never affect them. If some bank has NT4 machines outside of a firewall or even many NT4 servers and clients with no firewall between them, their IT department needs to be lined up and shot.
La cucaracha, la cucaracha.... da da da da da da da.
La cucaracha, la cucaracha.... da da da da da da da.
Bill me, Vicente Fox?
Magnetic induction. Like the SoniCare toothbrush, or any number of other devices. Dunno what that has to do with a tesla coil.