You're correct that "leaving you alone" is not part of the deal. As a Christian, I have the sincere belief that non-Christians are missing out on the wonderful gift of eternal life and an incredible relationship with Jesus Christ, outside of which life is (in comparison) dull, void and empty.
Unlike the vocal minorities which pollute all major religions, however, I do not believe that the solution is to mandate that government teach everyone about Intelligent Design. That approach is more likely to push people away from religion (like yourself) as to draw them towards it.
I sincerely hope you get to know a sincere Christian, one whose life exudes the love of Christ, and really investigate what their life, attitude and behavior are like. I dare say that would have an impact on your perspective.
I'd think it interesting to see the statistics for number of deaths in space-flight endeavors per mile travelled compared to commercial airlines compared to automobile travel. I would guess that in those terms, space-flight wouldn't look too bad.
Yes, they are rights. But with those rights come responsibilities. Just like my right to walk around in the sunshine where I want to comes the responsibility that I don't stab someone in the chest every 5 minutes when I want another cheeseburger. If you want to exercise your rights, you have to do it within the confines of the law. That includes speeding. You think the speed limits are set too low in your area? Fine, use the system to get them changed. Same thing I would have to do if I thought the gov't should hand out free cheeseburgers every 5 minutes so I didn't have to stab someone...
That's where the privilege aspect comes in. Your 'rights' are only rights so long as you obey the law. You have no 'unconditional' rights, except maybe thought, and they're working on that.
That all depends on how wealthy the window owner is. If the window owner is BillyG, then there is no decrease in spending on the part of the harmed.
The differential that would need to be examined would be the spending opportunity loss on the part of those requiring expenditures (in this case, mostly larger corporations) vs. the spending opportunity gained by the IT professionals who stand to gain from this.
If those were equal, the broken window would be a net zero.
However, it can in reality be unbalanced either direction based on the ones suffering harm vs. the ones gaining. In the end, it's the individual's savings rate that determines the effect on the money supply.
This thinking is exactly what I'm getting at. Why does a user by default have ONE home directory, where ALL their data is stored regardless of type, function, or sensitivity.
I'm trying to challenge you to think a bit more out of the box, here. No, it's not a problem that any one vendor can solve on their own (short of a whole new OS, I suppose.) As a starting point for your imagination, try a world where firefox could only 'see' files with a given extension, or set of extensions. Yes, I realize extensions have differing meanings in different OS'es, but stay with me for a minute.
Ideally, your Quicken (or whatever other sensitive data) shouldn't be locatable to any programs that you haven't given explicit access to view. Yes, making this mostly transparent to the user is a difficult thing. I'm not suggesting that there's any easy solution to it, but (for example) since Word knows it can't understand an.xls file, why should the OS even allow it to see the xls file? It doesn't have any business snooping around there. The fact that, by default, every program is in essence fully trusted by the user to do anything the user is allowed to do is unnerving. Do you entirely trust every app that you ever run? It's called the principle of least privilege. Since I've been privileged to deal with SOX issues, these are the types of things that I wonder about from a home user perspective now.
You're correct to some extent. Granted my proposal above shouldn't be at all necessary.
Truly what's missing is another security context at the application level. I (as a user) don't need for my apps to be able to see every file that I own. Even though I as a user have r-x access to a directory, if I'm running firefox, it should probably only have --x, and rwx only under it's own application directory. Unfortunately, unless you set up a user for every permuatation of User * Application, you can't get that in any current OS (at least not anything *nix/win32 based). Yeah, I know there are a LOT of issues with this idea, but especially in the case of the web browser, there's no reason it should have read access to everything *I* have read access to.
Even after you've installed an extension, you shouldn't be forced (by Firefox) to accept any and all behaviour it tries to produce. I should be able to install a toolbar and prevent it from calling home, for example. You should be able to set the permissions or at least the 'run-as' of the toolbar separately from the permissions of Firefox. Surely the security-conscious/. community should realize that.
Ooooh... I have a headache too. I must be suffering from this 'moderation' you talk about. Now if I can only get my doctor to prescribe that new Obecalp (tm). Surely that's what I need.
Either one of 2 options is true: 1) Your statement is in jest.
or
2) I don't want to work for your company, because any *good* programmer knows the difference between syntactically correct code and GOOD code. And you obviously wouldn't hire the *good* programmer.
Apparently, you still don't have a grammar or punctuation checker either.
Re:Still Logging In? The System Isn't Finished.
on
Weighing the Internet
·
· Score: 1
"'you don't really need to reboot linux anyways '
It grates on me a bit whenever I hear that. "
Yeah, but apparently you're not catching the point of the grandparent post. You only read the part you quoted. Suspending to disk, done right, can allow you to entirely power the thing down. I've tested it with my Windows laptop even to the point of removing the battery, and then restoring. The idea is to take the current state of memory (which is volatile, lost on power down) write it to disk, and then, on power up, copy back into memory, rather than go through the boot process again. It gives you a much faster warm-up time without keeping the filament (memory) warm in the mean time.
"Not counting the citations at the end, the book is 1,577 pages of "guidelines." "
Further, it's 160 pages into the book before you get the the first statement from the C standard. It covers everything from code defect lifetime to 44 pages on the psychology of human characterists. Stick to the topic, geez.
You do realise there are 16 quarter square miles in a square mile and not 4? [ducks]
I'd think you could fit a lot more quarters in a square mile. I mean, I can fit more than 16 quarters (US currency) on my mousepad.
Oh, I see, you're talking that special relativity stuff where it depends on your frame of reference whether you're stacking the quarters or balancing them on edge, or....[NO CARRIER]
Apparently the monkeys you hired to do grammar checking were on banana break when you submitted...
Parent should read:
"Sure, this affects Apache,...be completely unaffected by it."
It is true that both affect and effect can be used as both a verb and a noun. However, in common usage, 99% of the time you're looking for affect as a verb, and effect as a noun.
The last time I checked into the record for reciting pi, they were actually reciting 22/7, which is significantly easier, and just takes a lot of time. Can't tell which this applies to, though.
I figured that paucity of unbiased analysis had to be an anagram for something, and I got as far as stupid false bias, but I have some leftover letters...
"All of it, of course. Sooner or later we're going to have to get used to the idea that the concept of preserving piracy as a society disproportionately benefits individuals and groups with the resources to acquire and disseminate information regardless of the obstacles in their way."
Gives the sentence a whole different meaning, doesn't it. And then...
"It's too late to save piracy as most people currently envision it. What we need to be doing as a society is focus on transparency and equality-- ensuring that all parties in the social contract stand on an equal footing with regard to what information is publicly available. Secrecy is most dangerous when the powers that be insist that it be one-sided..."
That could have been an actual slashdot post on any random article about the RIAA...
Slashdot Mirror
You're correct that "leaving you alone" is not part of the deal. As a Christian, I have the sincere belief that non-Christians are missing out on the wonderful gift of eternal life and an incredible relationship with Jesus Christ, outside of which life is (in comparison) dull, void and empty.
Unlike the vocal minorities which pollute all major religions, however, I do not believe that the solution is to mandate that government teach everyone about Intelligent Design. That approach is more likely to push people away from religion (like yourself) as to draw them towards it.
I sincerely hope you get to know a sincere Christian, one whose life exudes the love of Christ, and really investigate what their life, attitude and behavior are like. I dare say that would have an impact on your perspective.
Hey, at least the news is from today! Isn't that an improvement? But good catch anyway.
I'd think it interesting to see the statistics for number of deaths in space-flight endeavors per mile travelled compared to commercial airlines compared to automobile travel. I would guess that in those terms, space-flight wouldn't look too bad.
Yes, they are rights. But with those rights come responsibilities. Just like my right to walk around in the sunshine where I want to comes the responsibility that I don't stab someone in the chest every 5 minutes when I want another cheeseburger. If you want to exercise your rights, you have to do it within the confines of the law. That includes speeding. You think the speed limits are set too low in your area? Fine, use the system to get them changed. Same thing I would have to do if I thought the gov't should hand out free cheeseburgers every 5 minutes so I didn't have to stab someone...
That's where the privilege aspect comes in. Your 'rights' are only rights so long as you obey the law. You have no 'unconditional' rights, except maybe thought, and they're working on that.
That all depends on how wealthy the window owner is. If the window owner is BillyG, then there is no decrease in spending on the part of the harmed.
The differential that would need to be examined would be the spending opportunity loss on the part of those requiring expenditures (in this case, mostly larger corporations) vs. the spending opportunity gained by the IT professionals who stand to gain from this.
If those were equal, the broken window would be a net zero.
However, it can in reality be unbalanced either direction based on the ones suffering harm vs. the ones gaining. In the end, it's the individual's savings rate that determines the effect on the money supply.
Nah, the real conspiracy is that the US govt is hoarding all the swiss cheese for themselves.
This thinking is exactly what I'm getting at. Why does a user by default have ONE home directory, where ALL their data is stored regardless of type, function, or sensitivity.
.xls file, why should the OS even allow it to see the xls file? It doesn't have any business snooping around there. The fact that, by default, every program is in essence fully trusted by the user to do anything the user is allowed to do is unnerving. Do you entirely trust every app that you ever run? It's called the principle of least privilege. Since I've been privileged to deal with SOX issues, these are the types of things that I wonder about from a home user perspective now.
I'm trying to challenge you to think a bit more out of the box, here. No, it's not a problem that any one vendor can solve on their own (short of a whole new OS, I suppose.) As a starting point for your imagination, try a world where firefox could only 'see' files with a given extension, or set of extensions. Yes, I realize extensions have differing meanings in different OS'es, but stay with me for a minute.
Ideally, your Quicken (or whatever other sensitive data) shouldn't be locatable to any programs that you haven't given explicit access to view. Yes, making this mostly transparent to the user is a difficult thing. I'm not suggesting that there's any easy solution to it, but (for example) since Word knows it can't understand an
You're correct to some extent. Granted my proposal above shouldn't be at all necessary.
Truly what's missing is another security context at the application level. I (as a user) don't need for my apps to be able to see every file that I own. Even though I as a user have r-x access to a directory, if I'm running firefox, it should probably only have --x, and rwx only under it's own application directory. Unfortunately, unless you set up a user for every permuatation of User * Application, you can't get that in any current OS (at least not anything *nix/win32 based). Yeah, I know there are a LOT of issues with this idea, but especially in the case of the web browser, there's no reason it should have read access to everything *I* have read access to.
Even after you've installed an extension, you shouldn't be forced (by Firefox) to accept any and all behaviour it tries to produce. I should be able to install a toolbar and prevent it from calling home, for example. You should be able to set the permissions or at least the 'run-as' of the toolbar separately from the permissions of Firefox. Surely the security-conscious /. community should realize that.
Ooooh... I have a headache too. I must be suffering from this 'moderation' you talk about. Now if I can only get my doctor to prescribe that new Obecalp (tm). Surely that's what I need.
Either one of 2 options is true:
1) Your statement is in jest.
or
2) I don't want to work for your company, because any *good* programmer knows the difference between syntactically correct code and GOOD code. And you obviously wouldn't hire the *good* programmer.
nothing wrong with that syntax in any C-based language (including C) other than the fact that there's no end to the statement.Now that represents the SCO lawsuit better.
Spelling is not grammar. Grammar is not punctuation. Spelling is not punctuation.
dont (sic) is not a word, although don't is a valid contraction. You also appear to be missing a shift key.
Apparently, you still don't have a grammar or punctuation checker either.
"'you don't really need to reboot linux anyways '
It grates on me a bit whenever I hear that. "
Yeah, but apparently you're not catching the point of the grandparent post. You only read the part you quoted. Suspending to disk, done right, can allow you to entirely power the thing down. I've tested it with my Windows laptop even to the point of removing the battery, and then restoring. The idea is to take the current state of memory (which is volatile, lost on power down) write it to disk, and then, on power up, copy back into memory, rather than go through the boot process again. It gives you a much faster warm-up time without keeping the filament (memory) warm in the mean time.
My post is a dupe of all the other complaints about the dupe editor complaints... [excessive recursion detected...aborting]
"Not counting the citations at the end, the book is 1,577 pages of "guidelines." "
Further, it's 160 pages into the book before you get the the first statement from the C standard. It covers everything from code defect lifetime to 44 pages on the psychology of human characterists. Stick to the topic, geez.
You do realise there are 16 quarter square miles in a square mile and not 4? [ducks]
....[NO CARRIER]
I'd think you could fit a lot more quarters in a square mile. I mean, I can fit more than 16 quarters (US currency) on my mousepad.
Oh, I see, you're talking that special relativity stuff where it depends on your frame of reference whether you're stacking the quarters or balancing them on edge, or
Apparently the monkeys you hired to do grammar checking were on banana break when you submitted...
Parent should read:
"Sure, this affects Apache,...be completely unaffected by it."
It is true that both affect and effect can be used as both a verb and a noun. However, in common usage, 99% of the time you're looking for affect as a verb, and effect as a noun.
The last time I checked into the record for reciting pi, they were actually reciting 22/7, which is significantly easier, and just takes a lot of time. Can't tell which this applies to, though.
I figured that paucity of unbiased analysis had to be an anagram for something, and I got as far as stupid false bias, but I have some leftover letters...
"SHUT UP ALREADY AND FILTER OUT THE GOOGLE TOPIC IF YOU ARE SICK OF IT!"
/.. I have to read every single story and find the dupes so that I can fr1st p0ts about how much it sucks.
But...but...but this is
Wow...I first read this as
"All of it, of course. Sooner or later we're going to have to get used to the idea that the concept of preserving piracy as a society disproportionately benefits individuals and groups with the resources to acquire and disseminate information regardless of the obstacles in their way."
Gives the sentence a whole different meaning, doesn't it. And then...
"It's too late to save piracy as most people currently envision it. What we need to be doing as a society is focus on transparency and equality-- ensuring that all parties in the social contract stand on an equal footing with regard to what information is publicly available. Secrecy is most dangerous when the powers that be insist that it be one-sided..."
That could have been an actual slashdot post on any random article about the RIAA...
Then again, importing biz.booksellers.amazon.* might unnecessarily bloat my package
So that's how all the 'enlarge your organ' products I see advertised work....
MS did something illegal? Will be hard to prove
Except for Gates telling Intel not to invest in Go. That just came out recently, and explains the timing and the viability of this suit.