The EU comission (basically "federal government") and EU parlament have voted for. It is stuck at the council of ministers (basically the second chamber representing the national governments). It is very popular for national politicians to use EU as a scape goat, but here the blame is on them.
Out of curiosity: is there a point with ObjC++ or are the advantages of C++ and ObjC redundant? Secondly : is C++ still a superset of C89 or have they diverged further?
The problem, even with a spinal cord cut intentionally and carefully, is that the surgeon has no way to know what connections in the head go to what connections in the body.
It sounds like he's simply hoping it all sorts itself out somehow. Or maybe that the brain could eventually remap everything. Seems unlikely. Especially within two years.
The basic idea would be physiotherapy afterwards to make the brain re-learn how to move the body
So the better alternative is to dowload and install everything manually? Yeah... That makes sense... As long as there are alternative and open distribution (I like the AUR for low contributor thresholds) I can not see your point.
Hopefully there will be an easy list with "trust scores" for 3rd party repositories easily available to users (and with the chocolatey already activated, the need for addotional repos for FOSS might not be needed). Btw OneGet is also open source and on github... Not the same MS that we love to hate...
OneGet is a generic powershell framework ("package manager manager") which is open for and designed for 3rd party repositories (most notably : chocolatey.org )
That they finally start with a package manager (or package manager manager) : OneGet which will integrate with Chocolatey is a big "right" in my book. As a Linux user for a decade, one of the strangest things in Windows-land has been that users still need to go to web-pages and download installers manually - which in it self poses a security risk since the average user might not verify that the web page is genuine. With an efficient software management (keep everything up-to-date) and installation eco-system, we can hope that a lot of the crapware littering download sites will go extinct (I have had to clean up various computers for friends and family running Windows - those running Linux did not need much support apart from the occasional upgrade). As a GUI front-end I find Chocolatey Explorer user friendly enough, but other options will most likely pop up later.
There has been plenty of people here who have claimed that Linux and open source provide an architecture which is by design more resilient against malware than proprietary solutions.
It is. That is why a Linux malware get to be news whereas yet another Windows malware does not register above the noise as news because there are so damn many of them. The same thing with the Bash, GnuTLS, OpenSSL etc vulnerabilities. "More resilient" does not mean immune - claiming immiunity would just be silly.
News of Critical Vulnerabilities in Windows are about as frequent as every Patch Tuesday.
I have re-linked/bin/sh to another light-weight minimalistic shell and I use another sell as cli. Despite this, it is nearly impossible to completely remove Bash from a GNU/Linux system (Arch in my case) because several critical components depend on Bash (either simply by calling #!/bin/bash instead of sh or by depending on bash-specific functionality). Getting rid of those dependencies would give the user freedom to choose any sh-compatible shell. One reason this bash bug and the openssl bug before it are so devastating is that those two implementations are so ubiquitous. If each component in a system is easily replaceable with an alternative implementation, the impact would be far smaller.
I fear a future systemd vulnerability....
What Apple does (keeping an ancient non-gpl3 version of bash as primary shell) seems to be the worst possible solution. There are several powerful shells with liberal licences that would fit osx better: zsh (very powerful, globbing and spelling correction), mksh (light and fast but still full of features) or perhaps for the easy-to-use philosophy: fish. Osx already diverges significantly from other *nixes (case-insensitive, binary format,...) so keeping bash for legacy support sounds strange - and if important they could just make it an optional install like in most BSDs...
A nice alternative is Alpine linux which feels a lot like Arch but uses openrc init, grsec kernel and musl libc. To make it even lighter, busybox is the default userland ( but coreutils is an option). It is apparently well suited as a minimal secute Xen host.
That is not how evolution works. We do not decend from any currently living species, we just share common ancestors and if you go far enough back in time we are related to everything living on Earth.
Studies of distant relative animals ("basal metazoans") and finding similarities to us indicate that our last common ancestor had those features.
In Samsungs case, switching from FAT or exFAT to F2FS and provide drivers for Windows and OSX would make sense. Windows users are used to having to install specialized drivers for peripherals anyway...
I still hope that the plasma desktop from KF5 finally will make KDE a real shell replacement on Windows. There is experimental support for this in the KDE4 builds, but as I have understood it KF5/Qt5 will enhance support significantly. If this is the case I will definitely put KDE on every machine when people want me to "fix" their Windows 8 machines (and refuse a proper OS).
I want to check if it builds on Plan9 APE. There is an old openssl port, but when I tried a more recent one it choked (lots of symlinks generated during configure, not supported on Plan9)
not imaginative enough. Life in outer space would be less similar to us than bacteria on Earth is (so bird-like and octupus like is too "tellocentric"). Having said that, certain body plans are likely to reoccur like light sensors (eyes have developed several times independently on Earth) likely close to the proccesing unit ("brain", could also be distributed like in an octopus) and feeding organs.
Mother Nature is a serial killer. No one's better. More creative. Like all serial killers, she can't help but the urge to want to get caught. But what good are all those brilliant crimes if no one takes the credit? So she leaves crumbs. Now the hard part, while you spent decades in school, is seeing the crumbs for the clues they are. Sometimes the thing you thought was the most brutal aspect of the virus, turns out to be the chink in its armor. And she loves disguising her weaknesses as strengths. She's a bitch. -Fassbach, World War Z
Standards is just one of the regulations in place to ensure a Free market (a market with choice for the consumer). In terms of ISPs it could be that there would be antitrust regulations and requirements that competing companies should be able to sell their services over the exising connections. Ideally the "network providers" and "service providers" are kept sepparate, and the "network providers" only billing the "service providers". This is how stuff works with electricity and gas, at least in the 2 countries where I have lived.
I often see to very different views on the concept of a free market. One is "free from intervention" and is producer-focused, which often leads to one or a few domninant players due to network effects and/or scale advantages. The second one can be interpreted as "optimal competition" and is consumer-focused, where regulations (antitrust, enforced standards, consumer protection etc) try to make sure that the consumer always has a choice and that a market can not stagnate into its stable state of one or a few dominant players. I think the telecom market in the US vs EU (and probably most of the world) is a good example. In most places, the government has mandated a single standard (for example GSM) and rules for roaming on a network. This has led to a big market of small service providers on a few networks (there is for example stiff competition on prepaid SIMs). What I have understood from the US, differing standards between the providers coupled with a subsidized payment plan for the phone effectively causes a lock-in situation for the consumer. I am definitely leaning in favour of the "optimal competition" interpretation of a free market (how can a market be free if the consumer does not have a choice?).
Slashdot Mirror
The EU comission (basically "federal government") and EU parlament have voted for. It is stuck at the council of ministers (basically the second chamber representing the national governments). It is very popular for national politicians to use EU as a scape goat, but here the blame is on them.
Out of curiosity: is there a point with ObjC++ or are the advantages of C++ and ObjC redundant? Secondly : is C++ still a superset of C89 or have they diverged further?
It sounds like he's simply hoping it all sorts itself out somehow. Or maybe that the brain could eventually remap everything. Seems unlikely. Especially within two years.
The basic idea would be physiotherapy afterwards to make the brain re-learn how to move the body
So the better alternative is to dowload and install everything manually? Yeah... That makes sense... As long as there are alternative and open distribution (I like the AUR for low contributor thresholds) I can not see your point.
Hopefully there will be an easy list with "trust scores" for 3rd party repositories easily available to users (and with the chocolatey already activated, the need for addotional repos for FOSS might not be needed). Btw OneGet is also open source and on github ... Not the same MS that we love to hate...
OneGet is a generic powershell framework ("package manager manager") which is open for and designed for 3rd party repositories (most notably : chocolatey.org )
That they finally start with a package manager (or package manager manager) : OneGet which will integrate with Chocolatey is a big "right" in my book. As a Linux user for a decade, one of the strangest things in Windows-land has been that users still need to go to web-pages and download installers manually - which in it self poses a security risk since the average user might not verify that the web page is genuine. With an efficient software management (keep everything up-to-date) and installation eco-system, we can hope that a lot of the crapware littering download sites will go extinct (I have had to clean up various computers for friends and family running Windows - those running Linux did not need much support apart from the occasional upgrade). As a GUI front-end I find Chocolatey Explorer user friendly enough, but other options will most likely pop up later.
Init: OpenRC Libc: musl Userland: busybox Looks like a nice alternative....
There has been plenty of people here who have claimed that Linux and open source provide an architecture which is by design more resilient against malware than proprietary solutions.
It is. That is why a Linux malware get to be news whereas yet another Windows malware does not register above the noise as news because there are so damn many of them. The same thing with the Bash, GnuTLS, OpenSSL etc vulnerabilities. "More resilient" does not mean immune - claiming immiunity would just be silly. News of Critical Vulnerabilities in Windows are about as frequent as every Patch Tuesday.
No ofcourse not. I was more thinking of the WINEPREFIX part ... And perhaps greater legacy win16/win32 compatibility than that found in Windows.
Would it not have made more sense to port wine to windows and make portable apps in the form of a WINEPREFIX?
I have re-linked /bin/sh to another light-weight minimalistic shell and I use another sell as cli. Despite this, it is nearly impossible to completely remove Bash from a GNU/Linux system (Arch in my case) because several critical components depend on Bash (either simply by calling #!/bin/bash instead of sh or by depending on bash-specific functionality). Getting rid of those dependencies would give the user freedom to choose any sh-compatible shell. One reason this bash bug and the openssl bug before it are so devastating is that those two implementations are so ubiquitous. If each component in a system is easily replaceable with an alternative implementation, the impact would be far smaller.
I fear a future systemd vulnerability....
What Apple does (keeping an ancient non-gpl3 version of bash as primary shell) seems to be the worst possible solution. There are several powerful shells with liberal licences that would fit osx better: zsh (very powerful, globbing and spelling correction), mksh (light and fast but still full of features) or perhaps for the easy-to-use philosophy: fish. Osx already diverges significantly from other *nixes (case-insensitive, binary format, ...) so keeping bash for legacy support sounds strange - and if important they could just make it an optional install like in most BSDs...
A nice alternative is Alpine linux which feels a lot like Arch but uses openrc init, grsec kernel and musl libc. To make it even lighter, busybox is the default userland ( but coreutils is an option). It is apparently well suited as a minimal secute Xen host.
Point 1 and 2 on my list would be UV and IR vision
That is not how evolution works. We do not decend from any currently living species, we just share common ancestors and if you go far enough back in time we are related to everything living on Earth. Studies of distant relative animals ("basal metazoans") and finding similarities to us indicate that our last common ancestor had those features.
In Samsungs case, switching from FAT or exFAT to F2FS and provide drivers for Windows and OSX would make sense. Windows users are used to having to install specialized drivers for peripherals anyway...
I still hope that the plasma desktop from KF5 finally will make KDE a real shell replacement on Windows. There is experimental support for this in the KDE4 builds, but as I have understood it KF5/Qt5 will enhance support significantly. If this is the case I will definitely put KDE on every machine when people want me to "fix" their Windows 8 machines (and refuse a proper OS).
I want to check if it builds on Plan9 APE. There is an old openssl port, but when I tried a more recent one it choked (lots of symlinks generated during configure, not supported on Plan9)
not imaginative enough. Life in outer space would be less similar to us than bacteria on Earth is (so bird-like and octupus like is too "tellocentric"). Having said that, certain body plans are likely to reoccur like light sensors (eyes have developed several times independently on Earth) likely close to the proccesing unit ("brain", could also be distributed like in an octopus) and feeding organs.
I am currently playing around with Alpine linux, musl libc + busybox + openrc. I like it a lot - a binary package management similar to Arch linux.
Enlightenment and EFL are bsd licensed and there are several others, like dwm, are permissively licensed
Mother Nature is a serial killer. No one's better. More creative. Like all serial killers, she can't help but the urge to want to get caught. But what good are all those brilliant crimes if no one takes the credit? So she leaves crumbs. Now the hard part, while you spent decades in school, is seeing the crumbs for the clues they are. Sometimes the thing you thought was the most brutal aspect of the virus, turns out to be the chink in its armor. And she loves disguising her weaknesses as strengths. She's a bitch. -Fassbach, World War Z
In this case, she is a Cereal killer
Standards is just one of the regulations in place to ensure a Free market (a market with choice for the consumer). In terms of ISPs it could be that there would be antitrust regulations and requirements that competing companies should be able to sell their services over the exising connections. Ideally the "network providers" and "service providers" are kept sepparate, and the "network providers" only billing the "service providers". This is how stuff works with electricity and gas, at least in the 2 countries where I have lived.
I often see to very different views on the concept of a free market. One is "free from intervention" and is producer-focused, which often leads to one or a few domninant players due to network effects and/or scale advantages. The second one can be interpreted as "optimal competition" and is consumer-focused, where regulations (antitrust, enforced standards, consumer protection etc) try to make sure that the consumer always has a choice and that a market can not stagnate into its stable state of one or a few dominant players. I think the telecom market in the US vs EU (and probably most of the world) is a good example. In most places, the government has mandated a single standard (for example GSM) and rules for roaming on a network. This has led to a big market of small service providers on a few networks (there is for example stiff competition on prepaid SIMs). What I have understood from the US, differing standards between the providers coupled with a subsidized payment plan for the phone effectively causes a lock-in situation for the consumer. I am definitely leaning in favour of the "optimal competition" interpretation of a free market (how can a market be free if the consumer does not have a choice?).