The funny thing about that is that, when it comes to loading a page, the iPhone on EDGE generally shows you the finished page before a 3G phone does. Even though the data is retrieved faster, the actual presentation of the final page is slower. Having done a side-by-side comparison, I'm going to have to disagree with this. Perhaps it's a function of the browser? My PPC6700 with Opera renders pretty darned quick, particularly for a phone at the end of its lifetime.
So modify the policy so that if the password is compromised, it must get changed. If it is changed to something which fits HIS requirements, it is made immune to the periodic change requirements.
Honestly, I figured that this would be obvious, however I underestimated the pedantic nature of some people to pounce on the tiniest flaw in a post (most likely the mis-use of the word "permanent".)
This requires trusting the OS with your password, having root at a minimum to install it and possibly to use it, and assumes that you don't want to use your thumbdrive on other operating systems. A truely hardware-based system where the drive doesn't even announce itself as a mass storage device until it is unlocked would be the best option.
Yeah, I really think that it was a battery life issue. I've heard that Steve Jobs is anal about usability (and rightly so!) and an iPhone with a battery life of 3 hours just wouldn't have cut it.
Wifi on the iPhone was supposed to be a compromise. In some US cities, it's hard NOT to find an area with free Wifi. And in cities where the population density isn't so high, many places where you'll use an iPhone will have connectivity.
That said, lack of 3G is what kept me from buying an iPhone. I live in a very low population-density area, and most restaurants around here don't have Wifi. The coffee shops all do, but I'm more likely to spend long periods of free time in a restaurant--if I'm at a coffee shop, it's with friends with whom I want to interact.
The other big use-case for the iPhone is while travelling. If I'm riding with a friend on a longish trip, I may want to be able to use the Internet on my phone. Here, again, Wifi isn't available, so on the iPhone, you're stuck with Edge. On a windows smartphone with 3G, you've got much better data rates.
There are several problems that occur once you get on the plane. The aisles are only wide enough for one person to pass, so if you need to get behind someone, you're waiting until they finish putting their bags up. Most people try to get things out of their bags as they put them in the overhead compartments, too. Then there are the problems getting the bags up there--some people can't lisft them, some people can't get them into the compartment (they snag on the hinges, etc.) and some people just move slowly.
Exacerbating the problem is that they usually seat in row blocks, so rows 25-32 might all seat at once. This means that if someone in row 25 gets there first, everyone waits on him. Of course, there are usually 4-6 people per row, so this problem can grow pretty quickly.
If Apple publishes the SPI as API, FireFox uses it, and Apple changes the data structure, Firefox breaks, and with "luck", so do Photoshop and Word....:-( It's worse than that--if they publish the SPI and then change it, breaking these applications, they get called out for intentionally breaking Firefox.
Nonetheless, Microsoft does it and they get tons of people crying foul. Apple does it, and people defend them. Is the fact that Microsoft is a monopoly really enough of a mitigating factor to preclude them from using their own SPI?
Generally, they access privileged instructions and memory, and they run code directly on the processor. A pure software emulator would not have this requirement.
It's sad that there aren't any good, robust virtual machine solutions out there. VMWare really does seem to be the best on all platforms, though trying to use anything non-Windows/Linux is probably going to be frustrating.
Xen really isn't much better. They have support for Windows on machines with hardware virtualization instructions, but more obscure operating systems just don't get support.
You can't assume that in software. A software implementation of a bridge might simply send packets out the interface which is connected to the live wire. I've seen similar (bad) implementations in code which purports to act as a bridge. The bug was originally noticed when connections through the bridge back to the host couldn't be made, since the switch received packets on the same port to which they should be forwarded.
This is a great example of how virtual machines can actually reduce security (something that Theo de Raadt said not that long ago, and was lambasted for.) Here's a case where a local exploit in the guest could turn into a root exploit in the host--all by virtual of the fact that virtual machines (necessarily) run as root on the host. Even if they didn't run as root, it would allow two local exploits (one on the guest and one on the host), and presumably the possible infection of other guests running under the same local user.
I'm not the original poster, but this comment made me think.
First of all, what if you're bridging? Does the OS snag the packet that's destined for its interface, or does it forward to the switch first?
Second, lots of people don't set up FTP anymore, due to better alternatives. What other options would you use? You could use Samba--again, if you have it set up.
Usually, I'd also use scp, but I'd use a weak (and fast) encryption mechanism. It's a shame that OpenSSH got rid of the "no encryption" cipher. I've seen patches to put it back in, but that's a pain to manage.
I'm pretty sad that this post got modded down so much. It really does expose a glaring fallacy--that open source is inherently more secure. Oh well, I've got Karma to burn.
It's true that more eyes can look at the code. It's true that anyone can try to fix it and then submit a patch. But it requires action for this to be the case. Firefox is a classic example of a major open source project which consistently has security holes left unpatched. It's a major project, people! It's practically the poster-child for alternatives to Microsoft software! Fix the damned bugs!
You have to use a third-party patch to get domU support for FreeBSD. Unfortunately, there is no dom0 support, and while there are people supposedly working on it, there aren't many status reports.
The main thing is that the packages on the ISO are frozen at -RELEASE. They're almost always out of date by the time you install them, which means that you need to go upgrade them, which makes one wonder what the point of installing it in the first place was. Unless it's a machine with limited or no network capabilities, installing the packages from the CD itself is going to be wasted time.
Besides, once the package is installed, it's easy enough to change the shell
When I install a new system, I just run the following as a matter of course: pkg_add -r zsh && pkg_add -r vim-lite && pkg_add -r mutt && pkg_add -r sudo && chsh -s/usr/local/bin/zsh sancho
Of course, adding screen is harder, allegedly due to a bug in screen. Gotta go to the ports for that: portsnap fetch extract && cd/usr/ports/sysutils/screen && make install clean
I'm a conservative, and a Republican, but I just gotta say this is a perfect example of conservative, Republican hypocrisy. (There, I said it.)... I really don't care what you choose for you own family, as long as you don't force *your* standards onto me. Ah, I see what the problem is. You don't understand that you're actually a libertarian.
I'd really love the idea of a.xxx domain if sane people were deciding which sites go there. Unfortunately, it would just be used as a way to censor any depiction or apparent depiction of sexual acts. Does an R-rated movie trailer deserve to be put on that domain? What about sites with user-generated content that might include sexually explicit material?
What really needs to happen is for people in the US to stop being prudish. Unfortunately, it would probably take a miracle for that to happen in my lifetime.
Rant about blue laws aside, there are still differences in the two situations. While buying alcohol on Sunday isn't likely to harm anyone else, a Taliban fighter or two forgetting to turn off his phone could compromise the group. Likewise, a group of cell phones suddenly going off at 7pm would be as suspicious as a group of them moving about. And there's still the possibility that the towers can track them even with the phones off (depending upon what "off" really means on that phone--my phone is never unless I pull the battery, but it's poorly designed.)
Design is done with CSS:) Yeah, I meant markup.
That's hardly specific to PHP though, I find Java worse than PHP for that. "why is this code using HashMap instead of Vector" etc... Idiocy transcends language boundaries. Perhaps, but features of a language can increase or decrease the difficulty of reading and comprehension.
Keyword "generally". I've got several small apps that exist as single PHP files. Forcing separation (or even OOP) here is not a good thing, it's pointless and stupid. Well, PHP was originally a templating language:) In fact, the common problems I have with it are when there's more PHP than HTML. When used as a templating language, it's just fine, and it makes sense for it to all be in one file. Other times, I'm not so sure, but I'd be hesitant to say that there's NEVER a time when one file doesn't make sense--it just usually doesn't. PHP's an enabler in this case, though.
I would say that it is good for building web *sites* but not so much web *apps*. PHP is fine if all you need is a little dynamic content here and there, but for applications it falls short, IMO. That's a pretty good way of looking at it. Usually, I find that PHP makes for unmaintainable code. Simple websites don't have this problem, but then, simple websites sometimes grow up to be large ones.
Oh well, not really interested in a PHP flamewar. Suffice it to say that ever since I've discovered Ruby and Python, I don't want to touch another line PHP code again. I don't care if you do dress it up in some MVC framework, it still looks like a turd to me. Well I hate Rails vehemently, but I'm liking Django (an MVC framework for Python.) Both have limitations, though. I used to think that a PHP MVC framework might be ok, but then I remembered that a lot of the things that I hate about PHP would still exist.
Something I find funny about PHP is that someone actually wrote a templating language for it (Smarty). I thought PHP WAS a templating language! This happens all the time. People take a perfectly reasonable tool and try to apply it in ways for which it was never designed. Then the developers add features to make those uses easier, and you end up with a crappy tool that does the job.
That's a really oversimplified example of templating. Templating usually allows you to be more specific--rather than just "inner page content" you can have much smaller bits of dynamic content. In its purest form, your HTML page looks like HTML, but essentially has variables for content (without markup or scripting) that gets replaced on the fly.
The purest form isn't always the best way of doing things, but a good rule of thumb is that the more that your template handles, the better.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't understand your point.
One could use any operating system for control of a botnet--that doesn't reflect poorly on the OS.
So modify the policy so that if the password is compromised, it must get changed. If it is changed to something which fits HIS requirements, it is made immune to the periodic change requirements.
Honestly, I figured that this would be obvious, however I underestimated the pedantic nature of some people to pounce on the tiniest flaw in a post (most likely the mis-use of the word "permanent".)
This requires trusting the OS with your password, having root at a minimum to install it and possibly to use it, and assumes that you don't want to use your thumbdrive on other operating systems. A truely hardware-based system where the drive doesn't even announce itself as a mass storage device until it is unlocked would be the best option.
Vista Media Center is pretty spiffy, from what I hear.
Yeah, I really think that it was a battery life issue. I've heard that Steve Jobs is anal about usability (and rightly so!) and an iPhone with a battery life of 3 hours just wouldn't have cut it.
Wifi on the iPhone was supposed to be a compromise. In some US cities, it's hard NOT to find an area with free Wifi. And in cities where the population density isn't so high, many places where you'll use an iPhone will have connectivity.
That said, lack of 3G is what kept me from buying an iPhone. I live in a very low population-density area, and most restaurants around here don't have Wifi. The coffee shops all do, but I'm more likely to spend long periods of free time in a restaurant--if I'm at a coffee shop, it's with friends with whom I want to interact.
The other big use-case for the iPhone is while travelling. If I'm riding with a friend on a longish trip, I may want to be able to use the Internet on my phone. Here, again, Wifi isn't available, so on the iPhone, you're stuck with Edge. On a windows smartphone with 3G, you've got much better data rates.
There are several problems that occur once you get on the plane. The aisles are only wide enough for one person to pass, so if you need to get behind someone, you're waiting until they finish putting their bags up. Most people try to get things out of their bags as they put them in the overhead compartments, too. Then there are the problems getting the bags up there--some people can't lisft them, some people can't get them into the compartment (they snag on the hinges, etc.) and some people just move slowly.
Exacerbating the problem is that they usually seat in row blocks, so rows 25-32 might all seat at once. This means that if someone in row 25 gets there first, everyone waits on him. Of course, there are usually 4-6 people per row, so this problem can grow pretty quickly.
The first OpenMoko phone didn't even have EDGE data rates. It had some neat features, but let's face it--it was doomed to failure because of this.
Nonetheless, Microsoft does it and they get tons of people crying foul. Apple does it, and people defend them. Is the fact that Microsoft is a monopoly really enough of a mitigating factor to preclude them from using their own SPI?
Ad hominem attacks are great for when you don't actually have a point to make, aren't they? Thanks for showing yourself to be the troll that you are.
Generally, they access privileged instructions and memory, and they run code directly on the processor. A pure software emulator would not have this requirement.
Good to hear.
It's sad that there aren't any good, robust virtual machine solutions out there. VMWare really does seem to be the best on all platforms, though trying to use anything non-Windows/Linux is probably going to be frustrating.
Xen really isn't much better. They have support for Windows on machines with hardware virtualization instructions, but more obscure operating systems just don't get support.
You can't assume that in software. A software implementation of a bridge might simply send packets out the interface which is connected to the live wire. I've seen similar (bad) implementations in code which purports to act as a bridge. The bug was originally noticed when connections through the bridge back to the host couldn't be made, since the switch received packets on the same port to which they should be forwarded.
This is a great example of how virtual machines can actually reduce security (something that Theo de Raadt said not that long ago, and was lambasted for.) Here's a case where a local exploit in the guest could turn into a root exploit in the host--all by virtual of the fact that virtual machines (necessarily) run as root on the host. Even if they didn't run as root, it would allow two local exploits (one on the guest and one on the host), and presumably the possible infection of other guests running under the same local user.
I'm not the original poster, but this comment made me think.
First of all, what if you're bridging? Does the OS snag the packet that's destined for its interface, or does it forward to the switch first?
Second, lots of people don't set up FTP anymore, due to better alternatives. What other options would you use? You could use Samba--again, if you have it set up.
Usually, I'd also use scp, but I'd use a weak (and fast) encryption mechanism. It's a shame that OpenSSH got rid of the "no encryption" cipher. I've seen patches to put it back in, but that's a pain to manage.
I'm pretty sad that this post got modded down so much. It really does expose a glaring fallacy--that open source is inherently more secure. Oh well, I've got Karma to burn.
It's true that more eyes can look at the code. It's true that anyone can try to fix it and then submit a patch. But it requires action for this to be the case. Firefox is a classic example of a major open source project which consistently has security holes left unpatched. It's a major project, people! It's practically the poster-child for alternatives to Microsoft software! Fix the damned bugs!
You have to use a third-party patch to get domU support for FreeBSD. Unfortunately, there is no dom0 support, and while there are people supposedly working on it, there aren't many status reports.
The Xen information is available here: http://www.fsmware.com/xenofreebsd/7.0/ linked from http://wiki.freebsd.org/FreeBSD/Xen.
That said, VMWare seems to run FreeBSD just fine. VirtualBox, sadly, doesn't play nicely with newer versions of FreeBSD.
The main thing is that the packages on the ISO are frozen at -RELEASE. They're almost always out of date by the time you install them, which means that you need to go upgrade them, which makes one wonder what the point of installing it in the first place was. Unless it's a machine with limited or no network capabilities, installing the packages from the CD itself is going to be wasted time.
/usr/local/bin/zsh sancho
/usr/ports/sysutils/screen && make install clean
Besides, once the package is installed, it's easy enough to change the shell
When I install a new system, I just run the following as a matter of course:
pkg_add -r zsh && pkg_add -r vim-lite && pkg_add -r mutt && pkg_add -r sudo && chsh -s
Of course, adding screen is harder, allegedly due to a bug in screen. Gotta go to the ports for that:
portsnap fetch extract && cd
I really don't care what you choose for you own family, as long as you don't force *your* standards onto me. Ah, I see what the problem is. You don't understand that you're actually a libertarian.
I'd really love the idea of a .xxx domain if sane people were deciding which sites go there. Unfortunately, it would just be used as a way to censor any depiction or apparent depiction of sexual acts. Does an R-rated movie trailer deserve to be put on that domain? What about sites with user-generated content that might include sexually explicit material?
What really needs to happen is for people in the US to stop being prudish. Unfortunately, it would probably take a miracle for that to happen in my lifetime.
Rant about blue laws aside, there are still differences in the two situations. While buying alcohol on Sunday isn't likely to harm anyone else, a Taliban fighter or two forgetting to turn off his phone could compromise the group. Likewise, a group of cell phones suddenly going off at 7pm would be as suspicious as a group of them moving about. And there's still the possibility that the towers can track them even with the phones off (depending upon what "off" really means on that phone--my phone is never unless I pull the battery, but it's poorly designed.)
It's overpriced compared to free, which is what lots of people have had for years while waiting for legitimate ways of playing the older games.
That's a really oversimplified example of templating. Templating usually allows you to be more specific--rather than just "inner page content" you can have much smaller bits of dynamic content. In its purest form, your HTML page looks like HTML, but essentially has variables for content (without markup or scripting) that gets replaced on the fly.
The purest form isn't always the best way of doing things, but a good rule of thumb is that the more that your template handles, the better.