As far as makefiles go, cmake looks promising. It seems to be a generalized Imake replacement. I haven't used it, but looks interesting. It is now part of the cygwin toolchain.
as far as tools go, look at cygwin. My company uses gnumakefiles on NT and UNIX, with generalized Makefiles for each project, and platform specific build rules in universal gmake include heeaders. We use ACE for a lot of the cross platform C++ stuff, a lot of our things are servers so we avoid the cross platform GUI stuff.
All slashdotting Open Sourcers should help out in creating the Porn Again SHell, the project doesn't seem to have much activity. Maybe his hands are cramped from....
I remember reading that the original Virtual Valerie game (the first interactive porn application, for B + W Macintosh) had a couple requests to change the command keys. Seems they wanted them remapped so they could be typed with one hand. Sadly, and surprisingly, I couldn't find anything about the original Virtual Valerie online...
When I was learning UNIX programming and C++ (on Solaris), we were taught how to code (nothing quite like Stevens' APUE, RIP Richard) but nothing about how to edit, not even a tipsheet/survival guide thing. I hated vi so much, I felt like an idiot because I don't know how to quit it. I programmed most of my stuff on a mac and ftp'ed stuff over. I used Alpha on the Mac, glad it's still around at least in some form. Still the best editor I've used, though NEdit (my current fave) comes close. Me has to start looking at new editors, I kind of like the idea of the folding editors, but they all seem to be too heavy with resources. For those with recommendations of emacs, see last statement about too much resources.
Well a lot of "Mom & Pop PC users" may not have USB either All new macs have USB, though most have Ethernet also, an honest to goodness 10Base-T port (anyone else remember AAUI? lets make it harder to connect to Ethernet, but easier to connect my Mac to that 10Base-5 line that I run...). PCs of the last couple years are more likely to have USB than Ethernet. UHCI controllers are damn cheap, and have come standard on the motherboard of every PC I've seen in the last 3 years.
To use the (self ironic) Pearl Jam song title, "This is not for you". This is for folks who do not know that the image that is their desktop is a a bitmap and how to convert it to a mac image file and put it in a place to be used as the Mac desktop. This is for folks who don't know where their Windows desktop directory is and how to copy stuff to their mac home directory, where they also don't know its location. This is for folks who don't know what linefeeds are and how to convert them. (Hmm, just came over me, does OS X use classic Mac linefeeds, or UNIX style?) This is for folks who don't know where their bookmarks file is on IE and how to convert that over to their shiny new mac. Most importantly, this is for folks who don't care and don't really care to learn. They just want stuff done. By and large, the folks on Slashdot like doing stuff like this, and like learning. Anytime there comes a device that obviates the need for learning, they scratch their heads and wonder "why bother? I can do . .." yes, you can do. But this is not for you.
Unfortunately the doc is light on the technical side. USB only allows one controller and one host, everything else is a passive device. I wonder how they get this stuff to work, my guess is the PC is the real controller, and the hardware fakes some stuff out to make the mac export its hard drive as a target device, and essentially copy stuff to the new drive. Anyone with more details?
I think the big deal for most big companies/governments is: Windows = $150. Windows upgrade forced on you every year or two later: $100 + Sysadmin costs. MS Office - bundled with computer: $200 hidden price on computer. MS Office updates every couple years, because you need to stay current because Microsoft changes the file format: $200 every couple years or so.
I think the Office thing is pissing people off. I think a lot of companies are realizing that its not in their best interests having their documents locked into a format that they have no control of. If the government wanted to really help folks out, make them open up the Office Document formats. It would help companies out, they'd know they could open up their documents no matter what MS changed the format to in the next version. What if you have a 10 year old document. Anybody have anything that can open that MacWrite II document that for some reason the IRS wants now?
Add to that some amount of time chasing down licenses so the BSA jackboots don't kick down your door. As MS makes their licensing stricter, I think this will be a bigger factor in switching to Free Software/Open source. I donwload/buy one copy of OpenOffice, and I'm OK. There's no presumption of guit you get sometimes with MS and the BSA, there's nothing to pirate.
Non executable stack on many architectures (including x86), non executable heap on many architectures
Not to troll (well, not much anyway) but interesting to see this here when Linus was adamant about not getting this into Linux, the whole false sense of security thing. Has this changed in Linux? I've heard of stack smashes, never a head attack. I wonder how common these are.
They used to. They used to make a range of workstations, using a chip called the Clipper (no relation to the encryption chip). It got killed in the volume economics of Intel. Intergraph then started with a range of Intel workstations, and that business crashed and died, which Intergraph states was due in large part to Intel refusing engineering support in order to coerce them to hand over patent rights. Then they started suing. Intergraph has a long history of litigation with Intel. Been going on and off since 1997, this is just another round of "been there, done that".
Folding as in proteins, or folding as in french military disasters? Being who they are, I'm sure the French government has the surrender mode fully worked out.
Bad. Though it does remind me of my favorite French millitary joke:
Q: Why are there so many trees on the Champs Elysees? A: Because the Germans like maching in the shade.
We'll see a lot of "dumb patent clerk" posts. But I think the problem is fundamental to the patent system and can't be fixed with smarter patent clerks.
My understanding of the system they make it fairly easy to grant patents. Since all inventions filter into the patent office, it would be hard for them to get anybody who could make informed choices on everything. The technology is just too varied. How many folks here can speak on Nuclear facilities, chemical enginerring processes, and medical tools and be able to say which is good and which is bad? Besides, by definition, patents tend to have a lot of new stuff, that there are no experts in yet. How can you make a judgement if somethings a real invention, or just snake oil? You can't.
A granted patent isn't a guarantee. It is something that can be fought and contested. Here is where the system determines value. The good guy is supposed to win these. The problem is that the fight has costs. Even if you know you should win, you have to hire attorneys. You have to take depositions, find prior art, all that fun stuff. So a lot of folks with little cash take the only choice they can see, capitulate.
The problem is that we can't legislate ethics. there's no real law against somebody being a patent shark. Sure the guys a jerk for doing it, and the lawyer's a jerk for taking a case with no merits, but we'll always have slimeballs. You'll have low end companies filing nuisance suits, and big companies with more $200 an hour lawyers than you have total employees doing it.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not a patent attorney. I am curious as to whether this is current practice.
Apache kind of already does this. Though the main (possibly root) apache does do the listen/accept, it doesn't do any reads of the data, it passed the open fd down to the child which then does the processing. root can't get hit by any buffer overflows, nothing is put into any buffers to overflow them. If you look at all the buffer overflow info for apache bugs, you'll see they pretty much say "Allows intruder to interact as apache user" not root, this is why.
Of course, this is true in 1.3 and the PREFORK_MPM of apache 2.0. Not sure if the other modules have a "root parent" and then pass it off to a lower privileged client.
We'll say this function is set to run as a setuid root (maybe/etc/priv.conf can only be read by root). An attacker could execute a
export LD_PRELOAD=/home/attacker/libc.so
This is a problem now, depending on how a setuid/setgid program takes their privileges. So the runtime linker can: ignore LD_PRELOAD (a lot of systems did this before) or libraries from "trusted" locations can be used.
Surely he means "to" and not "by" I'm pretty sure he means "by a factor of".
To be honest, posting your editorial of the article here probably doesn't help much. You may want to write to the original authors if there are thigns you still need to clear up.
We can only hope that the aliens can actually legally send signals and aren't emcumbered by "Patent 1,345,821,098,836: sending signals encoded in high frequency waves to unknown lifeforms over the aether", and that they think the unknown lifeform receivers have a shot of decoding the signal without getting hit by "IGADCA - Inter-Galactic Age Digital Copyright Act: violations of decrypting the radio encoding".
Hmm, maybe they have 8 arms and tentacles, and they'll just bite the lawyer's head off when they disagree with them.
Interesting read, but I disagree with a great number of his points. One basic problem is that he thinks a cool operating system is an end in itself, or absolute control of a program is the dominant goal. That may be for some folks, but most people just want to get work done. He then complains that people don't see the obvious, and make the same choices that he made. Folks have different goals, and it's him who can't see other's goals. Still interesting, was worth reading.
I remember an IBM screen with 300DPI. 300DPI is a sorta maghic number, resolution enough to make it easy to read stuff on screen. Problem it costs an arm and a leg and your house (at least back then). I wonder how far down the manufacturing costs have fallen, though probably no where near 'makes sense for an ebook reader".
Some folks have said (jokingly) it's all about getting 1Billion hours of free Internet. You don't really need the physical media, or at least only one copy not 1,000,000. What if everyone who got an AOL CD and was never going to use it, took their login for 1,000 hours free and posted to some website. Then folks could go there and download a new one an have continual free AOL.
Slashdot Mirror
As far as makefiles go, cmake looks promising. It seems to be a generalized Imake replacement. I haven't used it, but looks interesting. It is now part of the cygwin toolchain.
as far as tools go, look at cygwin. My company uses gnumakefiles on NT and UNIX, with generalized Makefiles for each project, and platform specific build rules in universal gmake include heeaders. We use ACE for a lot of the cross platform C++ stuff, a lot of our things are servers so we avoid the cross platform GUI stuff.
All slashdotting Open Sourcers should help out in creating the Porn Again SHell, the project doesn't seem to have much activity. Maybe his hands are cramped from ....
Speaking of one-handed typing.....
I remember reading that the original Virtual Valerie game (the first interactive porn application, for B + W Macintosh) had a couple requests to change the command keys. Seems they wanted them remapped so they could be typed with one hand. Sadly, and surprisingly, I couldn't find anything about the original Virtual Valerie online...
TECO anyone? Gotta love an editor that having a cat walk across your keyboard has as much chance as doing somethnig useful as you do.
When I was learning UNIX programming and C++ (on Solaris), we were taught how to code (nothing quite like Stevens' APUE, RIP Richard) but nothing about how to edit, not even a tipsheet/survival guide thing. I hated vi so much, I felt like an idiot because I don't know how to quit it. I programmed most of my stuff on a mac and ftp'ed stuff over. I used Alpha on the Mac, glad it's still around at least in some form. Still the best editor I've used, though NEdit (my current fave) comes close. Me has to start looking at new editors, I kind of like the idea of the folding editors, but they all seem to be too heavy with resources. For those with recommendations of emacs, see last statement about too much resources.
kdesh
Though you were probably making a joke with all that 32million minimum stuff, but DtKsh?
Well a lot of "Mom & Pop PC users" may not have USB either
." yes, you can do. But this is not for you.
All new macs have USB, though most have Ethernet also, an honest to goodness 10Base-T port (anyone else remember AAUI? lets make it harder to connect to Ethernet, but easier to connect my Mac to that 10Base-5 line that I run...). PCs of the last couple years are more likely to have USB than Ethernet. UHCI controllers are damn cheap, and have come standard on the motherboard of every PC I've seen in the last 3 years.
To use the (self ironic) Pearl Jam song title, "This is not for you". This is for folks who do not know that the image that is their desktop is a a bitmap and how to convert it to a mac image file and put it in a place to be used as the Mac desktop. This is for folks who don't know where their Windows desktop directory is and how to copy stuff to their mac home directory, where they also don't know its location. This is for folks who don't know what linefeeds are and how to convert them. (Hmm, just came over me, does OS X use classic Mac linefeeds, or UNIX style?) This is for folks who don't know where their bookmarks file is on IE and how to convert that over to their shiny new mac. Most importantly, this is for folks who don't care and don't really care to learn. They just want stuff done. By and large, the folks on Slashdot like doing stuff like this, and like learning. Anytime there comes a device that obviates the need for learning, they scratch their heads and wonder "why bother? I can do . .
Unfortunately the doc is light on the technical side. USB only allows one controller and one host, everything else is a passive device. I wonder how they get this stuff to work, my guess is the PC is the real controller, and the hardware fakes some stuff out to make the mac export its hard drive as a target device, and essentially copy stuff to the new drive. Anyone with more details?
Windows = $150+ (depending on where you get it)
I think the big deal for most big companies/governments is:
Windows = $150.
Windows upgrade forced on you every year or two later: $100 + Sysadmin costs.
MS Office - bundled with computer: $200 hidden price on computer.
MS Office updates every couple years, because you need to stay current because Microsoft changes the file format: $200 every couple years or so.
I think the Office thing is pissing people off. I think a lot of companies are realizing that its not in their best interests having their documents locked into a format that they have no control of. If the government wanted to really help folks out, make them open up the Office Document formats. It would help companies out, they'd know they could open up their documents no matter what MS changed the format to in the next version. What if you have a 10 year old document. Anybody have anything that can open that MacWrite II document that for some reason the IRS wants now?
Add to that some amount of time chasing down licenses so the BSA jackboots don't kick down your door. As MS makes their licensing stricter, I think this will be a bigger factor in switching to Free Software/Open source. I donwload/buy one copy of OpenOffice, and I'm OK. There's no presumption of guit you get sometimes with MS and the BSA, there's nothing to pirate.
Non executable stack on many architectures (including x86), non executable heap on many architectures
Not to troll (well, not much anyway) but interesting to see this here when Linus was adamant about not getting this into Linux, the whole false sense of security thing. Has this changed in Linux? I've heard of stack smashes, never a head attack. I wonder how common these are.
From the openbsd man pages:
pf.conf(5)
pfctl(8)
pf(4)
They used to. They used to make a range of workstations, using a chip called the Clipper (no relation to the encryption chip). It got killed in the volume economics of Intel. Intergraph then started with a range of Intel workstations, and that business crashed and died, which Intergraph states was due in large part to Intel refusing engineering support in order to coerce them to hand over patent rights. Then they started suing. Intergraph has a long history of litigation with Intel. Been going on and off since 1997, this is just another round of "been there, done that".
. . . become the Renault of the Linux world?
So instead of Le Car we're gonna have Le CD? Le OS?
Folding as in proteins, or folding as in french military disasters?
Being who they are, I'm sure the French government has the surrender mode fully worked out.
Bad. Though it does remind me of my favorite French millitary joke:
Q: Why are there so many trees on the Champs Elysees?
A: Because the Germans like maching in the shade.
I wonder if there's a multi-threaded Folding client......
Why? Just run one app per processor. I do this on my NT box. Just make sure you configure it right.
gmake has parallel makes. See the -j option.
We'll see a lot of "dumb patent clerk" posts. But I think the problem is fundamental to the patent system and can't be fixed with smarter patent clerks.
My understanding of the system they make it fairly easy to grant patents. Since all inventions filter into the patent office, it would be hard for them to get anybody who could make informed choices on everything. The technology is just too varied. How many folks here can speak on Nuclear facilities, chemical enginerring processes, and medical tools and be able to say which is good and which is bad? Besides, by definition, patents tend to have a lot of new stuff, that there are no experts in yet. How can you make a judgement if somethings a real invention, or just snake oil? You can't.
A granted patent isn't a guarantee. It is something that can be fought and contested. Here is where the system determines value. The good guy is supposed to win these. The problem is that the fight has costs. Even if you know you should win, you have to hire attorneys. You have to take depositions, find prior art, all that fun stuff. So a lot of folks with little cash take the only choice they can see, capitulate.
The problem is that we can't legislate ethics. there's no real law against somebody being a patent shark. Sure the guys a jerk for doing it, and the lawyer's a jerk for taking a case with no merits, but we'll always have slimeballs. You'll have low end companies filing nuisance suits, and big companies with more $200 an hour lawyers than you have total employees doing it.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not a patent attorney. I am curious as to whether this is current practice.
Apache kind of already does this. Though the main (possibly root) apache does do the listen/accept, it doesn't do any reads of the data, it passed the open fd down to the child which then does the processing. root can't get hit by any buffer overflows, nothing is put into any buffers to overflow them. If you look at all the buffer overflow info for apache bugs, you'll see they pretty much say "Allows intruder to interact as apache user" not root, this is why.
Of course, this is true in 1.3 and the PREFORK_MPM of apache 2.0. Not sure if the other modules have a "root parent" and then pass it off to a lower privileged client.
We'll say this function is set to run as a setuid root (maybe /etc/priv.conf can only be read by root). An attacker could execute a
export LD_PRELOAD=/home/attacker/libc.so
This is a problem now, depending on how a setuid/setgid program takes their privileges. So the runtime linker can:
ignore LD_PRELOAD (a lot of systems did this before) or libraries from "trusted" locations can be used.
Surely he means "to" and not "by"
I'm pretty sure he means "by a factor of".
To be honest, posting your editorial of the article here probably doesn't help much. You may want to write to the original authors if there are thigns you still need to clear up.
Wired had a good explanation on the problems inherent in predicting folding. IBM is building a big grid supercomputer to do this.
We can only hope that the aliens can actually legally send signals and aren't emcumbered by "Patent 1,345,821,098,836: sending signals encoded in high frequency waves to unknown lifeforms over the aether", and that they think the unknown lifeform receivers have a shot of decoding the signal without getting hit by "IGADCA - Inter-Galactic Age Digital Copyright Act: violations of decrypting the radio encoding".
Hmm, maybe they have 8 arms and tentacles, and they'll just bite the lawyer's head off when they disagree with them.
Hmm, so God has a command line. I wonder if he asked Mel to write it in Fortran.
I remember an IBM screen with 300DPI. 300DPI is a sorta maghic number, resolution enough to make it easy to read stuff on screen. Problem it costs an arm and a leg and your house (at least back then). I wonder how far down the manufacturing costs have fallen, though probably no where near 'makes sense for an ebook reader".
Some folks have said (jokingly) it's all about getting 1Billion hours of free Internet. You don't really need the physical media, or at least only one copy not 1,000,000. What if everyone who got an AOL CD and was never going to use it, took their login for 1,000 hours free and posted to some website. Then folks could go there and download a new one an have continual free AOL.
I know you must provide a CC # to sign up . . .
I think they started not requiring the CC #. I don't know, I've never dialed in, but I think their ads even tout that now.