There was a product -- I don't remember the name -- which was supposed to be a module you could drop into a conventional 35mm film camera that would turn it into a digital camera. It never materialized, of course.
What about someone whose life is important to other people -- i.e., the head of a large family who relies on him for income? I would think that someone like that would be able to kill themselves, but I don't think for a minute that they would be sanctioned for doing so. (I'm not talking about something like where he would kill himself so that his family could profit from the insurance money or something, but to follow the example strictly, someone drinking himself to death beacuse "that's his right.") I don't see that.
...is that Citibank apparently didn't even care. When someone sent out spams attempting to scam people with accounts with Sony Financial Services, I contacted them about it and they promised they'd have someone call me first thing next day. They never did.
I don't like to say this, but if they are indifferent about this sort of crime now, they are going to have no chance of fighting it.
1) It is customizeable, and 2) If I'm going to spend all day looking at a computer screen I'd at least like it to be halfway palatable (see #1). 3) Wasn't all the obligatory Windows-bashing already in for the week?
Yeah, I am grateful to see that W2K3 is definitely a lot tighter than its predecessors. They did the smart thing and shipped it locked down, rather than open-ended, and gave the user a bunch of central tools to open it up.
One of the central reasons people do choose Windows is because they make certain jobs easier. Some people will say that the point of running a server is not that it should be easy, but that it should be done well. This is akin to good old Steve Albini's comment that tape decks in recording studios should be as cumbersome and scary as possible to keep the riffraff out. I don't know that I agree with that sentiment.
Two reasons -- one, there are times when I do turn on the TV on impulse or for a news flash, and I don't like to be caught with my britches -- er, cable down. The other is that there are things I do watch, just not very often, and I'd rather not deal with the expense of a separate dish account.
I'm reminded, distantly, of a hoax that took place in the art world in the Sixties. A modern art exhibit was set up at a small downtown (NY) gallery, with about forty paintings, and an art critic for one of the major rags came down to check it out. He started doing this gush to the curator full of the usual ArtSpeak jargon, and then the hoax was revealed: the paintings were all the work of a two-year-old boy. There was a pause, and then the critic shifted gears as if nothing had happened and started gushing about the purity of a child's untarnished perspective!
The more I live, the more I see that people will do absolutely anything to pretend that everything is just hunky dory, even if it means being a consummate horse's ass. VeriSign are just the latest heirs to ass-dom.
Where I live, my cable modem and cable TV are both provided by Cablevision / Optimum Online. My combined bill to these guys for one modem and no premium channels, and their shiny new digital channel box, is over a hundred bucks a month. This is with the "discount" I get for having a cable modem and a cable box both in the same household, and it's done nothing but go up since I moved here.
Some of the money is probably being diverted into building new infrastructure. They've moved all the analog cable TV to a digital system, but the channel guide they provide is so clumsy and awkward that I wound up never using it, and I just break out the dead trees channel guide instead when I do watch TV (which isn't often). I'm guessing they're trying to get money to upgrade everything to allow Hi-Def signals in the future, but right now I feel like I'm paying for nothing, and the only reason they get away with this is because there's essentially no competition in the area.
As far as data goes, I could go with DSL, but after my horrid experiences with the mishmash of competing infrastructures that we laughingly call DSL here, I decided it was better to pay for the devil I did know.
"the real issue has much less to do with market penetration and a lot more to do with Microsoft building an Operating system that seems to be meant to be insecure."
I don't think MS means to make Windows insecure; I just don't think they've been as good for programming with that in mind as other people have. Windows was meant to run fast and be easy to work with, and only now are they realizing that this was not the smartest set of priorities to have.
But think about this for a second -- no one, I suspect, ever really counted on email becoming a source of danger, simply because very little in the way of real end-to-end security was built into it. Ditto IPv4 in general, and now (as we all know) there is a lot of work being done to try and overcome this. (Moving to IPv6 would not, I suspect, solve everything at once, and would take a long time.)
So I see it this way: Windows has vulnerabilities, but if you are conscientious about knowing them, you can reduce risks. If you're security-conscious and you run Linux, you'll do fine; if you're security-incompetent and you run Linux, someone else will eat your lunch anyway.
One of the smart things XP did (although it's still somewhat sticky) is allow for user-privilege accounts where the potential for damage is limited. It's not perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than before, where there was basically no such thing as a user account, or users, period.
Back to my core point. If Linux was as widely used, and by the same variety of people (both smart and stupid) that used Windows, I don't think that we'd have too long to wait before people found ways to screw it up just as badly, ways that have nothing to do with whatever security is built into Linux and everything to do with how people can do retarded things to their PCs without trying -- and how people can be tricked into screwing their machines up. I don't doubt that it's easier to do that in Windows than it is in Linux, but I have to wonder how much of that is because there is less of an attempt to do so (and, frankly, because there are less people openly inimical to Linux in this fashion).
If MS makes a better, safer Windows because of this kind of pressure, great. I hope they do, because I would really rather see them respond now that their necks are more on the line than ever than continue to be careless because it never really mattered in the past.
Actually, no, I do that as part of a hobby. It takes no more than five minutes a day to see if new patches are available. If I was dealing with multiple boxes I'd be using a patch-manager program.
Isn't the fact that Windows's vulnerabilities are well known a product of its widespread use? I mean, this just sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts.
Not that it matters to those of us who never patch, no matter what OS you're running. I administer a Win2K based server that has remained stable because I patched it religiously and made sure that it was not easily compromised, and so far nothing has happened to it. (In fact, I had a "white hat" come in and try the usual round of exploits on the box, and none worked.)
OTOH, a friend of mine administering a Linux server was too busy bragging about his non-stop uptime to upgrade to a non-exploitable version of Apache and got his site defaced. Twice.
They have a great feel -- a nice, "floaty" feeling that feels almost like a real fountain pen (I used to have a Montblanc before someone stole it, the swine). They also don't dry out anywhere nearly as easily as a conventional BiC ballpoint. The one big downside: they scratch the paper if you press slightly too hard, which means writing on both sides of paper (unless it's really thick) is out of the question.
The unit I use does 24/96 for up to four channels (two balanced, two unbalanced), and since it's 1394 you can chain as many of the inputs as you like into the laptop. It's mostly a matter of how much you're willing to lug around and how many channels at one time you really need. I don't need more than two channels live at any one time, so I don't need to carry very many of these!
It's entirely possible. I know that Japanese noise artist Merzbow now uses laptops almost exclusively, in conjunction with some homebuilt electronics (he's always been a do-it-yourselfer), and he loves the way you can just pop open the laptop and start work anywhere. Audio engineer Roger Nichols does almost all his mixing and mastering on Mac laptops, and takes his work on the road with him -- mixing 15 tracks at 40,000 feet is a blast!
I work on a fairly tight budget, so my software of choice is FruityStudio (just go to fruitystudio.com). It's not very flexible in some respects, but it honors almost all the industry-standard plugins for audio and I've been able to do some really wonderful things with it. Cheap, too: the full version of the product is only $99.
I've been doing PC-based recording for some time now using digital equipment that doesn't cost very much. My mixer and recorder are my PC, as are many of my instruments. You can now do stuff with a $1,000 PC that you used to need a $20,000 console to do. And it's only going to get cheaper, as the laptop angle implies.
1) They threw away their money on pricey real estate so they could make a pretentious claim of being upscale.
2) They went public, as did many companies at the time, and soon had nothing to show for it. I don't know if I can blame them completely for this one, but it does show a bit of a lemming mentality vis-a-vis their behavior as an on-line entity.
3) They alienated their formerly left-of-center readership by signing on rabid neocon weasels like David Horowitz and Camille Paglia -- people who have the distinction of either not having a thing to say or having traded in a formerly intelligent and insightful viewpoint for right-wing ass kissing so they could have a bigger audience. We call that "selling out."
4) C'mon, maybe they weren't all that good anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
There was a product -- I don't remember the name -- which was supposed to be a module you could drop into a conventional 35mm film camera that would turn it into a digital camera. It never materialized, of course.
Um --
no?
who thought Greenhouse Emissions was some kind of open-source project.
Well, it is kind of hard to prosecute a dead man.
Just a thought.
What about someone whose life is important to other people -- i.e., the head of a large family who relies on him for income? I would think that someone like that would be able to kill themselves, but I don't think for a minute that they would be sanctioned for doing so. (I'm not talking about something like where he would kill himself so that his family could profit from the insurance money or something, but to follow the example strictly, someone drinking himself to death beacuse "that's his right.") I don't see that.
At least one new revision to the right of the decimal point will take place in Linux!
A major software company will release a service release of their flagship competitor operating system!
Someone somewhere will switch from one of these operating systems to another!
...is that Citibank apparently didn't even care. When someone sent out spams attempting to scam people with accounts with Sony Financial Services, I contacted them about it and they promised they'd have someone call me first thing next day. They never did.
I don't like to say this, but if they are indifferent about this sort of crime now, they are going to have no chance of fighting it.
If this wasn't Slashdot, it would probably be something like "Linux Now Bring Used To Kill More People Than Windows".
[note to mods: THIS IS FUNNY]
1) It is customizeable, and
2) If I'm going to spend all day looking at a computer screen I'd at least like it to be halfway palatable (see #1).
3) Wasn't all the obligatory Windows-bashing already in for the week?
So this didn't not un-de-falsify the "theory" of "relativity!"
(This post has been rewritten to conform to the Slashdot Scientific Grammar Police Code.)
Yeah, I am grateful to see that W2K3 is definitely a lot tighter than its predecessors. They did the smart thing and shipped it locked down, rather than open-ended, and gave the user a bunch of central tools to open it up.
One of the central reasons people do choose Windows is because they make certain jobs easier. Some people will say that the point of running a server is not that it should be easy, but that it should be done well. This is akin to good old Steve Albini's comment that tape decks in recording studios should be as cumbersome and scary as possible to keep the riffraff out. I don't know that I agree with that sentiment.
Two reasons -- one, there are times when I do turn on the TV on impulse or for a news flash, and I don't like to be caught with my britches -- er, cable down. The other is that there are things I do watch, just not very often, and I'd rather not deal with the expense of a separate dish account.
...so much as the sneaky excuses.
I'm reminded, distantly, of a hoax that took place in the art world in the Sixties. A modern art exhibit was set up at a small downtown (NY) gallery, with about forty paintings, and an art critic for one of the major rags came down to check it out. He started doing this gush to the curator full of the usual ArtSpeak jargon, and then the hoax was revealed: the paintings were all the work of a two-year-old boy. There was a pause, and then the critic shifted gears as if nothing had happened and started gushing about the purity of a child's untarnished perspective!
The more I live, the more I see that people will do absolutely anything to pretend that everything is just hunky dory, even if it means being a consummate horse's ass. VeriSign are just the latest heirs to ass-dom.
Where I live, my cable modem and cable TV are both provided by Cablevision / Optimum Online. My combined bill to these guys for one modem and no premium channels, and their shiny new digital channel box, is over a hundred bucks a month. This is with the "discount" I get for having a cable modem and a cable box both in the same household, and it's done nothing but go up since I moved here.
Some of the money is probably being diverted into building new infrastructure. They've moved all the analog cable TV to a digital system, but the channel guide they provide is so clumsy and awkward that I wound up never using it, and I just break out the dead trees channel guide instead when I do watch TV (which isn't often). I'm guessing they're trying to get money to upgrade everything to allow Hi-Def signals in the future, but right now I feel like I'm paying for nothing, and the only reason they get away with this is because there's essentially no competition in the area.
As far as data goes, I could go with DSL, but after my horrid experiences with the mishmash of competing infrastructures that we laughingly call DSL here, I decided it was better to pay for the devil I did know.
"the real issue has much less to do with market penetration and a lot more to do with Microsoft building an Operating system that seems to be meant to be insecure."
I don't think MS means to make Windows insecure; I just don't think they've been as good for programming with that in mind as other people have. Windows was meant to run fast and be easy to work with, and only now are they realizing that this was not the smartest set of priorities to have.
But think about this for a second -- no one, I suspect, ever really counted on email becoming a source of danger, simply because very little in the way of real end-to-end security was built into it. Ditto IPv4 in general, and now (as we all know) there is a lot of work being done to try and overcome this. (Moving to IPv6 would not, I suspect, solve everything at once, and would take a long time.)
So I see it this way: Windows has vulnerabilities, but if you are conscientious about knowing them, you can reduce risks. If you're security-conscious and you run Linux, you'll do fine; if you're security-incompetent and you run Linux, someone else will eat your lunch anyway.
One of the smart things XP did (although it's still somewhat sticky) is allow for user-privilege accounts where the potential for damage is limited. It's not perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than before, where there was basically no such thing as a user account, or users, period.
Back to my core point. If Linux was as widely used, and by the same variety of people (both smart and stupid) that used Windows, I don't think that we'd have too long to wait before people found ways to screw it up just as badly, ways that have nothing to do with whatever security is built into Linux and everything to do with how people can do retarded things to their PCs without trying -- and how people can be tricked into screwing their machines up. I don't doubt that it's easier to do that in Windows than it is in Linux, but I have to wonder how much of that is because there is less of an attempt to do so (and, frankly, because there are less people openly inimical to Linux in this fashion).
If MS makes a better, safer Windows because of this kind of pressure, great. I hope they do, because I would really rather see them respond now that their necks are more on the line than ever than continue to be careless because it never really mattered in the past.
Actually, no, I do that as part of a hobby. It takes no more than five minutes a day to see if new patches are available. If I was dealing with multiple boxes I'd be using a patch-manager program.
Isn't the fact that Windows's vulnerabilities are well known a product of its widespread use? I mean, this just sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts.
Not that it matters to those of us who never patch, no matter what OS you're running. I administer a Win2K based server that has remained stable because I patched it religiously and made sure that it was not easily compromised, and so far nothing has happened to it. (In fact, I had a "white hat" come in and try the usual round of exploits on the box, and none worked.)
OTOH, a friend of mine administering a Linux server was too busy bragging about his non-stop uptime to upgrade to a non-exploitable version of Apache and got his site defaced. Twice.
It's not the OS, it's what you do with it.
They have a great feel -- a nice, "floaty" feeling that feels almost like a real fountain pen (I used to have a Montblanc before someone stole it, the swine). They also don't dry out anywhere nearly as easily as a conventional BiC ballpoint. The one big downside: they scratch the paper if you press slightly too hard, which means writing on both sides of paper (unless it's really thick) is out of the question.
See earlier in thread :)
The unit I use does 24/96 for up to four channels (two balanced, two unbalanced), and since it's 1394 you can chain as many of the inputs as you like into the laptop. It's mostly a matter of how much you're willing to lug around and how many channels at one time you really need. I don't need more than two channels live at any one time, so I don't need to carry very many of these!
It's entirely possible. I know that Japanese noise artist Merzbow now uses laptops almost exclusively, in conjunction with some homebuilt electronics (he's always been a do-it-yourselfer), and he loves the way you can just pop open the laptop and start work anywhere. Audio engineer Roger Nichols does almost all his mixing and mastering on Mac laptops, and takes his work on the road with him -- mixing 15 tracks at 40,000 feet is a blast!
I work on a fairly tight budget, so my software of choice is FruityStudio (just go to fruitystudio.com). It's not very flexible in some respects, but it honors almost all the industry-standard plugins for audio and I've been able to do some really wonderful things with it. Cheap, too: the full version of the product is only $99.
I've been doing PC-based recording for some time now using digital equipment that doesn't cost very much. My mixer and recorder are my PC, as are many of my instruments. You can now do stuff with a $1,000 PC that you used to need a $20,000 console to do. And it's only going to get cheaper, as the laptop angle implies.
It's a pretty good time to be a music creator.
1) They threw away their money on pricey real estate so they could make a pretentious claim of being upscale.
2) They went public, as did many companies at the time, and soon had nothing to show for it. I don't know if I can blame them completely for this one, but it does show a bit of a lemming mentality vis-a-vis their behavior as an on-line entity.
3) They alienated their formerly left-of-center readership by signing on rabid neocon weasels like David Horowitz and Camille Paglia -- people who have the distinction of either not having a thing to say or having traded in a formerly intelligent and insightful viewpoint for right-wing ass kissing so they could have a bigger audience. We call that "selling out."
4) C'mon, maybe they weren't all that good anyway.
The story can be found in a couple of compilations -- FLUX is one of them:
http://www.hycyber.com/SF/flux.html