I'm not quite sure where you've been for the last 10 years, but NT3.1 and every version of windows based on it (3.5, 3.51, 4.0, 2k, xp, 2k3) has a comprehensive user security model that pretty much blows UNIX's traditional 'uga/setuid' model out of the water.
Isn't the federal government supposed to own exclusive rights to be an oversized behemoth that takes everyone's money and does nothing of any use to anybody?
A remarkable property of chi-combining is that people have generally been sympathetic to its "Unsure" ratings: people usually agree that messages classed Unsure really are hard to categorize. For example, commercial HTML email from a company you do business with is quite likely to score as Unsure the first time the system sees such a message from a particular company. Spam and commercial email both use the language and devices of advertising heavily, so it's hard to tell them apart. Training quickly teaches the system all sorts of things about the commercial email you want, though, ranging from which company sent it and how they addressed you, to the kinds of products and services it's offering.
I've been using SpamBayes for about 9 months now and I've never had any problem with this 'new kind of spam' you mention. I just don't see it. I don't have to do anything, write any rules, configure anything, it just gets junked. I've never once had any false positives either I get about 30 spams/day, and out of the 8,200+ spams I have in my spambox, less than 100 of those spams are categorized as having less than 90% probability of being spam.
Actually SpamBayes isn't bayesian at all. It uses a chi^2-based algorithm which was shown in (the extensive spambayes team's) tests to be superior to regular bayesian filtering.
He's probably referring to ISVs. If you're an in-house developer or admin then you don't care about the GPL, it doesn't affect you. But if you're trying to sell shrink-wrapped software on the open market (as MS does) then his statement is right on the money (assuming he was talking about the GPL as opposed to effectively less restrictive licenses like BSD).
Re:How to stop MSN Messenger? You kidding?
on
Blocking MSN Messenger?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
yeah, and while you're waiting for the install to complete you can port that $2M suite of custom/in-house trading software you just finished paying for.
You're right of course, most languages allow you to do the equivalent of 'system("asm...");' and therefore they can all be as low level as any other, but my point is that not only is it as easy to do low-level stuff in C++ as it is in C (whereas with some other languages, it's not quite so easy), C++ also provides easier ways to code things that would be just as effient in C.
For example, it's extremely good at doing all sorts of things with tables of function pointers and sets of functions that take the same type of (struct *). In fact I'd say that if you're writing C code that uses either or both of those, then you should probably be using C++, for no other reasons than the code that's generated is at least as efficient (depending on your compiler), it's more readable, you have to write less of it, and you get better type checking.
It's not such a big step up on the 'high-level language' ladder, but AFAICT there should be no reason to write in C intead of C++ except: 1) my compiler sucks, and 2) I suck.
FYI: all versions of NT since 2000 except 2kpro (ie. 2ksvr, 2kadv, xp, 2k3) allow you to run TS in remote administration mode without requiring additional licenses.
Well, I guess it depends on your definition of the word 'use' in this context. I'd argue that source code in general is pretty much useless if you can't redistribute the results (with or without the original code, or derivatives). That would imply that redistribution is a 'use' of source code. And since one possible use of source code is to build it and redistribute the results without the source, and since GPL doesn't grant the right to do this, I'd still argue that this is a restriction on the use of GPLd code.
not all viruses are pathogenic. not all infectious things are bad, take laughter for example.
the term 'virus' is a good one because it implies something that exists within one entity and replicates itself when its host comes in contact with another potential host. the implication that such a process is bad is purely subjective.
there are _no_ restrictions of using GPLd software
Here's a restriction: you can't use it without contracting GPL (as per the contract of the license). This may or may not be a good thing in your view, but it's a restriction nonetheless.
I have an Apex Outlook 8-Port KVM Switch (180ES) and it does the same thing: when I switch machines I lose the mouse wheel/buttons, and on the XFree86 machines the mouse wheel produces the same weird behavior that you're seeing (on Windows the wheel does nothing).
I recently discovered that there's a 'reset' command in the on-screen menu which fixes the problem on the current machine until I switch again. I'm not sure if the problem is between the KVM and the mouse, or between the KVM and the machines, I guess it could be either. The Apex KVMs are excellent, although quite expensive, and I believe their newer models have special support for wheeled mice.
Yes, you're stealing the paper and the ink and the 'cost' of manufacturing the book. But the book has more value than that:
Compare the value of two books. Both are printed using the same process, contain the same number of pages, the same amount of ink. In one book the ink is arranged in such a way that it conveys some meaning (ie a novel, essays, etc...), the other book has pages that are just a bunch of random dots.
I've never seen any documentation specifying that LPSTR shall always be signed or unsigned. In fact, my copy of says "typedef char CHAR;" and "typedef CHAR *LPSTR, *PSTR;", so it depends entirely on CFLAGS.
well that's because your headers are probably tailored to your compiler, but for a different compiler with different char signedness you'd have a different set of definitions. you're really not getting my point, are you?
And somehow I don't think they meant to use a nonstandard meaning of "word". They just started using it in a short-sighted way and then had to declare it incorrectly (memorializing their ignorance) for Win32 and Win16 to be compatible. Probably the same people who think a "byte" is always eight bits instead of using "octet".
I'm sorry, what was I thinking. I must have forgotten for a second that everything Microsoft does is complete trash and everyone that works there are complete fools. How very un-slashdot of me.
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't the federal government supposed to own exclusive rights to be an oversized behemoth that takes everyone's money and does nothing of any use to anybody?
Try joining the mailing list. There's lots of very helpful people on there, and it's very low spam ;-)
SpamBayes only takes a day or two to get up to speed. After a week it's about as good as it's going to get.
RTFA!!!!
I've been using SpamBayes for about 9 months now and I've never had any problem with this 'new kind of spam' you mention. I just don't see it. I don't have to do anything, write any rules, configure anything, it just gets junked. I've never once had any false positives either I get about 30 spams/day, and out of the 8,200+ spams I have in my spambox, less than 100 of those spams are categorized as having less than 90% probability of being spam.
Actually SpamBayes isn't bayesian at all. It uses a chi^2-based algorithm which was shown in (the extensive spambayes team's) tests to be superior to regular bayesian filtering.
I guess his lawyers suggested he shave so he'd look more 'software engineer' and less 'taliban assistant' in court.
He's probably referring to ISVs. If you're an in-house developer or admin then you don't care about the GPL, it doesn't affect you. But if you're trying to sell shrink-wrapped software on the open market (as MS does) then his statement is right on the money (assuming he was talking about the GPL as opposed to effectively less restrictive licenses like BSD).
yeah, and while you're waiting for the install to complete you can port that $2M suite of custom/in-house trading software you just finished paying for.
For example, it's extremely good at doing all sorts of things with tables of function pointers and sets of functions that take the same type of (struct *). In fact I'd say that if you're writing C code that uses either or both of those, then you should probably be using C++, for no other reasons than the code that's generated is at least as efficient (depending on your compiler), it's more readable, you have to write less of it, and you get better type checking.
It's not such a big step up on the 'high-level language' ladder, but AFAICT there should be no reason to write in C intead of C++ except: 1) my compiler sucks, and 2) I suck.
See this for more info.
You can automate Excel (and most other office apps) quite easily.
// source // Gallery: xl3DPie // Format: // PlotBy: xlRows // CategoryLabels // SeriesLabels // HasLegend
Here's an example JScript script that creates a graph:
var excel = new ActiveXObject ("Excel.Application");
var book = excel.Workbooks.Add ();
var sheet = excel.Worksheets (1);
sheet.Range ("A1") = "foo";
sheet.Range ("B1") = "bar";
sheet.Range ("C1") = "goo";
sheet.Range ("A2") = "1";
sheet.Range ("B2") = "2";
sheet.Range ("C2") = "3";
var chart = sheet.ChartObjects.Add (100, 100, 200, 200).Chart;
chart.ChartWizard (
sheet.Range ("A1:C2"),
-4102,
7,
1,
1,
0,
1,
"Example Graph"
);
chart.Export ("c:\\chart.png", "PNG", false);
book.Close (false);
excel.Quit ();
But even if you restrict the argument to copyrighted code, there are licenses that allow you to use the code in more ways than does GPL.
Well, I guess it depends on your definition of the word 'use' in this context. I'd argue that source code in general is pretty much useless if you can't redistribute the results (with or without the original code, or derivatives). That would imply that redistribution is a 'use' of source code. And since one possible use of source code is to build it and redistribute the results without the source, and since GPL doesn't grant the right to do this, I'd still argue that this is a restriction on the use of GPLd code.
the term 'virus' is a good one because it implies something that exists within one entity and replicates itself when its host comes in contact with another potential host. the implication that such a process is bad is purely subjective.
Here's a restriction: you can't use it without contracting GPL (as per the contract of the license). This may or may not be a good thing in your view, but it's a restriction nonetheless.I recently discovered that there's a 'reset' command in the on-screen menu which fixes the problem on the current machine until I switch again. I'm not sure if the problem is between the KVM and the mouse, or between the KVM and the machines, I guess it could be either. The Apex KVMs are excellent, although quite expensive, and I believe their newer models have special support for wheeled mice.
What, like airline tickets?
There's more money in the world than there is cash.
Yes, you're stealing the paper and the ink and the 'cost' of manufacturing the book. But the book has more value than that:
Compare the value of two books. Both are printed using the same process, contain the same number of pages, the same amount of ink. In one book the ink is arranged in such a way that it conveys some meaning (ie a novel, essays, etc...), the other book has pages that are just a bunch of random dots.
Which book has more value?
That value is what is being stolen.