(this is kinda OT, but) vim has a great 'insert-by-default' mode which makes it work much like a 'regular' editor - the cursor keys move around, and you can just type/delete as normal. i use gvim on win32 and linux and i have to say that it's one of the most powerful programs that I use. the win32 version also has great windows-clipboard and mouse support. I don't use emacs, so I know I'm missing out there...
actually, i was thinking more of being able to script the plugin from javascript running on the containing page. SMIL is a good standard, but it doesn't provide the kind of flexibility that script provides.
someone modded my original comment as 'flaimbait'. i think it's a reasonable complaint, after all, the MacOS plugin exposes an object model to AppleScript (hardly a standard) why not expose the same model to JavaScript?
This is great news. I hope that he'll get a chance to faithfully reproduce the whole series on-screen. I can't wait for Leto's transformation. The execs at Sci-fi get my vote - I'll be buying this one on DVD...
Well, I enabled the Microsoft's IMAP4 connector on our Exchange 2000 server - it took about 60 seconds - and I was able to open my inbox from Mozilla's Mail/News window without problems. It did take a while to download the headers but it seems to work seamlessly. I don't really see the need for Ximian's Exchange connector, unless it provides native Exchange protocol support and the benifits that provides. I haven't tried Evolution, but Outlook's Exchange integration is much tighter than most people would think. Some of the features that IMAP doesn't cover are calendar/meeting, address-book, public folders, server-side inbox rules, poll-less message receipt, dynamic header download (as you scroll), etc... but it works fine for sending/receiving messages.
Great, how's about a browser plugin that supports scripting (javascript, anyone?) instead of the brain-dead, and completely useless, features it's had since its release?
evolution is continual. there's no point in time when two non-humans gave birth to a human. there's no distinction. maybe now it's easy to make one, but history proves it to be false. you can point to differences, but i could point to differences between a chimpanzee and a fish - irrelevant. there's no reason to think that the Internet isn't just a natural progression of the evolution of life on this planet. After all, it's just blobs of goo communicating with each other...
i believe that the language and core runtime features are being standardized. as for the rest of it (ASP.NET, ADO.NET, WinForms/GDI+, XML/WebServices, etc...) even though they may not be an open standard as such, Microsoft's implementation and specification will serve as standard enough for others to provide compatible implementations on other platforms (eg: Mono), in exactly the same way as has happened for Java.
Microsoft has historically been pretty good at keeping their SDKs backwardly compatible and I don't see any reason why they would break the compatibility of future.NET runtimes (the non-ECMA bits). Some would say that they'd do that just to break the 3rd party implementations, but in reality they'd lose more by pissing off their own developers than they'd gain.
sure, but i'm not saying that the vendor not provide any information about the vulnerability, just not nough information to exploit it. for example, i think it's good enough to provide:
a summary of the areas that are affected.
a series of suggested preventative measures.
again, it's in the vendor's interest to support its customers as well as it can. they cannot afford to lie about 'vaporware' vulnerabilities or fail to provide effective fixes.
so you're saying that the vendor's response to a vulnerability would be less prompt since they would percieve the threat from the exploit to be less significant due to the fact that fewer people know how to take advantage of it?
that may well be true, although it could also be argued that there may actually be a diminished threat due to less widespread knowledge. however we cannot rule out the possibility that malicious users may discover the exploit simultanously and use it before the patch is available. so you're right: it is important that the patch become available ASAP.
but the fact remains that the onus is on the vendor to provide the patch, and I think that the main driving force behind them fixing it quicly is that they must assume that some malicious user has discovered it because if they fail to provide a patch in a timely fasion and the vulnerability is (err) exploited then they will lose respect in the marketplace, which, since they're closed-source, is of upmost importance.
i believe that the market, above anything else, compells closed-source vendors to provide these patches regardless of whether or not the exploit is well-known, so i don't think that this represents a significant benifit of Full Disclosure.
Can someone explain the benifits of "Full Disclosure" in a closed-source scenario such as bugs in IIS in Windows?
I'm not interested in arguments about open-source systems, or how vendors should be liable for bugs, etc...
I simply want to know why it makes sense to publicise the code for a vulnerability as opposed to saying "there a bug in this area, we're working on a patch". What are the benifits?
I wonder: should we send Osama Bin Laden precise instructions for making Anthrax, Small-Pox, or Nuclear Weapons?
my guess is that it would be impossible to fit that many (2^48) PCMCIA cards into a 150ft radius sphere, let alone the computers and users you'd need to make them useful.
try rotating the access-point (and the arial, if it's not fixed position) through various axes. i found that just flipping mine around gave me an extra couple of feet.
i was under the impression that 802.11b had no theoretical limit on the number of clients that can be connected simultaneously. the only limits being shared bandwidth and IP addresses.
I imagine he has interference in the form of walls. it depends what your house is made of, of course, but walls and floors can seriously diminish the range of the signal.
morpheus works just fine for me (win2k, xp) it crashes occasionally (rarely), but it doesn't matter - the downloads are continued when you start it up again...
if you have a broadband connection and you're looking for a good gnutella client, try Xolox it does simultaneous, restartable downloads. it's not as good as morpheus for identifying identical content, and the gnutelly network doesn't support the rich metadata that morpheus has, but it's the best gnutella client i have found, nothing fancy..
one of the major selling points of Win2K is supposed to be driver compatibility with Win98
presumably you're referring to the WDM (windows driver model) that both win2k and win98 share. this is a shared code model for drivers for these platforms, but it doesn't require that the code for a driver on win98 should run on win2k. that would be impossible for many devices, the two operating systems' native IO models are completely different. it does, however allow for some devices to use layered 'class' drivers such as USB, serial, etc... and share code that way.
it's purely a design decision on the IHV's part. if your hardware isn't supported on your platform you need to talk to your hardware vendor. after all, this is what linux driver writers have been saying for years (winmodem, etc...)
of course, now that XP's shipped and 9x is going the way of the dinosaurs (at last) IHVs won't have so many platforms to support.
Slashdot Mirror
(this is kinda OT, but) vim has a great 'insert-by-default' mode which makes it work much like a 'regular' editor - the cursor keys move around, and you can just type/delete as normal. i use gvim on win32 and linux and i have to say that it's one of the most powerful programs that I use. the win32 version also has great windows-clipboard and mouse support. I don't use emacs, so I know I'm missing out there...
someone modded my original comment as 'flaimbait'. i think it's a reasonable complaint, after all, the MacOS plugin exposes an object model to AppleScript (hardly a standard) why not expose the same model to JavaScript?
This is great news. I hope that he'll get a chance to faithfully reproduce the whole series on-screen. I can't wait for Leto's transformation. The execs at Sci-fi get my vote - I'll be buying this one on DVD...
Well, I enabled the Microsoft's IMAP4 connector on our Exchange 2000 server - it took about 60 seconds - and I was able to open my inbox from Mozilla's Mail/News window without problems. It did take a while to download the headers but it seems to work seamlessly. I don't really see the need for Ximian's Exchange connector, unless it provides native Exchange protocol support and the benifits that provides. I haven't tried Evolution, but Outlook's Exchange integration is much tighter than most people would think. Some of the features that IMAP doesn't cover are calendar/meeting, address-book, public folders, server-side inbox rules, poll-less message receipt, dynamic header download (as you scroll), etc... but it works fine for sending/receiving messages.
Ten years of QuickTime?
Great, how's about a browser plugin that supports scripting (javascript, anyone?) instead of the brain-dead, and completely useless, features it's had since its release?
- menus fading in/out
- explorer drag-drop
transparent windows are cool, but to most users i'm sure they're confusing as hell - probably why MS didn't go overboard on the effect.
evolution is continual. there's no point in time when two non-humans gave birth to a human. there's no distinction. maybe now it's easy to make one, but history proves it to be false. you can point to differences, but i could point to differences between a chimpanzee and a fish - irrelevant. there's no reason to think that the Internet isn't just a natural progression of the evolution of life on this planet. After all, it's just blobs of goo communicating with each other...
I would argue that things unnatural do not exist. What is the difference between 'unnatural' and 'supernatural'?
Welcome to planet Earth...
Microsoft has historically been pretty good at keeping their SDKs backwardly compatible and I don't see any reason why they would break the compatibility of future .NET runtimes (the non-ECMA bits). Some would say that they'd do that just to break the 3rd party implementations, but in reality they'd lose more by pissing off their own developers than they'd gain.
one already is
in fact, one such port seems to be coming along very nicely.
In other words, attach a value to effort? Something that can be tangibly counted and traded.
I believe that's that the rest of the economic world is already doing: money for a day's work.
taanstafl.
again, it's in the vendor's interest to support its customers as well as it can. they cannot afford to lie about 'vaporware' vulnerabilities or fail to provide effective fixes.
i think my analogy stands.
that may well be true, although it could also be argued that there may actually be a diminished threat due to less widespread knowledge. however we cannot rule out the possibility that malicious users may discover the exploit simultanously and use it before the patch is available. so you're right: it is important that the patch become available ASAP.
but the fact remains that the onus is on the vendor to provide the patch, and I think that the main driving force behind them fixing it quicly is that they must assume that some malicious user has discovered it because if they fail to provide a patch in a timely fasion and the vulnerability is (err) exploited then they will lose respect in the marketplace, which, since they're closed-source, is of upmost importance.
i believe that the market, above anything else, compells closed-source vendors to provide these patches regardless of whether or not the exploit is well-known, so i don't think that this represents a significant benifit of Full Disclosure.
Can someone explain the benifits of "Full Disclosure" in a closed-source scenario such as bugs in IIS in Windows?
I'm not interested in arguments about open-source systems, or how vendors should be liable for bugs, etc...
I simply want to know why it makes sense to publicise the code for a vulnerability as opposed to saying "there a bug in this area, we're working on a patch". What are the benifits?
I wonder: should we send Osama Bin Laden precise instructions for making Anthrax, Small-Pox, or Nuclear Weapons?
try rotating the access-point (and the arial, if it's not fixed position) through various axes. i found that just flipping mine around gave me an extra couple of feet.
i was under the impression that 802.11b had no theoretical limit on the number of clients that can be connected simultaneously. the only limits being shared bandwidth and IP addresses.
can anyone clarify?
I imagine he has interference in the form of walls. it depends what your house is made of, of course, but walls and floors can seriously diminish the range of the signal.
if you have a broadband connection and you're looking for a good gnutella client, try Xolox it does simultaneous, restartable downloads. it's not as good as morpheus for identifying identical content, and the gnutelly network doesn't support the rich metadata that morpheus has, but it's the best gnutella client i have found, nothing fancy..
presumably you're referring to the WDM (windows driver model) that both win2k and win98 share. this is a shared code model for drivers for these platforms, but it doesn't require that the code for a driver on win98 should run on win2k. that would be impossible for many devices, the two operating systems' native IO models are completely different. it does, however allow for some devices to use layered 'class' drivers such as USB, serial, etc... and share code that way. it's purely a design decision on the IHV's part. if your hardware isn't supported on your platform you need to talk to your hardware vendor. after all, this is what linux driver writers have been saying for years (winmodem, etc...)
of course, now that XP's shipped and 9x is going the way of the dinosaurs (at last) IHVs won't have so many platforms to support.
was it on the HCL?
no, he's referring to Xenix...