How is renting a car, hanging out with crack dealers????
Crack dealer rents car. Crack dealer steals someone's stash, and escapes in said car. Crack dealer returns car. The next day, you rent said car. While driving out of the neighborhood, the former owner of the stash sees the car, decides he wants revenge, and guns you down.
Just to be a pedantic ass, he's actually only changing two bits. One change is making 02 (00000010) to 00 (00000000) and the other is making 01 (00000001) to 00 (00000000).
How about we just finish ditching this flash crap? There are plenty of projects out there that aren't based on nonstandard proprietary specifications, breaking function models, and inane annoyances. Give the effort to something that's worth it.
I've been here all along. And I consider myself more of a truth defender than a windows defender. I'll happily bash FUD for any side.
I think a reboot is required when one driver doesn't "fit" the hardware in place. I'm not sure of the specifics. But in my experience, if any driver (except for a mass storage driver on which the boot volume resides) requires a reboot, you're probably using the wrong driver, or a very poorly made "driver install utility".
So yes, I suppose your point stands, but only really if you're not using the right driver.
So tell NVIDIA and ATI to 'fix' their drivers, since they don't fit into your reboot logic. It's quite a bit different than Linux in this respect. I can change Nvidia drivers at will with no reboot in Linux, and that's impossible in Windows.
Funny, I just changed my laptop's nvidia drivers two days ago, and no reboot was required. Are you sure you have your facts straight?
Having knowledge as to the whereabouts of known sexual predators in your area is not "punishing" THEM. Being the father of two small children, I definitely am interested in the number of sexual predators in my area. Having perused my state's Offender's registry, I was surprised by the number of repeat offenders that are still loose on the streets. Knowing the areas that had a high concentration of rapists definitely played a part in my house hunting decisions
The idea is all well and good. The problem is that overzealous DAs try to pile up charges and get people put on these things for inane reasons. I know a guy who (along with his friend) had to register on that because they put hand-drawn (and very low detail, unrecognizable if you didn't know what it was) copies of goatse on elementary school property (on a weekend). That's not exactly the same kind of thing as molesting an eight year old girl.
Well the 8 office PC's (2K and XP), and 3 brand new vanilla installs of XP (not even connected to the internet) all seem to prove you wrong... I click the blue E, I get a new iexplore.exe process. I do CTRL-N from within IE, I get a new iexplore.exe process.
I gave you my proof. The burden is on you to explain why I'm wrong. The behavior is consistent across the few hundred workstations I administer. You're the troll here. Move along.
Windows XP has runas.exe. Of course, it's invoked from a command prompt. How many XP users use a command prompt?
You can also shift-right-click, "run as" any executable and lots of secondary files (like cpl files). And you only need to be an administrator to make system-wide changes. If your program doesn't work and claims it wants admin rights, then it's probably not really windows compatible, and/or the "developer" has no idea how to code for windows.
No, trolls like you aren't worth the time to follow links. I've been doing this for years, I know how it works. If you're getting too many instances of IE running, it's something you're doing wrong, end of story.
How is it FUD when I open my task manager and it lists;
iexplore.exe iexplore.exe iexplore.exe
each with a different PID, different memory allocation, different VM allocation...
It happens on this XPsp2 box, and on the 2Ksp4 box across my office. Have a screenshot to cure your own ignorance. http://www.cs-onp.com/files/elminst/iemem.JPG [cs-onp.com] It's not FUD if it's true.
An execellent example of said ignorance, or possibly user error. I count 14 IE windows and one IE process running here now. Perhaps the quoted poster doesn't keep track of what his computer does?
A shared library is not a program! A DLL that cannot be changed or written over by any program would not allow a virus or malware and still provide your code reuse.
Well if you had your computer set up right, that's how it would be. It's not the library's fault that you insist on logging on and running all sorts of random binaries as root.
Not to mention that every IE window you open is a completely separate instance of iexplore.exe, each one using a minimum 15-20Meg of memory. Which means these 3 IE windows I have open right now are consuming 63 Meg (!!) of my Ram (18M when all minimized). But this firefox window, with 3 different webpages in tabs, is using a measely 13 Meg (down to 1.5M when minimized).
Pure FUD, try again. I almost always have at least a half dozen IE windows open, and almost never have more than one IE process running. You should be ashamed of your ignorance.
What I'd really like to see is a combination PDA+iPod+GSM phone with Bluetoot/Wifi, the type of snap on accessories of the iPod and that runs some form of embedded OS.X or Linux.
I'm in for some of this too. Actually I don't think it would be too hard to make a sleeve (like the old ipaqs had) that had a battery and a 1.8" hard drive in it. The only problem is that the new hpaqs don't have the 100 pin expansion bus. Maybe the SDIO socket could be hijacked?
I don't see how it would help since you need to be admin to do anything useful in Windows. Unless of course you're someone who randomly deletes system files for fun.
Sounds like you need to stop using crappy software. I have no problem doing anything I need to in windows, with a non-admin account. The rules are no different than with linux. Use an admin account do do administrative stuff, then stop using it.
I didn't bother trying to refute the claim, because it's absurd. There is no regulation of speech here, only what can be accessed by government resources (while the same medium is available with no government restrictions from any number of private providers). It's pretty much the same as a public library choosing to not add certain books to its collection. Nobody is preventing someone from getting the book elsewhere.
Baseless claims like yours, aside from being obviously wrong to anybody who's even so much as glanced at either constitution, ultimately serve to harm the cause of states' rights by making all of its proponents look like fools or even hyprocites. If you're in favor of decency laws, you should at least have the nerve to aruge for them on their own merits and not try to hide behind something else.
The federal constitution only trumps in areas where it allows itself to. This is not one of those areas. I suppose you are to be expected - true slashdot style, running in and trying to look smart before you read the article.
If you don't have the permission to bypass filtering, or the contacts to get you bypass rights, then you probably shouldn't be downloading sysadmin tools.
Well, considering that the things these tools do is part of my job description, I'd say you're wrong. As you'll read in a preious post, the reason for the filters is politics, not technology, so getting any exception ranges from a major hassle, to impossible. The blind masses trust websense more than its victims.
Of course, ignorance of the capabilities of QuickTime is endemic on Slashdot so don't beat yourself up.
I don't see any point in learning the details of a proprietary format. All I need to know is how to tell someone to give it to me in a standard format. But thanks.
The solution is quite different. Higher-ups were convinced by an ignorant public to use some kind of filtering. It clearly inaccurately labels tools I use and need as "hacking/useless" or some such nonsense. They won't change it, because the legal people feel we would then take on liability, instead of websense (which is more idiocy - I'm sure they have a mile-long eula that bascially says "you can't sue us for anything, ever, no matter what").
Slashdot Mirror
How is renting a car, hanging out with crack dealers????
Crack dealer rents car. Crack dealer steals someone's stash, and escapes in said car. Crack dealer returns car. The next day, you rent said car. While driving out of the neighborhood, the former owner of the stash sees the car, decides he wants revenge, and guns you down.
QED.
except in this case you'll need to change 16. ;-)
Just to be a pedantic ass, he's actually only changing two bits. One change is making 02 (00000010) to 00 (00000000) and the other is making 01 (00000001) to 00 (00000000).
How about we just finish ditching this flash crap? There are plenty of projects out there that aren't based on nonstandard proprietary specifications, breaking function models, and inane annoyances. Give the effort to something that's worth it.
I've been here all along. And I consider myself more of a truth defender than a windows defender. I'll happily bash FUD for any side.
I think a reboot is required when one driver doesn't "fit" the hardware in place. I'm not sure of the specifics. But in my experience, if any driver (except for a mass storage driver on which the boot volume resides) requires a reboot, you're probably using the wrong driver, or a very poorly made "driver install utility".
So yes, I suppose your point stands, but only really if you're not using the right driver.
So tell NVIDIA and ATI to 'fix' their drivers, since they don't fit into your reboot logic. It's quite a bit different than Linux in this respect. I can change Nvidia drivers at will with no reboot in Linux, and that's impossible in Windows.
Funny, I just changed my laptop's nvidia drivers two days ago, and no reboot was required. Are you sure you have your facts straight?
Having knowledge as to the whereabouts of known sexual predators in your area is not "punishing" THEM.
Being the father of two small children, I definitely am interested in the number of sexual predators in my area.
Having perused my state's Offender's registry, I was surprised by the number of repeat offenders that are still loose on the streets.
Knowing the areas that had a high concentration of rapists definitely played a part in my house hunting decisions
The idea is all well and good. The problem is that overzealous DAs try to pile up charges and get people put on these things for inane reasons. I know a guy who (along with his friend) had to register on that because they put hand-drawn (and very low detail, unrecognizable if you didn't know what it was) copies of goatse on elementary school property (on a weekend). That's not exactly the same kind of thing as molesting an eight year old girl.
Well the 8 office PC's (2K and XP), and 3 brand new vanilla installs of XP (not even connected to the internet) all seem to prove you wrong... I click the blue E, I get a new iexplore.exe process. I do CTRL-N from within IE, I get a new iexplore.exe process.
I gave you my proof. The burden is on you to explain why I'm wrong.
The behavior is consistent across the few hundred workstations I administer. You're the troll here. Move along.
Windows XP has runas.exe. Of course, it's invoked from a command prompt. How many XP users use a command prompt?
You can also shift-right-click, "run as" any executable and lots of secondary files (like cpl files). And you only need to be an administrator to make system-wide changes. If your program doesn't work and claims it wants admin rights, then it's probably not really windows compatible, and/or the "developer" has no idea how to code for windows.
No, trolls like you aren't worth the time to follow links. I've been doing this for years, I know how it works. If you're getting too many instances of IE running, it's something you're doing wrong, end of story.
It is when the default account is setup to be 'root'. You have to go out of your way to NOT be an administrator account in Windows.
/add
net user user
Not that hard, now is it? And wouldn't it be a tad hard to, you know, do stuff with your computer if you don't have an administrator account?
How is it FUD when I open my task manager and it lists;
iexplore.exe
iexplore.exe
iexplore.exe
each with a different PID, different memory allocation, different VM allocation...
It happens on this XPsp2 box, and on the 2Ksp4 box across my office.
Have a screenshot to cure your own ignorance.
http://www.cs-onp.com/files/elminst/iemem.JPG [cs-onp.com]
It's not FUD if it's true.
An execellent example of said ignorance, or possibly user error. I count 14 IE windows and one IE process running here now. Perhaps the quoted poster doesn't keep track of what his computer does?
A shared library is not a program! A DLL that cannot be changed or written over by any program would not allow a virus or malware and still provide your code reuse.
Well if you had your computer set up right, that's how it would be. It's not the library's fault that you insist on logging on and running all sorts of random binaries as root.
Not to mention that every IE window you open is a completely separate instance of iexplore.exe, each one using a minimum 15-20Meg of memory. Which means these 3 IE windows I have open right now are consuming 63 Meg (!!) of my Ram (18M when all minimized). But this firefox window, with 3 different webpages in tabs, is using a measely 13 Meg (down to 1.5M when minimized).
Pure FUD, try again. I almost always have at least a half dozen IE windows open, and almost never have more than one IE process running. You should be ashamed of your ignorance.
Personally, I carry a big piece of plastic wherever I travel, because I value my freedom.
Of course, in this case, my plastic was manufactured by the likes of Mr. Glock.
Oh for mod points. Well put.
"Good God man!" then "He's already at +4, Funny. I dunnaw think I can push 'im much more, Cap'n." I think you're mixing your colorful metaphors.
WAP? Soooo they made a bunch of cell phone web pages?
Or perhaps the submitter meant "Wireless APs"?
I'm in here too. This is a laptop with a pen, not a tablet.
What I'd really like to see is a combination PDA+iPod+GSM phone with Bluetoot/Wifi, the type of snap on accessories of the iPod and that runs some form of embedded OS.X or Linux.
I'm in for some of this too. Actually I don't think it would be too hard to make a sleeve (like the old ipaqs had) that had a battery and a 1.8" hard drive in it. The only problem is that the new hpaqs don't have the 100 pin expansion bus. Maybe the SDIO socket could be hijacked?
I thought it was Digital Restrictions Management . . .
I don't see how it would help since you need to be admin to do anything useful in Windows. Unless of course you're someone who randomly deletes system files for fun.
Sounds like you need to stop using crappy software. I have no problem doing anything I need to in windows, with a non-admin account. The rules are no different than with linux. Use an admin account do do administrative stuff, then stop using it.
I didn't bother trying to refute the claim, because it's absurd. There is no regulation of speech here, only what can be accessed by government resources (while the same medium is available with no government restrictions from any number of private providers). It's pretty much the same as a public library choosing to not add certain books to its collection. Nobody is preventing someone from getting the book elsewhere.
Baseless claims like yours, aside from being obviously wrong to anybody who's even so much as glanced at either constitution, ultimately serve to harm the cause of states' rights by making all of its proponents look like fools or even hyprocites. If you're in favor of decency laws, you should at least have the nerve to aruge for them on their own merits and not try to hide behind something else.
The federal constitution only trumps in areas where it allows itself to. This is not one of those areas. I suppose you are to be expected - true slashdot style, running in and trying to look smart before you read the article.
If you don't have the permission to bypass filtering, or the contacts to get you bypass rights, then you probably shouldn't be downloading sysadmin tools.
Well, considering that the things these tools do is part of my job description, I'd say you're wrong. As you'll read in a preious post, the reason for the filters is politics, not technology, so getting any exception ranges from a major hassle, to impossible. The blind masses trust websense more than its victims.
Of course, ignorance of the capabilities of QuickTime is endemic on Slashdot so don't beat yourself up.
I don't see any point in learning the details of a proprietary format. All I need to know is how to tell someone to give it to me in a standard format. But thanks.
The solution is quite different. Higher-ups were convinced by an ignorant public to use some kind of filtering. It clearly inaccurately labels tools I use and need as "hacking/useless" or some such nonsense. They won't change it, because the legal people feel we would then take on liability, instead of websense (which is more idiocy - I'm sure they have a mile-long eula that bascially says "you can't sue us for anything, ever, no matter what").