Nah. There's a modern solution to this. Just get an X Windows window manager that can be configured to force maximized windows. If that's not enough for you, configure it so that it won't run more than one application at a time. If still not good enough (after all, with GUI applications, popups are kinda like using multitasking), just ditch X, remove screen (an application), and use only one virtual console. Possibly tweak the kernel so that suspend signals won't be delivered, if you're worrided you might get distracted by accidentally pressing ^Z.
So just a little bit of tweaking, you can go all the way to MSDOS level of single-tasking with Linux! And if you need those MSDOS applications, there's dosemu too, so there's absolutely no need to use proprietary MSDOS directly.
The Tandy 100 had no storage (plug in a cassette tape if you want to run or save a program), a 300 baud (maybe went up to 1200 baud) modem with cups that fit over the phone handset (which are no longer common), something like 256K of RAM, and a 24 x 8 character text only display. No network. No storage, no lighted display, no mouse, no pointing device or any kind, no USB ports, no sound, no wireless, no network software. They stopped making them because people stopped buying them. Sure the batteries lasted a long time. They had nothing to do. I believe we can stop romanticizing them. Hold on a minute... They had a really nice keyboard! OK, NOW we can stop romanticizing them.
Good to know, but I could give a crap about the record. I just want to download the installer, and the Mozilla Foundation (MoFo) to keep cranking out good versions and keep the damn site up when they're available:)
I'm not small minded; I'm explaining why things are the way they are. Until the rest of the world contributes articles as much as/. submitters who are in the USA, you're going to see US-centric content here.
"We" = the site maintainers and the primary target audience.
Terms like EST, DST, PST are not obfuscated, they're localized. We use a lot of SAE units (inches, miles, pounds) here too, and most often currency is given in USD, although we can handle CDN, Euro, and so forth.
If/. articles were decently edited, they'd provide conversions in the article body.
Or maybe slashcode needs a feature added, so that all units and measurements are automatically marked up in a fashion that makes them universalized, ready for localization we could all specify our preferences in our account settings and the site would autoconvert all values to our localized preferences.
The record attempt got a lot of free publicity, got the name out, and probably increased word-of-mouth by people who decided to help try to set the record, passing the word on to everyone they know.
Unfortunately, many millions of people ended up not even seeing the release until 1PM local time. And then, at 1PM, the site quickly went down. So the actual experience probably was a negative for a lot of people. Someone should have told Mozilla Foundation that June 17 starts at 12:00:01 AM in every time zone.
So was the exercise a net gain or net loss in terms of public awareness of Mozilla and public perception of Mozilla quality? I'm thinking the execution could have been quite a bit better.
I understand the promotional impact that the record attempt has, but it still seemed dumb to me to invite the entire world to try to melt your servers by manufacturing a download spike.
It'd be nice if they could use bittorrent to help with the load they're putting on themselves.
During the outage, I was still able to find a mirror ftp site that had the 3.0 install, and download it, but it wasn't as easy as it should have been, and lots of other parts of the mozilla site went down at times, too, making it difficult to find extensions, or just information.
The lithium CR1216 batteries on my shelf started corroding after 4 years. Several of the AG3/CX41 alkaline batteries began leaking after 5 years. Still untouched, in their wrappers. Right, but after four years, a battery powering one of these chips would have been discharged 4/263rds of its capacity, and ready to die of old age.
China's only been "developing" itself for the last 5000 or so years. They have nukes and rockets.
Their population is beyond huge. Even if.01% of their population was capable of computer programming, it's a vastly huge number of DevelopersDevelopersDevelopersDevelopers -- more than enough to hack through the US Gov's self-assessed "C-" grade IT security.
The "nothing to hide" argument was always a way to shut up opposition by intimidating it with the suggestion that opposing totalitarian information policies was equivalent to admission of being guilty of some undiscovered crime.
Obviously, people DO have things to hide, and it's not always something illegal. Sometimes, it's stuff that's not the government's business, period. Of course, anywhere the government can't look is potentially a "dark corner" for a criminal or threat to the state to hide. But that doesn't mean that the government should try to shine a light from all directions to eradicate all shadows.
It's sufficient to illuminate public space well enough that illegal activities cannot be carried out effectively at a large enough scale to seriously destabilize civil order.
That, and making sure that the government is reasonable about what it makes illegal, and rules by consent of the people, is what is, and has always been, called for.
If Vista didn't suck so much and wasn't as bloated as a dead whale carcass, Windows XP wouldn't have a reason to stick around. It's not just Linux, give credit where it's due.
The fact that Vista took 6 years to get here meant that the minimum specs for running Windows.CurrentVersion didn't change for 6 years, which created a market for ultra-cheap subnotebooks that would run like shit if they had to run Vista. Linux wins there, and XP's Microsoft's stopgap to try to compete with it.
how many republicans do you think would vote for someone named Barack Hussein Obama.
Anyone who'd not vote for someone based on the fact that their middle name was the surname of a hated enemy is too stupid to be allowed to vote. Hussein is a common name in.
It'd be like refusing to vote for someone named Jones because of the mental association with the notorious cult leader/mass murderer Jim Jones. If that's your sole reason for opposing his election, do the country a favor and stay home on the second Tuesday of November this year.
You can reverse engineer anything. Whether it has a well-thought out design or not, its functions can be analyzed and documented and re-implemented and/or tweaked.
If anything, the timetable may be in question, but not the question of whether or not it can be done. I have no doubt it can be done, it's just a matter of how long it'll take given the right resources, the right talent, the right technology, and the right knowledge.
Granted, I'm just an idiot posting on slashdot, and not an inventor or neuroscientist, but I still think I'm right on this.
No, I don't suppose so. However, if ALL designers did the right thing -- coded to standards -- Microsoft's feet would be held to the fire and they would be forced to develop a standards-compliant browser. Coding IE workarounds just fuels the problem, punishes Microsoft's bad behavior, and gives that 80% of the market 0 incentive to migrate to a better browser.
Instead, web developers find themselves in a hopeless situation, much like trying to be the only honest official in a thoroughly corrupt government. If we value standards, then we have to enforce them, just as if we value the rule of law, we have to enforce the laws.
If the standards or laws are broken, then fix them, I say. But IE's deviations from standards is nothing like reform or even civil disobedience, it's like an attempt to usurp and conquer.
The second one was Motorola 680x0 legacy code to run on PPC processors. The Apple solution was to package "Fat Binaries" of applications, that ran PPC code if it detected it was running on PPC hardware, and 68k code if it was running on older hardware. It wasn't exactly sandboxed, but it was if anything more elegant and seamless than Classic Mode was for legacy OS 9 apps running on OS X.
This is why I've long thought that the NoScript plug-in's method of whitelisting is fundamentally broken. Rather than whitelisting by domain, giving blanket trust to an entire domain, what should be done is give trust on a per-script basis, with a hash of the scripts that you've whitelisted stored as part of your mozilla user profile, and only those scripts which match the hashes of scripts that you've permanently whitelisted allowed to run without your explicit approval.
This should be a lot safer than applying trust to an entire domain. If the domain is compromised or co-opted or turns to the dark side tomorrow, you're still only running the code that you've authorized, not granted permission to a site to run whatever code it wants.
The last big missing feature in NoScript is a feature that gives you an abstract of what each script you are considering to allow to run in your web browser actually *does*, along with what level of access it is requesting to be granted. If I could hover over a NoScript-blocked object in a web page, and it said:
Title: xxxx; Descr: This script plays a short movie in the web browser window, along with an advertisement. If you are logged in to this site, your user name goes on a list which we use for our advertisers demographics statistics. No personally identifying information will be gathered or used. Local resources requested: read/write access to your browser's cache directory.
I'd feel a lot better informed about allowing or blocking scripts in my web browser.
Slashdot Mirror
Nah. There's a modern solution to this. Just get an X Windows window manager that can be configured to force maximized windows. If that's not enough for you, configure it so that it won't run more than one application at a time. If still not good enough (after all, with GUI applications, popups are kinda like using multitasking), just ditch X, remove screen (an application), and use only one virtual console. Possibly tweak the kernel so that suspend signals won't be delivered, if you're worrided you might get distracted by accidentally pressing ^Z.
So just a little bit of tweaking, you can go all the way to MSDOS level of single-tasking with Linux! And if you need those MSDOS applications, there's dosemu too, so there's absolutely no need to use proprietary MSDOS directly.
Just try to achive this with any modern Windows!
Great, now it won't boot anymore.All of these sorts of things tend to collapse under their own weight.
So, although the LHC is safe to operate, the world will be destroyed by Facebook? Oh noes!!I'm pretty sure that ice sublimates right out of the ice cube trays in my frost-free freezer.
Good to know, but I could give a crap about the record. I just want to download the installer, and the Mozilla Foundation (MoFo) to keep cranking out good versions and keep the damn site up when they're available:)
I'm not small minded; I'm explaining why things are the way they are. Until the rest of the world contributes articles as much as /. submitters who are in the USA, you're going to see US-centric content here.
/. articles were decently edited, they'd provide conversions in the article body.
"We" = the site maintainers and the primary target audience.
Terms like EST, DST, PST are not obfuscated, they're localized. We use a lot of SAE units (inches, miles, pounds) here too, and most often currency is given in USD, although we can handle CDN, Euro, and so forth.
If
Or maybe slashcode needs a feature added, so that all units and measurements are automatically marked up in a fashion that makes them universalized, ready for localization we could all specify our preferences in our account settings and the site would autoconvert all values to our localized preferences.
The record attempt got a lot of free publicity, got the name out, and probably increased word-of-mouth by people who decided to help try to set the record, passing the word on to everyone they know.
Unfortunately, many millions of people ended up not even seeing the release until 1PM local time. And then, at 1PM, the site quickly went down. So the actual experience probably was a negative for a lot of people. Someone should have told Mozilla Foundation that June 17 starts at 12:00:01 AM in every time zone.
So was the exercise a net gain or net loss in terms of public awareness of Mozilla and public perception of Mozilla quality? I'm thinking the execution could have been quite a bit better.
I understand the promotional impact that the record attempt has, but it still seemed dumb to me to invite the entire world to try to melt your servers by manufacturing a download spike.
It'd be nice if they could use bittorrent to help with the load they're putting on themselves.
During the outage, I was still able to find a mirror ftp site that had the 3.0 install, and download it, but it wasn't as easy as it should have been, and lots of other parts of the mozilla site went down at times, too, making it difficult to find extensions, or just information.
Because we're mostly americans, and those are meaningful to us.
Developing Nations! Developing Nations! Developing Nations! Developing Nations!
.01% of their population was capable of computer programming, it's a vastly huge number of DevelopersDevelopersDevelopersDevelopers -- more than enough to hack through the US Gov's self-assessed "C-" grade IT security.
China's only been "developing" itself for the last 5000 or so years. They have nukes and rockets.
Their population is beyond huge. Even if
It's not a "Save XP" petition so much as it is a "Spare us from Vista" petition.
The "nothing to hide" argument was always a way to shut up opposition by intimidating it with the suggestion that opposing totalitarian information policies was equivalent to admission of being guilty of some undiscovered crime.
Obviously, people DO have things to hide, and it's not always something illegal. Sometimes, it's stuff that's not the government's business, period. Of course, anywhere the government can't look is potentially a "dark corner" for a criminal or threat to the state to hide. But that doesn't mean that the government should try to shine a light from all directions to eradicate all shadows.
It's sufficient to illuminate public space well enough that illegal activities cannot be carried out effectively at a large enough scale to seriously destabilize civil order.
That, and making sure that the government is reasonable about what it makes illegal, and rules by consent of the people, is what is, and has always been, called for.
If Vista didn't suck so much and wasn't as bloated as a dead whale carcass, Windows XP wouldn't have a reason to stick around. It's not just Linux, give credit where it's due.
The fact that Vista took 6 years to get here meant that the minimum specs for running Windows.CurrentVersion didn't change for 6 years, which created a market for ultra-cheap subnotebooks that would run like shit if they had to run Vista. Linux wins there, and XP's Microsoft's stopgap to try to compete with it.
Black box reverse engineering is still possible. You don't even have to know that there is a CPU, let alone what it's architecture is.
Home of the goatse. Danger Will Robinson!
how many republicans do you think would vote for someone named Barack Hussein Obama.
Anyone who'd not vote for someone based on the fact that their middle name was the surname of a hated enemy is too stupid to be allowed to vote. Hussein is a common name in.
It'd be like refusing to vote for someone named Jones because of the mental association with the notorious cult leader/mass murderer Jim Jones. If that's your sole reason for opposing his election, do the country a favor and stay home on the second Tuesday of November this year.
You can't reverse-hack? Who says?
You can reverse engineer anything. Whether it has a well-thought out design or not, its functions can be analyzed and documented and re-implemented and/or tweaked.
If anything, the timetable may be in question, but not the question of whether or not it can be done. I have no doubt it can be done, it's just a matter of how long it'll take given the right resources, the right talent, the right technology, and the right knowledge.
Granted, I'm just an idiot posting on slashdot, and not an inventor or neuroscientist, but I still think I'm right on this.
That's GNU/Titanic. Get it right.
No, I don't suppose so. However, if ALL designers did the right thing -- coded to standards -- Microsoft's feet would be held to the fire and they would be forced to develop a standards-compliant browser. Coding IE workarounds just fuels the problem, punishes Microsoft's bad behavior, and gives that 80% of the market 0 incentive to migrate to a better browser.
Instead, web developers find themselves in a hopeless situation, much like trying to be the only honest official in a thoroughly corrupt government. If we value standards, then we have to enforce them, just as if we value the rule of law, we have to enforce the laws.
If the standards or laws are broken, then fix them, I say. But IE's deviations from standards is nothing like reform or even civil disobedience, it's like an attempt to usurp and conquer.
I know, I have to tear new holes in my forearms every time I get into a bar fight. Stupid healing factor! Ribbit!
Wonders of miniaturization! HOW did MS manage to cram an ENTIRE big-ass coffee table into a tiny little tablet PC? AMAZING.
This will be so cool. I can't wait for this feature to get dropped from Windows 7.
The second one was Motorola 680x0 legacy code to run on PPC processors. The Apple solution was to package "Fat Binaries" of applications, that ran PPC code if it detected it was running on PPC hardware, and 68k code if it was running on older hardware. It wasn't exactly sandboxed, but it was if anything more elegant and seamless than Classic Mode was for legacy OS 9 apps running on OS X.
This is why I've long thought that the NoScript plug-in's method of whitelisting is fundamentally broken. Rather than whitelisting by domain, giving blanket trust to an entire domain, what should be done is give trust on a per-script basis, with a hash of the scripts that you've whitelisted stored as part of your mozilla user profile, and only those scripts which match the hashes of scripts that you've permanently whitelisted allowed to run without your explicit approval.
This should be a lot safer than applying trust to an entire domain. If the domain is compromised or co-opted or turns to the dark side tomorrow, you're still only running the code that you've authorized, not granted permission to a site to run whatever code it wants.
The last big missing feature in NoScript is a feature that gives you an abstract of what each script you are considering to allow to run in your web browser actually *does*, along with what level of access it is requesting to be granted. If I could hover over a NoScript-blocked object in a web page, and it said:
I'd feel a lot better informed about allowing or blocking scripts in my web browser.