Though I do concur that 'bots should respect the robots.txt protocol, one must remember that/robots.txt does not solve the problem being highlighted by this article.
but Google undoubtedly uses techniques beyond that of the casual browser
Uhh...no.
HTTP is an extremely basic protocol. Google's bots simply do a series of GET requests.
It would be possible that Google's bots have a database of username/passwords for given sites, but the more likely scenario is that they have stumbled across another way to get the "protected" information:
a link which contains a username and/or password /protected/show_article.pl?username=foo&passwo rd=bar&num=1
a link to the pages which by-passes the protection scheme
/no_one_can_find_this_cause_Im_3l33t/article1.html
someone else posted the information elsewhere, and this is what is actually crawled
I ran robots for nearly 2 years and was harassed by many a Webmuster who could prove that my robots had hacked their site. They'd show me protected or secret data. It typically took 3 to 5 minutes to find the problem...usually the muster was the problem themself.
HERE'S A NOTE OF WARNING TO WEBMASTERS:
Black text links on black backgrounds in really small fonts are NOT secure.
Maybe I should get this posted to BugTraq...or would MS come after me??
Re:No wonder America is viewed as corrupt
on
Message from Kabul
·
· Score: 1
Hey, that is the Muslim heaven
Would you care to elaborate, or are you simply a Troll?
Software development is not a science in the normal sense. Designing large software systems is an art. It cannot be pigeonholed.
An experienced software project manager can usually be quite accurate in estimation of effort for a well analyzed software project.
This, however, highlights a few problems in The Real World:
many (most?) software projects are ill defined.
many (most?) software projects are not analyzed properly prior to the start of architecture design and start of coding
many (most?) software projects are not resourced properly up front; resources are thrown haphazardly at a project once deadlines are quickly approaching
many (most?) software projects are given unrealistic deadlines prior to analysis being done
many (most?) software project leaders do not have the political experience needed to manage the business expectations of a project [most engineering schools have mandatory Management Sciences courses for their students. Most CS schools avoid Humanities courses...yes, I am a CS grad].
many (most?) software senior developers are not encouraged to get involved in the "business" aspects of software projects.
You want Linux, cause its stable and wonderful. But we want to run DirectX. So lets emulate windows in linux. Now lets emulate DirectX in the emulated windows in linux.
Don't two emulates negate one another? Doesn't
this system end up not being the unreal thing?
Computer hardware doesn't violate copyright laws; people do.
Ahh! But people won't when we take away those "free" (as in Love) machines over which the copyright holders have no control.
You think MS wants to keep Windows alive? Nope.
MS, Sony, AOL/T-W, etc... will be extremely happy when all these "uncontrollable" machines are deemed illegal. Your only port into their medias will be via well-controlled turnkey boxes.
Currently, we call them gameconsoles (or settop boxes)...in the boardrooms of the media/technology giants, they are simply called consoles; the gateways they allow us to have onto their networks and media repositories.
Which of the following scenarios demonstrates a corporation's response to being notified of it having a chive on its tooth?
Gee, thanks Pal! I'll take care of it immediately because me, the front-line guy you got a hold of, has a clue about what a chive is.
<no response...all is silent...the giant sleeps tonight...>
Gee, thanks Pal! Here is a letter from our legal department telling you about how much fun you are going to have over the next few months dealing with our case being built against you.
Gee, thanks Pal! You are a life saver.
(For the last point, I left out the part of them grumbling over bottom lines, lack of resources, priorities, lack of exploits, etc... but I'm sure the casual reader picked up on that).
If it were my descision, I'd go with BSD or some other embedded OS. (Yes I know you still need to give credit, though at least I can link to a distributed library without giving out my source) The constant minefield of GPL/LGPL and fanatics that follow are too much to put up with.
Why put up with any of it? Write your own damned code!
The GPL is there to protect those who want to share their labours with others, in return for shared benefits of derived works.
If you don't want to share your work, then don't use GPL'd code. It's as bloody simple as that! If you are willing to use Microsoft's stuff, and pay for it, good-on-y'a.
There is a lot of damned good intellectual property under the GPL. The "fanatics", as you put it, are mainly interested in seeing that IP grow. Allowing people to violate the GPL quashes the authors' original intentions.
You don't want to share what you are doing? Don't use stuff that is meant to remain open.
One game I got with a computer package back in 1996 is "The Lost Mind of Dr. Brain" by Sierra.
The game is dated from a graphics standpoint,
but the playability and the problem-solving in
it are fantastic. Even most adults will find
the advanced level challenging.
But Kuhn is implying here that proprietary software should be illegal, and that's dangerous....
No he is not. Making something illegal means putting more legal restrictions in place. Kuhn's
argument is to remove restrictions that current legal systems have which prioprietary software makers use on their products.
This is quite akin to the trend in the distribution of CDs and DVDs. I no longer buy the DVD with a copy of its contents for my use; instead I license the contents for my use as prescribed by the license holder (say, by restricting the environment in which I can use said DVD...must run on an approved device using approved software in the region of the world they license it for, etc...).
So, no, Kuhn is not asking for more laws...he is asking for less!
We all know that the truth is, linux is hard to use for novices, and a good portion of linux users are not inclined to help newbies out. Read a few usenet posts to see this. "Linux is tough to use" is not FUD, it's the ugly truth.
Please note: there is a huge difference
between the situation stated in this article
(a managed network/office environment) and a
computer down in the basement at home.
Linux is now at a point where it is a fantastic,
low-cost, low-cost-of-ownership option for managed
IT shops: a place where there is a dedicated professional managing the systems. Windows is a beast in this environment for all the reasons stated in the article.
Businesses, Gov't, Schools, etc... would do well to move to Linux for the most-part. There are still a bunch of things for which Linux is not the end-all-and-be-all.
Many of the Windows apps are far more mature than Linux apps...but I suspect that an overwhelming number of these "advanced" features are unused by the vast majority of office workers.
For instance, in Muslim countries women aren't leered at and treated as sex objects, because society conditions them not to.
I don't get your point about exposure to sexual content. Are you trying to say that in "Muslim" countries there is less sexual and/or violent crimes than in other parts of the world?
Sorry, but you are comparing apples to corn bran here.
The problem you state above is "a C programmer interpreting Python code". The similar
argument in C would be:
if (x == 4) {
x = 10;
y = 6;
}
Now did the programmer mean:
if (x == 4) {
x = 10;
}
y = 6;
or what they originally wrote?
To a Python programmer, the Python code above
means only one thing. Yes, a mistake can be made
(indented incorrectly), but the identical problem can be made in C (put the braces in the wrong spot).
Oh, and for the record, I've never written any Python at all.
Waaaay back in the day, Yahoo! was just a search engine, nothing more.
Actually, no. Way back in the day, Yahoo! was a web directory. They offered a
modified grep to search their directory, not the contents of the pages in their directory.
They added search functionality in a partnership,
first with Open Text (my beloved OTI...sigh...), then with Alta Vista, now with Google. [ There may have been others in the mix...I got away from search engines for a while...sigh...;-) ]
It's a good marketing idea for Microsoft too, because like it or not, this will allow them to sell it to the same parents who are using their V-Chip enabled TVs...
"...and Mom, it has a vee-chip. That means
it is SAFE for us kids to use..."
When was the last time an Oracle-sized company fixed something because one customer called in with a problem?
Unless you are a M-A-J-O-R account (in purchases and/or in visibility), then having access to an Oracle-sized support service is the same as calling home to Mom for help [assuming it is a bug in the s/w].
When was the last time you heard of someone getting a problem fixed with the @Home network? For the most part, a fix there is usually just a server reboot or -HUP. Fixing code is a fair bit more difficult to get done.
Agreed, if they HAVE [MS SQL Server]already, just use it.
Might I add "if they HAVE it...and the resources to maintain it..."
DBMS's don't just "install and go". For the most part, there is a LOT of energy that goes into supporting an "Enterprise" system.
Why is it that Bosses think that Oracle and MS work better? They cost more to purchase AND they cost more to run AND they cost more to get back up if (when?) they go down.
In a closed-source environment, everyone who wants to build a system (say a Point Of Sale system) needs to reinvent everything which previous systems have built.
But, if there is a Free POS system available, then I can get paid not to re-invent the wheel (POS system), but to customize and/or enhance it.
A Free Software system allows the Software Architects/Designers to work on new building blocks (and get paid for it by people who want these enhancements) while the bulk of programmers can work on customizations, ports, and fixes of the existing systems.
In the Closed Source world, we do the exact same thing. Only the Architects are all scrambling to redesign previously architected works, while the programmers are working on fixes and recoding previously coded systems.
The only argument I currently see is in this thread against Free Software is: "but goes against today's business models"
I agree. Let's stop improving the way we do things an fight liked damned to keep the status quo.
Of course, we'll have to put up some sort of trade barriers against 2nd and 3rd World countries...because they'll eventually lap us using Free Software.
We don't advise building without symbol versioning, since you lose binary compatibility - forever!
[Disclaimer: I don't use Oracle at all...I find that most systems which need the "power" of Oracle are simply poorly designed and use horsepower to compensate].
Education. It seems from the threads in the post that the compatibility issues are being dealt with. The above post is a fantastic example of
vital development information which I suspect is not known by most programmers. It appears that even "professional" software packages, like Oracle, violate fundamental system-programming rules.
I get lost in the myriad of webspaces devoted to GNU/Linux/Kernel/glibc/gcc/yadayada. Many sites are either too basic, too sparse, too detailed or too out-of-date.
The resources available are as confusing as the collection of EMACS documentation. [I am a big proponent of EMACS use, but the documentation/support information for EMACS sucks, mainly due to its SIZE and its noise ratio.]
We, as a Linux community, need to work on a much cleaner, focused, up-to-date set of information resources.
I don't have the answer to this problem. Please
let me know if you do!
Slashdot Mirror
Though I do concur that 'bots should respect the robots.txt protocol, one must remember that /robots.txt does not solve the problem being highlighted by this article.
Uhh...no.
HTTP is an extremely basic protocol. Google's bots simply do a series of GET requests.
It would be possible that Google's bots have a database of username/passwords for given sites, but the more likely scenario is that they have stumbled across another way to get the "protected" information:
I ran robots for nearly 2 years and was harassed by many a Webmuster who could prove that my robots had hacked their site. They'd show me protected or secret data. It typically took 3 to 5 minutes to find the problem...usually the muster was the problem themself.
HERE'S A NOTE OF WARNING TO WEBMASTERS:
Black text links on black backgrounds in really small fonts are NOT secure.
Maybe I should get this posted to BugTraq...or would MS come after me??
Would you care to elaborate, or are you simply a Troll?
An experienced software project manager can usually be quite accurate in estimation of effort for a well analyzed software project.
This, however, highlights a few problems in The Real World:
Am I too pessimistic? I don't believe so.
Don't two emulates negate one another? Doesn't this system end up not being the unreal thing?
I bet you wouldn't be using that search engine for long...(then again, people still go to other slow websites...)
Ahh! But people won't when we take away those "free" (as in Love) machines over which the copyright holders have no control.
You think MS wants to keep Windows alive? Nope.
MS, Sony, AOL/T-W, etc... will be extremely happy when all these "uncontrollable" machines are deemed illegal. Your only port into their medias will be via well-controlled turnkey boxes.
Currently, we call them gameconsoles (or settop boxes)...in the boardrooms of the media/technology giants, they are simply called consoles; the gateways they allow us to have onto their networks and media repositories.
- Gee, thanks Pal! I'll take care of it immediately because me, the front-line guy you got a hold of, has a clue about what a chive is.
- <no response...all is silent...the giant sleeps tonight...>
- Gee, thanks Pal! Here is a letter from our legal department telling you about how much fun you are going to have over the next few months dealing with our case being built against you.
- Gee, thanks Pal! You are a life saver.
(For the last point, I left out the part of them grumbling over bottom lines, lack of resources, priorities, lack of exploits, etc... but I'm sure the casual reader picked up on that).Also, ever heard of a disassembler? I believe that there may even be one available from Microsoft...something about developer tools...
Why put up with any of it? Write your own damned code!
The GPL is there to protect those who want to share their labours with others, in return for shared benefits of derived works.
If you don't want to share your work, then don't use GPL'd code. It's as bloody simple as that! If you are willing to use Microsoft's stuff, and pay for it, good-on-y'a.
There is a lot of damned good intellectual property under the GPL. The "fanatics", as you put it, are mainly interested in seeing that IP grow. Allowing people to violate the GPL quashes the authors' original intentions.
You don't want to share what you are doing? Don't use stuff that is meant to remain open.
The game is dated from a graphics standpoint, but the playability and the problem-solving in it are fantastic. Even most adults will find the advanced level challenging.
I found this review of the game, but there seems to be a lot of webpages devoted to this topic.
Hope this helps.
Just because my library doesn't have the latest copy of M'Fink (or other Britainnie Steers or whatever), doesn't make it any less useful.
No he is not. Making something illegal means putting more legal restrictions in place. Kuhn's argument is to remove restrictions that current legal systems have which prioprietary software makers use on their products.
This is quite akin to the trend in the distribution of CDs and DVDs. I no longer buy the DVD with a copy of its contents for my use; instead I license the contents for my use as prescribed by the license holder (say, by restricting the environment in which I can use said DVD...must run on an approved device using approved software in the region of the world they license it for, etc...).
So, no, Kuhn is not asking for more laws...he is asking for less!
Please note: there is a huge difference between the situation stated in this article (a managed network/office environment) and a computer down in the basement at home.
Linux is now at a point where it is a fantastic, low-cost, low-cost-of-ownership option for managed IT shops: a place where there is a dedicated professional managing the systems. Windows is a beast in this environment for all the reasons stated in the article.
Businesses, Gov't, Schools, etc... would do well to move to Linux for the most-part. There are still a bunch of things for which Linux is not the end-all-and-be-all.
Many of the Windows apps are far more mature than Linux apps...but I suspect that an overwhelming number of these "advanced" features are unused by the vast majority of office workers.
I'm not saying this is the case, I'm just speculating.
I don't get your point about exposure to sexual content. Are you trying to say that in "Muslim" countries there is less sexual and/or violent crimes than in other parts of the world?
Sorry, but you are comparing apples to corn bran here.
The problem you state above is "a C programmer interpreting Python code". The similar argument in C would be:
To a Python programmer, the Python code above means only one thing. Yes, a mistake can be made (indented incorrectly), but the identical problem can be made in C (put the braces in the wrong spot).
Oh, and for the record, I've never written any Python at all.
Actually, no. Way back in the day, Yahoo! was a web directory. They offered a modified grep to search their directory, not the contents of the pages in their directory.
They added search functionality in a partnership, first with Open Text (my beloved OTI...sigh...), then with Alta Vista, now with Google. [ There may have been others in the mix...I got away from search engines for a while...sigh...;-) ]
Unless you are a M-A-J-O-R account (in purchases and/or in visibility), then having access to an Oracle-sized support service is the same as calling home to Mom for help [assuming it is a bug in the s/w].
When was the last time you heard of someone getting a problem fixed with the @Home network? For the most part, a fix there is usually just a server reboot or -HUP. Fixing code is a fair bit more difficult to get done.
Might I add "if they HAVE it...and the resources to maintain it..."
DBMS's don't just "install and go". For the most part, there is a LOT of energy that goes into supporting an "Enterprise" system.
Why is it that Bosses think that Oracle and MS work better? They cost more to purchase AND they cost more to run AND they cost more to get back up if (when?) they go down.
Not that I'm biased or anything...;-)
But, if there is a Free POS system available, then I can get paid not to re-invent the wheel (POS system), but to customize and/or enhance it.
A Free Software system allows the Software Architects/Designers to work on new building blocks (and get paid for it by people who want these enhancements) while the bulk of programmers can work on customizations, ports, and fixes of the existing systems.
In the Closed Source world, we do the exact same thing. Only the Architects are all scrambling to redesign previously architected works, while the programmers are working on fixes and recoding previously coded systems.
The only argument I currently see is in this thread against Free Software is: "but goes against today's business models"
I agree. Let's stop improving the way we do things an fight liked damned to keep the status quo.
Of course, we'll have to put up some sort of trade barriers against 2nd and 3rd World countries...because they'll eventually lap us using Free Software.
[Disclaimer: I don't use Oracle at all...I find that most systems which need the "power" of Oracle are simply poorly designed and use horsepower to compensate].
Education. It seems from the threads in the post that the compatibility issues are being dealt with. The above post is a fantastic example of vital development information which I suspect is not known by most programmers. It appears that even "professional" software packages, like Oracle, violate fundamental system-programming rules.
I get lost in the myriad of webspaces devoted to GNU/Linux/Kernel/glibc/gcc/yadayada. Many sites are either too basic, too sparse, too detailed or too out-of-date.
The resources available are as confusing as the collection of EMACS documentation. [I am a big proponent of EMACS use, but the documentation/support information for EMACS sucks, mainly due to its SIZE and its noise ratio.]
We, as a Linux community, need to work on a much cleaner, focused, up-to-date set of information resources.
I don't have the answer to this problem. Please let me know if you do!