Now, I'm a Mac user and do the rounds off all the Mac info and rumors sites each day as well as thoroughly reading evey article on/. having to do with Apple, so don't get me wrong. But, I guess I'm wondering why Apple stuff is being broken out? What's the reasoning? Will we have a windows.slashdot.org soon? Isn't this just going to make it possible to hide possibly interesting articles from people on the main page that don't visit apple.slashdot?
Let's not send the wrong message here... they said turn it off if you don't need it. Don't blow up your car just so no one will steal it. Lock the doors!
Similarly, SNMP is a really useful tool that administrators should be making even more use of. They shouldn't get rid of it just because of this bug or the fact that lots of people use defautl passwords. That doesn't make the tool bad. Fix the bug(s). (Have there been other bugs recently?) Set the passwords. Save the car.
Well, yes and no. It sounds like there are some assumptions that are commonly made when processing traps. However, if someone wants to be malicious, those assumptions may not hold. But, the protocol isn't necessarily flawed. It just means that developers need to check their assumptions (like they should all the time).
This is an all too common scenario. In fact, it's so common that my company has set out to fix it... our product - Lanturion - would have been able to not only tell you which interface on which router was down, but call you (all the tech people... whoever) and ask you if you wanted to restart the interface. Bottom line: a couple days of down time would have turned into, say, five mintues.
Rob Eden
Sr. Software Engineer
NetZilient Corporation
Re:Depends how it ships
on
Cracking OSX
·
· Score: 5
It does come with Apache, telnetd and sshd all disabled. Probably the biggest risk for these is that they can be enabled with the click of a button, so the average user might not think of it as a big deal.
Another security issue is that the root account is disabled by default. This is harder to enable though, so I would suspect that most users wouldn't know how to enable it and if they do, they probably are thinking about security.
Rather than saying "PDF is bad... Adobe is bad...", shouldn't we be saying "Why don't they like us?"
I've been a Mac user for a while and this is what Apple has been infamous for: saying "developer's don't like us... well who needs 'em!" The truth is, linux needs developers like Adobe desperately. (Ok, yes, it's a great OS with or without them, but to gain real, wide-spread acceptance it needs masive developer support.)
What this rejection of Linux should prompt us to ask is how we can motivate developers to support Linux and in doing so, make a better OS and get more developers!
Ok, I like these and all, but how many applications are we going to do this with? I now have themes (read: skins) for Netscape (or Mozilla, as you prefer), WinAmp, WindowBlinds, blah, blah.
The result is a Mutt user interface that looks like it's gone through the blender a few times. Part of me likes N6's themes, but part of me says "why not just use the standard API's and leave the rest up to WindowBlinds, or the Appearance Manager or whatever?" Yes, themes let you change the UI layout (I think) and the icons on the buttons, but is that really worth it? If so, you could do that without a complete skin that blows off other system-wide skins.
I was in the "Manage Bookmarks" section. I did finally get it to work, but here's the thing: you can't drag the top-level folder ("Imported IE Favorites"), but you can drag lower folders. But, this is what I'm talking about... the user (me) doesn't care which is a top-level folder and which isn't. If I try to drag a folder, dang it, drag the folder.
I've been an IE user for a while now mainly because Netscape has been losing the feature war. While I'm certainly not a Microsoft fan, I like Netscape and I like standards conformance (which Netscape has typically been better at), I use a browser a lot and I want to use what makes me feel most comfortable and lets me work the best.
With all that in mind, I was excited to see that N6 was out because I've liked the Mozilla and preview release builds, except that they were buggy and seemingly incomplete.
I like a lot of things in Netscape 6. The Gecko engine is great. It renders pages pretty fast, which is good. The "Modern" skin is pretty cool. Is it a good idea... well, that's another issue, but it's cool. There are a lot of features that I like in IE that weren't in Netscape 4.6.whenever-I-stopped-really-using-it like some of the sidebar stuff and the toolbar. (Yes, I know the toolbar has been in 4.7 or so for a long time, but it took them a long time to get it there!)
Here's the bottom line of my impressions with N6: it's all in the little things!!!
There are two things that are ticking me off enough to possibly send me back to IE. First, arranging the bookmarks. This should be easy: I have imported "toolbar favorites" from IE, I want them to be in my N6 toolbar. I'm a pretty smart guy and I have no idea how to do this. Drag-an-drop isn't supported, so I can't move them. Cut and paste are supported (even though "cut" is enabled in the edit menu. There's a menu command "Set as Personal Toolbar Menu"... which apparently does nothing! I know it's stupid, but these are the things that make me choose IE, not the engine. (Well, I shouldn't say that. If the engine was unacceptable it would influence me. But, being a typical web user, most engines I find are "acceptable", so it's not typically a factor.)
Second big annoyance, I now have five icons on my desktop (I'm using Win2000): Netscape (I wanted this one), "Free AOL Unlimited INternet" (fine, AOL owns Netscape... I'll bear it), "Net2Phone" (quit installing this!), "RealPlayer Basic" (I already had it), "Take5" (See previous, I hate this thing).
Goal for Netscape: Don't tick off you customers by installing worthless things. It may convince some people, but I think it angers more.
Another goal: Do less, do it well. I frankly, don't care about skins. If I did, I would use WindowBlinds. But I do care about being able to set up my "toolbar favorites".
I'm going to continue trying N6, because I like Mozilla and believe it can turn out good products, but I really hope the quality improves.
I don't think it even needs to be this advanced to be helpful. Besides, this would be awfully expensive for all the polling places to implement.
How about this...
On "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire", they vote on simple little boxes with four buttons. Lets say they cost a buck. Four options won't work, so lets beef that up to 12. Now it's three bucks. Now add an LCD screen at the top about the size of a Palm's. Any idea how much that would be? I have no clue, so let's guess $30.
All of these boxes would be connected to a central computer run by the election official at the polling place. When you check in, the official enables one box which steps you through the voting process. Once you're done, the box is disabled until it's again enabled by the offical.
For people with vision problems, they could have a "deluxe" model with a bigger screen. This wouldn't have to be a lot more expensive because you'd only have to have one or two of these and people with special needs could all use that booth.
Apple depends on people not having early knowledge of its product because much of its products selling points (appearance) are not "hard to produce". Imagine if the design for the iMac had leaked out. If eMachines had really hauled buns, they might have gotten their clone out at the same time or before Apple. Then:
Apple doesn't sell much because they don't have the cool product.
eMachines sues Apple because they got their model out first.
Apple dies and we have no one to think about cool designs in the industry.
Whether or not you like Apple's products, it should be pretty apparent that secrecy is important.
This is really funny and all, but ummm... isn't this fraud? I mean, a fake SETI@Home accelerator doesn't really bother anyone too much, but it's not too hard to see how this could do some real damage to advertise a fake product, say it will be out "Real Soon" and then say "ha, ha! Just kidding!".
Picture this: Evil Group (who exactly they are doesn't matter) doesn't like Nice Computer Company. Nice Computer Company releases a 1.5GHz system with a nice configuration. Evil Group at the same time creates Bogus Computer Company and puts out a big advertisement that they have will be selling a 2Ghz system with an even nicer configuration. Nice Computer Company loses sales because people are waiting to buy Bogus Computer Companies' systems.
Granted, maybe this is a little far-fetched, but what's to prevent these guys from making up some other nifty-cool yet bogus toy if we just sit here and say "Ha, ha! You sure got us good! What geeks we are!"?
I think this type of ruling is long overdue. Personally, I'm opposed to the level of violence in this type of game. But, even if you don't agree with that, I think this is a good thing because I think it will improve the quality of future games if they have to consider this type of ban.
Since Q1, there have been a lot of these first person shooters that become popular simply because they're more realistic. But is that really making a good game? I think a lot of the creativity has been lost because of the focus to improve the reality of the game.
In contrast, I think we can all probably think of a number of games that are highly addictive, not because they were all the real or even necessarily that the quality (graphically) was all the good, but the idea was new and inventive and the story was enchanting. A few examples: Civilization (pretty bad graphics), Myst 1 (good graphics, but not earth-shattering), lots of early space games, etc...
I'd like to see the focus less on making us think we're standing there and more on inventing a truely new or enthrawling experience.
This should be a really good thing for the MacOS because up until now the only game in town has been Metrowerks' CodeWarrior (or Apple's own stuff). I think this will be a Good Thing to keep Metrowerks from resting on its laurels. Now, I don't really care for JBuilder personally and I like CodeWarrior a lot, so I hope they can still survive well... but I hope that they both become better products from the competition.
In particular, it has a link to this site, which tells all about solar sailing. It has an introduction section with "Solar Sailing 101". It should explain your questions.
I think one argument to that could be that the intended purpose of the swimming pool is for swimming (thus the name). So, the kid -though not invited to do so- is just doing what the pool is intended for: swimming!
The web site hacker is not doing what the site is intended for. Though some might disagree, web sites are not made to be hacked.:)
I don't think that argument would stand up in this (or similar) case.
1) He (Smith) has a point if Nike was negligent. Just like there are laws if someone gets hurt on your property because of negligence on your part, there should probably be some similar laws in cyberspace. Now exactly how you define those... I'm not sure. Maybe check to see if the people have kept reasonably up-to-date with bug patches?
2) If someone steal a gun from your house and goes on a shooting rampage, are you responsible? (Well, probably again it depends whether you were negligable or not.) But, assuming that the person was responsible... how can you blame them?
Bottom line - I do think web sites have a responsibility to be attentive to protecting their resources and ensuring that they don't hurt other with them... but beyond doing your best, you can't do any more.
I'd love to see som leveraging of the Open Source movement to get some real inovation going. I'd like to see some developments into 3D window interfaces, and OpenGL would be a great tool. All the projects I've seen on this have been pretty lame. Linux might have a great opportuniy to leap-frog the cometition here.
I think the real question with this strategy is are we ready for this level of internet dependancy? Let's take one area: security. Okay, we know Microsoft's record for security. Come now. Are they going to be able to say that my information, which can be stored on their servers so I can use any computer as "my computer", is realy going to be safe? And what about speed? I know there has been some good progress in getting DSL, etc. out, but I for one still live in a small town. I'm lucky if I can connect at 52K. Though I actually think this is a good direction to be heading (as Sun said, "the network is the computer"), I'm not sure we're ready for the broad-sweeping scenario that MS is suggesting... yet. I'd love to see them dump some real research (dare I say inovation?) into things like better security and ways to distribute information faster & better.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, I'm a Mac user and do the rounds off all the Mac info and rumors sites each day as well as thoroughly reading evey article on /. having to do with Apple, so don't get me wrong. But, I guess I'm wondering why Apple stuff is being broken out? What's the reasoning? Will we have a windows.slashdot.org soon? Isn't this just going to make it possible to hide possibly interesting articles from people on the main page that don't visit apple.slashdot?
Let's not send the wrong message here... they said turn it off if you don't need it. Don't blow up your car just so no one will steal it. Lock the doors!
Similarly, SNMP is a really useful tool that administrators should be making even more use of. They shouldn't get rid of it just because of this bug or the fact that lots of people use defautl passwords. That doesn't make the tool bad. Fix the bug(s). (Have there been other bugs recently?) Set the passwords. Save the car.
Well, yes and no. It sounds like there are some assumptions that are commonly made when processing traps. However, if someone wants to be malicious, those assumptions may not hold. But, the protocol isn't necessarily flawed. It just means that developers need to check their assumptions (like they should all the time).
Take a look: www.netzilient.com
Rob Eden
Sr. Software Engineer
NetZilient Corporation
It does come with Apache, telnetd and sshd all disabled. Probably the biggest risk for these is that they can be enabled with the click of a button, so the average user might not think of it as a big deal. Another security issue is that the root account is disabled by default. This is harder to enable though, so I would suspect that most users wouldn't know how to enable it and if they do, they probably are thinking about security.
Rather than saying "PDF is bad... Adobe is bad...", shouldn't we be saying "Why don't they like us?"
I've been a Mac user for a while and this is what Apple has been infamous for: saying "developer's don't like us... well who needs 'em!" The truth is, linux needs developers like Adobe desperately. (Ok, yes, it's a great OS with or without them, but to gain real, wide-spread acceptance it needs masive developer support.)
What this rejection of Linux should prompt us to ask is how we can motivate developers to support Linux and in doing so, make a better OS and get more developers!
The result is a Mutt user interface that looks like it's gone through the blender a few times. Part of me likes N6's themes, but part of me says "why not just use the standard API's and leave the rest up to WindowBlinds, or the Appearance Manager or whatever?" Yes, themes let you change the UI layout (I think) and the icons on the buttons, but is that really worth it? If so, you could do that without a complete skin that blows off other system-wide skins.
Just a gripe... :)
I was in the "Manage Bookmarks" section. I did finally get it to work, but here's the thing: you can't drag the top-level folder ("Imported IE Favorites"), but you can drag lower folders. But, this is what I'm talking about... the user (me) doesn't care which is a top-level folder and which isn't. If I try to drag a folder, dang it, drag the folder.
With all that in mind, I was excited to see that N6 was out because I've liked the Mozilla and preview release builds, except that they were buggy and seemingly incomplete.
I like a lot of things in Netscape 6. The Gecko engine is great. It renders pages pretty fast, which is good. The "Modern" skin is pretty cool. Is it a good idea... well, that's another issue, but it's cool. There are a lot of features that I like in IE that weren't in Netscape 4.6.whenever-I-stopped-really-using-it like some of the sidebar stuff and the toolbar. (Yes, I know the toolbar has been in 4.7 or so for a long time, but it took them a long time to get it there!)
Here's the bottom line of my impressions with N6: it's all in the little things!!!
There are two things that are ticking me off enough to possibly send me back to IE. First, arranging the bookmarks. This should be easy: I have imported "toolbar favorites" from IE, I want them to be in my N6 toolbar. I'm a pretty smart guy and I have no idea how to do this. Drag-an-drop isn't supported, so I can't move them. Cut and paste are supported (even though "cut" is enabled in the edit menu. There's a menu command "Set as Personal Toolbar Menu"... which apparently does nothing! I know it's stupid, but these are the things that make me choose IE, not the engine. (Well, I shouldn't say that. If the engine was unacceptable it would influence me. But, being a typical web user, most engines I find are "acceptable", so it's not typically a factor.)
Second big annoyance, I now have five icons on my desktop (I'm using Win2000): Netscape (I wanted this one), "Free AOL Unlimited INternet" (fine, AOL owns Netscape... I'll bear it), "Net2Phone" (quit installing this!), "RealPlayer Basic" (I already had it), "Take5" (See previous, I hate this thing).
Goal for Netscape: Don't tick off you customers by installing worthless things. It may convince some people, but I think it angers more.
Another goal: Do less, do it well. I frankly, don't care about skins. If I did, I would use WindowBlinds. But I do care about being able to set up my "toolbar favorites".
I'm going to continue trying N6, because I like Mozilla and believe it can turn out good products, but I really hope the quality improves.
I don't think it even needs to be this advanced to be helpful. Besides, this would be awfully expensive for all the polling places to implement. How about this... On "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire", they vote on simple little boxes with four buttons. Lets say they cost a buck. Four options won't work, so lets beef that up to 12. Now it's three bucks. Now add an LCD screen at the top about the size of a Palm's. Any idea how much that would be? I have no clue, so let's guess $30. All of these boxes would be connected to a central computer run by the election official at the polling place. When you check in, the official enables one box which steps you through the voting process. Once you're done, the box is disabled until it's again enabled by the offical. For people with vision problems, they could have a "deluxe" model with a bigger screen. This wouldn't have to be a lot more expensive because you'd only have to have one or two of these and people with special needs could all use that booth.
Whether or not you like Apple's products, it should be pretty apparent that secrecy is important.
Picture this: Evil Group (who exactly they are doesn't matter) doesn't like Nice Computer Company. Nice Computer Company releases a 1.5GHz system with a nice configuration. Evil Group at the same time creates Bogus Computer Company and puts out a big advertisement that they have will be selling a 2Ghz system with an even nicer configuration. Nice Computer Company loses sales because people are waiting to buy Bogus Computer Companies' systems.
Granted, maybe this is a little far-fetched, but what's to prevent these guys from making up some other nifty-cool yet bogus toy if we just sit here and say "Ha, ha! You sure got us good! What geeks we are!"?
Since Q1, there have been a lot of these first person shooters that become popular simply because they're more realistic. But is that really making a good game? I think a lot of the creativity has been lost because of the focus to improve the reality of the game.
In contrast, I think we can all probably think of a number of games that are highly addictive, not because they were all the real or even necessarily that the quality (graphically) was all the good, but the idea was new and inventive and the story was enchanting. A few examples: Civilization (pretty bad graphics), Myst 1 (good graphics, but not earth-shattering), lots of early space games, etc...
I'd like to see the focus less on making us think we're standing there and more on inventing a truely new or enthrawling experience.
This should be a really good thing for the MacOS because up until now the only game in town has been Metrowerks' CodeWarrior (or Apple's own stuff). I think this will be a Good Thing to keep Metrowerks from resting on its laurels. Now, I don't really care for JBuilder personally and I like CodeWarrior a lot, so I hope they can still survive well... but I hope that they both become better products from the competition.
In particular, it has a link to this site, which tells all about solar sailing. It has an introduction section with "Solar Sailing 101". It should explain your questions.
Inspired by this, I'm going to pull the engine out of my car because it might contribute to my crashing the car!
The web site hacker is not doing what the site is intended for. Though some might disagree, web sites are not made to be hacked. :)
I don't think that argument would stand up in this (or similar) case.
1) He (Smith) has a point if Nike was negligent. Just like there are laws if someone gets hurt on your property because of negligence on your part, there should probably be some similar laws in cyberspace. Now exactly how you define those... I'm not sure. Maybe check to see if the people have kept reasonably up-to-date with bug patches?
2) If someone steal a gun from your house and goes on a shooting rampage, are you responsible? (Well, probably again it depends whether you were negligable or not.) But, assuming that the person was responsible... how can you blame them?
Bottom line - I do think web sites have a responsibility to be attentive to protecting their resources and ensuring that they don't hurt other with them... but beyond doing your best, you can't do any more.
I'd love to see som leveraging of the Open Source movement to get some real inovation going. I'd like to see some developments into 3D window interfaces, and OpenGL would be a great tool. All the projects I've seen on this have been pretty lame. Linux might have a great opportuniy to leap-frog the cometition here.
I think the real question with this strategy is are we ready for this level of internet dependancy? Let's take one area: security. Okay, we know Microsoft's record for security. Come now. Are they going to be able to say that my information, which can be stored on their servers so I can use any computer as "my computer", is realy going to be safe? And what about speed? I know there has been some good progress in getting DSL, etc. out, but I for one still live in a small town. I'm lucky if I can connect at 52K. Though I actually think this is a good direction to be heading (as Sun said, "the network is the computer"), I'm not sure we're ready for the broad-sweeping scenario that MS is suggesting... yet. I'd love to see them dump some real research (dare I say inovation?) into things like better security and ways to distribute information faster & better.