I just installed SP3 on my mother-in-law's new Dell laptop running Norton Internet Security (which included anti-virus functionality) and didn't encounter any problems.
How's that? I obviously thought I knew enough to presume that it could not be done (you only quoted part of my message). I may have been wrong (I'm not sure -- no one has yet to correct me definitively). It did seem like a reasonable conclusion with the information presented. When indicated that I might have been wrong, I didn't simply B.S., but replied at admitted that I may have been wrong.
I call that making a (possible) mistake in a (intentioanlly silly) comment, and admitting it, not a troll. But do as you like...
Are named pipes and shell scripting Windows capabilities? I've never seen named pipes used in Windows, and no one else had suggested what seemed obvious to me. However, a quick web search reveals hits that include discussion of named pipes alongside Windows (discussions of vulnerabilities, but that's besides the point), so maybe I was wrong. If so, I apologize.
However, I'm both a Windows and a Linux user, and have absolutely no idea how to pull off what I stated in Windows, while I could quite easily and quickly do it with Linux (or likely any similar Unix tool). Therefore, I stand by the "flavor" of my previous comment, despite the fact that you may consider it a troll.
It's rather simple. Simple create a named pipe and refer to that pipe as the WAV file in Outlook. Write a short bash script (or similar) that will simply cat a randomly chosen WAV file when that named pipe is opened and read from. That's it -- you're done! Don't you just love Open Source software?
Oh, wait, Outlook runs on Windows, doesn't it? Nevermind then...
Last time I was faced with this, I found it wasn't to hard to pull of touching neither Microsoft software not a floppy disk. First this I did was to download the freely available and open source FreeDOS. I simply downloaded a pre-built bootable floppy image, though you could make your own from scratch. I mounted that floppy image in Linux using the loopback device, added the necessary flash tool and BIOS binary, and unmounted. Using my custom image, I burned a bootable CD (bootable CDs use basically the same format as bootable floppies). I popped that CD in, and the machine booted right up as if I had a put in a floppy. Ran the tool as instructed, and I had a newly flashed BIOS. A little work, maybe, but worth it.
The biggest problem with your proposal is that it allows others to know who you voted for. This could encourage vote selling, since you can provide a verifiable receipt. Or it could make you subject to intimidation, with threats to your well-being unless you produce a receipt for the desired candidate.
IMO, you should get a receipt, but the receipt should be securely deposited at the voting precinct. That receipt is clear (no chad or optional scanning nonsense), and you can verify that the receipt is correct. If computer fraud is ever suspected, the secured receipts can be used to verify the computer results.
If God always existed, then it is also possible that the "seed" for the Big Bang also existed, but did not fire until 15 billion years ago. Similarly, God waited for some reason also to create this universe if we go that route.
I don't mean to argue a specific point, but you are assuming that God is bound by time ("God waited"). A supernatural being that exists outside of space-time (i.e., the creator of time itself), would not "wait" to create the universe. I admit I struggle to comprehend that, but I believe it is possible.
Isn't it true that HP learned of this exploit nearly a year ago and has done nothing except try to "silence" someone sounding a critical warning?
According to HP, no, that's not true. They received notification of the exploit on July 18th and Phased, without the rest of SnoSoft's permission, published the exploit on July 19th.
The rest of you points are kind of moot at that point.
No, the executable_stack parameter does not have to be on -- that's the whole point. Without execustable stack turned on, I got this to fail on my V5.1 workstation. However, it would not work on V5.1A nor on V5.1B.
I got it to work on a Tru64 V5.1 box, but not a Tru64 V5.1A box. I'm not sure if it's fixed in V5.1A, or if the exploit needs to be fixed. I think it's fixed in V5.1B (not yet released)
I just wanted to point out how illogical Hilary Rosen and the RIAA really are. I fully respect how the sharing of copyrighted music may be illegal. However, that is no justification to go after CD burning; there are just too many legitimate uses of CD burners.
Ms. Rosen speaks of an analogy of sharing a research paper. I think that is a fine analogy. To answer her question, no, I would likely not
like to see that paper distributed to others. There may be times, though, when that is okay. Should we get rid of all photocopiers because they may be used for copyright infringement? No, of course not. Rather, we would allow photocopiers to be used for legitimate practices, and go after those individuals whose seek to use them for copyright infringement.
Copy-protection of a CD is also the wrong solution. Let's extend Ms.Rosen's analogy. Say I write a report which you purchase. To prevent you from sharing that report, I make it so that most photocopiers can't copy it. However, because I did so, you are unable to make a copy for your personal use, in case you spill coffee on the report, or your kids get to it, or perhaps so that you have one copy for when you work at home and one for at the office. Additionally, my method of
copy-protection makes the report illegible except under proper lighting, and even then you swear that it's a little "off".
This is what happens with CD copy-protection. By eliminating all copying, it prevents legimate use of copies: backups, additional copies for personal use, creating "mix" discs of personally owned music for personal use, saving to a personal MP3 player for personal playback, etc. Additionally, most copy-protection scheme prevent playback in
computers and many DVD players. Even when used with "blessed" CD players, some people believe that they can hear the difference.
I respect the fact that the RIAA views copyright enfringement as "stealing" from the RIAA and the recording artists. However, attacking
CD burners in general, including legitimate personal uses and even non-music uses, is clearly the wrong solution.
I found your article "7 Experts Sound Off After a Music Test" to be rather lacking in the information it provided. First of all, was the test a so-called blind test? In a blind test, the testers are not told what they are listening to. It is a well know fact that if you are told what you are listening to, you may set expectations, and those expectations may affect your perceptions of reality. From the quotes you give, it rather sounds like the testers knew what they were listening to.
Also, you fail to mention the bit rate at which the sounds were recorded. The bit rate winds up affecting the size of the file and the rate of compression. Although a bit rate of 128 kbps is frequently found on files distributed on the Internet, it is fairly well known that in order to achieve a reasonable reproduction of the original music, a rate more along the lines of 192 kbps should be used for MP3. It has been claimed that Ogg Vorbis performs better at the same bit rate. In any such comparision, the bit rate should be mentioned, and care should be taken to ensure that the same bit rate is used on all encoders. The bit rate was not mentioned in your article, nor did you make clear if the same bit rate was used for all tests.
Also, I would hope that the listeners were comparing to a CD listened to via the same "ordinary stereo system". I'm assuming that's the case, because otherwise the stereo system itself could affect the outcome. You also don't mention how the sound was sent to the stereo system itself. If the sound was sent out of the computer's sound card, then the quality of the sound card could also come into play. A better check would be to convert the compressed audio back to.WAV files (uncompressed), and burn a CD with the audio. Then you mearly need to compare the quality of the CDs. This also helps with keeping the identity of the test samples hidden from the listeners.
This is obviously a very complex issue. I would appreciate such clarifications, as I'm sure would may others. You may find it interesting to know that your article is being discussed at http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/07/13/155823 9
If you've made it this far, you might want to consider emailing the author himself at: Robert Thomason <thomason@washpost.com>.
Please remember to keep your comments civilized and direct, of course.
Some CS programs have "tracks" for "focuses" that allow students to take their CS majors in specific directions. For instance, where I went to school (Taylor University), students could focus on business, graphics, etc. I focused on "Scientific Programming", and also got a degree in Mathematics, which is probably exactly the kind of thing you are looking for!
You could always contact Taylor or other schools specifically asking about "Scientific Programming" tracks.
Mini-discs died a pretty miserable death, and the continued failure of people to adopt any of the other recordable mediums suggest that we're pretty content with CD's for the time being. I think that there is a sort of law of diminishing returns with size, and anything smaller than a CD doesn't appeal to many people.
Any new medium must offer something substantial for it to be adopted. In the case of CD's it was quality of music. For MP3's it was transferability and effective HD storage. What new quality is offered by these disks that doesn't already exist in another form? Are CD's at 4.75 inches in diameter and negligable thickness really that inconvenient?
The next wave in media will most likely be based not on size but on durability. This is the one area where all current forms of storage are severly lacking.
I don't know how you play SoC, but when I build on a resource, no one else can build there or at any potential site directly adjacent to where I build.
Also, don't forget the concept of "the Robber" and stealing another player's resources.
That's what I get for going off without the facts. I meant to refer to Pronto, not PMail. I thought PMail's page didn't look right. Anyway, you get get Pronto at http://www.muhri.net/pronto/
No, but they are all "Americans". While those in the USA think of "America" as the "United States of America", "America" (or at least "The Americas") is a lot more. Similarly, while we often think England == The United Kingdom, England is actually a part of Britain, which itself is a part of the United Kingdom.
Well, you can always use MS Outlook:-( I've been looking for the same, with the addition of supporting HTML mail, and it seems like PMail for GNOME has all these features. If you are a KDE user, I think newer versions of KMailmight do the trick. StarOffice's email client also supports these features, but I found it to be awful. Mahogany may also be a consideration. If you enjoy a text-based program, I highly recommend mutt - awesome and highly configurable - I pass HTML mail through lynx or w3m to read it. I'll probably try out PMail for my wife soon.
Yes, it's a direct quote from the interview (on the linked ZDNet page, not Gore's page). And I didn't even catch the logarithmic thing, though I knew something sounded funny!
For the mathematically challenged, logarithmic functions grow very slowly. Exponential functions, like Moore's Law, grow quickly. The two are roughly opposites. Not only did Al Gore nearly claim to invent Moore's Law, but he got it backwards!
Slashdot Mirror
This EE Times article confirms that it's 1.6 PB. http://www.eetimes.com/news/design/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=213000489
It also says they'll be 16 cores per processor!
I just installed SP3 on my mother-in-law's new Dell laptop running Norton Internet Security (which included anti-virus functionality) and didn't encounter any problems.
How's that? I obviously thought I knew enough to presume that it could not be done (you only quoted part of my message). I may have been wrong (I'm not sure -- no one has yet to correct me definitively). It did seem like a reasonable conclusion with the information presented. When indicated that I might have been wrong, I didn't simply B.S., but replied at admitted that I may have been wrong.
I call that making a (possible) mistake in a (intentioanlly silly) comment, and admitting it, not a troll. But do as you like...
True enough.
Are named pipes and shell scripting Windows capabilities? I've never seen named pipes used in Windows, and no one else had suggested what seemed obvious to me. However, a quick web search reveals hits that include discussion of named pipes alongside Windows (discussions of vulnerabilities, but that's besides the point), so maybe I was wrong. If so, I apologize.
However, I'm both a Windows and a Linux user, and have absolutely no idea how to pull off what I stated in Windows, while I could quite easily and quickly do it with Linux (or likely any similar Unix tool). Therefore, I stand by the "flavor" of my previous comment, despite the fact that you may consider it a troll.
It's rather simple. Simple create a named pipe and refer to that pipe as the WAV file in Outlook. Write a short bash script (or similar) that will simply cat a randomly chosen WAV file when that named pipe is opened and read from. That's it -- you're done! Don't you just love Open Source software?
Oh, wait, Outlook runs on Windows, doesn't it? Nevermind then...
Last time I was faced with this, I found it wasn't to hard to pull of touching neither Microsoft software not a floppy disk. First this I did was to download the freely available and open source FreeDOS. I simply downloaded a pre-built bootable floppy image, though you could make your own from scratch. I mounted that floppy image in Linux using the loopback device, added the necessary flash tool and BIOS binary, and unmounted. Using my custom image, I burned a bootable CD (bootable CDs use basically the same format as bootable floppies). I popped that CD in, and the machine booted right up as if I had a put in a floppy. Ran the tool as instructed, and I had a newly flashed BIOS. A little work, maybe, but worth it.
I've been waiting such a long time
Just trying to get through
And it's taking all of my strength
To keep me here away from you
...
:-)
The biggest problem with your proposal is that it allows others to know who you voted for. This could encourage vote selling, since you can provide a verifiable receipt. Or it could make you subject to intimidation, with threats to your well-being unless you produce a receipt for the desired candidate.
IMO, you should get a receipt, but the receipt should be securely deposited at the voting precinct. That receipt is clear (no chad or optional scanning nonsense), and you can verify that the receipt is correct. If computer fraud is ever suspected, the secured receipts can be used to verify the computer results.
If God always existed, then it is also possible that the "seed" for the Big Bang also existed, but did not fire until 15 billion years ago. Similarly, God waited for some reason also to create this universe if we go that route.
I don't mean to argue a specific point, but you are assuming that God is bound by time ("God waited"). A supernatural being that exists outside of space-time (i.e., the creator of time itself), would not "wait" to create the universe. I admit I struggle to comprehend that, but I believe it is possible.
Isn't it true that HP learned of this exploit nearly a year ago and has done nothing except try to "silence" someone sounding a critical warning?
According to HP, no, that's not true. They received notification of the exploit on July 18th and Phased, without the rest of SnoSoft's permission, published the exploit on July 19th.
The rest of you points are kind of moot at that point.
No, the executable_stack parameter does not have to be on -- that's the whole point. Without execustable stack turned on, I got this to fail on my V5.1 workstation. However, it would not work on V5.1A nor on V5.1B.
I got it to work on a Tru64 V5.1 box, but not a Tru64 V5.1A box. I'm not sure if it's fixed in V5.1A, or if the exploit needs to be fixed. I think it's fixed in V5.1B (not yet released)
Ms. Rosen speaks of an analogy of sharing a research paper. I think that is a fine analogy. To answer her question, no, I would likely not like to see that paper distributed to others. There may be times, though, when that is okay. Should we get rid of all photocopiers because they may be used for copyright infringement? No, of course not. Rather, we would allow photocopiers to be used for legitimate practices, and go after those individuals whose seek to use them for copyright infringement.
Copy-protection of a CD is also the wrong solution. Let's extend Ms.Rosen's analogy. Say I write a report which you purchase. To prevent you from sharing that report, I make it so that most photocopiers can't copy it. However, because I did so, you are unable to make a copy for your personal use, in case you spill coffee on the report, or your kids get to it, or perhaps so that you have one copy for when you work at home and one for at the office. Additionally, my method of copy-protection makes the report illegible except under proper lighting, and even then you swear that it's a little "off".
This is what happens with CD copy-protection. By eliminating all copying, it prevents legimate use of copies: backups, additional copies for personal use, creating "mix" discs of personally owned music for personal use, saving to a personal MP3 player for personal playback, etc. Additionally, most copy-protection scheme prevent playback in computers and many DVD players. Even when used with "blessed" CD players, some people believe that they can hear the difference.
I respect the fact that the RIAA views copyright enfringement as "stealing" from the RIAA and the recording artists. However, attacking CD burners in general, including legitimate personal uses and even non-music uses, is clearly the wrong solution.
Dear Mr. Thomason:
.WAV files (uncompressed), and burn a CD with the audio. Then you mearly need to compare the quality of the CDs. This also helps with keeping the identity of the test samples hidden from the listeners.
3 9
I found your article "7 Experts Sound Off After a Music Test" to be rather lacking in the information it provided. First of all, was the test a so-called blind test? In a blind test, the testers are not told what they are listening to. It is a well know fact that if you are told what you are listening to, you may set expectations, and those expectations may affect your perceptions of reality. From the quotes you give, it rather sounds like the testers knew what they were listening to.
Also, you fail to mention the bit rate at which the sounds were recorded. The bit rate winds up affecting the size of the file and the rate of compression. Although a bit rate of 128 kbps is frequently found on files distributed on the Internet, it is fairly well known that in order to achieve a reasonable reproduction of the original music, a rate more along the lines of 192 kbps should be used for MP3. It has been claimed that Ogg Vorbis performs better at the same bit rate. In any such comparision, the bit rate should be mentioned, and care should be taken to ensure that the same bit rate is used on all encoders. The bit rate was not mentioned in your article, nor did you make clear if the same bit rate was used for all tests.
Also, I would hope that the listeners were comparing to a CD listened to via the same "ordinary stereo system". I'm assuming that's the case, because otherwise the stereo system itself could affect the outcome. You also don't mention how the sound was sent to the stereo system itself. If the sound was sent out of the computer's sound card, then the quality of the sound card could also come into play. A better check would be to convert the compressed audio back to
This is obviously a very complex issue. I would appreciate such clarifications, as I'm sure would may others. You may find it interesting to know that your article is being discussed at http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/07/13/15582
If you've made it this far, you might want to consider emailing the author himself at : Robert Thomason <thomason@washpost.com>.
Please remember to keep your comments civilized and direct, of course.
You could always contact Taylor or other schools specifically asking about "Scientific Programming" tracks.
And that wasn't even my intention. I had no idea there were so many die-hard MD users out there
Mini-discs died a pretty miserable death, and the continued failure of people to adopt any of the other recordable mediums suggest that we're pretty content with CD's for the time being. I think that there is a sort of law of diminishing returns with size, and anything smaller than a CD doesn't appeal to many people.
Any new medium must offer something substantial for it to be adopted. In the case of CD's it was quality of music. For MP3's it was transferability and effective HD storage. What new quality is offered by these disks that doesn't already exist in another form? Are CD's at 4.75 inches in diameter and negligable thickness really that inconvenient?
The next wave in media will most likely be based not on size but on durability. This is the one area where all current forms of storage are severly lacking.
I don't know how you play SoC, but when I build on a resource, no one else can build there or at any potential site directly adjacent to where I build.
Also, don't forget the concept of "the Robber" and stealing another player's resources.
That's what I get for going off without the facts. I meant to refer to Pronto, not PMail. I thought PMail's page didn't look right. Anyway, you get get Pronto at http://www.muhri.net/pronto/
Sorry, I would guess you're right. I use Outlook Express; Outlook may be different.
No, but they are all "Americans". While those in the USA think of "America" as the "United States of America", "America" (or at least "The Americas") is a lot more. Similarly, while we often think England == The United Kingdom, England is actually a part of Britain, which itself is a part of the United Kingdom.
Isn't Scotland part of Britain? Wouldn't all Scottish, Welsh, and English persons all be British? IOW, each set is a subset of Britains.
Well, you can always use MS Outlook :-( I've been looking for the same, with the addition of supporting HTML mail, and it seems like PMail for GNOME has all these features. If you are a KDE user, I think newer versions of KMail might do the trick. StarOffice's email client also supports these features, but I found it to be awful. Mahogany may also be a consideration. If you enjoy a text-based program, I highly recommend mutt - awesome and highly configurable - I pass HTML mail through lynx or w3m to read it. I'll probably try out PMail for my wife soon.
For the mathematically challenged, logarithmic functions grow very slowly. Exponential functions, like Moore's Law, grow quickly. The two are roughly opposites. Not only did Al Gore nearly claim to invent Moore's Law, but he got it backwards!