Point well taken. My response may have been a bit flippant.
As a thought experiment, imagine the following contest:
a) 1000 Linux developers are given (full) WinXP source code and locked in a room to find potential exploits.
b) In another room, 1000 WinXP developers are locked in a room with (insert distro here) source code to find potential exploits.
Which group finds more holes in a week? Which group finds more serious holes? Up until last week, this was purely a thought experiment, with OSS claiming the virtual victory. Last week, it became real.
(And don't you think that it's possible that Microsoft has been conducting contest (b) FOR YEARS trying to find holes to prove OSS insecurity?)
I'm sure if a bunch of Windows zealots were working around the clock to create Linux exploits except that they'd have some problems there, as there's not much of the GNU/Linux source written in Visual Basic, VBScript, or Dot Net:)
you'd see Linux exploits pop up with the same amount of frequency Highly doubtful. Given the fact that there could very easily be two orders of magnitude MORE Windows "zealots" out there than Linux zealots, how do you explain that we see a handful (one hand) of Linux exploits each year, Vs. dozens (nay, hundreds) of exploits for Windows? The math just doesn't support your assertion.
And do you think that this is the ONLY exploit we'll see out of the code leak this week? I'm putting my money on at least two more before the end of the weekend.
Or, more clearly, what do the operating routines look like? Does anyone have a flowchart that would show the data flow? What sort of error checking is done on incoming data? What sort of encryption is done on incoming/outgoing data? (Cartoon bubble: I picture a script kiddie with a powerful transmitter sending SQL injection to Spirit...)
What does the system do if it determines it has had an unexpected result/crash? How is such a system designed and tested?
I've never thought about it before - but a system like this must have redundant levels of i/o security, internal error checking, exception trapping, and some sort of self-repair, all built within multiply redundant systems.
Would any details of the embedded system architecture / program structure be available to the public?
So very true, assuming it's left to its own devices, to defend itself in the wild.
Which it won't.
A field of sweet corn, left to its own devices, will revert to assorted weeds within a couple of years. Sweet corn just can't compete. But, due to the diligence and intervention of the farmer, that same field produces tons of corn each year.
With a little help from enterprising "do-it-yourself" ecologists, looking to "take back" their waterways, the GM fish will impact wild stock in countless locales around the world. And if that introduction shows a reduction in the local carp population, they'll re-seed with more fry the next year, and the next.
Actually, I'm in favor of the introduction of the GM fish in Australia as well.
Again, COULD there be a problem? Yes, there could be. If "problem" is defined as the spread of the GM carp outside of Australia, I posit that there definitely WILL be. I don't think we disagree here. The question is, what will be the impact of the breakout? Nobody knows yet.
We could also be struck by meteorites. Again, I agree, there is a 100% chance that we will be struck by meteorites.
This species has to be erradicated by some means. I couldn't agree more. (I assume you mean "from non-native waters".)
Short of killing everything, what do you suggest is better than genetic manipulation, which you're in favor of elsewhere in the world? I can't think of anything better, short of going back in time and not proliferating carp in the first place. Since that's not going to happen, we move forward with plan B (GM) and take conservatively anticipate that the GM specie (s?) will also proliferate.
Why is this important? In our shrinking world, biological research in Australia affects farmers in California and countries in Asia. The Carp farmers in California should probably have a plan. Asian countries that depend on their wild carp population had better have a plan.
If you read carefully, you'll note that at no time do I argue against the introduction of this GM fish. I only point out that, for those arguing that this is a "safe" GM animal, that their assumptions are false.
I'm an anti-carp zealot. You can count me in among those who would take the opportunity to introduce GM Asian Carp to U.S. waters in an attempt to eliminate the all carp from our waters. Where I live (Minnesota - "Land of 10,000 lakes), if you catch a carp while fishing, it is a crime to allow carp to live, or to return a live or dead carp to the water. We fish them, we hunt them, we poison them, and we sometimes blow them up. They're not going anywhere.
I seriously doubt that I'll ever have the opportunity to personally take such a drastic action as smuggling GM carp into the country, but I guarantee that, of the millions of Americans who share my loathing for carp, several will. This carp, shortly after release in Australia, will show up in five other continents as well.
I'm also sensitive to the fact that there is a large portion of the world that stands a lot to lose through the introduction of this GM fish. They'd better start taking precautions now, as we can't put the genie back in the bottle at this point.
My later comment should have been a reply to yours, but we were responding contemporaneously...
The fact that the carp has been introduced everywhere by man, and is so ubiquitous, practically guarantees it'll be smuggled out of Australia to other "carp-infested" locales.
It would also be an insidious attack against the Asian countries who rely upon carp for food - by releasing the GM fry into farms, lakes, and rivers in SE Asia.
In general, one would think that introducing a GM freshwater fish in Australia would be a safe bet for containment. However...
There is NO WAY that this gene could be contained in the small "backwater basin" in Australia. There are enough other locales in the world (the majority of the US, and its Great Lakes for one) in which carp are despised, and enough motivated people with mobility, that there would quickly spring up a "black market" in these GM carp for export to ponds, lakes, and rivers abroad.
My first reaction is that, if France Telecom has the largest (non-hybrid) proprietary relational data storage, at 29 TB, ahead of AT&T and SBC, at around 26TB each, that France Telecom must have a bunch of redundant data lying around.
As of 2001-01-01, France had a population of about 59 Million. As it turns out, however, France Telecom (FTE) provides services to a dozen countries, not just France. Checking Yahoo! Finance, I see that
FTE had 2002 revenues of 49B, with 240,000 employees. ATT had 2002 revenues of 40B, with 71,000 employees. Finally, SBC had 2002 revenues of 43B, with 175,000 employees.
So nothing terribly unusual about the size of their database. But it's obvious that the French employees are a bunch of unproductive slackers...
Some of the better advice I've seen written lately. Eliminated the need for me say most of what I have to say, learned in my years of being photo editor for a Midwest university weekly newspaper.
I can't stress enough just how unsexy but totally reliable and capable the PentaxK1000 is. I have NEVER seen one break. I've yet to change the battery (operates the light meter) in mine after ten years - and I bought it used. It's a totally manual camera, but intuitive, and it just "feels" good in the hand. Add to that the fact that you can find hordes of good quality used lenses for this body in any camera exchange.
Lots of folks are "upgrading" to digital and fully auto cameras, leaving reliable workhorses like the K1000, and its many accessories, cheaper than they've ever been for the beginner.
Oooh! Oooh! This is is an easy one - can I take it?
From the GNU General Public License: 1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty; and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License along with the Program. (emphasis mine)
Granted, this applies to the distribution of copyrighted material, not simple use. I would assume that, having received GPL'd code, you could remove all comments in your local storage medium before your own personal use -- so it's not an answer in the spirit of your question, but an important consideration nonetheless.
and take government control out of the picture. I agree wholeheartedly that email should never become a revenue source for any government or organization.
If you want to make micropayments the vehicle to stem the tide of spam, go ahead, but let the recipient receive the payment.
re: Codename "MONAD" 10/29/2003 5:18 PM David McGhee What we will need next is intellisense for the command line! re: Codename "MONAD" 10/30/2003 1:33 PM Jason Nadal Yes we do! They're working on the UI last, from what they said in the breakout session on the topic. Intellisense was mentioned, and they do want to do it.
I really thought that the first post was sarcarstic, until I read the hordes of "Me Too" replies that followed. Call me crazy, but the last thing I want is Clippy monitoring my typing in tcsh.
re: Codename "MONAD" 10/31/2003 9:27 AM McGroarty Take that, dirty Linux hippies! Take that, Thieving Macintosh Republicans! Seriously, this is a wonderful thing. The shell has been one of the most lacking areas under Windows. I don't know how many times I've dropped into Cygwin or, before that, wasted time writing little C apps just to do basic bulk renaming operations and the likes.
Cool! Now Mac users are Republicans by default. I didn't know that.:)
I cut my teeth at the DOS prompt. As a *nix user for the past five years, I now understand the power of scripting that can't be accomplished in a GUI, and isn't possible in a.BAT file. I agree with the poster above, and posit that MONAD will be a truly Good Thing (tm) for Microsoft.
Using iTunes to rip an audio CD results in a folder full of MP3 files. DRM-free MP3 files. Do with them what you wish. Push them to your iPod and it'll play those same MP3 files. It's only the tunes you download from iTMS that are AAC encoded.
Consumers will find a way to get what they want. Right now, consumers want to experience entertainment on their own time, on their own terms.
Quoth the article: "But the entertainment industry does not want digitally enhanced "high-value" entertainment sent free over the air to be easily copied and distributed on the Internet. "
Why does the ??AA see such a stark difference between two free modes of distribution? Control. Note that this does not line up with consumer preference.
"Now the [FCC] agency is addressing how programming can be protected so that it cannot be easily copied and sent around the Internet, undermining the lucrative aftermarket for videos and television syndication."
I'd be interested in knowing what Fox would tell me my eyeballs are worth for one episode of "24". Is it $1.00? Less? If Fox and made it easy for me to watch that episode on my time, within a week or two of original airing via DVD or download without commercials I'd pay the dollar for the privilege. Over the course of the last month, my wife and I watched the first two seasons of "24" on DVD (via Blockbuster) and paid $48 for the privilege - $1.00 per episode. I don't think that I'm going to watch season 3 "live" on the air -- but I'd probably pay $4.00 to watch the first four episodes sometime next month.
But... Fox won't make this available for another ten months, at least. I don't want to wait that long. So I'll use TiVo and get (almost) the same result (but for loss of quality) with no additional revenue to Fox. And this ignores, of course, the other half-dozen quality shows on broadcast TV that will NEVER be offered on DVD, or online.
Microsoft, at least, has it right in their slogan, "Where do you want to go today?" The ??AA, in effect, is saying "Here's what you're going to consume today." Consumers have choices now, and we're sick of it. When the ??AA wake up and start providing consumers what they really want, we'll be happier, and they'll profit as well.
OnStar (or any other in-car wireless communication) + GPS + central monitoring service = Private sector traffic management system.
Don't alter the roadways when you can put the technology in the vehicle, and get the user to pay for it. If the automakers would link my dashboard GPS with wireless communication, I would have:
Automatic routing around construction and traffic Live weather radar (am I driving into snow?) Monitoring my teenage daughter's driving habits Directions to the closest theater screening "Texas Chainsaw Massacre"
I'd pay for the equipment up front, and I'd pay a monthly service fee as well. With enough subscribers (5% of the traffic on the road?) there would be a clear traffic pattern revealed to central monitoring.
Stop wasting tax dollars, and let the consumers pay for their convenience.
I think you're missing the point of "MSFreePC". I have a PC at home, and it's MSFree. The PC itself cost me hundreds, but the OS and application software are MSFree.
It seems that a large part of Microsoft's argument is the requirement on a wet-ink signature. The Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA) passed by most states in 2000-2001 sought to, among other things, give electronic signatures much the same force and effect as wet-ink signatures.
1633.7. (a) A record or signature may not be denied legal effect or enforceability solely because it is in electronic form.
(b) A contract may not be denied legal effect or enforceability solely because an electronic record was used in its formation.
(c) If a law requires a record to be in writing, an electronic record satisfies the law.
(d) If a law requires a signature, an electronic signature satisfies the law.
This seems pretty clear to me, but then, as they say, IANAL.
Slashdot Mirror
An excellent, often overlooked point you make: OSS != high quality.
There is a TON of crap out there in OSS space.
Point well taken. My response may have been a bit flippant.
As a thought experiment, imagine the following contest:
a) 1000 Linux developers are given (full) WinXP source code and locked in a room to find potential exploits.
b) In another room, 1000 WinXP developers are locked in a room with (insert distro here) source code to find potential exploits.
Which group finds more holes in a week? Which group finds more serious holes? Up until last week, this was purely a thought experiment, with OSS claiming the virtual victory. Last week, it became real.
(And don't you think that it's possible that Microsoft has been conducting contest (b) FOR YEARS trying to find holes to prove OSS insecurity?)
I'm sure if a bunch of Windows zealots were working around the clock to create Linux exploits :)
except that they'd have some problems there, as there's not much of the GNU/Linux source written in Visual Basic, VBScript, or Dot Net
you'd see Linux exploits pop up with the same amount of frequency
Highly doubtful. Given the fact that there could very easily be two orders of magnitude MORE Windows "zealots" out there than Linux zealots, how do you explain that we see a handful (one hand) of Linux exploits each year, Vs. dozens (nay, hundreds) of exploits for Windows? The math just doesn't support your assertion.
And do you think that this is the ONLY exploit we'll see out of the code leak this week? I'm putting my money on at least two more before the end of the weekend.
Can the same thing happen to linux?
Yeah, let's hope that the source code for Konqueror or Mozilla never gets leaked... No telling what kinds of exploits might pop up then.
Or, more clearly, what do the operating routines look like? Does anyone have a flowchart that would show the data flow? What sort of error checking is done on incoming data? What sort of encryption is done on incoming/outgoing data? (Cartoon bubble: I picture a script kiddie with a powerful transmitter sending SQL injection to Spirit...)
What does the system do if it determines it has had an unexpected result/crash? How is such a system designed and tested?
I've never thought about it before - but a system like this must have redundant levels of i/o security, internal error checking, exception trapping, and some sort of self-repair, all built within multiply redundant systems.
Would any details of the embedded system architecture / program structure be available to the public?
Nowif only we could find a way to introduce SCO to the WIPO.
So very true, assuming it's left to its own devices, to defend itself in the wild.
Which it won't.
A field of sweet corn, left to its own devices, will revert to assorted weeds within a couple of years. Sweet corn just can't compete. But, due to the diligence and intervention of the farmer, that same field produces tons of corn each year.
With a little help from enterprising "do-it-yourself" ecologists, looking to "take back" their waterways, the GM fish will impact wild stock in countless locales around the world. And if that introduction shows a reduction in the local carp population, they'll re-seed with more fry the next year, and the next.
The gene will not stay in Australia.
Actually, I'm in favor of the introduction of the GM fish in Australia as well.
Again, COULD there be a problem? Yes, there could be.
If "problem" is defined as the spread of the GM carp outside of Australia, I posit that there definitely WILL be. I don't think we disagree here. The question is, what will be the impact of the breakout? Nobody knows yet.
We could also be struck by meteorites.
Again, I agree, there is a 100% chance that we will be struck by meteorites.
This species has to be erradicated by some means.
I couldn't agree more. (I assume you mean "from non-native waters".)
Short of killing everything, what do you suggest is better than genetic manipulation, which you're in favor of elsewhere in the world?
I can't think of anything better, short of going back in time and not proliferating carp in the first place. Since that's not going to happen, we move forward with plan B (GM) and take conservatively anticipate that the GM specie (s?) will also proliferate.
Why is this important? In our shrinking world, biological research in Australia affects farmers in California and countries in Asia. The Carp farmers in California should probably have a plan. Asian countries that depend on their wild carp population had better have a plan.
Thanks for helping me to clarify.
If you read carefully, you'll note that at no time do I argue against the introduction of this GM fish. I only point out that, for those arguing that this is a "safe" GM animal, that their assumptions are false.
I'm an anti-carp zealot. You can count me in among those who would take the opportunity to introduce GM Asian Carp to U.S. waters in an attempt to eliminate the all carp from our waters. Where I live (Minnesota - "Land of 10,000 lakes), if you catch a carp while fishing, it is a crime to allow carp to live, or to return a live or dead carp to the water. We fish them, we hunt them, we poison them, and we sometimes blow them up. They're not going anywhere.
I seriously doubt that I'll ever have the opportunity to personally take such a drastic action as smuggling GM carp into the country, but I guarantee that, of the millions of Americans who share my loathing for carp, several will. This carp, shortly after release in Australia, will show up in five other continents as well.
I'm also sensitive to the fact that there is a large portion of the world that stands a lot to lose through the introduction of this GM fish. They'd better start taking precautions now, as we can't put the genie back in the bottle at this point.
My later comment should have been a reply to yours, but we were responding contemporaneously...
The fact that the carp has been introduced everywhere by man, and is so ubiquitous, practically guarantees it'll be smuggled out of Australia to other "carp-infested" locales.
It would also be an insidious attack against the Asian countries who rely upon carp for food - by releasing the GM fry into farms, lakes, and rivers in SE Asia.
In general, one would think that introducing a GM freshwater fish in Australia would be a safe bet for containment. However...
There is NO WAY that this gene could be contained in the small "backwater basin" in Australia. There are enough other locales in the world (the majority of the US, and its Great Lakes for one) in which carp are despised, and enough motivated people with mobility, that there would quickly spring up a "black market" in these GM carp for export to ponds, lakes, and rivers abroad.
My wishlist:
1. A wife just like Ellen
2. That my real wife doesn't read Slashdot when I'm not looking.
Congrats, Mr. Spertus. You've got a real gem.
Am I missing something?
My first reaction is that, if France Telecom has the largest (non-hybrid) proprietary relational data storage, at 29 TB, ahead of AT&T and SBC, at around 26TB each, that France Telecom must have a bunch of redundant data lying around.
As of 2001-01-01, France had a population of about 59 Million. As it turns out, however, France Telecom (FTE) provides services to a dozen countries, not just France. Checking Yahoo! Finance, I see that
FTE had 2002 revenues of 49B, with 240,000 employees.
ATT had 2002 revenues of 40B, with 71,000 employees.
Finally, SBC had 2002 revenues of 43B, with 175,000 employees.
So nothing terribly unusual about the size of their database. But it's obvious that the French employees are a bunch of unproductive slackers...
Some of the better advice I've seen written lately. Eliminated the need for me say most of what I have to say, learned in my years of being photo editor for a Midwest university weekly newspaper.
I can't stress enough just how unsexy but totally reliable and capable the Pentax K1000 is. I have NEVER seen one break. I've yet to change the battery (operates the light meter) in mine after ten years - and I bought it used. It's a totally manual camera, but intuitive, and it just "feels" good in the hand. Add to that the fact that you can find hordes of good quality used lenses for this body in any camera exchange.
Lots of folks are "upgrading" to digital and fully auto cameras, leaving reliable workhorses like the K1000, and its many accessories, cheaper than they've ever been for the beginner.
Oooh! Oooh! This is is an easy one - can I take it?
:
From the GNU General Public License
1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty; and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License along with the Program. (emphasis mine)
Granted, this applies to the distribution of copyrighted material, not simple use. I would assume that, having received GPL'd code, you could remove all comments in your local storage medium before your own personal use -- so it's not an answer in the spirit of your question, but an important consideration nonetheless.
and take government control out of the picture. I agree wholeheartedly that email should never become a revenue source for any government or organization.
If you want to make micropayments the vehicle to stem the tide of spam, go ahead, but let the recipient receive the payment.
Now I get it. Took me three tries - I was interpreting your reply literally, as in "tcsh is dumb"
Don't know that I've ever seen a phonetic attempt at the rimshot before.
I really thought that the first post was sarcarstic, until I read the hordes of "Me Too" replies that followed. Call me crazy, but the last thing I want is Clippy monitoring my typing in tcsh.
Cool! Now Mac users are Republicans by default. I didn't know that.
I cut my teeth at the DOS prompt. As a *nix user for the past five years, I now understand the power of scripting that can't be accomplished in a GUI, and isn't possible in a
Using iTunes to rip an audio CD results in a folder full of MP3 files. DRM-free MP3 files. Do with them what you wish. Push them to your iPod and it'll play those same MP3 files. It's only the tunes you download from iTMS that are AAC encoded.
We used to travel to the moon, but we don't any more.
We used to drive 400 horsepower cars, but we don't any more.
Not that I'm nostalgic, or anything...
Consumers will find a way to get what they want. Right now, consumers want to experience entertainment on their own time, on their own terms.
Quoth the article: "But the entertainment industry does not want digitally enhanced "high-value" entertainment sent free over the air to be easily copied and distributed on the Internet. "
Why does the ??AA see such a stark difference between two free modes of distribution? Control. Note that this does not line up with consumer preference.
"Now the [FCC] agency is addressing how programming can be protected so that it cannot be easily copied and sent around the Internet, undermining the lucrative aftermarket for videos and television syndication."
I'd be interested in knowing what Fox would tell me my eyeballs are worth for one episode of "24". Is it $1.00? Less? If Fox and made it easy for me to watch that episode on my time, within a week or two of original airing via DVD or download without commercials I'd pay the dollar for the privilege. Over the course of the last month, my wife and I watched the first two seasons of "24" on DVD (via Blockbuster) and paid $48 for the privilege - $1.00 per episode. I don't think that I'm going to watch season 3 "live" on the air -- but I'd probably pay $4.00 to watch the first four episodes sometime next month.
But... Fox won't make this available for another ten months, at least. I don't want to wait that long. So I'll use TiVo and get (almost) the same result (but for loss of quality) with no additional revenue to Fox. And this ignores, of course, the other half-dozen quality shows on broadcast TV that will NEVER be offered on DVD, or online.
Microsoft, at least, has it right in their slogan, "Where do you want to go today?" The ??AA, in effect, is saying "Here's what you're going to consume today." Consumers have choices now, and we're sick of it. When the ??AA wake up and start providing consumers what they really want, we'll be happier, and they'll profit as well.
OnStar (or any other in-car wireless communication) + GPS + central monitoring service = Private sector traffic management system.
Don't alter the roadways when you can put the technology in the vehicle, and get the user to pay for it. If the automakers would link my dashboard GPS with wireless communication, I would have:
Automatic routing around construction and traffic
Live weather radar (am I driving into snow?)
Monitoring my teenage daughter's driving habits
Directions to the closest theater screening "Texas Chainsaw Massacre"
I'd pay for the equipment up front, and I'd pay a monthly service fee as well. With enough subscribers (5% of the traffic on the road?) there would be a clear traffic pattern revealed to central monitoring.
Stop wasting tax dollars, and let the consumers pay for their convenience.
I think you're missing the point of "MSFreePC". I have a PC at home, and it's MSFree. The PC itself cost me hundreds, but the OS and application software are MSFree.
California's
2001 SB97 reads:
This seems pretty clear to me, but then, as they say, IANAL.