non-intrusive billboard-style advertising, what's the problem again?
we've had corporate logos and such in games for YEARS, the fact that it's now paid advertising merely means more funding to create better games, and I'll bet you it's a hell of a lot more effective than ad banners, and it doesn't eat up bandwidth, and again, it's non-intrusive, and infact could add another element to the game... I mean say you've got a bright red coke sign, if your opponent in black is standing right infront of it, you've got a perfect target, right? (actually this is a real example... there's a bright red sign in the Action Quake2 map urban, and people are constantly hooking on to it on the server I play on and giving me a perfect target)
For starters you're comparing apples and oranges, MS-DOS hasn't been an "active" operating system for at least 3 years, and as such hasn't kept up with the changing computer industry.
Second, MS-DOS does indeed meet all the criteria I laid down in one way or another, all versions of windows up to 95 were really not much more than a shell sitting on top of DOS, even win95, 98, and ME are technicaly shell's sitting on top of DOS, so DOS does posess a GUI
DOS can connect to the internet and run a web browser, an FTP client, a telnet client, etc.
Until I had someone slap me upside the head with a reality check, I was actually under the impression that BSD in general and FreeBSD in particular was an OS with its own merits that I didn't belive was designed to be used as a desktop OS on a single-user machine, but rather was really only good for multi-user machines as part of a wider network, or as a server.
However I certainly wasn't under the impression that it was specificaly a server OS, or was ONLY suitable for one or two specific applications, but rather that it wouldn't be worth it for someone who is just interested in having a stable desktop OS to setup on their PC.
Of course now I have FreeBSD installed on my system and am slowly working towards it being a day-to-day OS, though it's still a ways off, primary thing keeping me back is lack of a stable, fast browser (honestly, IE is faster and more stable in Win2k than Netscape, Mozilla, and Opera have ever been in ANY OS for me), and lack of an email client that I like the interface of (call me crazy but I prefer the OE interface to anything I've yet seen in the *nix world, and other interfaces drive me NUTS)
A desktop operating system is relatively easy to define as well, though it is a bit more complex than defining a server OS.
A desktop OS can essentialy be defined as:
Posessing a GUI (such that if you sit a competant person down infront of it that isn't scared of technology, they'll probably be able to acomplish SOMETHING)
Posesses the ability to connect to the internet and run various internet applications (web browser, FTP client, telnet client)
Can be used for gaming (while *n*x is still behind in this field mostly due to lack of acceptance from game developers, FreeBSD and GNU/Linux can still be used for gaming)
Can be used to run a word proccessor/spreadsheet/etc. (in the manner of StarOffice etc.)
that's essentialy all I would consider neccisary to call something a "Desktop" OS...
now, if you want an OS that a person who is essentialy a newbie could use day to day without constantly needing outside help, about the only thing that could come close in the *n*x-type world right now is Mandrake Linux, though a properly setup FreeBSD system is quite capable of being an average-day-to-day OS, but I garuntee you a newbie is going to need a *LOT* of outside help for quite some time before it becomes properly set up, and by the time that happens, he'll no longer be a newbie.
apparently they still don't get it
they're saying it's the GPL specificaly that's the threat because it requiers that if you use GPL'd code in your program, you must release the source to the program in its entirety
I do wonder why they couldn't simply write their own code instead of stealing someone elses and thus not be constrained by the GPL? HEEEELLLLLOOOOOOO, Earth To Microsoft, This Is LOGIC SPEAKING.
There should be prior art evidence all over the place, this sort of thing is hardly a "new" idea, nor one that Symantec first used... hell, simple cracks for executable programs could, if stretched, be called an "incrimental update" and thus "prior art".
I'd always thought Symantec was a good company, until now... *sigh*
Secure authenticated? that might be a bit much to ask.... however...
I'm speaking from only a general knowledge here, I'm not an expert on kernel hacking or anything, but possibly what could be done is this...
if you have multipul servers at the location, prehaps they could be connected via a serial port, and you could login to the other server that ISN'T completely ****ed up, and use the serial link? wether or not this will itself requier kernel patches I do not know, as I've never made use of a "serial console" in any way... but it seems a lot easier and probably more likely to happen than a secure authenticated method right to the locked server
A vulnerability is in the wild the INSTANT source code or a binary is avalible that contains it, I shouldn't have to wait for this group to decide to release the information publicly before I can secure MY systems against it.
I don't consider root-level nameserver operators any more deserving of patches and alerts than anyone else, hell my mother is just as deserving of alerts as they are.
As a general Geek who regularly screws around with things such as BIND and DNS servers, I can't for the life of me comprehend how something like this could possibly be BENIFICIAL.
I know the reasons for it, prevents massive waves of "cyber-crime" when a hole is discovered and announced, but it's completely absurd that I can't be made aware of security holes in something simply because I'm not "important" enough to them.
It's about time a company figured out how you fight crackers that are pissing them off, THIS is how you do it.
You don't run around suing everybody, you get your own programmers to make better technology that isn't so easily bypassed.
Of course the MPAA can ignore the previous message...
not *entirely* sure where that response came from... but ok...
I'm defining "OS" as the core of the system... the kernel, not the components of the rest of the system... I don't like the idea of an OS written in C++ at all (games and such are another matter), but I like the idea of *anything* written in java even less
I dare say I'm quite relieved at this, it means less support for Java throughout the industry, and nothing could be better.
Java is slow, worthless, and I'd rather see an OS written in C++ than any application written in Java.
Actually, as a geek/hacker/whatever you care to call me (why is it the media portrays "hacking" as always attempting to break into a system without authorization from the owner? ok ok I got off the point), I don't want a girlfriend, I want a room full of computers and other electronic gadgets... of course a robot to lift that giant server tower might be nice...
You misunderstand me, I didn't say it was *the* most important peice of code, I said it was probably *one of* the most important peices of code... not *the* most important peice
I didn't say it WOULD cause anything disasterous, and yes I know it would probably take many years before it had any significant effect, I'm just saying I'm more comfortable with them testing it on a comet that is much less likely to have any effect on us whatsoever than on Luna.
It's one of those "it's possible but so highly improbable that it's probably not worth worrying about but we might as well play it somewhat safe anyway"
Slashdot Mirror
non-intrusive billboard-style advertising, what's the problem again?
we've had corporate logos and such in games for YEARS, the fact that it's now paid advertising merely means more funding to create better games, and I'll bet you it's a hell of a lot more effective than ad banners, and it doesn't eat up bandwidth, and again, it's non-intrusive, and infact could add another element to the game... I mean say you've got a bright red coke sign, if your opponent in black is standing right infront of it, you've got a perfect target, right? (actually this is a real example... there's a bright red sign in the Action Quake2 map urban, and people are constantly hooking on to it on the server I play on and giving me a perfect target)
For starters you're comparing apples and oranges, MS-DOS hasn't been an "active" operating system for at least 3 years, and as such hasn't kept up with the changing computer industry.
Second, MS-DOS does indeed meet all the criteria I laid down in one way or another, all versions of windows up to 95 were really not much more than a shell sitting on top of DOS, even win95, 98, and ME are technicaly shell's sitting on top of DOS, so DOS does posess a GUI
DOS can connect to the internet and run a web browser, an FTP client, a telnet client, etc.
DOS can be used for gaming
DOS can be used to run a word processor
now, where did I say MS-DOS wasn't a desktop OS?
Until I had someone slap me upside the head with a reality check, I was actually under the impression that BSD in general and FreeBSD in particular was an OS with its own merits that I didn't belive was designed to be used as a desktop OS on a single-user machine, but rather was really only good for multi-user machines as part of a wider network, or as a server.
However I certainly wasn't under the impression that it was specificaly a server OS, or was ONLY suitable for one or two specific applications, but rather that it wouldn't be worth it for someone who is just interested in having a stable desktop OS to setup on their PC.
Of course now I have FreeBSD installed on my system and am slowly working towards it being a day-to-day OS, though it's still a ways off, primary thing keeping me back is lack of a stable, fast browser (honestly, IE is faster and more stable in Win2k than Netscape, Mozilla, and Opera have ever been in ANY OS for me), and lack of an email client that I like the interface of (call me crazy but I prefer the OE interface to anything I've yet seen in the *nix world, and other interfaces drive me NUTS)
A desktop operating system is relatively easy to define as well, though it is a bit more complex than defining a server OS.
A desktop OS can essentialy be defined as:
Posessing a GUI (such that if you sit a competant person down infront of it that isn't scared of technology, they'll probably be able to acomplish SOMETHING)
Posesses the ability to connect to the internet and run various internet applications (web browser, FTP client, telnet client)
Can be used for gaming (while *n*x is still behind in this field mostly due to lack of acceptance from game developers, FreeBSD and GNU/Linux can still be used for gaming)
Can be used to run a word proccessor/spreadsheet/etc. (in the manner of StarOffice etc.)
that's essentialy all I would consider neccisary to call something a "Desktop" OS...
now, if you want an OS that a person who is essentialy a newbie could use day to day without constantly needing outside help, about the only thing that could come close in the *n*x-type world right now is Mandrake Linux, though a properly setup FreeBSD system is quite capable of being an average-day-to-day OS, but I garuntee you a newbie is going to need a *LOT* of outside help for quite some time before it becomes properly set up, and by the time that happens, he'll no longer be a newbie.
Just as an aside, UPS and FedEx use these too, you could try asking them who their vendor is.
Free Software Foundation with, I'd imagine, the backing of a number of companies and individuals.
apparently they still don't get it
they're saying it's the GPL specificaly that's the threat because it requiers that if you use GPL'd code in your program, you must release the source to the program in its entirety
I do wonder why they couldn't simply write their own code instead of stealing someone elses and thus not be constrained by the GPL? HEEEELLLLLOOOOOOO, Earth To Microsoft, This Is LOGIC SPEAKING.
There should be prior art evidence all over the place, this sort of thing is hardly a "new" idea, nor one that Symantec first used... hell, simple cracks for executable programs could, if stretched, be called an "incrimental update" and thus "prior art".
I'd always thought Symantec was a good company, until now... *sigh*
Secure authenticated? that might be a bit much to ask.... however...
I'm speaking from only a general knowledge here, I'm not an expert on kernel hacking or anything, but possibly what could be done is this...
if you have multipul servers at the location, prehaps they could be connected via a serial port, and you could login to the other server that ISN'T completely ****ed up, and use the serial link? wether or not this will itself requier kernel patches I do not know, as I've never made use of a "serial console" in any way... but it seems a lot easier and probably more likely to happen than a secure authenticated method right to the locked server
just my $.02
A vulnerability is in the wild the INSTANT source code or a binary is avalible that contains it, I shouldn't have to wait for this group to decide to release the information publicly before I can secure MY systems against it.
I don't consider root-level nameserver operators any more deserving of patches and alerts than anyone else, hell my mother is just as deserving of alerts as they are.
As a general Geek who regularly screws around with things such as BIND and DNS servers, I can't for the life of me comprehend how something like this could possibly be BENIFICIAL.
I know the reasons for it, prevents massive waves of "cyber-crime" when a hole is discovered and announced, but it's completely absurd that I can't be made aware of security holes in something simply because I'm not "important" enough to them.
http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/ISP-Setup-RedHat-HOW TO.html
a little poking around can go a long way.
Than what the best commercials are, is just how much the halftime show cost... EEP!
Look at the page, it wasn't even filed until mid-1998, and I know I saw it in widespread use LONG before then.
It's about time a company figured out how you fight crackers that are pissing them off, THIS is how you do it.
You don't run around suing everybody, you get your own programmers to make better technology that isn't so easily bypassed.
Of course the MPAA can ignore the previous message...
not *entirely* sure where that response came from... but ok...
I'm defining "OS" as the core of the system... the kernel, not the components of the rest of the system... I don't like the idea of an OS written in C++ at all (games and such are another matter), but I like the idea of *anything* written in java even less
I dare say I'm quite relieved at this, it means less support for Java throughout the industry, and nothing could be better.
Java is slow, worthless, and I'd rather see an OS written in C++ than any application written in Java.
Humans have learned, and have fluently spoken, Klingon, thus it is a perfectly acceptable example.
Klingon is an *actual* language created by Gene Roddenberry, so it's perfectly acceptable to use it as an example.
I can't say I'm suprised... Microsoft probably has made use of GCC at some point for R&D.
Actually, as a geek/hacker/whatever you care to call me (why is it the media portrays "hacking" as always attempting to break into a system without authorization from the owner? ok ok I got off the point), I don't want a girlfriend, I want a room full of computers and other electronic gadgets... of course a robot to lift that giant server tower might be nice...
Sorry, I've had a string of discussions over the past few days where nobody understood what anyone else was saying very well :)
Oh well... I guess it's understandable... we probably won't see AMD really breaking into server marketplace untill SMP boards make it onto the market.
You misunderstand me, I didn't say it was *the* most important peice of code, I said it was probably *one of* the most important peices of code... not *the* most important peice
I didn't say it WOULD cause anything disasterous, and yes I know it would probably take many years before it had any significant effect, I'm just saying I'm more comfortable with them testing it on a comet that is much less likely to have any effect on us whatsoever than on Luna.
It's one of those "it's possible but so highly improbable that it's probably not worth worrying about but we might as well play it somewhat safe anyway"