Of the many contributing causes to American violence, I don't think video games are an especially high priority. But neither do I think the possibility can be ignored. These attrocities have to end, and we should all be willing to consider all potential causes. I love video games, but if a thorough and valid scientific inquiry shows a causal or aggravating relationship between violent video games and real-world, violence, then I would be willing to accept restrictions on sales to minors.
I will be insistent that the NRA and other pro-gun groups contribute constructively to the debate and possible solutions, and be willing to compromise, and gamers need to be part of the conversation too.
By all means, let's not over react, and knee-jerk reactions are not helpful, on either side of the question. But there are no sacred cows.
Setting aside the question about patens for a moment, your argument would apply to any contract. I mean, it is in the end a court that enforces a contract. Surely you don't intend for the terms of all contracts to be public, do you?
I'm curious as to how they decided what is porn in the first place, and how much of their own biases leaked into what they decided constituted a "search for porn."
For most organizations, especially non-technical organizations, the availability of source code is really irrelevant. One might argue that they *could* change things if they needed to, but as a practical matter they really can't. Organizations whose mission includes software development are certainly capable of taking advantage of free and open licenses.
But it sounds like the bottom line is that, in the end, they found Windows better for them than Linux. You certainly have to admire their willingness to try something outside the norm, however. IT wouldn't have made much difference, I suspect, if Windows were open source and Linux were proprietary.
Unless you're a software development organization, source availability per se is really not a useful criterion upon which to make an IT decision.
But this is Slashdot, so, you know, it must be a conspiracy.
From Wikipedia on the Fairness docrine: "In August 1987, the FCC abolished the doctrine by a 4-0 vote, in the Syracuse Peace Council decision, which was upheld by a different panel of the Appeals Court for the D.C. Circuit in February 1989.[14] The FCC also suggested that because of the many media voices in the marketplace, the doctrine be deemed unconstitutional..."
I agree that the fairness doctrine was bad, for many of the reasons you say and others. But its been dead for 23 years. This particular bogeyman is not out to get you.
With all due respect, fuck your deep breath. I know that the entire budget of the NSF won;t be cut, even under the most conspiratorial scenarios.
The issue here is one of priorities. Cutting science *first* is like eating your seed corn.
The dumb fuck, anti-intellectual, knuckle-dragging, bible thumping horse's asses leading the GOP aren't qualified to judge a worthy science project, but they sure as hell ought to know that their even dumber followers are even less qualified.
This is not about the budget. This is about creating the perception of being tough by finding some projects that very few non-scientists can understand, and railing against it. Damn the consequences!
I'll bet Sarah Palin will find some research on fruit flies and try to gut that.
We're not saying that it DID bomb. We're just asking the question -- did it bomb? Based on an unconfirmed, context free number measured against an unspecific post facto metric.
Did someone launch a missle at Los Angeles? 'Cause, you know, someone saw a contrail. And Obama's trip to India -- it cost $200M a day. Is Obama a secret muslim?
There are now four pretty good mobile operating systems to choose from, backed by companies with different design and development philosophies, and different strategies competing for an exploding market. And its obvious that all four companies are in it to win.
Windows Phone, whetever else it may be, is not a knock off of iPhone and is not a fractured ecosystem like Android.
Of all the secrets that the government keeps, why is THIS one public? Why is ANYTHING having to do with the status of nuclear weapons public? WTF? There are a few things that SHOULD be secret.
FTA, "Obviously, you only need to do this if you checked you are indeed running the backdoored version, as mentioned above."
A skilled attacker will have replaced md5sum so that it returns the hash that corresponds to the good version, and in general installed a rootkit. The remediation advice they provide is broken.
If you have installed the affected software, you should probably assume you are owned, regardless of what any local tests tell you.
Practice Active Listening from day one, and be humble about your own skills and abilities. Yes, you're smart. But over the years as you learn more you will discover that you know less and less, until you are absolutely confident that you know nothing.
You will find some people who do not seem to be very smart, but they are there for a reason. Dismiss them at your peril. Instead, try to learn from them.
Active listening will help you learn faster, gain respect among your colleagues, avoid misunderstandings, and build valuable relationships quickly.
NoSQL and "reliable" don't go together. Implementing a safety system in which integrity is critical with NoSQL would be a significant mistake. While it may be that the data doesn't have to be relational, as another poster commented it surely does need to be ACID.
Cross-site request forgery or Cross-site scripting may be the culprit, which of course renders the browser mostly irrelevant, except to the extent that modern browsers, IE8 included, have a certain degree of protection against badly-implemented web sites.
Am I missing something, or is this the stupidest idea on slashdot all year long?
How do they propose to patch the software? Or are they going to distribute perfect software on the first try?
I realize of course that you can't persist the malware (leaving aside the possibility of modifications to the firware of various peripherals or a 'Deep Door' style attack), but that's hardly all that matters. And even still, you could achieve the results better by using a VM with automatic disk-undo.
This is really a vulnerability in any meaningful sense of the word. Rather, this means that certain advanced protections that Windows uses are less effective in a Virtual PC. Microsoft is actually in a leading postion when it comes to memory protection features as compared to anyone this side of OpenBSD.
What isn't someone issuing an "advisory" that the MacOS implementation of things like GS, ALSR, early-heap-termination and SafeSEH are either weak or nonexistent?
ASLR could use more entropy. Stack coookies could be present in every function, instead of just some. Every defense can be improved, and I don't think Microsoft has ever claimed that ASLR or GS is a reason NOT to produce a patch.
IMHO, Microsoft is completely correct to not issue a bulletin for this since that is an indication of a severe issue. And Core is free to make the issue known publically as well, and people can decide for themselves. But the Slashdot title is midleading at best.
Its an interesting estimate, but I don't buy the argument for favorable tax treatment for "social welfare." For many companies, open source is one side of a many-sided business model: i.e., they're making their money somewhere else. Giving special tax treatment for such a thing would be similar to giving Adobe special tax treatment for Adobe Reader, or AT&T for giving away free cell phone. The freebie is a necessary for them to build a profitable market elsewhere.
Coverity asks, “would you like to know about 0day defects months in advance?” They ask that to promote their work in scanning open source projects for security vulnerabilities. Quoting from Coverity’s 2009 report:
“In January 2006, Coverity, Inc., was awarded a contract from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security [] to improve the security and quality of open source software[] Since 2006 [Coverity] scanned over 60 million unique lines of code on a recurring basis from more than 280 open source popular source projects.”
[...]
"You might argue that the mere fact that Coverity can do this work is just another set of eyeballs. But I reject that argument entirely. This is a government subsidy to go do some hard and useful work, not a magic property of the fact that these are open source projects. The real beneficiaries of the subsidy are not Coverity (who is providing a fine service), but other companies whose business model is primarily about services and not software.
We think that’s great. The work that Coverity is doing falls into a category of analysis known as “static analysis,” which Coverity defines as “a set of techniques for examining a software system and making determinations about what its behavior will be at run time, using information collected without running the code.” Microsoft and the SDL are big proponents of static analysis. "
From TFA: "Well, I can't prove it based solely on the Event Viewer logs, but it's safe to say the search service is the prime suspect." He noticed this warning when the PC booted up, and looked through the logs and saw a service with the word "search" in it, that started up at the same time. Guess what? Services start at bootup.
You can hate Microsoft all you like, but the author MADE THIS UP based on his uninformed speculation.
Slashdot Mirror
Of the many contributing causes to American violence, I don't think video games are an especially high priority. But neither do I think the possibility can be ignored. These attrocities have to end, and we should all be willing to consider all potential causes. I love video games, but if a thorough and valid scientific inquiry shows a causal or aggravating relationship between violent video games and real-world, violence, then I would be willing to accept restrictions on sales to minors.
I will be insistent that the NRA and other pro-gun groups contribute constructively to the debate and possible solutions, and be willing to compromise, and gamers need to be part of the conversation too.
By all means, let's not over react, and knee-jerk reactions are not helpful, on either side of the question. But there are no sacred cows.
I hope this is sarcasm. Otherwise, you give libertarianism a bad name. Specifically, "dumb ass philosophy with no connection to reality."
Setting aside the question about patens for a moment, your argument would apply to any contract. I mean, it is in the end a court that enforces a contract. Surely you don't intend for the terms of all contracts to be public, do you?
Competitors Compete. Film at 11.
I'm curious as to how they decided what is porn in the first place, and how much of their own biases leaked into what they decided constituted a "search for porn."
For most organizations, especially non-technical organizations, the availability of source code is really irrelevant. One might argue that they *could* change things if they needed to, but as a practical matter they really can't. Organizations whose mission includes software development are certainly capable of taking advantage of free and open licenses.
But it sounds like the bottom line is that, in the end, they found Windows better for them than Linux. You certainly have to admire their willingness to try something outside the norm, however. IT wouldn't have made much difference, I suspect, if Windows were open source and Linux were proprietary.
Unless you're a software development organization, source availability per se is really not a useful criterion upon which to make an IT decision.
But this is Slashdot, so, you know, it must be a conspiracy.
Prop that strawman up.
From Wikipedia on the Fairness docrine: "In August 1987, the FCC abolished the doctrine by a 4-0 vote, in the Syracuse Peace Council decision, which was upheld by a different panel of the Appeals Court for the D.C. Circuit in February 1989.[14] The FCC also suggested that because of the many media voices in the marketplace, the doctrine be deemed unconstitutional..."
I agree that the fairness doctrine was bad, for many of the reasons you say and others. But its been dead for 23 years. This particular bogeyman is not out to get you.
With all due respect, fuck your deep breath. I know that the entire budget of the NSF won;t be cut, even under the most conspiratorial scenarios.
The issue here is one of priorities. Cutting science *first* is like eating your seed corn.
The dumb fuck, anti-intellectual, knuckle-dragging, bible thumping horse's asses leading the GOP aren't qualified to judge a worthy science project, but they sure as hell ought to know that their even dumber followers are even less qualified.
This is not about the budget. This is about creating the perception of being tough by finding some projects that very few non-scientists can understand, and railing against it. Damn the consequences!
I'll bet Sarah Palin will find some research on fruit flies and try to gut that.
Jebus but these fuckers are stoopid!
We're not saying that it DID bomb. We're just asking the question -- did it bomb? Based on an unconfirmed, context free number measured against an unspecific post facto metric.
Did someone launch a missle at Los Angeles? 'Cause, you know, someone saw a contrail. And Obama's trip to India -- it cost $200M a day. Is Obama a secret muslim?
There are now four pretty good mobile operating systems to choose from, backed by companies with different design and development philosophies, and different strategies competing for an exploding market. And its obvious that all four companies are in it to win.
Windows Phone, whetever else it may be, is not a knock off of iPhone and is not a fractured ecosystem like Android.
I say, bring on the party.
This is modded "insightful?" :-) I suspect the original poster had tongue firmly implanted in cheek.
Of all the secrets that the government keeps, why is THIS one public? Why is ANYTHING having to do with the status of nuclear weapons public? WTF? There are a few things that SHOULD be secret.
Yeah, LiveCD is an option if you have it.
Yes, of course. Because its not even conceivable that the intruder has any local exploits.
Well, perhaps it was an inside job...
FTA, "Obviously, you only need to do this if you checked you are indeed running the backdoored version, as mentioned above."
A skilled attacker will have replaced md5sum so that it returns the hash that corresponds to the good version, and in general installed a rootkit. The remediation advice they provide is broken.
If you have installed the affected software, you should probably assume you are owned, regardless of what any local tests tell you.
There's a nice handy place for all of Microsoft's express editions
http://www.microsoft.com/express/
Practice Active Listening from day one, and be humble about your own skills and abilities. Yes, you're smart. But over the years as you learn more you will discover that you know less and less, until you are absolutely confident that you know nothing.
You will find some people who do not seem to be very smart, but they are there for a reason. Dismiss them at your peril. Instead, try to learn from them.
Active listening will help you learn faster, gain respect among your colleagues, avoid misunderstandings, and build valuable relationships quickly.
NoSQL and "reliable" don't go together. Implementing a safety system in which integrity is critical with NoSQL would be a significant mistake. While it may be that the data doesn't have to be relational, as another poster commented it surely does need to be ACID.
Cross-site request forgery or Cross-site scripting may be the culprit, which of course renders the browser mostly irrelevant, except to the extent that modern browsers, IE8 included, have a certain degree of protection against badly-implemented web sites.
Am I missing something, or is this the stupidest idea on slashdot all year long?
How do they propose to patch the software? Or are they going to distribute perfect software on the first try?
I realize of course that you can't persist the malware (leaving aside the possibility of modifications to the firware of various peripherals or a 'Deep Door' style attack), but that's hardly all that matters. And even still, you could achieve the results better by using a VM with automatic disk-undo.
This is really a vulnerability in any meaningful sense of the word. Rather, this means that certain advanced protections that Windows uses are less effective in a Virtual PC. Microsoft is actually in a leading postion when it comes to memory protection features as compared to anyone this side of OpenBSD.
What isn't someone issuing an "advisory" that the MacOS implementation of things like GS, ALSR, early-heap-termination and SafeSEH are either weak or nonexistent?
ASLR could use more entropy. Stack coookies could be present in every function, instead of just some. Every defense can be improved, and I don't think Microsoft has ever claimed that ASLR or GS is a reason NOT to produce a patch.
IMHO, Microsoft is completely correct to not issue a bulletin for this since that is an indication of a severe issue. And Core is free to make the issue known publically as well, and people can decide for themselves. But the Slashdot title is midleading at best.
Its an interesting estimate, but I don't buy the argument for favorable tax treatment for "social welfare." For many companies, open source is one side of a many-sided business model: i.e., they're making their money somewhere else. Giving special tax treatment for such a thing would be similar to giving Adobe special tax treatment for Adobe Reader, or AT&T for giving away free cell phone. The freebie is a necessary for them to build a profitable market elsewhere.
FTA ....
Coverity asks, “would you like to know about 0day defects months in advance?” They ask that to promote their work in scanning open source projects for security vulnerabilities. Quoting from Coverity’s 2009 report:
“In January 2006, Coverity, Inc., was awarded a contract from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security [] to improve the security and quality of open source software[] Since 2006 [Coverity] scanned over 60 million unique lines of code on a recurring basis from more than 280 open source popular source projects.”
[...]
"You might argue that the mere fact that Coverity can do this work is just another set of eyeballs. But I reject that argument entirely. This is a government subsidy to go do some hard and useful work, not a magic property of the fact that these are open source projects. The real beneficiaries of the subsidy are not Coverity (who is providing a fine service), but other companies whose business model is primarily about services and not software.
We think that’s great. The work that Coverity is doing falls into a category of analysis known as “static analysis,” which Coverity defines as “a set of techniques for examining a software system and making determinations about what its behavior will be at run time, using information collected without running the code.” Microsoft and the SDL are big proponents of static analysis. "
I read the whole article, and its pure unadulterated speculation with a provocative headline.
From TFA: "Well, I can't prove it based solely on the Event Viewer logs, but it's safe to say the search service is the prime suspect." He noticed this warning when the PC booted up, and looked through the logs and saw a service with the word "search" in it, that started up at the same time. Guess what? Services start at bootup.
You can hate Microsoft all you like, but the author MADE THIS UP based on his uninformed speculation.