Isn't this true in pro sports- the guys who garner competing offers generally make a lot... and so on. and so on...
The only place this isn't true is with unionized places....
Actors, Professional football (U.S.) players, Major League Baseball players, NHL Hockey Players, and Professional basketball players are all unionized. Part of why salaries in those industries make up about 50% of expenses, as opposed to golf's much smaller percentage (I can't remember off the top of my head, but 15-20% is a guestimate.)
So your exception is overly broad. Also, Where you graduate from law school appears to have more to do with your first years salary than your class rank. (this is partially because Columbia specializes in the well paying area of corporate law, while Hastings specializes in public policy law, that pays comparatively little. rather than people looking at the name of school)
One reason some developers dislike the BSD license is the story (you can find several examples if you feel like looking) of someone releasing a program under a BSD style license, someone else releasing a modified binary with no source and the original developer getting support requests that he/she cannot help with.
The GPL also has this to a lesser degree, which results in things like QMail, which has a license that says you cannot distribute binaries that are not compiled from pristine sources.
BSD is about freedom for the developer, GPL is about freedom for the end user (No vendor lock in).
Your preference is probably a matter of which you spend more time doing. Integrating software to perform a task (typical busines), or writing software to do a task (typical software business).
The GPL is a remarkably effective, though imperfect, solution to bad behavior.
NC was looking to build a waste-disposal site for low-level nuclear waste (generally stuff like rubber gloves used in medical procedures involving radiation or x-ray).
The radioactivity can range from just above background levels found in nature to very highly radioactive in certain cases such as parts from inside the reactor vessel in a nuclear power plant.
Emphasis added.
Basically, you can't dispose of medical waste without agreeing to dispose of nuclear power waste. A completely messed up situation.
"Short of changes in the law in Congress, we may be limited about what we can do in this area," U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said.
Gonzales told the station he can't use the laws now on the books to shut down Yahoo!'s child sex site. But back in 2002, the station broke the story when federal officials shut down a Web site called "Candyman" with those existing laws.
The "Candyman" site was geared only toward trading child sex pictures and stories, just like the Yahoo! rooms.
Call me cynical but I was suprised to find out that Yahoo! had given a mere $10,000 to the Republican National Committe, and an equal amount to the Democratice National Committe.
Personally, I suspected larger more frequent donations were required to keep the current administration paid off.
Unless, Alberto Gonzales is allowing Kiddie Porn to further his own political agenda. Personally, I hope that the current administration is just cheap. The alternative of the Bush administration not prosecuting kiddie porn because it will make a new bill easier to get passed,... do I even need to go on?
I started using FreeBSD three weeks ago on my desktop at work. Every day I use it I become more and more impressed by it, the integrated userland and kernel are like a breath of fresh air compared to linux.
Let me know how great FreeBSD as a workstation is when portupgrade fails. (I'm writing this from a FreeBSD workstation running Gnome 2.10.1)
FreeBSD with Gnome is nowhere near as integrated as Gnome in Debian. The ports collection is really nice, but quality control is far lower then that of Debians quality control, which admittedly is not as high as the base FreeBSD, but the base FreeBSD distribution is not really useful for anything other than a mail server or gateway.
FreeBSD has a great ip stack is 5.x is really responsive under load, and the quality of the base system is wonderful. The integration of userland and kernel is mostly a myth. There are good reasons to use FreeBSD integrated userland and kernel is not one of them. If anything, that is a reason to use debian. (and why debian releases take years, because most current userland apps are not worthy of a 1.0 designation. (Gnome, KDE, Mozilla, Openoffice.org, and Xfree86 being noteworthy examples of beta/alpha software being notable examples.)
Personally I like the ease of locking down a FreeBSD box. It is one of the easiest systems to lock down to the point of comfortably putting it on the net without a firewall, (and then add the firewall for depth,) and for control of what is on your machine. FreeBSD releases live much longer than most other distributions FreeBSD 4.8 is on Patch 32 and still maintained by the users, even though it dropped off official support long ago. FreeBSD also has many tuning options for tweaking your system to your hardware a la gentoo. nfs seems to work better under FreeBSD than under Linux. All great things but the integrated userland kernel is a myth.
Corp Watch has an article that has a couple of interesting points about water in India and World Environment day's premire sponsor, Coke
All of the cities in India that have a Coke plant blame part of their water shortage on Coke.
Coke in India has toxins in it.
Coke's defence is, well it is a drought, and the USDA doesn't have a problem with what we are selling. They have never challenged (to the best of my research) the fact that their is lead in the soft drinks, just the fact that it is unsafe
Coke is trucking water into the villages that it has plants, as a good will gesture
Coke offered Coke as fertilizer to farmers, but it turned out to have lead in it that made the land unfit for farming.
How can we "use up" the earth's water? It all remains here doesn't it?
We don't use up the water. We contaminate it. and while extracting plutonium from water is fairly stright forward, it is very expensive due to the fact that you really do have to get essentially all of it not 99% of it.
Most farmers vote on a single issue. Water rights.
So yes we will not run out of water, but we may well wind up with far less potable water than there is demand for.
As a bit of indirectg evidence that Humans are the problem. The only place on the planet that has a healthy eco system of large mammals is in the areas of Cambodia that have so many land mines that pochers refuse to go, and large crocs only exist in the war torn regions of Africa.
The statement that there are enough resources for humans, falls apart if you asume that we are to be living in an ecosystem and not trying to manufacture everything we need.
Back to water. Have you noticed the number of public drinking fountains lately? They were everywhere thirty years ago. Now They are almost extinct. Do you pay a water bill? Have you pulled on up from twenty years ago?
I am not someone who is anti-development. 500,000 people are going to move to California next year, and I am one of those lobbying that we should be building housing for these people, and that the new housing should be near the city centers.
Yes, many of the Indians that are objecting to Coke are Marxists, and Coke is doing a lot to sanitize thier image. But, that does not change the fact that their is a big fight over potable water, indicating the potable water is indicating that it is a limited resource.
I had a small problem, but if I remember correctly it was something like evolution and evolution-server were in a funky state in sid, I think I solved the problem by uninstalling evolution and then installing gnome which reinstalled evolution.
I might not have had to do that if I had used apt-get dist-upgrade instead of apt-get upgrade.
But I'm not sure, I do remember that the whole proces was about two hours, including download time (dsl at 1.5k download in the United States).
Having just migrated from Ubuntu to sid I was very supprised at how well this went.
Ubuntu has upped the version of each package from the debian version by "ubuntu" this means that the next package compiled from a more recent version will replace it. It seems to follow debian policy as well.
This is a far cry from Knoppix, which I personally wish would remove the install to hard disk option. Knoppix is so far from debian in versioning that upgrading to debian is a horrific pain (there was a base package that had it's version promoted from 0.2.x to 2.x so when 0.2.78 comes out it doesn't get installed. I can't remember the package, but it was a core, or almost core package.
That said, I wouldn't develop from Ubuntu, but from sid, as Ubuntu is a fork that may or may not get it's changes into sid, and has stated that it will sync back with sid. Also sid isn't as nasty as one might think, because there is the experimental branch, that depends on sid, that gets most major changes and first (KDE4, GCC4, Gnome3, etc.)
My uninformed opinion on the matter.
Re:This version doesnt fix some new type of popups
on
Firefox 1.0.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
adblock seems to stop the ad though:-)
I wonder if adblock will ever be idiot proof though, or if it will create a smarter class of users. as you have to learn about wildcards if you wnat to use adblock effectivly.
My company was planing on migrating from NT4 domain / Exchange 5.5 / SQL2000 / Win2k desktops to more platform independant solutions - Novell NDS / Groupwise / mix of SQL2k & PostgreSQL / mix of Linux & W2k desktops
The show stopper? PDA synch with shared calendar used by management. The PDAs synch through outlook. Outlook doesn't talk to Groupwise calendaring. Exchange 2003 requires Active Directory. Having AD makes SQL2005 directory integration an option now...
5 crappy PDAs and not wanting to retrain people on a new mail client is directing our infrastructure....*snif*
So write up a business case for buying 5 new PDAs. Add the cost of the new PDAs to the cost of migration, vs. the cost of all the Microsoft licenses. (If you can budget $2500 for the new PDAs and still have it come out less than the MS licenses and the if one of the new PDAs goes to the person approving the expenditure . ..)
And no, it's not an unfair comparison to put a Linux distro and a Windows install on the same level. Just because the Linux distro ships with more software doesn't matter. If someone buys Mandrake, uses the software it came with, and then gets exploited, that is an exploit of the Mandrake software distribution that they bought with their distro.
But what you are dismissing is the fact that most people do not install every program. I use debian on most of my systems, and I am not hit by the vast majority of flaws, because none of my systems have the software installed on them, other flaws only affect some of my systems, so the fact that a base Debian system is 200 meg and a full install is about 14 Gig (I think, I haven't actually tried to see how much I could cram on to a debian computer.) but if you would say Windows and *n*x Distribution flaws are generally not comparable I would agree. Personally, I think Windows vs. FreeBSD is a fair comparison. both have well known services that are subject to exploit, have everything you need to bet files off the internet, have a base firewall that you chose if you want to install. are somewhat close to the same size. Windows does have a desktop that FreeBSD doesn't have, but you can't get rid of the Windows desktop, even if you never use it, so it seems somewhat reasonable to allow the comparison. And with that comparison, you will see that windows has many more security holes.
Bollocks. The UNIX "filesystem standard" fragments things way more than Windows does. With Windows, you know a few places to look for a malicious program to get rid of it--\Windows, \Windows\System, \Program Files, and so on.
I've found spyware in every directory of friends Windows computers. (including My Photos, every subdirecory in $WINDOWS\, c:\WINDOWS (even though windows was installed in another directory)
Thankfully, most Linux users don't run as root,
This is because most distributions make it a pain to run as root, and it looks like Apples model of disabling root may catch on with Linux distributors, as opposed to the MS Model of, everyone is Administrator, and you can't fully administrate a Windows system with the runas command, although windows 2003 is better in this respect it still has a ways to go.
but there are still PLENTY of ways a program can exploit someone without needing root access.
true but they can be minimized with/home living on it's own partition and mounted noexec,nosuid,nodev. Admittedly this something that not many distributions do, but it is something that most *n*x admin books tell you to do, so it is a fairly common practice.
Believe me, malicious software writers would find a way you haven't thought of to screw people. That's what they do.
But that is what *n*x security people do as well, but we don't need to have a working exploit, just the theoretical possibility to shut the opening. Security models are testable and verifiable (with a lot of work). *n*x models have improved over the years, with the changes argued about in public, (and private) this is one of the main reasons that *n*x sytems are much more resiliant to attack than Windows systems. Windows tosses you some high grade chips and transistors and says "set up your security" while *n*x boxes generally use vastly inferior tools to give you hardened tested security that is not perfect but close to the best that those tools can make it. (not perfect, and there is room for improvement on most *n*x systems, but generally the default security is fairly stout.)
It will be interesting to see which OS gets MACL out of the box first a Linux system, or Windows. Microsoft has had a 15 year head start, but RedHat has been trying to get SeLinux into Fedora for over a year now. If I had to bet, I know where my money would go.
The modern (not 9x based) Windows OS's all support this functionality also, but you really have to be an experienced admin to run a system this way. This is without question a deficiency not in the base OS, but in the policies of software developers (MS is very much included).
I disagree with your conclusions.
Yes, Windows has security tools that are almost as advanced as SeLinux. MACL and such, as opposed to almost all *n*x systems that rely on user, group, world permisions for security.
The problem is that Microsoft ships windows (nt, 2k, xp, and 2003) with a sh*t/non-existant security model
For example, the windows security model, such as it is, allows everyone to write to the root directory, temp files are allowed to be created in $PROGRAM_FILES\ and on and on.
To secure Windows in any meaningful way requires creating a security model, implementing it, and then modifying the permissions of all the programs you install to fit your model, Which, if you document your work, you are well on your way to getting your Ph.D in C.S.
This is not at all reasonable or defencable. The *n*x security model is tough enough to grok, much less need-to-know, Ring-of-trust and other joys, this is the distributors responsibility, this is why Lindows/Linspire was flamed for a bad security model, and many FreeBSD admins view firewalls as a security risk (they make you more vulnerable to some denial of service attacks).
Windows has all the parts, but they aren't put together
"The mothers are going to walk right up to that computer and say, 'My children are dying, what can you do?' They're not going to sit there and like, browse eBay."
No, but she may sell the rug she made last week on Ebay.
Have you priced third world artifacts? Selling to the "First World" directly might help.
Scenario 1: Bug is detected. Full disclosure including exploit.
Result: Mallory uses exploit. Alice releases a bugfix, Bob applies the fix. If it takes Alice and Bob longer than Mallory, the server is compromised.
Alternate, and reasonable results:
Bob desides that he cannot risk compromise and disables the vulnerable software, while waiting for Alice to release a bug fix.
Bob ups intrusion detections for that vulnerablity and is able to respond promptly to Mallory's use of the exploit. Returning the system to its usual state after applying the bug fix from Alice.
Bob desides that it is of no consequence to him if Mallory uses the exploit.
While one may argue against releasing the exploit code immediatly. The idea that the system administrator is to be kept in the dark for her own good is a model that has resulted in securtity bugs languishing in Mozilla and Internet Explorer for months.
The more I see of this debate, the more sympathetic I am to D. J. Bernstein's arguement that programers should be punished for bad code.
This is just the downloads of the Mozilla site(s).
While some of the downloads are duplicate downloads, there are also administrators that download one copy and push it out to hundreds of machines. There are also people like the Debian maintainer that downloaded one copy (maybe two) and then packaged it for thousands of people to download.
Anecdotal evidence seems to point to the redistributors out numbering the duplicate downloaders.
A google.com or msn.com webmaster would probably have much better insights into what is really happening. These people seem not to be talking however.
in any semi-recent gecko based browser (galeon, mozilla, firefox, etc click on this link about:config
There is also files called user.js (optional) and prefs.js in your profile directory that give you all much more configurablity than explorer. (althogh maybe not quite as much as having writen your own browser in VB, for that you may need to edit some.xul files as well.)
By adding a printer, you're conceding that the electronic voting machine may not innately be able to provide complete confidence in the result.
By conceding that the electronic voting machine's results cannot be trusted, you're saying that you have no basis upon which to reject a request for a recount of the paper receipts. In other words, you're back to hand-counting paper votes each time.
That assumes that hand counting ballots is some automatic activity.
Someone has to request the hand count.
In some states, a hand count is triggered anytime an election is within a certain number of votes. In most states a hand count is triggered when the losing party requests a hand count and is willing to pay the costs up front, getting a refund only if the requester becomes elected/nominated/whatever was at stake in the election. This means that only in close elections where the losing party wants to make an issue are there hand counts.
This means that while your argument makes it sound like hand counts would happen all the time, the reality is that hand counts will be as rare as they are today for the same reasons that they are rare today.
. . . so it is impossible to go back and 'recreate the voters intent' as you can with paper/optical scan systems.
That assumes that voter intent is not regulated out of the process.
Most states have drawn up new laws for their electronic voting systems, and these laws tend to lean heavily on technical compliance with the law, and less so with what the voter intended.
Baum v.Arntz is a case that the Supreme Court may take. The director of elections in San Francisco threw out 14% of the votes for Terry Baum because while the voters wrote her name in, they failed to connect the arrow for the optical scanners.
The votes were tossed out based on the new law for the optical scanners, with any other voting system the votes would have counted (at least in California, as the laws currently are). Interestingly, if the voters that did not connect the arrows next to the name they wrote in had torn their ballots, an old section of the elections code that was not rewritten would have come into effect, and the ballots would have been counted.
The moral? The laws that are being implemented with these machines are even scarier than the machines.
You can still do that, for the most part. Just save your documents in Rich Text Format.
RTF is amazingly non-portable, in my experince.
Microsoft RTF seems to be incompatable with openoffice RTF and RTF's generated by xemacs seem to be incompatible with both of those formats, and I seem to recall yet another RTF standard from macwrite or something like that.
Now, it may be that several of those are not RTF and just use the RTF extentsion, but from the end users point of view, I would rather open a DOC file with abiword, than get an rtf file. (abiword is pretty bad at handling DOC files, but I have always been able to read the text even though the formating is almost always wrong.)
If a stock has almost no bounce after the IPO but holds steady, this means that the company going public (the entity that the CEO is supposed to be responsible to not the share holders.) Will have the largest cash reserves. this is one of the reasons that salon.com is still in business. and VA Linux is on the way to oblivion. The IPO for VA Linux was basically a fire sale that gutted the company of millions. The IPO of salon.com was a dutch auction similar to Googles. The IPO raised as much money as possible for salon.com and has allowed them to survive in the post dot com bubble.
This may not be successful from the investors point of view, or the underwriters point of view, but it will almost certainly be a success from Googles point of view. It can be argued that the CEO's of all the IPO's that popped on the first day of trading should be barred from heading up public companies and companies about to go public, because of there proven incompetence.
Slashdot Mirror
Actors, Professional football (U.S.) players, Major League Baseball players, NHL Hockey Players, and Professional basketball players are all unionized. Part of why salaries in those industries make up about 50% of expenses, as opposed to golf's much smaller percentage (I can't remember off the top of my head, but 15-20% is a guestimate.)
So your exception is overly broad. Also, Where you graduate from law school appears to have more to do with your first years salary than your class rank. (this is partially because Columbia specializes in the well paying area of corporate law, while Hastings specializes in public policy law, that pays comparatively little. rather than people looking at the name of school)
One reason some developers dislike the BSD license is the story (you can find several examples if you feel like looking) of someone releasing a program under a BSD style license, someone else releasing a modified binary with no source and the original developer getting support requests that he/she cannot help with.
The GPL also has this to a lesser degree, which results in things like QMail, which has a license that says you cannot distribute binaries that are not compiled from pristine sources.
BSD is about freedom for the developer, GPL is about freedom for the end user (No vendor lock in).
Your preference is probably a matter of which you spend more time doing. Integrating software to perform a task (typical busines), or writing software to do a task (typical software business).
The GPL is a remarkably effective, though imperfect, solution to bad behavior.
Why does the CSS test page itself contain bad CSS code?
Because the standard says how broken code should be handled.
See this link and this link for more info.
Basically, you can't dispose of medical waste without agreeing to dispose of nuclear power waste. A completely messed up situation.
- Vi or emacs
- Windows or Linux
- Replublican or Democrat
- Development or Systems
- Apache or IIS
- Apple or Intel
Any one else want to add more gray?Call me cynical but I was suprised to find out that Yahoo! had given a mere
$10,000 to the Republican National Committe, and an equal amount to the Democratice National Committe.
Personally, I suspected larger more frequent donations were required to keep the current administration paid off.
Unless, Alberto Gonzales is allowing Kiddie Porn to further his own political agenda. Personally, I hope that the current administration is just cheap. The alternative of the Bush administration not prosecuting kiddie porn because it will make a new bill easier to get passed,
Let me know how great FreeBSD as a workstation is when portupgrade fails. (I'm writing this from a FreeBSD workstation running Gnome 2.10.1)
FreeBSD with Gnome is nowhere near as integrated as Gnome in Debian. The ports collection is really nice, but quality control is far lower then that of Debians quality control, which admittedly is not as high as the base FreeBSD, but the base FreeBSD distribution is not really useful for anything other than a mail server or gateway.
FreeBSD has a great ip stack is 5.x is really responsive under load, and the quality of the base system is wonderful. The integration of userland and kernel is mostly a myth. There are good reasons to use FreeBSD integrated userland and kernel is not one of them. If anything, that is a reason to use debian. (and why debian releases take years, because most current userland apps are not worthy of a 1.0 designation. (Gnome, KDE, Mozilla, Openoffice.org, and Xfree86 being noteworthy examples of beta/alpha software being notable examples.)
Personally I like the ease of locking down a FreeBSD box. It is one of the easiest systems to lock down to the point of comfortably putting it on the net without a firewall, (and then add the firewall for depth,) and for control of what is on your machine. FreeBSD releases live much longer than most other distributions FreeBSD 4.8 is on Patch 32 and still maintained by the users, even though it dropped off official support long ago. FreeBSD also has many tuning options for tweaking your system to your hardware a la gentoo. nfs seems to work better under FreeBSD than under Linux. All great things but the integrated userland kernel is a myth.
All of the cities in India that have a Coke plant blame part of their water shortage on Coke.
Coke in India has toxins in it.
Coke's defence is, well it is a drought, and the USDA doesn't have a problem with what we are selling. They have never challenged (to the best of my research) the fact that their is lead in the soft drinks, just the fact that it is unsafe
Coke is trucking water into the villages that it has plants, as a good will gesture
Coke offered Coke as fertilizer to farmers, but it turned out to have lead in it that made the land unfit for farming.
We don't use up the water. We contaminate it. and while extracting plutonium from water is fairly stright forward, it is very expensive due to the fact that you really do have to get essentially all of it not 99% of it.
Most farmers vote on a single issue. Water rights.
So yes we will not run out of water, but we may well wind up with far less potable water than there is demand for.
As a bit of indirectg evidence that Humans are the problem. The only place on the planet that has a healthy eco system of large mammals is in the areas of Cambodia that have so many land mines that pochers refuse to go, and large crocs only exist in the war torn regions of Africa.
The statement that there are enough resources for humans, falls apart if you asume that we are to be living in an ecosystem and not trying to manufacture everything we need.
Back to water. Have you noticed the number of public drinking fountains lately? They were everywhere thirty years ago. Now They are almost extinct. Do you pay a water bill? Have you pulled on up from twenty years ago?
Why do you think that Intel recycles 3 million gallons of water a day, and puts it on their website?
I am not someone who is anti-development. 500,000 people are going to move to California next year, and I am one of those lobbying that we should be building housing for these people, and that the new housing should be near the city centers.
Yes, many of the Indians that are objecting to Coke are Marxists, and Coke is doing a lot to sanitize thier image. But, that does not change the fact that their is a big fight over potable water, indicating the potable water is indicating that it is a limited resource.
I had a small problem, but if I remember correctly it was something like evolution and evolution-server were in a funky state in sid, I think I solved the problem by uninstalling evolution and then installing gnome which reinstalled evolution.
I might not have had to do that if I had used apt-get dist-upgrade instead of apt-get upgrade.
But I'm not sure, I do remember that the whole proces was about two hours, including download time (dsl at 1.5k download in the United States).
Having just migrated from Ubuntu to sid I was very supprised at how well this went.
Ubuntu has upped the version of each package from the debian version by "ubuntu" this means that the next package compiled from a more recent version will replace it. It seems to follow debian policy as well.
This is a far cry from Knoppix, which I personally wish would remove the install to hard disk option. Knoppix is so far from debian in versioning that upgrading to debian is a horrific pain (there was a base package that had it's version promoted from 0.2.x to 2.x so when 0.2.78 comes out it doesn't get installed. I can't remember the package, but it was a core, or almost core package.
That said, I wouldn't develop from Ubuntu, but from sid, as Ubuntu is a fork that may or may not get it's changes into sid, and has stated that it will sync back with sid. Also sid isn't as nasty as one might think, because there is the experimental branch, that depends on sid, that gets most major changes and first (KDE4, GCC4, Gnome3, etc.)
My uninformed opinion on the matter.
adblock seems to stop the ad though :-)
I wonder if adblock will ever be idiot proof though, or if it will create a smarter class of users. as you have to learn about wildcards if you wnat to use adblock effectivly.
And no, it's not an unfair comparison to put a Linux distro and a Windows install on the same level. Just because the Linux distro ships with more software doesn't matter. If someone buys Mandrake, uses the software it came with, and then gets exploited, that is an exploit of the Mandrake software distribution that they bought with their distro.
But what you are dismissing is the fact that most people do not install every program. I use debian on most of my systems, and I am not hit by the vast majority of flaws, because none of my systems have the software installed on them, other flaws only affect some of my systems, so the fact that a base Debian system is 200 meg and a full install is about 14 Gig (I think, I haven't actually tried to see how much I could cram on to a debian computer.) but if you would say Windows and *n*x Distribution flaws are generally not comparable I would agree. Personally, I think Windows vs. FreeBSD is a fair comparison. both have well known services that are subject to exploit, have everything you need to bet files off the internet, have a base firewall that you chose if you want to install. are somewhat close to the same size. Windows does have a desktop that FreeBSD doesn't have, but you can't get rid of the Windows desktop, even if you never use it, so it seems somewhat reasonable to allow the comparison. And with that comparison, you will see that windows has many more security holes.
Bollocks. The UNIX "filesystem standard" fragments things way more than Windows does. With Windows, you know a few places to look for a malicious program to get rid of it--\Windows, \Windows\System, \Program Files, and so on.
I've found spyware in every directory of friends Windows computers. (including My Photos, every subdirecory in $WINDOWS\, c:\WINDOWS (even though windows was installed in another directory)
Thankfully, most Linux users don't run as root,
This is because most distributions make it a pain to run as root, and it looks like Apples model of disabling root may catch on with Linux distributors, as opposed to the MS Model of, everyone is Administrator, and you can't fully administrate a Windows system with the runas command, although windows 2003 is better in this respect it still has a ways to go.
but there are still PLENTY of ways a program can exploit someone without needing root access.
true but they can be minimized with
Believe me, malicious software writers would find a way you haven't thought of to screw people. That's what they do.
But that is what *n*x security people do as well, but we don't need to have a working exploit, just the theoretical possibility to shut the opening. Security models are testable and verifiable (with a lot of work). *n*x models have improved over the years, with the changes argued about in public, (and private) this is one of the main reasons that *n*x sytems are much more resiliant to attack than Windows systems. Windows tosses you some high grade chips and transistors and says "set up your security" while *n*x boxes generally use vastly inferior tools to give you hardened tested security that is not perfect but close to the best that those tools can make it. (not perfect, and there is room for improvement on most *n*x systems, but generally the default security is fairly stout.)
It will be interesting to see which OS gets MACL out of the box first a Linux system, or Windows. Microsoft has had a 15 year head start, but RedHat has been trying to get SeLinux into Fedora for over a year now. If I had to bet, I know where my money would go.
I disagree with your conclusions.
Yes, Windows has security tools that are almost as advanced as SeLinux. MACL and such, as opposed to almost all *n*x systems that rely on user, group, world permisions for security.
The problem is that Microsoft ships windows (nt, 2k, xp, and 2003) with a sh*t/non-existant security model
For example, the windows security model, such as it is, allows everyone to write to the root directory, temp files are allowed to be created in $PROGRAM_FILES\ and on and on.
To secure Windows in any meaningful way requires creating a security model, implementing it, and then modifying the permissions of all the programs you install to fit your model, Which, if you document your work, you are well on your way to getting your Ph.D in C.S.
This is not at all reasonable or defencable. The *n*x security model is tough enough to grok, much less need-to-know, Ring-of-trust and other joys, this is the distributors responsibility, this is why Lindows/Linspire was flamed for a bad security model, and many FreeBSD admins view firewalls as a security risk (they make you more vulnerable to some denial of service attacks).
Windows has all the parts, but they aren't put together
Vigor!
Inspired by
User Friendly.
Stated as it is announced that Amtrak will lose funding because it hasn't paid for itself. [And what transport system has?
... Hmm, seems like they also use taxpayer funded infrastructure.
Greyhound?
Last I checked they use roads funded by tax payers. (maybe they only use toll roads,.. mmm no. the use the interstate highway system.)
Southwest Airlines?
That's right pilots, and Airlines pay for airports, and the FAA, oops, more tax dollars...
Yellow Cab?
City streets are paid for by the cab companies!! that explains all the pot holes!
The Idea of a transportation system paying for its self has been abandoned over a century ago in the US.
If you don't belive in socialism, don't drive.
No, but she may sell the rug she made last week on Ebay.
Have you priced third world artifacts? Selling to the "First World" directly might help.
Scenario 1: Bug is detected. Full disclosure including exploit.
While one may argue against releasing the exploit code immediatly. The idea that the system administrator is to be kept in the dark for her own good is a model that has resulted in securtity bugs languishing in Mozilla and Internet Explorer for months.
The more I see of this debate, the more sympathetic I am to D. J. Bernstein's arguement that programers should be punished for bad code.
This is just the downloads of the Mozilla site(s).
While some of the downloads are duplicate downloads, there are also administrators that download one copy and push it out to hundreds of machines. There are also people like the Debian maintainer that downloaded one copy (maybe two) and then packaged it for thousands of people to download.
Anecdotal evidence seems to point to the redistributors out numbering the duplicate downloaders.
A google.com or msn.com webmaster would probably have much better insights into what is really happening. These people seem not to be talking however.
There is also files called user.js (optional) and prefs.js in your profile directory that give you all much more configurablity than explorer. (althogh maybe not quite as much as having writen your own browser in VB, for that you may need to edit some .xul files as well.)
Happy Hacking :-)
That assumes that hand counting ballots is some automatic activity.
Someone has to request the hand count.
In some states, a hand count is triggered anytime an election is within a certain number of votes. In most states a hand count is triggered when the losing party requests a hand count and is willing to pay the costs up front, getting a refund only if the requester becomes elected/nominated/whatever was at stake in the election. This means that only in close elections where the losing party wants to make an issue are there hand counts.
This means that while your argument makes it sound like hand counts would happen all the time, the reality is that hand counts will be as rare as they are today for the same reasons that they are rare today.
That assumes that voter intent is not regulated out of the process.
Most states have drawn up new laws for their electronic voting systems, and these laws tend to lean heavily on technical compliance with the law, and less so with what the voter intended.
Baum v.Arntz is a case that the Supreme Court may take. The director of elections in San Francisco threw out 14% of the votes for Terry Baum because while the voters wrote her name in, they failed to connect the arrow for the optical scanners.
The votes were tossed out based on the new law for the optical scanners, with any other voting system the votes would have counted (at least in California, as the laws currently are). Interestingly, if the voters that did not connect the arrows next to the name they wrote in had torn their ballots, an old section of the elections code that was not rewritten would have come into effect, and the ballots would have been counted.
The moral? The laws that are being implemented with these machines are even scarier than the machines.
Microsoft RTF seems to be incompatable with openoffice RTF and RTF's generated by xemacs seem to be incompatible with both of those formats, and I seem to recall yet another RTF standard from macwrite or something like that.
Now, it may be that several of those are not RTF and just use the RTF extentsion, but from the end users point of view, I would rather open a DOC file with abiword, than get an rtf file. (abiword is pretty bad at handling DOC files, but I have always been able to read the text even though the formating is almost always wrong.)
You missed my favorite quote
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on dinner."
--Thomas Jefferson
The one thing that is missing from this.
If a stock has almost no bounce after the IPO but holds steady, this means that the company going public (the entity that the CEO is supposed to be responsible to not the share holders.) Will have the largest cash reserves. this is one of the reasons that salon.com is still in business. and VA Linux is on the way to oblivion. The IPO for VA Linux was basically a fire sale that gutted the company of millions. The IPO of salon.com was a dutch auction similar to Googles. The IPO raised as much money as possible for salon.com and has allowed them to survive in the post dot com bubble.
This may not be successful from the investors point of view, or the underwriters point of view, but it will almost certainly be a success from Googles point of view. It can be argued that the CEO's of all the IPO's that popped on the first day of trading should be barred from heading up public companies and companies about to go public, because of there proven incompetence.