I have bought and sold (mostly sold) on eBay over the past year or so, but I've never used PayPal because their business model looked somewhat like a pyramid scheme to me. Besides, with all the dot-bomb craziness last year, I knew the sh*t was gonna hit the fan anytime soon. Folks invented products that nobody needed, wrote fancy business plans, made glossy presentations and websites, and (foolish) investors put tons of money into these companies in hopes of getting rich quick. (Choose when to work; Make more money; have more free time...) In other words, I knew something serious was going to happen, and I didn't want to become dependant on any online services.
As it turns out, PayPal, eBay and some of the other related auction services survived the dot-bomb mess--I guess the auction is one of the killer apps of the web. Anyway, every time I hear about a technology company getting an IPO, I can already see where it's going. People tell about a nice little company with a nice little product. Management and engineering worked in harmony (because management were themselves engineers). The product developed successfully and a community developed around it. Finally, the company had an IPO, and greedy shareholders took over. From that point, it was all downhill. Suddenly the company puts more innovation into legal proceedings than anything else. The product becomes bloated and buggy. Customer service goes down the tubes. The shareholders milk the company for every penny it's worth, and if it happens to survive, they continue to milk it (but they don't actually care about the underlying principles of the company). In some rare cases, enough "good" folks buy shares to invest in the company for the long run, and when that happens, the company might actually remain caring (even if it becomes bloated and inefficient).
I'm not saying this will happen in PayPal's case... but I've seen this happen to quite a few good small companies, with technically superior products, before they prostituted themselves, er, had their IPO.
This upsets me a little. I understand where Apple is coming from on this issue of "look-and-feel" because I can wholeheartedly respect the amount of work that goes into a successful user interface. It is very difficult to get everything working correctly, seamlessly and most of all... I hate it when I forget words. The word I wanted to use means that something can be operated with little instruction, using only common sense. You get the picture.
IMO, the user interface is the most difficult part of the system to make. There are so many rules and exceptions to those rules, and components have to interact with each other in ways that really don't make any sense. Design from a user's perspective is difficult, especially if you're trying to be (I hate to use this cuss word) "innovative." Design from a programmer's perspective is hell. Implementation is nothing short of a nightmare.
So when they get upset over someone using Aqua on a system that isn't Mac OS, I can totally understand. However, on the other hand, if I understood this story correctly, the Aqua interface was implemented as a theme FOR Mac OS. Now what upsets me is this: yes, I respect the work they put into Aqua, but they, on the other hand, clearly do NOT respect the colossal amount of work the Mozilla folks put into their browser. Why should it matter to Apple what Mozilla does? If Mozilla was a commercial product, and source code was not available publically, would Apple ever know or care how it was implemented? They say they want to be a part of the open source community and stuff, but I say "nay nay."
As a side note, I honestly prefer a simple command line interface, because it's so much easier to make and use. Personally, I don't know why the Windows and MacOS interfaces are mimicked so widely as they're clearly far from optimal. Windows is good for nothing. MacOS (I've used versions 7.x through 9) is great for running graphical applications where 99% of the input comes from the mouse. Its keyboard interface, on the other hand, is terrible IMO--even if you know all the shortcut keys. I might give OS X a try someday, just because it's based on BSD (I swear by the BSDs). Personally, I like to use the keyboard for 99% of the input, and the mouse as a supplimentary input device for when it's more convenient to click. I remember shipping air freight through Delta. Up until six months ago or so, they had old computer terminals with keyboard-only interfaces and old-school textual displays. The folks who worked there frankly didn't care how the text screen looked as long as it got the job done. And it did. One day, I stroll in there with a few packages and their system was changed... to Windows. It was probably one of those glossy sales presentations that got those things in there. The employees weren't even told about it--they came to work that day and their system was different, and there were no instructions. I remember how the guy had to click on a hundred different things with the mouse, move to the keyboard and punch in a few things, move back to the mouse and click on another hundred or so pretty pictures... in short, what used to take a minute or two by pushing a few keys now took about ten minutes, with most of the time spent clicking on things and moving between the keyboard and the mouse. Not only did Delta spend Lord-knows how much money on that new "system" but they lost productivity too. For what?! To be "user friendly?" To be "easy?" (Like AOL.) Why not just use the alleged "unfriendly" system, and just teach new employees the keys before putting them in front of that thing. The point of this side note is that graphical systems were originally invented for doing graphical work. Nowadays, this graphical system is used in places where a text one would actually be a better choice.
...Supreme Court rulings clear the way for her to do whatever is necessary to prevent not just past violations but also future violations of the law.
In other words... not only will the Supreme Court rule on measures to prevent future violations, they'll also rule that Microsoft must go back in time and prevent the past violations as well. Hey, that's what she said: "...prevent not just past violations..."
Most firms will see costs rise 33% to 107%, research firm
Gartner says. A company with 5,000 desktops will see its 3-year upgrade cost
for Microsoft Office, for instance, jump from about $900,000 to $1.5 million,
it says.
In other words, total cost of ownership is less than that of free operating systems such as Linux and *BSD. What a bunch of bull. I believe companies with a large number of computers should put together a dedicated "software team" composed of hackers and admins. (Ones with some real skills.) This team would install and administer free operating systems & software AND contribute to the projects as well. This, I believe, would yield a LOWER cost of ownership than using this Microsoft rubbish. The added advantages would be: enormous reduction in viruses and other compromises; custom features can be implemented; complete control over the system; no more fears of audits; easy and inexpensive compliance with license agreements (companies actually spend big dollars on license management software when using a lot of commercial software); many other benefits.
There are a lot of (angry) chief information officers out there," says Steven Steinbrecher, CIO for California's Contra Costa County.
Good. Maybe now, the damn suits will finally realize that it doesn't pay to spend a lot on buggy, crappy software, no matter how glossy the sales presentation is.
Other companies subscribing to Microsoft's "Open" or "Select" volume-licensing programs also complained about the change in licensing but requested anonymity.
Several recounted similar stories about Microsoft pressuring them to upgrade Office versions more frequently.
"They kept bringing up the BSA (Business Software Alliance) and insinuating about software audits," said one technology manager. "We got the message, all right: Upgrade to Office XP or else."
Maybe the Supreme Court should rule that Microsoft must change its name to Mafiasoft, to better reflect their business practices.
Unfortunately, Windows XP is starting to show some disturbing trends_namely, adding stuff that doesn't really need to be part of an operating system.
Really?! Gee, I didn't notice that the OS had a bunch of non-OS features! Why, even ITS always had a web browser built into the kernel!
Customer: I have a problem with Windows.
Me: Someday, you will learn that you can't win with Windows. Until then, may God save your soul.
Encryption is but one small detail in a sea of problems. Before a solution can be found, we must understand the problem--something the folks in government aren't very good at, especially when the problem is technical and scientific. This country has several very major problems, with deep roots. An easy-to-grasp example manifests itself in airline security (a common subject of conversation nowadays). The problem is twofold: first, public education in this country quite frankly sucks, and secondly, most people in this country expect the government to solve their problems for them.
The public education system in this country teaches students how to read, write and do arithmetic, but these are really just side-effects of the underlying agenda: teaching students, starting in kindergarden, to follow directions. I clearly remember getting points off my math homework for figuring out the answer a different, shorter way--points were taken off even when I had the correct answer! On one occasion, the teacher specifically told me that I hadn't followed directions, which is supposedly more important than the answer. On another occasion, a teacher admitted to me that when she studied to become a teacher, she was taught that teachers assign homework to their students not to exercise their new knowledge, but to see which ones do the homework and turn it in on time--another way of following directions. While I agree that homework (or any work) should be delivered on time, I believe that the results should be considered more important. Take a look at The Matrix: Mr. Anderson is expected to be at his desk on time every day--they don't care if he delivers results as long as he follows directions. There is an important pattern here...
The government spends way too much time and money writing long, cumbersome, complicated rules and regulations, to regulate things down to the smallest imaginable details. For example, someone once said that the entire Constitution is roughly 1/12 the length of a bill regulating the sale of cabbage. OSHA makes up workplace rules that make industrial work all but impossible. (This is more true in large corporate factories, where more time is spent filling out paperwork than actually accomplishing any work.) And finally (this one is the saddest--or the most amusing, depending on your point of view), a guy on 60 Minutes said that the FAA defines exactly what threats the security rent-a-cops are supposed to look for. One is a bomb, which is defined as an otherwise empty bag containing a bundle of dynamite with a big analog clock stuck on the side. (And I suppose they can only get you for this if you're wearing a black mask and a zorro-style hat.)
Coming back to the subject, the purpose of the past two paragraphs was to show you that first, the educational system (the government) teaches you to follow directions, and then, they compose mountains of directions covering every possible subject. The problem with this approach is that you can't code every possible combination beforehand--you have to figure out a pattern and come up with guidelines. The human mind has the capability (and beyond) to think on its own, in real time.
I mentioned above that "most people in this country expect the government to solve their problems for them," and haven't talked about that yet. This is one of the biggest reasons we have such a bloated and expensive government. There are government programs in place for everything, even for deciding what can be considered fine art and what can't. I heard a fine example of this on the radio last night--a guy called one of those talk-radio shows and suggested that the government should install solar panelling on all the buildings in our country so we won't be so dependant on the middle east for oil. Why does he expect the government to do this for him? If he wants solar panels on his house, then he should buy them and put them there! The government has no business placing solar cells on anybody's roof. This is the second part of a huge problem that starts in our education system--a colossal number of people in this country think the government should share in their personal problems.
I believe the government should spend less time and taxpayer money sticking their noses in our business. Instead, they should spend more of that fiat dough on improving the education system. This doesn't mean putting more Dells or iMacs in schools--if it were up to me, students would be required to handwrite their reports in cursive. It's an important but forgotten part of education called penmanship. An improved education system is one where students are taught, from day one, to think on their feet, in real-time. Don't follow the directions--make up the directions, and then follow them. Learn about priviledges and responsibility--and learn to accept responsibility for your actions and inactions. (Most folks currently expect the government to take responsibility for their actions or lack thereof.) Learn to do math the teacher's way, and then figure out faster and better ways to do problems (and present these to your peers in class). Learn to read between the lines and not believe everything you read, see and hear. Do these suggestions seem obvious? Why, then, aren't they being carried out? Why do so many of us have sloppy, incoherent handwriting? Why do students, when asked a difficult question, expect the teacher to know the answer? Why doesn't anybody in this country take responsibility for their actions? Why do we have defective policies in place for decades (and follow these policies), instead of proactively analysing the situation and finding a better way? Why do so many people believe every word the media tells them? (Including the claim that tools which can be used for evil will pervert the minds of those who possess them, much like the One Ring.) Don't pretend these problems don't exist--they are very real and very dangerous.
Education isn't limited to public schools, by the way. Our airline security, stewardesses, pilots and janitors should receive an education in psychology, body language and self defense, instead of regulations nobody reads that describe a Wile E. Coyote-style bomb. This rule applies across the board, yet training is only the beginning--the real training is in learning how to learn and think out of the box, all the time.
The problems with encryption, the DMCA, the SSSCA, and all other defective policies will work themselves out once people stop following directions and start using their brains.
People who write viruses may not be "terrorists"...
Hehehe... according to laws that are getting passed, a virus writer (who affects financial and/or government systems) is a terrorist. I don't have the link to the MATA / ATA or whatever they're calling it now (they only changed the name of the bill about 10 times).
Oh well... At least I feel better knowing that big brother is watching me.
Many folks don't know that the Federal Reserve is not part of the government--it is a corporation, owned by various banking institutions around the world. Cash money as we know it--the Federal Reserve Note--is not backed by gold or silver; it has no backing at all and is therefore not worth the paper it's printed on. You can buy stuff with it only because everybody thinks it's worth something.
You may have seen old gold or silver certificates. They look almost like our modern notes, except they say "United States of America" instead of "Federal Reserve Note" at the top. These notes were backed by actual gold or silver, and you could turn them in to obtain the gold you rightfully owned. IIRC, this was changed in 1934.
Inflation as we know it today is possible because money can be printed at any time. Although inflation still exists in a society where money is backed by gold, as more gold can be obtained, it is extremely small--perhaps a tiny fraction of one percent.
In a cashless society, money would be a lot like intellectual property. Just like so-called "cash" today, cashless money would not be backed by anything and would therefore have no rarity. In fact, it wouldn't even be backed by a note that isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Your money would simply be a number in a database.
With this kind of system in place, your life would be convenient--too convenient, actually. Picture this: Every transaction is tracked and matched to purchases, fees, etc. Of course, advertising agencies will use this information to send you convenient offers based on the things you buy. (Try visiting a strip-club one time, and see how you receive pr0n ads for the rest of your life.) Oh yeah, and the friendly Internal Revenue Service automatically gets a portion of every transaction, including your paycheck (even though IRS taxes are voluntary).
Oh yeah, and did I mention that Big Brother is watching you?
National identification cards have nothing to do with fighting terrorism or crime. Like all other legislation, a national identification system, if passed, would only affect honest people. Criminals and terrorists would find ways around the system, such as counterfeiting or hacking the database. Government clerks could be tricked--or bribed--into placing false information in the database. Criminals could even stay clean long enough to get into government offices, only to help other criminals get false IDs and database records. There are workarounds to every law, and so anytime a new law is created, an infinite amount of new troubles are created as well.
Now let's talk about the Social Security Number mentioned by several folks. Before I say this, I am not a lawyer, but this information is the result of a LOT of reading. Ask an expert in this complicated field before believing anything I'm saying here...
The SSN was originally a simple account number, yet it is now used as a national identification number by federal and state government agencies and corporations. (Example: I think every state requires your SSN before they issue a drivers license.)
Unbeknownst to most Americans, the IRS is a voluntary system--enforced only because of contract law! Nearly all Americans have no clue what their signature means on the social security form, or on the IRS forms they mail to the government every year. These forms are contracts, and by signing them, you are voluntarily agreeing to abide by various sections of government code which, as far as I understand are not positive law. (The constitutional amendment was never ratified!) The whole system operates on smoke and mirrors, as most Americans simply aren't aware of what's going on. Do you honestly want to give the government more power to track you around? My suggestion: the various government agencies should start doing their current jobs, before inventing new ways to bury themselves in work.
Don't misunderstand me: I love this country. I pay my taxes. I'm pissed off about what happened on the 11th and I certainly hope the government gets the "folks" who committed these atrocities, but when it comes to big-brother type things that won't help prevent another disaster, I say go back and reread 1984 before you take these matters so lightly.
Even a moderate size computer network requires significant expertise to configure and maintain.
Agreed. Computers and networks should be designed to make decisions for the user, since the computer is smarter than the user anyway.
The system would be self-configuring, self-monitoring, and self-tuning.
Agreed. Us developers and system administrators are really stupid, so Microsoft should out-think us ignorant folks to provide a better experience for themselves on the way to their bank.
And of course, it would be scalable and secure.
Oh, I get it now! Microsoft is simply passing around ideas for the free software community to implement! (The way that sentence is written, starting with "And of course" makes it sound as if even the writer doesn't believe it.)
Worldwide scalability. Logically there should be only
one system...
Note the one in italics--the emphasis is theirs. I wonder who intends to own and license this one system? I'd bet a reputable company like Microsoft will encourage the free software community to do it.
Self-tuning. The system should be able to reason about its computations and resources, allocating, replicating, and moving computations and data to optimize its own performance, resource usage, and fault-tolerance.
I'm sure the complete lack of bugs in these functions will ensure that applications operate flawlessly under even the heaviest loads.
Self-configuration. New machines, network links, and resources should be automatically assimilated.
We are Microsoft. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile. (Hmmm... an important feature they should add in this area would be to detect computers running non-Microsoft operating systems and to automatically uninstall those systems and place a copy of Windows on them instead. They could then lobby for new laws that would force the owner of the computer system to accept and pay for the license(s). An additional fine and "finder's fee" should be imposed on those owners for failing to run Microsoft operating systems in the first place.)
Security. Although a single system image is presented, data and computations may be in many different trust domains, with different rights and capabilities available to different security principals. Like the Internet, the system should allow non-hierarchical trust domains with no central authority necessary.
Wait a minute! Didn't you guys just say, "Logically there should be only one system?"
Resource controls. Both providers and consumers may explicitly manage the use of resources belonging to different trust domains. For instance, while some people might be content to allow their data and computations to use any resources available anywhere, some companies might choose, for instance, not to store or compute their year-end financial statement on their competitor's machines.
However, an important feature in this area called Bug#65535 will allow certain trade secrets to pass beyond the corporate boundaries and get stored on a competitor's machine. Microsoft's unbreakable encryption (plaintext (r)) will however prevent the competitor from accessing the information.
Aggressive abstraction. The level of abstraction should be raised to the point that application programmers are freed from the mechanics of distributed programming and the exigencies of physical computing components. This would allow them to focus on application concerns actually solving a problem for a user rather than system concerns such as communication or fault tolerance. To the greatest extent possible, the system should handle difficult issues like data placement, resource location, fault-tolerance, and load balancing.
In other words, 1,000 more layers will be built upon the existing operating system. Installation will be from a 16-DVD set and will take up 1,200 GB. Microsoft Notepad will require 1 GB of RAM to run (however, the critical portion of the application--the talking paperclip--will require an additional gig).
Storage-irrelevance. There should be no storage hierarchy. Once created, information should be accessible until it is no longer needed or referenced.
In other words, once created, information will be inaccessible because you don't know where it is, so it's no longer referenced, so it's no longer needed, and is therefore discarded.
Introspection. The system should possess some aspects of self-examination and reflection. It should pervasively monitor itself and its applications, and reason about configuration and performance issues. Its models of its own configuration and operation should suggest opportunities for self-tuning as well as generate suggestions for physical configuration changes or upgrades that would improve performance.
Microsoft's new BSOD will read: "This application might perform an illegal operation in two days. You must shut down the entire network, losing all work, saved and unsaved, and restart your network. Contact your Microsoft representative for a new software key." (Oh yeah, I forgot--their new licensing scheme will require you to call Microsoft's 900 number every time you start windows. And you have to pay a fine for not pushing Shut Down before turning the power off.)
The best way to avoid becoming a worm-hosting platform is to use good design and coding practices and to audit existing and new code (OpenBSD-style).
I spend countless hours studying others' code in the evenings. Although I don't consider myself an auditor, I like to examine basic and often-overlooked things like array and pointer usage. Most of the "bugs" I uncover are very subtle and usually don't affect the operation of the software at all (though they might as one small step in a complex, deliberate attack). An interesting side effect to this boring work is that I sometimes find faster or shorter ways to do things.
IMO, this kind of work is ideal for newbies who want to get involved but aren't skilled hackers yet. While many of us who code every day like to "read" code quickly, newbies must actually concentrate on understanding the significance of each character.
An even better way to audit is to explain some piece of code to an outsider, perhaps a nonprogrammer, line-by-line. They'll likely ask you some stupid questions, but you'll be surprised how many subtle bugs this can uncover that you'd never find otherwise. Oh yeah, and if you have a girlfriend who wonders WTF you do in front of that comp all night, this is one way to bring her closer to you.:-)
The year is 2209. The world is no longer called Earth; it is now called Microsoft Empire.
By order of Emperor William H. Gates VII, children are no longer born; they are licensed.
Microsoft Empire End Parent License Agreement
IMPORTANT-READ CAREFULLY: This End Parent License Agreement ("EPLA") is a legal agreement between you (either an individual or a single entity) and the owner ("Microsoft") of the newborn child ("Device") which you acquired. By begetting, naming, raising, teaching, playing with or otherwise using the Device, you agree to be bound by the terms of this EPLA. If you do not agree to the terms of this EPLA, Microsoft Empire is unwilling to license the Device to you. In such event, you may not use the Device, and you should promptly contact God for instructions on return of the unused Device for a refund.
DEVICE LICENSE: The Device is protected by copyright laws and patents, as well as other intellectual and physical property laws, as published by Microsoft Empire. The Device is licensed, not born. The term "World" as used herein shall mean the Microsoft Empire, which contains all parts of the known universe, within which the Device operates.
The remainder of the above license agreement is left as an exercise for the reader.
The government could not possibly know whether a data stream is encrypted data or random bits. Think about it... If a standard encryption scheme is used, there might be header data that they can look at, but if you're a terrorist or a crook, you'll probably use a nonstandard encryption scheme, or even a standard one but with some data rearranged. For example, you could encrypt the data and then reverse it strrev()-style before transmitting it.
The idea of crypto backdoors is really stupid for several reasons. The biggest one is that once the backdoor(s) are found, all data is compromised, and if this legislation is passed, I firmly believe that a year or so down the road, there will be billions of dollars in damages caused by the compromise of data, from credit card numbers to trade secrets. The terrorists will either avoid using the Internet altogether or will simply work around the backdoors.
If the government decides to force crypto backdoors, that would be the most ridiculous thing on the planet! Terrorists could simply write their plans on a piece of paper, seal them in an envelope and mail them! How is the government going to respond to that? By opening and reading all our mail as well? What if the mail is written in a code language? Is written encryption going to be outlawed? Why not arrest children who make up their own codenames and codewords?
The trouble is that the government is so busy blaming things like encryption that they're leaving huge gaping holes elsewhere. A guy on 60 Minutes, for example, said that airport security is trained to look for very specific things in luggage, like a bomb in an otherwise empty bag. Interestingly, he said that a bomb is defined as a bundle of dynamite sticks with a big analog clock stuck on the side. I don't know about you, but I have a feeling that bombs don't look like the ones we see in cartoons.
That's just one example of typical government regulations. Just like OSHA making up rules that every industrial employee must break daily because it's impossible to get any work done while following them. I'm starting to believe that the real problem with security is the fact that they're trying to replace common sense with very specific written rules. I think the first place to begin with this war on terrorism is in our education system. Children are taught to follow directions. Don't even get me started on this because I'll write pages and pages on the subject. Children should be taught to think on their own--this isn't currently happening, despite activities teachers call "problem solving."
Encryption is the digital counterpart of an envelope, no more, no less. Trying to force backdoors on encryption is going to be a futile effort, and will only provide the government with one more impossible task to waste their time on. Tell your friends and neighbors.
I keep saying this time and time again. Legislation only affects honest people. It does not affect the crooks and terrorists. I mean, honestly: if you're a terrorist who is going to deliberately kill yourself in an attack on a hated enemy, is fear of prosecution for sending an email going to stop you? It won't. They'll find ways around it, or use other systems the government hasn't thought of yet.
Let me explain what I mean by a "hated enemy" above. Many middle-eastern countries are basically ruled by tyrants. There are the elite few, who have unimaginable wealth, and then there are the poor people who make up nearly all of the population. These poor people are oppressed by their rulers so they're in a constant state of fear (and anger). The rulers, being smart, blame the country's problems on an external source, such as the United States, thereby shifting the hatred of their people. This is how they remain in power. It's very basic. (Read 1984... specifically the part that explains why Oceania is always at war.) And for some reason, they fail to point this out on the news.
Returning to our internal problems... I can understand why certain civil liberties need to be placed on hold at a time of war, as long as the object is to protect those liberties for the future. On the other hand, I think the government needs to start doing its current job before it makes up new responsibilities that it probably won't handle well. Look at INS, for example. They are so inefficient that I honestly doubt they can do anything to help. For one thing, I think their enormous backlog encourages illegal immigration. Now they're talking about giving INS more responsibilities, being totally oblivious to the facts (that they're horribly, terribly inefficient), and this is just one small portion of the government.
You know what? Let them pass legislation like this. Several months will go by--or a year--and suddenly, some hacker in Russia or some other nice country will figure out the backdoor, and voila! Billions of dollars in business and legal damages. Patient records, trade secrets, copyrighted material... they'll all be compromised. That'll teach 'em a lesson.
Sure, if you're honest like most of us, this will be a huge problem for you. If you're a crook on the other hand, the legislation doesn't apply to you. Remember: when inlaws are outlawed, only outlaws will have inlaws.
Oh yeah, and don't even bother to try and stop this... the idiots in government will be convinced by some glossy shrink-wrapped corporation that the backdoor will be 100% secure against hackers. Just wait and see... it'll happen.
I have been a professional software developer since 1980. I am sick and tired of the attitude that software, unlike every other product produced by man, should be exempt from lawsuits, scrutiny, etc. That attitude is precisely why Microsoft is spending time writing bad video editors and copy protection schemes rather than making their OS solid and bug-free.
That is probably the most well-said comment I've read here in a long time. Microsoft has created most of the problems I know of that are related to computers and software, starting with licensing, which is probably the root of horrible things like the DMCA (which should be abolished, by the way). They created an industry where I would guess that most software is slopped together hastily ("fast time to market," in suit-speak), rather than crafted by careful professionals.
Why are there so many "MCSE-in-2-weeks" ads in those lame freebie computer magazines? You don't honestly believe that 2 weeks of instruction make you a professional, do you? Here's something that will *really* crack you up: I heard a commercial on the radio for one of those lame MCSE courses. They said you'll earn 83,000 bucks in your first year on the job! I'd like to know exactly who-in-the-phuc will pay that kind of money, especially now when the economy's down the sh*tter. I haven't actually taken one of these courses myself, so if anyone has, please correct me if I'm wrong on this--I believe that these MCSE courses are just like SAT-prep classes: the answers to test questions are drilled into your head so you can pass the test. That's all. I don't honestly believe that anything (besides maybe some bedrock basics) is taught in those courses.
So back to my discussion of Microsoft... I believe they have and are committing fraud. They advertise high quality, high availability and security, when their software is probably the least secure on the planet.
Am I saying that UNIX doesn't have its problems? No. There are quite a few problems in UNIX and UNIX-like systems. The difference is that the entire software design, from the ground up, is inherently secure. The exploits are in subtle bugs, not in major software design issues. In the various Windows patchworks, the security problems stem from very deep software design issues. Oh yeah, and on top of that, they have the usual bugs. In other words, it's a buggy implementation of a crappy design built on a shaky foundation. And businesses trust their important data to this garbage, which results in billions lost every time some email attachment gets forwarded around. So after all that, what the hell is this about lower total cost of ownership?
I know I'm just ranting in this post... I'm really tired. Oh well.
In other words, "The tomorrow of Windows is the yesterday of UNIX." I don't remember whose sig that was, but I used it for a time because it is so true.
I think RMS hit the nail right on the head for this one. What we need is not a 1984-style police state. What we do need, besides moderate (but effective) security measures, is for the government to actually do its job. How many times in the past week have I read and heard about the FBI, CIA, FAA and INS not doing their jobs, leading to the disaster in NYC and DC?
Furthermore, I think the United States' ridiculous foreign policy is largely responsible for pissing off the middle east in the first place. It's because they jump in there like a bull in a china shop and meddle in the affairs of others, without even trying to understand their culture. As Americans, many of us demand that if you want to live and do business in our country, you should speak our language and know our customs. I believe the opposite should be true as well: that when we try to do business with others, we should at least make an effort at understanding their culture.
It's not the people of the United States that anger most angry middle-easterns. It's our government. Therefore, we should get our government to shape up their act. It's our responsibility.
I once saw an ad for a Java-to-machine-code compiler. (I think it was for Windows.) A free compiler like this would be really useful--imagine if you could bust out 99% of your program in Java, and do the time-critical portions in C. I don't currently do Java, but if something like this came along, I might seriously consider it.
Monetary support for
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
Hi everyone. As many of you are aware, people in Egypt and
other countries celebrated the attacks on New York and
Washington. Some of these countries receive billions of
dollars in aid from the United States. I believe that
people who celebrate the deaths of thousands of people do
not deserve to receive any aid from those peoples' country.
As a result, I've sent letters to representatives in the
government, urging them to stop support to these countries.
The money should be used to help the victims and their
families, and to rebuild what has been destroyed. I'm
including a copy of this letter below, and I invite and
urge all of you to mail a copy of it to your representatives,
or write your own. Please tell your family, friends,
coworkers and neighbors. Let's make this as widespread as
possible.
*** Begin letter ***
Dear Senators and Representatives,
People in Egypt and other countries were filmed celebrating
the September 11 attacks on America that destroyed thousands
of lives.
These countries receive billions of dollars in foreign aid
from us--paid for by those whose lives were destroyed or
altered forever by the attack. Their celebrating of these
horrible acts show total disrespect and disregard for human
lives, not to mention a complete lack of appreciation for
the support that has continued to benefit them.
I strongly urge you to stop financial aid to these countries.
The money should instead go to victims and their families,
not to those who celebrated their untimely deaths. And, of
course, the money should be used to rebuild the destroyed
properties and pay for the expensive investigations and other
actions that must take place.
The hard-earned money of those who died should NOT go to
those who celebrated their deaths.
Please send this letter or something similar to your representatives in Congress. Email is largely ignored, so I recommend printing and mailing. You can find your senators' mailing addresses at http://www.senate.gov/senators/senator_by_state.cf m
Dear [Senator],
People in Egypt and other countries were filmed celebrating the September 11 attacks on America that destroyed thousands of lives.
These countries receive billions of dollars in foreign aid from us--paid for by those whose lives were destroyed or altered forever by the attack. Their celebrating of these horrible acts show total disrespect and disregard for human lives, not to mention a complete lack of appreciation for the support that has continued to benefit them.
I strongly urge you to stop financial aid to these countries.
The money should instead go to victims and their families, not to those who celebrated their untimely deaths. And, of course, the money should be used to rebuild the destroyed properties and pay for the expensive investigations and other actions that must take place.
The hard-earned money of those who died should NOT go to those who celebrated their deaths.
Encourage your family, friends, coworkers and neighbors to do the same. Billions of dollars will be needed to rebuild the damage. Donating money is a good deed, but the United States must use these billions that we now need, not send it to those who celebrated carnage and destruction.
Please send this letter or something similar to your representatives in Congress. Email is largely ignored, so I recommend printing and mailing.
Dear [Senator / Representative],
People in Egypt and other countries were filmed celebrating the September 11 attacks on America that destroyed thousands of lives.
These countries receive billions of dollars in foreign aid from us--paid for by those whose lives were destroyed or altered forever by the attack. Their celebrating of these horrible acts show total disrespect and disregard for human lives, not to mention a complete lack of appreciation for the support that has continued to benefit them.
I strongly urge you to stop financial aid to these countries.
The money should instead go to victims and their families, not to those who celebrated their untimely deaths. And, of course, the money should be used to rebuild the destroyed properties and pay for the expensive investigations and other actions that must take place.
The hard-earned money of those who died should NOT go to those who celebrated their deaths.
Encourage your family, friends, coworkers and neighbors to do the same. Billions of dollars will be needed to rebuild the damage. Donating money is a good deed, but the United States must use these billions that we now need, not send it to those who celebrated carnage and destruction.
I'm sending this letter to everybody in my address book. I'm sure everybody knows about the terrorist attacks on our country. What some of you might not know is that people in Egypt and other countries celebrated the devastating attacks on thousands of lives in our country. This was shown on television.
I have never heard of Americans, or people of any *civilized* country for that matter, celebrating the deaths of so many thousands of *innocent* lives. I wish to point out that these same people--the ones who are celebrating right now--benefit from millions or billions of dollars of American money sent to them as foreign aid. The thought of these scumbags celebrating the deaths of those who support them disgusts me beyond belief. I am writing letters to folks in our state and federal governments, urging them to cut off monetary support for these countries. This will serve three purposes:
1. The money should be used to help those who lost family or friends to the disaster.
2. The rebuilding of destroyed properties and businesses, which will undoubtedly cost many billions upon billions of dollars.
3. Cutting off foreign aid to these countries serves as a very mild punishment for their celebrating of the death and destruction in our country. If they celebrate our deaths, let them starve for lack of food and money.
I urge you to write similar letters, and to urge your family, friends and neighbors to do the same. The time has come to help our victims and punish those who would have us slaughtered.
Additionally, for posting on Slashdot:
As the story says: "some Egyptians celebrating the attacks today." Yes, I realize that this isn't the opinion of all Egyptians. But nonetheless, I believe that our country has more important things to do with our money than spend it helping out people who hold Americans--or any people for that matter--in complete disrespect and disregard.
Slashdot Mirror
I have bought and sold (mostly sold) on eBay over the past year or so, but I've never used PayPal because their business model looked somewhat like a pyramid scheme to me. Besides, with all the dot-bomb craziness last year, I knew the sh*t was gonna hit the fan anytime soon. Folks invented products that nobody needed, wrote fancy business plans, made glossy presentations and websites, and (foolish) investors put tons of money into these companies in hopes of getting rich quick. (Choose when to work; Make more money; have more free time...) In other words, I knew something serious was going to happen, and I didn't want to become dependant on any online services.
As it turns out, PayPal, eBay and some of the other related auction services survived the dot-bomb mess--I guess the auction is one of the killer apps of the web. Anyway, every time I hear about a technology company getting an IPO, I can already see where it's going. People tell about a nice little company with a nice little product. Management and engineering worked in harmony (because management were themselves engineers). The product developed successfully and a community developed around it. Finally, the company had an IPO, and greedy shareholders took over. From that point, it was all downhill. Suddenly the company puts more innovation into legal proceedings than anything else. The product becomes bloated and buggy. Customer service goes down the tubes. The shareholders milk the company for every penny it's worth, and if it happens to survive, they continue to milk it (but they don't actually care about the underlying principles of the company). In some rare cases, enough "good" folks buy shares to invest in the company for the long run, and when that happens, the company might actually remain caring (even if it becomes bloated and inefficient).
I'm not saying this will happen in PayPal's case... but I've seen this happen to quite a few good small companies, with technically superior products, before they prostituted themselves, er, had their IPO.
This upsets me a little. I understand where Apple is coming from on this issue of "look-and-feel" because I can wholeheartedly respect the amount of work that goes into a successful user interface. It is very difficult to get everything working correctly, seamlessly and most of all... I hate it when I forget words. The word I wanted to use means that something can be operated with little instruction, using only common sense. You get the picture.
IMO, the user interface is the most difficult part of the system to make. There are so many rules and exceptions to those rules, and components have to interact with each other in ways that really don't make any sense. Design from a user's perspective is difficult, especially if you're trying to be (I hate to use this cuss word) "innovative." Design from a programmer's perspective is hell. Implementation is nothing short of a nightmare.
So when they get upset over someone using Aqua on a system that isn't Mac OS, I can totally understand. However, on the other hand, if I understood this story correctly, the Aqua interface was implemented as a theme FOR Mac OS. Now what upsets me is this: yes, I respect the work they put into Aqua, but they, on the other hand, clearly do NOT respect the colossal amount of work the Mozilla folks put into their browser. Why should it matter to Apple what Mozilla does? If Mozilla was a commercial product, and source code was not available publically, would Apple ever know or care how it was implemented? They say they want to be a part of the open source community and stuff, but I say "nay nay."
As a side note, I honestly prefer a simple command line interface, because it's so much easier to make and use. Personally, I don't know why the Windows and MacOS interfaces are mimicked so widely as they're clearly far from optimal. Windows is good for nothing. MacOS (I've used versions 7.x through 9) is great for running graphical applications where 99% of the input comes from the mouse. Its keyboard interface, on the other hand, is terrible IMO--even if you know all the shortcut keys. I might give OS X a try someday, just because it's based on BSD (I swear by the BSDs). Personally, I like to use the keyboard for 99% of the input, and the mouse as a supplimentary input device for when it's more convenient to click. I remember shipping air freight through Delta. Up until six months ago or so, they had old computer terminals with keyboard-only interfaces and old-school textual displays. The folks who worked there frankly didn't care how the text screen looked as long as it got the job done. And it did. One day, I stroll in there with a few packages and their system was changed... to Windows. It was probably one of those glossy sales presentations that got those things in there. The employees weren't even told about it--they came to work that day and their system was different, and there were no instructions. I remember how the guy had to click on a hundred different things with the mouse, move to the keyboard and punch in a few things, move back to the mouse and click on another hundred or so pretty pictures... in short, what used to take a minute or two by pushing a few keys now took about ten minutes, with most of the time spent clicking on things and moving between the keyboard and the mouse. Not only did Delta spend Lord-knows how much money on that new "system" but they lost productivity too. For what?! To be "user friendly?" To be "easy?" (Like AOL.) Why not just use the alleged "unfriendly" system, and just teach new employees the keys before putting them in front of that thing. The point of this side note is that graphical systems were originally invented for doing graphical work. Nowadays, this graphical system is used in places where a text one would actually be a better choice.
I'm sorry... To modify my own post, that last line was supposed to read, "... Until then, may God have mercy on your soul."
Q: Microsoft. Where do you want to go today?
A: Far away from where you're going!
In other words... not only will the Supreme Court rule on measures to prevent future violations, they'll also rule that Microsoft must go back in time and prevent the past violations as well. Hey, that's what she said: "...prevent not just past violations..."
Most firms will see costs rise 33% to 107%, research firm Gartner says. A company with 5,000 desktops will see its 3-year upgrade cost for Microsoft Office, for instance, jump from about $900,000 to $1.5 million, it says.
In other words, total cost of ownership is less than that of free operating systems such as Linux and *BSD. What a bunch of bull. I believe companies with a large number of computers should put together a dedicated "software team" composed of hackers and admins. (Ones with some real skills.) This team would install and administer free operating systems & software AND contribute to the projects as well. This, I believe, would yield a LOWER cost of ownership than using this Microsoft rubbish. The added advantages would be: enormous reduction in viruses and other compromises; custom features can be implemented; complete control over the system; no more fears of audits; easy and inexpensive compliance with license agreements (companies actually spend big dollars on license management software when using a lot of commercial software); many other benefits.
There are a lot of (angry) chief information officers out there," says Steven Steinbrecher, CIO for California's Contra Costa County.
Good. Maybe now, the damn suits will finally realize that it doesn't pay to spend a lot on buggy, crappy software, no matter how glossy the sales presentation is.
Other companies subscribing to Microsoft's "Open" or "Select" volume-licensing programs also complained about the change in licensing but requested anonymity. Several recounted similar stories about Microsoft pressuring them to upgrade Office versions more frequently. "They kept bringing up the BSA (Business Software Alliance) and insinuating about software audits," said one technology manager. "We got the message, all right: Upgrade to Office XP or else."
Maybe the Supreme Court should rule that Microsoft must change its name to Mafiasoft, to better reflect their business practices.
Unfortunately, Windows XP is starting to show some disturbing trends_namely, adding stuff that doesn't really need to be part of an operating system.
Really?! Gee, I didn't notice that the OS had a bunch of non-OS features! Why, even ITS always had a web browser built into the kernel!
Customer: I have a problem with Windows.
Me: Someday, you will learn that you can't win with Windows. Until then, may God save your soul.
Encryption is but one small detail in a sea of problems. Before a solution can be found, we must understand the problem--something the folks in government aren't very good at, especially when the problem is technical and scientific. This country has several very major problems, with deep roots. An easy-to-grasp example manifests itself in airline security (a common subject of conversation nowadays). The problem is twofold: first, public education in this country quite frankly sucks, and secondly, most people in this country expect the government to solve their problems for them.
The public education system in this country teaches students how to read, write and do arithmetic, but these are really just side-effects of the underlying agenda: teaching students, starting in kindergarden, to follow directions. I clearly remember getting points off my math homework for figuring out the answer a different, shorter way--points were taken off even when I had the correct answer! On one occasion, the teacher specifically told me that I hadn't followed directions, which is supposedly more important than the answer. On another occasion, a teacher admitted to me that when she studied to become a teacher, she was taught that teachers assign homework to their students not to exercise their new knowledge, but to see which ones do the homework and turn it in on time--another way of following directions. While I agree that homework (or any work) should be delivered on time, I believe that the results should be considered more important. Take a look at The Matrix: Mr. Anderson is expected to be at his desk on time every day--they don't care if he delivers results as long as he follows directions. There is an important pattern here...
The government spends way too much time and money writing long, cumbersome, complicated rules and regulations, to regulate things down to the smallest imaginable details. For example, someone once said that the entire Constitution is roughly 1/12 the length of a bill regulating the sale of cabbage. OSHA makes up workplace rules that make industrial work all but impossible. (This is more true in large corporate factories, where more time is spent filling out paperwork than actually accomplishing any work.) And finally (this one is the saddest--or the most amusing, depending on your point of view), a guy on 60 Minutes said that the FAA defines exactly what threats the security rent-a-cops are supposed to look for. One is a bomb, which is defined as an otherwise empty bag containing a bundle of dynamite with a big analog clock stuck on the side. (And I suppose they can only get you for this if you're wearing a black mask and a zorro-style hat.)
Coming back to the subject, the purpose of the past two paragraphs was to show you that first, the educational system (the government) teaches you to follow directions, and then, they compose mountains of directions covering every possible subject. The problem with this approach is that you can't code every possible combination beforehand--you have to figure out a pattern and come up with guidelines. The human mind has the capability (and beyond) to think on its own, in real time.
I mentioned above that "most people in this country expect the government to solve their problems for them," and haven't talked about that yet. This is one of the biggest reasons we have such a bloated and expensive government. There are government programs in place for everything, even for deciding what can be considered fine art and what can't. I heard a fine example of this on the radio last night--a guy called one of those talk-radio shows and suggested that the government should install solar panelling on all the buildings in our country so we won't be so dependant on the middle east for oil. Why does he expect the government to do this for him? If he wants solar panels on his house, then he should buy them and put them there! The government has no business placing solar cells on anybody's roof. This is the second part of a huge problem that starts in our education system--a colossal number of people in this country think the government should share in their personal problems.
I believe the government should spend less time and taxpayer money sticking their noses in our business. Instead, they should spend more of that fiat dough on improving the education system. This doesn't mean putting more Dells or iMacs in schools--if it were up to me, students would be required to handwrite their reports in cursive. It's an important but forgotten part of education called penmanship. An improved education system is one where students are taught, from day one, to think on their feet, in real-time. Don't follow the directions--make up the directions, and then follow them. Learn about priviledges and responsibility--and learn to accept responsibility for your actions and inactions. (Most folks currently expect the government to take responsibility for their actions or lack thereof.) Learn to do math the teacher's way, and then figure out faster and better ways to do problems (and present these to your peers in class). Learn to read between the lines and not believe everything you read, see and hear. Do these suggestions seem obvious? Why, then, aren't they being carried out? Why do so many of us have sloppy, incoherent handwriting? Why do students, when asked a difficult question, expect the teacher to know the answer? Why doesn't anybody in this country take responsibility for their actions? Why do we have defective policies in place for decades (and follow these policies), instead of proactively analysing the situation and finding a better way? Why do so many people believe every word the media tells them? (Including the claim that tools which can be used for evil will pervert the minds of those who possess them, much like the One Ring.) Don't pretend these problems don't exist--they are very real and very dangerous.
Education isn't limited to public schools, by the way. Our airline security, stewardesses, pilots and janitors should receive an education in psychology, body language and self defense, instead of regulations nobody reads that describe a Wile E. Coyote-style bomb. This rule applies across the board, yet training is only the beginning--the real training is in learning how to learn and think out of the box, all the time.
The following books (off the top of my head) contain some real insight, and should be mandatory reading for all employees of the government: The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People by Steven Covey--for its discussion of principle versus character, among other things; Out of the Crisis , by W. Edwards Deming; Nuts! by Kevin and Jackie Freiberg; and finally, The Pursuit of Wow! , by Tom Peters.
The problems with encryption, the DMCA, the SSSCA, and all other defective policies will work themselves out once people stop following directions and start using their brains.
...I once received an email that read something to this effect:
Hi! This email virus works on the honor system. Delete some random files and then forward this email to everybody in your address book.
Hmmm... I wonder if sending this email to a bunch of random people constitutes setting off a virus?
People who write viruses may not be "terrorists"...
Hehehe... according to laws that are getting passed, a virus writer (who affects financial and/or government systems) is a terrorist. I don't have the link to the MATA / ATA or whatever they're calling it now (they only changed the name of the bill about 10 times).
Oh well... At least I feel better knowing that big brother is watching me.
Many folks don't know that the Federal Reserve is not part of the government--it is a corporation, owned by various banking institutions around the world. Cash money as we know it--the Federal Reserve Note--is not backed by gold or silver; it has no backing at all and is therefore not worth the paper it's printed on. You can buy stuff with it only because everybody thinks it's worth something.
You may have seen old gold or silver certificates. They look almost like our modern notes, except they say "United States of America" instead of "Federal Reserve Note" at the top. These notes were backed by actual gold or silver, and you could turn them in to obtain the gold you rightfully owned. IIRC, this was changed in 1934.
Inflation as we know it today is possible because money can be printed at any time. Although inflation still exists in a society where money is backed by gold, as more gold can be obtained, it is extremely small--perhaps a tiny fraction of one percent.
In a cashless society, money would be a lot like intellectual property. Just like so-called "cash" today, cashless money would not be backed by anything and would therefore have no rarity. In fact, it wouldn't even be backed by a note that isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Your money would simply be a number in a database.
With this kind of system in place, your life would be convenient--too convenient, actually. Picture this: Every transaction is tracked and matched to purchases, fees, etc. Of course, advertising agencies will use this information to send you convenient offers based on the things you buy. (Try visiting a strip-club one time, and see how you receive pr0n ads for the rest of your life.) Oh yeah, and the friendly Internal Revenue Service automatically gets a portion of every transaction, including your paycheck (even though IRS taxes are voluntary).
Oh yeah, and did I mention that Big Brother is watching you?
War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.
National identification cards have nothing to do with fighting terrorism or crime. Like all other legislation, a national identification system, if passed, would only affect honest people. Criminals and terrorists would find ways around the system, such as counterfeiting or hacking the database. Government clerks could be tricked--or bribed--into placing false information in the database. Criminals could even stay clean long enough to get into government offices, only to help other criminals get false IDs and database records. There are workarounds to every law, and so anytime a new law is created, an infinite amount of new troubles are created as well.
Now let's talk about the Social Security Number mentioned by several folks. Before I say this, I am not a lawyer, but this information is the result of a LOT of reading. Ask an expert in this complicated field before believing anything I'm saying here...
The SSN was originally a simple account number, yet it is now used as a national identification number by federal and state government agencies and corporations. (Example: I think every state requires your SSN before they issue a drivers license.)
By the way, the issues mentioned here about SSN and employment are a big misunderstanding: Your employer has no business knowing your SSN, as they are not required to act as a free agent to the IRS or to Social Security. Nearly all companies do because they don't know this, or wish to avoid possible troubles with the IRS. There are companies out there that don't withhold payments to you.(See Arrow Custom Plastics' "Withholding Statement.") Also, check out the Yahoo! group: legality-of-income-tax at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/legality-of-income-t ax/.)
Unbeknownst to most Americans, the IRS is a voluntary system--enforced only because of contract law! Nearly all Americans have no clue what their signature means on the social security form, or on the IRS forms they mail to the government every year. These forms are contracts, and by signing them, you are voluntarily agreeing to abide by various sections of government code which, as far as I understand are not positive law. (The constitutional amendment was never ratified!) The whole system operates on smoke and mirrors, as most Americans simply aren't aware of what's going on. Do you honestly want to give the government more power to track you around? My suggestion: the various government agencies should start doing their current jobs, before inventing new ways to bury themselves in work.
Don't misunderstand me: I love this country. I pay my taxes. I'm pissed off about what happened on the 11th and I certainly hope the government gets the "folks" who committed these atrocities, but when it comes to big-brother type things that won't help prevent another disaster, I say go back and reread 1984 before you take these matters so lightly.
Just my $.02.
Agreed. Computers and networks should be designed to make decisions for the user, since the computer is smarter than the user anyway.
Agreed. Us developers and system administrators are really stupid, so Microsoft should out-think us ignorant folks to provide a better experience for themselves on the way to their bank.
Oh, I get it now! Microsoft is simply passing around ideas for the free software community to implement! (The way that sentence is written, starting with "And of course" makes it sound as if even the writer doesn't believe it.)
Note the one in italics--the emphasis is theirs. I wonder who intends to own and license this one system? I'd bet a reputable company like Microsoft will encourage the free software community to do it.
I'm sure the complete lack of bugs in these functions will ensure that applications operate flawlessly under even the heaviest loads.
We are Microsoft. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile. (Hmmm... an important feature they should add in this area would be to detect computers running non-Microsoft operating systems and to automatically uninstall those systems and place a copy of Windows on them instead. They could then lobby for new laws that would force the owner of the computer system to accept and pay for the license(s). An additional fine and "finder's fee" should be imposed on those owners for failing to run Microsoft operating systems in the first place.)
Wait a minute! Didn't you guys just say, "Logically there should be only one system?"
However, an important feature in this area called Bug#65535 will allow certain trade secrets to pass beyond the corporate boundaries and get stored on a competitor's machine. Microsoft's unbreakable encryption (plaintext (r)) will however prevent the competitor from accessing the information.
In other words, 1,000 more layers will be built upon the existing operating system. Installation will be from a 16-DVD set and will take up 1,200 GB. Microsoft Notepad will require 1 GB of RAM to run (however, the critical portion of the application--the talking paperclip--will require an additional gig).
In other words, once created, information will be inaccessible because you don't know where it is, so it's no longer referenced, so it's no longer needed, and is therefore discarded.
Microsoft's new BSOD will read: "This application might perform an illegal operation in two days. You must shut down the entire network, losing all work, saved and unsaved, and restart your network. Contact your Microsoft representative for a new software key." (Oh yeah, I forgot--their new licensing scheme will require you to call Microsoft's 900 number every time you start windows. And you have to pay a fine for not pushing Shut Down before turning the power off.)
I'm getting tired of this. See ya later!
The best way to avoid becoming a worm-hosting platform is to use good design and coding practices and to audit existing and new code (OpenBSD-style).
I spend countless hours studying others' code in the evenings. Although I don't consider myself an auditor, I like to examine basic and often-overlooked things like array and pointer usage. Most of the "bugs" I uncover are very subtle and usually don't affect the operation of the software at all (though they might as one small step in a complex, deliberate attack). An interesting side effect to this boring work is that I sometimes find faster or shorter ways to do things.
IMO, this kind of work is ideal for newbies who want to get involved but aren't skilled hackers yet. While many of us who code every day like to "read" code quickly, newbies must actually concentrate on understanding the significance of each character.
An even better way to audit is to explain some piece of code to an outsider, perhaps a nonprogrammer, line-by-line. They'll likely ask you some stupid questions, but you'll be surprised how many subtle bugs this can uncover that you'd never find otherwise. Oh yeah, and if you have a girlfriend who wonders WTF you do in front of that comp all night, this is one way to bring her closer to you. :-)
The year is 2209. The world is no longer called Earth; it is now called Microsoft Empire.
By order of Emperor William H. Gates VII, children are no longer born; they are licensed.
The remainder of the above license agreement is left as an exercise for the reader.
The only thing missing from this EULA is a statement like, "Do not make illegal copies of this End User License Agreement."
The government could not possibly know whether a data stream is encrypted data or random bits. Think about it... If a standard encryption scheme is used, there might be header data that they can look at, but if you're a terrorist or a crook, you'll probably use a nonstandard encryption scheme, or even a standard one but with some data rearranged. For example, you could encrypt the data and then reverse it strrev()-style before transmitting it.
The idea of crypto backdoors is really stupid for several reasons. The biggest one is that once the backdoor(s) are found, all data is compromised, and if this legislation is passed, I firmly believe that a year or so down the road, there will be billions of dollars in damages caused by the compromise of data, from credit card numbers to trade secrets. The terrorists will either avoid using the Internet altogether or will simply work around the backdoors.
If the government decides to force crypto backdoors, that would be the most ridiculous thing on the planet! Terrorists could simply write their plans on a piece of paper, seal them in an envelope and mail them! How is the government going to respond to that? By opening and reading all our mail as well? What if the mail is written in a code language? Is written encryption going to be outlawed? Why not arrest children who make up their own codenames and codewords?
The trouble is that the government is so busy blaming things like encryption that they're leaving huge gaping holes elsewhere. A guy on 60 Minutes, for example, said that airport security is trained to look for very specific things in luggage, like a bomb in an otherwise empty bag. Interestingly, he said that a bomb is defined as a bundle of dynamite sticks with a big analog clock stuck on the side. I don't know about you, but I have a feeling that bombs don't look like the ones we see in cartoons.
That's just one example of typical government regulations. Just like OSHA making up rules that every industrial employee must break daily because it's impossible to get any work done while following them. I'm starting to believe that the real problem with security is the fact that they're trying to replace common sense with very specific written rules. I think the first place to begin with this war on terrorism is in our education system. Children are taught to follow directions. Don't even get me started on this because I'll write pages and pages on the subject. Children should be taught to think on their own--this isn't currently happening, despite activities teachers call "problem solving."
Encryption is the digital counterpart of an envelope, no more, no less. Trying to force backdoors on encryption is going to be a futile effort, and will only provide the government with one more impossible task to waste their time on. Tell your friends and neighbors.
I keep saying this time and time again. Legislation only affects honest people. It does not affect the crooks and terrorists. I mean, honestly: if you're a terrorist who is going to deliberately kill yourself in an attack on a hated enemy, is fear of prosecution for sending an email going to stop you? It won't. They'll find ways around it, or use other systems the government hasn't thought of yet.
Let me explain what I mean by a "hated enemy" above. Many middle-eastern countries are basically ruled by tyrants. There are the elite few, who have unimaginable wealth, and then there are the poor people who make up nearly all of the population. These poor people are oppressed by their rulers so they're in a constant state of fear (and anger). The rulers, being smart, blame the country's problems on an external source, such as the United States, thereby shifting the hatred of their people. This is how they remain in power. It's very basic. (Read 1984... specifically the part that explains why Oceania is always at war.) And for some reason, they fail to point this out on the news.
Returning to our internal problems... I can understand why certain civil liberties need to be placed on hold at a time of war, as long as the object is to protect those liberties for the future. On the other hand, I think the government needs to start doing its current job before it makes up new responsibilities that it probably won't handle well. Look at INS, for example. They are so inefficient that I honestly doubt they can do anything to help. For one thing, I think their enormous backlog encourages illegal immigration. Now they're talking about giving INS more responsibilities, being totally oblivious to the facts (that they're horribly, terribly inefficient), and this is just one small portion of the government.
You know what? Let them pass legislation like this. Several months will go by--or a year--and suddenly, some hacker in Russia or some other nice country will figure out the backdoor, and voila! Billions of dollars in business and legal damages. Patient records, trade secrets, copyrighted material... they'll all be compromised. That'll teach 'em a lesson.
Sure, if you're honest like most of us, this will be a huge problem for you. If you're a crook on the other hand, the legislation doesn't apply to you. Remember: when inlaws are outlawed, only outlaws will have inlaws.
Oh yeah, and don't even bother to try and stop this... the idiots in government will be convinced by some glossy shrink-wrapped corporation that the backdoor will be 100% secure against hackers. Just wait and see... it'll happen.
That is probably the most well-said comment I've read here in a long time. Microsoft has created most of the problems I know of that are related to computers and software, starting with licensing, which is probably the root of horrible things like the DMCA (which should be abolished, by the way). They created an industry where I would guess that most software is slopped together hastily ("fast time to market," in suit-speak), rather than crafted by careful professionals.
Why are there so many "MCSE-in-2-weeks" ads in those lame freebie computer magazines? You don't honestly believe that 2 weeks of instruction make you a professional, do you? Here's something that will *really* crack you up: I heard a commercial on the radio for one of those lame MCSE courses. They said you'll earn 83,000 bucks in your first year on the job! I'd like to know exactly who-in-the-phuc will pay that kind of money, especially now when the economy's down the sh*tter. I haven't actually taken one of these courses myself, so if anyone has, please correct me if I'm wrong on this--I believe that these MCSE courses are just like SAT-prep classes: the answers to test questions are drilled into your head so you can pass the test. That's all. I don't honestly believe that anything (besides maybe some bedrock basics) is taught in those courses.
So back to my discussion of Microsoft... I believe they have and are committing fraud. They advertise high quality, high availability and security, when their software is probably the least secure on the planet.
Am I saying that UNIX doesn't have its problems? No. There are quite a few problems in UNIX and UNIX-like systems. The difference is that the entire software design, from the ground up, is inherently secure. The exploits are in subtle bugs, not in major software design issues. In the various Windows patchworks, the security problems stem from very deep software design issues. Oh yeah, and on top of that, they have the usual bugs. In other words, it's a buggy implementation of a crappy design built on a shaky foundation. And businesses trust their important data to this garbage, which results in billions lost every time some email attachment gets forwarded around. So after all that, what the hell is this about lower total cost of ownership?
I know I'm just ranting in this post... I'm really tired. Oh well.
In other words, "The tomorrow of Windows is the yesterday of UNIX." I don't remember whose sig that was, but I used it for a time because it is so true.
I think RMS hit the nail right on the head for this one. What we need is not a 1984-style police state. What we do need, besides moderate (but effective) security measures, is for the government to actually do its job. How many times in the past week have I read and heard about the FBI, CIA, FAA and INS not doing their jobs, leading to the disaster in NYC and DC?
Furthermore, I think the United States' ridiculous foreign policy is largely responsible for pissing off the middle east in the first place. It's because they jump in there like a bull in a china shop and meddle in the affairs of others, without even trying to understand their culture. As Americans, many of us demand that if you want to live and do business in our country, you should speak our language and know our customs. I believe the opposite should be true as well: that when we try to do business with others, we should at least make an effort at understanding their culture.
It's not the people of the United States that anger most angry middle-easterns. It's our government. Therefore, we should get our government to shape up their act. It's our responsibility.
I once saw an ad for a Java-to-machine-code compiler. (I think it was for Windows.) A free compiler like this would be really useful--imagine if you could bust out 99% of your program in Java, and do the time-critical portions in C. I don't currently do Java, but if something like this came along, I might seriously consider it.
Hi everyone. As many of you are aware, people in Egypt and other countries celebrated the attacks on New York and Washington. Some of these countries receive billions of dollars in aid from the United States. I believe that people who celebrate the deaths of thousands of people do not deserve to receive any aid from those peoples' country. As a result, I've sent letters to representatives in the government, urging them to stop support to these countries. The money should be used to help the victims and their families, and to rebuild what has been destroyed. I'm including a copy of this letter below, and I invite and urge all of you to mail a copy of it to your representatives, or write your own. Please tell your family, friends, coworkers and neighbors. Let's make this as widespread as possible.
*** Begin letter ***
Dear Senators and Representatives,
People in Egypt and other countries were filmed celebrating the September 11 attacks on America that destroyed thousands of lives.
These countries receive billions of dollars in foreign aid from us--paid for by those whose lives were destroyed or altered forever by the attack. Their celebrating of these horrible acts show total disrespect and disregard for human lives, not to mention a complete lack of appreciation for the support that has continued to benefit them.
I strongly urge you to stop financial aid to these countries.
The money should instead go to victims and their families, not to those who celebrated their untimely deaths. And, of course, the money should be used to rebuild the destroyed properties and pay for the expensive investigations and other actions that must take place.
The hard-earned money of those who died should NOT go to those who celebrated their deaths.
Sincerely,
[Your name here]
[I suggest including your mailing address]
***
Please send this letter or something similar to your representatives in Congress. Email is largely ignored, so I recommend printing and mailing. You can find your senators' mailing addresses at http://www.senate.gov/senators/senator_by_state.cf m
Encourage your family, friends, coworkers and neighbors to do the same. Billions of dollars will be needed to rebuild the damage. Donating money is a good deed, but the United States must use these billions that we now need, not send it to those who celebrated carnage and destruction.
Please send this letter or something similar to your representatives in Congress. Email is largely ignored, so I recommend printing and mailing.
Encourage your family, friends, coworkers and neighbors to do the same. Billions of dollars will be needed to rebuild the damage. Donating money is a good deed, but the United States must use these billions that we now need, not send it to those who celebrated carnage and destruction.
I'm sending this letter to everybody in my address book. I'm sure everybody knows about the terrorist attacks on our country. What some of you might not know is that people in Egypt and other countries celebrated the devastating attacks on thousands of lives in our country. This was shown on television.
I have never heard of Americans, or people of any *civilized* country for that matter, celebrating the deaths of so many thousands of *innocent* lives. I wish to point out that these same people--the ones who are celebrating right now--benefit from millions or billions of dollars of American money sent to them as foreign aid. The thought of these scumbags celebrating the deaths of those who support them disgusts me beyond belief. I am writing letters to folks in our state and federal governments, urging them to cut off monetary support for these countries. This will serve three purposes:
1. The money should be used to help those who lost family or friends to the disaster.
2. The rebuilding of destroyed properties and businesses, which will undoubtedly cost many billions upon billions of dollars.
3. Cutting off foreign aid to these countries serves as a very mild punishment for their celebrating of the death and destruction in our country. If they celebrate our deaths, let them starve for lack of food and money.
I urge you to write similar letters, and to urge your family, friends and neighbors to do the same. The time has come to help our victims and punish those who would have us slaughtered.
Additionally, for posting on Slashdot:
As the story says: "some Egyptians celebrating the attacks today." Yes, I realize that this isn't the opinion of all Egyptians. But nonetheless, I believe that our country has more important things to do with our money than spend it helping out people who hold Americans--or any people for that matter--in complete disrespect and disregard.