I've been doing the same over the last couple of hours, however with the wide difference in color... I am a bit skeptical because of the wide range of colors I am seeing with seemingly no pattern of the 10k so pixels that I think I've identified.
While he does have two new people to appoint, he still has three new positions. Once both empty seats are filled (or probably right after the first), he will nominate an elevation to chief justice, most likely choosing from an existing justice.
One cannot understate the importance of such a thing where not only is he able to change the overall make up of the court, but actually change the leadership as well, and that is where the count of 3 comes from.
I could have sworn this news came out a month or two ago and I took a look... but to get it you had to sign up for an account, which required a credit card number. While they claimed they wouldn't bill you unless you said so, you couldn't sign up without a CC #.
This is not unlike you making your own Version of the Firefox browser and calling it LellorFireFox. Despite the code being open source, the name and graphics are often not, so you would need to change both sufficiently to have it truly be your own version (despite OSS implications).
Um... no, he is prevented for the short term (usualy 6-24 months), and this was his choice when he signed on at Microsoft and signed the non-compete claus.
If the ability to build your own defines free in your mind... then really.NET (or at least the CLR and CLI) is just free as well, after all, both are well documented in the ECMA standard #335.
After all, off of what do you think all of the.NET clones were built?
They just happen to go after M$ due to their notoriously insecure OS's.
Oh not that again. You don't think that the market penetration they have has anything to do with it? You know... a big target?
Also... you have no credibility to say "but I don't have to go after M$ to discredit them" as you do go after them with your oh so clever use of the dollar sign. No wonder you posted as an AC.
With your method you create a window where the virus is able to infect others, automatically limiting its potential spread. It's the same as a virus killing its host 5 days in vs 10 days. Yes, you've got a bit more time to spread, but why not longer? Why not go for as long as you can before doing its evil.
My concern is viruses that have some sort of defense mechanism built in... after infecting a PC and going into 'infect others' mode, it still retain the ability to cause local havoc of what ever sort it chooses should it be found out. How to detect ones own process being detected would of course be rather tricky.
Oh yes, it's all about lazy Microsoft coders isn't it?
Those network and systems administrators who are on the front lines of keeping their networks secure and safe from threats both internal and external don't count.
Those who leave their doors unlocked or notes for the delivery man saying "key under doormat" are all innocent, it's all the fault of those Microsoft bastards who don't know how to write a single secure line of code.
The reason that viruses are not as damaging today as they were long ago is because virus writers have learned, propagation is the goal, not destruction.
Compare computer viruses to real world viruses and you'll see.
Ebola, smallpox take your pick from the fast acting, horrific and deadly viruses, very contagious and extremely deadly. With such a rap, why they it killed off everyone on earth yet. The answer why they haven't is simple, they kill their hosts before they have much of a chance to spread.
That is why HIV is such an evil bug, it takes it's time before killing its host, as well as taking plenty of time before an infection is apparent.
Computer viruses are the same, one that destroys a PC or locks down files isn't going to get very far, while one whose sole job is reproduction will spread far and wide and cause havoc only because of it's level of penetration and infection.
Dare I say it, I agree with the other poster. Removing IE as much as you can and outright attempting to replace it with Firefox may sound nice, but also removes the easy ability to use IE for those things that they may need to, those things which Firefox cannot do.
Slashdot Mirror
I've been doing the same over the last couple of hours, however with the wide difference in color... I am a bit skeptical because of the wide range of colors I am seeing with seemingly no pattern of the 10k so pixels that I think I've identified.
It's not that simple... the images are jpegs, thus lossy in terms of compression... curse them!
While he does have two new people to appoint, he still has three new positions. Once both empty seats are filled (or probably right after the first), he will nominate an elevation to chief justice, most likely choosing from an existing justice.
One cannot understate the importance of such a thing where not only is he able to change the overall make up of the court, but actually change the leadership as well, and that is where the count of 3 comes from.
Actually... Bush has 3 at this point.
One for the seat of O'Conner, one for Rehnquist... and one of Chief Justice.
The next year is going to be very interesting.
I could have sworn this news came out a month or two ago and I took a look... but to get it you had to sign up for an account, which required a credit card number. While they claimed they wouldn't bill you unless you said so, you couldn't sign up without a CC #.
I have little doubt it exists many places, however I know it from Babylon 5.
Gotta love Kosh.
Infidel! You must be cleansed!
It just has to do with the name.
This is not unlike you making your own Version of the Firefox browser and calling it LellorFireFox. Despite the code being open source, the name and graphics are often not, so you would need to change both sufficiently to have it truly be your own version (despite OSS implications).
All the better, without money, the root of all evil would be gone, therefore the world would be a wonderful and groovy place. Peace man!
From the looks of it, you are the first to hit the key point.
On a related note, we must not forget about a high school diploma that many seem to like and see as important.
Um... no, he is prevented for the short term (usualy 6-24 months), and this was his choice when he signed on at Microsoft and signed the non-compete claus.
If the ability to build your own defines free in your mind... then really .NET (or at least the CLR and CLI) is just free as well, after all, both are well documented in the ECMA standard #335.
.NET clones were built?
After all, off of what do you think all of the
Store maybe, but without Ethernet, how would you ever get it onto the machine?
I drive an Aztek you insensitive clod!
Don't you need a web browser to well... browse/view content that is indexed by Google Desktop?
Oh yes... because Novell and Red Hat are such great examples of making money hand over fist.
Let us also not forget VA Software, one of the original poster children for making money through Linux
3x the # of web sites hosted perhaps, but not in terms of actual web servers.
Remember the Port 80 survey for example?
We must not also forget the # of vulnerabilities for Apache vs IIS6 where in such a battle, IIS6 is winning.
Nice theory, except for that the bug that this worm takes advantage of is already fixable with a patch that was released days before this worm was.
This worm is not a problem if you have competent admins who are able to secure their network and systems within.
They just happen to go after M$ due to their notoriously insecure OS's.
Oh not that again. You don't think that the market penetration they have has anything to do with it? You know... a big target?
Also... you have no credibility to say "but I don't have to go after M$ to discredit them" as you do go after them with your oh so clever use of the dollar sign. No wonder you posted as an AC.
With your method you create a window where the virus is able to infect others, automatically limiting its potential spread. It's the same as a virus killing its host 5 days in vs 10 days. Yes, you've got a bit more time to spread, but why not longer? Why not go for as long as you can before doing its evil.
My concern is viruses that have some sort of defense mechanism built in... after infecting a PC and going into 'infect others' mode, it still retain the ability to cause local havoc of what ever sort it chooses should it be found out. How to detect ones own process being detected would of course be rather tricky.
Because once a flaw is found and fixed it becomes the responsibility of the admins to make sure their systems are protected.
Blame it on the coders all you want, but I would remind you that bugs exist just about everywhere, regardless of platform or who wrote it.
Oh yes, it's all about lazy Microsoft coders isn't it?
Those network and systems administrators who are on the front lines of keeping their networks secure and safe from threats both internal and external don't count.
Those who leave their doors unlocked or notes for the delivery man saying "key under doormat" are all innocent, it's all the fault of those Microsoft bastards who don't know how to write a single secure line of code.
Grow up.
The reason that viruses are not as damaging today as they were long ago is because virus writers have learned, propagation is the goal, not destruction.
Compare computer viruses to real world viruses and you'll see.
Ebola, smallpox take your pick from the fast acting, horrific and deadly viruses, very contagious and extremely deadly. With such a rap, why they it killed off everyone on earth yet. The answer why they haven't is simple, they kill their hosts before they have much of a chance to spread.
That is why HIV is such an evil bug, it takes it's time before killing its host, as well as taking plenty of time before an infection is apparent.
Computer viruses are the same, one that destroys a PC or locks down files isn't going to get very far, while one whose sole job is reproduction will spread far and wide and cause havoc only because of it's level of penetration and infection.
Dare I say it, I agree with the other poster. Removing IE as much as you can and outright attempting to replace it with Firefox may sound nice, but also removes the easy ability to use IE for those things that they may need to, those things which Firefox cannot do.
Do you really think that there were that many students going back to school who will be using Firefox who were just offline all summer?