> On the other hand what if you are in hicksville without your laptop and want to access an old email.
OK, catch 22. hourses for courses, swings and roundabouts and all that stuff. I like the idea of forwarding to GMail. that's pretty good. Better would be an account where you had both worlds. like GMail with POP. Now that would prod buttock.
the thing about the 'loads of storage space' thing is, right, archived mail, right? and to get to a web-based email service, I have to be online, right?
what if I'm not online? what if I'm in hicksville on my laptop and want to access an old email message from someone for some really important reason (yeah I know, incoherent sentence, but bear with me)
with the POP mail I have, my messages are RIGHT HERE. In have no need to go connecting to tha Intarweb to do this, right? but Gmail's amazing search capabilities so heavily plugged, are aimed right at this, going through your archived mail, right?
Is there some link I'm not making here? Forgive me, I'm in the pub so maybe I'm just lost.
A forthcoming bill in the U.S. Senate would, if passed, dramatically reshape copyright law by prohibiting file-trading networks and some consumer electronics devices on the grounds that they could be used for unlawful purposes.
just that last bit again:
they could be used for unlawful purposes
that applies to, well, everything. I could easily murder someone by smashing their head in with my laptop.
Surely, by this logic, my laptop should be banned, given that it can be used for an illegal purpose?
or is it just friday and I'm just as drunk as your average legislator? hell, I can't tell.
Re:I'm worried about...
on
Meet Joe Blog
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
flamebait?
slashdot's giving modpoints to jesus freaks now?
hey come on. salient is not the same as flamebait
I'm worried about...
on
Meet Joe Blog
·
· Score: -1, Flamebait
Last good comedy show was The Late Show, to my mind. then again I'm an expat Brit who's been here four-and-a-bit years, so I have no perspective outside that timeframe.
breaking into market or crushing market. either way it's here or nearly here. as usual, everyone has to go nuts. it does the tivo thing, it does the windows thing, and it also does the crushing competition thing. did they miss anything?
OK, so that clarifies, but the point still stands - 95 wasn't designed as a net-connected OS and the basic underlying objectives have changed little. Right up until it became a major issue.
Win 2003 server is pretty secure, because since XP the market has belligerently demanded it. Up till then, the subject didn't cross the barrier required to get it from "bunch of geeks" to "consumer"
> Why is WindowsXP still vulnerable to the same > viruses that Windows95 was?
Hate to say it, but it's because Windows XP-generation and its apps still have the same objective as Windows 95 and its apps did.
Functionality first, security second, internet be damned
Win95 was a pre-internet age OS. yes, the internet was around, but the vast majority of machines with 95 installed were not connected, or were connected on crappy slow modems at best. Windows XP's ethos has simply failed to keep up with the progress in internet connectivity.
Now, some users have kept up - I could run a 95 machine as securely as an XP machine right now, but the market has grown out of proportion to the average computing knowledge of the market, partly as a result of the simplicity and availability of windows. Unfortunately, the default configuration, until Windows Server 2003, has not had internet security in mind.
A non-net connected, or well firewalled, XP machine is pretty safe, just as a 95 machine is.
... I apologise for the percentage of MS users who are beyond help, and for the admins who allow them to be so.
We keep our corporate networks nice and clean, we stomp on infections fast, we try to educate our users, we run filters and firewalls, we put in place policies and we try our damndest to prevent this stuff.
But if those users go home to an infected PC, then we've failed. failed badly. We don't get paid to keep home machines clean, but how much harder would it be to really educate our users? really?
What can we do? Well, we can impress on our users, as I'm trying to do, that thay can suffer real, genuine harm if they don't practice safe computing.
I have this idea. A user doesn't give a crap if they're not harmed directly by a virus. OK, they have a spamming trojan on their machine, do they notice? no, they don't.
So I make sure I tell my users that there are viruses out there which can log their keystrokes and, by inference, steal their credit card number or online banking details or any other personal information.
That makes them wake up. Once there's a chance they might be directly affected in ways other than a slightly slowed down machine, then they start to take notice.
I'd urge every other techie on a windows network to inform your users in the same way. make sure they know that viruses aren't just something that affects other people. then they'll wake up, and everyone else will be better off. really.
... but not entirely unexpected or illogical. They wish to protect their bottom line, after all, which is what all mega corporations are required to do to compete. Look at it from the point of view of the heartless corporation.;-)
Of course it also means there's one more IE toolbar onto our 'banned' forever list. we used to allow the yahoo toolbar. >sigh
Slashdot Mirror
Outlook 2003 can and does block images by default in HTML email.
true. I posted my reply before the penny dropped about the pseudo-POP thing in OE. I don't think Outlook does the pseudo POP3 thing, does it? just OE?
yeah, sure, but we're talking about GMail. does GMail provide POP? If it does, rock and roll.
> On the other hand what if you are in hicksville without your laptop and want to access an old email.
OK, catch 22. hourses for courses, swings and roundabouts and all that stuff. I like the idea of forwarding to GMail. that's pretty good. Better would be an account where you had both worlds. like GMail with POP. Now that would prod buttock.
the thing about the 'loads of storage space' thing is, right, archived mail, right? and to get to a web-based email service, I have to be online, right?
what if I'm not online? what if I'm in hicksville on my laptop and want to access an old email message from someone for some really important reason (yeah I know, incoherent sentence, but bear with me)
with the POP mail I have, my messages are RIGHT HERE. In have no need to go connecting to tha Intarweb to do this, right? but Gmail's amazing search capabilities so heavily plugged, are aimed right at this, going through your archived mail, right?
Is there some link I'm not making here? Forgive me, I'm in the pub so maybe I'm just lost.
A forthcoming bill in the U.S. Senate would, if passed, dramatically reshape copyright law by prohibiting file-trading networks and some consumer electronics devices on the grounds that they could be used for unlawful purposes.
:
just that last bit again
they could be used for unlawful purposes
that applies to, well, everything. I could easily murder someone by smashing their head in with my laptop.
Surely, by this logic, my laptop should be banned, given that it can be used for an illegal purpose?
or is it just friday and I'm just as drunk as your average legislator? hell, I can't tell.
flamebait?
slashdot's giving modpoints to jesus freaks now?
hey come on. salient is not the same as flamebait
.... the word "Christian"
as anyone should be, really.
> requires us to pay an army of civil servants to read.
Ah! a make-work scheme to keep unemployment figures low before the next election. cunning
> Are you kidding?
actually I was, kinda.
> how many good Australian comedies are there?
Last good comedy show was The Late Show, to my mind. then again I'm an expat Brit who's been here four-and-a-bit years, so I have no perspective outside that timeframe.
"apparently 70 percent of spam is sent from China by American spam outfits who in turn have hosting arrangements with Chinese ISPs."
Infected Windows PCs Now Source Of 80% Of Spam
OK, which is the more reliable figure?
and the entertainment industry, don't forget them.
of course it's hard to see how we could fit more american programmes on Aussie TV
... I really do.
Windows XP Media Center
breaking into market or crushing market. either way it's here or nearly here. as usual, everyone has to go nuts. it does the tivo thing, it does the windows thing, and it also does the crushing competition thing. did they miss anything?
Yup, definitely there in my copy of J++ 6.0
;-)
yeah, I know. J++ 6.0. I feel suitably ashamed, thank you.
Well, IIRC, it was present in VS 6.0. I'll check that though.
maybe I go too far into the MS mindset, apologies.
that'd work for, oh, a few weeks. what you gonna do after that?
(yeah, I know it's a troll, I have a psychological disorder that makes me answer these posts. ask my doctor)
OK, so that clarifies, but the point still stands - 95 wasn't designed as a net-connected OS and the basic underlying objectives have changed little. Right up until it became a major issue.
Win 2003 server is pretty secure, because since XP the market has belligerently demanded it. Up till then, the subject didn't cross the barrier required to get it from "bunch of geeks" to "consumer"
Film at 11
corporate users, in a general sense, should a) live with the policies b) come up with a solid, working reason against said policies or c) leave.
> Why is WindowsXP still vulnerable to the same
> viruses that Windows95 was?
Hate to say it, but it's because Windows XP-generation and its apps still have the same objective as Windows 95 and its apps did.
Functionality first, security second, internet be damned
Win95 was a pre-internet age OS. yes, the internet was around, but the vast majority of machines with 95 installed were not connected, or were connected on crappy slow modems at best. Windows XP's ethos has simply failed to keep up with the progress in internet connectivity.
Now, some users have kept up - I could run a 95 machine as securely as an XP machine right now, but the market has grown out of proportion to the average computing knowledge of the market, partly as a result of the simplicity and availability of windows. Unfortunately, the default configuration, until Windows Server 2003, has not had internet security in mind.
A non-net connected, or well firewalled, XP machine is pretty safe, just as a 95 machine is.
... I apologise for the percentage of MS users who are beyond help, and for the admins who allow them to be so.
We keep our corporate networks nice and clean, we stomp on infections fast, we try to educate our users, we run filters and firewalls, we put in place policies and we try our damndest to prevent this stuff.
But if those users go home to an infected PC, then we've failed. failed badly. We don't get paid to keep home machines clean, but how much harder would it be to really educate our users? really?
What can we do? Well, we can impress on our users, as I'm trying to do, that thay can suffer real, genuine harm if they don't practice safe computing.
I have this idea. A user doesn't give a crap if they're not harmed directly by a virus. OK, they have a spamming trojan on their machine, do they notice? no, they don't.
So I make sure I tell my users that there are viruses out there which can log their keystrokes and, by inference, steal their credit card number or online banking details or any other personal information.
That makes them wake up. Once there's a chance they might be directly affected in ways other than a slightly slowed down machine, then they start to take notice.
I'd urge every other techie on a windows network to inform your users in the same way. make sure they know that viruses aren't just something that affects other people. then they'll wake up, and everyone else will be better off. really.
Well, that's something, I guess.
I was going to buy a Netgear wireless access point/router this week.
I initially went for it because my experience with their wired products has been good. A swift rethink would seem to be required.
Yeah, I agree, because looks are just what I worry about in my beta software
(?)
... but not entirely unexpected or illogical. They wish to protect their bottom line, after all, which is what all mega corporations are required to do to compete. Look at it from the point of view of the heartless corporation. ;-)
Of course it also means there's one more IE toolbar onto our 'banned' forever list. we used to allow the yahoo toolbar. >sigh