That may be true, but if you do not point out that halve truths hidden in the grand parent then you're not helping much. As far as I know you could simply be stating that to be trollish or something. I am not saying that you're lying, that I don't know, I have a limited knowledge in history, in fact I do get my history from TV, magazines and wikipedia;-) and because of that I cannot say what is wrong the grand parent.
I don't know, the US culture is much more centered in fear and has a higher level of social pressure in several ways. Well at least is in that way that you sell your country thought a number of movies and TV series, since I never went there to see for myself but I do have seen thousands of your movies and TV shows.
Every aspect of your lives, and I mean this in a broad way not personal, is ruled by a division of winners and loosers. This division is quite bad, a "looser" has a very heavy social burden, so I guess that this could be a source of this fear you talk.
Here in Brazil, or at least here in Rio, Brazil is very big after all, we usually do not classify people, at least not to their "faces". We are very polite and what would be the "winners" or "popular" people here will treat everybody equally well, once again "to their faces". It is considered "bad mojo" to be rude and to put people down. In a certain way, in my experience at least, being popular here means have more friends possible, leave no one out.:-D
This does not mean that there will not be discrimination and other social problems, it only means that usually those problems are more "under the surface". Some people will talk to you with a big smile as if you're their best friends and in your back they will still screw you up if they think it is needed.
Sure most of us can find out who is only being polite and who is not quite easily, but many foreigner people can find this hard, mainly when they are used to a more sincere and to the face attitude. Witch way is better? I don't know, probably none, as each model has it's advantages.
But returning to my point, this fear of not being accepted is not as common here as you see in US movies, my opinion is that many ads and marketing campaigns here target more a desire then a fear. The point here is not making people afraid, is more like making people relate to the trade marks in a positive way so when they see them they will be more likely to buy them. So they are funny and many of them show people having fun, surrounded by beautiful women, and every one is always smiling a fake smile with white teeth.
The fact that a app has to endure 50,000 inserts per second does not mean that it does have to do it every second. It probably mean that in some peak moment it does reach this level, but most of the time it have a much lighter access ratio.
Well, I am not so shure about this. I certainly could see this point of view in certain products like clothes, stetical products and even cars or other stuff that supose to give status (apple gear?). But not many people buy beer, for instance, for fearing not to ghet laid.
I don't know where you live, but here many marketing pieces do target something you do want. They show people being happy, parting or doing something pleasant. If you relate to the sceene in some level, for instance desiring to be one of those fake persons in a fake party where everyone is smiling all the time, in theory you will see the product with better eyes. This is not exploring a fear, even if you do have a fear of not beign anti-social or something. It is exploring something you wish.
On Friday, June 9th 2006 at 3.30pm, after sending several unanswered letters asking for an interview, and after warning of his coming, Richard Stallman led a delegation composed by Frédéric Couchet (Free Software Foundation France) and Christophe Espern (EUCD.INFO initiative) to meet the French Prime minister.
this came from the article, it states that he did sended several letters asking for an appointment, none of the letters were answered so he sent a warning of his comming. This sounds to me like a frustade attempt to make an appointement.
This "deliver in hands" routine is a last attempt to get the message, I believe that everyone in the party wasn't expecting to get to acomplish the meeting. But this is the last line, it is a political movement that says, or should say, to everyone that reads it that this administration has it's door closed to the needs of the consumers and is more avid to discuss police with Bill Gates then with their citzens that RMS were representing, when he took those hundred of thousand signatures.
The brazilian police is hopping to catch some drug dealer that are using Orkut, massively popular arround here, to sell drugs. But there is a line, if the drug dealer or bank robber posted publicly their crimes, then then they get what they deserve. But if the police or NSA or anybody else start bulling the companies to release them private notes and information, without a judge permit (I forgot the correct word:-P), I would think this is going too far.
What I mean is, if NSA or the police is using the data that is presented to everyone, it is okay. But if they gain a priviledged access to private records of the clients it is wrong and should be forbiden.
I aways think that people don't get right what is private and what is public. How many people I heard that it is absurd that someone that they did not indended read their scraps notes. Scrap notes are public to all orkut users, and are used by many people to chat arround, but some post to their unofficial lovers or secret stuff.
Except that people will not notice this slow down, or they will blame google. Now, with our net neutrality, when a site is slow what do you think is happening? You will prbably think "sure this site has a low bandwidth, or maybe it is slashdoted" and how can you be sure that it is not being throtled down by the weasel ISP?
And even if you realize that you are reciving less service then you're paying to, since you payed for "internet with X bandwidth" and not "internet with X bandwidth to certain services". When you attempt to change ISP do you really think there will be a neutral ISP available? And who is to say that the backbones will not start charging for trafic on them also? When you connect from X to Y you pass for a holle lot of router, if every company on the net that wants to deliver something fast has to worry about avery single router in the world then I guess there will be no way to that company make a profit.
It is scalable, soon joe sixpack will have a 68 stars computer, and he will know that he can only run games and application that have 68 or less stars. The only problem is counting those damn stars.:-D
Seriously though, I question this simple ratings, be it bogomips or # of stars. How does several ways of interaction matter? If I have a simple processor with 4gb of fast ram and a ultimate video board how does this compare with a dual core multi-gigahertz, top of the line with 512Mb and a on-board poor video card that shares memory with the main system? And if I have all the latest gizwiz stuff but my hard-drive is slower? There are simply too many ways to measure the speed of a computer, even AMD and Intel have different best-case scenarios.
Monarchy ensure freedom for the crown. Anarchy ensure freedom for the strong. Capitalism ensures freedom for the rich. Democracy ensures freedom for the majority. Republics ensure freedom for their constituents. All forms of government ensure freedom for those who are in power.
Or better saying :
Monarchy ensure power for the crown. Anarchy ensure power for the strong. Capitalism ensures power for the rich. Democracy ensures power for the majority. Republics ensure power for their constituents. All forms of government ensure power for some class.
Why do americans have to put "freedom" in every other sentence? Freedom is not the important, historicaly speaking, and the worry about who is free and who is not is very recent. Why do you think that slave labor was so common and only now it has disapeared, from sight, for I believe that many people are still slaves but the common sense just call them by other names.
Sure, I believe freedom is important, I believe that we should fight for it, but I also believe that the USA is not doing anything to make the world more free, or even the americans more free. In the modern world one can get out with anything, all you need is money and by money I mean power. For this is what this is all about, DRM is not because the poor record companies are getting less money, is about the fact that if they don't do anything they will loose power and then they will be screwed.
In the US, everyone can turn into president or maybe not. To even become a candidate in all states a huge amount of money (power) is needed. To have a slim chance of winning you need to make a campaing wroth of a few oscar, and again you need money. But all of this will be for nothing more then getting the people to know your name or your party so you can run for a lesser office in the next election unless you're part of one of the two main parties, and I can bet that you do not reach such a high place without consetions to "important people".
Freedom is a illusion, is a marketing campain that many goverments have been playing so people don't revolt. But we do live in relative better world, we have a less violence, we have more liberties and at least in the high class of the world we can live in a luxuory life that many kings of yesterday would only dream of, well at least those of us who are luck enougth to be a median class citizen, or better, of a country in civil order.
Not exactly, the text has been copyed int o the clipboard, witch is out of bound of the 'undo' operation. So this sequence ("ctrl-x ctrl-z") does the same of a simple 'copy' (ctrl-c).:-D
- Well so you want the car, would you want a service and maintanace insurance with it also? - How much it costs? - it's $50,000.00 a year. - $50,000.00 a year? - screams the customer - yup. - I guess not. - Are you sure? - responds the seller with a worried face. - Yes. - It might explode, you know. - says the seller it a very low volume. - What? - What? - What you just said? - nothing, I was just wondering if would like this incredible service and maintanace contract, for only $55,000.00 a year. - Wasn't it $50,000.00 a year? - It was a promotion, but that is over now. - And what about explosions, can this car explode? - Off course not, no way, this brand of car never explodes - in a lower voice - unless you put gas on it. - WHAT? - But this will not be a problem with our service, you see our mechanics will install the latest and newest anti-explosion kits during the nigth, so you will not be bothered. - So you're saying that unless I sign this contract the car can explode. - Not if you don't put any gas in it. - But without gas how can I drive it. - nervous - I guess that would be a problem, on the hand you would not have any problems with explosions. - No, absolutely, no, I will not buy a car that can explode. - But sir, may I remind you that you already signed the papers. Also there is nothing to worry about, the car won't explode anyway, unless you do some dumb mistake like starting the car with gas in it. And even so many customers did that and their car did not exploded. - oh, I fell much more confortable now... - well, not right away, anyway. And none of the customers that had their car exploded complained, so the explosion may be a good feature. - Can we null this contrat? - Nope, you see the contract is binding and eletronic, so your account has already been billed and the car is already yours. - So, you're saing that I already own a car that can explode any time. - not unless you put gas on it, you know gas is very dangerous. - I will sue your company, this is absurd. - Sir, may I show this paragraf in the contract that says that the company is not responsible for any damage cause by the gas, even including explosions and fires. - And if I sign this service contract? - Well then you don't need to worry about the explosions. - With it I can put gas on my car??? - Well yes. - Well I will sign it. - Here is the contract, it is only $60,000.00 a year. - What?!?, never mind. - the customer signs the contract and leaves.
It did release a license whose aim was to use existing copyright law to prevent proprietary software by making people choose between being able to build upon a free software project, or being able to release something proprietary, and likewise is using the same bargain against DRM.
I'm sorry, I don't think this is acurate. The GPL does not prevent proprietary software in no way. IUt prevents the free software that it protects to turn into proprietary, like what happened with BSD several times already.
This anti-DRM stuff in the GPL3 is for the same reason. Do you remember the scene where agent smith says "what good is a phone call, when you have no mouth"? This is the same, the way DRM is heading we will have it implemented on the hardware, then we will be able to use our free software, but we will have lost our freedom to tinker. Because the hardware will refuse to run the software once it has changed and not signed with the magic key.
GPL3 says that if a key is needed to sign the code in order to run it, then this key is part of the source, it must be shared. It does not say that you must share your private key that you use to sign your emails, because this key is not essential to run the software in question. But if there is a linux in the praystation 8, why shouldn't I be able to upload my version of that linux with my optimizations and hacks? If to run on it I need it to be signed by FONY, what good are the source if I cannot run it?
Well the problem isn't the math on the article, the problem is that you're trying to parse a natural language statement with a mathematical mindset. Mathematical texts, proofs and literature in general is written in a very concise and with great attention to the precision of what is being stated, and it is read in the same way, with every step being dissected and followed precisely.
Natural language don't have those requirements, it's intention is to communicate an idea and if this is successfully it don't matter how precise the idea is being stated. In the phrase above you got the idea, and I suppose you could, as I got, even learned more then simpe number.
The use of "up to", makes an idea that this value (30 times less) is in fact the best that it could do, this makes this final result more or less useless, when does this reach this levels? How often does this virtualization scheme gets to this 30 times speed up? My guess is that this is a highly specialized result that can only be achieved in testing environments, otherwise they would have used a wording like "consistently reaches 30 times less" or "it is 30 times less in average", simply because it sounds better.
Well, analyzing the hole result one can clearly sees that the message is clear and could be written in one sentence: "We feel that this solution is better, faster and cooler then Linux, use it now". They throw a few technical reasons to support and make a extraordinary claim with the best numbers they could crush. Now, I am not stating that this virtualization sucks or that they are being sneaky, this is a common tatics after all "up to 30 times less" is much better then the real mean multiplier and they are trying to make people see their otherwise unknown product, what better way then comparing with the product everyone knows and love?
Exactly, a good wireless TLD should be a trhee letter combination of "adgjmptw". ".jmp" is quite cool, maybe ".dad", ".jpg". But if I had the power I would say ".wa" for "Wireless Access".
The problem is, people don't care if they are secure or not, all they want is to feel safe. I know that is stupid, but most people have a limited way of looking into things that happen arroud them. How many people questions the resons why you told them about the vunerability?
All they can see is that you can enter without a password, for them to feel safe they must believe that the problem is not the system itself, but it was you, you had the supernatural power to break the system, and who knows what else. If the falt is yours they can still trust the world arround them.
Here Here, if firefox has crashed on me it must have been while I wasn't looking, because I can't really remember. I, as I stated in other thread in slashdot, have my confidence in the mozilla foundation. They are not tring to hide anything from me, be it the source code of their products be it the bugs they fix be it the bugs they found in it. It is all publicly available, it is more then you can say about MS, or apple or Sun.
MS has all this FUD going arround, but it is all marketing stunts. They think, and pehaps it could even be true to some degree, that if they put their suited monkeys speaking over and over, linux is more expensinve, linux is less reliable, linus is ugglier then Bill Gates, people will believe it and repeat (as parrots do). And that comment, article is abolut that.
By the way trusting MS, and many other companies, to say something true about a competitor is foolish.:-P It is not a question of the quality of what they do, I personally don't like it but other do like and who am I to say that they are wrong? It is a matter of believing a company who has been caught lying before, who has been doing dirty tricks on almost every corner where they are involved.
I imagined that, but you can never be too sure. As trait of my nacionality, I am Brazilian, I don't like to be rude and to offend people, more so with someone I don't know personaly. In fact, many of us here are unconfortable with being rude even with people that we actually dislike or consider them as a enemy.
This may seem good, but it has a dark side also, you have to learn how to "read people", otherwise is very hard to know when the person you are talking too is only being polite or when she really means to be friendly.
But anyway, back to topic, I aways try to be carefully when speaking in foruns in the web, because is very easy to hurt of offend people. We don't have a face-to-face or voice stress feedback, and those two are very comunicative, without those a simple joke can turn into a flametrhower, sometimes.... You can never be too carefully.
I don't think anti-virus is a good security solution. I think that preventing the virus from infecting in the first place would be a better solution. MS should be studding ways to harden the OS, A better separation between user/adimin would be a good start, they've been promissing that for some time now, but I have not seen it yet (as default of course).
But this is not enouth, a separation between the capabilities of each application would be good also, something in the line of SELinux. I know some people don't like it, because it causes some head aches, sometimes, but security is about this, forbidding the most you can so that the operation you want to do is still 100% functional.
As it happened with genetics, the Soviets often would persue anything other than the West is doing, just for sake of being different
I think that is good that science should be divided in such a way, a "just to be diferent" could make the research into fields that do not seem atractive at first sight just to find out a incredible result hidding in a corner.
With the amout of comunication we have today, in any givven area we end up having lot's of lot's of similar works in similar stuff. There is a "fashion subject" of the moment, everyone want's to study this for it's promisses of a new ground in whatever. If the fashion way is a dead end, we have a lot of people working for not much, if we had a diverging research, just to be different it would be better.
Unfortunaly science is, in the end, a battle of egos. Everyone, with few exceptions, want's to be the next prize winner, or have their name up high in the relevant papers. We should work, that this egos are satisfied, because that's what is making we live as we live today.
Please, by no means I was impliing or telling that your are an idiot or any other "bad name" for that matter. I do believe that there are problems in common for all browser, as I stated and you confirmed, there could be flaws in the specifications that would render all conforming browsers vulnerable. There may be subtle implementantion mistakes that are easily to be followed by two or more people that would implement the same thing.
I also don't think opera is a bad choice, it is much better then IE and it even can render the acid test, witch I believe that FF still does not pass. I do not know how secure it realy is, I believe that only opera workers can be sure about it, since it is a closed source browser. But in the other hand it's usage is not very high so there isn't much incentive to dig out problems with him, so I guess this could cancel out the "security throgh obscurity" factor.
I fell myself more confortable with FF, due to both my belieth that open is better then close and the fact that it has shown over and over that it is responsible and will fix the problems promptly as they appear.
I don't believe no project is perfect and without flaws, we're all humans, and we humans tend to make mistakes.
Microkernels have the promisse of mendling with lower level stuff without even have to reboot, since those things would be in the 'user space'. That would be nice.
I don't understand why people complain about the hype of combining old technologies, as if it wasn't something new. Usually the new and incredible stuff that get's out is a simple combination of "old technologies". In fact people have to tinker and tinker with new technology to get used to it, when people are used to it and learned their potentials and limitations, that is the point when someone can have a briliant idea and say "well if I fit this and that, maybe the result is bigger then both".
That is the hype behind AJAX, is a combination of old and tried stuff that when used in conjunction gets you a result that is better (or not?) then the parts. This is a good sign, is a sign that our tools are getting mature and people are confident enouth to use them, sure there will be some AJAX stuff that will suck and be all wrong, but AJAX is new now. People are just now getting the problems of this new way of doing stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
That may be true, but if you do not point out that halve truths hidden in the grand parent then you're not helping much. As far as I know you could simply be stating that to be trollish or something. I am not saying that you're lying, that I don't know, I have a limited knowledge in history, in fact I do get my history from TV, magazines and wikipedia ;-) and because of that I cannot say what is wrong the grand parent.
Please enlight us...
I don't know, the US culture is much more centered in fear and has a higher level of social pressure in several ways. Well at least is in that way that you sell your country thought a number of movies and TV series, since I never went there to see for myself but I do have seen thousands of your movies and TV shows.
:-D
Every aspect of your lives, and I mean this in a broad way not personal, is ruled by a division of winners and loosers. This division is quite bad, a "looser" has a very heavy social burden, so I guess that this could be a source of this fear you talk.
Here in Brazil, or at least here in Rio, Brazil is very big after all, we usually do not classify people, at least not to their "faces". We are very polite and what would be the "winners" or "popular" people here will treat everybody equally well, once again "to their faces". It is considered "bad mojo" to be rude and to put people down. In a certain way, in my experience at least, being popular here means have more friends possible, leave no one out.
This does not mean that there will not be discrimination and other social problems, it only means that usually those problems are more "under the surface". Some people will talk to you with a big smile as if you're their best friends and in your back they will still screw you up if they think it is needed.
Sure most of us can find out who is only being polite and who is not quite easily, but many foreigner people can find this hard, mainly when they are used to a more sincere and to the face attitude. Witch way is better? I don't know, probably none, as each model has it's advantages.
But returning to my point, this fear of not being accepted is not as common here as you see in US movies, my opinion is that many ads and marketing campaigns here target more a desire then a fear. The point here is not making people afraid, is more like making people relate to the trade marks in a positive way so when they see them they will be more likely to buy them. So they are funny and many of them show people having fun, surrounded by beautiful women, and every one is always smiling a fake smile with white teeth.
The fact that a app has to endure 50,000 inserts per second does not mean that it does have to do it every second. It probably mean that in some peak moment it does reach this level, but most of the time it have a much lighter access ratio.
Well, I am not so shure about this. I certainly could see this point of view in certain products like clothes, stetical products and even cars or other stuff that supose to give status (apple gear?). But not many people buy beer, for instance, for fearing not to ghet laid.
I don't know where you live, but here many marketing pieces do target something you do want. They show people being happy, parting or doing something pleasant. If you relate to the sceene in some level, for instance desiring to be one of those fake persons in a fake party where everyone is smiling all the time, in theory you will see the product with better eyes. This is not exploring a fear, even if you do have a fear of not beign anti-social or something. It is exploring something you wish.
Most marketing sucks anyway...
this came from the article, it states that he did sended several letters asking for an appointment, none of the letters were answered so he sent a warning of his comming. This sounds to me like a frustade attempt to make an appointement.
This "deliver in hands" routine is a last attempt to get the message, I believe that everyone in the party wasn't expecting to get to acomplish the meeting. But this is the last line, it is a political movement that says, or should say, to everyone that reads it that this administration has it's door closed to the needs of the consumers and is more avid to discuss police with Bill Gates then with their citzens that RMS were representing, when he took those hundred of thousand signatures.
Good for me that I live in a country that bases 98% of it's marketing on sex appeal, witch I find it, well... more appealing then fear.
The brazilian police is hopping to catch some drug dealer that are using Orkut, massively popular arround here, to sell drugs. But there is a line, if the drug dealer or bank robber posted publicly their crimes, then then they get what they deserve. But if the police or NSA or anybody else start bulling the companies to release them private notes and information, without a judge permit (I forgot the correct word :-P), I would think this is going too far.
What I mean is, if NSA or the police is using the data that is presented to everyone, it is okay. But if they gain a priviledged access to private records of the clients it is wrong and should be forbiden.
I aways think that people don't get right what is private and what is public. How many people I heard that it is absurd that someone that they did not indended read their scraps notes. Scrap notes are public to all orkut users, and are used by many people to chat arround, but some post to their unofficial lovers or secret stuff.
Except that people will not notice this slow down, or they will blame google. Now, with our net neutrality, when a site is slow what do you think is happening? You will prbably think "sure this site has a low bandwidth, or maybe it is slashdoted" and how can you be sure that it is not being throtled down by the weasel ISP?
And even if you realize that you are reciving less service then you're paying to, since you payed for "internet with X bandwidth" and not "internet with X bandwidth to certain services". When you attempt to change ISP do you really think there will be a neutral ISP available? And who is to say that the backbones will not start charging for trafic on them also? When you connect from X to Y you pass for a holle lot of router, if every company on the net that wants to deliver something fast has to worry about avery single router in the world then I guess there will be no way to that company make a profit.
It is scalable, soon joe sixpack will have a 68 stars computer, and he will know that he can only run games and application that have 68 or less stars. The only problem is counting those damn stars. :-D
Seriously though, I question this simple ratings, be it bogomips or # of stars. How does several ways of interaction matter? If I have a simple processor with 4gb of fast ram and a ultimate video board how does this compare with a dual core multi-gigahertz, top of the line with 512Mb and a on-board poor video card that shares memory with the main system? And if I have all the latest gizwiz stuff but my hard-drive is slower? There are simply too many ways to measure the speed of a computer, even AMD and Intel have different best-case scenarios.
Or better saying :
Monarchy ensure power for the crown.
Anarchy ensure power for the strong.
Capitalism ensures power for the rich.
Democracy ensures power for the majority.
Republics ensure power for their constituents.
All forms of government ensure power for some class.
Why do americans have to put "freedom" in every other sentence? Freedom is not the important, historicaly speaking, and the worry about who is free and who is not is very recent. Why do you think that slave labor was so common and only now it has disapeared, from sight, for I believe that many people are still slaves but the common sense just call them by other names.
Sure, I believe freedom is important, I believe that we should fight for it, but I also believe that the USA is not doing anything to make the world more free, or even the americans more free. In the modern world one can get out with anything, all you need is money and by money I mean power. For this is what this is all about, DRM is not because the poor record companies are getting less money, is about the fact that if they don't do anything they will loose power and then they will be screwed.
In the US, everyone can turn into president or maybe not. To even become a candidate in all states a huge amount of money (power) is needed. To have a slim chance of winning you need to make a campaing wroth of a few oscar, and again you need money. But all of this will be for nothing more then getting the people to know your name or your party so you can run for a lesser office in the next election unless you're part of one of the two main parties, and I can bet that you do not reach such a high place without consetions to "important people".
Freedom is a illusion, is a marketing campain that many goverments have been playing so people don't revolt. But we do live in relative better world, we have a less violence, we have more liberties and at least in the high class of the world we can live in a luxuory life that many kings of yesterday would only dream of, well at least those of us who are luck enougth to be a median class citizen, or better, of a country in civil order.
Not exactly, the text has been copyed int o the clipboard, witch is out of bound of the 'undo' operation. So this sequence ("ctrl-x ctrl-z") does the same of a simple 'copy' (ctrl-c). :-D
- Well so you want the car, would you want a service and maintanace insurance with it also?
- How much it costs?
- it's $50,000.00 a year.
- $50,000.00 a year? - screams the customer
- yup.
- I guess not.
- Are you sure? - responds the seller with a worried face.
- Yes.
- It might explode, you know. - says the seller it a very low volume.
- What?
- What?
- What you just said?
- nothing, I was just wondering if would like this incredible service and maintanace contract, for only $55,000.00 a year.
- Wasn't it $50,000.00 a year?
- It was a promotion, but that is over now.
- And what about explosions, can this car explode?
- Off course not, no way, this brand of car never explodes - in a lower voice - unless you put gas on it.
- WHAT?
- But this will not be a problem with our service, you see our mechanics will install the latest and newest anti-explosion kits during the nigth, so you will not be bothered.
- So you're saying that unless I sign this contract the car can explode.
- Not if you don't put any gas in it.
- But without gas how can I drive it. - nervous
- I guess that would be a problem, on the hand you would not have any problems with explosions.
- No, absolutely, no, I will not buy a car that can explode.
- But sir, may I remind you that you already signed the papers. Also there is nothing to worry about, the car won't explode anyway, unless you do some dumb mistake like starting the car with gas in it. And even so many customers did that and their car did not exploded.
- oh, I fell much more confortable now...
- well, not right away, anyway. And none of the customers that had their car exploded complained, so the explosion may be a good feature.
- Can we null this contrat?
- Nope, you see the contract is binding and eletronic, so your account has already been billed and the car is already yours.
- So, you're saing that I already own a car that can explode any time.
- not unless you put gas on it, you know gas is very dangerous.
- I will sue your company, this is absurd.
- Sir, may I show this paragraf in the contract that says that the company is not responsible for any damage cause by the gas, even including explosions and fires.
- And if I sign this service contract?
- Well then you don't need to worry about the explosions.
- With it I can put gas on my car???
- Well yes.
- Well I will sign it.
- Here is the contract, it is only $60,000.00 a year.
- What?!?, never mind. - the customer signs the contract and leaves.
I'm sorry, I don't think this is acurate. The GPL does not prevent proprietary software in no way. IUt prevents the free software that it protects to turn into proprietary, like what happened with BSD several times already.
This anti-DRM stuff in the GPL3 is for the same reason. Do you remember the scene where agent smith says "what good is a phone call, when you have no mouth"? This is the same, the way DRM is heading we will have it implemented on the hardware, then we will be able to use our free software, but we will have lost our freedom to tinker. Because the hardware will refuse to run the software once it has changed and not signed with the magic key.
GPL3 says that if a key is needed to sign the code in order to run it, then this key is part of the source, it must be shared. It does not say that you must share your private key that you use to sign your emails, because this key is not essential to run the software in question. But if there is a linux in the praystation 8, why shouldn't I be able to upload my version of that linux with my optimizations and hacks? If to run on it I need it to be signed by FONY, what good are the source if I cannot run it?
Well the problem isn't the math on the article, the problem is that you're trying to parse a natural language statement with a mathematical mindset. Mathematical texts, proofs and literature in general is written in a very concise and with great attention to the precision of what is being stated, and it is read in the same way, with every step being dissected and followed precisely.
Natural language don't have those requirements, it's intention is to communicate an idea and if this is successfully it don't matter how precise the idea is being stated. In the phrase above you got the idea, and I suppose you could, as I got, even learned more then simpe number.
The use of "up to", makes an idea that this value (30 times less) is in fact the best that it could do, this makes this final result more or less useless, when does this reach this levels? How often does this virtualization scheme gets to this 30 times speed up? My guess is that this is a highly specialized result that can only be achieved in testing environments, otherwise they would have used a wording like "consistently reaches 30 times less" or "it is 30 times less in average", simply because it sounds better.
Well, analyzing the hole result one can clearly sees that the message is clear and could be written in one sentence: "We feel that this solution is better, faster and cooler then Linux, use it now". They throw a few technical reasons to support and make a extraordinary claim with the best numbers they could crush. Now, I am not stating that this virtualization sucks or that they are being sneaky, this is a common tatics after all "up to 30 times less" is much better then the real mean multiplier and they are trying to make people see their otherwise unknown product, what better way then comparing with the product everyone knows and love?
Exactly, a good wireless TLD should be a trhee letter combination of "adgjmptw". ".jmp" is quite cool, maybe ".dad", ".jpg". But if I had the power I would say ".wa" for "Wireless Access".
The problem is, people don't care if they are secure or not, all they want is to feel safe. I know that is stupid, but most people have a limited way of looking into things that happen arroud them. How many people questions the resons why you told them about the vunerability?
All they can see is that you can enter without a password, for them to feel safe they must believe that the problem is not the system itself, but it was you, you had the supernatural power to break the system, and who knows what else. If the falt is yours they can still trust the world arround them.
hehehe ops. My bad... :-D
Here Here, if firefox has crashed on me it must have been while I wasn't looking, because I can't really remember. I, as I stated in other thread in slashdot, have my confidence in the mozilla foundation. They are not tring to hide anything from me, be it the source code of their products be it the bugs they fix be it the bugs they found in it. It is all publicly available, it is more then you can say about MS, or apple or Sun.
:-P It is not a question of the quality of what they do, I personally don't like it but other do like and who am I to say that they are wrong? It is a matter of believing a company who has been caught lying before, who has been doing dirty tricks on almost every corner where they are involved.
MS has all this FUD going arround, but it is all marketing stunts. They think, and pehaps it could even be true to some degree, that if they put their suited monkeys speaking over and over, linux is more expensinve, linux is less reliable, linus is ugglier then Bill Gates, people will believe it and repeat (as parrots do). And that comment, article is abolut that.
By the way trusting MS, and many other companies, to say something true about a competitor is foolish.
Gcc? No you're wong man. Actually it is ldd who bind OSS together, gcc only compiles.
I imagined that, but you can never be too sure. As trait of my nacionality, I am Brazilian, I don't like to be rude and to offend people, more so with someone I don't know personaly. In fact, many of us here are unconfortable with being rude even with people that we actually dislike or consider them as a enemy.
This may seem good, but it has a dark side also, you have to learn how to "read people", otherwise is very hard to know when the person you are talking too is only being polite or when she really means to be friendly.
But anyway, back to topic, I aways try to be carefully when speaking in foruns in the web, because is very easy to hurt of offend people. We don't have a face-to-face or voice stress feedback, and those two are very comunicative, without those a simple joke can turn into a flametrhower, sometimes.... You can never be too carefully.
I don't think anti-virus is a good security solution. I think that preventing the virus from infecting in the first place would be a better solution. MS should be studding ways to harden the OS, A better separation between user/adimin would be a good start, they've been promissing that for some time now, but I have not seen it yet (as default of course).
But this is not enouth, a separation between the capabilities of each application would be good also, something in the line of SELinux. I know some people don't like it, because it causes some head aches, sometimes, but security is about this, forbidding the most you can so that the operation you want to do is still 100% functional.
I think that is good that science should be divided in such a way, a "just to be diferent" could make the research into fields that do not seem atractive at first sight just to find out a incredible result hidding in a corner.
With the amout of comunication we have today, in any givven area we end up having lot's of lot's of similar works in similar stuff. There is a "fashion subject" of the moment, everyone want's to study this for it's promisses of a new ground in whatever. If the fashion way is a dead end, we have a lot of people working for not much, if we had a diverging research, just to be different it would be better.
Unfortunaly science is, in the end, a battle of egos. Everyone, with few exceptions, want's to be the next prize winner, or have their name up high in the relevant papers. We should work, that this egos are satisfied, because that's what is making we live as we live today.
Please, by no means I was impliing or telling that your are an idiot or any other "bad name" for that matter. I do believe that there are problems in common for all browser, as I stated and you confirmed, there could be flaws in the specifications that would render all conforming browsers vulnerable. There may be subtle implementantion mistakes that are easily to be followed by two or more people that would implement the same thing.
I also don't think opera is a bad choice, it is much better then IE and it even can render the acid test, witch I believe that FF still does not pass. I do not know how secure it realy is, I believe that only opera workers can be sure about it, since it is a closed source browser. But in the other hand it's usage is not very high so there isn't much incentive to dig out problems with him, so I guess this could cancel out the "security throgh obscurity" factor.
I fell myself more confortable with FF, due to both my belieth that open is better then close and the fact that it has shown over and over that it is responsible and will fix the problems promptly as they appear.
I don't believe no project is perfect and without flaws, we're all humans, and we humans tend to make mistakes.
Microkernels have the promisse of mendling with lower level stuff without even have to reboot, since those things would be in the 'user space'. That would be nice.
I don't understand why people complain about the hype of combining old technologies, as if it wasn't something new. Usually the new and incredible stuff that get's out is a simple combination of "old technologies". In fact people have to tinker and tinker with new technology to get used to it, when people are used to it and learned their potentials and limitations, that is the point when someone can have a briliant idea and say "well if I fit this and that, maybe the result is bigger then both".
That is the hype behind AJAX, is a combination of old and tried stuff that when used in conjunction gets you a result that is better (or not?) then the parts. This is a good sign, is a sign that our tools are getting mature and people are confident enouth to use them, sure there will be some AJAX stuff that will suck and be all wrong, but AJAX is new now. People are just now getting the problems of this new way of doing stuff.