There is no such think as completely secure. That is the first think these analysis those understand.
Yes, two factor is not perfect. But it is better than the password-only method. It is also (somewhat) cost-effective.
Since banks are used as an example for this, lets consider that, if the protection method is not cost-effective, it is cheaper for the bank to just accept the frauds, with or without ensurance.
Biometrics isn't perfect either. Even something that is widely considered perfect for security these days will show itself flawed in the future. So just bashing an idea because it is not perfect or foolproof is just plain stupid.
At least on paper, Microsoft's plans are good. Of course I, as much as any other/.er, expect they will screwup. But thats another issue.
Actually, it probably makes no difference for Oracle, as long they are installing selling their products. Be it under Solaries, Windows or whatever.
And considering IBM is pushing DB2 again, and Sun is the major solutiotion provider for Oracle highend products (like their ERP solution), it only makes sense they will support Sun on this one.
Now, I'm really surprised to find those two on the same boat. Despite that, does anyone think their reaction toward Linux would be any different ?
Both Microsoft and Sun are fighting deadly battles against Linux. They intent to take no prisioners.
On second thought, I'm not surprised. If there is anything that would unite Microsoft and Sun, that would be fighting Linux.
Also note they are created EDS to fight, among others, IBM. IBM is a heavy Linux supported and, by attacking Linux, they are also attacking the services IBM is selling.
There's no proof that Bush lied about WMDs. We had bad intel because past presidents gutted our operations in the middle east. Being misinformed, making a judgment call based on imperfect information...these things are not lying.
He was very clear, and said he was 100% sure. His representatives even said so to the United Nations.
But he did have to do something to cripple terrorism, and it does seem to be working. Egypt just opened their elections, Syria is pulling out of Lebanon, Iraq had elections, Qudaffi gave up the ghost. There's way too much evidence the Bush administration is doing the right thing to ignore.
By what right did Bush decided that an election was what Iraq needed ? By what right did Bush decided the fate of entire populations of other countries ? He has every right to do anything he pleases INSIDE the USA. If he wants to do something outside, there are correct ways to do that (United Nations, Diplomacy etc).
Since when the USA has the right to play the bully and force THEIR VIEWS (which are only one of many view) uppon the rest of the world ?
Is the USA paying for the reconstrution of Iraq alone ? What about the lives of other people, from other country, taken because of that invasion ?
So why do you choose to focus on the unsubstantiated point that "Bush lied" while ignoring all of these substantiated points that what he's doing is having the exact effect that any good American should want?
I WANT your money NOW. Give it to me.
What ? Well, I want it. Just because I want it, that doesn't mean it is right.
Since when fighting terror with terror is the right thing to do ?
We slipped up there a little. Oh well. Bad things happen in war when the chain of command breaks down.
Yes, thank you very much for supporting my point, which is exactly that. I never said Bush ordered the prisioners tortured on Gitmo. I never even said they WERE being tortured there. On the other hand, as you just said, it can and will happen, when you consider an organization as large as the USA armed forces. That is why outside control mechanisms are needed.
My attitude about Abu Ghraib is that we had people in the field that screwed up, we're dealing with it, and these things happen. Make an omelet, break a few eggs. It's war.
Are you saying that is justifiable ?
I'm down with every last detainee at Gitmo. I certainly wouldn't want the govt to release them and have them turn up in my neighborhood six months down the road. I think they should be given closed military tribunals and Bush doesn't seem to be doing that, so I do have points of disagreement on the details. But broad strokes, I think it's being handled in a way that protects us and doesn't compromise human rights to any degree we should be worried about.
And there you are wrong. First, yes, it can be close tribunals, but not closed military tribunals. Selected representatives of international bodies should be present.
Any compromise of human rights should worry us. Every big crime wave starts with small crimes. So monitotions should start early in the process.
Ok, I want to understand your argument, so let me get this straight. In your mind, countries like Iran and North Korea have moral equivalency with the United States?
Um, perspective much?
Besides the fact that I really don't think moral has anything to do with it, not to mention the fact that moral is not a word a would use to describe the Bush government.
In this particular case, I was speaking of Brazil, and our facilites that refine nuclear fuel for energy production. Check the news, and you will see what kind of pressure (bulling) USA used.
Are you going to compare Brazil with Iran and North Korea ?
I don't think there are any terribly good reasons to cut people's heads off. So, if I read you right, you're rationalizing the behavior of the terrorists? You're saying, "Hey, th
When are people like you going to wise up and start giving our government and our country the benefit of the doubt? They haven't done anything wrong yet!
How about forging evidence that Iraq had WMDs ? How about invading another country, putting the live of the civilian population at risk, for no real proof of anything ? Where are all those WMDs ?
How about pretty much ignoring the United Nations when invading Iraq, and then having them to help rebuilding the country that was, in part, destroyed by the invasion itself ?
How about those pictures of tortures everyone saw ? Isn't that enough proof ?
And even if we disregard all that, the simple fact that there is a lot of people (not all) held at Gitmo whose status is questionable, is enough to make me worry.
Oh, and before I forget: how about the fact that the USA governemnt DEMANDS that every country in the whole damn world allow them to inspect their facilities, while denying access to USA facilities even to USA human rights organizations ?
And, while you are at that, what would you call a good reason to cut a person's head off ?
Freedom is NOT freedom is it is forced uppon you. And since when the USA governemnt invaded Iraq due to religious issues ?
"Please ignore our previous actions and give us the benefit of the doubt". Yeah, right...
And proving that you see all of this as nothing but a game, and that all you can do is try making fun on other people arguments helps you side in what way ?
If you think I'm wrong, make your case. Otherwise, keep your peace, since you are making absolutely no contribution to this discussion.
In the USA, it takes a trial in court to prove that allegation. These people are not given one. How, then, are they "not innocent?" Are you saying that they're guilty until proven innocent? That's certainly not the American Way... in fact, it's strikingly unamerican!
And since the prime objective of the terrorist was to "destroy the American Way", I think they won.
How can you say that those actions are legal, since you have no idea what is really happening there ? Or even the identities of the people held there ?
people captured on the battlefield engaged in some kind of resistance or another.
Like resisting an invading army.
They were foreign nationals committing organized acts of war against the US
It is increadibly how widely varied the definition of "acts of war" can be.
There's no need for a trial, there's no need for Geneva Conventions
This speaks for itself.
We have to have some way of protecting ourselves against things like this. Why wouldn't we throw these people in the can and forget about them? Who cares about civil rights?
I'm pretty sure Hittler spoke words like that.
They don't operate under our Constitution (...) I just don't see any problem with this whole thing. Can someone explain it to me?
Sure. YOU should operate under your own constitution. And all the international papers you signed in the past.
That is true sometimes, of course. But that was not the point I was trying to make.
I was comparing people with comparable skills. Just a question of productivity due to system resources, and the fact that you will have, in the long run, lower suport calls with a unix network.
Most people tend to forget a basic fact about Unix versus Windows. Their learning curves are the inverse of each other.
To learn basic skills, Windows is (usually) easier. But the more you want to advance your knowledge, the harder it gets.
Unix is the oposite. Harder to learn the basics, and keeps getting easier and easier to advance your knowledge.
Just as an extra note, we don't know where this shares are coming from.
Are their the shares still held by the original founders, or are they the shares that ABN-Amro Bank held ?
If their are the shares held by the original founders, one has to guess how many shares of Mandrake are held by ABN, and if this is some kind of twisted move from ABN to get a hold of Mandrake too.
I'm sure it is very good for Mandrake, for the reasons already posted by several others here (mostly the brazilian government). And it will come pretty cheap for them, all things considered. If they invested that kind of money in comercial operations in Brazil (marketing, offices etc), they would not be able to get 10% of the market they are getting this way.
For Conectiva, I'm afraid to guess.
Conectiva turned into a profitable company mostly by firing employees and closing offices. That is what you get when you have a bank as the major shareholder of a company. Also, a good share of the technical ex-employees left on their own, instead of being fired, and opened their own companies. From that, you can see how much potential market was there. As far as I know, all those companies are profitable (although they are much smaller than Conectiva).
When RedHat opened their office here in Brazil, it was maned almost entirely by people that have left Conectiva.
On the other hand, I always considered Conectiva Linux technicaly more advanced than Mandrake.
So, IMHO, if we can join Conectiva's technical expertise, with Mandrake's comercial expertise, we might end up with a very nice company.
I have tried contacting a couple of Conectiva founders (board members) since I've heard of this. Got no answer so far, which is probably to be expected.
Considering Conectiva used to have 200+ employees when I used to work there, and it has around 60 now, I don't know how many they can still fire while keeping their doors open.
Slashdot Mirror
There is no such think as completely secure. That is the first think these analysis those understand.
/.er, expect they will screwup. But thats another issue.
Yes, two factor is not perfect. But it is better than the password-only method. It is also (somewhat) cost-effective.
Since banks are used as an example for this, lets consider that, if the protection method is not cost-effective, it is cheaper for the bank to just accept the frauds, with or without ensurance.
Biometrics isn't perfect either. Even something that is widely considered perfect for security these days will show itself flawed in the future.
So just bashing an idea because it is not perfect or foolproof is just plain stupid.
At least on paper, Microsoft's plans are good. Of course I, as much as any other
Actually, it probably makes no difference for Oracle, as long they are installing selling their products. Be it under Solaries, Windows or whatever.
And considering IBM is pushing DB2 again, and Sun is the major solutiotion provider for Oracle highend products (like their ERP solution), it only makes sense they will support Sun on this one.
Not only Microsoft is there, but Sun too.
Now, I'm really surprised to find those two on the same boat. Despite that, does anyone think their reaction toward Linux would be any different ?
Both Microsoft and Sun are fighting deadly battles against Linux. They intent to take no prisioners.
On second thought, I'm not surprised. If there is anything that would unite Microsoft and Sun, that would be fighting Linux.
Also note they are created EDS to fight, among others, IBM. IBM is a heavy Linux supported and, by attacking Linux, they are also attacking the services IBM is selling.
Don't expect to see any changes on that quarter.
There's no proof that Bush lied about WMDs. We had bad intel because past presidents gutted our operations in the middle east. Being misinformed, making a judgment call based on imperfect information...these things are not lying.
He was very clear, and said he was 100% sure. His representatives even said so to the United Nations.
But he did have to do something to cripple terrorism, and it does seem to be working. Egypt just opened their elections, Syria is pulling out of Lebanon, Iraq had elections, Qudaffi gave up the ghost. There's way too much evidence the Bush administration is doing the right thing to ignore.
By what right did Bush decided that an election was what Iraq needed ? By what right did Bush decided the fate of entire populations of other countries ? He has every right to do anything he pleases INSIDE the USA. If he wants to do something outside, there are correct ways to do that (United Nations, Diplomacy etc).
Since when the USA has the right to play the bully and force THEIR VIEWS (which are only one of many view) uppon the rest of the world ?
Is the USA paying for the reconstrution of Iraq alone ? What about the lives of other people, from other country, taken because of that invasion ?
So why do you choose to focus on the unsubstantiated point that "Bush lied" while ignoring all of these substantiated points that what he's doing is having the exact effect that any good American should want?
I WANT your money NOW. Give it to me.
What ? Well, I want it. Just because I want it, that doesn't mean it is right.
Since when fighting terror with terror is the right thing to do ?
We slipped up there a little. Oh well. Bad things happen in war when the chain of command breaks down.
Yes, thank you very much for supporting my point, which is exactly that. I never said Bush ordered the prisioners tortured on Gitmo. I never even said they WERE being tortured there. On the other hand, as you just said, it can and will happen, when you consider an organization as large as the USA armed forces. That is why outside control mechanisms are needed.
My attitude about Abu Ghraib is that we had people in the field that screwed up, we're dealing with it, and these things happen. Make an omelet, break a few eggs. It's war.
Are you saying that is justifiable ?
I'm down with every last detainee at Gitmo. I certainly wouldn't want the govt to release them and have them turn up in my neighborhood six months down the road. I think they should be given closed military tribunals and Bush doesn't seem to be doing that, so I do have points of disagreement on the details. But broad strokes, I think it's being handled in a way that protects us and doesn't compromise human rights to any degree we should be worried about.
And there you are wrong. First, yes, it can be close tribunals, but not closed military tribunals. Selected representatives of international bodies should be present.
Any compromise of human rights should worry us. Every big crime wave starts with small crimes. So monitotions should start early in the process.
Ok, I want to understand your argument, so let me get this straight. In your mind, countries like Iran and North Korea have moral equivalency with the United States?
Um, perspective much?
Besides the fact that I really don't think moral has anything to do with it, not to mention the fact that moral is not a word a would use to describe the Bush government.
In this particular case, I was speaking of Brazil, and our facilites that refine nuclear fuel for energy production. Check the news, and you will see what kind of pressure (bulling) USA used.
Are you going to compare Brazil with Iran and North Korea ?
I don't think there are any terribly good reasons to cut people's heads off. So, if I read you right, you're rationalizing the behavior of the terrorists? You're saying, "Hey, th
Okey, I'll take the bait.
...
When are people like you going to wise up and start giving our government and our country the benefit of the doubt? They haven't done anything wrong yet!
How about forging evidence that Iraq had WMDs ? How about invading another country, putting the live of the civilian population at risk, for no real proof of anything ? Where are all those WMDs ?
How about pretty much ignoring the United Nations when invading Iraq, and then having them to help rebuilding the country that was, in part, destroyed by the invasion itself ?
How about those pictures of tortures everyone saw ? Isn't that enough proof ?
And even if we disregard all that, the simple fact that there is a lot of people (not all) held at Gitmo whose status is questionable, is enough to make me worry.
Oh, and before I forget: how about the fact that the USA governemnt DEMANDS that every country in the whole damn world allow them to inspect their facilities, while denying access to USA facilities even to USA human rights organizations ?
And, while you are at that, what would you call a good reason to cut a person's head off ?
Freedom is NOT freedom is it is forced uppon you. And since when the USA governemnt invaded Iraq due to religious issues ?
"Please ignore our previous actions and give us the benefit of the doubt". Yeah, right
Neither do I. But how about the United Nations ? Oh, I forgot. The USA just ignores them these days.
So, how do you think (neutral party) should be allowed to inspect Gitmo ?
And proving that you see all of this as nothing but a game, and that all you can do is try making fun on other people arguments helps you side in what way ?
If you think I'm wrong, make your case. Otherwise, keep your peace, since you are making absolutely no contribution to this discussion.
People could use something like the various spam blocking sites (i.e. Spamhaus) that would put and end to that crap
Maybe I missed the part where it put an end to that crap of e-mail spams.
Maybe the problem won't be as big as the article claims, but it surely won't be that simple to solve.
By my logic, you can find out. Independant observers can find out. The judges can find out.
By yours, one should never be allowed to find out. Not you, not me, not internation observers, not even the judges.
In the USA, it takes a trial in court to prove that allegation. These people are not given one. How, then, are they "not innocent?" Are you saying that they're guilty until proven innocent? That's certainly not the American Way... in fact, it's strikingly unamerican!
And since the prime objective of the terrorist was to "destroy the American Way", I think they won.
How can you say that those actions are legal, since you have no idea what is really happening there ? Or even the identities of the people held there ?
I think talking about Hitler should be considered treason, and you should be shipped to Gitmo very fast.
Maybe countering that argument would give you more credit than just dismissing it ?
people captured on the battlefield engaged in some kind of resistance or another.
Like resisting an invading army.
They were foreign nationals committing organized acts of war against the US
It is increadibly how widely varied the definition of "acts of war" can be.
There's no need for a trial, there's no need for Geneva Conventions
This speaks for itself.
We have to have some way of protecting ourselves against things like this. Why wouldn't we throw these people in the can and forget about them? Who cares about civil rights?
I'm pretty sure Hittler spoke words like that.
They don't operate under our Constitution (...) I just don't see any problem with this whole thing. Can someone explain it to me?
Sure. YOU should operate under your own constitution. And all the international papers you signed in the past.
That is true sometimes, of course. But that was not the point I was trying to make.
I was comparing people with comparable skills. Just a question of productivity due to system resources, and the fact that you will have, in the long run, lower suport calls with a unix network.
Most people tend to forget a basic fact about Unix versus Windows. Their learning curves are the inverse of each other.
To learn basic skills, Windows is (usually) easier. But the more you want to advance your knowledge, the harder it gets.
Unix is the oposite. Harder to learn the basics, and keeps getting easier and easier to advance your knowledge.
Cost of a Linux support person compared to a Winblow -> HIGH
Rightly so, considering that a Linux support/admninstrator can handle, in average, 3 times more users/machines.
Absense of proof is not proof of absense.
So, just because some fiction things can happen in real life, doesn't mean all of them hold true.
How many corporations can you name that didn't use their powers to consolidate their bases ?
Yes, it should be questioned. But we should not act surprised when we see it happening.
Yes, that was some nice fiction, wasn't it ?
Some of the best fiction works I ever read.
Maybe it would also hold true for corporations. Inside a fiction book.
Several offices where closed, RJ and BH among others.
The truth to the issue was that Conectiva was cutting costs to make itself profitable.
Closing branch offices and doing business using business partness only was one of the things they did.
I'm not sure I agree 100% with what they did, or their motivation for it, but they are profitable now.
And there you are wrong.
Conectiva was NEVER, EVER close to bankrupcy.
Yes, it was not profitable for most of its existance, but that situation changed some time ago (1 year or so).
From what I gathered from talking to various people, this is not about saving Conectiva. It is about making MORE money than they do now.
ABN-AMRO was on of the investers in Mandrakesoft before it went public
And now one wonders how much of the new company ABN-AMRO owns.
I just got some confirmation from Conectiva that they will be merging their products, even before the next release of Conectiva Linux (11).
From that, one can imagine they will start merging their linux distributions almost imediately.
Neither dpkg or rpm can solve dependencies, unfortunately. They will point the dependencies, but not solve them.
That is why urpm/apt/smart are needed.
Just as an extra note, we don't know where this shares are coming from.
Are their the shares still held by the original founders, or are they the shares that ABN-Amro Bank held ?
If their are the shares held by the original founders, one has to guess how many shares of Mandrake are held by ABN, and if this is some kind of twisted move from ABN to get a hold of Mandrake too.
I'm sure it is very good for Mandrake, for the reasons already posted by several others here (mostly the brazilian government). And it will come pretty cheap for them, all things considered. If they invested that kind of money in comercial operations in Brazil (marketing, offices etc), they would not be able to get 10% of the market they are getting this way.
For Conectiva, I'm afraid to guess.
Conectiva turned into a profitable company mostly by firing employees and closing offices. That is what you get when you have a bank as the major shareholder of a company. Also, a good share of the technical ex-employees left on their own, instead of being fired, and opened their own companies. From that, you can see how much potential market was there. As far as I know, all those companies are profitable (although they are much smaller than Conectiva).
When RedHat opened their office here in Brazil, it was maned almost entirely by people that have left Conectiva.
On the other hand, I always considered Conectiva Linux technicaly more advanced than Mandrake.
So, IMHO, if we can join Conectiva's technical expertise, with Mandrake's comercial expertise, we might end up with a very nice company.
I have tried contacting a couple of Conectiva founders (board members) since I've heard of this. Got no answer so far, which is probably to be expected.
Considering Conectiva used to have 200+ employees when I used to work there, and it has around 60 now, I don't know how many they can still fire while keeping their doors open.
No idea on the Mandrake side, tho.