I'm sure it's the application -- but at the same time, this would be a mute issues on a linux/mac setup.
I think you meen moot.
For the application that you describe viruses should not be a threat on any platform. There should be no users on the box and if there are users they should not run using admin privs unless they are doing admin. Break those rules and you are in trouble regardless.
Your problem is going to come from worms. There are plenty of worms that attack UNIX boxes.
A network router box with port filtering can be bought for $50 or less. It is a good investment regardless of the O/S you run. A large number of security problems are the result of an admin reconfiguring the box.
Actually, the authors of HNHG *did* invent the junk they published. It was published as fact but was really mostly just a bunch of concoctions.
Not really, they were following a trial left by Pierre Plantard, founder of the Priory of Sion. Plantard went about planting fake evidence to bolster the absurd claim that his secret society had been around for at least 300 years.
Plantard invented the grail thing, the idea that Jesus was not crucified, married Mary Magdalen and went to live in France. He also borrowed from a range of sources including the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Yes but this particular fantasy was invented wholesale by Pierre Plantard, a French conspiracy nut who claimed to be the descendant of Christ &tc. who set up the Priory of Sion and fabricated all the evidence. HB/HG is derivative of Plantard.
If Baigent and Leigh win then surely Plantard's estate is also due a cut?
OK, I am not Kevin Drum, somehow I linked through to the article I was linking to this morning on Drum. One wonders what his postbag is looking like.
My argument on the need for auditability such as it is, is here.
The Drum article I link to is actually quite interesting because it brings up another thing that happened yesterday, the Diebold machines were certified in California despite objections to the security flaws.
I have several spindles of blank CDs that I doubt I will ever use. These days I back the computers up to a portable 400Gb drive and if I was going to use disks for backup I would buy a DVD-RW burner.
I do not use CDs as anything other than a distribution medium for buying music at this stage. I listen to most music on my MP3 player or occasionally a computer. This seems to be what most people do.
Folk seem to be going down the wrong road here, the issue is not whether the Attorney has a right to keep his client's information confidential, it is whether there was a duty . That comes under much more general trade secret and client confidentiality laws.
I am not a lawyer but I am pretty sure that CA law does not protect client confidentiality in cases where the client is planning an overtly criminal act. But that does not mean that disclosure to the press is necessarily protected.
It seems somewhat unlikely that this trial is going to result in a guilty verdict unless the court prevents the defense from presenting their case that the accused believed that he was protecting the election to the jury.
What it does mean is that there is going to be a lot of intense scrutiny of Diebold's voting machines and a lot of internal Diebold correspondence is going to come out in court.
At this point Diebold paranoia is mostly on the left in the US, but as I was arguing in my blog this morning it is only a matter of time before the right begins to become equally suspicious. Whether justified or not there is going to be someone who cries foul. I really do not think it is at all likely that Diebold would be part of any electoral conspiracy, even if the CEO is a Republican I'll bet most of his engineers are liberals and libertarians.
The key discovery here is that a voting system has to be auditable, not just secure. Diebold's ATMs only need to be secure. The bank knows how much cash is put into them each day and how much is withdrawn. The machine itself is not the sole trusted component in the audit loop. That is not the case with the voting machine designs.
I've personally seen just one infected S60 phone. The owner had hit 'No' a couple of times, then just "yes yes yes really yes ok ok ok yes" to get rid of the requesters.
Stupid people should not have ANY control over their hardware.
It sounds to me that the 'stupid person' here was the engineer that designed a user interface that didn't allow the user to say 'no means no'.
The feature of javascript that allows programs to repeatedly display popups requesting a code download is a serious bug. It is the result of the Netscape mindset that the content producer 'owns' the user experience, not that the user does. It isn't the only think Netscape screwed up in the service of their real customers, the companies buying the Netscape servers and PSO engagements.
I believe that there will be a market for cell phone anti-virus but not one that McAfee and Symantec are likely to make money from. The wireless customers are going to consider this the problem of the carriers, they are right. Anti-Virus systems for cell phones will all work at the network level.
The same companies have gotten away with region coding for years, and that's a pretty clear violation of international trade laws, specifically the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade section 2.2.
Unfortunately that is binding on governements, not corporations.
I think that in time the pressure to ban use of technical measures for anti-competitive purposes is going to be outlawed as an anti-trust violation. From the 1930s through to the 1970s the US government used to police the use of patents to create artificial barriers to competition - the seven 'Nos'.
If I could buy an ink jet printer for $400 that allowed me to use commodity ink without restriction I would (and no I don't mean an after market auto-inker). Thats a much better markup for the printer vendor than $100 + 2 lots of cartridges at $50 each. I do not use colour very often because it is too expensive per page. It could easily be cheaper to run the ink jet than my laser.
If I lived in the UK I would have bought a region free DVD player years ago. Now that the UK DVDs are cheaper than US ones I might get round to doing it.
A 12 user setup is not enterprise class. The cost of the local IT shop sending an onsite guy out is more like $55/hour and setting up a Samba server that will take care of a shop of this size just as well as AD will take less than 4 hours. The cost of the two additional cals they will need is as much as the IT guy will cost them.
$55/hour? Plumbers charge more. Here in Boston the cleaning services charge $40/hr.
If you can't charge more than that then either you don't rate your skills highly enough or you don't have skills worth rating.
Having used Real player on Windows a couple of times I would have to agree, it's truly horrible. But just to show Real isn't all bad, check out Real player on Linux some time. It's incredibly clean, stripped down, with a straighforward and minimalist interface - it is, quite simply, an excellent media player.
Thats because 1) they think Linux users don't have any money, 2) the only reason there is a Linux version at all is to encourage sysops to push for support for the RealPlayer proprietary format.
I stopped using RealPlayer about three years ago after their free version was larded up with so much adware as to be impossible to use. Deliberately making the code difficult to install was not appreciated. Since then I have noted a steady decline in the number of real media feeds and it is now quite rare to be unable to find a stream in WAV or quicktime format.
The complaint about Outlook and Office is simply wierd. You can buy versions of Office with or without Outlook. If you do not want Outlook you can save a few bucks. Outlook has always been exclusive to the premium, enterprise oriented versions of Office. The calendar functions do not make much sense unless you are going to be making meeting using Exchange server.
The complaint about active directory goes a stage further. O/S have had directories built into them since Sun started shipping yellow pages. People have openly advocated merging LDAP and DNS systems since LDAP first appeared.
Its a matter of ease of deployment and use. Most likely, this little law office isn't going to have an IT guy and most of the day-to-day will fall on the office manager, which most likely doesn't know SaMBa from doing the Rumba. In that situation, the cheapy solution makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Hence the real geek gripe about Windows: substitution.
Geeks would much rather that the law firm use free software and pay some geek $10K to configure it than buy something designed to work out of the box than can be configured in half the time.
"A law office with ten employees using Windows XP is going to buy a Windows server, end of story."
Why would they do that? This is actually an ideal place to implement a Samba solution. At 12 systems they aren't even looking at a domain, they are looking for a workgroup solution. There are advantages in cost, reliably, and all aspects of performance.
Because there is a lot more to Windows server than NFS support. There is no open source system that provides a turnkey replacement for active directory.
The cost of Windows server is irrelevant compared to the cost of having someone set up any enterprise class server. IT consultants charge upwards of $2000 a day.
At which point they will be "commanded" to bend over and grab their ankles for IBM. Suddenly secretely supporting a company to launch a bullshit attack on a competitor doesn't seem so funny.
I don't think there is the slightest chance of any information comming out that would suggest that. Microsoft's consultations with their internal and external counsel are covered by an absolute privilege. IBM cannot subpoena that material.
I doubt that the Microsoft lawyers wrote a note to SCO saying 'here is $16 mil, go shaft IBM'. What is more likely is that Microsoft wrote a series of letters denying SCO's claims.
Given that IBM has already spent in the region of $75 mil defending this suit paying $16 mil to see the back of them does not seem like a bad deal.
Yes, learning how to figure things out with pencil and paper is the basis of being a programmer or engineer.
How do you do that until you have learned to read or write?
My five year old taught himself how to read fluently at the age of 4 by playing computer games. Oddly enough not even computer games designed to be educational. I-Spy spooky mansion has a series of picture riddles with written clues. I worked with him the first time through, after that he wanted to play the game on his own. He is now teaching himself how to write by creating rebus puzzles.
I have a big problem with the anti-technology in education crowd. It is mostly prejudice. Sure constant 1 on 1 attention from a trained pre-school teacher might be more effective, but that is not going to happen for the vast majority of children. Even if it did a computer has certain advantages over a teacher, the biggest problem in getting a child to read is getting them to want to read. When a person asks them to read they give a puzzled look 'why don't you just read this'. With the computer they can see an immediate incentive.
Education is unfortunately an area where it is very hard to apply a scientific approach. Any attempt at innovation will be attacked by the traditionalists. Most of the 'research' produced is worthless, produced to further an agenda rather than to illuminate.
A good example of this is the recent rubbish produced in the UK to back the teaching reading using structural phonics. The report was requested by a minister of education who has an axe to grind. The experiment described involves a sample that is too small to be meaningful and appears to be intentionally flawed as both groups were taught using phonics.
There is an infallible method of detecting junk research. Whenever the results are released to the press and endorsed by a politician involved in the commission of the study before the text of the document is available for third party examination then the study is junk.
Phonetics is the basis of virtually all forms of human writing. Even apparently non-phonetic systems such as Han began as phonetic systems. It should not be suprising then that the majority of children respond best to teaching methods that take account of phonetic structure. But that does not mean that a phonetic system developed by one particular clique is better than other systems to the extent that teachers should be prohibited from using any other technique with any child.
I agree that Linux would have come higher if the eventual OS installs of servers with no OS installs had been recorded, though.
The researchers claim to have adjusted for that effect. Most servers are sold without an O/S because even machines bought as Windows boxes are likely to have the O/S loaded under a site license.
The non-Linux market for UNIX continues to shrink. As it does machines move from expensive proprietary platforms like HP, Sun or AIX to commodity Intel/AMD boxes. This means that Linux is effectively handicapped against the traditional UNIX varieties in this race, as is Microsoft of course.
Servers have been getting cheaper for years, the server market changes as a result. Forty years ago servers were mostly $1 million plus mainframes. Today its a definition thing, you can buy a 'server' for $100 in Frys and hang a printer off it.
All the growth in the market comes at the bottom end as small businesses start to invest in infrastructure. A law office with ten employees using Windows XP is going to buy a Windows server, end of story. An ISP with 100 Linux boxes doing hosted web is going to buy Linux for machines 101, 102,...
I don't think the survey is actually measuring real transitions. There is no compelling reason to move from Linux to Windows or from Windows to Linux if you have installed base. There is a huge cost incentive to move from proprietary UNIX to Linux. There is also a major incentive to introduce Windows Server systems to provide support infrastructure for networks of Windows machines.
There are relatively few areas of overlap between Windows and Linux. Both can host Web sites, but once you have developed active server pages you are locked into Windows. Both can host a mail server, but people do not buy Exchange as just a mail server, the calendar features are the real value.
If you remember, also, on the PET and CBM machines, you could drop into an assembly-savvy prompt right on the terminal...I don't recall how that worked anymore, though...I wonder if any are for sale cheap on ebay?
Thats SYS 1024.
If you do SYS 6502 you get an easter egg written by Bill Gates.
Generally, the smaller the particle, the higher the mass and/or energy of that particle. Neither one of those properties seem to be helpful for trying to create high speed or low power circuits.
Protons weigh less than a hydrogen atom but they are much smaller. So no does not seem to fit.
Exotic quarks like top, botom, beauty, charm weigh much more than ordinary up or down quarks. But they do not have a meaningful size.
A much bigger obstacle to using any form of exotic particle in a chip would be the fact that 1) they are exhorbitantly expensive to make, all the exotic particles created since particle physics started would fit comfortably in a ball the size of a pea, 2) they are unstable lasting tiny fractions of a second.
We are probably closer to making a warp drive work and certainly a lot closer to making a fussion reactor than making ICs out of short lived subatomic particles.
You're missing a lot of details about this software. It's closed source, and a violation of the DMCA to reverse engineer it. That means writing an open source version of the encryption/decryption tools is going to be a nightmare.
The security of this system does not depend on secrecy of the design. It is the trusted hardware that is the critical point in the system.
This is actually a lousy copyright enforcement scheme. The number of equiped machines and hence the market for protected content is tiny. The chips in the machines only provide a limited degree of security against hardware attack. You cannot extract keys using power analysis or snoop on the buses but the chip can be cracked using destructive techniques.
Copyright enforcement is break once, run anywhere. Content rights management is much more feasible since you only provision a few tens or perhaps a hundred machines with the keys you care about.
The TCB drivers were ported to Linux by IBM. This is a good thing because keeping server signing keys in protected storage is going to be considered essential for SSL security at some point. For details see my blog essay
used to do that to as many of the PET and CBM machines as I could in the computer lab right before the bell rang...
GOTO 20 would be more efficient. Also better to have the semicolon after the print command to supress the blank line. And the +1 would cause the poke value to be between 1 and 256 so your program would crash after about three and a half lines.
Real men entered the data into the video buffer directly:
And yet people still keep voting for democrats. And people who receive these phone calls from the republican fundraisers keep voting for republicans. If you vote for an incumbent you deserve what you get. ANY incumbent.
Crist is a Republican, not a Democrat. This is likely to be a bipartisan issue though.
Well this is the point, you can vote spammy politicians out of office, the situation is self-limiting. Commercial spammers do not face the same penalties.
CAN-SPAM was written very tightly to avoid unintended over-reach or being struck down as unconstitutional. In particular the drafters did not want to create a new cause of action for frivolous class action lawsuits as happened as a result of the Nevada law. Limiting or controlling political speech was likely to result in the spammers getting the act struck down as unconstitutional.
It's not necessarily what the Orange Book is failing to take into account, it's the observer. Microsoft Windows, thanks to Microsoft Visual Studio, and Microsoft's maximum documentation overkill mindset, is childishly easy to write apps for, apps which themselves are ignorant of security and stability standards and free to traipse across the memory and hard drive under the idea that anything not forbidden is compulsory
The CAPTCHA test method of operating system security. Build an IQ test into the system so that the only people who will ever bother how to use it are wizards.
The MIT AI lab did this much better than Ken Thomson and co. Try OpenGenera (Lisp Machine). Very few people who didn't have an MIT Phd ever learned how to use it (and most of those were studding for their MIT Phd). Come to that very few people used Genera at all
Windows is the whipping boy of choice, and has demonstrated over and over that it's not secure. As nearly as I can tell, the "B2" rating you speak of doesn't validate security *at all*; it validates 'processes' and a 'model' designated by the military to be 'necessary for base security'.
You are quite right in pointing out that B2 is not very relevant to today's security needs. But the fact remains that Windows NT was designed from the outset to meet a measurable security criteria that UNIX was not designed to meet.
Fifteen years ago we used to say exactly the same thing about UNIX. UNIX machines were always being broken into. Part of that was bad security design like the SETUID bit and the world readable password file. But the main reason for the frequency of attack was exposure to a much more risky threat environment. Very few VMS machines were on networks that were anywhere near as large.
The real security catastrophe came when millions of machines running operating systems designed for standalone use only were connected to the Internet. Windows 95 provides pretty decent security for the environment it was designed to be used in. The problem is that it is now used in a very different environment.
UNIX has done better because it has had longer exposure to the relevant risk environment. UNIX has been adapted to meet the type of security concerns that affect Internet servers. That does not mean that it meets the security needs of Internet users. So far I don't think any of the O/S out there meet that need.
, I'm still looking, but I think that SELinux might meet B2 if someone paid for it to be analyzed.
Thats a bit like saying that Woody Allen might become Pope if he became a Catholic. Nobody has ever got their system certified without having to make a lot of changes to close loopholes. A major security shortcomming of UNIX is that the original designers were never required to produce proper end user documentation or security document. There is no document called the system security guide as required by orange book. Not having to produce that book meant that the designers never had to think about all the security issues of the system as a whole.
To regulate the internet is to regulate the library. Sure we can have a private internet, but to regulate the public internet is no different than regulating public libraries. The internet is all about information, nothing more nothing less. The internet is most profitable when it is filled with diverse information. How are we supposed to tell China to be a free and open society if we close and restrict the internet?
Very nice.
Now you have your liberflame off your chest perhaps you will take the trouble to read the article or if thats too much work my essay which is slightly shorter.
The issue here is not government introducing regulations to impose a two tier Internet, the issue is whether the government will allow large carriers to leverage their defacto local monopolies to extract rents from third parties in return for access to their subscribers.
'Kenny boy' Lay and his friends at Enron managed to defraud California out of about $15 billion when they persuaded Cheney to tell the regulators to look the other way. The carriers probably thought they could get the same deal.
As I point out in the essay I do not think it is exactly likely that Congress are going to support the carriers over Google. Legislation is mostly written by 20 year old staffers who spend most of their research time using Google. Thy can be expected to explain to the legislators that allowing this sort of thing would not be a smart move.
Two tier pricing could well make sense if the settlements bought a lot of extra bandwidth for a short time. It would be nice to have home videoconferencing that is actually worth something. But what the carriers are demanding at this point is money for what their subscribers are already paying for which ain't going to fly.
The government should have no control over the internet.
If you were paying a little more attention to the debate you would know that Google is the one asking the government to ban this type of discrimination.
The FCC regulates the Internet, of course there needs to be some oversight. The question is whether that oversight is going to be for the benefit of Internet users or whichever corporation paid the party who appointed the regulators the biggest bribe, sorry campaign contribution.
There could be value in two tier pricing but the carriers are too greedy to make it work. see my blog essay i wrote earlier.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you meen moot.
For the application that you describe viruses should not be a threat on any platform. There should be no users on the box and if there are users they should not run using admin privs unless they are doing admin. Break those rules and you are in trouble regardless.
Your problem is going to come from worms. There are plenty of worms that attack UNIX boxes.
A network router box with port filtering can be bought for $50 or less. It is a good investment regardless of the O/S you run. A large number of security problems are the result of an admin reconfiguring the box.
Not really, they were following a trial left by Pierre Plantard, founder of the Priory of Sion. Plantard went about planting fake evidence to bolster the absurd claim that his secret society had been around for at least 300 years.
Plantard invented the grail thing, the idea that Jesus was not crucified, married Mary Magdalen and went to live in France. He also borrowed from a range of sources including the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Yes but this particular fantasy was invented wholesale by Pierre Plantard, a French conspiracy nut who claimed to be the descendant of Christ &tc. who set up the Priory of Sion and fabricated all the evidence. HB/HG is derivative of Plantard.
If Baigent and Leigh win then surely Plantard's estate is also due a cut?
My argument on the need for auditability such as it is, is here.
The Drum article I link to is actually quite interesting because it brings up another thing that happened yesterday, the Diebold machines were certified in California despite objections to the security flaws.
I do not use CDs as anything other than a distribution medium for buying music at this stage. I listen to most music on my MP3 player or occasionally a computer. This seems to be what most people do.
I am not a lawyer but I am pretty sure that CA law does not protect client confidentiality in cases where the client is planning an overtly criminal act. But that does not mean that disclosure to the press is necessarily protected.
It seems somewhat unlikely that this trial is going to result in a guilty verdict unless the court prevents the defense from presenting their case that the accused believed that he was protecting the election to the jury.
What it does mean is that there is going to be a lot of intense scrutiny of Diebold's voting machines and a lot of internal Diebold correspondence is going to come out in court.
At this point Diebold paranoia is mostly on the left in the US, but as I was arguing in my blog this morning it is only a matter of time before the right begins to become equally suspicious. Whether justified or not there is going to be someone who cries foul. I really do not think it is at all likely that Diebold would be part of any electoral conspiracy, even if the CEO is a Republican I'll bet most of his engineers are liberals and libertarians.
The key discovery here is that a voting system has to be auditable, not just secure. Diebold's ATMs only need to be secure. The bank knows how much cash is put into them each day and how much is withdrawn. The machine itself is not the sole trusted component in the audit loop. That is not the case with the voting machine designs.
It sounds to me that the 'stupid person' here was the engineer that designed a user interface that didn't allow the user to say 'no means no'.
The feature of javascript that allows programs to repeatedly display popups requesting a code download is a serious bug. It is the result of the Netscape mindset that the content producer 'owns' the user experience, not that the user does. It isn't the only think Netscape screwed up in the service of their real customers, the companies buying the Netscape servers and PSO engagements.
I believe that there will be a market for cell phone anti-virus but not one that McAfee and Symantec are likely to make money from. The wireless customers are going to consider this the problem of the carriers, they are right. Anti-Virus systems for cell phones will all work at the network level.
Unfortunately that is binding on governements, not corporations.
I think that in time the pressure to ban use of technical measures for anti-competitive purposes is going to be outlawed as an anti-trust violation. From the 1930s through to the 1970s the US government used to police the use of patents to create artificial barriers to competition - the seven 'Nos'.
If I could buy an ink jet printer for $400 that allowed me to use commodity ink without restriction I would (and no I don't mean an after market auto-inker). Thats a much better markup for the printer vendor than $100 + 2 lots of cartridges at $50 each. I do not use colour very often because it is too expensive per page. It could easily be cheaper to run the ink jet than my laser.
If I lived in the UK I would have bought a region free DVD player years ago. Now that the UK DVDs are cheaper than US ones I might get round to doing it.
$55/hour? Plumbers charge more. Here in Boston the cleaning services charge $40/hr.
If you can't charge more than that then either you don't rate your skills highly enough or you don't have skills worth rating.
Thats because 1) they think Linux users don't have any money, 2) the only reason there is a Linux version at all is to encourage sysops to push for support for the RealPlayer proprietary format.
I stopped using RealPlayer about three years ago after their free version was larded up with so much adware as to be impossible to use. Deliberately making the code difficult to install was not appreciated. Since then I have noted a steady decline in the number of real media feeds and it is now quite rare to be unable to find a stream in WAV or quicktime format.
The complaint about Outlook and Office is simply wierd. You can buy versions of Office with or without Outlook. If you do not want Outlook you can save a few bucks. Outlook has always been exclusive to the premium, enterprise oriented versions of Office. The calendar functions do not make much sense unless you are going to be making meeting using Exchange server.
The complaint about active directory goes a stage further. O/S have had directories built into them since Sun started shipping yellow pages. People have openly advocated merging LDAP and DNS systems since LDAP first appeared.
Hence the real geek gripe about Windows: substitution.
Geeks would much rather that the law firm use free software and pay some geek $10K to configure it than buy something designed to work out of the box than can be configured in half the time.
Because there is a lot more to Windows server than NFS support. There is no open source system that provides a turnkey replacement for active directory.
The cost of Windows server is irrelevant compared to the cost of having someone set up any enterprise class server. IT consultants charge upwards of $2000 a day.
I don't think there is the slightest chance of any information comming out that would suggest that. Microsoft's consultations with their internal and external counsel are covered by an absolute privilege. IBM cannot subpoena that material.
I doubt that the Microsoft lawyers wrote a note to SCO saying 'here is $16 mil, go shaft IBM'. What is more likely is that Microsoft wrote a series of letters denying SCO's claims.
Given that IBM has already spent in the region of $75 mil defending this suit paying $16 mil to see the back of them does not seem like a bad deal.
How do you do that until you have learned to read or write?
My five year old taught himself how to read fluently at the age of 4 by playing computer games. Oddly enough not even computer games designed to be educational. I-Spy spooky mansion has a series of picture riddles with written clues. I worked with him the first time through, after that he wanted to play the game on his own. He is now teaching himself how to write by creating rebus puzzles.
I have a big problem with the anti-technology in education crowd. It is mostly prejudice. Sure constant 1 on 1 attention from a trained pre-school teacher might be more effective, but that is not going to happen for the vast majority of children. Even if it did a computer has certain advantages over a teacher, the biggest problem in getting a child to read is getting them to want to read. When a person asks them to read they give a puzzled look 'why don't you just read this'. With the computer they can see an immediate incentive.
Education is unfortunately an area where it is very hard to apply a scientific approach. Any attempt at innovation will be attacked by the traditionalists. Most of the 'research' produced is worthless, produced to further an agenda rather than to illuminate.
A good example of this is the recent rubbish produced in the UK to back the teaching reading using structural phonics. The report was requested by a minister of education who has an axe to grind. The experiment described involves a sample that is too small to be meaningful and appears to be intentionally flawed as both groups were taught using phonics.
There is an infallible method of detecting junk research. Whenever the results are released to the press and endorsed by a politician involved in the commission of the study before the text of the document is available for third party examination then the study is junk.
Phonetics is the basis of virtually all forms of human writing. Even apparently non-phonetic systems such as Han began as phonetic systems. It should not be suprising then that the majority of children respond best to teaching methods that take account of phonetic structure. But that does not mean that a phonetic system developed by one particular clique is better than other systems to the extent that teachers should be prohibited from using any other technique with any child.
Video games are designed to be interesting to the player, not to be interesting to watch as a non-player.
The researchers claim to have adjusted for that effect. Most servers are sold without an O/S because even machines bought as Windows boxes are likely to have the O/S loaded under a site license.
The non-Linux market for UNIX continues to shrink. As it does machines move from expensive proprietary platforms like HP, Sun or AIX to commodity Intel/AMD boxes. This means that Linux is effectively handicapped against the traditional UNIX varieties in this race, as is Microsoft of course.
Servers have been getting cheaper for years, the server market changes as a result. Forty years ago servers were mostly $1 million plus mainframes. Today its a definition thing, you can buy a 'server' for $100 in Frys and hang a printer off it.
All the growth in the market comes at the bottom end as small businesses start to invest in infrastructure. A law office with ten employees using Windows XP is going to buy a Windows server, end of story. An ISP with 100 Linux boxes doing hosted web is going to buy Linux for machines 101, 102,...
I don't think the survey is actually measuring real transitions. There is no compelling reason to move from Linux to Windows or from Windows to Linux if you have installed base. There is a huge cost incentive to move from proprietary UNIX to Linux. There is also a major incentive to introduce Windows Server systems to provide support infrastructure for networks of Windows machines.
There are relatively few areas of overlap between Windows and Linux. Both can host Web sites, but once you have developed active server pages you are locked into Windows. Both can host a mail server, but people do not buy Exchange as just a mail server, the calendar features are the real value.
Thats SYS 1024.
If you do SYS 6502 you get an easter egg written by Bill Gates.
Protons weigh less than a hydrogen atom but they are much smaller. So no does not seem to fit.
Exotic quarks like top, botom, beauty, charm weigh much more than ordinary up or down quarks. But they do not have a meaningful size.
A much bigger obstacle to using any form of exotic particle in a chip would be the fact that 1) they are exhorbitantly expensive to make, all the exotic particles created since particle physics started would fit comfortably in a ball the size of a pea, 2) they are unstable lasting tiny fractions of a second.
We are probably closer to making a warp drive work and certainly a lot closer to making a fussion reactor than making ICs out of short lived subatomic particles.
The security of this system does not depend on secrecy of the design. It is the trusted hardware that is the critical point in the system.
This is actually a lousy copyright enforcement scheme. The number of equiped machines and hence the market for protected content is tiny. The chips in the machines only provide a limited degree of security against hardware attack. You cannot extract keys using power analysis or snoop on the buses but the chip can be cracked using destructive techniques.
Copyright enforcement is break once, run anywhere. Content rights management is much more feasible since you only provision a few tens or perhaps a hundred machines with the keys you care about.
The TCB drivers were ported to Linux by IBM. This is a good thing because keeping server signing keys in protected storage is going to be considered essential for SSL security at some point. For details see my blog essay
GOTO 20 would be more efficient. Also better to have the semicolon after the print command to supress the blank line. And the +1 would cause the poke value to be between 1 and 256 so your program would crash after about three and a half lines.
Real men entered the data into the video buffer directly:
20 poke 32768 + 1000 * rnd (0), 256 * rnd (0): goto 20
Crist is a Republican, not a Democrat. This is likely to be a bipartisan issue though.
Well this is the point, you can vote spammy politicians out of office, the situation is self-limiting. Commercial spammers do not face the same penalties.
CAN-SPAM was written very tightly to avoid unintended over-reach or being struck down as unconstitutional. In particular the drafters did not want to create a new cause of action for frivolous class action lawsuits as happened as a result of the Nevada law. Limiting or controlling political speech was likely to result in the spammers getting the act struck down as unconstitutional.
The CAPTCHA test method of operating system security. Build an IQ test into the system so that the only people who will ever bother how to use it are wizards.
The MIT AI lab did this much better than Ken Thomson and co. Try OpenGenera (Lisp Machine). Very few people who didn't have an MIT Phd ever learned how to use it (and most of those were studding for their MIT Phd). Come to that very few people used Genera at all
You are quite right in pointing out that B2 is not very relevant to today's security needs. But the fact remains that Windows NT was designed from the outset to meet a measurable security criteria that UNIX was not designed to meet.
Fifteen years ago we used to say exactly the same thing about UNIX. UNIX machines were always being broken into. Part of that was bad security design like the SETUID bit and the world readable password file. But the main reason for the frequency of attack was exposure to a much more risky threat environment. Very few VMS machines were on networks that were anywhere near as large.
The real security catastrophe came when millions of machines running operating systems designed for standalone use only were connected to the Internet. Windows 95 provides pretty decent security for the environment it was designed to be used in. The problem is that it is now used in a very different environment.
UNIX has done better because it has had longer exposure to the relevant risk environment. UNIX has been adapted to meet the type of security concerns that affect Internet servers. That does not mean that it meets the security needs of Internet users. So far I don't think any of the O/S out there meet that need.
, I'm still looking, but I think that SELinux might meet B2 if someone paid for it to be analyzed.
Thats a bit like saying that Woody Allen might become Pope if he became a Catholic. Nobody has ever got their system certified without having to make a lot of changes to close loopholes. A major security shortcomming of UNIX is that the original designers were never required to produce proper end user documentation or security document. There is no document called the system security guide as required by orange book. Not having to produce that book meant that the designers never had to think about all the security issues of the system as a whole.
Very nice.
Now you have your liberflame off your chest perhaps you will take the trouble to read the article or if thats too much work my essay which is slightly shorter.
The issue here is not government introducing regulations to impose a two tier Internet, the issue is whether the government will allow large carriers to leverage their defacto local monopolies to extract rents from third parties in return for access to their subscribers.
'Kenny boy' Lay and his friends at Enron managed to defraud California out of about $15 billion when they persuaded Cheney to tell the regulators to look the other way. The carriers probably thought they could get the same deal.
As I point out in the essay I do not think it is exactly likely that Congress are going to support the carriers over Google. Legislation is mostly written by 20 year old staffers who spend most of their research time using Google. Thy can be expected to explain to the legislators that allowing this sort of thing would not be a smart move.
Two tier pricing could well make sense if the settlements bought a lot of extra bandwidth for a short time. It would be nice to have home videoconferencing that is actually worth something. But what the carriers are demanding at this point is money for what their subscribers are already paying for which ain't going to fly.
If you were paying a little more attention to the debate you would know that Google is the one asking the government to ban this type of discrimination.
The FCC regulates the Internet, of course there needs to be some oversight. The question is whether that oversight is going to be for the benefit of Internet users or whichever corporation paid the party who appointed the regulators the biggest bribe, sorry campaign contribution.
There could be value in two tier pricing but the carriers are too greedy to make it work. see my blog essay i wrote earlier.