You rarely, if ever, install an application in a new OS which was designed for an old one.
And I am talking about Fortune 500 companies all around the world, which is where I have been working for the last 15 years.
In smaller companies you may do so, and as long as the application provider tells you it should work, you should be on the clear, but notice how the application is the one that dirves the adoption of the OS.
.... but the unions had far too much power in the UK.
Curbing their power was a good thing.
The UK and the US are the two more prosperous and economically stable countries of the developped world, the Thatcherite foundations created a climate in which work flexibility benefits both companies and workers (UK unemplyment has been literally non existent for many years).
Do not try to rewrite history, please. Don't insult our intelligence.
The GNU tools existed before Linux snad is what Linus used in order to build his new kernel.
Of course that they feed from each other since then, but there is no chicken and egg scenario here, all the Interent saw who laid the egg and the chickling hatching.
Stallman was the Engineer, the ideologue and even did sume plumbing.
Of course nobody ever knows about the people doing the dirty work in a pretty building, but their peers should be there to recognize their achievements when the general public fail to see their significance.
I hope all of you write to Time just to let them know the may be commiting an injustice, if anything they should receive a joint mention whenever OSS's influence is praised.
When Java came out the concept of virtual machine was not widespread, and certainly MS was not even thinking about it (heck, they were on denial about the Interenet, forget about applets and Java powered servers).
And as for all the object oriented stuff, that was described eons earlier in C++ and similar languages.
There is no chance in hell that MS has any valid patents pertaining to Java.
But the people saying the opossite using a similar analogy are also wrong.
We don't need analogies.
If the AP is open, you can connect.
If the AP is secured you can't.
That is how it was designed to work, if people are not using it correctly it should not be brought to bear against the people that are using the standard correctly.
... to which some people will go to make a cheap point.
TO any reasonable person it is glaringly obvious that a cable box, just because sits outside your property, is not an open invitation to make your own connection from there.
An unsecured wireless AP in the other hand is fucking sayin " Hello! I am here! I am unsecured!"
How you can compare one with the other is left as an exercise of the unexplainable.
From a technical point of view it is perfectly legitimate to connect to a service that is not secured. That is how any protocols are desinged to work, WiFi is not any different.
A router is not private property in the same sense as a house, specially if it is broadcasting its presence beyond the property of the owner. The analogy is completely flawed and it should not be used.
If you want to ascert your rihgt to control access to your AP then all the tools are provided, it is your by laziness and misinformation that owners of AP don't do so.
By leaving your AP open you leave it completely open to interpretation if you want people to use it or not.
Frankly people leaving it open should be assumed to be invinting others. The onous of securing the access point should be in the owners, not in the people within range that may even connect unknowingly.
Why morons all around the world are putting blame in the wrong person baffles me.
Slashdot Mirror
I want to be IT manager there.
And then you are in your own. No patches, no fixes. No nothing.
With Linux you can hire support or fix problems yourelf (as in hiring developers to get you out of a hole).
Applications are firmly tied up to OSes.
You rarely, if ever, install an application in a new OS which was designed for an old one.
And I am talking about Fortune 500 companies all around the world, which is where I have been working for the last 15 years.
In smaller companies you may do so, and as long as the application provider tells you it should work, you should be on the clear, but notice how the application is the one that dirves the adoption of the OS.
But the drooling about screen dumps is a regular feature of sites allegedly geared towards technically savy people.
.... but the unions had far too much power in the UK.
Curbing their power was a good thing.
The UK and the US are the two more prosperous and economically stable countries of the developped world, the Thatcherite foundations created a climate in which work flexibility benefits both companies and workers (UK unemplyment has been literally non existent for many years).
It wasn't Gorbachev matey.
Do not try to rewrite history, please. Don't insult our intelligence.
The GNU tools existed before Linux snad is what Linus used in order to build his new kernel.
Of course that they feed from each other since then, but there is no chicken and egg scenario here, all the Interent saw who laid the egg and the chickling hatching.
Stallman was the Engineer, the ideologue and even did sume plumbing.
Of course nobody ever knows about the people doing the dirty work in a pretty building, but their peers should be there to recognize their achievements when the general public fail to see their significance.
I hope all of you write to Time just to let them know the may be commiting an injustice, if anything they should receive a joint mention whenever OSS's influence is praised.
When se went embracing people with AIDS for example, she did so during a time of great ignorance about the disease.
Nobody is perfect, but to try to micro criticize people no matter what is frankly unfair and in some cases dishonest.
Wait, what is that I am hearing?
Er, it is silence I think.
Google for it.
When Java came out the concept of virtual machine was not widespread, and certainly MS was not even thinking about it (heck, they were on denial about the Interenet, forget about applets and Java powered servers).
And as for all the object oriented stuff, that was described eons earlier in C++ and similar languages.
There is no chance in hell that MS has any valid patents pertaining to Java.
.... when DVD Jon has the cracks ready please.
If I can't play on my Linux boxes I am not interested.
But the people saying the opossite using a similar analogy are also wrong.
We don't need analogies.
If the AP is open, you can connect.
If the AP is secured you can't.
That is how it was designed to work, if people are not using it correctly it should not be brought to bear against the people that are using the standard correctly.
We are not talking about property or tresspassing, we are talking about protocols.
If you don;t close your AP the network is open.
If you secure it it is closed.
How much clearer can we get?
... to which some people will go to make a cheap point.
TO any reasonable person it is glaringly obvious that a cable box, just because sits outside your property, is not an open invitation to make your own connection from there.
An unsecured wireless AP in the other hand is fucking sayin " Hello! I am here! I am unsecured!"
How you can compare one with the other is left as an exercise of the unexplainable.
From a technical point of view it is perfectly legitimate to connect to a service that is not secured. That is how any protocols are desinged to work, WiFi is not any different.
A router is not private property in the same sense as a house, specially if it is broadcasting its presence beyond the property of the owner. The analogy is completely flawed and it should not be used.
If you want to ascert your rihgt to control access to your AP then all the tools are provided, it is your by laziness and misinformation that owners of AP don't do so.
The network was wide open.
If you are going to especulate, at least part from correct assumptions.
You have freedom, unless you are an oposition candidate, you say a government official is not doing his job, and then you are sued for defamation.
And I think nobody will have too much work guessing which way the judicial power leans whenever such case is heard.
Many Sinagaporean opposition politicians have been bankrupted this way.
To pretend that Singapore has free elections is a vulgar lie that should be denounced wherever one sees it.
In many really free countries nobody bats an eye lid if somebody is haveing a sandwich or a drink in the underground or a bus.
-Don't kill young adults for being drugs mules.
-Don't execute nannies after years of abuse.
We may have some misconceptions, but some other conceptions are base in hard facts.
This is a country where when the oposition is campaining they are sued for defamation if in their opinion a government official is not doing his job.
I leave it to you to guess how many cases has the oposition won.
By leaving your AP open you leave it completely open to interpretation if you want people to use it or not.
Frankly people leaving it open should be assumed to be invinting others. The onous of securing the access point should be in the owners, not in the people within range that may even connect unknowingly.
Why morons all around the world are putting blame in the wrong person baffles me.
.... than clsoing your access point.
If you leave it open it is ambigious or unknown what your intentions are, even if you put a GetOut SSID
You are bad losers and have no sense of humour.
The GP post was fucking joking for bunnies sakes.