"Decompiling" is nearly impossible because of the loss of information that occurs when compiling a program. You can guess what was stripped, but there's really no way to know for sure.
Unfortunately, you can't run Windows Explorer this way. But, you can run Internet Explorer this way and simply browse to your hard drive. You'll find that it behaves a bit strangely (e.g. no auto-refresh), but otherwise it works fine.
I would agree that most Windows software is still built with single-user assumptions in mind. I don't see how you can blame this on the OS, though. Some people are just slow to change.
Until I installed XP a few months ago, I ran my home W2K box using a non-admin account. It was painful in some cases, but I almost always found a way to make it work. It's much easier now with XP, but it works under W2K as well.
Are you familiar with the "Run As" feature in both W2K and XP? When starting an app, hold down the Ctrl key, right-click on the icon, and choose to run as Administrator (or whatever account you want). No need to login under multiple accounts (even though, yes, this is now possible under XP).
What on earth makes you think that W2K is a single-user system? It isn't. Neither was NT, for that matter. NTFS provides real ACLs to prevent "user gains access he shouldn't have" problems (and I'm not aware of any major vulnerabilities in this area).
the study compares a kit of open-source software, which has received extensive peer review, to a closed-source product
A "kit"? Like a model rocket or a lego set? Some of the people who make this kit feel that it is ready for enterprise use. You can't have it both ways.
That sounds more like "suspend" than "hibernation". When you hibernate a Windows box, it writes its entire RAM image to disk and turns off. When you turn the box back on again, it actually has to boot the image back into RAM.
In your situation, some power is still necessary to maintain the RAM while the lid is closed.
Microsoft certainly has alot of work to do to improve the security of their products, but I think Shneier and Shostack go too far in some of their recommendations. Here's the worst offender:
Implementation of Microsoft SOAP, a protocol running over HTTP precisely so it could bypass firewalls, should be withdrawn.
First of all, SOAP is an industry standard, not a Microsoft protocol. Secondly, the need for security shouldn't prevent the development of web services over SOAP. I think the demand for these sort of services will mushroom over the next few years. Web services can be secured via the SOAPAction header attribute.
In general, we can't let security concerns prevent the development of useful new technology. Rather, we should make sure that such technology is secure prior to deployment.
IANAS(ysadmin), but this doesn't quite add up for me. Do they really need to go out of business? Heck, if the company is "solvent", it seems to me they could find a way to survive. In the worst case, they switch upstream providers, get new IP addresses for all their boxes, and even change domain names. Yes this is huge pain in the ass for everyone (especially customers), but I can't imagine that shuttering is any more convenient.
Who the heck modded this up as informative? It's just wrong. The bottom link goes to a page that describes the differences between "fields" and "properties" in C#. The top link simply defines the OO term "encapsulation". In neither instance is there any evidence that C# is not OO.
Sorry, but I think you're wrong -- or at least confused about the difference between fields and properties in C#. AFAIK, C# does not allow direct access to private members.
Expecting to become an analyst by teaching yourself UML is like expecting to become an author by teaching yourself English.
Learning UML is a necessary, but not sufficient, step. The important thing to understand is object-oriented analysis. UML is just a tool (and a flaky one in some respects).
Okay then, here's the dictionary definition of "copyright":
The legal right granted to an author, composer, playwright, publisher, or distributor to exclusive publication, production, sale, or distribution of a literary, musical, dramatic, or artistic work.
I think that's going a bit far. However passionately we may feel about it, we must admit that the intended purpose of the encryption is deter copying.
-- Brian
Re:has the targeted demographic really changed?
on
Attack of the Clones
·
· Score: 1
The target age may not have changed, but the mentality sure has. If the Bay City Rollers had a cameo in the original Star Wars, my 12-year-old self would have been pretty turned off. Thank god Lucas had a little more sense back then.
Is this legally accurate? In lay terms, I agree to give my money to the seller. PayPal is just the middleman.
But assuming you're right, then PayPal is also legally responsible for delivering the goods, right? I didn't give them my money for nothing, after all, did I? I would have to think that a decent CC company would go to bat for me on that point, but I may be wrong.
But you *are* using an "actual credit card". Can't you just get your CC company to reverse the transaction? Then PayPal is stiffed, but you aren't (joy!).
Slashdot Mirror
Cool, thanks.
LOL
#include <functional> is great fun, but it's only a hint of what you can do in a real FP language like Haskell.
-- Brian
"Decompiling" is nearly impossible because of the loss of information that occurs when compiling a program. You can guess what was stripped, but there's really no way to know for sure.
-- Brian
Like I said, just use Internet Explorer instead of Windows Explorer. The shell is integrated into IE so it works the same way.
Steps:
-- Brian
See my comment here. All you have to do is right-click on iexplore.exe (or a shortcut to it).
-- Brian
Unfortunately, you can't run Windows Explorer this way. But, you can run Internet Explorer this way and simply browse to your hard drive. You'll find that it behaves a bit strangely (e.g. no auto-refresh), but otherwise it works fine.
-- Brian
I would agree that most Windows software is still built with single-user assumptions in mind. I don't see how you can blame this on the OS, though. Some people are just slow to change.
Until I installed XP a few months ago, I ran my home W2K box using a non-admin account. It was painful in some cases, but I almost always found a way to make it work. It's much easier now with XP, but it works under W2K as well.
Are you familiar with the "Run As" feature in both W2K and XP? When starting an app, hold down the Ctrl key, right-click on the icon, and choose to run as Administrator (or whatever account you want). No need to login under multiple accounts (even though, yes, this is now possible under XP).
-- Brian
What on earth makes you think that W2K is a single-user system? It isn't. Neither was NT, for that matter. NTFS provides real ACLs to prevent "user gains access he shouldn't have" problems (and I'm not aware of any major vulnerabilities in this area).
-- Brian
the study compares a kit of open-source software, which has received extensive peer review, to a closed-source product
A "kit"? Like a model rocket or a lego set? Some of the people who make this kit feel that it is ready for enterprise use. You can't have it both ways.
-- Brian
That sounds more like "suspend" than "hibernation". When you hibernate a Windows box, it writes its entire RAM image to disk and turns off. When you turn the box back on again, it actually has to boot the image back into RAM.
In your situation, some power is still necessary to maintain the RAM while the lid is closed.
-- Brian
Microsoft certainly has alot of work to do to improve the security of their products, but I think Shneier and Shostack go too far in some of their recommendations. Here's the worst offender:
First of all, SOAP is an industry standard, not a Microsoft protocol. Secondly, the need for security shouldn't prevent the development of web services over SOAP. I think the demand for these sort of services will mushroom over the next few years. Web services can be secured via the SOAPAction header attribute.
In general, we can't let security concerns prevent the development of useful new technology. Rather, we should make sure that such technology is secure prior to deployment.
-- Brian
Yeah, but the article says that the company is (was) still solvent.
-- Brian
IANAS(ysadmin), but this doesn't quite add up for me. Do they really need to go out of business? Heck, if the company is "solvent", it seems to me they could find a way to survive. In the worst case, they switch upstream providers, get new IP addresses for all their boxes, and even change domain names. Yes this is huge pain in the ass for everyone (especially customers), but I can't imagine that shuttering is any more convenient.
-- Brian
Care to back that up with a fact based argument rather than a blanket assertion ?
Sure. I happen to have Visual Studio.NET right here. Let's give it a try, shall we?
When compiled, this program produces the following error on line 12:
Any questions?
-- Brian
Who the heck modded this up as informative? It's just wrong. The bottom link goes to a page that describes the differences between "fields" and "properties" in C#. The top link simply defines the OO term "encapsulation". In neither instance is there any evidence that C# is not OO.
-- Brian
Sorry, but I think you're wrong -- or at least confused about the difference between fields and properties in C#. AFAIK, C# does not allow direct access to private members.
Thanks anyway.
-- Brian
It's encapsulation mechanism is broken, all members are essentially public
That's news to me. Can you provide details?
-- Brian
Expecting to become an analyst by teaching yourself UML is like expecting to become an author by teaching yourself English.
Learning UML is a necessary, but not sufficient, step. The important thing to understand is object-oriented analysis. UML is just a tool (and a flaky one in some respects).
-- Brian
Okay then, here's the dictionary definition of "copyright":
-- Brian
Why cannot people grasp that the copyright is a priviledge, not a right?
Hmm, maybe it's because the word actually contains the letters r-i-g-h-t?
-- Brian
It has NOTHING to do with copying.
I think that's going a bit far. However passionately we may feel about it, we must admit that the intended purpose of the encryption is deter copying.
-- Brian
The target age may not have changed, but the mentality sure has. If the Bay City Rollers had a cameo in the original Star Wars, my 12-year-old self would have been pretty turned off. Thank god Lucas had a little more sense back then.
-- Brian
You agree to give your money to paypal
Is this legally accurate? In lay terms, I agree to give my money to the seller. PayPal is just the middleman.
But assuming you're right, then PayPal is also legally responsible for delivering the goods, right? I didn't give them my money for nothing, after all, did I? I would have to think that a decent CC company would go to bat for me on that point, but I may be wrong.
-- Brian
But you *are* using an "actual credit card". Can't you just get your CC company to reverse the transaction? Then PayPal is stiffed, but you aren't (joy!).
-- Brian
Okay, just read The Lathe of Heaven instead. You'll be okay then.
-- Brian