they are referring primarily to temperature and weather condition
Umm, I'm gathering you've never been to Canada.
Weather conditions and temperature are pretty nice here for 1/2 the year. My wife (who moved here from the Philippines two years ago) regularly complains that it's TOO HOT during the summer.
The comment is false - they should have said "High Arctic" instead of "Canada"..
Here's a hint to the story writers: next time you want to comment about climate, change the word "Canada" with the word "Michigan" and see if it still makes sense. (Michigan has similar weather to most Canadian cities.)
wouldn't this mean that the inventors may be revealing their secrets, and maybe not getting a patent?
Well, look at it this way:
If the method they were attempting to patent isn't worthy of being patented (ie, it's obvious or has prior art), it's not much of a secret they're revealing is it?
This is essentially a Rolls Royce Helicopter engine attached to two wheels.. 300HP, top speed is unknown (they've been unable to find a radar gun that goes up that high)
At $350,000 a pop, they aren't cheap, but for those of us who like bikes, this would make the perfect gift:o)
It's got global acceptance, and is designed around a philosophy that its' content should be viewable on any device, whether that device supports text, audio, graphics, or any combination thereof.
It's called HTML.
I agree, as a web designer you _SHOULDN'T_ have to learn another language.
It's just a damn shame that HTML has been so polluted by graphic artists that people think it's a purely graphical medium.
there hasn't been a UI that comes close to the useability of Win2K or MacOS.
Sorry, but I think you're confusing responsiveness with usability..
Responsiveness is determined by how quickly something responds to your actions - for this, Windows and MacOS beat X hands down.
Usability is determined by how easy (and quickly) a given task can be accomplished - for this, X and bash blow both Windows and MacOS out of the water. (I notice that you said UI, and not GUI, so we can enter the console into this discussion.)
For complex tasks, the console blows away anything other form of UI when it comes to usability, because that's what it's designed for - it's an interface that allows complex communication between the user and the computer. Most people type faster than they can move a mouse, so more information can be conveyed with the console in the same amount of time - humans also have a large capacity for language skills, which the console takes advantage of.
To contrast this with a GUI, Imagine trying to communicate with someone using a language that only had two words (or in the case of the Mac, one word) - yes the language would be much easier to learn than english (or any other language), but it takes a LOT longer to communicate with. This is what you're doing with a GUI (you have two words, "Left Click" and "Right Click", and what these words mean depends on what the mouse is hovering over at the time.)
The drawback to the console is that it takes more time to learn (just like it takes longer to learn English than the imaginary two-word language.)
As far as usability between X and Mac/Windows, all three are pretty similar - the differences are in the minor details.. My favourite example is the clipboard; it's much more logical (and faster) to use in X than the others.
Say you want to copy & paste under X - how much work is it? Two actions: Highlight the text you want copied, middle click where you want it pasted. Under Windows or Mac, it's at least four (if you know keyboard shortcuts); Higlight the text you want, hit CTRL-'X', click the window you want to paste into, hit CTRL-'V'... If you don't know keyboard shortcuts (or, if the app doesn't support them) it's even worse: Highlight the text, click 'edit', click 'copy', click 'edit' (in the destination window), click 'paste' - that's an awful lot of clicking to do one simple action.
Yes, X is less responsive, but responsiveness is not the same as usability.
I'd blame the bad refresh and redraw on the old graphics hardware in your machine.
Sorry, but I mostly have to agree with the previous poster.. not that Linux wasn't made to run graphics apps, but that X sucks..
I use Linux every day, and on the same hardware, X is much less responsive than Windows any day of the week.
X _is_ slow (relative to Windows) even on modern hardware (PII 400 w/128MB and a Voodoo 3500) - yes, faster hardware makes a difference, but the point is that it shouldn't have to.
On the plus side, I find X to be much more usable than windows, even though it's less responsive - it just works more logically (cut & paste, for example.) Working in X makes me more productive, because things are easier to do.
I too, love Linux (I only use Windows because of a few router management apps that are Windows only) but I won't make excuses for it
A conventional mouse relies on gravity to work.. take away the gravity, the mouse becomes useless
If you need proof, try this:
Turn your mouse upside down (or on its' side, any orientation that's not normal), and place a book over the bottom, then move the book around.. you'll notice that the screen pointer doesn't move..
Ball point pens don't work in zero G either, for similar reasons.
To be honest, as a Canadian I'm not sure what to do either.
Answer: TALK TO YOUR MP (as long as you don't live in She-Lied Copps' riding)
Talk to the Alliance members in your riding (whether they have seats or not) - most of them are not career politicians (or haven't been for long enough that you can still get through to them)
how much easier it is to configure an NT system than, say, Linux
Please define "easier".
For _ME_ (and probably a whole lot of people here) "easier" means: simple configuration that works, and does consumes little time.
Now, today, I just spent 3 hours trying to configure a network card under Windows98. (Yes, I know this is not W2K, but the methodology is the same.)
It consisted of installing the drivers, removing the drivers, tweaking driver configuration options via a GUI, tweaking OS configuration options via a GUI, finding and downloading older versions of the driver (in case there is a problem with the newest rev.) and installing them, lather, rinse, repeat.
In the end, I gave up - it just couldn't be done.
Now, configuring this network card under linux consisted of typing the following command:
# modprobe tulip
# ifconfig eth0 192.168.30.4
Now, which was easier? Granted, there was no pretty GUI, but GUI != easy.
For the uninitiated, a GUI can be easier to navigate, but if the stuff doesn't work the first time, you're just screwed - a command line is EASIER.
When you do an 'rpm -Uvh my.rpm' or 'rpm -i my.rpm' what do you think is happening? Two scripts are being run as root, one before extractions and one after.
This is a good point, but there are two issues wit it..
First, a script is slightly different than a binary executable - I can look at the source of a script to see what it does before I run it.
Second, _I_ never run either of the commands you specified, without first examining the source of the scripts; I use a utility to unpack the RPM, then look at what I'm installing.
OK, so I may be a _bit_ paranoid:o)... but then, when everybody's out to get you, paranoid is just good thinking.
A new package format that would combine the strengths of the current various is a good idea, but (and it's a big but) I hope the author isn't the guy to do it (he doesn't have a good grasp of security..)
He mentions making the package self-extracting - "just do a chmod +x on it, and away you go"
Sorry, but that's why "security" in Windows is so abysmal..
Think about it - to install, you're running this file as ROOT - would you run a binary from an unknown source as root? (I don't even untar source as root!) - this is inherently a bad idea.
Dropping ALL inbound ICMP can be a very bad thing.
Blocking ICMP Destination unreachable messages is a pain in the ass - when I try to get to a host, I _LIKE_ getting an immediate reply that there is a network problem (or that the host isn't listening on the port I want to use), instead of having to wait for the connection to timeout.
What about the 'Fragmentation Needed but DF set' message? Blocking that is a GREAT way to screw your connections performance.
I agree that SOME ICMP messages should be dropped (most notably ICMP echo-request) but blocking the protocol entirely is a bad idea. It exists for a reason. Yes, someone might abuse it (like in this example), but then again, someone might abuse UDP as well (what if it did a traceroute continually, so you could see _where_ the connection went bad) - would you advocate blocking UDP completely?
I agree with you that the "little brother" idea is a bad idea, but not for the same reason you do.
The subnets the attacks came from are most likely NOT the ones of the attacker -- just the ones of some sorry people who have an open socks, Back Orifice, Netbus, installed on their hdd and are not aware of it.
To me, this is a point in favour of the "little brother" approach - if there are people who are clueless enough to let it happen, they should be punished until they fix the problem.
"I know I kept my AK47 in an unlocked display case on my front yard along with 50 clips of ammo, but it's not MY fault that someone took it and committed crimes with it."
Using Access isn't necessarily a completely bad thing, because of ODBC..
If someone knows how to use Access, they can use it to interface with a better DB engine (ie. use Access for the queries, and store the data somewhere else.) For people who don't want to learn SQL, and like pretty graphics, setting this up is painless..
I just finished implementing a DB backend under subcontract (we used Postgres) - the client wanted to be able to use Access to generate reports and such.. using ODBC wasn't something I'd ever tried before, and (knowing MS's support for interoperability) was a little worried about making it all work together... it turns out I shouldn't have been - it took all of 5 minutes, and WOW - worked perfectly the first time.
I watch them with people who have not seen it before and get their reactions. It can be most entertaining. Especially if you are slightly sadistic and like to watch them suffer
You know, thats EXACTLY the reason I keep my copy of Shatner's version of "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" around. Just to see their reaction when they listen to it.
I just played it today for the guys at work... it got quite the reaction:o)
Slashdot Mirror
they are referring primarily to temperature and weather condition
Umm, I'm gathering you've never been to Canada.
Weather conditions and temperature are pretty nice here for 1/2 the year. My wife (who moved here from the Philippines two years ago) regularly complains that it's TOO HOT during the summer.
The comment is false - they should have said "High Arctic" instead of "Canada"..
Here's a hint to the story writers: next time you want to comment about climate, change the word "Canada" with the word "Michigan" and see if it still makes sense. (Michigan has similar weather to most Canadian cities.)
Magnetosphere?
:o)
Isn't that the place where Professor X's nemesis hangs out?
It is stable... (at least it appears that way)
:o)
It's just not secure.
wouldn't this mean that the inventors may be revealing their secrets, and maybe not getting a patent?
Well, look at it this way:
If the method they were attempting to patent isn't worthy of being patented (ie, it's obvious or has prior art), it's not much of a secret they're revealing is it?
For the Unlimited budget:
:o)
How about a Max Turbine Y2K superbike?
This is essentially a Rolls Royce Helicopter engine attached to two wheels.. 300HP, top speed is unknown (they've been unable to find a radar gun that goes up that high)
At $350,000 a pop, they aren't cheap, but for those of us who like bikes, this would make the perfect gift
There already is a standard.
It's got global acceptance, and is designed around a philosophy that its' content should be viewable on any device, whether that device supports text, audio, graphics, or any combination thereof.
It's called HTML.
I agree, as a web designer you _SHOULDN'T_ have to learn another language.
It's just a damn shame that HTML has been so polluted by graphic artists that people think it's a purely graphical medium.
there hasn't been a UI that comes close to the useability of Win2K or MacOS.
Sorry, but I think you're confusing responsiveness with usability..
Responsiveness is determined by how quickly something responds to your actions - for this, Windows and MacOS beat X hands down.
Usability is determined by how easy (and quickly) a given task can be accomplished - for this, X and bash blow both Windows and MacOS out of the water. (I notice that you said UI, and not GUI, so we can enter the console into this discussion.)
For complex tasks, the console blows away anything other form of UI when it comes to usability, because that's what it's designed for - it's an interface that allows complex communication between the user and the computer. Most people type faster than they can move a mouse, so more information can be conveyed with the console in the same amount of time - humans also have a large capacity for language skills, which the console takes advantage of.
To contrast this with a GUI, Imagine trying to communicate with someone using a language that only had two words (or in the case of the Mac, one word) - yes the language would be much easier to learn than english (or any other language), but it takes a LOT longer to communicate with. This is what you're doing with a GUI (you have two words, "Left Click" and "Right Click", and what these words mean depends on what the mouse is hovering over at the time.)
The drawback to the console is that it takes more time to learn (just like it takes longer to learn English than the imaginary two-word language.)
As far as usability between X and Mac/Windows, all three are pretty similar - the differences are in the minor details.. My favourite example is the clipboard; it's much more logical (and faster) to use in X than the others.
Say you want to copy & paste under X - how much work is it? Two actions: Highlight the text you want copied, middle click where you want it pasted. Under Windows or Mac, it's at least four (if you know keyboard shortcuts); Higlight the text you want, hit CTRL-'X', click the window you want to paste into, hit CTRL-'V'... If you don't know keyboard shortcuts (or, if the app doesn't support them) it's even worse: Highlight the text, click 'edit', click 'copy', click 'edit' (in the destination window), click 'paste' - that's an awful lot of clicking to do one simple action.
Yes, X is less responsive, but responsiveness is not the same as usability.
I'd blame the bad refresh and redraw on the old graphics hardware in your machine.
Sorry, but I mostly have to agree with the previous poster.. not that Linux wasn't made to run graphics apps, but that X sucks..
I use Linux every day, and on the same hardware, X is much less responsive than Windows any day of the week.
X _is_ slow (relative to Windows) even on modern hardware (PII 400 w/128MB and a Voodoo 3500) - yes, faster hardware makes a difference, but the point is that it shouldn't have to.
On the plus side, I find X to be much more usable than windows, even though it's less responsive - it just works more logically (cut & paste, for example.) Working in X makes me more productive, because things are easier to do.
I too, love Linux (I only use Windows because of a few router management apps that are Windows only) but I won't make excuses for it
A conventional mouse relies on gravity to work.. take away the gravity, the mouse becomes useless
If you need proof, try this:
Turn your mouse upside down (or on its' side, any orientation that's not normal), and place a book over the bottom, then move the book around.. you'll notice that the screen pointer doesn't move..
Ball point pens don't work in zero G either, for similar reasons.
Optical mice would be a different story
things often are available on the net before the infrastructure is ready for them, and then technology backfills the new need.
Yes, I've seen this happen already...
When ISP's started offering dial-up access, the cry was "but the Internet won't be able to handle all those users - the bandwidth just isn't there"
Then, when Cable and DSL was first introduced, we heard the same thing...
And now, we're hearing it again - some people just don't remember the past...
Yes, when these events happened in the past, there was three months of lag, but it eventually sorted itself out.
To be honest, as a Canadian I'm not sure what to do either.
Answer: TALK TO YOUR MP (as long as you don't live in She-Lied Copps' riding)
Talk to the Alliance members in your riding (whether they have seats or not) - most of them are not career politicians (or haven't been for long enough that you can still get through to them)
how much easier it is to configure an NT system than, say, Linux
Please define "easier".
For _ME_ (and probably a whole lot of people here) "easier" means: simple configuration that works, and does consumes little time.
Now, today, I just spent 3 hours trying to configure a network card under Windows98. (Yes, I know this is not W2K, but the methodology is the same.)
It consisted of installing the drivers, removing the drivers, tweaking driver configuration options via a GUI, tweaking OS configuration options via a GUI, finding and downloading older versions of the driver (in case there is a problem with the newest rev.) and installing them, lather, rinse, repeat.
In the end, I gave up - it just couldn't be done.
Now, configuring this network card under linux consisted of typing the following command:
# modprobe tulip
# ifconfig eth0 192.168.30.4
Now, which was easier? Granted, there was no pretty GUI, but GUI != easy.
For the uninitiated, a GUI can be easier to navigate, but if the stuff doesn't work the first time, you're just screwed - a command line is EASIER.
The big question that determines whether portscanning is good or bad is the INTENT of the person performing it.
Now, let's look at it from a sysadmin's perspective:
Someone is scoping my system to see what I have available.
They are doing this without invitation.
They are doing this without telling me.
Now, from MY point of view, this is cause for alarm. People here are saying "It's not that big a deal" - but it IS.
There are two possibilities that are being tossed about here: someone is just doing it because they feel like it, and they have no ill intent.
The other option is that it's someone scoping my network because they want to break in.
Well, since I don't really KNOW what the intent of the person doing the scanning, which one is the best to choose from?
Pretty easy answer: If someone is scanning me, they want to break in, and I'll do whatever is necessary to stop them.
When you do an 'rpm -Uvh my.rpm' or 'rpm -i my.rpm' what do you think is happening? Two scripts are being run as root, one before extractions and one after.
:o) ... but then, when everybody's out to get you, paranoid is just good thinking.
This is a good point, but there are two issues wit it..
First, a script is slightly different than a binary executable - I can look at the source of a script to see what it does before I run it.
Second, _I_ never run either of the commands you specified, without first examining the source of the scripts; I use a utility to unpack the RPM, then look at what I'm installing.
OK, so I may be a _bit_ paranoid
A new package format that would combine the strengths of the current various is a good idea, but (and it's a big but) I hope the author isn't the guy to do it (he doesn't have a good grasp of security..)
.02...
He mentions making the package self-extracting - "just do a chmod +x on it, and away you go"
Sorry, but that's why "security" in Windows is so abysmal..
Think about it - to install, you're running this file as ROOT - would you run a binary from an unknown source as root? (I don't even untar source as root!) - this is inherently a bad idea.
Just my
Just another reason to drop all incoming icmp.
Dropping ALL inbound ICMP can be a very bad thing.
Blocking ICMP Destination unreachable messages is a pain in the ass - when I try to get to a host, I _LIKE_ getting an immediate reply that there is a network problem (or that the host isn't listening on the port I want to use), instead of having to wait for the connection to timeout.
What about the 'Fragmentation Needed but DF set' message? Blocking that is a GREAT way to screw your connections performance.
I agree that SOME ICMP messages should be dropped (most notably ICMP echo-request) but blocking the protocol entirely is a bad idea. It exists for a reason. Yes, someone might abuse it (like in this example), but then again, someone might abuse UDP as well (what if it did a traceroute continually, so you could see _where_ the connection went bad) - would you advocate blocking UDP completely?
I didn't think so.
Compared to Netscape? Have you actually tried running Netscape on anything less than a PIII w/256MB of RAM?
YES.
Every day.
and MUCH LESS than a PIII. (How about a P133 with 32MB?)
And speed was very acceptable. (Netscape(4.5) under Linux is marginally slower than under Windows, and under Windows, is about the same as IE.)
Mozilla, OTOH is S_L_O_W.
I agree with you that the "little brother" idea is a bad idea, but not for the same reason you do.
The subnets the attacks came from are most likely NOT the ones of the attacker -- just the ones of some sorry people who have an open socks, Back Orifice, Netbus, installed on their hdd and are not aware of it.
To me, this is a point in favour of the "little brother" approach - if there are people who are clueless enough to let it happen, they should be punished until they fix the problem.
"I know I kept my AK47 in an unlocked display case on my front yard along with 50 clips of ammo, but it's not MY fault that someone took it and committed crimes with it."
this was all done with full knowledge of the results and the assumption that people just wouldn't call up the {name}_VH.gif files
The term for this in security circles is "Security through obscurity"
Basically saying "gee, nobody could possibly be smart enough to guess our incredibly simple file-naming scheme."
Using Access isn't necessarily a completely bad thing, because of ODBC..
If someone knows how to use Access, they can use it to interface with a better DB engine (ie. use Access for the queries, and store the data somewhere else.) For people who don't want to learn SQL, and like pretty graphics, setting this up is painless..
I just finished implementing a DB backend under subcontract (we used Postgres) - the client wanted to be able to use Access to generate reports and such.. using ODBC wasn't something I'd ever tried before, and (knowing MS's support for interoperability) was a little worried about making it all work together... it turns out I shouldn't have been - it took all of 5 minutes, and WOW - worked perfectly the first time.
I'm not sure if he's really naive, or lying...
Consider this:
"Sealand's laws prohibit child pornography."
...
"Sealand has no local morality or legislated morality"
These two statements contradit each other - child pornography is inherently a moral issue.
So, the question is, is he just naive, or is he lying?
we didn't like 5th Element, either (IN GENERAL)
Really? I've never met anyone who didn't enjoy 5th Element - it was awesome..
Are you saying that you didn't like it, or that you know lots of people who didn't?
I watch them with people who have not seen it before and get their reactions. It can be most entertaining. Especially if you are slightly sadistic and like to watch them suffer
:o)
You know, thats EXACTLY the reason I keep my copy of Shatner's version of "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" around. Just to see their reaction when they listen to it.
I just played it today for the guys at work... it got quite the reaction
If Microsoft didn't want the judge to be biased towards the DoJ, then why did they go out of their way to piss him off?
:o)
Two reasons:
Microsoft's Arrogance,
and Microsoft's Arrogance.
Now, I realize that's really only one reason, but it's such a big one, that I thought it was worth mentioning twice.
See what Scott Adams has to say on this subject: