Processes have read-write access to main memory, but they are kept from accessing each other's memory by the kernel (excluding secrity flaws, obviously). I'm sure he's suggesting a similar seperation here.
I had no idea they sold the GIMP like that(beyond the dodgy guys on ebay relabelling it). Yes, the time to install is a cost, but it's also added to every piece of software, and I doubt the GIMP would take anyone an hour of exclusive work to get up and running - you don't have to sit and watch the progress bar;)
I'd have to put myself in the "Not getting the CS attraction" camp. Every time I've played online it just seemed dull. There's no bullet flight-time, so you just put the crosshairs on the head and press fire. The levels are small and dull. Games mostly degenerate into either a sniper fest or one big bunny-hopping mess at the bottleneck. At least in Q3, bad players get to play the game rather than just spectate after being sniped ten seconds in. In BF1942, there's enough different types of vehicle and player to make attacking more interesting, plus sniping is far less powerful due to the bullet flight-time.
I've sat and spectated some CS games a few times. There were people who spent the whole game just sniping, using some strange fire-and-switch-weapon trick to skip the long reload pause (dunno if that's fixed yet), so anyone else who moved died while the sniper was still one pixel wide on their screen. If these are the kind of people who find CS fun, I can see why I don't like it.
But doesn't the fact that you get false positives whenever anyone new sends you an email rather diminish the benefit of a junk mail folder? The whole point of the junk mail folder is that you can just ignore it entirely, except to clear it out every so often. If new emails end up in it regularly, you have to trawl through it anyway, which is time consuming, especially on a slow webmail site like Hotmail.
Shooting stars is comedy? Doesn't comedy have to be funny? Have I Got News for you is good, and the office is a given. But My Hero, Coupling, Two pints of lager, ab fab(newer series), the Kumars? You're lucky to get one laugh in the whole half hour programme.
The Radio 4 documentaries are interesting, certainly: From Our Own Correspondent etc. John Simpson's programme was interesting. The Boney Programme and Panorama have occasional flashes of brilliance. The One Life series was interesting in parts.
But Battlefield Britain? Simplistic and dull. The laughable D-Day documentaries? The endless Robert Winston documentaries with virtually no information content? Documentaries on 'time' consisting entirely of some actor running around in slow motion?
Yes, there is some good content there, and I'm about to get a digibox to have a look at what's there. But the good stuff is drowning in a sea of crap, and this is public money they're pissing away.
I was mentally comparing to Channel 4's output, which (Big Brother aside), I find to be superior. BBC News (24) is certainly better than ITV, but that's not really saying much! I think News 24 is used as a training ground for the less experienced journalists, so you get a lot more mistakes and problems there. I guess comparing this year's output with everything before it is a little unfair, and Radio 4 does go a long way to making up the value of the licence fee to me. It would be nice, however, to see a channel that doesn't rely on advertising income for its existence to take more risks and be more creative in its output. As it is, at present I'm hard pressed to find much to watch on the BBC channels.
People actually go out of their way to watch Top Gear? I'd gladly pay my licence fee if they'd make a program where Jeremy Clarkson is beaten to a pulp by three burly blokes for half an hour.
Interesting that only one program in your list is UK created and most of the rest either aren't on or never were on BBC.
A few years ago I would have agreed with your point. But as the BBC has shown itself completely unable to produce much quality drama, documentaries or comedy for a long time, something needs to be done to shake up the BBC. They're still showing reruns of Only Fools and Horses from 20 years ago. The only decent drama they've done in recent memory was the one with Bill Nighey as the newspaper editor. The news coverage is going tabloid-style fast (don't get me started on the horrors of News24). So this year it's 120GBP for Newsnight, repeats of Little Britain and Malcom in the Middle.
2 pounds a week is a quarter of your food budget? Bloody hell - I thought I had it tough when I was a student. I guess the end of grants is hitting people hard!
Halfway along, Americans invented the corporation,
I think the Europeans had a headstart in money-grabbing corporations too - the East India Company (incorporated in 1600) had a monopoly on British-India 'relations' for 250 years.
But taking down a campaign website would nevertheless remove a critical tool for reaching the public -- and likely generate a slew of stories in the mainstream media about the crash.
As well as a slew of stories about "the other side's" supporters are childish criminals prepared to stifle others' free speech to prevent dissenting opinions being disseminated. Plus a slew of speeches from 'indignant, embattled' Republicans about how they will continue to campaign, despite the illegal attacks from the other side.
My point wasn't that these are particularly serious flaws in themselves, or that they will lead to some huge increase in trojans etc. My point was that they are indicative of the level of security that MS is prepared to add. Cmd.exe doesn't check for the zoneID, the only check for what zoneID a file is from is based on its filename, irrespective of its content or modified date. To me that indicates that they clearly favour convenience and speed over security, even in a Service Pack that's supposed to be dedicated to improving security. It's an insight into the mindset at MS. That said, the ZoneID system is definitely a step in the right direction.
Re:is it serious enough?
on
Latest SP2 News
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Except that they are pretty silly mistakes.
If they are prepared to sacrifice security for the sake of start-up performance by caching the ZoneID and not checking the file-modified date, which I guess is why the second flaw is present, it doesn't bode well for the future security of SP2.
How about explicitly banning GPL implementations of CIFS? Funding the AdTI, an anti-open source lobbyist group? Helping to get SCO funding for their lawsuits and endless FUD campaign against Linux? Is that active enough for you, astroturfer?
It's a news site run by the Open Source Technology Group - "Founded [as andover.net] in 1996 with the mission to provide unbiased content, community, and commerce for the Linux and Open Source communities".
It's run on the Open Source SlashCode engine, by the same company that runs the Open Source software sites freshmeat and sourceforge. So there's a pretty strong leaning towards F/OSS advocacy around here.
This is Slashdot, generally a F/OSS advocacy site. Microsoft is about as opposite in beliefs from the general audience of/. as it is possible to get - they've referred to OSS as a "cancer" and actively try to limit its growth. Why shouldn't the icons represent the distrust and dislike of MS this has created amongst the/, readership? It's a tongue-in-cheek thing anyway.
Huh? The title of the article is "...Computer Naivetie...", not "Windows is Lame". Most of the comments are "Why not install XP/2k or wipe the machine?". There's one or two Gentoo jokes, that's it.
Where's the linux fanboyism? Wouldn't it make sense to actually reply to a fanboy comment (if there are some below my threshold) rather than posting a top level comment?
The wireless monitors are basically small thin clients running some sort of VNC like software. That's why they are expensive, because it's like buying a whole extra small computer to put in your monitor.
Slashdot Mirror
Processes have read-write access to main memory, but they are kept from accessing each other's memory by the kernel (excluding secrity flaws, obviously). I'm sure he's suggesting a similar seperation here.
"Question - Konqueror
Open 'http://home.comcas.../switchfootmtl.mp3'?
Type: MPEG Layer 3 Audio"
Why? Why would anyone put background music on a website?
I had no idea they sold the GIMP like that(beyond the dodgy guys on ebay relabelling it). Yes, the time to install is a cost, but it's also added to every piece of software, and I doubt the GIMP would take anyone an hour of exclusive work to get up and running - you don't have to sit and watch the progress bar ;)
I'd have to put myself in the "Not getting the CS attraction" camp.
Every time I've played online it just seemed dull. There's no bullet flight-time, so you just put the crosshairs on the head and press fire. The levels are small and dull. Games mostly degenerate into either a sniper fest or one big bunny-hopping mess at the bottleneck.
At least in Q3, bad players get to play the game rather than just spectate after being sniped ten seconds in. In BF1942, there's enough different types of vehicle and player to make attacking more interesting, plus sniping is far less powerful due to the bullet flight-time.
I've sat and spectated some CS games a few times. There were people who spent the whole game just sniping, using some strange fire-and-switch-weapon trick to skip the long reload pause (dunno if that's fixed yet), so anyone else who moved died while the sniper was still one pixel wide on their screen. If these are the kind of people who find CS fun, I can see why I don't like it.
$40 for GIMP? Just what kind of bandwidth charges does your ISP make!
But doesn't the fact that you get false positives whenever anyone new sends you an email rather diminish the benefit of a junk mail folder?
The whole point of the junk mail folder is that you can just ignore it entirely, except to clear it out every so often. If new emails end up in it regularly, you have to trawl through it anyway, which is time consuming, especially on a slow webmail site like Hotmail.
just do a ps aux and look for a processes with a large resident size.
Which processes is it that eat up all the memory? I assume you don't just mean that top reports all memory used.
Did you report it at bugs.kde.org?
It's the Guardian - "We won't let the facts (or a spellchecker) get in the way of a good intro".
Shooting stars is comedy? Doesn't comedy have to be funny? Have I Got News for you is good, and the office is a given. But My Hero, Coupling, Two pints of lager, ab fab(newer series), the Kumars? You're lucky to get one laugh in the whole half hour programme.
The Radio 4 documentaries are interesting, certainly: From Our Own Correspondent etc. John Simpson's programme was interesting. The Boney Programme and Panorama have occasional flashes of brilliance. The One Life series was interesting in parts.
But Battlefield Britain? Simplistic and dull. The laughable D-Day documentaries? The endless Robert Winston documentaries with virtually no information content? Documentaries on 'time' consisting entirely of some actor running around in slow motion?
Yes, there is some good content there, and I'm about to get a digibox to have a look at what's there. But the good stuff is drowning in a sea of crap, and this is public money they're pissing away.
I was mentally comparing to Channel 4's output, which (Big Brother aside), I find to be superior. BBC News (24) is certainly better than ITV, but that's not really saying much! I think News 24 is used as a training ground for the less experienced journalists, so you get a lot more mistakes and problems there.
I guess comparing this year's output with everything before it is a little unfair, and Radio 4 does go a long way to making up the value of the licence fee to me. It would be nice, however, to see a channel that doesn't rely on advertising income for its existence to take more risks and be more creative in its output. As it is, at present I'm hard pressed to find much to watch on the BBC channels.
Fame Academy.
People actually go out of their way to watch Top Gear?
I'd gladly pay my licence fee if they'd make a program where Jeremy Clarkson is beaten to a pulp by three burly blokes for half an hour.
Interesting that only one program in your list is UK created and most of the rest either aren't on or never were on BBC.
A few years ago I would have agreed with your point. But as the BBC has shown itself completely unable to produce much quality drama, documentaries or comedy for a long time, something needs to be done to shake up the BBC.
They're still showing reruns of Only Fools and Horses from 20 years ago. The only decent drama they've done in recent memory was the one with Bill Nighey as the newspaper editor. The news coverage is going tabloid-style fast (don't get me started on the horrors of News24).
So this year it's 120GBP for Newsnight, repeats of Little Britain and Malcom in the Middle.
2 pounds a week is a quarter of your food budget? Bloody hell - I thought I had it tough when I was a student. I guess the end of grants is hitting people hard!
Halfway along, Americans invented the corporation,
I think the Europeans had a headstart in money-grabbing corporations too - the East India Company (incorporated in 1600) had a monopoly on British-India 'relations' for 250 years.
But taking down a campaign website would nevertheless remove a critical tool for reaching the public -- and likely generate a slew of stories in the mainstream media about the crash.
As well as a slew of stories about "the other side's" supporters are childish criminals prepared to stifle others' free speech to prevent dissenting opinions being disseminated. Plus a slew of speeches from 'indignant, embattled' Republicans about how they will continue to campaign, despite the illegal attacks from the other side.
Yeah, that'll really hurt the Republican cause.
My point wasn't that these are particularly serious flaws in themselves, or that they will lead to some huge increase in trojans etc.
My point was that they are indicative of the level of security that MS is prepared to add. Cmd.exe doesn't check for the zoneID, the only check for what zoneID a file is from is based on its filename, irrespective of its content or modified date. To me that indicates that they clearly favour convenience and speed over security, even in a Service Pack that's supposed to be dedicated to improving security. It's an insight into the mindset at MS.
That said, the ZoneID system is definitely a step in the right direction.
Except that they are pretty silly mistakes.
If they are prepared to sacrifice security for the sake of start-up performance by caching the ZoneID and not checking the file-modified date, which I guess is why the second flaw is present, it doesn't bode well for the future security of SP2.
How about explicitly banning GPL implementations of CIFS? Funding the AdTI, an anti-open source lobbyist group? Helping to get SCO funding for their lawsuits and endless FUD campaign against Linux?
Is that active enough for you, astroturfer?
It's a news site run by the Open Source Technology Group - "Founded [as andover.net] in 1996 with the mission to provide unbiased content, community, and commerce for the Linux and Open Source communities".
It's run on the Open Source SlashCode engine, by the same company that runs the Open Source software sites freshmeat and sourceforge. So there's a pretty strong leaning towards F/OSS advocacy around here.
This is Slashdot, generally a F/OSS advocacy site. Microsoft is about as opposite in beliefs from the general audience of /. as it is possible to get - they've referred to OSS as a "cancer" and actively try to limit its growth. /, readership? It's a tongue-in-cheek thing anyway.
Why shouldn't the icons represent the distrust and dislike of MS this has created amongst the
Huh? The title of the article is "...Computer Naivetie...", not "Windows is Lame". Most of the comments are "Why not install XP/2k or wipe the machine?". There's one or two Gentoo jokes, that's it.
Where's the linux fanboyism? Wouldn't it make sense to actually reply to a fanboy comment (if there are some below my threshold) rather than posting a top level comment?
For that much time and money, she could have bought a whole new computer!
The wireless monitors are basically small thin clients running some sort of VNC like software. That's why they are expensive, because it's like buying a whole extra small computer to put in your monitor.