No, no, no.
If you want to go the "Sendmail is buggy" way, well, at least, try to be informative where the alternatives are concerned.
For those who wish to try another MTA, the three big ones, not counting Sendmail, are Exim (small and easy, good for your home net), Qmail, and Postfix (fast and powerful, my personal fav). All four have their good points, and all four are certainly worth checking before you decide on one.
See? I mean, if Sendmail is still so widely used, there is a reason, you know...:)
What was amazingly smart, in Dogma, is that while it mercilessly made fun of the letter of Christianity, it was very respectful of its spirit. The simple allusion to all the doubts, all the fears of a young Jesus bound to a terrible destiny, and still accepting it, probably did more for Christianity than all the biggots who whined about the movies put together.
Smith is great. I didn't know of his other movies, but I'll be sure to look them out.
People, this is good. I may be biased toward that matter, but I'm watching closely this kind of development. As well as, I imagine, about every other person with a disability caused by nerve damage or destruction (total deafness in one ear in my case) (yeah, so I don't need to encode my MP3s in stereo).
My bio courses are far behind me, but aren't nerves the 'tail' of neurons?
It's too bad that the story was audio only. some of us may not have sound cards or may be at work where we can't listen to such. Heh.
Point. Not to mention non-natives! I can more or less read and write in English, but listening to it is a wholly different matter. Bleh.
Hopefully some helpful person (or some determined karma whore:)) will post a summary of the article?
Laptops in school? Aren't there more efficient things to do with the money, like, paying teachers a bit more, maybe?
I may be wrong, and I kind of hope I am, but this SO sounds like a political trick to make it look like they do something for kids education, instead of REALLY tackling problems...
Children tend to teach themselves when given the opportunity and the tools to do so.
Erm, excuse-me, but where the heck did you pull that out from? My mom is a primary school teacher, in a country where the government gives this kind of orders to schools (let's all be an utopian crowd and hope children will pull grammar rules out of their rear end!), and the result is a freaking disaster. My mom sometimes get 10 or 11 years old kids that can barely read, write or count, because so far what they've done is mostly draw and sing and play with so-called educational tools. Because she believes in her job, she works herself thin to help EACH of them catch up. And the kids love her, and the parents love her, but her school is giving her a HARD time because she goes against the (lefty) government's will. She's going to have to step down, because she's in no physical and mental shape to continue.
Now don't take me wrong. It IS necessary to give kids a chance to do their own things, to learn their way, etc. But to expect them to learn arbitrary things such as grammar and arithmetic without actively teaching them, well, excuse-me, but this is bullshit. A teacher is here to 1) teach the kids the arbitrary stuff, 2) give them the taste to explore their own fields of interest (which my mother makes sure to do). Without BOTH those points, elementary school education is crap.
we need to find a way to teach children individually.
That's also very true. BUT wishful thinking is not sufficient. My mom happens to be a primary school teacher (outside the US, BTW), so she gets to teach kids the most important basics (read, write, count). She gets definite instructions along the line of what you're suggesting -- adapt to each child, etc.
Except there are other 20 children in her class.
Well, she's tried. Bottom line: the kids learn well. They love her. Their parents love her.
But she's stepping down after only 5 years of it, because she's worked herself thin, and she's in too bad shape to continue.
So, yes, we need to find a way to teach children individually. But that's not by just telling the teachers to do so, obviously. Problem is: is it possible to fund enough teachers for all the kids? If not, then what can we do? Will it be sufficient if the parents actively take part in their kids' education, like other Slashdotters are suggesting?
Well, actually, it's some stupid minister who decided a tax on CD-Rs was needed. It was absolutely moronic: as was pointed out, now, buying CD-Rs (no matter what for -- some companies that backup data on CDs yelled a LOT) brings money mostly to music corps that don't exactly need it, and doesn't really help small labels that DO need a hand.
Bottom line: people bought massive amounts of CD-Rs just before the law became effective, so the prices went down, which vaguely made up for the tax.
But still. Did you notice that trend where big corps live by taking small amounts of money from you regularly, no matter if you buy something new from them or not? Am I the only one who thinks it is a dangerous road for an economy to tread?
Nah, if I got it right (note that I didn't read the article, it's 5am here and I'm too tired to download that PDF), different parts of the chip do their job at their own speed, somehow synchronizing between themselves when needed. So, effectively, there's no external clock, but your statement that 'everything is clocked' isn't wrong either.
Re:Microsoft's response...
on
Hotmail Hacked
·
· Score: 2
Indeed! But I fear that is not the point.
The problem isn't that their hashing algorithm is weak. The problem is that the stored emails are freaking world readable.
As for you, why do they toss in those nice shiny tech words? Could it be to divert our attention from the real problem, ie, the design of their system is downright braindead?:)
Re:Microsoft's response...
on
Hotmail Hacked
·
· Score: 4, Funny
That's it. We can quit MS bashing, people. They do a better job of it on their own anyway.;)
We remember the halcyon days of DOS prompts and command line interactions; some of us take an aspirin and lie down.
Well, I beg to differ. You could say I've kind of been enlightened after listening to the epitome of computer cluelessness: my mother.
She was struggling with the Windows explorer GUI, trying to move a file. And then, she said, and I'm not kidding: "Oh, I prefered DOS, you know, you typed a command, and it worked!"
Maybe what simplicity is really about, is determinism in the way the computer behaves?
There's that stenography tool, Outguess, that claims it can hide info into a pic without changing the pic's statistical properties (entropy et al, I surmise). I wonder if it's Outguess that makes false (or misinformed) claims, or if Prof. Farid's research on statistical analysis is already out of date...
Personally, no matter what, I wish Prof. Farid a lot of luck. His work might be what will save our collective ass from SDMI-like schemes down the road.
Re:As long as I can connect...
on
Taming the Web
·
· Score: 1
... wait until they throw the first few people in jail for using "technologies that prevent law enforcers from doing their job" (or something like that), and see how many people still have the balls to use strong encryption.
Actually, I thought of doing so with a friend who lives in the UK, where employers have a legal right to read your email. That in itself is another issue (my point was, my friend's employer can't force me to give him my private key if my friend PGP's the message, since I don't live in the UK), but the idea can probably be reused. I wonder how the world (and the judge!) would react to a lawsuit about a deliberately encrypted message, when the message would at the end turn out to be:
"If you can actually read this, then the world has sunken into a new dark age of no personal freedom."
Good grammatical point indeed.:)
I fear I still have to correct the physics of it. The decibel unit isn't a unit per se; it's 1/10th of a bel. A bel is a logarithmic quantity: it means you express a unit logarithmically. In effect, a 60 decibels (6 bels) sound is ten times louder than a 50 decibels sound. So, the words 'audio decibel' aren't that stupid.
Now, my physics courses are far behind me, but I believe the 'real' unit behind sound is joules, used to express the energy of the mass of air displaced by a sound. Or something like that anyway.:) Corrections and details welcome!
This guy is such an interesting person. Did other people also notice he was a key element in the DOJ vs Microsoft case? You know, this guy may be, in his own inconspicuous style, one of the best things happening to us as of late. Let's not lose trace of him.
Check out the amazing prequels!! CodeRed 0, CodeRed -1, and then BetaCode, in all theat-- err, all MS servers, starting next week! Don't miss the excitement!!
No, I don't think fiddling with the least significant bit would work well as a watermarking measure. That bit is VERY likely to change when the signal goes through encoding (MP3, OGG), converting (digital -> analog -> digital), or whatever. I thought of it too, but I quickly dismissed the scheme as unpractical.
Since they used a DSP for that scheme, it may have to do with frequencies (just an idea...). Why not a signal in some inaudible frequencies? I don't think so, it would be too easy to filter. I think it could be some frequency packing, ie, you filter certain frequencies out and mix their value into a very close frequency, close enough that the human ear won't notice it, but a machine will. It is likely to work well if you do it in the low frequency range, would I say (totally instinctively, based on my absolute ear and nothing else, so it doesn't mean much, alright -- that, and the fact high frequencies ARE left out when you encode at 11Khz). Then, to check for a watermark, you look for a pattern in the way certain given frequencies are filtered out. If the frequency at which the filter is turned on and off is of the same order of magnitude as the frequency being filtered, chances are it can't be detected through statistical analysis, especially if the frequency patterns filtered that way vary rapidly.
But, you realize, that's pure speculation.:) More info about audio watermarking would really be appreciated, if someone is knowledgeable in this area.
In the fact they actually sell Visual C to individuals, you have a point, indeed, though you could have voiced it just a tad more politely.
What prompted my feeling (just a feeling, Mr. AC:)) is a combination of parameters, actually. The wording of their presentation of.NET. The fact they generally don't seem to envision development outside an environment. The fact that while I've not done much development in Visual C (three months of it, all in all), I had a definite feeling of being trapped in what I'll call The Legal API Set. The fact I read about driver makers complaining they had to do guesswork in NT because the Legal APIs weren't sufficient for them and the rest wasn't documented, as you point out yourself. For that matter, Microsoft blamed NT's instability on those very drivers.
So maybe they've got nothing at all against individual programmers in themselves, but I still have the same feeling: they do not enjoy much programmers that want to go deeper than the Legal API. If you have different feelings, good for you, dude.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Point taken. :)
:)
Still, Windows is widely used because it capitalizes on user stupidity. Now try to have a stupid guy configure Sendmail.
How come IBM doesn't at least try to use Postfix? I mean, Postfix is an IBM-funded thing, and was developed to be the, quote, "IBM Secure Mailer"...
No, no, no.
:)
If you want to go the "Sendmail is buggy" way, well, at least, try to be informative where the alternatives are concerned.
For those who wish to try another MTA, the three big ones, not counting Sendmail, are Exim (small and easy, good for your home net), Qmail, and Postfix (fast and powerful, my personal fav). All four have their good points, and all four are certainly worth checking before you decide on one.
See? I mean, if Sendmail is still so widely used, there is a reason, you know...
Gotta agree. :)
What was amazingly smart, in Dogma, is that while it mercilessly made fun of the letter of Christianity, it was very respectful of its spirit. The simple allusion to all the doubts, all the fears of a young Jesus bound to a terrible destiny, and still accepting it, probably did more for Christianity than all the biggots who whined about the movies put together.
Smith is great. I didn't know of his other movies, but I'll be sure to look them out.
People, this is good. I may be biased toward that matter, but I'm watching closely this kind of development. As well as, I imagine, about every other person with a disability caused by nerve damage or destruction (total deafness in one ear in my case) (yeah, so I don't need to encode my MP3s in stereo).
My bio courses are far behind me, but aren't nerves the 'tail' of neurons?
Point. Not to mention non-natives! I can more or less read and write in English, but listening to it is a wholly different matter. Bleh.
Hopefully some helpful person (or some determined karma whore
Laptops in school? Aren't there more efficient things to do with the money, like, paying teachers a bit more, maybe?
I may be wrong, and I kind of hope I am, but this SO sounds like a political trick to make it look like they do something for kids education, instead of REALLY tackling problems...
Erm, excuse-me, but where the heck did you pull that out from? My mom is a primary school teacher, in a country where the government gives this kind of orders to schools (let's all be an utopian crowd and hope children will pull grammar rules out of their rear end!), and the result is a freaking disaster. My mom sometimes get 10 or 11 years old kids that can barely read, write or count, because so far what they've done is mostly draw and sing and play with so-called educational tools. Because she believes in her job, she works herself thin to help EACH of them catch up. And the kids love her, and the parents love her, but her school is giving her a HARD time because she goes against the (lefty) government's will. She's going to have to step down, because she's in no physical and mental shape to continue.
Now don't take me wrong. It IS necessary to give kids a chance to do their own things, to learn their way, etc. But to expect them to learn arbitrary things such as grammar and arithmetic without actively teaching them, well, excuse-me, but this is bullshit. A teacher is here to 1) teach the kids the arbitrary stuff, 2) give them the taste to explore their own fields of interest (which my mother makes sure to do). Without BOTH those points, elementary school education is crap.
That's very true.
That's also very true. BUT wishful thinking is not sufficient. My mom happens to be a primary school teacher (outside the US, BTW), so she gets to teach kids the most important basics (read, write, count). She gets definite instructions along the line of what you're suggesting -- adapt to each child, etc.
Except there are other 20 children in her class.
Well, she's tried. Bottom line: the kids learn well. They love her. Their parents love her.
But she's stepping down after only 5 years of it, because she's worked herself thin, and she's in too bad shape to continue.
So, yes, we need to find a way to teach children individually. But that's not by just telling the teachers to do so, obviously. Problem is: is it possible to fund enough teachers for all the kids? If not, then what can we do? Will it be sufficient if the parents actively take part in their kids' education, like other Slashdotters are suggesting?
Well, actually, it's some stupid minister who decided a tax on CD-Rs was needed. It was absolutely moronic: as was pointed out, now, buying CD-Rs (no matter what for -- some companies that backup data on CDs yelled a LOT) brings money mostly to music corps that don't exactly need it, and doesn't really help small labels that DO need a hand.
Bottom line: people bought massive amounts of CD-Rs just before the law became effective, so the prices went down, which vaguely made up for the tax.
But still. Did you notice that trend where big corps live by taking small amounts of money from you regularly, no matter if you buy something new from them or not? Am I the only one who thinks it is a dangerous road for an economy to tread?
Nah, if I got it right (note that I didn't read the article, it's 5am here and I'm too tired to download that PDF), different parts of the chip do their job at their own speed, somehow synchronizing between themselves when needed. So, effectively, there's no external clock, but your statement that 'everything is clocked' isn't wrong either.
Indeed! But I fear that is not the point. :)
The problem isn't that their hashing algorithm is weak. The problem is that the stored emails are freaking world readable.
As for you, why do they toss in those nice shiny tech words? Could it be to divert our attention from the real problem, ie, the design of their system is downright braindead?
That's it. We can quit MS bashing, people. They do a better job of it on their own anyway. ;)
Well, I beg to differ. You could say I've kind of been enlightened after listening to the epitome of computer cluelessness: my mother.
She was struggling with the Windows explorer GUI, trying to move a file. And then, she said, and I'm not kidding: "Oh, I prefered DOS, you know, you typed a command, and it worked!"
Maybe what simplicity is really about, is determinism in the way the computer behaves?
I'm having that weird image of a sysadming querying about children processes and receiving the answer: "Oy, oy, oy!"
There's that stenography tool, Outguess, that claims it can hide info into a pic without changing the pic's statistical properties (entropy et al, I surmise). I wonder if it's Outguess that makes false (or misinformed) claims, or if Prof. Farid's research on statistical analysis is already out of date...
Personally, no matter what, I wish Prof. Farid a lot of luck. His work might be what will save our collective ass from SDMI-like schemes down the road.
Actually, I thought of doing so with a friend who lives in the UK, where employers have a legal right to read your email. That in itself is another issue (my point was, my friend's employer can't force me to give him my private key if my friend PGP's the message, since I don't live in the UK), but the idea can probably be reused. I wonder how the world (and the judge!) would react to a lawsuit about a deliberately encrypted message, when the message would at the end turn out to be:
Good grammatical point indeed. :) :) Corrections and details welcome!
I fear I still have to correct the physics of it. The decibel unit isn't a unit per se; it's 1/10th of a bel. A bel is a logarithmic quantity: it means you express a unit logarithmically. In effect, a 60 decibels (6 bels) sound is ten times louder than a 50 decibels sound. So, the words 'audio decibel' aren't that stupid.
Now, my physics courses are far behind me, but I believe the 'real' unit behind sound is joules, used to express the energy of the mass of air displaced by a sound. Or something like that anyway.
This guy is such an interesting person. Did other people also notice he was a key element in the DOJ vs Microsoft case? You know, this guy may be, in his own inconspicuous style, one of the best things happening to us as of late. Let's not lose trace of him.
Check out the amazing prequels!! CodeRed 0, CodeRed -1, and then BetaCode, in all theat-- err, all MS servers, starting next week! Don't miss the excitement!!
You definitely have a point, you know; but you might also want to re-read this. If only it was as simple as a matter of 'right'...
... flashback to earlier reviews of these by Michael Sims and Jon Katz
:)
No I don't. But thank you.
Does goatse count as hour 0 or something? :)
No, I don't think fiddling with the least significant bit would work well as a watermarking measure. That bit is VERY likely to change when the signal goes through encoding (MP3, OGG), converting (digital -> analog -> digital), or whatever. I thought of it too, but I quickly dismissed the scheme as unpractical.
:) More info about audio watermarking would really be appreciated, if someone is knowledgeable in this area.
Since they used a DSP for that scheme, it may have to do with frequencies (just an idea...). Why not a signal in some inaudible frequencies? I don't think so, it would be too easy to filter. I think it could be some frequency packing, ie, you filter certain frequencies out and mix their value into a very close frequency, close enough that the human ear won't notice it, but a machine will. It is likely to work well if you do it in the low frequency range, would I say (totally instinctively, based on my absolute ear and nothing else, so it doesn't mean much, alright -- that, and the fact high frequencies ARE left out when you encode at 11Khz). Then, to check for a watermark, you look for a pattern in the way certain given frequencies are filtered out. If the frequency at which the filter is turned on and off is of the same order of magnitude as the frequency being filtered, chances are it can't be detected through statistical analysis, especially if the frequency patterns filtered that way vary rapidly.
But, you realize, that's pure speculation.
In the fact they actually sell Visual C to individuals, you have a point, indeed, though you could have voiced it just a tad more politely.
:)) is a combination of parameters, actually. The wording of their presentation of .NET. The fact they generally don't seem to envision development outside an environment. The fact that while I've not done much development in Visual C (three months of it, all in all), I had a definite feeling of being trapped in what I'll call The Legal API Set. The fact I read about driver makers complaining they had to do guesswork in NT because the Legal APIs weren't sufficient for them and the rest wasn't documented, as you point out yourself. For that matter, Microsoft blamed NT's instability on those very drivers.
:)
What prompted my feeling (just a feeling, Mr. AC
So maybe they've got nothing at all against individual programmers in themselves, but I still have the same feeling: they do not enjoy much programmers that want to go deeper than the Legal API. If you have different feelings, good for you, dude.