Of course I realize this would require some serious testing to make sure all the bugs were ironed out, but after a while I think it would make people much more confident to know how it was working behind the scenes.
Exactly! In this 'testing' phase we should be exposing the product to as many eyes as possible trying to find and exploit weaknesses. When it's pretty damn secure we offer a prize to whoever can circumvent it's security measures. Of course none of this means dick unless your client machine is secure, which if it's a desktop Windows machine you can bet it isn't. I'm not bashing MS here, I'm just saying a lot of people use it who aren't necessarily security minded, and there's nothing wrong with that when they're only guarding their own personal information, but when the leadership of the country is on the line it's a different matter and since this is already a huge run-on sentence I may as well add these few extra words.
Quote: What it means is that obscurity is not sufficient for security. It does not mean that obscurity is not helpful as part of an overall security system.
Precisely. If obscurity were not beneficial as part of security, then root passwords would be publicly available. End quote.
What you are talking about is giving away keys. What you should be talking about is opening up algorithms and protocols, since that is what would actually be opened. The relevant facts are that the product will be reverse engineered anyway, so vulnerabilities will be exploited, but if the code is open then they will be found faster and corrected faster. If you cannot stop exploits when your code is open, then you couldn't stop them when it is closed either. This follows a well known trend in encryption technology where algorithms are subjected to testing by as many people as possible to determine their security.
Microsoft may have made a mistake by boxing up a standard PC that can run off-the-shelf software, selling it below cost, and then trying to lock it up with a flimsy electronic scheme. I realize that they were trying to leverage PC game software for their platform, but there are downsides to that approach that they have to live with now.
In order to make a non-PC x-box, Microsoft would have had to actually invent something. They just couldn't let that happen.
Love him or hate him, any compassionate person would not make fun of Ronald Reagan (or anyone for that matter) for suffering from Alzheimer's disease. Anyone with an ounce of civility would realize that its just crude. Its not funny whatsoever.
Its odd that so many liberals, so eager to tell everyone who compassionate they are, are so quick to make jokes about such topics.
I don't think I've ever actually been modded 'troll' before, but I'm gonna give it a shot:
Guy goes to the doctor to get the results of his medical examination. The doctor says he's got bad news and really bad news. Guy says "Really bad news first.". Doctor tells him he has cancer and it's terminal. Guy scratches his chin "Shit, what's the bad news?". Doctor says "You have Alzheimers." Guy shrugs "Hey, at least I don't have cancer."
The defining characteristic of this country is the orderly transfer of power.
Well... yeah, except you're completely wrong. A more defining characteristic of this country would be the bill of rights protecting speach like calling our president a facist.
War on drugs ---> Bush Sr., Nancy was "Just say No to drugs." Not to mention drug use DID decline through the end of the 80's and early 90's. The war is 'lost' because we (people and government) lost focus not because it could not be won.
War on drugs is 'lost' because people want to get high. If they didn't want to get high they wouldn't do drugs. Same thing goes for alcohol.. prohibition didn't work because people wanted to get drunk. When there's a demand and a supply there will be an industry. It's not that fucking complicated.
The way I see it, Unix is like a bicycle, while Linux is more like a luxury car. Bicycles were invented before we had the technology to make luxury cars like Linux. Now that we have Linux we really don't need Unix anymore. Linux is open.. lots of people can get inside Linux and it's comfortable. Unix only has one occupant, and he's not very comfortable. IBM is like a huge truck. If a huge truck like IBM runs over a little bike like Unix then people become more careful about who they piss off in the future.
Linux is not ready for the desktop.
on
Linux on the Desktop
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Why are we using this arbitrary word 'ready' anyway? This clearly depends on who's using it and what they're using it for. People say that their mom can't run it, but forget that their mom can't run Windows either. It's a pointless argument anyway.. people wondering whether or not linux will 'succeed'. This isn't a commercial product, it's a bunch of open source projects. Look at how much developement was done before anyone knew about it or was interested in using it. It can't really fail. The real question is will Linux ever occupy the majority position on desktops the way that Windows does now. I think the answer is obvious. If Microsoft doesn't come up with some serious innovations then EVENTUALLY they will lose the desktop, where eventually could be a matter of a few decades.
Well, not literally.. SCO doesn't have a patent on my ass. Quote from article.
McBride, who is fluent in Japanese, will visit with several founding members to show them code samples in which the Linux open-source operating system allegedly violates SCO's Unix patents, said an SCO spokesman.
According to the patent search I just did, there are only three patents, one by Caldera and two by Santa Cruz Operation. While they have patented some useful things, like using a network, you would not have to view code when you're trying to see if something violates a patent. Patents are about what things do, not specifically how they are built. If you had a patent on 'a method of printing "Hello World!", I could copy almost all of your code, but change mine to printf("SCO sucks"); and it would not be patent infringement. This would be a case of copyright infringement, so the question is 'why aren't they suing for copyright infringement'... if someone was infringing on my copyrights that's probably what I would sue them for. Unless, that is, I had no case whatsoever. What they are suing for is contract violation.... there is no way anyone can say jack shit about that unless they have read the contracts. What I will say though is that it is clear SCO is claiming rights to technologies: NUMA, SMP, etc. based on the fact that they were incorporated into an operating system that was derivative of Unix. This is what they do in the press.... this completely irresponsible slander.. but what they will say in court remains to be seen.
You know why I bash Windows? I bash it because the people that make it do everything they can to take as much money as they can from the people that use it. I also bash it because I used it for a long time, now use Linux and can't believe I ever payed money for an OS. Mostly I bash it because after seeing what has been done with Linux(and OSS in general) I would like to see it improve even more. I think if more people were using Linux/GNU/OSS, more people would work on it, and it would get even better. To put it simply, I want my already cool OS to be even cooler. For purely selfish reasons I say MS sucks, long live Linux.
And while he won't ever actually pay out $180 million at $500/month, its still on the books. It still sets a ridiculous precedent, and might encourage other industries to use this sort of business model.
Not just that, but it will permanently put a cap on how much money he can make. I'm sure they can take anything he has of value above and beyond the $500 payment he's required to make... after five years of his life are spent on savage ass raping. And he was just close to hacking it.
Frazier was arrested in October 2002, when Customs agents tracking his operations found computer chips and hacking gear in his luggage on a flight from Canada.
This is my favorite part. It could have just as easily read something like "Frasier was arrested in October 2002, when Customs agents tracking his operations found a microscope and test tubes in his luggage on a flight from Canada"... or maybe "a drill and a hammer"... or "linux CD's and network gear". Seriously, I wonder how many people think it's illegal to posses computer chips. We'll just ignore the fact that it's patently ridiculous to bombard the air with signals and disallow people from interpreting them. Do they own the air? Why not, they can own ideas afterall, and they hardly have any physical manifestation at all.
Unfortunately I am not as technically savvy as the poster. Is there any way I can duplicate the 'investigation' to see if I get the same results at least so I know whether or not my information is being collected? I use DHCP to get my DNS, so I'm pretty much screwed if the poster is right.
/* Quote If the Linux Kernel commits show that: 1) Linux got SMP before IBM was involved; and/or 2) that the developer(s) who submitted the SMP code had no connection with IBM, then SCO's immediate case against IBM falls apart. */
As pointed out by the OSI's position paper(sorry, no link here, but it's been posted plenty and probably on this thread) Caldera provided the hardware upon which Alan Cox worked on SMP for Linux.
BTW, to respond to the last few posts, they aren't suing for copyright violation, they are suing for breach of contract... and they are completely fucked(no exageration) for many reasons.
1) Buy out SCO. Hostile style. Buy up enough of the stock to have them vote to merge under IBM.
It seems to me that based on the evidence IBM will probably countersue and get SCO as part of a settlement. I wonder what kind of number they'll put on the damage caused by SCO's unfounded campaign in the press.
How else do you think that the US is extracting information from the detainees? Asking nicely?
If the fact that they are detained is enough to assume they are being tortured, how is this different than anytime another country detains someone? Further, there has been no evidence that the US has 'extracted' any useful information from them anyway. The most valuable info so far seems to have been gathered from echelon.
If you really do believe that human rights aren't being abused at Camp X-Ray then you're either pretty naive, pretty stupid, or both. There are no so blind as those that will not see.
No, seriously.. tell me how you really feel. I'm sorry, but the US torturing people who know nothing under the watchful eye of the entire world seems a little far fetched to me. I will, however, believe it if sufficient evidence is provided.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course I realize this would require some serious testing to make sure all the bugs were ironed out, but after a while I think it would make people much more confident to know how it was working behind the scenes.
Exactly! In this 'testing' phase we should be exposing the product to as many eyes as possible trying to find and exploit weaknesses. When it's pretty damn secure we offer a prize to whoever can circumvent it's security measures. Of course none of this means dick unless your client machine is secure, which if it's a desktop Windows machine you can bet it isn't. I'm not bashing MS here, I'm just saying a lot of people use it who aren't necessarily security minded, and there's nothing wrong with that when they're only guarding their own personal information, but when the leadership of the country is on the line it's a different matter and since this is already a huge run-on sentence I may as well add these few extra words.
Quote:
What it means is that obscurity is not sufficient for security. It does not mean that obscurity is not helpful as part of an overall security system.
Precisely. If obscurity were not beneficial as part of security, then root passwords would be publicly available.
End quote.
What you are talking about is giving away keys. What you should be talking about is opening up algorithms and protocols, since that is what would actually be opened. The relevant facts are that the product will be reverse engineered anyway, so vulnerabilities will be exploited, but if the code is open then they will be found faster and corrected faster. If you cannot stop exploits when your code is open, then you couldn't stop them when it is closed either. This follows a well known trend in encryption technology where algorithms are subjected to testing by as many people as possible to determine their security.
Microsoft may have made a mistake by boxing up a standard PC that can run off-the-shelf software, selling it below cost, and then trying to lock it up with a flimsy electronic scheme. I realize that they were trying to leverage PC game software for their platform, but there are downsides to that approach that they have to live with now.
In order to make a non-PC x-box, Microsoft would have had to actually invent something. They just couldn't let that happen.
Actually I just started with the SCO bike analogy and got carried away, but good one.
Love him or hate him, any compassionate person would not make fun of Ronald Reagan (or anyone for that matter) for suffering from Alzheimer's disease. Anyone with an ounce of civility would realize that its just crude. Its not funny whatsoever.
Its odd that so many liberals, so eager to tell everyone who compassionate they are, are so quick to make jokes about such topics.
I don't think I've ever actually been modded 'troll' before, but I'm gonna give it a shot:
Guy goes to the doctor to get the results of his medical examination. The doctor says he's got bad news and really bad news. Guy says "Really bad news first.". Doctor tells him he has cancer and it's terminal. Guy scratches his chin "Shit, what's the bad news?". Doctor says "You have Alzheimers." Guy shrugs "Hey, at least I don't have cancer."
In your face mister compassionate.
The defining characteristic of this country is the orderly transfer of power.
Well... yeah, except you're completely wrong. A more defining characteristic of this country would be the bill of rights protecting speach like calling our president a facist.
War on drugs ---> Bush Sr., Nancy was "Just say No to drugs." Not to mention drug use DID decline through the end of the 80's and early 90's. The war is 'lost' because we (people and government) lost focus not because it could not be won.
War on drugs is 'lost' because people want to get high. If they didn't want to get high they wouldn't do drugs. Same thing goes for alcohol.. prohibition didn't work because people wanted to get drunk. When there's a demand and a supply there will be an industry. It's not that fucking complicated.
The way I see it, Unix is like a bicycle, while Linux is more like a luxury car. Bicycles were invented before we had the technology to make luxury cars like Linux. Now that we have Linux we really don't need Unix anymore. Linux is open.. lots of people can get inside Linux and it's comfortable. Unix only has one occupant, and he's not very comfortable. IBM is like a huge truck. If a huge truck like IBM runs over a little bike like Unix then people become more careful about who they piss off in the future.
Why are we using this arbitrary word 'ready' anyway? This clearly depends on who's using it and what they're using it for. People say that their mom can't run it, but forget that their mom can't run Windows either. It's a pointless argument anyway.. people wondering whether or not linux will 'succeed'. This isn't a commercial product, it's a bunch of open source projects. Look at how much developement was done before anyone knew about it or was interested in using it. It can't really fail. The real question is will Linux ever occupy the majority position on desktops the way that Windows does now. I think the answer is obvious. If Microsoft doesn't come up with some serious innovations then EVENTUALLY they will lose the desktop, where eventually could be a matter of a few decades.
I heard an unverified rumor that McDonalds use it for their "Food" services. So don't eat at McDonalds... in case you needed another reason.
Well, not literally.. SCO doesn't have a patent on my ass. Quote from article.
McBride, who is fluent in Japanese, will visit with several founding members to show them code samples in which the Linux open-source operating system allegedly violates SCO's Unix patents, said an SCO spokesman.
According to the patent search I just did, there are only three patents, one by Caldera and two by Santa Cruz Operation. While they have patented some useful things, like using a network, you would not have to view code when you're trying to see if something violates a patent. Patents are about what things do, not specifically how they are built. If you had a patent on 'a method of printing "Hello World!", I could copy almost all of your code, but change mine to printf("SCO sucks"); and it would not be patent infringement. This would be a case of copyright infringement, so the question is 'why aren't they suing for copyright infringement'... if someone was infringing on my copyrights that's probably what I would sue them for. Unless, that is, I had no case whatsoever. What they are suing for is contract violation.... there is no way anyone can say jack shit about that unless they have read the contracts. What I will say though is that it is clear SCO is claiming rights to technologies: NUMA, SMP, etc. based on the fact that they were incorporated into an operating system that was derivative of Unix. This is what they do in the press.... this completely irresponsible slander.. but what they will say in court remains to be seen.
Next thing you know we'll be trusting our software developement to Finish nationals.
Which is why state nullification has itself become null and void
And we call it "nullification nullification", or metanullification for short.
Does that place exist? If so *deface that* ;)
That's a nice extra benefit to the 'organizers' when the address of their greatest enemy is painted with 'we own you'.
You know why I bash Windows? I bash it because the people that make it do everything they can to take as much money as they can from the people that use it. I also bash it because I used it for a long time, now use Linux and can't believe I ever payed money for an OS. Mostly I bash it because after seeing what has been done with Linux(and OSS in general) I would like to see it improve even more. I think if more people were using Linux/GNU/OSS, more people would work on it, and it would get even better. To put it simply, I want my already cool OS to be even cooler. For purely selfish reasons I say MS sucks, long live Linux.
And while he won't ever actually pay out $180 million at $500/month, its still on the books. It still sets a ridiculous precedent, and might encourage other industries to use this sort of business model.
Not just that, but it will permanently put a cap on how much money he can make. I'm sure they can take anything he has of value above and beyond the $500 payment he's required to make... after five years of his life are spent on savage ass raping. And he was just close to hacking it.
Frazier was arrested in October 2002, when Customs agents tracking his operations found computer chips and hacking gear in his luggage on a flight from Canada.
This is my favorite part. It could have just as easily read something like "Frasier was arrested in October 2002, when Customs agents tracking his operations found a microscope and test tubes in his luggage on a flight from Canada"... or maybe "a drill and a hammer"... or "linux CD's and network gear". Seriously, I wonder how many people think it's illegal to posses computer chips. We'll just ignore the fact that it's patently ridiculous to bombard the air with signals and disallow people from interpreting them. Do they own the air? Why not, they can own ideas afterall, and they hardly have any physical manifestation at all.
and you're the reincarnation of Satan come to barbeque every newborn on the planet with some green peppers and steak sauce.
You show your ignorance when you post things like that. I don't even like green peppers.
--Satan
Unfortunately I am not as technically savvy as the poster. Is there any way I can duplicate the 'investigation' to see if I get the same results at least so I know whether or not my information is being collected? I use DHCP to get my DNS, so I'm pretty much screwed if the poster is right.
This isn't going to affect Swedish porn is it?
/* Quote
If the Linux Kernel commits show that: 1) Linux got SMP before IBM was involved; and/or 2) that the developer(s) who submitted the SMP code had no connection with IBM, then SCO's immediate case against IBM falls apart.
*/
As pointed out by the OSI's position paper(sorry, no link here, but it's been posted plenty and probably on this thread) Caldera provided the hardware upon which Alan Cox worked on SMP for Linux.
BTW, to respond to the last few posts, they aren't suing for copyright violation, they are suing for breach of contract... and they are completely fucked(no exageration) for many reasons.
Why do people always insist on insulting drug dealers by comparing them to Microsoft. Drug dealers offer real products with real choice.
I also am forced to pay a $10.00 fee for not giving the cable companies $21.00. I don't think this could happen in a free market.
1) Buy out SCO. Hostile style. Buy up enough of the stock to have them vote to merge under IBM.
It seems to me that based on the evidence IBM will probably countersue and get SCO as part of a settlement. I wonder what kind of number they'll put on the damage caused by SCO's unfounded campaign in the press.
How else do you think that the US is extracting information from the detainees? Asking nicely?
If the fact that they are detained is enough to assume they are being tortured, how is this different than anytime another country detains someone? Further, there has been no evidence that the US has 'extracted' any useful information from them anyway. The most valuable info so far seems to have been gathered from echelon.
If you really do believe that human rights aren't being abused at Camp X-Ray then you're either pretty naive, pretty stupid, or both. There are no so blind as those that will not see.
No, seriously.. tell me how you really feel. I'm sorry, but the US torturing people who know nothing under the watchful eye of the entire world seems a little far fetched to me. I will, however, believe it if sufficient evidence is provided.