Google doesn't have to develop an OS, they already have a huge cluster running linux, they just have to give everyone a window into that massive beast of a system (their browser) and install some apps on it, and there ya go, thin client, web based, architecture agnostic computing just what Netscape tried to do before MS killed them dead.
This would be a trivial thing for google to do, and I think its where they are heading. If they release a browser, look for them to shortly thereafter release a web based office suite (that only works in their browser), or possibly a web based vnc viewer type app (again that only works in their browser), then they can sell desktop apps over the web, charge a monthly service fee, you get 10TB of storage on google's cluster, you get access to the compute power of that cluster, you have access to it anywhere, everywhere, fast and easy.
This will be the death of MS, but as other posters have said, it is scary as all hell. Google is a nice company now, but this kind of power concentrated in 1 companies hands will prove horrible for the net.
Ok, I just did some research into these various claims, basically when Intel settled their claims with Intergraph they left their customers out in the cold. The settlement specifically gives Intergraph the right to sue any intel customer or distributor. When AMD settled they made it part of the settlement that all of their customers were covered by the settlement. This can be verified Here
IBM will not be next, as the entered into a cross-licensing agreement with Intergraph in 2003 which absolved IBM and Intergraph mutually of violating each other's patents. IBM also paid a bit of cash (like 10mil) this is all on their site
Here
Um, we're talking about windows boxes here, probably little devel machines... the question is why are these windows boxes right on the net at all... your setup obviously is the most rational if you've got the cash/hardware for it. However, I run a box with db and web on the same box (its a linux box) but access to the db is restricted to the localhost, and the firewall on the box only allows connections to port 80, 22, and 25...
Anyway, running db + web on the same box is not necessarily evil for small sites that don't require a separate db box for processing, but certainly you don't want your db open to the world, firewall that port, or restrict access to the db deamon to localhost (its easy to tell mysql not to allow root logins from anywhere but localhost) if you need remote db access, let some less privileged user have remote access... silly people.
I didn't say it wouldn't do much (or at least that's not what I meant) I was saying it isn't going to kill anyone. It's not like the ice is gonna all melt over night and suddenly the coasts will be 30 feet under water. Yes it will cost billions as the water eats up cities and shore-front property, but no one is gonna stand in their house and watch it flood over 10 years.
Further, yes I know that almost everyone lives 500 feet or less above sea level, but what percentage live 40-50 feet above sea level? That is the type of increase we are talking about here maybe 10 meters, not 200 meters.
Are you saying venice is sinking because of global warming? Wow that's an audacious claim. Anyway, Yes I know that it will affect alot of people, and cost billions in property damage. My point was simply that its not going to kill anyone. They will have plenty of time to get out of the way.
Your statement that somewhere is going to experience an 88 degree increase in temp and somewhere else will see a 66 degree drop is bizarre and absurd, you've watched the day after tomorrow too many times.
You obviously didn't get my sarcasm... Other than that, warming will not reduce farmland (siberia, northern canada) which are currently unusable (Siberia is HUGE!!) will become so.
How is global warming going to cause all food production to become impossible? Last time I checked more land was unusable for food production because of frost/tundra than anything else... (Siberia, Northern Canada). Why is an extra 10 degrees going to hurt crop production? It's not, its going to create a longer growing season, more crops in more places, and in the end more food. Plants like warmth, or do you think its colder in greenhouses?
OK, I'll bite... sea levels rise and destroy salt lake??? Dude I'm 4000 feet above sea level, and protected by a 12000 foot mountain range.... I think at last count if all the ice melted sea levels would rise like 8-10 meters.... that leaves you about 3960 feet before you're knocking on my door.
Further, yeah ok, maybe we lose some species, but guess what, the frozen tundra of siberia will become usable farmland, as well as the frozen tundra of Canada... Also, growing periods will lengthen causing more food to be produced... Anyway... Saying that Salt Lake will be under water lost you any sort of credibility you might have had.
This has to be the most idiotic post ever. Build a reflective device? What like a huge satelite umbrella? Yeah you go sell that to the world governments, France will probably give you a couple hundred million to try it...
Seriously I am yet to be shown how global warming is going to kill all 7 billion people on the planet, or even a substantial portion of them. Ok, the oceans get deeper, its gonna happen over what 100 years? 200 years? Even at "warp speed" maybe all the ice melts in 10 years, its not like the flood is gonna suprise anyone, yes it will cost alot in lost real estate, but its not gonna kill anyone.
If the storms got really really bad, they might kill a few people, but they're not gonna kill hundreds of thousands, certainly not millions.
Now in saying all this you probably think I'm some right wing whacko who doesn't care, wrong again, I think we should reduce our emissions, I think we should come up with really awesome cars/transport, and a solid non-polluting power source. I only want that because I think things look prettier when you don't have to look through 10 miles of haze and smog to see them. It's not about global warming, or climate change, its because I don't like breathing it, or seeing it.
Scare mongering, and bizarre ideas about building the earth an umbrella don't help. They don't get people to decide to try to reduce emissions. Take someone to Alaska, or into the himalayas, and say "look the rockies in Utah used to look like this", that moves people. Show them what the world looks like when you're not looking through 10 miles of polluted atmosphere, show them that, and they'll want to come up with a solution.
"Stephen Byers claims to know that 400 ppm is the maximum 'safe' level; what we show is that it may be impossible to pin down a safe level, and therefore we should not focus exclusively on stabilisation."
Ok, so its impossible to pin down a "safe level" of greenhouse gas, so we already might be over the "safe level" or it might not be "safe" if there are only 200ppm, so what we need to do is build this huge CO2 sink that will draw down CO2 to nearly 0ppm, that will be safe right? It has to be!
This is the same logic that causes Superfund in the US to clean up toxins to lower than naturally occuring levels wasting billions of dollars digging tons of dirt and replacing it with new dirt just because arsenic is found in higher than 3ppb naturally in some area.
We don't know what's safe, but we know that at some level it becomes bad, so that means at any level it's bad right?
I agree with the sentiment in your post. However, I really don't see how 11 degrees is going to suddenly make the planet uninhabitable.
Personally, I live in Salt Lake City, Utah, in the winter the average temp here is probably around 30 degrees F. My family lives in Las Vegas, NV a mere 400 miles away. The average temp there is probably more like 50 degrees, I was there last week wearing shorts and flip flops, it was warm (60 F) for January.
Now, in the summer it gets up to 120F in Vegas, yet more than a million people somehow manage to live there. That is easily 11C warmer than Salt Lake in the summer, people live all over this planet in all sorts of temperatures. Storms might get worse, but that's not going to make the planet "uninhabitable", the Tsunami killed more people by far than all of the huricanes Florida had last year, so unless you're saying global warming causes earthquakes, I'd say we fear that alot more than having to wear short sleeves instead of sweaters.
Even if "The day after tomorrow" happens, (oh whoops it only destroyed the US.. weird... I'm glad that the climate knows who is creating all the greenhouse gasses, and will selectively destroy only them, maybe I can move to Europe and I'll be ok...) That movie was so bizarre, if things really happened the way that movie talked about we'd have to redefine absolute zero (the temp is dropping 40 degrees per second!!!).
anyway, my point is the media sucks at "educating" people be it the news, movies, whatever, they are idiots and can't "convince" any thinking person of their "science". The complete misuse of statistics in this whole argument also renders it useless.
While this guy has some pretty shoddy logic in a few places, I agree by in large with his point. The goverment should not be in the business of regulating these things. First off, they shouldn't because they suck at it, (did the punishment have teeth in the end?). Hardly at all, because, the second reason they shouldn't be in the business of regulating this is because in the end, the gov't has a vested interested in having strong global companies, and regulating them in this way creates a blatant conflict of interest.
Anyway, if Sun, Netscape et al had taken their huge IPO bucks and spent it on making better products instead of attorneys, they might be in better positions now than they are. If Netscape had a better product with 4.7 than IE 5, people would have continued to use it. Firefox is better than IE 6, and lo and behold, its gaining market share. The ipod is the best mp3 player, and wow look at that, its winning. Linux is a solid and arguably better server system than windows and wow look at that, it's gaining market share.
In 96-97, you could pay 30,000 to Sun for a unix system, or you could pay 3-4000 for a small windows server system. If you're a small business of 10-15 employees, you don't have 30k to drop on a file/print server. That is why MS won, and it's why they are losing now. Now I can go to a small business and sell a linux server for 1-2k and a comparable windows server still costs 3-4k.
Now, MS can look back and say "we would have won if we didn't have to waste millions on antitrust litigation" and even when we win politically we'll lose. And the antitrust litigation didn't mean squat, the punishment doesn't have teeth, and doesn't change anything, it was just a big waste of time and energy just like this guys said, that could have been used to innovate, market, execute, instead it all ended up in the pockets of attorneys...
Hey, all you people complaining that this is a hoax story, at least this way there are alot of mirrors... you can go to snopes, or the australian page, or any number of other pages that have these pictures... and you don't have to deal with babel getting the translation all wrong.
Ok, so I know this is beta software, but I just went and installed the latest chandler release, and wow... I hope they have a strategy to trim this thing down, it doesn't even work and it uses more than 300MB of ram and about 2 minutes to load... I don't know how this thing is gonna be an outlook killer. If they actually add functionality to it it's gonna be using like 500MB of ram and won't run on anything but an 8 way opteron cluster... Anyway, I guess that's what happens when you use an interpreted language. (its all written in python) not to bash python, I think its a great language and has its uses, but this might not be one of them...
Um... yeah, the article you posted states quite clearly that if you don't have a top of the line card, you will be stuck with the windows 2k/xp interface, no 3d effects, no translucency for you. If you have any mac, from the lowest end mac mini, an ibook, an emac, imac, powerbook, or powermac... all of the windows, all of the features they are all there, whether you pay 500 or 5,000, with this, if you don't pay 500 for your graphics card, you won't get these features.
Furthermore... in all of these exploits I don't see a single one that is remotely exploitable. If you give a user access to a system, presumably you have some hold over him (employee, service contract, etc). If someone breaks a username/password, good job... but hey, why not try to just break into root...
This isn't to say that local exploits aren't bad, or that they shouldn't be fixed, I've just always assumed that if someone has local access, they have root. There are entirely too many programs that can be exploited, too many avenues of attack... Give as few people as possible shell access, and make sure you trust the ones you give it to (or can sue them if you don't), and enforce hard passwords.
I work for an ISP, the reason tech support calls dropped after SP2 is that installing it changes almost all error messages in the OS to blame someone other than MS for problems that are obviously caused by SP2.
If the firewall is blocking access to the internet for certain apps, the error message will say that the computer doesn't have an internet connect and to call your ISP. We fought with a bug where certain spyware if installed while the SP2 install runs, the installation corrupts the ip stack, causing the entire networking subsystem to fail. The error message blames the ISP or the home network.
Within 2 weeks after the release of SP2 the first question all our tech support engineers asked when they got on a call was "did you install service pack 2 recently?". We had a huge spike in calls after the release, and probably 90% of our calls in that time frame were SP2 related install errors, or misleading error messages after the install that blamed us for MS breaking things.
Does anyone know how well these linux pc's at walmart are selling? Anyway to find out? I'd be extremely interested to know what if any actual numbers of grandma's at walmart have been sold a linux pc.
hmmm, so to run windows securely you have to go in and spend at least an hour setting up auditing, installing new software, and creating non-admin users and making sure all of the apps still run under those accounts... And then you have to come back every week and clean out the audit logs to avoid filling the drive with them... so there's more time spent babysitting the box...
I think this was this guys point exactly, in Linux you don't have to do any of that, by default there is sane logging set up, there are sane defaults, and all the apps you need to do all the work you need to do (unless you need IE for some sites... grrrr... hate those sites). All of the apps run in non-root accounts, always, (ok, maybe not tcpdump, and the like... but hey in linux there is magical sudo, no need to actually log in as root).
Further, you can get spyware without clicking on any install links, without even being notified, by simply visiting a site that has one of the millions of IE holes exploited you get the privilege of sending all of your keystrokes, browsing habits and personal information to www.coolwwwsearch.com.
Yes he should have firefox installed, but that isn't the point either, the point is if MS says their system is for "everyone" then they should make a system that doesn't require knowledge of open source at all, and can still be used for more than 4 minutes on the internet without being hacked. The complaint here is precisely that in linux you don't have to do x, y, and z to create a secure system after its installed, in windows you have to do x, y, z, and then the whole rest of the alphabet again, probably with additional aa, ab, ac steps as well... that takes time and costs money.
Blocking all traffic from china while draconian, will fix the problem faster than anything else. If china can no longer do business with the US because of their spam policies, the business sector in china will quickly put pressure on the gov't to change the situation and it will change.
The Gimp team was forced to file for bankruptcy and cease development after its main supporters decided to cause a DDoS attack on their web site by simultaneously downloading a massive number of pictures and movies from their site.
SCO commented: "This attack is further proof that the Open Source community is largely a terrorist organization that cannot be trusted. They seem to be even as we speak cannabalizing their own allies. This behavior proves that we own linux."
I would agree with the conclusion of this study... I saw it happen in my life, but I wouldn't change anything about it. I got my first computer that was *mine* when I was 15 just after my freshman year of high school... up until then I was pretty much a straight a student. However, in my sophomore year I took a cs course (basic and pascal were the languages), and then I had way too much to do to worry about any other homework besides math, chemistry and physics (and cs of course). All my other grades dropped through the floor, but I had found my calling and I wouldn't go back and change it for anything.
I only maintained good grades in math and the sciences because I had fun making the classes easier by writing programs to do my homework for me, or in other ways exploring the equations presented in those classes with computing.
I am now bilingual (after learning computer programming, I had taken spanish courses but never got anything out of them, until after I learned 4 or 5 programming languages, then I went back to the Spanish and it was like something had switched on and I just understood it, I don't know if learning multiple programming languages somehow helped there but I certainly felt that it did)
I think that the main reason that computers negatively affect learning is because they give a child with no foundation a copout. Why learn the theory behind division if you can just punch it into your neat calculator and get all the answers you need for the test. Same for all maths up through calculus.. If that is all you use a computer for, and never *understand* what the computer is doing in the background, yes you will be dumber for using it. A child must build a foundation in math, problem solving, and logical reasoning before letting a computer solve those problems automatically for them, otherwise they will be lost.
Slashdot Mirror
Google doesn't have to develop an OS, they already have a huge cluster running linux, they just have to give everyone a window into that massive beast of a system (their browser) and install some apps on it, and there ya go, thin client, web based, architecture agnostic computing just what Netscape tried to do before MS killed them dead.
This would be a trivial thing for google to do, and I think its where they are heading. If they release a browser, look for them to shortly thereafter release a web based office suite (that only works in their browser), or possibly a web based vnc viewer type app (again that only works in their browser), then they can sell desktop apps over the web, charge a monthly service fee, you get 10TB of storage on google's cluster, you get access to the compute power of that cluster, you have access to it anywhere, everywhere, fast and easy.
This will be the death of MS, but as other posters have said, it is scary as all hell. Google is a nice company now, but this kind of power concentrated in 1 companies hands will prove horrible for the net.
Ok, I just did some research into these various claims, basically when Intel settled their claims with Intergraph they left their customers out in the cold. The settlement specifically gives Intergraph the right to sue any intel customer or distributor. When AMD settled they made it part of the settlement that all of their customers were covered by the settlement.
This can be verified Here
and Here
That is amazing. I'm never buying an intel processor again, nor producing any systems based on intel hardware ever again.
IBM will not be next, as the entered into a cross-licensing agreement with Intergraph in 2003 which absolved IBM and Intergraph mutually of violating each other's patents. IBM also paid a bit of cash (like 10mil) this is all on their site Here
Um, we're talking about windows boxes here, probably little devel machines... the question is why are these windows boxes right on the net at all... your setup obviously is the most rational if you've got the cash/hardware for it. However, I run a box with db and web on the same box (its a linux box) but access to the db is restricted to the localhost, and the firewall on the box only allows connections to port 80, 22, and 25...
Anyway, running db + web on the same box is not necessarily evil for small sites that don't require a separate db box for processing, but certainly you don't want your db open to the world, firewall that port, or restrict access to the db deamon to localhost (its easy to tell mysql not to allow root logins from anywhere but localhost) if you need remote db access, let some less privileged user have remote access... silly people.
I didn't say it wouldn't do much (or at least that's not what I meant) I was saying it isn't going to kill anyone. It's not like the ice is gonna all melt over night and suddenly the coasts will be 30 feet under water. Yes it will cost billions as the water eats up cities and shore-front property, but no one is gonna stand in their house and watch it flood over 10 years.
Further, yes I know that almost everyone lives 500 feet or less above sea level, but what percentage live 40-50 feet above sea level? That is the type of increase we are talking about here maybe 10 meters, not 200 meters.
Are you saying venice is sinking because of global warming? Wow that's an audacious claim. Anyway, Yes I know that it will affect alot of people, and cost billions in property damage. My point was simply that its not going to kill anyone. They will have plenty of time to get out of the way.
Your statement that somewhere is going to experience an 88 degree increase in temp and somewhere else will see a 66 degree drop is bizarre and absurd, you've watched the day after tomorrow too many times.
You obviously didn't get my sarcasm...
Other than that, warming will not reduce farmland (siberia, northern canada) which are currently unusable (Siberia is HUGE!!) will become so.
How is global warming going to cause all food production to become impossible? Last time I checked more land was unusable for food production because of frost/tundra than anything else... (Siberia, Northern Canada). Why is an extra 10 degrees going to hurt crop production? It's not, its going to create a longer growing season, more crops in more places, and in the end more food. Plants like warmth, or do you think its colder in greenhouses?
OK, I'll bite...
sea levels rise and destroy salt lake??? Dude I'm 4000 feet above sea level, and protected by a 12000 foot mountain range.... I think at last count if all the ice melted sea levels would rise like 8-10 meters.... that leaves you about 3960 feet before you're knocking on my door.
Further, yeah ok, maybe we lose some species, but guess what, the frozen tundra of siberia will become usable farmland, as well as the frozen tundra of Canada... Also, growing periods will lengthen causing more food to be produced... Anyway... Saying that Salt Lake will be under water lost you any sort of credibility you might have had.
This has to be the most idiotic post ever. Build a reflective device? What like a huge satelite umbrella? Yeah you go sell that to the world governments, France will probably give you a couple hundred million to try it...
Seriously
I am yet to be shown how global warming is going to kill all 7 billion people on the planet, or even a substantial portion of them. Ok, the oceans get deeper, its gonna happen over what 100 years? 200 years? Even at "warp speed" maybe all the ice melts in 10 years, its not like the flood is gonna suprise anyone, yes it will cost alot in lost real estate, but its not gonna kill anyone.
If the storms got really really bad, they might kill a few people, but they're not gonna kill hundreds of thousands, certainly not millions.
Now in saying all this you probably think I'm some right wing whacko who doesn't care, wrong again, I think we should reduce our emissions, I think we should come up with really awesome cars/transport, and a solid non-polluting power source. I only want that because I think things look prettier when you don't have to look through 10 miles of haze and smog to see them. It's not about global warming, or climate change, its because I don't like breathing it, or seeing it.
Scare mongering, and bizarre ideas about building the earth an umbrella don't help. They don't get people to decide to try to reduce emissions. Take someone to Alaska, or into the himalayas, and say "look the rockies in Utah used to look like this", that moves people. Show them what the world looks like when you're not looking through 10 miles of polluted atmosphere, show them that, and they'll want to come up with a solution.
"Stephen Byers claims to know that 400 ppm is the maximum 'safe' level; what we show is that it may be impossible to pin down a safe level, and therefore we should not focus exclusively on stabilisation."
Ok, so its impossible to pin down a "safe level" of greenhouse gas, so we already might be over the "safe level" or it might not be "safe" if there are only 200ppm, so what we need to do is build this huge CO2 sink that will draw down CO2 to nearly 0ppm, that will be safe right? It has to be!
This is the same logic that causes Superfund in the US to clean up toxins to lower than naturally occuring levels wasting billions of dollars digging tons of dirt and replacing it with new dirt just because arsenic is found in higher than 3ppb naturally in some area.
We don't know what's safe, but we know that at some level it becomes bad, so that means at any level it's bad right?
I agree with the sentiment in your post. However, I really don't see how 11 degrees is going to suddenly make the planet uninhabitable.
Personally, I live in Salt Lake City, Utah, in the winter the average temp here is probably around 30 degrees F. My family lives in Las Vegas, NV a mere 400 miles away. The average temp there is probably more like 50 degrees, I was there last week wearing shorts and flip flops, it was warm (60 F) for January.
Now, in the summer it gets up to 120F in Vegas, yet more than a million people somehow manage to live there. That is easily 11C warmer than Salt Lake in the summer, people live all over this planet in all sorts of temperatures. Storms might get worse, but that's not going to make the planet "uninhabitable", the Tsunami killed more people by far than all of the huricanes Florida had last year, so unless you're saying global warming causes earthquakes, I'd say we fear that alot more than having to wear short sleeves instead of sweaters.
Even if "The day after tomorrow" happens, (oh whoops it only destroyed the US.. weird... I'm glad that the climate knows who is creating all the greenhouse gasses, and will selectively destroy only them, maybe I can move to Europe and I'll be ok...) That movie was so bizarre, if things really happened the way that movie talked about we'd have to redefine absolute zero (the temp is dropping 40 degrees per second!!!).
anyway, my point is the media sucks at "educating" people be it the news, movies, whatever, they are idiots and can't "convince" any thinking person of their "science". The complete misuse of statistics in this whole argument also renders it useless.
While this guy has some pretty shoddy logic in a few places, I agree by in large with his point. The goverment should not be in the business of regulating these things. First off, they shouldn't because they suck at it, (did the punishment have teeth in the end?). Hardly at all, because, the second reason they shouldn't be in the business of regulating this is because in the end, the gov't has a vested interested in having strong global companies, and regulating them in this way creates a blatant conflict of interest.
Anyway, if Sun, Netscape et al had taken their huge IPO bucks and spent it on making better products instead of attorneys, they might be in better positions now than they are. If Netscape had a better product with 4.7 than IE 5, people would have continued to use it. Firefox is better than IE 6, and lo and behold, its gaining market share. The ipod is the best mp3 player, and wow look at that, its winning. Linux is a solid and arguably better server system than windows and wow look at that, it's gaining market share.
In 96-97, you could pay 30,000 to Sun for a unix system, or you could pay 3-4000 for a small windows server system. If you're a small business of 10-15 employees, you don't have 30k to drop on a file/print server. That is why MS won, and it's why they are losing now. Now I can go to a small business and sell a linux server for 1-2k and a comparable windows server still costs 3-4k.
Now, MS can look back and say "we would have won if we didn't have to waste millions on antitrust litigation" and even when we win politically we'll lose. And the antitrust litigation didn't mean squat, the punishment doesn't have teeth, and doesn't change anything, it was just a big waste of time and energy just like this guys said, that could have been used to innovate, market, execute, instead it all ended up in the pockets of attorneys...
Hey, all you people complaining that this is a hoax story, at least this way there are alot of mirrors... you can go to snopes, or the australian page, or any number of other pages that have these pictures... and you don't have to deal with babel getting the translation all wrong.
Ok, so I know this is beta software, but I just went and installed the latest chandler release, and wow... I hope they have a strategy to trim this thing down, it doesn't even work and it uses more than 300MB of ram and about 2 minutes to load... I don't know how this thing is gonna be an outlook killer. If they actually add functionality to it it's gonna be using like 500MB of ram and won't run on anything but an 8 way opteron cluster...
Anyway, I guess that's what happens when you use an interpreted language. (its all written in python) not to bash python, I think its a great language and has its uses, but this might not be one of them...
Um...
yeah, the article you posted states quite clearly that if you don't have a top of the line card, you will be stuck with the windows 2k/xp interface, no 3d effects, no translucency for you. If you have any mac, from the lowest end mac mini, an ibook, an emac, imac, powerbook, or powermac... all of the windows, all of the features they are all there, whether you pay 500 or 5,000, with this, if you don't pay 500 for your graphics card, you won't get these features.
Furthermore...
in all of these exploits I don't see a single one that is remotely exploitable. If you give a user access to a system, presumably you have some hold over him (employee, service contract, etc). If someone breaks a username/password, good job... but hey, why not try to just break into root...
This isn't to say that local exploits aren't bad, or that they shouldn't be fixed, I've just always assumed that if someone has local access, they have root. There are entirely too many programs that can be exploited, too many avenues of attack... Give as few people as possible shell access, and make sure you trust the ones you give it to (or can sue them if you don't), and enforce hard passwords.
I work for an ISP, the reason tech support calls dropped after SP2 is that installing it changes almost all error messages in the OS to blame someone other than MS for problems that are obviously caused by SP2.
If the firewall is blocking access to the internet for certain apps, the error message will say that the computer doesn't have an internet connect and to call your ISP. We fought with a bug where certain spyware if installed while the SP2 install runs, the installation corrupts the ip stack, causing the entire networking subsystem to fail. The error message blames the ISP or the home network.
Within 2 weeks after the release of SP2 the first question all our tech support engineers asked when they got on a call was "did you install service pack 2 recently?". We had a huge spike in calls after the release, and probably 90% of our calls in that time frame were SP2 related install errors, or misleading error messages after the install that blamed us for MS breaking things.
Because he's running IE, so he sent him that virus he was talking about signing...
Does anyone know how well these linux pc's at walmart are selling? Anyway to find out? I'd be extremely interested to know what if any actual numbers of grandma's at walmart have been sold a linux pc.
hmmm, so to run windows securely you have to go in and spend at least an hour setting up auditing, installing new software, and creating non-admin users and making sure all of the apps still run under those accounts... And then you have to come back every week and clean out the audit logs to avoid filling the drive with them... so there's more time spent babysitting the box...
I think this was this guys point exactly, in Linux you don't have to do any of that, by default there is sane logging set up, there are sane defaults, and all the apps you need to do all the work you need to do (unless you need IE for some sites... grrrr... hate those sites). All of the apps run in non-root accounts, always, (ok, maybe not tcpdump, and the like... but hey in linux there is magical sudo, no need to actually log in as root).
Further, you can get spyware without clicking on any install links, without even being notified, by simply visiting a site that has one of the millions of IE holes exploited you get the privilege of sending all of your keystrokes, browsing habits and personal information to www.coolwwwsearch.com.
Yes he should have firefox installed, but that isn't the point either, the point is if MS says their system is for "everyone" then they should make a system that doesn't require knowledge of open source at all, and can still be used for more than 4 minutes on the internet without being hacked. The complaint here is precisely that in linux you don't have to do x, y, and z to create a secure system after its installed, in windows you have to do x, y, z, and then the whole rest of the alphabet again, probably with additional aa, ab, ac steps as well... that takes time and costs money.
Blocking all traffic from china while draconian, will fix the problem faster than anything else. If china can no longer do business with the US because of their spam policies, the business sector in china will quickly put pressure on the gov't to change the situation and it will change.
The Gimp team was forced to file for bankruptcy and cease development after its main supporters decided to cause a DDoS attack on their web site by simultaneously downloading a massive number of pictures and movies from their site.
SCO commented: "This attack is further proof that the Open Source community is largely a terrorist organization that cannot be trusted. They seem to be even as we speak cannabalizing their own allies. This behavior proves that we own linux."
I would agree with the conclusion of this study... I saw it happen in my life, but I wouldn't change anything about it. I got my first computer that was *mine* when I was 15 just after my freshman year of high school... up until then I was pretty much a straight a student. However, in my sophomore year I took a cs course (basic and pascal were the languages), and then I had way too much to do to worry about any other homework besides math, chemistry and physics (and cs of course). All my other grades dropped through the floor, but I had found my calling and I wouldn't go back and change it for anything.
I only maintained good grades in math and the sciences because I had fun making the classes easier by writing programs to do my homework for me, or in other ways exploring the equations presented in those classes with computing.
I am now bilingual (after learning computer programming, I had taken spanish courses but never got anything out of them, until after I learned 4 or 5 programming languages, then I went back to the Spanish and it was like something had switched on and I just understood it, I don't know if learning multiple programming languages somehow helped there but I certainly felt that it did)
I think that the main reason that computers negatively affect learning is because they give a child with no foundation a copout. Why learn the theory behind division if you can just punch it into your neat calculator and get all the answers you need for the test. Same for all maths up through calculus.. If that is all you use a computer for, and never *understand* what the computer is doing in the background, yes you will be dumber for using it. A child must build a foundation in math, problem solving, and logical reasoning before letting a computer solve those problems automatically for them, otherwise they will be lost.