My mom lives about a mile and a half outside a medium-sized Midwest city. When my dad was alive, he once served as the campaign director for a friend of his who was running for County Commissioner, and they won the election. Fast forward about 15 years.
The county commission voted to enact a leash law. In this case, "county" means "sparsely populated area surrounding the city", not like Orange in SoCal. My mom owns a big, friendly mutt who pretty much kept her sane after my dad died. She was faced with a few options: get rid of her beloved pet (not gonna happen), turn the 100+ pound dog into an indoor pet (which would not have ended happily), or fence the yard. So she fenced it. All five acres. I have no idea what she actually paid for it, but that couldn't have been cheap.
Well, about a year later, Charlie The County Commissioner was running for re-election and called my mom for a campaign donation. After all, her dearly departed husband helped elect him, right? Mom told him, "sure! I'd love to! Put me down for $10,000. Oh, wait: that's how much I had to spend to build the redacted fence that your backward-assed commission forced me to put up to comply with the redacted leash law in the middle of the redacted countryside. Shove it up your redacted and don't ever call me again." She said that was the best phone call she's ever had.
I know that now (or at least I know where to look it up the next time I need to use it), but I think it's absolutely ludicrous that there's no way to find this out without resorting to RTFM. It comes down to discoverability. Well-written interfaces let users explore and learn just by interacting with the program. The alternative is, well, The GIMP.
I actually don't mind the multi-window arrangement. What I hate is that I've owned and used computers for over 30 years and have a CompSci degree, but can't figure out how to draw a straight line with R'ing TFM. You know, it's perfectly OK to make complex interfaces to complex programs, but GIMP has the least discoverable UI I've ever had the displeasure of fighting my way through. Even Emacs has easy functions for learning available keybindings, which makes it infinitely friendlier than GIMP.
If there's already malware on the machine running as the user
I think you're missing the point. I don't care about malware running as the user. I care about a crafted image file that exploits a bug in cupsd, takes advantage of cupsd's newly-granted ability to install software, and exploits yet another package to gain full root.
On a default Ubuntu installation, you also get avahi. Are you 100% beyond-a-shadow-of-a-doubt certain that its networking code is invulnerable so that Joe Cracker down at the mall food court can't compromise the avahi daemon and user? If that were to happen under Ubuntu, the cracker would be limited to running whatever the avahi user has rights to. Under Fedora's new defaults, that includes any software that the avahi user can conceivably install. Not to pick on avahi, but wanted to demonstrate how a previously minor remote exploit on a normally-sandboxed daemon can now turn into a full-blown remote root shell.
You assume wrong. There are plenty of minor little daemons that wouldn't normally have access to the entire system. Give them the option to install their own suid binaries and full write access to system directories, though, and the entire security model breaks down.
There is no such thing as a personal use computer. There are only computers that haven't been compromised by other, uninvited users. When (not if) you get such a visitor, do you want them to trivially take over your entire machine, or do you want their impact limited to the access of the broken daemon that they attacked?
On paper, I don't think the performance difference between this and something like an Intel X-25m is going to justify the 4 fold price difference.
This is the perfect caching layer for ZFS. One command to insert it as a read cache between the OS and a big array can make a huge difference in IOPS. I can't easily convince my boss to buy a machine with 80GB of RAM that will be used for nothing but filesystem caching, but I wouldn't hesitate to ask him for a PCIe card to drop into the servers we already have.
I think Adobe just Photoshopped their own text into the same boilerplate:
The Photoshop trademark must never be used as a common verb or as a noun. The Photoshop trademark should always be capitalized and should never be used in possessive form or as a slang term. It should be used as an adjective to describe the product and should never be used in abbreviated form.
Specifically, it made three modifications: (1) replacing the Mac OS X bootloader with a different bootloader to enable an unauthorized copy of Mac OS X to run on Psystar's computers; (2) disabling and removing Apple kernel extension files; and (3) adding non-Apple kernel extensions.
So they never actually modified Apple's software - they just adjusted the settings and added some new plugins of their own (sort of like Bob's PC and Bait removing something from Windows and installing a driver for their their own Fish-O-Matic).
Apple feels that this alone is sufficient to constitute a derived work.
Forget anti-GPL fanboys; Apple is way more viral than anyone's ever claimed RMS and his licenses to be.
Since Coke is probably the single most common dark mixer, a lot of bartenders are going to be peeved over this one.
Re:Not first-sale doctrine: Psystar altered OS X
on
Psystar Crushed In Court
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I imagine if you tried to sell the modified GM vehicle, GM would come after you with their lawyers.
Carroll Shelby, Mopar, and Magnuson Moss think you're full of crap.
Remember the Slashdot rules: even if any other physical or software manufacturer would be publicly flayed for committing an act, it's Right and Good and Justified if Apple does it.
I'm typing this on a Mac, probably the last Apple product I'll ever buy because of the crap they pull.
I can think of pre-made modules (or builtin features) for every single one of those. I can personally vouch for the LDAP module, which we use to authenticate against Active Directory instead of maintaining a separate, parallel password database.
We use it for our intranet and everyone seems to like it. As far as developing for it: what exactly are you wanting to do? There are a bazillion pre-made modules for just about every task you can imagine, and you're probably better of finding something close to what you need and making minor adjustments as necessary.
Honestly, I can't think of anything bad about it. If nothing else, why not install it on your own machine and play with it until you get everything working the way you like it, then move your settings.php file onto a production server. It's not like you have to buy licenses for multiple installations.
Even though OS X is explicitly sold with strings attached which make it hard for me to legally build a hackintosh
Except that it isn't. No one made me sign a contract when I bought my copy of Leopard, any more than they tacked on after-sale terms when I bought a book and a cup of coffee afterward. Maybe you had to sign a lease agreement or similar, but I don't know of anyone else who did.
how precisely do you determine that it is not a GPL violation?
Bring the GPL code's author in under an NDA and show him your code, thus killing two birds with one stone: you've demonstrated your innocence to the only person who legally matters, and poisoned him from being able to develop it any more.
Slashdot Mirror
And to top it off, he's a competitor. Pretty slimy.
If Ford discovers a flaw in Chevy's cars and tells you about it, is it automatically untrue?
Car analogy FTW.
My mom lives about a mile and a half outside a medium-sized Midwest city. When my dad was alive, he once served as the campaign director for a friend of his who was running for County Commissioner, and they won the election. Fast forward about 15 years.
The county commission voted to enact a leash law. In this case, "county" means "sparsely populated area surrounding the city", not like Orange in SoCal. My mom owns a big, friendly mutt who pretty much kept her sane after my dad died. She was faced with a few options: get rid of her beloved pet (not gonna happen), turn the 100+ pound dog into an indoor pet (which would not have ended happily), or fence the yard. So she fenced it. All five acres. I have no idea what she actually paid for it, but that couldn't have been cheap.
Well, about a year later, Charlie The County Commissioner was running for re-election and called my mom for a campaign donation. After all, her dearly departed husband helped elect him, right? Mom told him, "sure! I'd love to! Put me down for $10,000. Oh, wait: that's how much I had to spend to build the redacted fence that your backward-assed commission forced me to put up to comply with the redacted leash law in the middle of the redacted countryside. Shove it up your redacted and don't ever call me again." She said that was the best phone call she's ever had.
Ball's in your court.
"Your turn." Standard English.
Balls in your court.
A judge is alone at her bench when the handsome young lawyer walks in. Bow-chicka-bow-wow!
It's a very Google ideal to embrace beta and subject users to technologies while they're still only half baked.
Gmail was listed as beta until July. Hotmail was listed as production since like 1998. Therefore, Hotmail is better than Gmail, case closed. Right?
I'd much rather have "release early and release often" than "stick a fork in it and languish".
I've literally never touched Photoshop. If it acts the same way and is no easier to figure out then I'd say it sucks for the same reason.
I know that now (or at least I know where to look it up the next time I need to use it), but I think it's absolutely ludicrous that there's no way to find this out without resorting to RTFM. It comes down to discoverability. Well-written interfaces let users explore and learn just by interacting with the program. The alternative is, well, The GIMP.
Why do people realise how stupid benchmarks are, yet parrot on about ACID all day?
I don't like tomatoes, but I like unit testing. I thought I'd mention that as long as we're tossing out non-sequiturs.
I actually don't mind the multi-window arrangement. What I hate is that I've owned and used computers for over 30 years and have a CompSci degree, but can't figure out how to draw a straight line with R'ing TFM. You know, it's perfectly OK to make complex interfaces to complex programs, but GIMP has the least discoverable UI I've ever had the displeasure of fighting my way through. Even Emacs has easy functions for learning available keybindings, which makes it infinitely friendlier than GIMP.
If there's already malware on the machine running as the user
I think you're missing the point. I don't care about malware running as the user. I care about a crafted image file that exploits a bug in cupsd, takes advantage of cupsd's newly-granted ability to install software, and exploits yet another package to gain full root.
On a default Ubuntu installation, you also get avahi. Are you 100% beyond-a-shadow-of-a-doubt certain that its networking code is invulnerable so that Joe Cracker down at the mall food court can't compromise the avahi daemon and user? If that were to happen under Ubuntu, the cracker would be limited to running whatever the avahi user has rights to. Under Fedora's new defaults, that includes any software that the avahi user can conceivably install. Not to pick on avahi, but wanted to demonstrate how a previously minor remote exploit on a normally-sandboxed daemon can now turn into a full-blown remote root shell.
But at least it's convenient, huh?
You assume wrong. There are plenty of minor little daemons that wouldn't normally have access to the entire system. Give them the option to install their own suid binaries and full write access to system directories, though, and the entire security model breaks down.
There is no such thing as a personal use computer. There are only computers that haven't been compromised by other, uninvited users. When (not if) you get such a visitor, do you want them to trivially take over your entire machine, or do you want their impact limited to the access of the broken daemon that they attacked?
Unfortunately, C3 is "staring malevolently" and C3 is "licking crotch". For C1, it gets out the pliers and letter opener.
And in today's lesson: "significant digits" and "approximation".
Tomorrow we'll advance to "orders of magnitude".
The article was right. It has about 100,000 times more RAM than your PC.
On paper, I don't think the performance difference between this and something like an Intel X-25m is going to justify the 4 fold price difference.
This is the perfect caching layer for ZFS. One command to insert it as a read cache between the OS and a big array can make a huge difference in IOPS. I can't easily convince my boss to buy a machine with 80GB of RAM that will be used for nothing but filesystem caching, but I wouldn't hesitate to ask him for a PCIe card to drop into the servers we already have.
I think Adobe just Photoshopped their own text into the same boilerplate:
The Photoshop trademark must never be used as a common verb or as a noun. The Photoshop trademark should always be capitalized and should never be used in possessive form or as a slang term. It should be used as an adjective to describe the product and should never be used in abbreviated form.
I've been warning people about the dangers of whiskey and coke for years
Yes, namely that I can't shoot pool without enough of it. Won't someone think of the billiards?
Specifically, it made three modifications: (1) replacing the Mac OS X bootloader with a different bootloader to enable an unauthorized copy of Mac OS X to run on Psystar's computers; (2) disabling and removing Apple kernel extension files; and (3) adding non-Apple kernel extensions.
So they never actually modified Apple's software - they just adjusted the settings and added some new plugins of their own (sort of like Bob's PC and Bait removing something from Windows and installing a driver for their their own Fish-O-Matic).
Apple feels that this alone is sufficient to constitute a derived work.
Forget anti-GPL fanboys; Apple is way more viral than anyone's ever claimed RMS and his licenses to be.
Since Coke is probably the single most common dark mixer, a lot of bartenders are going to be peeved over this one.
I imagine if you tried to sell the modified GM vehicle, GM would come after you with their lawyers.
Carroll Shelby, Mopar, and Magnuson Moss think you're full of crap.
Remember the Slashdot rules: even if any other physical or software manufacturer would be publicly flayed for committing an act, it's Right and Good and Justified if Apple does it.
I'm typing this on a Mac, probably the last Apple product I'll ever buy because of the crap they pull.
I can think of pre-made modules (or builtin features) for every single one of those. I can personally vouch for the LDAP module, which we use to authenticate against Active Directory instead of maintaining a separate, parallel password database.
We use it for our intranet and everyone seems to like it. As far as developing for it: what exactly are you wanting to do? There are a bazillion pre-made modules for just about every task you can imagine, and you're probably better of finding something close to what you need and making minor adjustments as necessary.
Honestly, I can't think of anything bad about it. If nothing else, why not install it on your own machine and play with it until you get everything working the way you like it, then move your settings.php file onto a production server. It's not like you have to buy licenses for multiple installations.
I remember seeing that in the documentary.
Ah, the famous case where a company obligated itself to its customers. That's perhaps not the best precedent you could have cited to make your point.
Even though OS X is explicitly sold with strings attached which make it hard for me to legally build a hackintosh
Except that it isn't. No one made me sign a contract when I bought my copy of Leopard, any more than they tacked on after-sale terms when I bought a book and a cup of coffee afterward. Maybe you had to sign a lease agreement or similar, but I don't know of anyone else who did.
how precisely do you determine that it is not a GPL violation?
Bring the GPL code's author in under an NDA and show him your code, thus killing two birds with one stone: you've demonstrated your innocence to the only person who legally matters, and poisoned him from being able to develop it any more.