First of all, MY Macs won't run OS X... in fact, they won't run 8.
Second, Ctrl-Click isn't exactly what I have in mind, when I want my hands off the keyboard.
A multi-button mouse does not come STANDARD. And the mice that do come standard (such as on the iMac) are the most uncomfortable things in the world to use. Oh, and did I mention my Macs don't have USB ports, either?
Yeah, my Macs are old... and you know what... they are still of use to me... but the OS that shipped with them didn't have these features... nor were they options. (I'll give you the Ctrl-Click, but that is *NOT* what I had in mind at the time. I apologize for not being as clear as I could have been. I meant getting a context menu, using _ONLY the mouse.)
By the way, your post would look much more intelligent and readable if you'd done a little formatting on it... you know... paragraphs and such. Maybe you haven't the education to construct such complex things.
Finally, what right do you have to call me a 'fucking' idiot, or 'dipshit'? What provoked this verbal attack? You can call me an idiot all you want, but I didn't deserve to have the word 'fucking' thrown in there. Use of profanity to emphasize a word shows a lack of intelligence in itself... obviously you are not intelligent enought to find a single word that would get your point across about how you feel about me. Instead you had to use 'fucking' which is an obnoxious, uncalled-for word which I find personally offensive.
If you'd called me idiot to my face, instead of here, I would have accepted that. If you called me a 'fucking' idiot to my face... I would have shown you my fist. Up close and personal. Think about that the next time you consider telling that to someone you might meet somewhere... It might be me... and I don't have any qualms about showing people exactly how displeased I am with they way they treat or talk to me.
Apple's operating system has a consistent, single, rational user interface; Linux does not have a consistent user interface (Gnome, KDE, etc.)
MacOS may have a single, rational user interface... but what it does not have is a particularly fast or flexible user interface.
Among my collection of computers, I have several Macs. I find the MacOS to be highly slow to use... not based on the speed of the computer, but based on how much mouse travel I need to do before the computer does what I want.
Key features missing from the MacOS GUI:
Context menus: A very nice thing. Something M$ got right. C'mon, Apple... 2 and 3 button mice have been around for years.
Menubars incorporated in windows: makes more sense than a single bar at the top where half the time you can't tell which application is currently in focus, due to ambiguities.
Those two features make an interface very fast to use... the MacOS has neither, and it's annoying. Apple may be innovative... but a key difference between Apple's products and other products is this: When Apple innovates, others copy. When others innovate, Apple stubbornly refuses to copy. That's why Apple is falling behind.
Who better to have in office than the creator of the Internet
Why not put another shameless liar in office.
Ohh, and he'd probably keep the Attorney General Adolph Reno in office, so she can use her Gestapo to point submachine guns in little kid's faces, and send them back to the enemy.
Vote for the man who thinks the internal combustion engine is more dangerous than nuclear weapons!
Make sure we have someone who learned from the master on how to abuse presidential authority.
Maybe he will continue the tradition of bombing pharmaceutical plants in other countries when he needs the heat off him after he gets caught in a lie.
Don't forget the strong evidence that he and his master are probably dual-citizens of both the U.S. and Communist China. Obviously the internal combustion engine really is less dangerous than atomic weapons. We freely give atomic weapons secrets to our enemies.
Hmm... now that I think of it... maybe voting for Al Gore would be a bad idea?
I really hate software that comes with online-only documentation. I think the good old paper codex is 3 times faster to reference and learn from. But paperless documentation has a place.
The typical man page is a great form of paperless documentation... quick and fast, and very small. But, if I have to read the equivalent of a (pulling out a book I use regularly) 1,130 page book on the computer screeen, I won't be in a very happy mood. In fact, chances are I won't buy your product if it's commercial, unless it comes with a nice bound stack of dead tree.
When someone invents a device that lets me turn and scan paperless documentation as easily and as fast as a book, and also makes monitors as easy on the eyes for reading said documentation, I might change my mind. But, until then, I will stick with my friendly, easy to use, easy to read book.
I used to say: "Please remove my name and number from your list."
After all, they are only doing their job, right?
That was before I got a job... and that job suddenly expanded into a job that would sometimes required me to make unsoliticed phone calls. I refused. I don't have that job now. It gave me one thing that's stuck in my mind:
I'd rather starve to death, jobless, than to be the asshole on the giving end of a telemarting call.
So now, I'm not polite to telemarketers. I don't respect the fact that it's their job. I don't care. If someone is willing to be a telemarketer, than they'd better be willing to put up with me. I do my best to make telemarketers feel worse than the lowliest humans. If they hang up, start crying, or start yelling back, then I know I am doing a good job.
The more of them I can make quit their jobs, the less of them there are in the world.
I don't feel sorry for telemarketers.
Besides, it's great stress relief to curse a telemarketer as the spawn of evil when they interrupt your fine dinner, or episode of Star Trek: Voyager, after you've just had a long day of work, and are trying to relax.
Backwards compatibility is also what bites M$ in the ass almost every time there is a problem with Windows: Having to support everything all the way down to M$-DOS 1.0, emulating old versions of Netware, running 16-bit code in a supposed 32-bit environment, etc.
Backwards compatibility should not be taken to an extreme.
And do you *really* know anyone who uses any computer less than a Pentium? I sure as hell don't.
On behalf of myself, and many others, I'm sure, I'd just like to thank you for your activity here. It's refreshing to see you Red Hat guys participating here, answering questions. That alone is one of the primary reasons I'm going to stick with Red Hat Linux.
I've got a 12-month contract with U.S. Cellular... $25/month, with 60 minutes per month free airtime, and 1500 minutes free weekend airtime each month. Absolutely perfect for what I use it for, and cheaper than U.S. West landline service.
I had non-contract service before, and it was costing me a little more.
The moral? Contract service is fine, just be damned sure you don't cancel early.:) Then your out $200+ dollars.
Hey, I worked many summers as a painter. Watching paint dry is very fun, as it lets you know you can get the second coat done and start the trim work!
Umm, second? (probably not)
Observing satellites and satellite "flashing"...
on
R.I.P. Iridium
·
· Score: 1
Actually, I've seen quite a few satellite "flashes."
The first was when I was very young, and I thought I was seeing a UFO.
You can observe the phenomena yourself. The best time is to look after sunset, when there is a minimal amount of light over the horizon, and stars are out. Look straight up, or slightly to the west. A new moon makes a much better night to observe satellites.
Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites are quite visible during the above times, and you can spot them as a quick moving object about as bright as a dim star. If you follow one on it's path, if you are lucky you might see it "flash" as a flat panel catches the sun. This isn't very common, but more common with the Iridium birds. If you are VERY lucky, you may observe an even rarer sight: A rotating satellite that continally "flashes." I've only seen this once. I was in Oklahoma at the time.
"Try telling that to a friend of mine who lost one of his best friend's as a child when he was playing with a gun and it went off." It still didn't go off by itself. The kid was playing with it.
That doesn't matter, though. The parents were responsible. Why was this kid allowed access to a gun... or the ammunition, or worse, both at the same time. I say we don't ban guns, let's just ban irresponsibility.
(BTW, the Dr. Pepper argument is stupid from all points of view.)
Guns actually don't do any damage on their own. Point one at someone's head, pull the trigger, and they are dead. But the gun didn't inflict the damage. The person pulling the trigger did.
FYI, I am not a hunter, nor a killer. I'm a target shooter. It's a sport of skill, coordination, and accuracy. Then again, most sports are. I'll let you ban guns. When you ban basketball, football, baseball, golf, and every other sport that requires skill, coordination, and accuracy.
In any case, I will restate what I said in my original post in simple words: L0phtcrack is a tool, and so is a gun. Both can be used lawfully, both can be used unlawfully. It doesn't matter what gets banned first. With each successive ban of one tool, it makes it easier for the government to ban another tool.
The point is, the government shouldn't take away your rights because you have a tool that *can* do something unlawful.
If that were legitimate, then I see no reason why it couldn't be extended. Slander and libel are illegal. Why not ban free speech, because someone might slander or libel...
Think about that. Then again, I can't make you think. Besides, you might think about something that is unlawful, or the rest of us don't like. So let's ban thinking, too.
Go read "Brave New World" sometime. Maybe you will think...
Sorry for any blank message... "Submit" has default focus for some lame reason
Anyway, following Slashdot "tradition," I will now turn this into a gun control debate.
Seems to me the same people defending L0phtcrack as a tool, not illegal to posess, and not illegal to use for lawful purposes are the same people who want to ban guns. Guns being the same as L0phtcrack, a tool and nothing more.
So, along those lines, it doesn't bother me that some politicians are taking the stance that L0phtcrack might be an "evil" tool. (Although, assinging a moral aspect to a non-entity is illogical and stupid.) After all, if they can do it with guns, why not a tool such as L0phtcrack?
And watch it go on to include nmap, bo2k, and whatever else. Even M$ SMS.
And people wonder why other people like RMS and myself support the Second Amendment and the right to own firearms. The same principle here, guys. Don't be so blind. Once the dominoes start falling, it's hard to stop them.
Right to own firearms, right to have strong cryptography, right to have tools such as L0phtcrack. Stop assuming there is a difference. Any of these tools can be abused, and they all have legitimate purposes.
When your dominoes are all knocked over, don't cry. You let it happen.
ESR providing fire support? Well, maybe... but *I* am a U.S. Army trained Fire Support Specialist. Did fire support for a living for 3 years. Count me in!:)
After about an hour of heavy surfing, Netscape 4.7 likes to suddenly request more memory than I actually have (64MB Phys, 64 MB Swap)... the system slows to a crawl, virtual memory thrashes, can't even type or move the mouse. Eventually, (I assume after all memory is used), the Linux VM subsystem kills it.
I once managed to get to another VT while this was happening, and I couldn't log in due to lack of memory. Finally I got "VM: killing process netscape"... at least the Linux kernel is smart enough to do this. I can't imagine what NT does.
RDS has been in use for at least two years in Bend, Oregon. A few stations have it, notably KSJJ (a country station, of all things, and had RDS first here). I'm using a Grundig YB 500 world receiver.
I've seen several other people say that they have RDS in other cities in the U.S., mostly major areas (Boston, L.A.), but Bend is a city with a mere population of 50,000. So, perhaps it's not that you don't have RDS in your area... you just don't have a receiver capable of using it.
Too bad, because it's kinda cool. Can't wait to hear a pirate radio station hijack the country stations.:)
I think a reasonable plan is to modify QW so that to play in "competition mode", it would have to be launched by a separate closed-source program that does all sorts of encryption and verification of the environment. If it just verifies the client, it would prevent the trivial modified client scanners and aim bots. It could verify the media data to prevent media information cheating. To prevent proxy information cheating and aim bots, it would have to encrypt the entire data stream, not just the connection process. That might have negative consequences on latency unless the encrypter is somehow able to be in the same address space as the verified client or scheduling can be tweaked enough to force task switches right after sends.
Okay, so there is race condition between the time that the verification program finishes verifying, and the launching of the new executable.
Under unix-like OSes, two copies of an entire directory tree could be kept, and a symlink switched to the cheating copy during the instant between the verifying program and the launch of the actual game, thus causing the verification program to launch the wrong one. A new filesystem could also be mounted over the original directory, or any number of other clever race-condition exploits.
Of course, this can be worked around, but such a closed-source verification program would have to be *very* carefully designed to avoid pitfalls such as this. A method such as... say, forking and execing the potential game executable _before_ verification, and immediately sending the process a SIGSTOP, then if it checks out, go ahead and send a SIGCONT to continue execution, if not, send SIGKILL and quit. Also, not following symbolic links during verification, and not following symbolic links to get to the executable. Further, checking to make sure that the path of the executable and media hasn't changed, or that it is not on a different filesystem from the one it was just on.
The problem is, the closed-source executable would not be subject to the peer review that open-source software is, and must either be *very* well thought-out, or must implement M$-style security through obscurity.
It's easy to say to do something, it's a lot harder to do it.
Slashdot Mirror
Why I grace this with a reply, I will never know.
First of all, MY Macs won't run OS X... in fact, they won't run 8.
Second, Ctrl-Click isn't exactly what I have in mind, when I want my hands off the keyboard.
A multi-button mouse does not come STANDARD. And the mice that do come standard (such as on the iMac) are the most uncomfortable things in the world to use. Oh, and did I mention my Macs don't have USB ports, either?
Yeah, my Macs are old... and you know what... they are still of use to me... but the OS that shipped with them didn't have these features... nor were they options. (I'll give you the Ctrl-Click, but that is *NOT* what I had in mind at the time. I apologize for not being as clear as I could have been. I meant getting a context menu, using _ONLY the mouse.)
By the way, your post would look much more intelligent and readable if you'd done a little formatting on it... you know... paragraphs and such. Maybe you haven't the education to construct such complex things.
Finally, what right do you have to call me a 'fucking' idiot, or 'dipshit'? What provoked this verbal attack? You can call me an idiot all you want, but I didn't deserve to have the word 'fucking' thrown in there. Use of profanity to emphasize a word shows a lack of intelligence in itself... obviously you are not intelligent enought to find a single word that would get your point across about how you feel about me. Instead you had to use 'fucking' which is an obnoxious, uncalled-for word which I find personally offensive.
If you'd called me idiot to my face, instead of here, I would have accepted that. If you called me a 'fucking' idiot to my face... I would have shown you my fist. Up close and personal. Think about that the next time you consider telling that to someone you might meet somewhere... It might be me... and I don't have any qualms about showing people exactly how displeased I am with they way they treat or talk to me.
Apple's operating system has a consistent, single, rational user interface; Linux does not have a consistent user interface (Gnome, KDE, etc.)
MacOS may have a single, rational user interface... but what it does not have is a particularly fast or flexible user interface.
Among my collection of computers, I have several Macs. I find the MacOS to be highly slow to use... not based on the speed of the computer, but based on how much mouse travel I need to do before the computer does what I want.
Key features missing from the MacOS GUI:
Context menus: A very nice thing. Something M$ got right. C'mon, Apple... 2 and 3 button mice have been around for years.
Menubars incorporated in windows: makes more sense than a single bar at the top where half the time you can't tell which application is currently in focus, due to ambiguities.
Those two features make an interface very fast to use... the MacOS has neither, and it's annoying. Apple may be innovative... but a key difference between Apple's products and other products is this: When Apple innovates, others copy. When others innovate, Apple stubbornly refuses to copy. That's why Apple is falling behind.
Now let's see how fast this gets moderated to -1 by moderators who base their moderation on politics and not factual, informative information.
Who better to have in office than the creator of the Internet
Why not put another shameless liar in office.
Ohh, and he'd probably keep the Attorney General Adolph Reno in office, so she can use her Gestapo to point submachine guns in little kid's faces, and send them back to the enemy.
Vote for the man who thinks the internal combustion engine is more dangerous than nuclear weapons!
Make sure we have someone who learned from the master on how to abuse presidential authority.
Maybe he will continue the tradition of bombing pharmaceutical plants in other countries when he needs the heat off him after he gets caught in a lie.
Don't forget the strong evidence that he and his master are probably dual-citizens of both the U.S. and Communist China. Obviously the internal combustion engine really is less dangerous than atomic weapons. We freely give atomic weapons secrets to our enemies.
Hmm... now that I think of it... maybe voting for Al Gore would be a bad idea?
Strip mining prevents forest fires! *grin*
I don't mind sponsored by messages... or things like that... what I would not like to see is this:
Visit http://xxxpics.com/p0rn?adclick=8q3w48w
or anything else telling me to visit a site. So, in my book, sponsored by ads are fine... but visit ads or annoying ads would really piss me off.
I would prefer that sponsorship ads and copyrights and similar not make it into my syslog, though...
I really hate software that comes with online-only documentation. I think the good old paper codex is 3 times faster to reference and learn from. But paperless documentation has a place.
The typical man page is a great form of paperless documentation... quick and fast, and very small. But, if I have to read the equivalent of a (pulling out a book I use regularly) 1,130 page book on the computer screeen, I won't be in a very happy mood. In fact, chances are I won't buy your product if it's commercial, unless it comes with a nice bound stack of dead tree.
When someone invents a device that lets me turn and scan paperless documentation as easily and as fast as a book, and also makes monitors as easy on the eyes for reading said documentation, I might change my mind. But, until then, I will stick with my friendly, easy to use, easy to read book.
I used to be polite to telemarketers.
I used to say: "Please remove my name and number from your list."
After all, they are only doing their job, right?
That was before I got a job... and that job suddenly expanded into a job that would sometimes required me to make unsoliticed phone calls. I refused. I don't have that job now. It gave me one thing that's stuck in my mind:
I'd rather starve to death, jobless, than to be the asshole on the giving end of a telemarting call.
So now, I'm not polite to telemarketers. I don't respect the fact that it's their job. I don't care. If someone is willing to be a telemarketer, than they'd better be willing to put up with me. I do my best to make telemarketers feel worse than the lowliest humans. If they hang up, start crying, or start yelling back, then I know I am doing a good job.
The more of them I can make quit their jobs, the less of them there are in the world.
I don't feel sorry for telemarketers.
Besides, it's great stress relief to curse a telemarketer as the spawn of evil when they interrupt your fine dinner, or episode of Star Trek: Voyager, after you've just had a long day of work, and are trying to relax.
No pity for telemarketers.
Okay, fine, so there *are* people who use older machines... I stand corrected. When I stand at all.
Backwards compatability is the best thing.
Backwards compatibility is also what bites M$ in the ass almost every time there is a problem with Windows: Having to support everything all the way down to M$-DOS 1.0, emulating old versions of Netware, running 16-bit code in a supposed 32-bit environment, etc.
Backwards compatibility should not be taken to an extreme.
And do you *really* know anyone who uses any computer less than a Pentium? I sure as hell don't.
On behalf of myself, and many others, I'm sure, I'd just like to thank you for your activity here. It's refreshing to see you Red Hat guys participating here, answering questions. That alone is one of the primary reasons I'm going to stick with Red Hat Linux.
Thanks again.
But, I'm not in Canada, nor in a large enough metropolis that there is competition. Two nets to choose from, and US Cell was cheaper. :)
And no such thing as a non-contract plan in this area, either! (Unless you want prepaid rip-off service.)
I've got a 12-month contract with U.S. Cellular... $25/month, with 60 minutes per month free airtime, and 1500 minutes free weekend airtime each month. Absolutely perfect for what I use it for, and cheaper than U.S. West landline service.
I had non-contract service before, and it was costing me a little more.
The moral? Contract service is fine, just be damned sure you don't cancel early. :) Then your out $200+ dollars.
I've got a Nokia 918... simple, small, elegant design. 5 ring tones, and three of them are nice and short. (I used the high-pitched ring-ring one.)
It's got no games, either. I'm jealous. That'd be great when stuck in gridlock traffic.
I've also got a Motorola Startac (not hooked up anymore) It was a good phone, too, but the LED display was rather '80s. :)
10 more months to go, and I get another phone. Gotta love getting a free phone every time you sign up for new service!
Hey, I worked many summers as a painter. Watching paint dry is very fun, as it lets you know you can get the second coat done and start the trim work!
Umm, second? (probably not)
Actually, I've seen quite a few satellite "flashes."
The first was when I was very young, and I thought I was seeing a UFO.
You can observe the phenomena yourself. The best time is to look after sunset, when there is a minimal amount of light over the horizon, and stars are out. Look straight up, or slightly to the west. A new moon makes a much better night to observe satellites.
Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites are quite visible during the above times, and you can spot them as a quick moving object about as bright as a dim star. If you follow one on it's path, if you are lucky you might see it "flash" as a flat panel catches the sun. This isn't very common, but more common with the Iridium birds. If you are VERY lucky, you may observe an even rarer sight: A rotating satellite that continally "flashes." I've only seen this once. I was in Oklahoma at the time.
But he's right, guns don't shoot themselves.
"Try telling that to a friend of mine who lost one of his best friend's as a child when he was playing with a gun and it went off." It still didn't go off by itself. The kid was playing with it.
That doesn't matter, though. The parents were responsible. Why was this kid allowed access to a gun... or the ammunition, or worse, both at the same time. I say we don't ban guns, let's just ban irresponsibility.
(BTW, the Dr. Pepper argument is stupid from all points of view.)
Guns actually don't do any damage on their own. Point one at someone's head, pull the trigger, and they are dead. But the gun didn't inflict the damage. The person pulling the trigger did.
FYI, I am not a hunter, nor a killer. I'm a target shooter. It's a sport of skill, coordination, and accuracy. Then again, most sports are. I'll let you ban guns. When you ban basketball, football, baseball, golf, and every other sport that requires skill, coordination, and accuracy.
In any case, I will restate what I said in my original post in simple words: L0phtcrack is a tool, and so is a gun. Both can be used lawfully, both can be used unlawfully. It doesn't matter what gets banned first. With each successive ban of one tool, it makes it easier for the government to ban another tool.
The point is, the government shouldn't take away your rights because you have a tool that *can* do something unlawful.
If that were legitimate, then I see no reason why it couldn't be extended. Slander and libel are illegal. Why not ban free speech, because someone might slander or libel...
Think about that. Then again, I can't make you think. Besides, you might think about something that is unlawful, or the rest of us don't like. So let's ban thinking, too.
Go read "Brave New World" sometime. Maybe you will think...
Meant to say ESR, not RMS. Damn people who are known by acronyms... always mixing them up :)
Sorry for any blank message... "Submit" has default focus for some lame reason
Anyway, following Slashdot "tradition," I will now turn this into a gun control debate.
Seems to me the same people defending L0phtcrack as a tool, not illegal to posess, and not illegal to use for lawful purposes are the same people who want to ban guns. Guns being the same as L0phtcrack, a tool and nothing more.
So, along those lines, it doesn't bother me that some politicians are taking the stance that L0phtcrack might be an "evil" tool. (Although, assinging a moral aspect to a non-entity is illogical and stupid.) After all, if they can do it with guns, why not a tool such as L0phtcrack?
And watch it go on to include nmap, bo2k, and whatever else. Even M$ SMS.
And people wonder why other people like RMS and myself support the Second Amendment and the right to own firearms. The same principle here, guys. Don't be so blind. Once the dominoes start falling, it's hard to stop them.
Right to own firearms, right to have strong cryptography, right to have tools such as L0phtcrack. Stop assuming there is a difference. Any of these tools can be abused, and they all have legitimate purposes.
When your dominoes are all knocked over, don't cry. You let it happen.
ESR providing fire support? Well, maybe... but *I* am a U.S. Army trained Fire Support Specialist. Did fire support for a living for 3 years. Count me in! :)
After about an hour of heavy surfing, Netscape 4.7 likes to suddenly request more memory than I actually have (64MB Phys, 64 MB Swap)... the system slows to a crawl, virtual memory thrashes, can't even type or move the mouse. Eventually, (I assume after all memory is used), the Linux VM subsystem kills it.
I once managed to get to another VT while this was happening, and I couldn't log in due to lack of memory. Finally I got "VM: killing process netscape"... at least the Linux kernel is smart enough to do this. I can't imagine what NT does.
(sorry if a blank comment got posted before this)
RDS has been in use for at least two years in Bend, Oregon. A few stations have it, notably KSJJ (a country station, of all things, and had RDS first here). I'm using a Grundig YB 500 world receiver.
I've seen several other people say that they have RDS in other cities in the U.S., mostly major areas (Boston, L.A.), but Bend is a city with a mere population of 50,000. So, perhaps it's not that you don't have RDS in your area... you just don't have a receiver capable of using it.
Too bad, because it's kinda cool. Can't wait to hear a pirate radio station hijack the country stations. :)
Not if you install it with the same functionality that Windows has when it gets installed.
A typical Linux installation (mine is ~450MB), has the same functionality of Windows with about $500 worth of additional software to make it useful.
Windows 2001: An occupies-too-much-disk-space Odyssey
Windows 2010: Odyssey Two (Bugfix release to repair our malfunctioning OS that's stuck at Jupiter!)
I think a reasonable plan is to modify QW so that to play in "competition mode", it would have to be launched by a separate closed-source program that does all sorts of encryption and verification of the environment. If it just verifies the client, it would prevent the trivial modified client scanners and aim bots. It could verify the media data to prevent media information cheating. To prevent proxy information cheating and aim bots, it would have to encrypt the entire data stream, not just the connection process. That might have negative consequences on latency unless the encrypter is somehow able to be in the same address space as the verified client or scheduling can be tweaked enough to force task switches right after sends.
Okay, so there is race condition between the time that the verification program finishes verifying, and the launching of the new executable.
Under unix-like OSes, two copies of an entire directory tree could be kept, and a symlink switched to the cheating copy during the instant between the verifying program and the launch of the actual game, thus causing the verification program to launch the wrong one. A new filesystem could also be mounted over the original directory, or any number of other clever race-condition exploits.
Of course, this can be worked around, but such a closed-source verification program would have to be *very* carefully designed to avoid pitfalls such as this. A method such as... say, forking and execing the potential game executable _before_ verification, and immediately sending the process a SIGSTOP, then if it checks out, go ahead and send a SIGCONT to continue execution, if not, send SIGKILL and quit. Also, not following symbolic links during verification, and not following symbolic links to get to the executable. Further, checking to make sure that the path of the executable and media hasn't changed, or that it is not on a different filesystem from the one it was just on.
The problem is, the closed-source executable would not be subject to the peer review that open-source software is, and must either be *very* well thought-out, or must implement M$-style security through obscurity.
It's easy to say to do something, it's a lot harder to do it.