This is completely false. I can bring anything I want on my own private plane. There is no security at all nor should there be. I have flown all manner of things that would never be allowed on a commercial airline flight. The whole article is bogus.
The problem is not that they did not QA every single part they shipped. The problem is that they did not QA the process through which those parts are made. Why would they even have a Windows system anywhere near production? And if they were going to have such a system why wasn't it better secured? That is the issue here.
You just know MS is going to count the vulnerabilities in this distro against Linux just like how they count one vulnerability which affects 10 distros as 10 vulnerabilities because 10 warnings get sent out.
There are now a great many copies of his birth certificate in circulation. So many so that Hawaii has stopped honoring public recoreds requests for it:
Interesting, thanks for the link. The reviews are pretty mixed and people who work in a datacenter really need something that works with a mobile phone or landline. VOIP soft phones are rare in this application and would tie you to a particular location.
Aircraft headsets have separate mic and headset connectors and seem to require power from the aircraft intercom system. They do not work standalone as far as I know. I am a pilot and own three different headsets. I would love to be able to use one in the datacenter. I have asked this very question on the lopsa mailing list here:
It also reminds me of machine executable contracts in the form of computer programs being traded around in some sci-fi I have read recently...either Vinge ("Deepness in the sky", "A Fire Upon The Deep") or it may have been Stross ("Accelerando"), I don't recall which. They are both same genre and fascinating to me.
Given that a W47 is thermonuclear it is hardly fair to count that as "only" 700lbs of "boom" on target. The first model of the W47 had a yield of 600kilotons. Practically speaking, that is 1,200,000,000 pounds of boom on target. Not 700. You right about the physical mass fraction but compare the actual resulting "boom fraction" and it is a very different story.
I have been a slashdot reader since darn near the beginning (see uid). And I finally have to admit that the quality of information here has seriously gone downhill. As everyone else has rightly pointed out, the article is bogus. They didn't break Brooke's law.
Just yesterday a server I administer which runs a very non-optimized PHP and graphics and database heavy site was linked in a story on the front page. The server barely noticed the load. A hit every other second or so. And it was a direct link, no coral caching or whatever. I remember a day when slashdot had enough readers to utterly destroy a single server. It looks like a lot of people have taken off. If this continues I may have to take off too. As it is reddit, hackernews, and many other tech news sites with superior content in my rss feed are competing with slashdot for my eyeballs. I may finally have to trim slashdot from the list if this keeps up.
And you have just described the business network (as opposed to production server network which is of course Linux and by definition far more secure) of pretty much every place I have ever worked.
As a commercial pilot who isn't taking the airline route: The pilot thing is funny. People don't trust a pilot who isn't wearing a uniform. Even as a corporate charter pilot you are expected to wear a uniform.
Fast food employees wear uniforms because when you go to a McDonalds you know/expect the people will be dressed a certain way (always the same) and the fries will taste a certain way. Consistency and familiarity are the values of the food brand.
Your comment is amusing but it does not necessarily follow that we must fight low tech with low tech. Imagine how the collateral damage situation will be when we can someday, instead of dropping a 500lb bomb on the spot where the bad guy is potentially killing innocents, point a very high energy laser directly at his head from many thousands of feet up. Bystanders might get some splatter but would be otherwise unharmed. That would be a very useful new technology and we aren't necessarily that far from it.
Being able to use night vision (and whatever other cool imaging technologies they are now coming up with) is already very useful to defeat low-tech enemies by targeting them at night. I have seen night vision videos of guys planting a roadside bomb being taken out by Apache. Without a very expensive high tech development program to develop that tech those guys and who knows how many more would have succeeded.
The ultimate in a guerilla war type scenario would be the development of a sort of JSTARS technology but for human beings. Will be very nice for patrolling boarders such as with Pakistan/Afghanistan or even the US border with Mexico.
Also remember that these days it takes about 20 years to go from idea to deployed combat ready aircraft. If we cancel the F-35 now we get to start over and hope our enemies don't surprise us in the next 20 years. Not a risk I want to take.
And what advanced aircraft program of the last 20 years *didn't* go over time and budget? Why wouldn't the next one become an overpriced boondoggle also? It seems to be the nature of the beast and if we canceled every program that became such we wouldn't have any aircraft at all.
All of those changes are perfectly naturally occurring events. And when you can no longer get food or water or you die in a flood or tornado have no fear: It was a perfectly natural death!
I know, it burns up. But I would kinda like to see that process. It seems that they have imagery from the ground of the thing in space even after it has separated. How long does it take to come down and what does that look like? That is what I found myself wondering at the end of the video.
Not at all similar. Any defects are present in software from the day it is first shipped. The bits don't actually rot over time. Unlike in a car where the car is pristine when it rolls off the showroom floor but does actually rot over time.
Slashdot Mirror
This is completely false. I can bring anything I want on my own private plane. There is no security at all nor should there be. I have flown all manner of things that would never be allowed on a commercial airline flight. The whole article is bogus.
http://hypertextbook.com/eworld/geocentric.shtml
http://hypertextbook.com/eworld/geocentric.shtml
Unfortunately, that mechanic has the right to vote.
Finally, I get to shout:
FOLLOW THAT CAB!
The problem is not that they did not QA every single part they shipped. The problem is that they did not QA the process through which those parts are made. Why would they even have a Windows system anywhere near production? And if they were going to have such a system why wasn't it better secured? That is the issue here.
You just know MS is going to count the vulnerabilities in this distro against Linux just like how they count one vulnerability which affects 10 distros as 10 vulnerabilities because 10 warnings get sent out.
They include a picture of it. So you have seen it too. :)
There are now a great many copies of his birth certificate in circulation. So many so that Hawaii has stopped honoring public recoreds requests for it:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/04/barack-obama-birth-certificate-linda-lingle.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+topoftheticket+(Top+of+the+Ticket)
Give it a rest.
Interesting, thanks for the link. The reviews are pretty mixed and people who work in a datacenter really need something that works with a mobile phone or landline. VOIP soft phones are rare in this application and would tie you to a particular location.
Aircraft headsets have separate mic and headset connectors and seem to require power from the aircraft intercom system. They do not work standalone as far as I know. I am a pilot and own three different headsets. I would love to be able to use one in the datacenter. I have asked this very question on the lopsa mailing list here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/tech@lopsa.org/msg01673.html
And we never came up with a decent answer. This was also asked on the kernel-panic mailing list and we found nothing through that discussion either.
This very much reminds me of:
Composing contracts: an adventure in financial engineering
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/simonpj/papers/financial-contracts/contracts-icfp.htm
by Simon Peyton Jones.
It also reminds me of machine executable contracts in the form of computer programs being traded around in some sci-fi I have read recently...either Vinge ("Deepness in the sky", "A Fire Upon The Deep") or it may have been Stross ("Accelerando"), I don't recall which. They are both same genre and fascinating to me.
Given that a W47 is thermonuclear it is hardly fair to count that as "only" 700lbs of "boom" on target. The first model of the W47 had a yield of 600kilotons. Practically speaking, that is 1,200,000,000 pounds of boom on target. Not 700. You right about the physical mass fraction but compare the actual resulting "boom fraction" and it is a very different story.
Zeus Smoky Bacon Edition or Zeus Kenny Loggins edition? Bacon is delicious, but I also love that Footloose song...
I have been a slashdot reader since darn near the beginning (see uid). And I finally have to admit that the quality of information here has seriously gone downhill. As everyone else has rightly pointed out, the article is bogus. They didn't break Brooke's law.
Just yesterday a server I administer which runs a very non-optimized PHP and graphics and database heavy site was linked in a story on the front page. The server barely noticed the load. A hit every other second or so. And it was a direct link, no coral caching or whatever. I remember a day when slashdot had enough readers to utterly destroy a single server. It looks like a lot of people have taken off. If this continues I may have to take off too. As it is reddit, hackernews, and many other tech news sites with superior content in my rss feed are competing with slashdot for my eyeballs. I may finally have to trim slashdot from the list if this keeps up.
And you have just described the business network (as opposed to production server network which is of course Linux and by definition far more secure) of pretty much every place I have ever worked.
...DeBeers lobbies congress that the Space Program is a huge waste of money when there are real problems to be solved *here on earth*.
As a commercial pilot who isn't taking the airline route: The pilot thing is funny. People don't trust a pilot who isn't wearing a uniform. Even as a corporate charter pilot you are expected to wear a uniform.
Fast food employees wear uniforms because when you go to a McDonalds you know/expect the people will be dressed a certain way (always the same) and the fries will taste a certain way. Consistency and familiarity are the values of the food brand.
I thought it was to hold the foreskin back.
Your comment is amusing but it does not necessarily follow that we must fight low tech with low tech. Imagine how the collateral damage situation will be when we can someday, instead of dropping a 500lb bomb on the spot where the bad guy is potentially killing innocents, point a very high energy laser directly at his head from many thousands of feet up. Bystanders might get some splatter but would be otherwise unharmed. That would be a very useful new technology and we aren't necessarily that far from it.
Being able to use night vision (and whatever other cool imaging technologies they are now coming up with) is already very useful to defeat low-tech enemies by targeting them at night. I have seen night vision videos of guys planting a roadside bomb being taken out by Apache. Without a very expensive high tech development program to develop that tech those guys and who knows how many more would have succeeded.
The ultimate in a guerilla war type scenario would be the development of a sort of JSTARS technology but for human beings. Will be very nice for patrolling boarders such as with Pakistan/Afghanistan or even the US border with Mexico.
Also remember that these days it takes about 20 years to go from idea to deployed combat ready aircraft. If we cancel the F-35 now we get to start over and hope our enemies don't surprise us in the next 20 years. Not a risk I want to take.
And what advanced aircraft program of the last 20 years *didn't* go over time and budget? Why wouldn't the next one become an overpriced boondoggle also? It seems to be the nature of the beast and if we canceled every program that became such we wouldn't have any aircraft at all.
All of those changes are perfectly naturally occurring events. And when you can no longer get food or water or you die in a flood or tornado have no fear: It was a perfectly natural death!
I know, it burns up. But I would kinda like to see that process. It seems that they have imagery from the ground of the thing in space even after it has separated. How long does it take to come down and what does that look like? That is what I found myself wondering at the end of the video.
Not at all similar. Any defects are present in software from the day it is first shipped. The bits don't actually rot over time. Unlike in a car where the car is pristine when it rolls off the showroom floor but does actually rot over time.
Or whether they are convicted or let off. We always hear about arrests but rarely convictions.