Yes, calling VirtualBox "enterprise grade" stretches it a little bit. It's a nice tool and they're making consistent progress, but I wouldn't recommend it for mission-critical solutions. There are just too many little bugs, also regressions in new versions. Most of them get fixed over time, but I still have to work around some things. VMWare on the other side has "always worked" for me.
Maybe the AV companies don't get paid by software vendors. But they admit that they don't fix false positives in non-malicious keygens, because it's "illegal software".
See here for example: http://forum.avira.com/wbb/index.php?page=Thread&threadid=27517
Well, there are some cracks I and many people I know have used on a lot of computers and that have never installed trojans or anything. Suddenly, Avira complains about it.
And how can you explain that AV software assigns some random virus names like TrojanSpy/123 without any further information?
My understanding of the false positives in no-CD checks is that they are UPX false positives.
But that wouldn't explain all the different signatures like TrojanSpy/12345 that Avira and others assign to these executables. It also happened to me that a crack that has never been identified as a threat suddenly (after a virus database update) got flagged for some reason.
To me, this looks like the AV companies deliberately add those programs to their databases. Presumably because they are paid by software vendors.
Apparently, you have no idea what XSS means. Neither eBay or Myspace allow the execution of user-provided scripts for obvious reasons. Given the market share of Firefox, the big sites will implement CSP pretty soon.
No, CSP doesn't work like that. You can't specify path patterns or something like that. If you have an XSS flaw on your site an attacker still can inject scripts. But the scripts won't get executed because CSP only allows external scripts from white-listed hosts.
First of all, the Lagrange points are only the solution of a special case of the three body problem (m3 is negligibly small). Then, L4 and L5 actually are stable. The arrows in the Wikipedia article "indicate the gradients of increasing potential". Note the word "increasing".
Did anyone notice that the only benchmark they base their chart on is Cinebench? Coincidentally, this is a benchmark that makes the Phenoms look especially good. There is also no commentary whatsoever why they chose that benchmark. So IMO the article is completely useless unless you only use Cinema 4D on your machine.
One shouldn't forget that the watts in all these price per watt numbers are peak power. From Wikipedia:
A common rule of thumb is that average power is equal to 20% of peak power, so that each peak kilowatt of solar array output power corresponds to energy production of 4.8 kWh per day (24 hours x 1kWh x 20% = 4.8 kWh)
I administer some websites with 10,000 - 100,000 visits a month, and depending on the site between 1.5% and 2.5% of visitors don't have Flash installed. Another 1% has Flash version 6, which is really outdated.
Slashdot Mirror
Never heard of videos-dl.com. But it seems they got it wrong. All Youtube HD videos are H.264 encoded.
Sorenson Spark and H.264
Yes, calling VirtualBox "enterprise grade" stretches it a little bit. It's a nice tool and they're making consistent progress, but I wouldn't recommend it for mission-critical solutions. There are just too many little bugs, also regressions in new versions. Most of them get fixed over time, but I still have to work around some things. VMWare on the other side has "always worked" for me.
YouTube has never used the VP6 codec.
Also, the linked article and the news on the Codenomicon website don't mention GNOME.
Yeah, fuck e-books. What is an e-book anyway? Just another file format. So fuck .txt files and fuck HTML.
Because not every domain has a honeypot? The spammers just have to check that they don't send too many emails to a single domain.
Maybe the AV companies don't get paid by software vendors. But they admit that they don't fix false positives in non-malicious keygens, because it's "illegal software".
See here for example: http://forum.avira.com/wbb/index.php?page=Thread&threadid=27517
Well, there are some cracks I and many people I know have used on a lot of computers and that have never installed trojans or anything. Suddenly, Avira complains about it.
And how can you explain that AV software assigns some random virus names like TrojanSpy/123 without any further information?
My understanding of the false positives in no-CD checks is that they are UPX false positives.
But that wouldn't explain all the different signatures like TrojanSpy/12345 that Avira and others assign to these executables. It also happened to me that a crack that has never been identified as a threat suddenly (after a virus database update) got flagged for some reason.
To me, this looks like the AV companies deliberately add those programs to their databases. Presumably because they are paid by software vendors.
The AV companies are paid to include cracks, no-CD patches etc. in their virus databases, even if they're not trojans or anything.
Apparently, you have no idea what XSS means. Neither eBay or Myspace allow the execution of user-provided scripts for obvious reasons. Given the market share of Firefox, the big sites will implement CSP pretty soon.
No, CSP doesn't work like that. You can't specify path patterns or something like that. If you have an XSS flaw on your site an attacker still can inject scripts. But the scripts won't get executed because CSP only allows external scripts from white-listed hosts.
And a bunch of other things: RMS
First of all, the Lagrange points are only the solution of a special case of the three body problem (m3 is negligibly small). Then, L4 and L5 actually are stable. The arrows in the Wikipedia article "indicate the gradients of increasing potential". Note the word "increasing".
Did anyone notice that the only benchmark they base their chart on is Cinebench? Coincidentally, this is a benchmark that makes the Phenoms look especially good. There is also no commentary whatsoever why they chose that benchmark. So IMO the article is completely useless unless you only use Cinema 4D on your machine.
Yeah, isn't he called Linux Trollwalds?
...and forget the advertising bits.
One shouldn't forget that the watts in all these price per watt numbers are peak power. From Wikipedia:
In many parts of the world it's even less.
I administer some websites with 10,000 - 100,000 visits a month, and depending on the site between 1.5% and 2.5% of visitors don't have Flash installed. Another 1% has Flash version 6, which is really outdated.
... because I simply use Debian testing, updated each Sunday (like today) morning.
If you're running a server this sounds like a recipe for disaster.
Or simply use debootstrap. Even more light-weight, but requires some manual configuration.
I agree with most of your points, but the use of XML at the communication layer rarely has a big impact on performance.
EU citizens and companies are rich enough to afford Windows. You could ask as well why the US doesn't develop a nation-wide open source OS.
I have yet to encounter any *nix software that came in a .7z file,
Imagemagick has .7z and .lzma tarballs: ftp://ftp.imagemagick.org/pub/ImageMagick/
Also, the small gains from using 7zip just isn't worth "converting",
I would consider 30% smaller files (almost 50% compared to gzip) pretty impressive.