I did not blame the modern Western diet for "all that ails me;" I said "the modern Western diet is skewed towards promoting inflammation."
You might want to lookup research done at the NIH on omega-3 to omega-6 EFA ratios, before firing off the old quackometer.
I had not seen the Dr. Weil vitamin episode; my dietary changes are a result of reading Dr. Weil's "Eating Well for Optimum Health" text, and reviewing the scientific evidence presented therein with external sources.
If you do dispute the casual relationship between the dietary change and corresponding reduction of tendonitis symptoms, what alternate explanation would you offer?
You can also change your diet; the modern Western diet is skewed towards promoting inflammation. I've changed my diet, and my tendonitis has gone down considerably. Typing less would eliminate the problem, but hey...
Okay, suppose someone passes such a law. How the hell is the law going to be enforced?
On the defensive side, you really have no idea whether the host you're being scanned from is really where the packets are coming from, so you could end up throwing your lawyers at host A whilst on host B the "real" scanner is laughing at your expense and looking for someone else to spoof.
On the offensive side, you could outlaw tools like nmap, to prevent people from scanning in the first place. If the lesson from DeCSS means anything, making nmap illegal will not hinder anyone's access to it, except people who have a legitimate need to use such tools.
You could license use of scanning tools, e.g. to "Certified Systems Administrators," but that won't slow down the black hats any (see above), and just make the life of a sysadmin more difficult.
Laws against portscanning would be unenforcable; time better spent securing systems so they don't get cracked in the first place, and leveraging existing laws against the people who *do* break into systems.
Enlightened universities will usually license Antivirus software for Mac OS. I only install it on machines that have to run Microsoft Office, as Word Macros are the only virus I've ever seen on Mac OS in the last decade (besides the auto-boot thingy, easily disabled from the QuickTime control panel).
On the email side of things, we encourage people in our department not to use Outlook, which has paid off well, as the inevitable Outlook worms don't spread through us, which saves both the clients us time well spent doing more productive things.
There's something in the Bible about not building your house on sand. That's one of my reasons for not supporting Microsoft.
We've been trying to support a HP DesignJet at work, which needs a special software rip thingy running on a Windows box. Tried services for Mac and Unix, and the NT 4 box spent the next few hours crashing as jobs came in. Granted, W2K may have fixed those problems, but that's expensive, and begs the question why an upgrade is needed to provide a functionality that they claimed to be present in NT 4.
Microsoft can't even interoperate with software they wrote; before moving over to mainly unix duties, I was dealing with "I've got a Word N document on platform X, and someone with Word M on platform Y can't read/send the document to me" issues all the time. And it's not like they couldn't have used an existing technology at the time, like, oh a subset of SGML or TeX instead of their current proprietary virus prone document format...
The BSD License is already very business friendly. Ogg Vorbis just switched to it, and Apple is using work done in the *BSD distributions in their next OS. It is also listed as an "Open Source" license:
I've seen some very smart people come wandering into the local SAGE meetings newly unemployed, so it's not just the unskilled that have to fret and worry.
full path, yes, wildcards, no. I type wildcards into my scp lines (hell, even environment variables work) all the time, and haven't had any problems...
However, yes, for anything more than quick or automated file moves, stfp is a much better option.
True, the odds of them getting to your personally secured OpenBSD box sitting behind a firewall from the ISP's primary DNS are slim.
However, the amount of damage they could cause on the networking/server side of things is potentially massive, which may hurt you in other ways besides them getting root on your personal machine-- your buisness webpage could be redirected to a porn site, for example.
Regular users should be aware of such issues, as it makes them more informed consumers. I'd switch ISP's really quickly if I found out my ISP wasn't patching their servers with the latest software, as nefarious people (you know who you are) can do all sorts of nasty thing with a cracked primary DNS server, or a open mail relay, etc.
In a similar vein, bum tires are of iterest primarily to car mechanics and other "car geeks" who will be upgrading the tires, but users of the cars should be aware of the problem as well.
Granted, they don't have to study the matter in the detail a hacker would a Bugtraq memo on the inner workings of a forged BIND exploit, or the chemistry as to why the tires suck... just enough to know that there is a problem and that they probably should contact their admins to see what is being done.
The exploit (posted to BugTraq recently) gives you a remote shell on the machine, so (assuming the shell thingy works in a chroot environ), the attacker would be sitting at a prompt as the user you're running bind as, prehaps in a chroot area.
As a different user without the chroot, the attacker would then have to leverage a localhost exploit (say a unpatched local string format bug, or maybe you have an older 2.2.15 or lower Linux kernel, or an old version of PAM, etc.) to gain root, which may or may not be easy, depending on how well patched your machine is.
chroot is better, as the attacker has access to less resources, though there are still ways of poking a hole out, especially if you're poking a hole through the chroot area with an external holelogd or syslogd stream the attacker might be able to ride out. A better idea is to have BIND log to a file inside the chroot'ed area, which is nabbed out every once in a while by something unpriv'ed and untrusting.
The best idea is for the BIND folks to stop dreaming of a pay-us-money secret BIND club and get off their asses to audit the BIND codebase from scratch. A tough job, according to the OpenBSD folks who have attempted to audit the code for BIND 8/9 in the past, but if hackers are finding more holes in your product than in a block of swiss cheese...
IANAM: From what I hear, the Bering Strait is not the best place to be wandering around in ferries, what with the nasty winter storms and all that. (M is for Meterologist)
Geologically, there is evidence for a Bering block, which strikes me as a bad thing to try put a tunnel through:
For cheap, you might root around in used hardware or school surplus areas for old Macs; just be sure to check that the hardware you are buying is supported by Linux PPC first:
You may still encounter niggling issues when installing and/or attempting to customize a Linux PPC box-- in my experience, this usually has to do with X Windows (which a "real" server probably shouldn't be running) or issues with building your own custom kernel-- usually programs complaining about modules that got evicted during the make config stage. Nothing someone who knows linux well should be tripped up by.
That being said, I have Linux PPC running on a old 180 MHz Apple clone, running X Windows for me, an AppleShare server for about 25 users, development Apache webserver, samba, and whatever else I might be fooling around with:
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.4thestate.co.uk/cipherchallenge/
The book has a good summary of Quantum Encryption, among other goodies.
Golly, that would suck to be stuck in a 30 zone, needing to go 60 to get out of the way of an oncoming truck.
Would not a better solution be better driver training and education?
Shift+Page UP/Page Down will allow you to view the stuff you missed, BTW.
Checkout netcraft, they seem to be doing a good job of tracking that sort of thing:
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/
The tendonitis isn't gone; it's greatly reduced. In fact, I'm typing *more* now that the symptons have gone down.
:)
The reason why I switched to the new diet was that neither reducing the amount of typing nor physical therapy had helped in the past.
And no, I'm not about to change my diet back for the sake of scientific curiosity.
I did not blame the modern Western diet for "all that ails me;" I said "the modern Western diet is skewed towards promoting inflammation."
You might want to lookup research done at the NIH on omega-3 to omega-6 EFA ratios, before firing off the old quackometer.
I had not seen the Dr. Weil vitamin episode; my dietary changes are a result of reading Dr. Weil's "Eating Well for Optimum Health" text, and reviewing the scientific evidence presented therein with external sources.
If you do dispute the casual relationship between the dietary change and corresponding reduction of tendonitis symptoms, what alternate explanation would you offer?
You can also change your diet; the modern Western diet is skewed towards promoting inflammation. I've changed my diet, and my tendonitis has gone down considerably. Typing less would eliminate the problem, but hey...
2 ,0 0.html
h tm l
http://www.drweil.com/database/display/0,1412,7
http://www.drweil.com/archiveqa/0,2283,1580,00.
Crime, eh?
Okay, suppose someone passes such a law. How the hell is the law going to be enforced?
On the defensive side, you really have no idea whether the host you're being scanned from is really where the packets are coming from, so you could end up throwing your lawyers at host A whilst on host B the "real" scanner is laughing at your expense and looking for someone else to spoof.
On the offensive side, you could outlaw tools like nmap, to prevent people from scanning in the first place. If the lesson from DeCSS means anything, making nmap illegal will not hinder anyone's access to it, except people who have a legitimate need to use such tools.
You could license use of scanning tools, e.g. to "Certified Systems Administrators," but that won't slow down the black hats any (see above), and just make the life of a sysadmin more difficult.
Laws against portscanning would be unenforcable; time better spent securing systems so they don't get cracked in the first place, and leveraging existing laws against the people who *do* break into systems.
Enlightened universities will usually license Antivirus software for Mac OS. I only install it on machines that have to run Microsoft Office, as Word Macros are the only virus I've ever seen on Mac OS in the last decade (besides the auto-boot thingy, easily disabled from the QuickTime control panel).
On the email side of things, we encourage people in our department not to use Outlook, which has paid off well, as the inevitable Outlook worms don't spread through us, which saves both the clients us time well spent doing more productive things.
There's something in the Bible about not building your house on sand. That's one of my reasons for not supporting Microsoft.
Technically, the Titanium laptop does have a fan, which will kick on when the machine gets too hot.
Memes. Ifectious, insidious lot, all of them.
You shouldn't at this point, which is why Microsoft is moving to get that nasty little UCITA law passed...
Umm, it would probably take a bit of patching, and some other diddling around in other obscure text files to get FreeBSD ports working on Darwin.
_ po rts/
Kind like, oh:
http://elisa.utopianet.net/~rlucia/devel/darwin
Seeing and believing are two different things.
:)
We've been trying to support a HP DesignJet at work, which needs a special software rip thingy running on a Windows box. Tried services for Mac and Unix, and the NT 4 box spent the next few hours crashing as jobs came in. Granted, W2K may have fixed those problems, but that's expensive, and begs the question why an upgrade is needed to provide a functionality that they claimed to be present in NT 4.
Microsoft can't even interoperate with software they wrote; before moving over to mainly unix duties, I was dealing with "I've got a Word N document on platform X, and someone with Word M on platform Y can't read/send the document to me" issues all the time. And it's not like they couldn't have used an existing technology at the time, like, oh a subset of SGML or TeX instead of their current proprietary virus prone document format...
If I sound bitter, I am.
What do you mean "think there is room?"
The BSD License is already very business friendly. Ogg Vorbis just switched to it, and Apple is using work done in the *BSD distributions in their next OS. It is also listed as an "Open Source" license:
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/index.html
I've seen some very smart people come wandering into the local SAGE meetings newly unemployed, so it's not just the unskilled that have to fret and worry.
Especially if whole divisions go up in flames...
Well, my dictionary defines Retroactive as "vi to act backward..."
There's some other stuff, but that first definition suits Microsoft well, IMHO. Think of it as rollbacks for a database after an oopsie.
full path, yes, wildcards, no. I type wildcards into my scp lines (hell, even environment variables work) all the time, and haven't had any problems...
However, yes, for anything more than quick or automated file moves, stfp is a much better option.
True, the odds of them getting to your personally secured OpenBSD box sitting behind a firewall from the ISP's primary DNS are slim.
However, the amount of damage they could cause on the networking/server side of things is potentially massive, which may hurt you in other ways besides them getting root on your personal machine-- your buisness webpage could be redirected to a porn site, for example.
Regular users should be aware of such issues, as it makes them more informed consumers. I'd switch ISP's really quickly if I found out my ISP wasn't patching their servers with the latest software, as nefarious people (you know who you are) can do all sorts of nasty thing with a cracked primary DNS server, or a open mail relay, etc.
In a similar vein, bum tires are of iterest primarily to car mechanics and other "car geeks" who will be upgrading the tires, but users of the cars should be aware of the problem as well.
Granted, they don't have to study the matter in the detail a hacker would a Bugtraq memo on the inner workings of a forged BIND exploit, or the chemistry as to why the tires suck... just enough to know that there is a problem and that they probably should contact their admins to see what is being done.
The exploit (posted to BugTraq recently) gives you a remote shell on the machine, so (assuming the shell thingy works in a chroot environ), the attacker would be sitting at a prompt as the user you're running bind as, prehaps in a chroot area.
As a different user without the chroot, the attacker would then have to leverage a localhost exploit (say a unpatched local string format bug, or maybe you have an older 2.2.15 or lower Linux kernel, or an old version of PAM, etc.) to gain root, which may or may not be easy, depending on how well patched your machine is.
chroot is better, as the attacker has access to less resources, though there are still ways of poking a hole out, especially if you're poking a hole through the chroot area with an external holelogd or syslogd stream the attacker might be able to ride out. A better idea is to have BIND log to a file inside the chroot'ed area, which is nabbed out every once in a while by something unpriv'ed and untrusting.
The best idea is for the BIND folks to stop dreaming of a pay-us-money secret BIND club and get off their asses to audit the BIND codebase from scratch. A tough job, according to the OpenBSD folks who have attempted to audit the code for BIND 8/9 in the past, but if hackers are finding more holes in your product than in a block of swiss cheese...
Not really, I've seen Gnome running on a Mac. That was shortly before I replaced it with a better WM a year or two ago...
IANAM: From what I hear, the Bering Strait is not the best place to be wandering around in ferries, what with the nasty winter storms and all that. (M is for Meterologist)
Geologically, there is evidence for a Bering block, which strikes me as a bad thing to try put a tunnel through:
http://www.geosociety.org/pubs/1197geo.htm#S5
For cheap, you might root around in used hardware or school surplus areas for old Macs; just be sure to check that the hardware you are buying is supported by Linux PPC first:
http://linuxppc.org/hardware/supported/
P.S. anything with 'Performa' in it's name is bad.
You may still encounter niggling issues when installing and/or attempting to customize a Linux PPC box-- in my experience, this usually has to do with X Windows (which a "real" server probably shouldn't be running) or issues with building your own custom kernel-- usually programs complaining about modules that got evicted during the make config stage. Nothing someone who knows linux well should be tripped up by.
That being said, I have Linux PPC running on a old 180 MHz Apple clone, running X Windows for me, an AppleShare server for about 25 users, development Apache webserver, samba, and whatever else I might be fooling around with:
$ uptime
10:28am up 126 days, 9:46, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
I threw out Gnome and KDE a few years ago for fvwm, which preforms much better, especially on an old crappy machine like mine.