does anyone else find it hillarious that everyone is chiming in, "oh, green transportation! no surprise it's not the US doing it!"? what bullshit.
Hello! These a) are electric bikes, b) are replacing non-powered bikes, and c) would not even be viable in an industrialized country where the infrastructure is dependent on massive transportation systems.
So please just stop. This isn't even "green", when you compare it to the human-powered bikes that they're replacing, ffs. There's no need to be so zealotrously anti-American; you're simply illustrating your ignorance.
I started reading fark.com recently. This same item was on fark at least a day, but more like 2 or 3, ago. This is probably the 3rd or 4th case of my noticing slashdot post something that was on fark a good time prior.
That, combined with the fact that slashdot rarely has any 'cool' topic postings anymore (remember the matchbox server, anyone?), and is largely politically focused (from "real world" politics to "geek"/business - sco, ibm, novell, etc. - politics) kind of makes slashdot a fairly worthless place for entertainment.
And let's face it - slashdot is all about entertianment. if "keeping informed" were your goal, you'd read the newspaper's blurbs and be done with it. there's nothing "news" like about the one-sided political opnions on slashdot.:(
I wonder if this is a precusor to seeing the "water canopy" return, in addition to "global warming". It'd be nice to have an overall mediterranean climate with less glaring light. Granted, that would likely result in the US not being the world's 'bread basket' but for more universal food production capabilities...
Also, along that note: has anyone noticed that the sun burns significantly more now than it did several years ago? Or is it just me and my hyper-sensitive skin, as influenced by prolonged lack of sunlight?:)
Does anyone else find it interesting that they'd host their "open" projects on sourceforge instead of on one of the many microsoft.com sites? What's to gain?
* wider open source community acceptance of MS (for releasing something "open source" which was argueably already open source - hello, header files, anyone?) * strain on the open source community (ie, sourceforge) to further/improve the Win32/MS ballpark (granted, its a negligible strain, but it's pennies which add up to dollars, and so forth, nonetheless)
does anyone else feel like MS is simply releasing these fairly-trivial items to the "open source community" in an attempt to try and appease the geeks out there? This seems like nothing more than a token gesture - they are still able to lock people in with Windows and Office.
They still have exploitive upgrade paths. And they can always change things in the future, and make future toolkits unavailable except via licensing/$, as their future offerings are undoubtably going to be different.
Re:keep it anonymous and private.
on
Privacy in the Woods?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
actually, I think it would be more important to keep it optional. It's not your life to decide what happens to it. If someone wants to get lost in the woods and have no way to be tracked, they won't take the (optional) tracking bracelet or whatever with them. If they want that "failsafe" for their safety, they'll take it.
People argue "right to choose" and such, so why not choose for something like this too?
That is utterly amazing architecture! At first I thought the buildings were colapsing, or that what I was looking at was some sort of odd artistic representation of the buildings - sort of like an initial commemorative mosaic or something - not the buildings themselves.
It's fairly fitting, I think, that a building as full of mis-match shapes, sizes, colors, and poorly geometic angles would be named after the man that is predominantly responsible for such contortions within the software world.
This raises the question: would it be possible to get a fleet of systems with multiple AGP ports, so as to utilize multiple GPUs in each machine for scientific and/or industrial purposes (for instance, in the film industry)? Or does the AGP spec not allow for a second AGP slot?
I wonder how quickly someone could break top-notch encryption with 10 servers x 5 GPUs each.
A natural monopoly is somehting such as a cable (or phone) company, which has a regional precense due ot their cable line investment: they're physically monopolying the lines that carry the communications. The same would be true for a farmer or rancher that owns the majority of the land/cattle - Ted Turner springs to mind with his herds of cattle, but that's much less a natural monopoly than the cable/telco companies. The government has regulated both the phone and cable companies to allow competition within their natural monopolies, as well.
MS has no such thing. They are not a natural monopoly, as they do not own all of the core resouces - in this case, computers. It is possible to get a computer without paying an additional fee to MS anywhere in the US. Granted, you're likely to get taxed by MS in most cases, but this isn't a case of a natural monopoly. Were Apple the ones in MS' shoes, then you'd have a natural monopoly.
MS is just a tyranical and greedy monopoly. Don't try and paint it any other way, as history will prove you wrong.
Can anyone explain to me why a web browser would care about filesystems?
Because that's how Windows has done things since IE4 came out?
There's no cleardistinction between IE and Windows Explorer anymore. I think what he may have been getting at was to impliment a WinFS-compatible file manager within mozilla - or at least provide a plugin. Marketingspeak, of course, but that's the gist of the idea that I gte.
The Cuckoo's Egg is one of my favorite books as well. It inspired me to interest in computer security via scientific method, just as it did you.
I'd just note a couple things (I re-read the book a couple weeks ago):
it took Stoll the better part of a year to catch the hacker in his book. It was really quite an amazing find, too, considering the number of dead-ends and various connection hops that the hacker took to get to Stoll's Berkley machine.
The actual hacker was not the one that was found dead, it was his accomplice, who was heavily into drugs and more bent on the 'illegal' side of things. The hacker did his (relatively short, by today's standards) prison term, got out, and started a computer business, IIRC.
It's interesting to note that, considering what the hacker did, he would be considered a terrorist by today's standards and swiftly brought to the US for a trial - if he gets that much. He was deep within military networks with material that is essentially classified now due to changing classifications. I'd argue that back then it was industrial/military espionage, but it doesn't seem to have been considered as such in the trial.
It's a fookin' SHOE. Not a powered cement block. The person wearing the shoe will still be able to move about while wearing them - they just won't have whatever special "feature" the enhancements add.
Furthermore, do you seriously think the manual will be needed? How many people do you know that RTFM? I know one, and that's myself (at least in the real world). Then, only when I need to. I seriously doubt the interface for a running shoe is terribly difficult to figure out by twiddling.
The only complexity these shoes add are a large red balance in the check book/credit card at the end of the month. I doubt there's much that's functionally different from those trendy "pump" shoes years back. I don't know about any of you, but I notice absolutely no difference between a shoe with an "air cell" and one without, and I've known people that still use their "air cell" shoes after one of the cells has popped - with no noticeable difference in function.
It would seem ot me that withholding specific information about what's being patched (ala the open source movement) would be a necessity in a mass-consumer market where closed source is involved. I'm surprised MS doesn't do more of the same, as it would likely decrease the number of worms released - if not the frequency.
If you're going to use the MS-method of "security through obscurity" you might as well do a good of obscurity. The open source "many eyes make all bugs shallow" ethos are quite similar, really. With few eyes, all bugs are obscure.
Security through obscurity is a good method of protecting yourself against mistakes that would be plainly obvious, were the source available. By not telling the person specifically what's being fixed, they avoid a fairly large vulnerability - they're basically saying, "There's a problem, but we fixed it" - a hacker would still have to figure out what the issue is. MS doesn't tend to do this.
I imagine MS would go more the route of apple, if they could. It seems as if MS updates break more often than MacOS updates. Combine this with the fact that MS stuff has a much larger deployment - particularly in business environments - and you run into a scenario where those that need to upgrade the systems need to know what's going on, at least to some degree.
I wonder if things would be different with Apple if they had a large industry deployment. I suspect they'd offer a special contract for such information, so as to prevent such hastles for the IT folks emplyoing apple tech, while at the same time trying to cut back on the "in the wild" information.
What's the point of building something like this out of - of all things - a wooden frame, cement boards, and plaster?
Personally, what's cool about stonehenge is not that it points to the stars' alignment, or that it measures time in seasons, years, and decades. What's cool about it is the mystery surrounding it: it was built long before modern machines, by the sweat of the brow and ingenious engineering. It is a massive undertaking, even by today's standards (considering the size and numbers of the rocks). What's more, the exact purpose of Stonehenge isn't terribly well known, and there's a fair bit of question: why would someone build such a massive structure, if not for practical reasons?
This modern implimentation of stonehenge is a joke. It'll last a couple hundred years - at best! - and be forgotten, as perminant materials weren't used.
You don't have to deal with all the trojans, the attempts to use you as a spam gateway, and now getting your ass sued for being insecure (unknowingly or otherwise).
What's the game industry's incentive to make all these high-detail, high-requirement games? I don't see anything but a very small subset of gamers (most of which seem to pirate most of their games anyway) who give that much of a damn about this and that new graphic feature anymore.
If anything, it's a pain in the ass and disliked. It's almost always the case that at LAN parties there's someone or multiple someons that don't have fast enough systems, enough memory, or fast enough video cards to handle the game that 75% of the people want to play. So the result? The game doesn't get played.
It seems to me that they'd get more of a client base if they were to make stories that are immersive, and gameplay that is immersive. I can only take so much repetitive running around and shooting. Give me some variance to that, and I'll be happy - as will many other gamers that are similarly bored with games.
I've got a system which is functionally a year or so old. It's got a gf4ti4200, 512Mb ram, and an axp 2000+. It can play every new game I've seen without a hitch.
No, it can't play Q3A or HL2. But those games aren't out yet, so I have no way of knowing how well they will or not. On the highest grphical settins? not likely. But they'll be playable, surely.
Er, why would you want to bootloader to do it? It's not really a practicality. There's only so much space with which the bootloader has to work with, afterall.
Most slashdotters seem to hold an incorrect meaning for the word "frugal" true (and indeed, so does the majority of society).
Frugality isn't so much about only buying the cheapest thing, it's about not buying things in the first place. It's using the wisdom to know what you do and do not really need. Buying 2 liter bottles of cola because 20 oz bottles are more expensive isn't frugal, that's economics. Frugality would be not buying the soda in the first place, because you don't need it and water is freely available (and better for you, to boot).
Slashdot Mirror
does anyone else find it hillarious that everyone is chiming in, "oh, green transportation! no surprise it's not the US doing it!"? what bullshit.
Hello! These a) are electric bikes, b) are replacing non-powered bikes, and c) would not even be viable in an industrialized country where the infrastructure is dependent on massive transportation systems.
So please just stop. This isn't even "green", when you compare it to the human-powered bikes that they're replacing, ffs. There's no need to be so zealotrously anti-American; you're simply illustrating your ignorance.
I started reading fark.com recently. This same item was on fark at least a day, but more like 2 or 3, ago. This is probably the 3rd or 4th case of my noticing slashdot post something that was on fark a good time prior.
:(
That, combined with the fact that slashdot rarely has any 'cool' topic postings anymore (remember the matchbox server, anyone?), and is largely politically focused (from "real world" politics to "geek"/business - sco, ibm, novell, etc. - politics) kind of makes slashdot a fairly worthless place for entertainment.
And let's face it - slashdot is all about entertianment. if "keeping informed" were your goal, you'd read the newspaper's blurbs and be done with it. there's nothing "news" like about the one-sided political opnions on slashdot.
I wonder if this is a precusor to seeing the "water canopy" return, in addition to "global warming". It'd be nice to have an overall mediterranean climate with less glaring light. Granted, that would likely result in the US not being the world's 'bread basket' but for more universal food production capabilities...
:)
Also, along that note: has anyone noticed that the sun burns significantly more now than it did several years ago? Or is it just me and my hyper-sensitive skin, as influenced by prolonged lack of sunlight?
how is it possible for something that broadcasts NBT all of the place to be considered "stealth"? :P
Does anyone else find it interesting that they'd host their "open" projects on sourceforge instead of on one of the many microsoft.com sites? What's to gain?
* wider open source community acceptance of MS (for releasing something "open source" which was argueably already open source - hello, header files, anyone?)
* strain on the open source community (ie, sourceforge) to further/improve the Win32/MS ballpark (granted, its a negligible strain, but it's pennies which add up to dollars, and so forth, nonetheless)
does anyone else feel like MS is simply releasing these fairly-trivial items to the "open source community" in an attempt to try and appease the geeks out there? This seems like nothing more than a token gesture - they are still able to lock people in with Windows and Office.
They still have exploitive upgrade paths. And they can always change things in the future, and make future toolkits unavailable except via licensing/$, as their future offerings are undoubtably going to be different.
actually, I think it would be more important to keep it optional. It's not your life to decide what happens to it. If someone wants to get lost in the woods and have no way to be tracked, they won't take the (optional) tracking bracelet or whatever with them. If they want that "failsafe" for their safety, they'll take it.
People argue "right to choose" and such, so why not choose for something like this too?
Hrm, but what about dualhead AGP cards? Are they not sufficient?
That is utterly amazing architecture! At first I thought the buildings were colapsing, or that what I was looking at was some sort of odd artistic representation of the buildings - sort of like an initial commemorative mosaic or something - not the buildings themselves.
It's fairly fitting, I think, that a building as full of mis-match shapes, sizes, colors, and poorly geometic angles would be named after the man that is predominantly responsible for such contortions within the software world.
This raises the question: would it be possible to get a fleet of systems with multiple AGP ports, so as to utilize multiple GPUs in each machine for scientific and/or industrial purposes (for instance, in the film industry)? Or does the AGP spec not allow for a second AGP slot?
I wonder how quickly someone could break top-notch encryption with 10 servers x 5 GPUs each.
Erm, I think neither is correct. More like:
"MS Sales Growth Limited by Complete Market Saturation"
Um... natural monopoly... no?
A natural monopoly is somehting such as a cable (or phone) company, which has a regional precense due ot their cable line investment: they're physically monopolying the lines that carry the communications. The same would be true for a farmer or rancher that owns the majority of the land/cattle - Ted Turner springs to mind with his herds of cattle, but that's much less a natural monopoly than the cable/telco companies. The government has regulated both the phone and cable companies to allow competition within their natural monopolies, as well.
MS has no such thing. They are not a natural monopoly, as they do not own all of the core resouces - in this case, computers. It is possible to get a computer without paying an additional fee to MS anywhere in the US. Granted, you're likely to get taxed by MS in most cases, but this isn't a case of a natural monopoly. Were Apple the ones in MS' shoes, then you'd have a natural monopoly.
MS is just a tyranical and greedy monopoly. Don't try and paint it any other way, as history will prove you wrong.
Can anyone explain to me why a web browser would care about filesystems?
Because that's how Windows has done things since IE4 came out?
There's no cleardistinction between IE and Windows Explorer anymore. I think what he may have been getting at was to impliment a WinFS-compatible file manager within mozilla - or at least provide a plugin. Marketingspeak, of course, but that's the gist of the idea that I gte.
I'd just note a couple things (I re-read the book a couple weeks ago):
it took Stoll the better part of a year to catch the hacker in his book. It was really quite an amazing find, too, considering the number of dead-ends and various connection hops that the hacker took to get to Stoll's Berkley machine.
The actual hacker was not the one that was found dead, it was his accomplice, who was heavily into drugs and more bent on the 'illegal' side of things. The hacker did his (relatively short, by today's standards) prison term, got out, and started a computer business, IIRC.
It's interesting to note that, considering what the hacker did, he would be considered a terrorist by today's standards and swiftly brought to the US for a trial - if he gets that much. He was deep within military networks with material that is essentially classified now due to changing classifications. I'd argue that back then it was industrial/military espionage, but it doesn't seem to have been considered as such in the trial.
It would appear (at least to me) that you inadvertantly made a joke - of them, at any rate. :)
You can't be serious... can you?
It's a fookin' SHOE. Not a powered cement block. The person wearing the shoe will still be able to move about while wearing them - they just won't have whatever special "feature" the enhancements add.
Furthermore, do you seriously think the manual will be needed? How many people do you know that RTFM? I know one, and that's myself (at least in the real world). Then, only when I need to. I seriously doubt the interface for a running shoe is terribly difficult to figure out by twiddling.
The only complexity these shoes add are a large red balance in the check book/credit card at the end of the month. I doubt there's much that's functionally different from those trendy "pump" shoes years back. I don't know about any of you, but I notice absolutely no difference between a shoe with an "air cell" and one without, and I've known people that still use their "air cell" shoes after one of the cells has popped - with no noticeable difference in function.
It would seem ot me that withholding specific information about what's being patched (ala the open source movement) would be a necessity in a mass-consumer market where closed source is involved. I'm surprised MS doesn't do more of the same, as it would likely decrease the number of worms released - if not the frequency.
If you're going to use the MS-method of "security through obscurity" you might as well do a good of obscurity. The open source "many eyes make all bugs shallow" ethos are quite similar, really. With few eyes, all bugs are obscure.
Security through obscurity is a good method of protecting yourself against mistakes that would be plainly obvious, were the source available. By not telling the person specifically what's being fixed, they avoid a fairly large vulnerability - they're basically saying, "There's a problem, but we fixed it" - a hacker would still have to figure out what the issue is. MS doesn't tend to do this.
I imagine MS would go more the route of apple, if they could. It seems as if MS updates break more often than MacOS updates. Combine this with the fact that MS stuff has a much larger deployment - particularly in business environments - and you run into a scenario where those that need to upgrade the systems need to know what's going on, at least to some degree.
I wonder if things would be different with Apple if they had a large industry deployment. I suspect they'd offer a special contract for such information, so as to prevent such hastles for the IT folks emplyoing apple tech, while at the same time trying to cut back on the "in the wild" information.
What's the point of building something like this out of - of all things - a wooden frame, cement boards, and plaster?
Personally, what's cool about stonehenge is not that it points to the stars' alignment, or that it measures time in seasons, years, and decades. What's cool about it is the mystery surrounding it: it was built long before modern machines, by the sweat of the brow and ingenious engineering. It is a massive undertaking, even by today's standards (considering the size and numbers of the rocks). What's more, the exact purpose of Stonehenge isn't terribly well known, and there's a fair bit of question: why would someone build such a massive structure, if not for practical reasons?
This modern implimentation of stonehenge is a joke. It'll last a couple hundred years - at best! - and be forgotten, as perminant materials weren't used.
Dialup gets more appealing as time goes on.
You don't have to deal with all the trojans, the attempts to use you as a spam gateway, and now getting your ass sued for being insecure (unknowingly or otherwise).
I seriously doubt most of the bacteria on slashdotters' shower curtains is "hiding". It's likely boldly screaming, "look at me, look at me!"
I'd not be surprised if someone had full-spectrum bacteria on their curtains, not just white/pink/green.
What's the game industry's incentive to make all these high-detail, high-requirement games? I don't see anything but a very small subset of gamers (most of which seem to pirate most of their games anyway) who give that much of a damn about this and that new graphic feature anymore.
If anything, it's a pain in the ass and disliked. It's almost always the case that at LAN parties there's someone or multiple someons that don't have fast enough systems, enough memory, or fast enough video cards to handle the game that 75% of the people want to play. So the result? The game doesn't get played.
It seems to me that they'd get more of a client base if they were to make stories that are immersive, and gameplay that is immersive. I can only take so much repetitive running around and shooting. Give me some variance to that, and I'll be happy - as will many other gamers that are similarly bored with games.
That's not true in the least.
I've got a system which is functionally a year or so old. It's got a gf4ti4200, 512Mb ram, and an axp 2000+. It can play every new game I've seen without a hitch.
No, it can't play Q3A or HL2. But those games aren't out yet, so I have no way of knowing how well they will or not. On the highest grphical settins? not likely. But they'll be playable, surely.
Er, why would you want to bootloader to do it? It's not really a practicality. There's only so much space with which the bootloader has to work with, afterall.
Most slashdotters seem to hold an incorrect meaning for the word "frugal" true (and indeed, so does the majority of society).
Frugality isn't so much about only buying the cheapest thing, it's about not buying things in the first place. It's using the wisdom to know what you do and do not really need. Buying 2 liter bottles of cola because 20 oz bottles are more expensive isn't frugal, that's economics. Frugality would be not buying the soda in the first place, because you don't need it and water is freely available (and better for you, to boot).
Why is this not moderated "Funny"?
I've not seen a linux distro that -hasn't- done this since, what, Redhat 5.2?