Depends on the technologies, of course. Some code bases have hard-written limits due to internal data structures, whereas others will be limited by the filesystem itself.
Here's an example of one well designed, well written database's limits.
Find the grunts at the bottom of the IT organization...the ones who actually do the work.
Once you have the contact, you need to work them. Make them realize you aren't a moron (i.e. a typical customer of theirs), and that you are willing to help them out where you can. I often offer to help out with simple s/w upgrades or to go answer some end-user's question about MS-Office or whatever.
You likely have to put up with their blabbering about their views of the OS/editor/language wars, or other geekout topics, but the idea is to keep them as a friend. Ping them from time to time asking about their kids, or their whacked out computer, or their modded coffee machine or whatever it is they are in to.
Also make them realize that you realize there's a bureaucracy that needs to be worked within. Offer to open support tickets for any work they are doing for you "outside of the loop" to make sure they get credit for the work. Also put in their name for "star performer" awards or whatever type of reward system your company may have.
Then in another article posted on Nov 18, he writes:
"...As much as I support Linux and Macintosh, I must say a free copy of Vista would be very tempting"
This Varun guy is a nutbar. In another article he goes on and on about how MS invented the PC experience, how everyone else is playing nothing but catch up to their "stability", and how other software company make their yearly financials by suing MS...apparently this is something that is quite easy to do and makes Sun and Oracle numbers time and again.
He somehow missed the whole "guilty of monopolistic practices in the US" angle while he slams the EU for essentially charging them with the same thing.
Linux isn't sold, only packaging and support can be sold, its a GPL thing.
Errr...no. There is nothing (nothing) in the GPL taking away your freedom from selling GPL'ed software. Did I mention nothing?
The GPL outlines a few freedoms for whoever it is you distribute a GPL'ed program to: they may receive the source code from you at minimal or no cost, they may use or distribute the GPL'ed program (and source) in any way they should care to.
"This Independent band you never heard of released a new album which you will never hear on the radio and will not be able to find in any record store within 500 miles of here.
Yes, there are laws in Quebec geared towards preserving the french language (and Quebec culture). It is understandable as an island surrounded by a completely different and domineering language/culture, that the older generations will fear the loss of their own language/culture. The youth get bombarded by english (Canadian and USian) television, music, Internet, so they gravitate away from their own.
I believe the current rules are that if the parent did not have an "english" education in the province that the children must attend a french school.
There have been some cases of pretty brutal mis-enforcements of the laws by some extreme groups. A simple search should find you more info.
Right now the US controls the root name servers, and they let anybody register a domain name. What? The EU is complaining about the lack of a.xxx domain? Then guess what, they can do a.xxx.de or a.xxx.uk, or a.xxx.fr.
But why, on the internet must someone declare that their web service is.uk,.fr,.de or whatever? What, besides national-centricity, makes the US believe they are in the right to be the only nation controlling the "world wide" part of the web? But then again, they are also the ones controlling the "world series".
MySQL 5.0 has a strict mode that will make it operate that way so this argument is going to become a non-issue once MySQL 5 is finalized.
Yes, but if strict mode is not enabled by default, then for (most) intents and purposes it is useless. The vast majority of people using MySQL are using the version installed with their OS or via RPM or whatever, start the server and start building their app. Only when they are working on a subsequent version or when someone else joins the development work do they realize how badly they've written their code.
This is a similar argument made by those who code in "forgiving" languages. They turn to a stricter language and get frustrated that they have to keep going back and fixing all these "stupid errors/warnings"...the ones that indicate their programs are MISBEHAVING, the ones their "smarter" languages would have quietly sequestered for them.
I have a customer migrating from MS-Access to a real database. They don't understand why this "stupid" real database gives errors when their FORWARD-ONLY, READ-ONLY cursor code tries to go back a few rows and update its values. It "works" in that other "product"...
I used to maintain a "P/390" four years ago, a Pentium machine (I think a P200), running OS/2 which hosted the OS/390 card.
There is no way in the world anyone would use the term "a good chunck of speed" to describe this box. Even the later releases which promised a doubling of performance of the 390 card were next to unusable. Compiling GNU Make took something in the order of 6 hours.
But it all comes down to cost. A number of posts in this thread state that anonymous posting of illegal activities is essential in our society.
Phooey. The only reason that anonymity is needed for reporting of information to authorities is in order to protect the individual. However, this is a resource/cost issue, not a philisophical necessity.
The request for anonymous posting is because individuals feel threatened. If people were to find out that they reported something, then the reportee's safety would be in jeopardy.
I don't see that anonymity solves the real problem. If a person feels threatened by following a legal (or at least socially responsible) life-style, then the real problem is that society itself is not protecting its own citizens.
Basically, if the problem is that you can't trust the authorities, then what good will reporting anything do? You fear your society. Anonymity is not going to solve that problem; though it might protect you for this one time episode. Or, if you fear reprisal from those you report, then again society is not supporting you properly (for example, the police don't have enough resources to protect you from this reprisal).
So either you live in fear of the authorities of the society, or you have allowed your society to take cost-cutting measure to a point where you aren't properly protected.
I feel extremely sorry for you if this is the case.
It can only be entrapment if you are trying to prosecute them. If the point is to simply watch them and better understand their tactics, then the only issue IMO is moral, not legal.
I think the point to the honeypot is to encourage hackers to come in. You are trying to get them to come so that you can monitor them (at least that's how I read the original question).
Besides, closed doors don't frustrate hackers...it simply forces them to look harder for ways in.
This is actually bad. Remember when there used to be different home computers, eg Amiga, Commadore 64, Apple IIgs? It was a pain to find an application you wanted but only to find that it wasn't available on your system. Imagine if every car company had its own special fuel. If a software company had to produce a product on 3 different OSs, don't you think that the cost would be passed on?
And it is for this exact reason that Open Source is a Very Good Thing. M$ is the one spreading the special fuel problem and halting any attempts to standardize (via embrace, extend, and break-away). Why are the Office file formats not released as a standard?
The Open Source world is working very hard with the various standards. The software written in the Open Source world works with the standards, not against them.
Open sourced code is not a choice for the average user.
Yet. GNU/Linux is not the right choice yet. The various distros are working hard to bridge the deficiencies for the average end-user. The work is underway, but right now the incentive is only there (really) for the distro makers.
However if I could set up my mother's computer with all the settings and software, I would much rather support a Linux box for her than a Windows box. I would be able to easily upgrade things remotely, change system settings, and lock down those settings I don't want her changing. But, right now, the software applications she wants to use are stable and well documented on Windows. The Open Source software is still a ways back (for her purposes and technology level). I do spend many-an-hour on the phone with her trying to figure out why her Win98 box won't get on the 'Net, or why applications don't print, etc... with little support utilities to help me sort out the mess. I, myself, am very happy to have an all-Free system at home.
Once the software packages are there, I can easily see a world where you buy a Linux box which "knows" how to upgrade itself. It will contact an authorized knowledge-base, figure out which libs/packages/sources/etc. it needs and Do The Right Thing. M$ would love to have this, but Open Source will be there long before they will (we learned this [the first time] during the MS-DOS years...)
Many users just want to install and run, not to search for tar.gz files on the internet [...]
Don't view.tar.gz files as being a barrier. For example, RPM resolves many issues and rpmfind resolves more. There will be improvements to these systems and/or new systems that make upgrades and installations easier or automatic.
Slashdot Mirror
So if a game studio figures how to hold off the crackers for a week, then software piracy is history?
Please, don't let Lou Dobbs (et al.) guide your world. He's an idiot. Don't follow suit.
Here's an example of one well designed, well written database's limits.
Once you have the contact, you need to work them. Make them realize you aren't a moron (i.e. a typical customer of theirs), and that you are willing to help them out where you can. I often offer to help out with simple s/w upgrades or to go answer some end-user's question about MS-Office or whatever.
You likely have to put up with their blabbering about their views of the OS/editor/language wars, or other geekout topics, but the idea is to keep them as a friend. Ping them from time to time asking about their kids, or their whacked out computer, or their modded coffee machine or whatever it is they are in to.
Also make them realize that you realize there's a bureaucracy that needs to be worked within. Offer to open support tickets for any work they are doing for you "outside of the loop" to make sure they get credit for the work. Also put in their name for "star performer" awards or whatever type of reward system your company may have.
pp.
What does any of this have to do with Sap?
News flash: there is more than one OS guideline out there. Many of them conflict.
Emacs works the same way everywhere; that is, you get a fantastic text editor everywhere.
He somehow missed the whole "guilty of monopolistic practices in the US" angle while he slams the EU for essentially charging them with the same thing.
Nutbar, plain and simple.
But the availability of the GCC, Apache, etc. does not mean that it is UNIX.
GCC, Apache, etc. are available for MS OSes too... In fact, different versions are available (native win32, Cygwin, SFU(?)).
Errr...no. There is nothing (nothing) in the GPL taking away your freedom from selling GPL'ed software. Did I mention nothing?
The GPL outlines a few freedoms for whoever it is you distribute a GPL'ed program to: they may receive the source code from you at minimal or no cost, they may use or distribute the GPL'ed program (and source) in any way they should care to.
Nothing about selling in there.
Just how fast is that?
Did you go to UW ??
And random order is just another form of order.
I believe the current rules are that if the parent did not have an "english" education in the province that the children must attend a french school.
There have been some cases of pretty brutal mis-enforcements of the laws by some extreme groups. A simple search should find you more info.
Sybase may be floating along idly, but its iAnywhere subsidiary is doing quite well indeed.
But why, on the internet must someone declare that their web service is .uk, .fr, .de or whatever? What, besides national-centricity, makes the US believe they are in the right to be the only nation controlling the "world wide" part of the web? But then again, they are also the ones controlling the "world series".
No such market exists.
This is a similar argument made by those who code in "forgiving" languages. They turn to a stricter language and get frustrated that they have to keep going back and fixing all these "stupid errors/warnings"...the ones that indicate their programs are MISBEHAVING, the ones their "smarter" languages would have quietly sequestered for them.
I have a customer migrating from MS-Access to a real database. They don't understand why this "stupid" real database gives errors when their FORWARD-ONLY, READ-ONLY cursor code tries to go back a few rows and update its values. It "works" in that other "product"...
I used to maintain a "P/390" four years ago, a Pentium machine (I think a P200), running OS/2 which hosted the OS/390 card.
There is no way in the world anyone would use the term "a good chunck of speed" to describe this box. Even the later releases which promised a doubling of performance of the 390 card were next to unusable. Compiling GNU Make took something in the order of 6 hours.
Pp.
I had a very similar experience. I was given winfiles.com and got the ODBC error with my response: freshmeat.net. ...sigh... Pp.
- Nessus: Free. Open-sourced. Up-to-date.
- GNU Privacy Guard 1.0
Slightly ironic, isn't it?Pp.
Phooey. The only reason that anonymity is needed for reporting of information to authorities is in order to protect the individual. However, this is a resource/cost issue, not a philisophical necessity.
The request for anonymous posting is because individuals feel threatened. If people were to find out that they reported something, then the reportee's safety would be in jeopardy.
I don't see that anonymity solves the real problem. If a person feels threatened by following a legal (or at least socially responsible) life-style, then the real problem is that society itself is not protecting its own citizens.
Basically, if the problem is that you can't trust the authorities, then what good will reporting anything do? You fear your society. Anonymity is not going to solve that problem; though it might protect you for this one time episode. Or, if you fear reprisal from those you report, then again society is not supporting you properly (for example, the police don't have enough resources to protect you from this reprisal).
So either you live in fear of the authorities of the society, or you have allowed your society to take cost-cutting measure to a point where you aren't properly protected.
I feel extremely sorry for you if this is the case.
Pp.
I think the point to the honeypot is to encourage hackers to come in. You are trying to get them to come so that you can monitor them (at least that's how I read the original question).
Besides, closed doors don't frustrate hackers...it simply forces them to look harder for ways in.
And it is for this exact reason that Open Source is a Very Good Thing. M$ is the one spreading the special fuel problem and halting any attempts to standardize (via embrace, extend, and break-away). Why are the Office file formats not released as a standard?
The Open Source world is working very hard with the various standards. The software written in the Open Source world works with the standards, not against them.
Open sourced code is not a choice for the average user.
Yet. GNU/Linux is not the right choice yet. The various distros are working hard to bridge the deficiencies for the average end-user. The work is underway, but right now the incentive is only there (really) for the distro makers.
However if I could set up my mother's computer with all the settings and software, I would much rather support a Linux box for her than a Windows box. I would be able to easily upgrade things remotely, change system settings, and lock down those settings I don't want her changing. But, right now, the software applications she wants to use are stable and well documented on Windows. The Open Source software is still a ways back (for her purposes and technology level). I do spend many-an-hour on the phone with her trying to figure out why her Win98 box won't get on the 'Net, or why applications don't print, etc... with little support utilities to help me sort out the mess. I, myself, am very happy to have an all-Free system at home.
Once the software packages are there, I can easily see a world where you buy a Linux box which "knows" how to upgrade itself. It will contact an authorized knowledge-base, figure out which libs/packages/sources/etc. it needs and Do The Right Thing. M$ would love to have this, but Open Source will be there long before they will (we learned this [the first time] during the MS-DOS years...)
Many users just want to install and run, not to search for tar.gz files on the internet [...]
Don't view .tar.gz files as being a barrier. For example, RPM resolves many issues and rpmfind resolves more. There will be improvements to these systems and/or new systems that make upgrades and installations easier or automatic.
What about the Amiga? How about:
type mytest.txt > SPEAKER: