Probably not -- like much software I'm guessing you'll only need a connection for resubscribing when your current license expires and for downloading updates.
Agreed. OpenOffice does everything I need and no one even knows I'm not doing my work with MS Office. My docs look great and my spreadsheets do everything I need. I don't do many presentations ala PowerPoint, but I could do it with OpenOffice if I needed to.
I actually understand why people stick with Windows more than I do Office. To most people Windows appears to come "free" with their computer. Office is always extra. OpenOffice is free, powerful and just as easy to use. Why pay for something when you can get the same feel and functionality for free?
Otherwise, I honestly find that Ubuntu is a much better value. Besides being free it comes with a huge range of applications (free) that I use. In fact, I find it has a lot more features than Windows.
I'm not completely anti-Microsoft and do think Windows is the right decision for some people -- and gamers go without saying. However, my experience is much the opposite of yours. My Ubuntu desktop is much more capable and pleasant than Vista or XP.
Re:Shorting AMD stock: NASDAQ figures
on
Is AMD Dead Yet?
·
· Score: 1
I think you hit the nail on the head: integrating the CPU and GPU is the grail. For that, a CPU maker needs a GPU maker.
Suppose I run a company that does security work for my clients. One of the things I do for them is run a battery of tests to see if I can break their security via any of their installed software. It seems to me that you are arguing that if I find something I have a moral obligation to inform not just my clients, but the vendor of the software.
Well, that's an interesting argument. I'm not sure I agree, but I'm not sure I disagree either.
On one hand, making sure the vulnerability is explained in detail to the vendor so that the vendor can fix it helps everyone globally that uses their software. On the other hand, why should I turn the results of my work over to them for free when they could have (should have?) found the problem themselves. It's kind of grey to me, so that's why I described it as "playing to win". I'm not making any statement whatsoever as to what you call the "qualifications" of the recipient of the information.
My big point is that I would withhold rabid condemnations of the security firm unless they are actually releasing the technical details to the highest bidder while withholding those details from the vendor.
Reporting details free of charge to the vendor is magnanimous. Notifying the vendor and offering to sell them the details (contingent on proving to them the problem really is on their end) strikes me as simply business. Notifying the vendor that you are selling off the details to anyone willing to pay is blackmail.
If the company knows of an exploit and wants to sell the information about it to the vendor that's perfectly fine as long as they aren't threatening to tell others about it.
It's much list noticing my neighbor has an open wifi point advertising his file shares. Nothing wrong with offering to show them exactly what the problem is for a fee. If he doesn't want to pay for my expertise -- well, I told him his wifi point is leaving him open to hackers, so he has been warned. Now if I say I'm going to sell the information to others if he doesn't pay me -- that's extortion.
I couldn't tell with certainty from the article whether or not the firm is showing the actual exploit to their subscribers or not. They may just be informing their clients of the existence of the exploit and giving guidelines about the severity and potential impact to business operations. If that's all they're doing, I'd say they are playing to win, but playing by the rules.
On the other hand, if they sold the actual exploit to their subscribers then they're criminals.
Sure, polls and results can differ. However, that is NOT what this is about.
The interesting part is that the results from areas using Diebold machines are significantly different from the results in hand-counted areas -- by an margin amply large to change the result of the primary. The data being published at Black Box Voting show that the differences exist even when accounting for the size of the population centers.
Maybe nothing to see here, but there is certainly enough here to warrant a closer look.
The same thing crossed my mind and I wonder if they didn't miss something important.
What they test was weather you can read numbers faster during high-adrenaline moments. That does NOT test how fast you perceive time to pass. The maximum speed with which you can read numbers flashing by is dependent on multiple things:
1) The speed and method the eye itself uses to capture "frames" of image data. 2) The speed of any low-level image "pre-processing" that may occur outside of the brain (i.e.: in the eye or the nerve centers near it). I don't know that this happens, but our sense of touch definitely does (reflex responses) and we definitely blink in response to objects approaching our eyes. If pre-processing does occur, this would occur before passing the information on for higher-level analysis by the brain. 3) The speed at which the brain is processing the data.
The experiment shows that the slowest of these three steps doesn't get faster during times of fear.
I've had the time-distortion experience. I remember thinking "whoa..." at the time because it seemed to take forever. I wonder if crisis speeds the thought process so that we can better think through the situation. The "overclocking" makes everything seem slower. However, that isn't the same as time being relative -- I can't move faster and I can't take in data faster. I can just THINK faster for a brief period of time. That's not a cure-all, but it's still an advantage in an emergency.
The sig is a quote from WKRP in Cincinnati. As a promotion, the station dropped live turkeys onto a crowd of Thanksgiving shoppers. They were supposed to drift down using their wings to slow their descent. Instead, well, let's just say the promo "bombed"...
Afterwards, Mr. Carlson said "As God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."
It may be worse than that: the FDIC insurance applies to checking and savings accounts, but not money market accounts. Money market account holders can get in line with other creditors during the bankruptcy proceedings. Moral of the story: if you have a money market account, make sure you know the financial health of your bank.
(Note that credit unions are insured separately by a different organization, so money market accounts there may be covered.)
Good grief! That radio button is the PROBLEM not the SOLUTION. I *hate* dealing with IIS and 2003 because of the GUI. No, I don't mind being able to click buttons and boxes -- much easier -- but trying to look at your configuration when a problem arises means going through all those zillion menus, boxes and buttons looking for the one that was clicked by mistake. I'd much rather just read a text config file. MUCH quicker.
So you wouldn't feel wronged if Slashdot deleted your comment, right?
Is it in there power to do so? Sure. Would that make it right? No. Her posting on Flickr wasn't inappropriate -- in fact, it should be important to Flickr. She's one of the most popular photographer's Flickr has. I fell in love with her work back with this one:
More importantly, this very popular photographer is having her work RIPPED OFF by some print shop in England. It's in Flickr's best interest for her to get the word out since this kind of criminal behavior scares people away from posting good stuff on Flickr.
That's what is sad to me about this. The blogger didn't know Ashley was using her real name on the fake ID (why would ANYONE do that?) and would likely have removed/obscured her name if she'd simply asked. Instead, we have a DMCA takedown notice and some vigilante work from Ashley's friends, and we have several crimes committed, some of which are quite possibly felonies (the use of Rachel's identity to sign her up for magazine subscriptions, for example may constitute identity theft and wire fraud). Also, the use of a fake ID to break the law is, I believe, a felony in New York, so Ashley could face legal action and arrest. With all this now on the front page of/. we may also see more vigilante action AGAINST the first group of vigilantes -- possibly meaning even more crimes are committed.
This is a case where a quick email and a nice word might have saved a lot of people a lot of grief. It's a testament to the fact that you should consider your actions before you act to make sure your response is measured and appropriate.
I hope they DON'T try it. Not only do I find all the stupid restrictions of DRM annoying, but all the work on DRM and DRM-enabled products has to mean that I'm paying more for things that do less. Well, which do less FOR ME THE OWNER anyway.
Just one comment on your exchange: Grandparent talked about the level of employment, you addressed the level of unemployment. Two different things since unemployment statistics relate to the percentage of job-seekers without work while employment is a measure of the percentage of the population that has jobs. If unemployed workers give up searching for jobs it is possible for unemployment AND employment statistics to both fall.
The good folks at SANS do their best to act as early warning and protection for the net. They'd likely be interested in helping break this up AND they have the appropriate contacts in government and law enforcement to do so.
You can contact them here: http://isc.sans.org/contact.html and see if they are interested or can direct you to the appropriate person or agency contact.
You hit the nail on the head -- I've been picking through the report to see if I could find their methodology or a list of the vulnerabilities to determine what OS vulnerability is.
Does a Firefox bug count against anyone, no one, or just Linux (which usually has it available for installation as part of the included packages)?
Basically, does a vulnerability count only against an "OS" if it is bundled with the CDs? If so, Windows SHOULD come out WAY ahead because it ships with almost nothing at all. Linux would rank last because of all the things you can install. Openoffice would be counted against Linux, but MS Office wouldn't count against Windows in this scenario.
Basically, I can't tell if the report has any merit or all or is simply noise!
From what I read (NY Times, I believe) the system didn't really have a big an impact as some headlines would lead you to believe.
Apparently the system that computes and displays the current Dow couldn't keep up with the systems that process the transactions when the number of transactions became very large. The display system caught up a bit later making it *appear* that the market at suddenly dropped something like 250 points in a few seconds.
In reality, the decline was fast but steady. It was just the exchange's version of "Damn lag!"
Slashdot Mirror
Hmmm... I could clone my own tissue for sale and put up a giant sign that reads "Eat Me".
Might be worth it.
Probably not -- like much software I'm guessing you'll only need a connection for resubscribing when your current license expires and for downloading updates.
Agreed. OpenOffice does everything I need and no one even knows I'm not doing my work with MS Office. My docs look great and my spreadsheets do everything I need. I don't do many presentations ala PowerPoint, but I could do it with OpenOffice if I needed to.
I actually understand why people stick with Windows more than I do Office. To most people Windows appears to come "free" with their computer. Office is always extra. OpenOffice is free, powerful and just as easy to use. Why pay for something when you can get the same feel and functionality for free?
"if you're playing games" -- point conceded
Otherwise, I honestly find that Ubuntu is a much better value. Besides being free it comes with a huge range of applications (free) that I use. In fact, I find it has a lot more features than Windows.
I'm not completely anti-Microsoft and do think Windows is the right decision for some people -- and gamers go without saying. However, my experience is much the opposite of yours. My Ubuntu desktop is much more capable and pleasant than Vista or XP.
I think you hit the nail on the head: integrating the CPU and GPU is the grail. For that, a CPU maker needs a GPU maker.
Suppose I run a company that does security work for my clients. One of the things I do for them is run a battery of tests to see if I can break their security via any of their installed software. It seems to me that you are arguing that if I find something I have a moral obligation to inform not just my clients, but the vendor of the software.
Well, that's an interesting argument. I'm not sure I agree, but I'm not sure I disagree either.
On one hand, making sure the vulnerability is explained in detail to the vendor so that the vendor can fix it helps everyone globally that uses their software. On the other hand, why should I turn the results of my work over to them for free when they could have (should have?) found the problem themselves. It's kind of grey to me, so that's why I described it as "playing to win". I'm not making any statement whatsoever as to what you call the "qualifications" of the recipient of the information.
My big point is that I would withhold rabid condemnations of the security firm unless they are actually releasing the technical details to the highest bidder while withholding those details from the vendor.
Reporting details free of charge to the vendor is magnanimous. Notifying the vendor and offering to sell them the details (contingent on proving to them the problem really is on their end) strikes me as simply business. Notifying the vendor that you are selling off the details to anyone willing to pay is blackmail.
I think you've hit the nail on the head.
If the company knows of an exploit and wants to sell the information about it to the vendor that's perfectly fine as long as they aren't threatening to tell others about it.
It's much list noticing my neighbor has an open wifi point advertising his file shares. Nothing wrong with offering to show them exactly what the problem is for a fee. If he doesn't want to pay for my expertise -- well, I told him his wifi point is leaving him open to hackers, so he has been warned. Now if I say I'm going to sell the information to others if he doesn't pay me -- that's extortion.
I couldn't tell with certainty from the article whether or not the firm is showing the actual exploit to their subscribers or not. They may just be informing their clients of the existence of the exploit and giving guidelines about the severity and potential impact to business operations. If that's all they're doing, I'd say they are playing to win, but playing by the rules.
On the other hand, if they sold the actual exploit to their subscribers then they're criminals.
Absolutely! No more one hour logouts! Just download the iso from h
Sure, polls and results can differ. However, that is NOT what this is about.
The interesting part is that the results from areas using Diebold machines are significantly different from the results in hand-counted areas -- by an margin amply large to change the result of the primary. The data being published at Black Box Voting show that the differences exist even when accounting for the size of the population centers.
Maybe nothing to see here, but there is certainly enough here to warrant a closer look.
The same thing crossed my mind and I wonder if they didn't miss something important.
What they test was weather you can read numbers faster during high-adrenaline moments. That does NOT test how fast you perceive time to pass. The maximum speed with which you can read numbers flashing by is dependent on multiple things:
1) The speed and method the eye itself uses to capture "frames" of image data.
2) The speed of any low-level image "pre-processing" that may occur outside of the brain (i.e.: in the eye or the nerve centers near it). I don't know that this happens, but our sense of touch definitely does (reflex responses) and we definitely blink in response to objects approaching our eyes. If pre-processing does occur, this would occur before passing the information on for higher-level analysis by the brain.
3) The speed at which the brain is processing the data.
The experiment shows that the slowest of these three steps doesn't get faster during times of fear.
I've had the time-distortion experience. I remember thinking "whoa..." at the time because it seemed to take forever. I wonder if crisis speeds the thought process so that we can better think through the situation. The "overclocking" makes everything seem slower. However, that isn't the same as time being relative -- I can't move faster and I can't take in data faster. I can just THINK faster for a brief period of time. That's not a cure-all, but it's still an advantage in an emergency.
The sig is a quote from WKRP in Cincinnati. As a promotion, the station dropped live turkeys onto a crowd of Thanksgiving shoppers. They were supposed to drift down using their wings to slow their descent. Instead, well, let's just say the promo "bombed"...
Afterwards, Mr. Carlson said "As God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."
It may be worse than that: the FDIC insurance applies to checking and savings accounts, but not money market accounts. Money market account holders can get in line with other creditors during the bankruptcy proceedings. Moral of the story: if you have a money market account, make sure you know the financial health of your bank.
(Note that credit unions are insured separately by a different organization, so money market accounts there may be covered.)
Good grief! That radio button is the PROBLEM not the SOLUTION. I *hate* dealing with IIS and 2003 because of the GUI. No, I don't mind being able to click buttons and boxes -- much easier -- but trying to look at your configuration when a problem arises means going through all those zillion menus, boxes and buttons looking for the one that was clicked by mistake. I'd much rather just read a text config file. MUCH quicker.
So you wouldn't feel wronged if Slashdot deleted your comment, right?
t -72057594112345061/
Is it in there power to do so? Sure. Would that make it right? No. Her posting on Flickr wasn't inappropriate -- in fact, it should be important to Flickr. She's one of the most popular photographer's Flickr has. I fell in love with her work back with this one:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rebba/47807949/in/se
More importantly, this very popular photographer is having her work RIPPED OFF by some print shop in England. It's in Flickr's best interest for her to get the word out since this kind of criminal behavior scares people away from posting good stuff on Flickr.
The deletion was just plain stupid.
Or...
Hey, Microsoft, SCO called. They want their business model back.
That's what is sad to me about this. The blogger didn't know Ashley was using her real name on the fake ID (why would ANYONE do that?) and would likely have removed/obscured her name if she'd simply asked. Instead, we have a DMCA takedown notice and some vigilante work from Ashley's friends, and we have several crimes committed, some of which are quite possibly felonies (the use of Rachel's identity to sign her up for magazine subscriptions, for example may constitute identity theft and wire fraud). Also, the use of a fake ID to break the law is, I believe, a felony in New York, so Ashley could face legal action and arrest. With all this now on the front page of /. we may also see more vigilante action AGAINST the first group of vigilantes -- possibly meaning even more crimes are committed.
This is a case where a quick email and a nice word might have saved a lot of people a lot of grief. It's a testament to the fact that you should consider your actions before you act to make sure your response is measured and appropriate.
I hope they DON'T try it. Not only do I find all the stupid restrictions of DRM annoying, but all the work on DRM and DRM-enabled products has to mean that I'm paying more for things that do less. Well, which do less FOR ME THE OWNER anyway.
Microsoft would is trying to make you believe sudo was their idea. Cancel or Allow?
Just one comment on your exchange: Grandparent talked about the level of employment, you addressed the level of unemployment. Two different things since unemployment statistics relate to the percentage of job-seekers without work while employment is a measure of the percentage of the population that has jobs. If unemployed workers give up searching for jobs it is possible for unemployment AND employment statistics to both fall.
The good folks at SANS do their best to act as early warning and protection for the net. They'd likely be interested in helping break this up AND they have the appropriate contacts in government and law enforcement to do so.
You can contact them here: http://isc.sans.org/contact.html and see if they are interested or can direct you to the appropriate person or agency contact.
You hit the nail on the head -- I've been picking through the report to see if I could find their methodology or a list of the vulnerabilities to determine what OS vulnerability is.
Does a Firefox bug count against anyone, no one, or just Linux (which usually has it available for installation as part of the included packages)?
Basically, does a vulnerability count only against an "OS" if it is bundled with the CDs? If so, Windows SHOULD come out WAY ahead because it ships with almost nothing at all. Linux would rank last because of all the things you can install. Openoffice would be counted against Linux, but MS Office wouldn't count against Windows in this scenario.
Basically, I can't tell if the report has any merit or all or is simply noise!
I'm sorry, but did you just suggest a ZERO-TOLERANCE approach to zealotry? Isn't that a bit...
overzealous?
This is where we loop back to the earlier threads about being Irish, isn't it?
Or maybe someday "they" will require every network card to use a unique ID number permanently assigned to the card!
...oh, wait.
From what I read (NY Times, I believe) the system didn't really have a big an impact as some headlines would lead you to believe.
Apparently the system that computes and displays the current Dow couldn't keep up with the systems that process the transactions when the number of transactions became very large. The display system caught up a bit later making it *appear* that the market at suddenly dropped something like 250 points in a few seconds.
In reality, the decline was fast but steady. It was just the exchange's version of "Damn lag!"