which does not mean they can't gain kernel level privs. how else would they check for rootkits outside of users' context?
I think the point really is does Microsoft publish the exact same hooks that they use internally? In the past this has had a resounding NO answer. Will the EU change this, even in this limited way, is a question for history.
That trust is severely misplaced. Third-party companies can only play catch-up and do so from the disadvantage of external access to the system.
The parent article misses a beat in that Microsoft has an API to the kernel for their AV needs, by definition. The only issue is should that be public. The EU is making them publish this API (in some form, I don't trust Microsoft to release all their 'goodies'). But should it remain private to Microsoft then the consequence is that virus writer's will de-engineer it as they have done with so much of Microsoft's closed technology. Obviously, then, it benefits the end-users that the API be published and it benefits the end user that third-parties have a better vehicle towards check&balances of their own AV solutions.
But don't ever expect them to be able to produce the tightly-integrated, non-intrusive extensions to the kernel that Microsoft *could* produce, were they sufficiently motivated. To that, having the load-library/file-access hooks published for the kernal and the necessary security credentials to do so is a good thing since various pieces can be compared as to how one or the other of third-parties or Microsoft works better/faster/less problematic. That's good for the end user.
The squeals heard from AV companies are to be expected. Any change affects their income lines. Vista could be remedially-exempt (eg. totally secure) and some form of the same complaints from them, and the EU, would still be heard. That's a case of they're damned if they do and if they don't. My assertion is they created the situation so just have to live with it;)
Can you imagine the political back-lash from folks who can barely afford the cheapest generic incandescent bulbs now?! Such a move would require funding and distribution articles to help manage conversion for Senior Citizens and other's on fixed/assisted incomes.
And on an ongoing basis I can only imagine that some kind of subsistence percentage would have to be added for lighting.
Re:It's like nothing we've seen .. since Linux
on
A New Kind of OS
·
· Score: 1
I have to disagree that the definition of programming is a moving tarket. Marketing at big software suppliers might wish to entangle it such that the common person believe s/he is 'programming', but that does not make it so.
It's the difference between Teaching and Control. Like, for example, selectively breeding a tomato plant to be frost resistant (teaching) as opposed to genetically altering it directly (programming). On the one hand it's a very hit-and-miss affair (eg. netflix) compared to a very precise and mostly deterministic (ie. cron task, sed, etc.) system modification.
Mail filters, Netflix recommendations and such require infrastructure built into complex systems. Well, in that regard even the C programs we write depend heavily on the shoulders of others who have come before us. But the C program is highly predictable and has access to system resources in an authoritive manner. Applications and system context facilities like filters and favorites/recommendations have no context outside of their hosting application or system.
I agree that the adaptive systems of the future will provide a very real DAIS (Do As I Say) environment for non-technical users. The edge of predictability is moving, and towards such Learning/Teaching metaphors. I think that's a good thing.
But the core difference of context scope will not change.
I think you make some great points. You seem to be from the perspective of knowing enough about wifi routers to get along. The user who drops by WalMart for a router wouldn't make the same assumptions. S/he might even see "nameofthisnetwork" as the appropriate entry (it names the network here, right?).
I'm reminded by a story my father told me in which he had to drive in reverse for miles because the drive belt on his early-centuary Ford had broken. In such a vehicle, knowing how to adjust the carb, fix a flat at the side of the road, replace belts and such was imperative. There weren't experts (fueling stations and repair mechanics) available across the country like there is today.
Those early-adoptive automobile operators had it rough. And -back to the relevant part- AFAIK locks and keys were not included. They didn't have to be.
Well, we're at a place where keys to our wifi are becoming necessary.
Slashdotter Republicans and Libertarians generally favor free-market economics. So to you who are bitching about this *business* placing constraints on its free-market *customers*, I have to ask you just what is your beef?
It may very well be that the Condo Association is reselling internet access in which case they have a very vested interest in what goes on the pipe. And if not, I'd imagine that each subscriber has agreed to vet each user of h/er service so open wifi is contrary to their agreement with their ISP.
And it may just be that this is the first time many of these tennants have ever heard that they could, or *should* , modify their wifi settings. I just bought a Netgear Rangemax (gigabit ports) and it was the first time I'd ever used wifi. I can't say that anything I read impressed me with a need to apply security. I was familiar with the concepts enough to change the SSID and make it non-broadcast and to enable WPA, but even with this very recent router (late 2005?), this was not a default and their wizard did not require it. A simple solution to this is for Netgear to limit the througput to, oh say 1KB/Sec, for operation at default. This would allow users to get it working, and Netgear could offload to the voicemail system the message to 'pls check your wifi security settings'.
While I appreciate the sentiment of those who *choose* to operate a secure but open wifi access you must surely be in the vast minority. Do you want your pipe overloaded by some deck down the hall that is accessible from the parking lot next plot over?
well, if you expect that a sophisticated brain scanning device couldn't tell the difference between purposeful lies and the sociopath (isn't compulsive lieing a form of this?) who feels he's "right" so isn't lieing.
I think your point is valid though for the delusional who would have no clue, or mental ciruitry, about things the rest of us considered lies or untruths. He'd think it was actually *true* that every black helicopter was recording his every thought.
I'm going to start using your spindle idea. thanks.
You can make an impromptu sleeve out of a piece of discarded printer paper.
1. fold along the longer horizontal in thirds. 2. place the disk in the pocket and fold from the left and right into the center. 3. scotch tape 4. decorate as necessary
Also, if you put two disks into one standard jewel case, it tends to get cracked less easily. The space being filled seems to help. But I wouldn't drive my car over it or something.;) That works out for me since a full backup takes 2 DVD's, when I include opt and share that is.
You're very charitable. If Gnome or KDE allowed even limited downloads that sucked so badly, they'd be spit roasted.
My take on why Microsoft would beta is 1) they really don't understand nor use reduced priv. user, and 2) they wish to find out just how high the pain threshold might be for their users. That goal supercedes any fear of backlash from media channels since they'll just release YAB that approximates what they see as the limit. Rinse; Wash; Repeat.
"Warnings Threshold" is an interesting spin. I'd think their admission that the current implementation is a 'pain' is enough to show it's not a configurable but, rather, they're having trouble actually making it work. That's clearly a design issue.
I know I'd be fearly constrained to buy or use their Vista 1.0.0
Oh yeah, they don't use minor versions in marketing.... wouldn't want to confuse the folks that will forget they ever heard that reduced privilege user ever exhibited problems....
I kid. Vista won't have any versioning. Unless they decide they need to release Vista Improved, Vista 2008, Vista EnhancedEdition or some such later in the game.
I'm glad it works for you and glad this guy gets some bling. but without seeing how the message board is threaded under this new look, they all look the same.
Scatological, calumniatory, raw porn is quite different from the philisophical issues you mention. There's no desire on my part mentioned in my post, just that I could not make a case for such a site being *not* blocked. "no constitutional right" is what I said. That's far different from expressing a desire for such filtering.
I don't, actually, even filter here at home. Unless you count having my 13 year old son's computer in a public part of the house as "filtering" (I don't). I trust him. I don't think if he visited such a site it would cause the earth to tremble (IOW, he'd get out of it whatever he was ready for). And having the computer *not* hidden away in his room limits the amount of temptation.
While you make some good points, they're really not applicable to me.
MyBestGoldenShower.com is *not* a constitutional right.
Now, I've alwasy come down on the side of preferring to allow my kids as many freedoms as myself. I believe *I* have the right to allow or disallow such a 'resource' to my own child. I think the school filtering it is completely appropriate; *at the school*.
I don't believe any knowledge or experience with such a site my kid might have is at all relevent to the school, public or private.
>>agree that the columbine reference was ill conceived
One might expect folks who are responsible for acedemic advancement of that student to understand the language and to have some capacity for reading comprehension.
It's like that mention of Communism in another post to this article. Allegorically, it can only be viewed as successful or not, not threatening or not. It's clear that it was an example to illustrate a point. And if it were not clear, the student clarified his intention by stating that no threat had happened. It's a contrastual construct. Good/Bad. The kids of Columbine reacted in a manner, but nothing like that happens here...except maybe on your (the school's) part.
And if it were not clear and there were no clarification, even then, an ironic allegory that puts the Administration in the place of the Columbine Students *still* is not actionable. Not if we want our kids to grow-up with a sense of purpose, a sense of some absoluteness to Right and Wrong.
The factor of most concern that I've seen over the last 30 years or so is the continual sand shifting of our Responsibility to Law. The rules are constantly changing. Where we allow entrenched power to encroach on our ability to Act Within Our Own Conscience, we lose a little more of our blood-garnered Citizenship.
Others have made hay with examples of parties, fights and harrassments. These are Actions. The only 'action' this student is culpable to is Expression. It is our core Right as Citizens, for without it none of our guaranteed liberty means a damn; not Assembly nor Worship nor Vote. How can you assemble without speaking? How can you worship without Expression of your personal beliefs? How can you vote without the former?!
How can you seek to cause a change, or as a minor even hope to understand if a change is necessary, without free flow of ideas and expression of your viewpoint?
While blogs on myspace and such are public in the strictest sense, the reality is that we blog to our constituents. It's less like a Newspaper than it is like a Newsletter. I doubt that the same contents would have aroused the school administration had they been committed to paper and circulated to friends and family. And yet, the readership of the blog is probably just that limited. If I drop my family newsletter and it is picked up, is then 'Johnny' liable to Publishing standards? If 'Johnny' blogs to a group of friends is that more public than the lost newsletter?
Should we allow our kids' first experience with the Rule of Law in America to be of Fascist containment?
Quite the contrary it must be a more flexible interpretation of their, admittedly immature, Expression and Speach that we allow. To Teach is to Guide, not to Control. Sadly, the NEA has lost its way in this.
As a Parent I cannot allow such an obvious collusion to contravene my biological, moral, ethical and legal rights. In many localities it is legal to let my minor dependant smoke, consume alcohol, be nude, shoot a firearm... even wreck our car if driven only on our property. Within the law he may drive on public roads. But, apparantly, whoa be it if he has a bumper sticker that someone, somewhere, in the school finds uncomfortable. Or inconvenient.
Did the administration sense a real danger or did they knee-jerkily react to inconvenience?
FTA: "said Fred Hayes, deputy chief for Joliet Police Department. "Now, they can post it on a Web site. We are not seeing an explosion of new feelings or expressions from students."
Back in the day we'd have just used the good old-fashioned telephone to advise our friends of our feeling. Or we'd have shared it while playing foosball or pinball at the rec. Or maybe bitched about it on CB radio. Or, god help the one who, wrote a letter to the school newspaper. Are any of those channels more actionable?
Even with a reference to Columbine?
Do we wish to live in a place wherein we can talk freely and openly.... so long as it's only about State Acceptable topics and content?
>>using an IDE will mask much of what could be valuable in learning, to the extent >>students don't even "get" some of the important underlying principles.
Generally I agree with this. But if the underlying principles you wish to teach are the Object Oriented concepts, and not the system issues of classpath, object files, etc, then the BlueJ IDE might be a good compromise.
This year I served as a resource to a High School program which taught beginning java programming. They used the Java Concepts 4th edition textbook (Wiley - ISBN 0-471-73755-0) and from what I've heard it went well.
The BlueJ environment is cross-platform and allows the student to initiate classes, interfaces and abstract classes and provides a graphical way to implement those. I was dubious at first, coming from a JBuilder/Netbeans/Eclipse background. And those habits still had me providing advice using snippets of code or java files. BlueJ allowed the teacher to paste my code examples into the IDE though, so there really was no problem for either of us.
Addmittedly it's harder to create the code to allow the game to run against one shared disk than it is to play with a dedicated source disk in the local drive. And addmittedly there probably isn't even a fraction of the need for that as there is support for TCP/IP multiplayer play.
This one, however, advertises LAN, modem and MSN Web use which made me think that only one source disk would be required. This is Motorcycle Madness 2 (circa Windows 95 - pentium 233) so perhaps my perception is of the old-school.
Its motorcycle simulation provided that it wasn't worth worrying about in any case, it was that bad. I'm sure I'm old school in this too. A motorcycle simulation I really liked I played on the Commodore 64 and it reacted as a real bike would in the real physical world. Yes, I understand this game is not marketed as a simulation. The reviews painted it as such IIRC, and described it as best-of-breed. Not what I was looking for.
But I'd have felt I got some value if it would have allowed us to play against each other on the home LAN....
The american people must again become great if the vision of our greatest legacies are to come to fruition. I take any chance to add my voice to the quell, rhetorical or not, in hopes that every voice helps turn the tide.
I agree with you that out of bounds spending, the Fed garnering evermore the place of the State, and a general populist enticement towards reward instead of duty stand in the way of visionary accomplishment.
I sense danger where the decision to spend on space exploration is determined unilaterally at the top....
Re:Why Then Not Now?
on
Back to the Moon
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
They did not have any apprentices whom they could mentor in the arcane business of placing men on celestial bodies
We still know how to put a complicated technological device into orbit and how to include humans in that. We still know how to find the point of breakaway orbit to accomplish putting that object in places outside of Earth orbit. We still know how to manage the health of those humans and how to return them to Earth.
I get your point, but I don't think the situation is as dire as you present.
We will have to redesign the systems. Newer composites and materials that are lighter, more resiliant and possibly, thought not probably, less expensive. But in any case, much different. Faster computers, better robotics, more intelligent software... the possibilities astound me.
I really don't think that circa 1969 expertise, even having been maintained these several decades, would be all that relevent today. I see it as a positive thing actually since we're now forced into a redesign that, had those entrenched interests persisted, we might not.
>>I might [consider applying for it]. You misquoted me.
>>I'd not give the posting another look. If it mentions having skills on windows and macintosh, I might. The active verb was look not apply. All I meant in everything I said about this contrived example is that having lateral skills might sometimes draw someone into looking at a posting that didn't strictly eliminate him. My experience was just an example, but to set your mind at ease I have never applied, nor do I anticipate applying, where Mac skills are a priority since I know my background is -at best- weak in this.
>>And if your addvert does mention Windows under Preferred, My language skills are better than most. As you can see, I got the placement of windows as "desired" not "required". You passed completely on my suggestions that having Macintosh parenthasized in the job title was suboptimal, and that the core macintosh skills you desire are both indefinate. I contrived another example to illustrate.
>>Mac skills are labeled "Required qualifications Macintosh O/S Protocols are labeled as required. Does that really say to you macintosh skills? As I pointed out, googling that phrase brought me networking hits and, I should add for clarity, *nothing* Mac specific. Such imprecision from an edu really makes the reader wonder if they actually have any idea what they need, specifically, or if they need a generalist to cover "whatever comes up".
You admit that the "phrasing is weird" yet you seem wholly incapable of accepting friendly advice to wit: your job posting is confusing and does not assert the primary position of macintosh.
I don't mean, even though I used me as an example, that it is confusing to me. I wouldn't apply if I had no Mac experience at all, unless I met all of the following: - significant Windows exprerience - networking expertise - graphics design either in school, as intern or on the job (ie. reasonable exposure to their tools) - experience managing networked devices (servers, printers, workstations) - experience supporting users
You know, I get that you need someone who can hit the ground running as to supporting a primarily macintosh-based network. Ad Hominems aside, that is not conveyed -in strong terms- in the posting. Do you notice that it asks the applicant to support, generically, "computer hardware"... and only implies a secondary need to manage macintosh's specifically? If you can't see that, then I'm done here.
I also get that you believe "Insure smooth operation of Macintosh computers" spells it out cleanly and completely. It doesn't, not even when listed as the first Responsibility. I know enough to do that (don't even bother;), especially at an edu. If these are mission-critical, 24/7/365, 5-nines machines then add "mission-critical macintosh". Being an edu, I doubt they are. I'm guessing you've got these as resources to graphics art students and faculty. But -hold on a minute- that's something your applicants also will wonder about; What Kind of Users? If you do have more than a couple of dozen macintosh's for this person to handle, a number would also be useful to that applicant. Scope. Requirements 101...
Drop the "OS Protocols" bit and say you need someone with networking of macintosh computers as well as other OS's if appropriate. Ask the applicant to insure operation of heterogenous networking environment and to provide first-tier support of macintosh (specify included OS versions) workstations (and servers if appropriate). If you don't have Windows, drop that bit. Suggest to the applicant that certification like ACHDS is desired (maybe in lieu of the AS degree though I understand being an edu that's probably not going to be acceptable to HR). List or exemplify key applications. Clarify user base.
If you still get primarily windows folks, then I was wrong;)
You have this microsoft url in your postings. Having not been corrected it became concrete in my thinking. thanks for setting me straight. I never went to the url... yeah I know it's not a microsoft domain.
Hey, we're all naive at times, no need to be arrogant. If a developer position asked for Xcode specifically I'd not give the posting another look. If it mentions having skills on windows and macintosh, I might. Even though I haven't sat at a Mac since OS8. Depending on the tools and targets. But that's my point in a nutshell; the more specifics in the posting should weed out those who wouldn't have a chance.
Perhaps I missed hitting the exact fallacy or problem. I would still think it _obvious_ that a huge number of misguided applicants signals a problem somewhere. Maybe they all wish to work for your employer (the microsoft theory though it *could* apply to a 'popular' university), maybe the local job market is so bad that a lot of folks are trying _anything_, maybe the local education is such that there is a glut of folks qualified to the HelpDesk level, perhaps you have an evil twin murmuring in folks ears at night "apply everywhere, no matter what they're asking for... apply everywhere....".
The only other potentialy helpful thing I have is a question. Is this is from your job posting "Experience with PC-based hardware and software installation, Intel-based hardware installation, and Windows operating system."?
If so then I have to tell you the posting is confusing as to the priority of Mac. Seems to be an IS/IT position that includes some Macs or who use Macs (Macintosh being in parens).
And "Insure smooth operation" and "Knowlege of OS Protocols" are both open ended. Given a chance I could probably insure the smooth operation of a catamaran even though at this particular point I'm not sure I even know how to spell it and I certainly wouldn't be able to identify one. I could read up on the docking and maritime protocols. And I feel capable of doing well because I have drive. Before you start typing let me just clarify this incidence of hyperbole...
I don't in any guise feel *qualified* to maintain or operate a catamaran. Just capable. I'm certain there are many more who are more capable. But if the catamaran has a cousin or two and so I'm considering managing catamaran, row boat and canoe, then I'm even more likely to take a look.
I couldn't imagine what you meant by OS Protocol. That could either be real low level BIOS stuff (yeah that's not MAC, I know) or kernel-level API or -well- I dunno what. A google though brings up networking results (SLP, IP, Kerberos, and such). I'm just pointing out that where you see that as qualifying a requirement, from my perspective it signals some ambivalence about what is wanted. And if your addvert does mention Windows under Preferred, well, I can certainly see why you're getting Windows folks.
But then again, the problem might lie in one of those other things I listed above;)
Slashdot Mirror
go away troll.
I use linux for everything. finances. video. correspondence. development. servers that have access to *everything* that goes across my LAN.
Hitting my Windows OS's only means compromising VMware sessions.
you dumb fuck
which does not mean they can't gain kernel level privs. how else would they check for rootkits outside of users' context?
I think the point really is does Microsoft publish the exact same hooks that they use internally? In the past this has had a resounding NO answer. Will the EU change this, even in this limited way, is a question for history.
That trust is severely misplaced. Third-party companies can only play catch-up and do so from the disadvantage of external access to the system.
;)
The parent article misses a beat in that Microsoft has an API to the kernel for their AV needs, by definition. The only issue is should that be public. The EU is making them publish this API (in some form, I don't trust Microsoft to release all their 'goodies'). But should it remain private to Microsoft then the consequence is that virus writer's will de-engineer it as they have done with so much of Microsoft's closed technology. Obviously, then, it benefits the end-users that the API be published and it benefits the end user that third-parties have a better vehicle towards check&balances of their own AV solutions.
But don't ever expect them to be able to produce the tightly-integrated, non-intrusive extensions to the kernel that Microsoft *could* produce, were they sufficiently motivated. To that, having the load-library/file-access hooks published for the kernal and the necessary security credentials to do so is a good thing since various pieces can be compared as to how one or the other of third-parties or Microsoft works better/faster/less problematic. That's good for the end user.
The squeals heard from AV companies are to be expected. Any change affects their income lines. Vista could be remedially-exempt (eg. totally secure) and some form of the same complaints from them, and the EU, would still be heard. That's a case of they're damned if they do and if they don't. My assertion is they created the situation so just have to live with it
A.A.R.P.
Can you imagine the political back-lash from folks who can barely afford the cheapest generic incandescent bulbs now?! Such a move would require funding and distribution articles to help manage conversion for Senior Citizens and other's on fixed/assisted incomes.
And on an ongoing basis I can only imagine that some kind of subsistence percentage would have to be added for lighting.
I have to disagree that the definition of programming is a moving tarket. Marketing at big software suppliers might wish to entangle it such that the common person believe s/he is 'programming', but that does not make it so.
It's the difference between Teaching and Control. Like, for example, selectively breeding a tomato plant to be frost resistant (teaching) as opposed to genetically altering it directly (programming). On the one hand it's a very hit-and-miss affair (eg. netflix) compared to a very precise and mostly deterministic (ie. cron task, sed, etc.) system modification.
Mail filters, Netflix recommendations and such require infrastructure built into complex systems. Well, in that regard even the C programs we write depend heavily on the shoulders of others who have come before us. But the C program is highly predictable and has access to system resources in an authoritive manner. Applications and system context facilities like filters and favorites/recommendations have no context outside of their hosting application or system.
I agree that the adaptive systems of the future will provide a very real DAIS (Do As I Say) environment for non-technical users. The edge of predictability is moving, and towards such Learning/Teaching metaphors. I think that's a good thing.
But the core difference of context scope will not change.
I think you make some great points. You seem to be from the perspective of knowing enough about wifi routers to get along. The user who drops by WalMart for a router wouldn't make the same assumptions. S/he might even see "nameofthisnetwork" as the appropriate entry (it names the network here, right?).
I'm reminded by a story my father told me in which he had to drive in reverse for miles because the drive belt on his early-centuary Ford had broken. In such a vehicle, knowing how to adjust the carb, fix a flat at the side of the road, replace belts and such was imperative. There weren't experts (fueling stations and repair mechanics) available across the country like there is today.
Those early-adoptive automobile operators had it rough. And -back to the relevant part- AFAIK locks and keys were not included. They didn't have to be.
Well, we're at a place where keys to our wifi are becoming necessary.
Slashdotter Republicans and Libertarians generally favor free-market economics. So to you who are bitching about this *business* placing constraints on its free-market *customers*, I have to ask you just what is your beef?
It may very well be that the Condo Association is reselling internet access in which case they have a very vested interest in what goes on the pipe. And if not, I'd imagine that each subscriber has agreed to vet each user of h/er service so open wifi is contrary to their agreement with their ISP.
And it may just be that this is the first time many of these tennants have ever heard that they could, or *should* , modify their wifi settings. I just bought a Netgear Rangemax (gigabit ports) and it was the first time I'd ever used wifi. I can't say that anything I read impressed me with a need to apply security. I was familiar with the concepts enough to change the SSID and make it non-broadcast and to enable WPA, but even with this very recent router (late 2005?), this was not a default and their wizard did not require it. A simple solution to this is for Netgear to limit the througput to, oh say 1KB/Sec, for operation at default. This would allow users to get it working, and Netgear could offload to the voicemail system the message to 'pls check your wifi security settings'.
While I appreciate the sentiment of those who *choose* to operate a secure but open wifi access you must surely be in the vast minority. Do you want your pipe overloaded by some deck down the hall that is accessible from the parking lot next plot over?
but at least I'll come in with a fresh perspective in the morning ;)
well, if you expect that a sophisticated brain scanning device couldn't tell the difference between purposeful lies and the sociopath (isn't compulsive lieing a form of this?) who feels he's "right" so isn't lieing.
...
;)
I think your point is valid though for the delusional who would have no clue, or mental ciruitry, about things the rest of us considered lies or untruths. He'd think it was actually *true* that every black helicopter was recording his every thought.
hey. wait a minute....
---
Moderation replaced by this sig
I'm going to start using your spindle idea. thanks.
;) That works out for me since a full backup takes 2 DVD's, when I include opt and share that is.
You can make an impromptu sleeve out of a piece of discarded printer paper.
1. fold along the longer horizontal in thirds.
2. place the disk in the pocket and fold from the left and right into the center.
3. scotch tape
4. decorate as necessary
Also, if you put two disks into one standard jewel case, it tends to get cracked less easily. The space being filled seems to help. But I wouldn't drive my car over it or something.
You're very charitable. If Gnome or KDE allowed even limited downloads that sucked so badly, they'd be spit roasted.
My take on why Microsoft would beta is 1) they really don't understand nor use reduced priv. user, and 2) they wish to find out just how high the pain threshold might be for their users. That goal supercedes any fear of backlash from media channels since they'll just release YAB that approximates what they see as the limit. Rinse; Wash; Repeat.
"Warnings Threshold" is an interesting spin. I'd think their admission that the current implementation is a 'pain' is enough to show it's not a configurable but, rather, they're having trouble actually making it work. That's clearly a design issue.
I know I'd be fearly constrained to buy or use their Vista 1.0.0
Oh yeah, they don't use minor versions in marketing.... wouldn't want to confuse the folks that will forget they ever heard that reduced privilege user ever exhibited problems....
I kid. Vista won't have any versioning. Unless they decide they need to release Vista Improved, Vista 2008, Vista EnhancedEdition or some such later in the game.
sigh...
oh, and it looks like the advertisement area in the upper right is larger. cool. :(
ps- "Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment."
this sucks
pps- could you consider using a 10 point recommendation instead of 5?
I'm glad it works for you and glad this guy gets some bling. but without seeing how the message board is threaded under this new look, they all look the same.
The Ozone Hole (tm) is what we were going to use to fix the CO2 problem, you insensitive clod!
Now you're really screwed....
----
pay no attention to this post - IANAC
Scatological, calumniatory, raw porn is quite different from the philisophical issues you mention. There's no desire on my part mentioned in my post, just that I could not make a case for such a site being *not* blocked. "no constitutional right" is what I said. That's far different from expressing a desire for such filtering.
I don't, actually, even filter here at home. Unless you count having my 13 year old son's computer in a public part of the house as "filtering" (I don't). I trust him. I don't think if he visited such a site it would cause the earth to tremble (IOW, he'd get out of it whatever he was ready for). And having the computer *not* hidden away in his room limits the amount of temptation.
While you make some good points, they're really not applicable to me.
MyBestGoldenShower.com is *not* a constitutional right.
Now, I've alwasy come down on the side of preferring to allow my kids as many freedoms as myself. I believe *I* have the right to allow or disallow such a 'resource' to my own child. I think the school filtering it is completely appropriate; *at the school*.
I don't believe any knowledge or experience with such a site my kid might have is at all relevent to the school, public or private.
>>agree that the columbine reference was ill conceived
One might expect folks who are responsible for acedemic advancement of that student to understand the language and to have some capacity for reading comprehension.
It's like that mention of Communism in another post to this article. Allegorically, it can only be viewed as successful or not, not threatening or not. It's clear that it was an example to illustrate a point. And if it were not clear, the student clarified his intention by stating that no threat had happened. It's a contrastual construct. Good/Bad. The kids of Columbine reacted in a manner, but nothing like that happens here...except maybe on your (the school's) part.
And if it were not clear and there were no clarification, even then, an ironic allegory that puts the Administration in the place of the Columbine Students *still* is not actionable. Not if we want our kids to grow-up with a sense of purpose, a sense of some absoluteness to Right and Wrong.
The factor of most concern that I've seen over the last 30 years or so is the continual sand shifting of our Responsibility to Law. The rules are constantly changing. Where we allow entrenched power to encroach on our ability to Act Within Our Own Conscience, we lose a little more of our blood-garnered Citizenship.
Others have made hay with examples of parties, fights and harrassments. These are Actions. The only 'action' this student is culpable to is Expression. It is our core Right as Citizens, for without it none of our guaranteed liberty means a damn; not Assembly nor Worship nor Vote. How can you assemble without speaking? How can you worship without Expression of your personal beliefs? How can you vote without the former?!
How can you seek to cause a change, or as a minor even hope to understand if a change is necessary, without free flow of ideas and expression of your viewpoint?
While blogs on myspace and such are public in the strictest sense, the reality is that we blog to our constituents. It's less like a Newspaper than it is like a Newsletter. I doubt that the same contents would have aroused the school administration had they been committed to paper and circulated to friends and family. And yet, the readership of the blog is probably just that limited. If I drop my family newsletter and it is picked up, is then 'Johnny' liable to Publishing standards? If 'Johnny' blogs to a group of friends is that more public than the lost newsletter?
Should we allow our kids' first experience with the Rule of Law in America to be of Fascist containment?
Quite the contrary it must be a more flexible interpretation of their, admittedly immature, Expression and Speach that we allow. To Teach is to Guide, not to Control. Sadly, the NEA has lost its way in this.
As a Parent I cannot allow such an obvious collusion to contravene my biological, moral, ethical and legal rights. In many localities it is legal to let my minor dependant smoke, consume alcohol, be nude, shoot a firearm... even wreck our car if driven only on our property. Within the law he may drive on public roads. But, apparantly, whoa be it if he has a bumper sticker that someone, somewhere, in the school finds uncomfortable. Or inconvenient.
Did the administration sense a real danger or did they knee-jerkily react to inconvenience?
FTA: "said Fred Hayes, deputy chief for Joliet Police Department. "Now, they can post it on a Web site. We are not seeing an explosion of new feelings or expressions from students."
Back in the day we'd have just used the good old-fashioned telephone to advise our friends of our feeling. Or we'd have shared it while playing foosball or pinball at the rec. Or maybe bitched about it on CB radio. Or, god help the one who, wrote a letter to the school newspaper. Are any of those channels more actionable?
Even with a reference to Columbine?
Do we wish to live in a place wherein we can talk freely and openly.... so long as it's only about State Acceptable topics and content?
>>using an IDE will mask much of what could be valuable in learning, to the extent
>>students don't even "get" some of the important underlying principles.
Generally I agree with this. But if the underlying principles you wish to teach are the Object Oriented concepts, and not the system issues of classpath, object files, etc, then the BlueJ IDE might be a good compromise.
This year I served as a resource to a High School program which taught beginning java programming. They used the Java Concepts 4th edition textbook (Wiley - ISBN 0-471-73755-0) and from what I've heard it went well.
The BlueJ environment is cross-platform and allows the student to initiate classes, interfaces and abstract classes and provides a graphical way to implement those. I was dubious at first, coming from a JBuilder/Netbeans/Eclipse background. And those habits still had me providing advice using snippets of code or java files. BlueJ allowed the teacher to paste my code examples into the IDE though, so there really was no problem for either of us.
---
http://www.bluej.org/about/what.html
Addmittedly it's harder to create the code to allow the game to run against one shared disk than it is to play with a dedicated source disk in the local drive. And addmittedly there probably isn't even a fraction of the need for that as there is support for TCP/IP multiplayer play.
This one, however, advertises LAN, modem and MSN Web use which made me think that only one source disk would be required. This is Motorcycle Madness 2 (circa Windows 95 - pentium 233) so perhaps my perception is of the old-school.
Its motorcycle simulation provided that it wasn't worth worrying about in any case, it was that bad. I'm sure I'm old school in this too. A motorcycle simulation I really liked I played on the Commodore 64 and it reacted as a real bike would in the real physical world. Yes, I understand this game is not marketed as a simulation. The reviews painted it as such IIRC, and described it as best-of-breed. Not what I was looking for.
But I'd have felt I got some value if it would have allowed us to play against each other on the home LAN....
If nobody thinks up these evil things then there won't be any dangers.
All we need to do is regulate thought. yeah, that's it. regulate thought....
The american people must again become great if the vision of our greatest legacies are to come to fruition. I take any chance to add my voice to the quell, rhetorical or not, in hopes that every voice helps turn the tide.
I agree with you that out of bounds spending, the Fed garnering evermore the place of the State, and a general populist enticement towards reward instead of duty stand in the way of visionary accomplishment.
I sense danger where the decision to spend on space exploration is determined unilaterally at the top....
yes.
We still know how to put a complicated technological device into orbit and how to include humans in that. We still know how to find the point of breakaway orbit to accomplish putting that object in places outside of Earth orbit. We still know how to manage the health of those humans and how to return them to Earth.
I get your point, but I don't think the situation is as dire as you present.
We will have to redesign the systems. Newer composites and materials that are lighter, more resiliant and possibly, thought not probably, less expensive. But in any case, much different. Faster computers, better robotics, more intelligent software... the possibilities astound me.
I really don't think that circa 1969 expertise, even having been maintained these several decades, would be all that relevent today. I see it as a positive thing actually since we're now forced into a redesign that, had those entrenched interests persisted, we might not.
The Entity known as 'Glenn' became a politician. That's about as Lost as it gets
>>I might [consider applying for it].
;), especially at an edu. If these are mission-critical, 24/7/365, 5-nines machines then add "mission-critical macintosh". Being an edu, I doubt they are. I'm guessing you've got these as resources to graphics art students and faculty. But -hold on a minute- that's something your applicants also will wonder about; What Kind of Users? If you do have more than a couple of dozen macintosh's for this person to handle, a number would also be useful to that applicant. Scope. Requirements 101...
;)
You misquoted me.
>>I'd not give the posting another look. If it mentions having skills on windows and macintosh, I might.
The active verb was look not apply. All I meant in everything I said about this contrived example is that having lateral skills might sometimes draw someone into looking at a posting that didn't strictly eliminate him. My experience was just an example, but to set your mind at ease I have never applied, nor do I anticipate applying, where Mac skills are a priority since I know my background is -at best- weak in this.
>>And if your addvert does mention Windows under Preferred,
My language skills are better than most. As you can see, I got the placement of windows as "desired" not "required". You passed completely on my suggestions that having Macintosh parenthasized in the job title was suboptimal, and that the core macintosh skills you desire are both indefinate. I contrived another example to illustrate.
>>Mac skills are labeled "Required qualifications
Macintosh O/S Protocols are labeled as required. Does that really say to you macintosh skills? As I pointed out, googling that phrase brought me networking hits and, I should add for clarity, *nothing* Mac specific. Such imprecision from an edu really makes the reader wonder if they actually have any idea what they need, specifically, or if they need a generalist to cover "whatever comes up".
You admit that the "phrasing is weird" yet you seem wholly incapable of accepting friendly advice to wit: your job posting is confusing and does not assert the primary position of macintosh.
I don't mean, even though I used me as an example, that it is confusing to me. I wouldn't apply if I had no Mac experience at all, unless I met all of the following:
- significant Windows exprerience
- networking expertise
- graphics design either in school, as intern or on the job (ie. reasonable exposure to their tools)
- experience managing networked devices (servers, printers, workstations)
- experience supporting users
You know, I get that you need someone who can hit the ground running as to supporting a primarily macintosh-based network. Ad Hominems aside, that is not conveyed -in strong terms- in the posting. Do you notice that it asks the applicant to support, generically, "computer hardware"... and only implies a secondary need to manage macintosh's specifically? If you can't see that, then I'm done here.
I also get that you believe "Insure smooth operation of Macintosh computers" spells it out cleanly and completely. It doesn't, not even when listed as the first Responsibility. I know enough to do that (don't even bother
Drop the "OS Protocols" bit and say you need someone with networking of macintosh computers as well as other OS's if appropriate. Ask the applicant to insure operation of heterogenous networking environment and to provide first-tier support of macintosh (specify included OS versions) workstations (and servers if appropriate). If you don't have Windows, drop that bit. Suggest to the applicant that certification like ACHDS is desired (maybe in lieu of the AS degree though I understand being an edu that's probably not going to be acceptable to HR). List or exemplify key applications. Clarify user base.
If you still get primarily windows folks, then I was wrong
You have this microsoft url in your postings. Having not been corrected it became concrete in my thinking. thanks for setting me straight. I never went to the url... yeah I know it's not a microsoft domain.
;)
Hey, we're all naive at times, no need to be arrogant. If a developer position asked for Xcode specifically I'd not give the posting another look. If it mentions having skills on windows and macintosh, I might. Even though I haven't sat at a Mac since OS8. Depending on the tools and targets. But that's my point in a nutshell; the more specifics in the posting should weed out those who wouldn't have a chance.
Perhaps I missed hitting the exact fallacy or problem. I would still think it _obvious_ that a huge number of misguided applicants signals a problem somewhere. Maybe they all wish to work for your employer (the microsoft theory though it *could* apply to a 'popular' university), maybe the local job market is so bad that a lot of folks are trying _anything_, maybe the local education is such that there is a glut of folks qualified to the HelpDesk level, perhaps you have an evil twin murmuring in folks ears at night "apply everywhere, no matter what they're asking for... apply everywhere....".
The only other potentialy helpful thing I have is a question. Is this is from your job posting "Experience with PC-based hardware and software installation, Intel-based hardware installation, and Windows operating system."?
If so then I have to tell you the posting is confusing as to the priority of Mac. Seems to be an IS/IT position that includes some Macs or who use Macs (Macintosh being in parens).
And "Insure smooth operation" and "Knowlege of OS Protocols" are both open ended. Given a chance I could probably insure the smooth operation of a catamaran even though at this particular point I'm not sure I even know how to spell it and I certainly wouldn't be able to identify one. I could read up on the docking and maritime protocols. And I feel capable of doing well because I have drive. Before you start typing let me just clarify this incidence of hyperbole...
I don't in any guise feel *qualified* to maintain or operate a catamaran. Just capable. I'm certain there are many more who are more capable. But if the catamaran has a cousin or two and so I'm considering managing catamaran, row boat and canoe, then I'm even more likely to take a look.
I couldn't imagine what you meant by OS Protocol. That could either be real low level BIOS stuff (yeah that's not MAC, I know) or kernel-level API or -well- I dunno what. A google though brings up networking results (SLP, IP, Kerberos, and such). I'm just pointing out that where you see that as qualifying a requirement, from my perspective it signals some ambivalence about what is wanted. And if your addvert does mention Windows under Preferred, well, I can certainly see why you're getting Windows folks.
But then again, the problem might lie in one of those other things I listed above