gee, and here I was thinking this was bad news because it delays the only change in consumer software choice since the shareware revolution.
Re:Why do people think they're successful?
on
Hi-Tech Repo Man
·
· Score: 3
when they still work for someone else? I wouldn't call this work.
when they still have to act a certain way, Havn't noticed any change.
dress a certain way, t-shirt and shorts, no shoes, same as always
or be in certain places at certain times? Meetings suck, but if I didn't go I wouldn't cop too much shit.
when being without a few paychecks would mean losing your toys, or even your home? have neither a home nor toys I own (well, there is that laptop..)
when I started enjoying success in a high-tech job I didn't go out and buy a bmw. me either
I drive a 60's model volkswagen. dont drive.
I didn't "buy" real estate in california either. why would you want to live here for longer than you have to? It's a fucking suburb, everything is too far apart, there's nothing to do here, the pubs close at 2am, and most of em only serve beer and wine anyway.
what the fuck were you people thinking? They weren't, they were reacting to the wants and needs that have been driven into them by society.
One day someone just might, and they'll throw away these theories and say "I dont know how anyone could have believed xyz". The point is that Microsoft had a false assumption, that PE files were more resistant to infection, this was proven to be false and the theory of viruses being impossible on the win95 platform was invalidated. Soon after they said it was only possible to write a resident virus because memory protection is slack on win95 platforms, and then said it was impossible to write a resident winnt virus. They were wrong again. why? Because their assumption that a resident virus must run in ring 0 was false. Per process residency viruses run completely in ring 3 and are as effective in practice as a system wide virus. Once again, the assumption is undermined and the theory folds. If you would like we could give some examples in physics, but I think the domain I have chosen demonstrates the issue just as effectively. Never say never.
Bill Gates suggested something similar in this very lame book (after The Road Ahead, I really expected better), of course, he figured people would be using Excel pivot tables.
I've been meaning to write up a FAQ on "office living", being that I'm here in the bay area for 6 months and at $1200/month for a studio appartment, I would rather sleep on the floor in my office wrapped in a sleeping bag.
You can relicense BSD code. The only difference between the BSD license and public domain is that the BSD license specifically states that you can not sue the programmer who wrote it.
You know absolutely nothing about communism. Go here read it and stop foaming at the mouth. BTW - at the last turn of the century it was precisely the communists who believed that "human labor is about to go the way of the dinosaurs".
Hey man, this is the open source revolution and you cant have a revolution without some bloodshed, or at least taking a few hostages. Proletariatians of the computing world, gather up your arms! The operating system will not be held by the bourgeois at Microsoft, no longer! We demand an operating system of the proletariat, owned only by the community!
Here's a whole bunch of stuff I made, I'll just put it in this box outside my house with a sign that says "take what you want, some of the stuff may not work". People take said stuff. mikethegeek drops by and accuses a number of people of stealing my stuff. Who here thinks that mike didn't read the sign?
yawn. Fix the law, dont break it, ok, well break it, but fix it too, or at least tell other people to fix it.. fuck it, got any ftp sites with startrek ds9 episodes on em? email me.
forget "consumer", this is about the citizens of the republic of the united states of america. Someday, probably quite a time from now, but someday, people will be asked to choose: do you want copyright law or not?
See this is the second time that someone has posted the exact same retort, I will respond. Quicktime is Apple's baby. It is considered one of their best pieces of IP. To a lesser extent, so is TrueType (being the essence of their desktop publishing market hold). To give these technologies away or otherwise weaken their hold on them would be detrimental to their overall business strategy and the person responsible would be strung up by their shareholders. Frankly, I find it scary that QT for windows exists.
All true. Personally I'd prefer they fix the bug than give out sploits to everyone. If you are going to write a sploit that puts a txt file in the root directory saying where the admin can get the patch, why not fix it yourself? It was just one byte ya know. Da fedz should write a one byte patch sploit and scan the net patching this for people. That would be sweet.
That's their business, it is hardly a new tactic. The only way to sell security is via the media, because only an expert can tell the difference between two security companies. They are indeed in it for the publicity. They are sending a very specific message to the media: if you had their product installed you would not be vulnerable (note: they had fixed this bug even before they found it!), but seeing as you dont, well here's the exploit kids, have fun. Actually it's not like that, but it was last time:)
Yawn, I'm not going to go over this argument yet again. The bug is essentially this one instruction:
mov [ebp+var_4], 202h
when the buffer is actually only 101h bytes long. So eEye could of made a one byte patch and released this, fixed the problem and then gone to Microsoft to get them to fix it in the source. But that's not the way it goes down. Microsoft has to be the one that makes the patch and although they beat the 30 day average I think 11 days to release a patch is pretty shameful (openbsd would patch this in under 6 hours, 24 hours being the maximum). Especially considering that mumblings of this bug were on bugtraq before April 19.
as I think it has been mentioned a dozen times already, everybody uses the BSD tcp/ip stack.. If you need some specific functionality in your product and you can get it for free, why wouldn't you go and grab it.
Slashdot Mirror
gee, and here I was thinking this was bad news because it delays the only change in consumer software choice since the shareware revolution.
when they still work for someone else?
I wouldn't call this work.
when they still have to act a certain way,
Havn't noticed any change.
dress a certain way,
t-shirt and shorts, no shoes, same as always
or be in certain places at certain times?
Meetings suck, but if I didn't go I wouldn't cop too much shit.
when being without a few paychecks would mean losing your toys, or even your home?
have neither a home nor toys I own (well, there is that laptop..)
when I started enjoying success in a high-tech job I didn't go out and buy a bmw.
me either
I drive a 60's model volkswagen.
dont drive.
I didn't "buy" real estate in california either.
why would you want to live here for longer than you have to? It's a fucking suburb, everything is too far apart, there's nothing to do here, the pubs close at 2am, and most of em only serve beer and wine anyway.
what the fuck were you people thinking?
They weren't, they were reacting to the wants and needs that have been driven into them by society.
that you shit gold and pee perfume?
Indeed.
wow that's great! Now the bank can sue your company for aiding you to defraud them.
One day someone just might, and they'll throw away these theories and say "I dont know how anyone could have believed xyz". The point is that Microsoft had a false assumption, that PE files were more resistant to infection, this was proven to be false and the theory of viruses being impossible on the win95 platform was invalidated. Soon after they said it was only possible to write a resident virus because memory protection is slack on win95 platforms, and then said it was impossible to write a resident winnt virus. They were wrong again. why? Because their assumption that a resident virus must run in ring 0 was false. Per process residency viruses run completely in ring 3 and are as effective in practice as a system wide virus. Once again, the assumption is undermined and the theory folds. If you would like we could give some examples in physics, but I think the domain I have chosen demonstrates the issue just as effectively. Never say never.
They told me it was impossible to write a virus for win95. We did it before the first beta was released. Impossible is highly overrated.
uhh.. hovertech?
So I guess you havn't heard of psychohistory?
Bill Gates suggested something similar in this very lame book (after The Road Ahead, I really expected better), of course, he figured people would be using Excel pivot tables.
I've been meaning to write up a FAQ on "office living", being that I'm here in the bay area for 6 months and at $1200/month for a studio appartment, I would rather sleep on the floor in my office wrapped in a sleeping bag.
You can relicense BSD code. The only difference between the BSD license and public domain is that the BSD license specifically states that you can not sue the programmer who wrote it.
You know absolutely nothing about communism. Go here read it and stop foaming at the mouth. BTW - at the last turn of the century it was precisely the communists who believed that "human labor is about to go the way of the dinosaurs".
Hey man, this is the open source revolution and you cant have a revolution without some bloodshed, or at least taking a few hostages. Proletariatians of the computing world, gather up your arms! The operating system will not be held by the bourgeois at Microsoft, no longer! We demand an operating system of the proletariat, owned only by the community!
The mere fact that there is "philosophical debate" about software should be ample reason to consider the system inheriently unjust.
Here's a whole bunch of stuff I made, I'll just put it in this box outside my house with a sign that says "take what you want, some of the stuff may not work". People take said stuff. mikethegeek drops by and accuses a number of people of stealing my stuff. Who here thinks that mike didn't read the sign?
yawn. Fix the law, dont break it, ok, well break it, but fix it too, or at least tell other people to fix it.. fuck it, got any ftp sites with startrek ds9 episodes on em? email me.
forget "consumer", this is about the citizens of the republic of the united states of america. Someday, probably quite a time from now, but someday, people will be asked to choose: do you want copyright law or not?
I stand corrected, in the case of TrueType they're just cunts.
See this is the second time that someone has posted the exact same retort, I will respond. Quicktime is Apple's baby. It is considered one of their best pieces of IP. To a lesser extent, so is TrueType (being the essence of their desktop publishing market hold). To give these technologies away or otherwise weaken their hold on them would be detrimental to their overall business strategy and the person responsible would be strung up by their shareholders. Frankly, I find it scary that QT for windows exists.
All true. Personally I'd prefer they fix the bug than give out sploits to everyone. If you are going to write a sploit that puts a txt file in the root directory saying where the admin can get the patch, why not fix it yourself? It was just one byte ya know. Da fedz should write a one byte patch sploit and scan the net patching this for people. That would be sweet.
They took 11 days to change one byte.
That's their business, it is hardly a new tactic. The only way to sell security is via the media, because only an expert can tell the difference between two security companies. They are indeed in it for the publicity. They are sending a very specific message to the media: if you had their product installed you would not be vulnerable (note: they had fixed this bug even before they found it!), but seeing as you dont, well here's the exploit kids, have fun. Actually it's not like that, but it was last time :)
Yawn, I'm not going to go over this argument yet again. The bug is essentially this one instruction:
mov [ebp+var_4], 202h
when the buffer is actually only 101h bytes long. So eEye could of made a one byte patch and released this, fixed the problem and then gone to Microsoft to get them to fix it in the source. But that's not the way it goes down. Microsoft has to be the one that makes the patch and although they beat the 30 day average I think 11 days to release a patch is pretty shameful (openbsd would patch this in under 6 hours, 24 hours being the maximum). Especially considering that mumblings of this bug were on bugtraq before April 19.
I'm sure eEye has a very long list of bugs just like this one that they will not release until the media attention dies down.
Perhaps one day you will learn that insulting people is not a way of talking to them. Now fuck off and take your stupid opinion with you. Fuckwit.
as I think it has been mentioned a dozen times already, everybody uses the BSD tcp/ip stack.. If you need some specific functionality in your product and you can get it for free, why wouldn't you go and grab it.