I'm actually running as a limited user. The UAC prompt comes up, but instead of a "Yes/No" prompt, I have to enter in a password. I am actually considering going back, because in my opinion, the OS hooks are good enough that running as Administrator with UAC enabled is about equivalent to what I'm doing now. Only with less password typing.
Your other arguments are good, but apply equally to Ubuntu and OS X, which use sudo escalation prompts for everything. Or do you run as root on all your machines? I have to privilege escalate in Vista two or three times a week -- that's about how often I install new software or monkey with system settings. It's about the same with Linux.
If you have routine crashes with Vista, there is a very good chance hardware or drivers are involved (just like routine crashes with OS X or Linux or other modern OSes).
The anti-Vista whining has gotten more annoying than the silly "M$" thing or the Slashdot trolls talking about Microsoft users sucking Bill's cock.
The genuine problems with Vista (the multiple versions, the price, lack of solid drivers) were exhausted as a subject months ago. Since then, the computer press has acted like a bunch of 15-year-olds with a nerd fetish. Vista is actually somewhat nice.
Backup management is a hell of a lot nicer in Vista -- XP almost forced you to go with a third-party app. UAC works very well, and makes running Windows as a limited user a reasonable experience -- in XP it was doable, but a serious pain. System restore is _much_ improved with Vista, something I noticed after a borked nVidia RAID driver update. The performance and reliability wizards that can go through and look at which of your apps are crashing are a nice little idea. There are hundreds of these little improvements. It's not god's gift computer nerds, but it's not that bad either.
And yes, I am a Linux sys admin. At any given time I probably have more Linux boxes running than Windows boxes.
But they can already do this by forcing you to give up keys to a safe, which may well contain incriminating files unknown to the government before that. This ruling doesn't make much sense.
Explain to me how it is that hundreds, I mean, thousands, check that, MILLIONS of blacks operate on the same level as whites if they're so dumb.
Have you ever heard of a normal distribution? Even if the average black IQ is 85 (it is), 14% of blacks will be smarter than the average white person. Good god, I'm arguing with a mathematical ignoramus. I quit.
That's what I do. And her BS is in Computer Science, so win-win. Except for all the emacs versus vim arguments. Gah! So many years of schooling, and she can't understand that vim is superior?
Yeah, that's why rich black kids score so much higher on their SATs than poor white kids. Also I have a bridge to sell you.
Anyway, I'm sure that if I came up with 50 other examples, you'd be able to explain to me how there was some cultural explanation for every one of them. But I have one question: doesn't all that special pleading ever start to ring a little hollow when you hear yourself saying it?
I am sure you are aware of Dr. James Watson's recent controversial assertion that blacks are not as "endowed" intellectually as whites. While the few studies I have seen do not support this conclusion at all I am still curious as to know how evolution has made us different (obviously) in other ways.
You haven't checked out very many studies. Just for grins, why don't you try to find last year's U.S. SAT scores on the internet separated by race (I haven't looked, but I can guess the numbers pretty closely anyway). Or count up the number of black grandmaster chess players, etc., etc. Watson is right, and the people attacking him were jokers. Jason Malloy wrote a great article defending him on GNXP.
This does not mean that the mutation rate has increased.
Correct, these researchers do not claim that the mutation rate has changed. As you say, this is entirely a population effect.
The speed of evolution is how different the average person today is from the average person back then and nobody has more than a few of these new genes.
Ever heard of natural selection causing a gene to go to fixation?
Nonsense.
Check out the paper. The number of recent selection events and their average age is well-known from some recent gene studies.
I am friends with one of the researchers involved, and yes they are quite aware of the non-PC consequences of this paper (just look up the USATODAY article for a good quote). Come on, Cochran is the same guy who wrote the Ashkenzai paper that hit Slashdot a couple years back, about selection for intelligence in Ashkenazi Jews.
A more interesting point was made to me just the other day, which is that there's always enough ambient entropy in any real world system to deviate between trusted and untrusted behavior. In other words, for a turing complete app, you *can't* create a meaningful hash, because you aren't capturing all bits that will drive the execution flow. So, getting code signed really doesn't assert anything other than a business relationship. App signatures don't actually work, for any arbitrarily good hash.
That is simply wrong. For any "arbitrarily good" hash there exist collisions out there between bad_app and good_app. However, if finding bad_app or bad_app2, etc., is computationally impracticable (which is the definition of a good hash), then the hash is quite useful.
Currently md5 is fairly broken, in that a person can specially prepare good_app and bad_app. However, it is not yet completely broken (like CRC, if it were ever used as a secure hash), in that it is not yet possible for someone to take an arbitrary md5-signed file (like the recently released ubuntu iso, to give an example) and generate a collision. The birthday paradox makes the former much easier than the later.
The first iteration of the Zune hardware wasn't as bad as the press said it was. Nobody forced you to buy brown. Note: the computer press is worse than the game review press. They're ignorant and like to jump on bandwagons. See what Udolpho says about them on Windows Fucking Vista.
The old Zune software was bad. In my opinion, it was iTunes-for-Windows level bad. The new Zune software is much nicer than the old Zune software or iTunes. (iTunes is rotten software, too, smearing the desktop with its links every time it updates itself, and trying to get you to install other products like Safari and Quicktime with each security patch.)
The new Zune software is really wonderful. It's one of the best pieces of software I've seen in some time. Microsoft's Allchin has better magic than Steve Jobs, any day. Further the Zune's killer feature is its subscription service, which doesn't get nearly enough play. Do you hear about any of this from the computer press? No, because they suck. See above.
The Zune players themselves are very good and priced quite competitively compared to ipods. The video screens are very nice for watching videos. Unless you are a semi-serious computer user, however, you will have trouble converting your own videos to make them playable. (I recommend the free Encode360 software.) Also, the Zunes are not bright and shiny. They're the sort of device a straight male doesn't mind carrying around.
I was wondering when Slashdot would pick this story up. But what's this? Violation of the GPL "in spirit?" It's a lot more than that: they've modified the source code, but haven't distributed their modifications. A friend at work couldn't get Ubuntu working with his eee's wireless card for this reason.
And why should the customers be the ones to care about the GPL? It's the people who wrote the GPL'd code that has been stolen by ASUS that care.
Windows has alwayss been vunerable locally (luckily for admins whose users forget passwords etc)
Ah...no. You can edit the administrator password directly on the hard drive, but you can do the same for Unix systems. You are confusing physical access with privilege escalation flaws.
Are there really any CNet readers who aren't tech savvy enough to have actually heard of open source? Sure, there are people out there who have never used any free software, but they sure don't read CNet.
As an individual, your right to vote is nearly worthless, and anybody saying anything else is rabble-rousing. A million dollars is far overpaying for the right. You, as an individual, cannot make a difference with your vote. If you think you can, I've got a bridge to sell you.
As a population, your right to vote is fairly important. Well, at least the right to vote guarantees that politicians have to say nice things about democracy. What else it guarantees, I'm not so sure.
No. I don't think that is the explanation. It's just that it's far easier to dash off a threatening email, so the sample of threatening emails they worked from were from, ah, less dedicated, psychotic individuals than were the threatening postal messages. There are probably just as many truly threatening and disturbed emails, but they are drowned out by the angry emails that no one would take the time to send by postal mail.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm actually running as a limited user. The UAC prompt comes up, but instead of a "Yes/No" prompt, I have to enter in a password. I am actually considering going back, because in my opinion, the OS hooks are good enough that running as Administrator with UAC enabled is about equivalent to what I'm doing now. Only with less password typing.
Your other arguments are good, but apply equally to Ubuntu and OS X, which use sudo escalation prompts for everything. Or do you run as root on all your machines? I have to privilege escalate in Vista two or three times a week -- that's about how often I install new software or monkey with system settings. It's about the same with Linux.
If you have routine crashes with Vista, there is a very good chance hardware or drivers are involved (just like routine crashes with OS X or Linux or other modern OSes).
The anti-Vista whining has gotten more annoying than the silly "M$" thing or the Slashdot trolls talking about Microsoft users sucking Bill's cock.
The genuine problems with Vista (the multiple versions, the price, lack of solid drivers) were exhausted as a subject months ago. Since then, the computer press has acted like a bunch of 15-year-olds with a nerd fetish. Vista is actually somewhat nice.
Backup management is a hell of a lot nicer in Vista -- XP almost forced you to go with a third-party app. UAC works very well, and makes running Windows as a limited user a reasonable experience -- in XP it was doable, but a serious pain. System restore is _much_ improved with Vista, something I noticed after a borked nVidia RAID driver update. The performance and reliability wizards that can go through and look at which of your apps are crashing are a nice little idea. There are hundreds of these little improvements. It's not god's gift computer nerds, but it's not that bad either.
And yes, I am a Linux sys admin. At any given time I probably have more Linux boxes running than Windows boxes.
But they can already do this by forcing you to give up keys to a safe, which may well contain incriminating files unknown to the government before that. This ruling doesn't make much sense.
Selling something? Like Windows 95?
That's what I do. And her BS is in Computer Science, so win-win. Except for all the emacs versus vim arguments. Gah! So many years of schooling, and she can't understand that vim is superior?
Yeah, that's why rich black kids score so much higher on their SATs than poor white kids. Also I have a bridge to sell you.
Anyway, I'm sure that if I came up with 50 other examples, you'd be able to explain to me how there was some cultural explanation for every one of them. But I have one question: doesn't all that special pleading ever start to ring a little hollow when you hear yourself saying it?
I am friends with one of the researchers involved, and yes they are quite aware of the non-PC consequences of this paper (just look up the USATODAY article for a good quote). Come on, Cochran is the same guy who wrote the Ashkenzai paper that hit Slashdot a couple years back, about selection for intelligence in Ashkenazi Jews.
I thought he might possibly have meant that. And yes, it's still wrong.
Currently md5 is fairly broken, in that a person can specially prepare good_app and bad_app. However, it is not yet completely broken (like CRC, if it were ever used as a secure hash), in that it is not yet possible for someone to take an arbitrary md5-signed file (like the recently released ubuntu iso, to give an example) and generate a collision. The birthday paradox makes the former much easier than the later.
Apple even pays you for those trolls on a Saturday? Whoa.
Yeah, because I could be a thief and steal all that music instead. That would save me a lot of money.
The first iteration of the Zune hardware wasn't as bad as the press said it was. Nobody forced you to buy brown. Note: the computer press is worse than the game review press. They're ignorant and like to jump on bandwagons. See what Udolpho says about them on Windows Fucking Vista.
The old Zune software was bad. In my opinion, it was iTunes-for-Windows level bad. The new Zune software is much nicer than the old Zune software or iTunes. (iTunes is rotten software, too, smearing the desktop with its links every time it updates itself, and trying to get you to install other products like Safari and Quicktime with each security patch.)
The new Zune software is really wonderful. It's one of the best pieces of software I've seen in some time. Microsoft's Allchin has better magic than Steve Jobs, any day. Further the Zune's killer feature is its subscription service, which doesn't get nearly enough play. Do you hear about any of this from the computer press? No, because they suck. See above.
The Zune players themselves are very good and priced quite competitively compared to ipods. The video screens are very nice for watching videos. Unless you are a semi-serious computer user, however, you will have trouble converting your own videos to make them playable. (I recommend the free Encode360 software.) Also, the Zunes are not bright and shiny. They're the sort of device a straight male doesn't mind carrying around.
Come on, if you were on the block for murder, would you actually hire a Yale grad? Seriously?
Nobody in their right mind sues a lawyer assembly plant, coward or not.
I was wondering when Slashdot would pick this story up. But what's this? Violation of the GPL "in spirit?" It's a lot more than that: they've modified the source code, but haven't distributed their modifications. A friend at work couldn't get Ubuntu working with his eee's wireless card for this reason.
And why should the customers be the ones to care about the GPL? It's the people who wrote the GPL'd code that has been stolen by ASUS that care.
Tasing is a hell of a lot safer than tackling and wrestling with a suspect. For both the officer and the suspect. Good god.
Are there really any CNet readers who aren't tech savvy enough to have actually heard of open source? Sure, there are people out there who have never used any free software, but they sure don't read CNet.
You still program Adblock? Give Adblock Plus and its automatically updating filters a try.
As an individual, your right to vote is nearly worthless, and anybody saying anything else is rabble-rousing. A million dollars is far overpaying for the right. You, as an individual, cannot make a difference with your vote. If you think you can, I've got a bridge to sell you.
As a population, your right to vote is fairly important. Well, at least the right to vote guarantees that politicians have to say nice things about democracy. What else it guarantees, I'm not so sure.
No. I don't think that is the explanation. It's just that it's far easier to dash off a threatening email, so the sample of threatening emails they worked from were from, ah, less dedicated, psychotic individuals than were the threatening postal messages. There are probably just as many truly threatening and disturbed emails, but they are drowned out by the angry emails that no one would take the time to send by postal mail.
Actually, it's a really good choice if that number comes up, because any other would lose.