Open a terminal, and do `sudo ls`. It'll ask for your password. Do it again, and it won't - password is cached.
Now open a second terminal, and do `sudo ls` in that one. It'll ask for your password again.
Sudo password caching (it's actually an authentication validity timeframe, doesn't store the password) is local to your terminal. An application that's running in the background somewhere won't be able to access it.
If you close both terminals, the next one you open will again have the same VT as the other first, where you originally sudo'ed, and will thus still work within the timeframe - this actually could be an issue, but can probably be easily solved with an exit script in your shell or something. Also see "lock your damn screen when you wander off" and "blueproximity".
The Wii wasn't designed with loner geeks in mind, it was meant as a gaming platform for the more common socially-enabled variant of the species. This is also why it keeps selling like hotcakes: it's good at fun party games, not high-focus concentration games.
You invite a couple of friends over, open up a few bottles, and if there's a dull moment, you turn on the Wii and make a fool of yourselves playing bats.
Not unlike that Monopoly or Life set of yours, the Wii mostly designed to be groupware. While you most certainly can play alone, it isn't half as much fun.
Maybe that's because we're a) not paying for b) using their software and machines.
When Google delivers a free service, I can't much complain when they do updates without telling me. If I pay for their services, I expect there to be SLAs and for them to apply patches non-disruptively and without breaking contract.
If I BUY software from Microsoft, run it on my own hardware, pay for their support and have to do the patching myself, I feel they have an obligation to tell me what a patch does in order for me to be able to decide wether or not it's worth applying.
It appears that you would be very surprised indeed about the number of noobs on here. Note the "eternal" part about "eternal september" ? It's not a joke.
Yes, people could eavesdrop on your transactions, which is not a desireable situation; but unless they can access the actual hardware to 'fix' the authentication (at least challenge/response, I would hope) they can't *modify* the transactions and steal your monies.
Maybe that's not a major difference for you, but it is for me.
Regardless of anything else, if you break into an ATM you're not gonna take the time to extract the money from victim accounts, you just tell it to start spitting bills.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't sue them, silly. Just put in in the terms of the contract and see who still dares to offer voting machines.
"Dreck" ? Really ? Means "shit" in german :-)
> the ABL (big laser)
You mean "Awesomely Big Laser".
In mathematics, I believe this is called a cumulative rounding error.
Yes. Hentai Porn Lovecraft.
> MPEG-LA can literally revoke all licenses and make everyone pay fora separate license to create,view, edits, or distributes H.264 video.
Cue the Next Big Thing.
Regardless of anything else, I might hope that the likes of microsoft.com is also nothing like wondows home machines/users; and still...
Nope, and I just checked to be certain.
Open a terminal, and do `sudo ls`. It'll ask for your password. Do it again, and it won't - password is cached.
Now open a second terminal, and do `sudo ls` in that one. It'll ask for your password again.
Sudo password caching (it's actually an authentication validity timeframe, doesn't store the password) is local to your terminal. An application that's running in the background somewhere won't be able to access it.
If you close both terminals, the next one you open will again have the same VT as the other first, where you originally sudo'ed, and will thus still work within the timeframe - this actually could be an issue, but can probably be easily solved with an exit script in your shell or something. Also see "lock your damn screen when you wander off" and "blueproximity".
You're thinking of Uranium, the stuff used in nuclear powerplants and stuff.
Uranus isn't an element.
The Wii wasn't designed with loner geeks in mind, it was meant as a gaming platform for the more common socially-enabled variant of the species. This is also why it keeps selling like hotcakes: it's good at fun party games, not high-focus concentration games.
You invite a couple of friends over, open up a few bottles, and if there's a dull moment, you turn on the Wii and make a fool of yourselves playing bats.
Not unlike that Monopoly or Life set of yours, the Wii mostly designed to be groupware. While you most certainly can play alone, it isn't half as much fun.
OK, I'll pay for the data rate. I will then also expect no whining whatsoever if I choose to use the full capacity of that data rate 24/7/365.
You're in the 'Ask' section, not the 'News' section.
> Why steal what someone else will give you for free?
For the thrill of it, like any good kleptomaniac will tell you.
Maybe that's because we're a) not paying for b) using their software and machines.
When Google delivers a free service, I can't much complain when they do updates without telling me. If I pay for their services, I expect there to be SLAs and for them to apply patches non-disruptively and without breaking contract.
If I BUY software from Microsoft, run it on my own hardware, pay for their support and have to do the patching myself, I feel they have an obligation to tell me what a patch does in order for me to be able to decide wether or not it's worth applying.
Maybe Sony should've tried that, too.
It appears that you would be very surprised indeed about the number of noobs on here. Note the "eternal" part about "eternal september" ? It's not a joke.
"They" was referring to the hair people, silly.
I don't think anyone could mistake BP for a non-profit.
Let's keep it that way, maybe.
No, it's saying that the first order of business is to keep you from stealing my money, not keep you from seeing it.
Yes, people could eavesdrop on your transactions, which is not a desireable situation; but unless they can access the actual hardware to 'fix' the authentication (at least challenge/response, I would hope) they can't *modify* the transactions and steal your monies.
Maybe that's not a major difference for you, but it is for me.
Not from eavesdroppers, but it does protect you from MITM attacks.
Regardless of anything else, if you break into an ATM you're not gonna take the time to extract the money from victim accounts, you just tell it to start spitting bills.
No encryption does not necessarily mean no authentication.