no, ofcourse we shouldn't. but to say that everyone inside the network should be as conscious as the sysadmin in charge of the firewall is absurd. and yes, you *have* essentially hacked the network. basic security practices should still be used, but attempting to follow every existing security patch and not allow connections on all but the most needed ports is not realistic
what do they mean "security inside?" the whole point of a network / firewall setup is that people can't get to you from the outside INTO your inside.
a posting on my local lug group mailing list suggested that firewalls are bad because it relaxed internal network security. that is like saying that you should remove the side rails on the highway, because that way people will be more aware of the dangers.
security on internal machines is always going to be inferior to that of the company firewall. what you should do is try to prevent people from sneaking in in the first place.if they are already in, there really is no limit to what they can do, because they have essentially hacked the network. (albeit physically)
sure, harmless hacking and reporting of this sort violates the DMCA; sure, they say they want legal protection for the people that help them; and sure, they will probably try to do something if you get arrested in the process of reporting a bug. if they succeed in helping you, they will claim triumph. if not, they dont really care because systems that they rely on might get bugs fixed, and there are plenty of people in reserve, even if u eliminate a few. i don't think that the advisor's reputation would be at all affected if some DMCA lawsuit ensues.
even though techies DO have a bad name for the "we know best" attitude i would argue that the people reviewing mozilla are also assuming that anything they use will have no learning curve. they expect every new piece of software to behave exactly like every other piece of software they have used to date.
many people complain that linux desktop (for example) is very confusing and convoluted. not so, if u'v never used windows. case in point, our company accountant was given a linux installation and doing all the work just fine. mozilla for browsing, openoffice for spreadsheets / docs, and as of yet, no problems getting things working. personally, i am used to the mozilla interface, so frankly, i would give IE a bad rating (if i was as narrow minded as the reviewers) because i honestly am confused by its interface. really the only difference is where certain menu items are and where tabs are placed. instead of bitching that u occasionally get confused, get USED to it. perhaps then you will actually be able to use the application. it can't take more than a week to get used to any application.
notice the phrase "the hue shift to red" since the underbelly is white, trying to remove the green and add the red is pretty fatal. instead, what u do is select the body of the lizzard and shift the hue on the whole lizzard into (what usually is the negative) the red.
some have said that "if our brain was simple enough to understand, we would be too simple to understand it." therefore, many have suggested on teaching an AI how to learn and evolve its skills, instead of trying to teach it every bit of information necessary. what role do you see, in future AI developments, of evolutionary techniques and self-organizing growing neural nets (and the like) that do online training and do not require any form of prior knowledge to succeed.?
good job for pointing out that there really IS a diff between computer science and engineering. its a whole different mentality for one...however, the whole "design 50 times over before u write" is a bit excessive. u start with an idea and good system structure. it should be more like: design, write, design, write, test, design, write...ad infinitum. it is nice to do design and discussion, but there are FAR too many problems that are evident only once u start actually writing the software. if the writing of the actualy software is so inflexible that there is no room for redesign, you will end up with some pretty bad software. personally, i think the KEY thing to any good software is:
only one person should be writing it.
each additional person you add to the project does not yield another person in terms of work. maybe 0.6 of a person, if communication is ideal and he is a good programmer. otherwise, it is much less. if one person writes it, there are no inconsistensies that can ruin projects, simply because the 2 (or more) ppl didnt talk amongst each other enough.
see, if the roman catholic church wanted to REALLY get the dough, the could sell their goodness online. they are just not utilizing the new market place!
but if they can communicate, isnt that superluminal communication. regardless of how it came about, if i know something i didnt before because of it, its communication.
quantum entanglement is instantaneous, not at the speed of light. the article was mistaken and actually *somewhat* corrected by one of the comments at the bottom of it. teleportation is just a neat word the press uses to describe what they are doing: quantum entanglement communication. that is what is important. since it IS instant, it does break einstein's laws for no communication faster than the speed of light. this needs to be tried at large distances, like across the world or, say, to mars.
in that case, the second description of the creation of the world would be more appropriate (or is it the first)..where man was put on earth last (not the one where he is put first)
good point, but to me this seems like an entirely different problem. especially if you have options, then yes, use another ISP. In this particular case, the issue is pretty much fair. i don't think the title is accurate. they dont want limit personal cable modem use (well maybe they do), its just more difficult for them to maintain them if you buy your own.
i wonder how much coverage of fps games there was (perhaps i missed it in review). i would surely hope it was small, due to the fact that doom and quake1 are really the inly innovations and new technologies. subequent versions have not really done anything new. all they did is improve grafx, but the gameplay quickly became nonimportant.
that is just another level of security but it is NOT really safe. you can still break into the safe, #1, and #2, you have to memorize the safe numbers in addition to the password you are using.
hmm...i was always told it was. a lot of plastics are. i guess i might be mistaken then. in that case, what plastics and plastic object ARE one molecule?
they say lucent has made molecule size organic transistors. what size molecules are they talking about? a BOWLING BALL is one molecule, so that is clearly not what they mean. how do these compare to ATOMIC size is the question.
stallman says that he is NOT using m$ style force, because he just simply made an ultimatum (albeit a rather strong one) that stated that if the name was not changed, the greatest advocate of the thing he wants it changed to is not going to speak.
however, barr has a point. i don't think he is saying that stallman IS using m$ style force, but this is the impression that mailing list participants get. as much as ideology and religion is important, you have to do a little PR on the side too. the point is, people DO want stallman to speak because he is a famous guy and has created an enormous force in the community of which many of us are a part.
you cannot go around telling people that they have to submit to your will in order for them to use your services. the people on the mailing list want the speech, so using his fame as leverage for such immediate and sudden action is rather strange. sure, RMS has a point to make, and he IS making it. but you have to have a little give and take in terms of naming conventions.
he himself said that it would be ok if barr called linux "linux" instead of calling gnu/linux "gnu/linux". all that was important was understanding. i think a mailing list that wants RMS to speak understands...
Slashdot Mirror
no, ofcourse we shouldn't. but to say that everyone inside the network should be as conscious as the sysadmin in charge of the firewall is absurd. and yes, you *have* essentially hacked the network. basic security practices should still be used, but attempting to follow every existing security patch and not allow connections on all but the most needed ports is not realistic
.
what do they mean "security inside?" the whole point of a network / firewall setup is that people can't get to you from the outside INTO your inside.
a posting on my local lug group mailing list suggested that firewalls are bad because it relaxed internal network security. that is like saying that you should remove the side rails on the highway, because that way people will be more aware of the dangers.
security on internal machines is always going to be inferior to that of the company firewall. what you should do is try to prevent people from sneaking in in the first place.if they are already in, there really is no limit to what they can do, because they have essentially hacked the network. (albeit physically)
QED
sure, harmless hacking and reporting of this sort violates the DMCA; sure, they say they want legal protection for the people that help them; and sure, they will probably try to do something if you get arrested in the process of reporting a bug. if they succeed in helping you, they will claim triumph. if not, they dont really care because systems that they rely on might get bugs fixed, and there are plenty of people in reserve, even if u eliminate a few. i don't think that the advisor's reputation would be at all affected if some DMCA lawsuit ensues.
QED
even though techies DO have a bad name for the "we know best" attitude i would argue that the people reviewing mozilla are also assuming that anything they use will have no learning curve. they expect every new piece of software to behave exactly like every other piece of software they have used to date.
many people complain that linux desktop (for example) is very confusing and convoluted. not so, if u'v never used windows. case in point, our company accountant was given a linux installation and doing all the work just fine. mozilla for browsing, openoffice for spreadsheets / docs, and as of yet, no problems getting things working. personally, i am used to the mozilla interface, so frankly, i would give IE a bad rating (if i was as narrow minded as the reviewers) because i honestly am confused by its interface. really the only difference is where certain menu items are and where tabs are placed. instead of bitching that u occasionally get confused, get USED to it. perhaps then you will actually be able to use the application. it can't take more than a week to get used to any application.
QED
...are now just downloaded bash scripts!
.
notice the phrase "the hue shift to red" since the underbelly is white, trying to remove the green and add the red is pretty fatal. instead, what u do is select the body of the lizzard and shift the hue on the whole lizzard into (what usually is the negative) the red.
QED
i have seen plenty of full blown wonderful projects written by one person. i am also talking about initial development, not supplemental additions.
QED
some have said that "if our brain was simple enough to understand, we would be too simple to understand it." therefore, many have suggested on teaching an AI how to learn and evolve its skills, instead of trying to teach it every bit of information necessary. what role do you see, in future AI developments, of evolutionary techniques and self-organizing growing neural nets (and the like) that do online training and do not require any form of prior knowledge to succeed.?
good job for pointing out that there really IS a diff between computer science and engineering. its a whole different mentality for one...however, the whole "design 50 times over before u write" is a bit excessive. u start with an idea and good system structure. it should be more like: design, write, design, write, test, design, write...ad infinitum. it is nice to do design and discussion, but there are FAR too many problems that are evident only once u start actually writing the software. if the writing of the actualy software is so inflexible that there is no room for redesign, you will end up with some pretty bad software. personally, i think the KEY thing to any good software is:
only one person should be writing it.
each additional person you add to the project does not yield another person in terms of work. maybe 0.6 of a person, if communication is ideal and he is a good programmer. otherwise, it is much less. if one person writes it, there are no inconsistensies that can ruin projects, simply because the 2 (or more) ppl didnt talk amongst each other enough.
QED
that is why some say that god made a mistake when he gave us 5 fingers per hand. we would have been been much better off with 6.
QED
i had the same problem with presentations. (not quite as bad, but still)
all graphical bullets (imported or exported) appear as ugly boxes in openoffice, or just as regular bullets in powerpoint.
QED
should be interesting to compare to tarkovsky's version. hollywood is probably going to ruin this one too...
QED
see, if the roman catholic church wanted to REALLY get the dough, the could sell their goodness online. they are just not utilizing the new market place!
QED
but if they can communicate, isnt that superluminal communication. regardless of how it came about, if i know something i didnt before because of it, its communication.
QED
yes, it IS faster than light teleportation!
quantum entanglement is instantaneous, not at the speed of light. the article was mistaken and actually *somewhat* corrected by one of the comments at the bottom of it. teleportation is just a neat word the press uses to describe what they are doing: quantum entanglement communication. that is what is important. since it IS instant, it does break einstein's laws for no communication faster than the speed of light. this needs to be tried at large distances, like across the world or, say, to mars.
QED
there are 2 versions:
1 where man is created first then names all the animals
2 the one we are more familiar with: where he is created last on the sixth day
QED
in that case, the second description of the creation of the world would be more appropriate (or is it the first)..where man was put on earth last (not the one where he is put first)
QED
sorry, thought the title was something different. for once /. DID name something appropriately!
good point, but to me this seems like an entirely different problem. especially if you have options, then yes, use another ISP. In this particular case, the issue is pretty much fair. i don't think the title is accurate. they dont want limit personal cable modem use (well maybe they do), its just more difficult for them to maintain them if you buy your own.
QED
well what can we say if he was using ie:
he was ASKING for it!
QED
i wonder how much coverage of fps games there was (perhaps i missed it in review). i would surely hope it was small, due to the fact that doom and quake1 are really the inly innovations and new technologies. subequent versions have not really done anything new. all they did is improve grafx, but the gameplay quickly became nonimportant.
QED
that is just another level of security but it is NOT really safe. you can still break into the safe, #1, and #2, you have to memorize the safe numbers in addition to the password you are using.
QED
hmm...i was always told it was. a lot of plastics are. i guess i might be mistaken then. in that case, what plastics and plastic object ARE one molecule?
QED
they say lucent has made molecule size organic transistors. what size molecules are they talking about? a BOWLING BALL is one molecule, so that is clearly not what they mean. how do these compare to ATOMIC size is the question.
QED
stallman says that he is NOT using m$ style force, because he just simply made an ultimatum (albeit a rather strong one) that stated that if the name was not changed, the greatest advocate of the thing he wants it changed to is not going to speak.
however, barr has a point. i don't think he is saying that stallman IS using m$ style force, but this is the impression that mailing list participants get. as much as ideology and religion is important, you have to do a little PR on the side too. the point is, people DO want stallman to speak because he is a famous guy and has created an enormous force in the community of which many of us are a part.
you cannot go around telling people that they have to submit to your will in order for them to use your services. the people on the mailing list want the speech, so using his fame as leverage for such immediate and sudden action is rather strange. sure, RMS has a point to make, and he IS making it. but you have to have a little give and take in terms of naming conventions.
he himself said that it would be ok if barr called linux "linux" instead of calling gnu/linux "gnu/linux". all that was important was understanding. i think a mailing list that wants RMS to speak understands...
QED