It's even easier than that. Just distribute a URL pointing to your root cert, click on it and then say "Yes" a few times. Bam, it's a trusted CA now.
By the way if you interpreted this as meaning "Give everybody in your company a copy of the private key for your root CA", then please stop using SSL right away. You may have a little more reading to do.
Or would you trust the guy in the truck because he showed you a self-signed document saying: "I am authorised to do what I'm doing. Signed: me." Of course not!
Actually what the guy is doing is saying "I'm the same guy who showed up last week and the week before, because I have the same certificate." All you need to do is verify the certificate once and it will be at least as reliable as one signed by any other certificate authority.
Why would you feel more comfortable if the guy in the truck had paid fifty bucks to get a signed document saying "I'm authorized to do what I'm doing. Signed: Epstein's Mom"?
Which would be why the subject references "Digital UNIX", which was the name used by DEC after they gave up on OSF/1. Tru64 was Compaq's name for it, because they really hated words that were spelled correctly.
Of course if you know enough to nit-pick that then you would also know about what happened to it after the HP-Compaq merger and how the last surviving Digital engineers tried to weld useful features like AdvFS and TruCluster onto HP-UX only to have their projects canceled in favour of inferior and more expensive Carly-approved products.
So I won't explain that, given the lineage of the code, it's probably the stuff that was ported to HP-UX.
...all I can say is that this would have been amazing news about ten years ago. Even five years ago it would have been pretty great.
Now? Well, it sounds like HPaq is just kicking it to the curb so it will probably be another year or two before anyone can beat it into a working filesystem for anything but HPucks. There is already no shortage of file systems that can do what AdvFS could do, so by the time it is ready for prime time prime time will have moved on.
"In theory" you can't accidentally summon the elder gods by not limiting your.signature to 120 characters.
"In theory" posting more than twice within a ten minute limit won't create an imbalance of left-handed and right-handed electrons within the local ethernet causing anything up to and including total protonic reversal. (I bet you'd be kicking yourself for not buying cables with signal directional markings which could have prevented this problem.)
So, yes, "in theory" the world is safe from being destroyed by you. Today.
Doesn't calling it 'incomplete code' imply that there might some day be a complete version? This is the new 'Atari' we're talking about here.
(Note to lawyers from Infogrames/Atari/Hasbro/Shiny/StuffthatIfoundonmyshoe: I will consider reversing this position when you ship me a complete copy of Master of Orion 3. No sooner.)
You may want to send your legal department a copy of the GPL, and possibly a copy of the accompanying FAQ, which explains things in terms simple enough for non-lawyers or even just really confused lawyers to understand.
At least two out of three admins have professional ethics.
The other one is easily tricked by slanted survey questions posed by a company with a vested interest in selling security products designed to prevent snooping.
"Have you ever, in the course of your work, sought out or been exposed to confidential information which you were not supposed to see? Examples would include personal files, documents or misdirected mail."
"I don't look at anyone else's files, but as the postmaster for our domain I personally receive every bounced email and those sometimes contain information which should have been kept confidential. I don't read any of it because that would be wrong, but it does wind up in my mailbox."
"Okay, we'll put you down for 'Snoops on his coworkers' then, and I'll have the rest of our sales team take your manager out for lunch to discuss this. Thanks!"
"Using water as energy is not hard, converting it to a 'useful' form of energy that is more than the energy required to convert it or break it apart it is the trick, but wouldn't break any Physics Laws."
Personally, I'm a big fan of the first law of thermodynamics. That's the one that says that the Universe doesn't pull energy out of its butt.
For something to think getting hydrogen out of water is UBER crazy talk, doesn't realize that the laser printer on their desk is creating ozone by the electrical charges bouncing oxygen atoms around.
I'm sure that all of those laser printers are plugged in to an external source of electricity. It takes a lot of power to do that, and it all has to come from somewhere. If you had a big enough power supply you could get all the hydrogen you want out of water, but you won't get back any more energy than you put into it.
Separating hydrogen from water is NOT breaking any form of phsyics. The question would be the chemical/energy cost to do it.
That's exactly it. If you convert a water molecule into its component atoms, you need to use energy to do that. That's exactly the same amount of energy that you get back by combining them into water again. Anyone who says that they can create a closed system in which water is broken apart and then recombined to produce excess energy with no other processes involved is lying. If you're getting excess energy from those two reactions, then it has to come from some third reaction which is going on.
Nobody is saying that it's not possible to design a car that runs on something other than gasoline, they're saying that the running a car which is powered _only_ by water, in the manner described, is impossible. If this car works at all it's because there is some other process involved which we aren't being told about, not because of some magical but hitherto unnoticed property of H2O.
So basically, we're not going to give you the right to be an antisocial retard and annoy everyone else
Actually, if you read the US Constitution you'll see that people already have the inalienable right to be antisocial retards. What you're proposing is taking that away.
Given the choice between fifteen million CPU years spent breaking keys and about ten minutes of breaking fingers, it seems pretty clear which one is more efficient.
Slashdot Mirror
That's a serial console. The fact that USB was involved is just a coincidence.
Hey hey... speak in English, not that science talk!
What many people don't know is that in addition to being a great bongo player, Richard Feynman was also quite an accomplished physicist.
It's true!
It's even easier than that. Just distribute a URL pointing to your root cert, click on it and then say "Yes" a few times. Bam, it's a trusted CA now.
By the way if you interpreted this as meaning "Give everybody in your company a copy of the private key for your root CA", then please stop using SSL right away. You may have a little more reading to do.
Actually what the guy is doing is saying "I'm the same guy who showed up last week and the week before, because I have the same certificate." All you need to do is verify the certificate once and it will be at least as reliable as one signed by any other certificate authority.
Why would you feel more comfortable if the guy in the truck had paid fifty bucks to get a signed document saying "I'm authorized to do what I'm doing. Signed: Epstein's Mom"?
Which would be why the subject references "Digital UNIX", which was the name used by DEC after they gave up on OSF/1. Tru64 was Compaq's name for it, because they really hated words that were spelled correctly.
Of course if you know enough to nit-pick that then you would also know about what happened to it after the HP-Compaq merger and how the last surviving Digital engineers tried to weld useful features like AdvFS and TruCluster onto HP-UX only to have their projects canceled in favour of inferior and more expensive Carly-approved products.
So I won't explain that, given the lineage of the code, it's probably the stuff that was ported to HP-UX.
...all I can say is that this would have been amazing news about ten years ago. Even five years ago it would have been pretty great.
Now? Well, it sounds like HPaq is just kicking it to the curb so it will probably be another year or two before anyone can beat it into a working filesystem for anything but HPucks. There is already no shortage of file systems that can do what AdvFS could do, so by the time it is ready for prime time prime time will have moved on.
Oh well. 1998 me is still pleased to hear this.
"In theory", posting to Slashdot is safe.
"In theory" you can't accidentally summon the elder gods by not limiting your .signature to 120 characters.
"In theory" posting more than twice within a ten minute limit won't create an imbalance of left-handed and right-handed electrons within the local ethernet causing anything up to and including total protonic reversal. (I bet you'd be kicking yourself for not buying cables with signal directional markings which could have prevented this problem.)
So, yes, "in theory" the world is safe from being destroyed by you. Today.
And "in theory" that makes me feel better.
Well, I'm still waiting.
...that this kidn of system relies on the goodwill of its users. No matter how complicated you make the system, someone's bound to mess with it some time.
Doesn't calling it 'incomplete code' imply that there might some day be a complete version? This is the new 'Atari' we're talking about here.
(Note to lawyers from Infogrames/Atari/Hasbro/Shiny/StuffthatIfoundonmyshoe: I will consider reversing this position when you ship me a complete copy of Master of Orion 3. No sooner.)
And, much like Opera, it's not over until...
Oh, never mind. You can just fill in your own joke here.
You may want to send your legal department a copy of the GPL, and possibly a copy of the accompanying FAQ, which explains things in terms simple enough for non-lawyers or even just really confused lawyers to understand.
That's why there are teams of researchers working night and day to improve the state of tentacle modeling.
If you have what it takes to advance the state of the art there could be a big government grant and a PhD in it for you.
The other one is easily tricked by slanted survey questions posed by a company with a vested interest in selling security products designed to prevent snooping.
"Have you ever, in the course of your work, sought out or been exposed to confidential information which you were not supposed to see? Examples would include personal files, documents or misdirected mail."
"I don't look at anyone else's files, but as the postmaster for our domain I personally receive every bounced email and those sometimes contain information which should have been kept confidential. I don't read any of it because that would be wrong, but it does wind up in my mailbox."
"Okay, we'll put you down for 'Snoops on his coworkers' then, and I'll have the rest of our sales team take your manager out for lunch to discuss this. Thanks!"
The effect. Say it back.
Eeeeeefect.
Now please look up the definitions of those two words and write them on the blackboard a hundred times before the start of Monday's class.
Yes indeed. Now what did that fellow from Verizon say his username was?
And the name of the network he was on? And who was he peering with again?
Ah, yes. <clickity-click>
Don't worry, there's still plenty of that available on the web.
Personally, I'm a big fan of the first law of thermodynamics. That's the one that says that the Universe doesn't pull energy out of its butt.
I'm sure that all of those laser printers are plugged in to an external source of electricity. It takes a lot of power to do that, and it all has to come from somewhere. If you had a big enough power supply you could get all the hydrogen you want out of water, but you won't get back any more energy than you put into it.
That's exactly it. If you convert a water molecule into its component atoms, you need to use energy to do that. That's exactly the same amount of energy that you get back by combining them into water again. Anyone who says that they can create a closed system in which water is broken apart and then recombined to produce excess energy with no other processes involved is lying. If you're getting excess energy from those two reactions, then it has to come from some third reaction which is going on.
Nobody is saying that it's not possible to design a car that runs on something other than gasoline, they're saying that the running a car which is powered _only_ by water, in the manner described, is impossible. If this car works at all it's because there is some other process involved which we aren't being told about, not because of some magical but hitherto unnoticed property of H2O.
Try getting yours from a source that doesn't also bring you "American Idol", "The Simpsons" and "Are You Smarter Than A 5th Grader?".
Um, it was their first day.
Actually, if you read the US Constitution you'll see that people already have the inalienable right to be antisocial retards. What you're proposing is taking that away.
And that is why anyone named Ronnie James is a shoe in for a Democratic seat in Ohio.
Given the choice between fifteen million CPU years spent breaking keys and about ten minutes of breaking fingers, it seems pretty clear which one is more efficient.
Is that I finally have a good reason to use the phrase "Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D'OH!)" in casual conversation.