AOL and MSN are the biggest providers. So they're going to make their home pages the default for their users. Plus, ie makes msn.com the default home page, or at least tries to.
I won't be happy until it can hold 8000 songs. That's the size of my current mp3 collections (all live recordings and my encoded CD collections.) I've stayed away from hard-drive based systems because I can't see constantly copying music to them. Of course, it's probably just as tedious to keep making new CD-RWs.
Since nobody else pointed this out, I will. This was suggested in an Episode (season 3) of the X-files. In the episode, a scientist theorized that explorations like a Mars expedition would be conducted by robots, and that creating robots to mimic insects was much more practical than making them mimic humans.
The episode further suggests that in fact this is how alien civilisations are exploring our planet.
Exploits are still made against products that Microsoft secured over a year ago. And indeed, microsoft gets exploited the most because they are used by the vast majority of non-technical users. Can you imagine what would happen if 90% of the computer-owning people used linux? Every single hole in the OS would not only be explioted, but you could count on it being a LOT less likely that the average-joe user would *ever* update his software to fix the hole
"The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct."
Where does it say that people are constitutionally required to fill out a census form? Perhaps I'm being too literal, but this seems to be directed at the Congress, not the people, on what they *have* to do.
Is it possible to patent things that others have been using for years? Those goes against every patent law I've seen. Basically to be patentable, you have to establish that it's *yours* and that nobody else has developed the technology simutaneously.
This isn't a security flaw (it was, about a year ago, but that flaw was patched). This is users who don't update their software. If linux was on all of these desktops, and a flaw showed up (they do) you can be sure that most users wouldn't ever fix this.
I know this because I have office XP, and Outlook won't even let me glance sideways at.js,.scr,.bat and other extensions of those types.
That's one nice thing about winXP. It defaults to the following update scheme "Hey stupid. I've done all the work, click this big flashy button and everything will be OK."
Microsoft makes some doozies, but there comes a point when there's nothing more a software vender can do to stem the idiocy of their users.
How would you (the slashdot community) suggest this could be stopped? Don't let script files do mass mailings? I happen to know that there are several beneficial applications of this. In fact, Outlook XP doesn't even let you do that... you have to confirm for every send, so they've basically taken that functionality away. How does linux solve this problem? Obviously it doesn't have attachements, but with GUIs and Ximian become more sophisticated, is it really that far off that you could run malicious code attached to an email?
thank God it's so easy to turn on a filter in outlook. This is really something you just can't blame MS for any more. They fixed this problem more than a year ago (remember Iluvyou?) I hate moronic people. Why are they allowed computers?
They post this drivel with no content, but not my post from the *same* website about selling the Moon.
Anywho, who really cares about this? It will go away when the winter games are over. It'll be amusing if it gets hacked. Probably, an anthrax scare or two (or 463) will get much more news attention.
Nerds do not care about the olympics. The olympics test how much Weight Gain 4000 a single person can consume and not have their liver fail (at least before the games.)
I still can't see why this was posted. This is a tiny network. Is it even critical? The games will still be playable if every single machine decides to melt.
Let's go back to our normal posts, mainly, 23 ways to bitch about MS.
No one seems to be taking to task that the big thing to worry about, that this is just a way to rope us in so that when Windows goes to a subscription service, they'll have an easy way to charge us. In fact, I didn't much mind using passport to log into sites... I mean, at worst, a hacker can read my hotmail account. However, when they started talking about web services and tying that into the OS, I knew I had to get away (I've since been working to get rid of my hotmail account and been moving to the mozilla browsers. I can't bring myself to use linux yet... I just don't like it as much as winXP.)
Granted, having to pay $10 a month to keep using our computer sounds insane, but for most users (who, btw, will already have their CC info stored with MS) they're probably not going to notice, and not know they have an alternative.
Indeed, if MS ties.NET soley to passport, that's yet another reason that no one will go with other solutions.
Will splitting up the company alleviate this? Probably not. I mean, AT&T was split up 20 years ago into a bunch of little companies. Now look at them. They own half the local service in the country, plus a bunch of cable companies.
Does anyone else find it disturbing that AOL has risen to be our defender against Microsoft. They can't be the hero. They've been evil *far* longer than Microsoft. And they actually hire intelligent people. I think the people that work at AOL must get paid minimum wage, because that's all they're worth.
Granted, AOL can't be entirely blamed for the idiocy of its user base (and there are smart people who have no other choice) but AOL is responsible for more landscape filling with their CD coasters than MS has been with their inflated OSs.
As of now, three sites I use utilize passport for authentication. I log into one, then I'm in all three. Ebay, Hotmail, and Expedia. Sure, this makes things a bit faster, but as other posters have pointed out, it also makes a single point of entry that hackers can focus in on. My university is going to a single-authentication scheme that actually seems to be pretty secure, but I wouldn't trust that to the whole internet.
The solution seems obvious. Expanding and integrating password tracking features into browsers. The w3c would be wise to set this down as a standard. This way, a user could store CC, mailing info, and passwords for *any* site they wanted. As of now, the best implementation of this is Mozilla (that i've seen) because it automatically fills in the form fields when you return to a page. (IE requires you to click on the field and choose from a dropdown box.) This to me gives the ease of single login (because in *nix, you have to log in, and in XP the default is to require each user to log in.) But, you don't have the problems of the passwords (or other personal information) stored at a website.
Heck, you could almost do this with cookies, at least for things like mailing address and cc info. This is where I think amazon failed. Why store CC and mailing information in a database on the web when you can just store it as a cookie?
Am I way off base on this, or does this actually make sense. This is how I manage my many different logins, but of course if uninstall/reinstall mozilla, I've got to retype it. It would be nice if this was actually a package on the browser, and I could save (and backup) this information, and be able to restore it, or even better, copy it over to another browser if I want.
and w3c already has a standard in place on how to present audio data so that deaf clients can use it (believe it or not, there are some websites that actually put useful information in sound files, such as companies copying over their phone-tree solutions.
This would mean you would need browsers, or specific derivations of them, that could read these standards, which is a software issue, and one that I don't think the open source community is going to push for very quickly. Indeed, the commercial demand for this seems pretty small, since for the most part, people can live without sound on the Net
Obviously, in-studio recording where you're not all in-studio is the "intended" application for this. However, I can see some practical uses for this in the live recording biz. Instead of piping everything through a soundboard, and then recording it, bands could instead have the music going to an on-site studio, that could get each instrument directly (and the audience) if you want it, editing and encoding the music right there, and perhaps having songs, or whole concerts, posted to the web that night.
It was designed and is primarily used as a government and academic research tool, just as the Internet was in days before the popularity of the WWW brought useful data transfer to its knees. At the Abilene/Internet 2 NOC (which is in the building next to mine) they're actually the Operations Center for several other nets that show promise as the "replacement" for the Internet, but Internet2 is probably not it.
Your comparison to "Silent Spring" is a pretty good one. We should note, however, that the chemical companies and the US government rallied *hard* against DDT studies that showed it was unsafe. It took something like 10 years for it to be declared unsafe for human exposure. The same goes for CFCs. Studies in the late 70s showed conclusively that they contributed to the ozone holes, but it wasn't until the late 80s that any real action was taken to require companies to lessen their use of them. Again, you had big companies fighting this tooth-and-nail.
The point is, these battles are always hard. The only thing this particular fight has going for it as that creators of content (coders, musicians, filmmakers) also have a vested interest in keeping their products from obscurity.
Gandalf tells the story to the Council of Elrond. He'll probably be seen, but only from far off, or in very small movement shots. He has to move (and talk) a LOT in the second and third films.
I imagine he should look as good as FF: Spirits within, and since he's practically non-human looking, it shouldn't be too hard to pull off.
Slashdot Mirror
AOL and MSN are the biggest providers. So they're going to make their home pages the default for their users. Plus, ie makes msn.com the default home page, or at least tries to.
when was microsoft allowed to destroy email by removing the bounce command?
I won't be happy until it can hold 8000 songs. That's the size of my current mp3 collections (all live recordings and my encoded CD collections.) I've stayed away from hard-drive based systems because I can't see constantly copying music to them. Of course, it's probably just as tedious to keep making new CD-RWs.
Since nobody else pointed this out, I will. This was suggested in an Episode (season 3) of the X-files. In the episode, a scientist theorized that explorations like a Mars expedition would be conducted by robots, and that creating robots to mimic insects was much more practical than making them mimic humans.
The episode further suggests that in fact this is how alien civilisations are exploring our planet.
doesnt' mean they're the least secure.
Exploits are still made against products that Microsoft secured over a year ago. And indeed, microsoft gets exploited the most because they are used by the vast majority of non-technical users. Can you imagine what would happen if 90% of the computer-owning people used linux? Every single hole in the OS would not only be explioted, but you could count on it being a LOT less likely that the average-joe user would *ever* update his software to fix the hole
Lucky linux users didn't have to sit through that 2 minutes of useless tripe.
At least it'll keep us from sitting through 90 minutes of George Lucas secretly singing "Money money money"
Mine says (In article 1, section 2)
"The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct."
Where does it say that people are constitutionally required to fill out a census form? Perhaps I'm being too literal, but this seems to be directed at the Congress, not the people, on what they *have* to do.
that's *classified*.
;)
Is it possible to patent things that others have been using for years? Those goes against every patent law I've seen. Basically to be patentable, you have to establish that it's *yours* and that nobody else has developed the technology simutaneously.
How did Tivo let them get away with this.
Unlike being shackled with outlook as some of us are, no one has to use mirc. And no one should.
This isn't a security flaw (it was, about a year ago, but that flaw was patched). This is users who don't update their software. If linux was on all of these desktops, and a flaw showed up (they do) you can be sure that most users wouldn't ever fix this.
.js, .scr, .bat and other extensions of those types.
I know this because I have office XP, and Outlook won't even let me glance sideways at
That's one nice thing about winXP. It defaults to the following update scheme "Hey stupid. I've done all the work, click this big flashy button and everything will be OK."
Microsoft makes some doozies, but there comes a point when there's nothing more a software vender can do to stem the idiocy of their users.
How would you (the slashdot community) suggest this could be stopped? Don't let script files do mass mailings? I happen to know that there are several beneficial applications of this. In fact, Outlook XP doesn't even let you do that... you have to confirm for every send, so they've basically taken that functionality away. How does linux solve this problem? Obviously it doesn't have attachements, but with GUIs and Ximian become more sophisticated, is it really that far off that you could run malicious code attached to an email?
No comments from the peanut gallery.
On a local address book of 20k exchange users.
thank God it's so easy to turn on a filter in outlook. This is really something you just can't blame MS for any more. They fixed this problem more than a year ago (remember Iluvyou?) I hate moronic people. Why are they allowed computers?
They post this drivel with no content, but not my post from the *same* website about selling the Moon.
Anywho, who really cares about this? It will go away when the winter games are over. It'll be amusing if it gets hacked. Probably, an anthrax scare or two (or 463) will get much more news attention.
Nerds do not care about the olympics. The olympics test how much Weight Gain 4000 a single person can consume and not have their liver fail (at least before the games.)
I still can't see why this was posted. This is a tiny network. Is it even critical? The games will still be playable if every single machine decides to melt.
Let's go back to our normal posts, mainly, 23 ways to bitch about MS.
No one seems to be taking to task that the big thing to worry about, that this is just a way to rope us in so that when Windows goes to a subscription service, they'll have an easy way to charge us. In fact, I didn't much mind using passport to log into sites... I mean, at worst, a hacker can read my hotmail account. However, when they started talking about web services and tying that into the OS, I knew I had to get away (I've since been working to get rid of my hotmail account and been moving to the mozilla browsers. I can't bring myself to use linux yet... I just don't like it as much as winXP.)
.NET soley to passport, that's yet another reason that no one will go with other solutions.
Granted, having to pay $10 a month to keep using our computer sounds insane, but for most users (who, btw, will already have their CC info stored with MS) they're probably not going to notice, and not know they have an alternative.
Indeed, if MS ties
Will splitting up the company alleviate this? Probably not. I mean, AT&T was split up 20 years ago into a bunch of little companies. Now look at them. They own half the local service in the country, plus a bunch of cable companies.
Does anyone else find it disturbing that AOL has risen to be our defender against Microsoft. They can't be the hero. They've been evil *far* longer than Microsoft. And they actually hire intelligent people. I think the people that work at AOL must get paid minimum wage, because that's all they're worth.
Granted, AOL can't be entirely blamed for the idiocy of its user base (and there are smart people who have no other choice) but AOL is responsible for more landscape filling with their CD coasters than MS has been with their inflated OSs.
As of now, three sites I use utilize passport for authentication. I log into one, then I'm in all three. Ebay, Hotmail, and Expedia. Sure, this makes things a bit faster, but as other posters have pointed out, it also makes a single point of entry that hackers can focus in on. My university is going to a single-authentication scheme that actually seems to be pretty secure, but I wouldn't trust that to the whole internet.
The solution seems obvious. Expanding and integrating password tracking features into browsers. The w3c would be wise to set this down as a standard. This way, a user could store CC, mailing info, and passwords for *any* site they wanted. As of now, the best implementation of this is Mozilla (that i've seen) because it automatically fills in the form fields when you return to a page. (IE requires you to click on the field and choose from a dropdown box.) This to me gives the ease of single login (because in *nix, you have to log in, and in XP the default is to require each user to log in.) But, you don't have the problems of the passwords (or other personal information) stored at a website.
Heck, you could almost do this with cookies, at least for things like mailing address and cc info. This is where I think amazon failed. Why store CC and mailing information in a database on the web when you can just store it as a cookie?
Am I way off base on this, or does this actually make sense. This is how I manage my many different logins, but of course if uninstall/reinstall mozilla, I've got to retype it. It would be nice if this was actually a package on the browser, and I could save (and backup) this information, and be able to restore it, or even better, copy it over to another browser if I want.
and w3c already has a standard in place on how to present audio data so that deaf clients can use it (believe it or not, there are some websites that actually put useful information in sound files, such as companies copying over their phone-tree solutions.
This would mean you would need browsers, or specific derivations of them, that could read these standards, which is a software issue, and one that I don't think the open source community is going to push for very quickly. Indeed, the commercial demand for this seems pretty small, since for the most part, people can live without sound on the Net
1. Ted Nugent "fans" (the term is highly suspect) are already deaf.
2. If this proposed incident did actually damage or kill 200 of his "fans," wouldn't that decimate his fan base by 100%?
3. Hopefully, the buffalo (or is it a bison?) that he parades around shamelessly will finally die and free from its miserable life.
Obviously, in-studio recording where you're not all in-studio is the "intended" application for this. However, I can see some practical uses for this in the live recording biz. Instead of piping everything through a soundboard, and then recording it, bands could instead have the music going to an on-site studio, that could get each instrument directly (and the audience) if you want it, editing and encoding the music right there, and perhaps having songs, or whole concerts, posted to the web that night.
Hardly.
It was designed and is primarily used as a government and academic research tool, just as the Internet was in days before the popularity of the WWW brought useful data transfer to its knees. At the Abilene/Internet 2 NOC (which is in the building next to mine) they're actually the Operations Center for several other nets that show promise as the "replacement" for the Internet, but Internet2 is probably not it.
Your comparison to "Silent Spring" is a pretty good one. We should note, however, that the chemical companies and the US government rallied *hard* against DDT studies that showed it was unsafe. It took something like 10 years for it to be declared unsafe for human exposure. The same goes for CFCs. Studies in the late 70s showed conclusively that they contributed to the ozone holes, but it wasn't until the late 80s that any real action was taken to require companies to lessen their use of them. Again, you had big companies fighting this tooth-and-nail.
The point is, these battles are always hard. The only thing this particular fight has going for it as that creators of content (coders, musicians, filmmakers) also have a vested interest in keeping their products from obscurity.
No one thinks Java is clean and orderly. Or useful.
;)
They're wonderful keys that allow you to select more than one message at time. much faster than hitting "s " 200 times.
Gandalf tells the story to the Council of Elrond. He'll probably be seen, but only from far off, or in very small movement shots. He has to move (and talk) a LOT in the second and third films.
I imagine he should look as good as FF: Spirits within, and since he's practically non-human looking, it shouldn't be too hard to pull off.
It's much easier to blather on mindlessly about Star Wars, since it has no real substance behind it. Tolkien is *way* too deep for /.