You should have to be a citizen to vote. Just because you pay taxes and respect local laws doesn't give you the right to vote.
For example, say I go on vacation/holiday to England. While I am living in England on my vacation/holiday I pay taxes and respect the local laws. Does that mean I should be allowed to vote there? No. Citizenship is a way of becoming a part of a nation and with that you are given more rights such as the right to vote.
Is that the average _individual_ American income or the combined household income?
I think 30% - 30% is WAY too high to pay. Where is all my money going? Why should I have to have a humbler home for my wife and children to pay for social health care like medicare/medicade/whatever which I don't need or use?
I think a flat tax rate of 10% - 15% is the best way to go. You pay 10% - 15% and do not get any of it back. The state and feds can split that 50-50 and then leave us alone. A 10% - 15% flat tax would be the only fair solution since 15% is 15% wheather you make $30,000 a year or $100,000 a year. If you make more, you are paing more, but it is still 15%.
Basically I want to know if they want a sliding tax bracket and what is the maximum percentage of income the Green party thinks a American should pay.
I also think that $30,000 figure is old and the average salary is closer to $35,000 - $38,000. Also, many American families have two incomes and the average American household income should be close to $60,000. My salary is in that $75,000 dollar range and I want to know if the Green party's "answers to all problems" it to try and take 40% or more of my money away for all their social programs.
These social programs and high taxes is why I lean toward the Libertarian party, though I agree with some things in the Green party such as environmental issues, just not the crazy taxation. I am taxed enough as it is, leave my money alone please : )
Where do you stand on racism laws? From watching your debate it appears as if the Green Party feels that racism is when a white person is racist against a black person or when a male is racist against a female. According to dictionary.com
rac-ism
1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
Wouldn't this mean that racism is really one race thinking they are superior to others and not just white vs. black? Exactly how would creating laws that favor blacks or women end racism?
I recently watched your very good and very friendly debate between Libertarian candidate Michael Badnarik. One issue you brought up was universal health care that taxpayer would pay for. If you are elected president, what do you think is a fair tax percentage for the average American, 10%, 20%, 30%? If you say it depends on how much you make, then for the sake of this question, say I make $75,000 a year. What percentage would a Green party president expect an average American making $75,000 a year pay to support all these social plans?
I have never worked with Oblix, so I cannot comment. We had a Netegrity support person come out, and you should see the bill. Who do you think paid for the plane, hotel, food, toothbrush and just about anything else? We did. We pay an annual support contract, you would think that having someone come out would be included in those costs, but they are not. Bigger doesn't always mean better.
I personally don't care who a company sends out for onsite support as long and they know what they are doing and gets the job done.
We provide personal content to all our users. However they have to authenticate the first time with a Netegrity policy server over SSL. Having a few web apps determine how to authenticate a user is not a big deal. However when you have hundreds if not a few thousand corporate apps delivered over the web (as we do), it makes much more sense to use some type of corporate authentication system. Also, I never said it is bad to do this. I said it is bad the way IE does it. Firefox can do it as well. However, Firefox requires a white-list of servers that it will silently send credentials to. IE uses "zones" and those zones have been exploited.
Kerberos over SPNEGO is not bad, Kerveros was developed at MIT, though I don't know how much MS changed their implementation to be non-standards compliant. What I don't like is that MS will silently downgrade from a PNEGO/Kerberos token (if the user is not logged onto a domain, etc) to NTLMv2 or NTLMv1. NTLMv1 is very bad and easily crackable and should never be silently downgraded to.
You are correct. Most of our web applications on our intranet use the default policy that requires them to use a Netegrity form over SSL the first time they try to get to a protected resource (we use this on Linux Apache servers and IIS servers). Some special applications with more sensitive information use a different policy and even if a user authenticated against one of the general applications, they are forced to authenticate again.
Netegrity is not a bad product, though their support is expensive and has been pretty sucky from my experience. Also, Netegrity's Apache support has not been keeping up.
I don't know if you use Apache, if you do, you might want to check Oblix. Oblix and Netegrity both seem to do the same things with policies. See which one costs less and works in your current environment and more importantly, your future environment. We are basically stuck with Netegrity because it would cost to much to redo everything. We have been adding Apache servers on Linux and Solaris to handle J2EE and our PeopleSoft portal, and Netegrity's support for Apache has not been anything to write home about. We do have Netegrity working with Apache. However, the client plugin that is used with a web server such as Apache or IIS is specific to the Netegrity policy server. The Netegrity client piece for our current Netegrity policy server only supports a very old Apache 1.3.27 and we want to use Apache 2.x. When we upgrade our policy servers we can then upgrade our Apache Netegrity clients, however it is not something you can do in 1 hour during business times.
We had issues with Netegrity being behind a load balancer. The only solution from Netegrity was to upgrade the Netegrity client which would require an upgrade to the Netegrity policy servers, and upgrade to our BEA Weblogic servers and an upgrade to our Apache servers (we want to upgrade Apache though). We did look at switch from Netegrity, however the costs of new license for a new product and the cost to switch tons of servers and re-test was too much. So we just had to suck it up and stick with Netegrity. If doing it again, I know I would really push to do a deeper evaluation of copmeting products that support Apache, IIS and a J2EE server like Bea Weblogic or Oracle 9iAS.
blancolioni, is right on the money. Many people falsely believe that if software patents go away, all innovative and novel ideas go away. That is just rubbish. IMO, without software patents, innovation will take off like a bat out of h-e-double-hockey-sticks. People and companies will always innovate because there is the incentive to being the first to market, having the better solution or the more cost effective solution. There are unlimited ways for a company or individual to differentiate their work. The only things currently holding back that unlimited differentiation are software patents and costly litigation over software patents.
It is called copyright and prevents me from taking your work. We do not need anything more then that with software.
Could I go out and patent addition, subtraction, multiplication and division? NO. Why, because it would encumber the building blocks of mathematics. However, this is exactly what has happened with software patents in the USA. Most of the basic and especially trivial building blocks of software have been taken and held ransom by big corporations. So even if I as a programmer create something new and innovative, the big patent holders will have some basic building blocks of my software creation patented and can hold it ransom for money.
This is also the reason why you can not get a patent on a recipe. Imagine if I were allowed to get a patent on adding salt and pepper to a recipe. I would be rich. I could patent so many ingredients that it would make a chefs job incredibly hard if not impossible. Yet as programmers we are supposed to sit back and let big corporations take away all of our fundamental building blocks of software creation. It is sickening to me.
The driving force behind software patents is not to expand the public domain and create novel and innovative creations. The driving force is BIG MONEY. Big money from big corporations going into the hands of politicians to get laws passed to remove copetition and further fill the coffers of big corporate entities.
Outlook 2003 uses the same broken "Security zones" that IE uses. There have been exploits around that then can trick IE and things that use IE like Outlook 2003 to switch to the local intranet zone which does not have much security around it.
So if some one from your company sends you an HTML email with a broken JPG then outlook 2003 will show it. If someone in your address book sends you an HTML email with images, then Outlook 2003 will show it. If someone in your address book or on your corporate network gets a virus that sends out emails and you get one with this expliot, Outlook 2003 will show it. I think it is funny that it has taken MS this many _years_ to make their mailers not show images or run attachments by default.
As far as this JPG exploit, I wont come down hard on MS since flaws will happen in software. However, I do come down hard on MS for poor design choices like showing images and running apps by default that have been the normal operation of MS software for years. There are millions of MS Windows users that are not using the latest versions of MS Office or Outlook. It is pretty sad that these users will have to pay hundreds of dollars to upgrade to not have a mailer that does not do stupid things by default.
See my post here. Firefox will let you sign in without prompting, however it only allows it to happen for a white-list of servers. IE does it by internet zones which is has shown to be a bad concept. The post I linked tells you how to turn it on so Firefox will not prompt you for NTLM by doing it manually or pushing out a prefs.js file to all user profiles.
One other thing I forgot to add. Firefox/Mozilla will just send your credentials without prompting you. However you can make Firefox/Mozilla do this for server or proxys on your intranet. Just close Firefox/Mozilla and add this line to your users prefs.js file in their profile.
Then Firefox will not prompt for those servers and will prompt for a username/password for any other server. Even if Firefox prompts, a user can still click on "remember password" so they just have to hit OK next time. However, if you want it to be like IE an not prompt, just push out the above user_pref to your users. You can also do this manually for your own browser by going to about:config and filter for ntml and then enter the sites into network.automatic-ntlm-auth.trusted-uris.
Single sign-on has been working with Firefox/Mozilla for the past few versions. Their implementation is cross-platform which means it works in Linux, Mac, Windows, Solaris, etc. The only difference is that it does not take your MS Windows login info and just send it. It will prompt you for a username/password and give you an option to remember it so you do not need to enter it again.
While it may seem handy to have IE just log you in to intranet site, it is not very secure. If a user leaves his/her desk without locking or signing out, any user can fire up a browser and get to that users information. Where I work all our intranet apps/sites are blocked by Netegrity and a user is stopped once per session by a Netegrity sign-on form over SSL so we can be certain that a user is who they say they are. This works with any browser, takes about 2 seconds and is much better then having IE just send credentials that have not been verified since a user last logged into their desktop.
This is the same problem with Outlook IMO. Outlook just assumes that I am the person that logged into the desktop. While that _should_ always be the case, there are bad employees from time to time. IE and Outlook should at least prompt for the current password the first time it is about to send the Windows authentication credentials.
Most corporate work places are very insecure. Anybody that can get into the building can usually find a desktop and have a ball. I am not suggesting to lock down a corporate workplace to where it lowers productivity, I am just suggesting a few simple things that barely add any time to a task and can really help with security. That is why we make our corporate intranet users authenticate with a Netegrity form over SSL at the start of a session and every hour during that session. Our corporate PeopleSoft portal and PeopleSoft HR systems expose tons of personal and financial information which users like. However, we want to be sure that a user is who they say they are. Asking for a username/password once an hour is not full-proof, but it is much better then letting a user just fire up IE and start clicking.
We use Netegrity as well. However we went against the single sign-on thing since it was less secure. Our users get stopped by a Netegrity form and enter their username password and then can go to any corporate intranet web app without signing in again until they close their browser or the session expires (about every hour). Firefox/Mozilla already support Windows authentication for single sign-on. It prompts a user for their name and password instead of just silently sending it. The user can even check a "remember password/username" option so they don't have to enter it again. Some management tried to get the admins to turn on windows authentication with Netegrity but the admins and we programmers stood our ground and said how bad an idea it was. Our users can get to all types of personal information and personal financial information on our corporate intranet. It is really dumb to not authenticate a user at least once per session. If a user walked away from their desktop without locking it (happens all the time), anyone could walk up to their box and get to all their personal data if we used just windows authentication. We do have a policy that locks a desktop after 15 minutes, however that is still a 15 minute windows for someone to do get to someone elses personal and financial data.
Tell your management to turn off the Netegrity/windows authentication and use Netegrity form authentiation over SSL. Also, there is no reason why your users cannot user Firefox/Mozilla since it has had cross-platform support for Windows authentication for a few versions now.
The Creative has a nice browser feature once you install the drivers on your computer
Do you have to install drivers to get to the hard drive on the player? It doesn't just mount as a mass-storage USB device? If it needs drivers, it would not be an option to me. I want a player I can just plugin and get to the hard drive so I can use in on MS Windows and Linux.
Exactly how am I ripping off an artist? A legal service is being offered to me and I can only assume that people are being paid correctly. Also, if I were a musician I would not put my self and my works in a position where I had to give up my rights to my own creation.
I reward musicians by going to concerts. That is where they make their money. Unfortuately, most artists have sold out to the RIAA to become "rich and famous".
Also, the RIAA take away an artists copyright and then almost always give the artist a _lower_ cut of the profits then the RIAA gets. That is pretty sickening to me. In the end the only people to blame are the artists who let their talents be whored out. If all artists stood their ground and did not give up their copyrights, the music world would be much different.
If I were an artist I would have no problem with selling a digital _copy_ of my work for $0.02 - $0.05 each. I would be touring to make the big bucks and have a steady revenue stream from selling digital copies for almost no cost.
Talent will always be awared well. If you want to be an RIAA groupie and believe their FUD about the need to charge so much for a stinkin digital _copy_ then that is your choice. I will not beleive that FUD. The reason the RIAA wants to charge so much per digital copy is because those middle-men (who contribute nothing to the artistice process) want to get their fat-cat salaries. The RIAA puts their hand into the pie and take the _majority_ of profits and do creative accounting to show how little is left over for the artists. Then they give us the song-n-dance about the poor artists. Eliminate the RIAA and artists would make much more money, get the majority of the copensation and music would cost much less.
is still far better. Tons of songs and the price cannot be beat. Encode in the format that _you_ want at the bitrate that _you_ want with no DRM junk. For $25 USD you get 2.5 Gb of download. If you encoded to say 160kbs OGG, you can get hundreds of songs for that price. So far I have downloaded 50 songs and it cost me $2.16 USD. No "FairPlay" or MS DRM stopping me from putting the songs on my older MP3 player. No burning to CD then ripping to OGG/MP3.
The USA needs a service like this with no DRM. Even if the price was doubled to $25 for 1 GB of download, it would still dominate. The RIAA should be thinking wholesale like Walmart, Home Depot and Lowes. Instead of selling one song for a buck, sell 20 songs for $0.05. It doesn't cost anything to resell the song since it is just stored as a file. No duplication or media costs. If a popular song was downloaded 10 million times at $0.05 that would be $500,000! Not bad for just one song. Release this type of service to the world an you could easily get 100 million downlooads for a song, that 5 million bucks off of just one song.
I'm just saying that's not 100% the case - if people ask you to recommend the best OS for their particular purpose, you always say "Linux!", then you've got a problem.
Nope, I never said that. We have more MS Windows servers where I work then Linux/Solaris servers.
And Evolution can connect to Exchange server so that the customers don't even have to use MS Outlook.
Evolution using the now open Ximian/Novell connector can only connect to MS Exchange 2000/2003 servers that have Outlook Web Access turned on (I use it where I work). Evolution cannot talk to MS Exchange directly like an MS Outlook client can since MS Exchange uses a proprietary protocol. I think, though I am not sure, that you could turn on some type of IMAP support in MS Exchange and have Evolution use that.
The shutdown is not a crash but a scheduled event to bring the servers down to flush data.
That is MS PHB speek to "assure" other PHB's that it was not MS's fault. What _modern_ server OS needs to reboot to flush freakin data!
Why do you think technical details are never released in these types of press releases?
The reboot was to reset the logic flaw in the MS system timer. Read my post here on it. It has affected other MS made apps on MS Windows 2000 servers. So if MS's programmers get affected by it, you can expect non-MS employeed programmers to get affected too since they do not have the same level of access to the proprietary OS.
Funny, no where in the doc for GetTickCount() does it say it is deprecated and not to use it. The only thing it does say is "If you need a higher resolution timer, use a multimedia timer or a high-resolution timer." I don't know what the program needs since I did not write it nor have I seen the code. Maybe they didn't need a high-res timer and wanted a tick count for how long the system has been up? I don't think that is too much to ask from on OS.
The GetSystemTimeAsFileTime() function retrieves the current system date and time. The information is in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) format. It doesn't tell you how long the system has been up.
Oh, and if MS did not think this is a problem why did they fix it in a WinNT service pack? Also, right in that link MS says
Microsoft has confirmed that
this is a problem in Windows NT 4.0 and Windows NT Server 4.0, Terminal Server Edition. This problem was first corrected in Windows NT 4.0 Service Pack 4.0 and Windows NT Server 4.0, Terminal Server Edition Service Pack 4.
MS also didn't seem to fix it in Win2000 Server and their own engineers got hurt by it, specifically with Rpcss.exe which according to MS
SYMPTOMS
The Rpcss.exe process consumes 60 percent or more of CPU time, and system performance and network performance are affected. This symptom typically occurs 49.7 days after the server is started.
CAUSE
This problem occurs because a call to the GetTickCount timer function causes the function to overflow 49.7 days after the server is started.
If GetTickCount is "deprecated" as you state, why in the world is MS's own programmers using it in rpcss.exe? According to this site
rpcss.exe is an executable of Microsoft Windows Opearting System. It is reponsible for Remote Procedure Call services on the local machine. These are public services available to the local network.
This program is important for the stable and secure running of your computer and should not be terminated.
Still not convinced and want to appologize for MS? Well here are some more of MS's software that are affected by it in Windows 2000 servers (what this FAA project is using).
Print Spooler Stops Scheduling Print Jobs
The Print Spooler service may stop scheduling print jobs to specific Simple Port Monitor (SPM) ports. Although incoming jobs are queuing into the spooler, print jobs may not start. Note that this symptom
occurs 49.7 days after you start the Print Spooler service.
There are a bunch of MS apps affected by this logic flaw that has been passed from version to version of MS OSes. If this flaw affected all these MS developers who have far more access to proprietary docs, I don't see how other developers would not stumble over it as well since they do not have access to the proprietary OS.
Not likely. I have worked at 3 fortune 500 companies and MS _always_ have their cronies around at all 3 to help influence decisions, especially for bigger purchases or where a non-MS competitor was also being looked at. A big switch like this is like pay-day for MS. I am sure they had some of their techs and PHB cronies there.
Sure you could blame the poor tech dude. However, humans make mistakes far more often then well written software. They should have know that it _would_ happen. The real meat of the problem is that they had to come up with this kludge to remember to reboot at least ever 30 days because of a logic error in MS software that MS _repeated_ from Win95. MS stored the system time in milliseconds in a 32-bit int. That gives about 49.7 days until it loops. What a coincidence. The FAA is to blame because their PHB's were suckered into using MS for a _very_ critical system. Just imagine what would have happened if planes had crashed into each other. 800+ planes delayed, thousands of unhappy customers and what does MS say? "We cannot comment at this time".
It is MS's software fault. It is the FAA's fault for getting suckered into using MS software for such a critical system (I have no problem if a company wants to use MS software for non-critical corporate tasks like desktops etc). And lest of all the poor tech guys fault for not rebooting.
It's somebody else's fault and Microsoft is blameless in this matter.
Wow, nothing like being an MS apologist. MS had this same logic flaw in Win95 and they did it again in their WinNT based systems. They stuck the system time in milliseconds in a 32-bit int. It basically gives about 49.7 days. What a coincedence. This app was probably relying on the system timer when MS's logic flaw caused the issues.
Slashdot Mirror
For example, say I go on vacation/holiday to England. While I am living in England on my vacation/holiday I pay taxes and respect the local laws. Does that mean I should be allowed to vote there? No. Citizenship is a way of becoming a part of a nation and with that you are given more rights such as the right to vote.
I think 30% - 30% is WAY too high to pay. Where is all my money going? Why should I have to have a humbler home for my wife and children to pay for social health care like medicare/medicade/whatever which I don't need or use?
I think a flat tax rate of 10% - 15% is the best way to go. You pay 10% - 15% and do not get any of it back. The state and feds can split that 50-50 and then leave us alone. A 10% - 15% flat tax would be the only fair solution since 15% is 15% wheather you make $30,000 a year or $100,000 a year. If you make more, you are paing more, but it is still 15%.
I also think that $30,000 figure is old and the average salary is closer to $35,000 - $38,000. Also, many American families have two incomes and the average American household income should be close to $60,000. My salary is in that $75,000 dollar range and I want to know if the Green party's "answers to all problems" it to try and take 40% or more of my money away for all their social programs.
These social programs and high taxes is why I lean toward the Libertarian party, though I agree with some things in the Green party such as environmental issues, just not the crazy taxation. I am taxed enough as it is, leave my money alone please : )
I recently watched your very good and very friendly debate between Libertarian candidate Michael Badnarik. One issue you brought up was universal health care that taxpayer would pay for. If you are elected president, what do you think is a fair tax percentage for the average American, 10%, 20%, 30%? If you say it depends on how much you make, then for the sake of this question, say I make $75,000 a year. What percentage would a Green party president expect an average American making $75,000 a year pay to support all these social plans?
I personally don't care who a company sends out for onsite support as long and they know what they are doing and gets the job done.
Kerberos over SPNEGO is not bad, Kerveros was developed at MIT, though I don't know how much MS changed their implementation to be non-standards compliant. What I don't like is that MS will silently downgrade from a PNEGO/Kerberos token (if the user is not logged onto a domain, etc) to NTLMv2 or NTLMv1. NTLMv1 is very bad and easily crackable and should never be silently downgraded to.
Netegrity is not a bad product, though their support is expensive and has been pretty sucky from my experience. Also, Netegrity's Apache support has not been keeping up.
I don't know if you use Apache, if you do, you might want to check Oblix. Oblix and Netegrity both seem to do the same things with policies. See which one costs less and works in your current environment and more importantly, your future environment. We are basically stuck with Netegrity because it would cost to much to redo everything. We have been adding Apache servers on Linux and Solaris to handle J2EE and our PeopleSoft portal, and Netegrity's support for Apache has not been anything to write home about. We do have Netegrity working with Apache. However, the client plugin that is used with a web server such as Apache or IIS is specific to the Netegrity policy server. The Netegrity client piece for our current Netegrity policy server only supports a very old Apache 1.3.27 and we want to use Apache 2.x. When we upgrade our policy servers we can then upgrade our Apache Netegrity clients, however it is not something you can do in 1 hour during business times.
We had issues with Netegrity being behind a load balancer. The only solution from Netegrity was to upgrade the Netegrity client which would require an upgrade to the Netegrity policy servers, and upgrade to our BEA Weblogic servers and an upgrade to our Apache servers (we want to upgrade Apache though). We did look at switch from Netegrity, however the costs of new license for a new product and the cost to switch tons of servers and re-test was too much. So we just had to suck it up and stick with Netegrity. If doing it again, I know I would really push to do a deeper evaluation of copmeting products that support Apache, IIS and a J2EE server like Bea Weblogic or Oracle 9iAS.
blancolioni, is right on the money. Many people falsely believe that if software patents go away, all innovative and novel ideas go away. That is just rubbish. IMO, without software patents, innovation will take off like a bat out of h-e-double-hockey-sticks. People and companies will always innovate because there is the incentive to being the first to market, having the better solution or the more cost effective solution. There are unlimited ways for a company or individual to differentiate their work. The only things currently holding back that unlimited differentiation are software patents and costly litigation over software patents.
Could I go out and patent addition, subtraction, multiplication and division? NO. Why, because it would encumber the building blocks of mathematics. However, this is exactly what has happened with software patents in the USA. Most of the basic and especially trivial building blocks of software have been taken and held ransom by big corporations. So even if I as a programmer create something new and innovative, the big patent holders will have some basic building blocks of my software creation patented and can hold it ransom for money.
This is also the reason why you can not get a patent on a recipe. Imagine if I were allowed to get a patent on adding salt and pepper to a recipe. I would be rich. I could patent so many ingredients that it would make a chefs job incredibly hard if not impossible. Yet as programmers we are supposed to sit back and let big corporations take away all of our fundamental building blocks of software creation. It is sickening to me.
The driving force behind software patents is not to expand the public domain and create novel and innovative creations. The driving force is BIG MONEY. Big money from big corporations going into the hands of politicians to get laws passed to remove copetition and further fill the coffers of big corporate entities.
So if some one from your company sends you an HTML email with a broken JPG then outlook 2003 will show it. If someone in your address book sends you an HTML email with images, then Outlook 2003 will show it. If someone in your address book or on your corporate network gets a virus that sends out emails and you get one with this expliot, Outlook 2003 will show it. I think it is funny that it has taken MS this many _years_ to make their mailers not show images or run attachments by default.
As far as this JPG exploit, I wont come down hard on MS since flaws will happen in software. However, I do come down hard on MS for poor design choices like showing images and running apps by default that have been the normal operation of MS software for years. There are millions of MS Windows users that are not using the latest versions of MS Office or Outlook. It is pretty sad that these users will have to pay hundreds of dollars to upgrade to not have a mailer that does not do stupid things by default.
See my post here. Firefox will let you sign in without prompting, however it only allows it to happen for a white-list of servers. IE does it by internet zones which is has shown to be a bad concept. The post I linked tells you how to turn it on so Firefox will not prompt you for NTLM by doing it manually or pushing out a prefs.js file to all user profiles.
While it may seem handy to have IE just log you in to intranet site, it is not very secure. If a user leaves his/her desk without locking or signing out, any user can fire up a browser and get to that users information. Where I work all our intranet apps/sites are blocked by Netegrity and a user is stopped once per session by a Netegrity sign-on form over SSL so we can be certain that a user is who they say they are. This works with any browser, takes about 2 seconds and is much better then having IE just send credentials that have not been verified since a user last logged into their desktop.
This is the same problem with Outlook IMO. Outlook just assumes that I am the person that logged into the desktop. While that _should_ always be the case, there are bad employees from time to time. IE and Outlook should at least prompt for the current password the first time it is about to send the Windows authentication credentials.
Most corporate work places are very insecure. Anybody that can get into the building can usually find a desktop and have a ball. I am not suggesting to lock down a corporate workplace to where it lowers productivity, I am just suggesting a few simple things that barely add any time to a task and can really help with security. That is why we make our corporate intranet users authenticate with a Netegrity form over SSL at the start of a session and every hour during that session. Our corporate PeopleSoft portal and PeopleSoft HR systems expose tons of personal and financial information which users like. However, we want to be sure that a user is who they say they are. Asking for a username/password once an hour is not full-proof, but it is much better then letting a user just fire up IE and start clicking.
Tell your management to turn off the Netegrity/windows authentication and use Netegrity form authentiation over SSL. Also, there is no reason why your users cannot user Firefox/Mozilla since it has had cross-platform support for Windows authentication for a few versions now.
I reward musicians by going to concerts. That is where they make their money. Unfortuately, most artists have sold out to the RIAA to become "rich and famous".
Also, the RIAA take away an artists copyright and then almost always give the artist a _lower_ cut of the profits then the RIAA gets. That is pretty sickening to me. In the end the only people to blame are the artists who let their talents be whored out. If all artists stood their ground and did not give up their copyrights, the music world would be much different.
If I were an artist I would have no problem with selling a digital _copy_ of my work for $0.02 - $0.05 each. I would be touring to make the big bucks and have a steady revenue stream from selling digital copies for almost no cost.
Talent will always be awared well. If you want to be an RIAA groupie and believe their FUD about the need to charge so much for a stinkin digital _copy_ then that is your choice. I will not beleive that FUD. The reason the RIAA wants to charge so much per digital copy is because those middle-men (who contribute nothing to the artistice process) want to get their fat-cat salaries. The RIAA puts their hand into the pie and take the _majority_ of profits and do creative accounting to show how little is left over for the artists. Then they give us the song-n-dance about the poor artists. Eliminate the RIAA and artists would make much more money, get the majority of the copensation and music would cost much less.
The USA needs a service like this with no DRM. Even if the price was doubled to $25 for 1 GB of download, it would still dominate. The RIAA should be thinking wholesale like Walmart, Home Depot and Lowes. Instead of selling one song for a buck, sell 20 songs for $0.05. It doesn't cost anything to resell the song since it is just stored as a file. No duplication or media costs. If a popular song was downloaded 10 million times at $0.05 that would be $500,000! Not bad for just one song. Release this type of service to the world an you could easily get 100 million downlooads for a song, that 5 million bucks off of just one song.
It _still_ doesn't say it is deprecated and it is funny that a bunch of apps from MS used GetTickCount() and got hit by the logic flaw. Also, HKEY_PERFORMANCE_DATA is not supported on Win9x, so GetTickCount() can be used instead for apps that need to run on Win9x and WinNT.
The reboot was to reset the logic flaw in the MS system timer. Read my post here on it. It has affected other MS made apps on MS Windows 2000 servers. So if MS's programmers get affected by it, you can expect non-MS employeed programmers to get affected too since they do not have the same level of access to the proprietary OS.
The GetSystemTimeAsFileTime() function retrieves the current system date and time. The information is in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) format. It doesn't tell you how long the system has been up.
Oh, and if MS did not think this is a problem why did they fix it in a WinNT service pack? Also, right in that link MS says
MS also didn't seem to fix it in Win2000 Server and their own engineers got hurt by it, specifically with Rpcss.exe which according to MS
If GetTickCount is "deprecated" as you state, why in the world is MS's own programmers using it in rpcss.exe? According to this siteStill not convinced and want to appologize for MS? Well here are some more of MS's software that are affected by it in Windows 2000 servers (what this FAA project is using).
Print Spooler Stops Scheduling Print Jobs
There are a bunch of MS apps affected by this logic flaw that has been passed from version to version of MS OSes. If this flaw affected all these MS developers who have far more access to proprietary docs, I don't see how other developers would not stumble over it as well since they do not have access to the proprietary OS.
It is MS's software fault. It is the FAA's fault for getting suckered into using MS software for such a critical system (I have no problem if a company wants to use MS software for non-critical corporate tasks like desktops etc). And lest of all the poor tech guys fault for not rebooting.