For lazy people, about 3 vulnerabilities classified as "Highly" critical, 0 "Extremely", out of a total of around 50 across Apache 1, Apache 2.0.x, and Apache 2.2.x. Of the 50, the vast majority are at least partially fixed.
It's hard to get a fix on equivalent numbers for IIS, since they all seem to fall under the MS Windows category.
Because the government is terrible at managing things, has no competition, and little oversight.
Not true, no matter how much it's the cornerstone of libertarian thinking. It's just that the stuff that the government does manage really well hardly ever gets noticed. Examples include municipal water systems, fire fighting and prevention, traffic controls, and park systems. Municipal power companies also tend to do at least as well as their private competitors in the next town or city over in terms of providing cheap and efficient service to their customers.
But the real answer in the US auto market is "none of the above", because most cars are tuned for one of these: 4. Low cost 5. Larger size (to sell to men) 6. Cuter colors (to sell to women) 7. Number of cupholders
None of which have anything to do with efficiency of any kind, and everything to do with selling more cars.
It's actually a more interesting issue than you might think. Fox News would certainly like the image of Biden to be a lightweight gaffe-prone goof, while MSNBC would like the image of Biden to be a devoted father and promoter of a better rail transportation system who knows how to work the Senate floor.
I have to think a similar dual effect happened with regards to Dan Quayle. At the same time, none of Biden's gaffes have suggested that he can't spell.
As a counterexample, here's my fairly recent installation experience when it came to sound:
Ubuntu - found my sound system, fired it up automatically, and linked my keyboard volume control buttons.
Windows - Had to spend a while figuring out the sound hardware myself, determine that the driver CD that came with the card couldn't properly install the driver under SP 3, downloaded drivers from the manufacturer, and ran that.
As a sibling post pointed out, this checklist is used whenever there's discussion of solutions to the spam problem.
(X) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
Legitimate mass mailers would require a registration to be placed on an allow list. Of course, spammers need not apply. Licensing fees could even be charged for this list to pay for the program, but that may not be fair.
What if I'm a legitimate mass mailer who, say, wants to organize political protests? Who may not want their activities on a government list?
(X) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email (X) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
Machines that have been zombiefied would be cut off from the web at the router level. They will be allowed back on once their ISP can verify they have been de-zombied.
How long do you think AT&T and other broadband ISPs would put up with this? All the customer sees is "My Internets is broken. $ISP sucks, I'm switching." Also, if there's a 10000 per host limit (over a particular period), 9999 * 10 million is a pretty significant chunk of spam.
(X) Infrastructure costs that are involved in deep packet inspection on the core routers (X) Privacy concerns in letting ISPs perform deep packet inspection on the core routers
Why not just use the same setup the previous administration did to monitor phone calls?
Because it's illegal under wiretapping laws, for starters.
(X) I don't want the government reading my email
Since the emails are counted instead of read, there would be no privacy concerns.
Using the example of a non-profit group, the government now has a count of the size of everyone's email list. Or has a much shorter list of who to look at for who's running the email server of a political group.
That's my point: grand misuse of statistics (a lot of people) leading to conclusions that are completely bogus, but are given lots of weight because they have what appears to be mathematical infallibility behind them. In short, statistics make an excellent cover for BS.
approach to fighting spam. The idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to this particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses (X) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected ( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks (X) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it (X) Users of email will not put up with it ( ) Microsoft will not put up with it ( ) The police will not put up with it ( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers ( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once (X) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers ( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists (X) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it ( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email ( ) Open relays in foreign countries ( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses (X) Asshats ( ) Jurisdictional problems ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money ( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP (X) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack (X) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email (X) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes (X) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches (X) Extreme profitability of spam ( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft (X) Technically illiterate politicians ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers ( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves (X) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering ( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(X) Ideas similar to this are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable ( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation (X) Blacklists suck ( ) Whitelists suck (X) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud (X) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks ( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually ( ) Sending email should be free (X) Why should we have to trust you and your servers? ( ) Incompatibility with open source or open source licenses ( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome (X) I don't want the government reading my email (X) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about them:
( ) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work. (X) This is a stupid idea, and they're stupid person for suggesting it. ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
As far as the MS Office issue, Linux can run your app via Wine or Crossover Office. There are also alternatives with varying degrees of quality.
It seems like a lot of your difficulties (No exchange client, no AD integration) have more to do with expecting Linux do things like Windows does when sometimes it doesn't. And sometimes there are ways of doing what you want to do that you just haven't learned about yet.
This has a lot to do with the processing of food being a lot more profitable than the production of food. And because there's no way to tell exactly what went into processed foods, the ingredients put into processed food are typically the worst and cheapest the processor can get away with.
Thanks to the screwed up nature of the corn market in particular (government subsidies working in concert with ADM and Cargill), those subpar ingredients can actually end up cheaper then whole foods like black beans.
Distributors and growers won't get raided now, but about 6 months ago they would have. I understand that Obama's changed that rule (good news), but that's not really a solution.
Slashdot Mirror
For lazy people, about 3 vulnerabilities classified as "Highly" critical, 0 "Extremely", out of a total of around 50 across Apache 1, Apache 2.0.x, and Apache 2.2.x. Of the 50, the vast majority are at least partially fixed.
It's hard to get a fix on equivalent numbers for IIS, since they all seem to fall under the MS Windows category.
Because the government is terrible at managing things, has no competition, and little oversight.
Not true, no matter how much it's the cornerstone of libertarian thinking. It's just that the stuff that the government does manage really well hardly ever gets noticed. Examples include municipal water systems, fire fighting and prevention, traffic controls, and park systems. Municipal power companies also tend to do at least as well as their private competitors in the next town or city over in terms of providing cheap and efficient service to their customers.
If it had been just once, I'd have let it go. Since Mr AC did it twice, I figured it was a worthy target of a pun, that's all.
I'm sorry, that sort of attempt at biling fraud makes me puke.
Forcing car companies to make vehicles that people don't want to buy isn't going to do anybody any good.
Please explain why there's steadily rising sales on the Prius and steadily falling sales on Hummers and other large vehicles.
All the exercise in the world won't make a 6'5" man turn into a 5'10" man.
But the real answer in the US auto market is "none of the above", because most cars are tuned for one of these:
4. Low cost
5. Larger size (to sell to men)
6. Cuter colors (to sell to women)
7. Number of cupholders
None of which have anything to do with efficiency of any kind, and everything to do with selling more cars.
get your fucking priorities straight you worthless politician.
He has his priorities straight from his point of view. They are as follows:
1. Get elected.
2. Get re-elected.
By attempting to reason with unreasonable people and failing, you can more easily demonstrate to the rest of the world that they're unreasonable.
This is handy when you're dealing with, say, an elected official.
On top of the point that GP points out quite clearly that he's guessing, we're dealing with a public figure. So it's only libellous if it's not true.
Use your pickaxe to dig a pit in the floor, drag the ball into the pit, and push a boulder into the pit.
Oh, wait, real life doesn't work quite like Nethack.
It's actually a more interesting issue than you might think. Fox News would certainly like the image of Biden to be a lightweight gaffe-prone goof, while MSNBC would like the image of Biden to be a devoted father and promoter of a better rail transportation system who knows how to work the Senate floor.
I have to think a similar dual effect happened with regards to Dan Quayle. At the same time, none of Biden's gaffes have suggested that he can't spell.
He ... insists that reproduction of any kind is prohibited without permission.
He's just jealous of those of us able to reproduce.
As a counterexample, here's my fairly recent installation experience when it came to sound:
Ubuntu - found my sound system, fired it up automatically, and linked my keyboard volume control buttons.
Windows - Had to spend a while figuring out the sound hardware myself, determine that the driver CD that came with the card couldn't properly install the driver under SP 3, downloaded drivers from the manufacturer, and ran that.
Well, we had a slightly different set of concerns. Of course, mine is redundant because I took 6 minutes longer in filling it out.
As a sibling post pointed out, this checklist is used whenever there's discussion of solutions to the spam problem.
(X) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
Legitimate mass mailers would require a registration to be placed on an allow list. Of course, spammers need not apply. Licensing fees could even be charged for this list to pay for the program, but that may not be fair.
What if I'm a legitimate mass mailer who, say, wants to organize political protests? Who may not want their activities on a government list?
(X) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
(X) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
Machines that have been zombiefied would be cut off from the web at the router level. They will be allowed back on once their ISP can verify they have been de-zombied.
How long do you think AT&T and other broadband ISPs would put up with this? All the customer sees is "My Internets is broken. $ISP sucks, I'm switching." Also, if there's a 10000 per host limit (over a particular period), 9999 * 10 million is a pretty significant chunk of spam.
(X) Infrastructure costs that are involved in deep packet inspection on the core routers
(X) Privacy concerns in letting ISPs perform deep packet inspection on the core routers
Why not just use the same setup the previous administration did to monitor phone calls?
Because it's illegal under wiretapping laws, for starters.
(X) I don't want the government reading my email
Since the emails are counted instead of read, there would be no privacy concerns.
Using the example of a non-profit group, the government now has a count of the size of everyone's email list. Or has a much shorter list of who to look at for who's running the email server of a political group.
That's my point: grand misuse of statistics (a lot of people) leading to conclusions that are completely bogus, but are given lots of weight because they have what appears to be mathematical infallibility behind them. In short, statistics make an excellent cover for BS.
The Defense Information Systems Agency advocates a
(X) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. The idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to this particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
(X) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
(X) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
(X) Users of email will not put up with it
( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
( ) The police will not put up with it
( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
(X) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
(X) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
( ) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
(X) Asshats
( ) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
(X) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
(X) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
(X) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
(X) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
(X) Extreme profitability of spam
( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
(X) Technically illiterate politicians
( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
(X) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(X) Ideas similar to this are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
been shown practical
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
(X) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
(X) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
(X) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
( ) Sending email should be free
(X) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatibility with open source or open source licenses
( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
(X) I don't want the government reading my email
(X) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about them:
( ) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
(X) This is a stupid idea, and they're stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
I actually don't expect much resistance to the puns, but I'd think that sort of thing should be confined to your own ohm.
15% of MBA's will get you the correct statistics though.
So all I need 7 MBAs to achieve 100% accurate knowledge of everything. Great!
(Yes, I know that's flawed math, just making a point)
As far as the MS Office issue, Linux can run your app via Wine or Crossover Office. There are also alternatives with varying degrees of quality.
It seems like a lot of your difficulties (No exchange client, no AD integration) have more to do with expecting Linux do things like Windows does when sometimes it doesn't. And sometimes there are ways of doing what you want to do that you just haven't learned about yet.
This has a lot to do with the processing of food being a lot more profitable than the production of food. And because there's no way to tell exactly what went into processed foods, the ingredients put into processed food are typically the worst and cheapest the processor can get away with.
Thanks to the screwed up nature of the corn market in particular (government subsidies working in concert with ADM and Cargill), those subpar ingredients can actually end up cheaper then whole foods like black beans.
Seems to me like you could just make a small tank look like a heavy truck by hanging some shit on it. Ditto for the rocket launcher situation.
Not only can you do that, Bernard Montgomery's Eighth Army did so at El Alamein back in 1942.
It could be worse: Randall Flagg could be traveling the countryside to gather his minions in Las Vegas.
Distributors and growers won't get raided now, but about 6 months ago they would have. I understand that Obama's changed that rule (good news), but that's not really a solution.