With IPv6, there are (effectively) an unlimited number of IP addresses available for spammers. "Effectively" because no one is going to run a database big enough to track them as fast as the spammers change them.
In that case you use a white-list of known good SMTP servers.
Thanks - I'm aware of web'n'walk but firstly T-Mobile's service is crap where I live, secondly their handsets come in a crap brown or very gay pink compared with Orange's black.
Orange do an 'off peak' for £5 a month where 'off-peak' is after 7pm until 7am weekdays and all day weekends. This is all well and good except any other times it's £4 a megabyte.
Firstly, show me any OSX user that does not run their Mac as an admin user. This gives write access to a lot of the system.
Secondly automatic self propagating code is a worm, not a virus. That's the important difference - viruses traditionally need the actions of users to spread between computers. Worms do not.
Thirdly since when did the difficulty of code writing determine whether code is viral or not?
The amusing thing is the word 'virus' - every time something like this comes out the Apple apologists pop up desperately trying to redefine the word 'virus' and bend over backwards to try to prove that the threat is anything other than a 'virus' as if this somehow makes it any different - I've seen people saying things along the line of 'no it's not a virus - it's just a program that copies itself' and 'it doesn't do any damage so it's not a virus'.
Finally for a system that claims zero viruses, any virus for OSX is front page news. I'm actually stunned that with/.'s Apple bias that this made the front page - usually bad stories are kept in the Apple section; one suspects because of a fear of criticism from the rest of the/. crowd, and seeing as there are so many pompous Apple users with smarmy attitudes out there I can understand why - they literally can't take criticism because a great number of them know _jack_ about computers. They annoy me because I've tried to convince people to buy a Mac in the past and all it takes is that one person they know who convinces otherwise because of the reputation of the Mac zealots.
Firstly, it's a proof of concept. This means that the concept is being proven - if it were not proven in this manner, people like you would deny it were possible at all.
Note that even though we now have a proof of concept, you are basically saying it's not a viable virus. Duh - it's a proof of concept. Should the next author make their proof of concept do something malicious just to shut the likes of you up? I wonder what you would say then? I'm sure you would find some angle of how it wasn't a 'real' virus. FYI this IS a 'real' virus because it spreads.
With regard to 'no vector of propagation' - ever hear of users? This is old school virus writing - user runs infected program. Virus is now memory resident. Virus infects all other programs it can find. User sends infected program to other user. User runs infected program. Infection spreads.
It's interesting seeing this pattern in this day and age because I don't think people use computers like they used to 20 years ago - for example when was the last time you gave someone a program on disc - typically people just point others at a URL to download something. What if a popular downloadable program (say on a 'warez' site) is infected however? Instant global distribution. I can hear the likes of you already saying 'I don't download warez so it doesn't count. Wah!' It doesn't matter - it would spread.
Combine this with a 0day Safari exploit I discovered (which has been unpatched for literally YEARS) and things could get interesting. Why have I not reported this to Apple? It's because of people like you.
Commercials always use different audio mastering techniques to 'sound louder' - should be simple enough to detect this - just look at the wave forms and you'll see what I mean.
When Wildfire launched five years ago, it was an innovative service offering Orange customers the opportunity to access voice messages. However, over the last eighteen months user numbers have declined rapidly and during a recent review of the service it became clear that Wildfire does not offer some key features that many Orange customers have come to expect from their answer phone service. As a result, it has now become financially and technically impractical to run the service.
That is total and complete bullshit. For starters, Orange were actively refusing customers who requested Wildfire be added to their account for at least three years before they pulled the plug. I'd lost count of the people I demonstrated Wildfire to who immediately called Orange to have it added to their account only be be told they were not taking any more customers.
Secondly, just WHAT features did it not have that 'many Orange customers have come to expect from their answer phone service' - WHAT? The only 'feature' that you could do with the regular crappy Orange answerphone that you couldn't do with Wildfire was forward a message to someone. Does ANYONE EVER do this..?? If it was a feature you couldn't live without, then nobody was forcing you to keep wildfire.
Since Hutchison sold Orange it went down the pan. It's obviously run by cretins - don't even get me started on their fucking stupid data plans. Sure - have a new 3G phone at £4 PER MEGABYTE. What? You can take a data plan that's only £4 for 4 Mb? Great! Except... what's that? No you can't have off peak data as well as that silly! Fucking. Morons.
...the thing is, I was only referring to the fact that OSX can read and write PDF files. It seems Adobe has gone after Microsoft for providing this functionality in Vista, yet OSX has been doing this for years. For many, using OSX means they don't have to buy Acrobat because OSX can read and write PDF files. Sure Acrobat has some extra features like javascripting and forms that report to a database etc, however I think in the grand scheme of things that the majority of users probably only use it to make PDFs.
So my question stands - will Adobe go after Apple with regard to PDF functionality in OSX?
Slashdot Mirror
As there is sure to be demand for this as multi-cores become more popular, if it doesn't then it's sure to happen in the near future.
With IPv6, there are (effectively) an unlimited number of IP addresses available for spammers. "Effectively" because no one is going to run a database big enough to track them as fast as the spammers change them.
In that case you use a white-list of known good SMTP servers.
I heard Google were interested in buying Apple.
Interesting - perhaps they are only monitoring VoIP (as obviously it would cut into their revenue).
Thanks - I'm aware of web'n'walk but firstly T-Mobile's service is crap where I live, secondly their handsets come in a crap brown or very gay pink compared with Orange's black.
Finally 'web'n'walk' is web only - it's not all ports and protocols (although they tried to tell me in the shop that it was 'full internet access'), however they have been threatening to cancel the contracts of users running Skype.
Orange do an 'off peak' for £5 a month where 'off-peak' is after 7pm until 7am weekdays and all day weekends. This is all well and good except any other times it's £4 a megabyte.
I have a 3G phone (Orange SPV M3100) - no problems with the speed at all.
The problem is prohibitive data prices - at £4 a megabyte from Orange, I literally can not afford to use it.
....surely the creator of a theory is the most qualified person to write about that theory?
Why do I find it difficult to believe you?
Firstly, show me any OSX user that does not run their Mac as an admin user. This gives write access to a lot of the system.
/.'s Apple bias that this made the front page - usually bad stories are kept in the Apple section; one suspects because of a fear of criticism from the rest of the /. crowd, and seeing as there are so many pompous Apple users with smarmy attitudes out there I can understand why - they literally can't take criticism because a great number of them know _jack_ about computers. They annoy me because I've tried to convince people to buy a Mac in the past and all it takes is that one person they know who convinces otherwise because of the reputation of the Mac zealots.
Secondly automatic self propagating code is a worm, not a virus. That's the important difference - viruses traditionally need the actions of users to spread between computers. Worms do not.
Thirdly since when did the difficulty of code writing determine whether code is viral or not?
The amusing thing is the word 'virus' - every time something like this comes out the Apple apologists pop up desperately trying to redefine the word 'virus' and bend over backwards to try to prove that the threat is anything other than a 'virus' as if this somehow makes it any different - I've seen people saying things along the line of 'no it's not a virus - it's just a program that copies itself' and 'it doesn't do any damage so it's not a virus'.
Finally for a system that claims zero viruses, any virus for OSX is front page news. I'm actually stunned that with
Firstly, it's a proof of concept. This means that the concept is being proven - if it were not proven in this manner, people like you would deny it were possible at all.
Note that even though we now have a proof of concept, you are basically saying it's not a viable virus. Duh - it's a proof of concept. Should the next author make their proof of concept do something malicious just to shut the likes of you up? I wonder what you would say then? I'm sure you would find some angle of how it wasn't a 'real' virus. FYI this IS a 'real' virus because it spreads.
With regard to 'no vector of propagation' - ever hear of users? This is old school virus writing - user runs infected program. Virus is now memory resident. Virus infects all other programs it can find. User sends infected program to other user. User runs infected program. Infection spreads.
It's interesting seeing this pattern in this day and age because I don't think people use computers like they used to 20 years ago - for example when was the last time you gave someone a program on disc - typically people just point others at a URL to download something. What if a popular downloadable program (say on a 'warez' site) is infected however? Instant global distribution. I can hear the likes of you already saying 'I don't download warez so it doesn't count. Wah!' It doesn't matter - it would spread.
Combine this with a 0day Safari exploit I discovered (which has been unpatched for literally YEARS) and things could get interesting. Why have I not reported this to Apple? It's because of people like you.
Commercials always use different audio mastering techniques to 'sound louder' - should be simple enough to detect this - just look at the wave forms and you'll see what I mean.
When Wildfire launched five years ago, it was an innovative service offering Orange customers the opportunity to access voice messages. However, over the last eighteen months user numbers have declined rapidly and during a recent review of the service it became clear that Wildfire does not offer some key features that many Orange customers have come to expect from their answer phone service. As a result, it has now become financially and technically impractical to run the service.
That is total and complete bullshit. For starters, Orange were actively refusing customers who requested Wildfire be added to their account for at least three years before they pulled the plug. I'd lost count of the people I demonstrated Wildfire to who immediately called Orange to have it added to their account only be be told they were not taking any more customers.
Secondly, just WHAT features did it not have that 'many Orange customers have come to expect from their answer phone service' - WHAT? The only 'feature' that you could do with the regular crappy Orange answerphone that you couldn't do with Wildfire was forward a message to someone. Does ANYONE EVER do this..?? If it was a feature you couldn't live without, then nobody was forcing you to keep wildfire. Since Hutchison sold Orange it went down the pan. It's obviously run by cretins - don't even get me started on their fucking stupid data plans. Sure - have a new 3G phone at £4 PER MEGABYTE. What? You can take a data plan that's only £4 for 4 Mb? Great! Except... what's that? No you can't have off peak data as well as that silly! Fucking. Morons.
sleazebag elitists. nuff said.
Speak for yourself, shorty.
And as we all know 'sexual predators' are all going to use their real names on MySpace.
You mean for games right?
Run X11 and use Terminal Services to connect to your Windows servers for anything you could ever want to do (except games).
Don't worry about it - by the time you graduate they will be the same (Evil®) company.
I was wondering what she meant about the vibration feature.
Ah ok. That makes sense.
...the thing is, I was only referring to the fact that OSX can read and write PDF files. It seems Adobe has gone after Microsoft for providing this functionality in Vista, yet OSX has been doing this for years. For many, using OSX means they don't have to buy Acrobat because OSX can read and write PDF files. Sure Acrobat has some extra features like javascripting and forms that report to a database etc, however I think in the grand scheme of things that the majority of users probably only use it to make PDFs.
So my question stands - will Adobe go after Apple with regard to PDF functionality in OSX?
Yes - OSX.
...because OSX can read and write PDF files without requiring Acrobat.
So will Adobe be going after Apple with regard to Acrobat and PDFs?
Just have everyone use a blank password for everything then you don't need any fancy vaults.
Fair comment.
You forgot all those people who want (and have wanted for years) a mid-range standalone machine.
Apple make a 'mid range' machine - it's called the iMac. The Mac Pro is as it's very name suggests, for high end users.