I think you may have just explained it. Look at how many clueless person don't update thier windows machines. I don't know how many Mac users don't update rugularly, but I'm shure there are plenty.
And this might shock some of us here, but not everyone connects thier machines to the net. So unless apple sends out update cd's there are probably at least a few un-updated machines out there. I do know of at least one company that did some work with Mac for small scale publishing that didn't let thier macs or pc's be connected to the net for both security and keeping employees from porn browsing.
It may not be completely accurate, but it is a factor.
Other factors include such things as the TYPE of person using the platform in question. While this is purely anectedotal, Most of the Mac users I run into have one of several attitudes that make them less likely to be virus writers. Many are proffessional/serious hobbiest audio/visual people and preffer to spend thier time on that. Most Mac owners are very pro Apple and Evangelize the apple heavilly, writing Mac viruses would counter productive.
Another is the anger issue. I would wager comparatively few Mac users hate apple compared to the number who hate Microsoft.
And Finally there is inherent differences in the platforms themselves. Windows security model and codebase seems very exploit friendly to my mind, and with OSX being bsd at the core is most likely less malware friendly (I couldn't comment on previous mac os's, but bsd seems to be widly held as doing well in this regard).
And I'd like to point out at least one flaw in the site you linked to. It pointed out some windows exploits target as small or smaller a subsegment of windows users as the macs overal market segment. This completely misses the fact all the toolkits virus writers have developed for windows sofar (A great many) are much more easily adapted to target a single windows application than they are to port to a mac, where so much is different right down to processor.
I don't know enough about the Mac platform to know how this would work. But like any uninformed slashdoter I'm willing to guess:)
If a Mac takes absolutely NO action on cd insert (disc goes in, nothing happens not even a spin up of the drive) then I can only guesse is that they've pulled a really clever trick on the cd involving some sort of buffer issue, perhaps with the crc info and or the cdrom buffer/firmware, that causes a small piece of code to be run that loads the software when any of the music plays.
If the Mac does anything on insert then the possible exploits expand, even if it's just the Mac reading the disc to find out what's on it, that is it mounts the volume and in theory only reads the data needed to know what kind of disc it is and what's on it.
In the first case the fact that Apple ships it's Mac's with very specific hardware is what would make such a thing possible, as the company developing the drm crap could buy a few of those specific drives and a few Macs and tear into them and analyze them to the last diode. But it is reaching a bit for an explanation.
Now lots of Mac users here have said OSX doesn't autorun discs. Question, is this only data that's not autorun, or is it data and music. In general what exactly will a Mac do when a new disc is inserted in it's drive. The more it does, the more opportunity for infection and more believable claims of infection by this disc is. I suspect it only happens if you run/use anything on a Mac specific data session on the disc like a trojan.
But if Macs don't autorun any software on-disc as many have said, then it would take eigther a trojan like install when you do run somthing on it, or a clever exploit with a likelyhood I can't guess at with any hope of accuracy.
So what does a Mac do when various kinds of cd-like disc's are installed? People who actually are cluefull might be able to shed some insight on these claims.
A 'Blue Moon' is the second full moon in the same callendar month, IIRC every 12 to 13 months.
Just some odd trivia I thought I'd throw out. Was going to try for funny, but can't think of a way to make it funny. Oh well.
LOL, I believe it. Me I don't often get the big funny odd coincidences(sp?). Just a constant stream of wtf was that little non-sensical oddities, but people who are around me long enough start to notice, and somtimes accuse me of doing it.
Like I can really cause some of these things. Like the time I met somone and was talking about an old friend I hadn't seen in years, in response to his mentioning a friend he'd lost contact with a about year ago. Well a few minutes later we discover we're talking about the same guy. Then as we reach the cash-register (book store, how we met, he was looking for a book) and guesse who was in line ahead of us.I was almost 3,000 miles from home at the time. That's about oddest single incident.
At the other end is things like doors opening for no reason, all the filliments of a 3-way bulb going out at the same time, and the one that helps my rep around tech: things somtimes just spontaneously start working right again if I do anything not actually harmfull to them, or somtimes just watch a friend try and show me what is wrong before I even touch it.
It's not like it's every day, just somthing like the last paragraph once or twice a week. And somthing about 2/3 as wierd as the mutal friend thing every year to 18 months. Though come to think of it the rate has almost halved from that since about '95.
I remember EA back in the mid 80's. They had some good games on the commodore64. I Just wish they hadn't bought several companies that were also producing good games and then shut them down. Especially several games that would be great as updated sequals.
CarWars, and Earth Orbit Stations, and MULE, and I wish I could remember more clearly, it's allkinda faded into nostalgia and a vague sense of 'those f'ing bastard ruined my life^h^h^h^h^h^h^h any hope of seeing modern version of some of my early favorites'.
YES, this has become rule one for me. CHECK THE CABLES! you'd be suprised how much time this can save if you don't know already.
There is one important aspect to this. If you're fixing other peoples computers for a living, be very carefull how you explain things involved in rule one, especialy rule one itself. Really easy for someone already uptight about that very complex machine in front of them, that they need for thier job, that they don't understand, to decide you are treating them like an idiot. Espescially if thier job is one that requires significant skills and thier used to being valued for thier expertise. I'll never make that mistake twice.
Of course you can mention rule 1 if an internal cable has somehow come loose, just make shure they know you don't think THEY would be stupid enough to miss a disconted/loose monitor cable, especially if they probably are.
"What is scary to me is that there have been various studies that show people would rather have a bad product everytime than one that is sometimes good, sometimes bad."
This is because people don't like unpredictable results except in limited circumstances. It may be bad, but if it's not bad to the point of unuseability, and consistant. Then people will use it.
The perception created by sometimes poor and sometimes good product is that your getting cheated everytime the product is poor, which is proven by the fact that they CAN do good.
No he said it the way that makes sense. A screen door on a battleship can make sense. but not on a submarine.
I've always heard it as submarine and never battleship till now.
Think about it in both cases.
I thought it was Finagles law. Then again I may be just confusing what a character in an sf novel called it.
I do know I like to quote it to people when eigther a) explaining somthing out-there like uncertanty or why FTL is such a no-no or b) somthing really wierd happens, as it frequently does around me. I dunno why that is.
Somedays I feel Rod Serling would've refused to do tv show on my life because it was to wierd to believe at times.
I'm going to have to agree. While I can understand the desire for a slimer program, and thus no support for irc/usenet/im/etc., good encryption in email is a chicken-egg problem of the easy-to-fix sort. It's not there by default because no one uses it much because it's not there by default.
Mycroft
p.s. no usenet would be o.k. having usenet would be really o.k. having broken usenet just sucks (but hey it is a 0.x release so I'm hopefull).
Not shure about e-mail. But I made the mistake of selecting a whole conversation thread on usenet and hit return. I GUARANTEE you lots and lots of new windows that way (like at least 47)!
I was trying to find a way to download all the messages so I could read them offline. It tried all right. It tried to open 47 connections at once to my usenet server, which only allows 4 per ip addy. So I got 47 windows and 43 error messages. Funny now, frustrating then.
Haven't had that much netbarf since the last time I accidently hit one of those gazillion pop-up sites in IE (which I now do not use, Tbird.8 right now, will try.9 soon).
I tried Thunderbird last night, o.k. for an e-mail client, and certainly more secure Lookout Virus Express (I know, it's lame to re-name like that, but I just de-loused a computer becasue OE crap).
Problem is they got a LONG ways to go on Usenet support. Especially for the binaries groups. No combine and decode for one. A big one I ran into is trying to save an attachment, you download a usenet post with a cool pic attached, the whole thing downloads and you decide to save the pic so you click and do save image, and it RE-DOWNLOADS the damn thing. Add that to the fact that it doesn't give good feedback most of the time and I wound up downloading one message three times! All for a stupid pic of the andromeda ascendant (trying to model it as a learning excerise in 3dsmax).
I also couldn't find a way to select a group of messages to download for offline reading, I could flag a bunch of messages, but the flag does nothing as far as I can tell execept put an icon next to the messages.
Now if that is a bug in the latest re-lease that is not present in the previous someone please tell me so I can try that, I hate OE, and thunderbird looks alot like what I'm looking for, but broken usenet kills it for me since there is NO broadband, not even sat, too many high hills with metal bearing ore in the way can't get a signal strong enough, where I live.
I'm trully suprised that out of all of slashdot reading this your the only one to say that or somthing simular.
I don't know whether to respect them for 'getting it' and avoiding redundancy (doubt it, you're post hasn't been moded up), or to shocked NO ONE else has mananged to belong to the group that a)read stranger, b) read this thread, and c) connected the two.
Of course my perspective COULD be off. For clue as to why see my nick.
Actually, while much of what you said has merit (esp the part about judging a coutry based on ONE famous city), number six is pretty much a general truth. Both men and Women tend to be attracted to the exotic. And a non-anoying accent alone is often enough.
Just for the record I'm only blaming the government of France, not the otherwise decent people of France who were just as sold down the river as anyone else screwed by this disgracefull act.
It wasn't brave and noble. They had oil deals in Iraq in violation the UN sanctions. They didn't want to kill thier Illicit income. Looks a lot like they were bought and paid for by Saddam to me.
This gets modded insightfull and the GP post is a troll. Thier both opinioned and lack much fact, but then that's not uncommon on slashdot.
Other than length and side of the stupid name calling argument thier the same f'ing post with sides reversed.
The mods involved should be ashamed of themselves for thier hypocrocy or modding based on ideology rather than honestly.
Gak didn't see your reply, ingore above post by me.
Modern interpretation is wrong in many places IMHO, as the courts seem to have read into the constitution things the founding fathers SPECIFICALY said otherwise on.
Take the whole interstate commerce clause. The courts have ruled that a purely in-state action, that has no effect on any other state whatsoever, falls under said clause. Rediculous. the interstate commerce clause exists to deal with, and this is a real shocker, commerce between the states. Yet the courts seem to be siding with federal prossecutions of anyone following a medical marijuana law, just as one example.
Incorrect on the relative power of the states vs the fed government.
Read the tenth amendment as someone below has pointed out.
I'm only posting this as the poster below posted as a sibling to your comment instead of under it.
I'm sorry but as much as I find biggoted and simular speach the result of an evil or at least twisted and sick mind, laws against speech, based on it's distastefull nature, are flat out wrong and unconstitutional.
That said I have no problem with someone suffering the leagle consequence of slander or libel.
Frankly most hate speech laws are redundant and subject to abuse. We already have laws that deal with suth things just fine IF they do more than prove the speaker a hatefull, biggoted, moron.
Incitement to riot, Libel, Slander, Disturbing the Peace, even public indecency or obsenity. just to name a few.
You know that whole timing thing used to matter. If durring certain hours you showed certain things or said others the fcc would fine you. BUT at other hours other rules applied. I can clearly remember seing nudity on BROADCAST tv, but always between (IIRC) 11pm and 5am when the odds are the entire audience was adult.
Bingo! Why this is sitting at it's original score and not already modded up is a wonder.
And besides that I want to know WHY 'euorpe' is trying to urge the US government to limit speach on the net. It's stupid. Our government is BANNED from doing so by the first amendment to the constitution.
Now I know some idiot is going to try and come up with some argument about how that's not correct. Or maybee point to some stupid law or decision that seems to support that it could happen. But frankly if they did pass such a law it would be unconstitutional and barring stupid,clueless judges, or judges that don't uphold the constitution, it would be found as such.
Thanks for the link. That also reminded me of why I thought they might be the same, ravens are sorta subsets of crows, but more like how both chimps and gorillas are primates.
No sh*t 3ds max's optimize is not that smart, it leaves a horrible mesh, somtimes killing details by eliminating needed polies and the leaving 4-5 pollies on a nearly flat surface.
I'm glad to hear someone has come up with a much smarter routine. Hopefully it's not to much of a hit cpu wise, though I'm shure they claimed it wasn't if thier planning on comercializing thier algorithym.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you may have just explained it.
Look at how many clueless person don't update thier windows machines. I don't know how many Mac users don't update rugularly, but I'm shure there are plenty.
And this might shock some of us here, but not everyone connects thier machines to the net. So unless apple sends out update cd's there are probably at least a few un-updated machines out there. I do know of at least one company that did some work with Mac for small scale publishing that didn't let thier macs or pc's be connected to the net for both security and keeping employees from porn browsing.
Mycroft
It may not be completely accurate, but it is a factor.
Other factors include such things as the TYPE of person using the platform in question. While this is purely anectedotal, Most of the Mac users I run into have one of several attitudes that make them less likely to be virus writers. Many are proffessional/serious hobbiest audio/visual people and preffer to spend thier time on that. Most Mac owners are very pro Apple and Evangelize the apple heavilly, writing Mac viruses would counter productive.
Another is the anger issue. I would wager comparatively few Mac users hate apple compared to the number who hate Microsoft.
And Finally there is inherent differences in the platforms themselves. Windows security model and codebase seems very exploit friendly to my mind, and with OSX being bsd at the core is most likely less malware friendly (I couldn't comment on previous mac os's, but bsd seems to be widly held as doing well in this regard).
And I'd like to point out at least one flaw in the site you linked to. It pointed out some windows exploits target as small or smaller a subsegment of windows users as the macs overal market segment. This completely misses the fact all the toolkits virus writers have developed for windows sofar (A great many) are much more easily adapted to target a single windows application than they are to port to a mac, where so much is different right down to processor.
Mycroft
I don't know enough about the Mac platform to know how this would work. But like any uninformed slashdoter I'm willing to guess :)
If a Mac takes absolutely NO action on cd insert (disc goes in, nothing happens not even a spin up of the drive) then I can only guesse is that they've pulled a really clever trick on the cd involving some sort of buffer issue, perhaps with the crc info and or the cdrom buffer/firmware, that causes a small piece of code to be run that loads the software when any of the music plays.
If the Mac does anything on insert then the possible exploits expand, even if it's just the Mac reading the disc to find out what's on it, that is it mounts the volume and in theory only reads the data needed to know what kind of disc it is and what's on it.
In the first case the fact that Apple ships it's Mac's with very specific hardware is what would make such a thing possible, as the company developing the drm crap could buy a few of those specific drives and a few Macs and tear into them and analyze them to the last diode. But it is reaching a bit for an explanation.
Now lots of Mac users here have said OSX doesn't autorun discs. Question, is this only data that's not autorun, or is it data and music. In general what exactly will a Mac do when a new disc is inserted in it's drive. The more it does, the more opportunity for infection and more believable claims of infection by this disc is. I suspect it only happens if you run/use anything on a Mac specific data session on the disc like a trojan.
But if Macs don't autorun any software on-disc as many have said, then it would take eigther a trojan like install when you do run somthing on it, or a clever exploit with a likelyhood I can't guess at with any hope of accuracy.
So what does a Mac do when various kinds of cd-like disc's are installed? People who actually are cluefull might be able to shed some insight on these claims.
Mycroft
A 'Blue Moon' is the second full moon in the same callendar month, IIRC every 12 to 13 months.
Just some odd trivia I thought I'd throw out. Was going to try for funny, but can't think of a way to make it funny. Oh well.
Mycroft
LOL, I believe it. Me I don't often get the big funny odd coincidences(sp?). Just a constant stream of wtf was that little non-sensical oddities, but people who are around me long enough start to notice, and somtimes accuse me of doing it.
Like I can really cause some of these things.
Like the time I met somone and was talking about an old friend I hadn't seen in years, in response to his mentioning a friend he'd lost contact with a about year ago. Well a few minutes later we discover we're talking about the same guy. Then as we reach the cash-register (book store, how we met, he was looking for a book) and guesse who was in line ahead of us.I was almost 3,000 miles from home at the time. That's about oddest single incident.
At the other end is things like doors opening for no reason, all the filliments of a 3-way bulb going out at the same time, and the one that helps my rep around tech: things somtimes just spontaneously start working right again if I do anything not actually harmfull to them, or somtimes just watch a friend try and show me what is wrong before I even touch it.
It's not like it's every day, just somthing like the last paragraph once or twice a week. And somthing about 2/3 as wierd as the mutal friend thing every year to 18 months. Though come to think of it the rate has almost halved from that since about '95.
Mycroft
I remember EA back in the mid 80's. They had some good games on the commodore64. I Just wish they hadn't bought several companies that were also producing good games and then shut them down. Especially several games that would be great as updated sequals.
CarWars, and Earth Orbit Stations, and MULE, and I wish I could remember more clearly, it's allkinda faded into nostalgia and a vague sense of 'those f'ing bastard ruined my life^h^h^h^h^h^h^h any hope of seeing modern version of some of my early favorites'.
Mycroft
YES, this has become rule one for me. CHECK THE CABLES! you'd be suprised how much time this can save if you don't know already.
There is one important aspect to this. If you're fixing other peoples computers for a living, be very carefull how you explain things involved in rule one, especialy rule one itself. Really easy for someone already uptight about that very complex machine in front of them, that they need for thier job, that they don't understand, to decide you are treating them like an idiot. Espescially if thier job is one that requires significant skills and thier used to being valued for thier expertise. I'll never make that mistake twice.
Of course you can mention rule 1 if an internal cable has somehow come loose, just make shure they know you don't think THEY would be stupid enough to miss a disconted/loose monitor cable, especially if they probably are.
Mycroft
"What is scary to me is that there have been various studies that show people would rather have a bad product everytime than one that is sometimes good, sometimes bad."
This is because people don't like unpredictable results except in limited circumstances. It may be bad, but if it's not bad to the point of unuseability, and consistant. Then people will use it.
The perception created by sometimes poor and sometimes good product is that your getting cheated everytime the product is poor, which is proven by the fact that they CAN do good.
Mycroft
No he said it the way that makes sense. A screen door on a battleship can make sense. but not on a submarine.
I've always heard it as submarine and never battleship till now.
Think about it in both cases.
Mycroft
I thought it was Finagles law. Then again I may be just confusing what a character in an sf novel called it.
I do know I like to quote it to people when eigther a) explaining somthing out-there like uncertanty or why FTL is such a no-no
or b) somthing really wierd happens, as it frequently does around me. I dunno why that is.
Somedays I feel Rod Serling would've refused to do tv show on my life because it was to wierd to believe at times.
Mycroft
I'm going to have to agree. While I can understand the desire for a slimer program, and thus no support for irc/usenet/im/etc., good encryption in email is a chicken-egg problem of the easy-to-fix sort. It's not there by default because no one uses it much because it's not there by default.
Mycroft
p.s. no usenet would be o.k. having usenet would be really o.k. having broken usenet just sucks (but hey it is a 0.x release so I'm hopefull).
Not shure about e-mail. But I made the mistake of selecting a whole conversation thread on usenet and hit return. I GUARANTEE you lots and lots of new windows that way (like at least 47)! .8 right now, will try .9 soon).
I was trying to find a way to download all the messages so I could read them offline. It tried all right. It tried to open 47 connections at once to my usenet server, which only allows 4 per ip addy. So I got 47 windows and 43 error messages. Funny now, frustrating then.
Haven't had that much netbarf since the last time I accidently hit one of those gazillion pop-up sites in IE (which I now do not use, Tbird
Mycroft
Mycroft
I tried Thunderbird last night, o.k. for an e-mail client, and certainly more secure Lookout Virus Express (I know, it's lame to re-name like that, but I just de-loused a computer becasue OE crap).
Problem is they got a LONG ways to go on Usenet support. Especially for the binaries groups. No combine and decode for one. A big one I ran into is trying to save an attachment, you download a usenet post with a cool pic attached, the whole thing downloads and you decide to save the pic so you click and do save image, and it RE-DOWNLOADS the damn thing. Add that to the fact that it doesn't give good feedback most of the time and I wound up downloading one message three times! All for a stupid pic of the andromeda ascendant (trying to model it as a learning excerise in 3dsmax).
I also couldn't find a way to select a group of messages to download for offline reading, I could flag a bunch of messages, but the flag does nothing as far as I can tell execept put an icon next to the messages.
Now if that is a bug in the latest re-lease that is not present in the previous someone please tell me so I can try that, I hate OE, and thunderbird looks alot like what I'm looking for, but broken usenet kills it for me since there is NO broadband, not even sat, too many high hills with metal bearing ore in the way can't get a signal strong enough, where I live.
Mycroft
I'm trully suprised that out of all of slashdot reading this your the only one to say that or somthing simular.
I don't know whether to respect them for 'getting it' and avoiding redundancy (doubt it, you're post hasn't been moded up), or to shocked NO ONE else has mananged to belong to the group that a)read stranger, b) read this thread, and c) connected the two.
Of course my perspective COULD be off. For clue as to why see my nick.
Mycroft
Actually, while much of what you said has merit (esp the part about judging a coutry based on ONE famous city), number six is pretty much a general truth. Both men and Women tend to be attracted to the exotic. And a non-anoying accent alone is often enough.
Mycroft
Just for the record I'm only blaming the government of France, not the otherwise decent people of France who were just as sold down the river as anyone else screwed by this disgracefull act.
Mycroft
It wasn't brave and noble. They had oil deals in Iraq in violation the UN sanctions. They didn't want to kill thier Illicit income. Looks a lot like they were bought and paid for by Saddam to me.
Mycroft
This gets modded insightfull and the GP post is a troll. Thier both opinioned and lack much fact, but then that's not uncommon on slashdot.
Other than length and side of the stupid name calling argument thier the same f'ing post with sides reversed.
The mods involved should be ashamed of themselves for thier hypocrocy or modding based on ideology rather than honestly.
Mycroft
Gak didn't see your reply, ingore above post by me.
Modern interpretation is wrong in many places IMHO, as the courts seem to have read into the constitution things the founding fathers SPECIFICALY said otherwise on.
Take the whole interstate commerce clause. The courts have ruled that a purely in-state action, that has no effect on any other state whatsoever, falls under said clause. Rediculous. the interstate commerce clause exists to deal with, and this is a real shocker, commerce between the states. Yet the courts seem to be siding with federal prossecutions of anyone following a medical marijuana law, just as one example.
Mycroft
Incorrect on the relative power of the states vs the fed government.
Read the tenth amendment as someone below has pointed out.
I'm only posting this as the poster below posted as a sibling to your comment instead of under it.
Mycroft
I'm sorry but as much as I find biggoted and simular speach the result of an evil or at least twisted and sick mind, laws against speech, based on it's distastefull nature, are flat out wrong and unconstitutional.
That said I have no problem with someone suffering the leagle consequence of slander or libel.
Frankly most hate speech laws are redundant and subject to abuse. We already have laws that deal with suth things just fine IF they do more than prove the speaker a hatefull, biggoted, moron.
Incitement to riot, Libel, Slander, Disturbing the Peace, even public indecency or obsenity. just to name a few.
Mycroft
You know that whole timing thing used to matter. If durring certain hours you showed certain things or said others the fcc would fine you. BUT at other hours other rules applied. I can clearly remember seing nudity on BROADCAST tv, but always between (IIRC) 11pm and 5am when the odds are the entire audience was adult.
Mycroft
Bingo! Why this is sitting at it's original score and not already modded up is a wonder.
And besides that I want to know WHY 'euorpe' is trying to urge the US government to limit speach on the net. It's stupid. Our government is BANNED from doing so by the first amendment to the constitution.
Now I know some idiot is going to try and come up with some argument about how that's not correct. Or maybee point to some stupid law or decision that seems to support that it could happen. But frankly if they did pass such a law it would be unconstitutional and barring stupid,clueless judges, or judges that don't uphold the constitution, it would be found as such.
Mycroft
Thanks for the link. That also reminded me of why I thought they might be the same, ravens are sorta subsets of crows, but more like how both chimps and gorillas are primates.
Mycroft
No sh*t 3ds max's optimize is not that smart, it leaves a horrible mesh, somtimes killing details by eliminating needed polies and the leaving 4-5 pollies on a nearly flat surface.
I'm glad to hear someone has come up with a much smarter routine. Hopefully it's not to much of a hit cpu wise, though I'm shure they claimed it wasn't if thier planning on comercializing thier algorithym.
Mycroft