please read my reply to a similar post: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=91659&c id=7886 174
when i tell clients to never auto-update if their computer is working fine, this doesn't mean that i don't take steps to insure that their systems are secure.
and yes, when i'm dealing with a multiple-homogeneous-hardware deployment i most certainly test patches prior to application. but when dealing with one-off-heterogenous systems it is only possible to pre-test patches with additional labor, something that many folks cannot afford.
please read my reply to a similar post: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=91659&c id=7886 174
when i tell clients to never auto-update if their computer is working fine, this doesn't mean that i don't take steps to insure that their systems are secure.
i agree it is important to have the latest security patches to create a more reliable interconnected world. i disagree that auto-updates from microsoft are the way to do it.
i make sure my clients are not a menace to the internet by installing a copy of eTrust antivirus and set it to auto-update on every microsoft system i touch. i tell my customers this is the only kind of auto-updating i recommend.
they are probably out there, but i've yet to see an ms zombie exploit that isn't halted by antivirus software. seems that most malicious code is delivered via a "virus".
given my limited linux experience (my only experience with linux is debian and whenever i've used apt-get update things keep right on working) i don't have enough empirical data to say in general if linux auto-updates tend to lead to OS instability any less frequently than windows auto-updates.
my comment was in all seriousness. not for a moment was i intending to be a troll.
this is actually very good advice and my customers are better off when they take this advice.
btw, i take this same advice myself. i've been consulting for over 20 years and this advice has never lead to a problem. on the other hand i've had many of my competitors' clients come to me after they tried to fix the respective client's problem by applying the latest service pack.
i personally advise customers to *never* update their windows systems.
i receive many calls regarding windows computers that are no longer working and when i ask when the system last worked they say before they updated. then they express their confusion at having been told to keep their system up to date.
part of the problem is that (beyond the initial service pack for any particular microsoft product) not enough people install the updates so that the bugs in the updates are not addressed.
another way to approach manifesting open source graphics card drivers would be to request ATI, NVIDIA, VIA., etc. to release the source for the drivers for their old graphics cards. let the companies decide what an "old" graphics card is.
i'm imagining many open source folks would gladly put energy into stabilizing some older non-bleeding edge graphics cards. if this proved popular a new competition might emerge between graphics cards manufacturers to be the first to release the source for hardware that isn't bleeding edge.
who *legally* has the right to the "Linux Gazette" name seems controversial at the very least. that being the case this is how i would approach resolving the situation.
if i were the Answer Gang i would offer SSC the option of having the Linux Gazette name in exchange for a prominent announcement (on the front page of linuxgazette.com) that due to a disagreement some of the contributors have created a new zine at linuxwhatever.???.
this would allow the readers to choose what to read.
if SSC doesn't agree to this i might persist in asserting ownership of the Linux Gazette name only as long as i didn't have to put any energy into doing so. if actions from SSC resulted in legal pressure to stop using the name i would let it go instead of putting up a fight (even though i might win the fight).
i would also request support from readers to publicize the name and location of the new zine. i would encourage readers to contact other readers and linkers to the Linux Gazette and point them to the new website.
in my personal experience a name is only a pointer to something that is real. when my good friend changed her name from alexis to ocean i didn't go looking for another friend named alexis.
readers were drawn to the Linux Gazette because of the writing not because of the name. there may be a lull in readership for the Answer Gang due to a domain name change but this probably won't be for very long. it actually seems like a great opportunity for the Answer Gang to manifest something that is more in line with their visions.
if there is a burden that is incurred as the result of the domain name change i suspect that there are some readers that would love to help minimize this burden.
if you are part of the Answer Gang and are reading this i encourage you to ask yourself: will fighting to keep the Linux Gazette name bring me joy? will rebirthing our zine bring me joy?
ask yourself these questions irrespective of whether or not you think each is achievable. if you choose to fight for the Linux Gazette name ask yourself these same questions again a day or a week later. if you regularly check-in with yourselves as this name controversy unfolds you will less likely find yourselves caught up in an activity that is draining.
peace
P.S. it isn't a surprise to me that the SSC is behaving the way it is. it is a traditional top-down hierarchical for-profit organization. it's raison d'etre is to make money (i understand that this may not have been the reason the SSC was created). if you remember this then all of their current actions make a bit more sense.
the thought of sitting through the FOTR Extended Edition then the TTT Extended Edition and then the finale - the ROTK squeeze me into a tolerable amount of time for most people Edition, sounds very annoying. why the heck would anyone want to sit through two Extended Editions and one regular finale?
talk about a let down. after i see the ROTK the first thing i'll be speculating about will be what scenes were missing that will be on the ROTK Extended Edition DVD.
watching all three Extended Editions back-to-back is the only way such a masochistic activity makes sense.
sounds a bit annoying to me.
sitting through the FOTR Extended Edition then the TTT Extended Edition and then the finale - the ROTK squeeze me into a tolerable amount of time for most people Edition.
talk about a let down.
after i see the ROTK the first thing i'll be speculating about will be what scenes were missing that will be on the ROTK Extended Edition DVD.
actually, i also told this person that microsoft would never die because they are a huge financial entity. i've been simply questioning their ability to remain dominant in the areas they currently dominate.
i just got finished explaining to a non-techie friend how microsoft's long-term prospects on the back-end look dim. i also explained how microsoft's desktop presence is also threatened. i then went on to speculate that the future for microsoft might be under-the-hood of consumer electronics devices including disposable PCs (Dell, HP, etc.).
the future doesn't look bright for microsoft's OS business.
whitelists are problematic in the same way that the Welchia/Nachi "anti-blaster worm" worm is problematic. consumption of too much bandwidth replying to all the spam for a confirmation in case it's a legitimate human.
after all, it's only propaganda, and if you understand that you won't be distracted from putting your energy into positive change.
one of the most detrimental effects of propaganda is distraction and thus redirection of energy. thankfully, in the case of linux there seem to be enough folks who aren't distracted and just keep coding.
bill gates' words can either energize you or paralyze you. if you are reacting to bill gates' (or SCO's) words you are probably paralyzed, and every bit of energy spent in reaction means exactly that amount of creative energy is redirected by propaganda.
here's some more food for thought (different issues, same principles):
Collateral Language
http://www.zmag.org/ZMagSite/Aug2003/barsamian0803.html
i suspect one reason John's research shows little value in phrases is due to the heavy computational load that would be required to actually integrate phrases into a Bayesian system in an automated way.
Bayesian systems are stupid - they don't understand the meaning of the words that are being analyzed. thus EVERY phrase needs to be parsed and processed. also, what is a phrase? two words? three words? four words?
if you couple human intelligence with Bayesian stupidity in selecting phrases, then phrases may increase the accuracy of a Bayesian system with an acceptable increase in computational overhead.
how much of an increase in accuracy? Bayesian systems based on words seem to consistently display accuracy in the 95% - 99% range. if a Bayesian system is being used to sort hundreds or thousands of messages at a time even an additional percent or two of accuracy would be worth a significant computational increase for some folks.
read Kevin Mitnick's story
on
New Phrack
·
· Score: 5, Informative
this, IMHO, is the most valuable information in Phrack 60:
Slashdot Mirror
please mod parent up
please read my reply to a similar post:c id=7886 174
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=91659&
when i tell clients to never auto-update if their computer is working fine, this doesn't mean that i don't take steps to insure that their systems are secure.
and yes, when i'm dealing with a multiple-homogeneous-hardware deployment i most certainly test patches prior to application. but when dealing with one-off-heterogenous systems it is only possible to pre-test patches with additional labor, something that many folks cannot afford.
please read my reply to a similar post:c id=7886 174
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=91659&
when i tell clients to never auto-update if their computer is working fine, this doesn't mean that i don't take steps to insure that their systems are secure.
i agree it is important to have the latest security patches to create a more reliable interconnected world. i disagree that auto-updates from microsoft are the way to do it.
i make sure my clients are not a menace to the internet by installing a copy of eTrust antivirus and set it to auto-update on every microsoft system i touch. i tell my customers this is the only kind of auto-updating i recommend.
they are probably out there, but i've yet to see an ms zombie exploit that isn't halted by antivirus software. seems that most malicious code is delivered via a "virus".
given my limited linux experience (my only experience with linux is debian and whenever i've used apt-get update things keep right on working) i don't have enough empirical data to say in general if linux auto-updates tend to lead to OS instability any less frequently than windows auto-updates.
my comment was in all seriousness. not for a moment was i intending to be a troll.
this is actually very good advice and my customers are better off when they take this advice.
btw, i take this same advice myself. i've been consulting for over 20 years and this advice has never lead to a problem. on the other hand i've had many of my competitors' clients come to me after they tried to fix the respective client's problem by applying the latest service pack.
peace
i personally advise customers to *never* update their windows systems.
i receive many calls regarding windows computers that are no longer working and when i ask when the system last worked they say before they updated. then they express their confusion at having been told to keep their system up to date.
part of the problem is that (beyond the initial service pack for any particular microsoft product) not enough people install the updates so that the bugs in the updates are not addressed.
could someone please mod the parent post up. it deserves a +5 for the link, imho.
thanks
another way to approach manifesting open source graphics card drivers would be to request ATI, NVIDIA, VIA., etc. to release the source for the drivers for their old graphics cards. let the companies decide what an "old" graphics card is.
i'm imagining many open source folks would gladly put energy into stabilizing some older non-bleeding edge graphics cards. if this proved popular a new competition might emerge between graphics cards manufacturers to be the first to release the source for hardware that isn't bleeding edge.
who *legally* has the right to the "Linux Gazette" name seems controversial at the very least. that being the case this is how i would approach resolving the situation.
if i were the Answer Gang i would offer SSC the option of having the Linux Gazette name in exchange for a prominent announcement (on the front page of linuxgazette.com) that due to a disagreement some of the contributors have created a new zine at linuxwhatever.???.
this would allow the readers to choose what to read.
if SSC doesn't agree to this i might persist in asserting ownership of the Linux Gazette name only as long as i didn't have to put any energy into doing so. if actions from SSC resulted in legal pressure to stop using the name i would let it go instead of putting up a fight (even though i might win the fight).
i would also request support from readers to publicize the name and location of the new zine. i would encourage readers to contact other readers and linkers to the Linux Gazette and point them to the new website.
in my personal experience a name is only a pointer to something that is real. when my good friend changed her name from alexis to ocean i didn't go looking for another friend named alexis.
readers were drawn to the Linux Gazette because of the writing not because of the name. there may be a lull in readership for the Answer Gang due to a domain name change but this probably won't be for very long. it actually seems like a great opportunity for the Answer Gang to manifest something that is more in line with their visions.
if there is a burden that is incurred as the result of the domain name change i suspect that there are some readers that would love to help minimize this burden.
if you are part of the Answer Gang and are reading this i encourage you to ask yourself: will fighting to keep the Linux Gazette name bring me joy? will rebirthing our zine bring me joy?
ask yourself these questions irrespective of whether or not you think each is achievable. if you choose to fight for the Linux Gazette name ask yourself these same questions again a day or a week later. if you regularly check-in with yourselves as this name controversy unfolds you will less likely find yourselves caught up in an activity that is draining.
peace
P.S.
it isn't a surprise to me that the SSC is behaving the way it is. it is a traditional top-down hierarchical for-profit organization. it's raison d'etre is to make money (i understand that this may not have been the reason the SSC was created). if you remember this then all of their current actions make a bit more sense.
i'd love to have a local copy of google before it becomes any more tainted due to policy decisions.
unfortunately i can't imagine a easy way creating a local snapshot of google assuming i have enough hard drive space.
any ideas?
the thought of sitting through the FOTR Extended Edition then the TTT Extended Edition and then the finale - the ROTK squeeze me into a tolerable amount of time for most people Edition, sounds very annoying. why the heck would anyone want to sit through two Extended Editions and one regular finale?
talk about a let down. after i see the ROTK the first thing i'll be speculating about will be what scenes were missing that will be on the ROTK Extended Edition DVD.
watching all three Extended Editions back-to-back is the only way such a masochistic activity makes sense.
please spend some time reading about plastic before you respond to this post:
Plastic
http://www.mindfully.org/Plastic/plastic.htm
Your 99c belong to the RIAA - Steve Jobs
http://theregister.co.uk/content/6/33850.html
here's a couple links i just posted to the last voip story - reposted here in case you don't read that thread.
_ v1 .0.pdf
another perspective on SIP:
The Instant Messaging Standards Race:
Comparing XMPP/Jabber and SIP/SIMPLE
http://www.jabber.com/pdf/The_IM_Standards_Race
more related data for curious phreaks:
http://www.openss7.org/
http://www.openss7.org/
The Instant Messaging Standards Race:
_ v1 .0.pdf
Comparing XMPP/Jabber and SIP/SIMPLE
http://www.jabber.com/pdf/The_IM_Standards_Race
sounds a bit annoying to me. sitting through the FOTR Extended Edition then the TTT Extended Edition and then the finale - the ROTK squeeze me into a tolerable amount of time for most people Edition. talk about a let down. after i see the ROTK the first thing i'll be speculating about will be what scenes were missing that will be on the ROTK Extended Edition DVD.
actually, i also told this person that microsoft would never die because they are a huge financial entity. i've been simply questioning their ability to remain dominant in the areas they currently dominate.
i just got finished explaining to a non-techie friend how microsoft's long-term prospects on the back-end look dim. i also explained how microsoft's desktop presence is also threatened. i then went on to speculate that the future for microsoft might be under-the-hood of consumer electronics devices including disposable PCs (Dell, HP, etc.).
the future doesn't look bright for microsoft's OS business.
whitelists are problematic in the same way that the Welchia/Nachi "anti-blaster worm" worm is problematic. consumption of too much bandwidth replying to all the spam for a confirmation in case it's a legitimate human.
but will we ever be able to see the ROTK Extended Edition in theaters?
after all, it's only propaganda, and if you understand that you won't be distracted from putting your energy into positive change.
3 .html
one of the most detrimental effects of propaganda is distraction and thus redirection of energy. thankfully, in the case of linux there seem to be enough folks who aren't distracted and just keep coding.
bill gates' words can either energize you or paralyze you. if you are reacting to bill gates' (or SCO's) words you are probably paralyzed, and every bit of energy spent in reaction means exactly that amount of creative energy is redirected by propaganda.
here's some more food for thought (different issues, same principles):
Collateral Language
http://www.zmag.org/ZMagSite/Aug2003/barsamian080
i suspect one reason John's research shows little value in phrases is due to the heavy computational load that would be required to actually integrate phrases into a Bayesian system in an automated way.
Bayesian systems are stupid - they don't understand the meaning of the words that are being analyzed. thus EVERY phrase needs to be parsed and processed. also, what is a phrase? two words? three words? four words?
if you couple human intelligence with Bayesian stupidity in selecting phrases, then phrases may increase the accuracy of a Bayesian system with an acceptable increase in computational overhead.
how much of an increase in accuracy? Bayesian systems based on words seem to consistently display accuracy in the 95% - 99% range. if a Bayesian system is being used to sort hundreds or thousands of messages at a time even an additional percent or two of accuracy would be worth a significant computational increase for some folks.
this, IMHO, is the most valuable information in Phrack 60:
. html e r%201%20-%20Banned%20Edition.doc
Kevin Mitnick wrote a book, "The Art of Deception". The first chapter
has been deleted by the publisher at the last minute. It's available
on the internet:
http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,56187,00
http://littlegreenguy.fateback.com/chapter1/Chapt
[i linked this Phrack quote because Slash adds a space character to strings that wordwrap - can anyone tell me how to prevent this from happening?]
what's to prevent a private non-profit organization from taking up the reigns of PubSCIENCE?