MathML is not part of the main developement tree, and no-one from Netscape is working on it, only outside developers. For me, and plenty of other users working in an academic environment, it makes Mozilla a must-have: currently the only browser that supports MathML is the W3C's Amaya browser.
The fact that Windows crashes as often as it does is, surprisingly, also not that important. Why? Because Windows users are not server operators. Uptime is not nearly as important for the typical PC user. Also, most Windows users turn their boxes on and off regularly anyway.
Whoa! Hold on a mo. For Win 3.1/95/98 this might be a fair defence, but it is not OK for Win NT which was always meant to be a server OS. The early NT boxes were egregiously missold as being something they were not.
Anyone can bring in their own laptop and hook it into an ethernet socket. The point is that if you start looking inside packets, it is possible to see that the packets have been tampered with.
Gray hat hackers means hackers who don't either try to break into your site, or to defend against it, but for whom security is just an interesting puzzle. When they figure out an exploit, they don't try to secure the system, like a white hat, or use it to break in, like a black hat, but instead they publish it to show off how smart they are.
There's two kinds of security you might aim for in your system: real security, which means securing the system against a determined and skilled attacker. You have to secure against not just all known attacks, but must also apply the best practice to minimise the vulnerability from unforseen attacks. The other kind is basic security, which protects against the `random intruder'. This means investing abit of effort in measures that protect your system from the most egregious holes.
Security through obscurity is bad for real security, but it is probably good for basic security, since if exploits aren't published only the experts know about them. Obscurity isn't a real defence, but it has a kind of sociological advantage of increasing the amount of work involved in breaking your site.
It seems to me that themes are a good thing from your point of view. Rather like style sheets, if all of this `natty design' is put in the themes, then you are free to override it.
English law has something about goods being fit for the purpose they were designed for, and I suppose the same is true of US law. I'm guessing the MPAA isn't trying to argue that the purpose of a DVD disk is to be a pretty, shiny round thing.
I was wondering about web spiders, and not just malicious ones: there are loony spiders out there that download junk like pdf files and ignore robots.txt files. Are they taking account of this kind of traffic? What about repeated downloads of the pdf file by people who misplaced the orginal that they paid for? I guess I'm asking: how can they be so sure about there numbers?
It does give some idea as to how fast/responsive the ditributions are to warnings and advisories. Given that most break ins are due to running outdated software with known security vulnerabilities, that seems to me worthwhile.
I read a fascinating article about how these bacteria are supposed to survive high doses of radiation: the ionising radiation is so energetic it will actually sever any DNA it encounters, but the bacteria is able to reassemble the original DNA from fragments. Reported in the recent Economist survey on the Genome project.
In other words, the LDPS isn't intended to be a standard which tells distributions what to do. Rather, it's a recommendation to third-party developers about how they can create binaries that are likeliest to be portable.
There is a very thorough benchmark comparing Linux (kernel 2.2.12) to FreeBSD (4.0). The benchmark takes time to analyse file system performance, kernel timings such as contexts switches and use of memeory managers and thread/process creation, all tied up with an excellent summary.
Another factor is the: well I payed my dollar, and King didn't release any more chapters. This can piss people off, who figure they have been screwed by the contract, even if the amount at stake is just a token. Depressing the utility of D (this worst case outcome) is a deterrent to people to take part, another reason why the `target percentage' is a bad idea.
The real Street Performers Protocol has a refund system in it.
The legal system you argue should always be obeyed wouldn't exist except for law breakers. Laws shouldn't be broken lightly, but injust laws shouldn't be followed blindly either.
Agreed. Jeffrey Rosen has written a lot of smart things about how a lot of things about ugly working environments have been treated with the wrong legal tools: harassment laws, where laws about personal space and dignity would have been more appropriate, with the effect of causing great intrusions into privacy. His new book `The Unwanted Gaze: The Destruction of Privacy in America', looks very promising, and I hope his ideas are influential. There's a good review here and an extract has been available for a while.
Well, the moralists seem to be very effective in state legislatures. The majority of states have sodomy laws (often worded so as to include oral sex, which is illegal in 12 states, or vague wording about `unnatural' sex) and blasphemy laws, and many states intrusive laws about who can have sex (Massachussetts has laws that criminalise adultery and premarital sex). I think American culture is less prudish than in Britain, but in this respect the States are much, much worse. In genuinely liberal countries like Germany, this makes the US a laughing stock.
I had a moderately sheltered childhood, and I became aware of pornography by the age of 7, through a very middle class, respectable school. There's more of this stuff available on the internet, but if you think pornography is an evil corrupting threat created by the internet you are wrong. It was created by the high school system a long, long time ago.
The danger of pornography is the twisted view of relationships some of it contains (you could say the same about the view of some religious organisations, but you don't see the same calls for protecting children from their filth). The best way to protect your child is to give them an understanding of the issues around them: a moral compass, if you like... The disease metaphor about pornography seems to be entirely counterproductive.
Slashdot Mirror
MathML is not part of the main developement tree, and no-one from
Netscape is working on it, only outside developers. For me, and
plenty of other users working in an academic environment, it makes
Mozilla a must-have: currently the only browser that supports MathML
is the W3C's Amaya browser.
also not that important. Why? Because Windows users are not server
operators. Uptime is not nearly as important for the typical PC user.
Also, most Windows users turn their boxes on and off regularly
anyway.
Whoa! Hold on a mo. For Win 3.1/95/98 this might be a fair defence,
but it is not OK for Win NT which was always meant to be a server OS.
The early NT boxes were egregiously missold as being something they
were not.
An advantage of S/Key is that you don't need to trust the system you are logging in from.
As a matter of interest, how do you forward ftp over ssh? Is this by using ssh to construct a VPN, or is there some other trick?
Anyone can bring in their own laptop and hook it into an ethernet
socket. The point is that if you start looking inside packets, it is
possible to see that the packets have been tampered with.
Gray hat hackers means hackers who don't either try to break into your
site, or to defend against it, but for whom security is just an
interesting puzzle. When they figure out an exploit, they don't try
to secure the system, like a white hat, or use it to break in, like a
black hat, but instead they publish it to show off how smart they are.
security, which means securing the system against a determined and
skilled attacker. You have to secure against not just all known
attacks, but must also apply the best practice to minimise the
vulnerability from unforseen attacks. The other kind is basic
security, which protects against the `random intruder'. This means
investing abit of effort in measures that protect your system from the
most egregious holes.
Security through obscurity is bad for real security, but it is
probably good for basic security, since if exploits aren't published
only the experts know about them. Obscurity isn't a real defence, but
it has a kind of sociological advantage of increasing the amount of
work involved in breaking your site.
It seems to me that themes are a good thing from your point of view.
Rather like style sheets, if all of this `natty design' is put in the
themes, then you are free to override it.
English law has something about goods being fit for the purpose they
were designed for, and I suppose the same is true of US law. I'm
guessing the MPAA isn't trying to argue that the purpose of a DVD disk
is to be a pretty, shiny round thing.
Well, I know hard drives are cheap, but I don't yet regard them as an exchangeable media :->
I was wondering about web spiders, and not just malicious ones: there
are loony spiders out there that download junk like pdf files and
ignore robots.txt files. Are they taking account of this kind of
traffic? What about repeated downloads of the pdf file by people who
misplaced the orginal that they paid for? I guess I'm asking: how can
they be so sure about there numbers?
... whereas weak typing is for those with strong stomachs.
It does give some idea as to how fast/responsive the ditributions are
to warnings and advisories. Given that most break ins are due to
running outdated software with known security vulnerabilities, that
seems to me worthwhile.
Why would reentry present any particular danger to a unicellular organism?
I read a fascinating article about how these bacteria are supposed to
survive high doses of radiation: the ionising radiation is so
energetic it will actually sever any DNA it encounters, but the
bacteria is able to reassemble the original DNA from fragments.
Reported in the recent Economist survey on the Genome project.
What's wrong with MIME? If I were to choose a UNIX standard as an example of something that wasn't broken, I'd have chosen MIME...
tells distributions what to do. Rather, it's a recommendation to
third-party developers about how they can create binaries that are
likeliest to be portable.
Not exactly totalitarian.
There is a very thorough benchmark comparing Linux (kernel 2.2.12) to
FreeBSD (4.0). The benchmark takes time to analyse file system
performance, kernel timings such as contexts switches and use of
memeory managers and thread/process creation, all tied up with an
excellent summary.
any more chapters. This can piss people off, who figure they have
been screwed by the contract, even if the amount at stake is just a
token. Depressing the utility of D (this worst case outcome) is a
deterrent to people to take part, another reason why the `target
percentage' is a bad idea.
The real Street Performers Protocol has a refund system in it.
The legal system you argue should always be obeyed wouldn't exist
except for law breakers. Laws shouldn't be broken lightly, but injust
laws shouldn't be followed blindly either.
The word is: no interoperability before KDE 3.0, as reported in several recent slashdot stories.
It has succeeded in higher education, despite Sun and MS trying to flood the universities with free versions of their products.
Agreed. Jeffrey Rosen has written a lot of smart things about how a
lot of things about ugly working environments have been treated with
the wrong legal tools: harassment laws, where laws about personal
space and dignity would have been more appropriate, with the effect of
causing great intrusions into privacy. His new book `The Unwanted
Gaze: The Destruction of Privacy in America', looks very promising,
and I hope his ideas are influential. There's a good review here and
an extract has been available for a while.
Well, the moralists seem to be very effective in state legislatures.
The majority of states have sodomy laws (often worded so as to include
oral sex, which is illegal in 12 states, or vague wording about
`unnatural' sex) and blasphemy laws, and many states intrusive laws
about who can have sex (Massachussetts has laws that criminalise
adultery and premarital sex). I think American culture is less
prudish than in Britain, but in this respect the States are much, much
worse. In genuinely liberal countries like Germany, this makes the US
a laughing stock.
by the age of 7, through a very middle class, respectable school.
There's more of this stuff available on the internet, but if you think
pornography is an evil corrupting threat created by the internet you
are wrong. It was created by the high school system a long, long time
ago.
The danger of pornography is the twisted view of relationships some
of it contains (you could say the same about the view of some
religious organisations, but you don't see the same calls for
protecting children from their filth). The best way to protect your
child is to give them an understanding of the issues around them: a
moral compass, if you like... The disease metaphor about pornography
seems to be entirely counterproductive.
Ah, thanks a lot.