The comment was more along the lines of, had those patches never been created in the first place, would SP2's Data Execution Prevention still prevent the problem? After all, "Prevention" implies a proactive system, so it should be able to prevent the problem even if a patch doesn't even exist.
So why not block any stories labeled as "Politics" from your home page? That's what that feature is there for. Some of us like a more well-balanced homepage, and the default is the most inclusive. From there you can edit the page down until you get your own individual view.
Even worse is the fact that they actually have no shame in selling an "Extreme" power cord for $59. I didn't know that power cords were so important in the performance of a computer...
Hard drives are considered "user servicable parts" under AppleCare and therefore changing them doesn't void your warranty. In fact, virtually everything you could buy off the shelf and install into your G4 will be considered user servicable. The only things that could void your warranty would be, say, changing out the logic board or other devices that aren't readily available and must be procured from Apple.
Now, of course, if you go to install a hard drive, and you snap pins off of the IDE connector on the logic board, then yeah, you would void your warranty. This is no different from PCs. However, assuming that everything gets done correctly, AppleCare will continue to cover your computer regardless of what you've upgraded.
Starbucks isn't owned by Philip Morris and, as far as I know, never has been. It's a publicly traded company which, by extension, means it's owned jointly by all of its shareholders. The same thing applies to Kraft, which a while ago was spun off from Philip Morris and is now publicly traded as well.
Your argument only works if you assume that fully 100% of people who are arrested and in the process of being booked are guilty. What if the police are looking for someone who is accused of a crime and pick up someone who only looks similar. Then, what if that person's boss is sitting at work, watching the jailcam, and sees that person and decides to fire them rather than continuing hiring what appears to be a criminal? Not everyone who is booked for a crime happens to be guilty, and you have to draw a line somewhere to protect those who are innocent yet get arrested wrongly.
One way is P/E ratios. At this price, Google must be trading at over a hundred times annual earnings if they open at the commonly-quoted price. That's extremely high based on their still young company's forward performance. I'd wait and see how much their earnings really are (I doubt it's much beyond $1/share) and then decide what the right valuation is.
I don't think the point is that a commercial entity must be evil, but instead must not necessarily be good. As I've said many times before, the average publicly-traded company is not designed to be a benevolent voice for the consumer, it's designed to make money (in the vast majority of cases, in a legal manner). Anything "good" they do is purely designed to bring some tangible benefit to the company. Case in point: the Microsoft agreement to donate software and computers to schools. But, guess what? They're all Windows based! They're locking schools into their platform while looking like they're nice to the general public.
I dare say that the "little investor" would get the raw end of the deal in this IPO. Anyone who buys shares at $130 on opening day will quite likely be mighty upset when in a few months those shares are worth half that or less. I'm not sure that Google can sustain that high of a price for very long.
Likewise with the Airport card in my iBook, a Linksys router, and a Vtech phone. I kept getting low bandwidth and outright disconnections until I switched the channel to 11. From then on it's worked perfectly.
Well, considering that they're already up to 0.9.3, it seems that the Firefox/Thunderbird team doesn't have much time to get the silent install working. It'd be nice to have it working well before 1.0, instead of just including it in the 1.0 version and letting people have beta-quality installers in what's supposed to be a stable version. Something like silent installation is going to take quite a bit of testing in many different situations before it gets stable.
How is the grandparent post a troll? The poster details exactly their rationale for preferring BSD over Linux. Linux and BSD are often designed for different purposes. They are not direct equals, no matter how much you want them to be. They have different methodologies and purposes.
As for games, well, some of us prefer to play games on PCs rather than consoles. I'd much rather play Counterstrike on a PC than on a console, and there are many games that I like that I simply can't find in console form. Just because you like something better doesn't automatically make it better.
In closing, I'm not quite sure that the grandparent post is the troll post in this thread. Arguments could be made that your post is the obligatory "Linux and its popular methodology rocks everything else" troll.
Moving up to the 9600XT 128 isn't expensive at all ($40), and you get much more than $40 worth of extra performance over the standard FX5200. Also note that the new dual 2.5 Power Macs come standard with the 9600XT. However, considering that Doom 3 for the Mac hasn't even been demoed yet, I find it all to be a moot point until we get a taste of what it runs like.
Now specifically at work, but when my girlfriend calls I launch UT2003 and play a zoom-instagib deathmatch game using one hand (thum button forwards, left click shoot, right click jump, middle click zoom, pinky button backwards). This helps to keep me sane while talking to her.
For some reason, the above quote strikes me as exactly the sort of thing I'd see on Slashdot. Well, OK, it does reference the word "girlfriend", a word foreign to approximately 99.9% of the Slashdot population. However, if said population did have girlfriends (or boyfriends), this is exactly what I would expect them to say.
(All of this is, of course, tongue in cheek. I'm just kidding!)
How so? What's the stop the author of your favorite page (other than Slashdot;), who happens to unwittingly be less than honest, secretly preloading the XUL on his/her page, and then including a link labeled "Donate to RandomSite using Paypal!" which, when clicked, actually uses a similar exploit? Phishing emails are easy to identify, but this exploit is far from limited to just those. I think the implication that you and others on Slashdot are superior to those "simple IE-using folk" who click on phishing emails is simply wrong. This exploit could affect any of us.
This proof-of-concept page seems to be a quick hack to simply prove that it can be done. If the author spent enough time, I'm sure they could code something that would fix many of the weird quirks that are in the current XUL version. And, frankly, that's what concerns me.
Well, that's only partially true. It does look slightly odd when you load the exploit in OS X's version of Firefox, but it's possible that someone, looking at the screen in a hurry, could realize that it's different only after entering their user name and password and hitting submit.
That being said, I'm slightly upset at the fact that this problem was known for 5 years, and it took someone just happening to find this bug for the Mozilla developers to ever admit that it existed. I'm a big fan of Firefox (it's my main browser now), but I expect the development team to be a little more forthcoming when it comes to identifying and fixing these bugs.
We Mac users get an official RealPlayer, but it doesn't seem to come with any spyware. It's a bit harder to install spyware on a *nix/BSD system that has things like permissions to deal with, as opposed to Windows, which doesn't really enforce many limitations on programs running. The program works OK in my experience, certainly better than on Windows, but with so many places going Quicktime and WMP nowadays, I really don't use Real streams all that much.
The problem with "consumer choice first, corporate interests second" is that it doesn't benefit Apple in the end. Like it or not, corporations are not formed to be the benevolent fighters for consumers. Corporations, especially ones that issue stock, are beholden first and foremost to their bottom line. If something is losing them money, they are expected to take action to regain their market. That may take the form of introducing new technology or, when appropriate, suing other companies that illegally manipulate their products.
The one thing that they will NOT do is say, "Well, this will cost us $X million, and won't gain us at least (X+1) million back, but it's good for $RANDOM_SLASHDOT_ISSUE_OF_THE_WEEK, so let's go ahead and do it!" That's not how business works. Anything that encourages consumer choice must go hand-in-hand with the corporation's financial interests. Whether you may find this morally reprehensible or not, it's the way that business goes. (Note that all of these actions must take legal forms. I'm not advocating corporations doing an Enron in order to get ahead. However, I am saying that there is a fundamental difference between the focus of consumers, and the focus of corporations.)
As far as I know, Google hasn't actually started the auction process yet. If they had, the shares would be trading as of today, which obviously hasn't happened yet. More likely what they did is just poll some of the bigger traders and say, "If you were buying Google stock today, what would you pay for it?". Then, they take those numbers and calculate the price that people were willing to pay on average.
Here's the registration form with the SEC that Google filed when they wanted to issue shares a few months ago. Although, they say that the stock price is based upon the auction format that they are setting up, which makes sense because then the people who buy into the IPO determine the price in this style of selling. Google or someone else is probably just estimating, based on surveying traders, what the market is willing to pay for stock in the auction.
Microsoft's been involved with other promotional games in the past, particularly (as noted earlier in the comments) the AI (the movie) interactive game. There's been some hope that Microsoft and the "puppetmasters" of the AI game might return in the future with another game, especially after the overwhelming success of the AI game. With any luck, this is another similar game and should be just as challenging if they kept the same people on board.
Well, for the most part you are right. However, players of "The Beast" did get offered free tickets to the sneak preview of the movie in theaters through one of the game's sites. Unfortunately, I heard about the game too late to get really involved in it, but there have been other "Alternate Reality Games" created in the meantime, particularly Chasing the Wish, which concluded not too long ago. It's really an interesting genre of game, presenting a new and particularly challenging gameplay.
More along the lines of, it failed because it was effectively painted as being "of, by, and for idiots." Never underestimate the power of media and the other candidates in being able to influence the direction of an election, even if what they say has no bearing on reality.
Slashdot Mirror
The comment was more along the lines of, had those patches never been created in the first place, would SP2's Data Execution Prevention still prevent the problem? After all, "Prevention" implies a proactive system, so it should be able to prevent the problem even if a patch doesn't even exist.
So why not block any stories labeled as "Politics" from your home page? That's what that feature is there for. Some of us like a more well-balanced homepage, and the default is the most inclusive. From there you can edit the page down until you get your own individual view.
Even worse is the fact that they actually have no shame in selling an "Extreme" power cord for $59. I didn't know that power cords were so important in the performance of a computer...
Hard drives are considered "user servicable parts" under AppleCare and therefore changing them doesn't void your warranty. In fact, virtually everything you could buy off the shelf and install into your G4 will be considered user servicable. The only things that could void your warranty would be, say, changing out the logic board or other devices that aren't readily available and must be procured from Apple.
Now, of course, if you go to install a hard drive, and you snap pins off of the IDE connector on the logic board, then yeah, you would void your warranty. This is no different from PCs. However, assuming that everything gets done correctly, AppleCare will continue to cover your computer regardless of what you've upgraded.
Starbucks isn't owned by Philip Morris and, as far as I know, never has been. It's a publicly traded company which, by extension, means it's owned jointly by all of its shareholders. The same thing applies to Kraft, which a while ago was spun off from Philip Morris and is now publicly traded as well.
Your argument only works if you assume that fully 100% of people who are arrested and in the process of being booked are guilty. What if the police are looking for someone who is accused of a crime and pick up someone who only looks similar. Then, what if that person's boss is sitting at work, watching the jailcam, and sees that person and decides to fire them rather than continuing hiring what appears to be a criminal? Not everyone who is booked for a crime happens to be guilty, and you have to draw a line somewhere to protect those who are innocent yet get arrested wrongly.
One way is P/E ratios. At this price, Google must be trading at over a hundred times annual earnings if they open at the commonly-quoted price. That's extremely high based on their still young company's forward performance. I'd wait and see how much their earnings really are (I doubt it's much beyond $1/share) and then decide what the right valuation is.
I don't think the point is that a commercial entity must be evil, but instead must not necessarily be good. As I've said many times before, the average publicly-traded company is not designed to be a benevolent voice for the consumer, it's designed to make money (in the vast majority of cases, in a legal manner). Anything "good" they do is purely designed to bring some tangible benefit to the company. Case in point: the Microsoft agreement to donate software and computers to schools. But, guess what? They're all Windows based! They're locking schools into their platform while looking like they're nice to the general public.
I dare say that the "little investor" would get the raw end of the deal in this IPO. Anyone who buys shares at $130 on opening day will quite likely be mighty upset when in a few months those shares are worth half that or less. I'm not sure that Google can sustain that high of a price for very long.
Likewise with the Airport card in my iBook, a Linksys router, and a Vtech phone. I kept getting low bandwidth and outright disconnections until I switched the channel to 11. From then on it's worked perfectly.
Well, considering that they're already up to 0.9.3, it seems that the Firefox/Thunderbird team doesn't have much time to get the silent install working. It'd be nice to have it working well before 1.0, instead of just including it in the 1.0 version and letting people have beta-quality installers in what's supposed to be a stable version. Something like silent installation is going to take quite a bit of testing in many different situations before it gets stable.
How is the grandparent post a troll? The poster details exactly their rationale for preferring BSD over Linux. Linux and BSD are often designed for different purposes. They are not direct equals, no matter how much you want them to be. They have different methodologies and purposes.
As for games, well, some of us prefer to play games on PCs rather than consoles. I'd much rather play Counterstrike on a PC than on a console, and there are many games that I like that I simply can't find in console form. Just because you like something better doesn't automatically make it better.
In closing, I'm not quite sure that the grandparent post is the troll post in this thread. Arguments could be made that your post is the obligatory "Linux and its popular methodology rocks everything else" troll.
Moving up to the 9600XT 128 isn't expensive at all ($40), and you get much more than $40 worth of extra performance over the standard FX5200. Also note that the new dual 2.5 Power Macs come standard with the 9600XT. However, considering that Doom 3 for the Mac hasn't even been demoed yet, I find it all to be a moot point until we get a taste of what it runs like.
Now specifically at work, but when my girlfriend calls I launch UT2003 and play a zoom-instagib deathmatch game using one hand (thum button forwards, left click shoot, right click jump, middle click zoom, pinky button backwards). This helps to keep me sane while talking to her.
For some reason, the above quote strikes me as exactly the sort of thing I'd see on Slashdot. Well, OK, it does reference the word "girlfriend", a word foreign to approximately 99.9% of the Slashdot population. However, if said population did have girlfriends (or boyfriends), this is exactly what I would expect them to say.
(All of this is, of course, tongue in cheek. I'm just kidding!)
How so? What's the stop the author of your favorite page (other than Slashdot ;), who happens to unwittingly be less than honest, secretly preloading the XUL on his/her page, and then including a link labeled "Donate to RandomSite using Paypal!" which, when clicked, actually uses a similar exploit? Phishing emails are easy to identify, but this exploit is far from limited to just those. I think the implication that you and others on Slashdot are superior to those "simple IE-using folk" who click on phishing emails is simply wrong. This exploit could affect any of us.
This proof-of-concept page seems to be a quick hack to simply prove that it can be done. If the author spent enough time, I'm sure they could code something that would fix many of the weird quirks that are in the current XUL version. And, frankly, that's what concerns me.
Well, that's only partially true. It does look slightly odd when you load the exploit in OS X's version of Firefox, but it's possible that someone, looking at the screen in a hurry, could realize that it's different only after entering their user name and password and hitting submit.
That being said, I'm slightly upset at the fact that this problem was known for 5 years, and it took someone just happening to find this bug for the Mozilla developers to ever admit that it existed. I'm a big fan of Firefox (it's my main browser now), but I expect the development team to be a little more forthcoming when it comes to identifying and fixing these bugs.
We Mac users get an official RealPlayer, but it doesn't seem to come with any spyware. It's a bit harder to install spyware on a *nix/BSD system that has things like permissions to deal with, as opposed to Windows, which doesn't really enforce many limitations on programs running. The program works OK in my experience, certainly better than on Windows, but with so many places going Quicktime and WMP nowadays, I really don't use Real streams all that much.
The problem with "consumer choice first, corporate interests second" is that it doesn't benefit Apple in the end. Like it or not, corporations are not formed to be the benevolent fighters for consumers. Corporations, especially ones that issue stock, are beholden first and foremost to their bottom line. If something is losing them money, they are expected to take action to regain their market. That may take the form of introducing new technology or, when appropriate, suing other companies that illegally manipulate their products.
The one thing that they will NOT do is say, "Well, this will cost us $X million, and won't gain us at least (X+1) million back, but it's good for $RANDOM_SLASHDOT_ISSUE_OF_THE_WEEK, so let's go ahead and do it!" That's not how business works. Anything that encourages consumer choice must go hand-in-hand with the corporation's financial interests. Whether you may find this morally reprehensible or not, it's the way that business goes. (Note that all of these actions must take legal forms. I'm not advocating corporations doing an Enron in order to get ahead. However, I am saying that there is a fundamental difference between the focus of consumers, and the focus of corporations.)
Perhaps you're thinking of Warren Buffett? Warren Beatty is an actor/director.
As far as I know, Google hasn't actually started the auction process yet. If they had, the shares would be trading as of today, which obviously hasn't happened yet. More likely what they did is just poll some of the bigger traders and say, "If you were buying Google stock today, what would you pay for it?". Then, they take those numbers and calculate the price that people were willing to pay on average.
Here's the registration form with the SEC that Google filed when they wanted to issue shares a few months ago. Although, they say that the stock price is based upon the auction format that they are setting up, which makes sense because then the people who buy into the IPO determine the price in this style of selling. Google or someone else is probably just estimating, based on surveying traders, what the market is willing to pay for stock in the auction.
Microsoft's been involved with other promotional games in the past, particularly (as noted earlier in the comments) the AI (the movie) interactive game. There's been some hope that Microsoft and the "puppetmasters" of the AI game might return in the future with another game, especially after the overwhelming success of the AI game. With any luck, this is another similar game and should be just as challenging if they kept the same people on board.
Well, for the most part you are right. However, players of "The Beast" did get offered free tickets to the sneak preview of the movie in theaters through one of the game's sites. Unfortunately, I heard about the game too late to get really involved in it, but there have been other "Alternate Reality Games" created in the meantime, particularly Chasing the Wish, which concluded not too long ago. It's really an interesting genre of game, presenting a new and particularly challenging gameplay.
More along the lines of, it failed because it was effectively painted as being "of, by, and for idiots." Never underestimate the power of media and the other candidates in being able to influence the direction of an election, even if what they say has no bearing on reality.