With all that OOP overhype I don't see any operating system of being migrated from files-systems to object stores. Doesn't it prove that OOP concept is not a panacea?
If i need general purposes computing device, I would prefer laptop.
I am fed up with PalmOS. It takes too much efforts to develop anything for it. As for buying - the market of software for PalmOS is very limited (even less then Linux's one) and has very few of really good programs (less than a dozen). Besides, my eyes are crying after watching to palm screen longer than 5 minutes, while my fingers a sick of drawing text on it.
Laptop doesn't exceed the size of palmtop too much. I bring my Powerbook almost always with me in my backpack, which is usually with me, while its accessories are in my car, which is my usual transportation mean. Sure its a bit heavier than PalmVx, although I am not exactly a weak person, physically. But as a benefit - it's a real general-purpose computer, with dual-boot between MacOS and Linux, with virtually unlimited ability of easily writing my own applications, with local web server and database, with various multimedia tools, various content and document authoring tools. I use it for presentations, for demonstrations, for diagnostic, for training, for learning, for surfing, for data gathering and even for some AI-based data processing. And it's big enough to save my eyes and my fingers from any potential health problems typical for Palm users.
Grandma isn't going to notice that her email to aunt sally take a half second longer
Wrong. Grandma won't be able to read a word, as (1) you suggest to encrypt instead of to sign, (2) Grandma is still using either old MUA without decryption or public webmail account on yahoo/hotmail/localISP. What you suggest is breaking backward compatibility and thus no one will support your suggestion.
Besides, stealing the public key of your grandma (if it's published online is not more difficult than stealing her email address, even less difficult as it's oublished on well known keyservers. As for few more CPU cycles - it's loughable.
One more attemt to correct you: instead of encryption new-generation of email receivers (either MUA or MTA or both) should accept only signed email and signed with only trusted (from friend or from CA) key. Therefore old-generation will be still able to read email, ignoring it's signature header/footer leaving spam unfiltered (or filtered by old black-list-pattern methods and motivating the reader to migrate to new-generation. As for spammers - any attempt to go around will punish by revoking the key and thus forcing to pay a really big chunk of money for penalty as well as for new key, bigger and bigger with every revokation. That is not loughable - that will destroy a spam industry in no time.
The concept of my suggestion is: no more anonymously sent email. I understand many remember their human right and will demand the right to send email anonymously. Pay attention: no more anonymously sent email. If you want to send email anonymously and you sure it won't be revoke your trusted certificate - send it through special proxy, aka mail-list. You send it with signing it, they re-sign it with mail-list key (still trusted) and forward it to subscribers anonymously. If you send one time spam through the list, the list hosting company will be punished, they will have to pay to renew the key after temporal revoking, they will revoke your key, so you won't be able to send more than few spam messages through the same list. In other words: No more anonymous *AND* free email. It's either free or anonymous. That doesn't work for spammers. And that what I'd like to see around me.
But the area of potential tornados is a VAST area. Are you seriously suggesting that nobody should build anywhere in all of Oklahoma, Texas, Nebraska, etc?
Move to Canada. There are still enough of not-overcrowded-yet places.
Besides, I think that flooding once every 50 years is less disater as arrogant goverment after every other election.
Programming is engineering science and as such requires you to know math, rather than English.
You don't speak your code, you think it. If you think in abstract concepts - you are good with math and you are a good engineer. But if you think in plain english words - too bad, stay way from programming. Better be a manager or a businessman:)
You don't understand PKI or I don't understand you. Or let me just explain better my points, which might correct you or just put more details for what you have already said:
1. encryption will close the content of the message until decryption and thus it's good only to close a proprietary content. Eencryption by itself doesn't let me trus or distrust th thender. So, I still want to protect my mailbox from untrusted emails;
2. the only two ways for me to trust email messages is either (A) it's signed with a private key, which public counterpart is already in my keyring and thus I trust it, or (B) it's signed with a private key, which public counterpart is available online on some keyserver *AND* I trust such keyserver (that makes that server to be CA for me). A-signs are common between friends and partners, while B-sign is the way to trus previously unkown sources.
My goal is to read only email from trusted sources: my friends (I've got their public keys) and from publicly trusted sources. Therefore CA must make me to trust all keyholders hosted there. Therefore CA must revoke public keys after getting enough of compromising complains. It's a business and it cannot be free.
It won't be too expensive to buy such publicly trusted key if you buy it rarely - when you register your company with CA and you do it only once at the beginning. But it will certainly hurt spammer as they would have to buy such certificates again and again.
In business one of good practices is insurance. If several spam victims go to court and prove they've been hurt by spam from CA-trusted sources, then the court might apply charges not only to spammers, but also to CA for falsificated trust information. Therefore CA might charge different prices for different clients based on potential risks. Companies without bad trust history may pay less. Company with a bad trust history must pay more. And CA might hire private investigators to figure the trust history out as banks do before giving the credit.
If the picture above sounds sweet for you - wake up. It's not gonna happen soon. There is no such business practice between companies. More important - there is no such culture of "hygienic" email usage between regular users. That's why in a lack of demand Internet infrastructure doing nothing to stop untrusted email flow.
A#1.2: GNO was developed by Procyon Enterprises (Jawaid Bazyar, prop.). Until August 1997, GNO was a commercial product. In August 1997, Jawaid changed GNO's status to that of freeware. Procyon still retains the copyright on the kernel, gsh, and other components which were written by or for Procyon.
GNO IS NOT PUBLIC DOMAIN.
I think this explains why it was not ported on PPC and other nowadays platforms.
Most of people want to live. Many would like to live even forver. But some of want to die having various reasons for that. In many countries it's illegal to help people to die. But it doesn't stop some inventors to invent suicide plastic bags specially for such cases.
Well, while mid-class people buy guns or special plastic bags (poor people use bridges and other free-of-charge methods), top class people look for something that can satisfy their ambitions at last seconds or minutes. But how about days or weeks or even months?
Eject such guys to the orbit or to the moon, where they can enjoy their last days-weeks-months before they are running of money and air. Or they fail down to burn in the athmosphere. Or just fail down and crash to the moon. I thing many multi rich people would like to enjoy such an end. People, who are still alive, will enjoy they payment. So, everybody would be happy.
... I think I should patent the idea... or at least GPL it:)
I absolutely support that PK is the way to protect email. However, the trick is in infrastrucure, PKI.
What is the % of email users receives their MUA (email clients) with PKI support? Is there any PKI support in Yahoo and Hotmail free email hosting systems? How about AOL, Earthlink and other ISPs?
OK, my friends have god Evolution and Outlook, both with PKI support. Is it right that they can sign email and read it? No problems between proprietary and open standards?
Finally, what CA can they use? How easy is it? Is it free?
And don't forget: do all (or most of) email users know what is PKI and why they need it?
Persoanlly I use GPG. But I see (and experience!) lots of problems with PKI and with other users because of most questions above have not-so promising answers.
I agree, why water? But thinking further I believe that Uranus and Saturn has more chances of having life than Mars. Those giants has a lot of gas and lots of energy - that's exactly what's needed for life, for self-organizing evolving processes. The question is - can we recognize such life? I suspect we have a very narrow vision and we look only for life similar to us, based on DNA and all chemistry around it. Open your mind! How did you define "life"? And why? Are you sure there is no life in plasma clouds around the star? Even, are you sure our sky clouds are not alive here, on Earth?
Neither a header or a body are forged if e-signed (like with PGP).
I want to protect my mailbox from all spammers, including human beings being capable to read the picture, therefore Earthlink does not protect me. However I do: I use whitelists. At least I try and I know it's not enough. I want to require all senders to sign their email messages with a certificate I could trust. But the only way to make it work is to have a global (even international) infrustructure of trusted, available and affordable (!) CAs. Do we have such thing yet?
1. it's not an awful work when Linux with MOL are already tuned on your PPC for many other reasons. For example, MOL gives me some Mac games as well as Flash player for Mozilla. I run MOL sometimes for it, while Linux on my PPC works in 24/7 (I reboot Gentoo/Linux only when I move to another apartment).
2. Somehow I am more comfortable from legal prospective in saving the sound of MOL in Linux than in hijacking it using special cracking software in OSX.
Indeed I don't need one more such tradegy. I would rather withdraw all my arguments then look for their confirmation.
My point was, that already twice America lost 7 crew members, killed by very comfortable, but yet dangerous vehicle. Comparing to Soyuz - it's too high price. And I mean first of all human lives when I said "price".
Although, the economics of NASA is also a big looser and would not work even a day without such big pockets as US Goverment opens for it.
Yes, you can burn the AACs as plain audio onto a blank CD-R, and then re-rip and re-encode them as MP3s and then manually re-tag them, but as a file-conversion technique, this process takes a lot of time. And uses up an awful lot of plastic, too.
You can save in your favorite format without actual CD burning:
Boot Linux on your PPC, start MOL with your OSX in X11 window with network activated, run iTunes, listen the file, hook at your xmms and save it in any format xmms supports.
Legally, you should do it only to listen on the same PPC, just when you boot to Linux. Or, let's say, for "backup" purposes (like on tape).
US goverment artificially does everything to make DSL as hard available for Americans as possible. So, Americans has to use dialup. Most of Americans use AOL. AOL is under the same roof as CNN. And the goverment want to make sure that most of new American people read from CNN. Simple. Because they don't want Americans to think.
Let's take the situation with International Crime Court. I was reading about since the begining, since the time when Bush administration said that American soldiers cannot be called to that court. That was actually even before Afganistan compain. And you know what? All Europian and Asian news agencies was full of headlines about such a scandal story ("America wants to be above the international law!"), but CNN has keeping a silence in about 5 days until it first time has mentionened the story. They have been waiting the further developement of events or commands from the White House or both.
I know, the most of American/.ers are on DSL already. But they are a fraction of % of all Americans. Besides they are "strange people" for the most of Americans. No one will listen them. 99.99% - that's the number the administration wants to control. They must watch CNN and only CNN and they must connect to internet using AOL and only AOL.
As for Canada - somehow here the goverment is more free to do its corrupted business no matter what Canadians read, think and say. That's why it's way too simpler and cheaper and of better quality to get DSL here in GTA than in Silicon Valley. I know what I am talking about - I used to use DSL in both places.
The software industry may get worse because of outsourcing to 3rd world countries where the labor costs are lower but it will not just die.
Expansion (through the offshore outsourcing) of software industry from USA to the rest of the world is helping the world's software industry overall. It may hurt bit in a salary of some Americans, but don't worry about them - they are not gonna just die:)
So, instead of wasting time to search for non-exisitng "missed" parts of the universe, it's better to find the way how to crack the Matrix and actually to fix it. I think it's worthy of Matrix-4 in the sequel:)
So, in order to enforce such a law, we have to make impossible any falsifiing of SMTP header. The only reliable way to do it is to migrate all SMTP infrastructure to certifications. But having done that no taxes are needed: it would be easier and more efficient to stop spammers with white-lists based on trusted certificated signed by trusted CA.
Oops. Did I say trusted CA? Here is the key! In order to send the message I have to sign it. And it most likely that the key will cost money. And key holders with a bad reputation can be punished even more severe.
So, don't go to taxes: it won't work internationally, it will hurt innocent users and it won't work efficiently in USA. Instead go with CA/PKI - that the only way to make sure that Internet users can still trust each other and trus Internet itself.
Gentoo leaves you a choice of keeping your system stable or keeping the bleeding edge. If you have stable flags and keyword settings than any instability would be so rare that many gentoo developers will be eager to see why it fails on updates. My observation of my own experience and also of what I see on forums and bugzilla is that in 99% of cases when upgrade is screewd up is b/c the user has installed (or reconfigured) the system to accept risky versions and unstable flags.
Having said that I'd like to add that this comment is not a RTFM, I just try to explain the real situation.
Slashdot Mirror
With all that OOP overhype I don't see any operating system of being migrated from files-systems to object stores. Doesn't it prove that OOP concept is not a panacea?
I am fed up with PalmOS. It takes too much efforts to develop anything for it. As for buying - the market of software for PalmOS is very limited (even less then Linux's one) and has very few of really good programs (less than a dozen). Besides, my eyes are crying after watching to palm screen longer than 5 minutes, while my fingers a sick of drawing text on it.
Laptop doesn't exceed the size of palmtop too much. I bring my Powerbook almost always with me in my backpack, which is usually with me, while its accessories are in my car, which is my usual transportation mean. Sure its a bit heavier than PalmVx, although I am not exactly a weak person, physically. But as a benefit - it's a real general-purpose computer, with dual-boot between MacOS and Linux, with virtually unlimited ability of easily writing my own applications, with local web server and database, with various multimedia tools, various content and document authoring tools. I use it for presentations, for demonstrations, for diagnostic, for training, for learning, for surfing, for data gathering and even for some AI-based data processing. And it's big enough to save my eyes and my fingers from any potential health problems typical for Palm users.
So, that's a general-purpose computer device.
Wrong. Grandma won't be able to read a word, as (1) you suggest to encrypt instead of to sign, (2) Grandma is still using either old MUA without decryption or public webmail account on yahoo/hotmail/localISP. What you suggest is breaking backward compatibility and thus no one will support your suggestion.
Besides, stealing the public key of your grandma (if it's published online is not more difficult than stealing her email address, even less difficult as it's oublished on well known keyservers. As for few more CPU cycles - it's loughable.
One more attemt to correct you: instead of encryption new-generation of email receivers (either MUA or MTA or both) should accept only signed email and signed with only trusted (from friend or from CA) key. Therefore old-generation will be still able to read email, ignoring it's signature header/footer leaving spam unfiltered (or filtered by old black-list-pattern methods and motivating the reader to migrate to new-generation. As for spammers - any attempt to go around will punish by revoking the key and thus forcing to pay a really big chunk of money for penalty as well as for new key, bigger and bigger with every revokation. That is not loughable - that will destroy a spam industry in no time.
The concept of my suggestion is: no more anonymously sent email. I understand many remember their human right and will demand the right to send email anonymously. Pay attention: no more anonymously sent email. If you want to send email anonymously and you sure it won't be revoke your trusted certificate - send it through special proxy, aka mail-list. You send it with signing it, they re-sign it with mail-list key (still trusted) and forward it to subscribers anonymously. If you send one time spam through the list, the list hosting company will be punished, they will have to pay to renew the key after temporal revoking, they will revoke your key, so you won't be able to send more than few spam messages through the same list. In other words: No more anonymous *AND* free email. It's either free or anonymous. That doesn't work for spammers. And that what I'd like to see around me.
Move to Canada. There are still enough of not-overcrowded-yet places.
Besides, I think that flooding once every 50 years is less disater as arrogant goverment after every other election.
English spear, uh? Use Cobol then.
Programming is engineering science and as such requires you to know math, rather than English.
You don't speak your code, you think it. If you think in abstract concepts - you are good with math and you are a good engineer. But if you think in plain english words - too bad, stay way from programming. Better be a manager or a businessman :)
1. encryption will close the content of the message until decryption and thus it's good only to close a proprietary content. Eencryption by itself doesn't let me trus or distrust th thender. So, I still want to protect my mailbox from untrusted emails;
2. the only two ways for me to trust email messages is either (A) it's signed with a private key, which public counterpart is already in my keyring and thus I trust it, or (B) it's signed with a private key, which public counterpart is available online on some keyserver *AND* I trust such keyserver (that makes that server to be CA for me). A-signs are common between friends and partners, while B-sign is the way to trus previously unkown sources.
My goal is to read only email from trusted sources: my friends (I've got their public keys) and from publicly trusted sources. Therefore CA must make me to trust all keyholders hosted there. Therefore CA must revoke public keys after getting enough of compromising complains. It's a business and it cannot be free.
It won't be too expensive to buy such publicly trusted key if you buy it rarely - when you register your company with CA and you do it only once at the beginning. But it will certainly hurt spammer as they would have to buy such certificates again and again.
In business one of good practices is insurance. If several spam victims go to court and prove they've been hurt by spam from CA-trusted sources, then the court might apply charges not only to spammers, but also to CA for falsificated trust information. Therefore CA might charge different prices for different clients based on potential risks. Companies without bad trust history may pay less. Company with a bad trust history must pay more. And CA might hire private investigators to figure the trust history out as banks do before giving the credit.
If the picture above sounds sweet for you - wake up. It's not gonna happen soon. There is no such business practice between companies. More important - there is no such culture of "hygienic" email usage between regular users. That's why in a lack of demand Internet infrastructure doing nothing to stop untrusted email flow.
- CPU: from 200Mhz to 2Ghz - 10 times;
- RAM: from 128MB to 1GB - about 10 times;
- ISP: from 33K to 3Mbs - 100 times;
- System Bus: from 66 Mhz to 133 MHz - 2 times;
So, seems like motherboards is the worst parts, at least for typical home PCs and desktops. Too bad.Or is it just a problem of x86 architecture?
Too bad that personal ambitions kill good ideas.
Well, while mid-class people buy guns or special plastic bags (poor people use bridges and other free-of-charge methods), top class people look for something that can satisfy their ambitions at last seconds or minutes. But how about days or weeks or even months?
Eject such guys to the orbit or to the moon, where they can enjoy their last days-weeks-months before they are running of money and air. Or they fail down to burn in the athmosphere. Or just fail down and crash to the moon. I thing many multi rich people would like to enjoy such an end. People, who are still alive, will enjoy they payment. So, everybody would be happy.
What is the % of email users receives their MUA (email clients) with PKI support? Is there any PKI support in Yahoo and Hotmail free email hosting systems? How about AOL, Earthlink and other ISPs?
OK, my friends have god Evolution and Outlook, both with PKI support. Is it right that they can sign email and read it? No problems between proprietary and open standards?
Finally, what CA can they use? How easy is it? Is it free?
And don't forget: do all (or most of) email users know what is PKI and why they need it?
Persoanlly I use GPG. But I see (and experience!) lots of problems with PKI and with other users because of most questions above have not-so promising answers.
I agree, why water? But thinking further I believe that Uranus and Saturn has more chances of having life than Mars. Those giants has a lot of gas and lots of energy - that's exactly what's needed for life, for self-organizing evolving processes. The question is - can we recognize such life? I suspect we have a very narrow vision and we look only for life similar to us, based on DNA and all chemistry around it. Open your mind! How did you define "life"? And why? Are you sure there is no life in plasma clouds around the star? Even, are you sure our sky clouds are not alive here, on Earth?
I want to protect my mailbox from all spammers, including human beings being capable to read the picture, therefore Earthlink does not protect me. However I do: I use whitelists. At least I try and I know it's not enough. I want to require all senders to sign their email messages with a certificate I could trust. But the only way to make it work is to have a global (even international) infrustructure of trusted, available and affordable (!) CAs. Do we have such thing yet?
If you, guys in HP, support linux, then where are Linux drivers for your scanners?
Don't say words - prove it by your deeds.
2. Somehow I am more comfortable from legal prospective in saving the sound of MOL in Linux than in hijacking it using special cracking software in OSX.
My point was, that already twice America lost 7 crew members, killed by very comfortable, but yet dangerous vehicle. Comparing to Soyuz - it's too high price. And I mean first of all human lives when I said "price".
Although, the economics of NASA is also a big looser and would not work even a day without such big pockets as US Goverment opens for it.
You can save in your favorite format without actual CD burning:
Boot Linux on your PPC, start MOL with your OSX in X11 window with network activated, run iTunes, listen the file, hook at your xmms and save it in any format xmms supports.
Legally, you should do it only to listen on the same PPC, just when you boot to Linux. Or, let's say, for "backup" purposes (like on tape).
Hold on. Once M$ will announce (I guess - very soon) same/similar service, that would be 1M/day, and only if M$ will limit it to USA as Apple does.
That's right. "You" are Americans. As such you prefer to kill 7 crew memebers (again and again) when they fly in comfortable conditions.
Let's take the situation with International Crime Court. I was reading about since the begining, since the time when Bush administration said that American soldiers cannot be called to that court. That was actually even before Afganistan compain. And you know what? All Europian and Asian news agencies was full of headlines about such a scandal story ("America wants to be above the international law!"), but CNN has keeping a silence in about 5 days until it first time has mentionened the story. They have been waiting the further developement of events or commands from the White House or both.
I know, the most of American /.ers are on DSL already. But they are a fraction of % of all Americans. Besides they are "strange people" for the most of Americans. No one will listen them. 99.99% - that's the number the administration wants to control. They must watch CNN and only CNN and they must connect to internet using AOL and only AOL.
As for Canada - somehow here the goverment is more free to do its corrupted business no matter what Canadians read, think and say. That's why it's way too simpler and cheaper and of better quality to get DSL here in GTA than in Silicon Valley. I know what I am talking about - I used to use DSL in both places.
Americans are so ignorant. Ignore them too :)
Expansion (through the offshore outsourcing) of software industry from USA to the rest of the world is helping the world's software industry overall. It may hurt bit in a salary of some Americans, but don't worry about them - they are not gonna just die :)
So, instead of wasting time to search for non-exisitng "missed" parts of the universe, it's better to find the way how to crack the Matrix and actually to fix it. I think it's worthy of Matrix-4 in the sequel :)
Oops. Did I say trusted CA? Here is the key! In order to send the message I have to sign it. And it most likely that the key will cost money. And key holders with a bad reputation can be punished even more severe.
So, don't go to taxes: it won't work internationally, it will hurt innocent users and it won't work efficiently in USA. Instead go with CA/PKI - that the only way to make sure that Internet users can still trust each other and trus Internet itself.
Having said that I'd like to add that this comment is not a RTFM, I just try to explain the real situation.