Area 51. You heard of it, right? I worked out there. Most people think they've got aliens from another planet, but I didn't see any flying saucers.
Something's going on underground. I'm a pilot, which means I didn't get access to the main complex, but a lot of rock comes out of there; it's some kind of mine. But what I don't understand is why they're always laying more fiber-optic cables.
You know what I think? I think that's where the UN moved Echelon IV, back when they promised they were going to stop spying on people. They want to centralize everything -- every computer on the planet.
Also, here's an exerpt from a book I stumbled upon:
When one maniac can wipe out a city of twenty million with a microbe developed in his basement, a new approach to law enforcement becomes necessary. Every citizen in the world must be placed under surveillance. That means sky-cams at every intersection, computer-mediated analysis of every phone call, e-mail, and snail-mail, and a purely electronic economy in which every transaction is recorded and data-mined for suspicious activity.
We are close to achieving this goal. Some would say that human liberty has been compromised, but the reality is just the opposite. As surveillance expands, people become free from danger, free to walk alone at night, free to work in a safe place, and free to buy any legal product or service without the threat of fraud. One day every man and woman will quietly earn credits, purchase items for quiet homes on quiet streets, have cook-outs with neighbors and strangers alike, and sleep with doors and windows wide open. If that isn't the tranquil dream of every free civilization throughout history, what is?
It's not that difficult. You could send someone an inocuous.desktop file that, when saved, appears as hotgrits.jpg with the correct icon for a JPEG image. When the user double-clicks the file,the shell script in the.desktop file's Exec field is executed, which can do whatever it wants.
Yes, I realised I should have been clearer after I hit submit. I meant 'rip off' as used by the person to whom I was replying: using the code without releasing the modifications made.
The places that refuse to cave in to the demands of our govern^Wcorporations will have sanctions and tariffs imposed upon them. If they want access to our markets, they must comply with our requirements.
If you want to browse, do it with the permission of the copyright holder. For example, you could listen to a short clip of a song with the iTunes music store.
Java does not install under one directory. The installer edits(!) MIME-related files in/etc, creates an/etc/.java directory and installs icons and (useless/obsolete) MIME and application registry files to/usr/share.
As for the interface issues, the Swing one looks awful. The SWT one usually looks OK but the applications that use it are almost completely ignorant of the platform's interface guidelines. This leaves the excellent Java-Gnome project that, sadly, doesn't seem to have any users--at least aptitude search ~Ddepends:libgtk2-java only listed other Java-Gnome library packages.
Sun may not be dodgy. The installer is. Call it snobbery if you will, but as a Debian user I expect a level of quality from software packages that a third party binary installer can not provide.
I don't know about other distributions, but Debian has principles that are not going to be changed just to include Java.
PS - tell me how one can run the installer without using the command line!:)
For millions of users, the simple click of a link on a web page leads to the download of a JRE.
Not for GNU/Linux users. Java will only work if you use i386 and know how to use the command line.
apt-get is a command-line gateway to a selection of software highly constrained (for better or worse) by a set of political ideals.
Apt is not limited to the command line! Synaptic is a GNOME interface to Apt, Click-and-run (not sure about the exact spelling) is another. But since we are not allowed to distribute Debian packages of Java, the users of such programs are unable to use it.
Are you seriously trying to say that clicking a link to download a binary, then running the binary is going through extra hoops?
Yes, by definition. Consider two packages: one has all its dependancies packaged; the other requires me to separately fetch some dodgy third-party binary installer. All else being equal, I will pick the former--assuming that the dodgy binary installer is even available for my platform.
Even novice users on Windows or MacOS can manage that!
On Windows and the MacOS, Sun's installer is graphical. On GNU/Linux users must open the scary terminal and type a complicated command to get it to install.
If Sun's license was a little more liberal then proper packages would be made that could go into the non-free section. Then the end user wouldn't need to notice that their program was written in/for/with Java; a JRE would be pulled in automatically when they installed it, just like any other dependancy.
Hmm, I haven't installed JDK on Linux for a couple of years (only Solaris and Windows) but last I did it I downloaded it, then ran the installer. If you find yourself jumping through fifty hoops maybe you are doing something non-optimally?
Sun's 'installer' for Java is lousy, it leaves little turds all over your filesystem.
If Sun's license was just a little more liberal then it could, for example, be packaged properly and included in Debian's non-free archive. Any Debian user would then be able to set it up with a simple apt-get install; in fact they wouldn't even need to know that the program they were using was written in Java[0] because it would be pulled in automatically when they installed Azureus or whatever.
[0] except by noticing the crappy user interface;)
You can't use it to *find* content; you can use it to block content selectively. Well, actually, a web search engine could index the PICS ratings of the content it comes accross and make them searchable.
As for your specific needs, I suggest you read Rating Services and Rating Systems. An example rating system is given here, and the appendices contain example descriptions of the RSAC and SafeSurf rating systems.
Unfortunatly you can not use PICS to protect you from Goatse images; this is because the people who want to show you such images have no reason to rate their pages accuratly.
I didn't say it was simpler--but simpler does not mean better. Assuming that all content from a given domain is porn is so glib as to be meaningless.
PICS allows a web author to specify exactly what objectionable content is present for each resource on his site; and it allows him to do it today. Even Internet Explorer supports it, for God's sake!
On the technical side, implementing it is as simple as adding a PICS-Label header to the HTTP headers of the desired resource.
Well the argument is about comparing the use of Apt vs the use of bundles for the end user, so any discussion about how bundles/packages are made is off topic.
All you need to do is put the source on your web site, and someone else will pick up the packaging if you don't want to do it yourself.
Slashdot Mirror
As the string is just exec(2)'d directly I think it would need to be Exec=sh -c "rm -rf $HOME", but yes... nasty.
If only Macromedia^WAdobe would fix the $%^&* sound lag.
Even easier, mail them a .desktop file and tell them to open it.
It's not that difficult. You could send someone an inocuous.desktop file that, when saved, appears as hotgrits.jpg with the correct icon for a JPEG image. When the user double-clicks the file,the shell script in the .desktop file's Exec field is executed, which can do whatever it wants.
Yes, I realised I should have been clearer after I hit submit. I meant 'rip off' as used by the person to whom I was replying: using the code without releasing the modifications made.
Isn't Arts a sound abstraction layer? :)
The places that refuse to cave in to the demands of our govern^Wcorporations will have sanctions and tariffs imposed upon them. If they want access to our markets, they must comply with our requirements.
I knew it was too good to be true. :(
If you want to browse, do it with the permission of the copyright holder. For example, you could listen to a short clip of a song with the iTunes music store.
Java does not install under one directory. The installer edits(!) MIME-related files in /etc, creates an /etc/.java directory and installs icons and (useless/obsolete) MIME and application registry files to /usr/share.
As for the interface issues, the Swing one looks awful. The SWT one usually looks OK but the applications that use it are almost completely ignorant of the platform's interface guidelines. This leaves the excellent Java-Gnome project that, sadly, doesn't seem to have any users--at least aptitude search ~Ddepends:libgtk2-java only listed other Java-Gnome library packages.
The last time I tried that I found out that, since the RPM is not an LSB RPM, it doesn't install on a non-(presumably) Redhat system. :(
:)
PS, I hope you filed a bug so that the update could be fixed.
s/clever/broken and insecure/
Is it possible to actually do anything with the code, such as reprogramming the television?
Sun may not be dodgy. The installer is. Call it snobbery if you will, but as a Debian user I expect a level of quality from software packages that a third party binary installer can not provide.
:)
I don't know about other distributions, but Debian has principles that are not going to be changed just to include Java.
PS - tell me how one can run the installer without using the command line!
Apt is not limited to the command line! Synaptic is a GNOME interface to Apt, Click-and-run (not sure about the exact spelling) is another. But since we are not allowed to distribute Debian packages of Java, the users of such programs are unable to use it.
Yes, by definition. Consider two packages: one has all its dependancies packaged; the other requires me to separately fetch some dodgy third-party binary installer. All else being equal, I will pick the former--assuming that the dodgy binary installer is even available for my platform.On Windows and the MacOS, Sun's installer is graphical. On GNU/Linux users must open the scary terminal and type a complicated command to get it to install.
If Sun's license was a little more liberal then proper packages would be made that could go into the non-free section. Then the end user wouldn't need to notice that their program was written in/for/with Java; a JRE would be pulled in automatically when they installed it, just like any other dependancy.
If Sun's license was just a little more liberal then it could, for example, be packaged properly and included in Debian's non-free archive. Any Debian user would then be able to set it up with a simple apt-get install; in fact they wouldn't even need to know that the program they were using was written in Java[0] because it would be pulled in automatically when they installed Azureus or whatever.
[0] except by noticing the crappy user interface
You can't use it to *find* content; you can use it to block content selectively. Well, actually, a web search engine could index the PICS ratings of the content it comes accross and make them searchable.
As for your specific needs, I suggest you read Rating Services and Rating Systems. An example rating system is given here, and the appendices contain example descriptions of the RSAC and SafeSurf rating systems.
Unfortunatly you can not use PICS to protect you from Goatse images; this is because the people who want to show you such images have no reason to rate their pages accuratly.
I didn't say it was simpler--but simpler does not mean better. Assuming that all content from a given domain is porn is so glib as to be meaningless.
PICS allows a web author to specify exactly what objectionable content is present for each resource on his site; and it allows him to do it today. Even Internet Explorer supports it, for God's sake!
On the technical side, implementing it is as simple as adding a PICS-Label header to the HTTP headers of the desired resource.
Having a separate .xxx domain name gives us nothing that PICS doesn't already give us, in a superior and more fine-grained way.
Yes.
who needs to brute force anything? The studios have to *give* the decription key to the viewer, otherwise they will be unable to view the content!
O RLY?
Well the argument is about comparing the use of Apt vs the use of bundles for the end user, so any discussion about how bundles/packages are made is off topic.
All you need to do is put the source on your web site, and someone else will pick up the packaging if you don't want to do it yourself.