What about running CGI scripts on a separate virtual machine from the rest of the system? Basically set up a separate web server on that, and have all CGI scripts be executed from there. For access to shared resources, have a "gate keeper" process (or module in the web server) running on the original host which can give out one-time passwords which are then passed onto the script, and which the script can then use to access the resources through that gate keeper. The gate keeper can have a detailed knowledge about what each script is allowed to access, and block any other request. I'm not sure if this would be feasible performance-wise, but I think it would make quite a secure system. Indeed, the script server could mount all file systems readonly (you could even remove the write capability from the file system driver if you're paranoid enough), because you don't need to change the scripts from within the scripts (installing the scripts would be done from the host system or another virtual machine). That way, even if someone managed to hijack a script, the worst he could do is to mess with those things the specific script is allowed to access (because the gate keeper knows which script was called, and won't allow any other access). Unless the attacker additionally finds a security hole in the gate keeper process, of course. As an additional bonus, the scripts would not need to have the database password (the gate keeper would have it), so even if the script server was completely hacked, the database password would still not leak.
Also they say that the starter edition(!) of the control software will cost $300. Yes, that's for the software only. In addition to the cost of the actual printer (which seems not yet to be decided).
The phone icon is a universal symbol that's been around since at least 1996. While Apple did apply for a trademark on it in 2010, the pre-existing use of the symbol I've linked to I think pretty clearly invalidates the trademark. Unless you're somehow claiming nobody else is allowed to color their phone symbol green (the internationally recognized color for go).
Look at this phone: What do you see on one of the buttons? Correct: A green phone receiver icon. And it cleary predates the iPhone.
Read the documentation of BetterPrivacy to see the limitations. Ideally, it would offer controls on par with Cookie Monster. However, that's simply not possible with Flash cookies.
What you don't seem to realize is that you're playing exactly the same game: using your familiarity with the Gimp as an excuse to think it's intuitive when it is far from it.
I said "I consider it very intuitive" not "it is very intuitive". That's a big difference.
The Gimp blows them all away in sheer maddening unusability, or did the last time I bothered to try, which was probably ten years ago.
The UI 10 years ago was very different from today. It didn't even have a menu bar back then!
It earned itself a lifetime ban from me. I literally don't care how much anyone says it's improved; the scars are too deep.
Well, it's OK if you decided for yourself that you don't want to look at it again, it's your decision. However if you have no idea what the interface looks like today, you should refrain from claiming it to be very bad. You simply don't know the current interface, therefore you're simply not qualified to say whether it's good or bad.
Note that I don't say the GIMP UI is perfect. It isn't. But overall I consider it quite well. It allowed me to discover a lot of functionality without reading manuals or tutorials.
IIRC, toolbar behavior was especially frustrating for me-- they weren't floating,
There's an option about whether to keep toolbars on top (it might be that this wasn't yet there when you used it, though). Of course it also depends on whether your window manager honours the request.
they tended to be buried under things
Isn't that the same complaint as before?
and they sometimes got sent to the wrong virtual desktop.
Never happened to me. Maybe I was just lucky, maybe my window manager is better (it's the window manager's job to put the window on the correct desktop, AFAIK GIMP cannot do anything about it), or maybe my usage pattern just doesn't lead to such problems.
Of course programs on other operating systems could do "single window mode" (i.e. MDI). However normally only programs on Windows do.
Linux always has either none or multiple windows?
"Single window mode" here means MDI, i.e. having a single main window with subwindows instead of multiple independent windows.
I for one think it's nice to be able to have the screen focused on a single purpose without a distracting background or icons and windows you might accidentally click. Particularly the visually distraction of it all. Ever noticed how Photoshop has a very dull and gray interface?
Nobody forces you to have a distracting background. And if the desktop GIMP is running on contains any windows other than those related to your image editing (which may include non-GIMP windows), well, why did you open them on that desktop to begin with?
Actually I consider it very intuitive. Maybe it's because I've not been trained by Photoshop, and thus don't confuse "it works like Photoshop" with "it is intuitive".
But if they now have a Photoshop-like MDI interface, maybe they can undo some negative changes in the multi-window interface (like, add back the main menu to the tools window and don't force an otherwise useless image window without an image to be open just to have the main menu available). The Photoshop-UI-lovers can just use the MDI interface.
You down play genocide by colloquially referring to it as "it would not have been good for the people, but since when do any governments care about the people".
Where is this downplaying genocide? Or are you of the big illusion that governments are inherently good?
That is evil, even if you are too ignorant to have intended it.
Since "evil" is 100% about intention, your sentence does not make sense.
Flash is an external process and thus bypasses browser settings. It even works cross-browser: A "Flash cookie" (LSO) can e.g. be set in Firefox and then read in Opera.
For HTML5 features however, I have to agree with you.
The "standard" Firefox plugins already take care of it.
No DOM storage without JavaScript, no Flash cookies without Flash -> NoScript Most tracking cookies come from ad networks -> AdBlock Plus Most tracking cookies come from third party domains -> RequestPolicy. And if you get one anyway, you can also get rid of it -> BetterPrivacy.
Well, I guess blocking Apple out of the market for 3 years, or even just for two years, would be disastrous for Apple. So those patents can be an effective weapon even with only 3 years left.
Slashdot Mirror
There are still people who didn't switch to introsort?
What about running CGI scripts on a separate virtual machine from the rest of the system? Basically set up a separate web server on that, and have all CGI scripts be executed from there. For access to shared resources, have a "gate keeper" process (or module in the web server) running on the original host which can give out one-time passwords which are then passed onto the script, and which the script can then use to access the resources through that gate keeper. The gate keeper can have a detailed knowledge about what each script is allowed to access, and block any other request. I'm not sure if this would be feasible performance-wise, but I think it would make quite a secure system. Indeed, the script server could mount all file systems readonly (you could even remove the write capability from the file system driver if you're paranoid enough), because you don't need to change the scripts from within the scripts (installing the scripts would be done from the host system or another virtual machine). That way, even if someone managed to hijack a script, the worst he could do is to mess with those things the specific script is allowed to access (because the gate keeper knows which script was called, and won't allow any other access). Unless the attacker additionally finds a security hole in the gate keeper process, of course. As an additional bonus, the scripts would not need to have the database password (the gate keeper would have it), so even if the script server was completely hacked, the database password would still not leak.
He said he constantly does what he can to destroy them. Which may very well be nothing at all.
Sorry, but you'll get something which is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea.
Also they say that the starter edition(!) of the control software will cost $300. Yes, that's for the software only. In addition to the cost of the actual printer (which seems not yet to be decided).
Okay, I just disable cookies completely in Firefox and explicitly allow the sites that need them for a purpose I agree with.
The point of those supercookies is that this isn't sufficient.
The phone icon is a universal symbol that's been around since at least 1996. While Apple did apply for a trademark on it in 2010, the pre-existing use of the symbol I've linked to I think pretty clearly invalidates the trademark. Unless you're somehow claiming nobody else is allowed to color their phone symbol green (the internationally recognized color for go).
Look at this phone: What do you see on one of the buttons? Correct: A green phone receiver icon. And it cleary predates the iPhone.
Nowhere did I ask what SFTP is. I know that. I asked why it should be preferred over FTPS.
Read the documentation of BetterPrivacy to see the limitations. Ideally, it would offer controls on par with Cookie Monster. However, that's simply not possible with Flash cookies.
I said "I consider it very intuitive" not "it is very intuitive". That's a big difference.
The UI 10 years ago was very different from today. It didn't even have a menu bar back then!
Well, it's OK if you decided for yourself that you don't want to look at it again, it's your decision. However if you have no idea what the interface looks like today, you should refrain from claiming it to be very bad. You simply don't know the current interface, therefore you're simply not qualified to say whether it's good or bad.
Note that I don't say the GIMP UI is perfect. It isn't. But overall I consider it quite well. It allowed me to discover a lot of functionality without reading manuals or tutorials.
The GNU Image Manipulation Program. :-)
Problem solved.
There's an option about whether to keep toolbars on top (it might be that this wasn't yet there when you used it, though). Of course it also depends on whether your window manager honours the request.
Isn't that the same complaint as before?
Never happened to me. Maybe I was just lucky, maybe my window manager is better (it's the window manager's job to put the window on the correct desktop, AFAIK GIMP cannot do anything about it), or maybe my usage pattern just doesn't lead to such problems.
What is GIMP's goal?
Being good at image manipulation?
Of course programs on other operating systems could do "single window mode" (i.e. MDI). However normally only programs on Windows do.
"Single window mode" here means MDI, i.e. having a single main window with subwindows instead of multiple independent windows.
Nobody forces you to have a distracting background. And if the desktop GIMP is running on contains any windows other than those related to your image editing (which may include non-GIMP windows), well, why did you open them on that desktop to begin with?
Actually I consider it very intuitive. Maybe it's because I've not been trained by Photoshop, and thus don't confuse "it works like Photoshop" with "it is intuitive".
But if they now have a Photoshop-like MDI interface, maybe they can undo some negative changes in the multi-window interface (like, add back the main menu to the tools window and don't force an otherwise useless image window without an image to be open just to have the main menu available). The Photoshop-UI-lovers can just use the MDI interface.
Where is this downplaying genocide? Or are you of the big illusion that governments are inherently good?
Since "evil" is 100% about intention, your sentence does not make sense.
At least if it's in HTML, plugins can do something against it. For Flash, there's little plugins can do.
Flash is an external process and thus bypasses browser settings. It even works cross-browser: A "Flash cookie" (LSO) can e.g. be set in Firefox and then read in Opera.
For HTML5 features however, I have to agree with you.
The "standard" Firefox plugins already take care of it.
No DOM storage without JavaScript, no Flash cookies without Flash -> NoScript
Most tracking cookies come from ad networks -> AdBlock Plus
Most tracking cookies come from third party domains -> RequestPolicy.
And if you get one anyway, you can also get rid of it -> BetterPrivacy.
Reading comprehension: Epic fail.
Here's what I wrote (emphasis added): "Yes, it would not have been good for the people"
What do you think the word I've now emphasized means?
Well, I guess blocking Apple out of the market for 3 years, or even just for two years, would be disastrous for Apple. So those patents can be an effective weapon even with only 3 years left.
Here's your error. They didn't evolve independently, they evolved together, interbreeding in their own (rather large) group.
Heretic! Next you'll tell us that the bible also didn't tell us to praise the iPhone! :-)
Having had Latin in school, "malus" means both apple and evil; "malum" is just the neutral version of "malus" (in the second meaning, "evil").
There was a fall. Each year, in fact. After the summer and before the winter. :-)