I figured I'd save everyone the trouble of writing their own question, and just post my template.
I was wondering, has anyone here done $COMMON TASK$ with $INAPPROPRIATE DEVICE$ ? If so, how well did it work ? What problems did you encounter ? I am aware of $APPROPRIATE DEVICE$ for $COMMON TASK$, but I really want to try $INAPPROPRIATE DEVICE$, because of $UNLIKELY TO BE REALIZED BENEFITS$. Thanks.
They rely on tricking people into opening attachments, which, if Linux had the userbase Windows had, would still work on Linux.
Have you ever used a unix-like system ? Do you know that an attachment would have to be flagged as executable in order to run, and that this is NOT the default ?
Basically, to get your email virus to run requires either: i) a completely broken mail client, or ii) substantial user intervention
By a broken mail client, I mean anything which sets attachments to executable, or contains scripting functionality sufficient to write a virus.
If you want an easy-to-use desktop system that doesn't require you to learn anything new, stick with whatever you're currently using. Hopefully it's easy enough.
This is great news. The O(1) scheduler in Linux is awesome, and it's good to see FreeBSD keeping up. Now if we just had an O(1) way to squash *BSD trolls, Slashdot would be saved.
Just say "I can hide all these cables by running them through the wall", then punch a hole in the wall using a hammer. She won't even notice your cables at all after that.
The CPUs are listed approximately in order of introduction. Granted, most of it is anecdotal, but differences in processor performace was so much more pronouced back then.
386SX-16 The 386 was a huge advance but you'd never know it from one of these - they were usually out-performed by the better 286s.
386SX-20 These were a little faster than an SX-16. But then, so was custard. We vividly remember how they seemed to be slower than a 286-20 too...
286-25
We only ever saw two of these. They flew! We had one in the shop for a while, and used to ask friends to guess what was inside it without looking. Most people thought it was a 386DX-40.
The reason to prefer ECC over RSA is that ECC offers better security per key-bit. Asymmetric ciphers in general require much longer keys than symmetric ciphers, so keylength with RSA is a concern. Also, look at all the work that has been done on integer factorization in the last 20 years:)
If you think the polygraph is bad, you should take a closer look at the "science" of identifying fingerprints. It's not a science at all, basically, and unlike polygraphs, fingerprints are admissible.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft:
"Leading companies and third-party analysts confirm it: Windows has a lower total cost of ownership and outperforms Linux."
From Slashdot troll
"It is official; Netcraft confirms: *BSD is dying"
You don't have to be an Amazing Kreskin to see this one.
...I could select a bunch of files and then type a command against them at a command line.
KDE will do this, under Tools / Run Command. Pretty useful sometimes.
I figured I'd save everyone the trouble of writing their own question, and just post my template.
I was wondering, has anyone here done $COMMON TASK$ with $INAPPROPRIATE DEVICE$ ? If so, how well did it work ? What problems did you encounter ? I am aware of $APPROPRIATE DEVICE$ for $COMMON TASK$, but I really want to try $INAPPROPRIATE DEVICE$, because of $UNLIKELY TO BE REALIZED BENEFITS$. Thanks.
They rely on tricking people into opening attachments, which, if Linux had the userbase Windows had, would still work on Linux.
:
Have you ever used a unix-like system ? Do you know that an attachment would have to be flagged as executable in order to run, and that this is NOT the default ?
Basically, to get your email virus to run requires either
i) a completely broken mail client, or
ii) substantial user intervention
By a broken mail client, I mean anything which sets attachments to executable, or contains scripting functionality sufficient to write a virus.
Don't get mad at Microsoft - blame your own poor reading comprehension and math skills.
"Windows Server offers a savings of 11%-22% over Linux in 4 out of 5 workload scenarios"
I actually clicked on the ad out of curiosity. They tested Windows 2000 over a five year period. Interesting.
If you want an easy-to-use desktop system that doesn't require you to learn anything new, stick with whatever you're currently using. Hopefully it's easy enough.
Stupid people don't choose to be stupid.
How do you know ? Maybe they do, it seems like a fairly consistent choice.
More like married guys don't GET broadband, or they get their broadband taken away! It's like its some sort of conspiracy or something.
And what's the first thing people will try ?
C:\STARTMENU
Iraqi Linux! It's free as in... ???
Wow, you've been using Winzip for almost 35000 years!
Why this does seem quite cool I want to offer a warning before you go and install this on your non-backed up mission critical server.
Anyone who run Windows on mission critical servers will probably do it anyway.
This is great news. The O(1) scheduler in Linux is awesome, and it's good to see FreeBSD keeping up. Now if we just had an O(1) way to squash *BSD trolls, Slashdot would be saved.
If you have to buy 10 computers to send your spam, instead of just one, it's suddenly far less profitable.
Spammers will just hijack more and more computers with trojan horse programs. You wouldn't even need full privileges.
Just say "I can hide all these cables by running them through the wall", then punch a hole in the wall using a hammer. She won't even notice your cables at all after that.
The CPUs are listed approximately in order of introduction. Granted, most of it is anecdotal, but differences in processor performace was so much more pronouced back then.
386SX-16
The 386 was a huge advance but you'd never know it from one of these - they were usually out-performed by the better 286s.
386SX-20
These were a little faster than an SX-16. But then, so was custard. We vividly remember how they seemed to be slower than a 286-20 too...
286-25
We only ever saw two of these. They flew! We had one in the shop for a while, and used to ask friends to guess what was inside it without looking. Most people thought it was a 386DX-40.
When the 386 was introduced it was, clock-for-clock, twice as fast as the 286, no recompiling necessary.
No, quite the opposite, actually.
This time the woman wears an iPod.
She is just trying to get the battery replaced and no one will help her.
Don't be so quick to call someone a moron when you might be one yourself.
My companion runs windows. The hackers attack them because it is easy. Hence I am more secure.
For a scientist, you have a disturbing tendency to contradict yourself. Prehaps you are a social scientist ?
The reason to prefer ECC over RSA is that ECC offers better security per key-bit. Asymmetric ciphers in general require much longer keys than symmetric ciphers, so keylength with RSA is a concern. Also, look at all the work that has been done on integer factorization in the last 20 years :)
If you think the polygraph is bad, you should take a closer look at the "science" of identifying fingerprints. It's not a science at all, basically, and unlike polygraphs, fingerprints are admissible.
Just hope you never write anything bigger than 32k.
Mine just gives me a grey screen of death.
misunderestimating
Dubya done teach ya good.