I tried scoping to Media stuff. Still no moviemaker. I typed in movie. Nothing. I typed in movie maker. Nothing. It does not work like that. You have to google moviemaker download. There you go. First hit:)
I completely agree with you, and I too think that Mac OS X's day will definitely come at some point, and that will be the time Mac has a bit more market share. At the time being it just doesn't make sense to write a large scale virus/spambot/trojan for the mac platform. But anyway, just to know that a Trojan is "possible" on the mac should make the mac users aware that if someone targets their machine they are just as vulnerable as a windows user (executing untrusted code locally is just bad on any platform).
There are already plans to include PVM interpreter in Firefox which means it will be available as a viable target for scriping dynamic html pages for all of its derivatives like Camino, Galeon and Konqueror. Just a quick note: Konqeror does not use jecko, the HTML rendering engline ff uses, but KHTML.
Your public key is public, and there is no problemwith that. Nobody can decrypt your email with your public key. You encrypt a mail with the public key of the person you send it to, and the receiver decrypts the mail with his private key. So only the private key has to be secret. That's why it's called private and public key pair. Ex.: Person A has a public key (PubKA), and a private key (PrivKA) and wants to send an email to Person B, who has PubKB and PrivKB. Public keys are public, so person A and person B know eachothers pubkeys. Person A encrypts the email he sends with PubKB, and only the person who has PrivKB will be able to read that email. The sender can also encrypt that email with two pubkeys together, say with his own pubkey, so he will be able to decrypt his own email as well.
Is this not like re-licensing the code they ship? I guess most of the software they package is GPL, so is applying an EULA on GPLed code even allowed? Novell should be free to put EULAs on the code *they* write (of course), but OpenSUSE is a distro, and I guess most of the code is not their own.
Want to take a beer or two? You can find my contact info in my profile page if you want. Would be cool to meet a slashdotter. But leave your guns at home:)
You don't deny that there are bad people on your side of the pond, No, of course not. That would be silly.
people who would hurt or maim or kill you for little or no reason- wouldn't you rather have the ability to defend yourself That this happens to me is very very unlikely. There is a greater chance that I get run over by a bus that someone shoots me. I know nobody that got robbed. Sometimes it happens, but sometimes people get run over by a bus too. I don't know what you all are scared of... really, I can't understand, but it's ok. We are all very different.
I never had the need for a gun, as nobody here has one. I'm in a wheelchair, you insensitive clod. How exactly do I deal with the thug with a wooden plank who wants my wallet and my infant child? Maybe I should just run away? Oh wait... The dad of my girlfriend is in a wheelchair too. He doesn't have a gun and he had never the need for one. Maybe you live in a place where a gun is needed? A bad neighbourhood? Did you ever need a gun? Or do you carry one just in case? I am not really for or against guns. I don't really care. I feel comfortable not having one, and I feel comfortable knowing that almost nobody else has one, except police officers, security guards or hunters in the hunting season. But that is me.
And that's the problem - you're 'feeling', you're not 'thinking'. Probably. Here nobody carries guns. Farmers are no exception. When the hunting season is open you can go hunt, but only with guns that are allowed for hunting (you can't carry a Kalashnikov for example) and only in those areas. That said, if someone here caries a gun, I would "feel" something is wrong because it's an unusual thing.
As for carrying, in most areas of the USA there's the assumption that there are many good people, who, while not police, military, or security, are perfectly capable of handling a firearm responsibly. Do you have to get a gun-license to carry a gun in America, or can anyone buy one? If I have some psychological problem will I be able to buy one?
This includes hunting Well, if you hunt you are probably in the the middle of the wood or something, and it's hunting season. Or can anyone go hunt everywhere with whatever gun he/she likes? I am asking. I am really curious as to how it works over there.
and self defense. I never had the need for a gun, as nobody here has one. And I know nobody that has a gun, except those who go to the shooting rage regularly (those who don't go regularly rent it there).
In most states you can get a 'CCW permit', enabling the holder to carry a firearm concealed. Despite fear mongering, we do not whip it out routinely as a dick measuring contest. We are not looking to ventilate somebody. We merely wish to have an extremely effective means of defense available if somebody not willing to play by the rules attempts to cause us harm. Ok. But in that case I guess you wear it, and don't show it to everybody (like some nerds playing MD5 GPS).
Areas in the USA that attempt to ban guns historically have higher violent crime rates than those that don't. Maybe. Maybenot. Here arms are banned. And we had 1 killed person because of firearms maybe 15 years ago. I don't know if the higher violet crimes depend from gun control or not. Can you link some studies? I think that would be very difficult to prove.
Heck, there was a school shooting in Germany around 7 years ago that had more fatalities than Columbine. There was an incident in Japan with a big knife/short sword that had about a dozen fatalities. Yes, but you can't really say that that depends from gun control.
We'd do far more good cleaning up our health care system, getting out of the 'war on drugs' mess than trying to ban guns. I agree.
They should be used only in a shooting range or by people with uniforms.
I'm fascinated by your assumption that wearing a uniform automatically qualifies someone as trustworthy with a gun (albeit only at a shooting range). I don't know why I got moderated flamebait, did I write something offensive? What I was trying to say is that an individual wearing a uniform probably has a good reason to have a gun too (not only at a shooting rage, or an individual at a shooting rage). Where did I write that that a uniform automatically qualifies someone as trustworthy? Of course there are untrustworthy people in uniforms as well, but that is usually not the case. Here where I live you are free to have a gun in your house only if you have a gun-license, and you can carry it with you only from location A to location B with written permission from the police, and you have to keep the gun separate from the bullets while you carry it.
Why would somebody owning a gun be "scary" or "a lunatic"? I can understand the fear of guns empowering criminals (even if I don't agree with the conclusions some reach on that basis) but guns in the hands of the good guys should probably be reassuring, not alarming. Because guns are "never" something "good". Not in good hands, and not in bad hands. They should be used only in a shooting range or by people with uniforms. If that is not the case, over here, people with guns are scary or lunatic. I know it's different on the left side of the ocean, I guess it's a cultural thing, but I would *never* feel comfortable having someone in sight wearing or holding a gun whoi is not a policeman or a guard or something.
Is it? Yes.
Are we supposed to take your word for that? No. Just look at every other programming language that implements Drag&Drop.
Drag-and-drop sounds complicated to me It's not. It's easy in Qt, it's easy in GTK, it's easy in WinForms, it's easy in SWING. Even in VB it is easy. There is no reason it has to be hard in javascript or a client side Web programming language.
how do I know that file isn't big simply because it does a lot? You could look at it?
Under 1000 lines for drag & drop support? This looks like a moderate amount of code, taking into account that you only get raw mouse coordinates from the browser in JS, and that it supports IE. That's my point. 1000 lines of code to implement Drag&Drop is not a moderate amount of code for a feature that should be part of the language specification itself. If an html element had drag_start, drag_within and drag_stop events, just like Desktop GUI Widgets, all that code would be obsolete, and everything would be a lot cleaner.
His argument was against your assertion that 'everybody thinks javascript just doesn't cut it for current web apps'. Well, javascript as a language has nothing wrong by itself, but it was never meant to do things like AJAX, drag & drop items, move a map or a lot of other things that it currently (with a lot of hacks) does. Just look at the drag&drop source of script.aculo.us. It's huge. With something that is not javascript (or with a "better" javascript) this could all be done a lot more easier (and maybe without third party libraries!). If ruby is the answer to the problem I don't know, and I am not sure MS is the right entity to make such a choice, but they try. I'll look forward at what comes out from this.
Dynamic type conversions are a pretty common way to exploit SQL injection holes and circumvent input validation. We are talking about a client side language here, running in the browser instead of javascript. If currently you write SQL queries in javascript, and deal with SQL injection issues in javascript, I think you have way more serious problems in your code:)
but the user enters something that isn't a number it could be designed to overflow or an SQL injection. User inputted data should be strongly typed so that it rejects any data that is not of that type. We are talking about a client side language here, running in the browser. If currently you write SQL queries in javascript, and deal with SQL injection issues in javascript, I think you have way more serious problems in your code:)
Microsoft did something not cool and not useful Well, if you don't like it, don't use it. We all have different tastes.
Not cool as in hijack something cool and do something that ties it to their latest thing... How exactly is this going to tie ruby to silverlight? This will use ruby in IE instead/together with javascript. This will in no way affect MRI that will continue to exist just fine as it did until now.
Not useful as in only works in the next version of their system, if you have their modified version of Ruby and IIS and use Internet Explorer... The article and the summary are very clear that this will be a client side implementation of ruby. No IIS involved. And yes, it will work only in IE if nobody else implements it. What's wrong with that? It's the same with XUL: nobody else can use that.
So this is another way to break all the other systems... and Silverlight was allegedly cross-platform... this cuts it down to.... windows only again... Ruby is cross platform. If Silverlight will ever be, we'll see (I am not holding my breath).
Are you a troll (perhaps even a shill) or just a schmuck? There's nothing seriously wrong with Javascript as a language, only with specific implementations, some of which are actually quite good these days.
No, I am not trolling. I am very serious and I mean what I write. Just because there is nothing wrong with Javascript does not mean there should be nothing else beside it that is better. There was nothing wrong with Cobol as well, but something better came up one day. Was that the only argument you had?
I'm guessing you are just a troll, but I don't want anyone to think you're right or anything and I have a little time on my hands:P
Calling me a troll seems to be the only thing you are able to do. Just elaborate on what you think instead of calling names like 3yr old.
Weak security because of dynamic typing? You really have to elaborate on this, because like this it just makes no sense. How is a strong typed languare more secure than a dynamic typed one?
Microsoft did somethin cool and useful. I am absolutely 100% certain that almost every comment on this article will bash MS some way or another for this, but this time, this feature, is something grat. Everybody thinks that javascript just doesn't cut it for current Web Apps, and it was never meant to work like we make it work today. Switch to something else is just the right thing to do, and if it is ruby (or python or anything else that is FLOSS for that matter), that's just great. kudos for making the first step. Hopfully others will follow.
Slashdot Mirror
I completely agree with you, and I too think that Mac OS X's day will definitely come at some point, and that will be the time Mac has a bit more market share. At the time being it just doesn't make sense to write a large scale virus/spambot/trojan for the mac platform.
But anyway, just to know that a Trojan is "possible" on the mac should make the mac users aware that if someone targets their machine they are just as vulnerable as a windows user (executing untrusted code locally is just bad on any platform).
I guess the latter, because I can't belive that Berkley can be slashdotted...
jecko = gecko...
Your public key is public, and there is no problemwith that. Nobody can decrypt your email with your public key. You encrypt a mail with the public key of the person you send it to, and the receiver decrypts the mail with his private key. So only the private key has to be secret. That's why it's called private and public key pair.
Ex.:
Person A has a public key (PubKA), and a private key (PrivKA) and wants to send an email to Person B, who has PubKB and PrivKB. Public keys are public, so person A and person B know eachothers pubkeys. Person A encrypts the email he sends with PubKB, and only the person who has PrivKB will be able to read that email.
The sender can also encrypt that email with two pubkeys together, say with his own pubkey, so he will be able to decrypt his own email as well.
Is this not like re-licensing the code they ship? I guess most of the software they package is GPL, so is applying an EULA on GPLed code even allowed? Novell should be free to put EULAs on the code *they* write (of course), but OpenSUSE is a distro, and I guess most of the code is not their own.
Want to take a beer or two? :)
You can find my contact info in my profile page if you want. Would be cool to meet a slashdotter. But leave your guns at home
I am not really for or against guns. I don't really care. I feel comfortable not having one, and I feel comfortable knowing that almost nobody else has one, except police officers, security guards or hunters in the hunting season. But that is me.
That said, if someone here caries a gun, I would "feel" something is wrong because it's an unusual thing. As for carrying, in most areas of the USA there's the assumption that there are many good people, who, while not police, military, or security, are perfectly capable of handling a firearm responsibly. Do you have to get a gun-license to carry a gun in America, or can anyone buy one? If I have some psychological problem will I be able to buy one? This includes hunting Well, if you hunt you are probably in the the middle of the wood or something, and it's hunting season. Or can anyone go hunt everywhere with whatever gun he/she likes? I am asking. I am really curious as to how it works over there. and self defense. I never had the need for a gun, as nobody here has one. And I know nobody that has a gun, except those who go to the shooting rage regularly (those who don't go regularly rent it there). In most states you can get a 'CCW permit', enabling the holder to carry a firearm concealed. Despite fear mongering, we do not whip it out routinely as a dick measuring contest. We are not looking to ventilate somebody. We merely wish to have an extremely effective means of defense available if somebody not willing to play by the rules attempts to cause us harm. Ok. But in that case I guess you wear it, and don't show it to everybody (like some nerds playing MD5 GPS). Areas in the USA that attempt to ban guns historically have higher violent crime rates than those that don't. Maybe. Maybenot. Here arms are banned. And we had 1 killed person because of firearms maybe 15 years ago. I don't know if the higher violet crimes depend from gun control or not. Can you link some studies? I think that would be very difficult to prove. Heck, there was a school shooting in Germany around 7 years ago that had more fatalities than Columbine. There was an incident in Japan with a big knife/short sword that had about a dozen fatalities. Yes, but you can't really say that that depends from gun control. We'd do far more good cleaning up our health care system, getting out of the 'war on drugs' mess than trying to ban guns. I agree.
I'm fascinated by your assumption that wearing a uniform automatically qualifies someone as trustworthy with a gun (albeit only at a shooting range). I don't know why I got moderated flamebait, did I write something offensive? What I was trying to say is that an individual wearing a uniform probably has a good reason to have a gun too (not only at a shooting rage, or an individual at a shooting rage). Where did I write that that a uniform automatically qualifies someone as trustworthy? Of course there are untrustworthy people in uniforms as well, but that is usually not the case.
Here where I live you are free to have a gun in your house only if you have a gun-license, and you can carry it with you only from location A to location B with written permission from the police, and you have to keep the gun separate from the bullets while you carry it.
If ruby is the answer to the problem I don't know, and I am not sure MS is the right entity to make such a choice, but they try. I'll look forward at what comes out from this.
Dynamic type conversions are a pretty common way to exploit SQL injection holes and circumvent input validation. We are talking about a client side language here, running in the browser instead of javascript. If currently you write SQL queries in javascript, and deal with SQL injection issues in javascript, I think you have way more serious problems in your code
What's wrong with my open source comments? Maybe you should go and reply with some arguments instead of just writing nonsense.
Are you a troll (perhaps even a shill) or just a schmuck? There's nothing seriously wrong with Javascript as a language, only with specific implementations, some of which are actually quite good these days.
No, I am not trolling. I am very serious and I mean what I write. Just because there is nothing wrong with Javascript does not mean there should be nothing else beside it that is better. There was nothing wrong with Cobol as well, but something better came up one day. Was that the only argument you had?I'm guessing you are just a troll, but I don't want anyone to think you're right or anything and I have a little time on my hands :P
Calling me a troll seems to be the only thing you are able to do. Just elaborate on what you think instead of calling names like 3yr old.Weak security because of dynamic typing? You really have to elaborate on this, because like this it just makes no sense. How is a strong typed languare more secure than a dynamic typed one?
Microsoft did somethin cool and useful. I am absolutely 100% certain that almost every comment on this article will bash MS some way or another for this, but this time, this feature, is something grat. Everybody thinks that javascript just doesn't cut it for current Web Apps, and it was never meant to work like we make it work today. Switch to something else is just the right thing to do, and if it is ruby (or python or anything else that is FLOSS for that matter), that's just great. kudos for making the first step. Hopfully others will follow.
By the count of comments on this post, and thus the interest of the Slashdot comunity on the topic, I would say yes.