Gnome decided, that the most important part, is simplicity. But their developers thought, you could not reach this, without removing freedom. So they hard-coded options, which also saved them the time to implement the other options. But in the end it was a pointless loss of efficiency and freedom, because of laziness and that false dichotomy.
What you describe is pretty much exactly OSX.
In fact in OSX its worse than Gnome.
Want to change the color of the 'gumdrop' buttons on the windows? You have to hack the KERNEL.
There is (third party) software for OSX which allows you to change stuff like that. Behind the scenes it hacks the kernel for you. Sometimes, when theres an OSX security update, your mac no longer boots.
I'm in oceanography research, and I've seen a number of talks now talking about changing pH in the oceans.
Maybe you can answer a question for me then.
According to wikipedia, the Great Barrier Reef of Australia dates back maybe 600,000 years.
During the last 600,000 years there has been some significant climate change, way more radical than what we have been experiencing with the whole 'global warming' thing. There was an ice age, what? 20,000 years ago?
So my question is, do we have any evidence of historical ocean acidification and if so what impact did it have on the reefs at the time? Because OBVIOUSLY they have survived and thrived in recent millennia.
The fact that the original sin was eating the fruit of the KNOWLEDGE tree tells me that the bronze age shaman who wrote it wanted to keep you in the dark
Shaman?
Theres an interesting comparison between religion and shamanism. It goes like this:
In religion you are worshiping someone who stands on the other side of a doorway.
In shamanism theres someone standing in a doorway and you are shoving your way past them.
From the article: Jelle Prins created an iPhone app called Lyrics that allows a user to search for the lyrics to any song--even NWA's "F*ck Tha Police" or Rage Against The Machine's "Killing In The Name." Of course, Apple promptly rejected the app citing the "objectionable content" clause of the iPhone developer's agreement
What. The. Fuck?
So an application which does not specifically prohibit iphone users from searching for 'objectionable content' gets rejected?
This isn't just about apps that *contain* 'objectionable content'.
Its about apps that *permit* the user to *search* for 'objectionable content'.
To me, and I'm sure to most reasonable people, this is in itself objectionable.
Since you know so much about Apple security announcements can you tell us whether Apple have even acknowledged that this Java vulnerability even exists?
Well, this is certainly research I'd clear with a lawyer before doing. I assume they did so.
I'd be dubious about any advice a lawyer gave on such a thing.
What I'd *assume* would happen would be something like...
1.You pay lawyer large amounts of money for legal advice. 2. Lawyer says "yeah probably legal". 3. You go out and do it only to get busted and to discover that it was actually illegal. 4. Your original lawyers buddies then make large amounts of money on the ensuing court case.
End result: all lawyers involved make even more money.
Never trust a lawyer to give advice that isn't intended to line their or other lawyers pockets.
I seem to recall, from an old scientific american article which I no longer have, that the yeast organisms production of single-isomer alcohol has something to do with quantum effects as well.
Something about one isomer having a slightly more favorable energy state or something... I dunno. Not a quantum physicist. Not any kind of physicist. I like alcohol tho.
This is a rootkit -- which is like deciding what to do with the car after you've stolen it.
This is worse; its more like modifying the cars chassis so that regardless of whatever anyone does with the car to try to re-secure it after you have done this you can walk up to the car and drive it away.
Locks, alarms etc are all useless. Replacing the engine or car electronics won't help. You'd have to replace the entire chassis assembly.
Attackers get root and then modify the bios to ensure that whatever you do with the box including install fresh hard drives and reinstall from scratch they still have root.
This is not a trivial 'oh they need root to install a rootkit' joke.
Slashdot Mirror
So... you are saying that there was no profiteering?
Profiteering? Really? We've spent $80+ Billion/year. How does $-80,000,000,000 somehow equal a profit?
LOL
Who do you imagine gets that cash? Iraqis?
Most of it will go into the pockets of multinational corporations. They are 'profiteering'.
Gnome decided, that the most important part, is simplicity. But their developers thought, you could not reach this, without removing freedom. So they hard-coded options, which also saved them the time to implement the other options. But in the end it was a pointless loss of efficiency and freedom, because of laziness and that false dichotomy.
What you describe is pretty much exactly OSX.
In fact in OSX its worse than Gnome.
Want to change the color of the 'gumdrop' buttons on the windows? You have to hack the KERNEL.
There is (third party) software for OSX which allows you to change stuff like that. Behind the scenes it hacks the kernel for you. Sometimes, when theres an OSX security update, your mac no longer boots.
It's my right because I OWN the device.
How do you 'own' an iphone?
You think that you go to the store and just 'buy' an iphone?
No, thats not how it works.
You go to the store and you buy the *right* to *use* an iphone.
The iphone is still the property of Steve Jobs. Not yours.
You merely buy the temporary and revocable right to use the blessed smartphone of the gods.
'own' an iphone indeed... only one person on the planet has the moral authority to own an actual authentic iphone.
Information wants to be free. Don't be Jewish with the knowledge.
Why, are you suggesting that knowledge is catholic?
Knowledge is Shamanistic.
Something I once read, attributed to an Inuit shaman, compared shamanism and religion (Judaeo-Christian religion).
It says that in religion, theres a doorway and you are worshiping someone standing on the other side of that doorway.
In shamanism, theres a doorway and someone is standing in the doorway; you are shoving your way past them.
I'm in oceanography research, and I've seen a number of talks now talking about changing pH in the oceans.
Maybe you can answer a question for me then.
According to wikipedia, the Great Barrier Reef of Australia dates back maybe 600,000 years.
During the last 600,000 years there has been some significant climate change, way more radical than what we have been experiencing with the whole 'global warming' thing. There was an ice age, what? 20,000 years ago?
So my question is, do we have any evidence of historical ocean acidification and if so what impact did it have on the reefs at the time? Because OBVIOUSLY they have survived and thrived in recent millennia.
Ultimately, nothing is more important than what God thinks of you
God thinks?
News to me...
The fact that the original sin was eating the fruit of the KNOWLEDGE tree tells me that the bronze age shaman who wrote it wanted to keep you in the dark
Shaman?
Theres an interesting comparison between religion and shamanism. It goes like this:
In religion you are worshiping someone who stands on the other side of a doorway.
In shamanism theres someone standing in a doorway and you are shoving your way past them.
ppl love apple, then th same ppl hate it.
Thats because Apple is both inspired and retarded at the same time.
Heres a related article:
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2009/05/easter-eggs-may-get-apps-approved-but-could-hurt-app-store.ars
From the article:
Jelle Prins created an iPhone app called Lyrics that allows a user to search for the lyrics to any song--even NWA's "F*ck Tha Police" or Rage Against The Machine's "Killing In The Name." Of course, Apple promptly rejected the app citing the "objectionable content" clause of the iPhone developer's agreement
What. The. Fuck?
So an application which does not specifically prohibit iphone users from searching for 'objectionable content' gets rejected?
This isn't just about apps that *contain* 'objectionable content'.
Its about apps that *permit* the user to *search* for 'objectionable content'.
To me, and I'm sure to most reasonable people, this is in itself objectionable.
Hang on....
Does the CMB represent a fixed frame of reference for everything in the universe?
Since you know so much about Apple security announcements can you tell us whether Apple have even acknowledged that this Java vulnerability even exists?
Their lack of candor in discussing vulnerabilities
Thats a huge understatement.
So far as I can tell, with respect to this Java vulnerability, Apple have never even acknowledged that it exists.
If its marketting pamphlets say that it is super accurate and reliable and last a long time on a set of batteries, what other tests are needed?
Fixed that for you...
Well, this is certainly research I'd clear with a lawyer before doing. I assume they did so.
I'd be dubious about any advice a lawyer gave on such a thing.
What I'd *assume* would happen would be something like...
1.You pay lawyer large amounts of money for legal advice.
2. Lawyer says "yeah probably legal".
3. You go out and do it only to get busted and to discover that it was actually illegal.
4. Your original lawyers buddies then make large amounts of money on the ensuing court case.
End result: all lawyers involved make even more money.
Never trust a lawyer to give advice that isn't intended to line their or other lawyers pockets.
There already is a class of malware called "rouge anti-virus"
Does it also have high-heeled shoes and a miniskirt? And way too much makeup?
Has the USA *ever* had an 'antebellum' era? ('antebellum' meaning 'before war')
I thought that the USA averaged a major war every 20 years ever since the nation was formed?
I seem to recall, from an old scientific american article which I no longer have, that the yeast organisms production of single-isomer alcohol has something to do with quantum effects as well.
Something about one isomer having a slightly more favorable energy state or something... I dunno. Not a quantum physicist. Not any kind of physicist. I like alcohol tho.
This is a rootkit -- which is like deciding what to do with the car after you've stolen it.
This is worse; its more like modifying the cars chassis so that regardless of whatever anyone does with the car to try to re-secure it after you have done this you can walk up to the car and drive it away.
Locks, alarms etc are all useless. Replacing the engine or car electronics won't help. You'd have to replace the entire chassis assembly.
Attackers get root and then modify the bios to ensure that whatever you do with the box including install fresh hard drives and reinstall from scratch they still have root.
This is not a trivial 'oh they need root to install a rootkit' joke.
The SMM exploit requires that the attacker already have root. You're already screwed at this point
Given the nature of the exploit thats pretty naive.
Rootkit hypervisor in re-written bios?
You become aware that the box was rooted and reinstall from scratch, wiping the hard drive completely.
The root kit isn't gone, its in the bios.
Box is still rooted.
We are really just at the beginning of the MMO genre.
The game companies are still trying to figure out how to produce, test, market, maintain these games.
Its a completely new model for them.
Its bound to be a bumpy ride for the next few years, maybe even a decade or so.
Ok so the treaty is totally mis-named and isn't a *TEST* ban but a *TOTAL* ban.
I'll remove my pedant hat now...
There is a Treaty banning Nuclear Weapon Tests In The Atmosphere, In Outer Space And Under Water
Read that sentence again.
Note the use of the word 'test'.
This is not about nuclear tests! This is about practical real-world detonations, not tests!
As I understand it, nukes behave very differently in vacuum.
The fireball and blast effect that you get from nukes detonated in atmosphere is due to the xray radiation detonating the air.
In vacuum there is little blast; its mostly hard radiation which might not do a great deal to change the course of an asteroid.