This whole thing sounds like crap from Intel. "Whoops, your honour, we, a giant, multibillion dollar organization, staffed with the brightest engineering and IT minds that money can buy, accidentally forgot to keep email archives. TeeHee. No idea how that happened. Oh well, since there's no evidence of our transgressions thanks to this 'oopsie', we'll just go home now..."
I mean, does anyone actually believe that they forgot to uncheck that annoying little box in Exchange labelled "Delete all incriminating emails after 30 days"? I could believe that a few emails got misplaced, even believe that one set of tapes was damaged or corrupted... but "the staff wasn't doing it, IT didn't think about it, and the system was automatically deleting them"?
I think I may just keep buying AMD, mostly because I'm worried that Intel quality control is about the same as their IT competence, and I'll open up my new Core Duo to find a severed human finger in there. (but safely wrapped in a clean room suit).
There's an easy answer to this problem. Give Shockley a sledgehammer, point him at the building, and tell him the building was saying bad things about him. In an hour or two, this entire argument would be pointless.:)
Oddly enough, I did a fresh Ubuntu install off a fresh ISO download shortly after this comment, at the same time I was running an XP reinstall for a client.
XP required 3 reboots, during which I did whatever tweaks I was doing, and took a little over an hour (I did my tweaks and then watched some TV).
Ubuntu required no reboots, did it's updates all together... and took over 2 hours. And then some of the updates weren't done, and I had to run it again to pick the last few up. And although it was technically possible to fiddle with things while it was updating, it was a bloody sight slower and less responsive than the XP box.
Now, that's just my experience... but food for thought.
I agree, multimonitor is old news. I remember many years ago digging up a lot of cords and spare parts so I could see if I really could fill all my PCI slots with graphics cards and have it work. 6 monitors later, I did.:) Heck, I'm pretty sure I was running Win98SE back when I had 3 monitors running.
Also, I found it humourous that the blurb complained about 6 monitors, directly over a picture of... 7 monitors. Great proofreading there guys. Can't wait for you to be a/. editor.
Consider that example yourself, for a moment. Your world hasn't changed until the news has arrived. Think of it another way: Is your neighbor alive right now? He could be. He probably is. He may not be. You really couldn't say that he is or isn't already dead. To put it another way: The odds of his survival are in his favor, but they become 1 in 1 when you find out the outcome.
Think about it.:P
Ah, but you're arguing a different outlook on the universe. It's been a long time since I took my philosophy classes so I can't recall the specific words for it, but you're basically discussing your universe, not the universe. The reality of your dead mother doesn't change, whether you know it or not. Your relatavistic outlook on the universe may be different, but "the cold hard truth" is what it is.
Of course, none of it matters, because the entire universe is actually just a construct in my mind... this is one long dream, you all are fictional constructs of my subconscious, and when I awake, this reality will cease to exist.
Perhaps you should look up slipstreaming updates into a Windows installation before you speak incorrectly on the topic. Just about all updates and service packs, including hot fixes, can be slipstreamed onto a new install disc much like the current Linux distro's daily/weekly/monthly offerings. *cough* *point to 3rd line* I can have a fully set up and updated XP box inside of 3 hours... 1.5 if I use a slipstream disk.
I know none of us RTFA, but can we at least RTFC?:)
In all seriousness, I was relating to the most standard method of XP installs, which is "put the disc in, install, then do a few hundred megs of updates". When I'm looking for speed in my installs, yeah, I can use a slipstream disk, hell, I'll make a HD image if I'm doing a multi-station rollout.
The parent poster, however, was comparing a freshly-downloaded Linux ISO, which is already patched, with an XP install that required updates to be downloaded, and then complaining about the difference in speed. Yes, it's entirely possible to make an XP install zip right along... slipstream in updates, even program installs and configs, and you can be done in a comparable timeframe to a linux distro. I'm all for fair comparisons. The parent poster, however, wasn't making a fair comparison, and I was pointing out that flaw in his argument.
Yeah, a great deal of that is because you can download a linux ISO that is already mostly up-to-date with patches. With Windows, you're stuck with whatever you have pressed on the CD. And if it takes you 6 hours to do updates, WTF are you using, RC1 on a P120? I install XP frequently (I do a lot of side work), and I use a stock XP SP2 disk, figure on an hour, maybe 1.5 at the outside, for downloads, I tweak it while those are running... I can have a fully set up and updated XP box inside of 3 hours... 1.5 if I use a slipstream disk.
Yeah, it does take a bit longer when you have an extra 200mb of downloads and updates to do... but your post was a little too FUD-y, even for a linux zealot.
"In other news, a recent survey says that over 10% of all adult computer users are intending to switch to the new Microsoft 'Vista' operating system. This is great news for the software giant, as it indicates that Vista is being embraced by more than the 'early adopter' crowd.
Amazing how different that sounds, eh?
Err, forgot where I was, sorry. I mean "M$ sucks. Boo. Boo-urns..."
You are correct, algae seems to be the most sensible solution to the fuel issue. Hemp, however, is a more efficient crop than trees or corn or cotton, so although it will tax the agricultural resources, we'll be able to produce more with the same resources we have now.
In addition, all the business-minded Republicans should be urinating themselves with joy at the thought of an entirely new area of business to grow. Likewise, all the big-government-minded Republicans should be thrilled that they'll have an entirely new area of commerce to regulate.
All the democrats will just be happy to have some pot around.
The summary is right... biofuels made from food are causing deforestation and a rise in food prices. The solution is obvious. The USA needs to get it's head out of the sand and legalize THC-Removed Hemp for biofuel production. Hemp is more efficient, has more crops per year, can fill the roll of many other crops that are less efficient, and won't increase the price of foods that shouldn't be associated with fuel anyways (corn? Come on. Painful example of how rampant lobbying can overcome a products inefficiency).
With legal, non-smokable Hemp, we could stop cutting down forests. We could cut back on the amount of cotton crops that have to be grown (and the corresponding amount of land that has to be rested because cotton crops sucked the life out of them). We could even use it for biofuel until we can get algae farms that are efficient. Hemp was made illegal because some big tycoon decided he wanted to protect his cash cow. It's time to get rid of that silliness, and start using our heads. Hemp is where it's at. Wake up, USA.
And, in conjunction with Hemp, let's work on algae... a great way to make use of inhospitable land, and possibly the best/most-efficient biological source that we can turn into biofuel to replace our dependence on dead dinosaurs.
I picked up an old Dell 1Ghz laptop, added an external HD with a USB enclosure, and plugged in all my gizmos with a docking station. Now it does all my 24/7 tasks, hosts my domain, etc. A PCMCIA -> SCSI card serves up my tape backup. VNC means I can keep it tucked away in my rack (though, technically, it's connected to my KVM too), it's quiet, power efficient, low heat, and a little research ensures it won't explode on me.
Don't get me wrong, it's no speed demon, things run slower than if I used a decent desktop... but really, for something that's on all the time, that doesn't really matter if my backup takes 3 hours instead of 2, or email takes a bit longer to process.
And, with this thing handling all my mundane tasks, I can have my main desktop dedicated to being a solid game machine. Best of both worlds. Don't try to make one machine do all your tasks. Running all the time to do low-cpu tasks, and being a solid desktop machine, are two different things.
I'd love to grab one of these (even the 32MB one) and slap my OS and apps on there... but I'm concerned about what the usable life really is. I mean, sure, it's good for maybe a million write cycles (number pulled out of my ass), but really, with your OS running, the usual memory-resident programs, perhaps a nice game of warcrack going... how long is that going to last you?
Some systems I have use hard drives I bought ten years ago... really, 8GB is more than enough to hold the OS, programs, etc etc, and if it's working and I have it backed up, why should I bother buying a new one for something that doesn't need it? Will these drives hold up long enough to be used 5 years from now? How well do they degrade? Do you just notice that your available size gets smaller over time, as the flash gradually goes bad and the bits are eliminated from the FAT? Or does your system stop working one day 6 months from now because the bad bit was in your bootloader?
I'd love to get my hands on one of these, HD bottlenecks are the biggest PITA.... but I'm not going to be an early adopter. I want to hear some horror stories first.
Please let me know what your algorithm is for a valid user name. As far as I know, they are free text (which seems perfectly valid.) As for the other information, it would pass your typical regex for validation. If oracle gets a phone number, should they call it to validate that the person has the same information as the login gave. Do you run a website that does something similar, and has the same number of hits the Oracle website does?
I appreciate a holy-than-thou attitude, but please tell me what site YOU are in charge of the security for (and if I can then pass in crap like the above, then you're in for a nice big plate of humble pie, slashdot style.) Alternatively, you're talking out your ass. I have this funny thing, when I issue a username, I actually make sure it is valid and usable. Similarly, when a website of mine asks for a username, it tends to check and see if that username is actually valid before allowing the user to proceed. The way these logins are presented in the suit, it certainly seems like SAP just made up some random usernames, and Oracle just let them in.
Also, I like to do other, holier-than-thou things, like requiring passwords, and expiring users passwords when their contracts expire. Sometimes, just for shits and giggles, I like to assign usernames in a predetermined format to ensure accuracy, ease of use, etc etc. I like to actually make sure the site is a little bit secure. It doesn't seem like they did a very good job of this.
Also, there are plenty of scripts for plenty of different platforms that will do basic validation on data fields. They can check to see if your phone number is all the same digit, or 123-456-7890. Some of the more advanced forms even require minimum length on usernames or passwords. If you have millions to spend, you can even get super-advanced DARPA user-creation scripts that run checks to make sure your city is valid, or your data meets a required format.
Finally, sometimes, if your luck is amazing and your spirit pure, you can spill coke on your keyboard while you sit in your moms basement, get an electric shock, and purge all that sanctimonious bullshit and "strawmen are our friend" thinking from your pale, pudgy little head. Believe it or not, it's possible to have an informed opinion on something without spending your whole life doing exactly and only that. Although if you don't believe it, it does make it easier to talk smack and belittle your opponent without actually advancing a valid argument, thusly helping disguise an inferior argument or intellect.
And that is a slice of a different kind of pie. Slashdot style.
I'm reading through the first bit of the actual suit, and here's what caught my eye:
These "customer users" supplied user information (such as user name, email address, and phone number) that did not match the customer at all. In some cases, this user information did not match anything: it was fake. For example, some users logged in with the user names of "xx" "ss" "User" and "NULL." Others used phony email addresses like "test@testyomama.com" and fake phone numbers such as "7777777777" and "123 456 7897."
Now, they do state that the IP doing the downloading was an SAP branch office in Texas... but still, if your supposedly secure support site accepts "xx" and "ss" and "User" as valid logins to access support documents and what appears to be actual product downloads... well, what the hell?
I think I just became a little less likely to buy either SAP or Oracle software, if this is their idea of ethics and security, respectively.
Here's a copy of the article in case it gets slashdotted:
Oracle Sues SAP On March 22, 2007, Oracle filed a lawsuit in U.S. Federal District Court in the Northern District of California against SAP. Among the claims made against SAP are violations of the Federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and California Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, Unfair Competition, Intentional and Negligent Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage and Civil Conspiracy.
Yeah, that's the entire thing (except for the 44 page PDF of the actual suit). Glad I could make sure that everyone got that clear and concise summarization, and can now fairly and properly comment on it.
Slashdot Mirror
If only I had mod points, you'd be "+1, Amen"
I've yet to be able to wrap my head around the "Here's a gun, go kill for your country... but no beer for you!" policy of americans.
This whole thing sounds like crap from Intel. "Whoops, your honour, we, a giant, multibillion dollar organization, staffed with the brightest engineering and IT minds that money can buy, accidentally forgot to keep email archives. TeeHee. No idea how that happened. Oh well, since there's no evidence of our transgressions thanks to this 'oopsie', we'll just go home now..."
I mean, does anyone actually believe that they forgot to uncheck that annoying little box in Exchange labelled "Delete all incriminating emails after 30 days"? I could believe that a few emails got misplaced, even believe that one set of tapes was damaged or corrupted... but "the staff wasn't doing it, IT didn't think about it, and the system was automatically deleting them"?
I think I may just keep buying AMD, mostly because I'm worried that Intel quality control is about the same as their IT competence, and I'll open up my new Core Duo to find a severed human finger in there.
(but safely wrapped in a clean room suit).
There's an easy answer to this problem. :)
Give Shockley a sledgehammer, point him at the building, and tell him the building was saying bad things about him.
In an hour or two, this entire argument would be pointless.
"Raaaawwwwrrr... Shockley CRUSH!"
Oddly enough, I did a fresh Ubuntu install off a fresh ISO download shortly after this comment, at the same time I was running an XP reinstall for a client.
XP required 3 reboots, during which I did whatever tweaks I was doing, and took a little over an hour (I did my tweaks and then watched some TV).
Ubuntu required no reboots, did it's updates all together... and took over 2 hours. And then some of the updates weren't done, and I had to run it again to pick the last few up. And although it was technically possible to fiddle with things while it was updating, it was a bloody sight slower and less responsive than the XP box.
Now, that's just my experience... but food for thought.
I agree, multimonitor is old news. I remember many years ago digging up a lot of cords and spare parts so I could see if I really could fill all my PCI slots with graphics cards and have it work. 6 monitors later, I did. :)
... 7 monitors. /. editor.
Heck, I'm pretty sure I was running Win98SE back when I had 3 monitors running.
Also, I found it humourous that the blurb complained about 6 monitors, directly over a picture of
Great proofreading there guys. Can't wait for you to be a
Consider that example yourself, for a moment. Your world hasn't changed until the news has arrived. Think of it another way: Is your neighbor alive right now? He could be. He probably is. He may not be. You really couldn't say that he is or isn't already dead. To put it another way: The odds of his survival are in his favor, but they become 1 in 1 when you find out the outcome.
:P
:P
Think about it.
Ah, but you're arguing a different outlook on the universe. It's been a long time since I took my philosophy classes so I can't recall the specific words for it, but you're basically discussing your universe, not the universe. The reality of your dead mother doesn't change, whether you know it or not. Your relatavistic outlook on the universe may be different, but "the cold hard truth" is what it is.
Of course, none of it matters, because the entire universe is actually just a construct in my mind... this is one long dream, you all are fictional constructs of my subconscious, and when I awake, this reality will cease to exist.
Think about it.
It hasn't happened until we know it has happened.
So, if I shoot your mother, she isn't dead until the cops call you?
*point to 3rd line*
I can have a fully set up and updated XP box inside of 3 hours... 1.5 if I use a slipstream disk.
I know none of us RTFA, but can we at least RTFC?
In all seriousness, I was relating to the most standard method of XP installs, which is "put the disc in, install, then do a few hundred megs of updates". When I'm looking for speed in my installs, yeah, I can use a slipstream disk, hell, I'll make a HD image if I'm doing a multi-station rollout.
The parent poster, however, was comparing a freshly-downloaded Linux ISO, which is already patched, with an XP install that required updates to be downloaded, and then complaining about the difference in speed. Yes, it's entirely possible to make an XP install zip right along... slipstream in updates, even program installs and configs, and you can be done in a comparable timeframe to a linux distro. I'm all for fair comparisons. The parent poster, however, wasn't making a fair comparison, and I was pointing out that flaw in his argument.
This has to be the longest, geekiest, and least-erotic porn post ever on Slashdot...
Yeah, a great deal of that is because you can download a linux ISO that is already mostly up-to-date with patches. With Windows, you're stuck with whatever you have pressed on the CD.
And if it takes you 6 hours to do updates, WTF are you using, RC1 on a P120? I install XP frequently (I do a lot of side work), and I use a stock XP SP2 disk, figure on an hour, maybe 1.5 at the outside, for downloads, I tweak it while those are running... I can have a fully set up and updated XP box inside of 3 hours... 1.5 if I use a slipstream disk.
Yeah, it does take a bit longer when you have an extra 200mb of downloads and updates to do... but your post was a little too FUD-y, even for a linux zealot.
It's all about the spin baby...
"In other news, a recent survey says that over 10% of all adult computer users are intending to switch to the new Microsoft 'Vista' operating system. This is great news for the software giant, as it indicates that Vista is being embraced by more than the 'early adopter' crowd.
Amazing how different that sounds, eh?
Err, forgot where I was, sorry. I mean "M$ sucks. Boo. Boo-urns..."
I think you missed a few, I fixed them for you:
MOLTEN CORE "Fuck you, I'm eating" - Carls Jr.
WARSONG GULCH (pvp area) "With electrolytes!" - Brawndo
You are correct, algae seems to be the most sensible solution to the fuel issue. Hemp, however, is a more efficient crop than trees or corn or cotton, so although it will tax the agricultural resources, we'll be able to produce more with the same resources we have now.
In addition, all the business-minded Republicans should be urinating themselves with joy at the thought of an entirely new area of business to grow. Likewise, all the big-government-minded Republicans should be thrilled that they'll have an entirely new area of commerce to regulate.
All the democrats will just be happy to have some pot around.
The summary is right... biofuels made from food are causing deforestation and a rise in food prices. The solution is obvious. The USA needs to get it's head out of the sand and legalize THC-Removed Hemp for biofuel production. Hemp is more efficient, has more crops per year, can fill the roll of many other crops that are less efficient, and won't increase the price of foods that shouldn't be associated with fuel anyways (corn? Come on. Painful example of how rampant lobbying can overcome a products inefficiency).
With legal, non-smokable Hemp, we could stop cutting down forests. We could cut back on the amount of cotton crops that have to be grown (and the corresponding amount of land that has to be rested because cotton crops sucked the life out of them). We could even use it for biofuel until we can get algae farms that are efficient. Hemp was made illegal because some big tycoon decided he wanted to protect his cash cow. It's time to get rid of that silliness, and start using our heads. Hemp is where it's at. Wake up, USA.
And, in conjunction with Hemp, let's work on algae... a great way to make use of inhospitable land, and possibly the best/most-efficient biological source that we can turn into biofuel to replace our dependence on dead dinosaurs.
Really, how sad. I wish I could be so unfortunate and unlucky and untalented as to sell 20 million copies of my software in 2 months.
Poor Redmond. I feel for you.
One word: laptop.
I picked up an old Dell 1Ghz laptop, added an external HD with a USB enclosure, and plugged in all my gizmos with a docking station. Now it does all my 24/7 tasks, hosts my domain, etc. A PCMCIA -> SCSI card serves up my tape backup. VNC means I can keep it tucked away in my rack (though, technically, it's connected to my KVM too), it's quiet, power efficient, low heat, and a little research ensures it won't explode on me.
Don't get me wrong, it's no speed demon, things run slower than if I used a decent desktop... but really, for something that's on all the time, that doesn't really matter if my backup takes 3 hours instead of 2, or email takes a bit longer to process.
And, with this thing handling all my mundane tasks, I can have my main desktop dedicated to being a solid game machine. Best of both worlds.
Don't try to make one machine do all your tasks. Running all the time to do low-cpu tasks, and being a solid desktop machine, are two different things.
Please don't give Steve Balmer any ideas.
What? Is Bush going to invade Iowa?
No, he won't be invading Eastern Europe until his third term.
I'd love to grab one of these (even the 32MB one) and slap my OS and apps on there... but I'm concerned about what the usable life really is. I mean, sure, it's good for maybe a million write cycles (number pulled out of my ass), but really, with your OS running, the usual memory-resident programs, perhaps a nice game of warcrack going... how long is that going to last you?
Some systems I have use hard drives I bought ten years ago... really, 8GB is more than enough to hold the OS, programs, etc etc, and if it's working and I have it backed up, why should I bother buying a new one for something that doesn't need it? Will these drives hold up long enough to be used 5 years from now? How well do they degrade? Do you just notice that your available size gets smaller over time, as the flash gradually goes bad and the bits are eliminated from the FAT? Or does your system stop working one day 6 months from now because the bad bit was in your bootloader?
I'd love to get my hands on one of these, HD bottlenecks are the biggest PITA.... but I'm not going to be an early adopter. I want to hear some horror stories first.
I preferred it when it was called "Social Engineering".
I wish HP would just hurry up and patent "pretexting" so we can all start using a different term.
Hey, Lamby, you got any human in you?
Just 15%? What do you say we make it 15.2% ?
Fixed that for you...
I appreciate a holy-than-thou attitude, but please tell me what site YOU are in charge of the security for (and if I can then pass in crap like the above, then you're in for a nice big plate of humble pie, slashdot style.) Alternatively, you're talking out your ass. I have this funny thing, when I issue a username, I actually make sure it is valid and usable. Similarly, when a website of mine asks for a username, it tends to check and see if that username is actually valid before allowing the user to proceed. The way these logins are presented in the suit, it certainly seems like SAP just made up some random usernames, and Oracle just let them in.
Also, I like to do other, holier-than-thou things, like requiring passwords, and expiring users passwords when their contracts expire. Sometimes, just for shits and giggles, I like to assign usernames in a predetermined format to ensure accuracy, ease of use, etc etc. I like to actually make sure the site is a little bit secure. It doesn't seem like they did a very good job of this.
Also, there are plenty of scripts for plenty of different platforms that will do basic validation on data fields. They can check to see if your phone number is all the same digit, or 123-456-7890. Some of the more advanced forms even require minimum length on usernames or passwords. If you have millions to spend, you can even get super-advanced DARPA user-creation scripts that run checks to make sure your city is valid, or your data meets a required format.
Finally, sometimes, if your luck is amazing and your spirit pure, you can spill coke on your keyboard while you sit in your moms basement, get an electric shock, and purge all that sanctimonious bullshit and "strawmen are our friend" thinking from your pale, pudgy little head. Believe it or not, it's possible to have an informed opinion on something without spending your whole life doing exactly and only that. Although if you don't believe it, it does make it easier to talk smack and belittle your opponent without actually advancing a valid argument, thusly helping disguise an inferior argument or intellect.
And that is a slice of a different kind of pie. Slashdot style.
I'm reading through the first bit of the actual suit, and here's what caught my eye:
These "customer users" supplied user information (such as user name, email address, and phone number) that did
not match the customer at all. In some cases, this user information did not match anything: it was fake. For example, some users logged in with the user names of "xx" "ss" "User" and "NULL." Others used phony email addresses like "test@testyomama.com" and fake phone numbers such as "7777777777" and "123 456 7897."
Now, they do state that the IP doing the downloading was an SAP branch office in Texas... but still, if your supposedly secure support site accepts "xx" and "ss" and "User" as valid logins to access support documents and what appears to be actual product downloads... well, what the hell?
I think I just became a little less likely to buy either SAP or Oracle software, if this is their idea of ethics and security, respectively.
Here's a copy of the article in case it gets slashdotted:
Oracle Sues SAP
On March 22, 2007, Oracle filed a lawsuit in U.S. Federal District Court in the Northern District of California against SAP. Among the claims made against SAP are violations of the Federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and California Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, Unfair Competition, Intentional and Negligent Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage and Civil Conspiracy.
Yeah, that's the entire thing (except for the 44 page PDF of the actual suit). Glad I could make sure that everyone got that clear and concise summarization, and can now fairly and properly comment on it.
Cheers!