It is not a problem with windows because if you are an OEM or a volume license customer you are explicitly allowed to do imaging and image customization (within limits) by the license. Microsoft unlike Apple does not build their own systems they are not stupid and they took care of this little matter. Apple did not because there was no need to grant such permission.
Microsoft has some pretty scary terms in their agreements but it is possible to comply and still run a business.
Gee you think maybe Red Hat Software's policy is geared towards getting customers to simply hold up their end of an agreement they made when they licensed the software while Microsoft's is geared toward giving them as much control over you and your business as possible in case they ever want to exercise it.
What M$ is doing opens the door to them extorting just about anything they want from you. What RH is doing is just saying well you agreed to pay us $X per seat you have Y seats pay us $X*Y and we can all be friends.
I am not saying the USA is anything like Nazi Germany, but know your history. Its not like in the early thirties you typical German citizen was having their daily jew hate either. In fact its true that the majority really did not know (because they did not ask) the treatment the jews and many of the ones that did know did not approve.
A blind eye was turned because people were slowly thought to think of them as a different group and then the well its not me or mine thinking came in to play. They sat by and did nothing about it in most cases. This is the real danger. Apathy can be fostered allowing a few crazy people to perpetrate horrible crimes.
If Germany in the thirties is any indication at all, its shows how quickly such a situation could be created in the USA.
I know we are talking UK and IANAL but here in the USA they take a great deal of care to do what most of us using insticts would say fail to draw that line. If they did perps would regularly walk because the law would be void for vagueness. What you and I define as "obscene" might be very different. Its not a good legal word. There have been lots of pornography cases mostly around freedom of speech where the SCOTUS waxes on for pages trying to pin down what is obscene and when even though something is obscene is still has some artistic or political value and is protected anyway.
Its actually a pretty hard problem to solve in a fair way. The basic solution ( and I don't feel its really a good one ) is to write laws that cast a pretty wide net on what is and is not CP, and then leave it up people to decide when to report someone, prosecutes and Attorney Generals to decide when to try someone, and finally juries and judges to decide when to vacate. This naturally leads to a dangerous situation where the law can be enforced selectively against individuals for reasons having nothing to do with CP at all.
Chances are where you live there is a CP law that would define those pictures of your first child bathing in the kitchen sink as CP. Now nobody is going to report you for having those in a phone album, and no prosecutor would bring charges if they did, and finally no jury would convict; in most cases. Unless you run afoul of someones political agenda with access to any of those people and then all bets are off.
Which is probably why MBA is a masters program. The assumption is you have some domain specific background either from experience by that point you start an MBA or from an undergraduate education. The trouble we have to day all those undergrad business majors moving directly to the MBA programs, having never done any business.
Its a short sited probably ultimately self defeating goal. I was listening to PBS business report just last night and they were interviewing some economics professors who were discussing how the move to always maximize share holder value has not actually lead to better share holder returns over the longer time period of the past two decades.
They also pointed out one company P&G pretty well stayed on the build new business and protect the customers perception of value, noting that it outperformed the market over those two decades. Now obviously you'd need to go through alot more data to reach sound conclusions.
I do think there is enough evidence out there that a longer term view eventually yeilds better returns. We should try and break the 18mo CEO cycle.
We've had airport security for decades. When did it start? Early seventies? The only time we needed airport security to work, it didn't
I don't see how you can make that statement. It requires you to prove a negative. How many would be attackers and terrorists has the perception that airport security would prevent success has caused them not to try? Do you think you always hear about it when arrests are made successfully? Has the do not fly list stopped any would be terrorists at the ticket counter? You don't know and you can't.
I don't think the security can be made perfect either not unless you want all your flying to be done naked and handcuffed anyway. I do think there is some value in perpetuating the belief airport security work; regardless of if that is accomplished by making it actually work better or just good theater. The thing I hope the PTBs keep in mind is that if it is just theater don't impose costs that are to great or create trouble to aggravating.
Bestbuy used to be much much better. I grew up in MPLS/SP where it got started and before it became a national chain they had much wider selections of stuff. I really blame the internet for killing their selection of PC parts as I can totally understand no b&m is going to be able to compete in that space. Other stuff though like stereo equipment and the like I really don't know what happened. You used to be able to go in and look at 20 different receivers/amps and 10 complete sets of speakers, now you'd be lucky to find five different makes of either.
They have really gone lowest common denominator and totally main stream.
I am not arguing for a planned economy here. If people want to spend money on virtual goods that is just fine by me; its also fine that sellars "produce" as many of such goods as they can market. I do think the parent has a point though. Cultural values shape to some degree or another what we "want" beyond our basic survival needs.
Its evident that great societies of the past suffered when they became to decadent. Some of this crumbled from within and others fell to invasion by groups who had allocated their labor and production differently. See Egypt and the Hittites, The Austrian Empire and the other European powers, Muscovite(Sp?) Russia if you want examples outside of the usual Rome citiation.
So I do think that perhaps we as a society are allocating far to much production to Art and Entertainment, more so Entertainment than art the two are quite different; even though there are countless cases where they overlap.
We are spending a great deal of time being entertained and entertaining, and most of us our enjoying it. I don't propose we stop doing that as individuals or as a society but It might be a good idea to step back now and then and ask what else might we be doing?
We might not need block devices when everyone has a 256-bit CPU in their laptop but until then your idea is completely impractical.
You have to address memory. Primary memory has to be addressed at the if not the byte level than certainly at whatever size the registers are in the CPU, be it dwords, qwords or whatever else. The CPU needs to be able to fetch and store single arguments. You could have some sort of address translation were each address from the CPU's perspective is a 4 a number of 4 byte offsets or something but that still won't get you more than a 2^63 bytes even on modern cpus. People want bigger drives than that.
So you are still going to have to address large(ish) ranges of bytes in secondary storage to have any reasonable capacity; without royal pain. I suppose if you really wanted to solve the problem a different way and bring persistent secondary storage into the "direct" address space you could go back to some kind of multiple addressing mode scheme but the software people will certainly hunt you down and kill you.
Right nobody wants a CLI which is why Microsoft is developing most of the management tools for their high end products like SQL Server, Exchange, Windows Server fist and writing the MMC and like tools second; often not including access to all settings and features there.
Obviously the CLI *is* better suited to some tasks; and is quicker and more flexible when it comes to dealing with new input and new types of input.
Its not the way to go for all things. I happen to like drag and drop file managers for operations like selective copying.
Saying its a FAIL to require the CLI for something is short sited, not bothering to do a gui for a well understood work flow with a known scope is lazy.
You are confusing physical sector size with cluster size. May file systems are already addressing data in larger blocks. 4096 is very commonly used. They are generally multiples of 512 which is the physical sector size; so that its is easy to calculate the physical sector that needs to be changed when you know the logical.
Its quite possible to have a cluster size smaller than the sector size; the file system would need to be smart enough to determine what other clusters fall on that sector and write them all though.
Its not helpful in reducing SPAM unless or until every uses it. Why because you can't toss out mail from domains without SPF records you'd loose to much HAM. You can only uses it to detect and reject spoofs from domains with SPF.
Its not good as an anti spoofing technique in general because there are lots of ways you could make it look like you were sending from the correct host. Possibly in conjunction with DNSSEC (something only being slowly adopted) and some enhancements to BGP you could get there buy SPF alone does not do it.
A public private key scheme on the message bodies would, be much much more secure, and reliable for the anti spoof use.
Sometimes you want to temporarily run your mail out a different IP or relay from another domain, and if you used SPF and your recipients have the dns record cached you are kinda screwed if you need to do anything in a hurry.
SPF is an infective solution at best and really amounts to needless complexity which can only cause problems at worst.
The SPAM and tamper issues are both better solved with message signing.
Why did nobody slap AES or blowfish block ciphers around the video packets? I admit I am assuming the video is digital. There are inexpensive (in terms of the cost of a drone) silicon implementations of both for the planes and BSD licensed software for the stations. If they just used preshared keys its would have been trivial to do and probably would have prevented this.
You know I get this argument quite often from intellectuals. What you are essentially saying, at least in practice, is that if you hold an unpopular opinion you are obligated to maintain a higher standard of behavior.
If we were operating in strictly academic or professional circles I would tend to agree that keeping everything entirely above board and beyond reproach would be the best way to ensure that if you are correct you eventual prevail in the debate. The problem is we are not in those circles; the climate debate is political first science second.
The "pro choice" crowed figured out early on the way to win the debate was to control language used. This is why the neither side will use the others language now. The "pro life" lost lots of ground before they learned that an academic discussion of ethics and morality was not an effective strategy labeling their opponents as "baby killers" is.
We moved into the same realm with climate science. Its a political problem now and its going to get a political solution regardless of weather that has any relationship with natural world or not. If you are not convinced its happening, or that it is a serious threat and you are seeking to avoid a major political intervention than the answer, somewhat sadly, is to label your opponents. You call them "fascist, warmer, totalitarian, idiot" while they call you "heartless, denier, cook, conspiracy nut,..."
The answer is obvious. You simply put it in writing that in your professional opinion someone without an educational background or specific vocational training related the security and operation of whatever system you are dealing with should not operate its administrative features. You than state that you cannot be solely responsible for security or system failures if you are not permitted to be the gatekeeper. You then hand over the passwords if your employer or client agrees.
If you really wanted to share stuff in a "controlled" way you would set up a web or ftp server and only give your friends an family the password. Facebook privacy setings are security like putting the house key under the doormat is security.
I would argue the debate is not about health care and should not be about health care. You said it yourself "mandatory", the government has never in history required someone to purchase a good or service. Liar's like Chuck Schummer claim its comparable to auto insurance.
Its not; its not at all. Everyone has a choice about owning a car; they then have another choice about operating it on public roads. I could buy a pickup and drive it around my private farm with no registration and no insurance, legally. Its only if you want the privilege of using a public resource the roads that you become required to insure the safety of others and their property. Oh and most perhaps all states only require that, liability coverage. In other words you are responsible for risk you impose on others you do not have to purchase any coverage for your self.
Our nation was founded on principles of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I was given no choice about life, may parents made that call, and it is certainly contrary to liberty to force me to buy an insurance policy if I don't want one, and it also makes me unhappy. That constitutes the complete failure of what the founders set out to do.
Health care is not a right, and I don't want it to become one if its at the expense personal freedom and if government provides it, than it almost surely will be. Honestly if you don't like it emigrate, you have freedom to leave this nation, not something other governments always afford their citizens.
There are also economic considerations here; look at Germany and the trouble its having with the ratio of old to young. Increasing life spans of those who could not afford the best levels of care on their own may not be beneficial to society as a whole. Health is like anything else you play the hand your dealt. Some people get a better hand and some people play their hand better than others. Its call life. We supposed to be about equality of opportunity, that is meritocracy; not equality of result which is socialism.
Don't forget one of the big 2-stroke killers in the USA was the as usual the EPA. Because they set at the emissions requirements as ratios; rather than say an absolute value per horsepower hour. A 2 stroke looks dirty compared to a four stroke if you compare the various amounts of controlled gases in a sample but they are often allot better in absolute terms; because they can do more work per unit of displacement and revolution.
450 albums cost $4,500 to $11,250 new; just try and resell them you will find out what they are worth and I can tell you its going to be less than $4,500; unless you lucked into something very rare and considered important.
The best way would be to just make the user responsible. Require a license to use the internet. Make it 1Euro (since this is Germany) and no renewals no exams nothing; just like buying fishing license in the USA. Once you apply you have it. The license entitles you to have a personal computer system attached to public internet. You should still be free to use the internet at friends house library etc with no internet license.
I am not proposing any elaborate tracking scheme here either. All this would be is you have to show a provider a valid license before they can sell you service. Now for the hooks; providers caught selling services to people without licenses should be shutdown. Individuals caught with machines participating in botnets, sending spam etc should have their license suspended, and the internet service subscriptions canceled. Make like E50 to get your license out of suspended status.
That way everyone has motivation to learn enough to operate safely or hire someone else to do it for them.
If this type of thing is implemented at the file level every application is going to have to do its own thing. That means to many implementations most of which wont be very good or well tested. It also means applications developers will have to be busy slogging though error correction data in their files rather than the data they actually wanted to persist for their application. I think the article offers a number of good ideas but it would be better to do most of them at the filesystem and perhaps some at the storage layer.
Also if we can present the same logical file when read to the application even if every 9th byte is parity on the disk that is a plus because it means legacy apps can get the enhanced protection as well.
You don't start out typing man anything. You should start out
$apropos burn cd
to get a list of documentation that has those keywords. You get back really pretty good results; though admittedly there are a number of spurious ones too. It does tell you what section of the manual the documentation comes from though and hopefully you know enough that the stuff from sections 7 and 8 are going to be most useful.
apropos is a great tool? It works at least as well as "Search" or "Find" functions in the help systems found on other platforms do. You don't open any of those help systems directly to the subject you are interested in at first blush either you always start with a keyword search.
There is always xman as well in almost all dirstros; if you want a gui front end to all of it.
Probably because nobody really wants that. The point of most polices is ultimately to ensure that there is no responsibility for acts of GOD. Bad stuff is always going to happen. You can have good policies in place and generally do a good job of administration and still get hacked; its possible. Someone you thought you could trust could walk away with sensitive data.
I think most people agree that if you can show that you did your due diligence and complied with a good solid set of requirements and something still happens that its not your fault its just something that happened. That lets you keep your job; otherwise someone has to take the fall for political reasons if nothing else; and that person is probably some sysadmin who may or may not have been doing a good job. You can't prevent every emergency, but you can take and show that you took reasonable precautions; its actually a good thing when what those precautions entail is formalized.
Considering how long people hold onto their version of IE, it will be ages until IE7 disappears.
I really don't think you are right about that. There will always be those home users on dialup that don't run automatic updates ever but they are not very useful in a bot net anyway. Most people will get update to IE8 weather they mean to do it or not. IE 6 lives in the corporate space because it was around long enough for its own software ecosystem to develop in and on it. IE7 was around for like a year before 8 was released as beta and 8 does not break much compatibility with 7 its much less significant than 6 -> 7.
I doubt there is much code out there target at 7 that does not work on 8. The projects that do would have to have been pretty small and would have been designed and completed in a pretty narrow time window between 7's release and the pretty clear public information on what was coming in 8.
Slashdot Mirror
It is not a problem with windows because if you are an OEM or a volume license customer you are explicitly allowed to do imaging and image customization (within limits) by the license. Microsoft unlike Apple does not build their own systems they are not stupid and they took care of this little matter. Apple did not because there was no need to grant such permission.
Microsoft has some pretty scary terms in their agreements but it is possible to comply and still run a business.
Gee you think maybe Red Hat Software's policy is geared towards getting customers to simply hold up their end of an agreement they made when they licensed the software while Microsoft's is geared toward giving them as much control over you and your business as possible in case they ever want to exercise it.
What M$ is doing opens the door to them extorting just about anything they want from you. What RH is doing is just saying well you agreed to pay us $X per seat you have Y seats pay us $X*Y and we can all be friends.
I am not saying the USA is anything like Nazi Germany, but know your history. Its not like in the early thirties you typical German citizen was having their daily jew hate either. In fact its true that the majority really did not know (because they did not ask) the treatment the jews and many of the ones that did know did not approve.
A blind eye was turned because people were slowly thought to think of them as a different group and then the well its not me or mine thinking came in to play. They sat by and did nothing about it in most cases. This is the real danger. Apathy can be fostered allowing a few crazy people to perpetrate horrible crimes.
If Germany in the thirties is any indication at all, its shows how quickly such a situation could be created in the USA.
I know we are talking UK and IANAL but here in the USA they take a great deal of care to do what most of us using insticts would say fail to draw that line. If they did perps would regularly walk because the law would be void for vagueness. What you and I define as "obscene" might be very different. Its not a good legal word. There have been lots of pornography cases mostly around freedom of speech where the SCOTUS waxes on for pages trying to pin down what is obscene and when even though something is obscene is still has some artistic or political value and is protected anyway.
Its actually a pretty hard problem to solve in a fair way. The basic solution ( and I don't feel its really a good one ) is to write laws that cast a pretty wide net on what is and is not CP, and then leave it up people to decide when to report someone, prosecutes and Attorney Generals to decide when to try someone, and finally juries and judges to decide when to vacate. This naturally leads to a dangerous situation where the law can be enforced selectively against individuals for reasons having nothing to do with CP at all.
Chances are where you live there is a CP law that would define those pictures of your first child bathing in the kitchen sink as CP. Now nobody is going to report you for having those in a phone album, and no prosecutor would bring charges if they did, and finally no jury would convict; in most cases. Unless you run afoul of someones political agenda with access to any of those people and then all bets are off.
Which is probably why MBA is a masters program. The assumption is you have some domain specific background either from experience by that point you start an MBA or from an undergraduate education. The trouble we have to day all those undergrad business majors moving directly to the MBA programs, having never done any business.
Its a short sited probably ultimately self defeating goal. I was listening to PBS business report just last night and they were interviewing some economics professors who were discussing how the move to always maximize share holder value has not actually lead to better share holder returns over the longer time period of the past two decades.
They also pointed out one company P&G pretty well stayed on the build new business and protect the customers perception of value, noting that it outperformed the market over those two decades. Now obviously you'd need to go through alot more data to reach sound conclusions.
I do think there is enough evidence out there that a longer term view eventually yeilds better returns. We should try and break the 18mo CEO cycle.
We've had airport security for decades. When did it start? Early seventies? The only time we needed airport security to work, it didn't
I don't see how you can make that statement. It requires you to prove a negative. How many would be attackers and terrorists has the perception that airport security would prevent success has caused them not to try? Do you think you always hear about it when arrests are made successfully? Has the do not fly list stopped any would be terrorists at the ticket counter? You don't know and you can't.
I don't think the security can be made perfect either not unless you want all your flying to be done naked and handcuffed anyway. I do think there is some value in perpetuating the belief airport security work; regardless of if that is accomplished by making it actually work better or just good theater. The thing I hope the PTBs keep in mind is that if it is just theater don't impose costs that are to great or create trouble to aggravating.
Bestbuy used to be much much better. I grew up in MPLS/SP where it got started and before it became a national chain they had much wider selections of stuff. I really blame the internet for killing their selection of PC parts as I can totally understand no b&m is going to be able to compete in that space. Other stuff though like stereo equipment and the like I really don't know what happened. You used to be able to go in and look at 20 different receivers/amps and 10 complete sets of speakers, now you'd be lucky to find five different makes of either.
They have really gone lowest common denominator and totally main stream.
I am not arguing for a planned economy here. If people want to spend money on virtual goods that is just fine by me; its also fine that sellars "produce" as many of such goods as they can market. I do think the parent has a point though. Cultural values shape to some degree or another what we "want" beyond our basic survival needs.
Its evident that great societies of the past suffered when they became to decadent. Some of this crumbled from within and others fell to invasion by groups who had allocated their labor and production differently. See Egypt and the Hittites, The Austrian Empire and the other European powers, Muscovite(Sp?) Russia if you want examples outside of the usual Rome citiation.
So I do think that perhaps we as a society are allocating far to much production to Art and Entertainment, more so Entertainment than art the two are quite different; even though there are countless cases where they overlap.
We are spending a great deal of time being entertained and entertaining, and most of us our enjoying it. I don't propose we stop doing that as individuals or as a society but It might be a good idea to step back now and then and ask what else might we be doing?
We might not need block devices when everyone has a 256-bit CPU in their laptop but until then your idea is completely impractical.
You have to address memory. Primary memory has to be addressed at the if not the byte level than certainly at whatever size the registers are in the CPU, be it dwords, qwords or whatever else. The CPU needs to be able to fetch and store single arguments. You could have some sort of address translation were each address from the CPU's perspective is a 4 a number of 4 byte offsets or something but that still won't get you more than a 2^63 bytes even on modern cpus. People want bigger drives than that.
So you are still going to have to address large(ish) ranges of bytes in secondary storage to have any reasonable capacity; without royal pain. I suppose if you really wanted to solve the problem a different way and bring persistent secondary storage into the "direct" address space you could go back to some kind of multiple addressing mode scheme but the software people will certainly hunt you down and kill you.
Right nobody wants a CLI which is why Microsoft is developing most of the management tools for their high end products like SQL Server, Exchange, Windows Server fist and writing the MMC and like tools second; often not including access to all settings and features there.
Obviously the CLI *is* better suited to some tasks; and is quicker and more flexible when it comes to dealing with new input and new types of input.
Its not the way to go for all things. I happen to like drag and drop file managers for operations like selective copying.
Saying its a FAIL to require the CLI for something is short sited, not bothering to do a gui for a well understood work flow with a known scope is lazy.
You are confusing physical sector size with cluster size. May file systems are already addressing data in larger blocks. 4096 is very commonly used. They are generally multiples of 512 which is the physical sector size; so that its is easy to calculate the physical sector that needs to be changed when you know the logical.
Its quite possible to have a cluster size smaller than the sector size; the file system would need to be smart enough to determine what other clusters fall on that sector and write them all though.
Its not helpful in reducing SPAM unless or until every uses it. Why because you can't toss out mail from domains without SPF records you'd loose to much HAM. You can only uses it to detect and reject spoofs from domains with SPF.
Its not good as an anti spoofing technique in general because there are lots of ways you could make it look like you were sending from the correct host. Possibly in conjunction with DNSSEC (something only being slowly adopted) and some enhancements to BGP you could get there buy SPF alone does not do it.
A public private key scheme on the message bodies would, be much much more secure, and reliable for the anti spoof use.
Sometimes you want to temporarily run your mail out a different IP or relay from another domain, and if you used SPF and your recipients have the dns record cached you are kinda screwed if you need to do anything in a hurry.
SPF is an infective solution at best and really amounts to needless complexity which can only cause problems at worst.
The SPAM and tamper issues are both better solved with message signing.
Why did nobody slap AES or blowfish block ciphers around the video packets? I admit I am assuming the video is digital. There are inexpensive (in terms of the cost of a drone) silicon implementations of both for the planes and BSD licensed software for the stations. If they just used preshared keys its would have been trivial to do and probably would have prevented this.
You know I get this argument quite often from intellectuals. What you are essentially saying, at least in practice, is that if you hold an unpopular opinion you are obligated to maintain a higher standard of behavior.
If we were operating in strictly academic or professional circles I would tend to agree that keeping everything entirely above board and beyond reproach would be the best way to ensure that if you are correct you eventual prevail in the debate. The problem is we are not in those circles; the climate debate is political first science second.
The "pro choice" crowed figured out early on the way to win the debate was to control language used. This is why the neither side will use the others language now. The "pro life" lost lots of ground before they learned that an academic discussion of ethics and morality was not an effective strategy labeling their opponents as "baby killers" is.
We moved into the same realm with climate science. Its a political problem now and its going to get a political solution regardless of weather that has any relationship with natural world or not. If you are not convinced its happening, or that it is a serious threat and you are seeking to avoid a major political intervention than the answer, somewhat sadly, is to label your opponents. You call them "fascist, warmer, totalitarian, idiot" while they call you "heartless, denier, cook, conspiracy nut,..."
The answer is obvious. You simply put it in writing that in your professional opinion someone without an educational background or specific vocational training related the security and operation of whatever system you are dealing with should not operate its administrative features. You than state that you cannot be solely responsible for security or system failures if you are not permitted to be the gatekeeper. You then hand over the passwords if your employer or client agrees.
There is really no problem here at all.
If you really wanted to share stuff in a "controlled" way you would set up a web or ftp server and only give your friends an family the password. Facebook privacy setings are security like putting the house key under the doormat is security.
I would argue the debate is not about health care and should not be about health care. You said it yourself "mandatory", the government has never in history required someone to purchase a good or service. Liar's like Chuck Schummer claim its comparable to auto insurance.
Its not; its not at all. Everyone has a choice about owning a car; they then have another choice about operating it on public roads. I could buy a pickup and drive it around my private farm with no registration and no insurance, legally. Its only if you want the privilege of using a public resource the roads that you become required to insure the safety of others and their property. Oh and most perhaps all states only require that, liability coverage. In other words you are responsible for risk you impose on others you do not have to purchase any coverage for your self.
Our nation was founded on principles of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I was given no choice about life, may parents made that call, and it is certainly contrary to liberty to force me to buy an insurance policy if I don't want one, and it also makes me unhappy. That constitutes the complete failure of what the founders set out to do.
Health care is not a right, and I don't want it to become one if its at the expense personal freedom and if government provides it, than it almost surely will be. Honestly if you don't like it emigrate, you have freedom to leave this nation, not something other governments always afford their citizens.
There are also economic considerations here; look at Germany and the trouble its having with the ratio of old to young. Increasing life spans of those who could not afford the best levels of care on their own may not be beneficial to society as a whole. Health is like anything else you play the hand your dealt. Some people get a better hand and some people play their hand better than others. Its call life. We supposed to be about equality of opportunity, that is meritocracy; not equality of result which is socialism.
Don't forget one of the big 2-stroke killers in the USA was the as usual the EPA. Because they set at the emissions requirements as ratios; rather than say an absolute value per horsepower hour. A 2 stroke looks dirty compared to a four stroke if you compare the various amounts of controlled gases in a sample but they are often allot better in absolute terms; because they can do more work per unit of displacement and revolution.
450 albums is worth $4,500 to $11,250
450 albums cost $4,500 to $11,250 new; just try and resell them you will find out what they are worth and I can tell you its going to be less than $4,500; unless you lucked into something very rare and considered important.
The best way would be to just make the user responsible. Require a license to use the internet. Make it 1Euro (since this is Germany) and no renewals no exams nothing; just like buying fishing license in the USA. Once you apply you have it. The license entitles you to have a personal computer system attached to public internet. You should still be free to use the internet at friends house library etc with no internet license.
I am not proposing any elaborate tracking scheme here either. All this would be is you have to show a provider a valid license before they can sell you service. Now for the hooks; providers caught selling services to people without licenses should be shutdown. Individuals caught with machines participating in botnets, sending spam etc should have their license suspended, and the internet service subscriptions canceled. Make like E50 to get your license out of suspended status.
That way everyone has motivation to learn enough to operate safely or hire someone else to do it for them.
If this type of thing is implemented at the file level every application is going to have to do its own thing. That means to many implementations most of which wont be very good or well tested. It also means applications developers will have to be busy slogging though error correction data in their files rather than the data they actually wanted to persist for their application. I think the article offers a number of good ideas but it would be better to do most of them at the filesystem and perhaps some at the storage layer.
Also if we can present the same logical file when read to the application even if every 9th byte is parity on the disk that is a plus because it means legacy apps can get the enhanced protection as well.
You don't start out typing man anything. You should start out
$apropos burn cd
to get a list of documentation that has those keywords. You get back really pretty good results; though admittedly there are a number of spurious ones too. It does tell you what section of the manual the documentation comes from though and hopefully you know enough that the stuff from sections 7 and 8 are going to be most useful.
apropos is a great tool? It works at least as well as "Search" or "Find" functions in the help systems found on other platforms do. You don't open any of those help systems directly to the subject you are interested in at first blush either you always start with a keyword search.
There is always xman as well in almost all dirstros; if you want a gui front end to all of it.
Probably because nobody really wants that. The point of most polices is ultimately to ensure that there is no responsibility for acts of GOD. Bad stuff is always going to happen. You can have good policies in place and generally do a good job of administration and still get hacked; its possible. Someone you thought you could trust could walk away with sensitive data.
I think most people agree that if you can show that you did your due diligence and complied with a good solid set of requirements and something still happens that its not your fault its just something that happened. That lets you keep your job; otherwise someone has to take the fall for political reasons if nothing else; and that person is probably some sysadmin who may or may not have been doing a good job. You can't prevent every emergency, but you can take and show that you took reasonable precautions; its actually a good thing when what those precautions entail is formalized.
Considering how long people hold onto their version of IE, it will be ages until IE7 disappears.
I really don't think you are right about that. There will always be those home users on dialup that don't run automatic updates ever but they are not very useful in a bot net anyway. Most people will get update to IE8 weather they mean to do it or not. IE 6 lives in the corporate space because it was around long enough for its own software ecosystem to develop in and on it. IE7 was around for like a year before 8 was released as beta and 8 does not break much compatibility with 7 its much less significant than 6 -> 7.
I doubt there is much code out there target at 7 that does not work on 8. The projects that do would have to have been pretty small and would have been designed and completed in a pretty narrow time window between 7's release and the pretty clear public information on what was coming in 8.