Are you bonkers? LCD displays are hardly different from any other video output device. Your graphics cards available video modes (resolutions, bit depths, refresh rates) matter more wrt compatibility than your OS.
Hey, is there a feasability problem with making the addition of TLS a socket option? For TCP/UDP/SCTP clients (connection/datagram initiators), it would be great to use a system-wide certificate store (perhaps in kernel space?), and just say "turn on TLS". This would make writing network clients with encrypted traffic a dream.
Granted, openssl's interface may be trivially more complex, but just the thought of managing yet another set of certificates makes me cringe.
Instead of shoehorning in functionality into a free-form field (or so I assume, by its name), why not use something more appropriate? Why not write an I-D about how DNS should include "MIRROR" records? I'll leave it to the mailing lists to debate whether DNS should know so much about a name, and the specifics of what exactly is meant by "mirror" (what content, what protocols, etc.).
The IETF has some great things cooking. RSerPool, e.g. -- though it's not designed primarily for load-distribution (rather uptime, AFAIK). Perhaps I'm suggesting you use a hammer to crack a nut, but this might abate the need for posting mirrors, like you said.
Open Source is such a beautiful thing. It's unfortunate that so much of its energy is spent writing competing implementations of various similar protocols. But I digress.
I always remember hearing that Watson & Crick were not _really_ first...Anyone know for sure? Maybe that's just a bunch of baloney. (Maybe I should RTFA)
Why not start off with whitelisting? Add some extension to SMTP that would sign outgoing mail with a domain certificate. Old, noncompliant software could ignore the extension. Newer versions could verify the signature and bypass the spam (message content) filters, but check the domain name against a domain blacklist. Once a domain was found to be a source of spam, it could be added to a domain blacklist (or better yet, request that they get put on the CRL!). Eventually, you'd get to the point where you (the mail server admin) would feel comfortable requiring all domains to sign their mail to you.
How about it, guys? (I looked, and this was the closest thing I could find.)
So can we expect similar native SVG support from our favorite gratis and libre browsers (Mozilla, Opera, et al) soon? I think it's only been available via a plugin before.
Well, if it's binary compatible with other win32 platforms, you could just copy over your favorite shell (most people use explorer.exe). There are ports of XFree86 for win32, too. Voila, instant graphical interface.
What are IP "Connections"? AFAIK, the transport layers can have connections, but not the network layer. IP has datagrams. I did RTFA, but there's not a whole lot of context in that message, and I was too lazy to go read the whole thread. Are they just talking about TCP connections, or what?
Start gathering old (or at least current) hardware now. If you're good at soldering, you might be able to wait a bit longer -- modchips will probably work on the first generation TCPA products.
Yeah, TCPA is pure evil. Make no mistake, I can't stand the fact that everyone's on board with this. But at least some good things might come about -- not having to remember 1000 passwords would be kinda cool. (Especially on your computer at work, where those Nazis are conspiring to control your every move anyways.)
Because who determines what gets on the "white" list? The same censors who created the blacklist?
I think that the.kids.us domain could accomplish some of these goals. You make a good point, though -- even in a regulated system there is potential for inaccuracy/censorship/abuse. (Especially if it's run by a government agency.) But it's much better than a million third-parties (NetNanny, et al) coming up with their own whitelists.
Re:Evidence we've been damaging the environment
on
Starshine 3 is Toast
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
You've got to be trolling me, right?
The sun doesn't normally double peak in its 11 year sunspot cycle but this time it has. This is an unusual event - sunspot activity should have died right down by now.
I continue to be amazed by quotes like this that something "usually" happens or doesn't. Meteorological data on this planet goes back a couple of hundred years at best. Astronomical/Solar data as to whether and when sunspots occur is probably similar. Whatever the case, the amount of data available is relatively miniscule. How can anyone find trends in such statistically insignificant amount of time?
... people ought to at least be considering the possibility that this, like global warming, and the ozone hole, is a result of man's harmful ongoing activities on Earth.
Now I know I've been trolled. Man bites Sun? C'mon, give me a break. In fact, the global warming hooey (have you been outside today?) is probably caused by inconsistent solar thermal output.
I couldn't stomach the whole article. It doesn't look like an editor went anywhere near it. And what's the deal with his footnotes/references? The 'HT' in HTTP and HTML stands for what again? Is it too much to ask for those references to really go somewhere?
I dunno, worked for me. I'm assuming you're talking about using a Windows VNC server when you say "Under windoze". I'd probably agree that there's more latency using a Windows VNC server. If you're not limited to Windows-only IDEs/compilers, then you're free to develop on a unix platform (which hosts the VNC server), and use win32 VNC viewers.
Pair programming does not merely increase quality of the output code, it is a fantastic way to perform knowledge transfer (either of specific code design, or general coding skills, depending on the relative skill level of those involved).
Does it work? There's lots of evidence it's worked for a lot of people who've tried it (including me).
Chalk up one more piece of anecdotal evidence -- I've done it, and I recommend it.
Does it always work, for everyone, in every project? That's an open question.
I have some doubt as to a theory that any one methodology can be a panacea. (This is why we have great holy wars over things like editors...)
Pair programming is not the first XP practice a project should try. Could a project get a lot of value out of XP without doing pair programming? I think yes, and I'm an advocate of programming in pairs; the question is open to debate.
Hear, hear. There are several standalone XP practices: code-to-the-test, pair programming, e.g. I recommend giving those a try first. If you can find an XP advocate with some experience, having them walk you through some of them has to be the best way to go about it. (IMHO).
I was just going to suggest that very thing! I live right down the street from the Wisconsin factory and have yet to stop by.
I work at MotLabs -- if you're interested in a tour, I can look into it. Since there's research a-doings there, it might only be a factory tour, and I don't know anything interesting that's assembled in Schaumburg.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you bonkers? LCD displays are hardly different from any other video output device. Your graphics cards available video modes (resolutions, bit depths, refresh rates) matter more wrt compatibility than your OS.
Hey, is there a feasability problem with making the addition of TLS a socket option? For TCP/UDP/SCTP clients (connection/datagram initiators), it would be great to use a system-wide certificate store (perhaps in kernel space?), and just say "turn on TLS". This would make writing network clients with encrypted traffic a dream.
Granted, openssl's interface may be trivially more complex, but just the thought of managing yet another set of certificates makes me cringe.
Instead of shoehorning in functionality into a free-form field (or so I assume, by its name), why not use something more appropriate? Why not write an I-D about how DNS should include "MIRROR" records? I'll leave it to the mailing lists to debate whether DNS should know so much about a name, and the specifics of what exactly is meant by "mirror" (what content, what protocols, etc.).
The IETF has some great things cooking. RSerPool, e.g. -- though it's not designed primarily for load-distribution (rather uptime, AFAIK). Perhaps I'm suggesting you use a hammer to crack a nut, but this might abate the need for posting mirrors, like you said.
Open Source is such a beautiful thing. It's unfortunate that so much of its energy is spent writing competing implementations of various similar protocols. But I digress.
I always remember hearing that Watson & Crick were not _really_ first...Anyone know for sure? Maybe that's just a bunch of baloney. (Maybe I should RTFA)
Why not start off with whitelisting? Add some extension to SMTP that would sign outgoing mail with a domain certificate. Old, noncompliant software could ignore the extension. Newer versions could verify the signature and bypass the spam (message content) filters, but check the domain name against a domain blacklist. Once a domain was found to be a source of spam, it could be added to a domain blacklist (or better yet, request that they get put on the CRL!). Eventually, you'd get to the point where you (the mail server admin) would feel comfortable requiring all domains to sign their mail to you.
How about it, guys? (I looked, and this was the closest thing I could find.)
So can we expect similar native SVG support from our favorite gratis and libre browsers (Mozilla, Opera, et al) soon? I think it's only been available via a plugin before.
Well, if it's binary compatible with other win32 platforms, you could just copy over your favorite shell (most people use explorer.exe). There are ports of XFree86 for win32, too. Voila, instant graphical interface.
I'll bet that revived Teacher in Space program gets grounded again.
I'll be danged. Sure enough, there it is. I sit corrected.
What are IP "Connections"? AFAIK, the transport layers can have connections, but not the network layer. IP has datagrams. I did RTFA, but there's not a whole lot of context in that message, and I was too lazy to go read the whole thread. Are they just talking about TCP connections, or what?
Start gathering old (or at least current) hardware now. If you're good at soldering, you might be able to wait a bit longer -- modchips will probably work on the first generation TCPA products.
Yeah, TCPA is pure evil. Make no mistake, I can't stand the fact that everyone's on board with this. But at least some good things might come about -- not having to remember 1000 passwords would be kinda cool. (Especially on your computer at work, where those Nazis are conspiring to control your every move anyways.)
I couldn't stomach the whole article. It doesn't look like an editor went anywhere near it. And what's the deal with his footnotes/references? The 'HT' in HTTP and HTML stands for what again? Is it too much to ask for those references to really go somewhere?
I was just going to suggest that very thing! I live right down the street from the Wisconsin factory and have yet to stop by. I work at MotLabs -- if you're interested in a tour, I can look into it. Since there's research a-doings there, it might only be a factory tour, and I don't know anything interesting that's assembled in Schaumburg.
Correct Link
Why not this one, though?