And this is from an organisation that has this accross the top of it's website:
The Manhattan Institute is a think tank whose mission is to develop and disseminate
new ideas that foster greater economic choice and individual responsibility
In what way does giving up privacy to the government foster individual responsibility?
I am currently working in a large UK company and we have websites on both IIS and Apache, but guess what? No Linux, No open source databases, no PHP/Perl/Python.
The point is that Apache domiantes the server world becuase it comes with all commercial Unix boxes. And large companies are happy that this piece of open source that came bundled with AIX or HPUX or Solaris has some kind of formal support and backing (if the Apache project ever looked like folding, HP/Sun/IBM would keep it going).
Only recently are we seeing the real dominace of Linux in ISPs, and that again is partly becuase of IBM and Sun (Cobalt, etc). So I don't think there is any linkage between the uptake of Apache and the corporate uptake of Open Source in general, either on the server or the client.
Did you read what these vulnerablities were? I would think they are beyond most people to exploit and well aout side the realm of script kiddies. Anyone who sucessfully exploits these ought to get an instant CS degree and decent job.
Secrecy worries most people. If people we depend on are open and honest then the vast majority of people tend to trust them to do thier job. However if a little clique forms and seeks to control information, people - like hack4life - get concerned and feel a need to blow the wistle. It is far better to be open and honest about a problem than to cover it up. Even if your intentions for covering it up were good.
There's also the issue of intent. If a hacker is "A person who enjoys exploring the details of programmable systems and how to stretch their capabilities"; then if I explore your website and happen to stumble into an area you did not want me to see, I think I am still a hacker, but you think I am a cracker.
It's too fine a line to draw since cracking is one possible extension hacking. I have never understood why programmers don't want to be called programmers? I am a professional engineer and a programmer and I am happy with either title. I am also a hacker in the classical sense of the word but I never use the term about myself. In a lot of countries an Engineer can be anyone from the guy changes the oil in your car to the guy who designed the wing of a passenger jet.
Engineers have to live with the widespread use of a title that can (for some of us) take years of professional training to achieve.
So I say to all you disgruntled hackers out there, don't be so touchy. Prove yourself by actions not by a label. If you're good at what you do, you don't need a label.
And on groceries, have an RFID scanner activated when you throw the empty package away and add it on to your shopping list. Once a week you check the list and mail it to the retailer - next day groceries.
... now if someone could just come up with something to put the shopping in the cupboards!
also (warming to theme and wandering off topic) why don't dish washers come with two sets of racks? You could then have a cupboard next to the dishwasher sized to hold the racks. You can then take the rack of clean pots and put it in the cupboard, put empty racks in the dishwasher and fill them with dirty pots, when full, wash and repeat.
Why were the Brits never any good at building computer hardware?
They couldn't figure out how to make it leak oil.
Re:So you can use it on drug boxes...
on
Paper Mounted CPUs
·
· Score: 1
But seriously, surely what the world wants is the PC-less(TM) office. We can then get rid of these crappy multi-function tools that do lots of jobs badly and replce them with smart paper applications where each sheet of paper is specific to an application
Most things we do are about filling in a form (how many web forms have you created and/or filled today?). Suppose you want to post on/. You take your "Form request" form and write what you want on it, it requests the "/. post comment" form from your local printer. You write your comment on the "/. post comment" form and check the "Submit" box - your comment appears on/.
Xerox already have reprintable paper for those who think this is wasteful. So once you have a form for a specific application you could keep wiping it (just the bits you wrote, not the layout or the underlying electonics) and re-using it.
the world is a bad place so I need a gun to protect myself
lets make the world a safer place in which to live
I've seen lots of comments in this forum arguing that Good Guys need guns, Women need guns etc.etc. But no one is arguing that what is actually needed is a safer society then no one would need a gun.
Several years ago hand guns were banned in the UK, of course some of the Criminals still have guns, but now it is significantly more difficult to acquire/own/carry a gun. I would hate to be so scared (paranoid?) in my own home, or on the street, that I thought I needed to carry any type of weapon. I'd want to move...
Iron bridge gorge cannot be over-hyped after all it's a world heritage site. There are number of world's firsts here - the bridge is the first Iron bridge (steel had not been invented[discovered/created?]) - everything that went before was stone, brick or timber. It's also where the worlds first blast furnace was built and the Blist's hill working museum (same area) is a really good day out.
Also agree about the Science Museum, Thames Barrier and Royal Observatory. But lest face it Britain is littered with industrial archaeology, and there is also new stuff such as The Eden Project as featured in the latest Bond movie.
I would recomment a trip round a big ship yard - the scale of things is just mind-blowing and I once got on a trip round the Springfield nuclear reprocessing plant here in the UK. Most safety notices say "walk don't run", at Springfield they say "Run to the nearest exit"
If I buy a big electric motor and a fan and connect it to the grid, I can use it to drive my wind turbine continuously to produce light to power the solar panels on my roof to produce electricity for my house.
I have many tools in my toolbox, this saves me having to drive nails with a screwdriver.
If a 757 wing was protected it would be protected by Patent (I know opinion round here is not too favourable for Sotware Patents but bare with me on this) - and Patents *require* you to disclose what it is that you are protecting. This is so that it is clear to others what you claim to be protected.
I use a lot of open source but I rarely if ever look at the code. Often I don't even download it but I like the safety net of having it there if a product that I have committed a lot of time to falls short in one area or another.
The argument about competitors reverse engineering a product is pretty fatuous. It is fairly rare that I see software that I could not write myself just by looking at what it does. Most of the algorithms and protocols are published in technical journals and on the web. The reason I don't write a given piece of software myself is time. This goes for all the companies I have ever worked for also - they only write the stuff they cannot by, whether or not they can get the source for it.
One final point - look at the up-take of FREE, in every sense, software in large corporations. It is next to zero, M$ and the like make their money on enterprise wide deals to big companies and big companies will continue to pay if the source is avaialable or not and will never look at the source.
Slashdot Mirror
In what way does giving up privacy to the government foster individual responsibility?
The point is that Apache domiantes the server world becuase it comes with all commercial Unix boxes. And large companies are happy that this piece of open source that came bundled with AIX or HPUX or Solaris has some kind of formal support and backing (if the Apache project ever looked like folding, HP/Sun/IBM would keep it going).
Only recently are we seeing the real dominace of Linux in ISPs, and that again is partly becuase of IBM and Sun (Cobalt, etc). So I don't think there is any linkage between the uptake of Apache and the corporate uptake of Open Source in general, either on the server or the client.
Damn this globalisation
Did you read what these vulnerablities were? I would think they are beyond most people to exploit and well aout side the realm of script kiddies. Anyone who sucessfully exploits these ought to get an instant CS degree and decent job.
Secrecy worries most people. If people we depend on are open and honest then the vast majority of people tend to trust them to do thier job. However if a little clique forms and seeks to control information, people - like hack4life - get concerned and feel a need to blow the wistle. It is far better to be open and honest about a problem than to cover it up. Even if your intentions for covering it up were good.
It's too fine a line to draw since cracking is one possible extension hacking. I have never understood why programmers don't want to be called programmers? I am a professional engineer and a programmer and I am happy with either title. I am also a hacker in the classical sense of the word but I never use the term about myself. In a lot of countries an Engineer can be anyone from the guy changes the oil in your car to the guy who designed the wing of a passenger jet. Engineers have to live with the widespread use of a title that can (for some of us) take years of professional training to achieve.
So I say to all you disgruntled hackers out there, don't be so touchy. Prove yourself by actions not by a label. If you're good at what you do, you don't need a label.
also (warming to theme and wandering off topic) why don't dish washers come with two sets of racks? You could then have a cupboard next to the dishwasher sized to hold the racks. You can then take the rack of clean pots and put it in the cupboard, put empty racks in the dishwasher and fill them with dirty pots, when full, wash and repeat.
They couldn't figure out how to make it leak oil.
Most things we do are about filling in a form (how many web forms have you created and/or filled today?). Suppose you want to post on /. You take your "Form request" form and write what you want on it, it requests the "/. post comment" form from your local printer. You write your comment on the "/. post comment" form and check the "Submit" box - your comment appears on /.
Xerox already have reprintable paper for those who think this is wasteful. So once you have a form for a specific application you could keep wiping it (just the bits you wrote, not the layout or the underlying electonics) and re-using it.
So you think it's OK to be in the richest nation on earth and aspire to the standards of some of the poorest?
the world is a bad place so I need a gun to protect myself
lets make the world a safer place in which to live
I've seen lots of comments in this forum arguing that Good Guys need guns, Women need guns etc.etc. But no one is arguing that what is actually needed is a safer society then no one would need a gun.
Several years ago hand guns were banned in the UK, of course some of the Criminals still have guns, but now it is significantly more difficult to acquire/own/carry a gun. I would hate to be so scared (paranoid?) in my own home, or on the street, that I thought I needed to carry any type of weapon. I'd want to move...
Also agree about the Science Museum, Thames Barrier and Royal Observatory. But lest face it Britain is littered with industrial archaeology, and there is also new stuff such as The Eden Project as featured in the latest Bond movie.
I would recomment a trip round a big ship yard - the scale of things is just mind-blowing and I once got on a trip round the Springfield nuclear reprocessing plant here in the UK. Most safety notices say "walk don't run", at Springfield they say "Run to the nearest exit"
I have many tools in my toolbox, this saves me having to drive nails with a screwdriver.
I use a lot of open source but I rarely if ever look at the code. Often I don't even download it but I like the safety net of having it there if a product that I have committed a lot of time to falls short in one area or another.
The argument about competitors reverse engineering a product is pretty fatuous. It is fairly rare that I see software that I could not write myself just by looking at what it does. Most of the algorithms and protocols are published in technical journals and on the web. The reason I don't write a given piece of software myself is time. This goes for all the companies I have ever worked for also - they only write the stuff they cannot by, whether or not they can get the source for it.
One final point - look at the up-take of FREE, in every sense, software in large corporations. It is next to zero, M$ and the like make their money on enterprise wide deals to big companies and big companies will continue to pay if the source is avaialable or not and will never look at the source.
then againm, may be the guy doesn't want to be hacked - never a good idea to give out techinical details on open forums