"So either these guys are gonna be the SCO of the semi-conductor world, or their crack is pretty good."
I don't see how you find this to be an either/or situation. Doesn't being the SCO of anything by definition mean your crack is good and your smoking lots of it?
Believe it or not the primary purpose of using linux isn't to boot windows. Out of every possible thing that could break windows booting is probably dead last on the priority list.
I believe he's talking about that class of user on windows who has just enough of a clue to break things.
There are users who know what their doing, there are users who have no clue and don't claim to, there are users who have half a clue and believe they have a full clue and those who do have a full clue are special geniuses and wizards.
It's the last class that is most dangers, they download and run all kinds of junk, things like incredimail, weatherbug, kazaa. They are the ones who pass around joke mails that feed mail viruses lots and lots of addresses, most non-CS/engineering college students fall into this category.
These users generally waste time setting up a screen saver and pretty background, usually one they downloaded from the net. Where most advanced users (who haven't written a screensaver for themselves) turn off every piece of desktop prettiness they can because it improves system performance. And because as a rule, the less that's running the more secure the system is.
That's possible. But if that were the case I'd disagree with them.
Throughout the day I don't have time to read slashdot and browse the comments at work (yes I actually have to *work* at work, the nerve of those people). But I certainly load up the page and scan for vulnerability/worm/etc headlines because slashdot is the one place that generally covers all the majors fairly fast (using an open source type method so to speak) which will point me to the individual site covering the issue. Or make me aware of said issue so I can hunt out more information.
For blaster for instance, this was extremely useful, I knew about blaster right away, and although there wasn't a fix out yet when it first hit until about noon that day, because I'd found out that this beast existed on slashdot we didn't spend hours trying to fix these issues before realizing it was a new worm.
The same is true for the linux systems we have out there. Granted I've never had a linux update break anything yet, but the Windows world has me paranoid enough that I haven't set automatic update downloading. And although I update routinely if I hear about a certainly especially critical issue I make it a point to update the systems affected IMMEDIATELY.
Throughout the day I generally have 2 or 3 30second windows in which I can check a site for information about current issues, that means I have time to check ONE site. I imagine alot of people are in this boat.
Either slashdot covers vulnerabilities or it doesn't, either it covers worms or it doesn't. Perhaps not on the main page for every single one... but I have EVERYTHING turned on for what is supposed to come up on my slashdot page, so if a legitimate vulnerability/virus/worm/trojan/spyware/activation issue/or anything else which will likely have an impact on a large number of computers and the way they are supported, article is submitted I'd sure like to see it.
That said, I think your mistaken though. I still find it suspicious that this started occuring right about the time the volume was seriously cranked up on the Microsoft ads (not when Microsoft ads first started appearing, there used to be some, now almost all the ads are).
If you crack out folgers and use the brewing process which yields expresso, guess what, the result is expresso.
If you take "expresso beans" and brew them like regular coffee. Guess what, the result is called Coffee.
Express is about the technique used to make it, the beans are merely a common preference because most people couldn't handle true expresso made with fine roast.
Espresso Roast'd beans have nothing to do with the drink called expresso.
Expresso can be made with any type of bean roasted to any degree. Expresso is expresso not because of the beans used but because of the method used to derive it. Hot water is jetted through extremely tightly packed grounds which produces much stronger coffee than you would get by brewing with the same grounds.
Expresso roast is mainly used because using a normal roast with the expresso process results in a black tarlike substance that you could only manage to sell to a fraction of a percent of people in the US who truely enjoy proper Expresso. Expresso roast is intentionally chosen because the beans are overroasted and weaker.
Your assuming they are looking for something specific or even actually expect to find anything of that nature.
I on the other hand believe the feds will ask for any information they have an excuse to get and add absolutely everything they get their hands on to their own private databases.
Yeah, maybe as little as a year or two ago. Now the site is run by Microsoft Fanboy's as sad I am to say it.
This post will be modded down just for saying it. Any pro linux or anti microsoft sentiment expressed on slashdot anymore is modded down. Any post which reflects negatively on the security of closed source is modded down.
Hell I'm starting to believe that the rumors that Microsoft has bought a chunk of Slashdot are true (90% of the ads on the site are Microsoft AD's, some are even TCO FUD links).
Just a test, try submitting 12 stories about new microsoft vulnerabilities after one has been ran. It's fairly easy to do, dozens of MS vulnerabilities are discovered weekly if you watch cert and other similar sites. Watch as all 12 are rejected.
If you pay attention the ratio of Microsoft Vul's which make the page is about 2 for every open source vul reported. As opposed to the 5 or so it used to be. But if you watch the advisory pages nothing has changed in the number of vulnerabilities reported, there is no lower ratio in reality. Stories are being accepted in such a way that it makes it appear that's the case.
I genuinely believe now that Microsoft is exerting at least some influence on the slashdot staff (maybe using their ad dollars as leverage) and definately believe that Microsoft has plenty of moles in the readership.
"Why should UPS agree to the union's terms if it feels that it's not right? Believe it or not, for-profit companies exist to for profit. The owners/shareholders demand certain level of profit. Otherwise, why risk investing in the stock market?"
Why should the employees continue to work if they don't feel they are being treated fairly?
"The standard reply to the "I want OSX on Win" plea is that Apple will never do it as it would kill their hardware sales. However I don't think this is the case: Just look at Sony, they are aimed at the same market as apple : High end Multi-media. And their PC's are just as, if not more expensive, than Apple."
Yes but it's worth noting, apple at least has decent overpriced hardware. As a former sony employee, I can assure you, sony WILL put the cheapest piece of crap in the system they can find so long as it has spec X that the consumer looks at. And it's not like their other products, they don't give support for their pc's/computer hardware (internal hardware is altogether different, cdroms, burners, dats, etc) which even rivals that of gateway or compaq.
I agree though, sooner or later it'd be nice for Apple to go x86. For it to happen though, they are going to have to clue in to the fact that Mac hardware is has become too pclike and they don't have the tight hardware experience they used to have.
It used to be that you went to store, bought X piece of mac hardware, go home, plug X hardware in. Your done.
Now it's the same as a pc, you go to store, buy X hardware, go home, plug X hardware in, pray, install driver if your prayers were answered, pray driver works.
"Many other stories are fairly gray, but I'm pretty sure the license to use OSX pretty much says that you are only allowed to install it on Apple hardware (although correct me if I'm wrong). This is promoting a fairly blatant breach of the license (Pear doesn't actually breach that license by existing)."
There is nothing to say that the terms of said license are legal. Thus far there is no reason to believe that licenses which extend control beyond what a copyright grants are legal, and a copyright grants the owner of said copyright control of distribution, it gives no authority over how a work is used once distributed.
Remember, without the copyright ALL the rights would be in the hands of the public. Copyright is the public giving the author/whathaveyou what is essentially a contract allowing them to control distribution for a limited time. The public owns OSX (well technically nobody does, or humankind does, ideas aren't ownable even under our screwed up legal system yet), apple just holds a copyright.
Simply because powerful copyright holders try to claim they own the material doesn't make it true, ideas aren't really ownable.
I see them as more likely to try to shutdown the emulator and if that fails to start revoking licenses (since the OSX license while it may not be truely legal, along with the rest of licenses of this type, says you can't run it on anything but Apple hardware).
While I agree with the rest of your post, this statement is a bit far fetched (unless you mean specifically in terms of purchasing a pc to emulate a mac).
A technically literate individual can walk out with a decent Beigebox Mac for something to the tune of $2500-$3000. A decent beigebox pc will run you under $800.
You don't define the cost difference by the bottom of the barrel piece of junk joe idiot buys, nor even by the top of the line spare no expense systems.
You define it by the systems someone who has a both a budget and true technical expertise would buy for themselves.
And yes, I do consider it fair to build the pc yourself for the comparison. You still can't piece together a mac cheaper than their sold by the manufacturer and that is due to intentionally inflated prices.
Not anymore, thanks to pci support and third party hardware Macs and hardware aren't QUITE as bad as the pc yet overall. But the only thing saving is them is the amount of work.
For the hardware which does work, it's as bad as windows and you have to load driver disks for everything. Since they have a Unix underpinning though, they may someday achieve the "95% of the time you don't need to manually load or ever be aware of the loading of drivers" linux has out of the box.
Someday maybe linux will achieve the other 5%.
Call me a Zealot if you will, but I fail to see any reason why with such perfect hardware detection and installation of the hardware which is supported under linux, there is any technical failing on that OS's hardware detection. Simply a lack of marketshare to get drivers developed.
My argument against Paypal is that what they do is act like a bank, offer bank services, and pretend your money is safe with them as it would be with a bank.
And hide all statements to the contrary in the very very fine print intentionally with the knowledge nobody will read it.
No the answer isnt' to get everyone to read, it won't happen. The answer to put in large bold letters just above the paypal logo on the site "We are not a Bank and under certain conditions we will confiscate funds held in our accounts."
This of course should be under the link "Pay with paypal" pages on all auction sites as well as the homepage.
Yeah, they'd probably be smart to do that here. But instead the supermarkets and even gas stations have real honest to god big steal vault and all banks in them.
Usually the supermarkets do check cashing but as far as I know there is nothing even especially bank backed about it. You go to the courtesy counter and they cash the payroll check. AFAIK they just do it as a third party check to cash it themselves. Which is why they require it be drawn on a local bank and be issued by a local buisness AND it generally has to be $300 or less.
Now bear in mind I said I've seen them, they aren't rare per say but much more common are supermarkets with ATM machines and check cashing and nothing else.
This is something all banks do as well. However they charge you an overdraft fee whether they cover the difference or not.
If they don't cover the difference then you'll generally have an additional fee from whoever you wrote the check to.
Most companies run a check twice, since some places automate this (like walmart) and often do it one right after another you'll get two overdraft fees and then another from whoever you wrote the check to.
The service agreement is irrelvant, it's extraordinarily wrong, nobody reads them and paypal knows nobody reads them. They offer "secure" bank services, they offer savings accounts, they perform electronic transfers between their accounts and those of other banks, they offer debit cards, they offer paypal credit cards.
They do everything but actually say "we are a bank" on the homepage. What they put in the service agreement is reality, which has nothing to do with implication. Their actual visual and percieved front is what they imply.
Yes in the end they all paid me back. Although in the first case with providian several checks bounced because of it, the charges from those caused the account to below (I had about 15 outstanding checks bounce as a chain effect of the initial charge) and the bank refused to refund the charges for those. It ended up costing me alot more than the wrongful charge was in the end.
My current bank at least didn't give me much trouble, as soon as they discovered I failed to understand why it should be ok for them to charge against my account under someone elses name simply because they've chosen to automate the system they refunded immediately. Only took 2hrs on the phone to get it resolved with them and they refunded instantly once it was.
With all three I had to fight though, my current bank was just the least fight.
Slashdot Mirror
"So either these guys are gonna be the SCO of the semi-conductor world, or their crack is pretty good."
I don't see how you find this to be an either/or situation. Doesn't being the SCO of anything by definition mean your crack is good and your smoking lots of it?
Believe it or not the primary purpose of using linux isn't to boot windows. Out of every possible thing that could break windows booting is probably dead last on the priority list.
I believe he's talking about that class of user on windows who has just enough of a clue to break things.
There are users who know what their doing, there are users who have no clue and don't claim to, there are users who have half a clue and believe they have a full clue and those who do have a full clue are special geniuses and wizards.
It's the last class that is most dangers, they download and run all kinds of junk, things like incredimail, weatherbug, kazaa. They are the ones who pass around joke mails that feed mail viruses lots and lots of addresses, most non-CS/engineering college students fall into this category.
These users generally waste time setting up a screen saver and pretty background, usually one they downloaded from the net. Where most advanced users (who haven't written a screensaver for themselves) turn off every piece of desktop prettiness they can because it improves system performance. And because as a rule, the less that's running the more secure the system is.
yup, in fact their all free to leave at once. That's what they call "a strike" see how that works?
That's possible. But if that were the case I'd disagree with them.
n issue/or anything else which will likely have an impact on a large number of computers and the way they are supported, article is submitted I'd sure like to see it.
Throughout the day I don't have time to read slashdot and browse the comments at work (yes I actually have to *work* at work, the nerve of those people). But I certainly load up the page and scan for vulnerability/worm/etc headlines because slashdot is the one place that generally covers all the majors fairly fast (using an open source type method so to speak) which will point me to the individual site covering the issue. Or make me aware of said issue so I can hunt out more information.
For blaster for instance, this was extremely useful, I knew about blaster right away, and although there wasn't a fix out yet when it first hit until about noon that day, because I'd found out that this beast existed on slashdot we didn't spend hours trying to fix these issues before realizing it was a new worm.
The same is true for the linux systems we have out there. Granted I've never had a linux update break anything yet, but the Windows world has me paranoid enough that I haven't set automatic update downloading. And although I update routinely if I hear about a certainly especially critical issue I make it a point to update the systems affected IMMEDIATELY.
Throughout the day I generally have 2 or 3 30second windows in which I can check a site for information about current issues, that means I have time to check ONE site. I imagine alot of people are in this boat.
Either slashdot covers vulnerabilities or it doesn't, either it covers worms or it doesn't. Perhaps not on the main page for every single one... but I have EVERYTHING turned on for what is supposed to come up on my slashdot page, so if a legitimate vulnerability/virus/worm/trojan/spyware/activatio
That said, I think your mistaken though. I still find it suspicious that this started occuring right about the time the volume was seriously cranked up on the Microsoft ads (not when Microsoft ads first started appearing, there used to be some, now almost all the ads are).
If you crack out folgers and use the brewing process which yields expresso, guess what, the result is expresso.
If you take "expresso beans" and brew them like regular coffee. Guess what, the result is called Coffee.
Express is about the technique used to make it, the beans are merely a common preference because most people couldn't handle true expresso made with fine roast.
Espresso Roast'd beans have nothing to do with the drink called expresso.
Expresso can be made with any type of bean roasted to any degree. Expresso is expresso not because of the beans used but because of the method used to derive it. Hot water is jetted through extremely tightly packed grounds which produces much stronger coffee than you would get by brewing with the same grounds.
Expresso roast is mainly used because using a normal roast with the expresso process results in a black tarlike substance that you could only manage to sell to a fraction of a percent of people in the US who truely enjoy proper Expresso. Expresso roast is intentionally chosen because the beans are overroasted and weaker.
Your assuming they are looking for something specific or even actually expect to find anything of that nature.
I on the other hand believe the feds will ask for any information they have an excuse to get and add absolutely everything they get their hands on to their own private databases.
Yeah, maybe as little as a year or two ago. Now the site is run by Microsoft Fanboy's as sad I am to say it.
This post will be modded down just for saying it. Any pro linux or anti microsoft sentiment expressed on slashdot anymore is modded down. Any post which reflects negatively on the security of closed source is modded down.
Hell I'm starting to believe that the rumors that Microsoft has bought a chunk of Slashdot are true (90% of the ads on the site are Microsoft AD's, some are even TCO FUD links).
Just a test, try submitting 12 stories about new microsoft vulnerabilities after one has been ran. It's fairly easy to do, dozens of MS vulnerabilities are discovered weekly if you watch cert and other similar sites. Watch as all 12 are rejected.
If you pay attention the ratio of Microsoft Vul's which make the page is about 2 for every open source vul reported. As opposed to the 5 or so it used to be. But if you watch the advisory pages nothing has changed in the number of vulnerabilities reported, there is no lower ratio in reality. Stories are being accepted in such a way that it makes it appear that's the case.
I genuinely believe now that Microsoft is exerting at least some influence on the slashdot staff (maybe using their ad dollars as leverage) and definately believe that Microsoft has plenty of moles in the readership.
The above story is offtopic. Dial-up and Phreaking are obsolete, thus I fail to see how this in any way relates to Nerds.
Last I checked the overall topic was "News for Nerds", can someone please moderate the story offtopic please?
"Why should UPS agree to the union's terms if it feels that it's not right? Believe it or not, for-profit companies exist to for profit. The owners/shareholders demand certain level of profit. Otherwise, why risk investing in the stock market?"
Why should the employees continue to work if they don't feel they are being treated fairly?
"The standard reply to the "I want OSX on Win" plea is that Apple will never do it as it would kill their hardware sales. However I don't think this is the case: Just look at Sony, they are aimed at the same market as apple : High end Multi-media. And their PC's are just as, if not more expensive, than Apple."
Yes but it's worth noting, apple at least has decent overpriced hardware. As a former sony employee, I can assure you, sony WILL put the cheapest piece of crap in the system they can find so long as it has spec X that the consumer looks at. And it's not like their other products, they don't give support for their pc's/computer hardware (internal hardware is altogether different, cdroms, burners, dats, etc) which even rivals that of gateway or compaq.
I agree though, sooner or later it'd be nice for Apple to go x86. For it to happen though, they are going to have to clue in to the fact that Mac hardware is has become too pclike and they don't have the tight hardware experience they used to have.
It used to be that you went to store, bought X piece of mac hardware, go home, plug X hardware in. Your done.
Now it's the same as a pc, you go to store, buy X hardware, go home, plug X hardware in, pray, install driver if your prayers were answered, pray driver works.
"Many other stories are fairly gray, but I'm pretty sure the license to use OSX pretty much says that you are only allowed to install it on Apple hardware (although correct me if I'm wrong). This is promoting a fairly blatant breach of the license (Pear doesn't actually breach that license by existing)."
There is nothing to say that the terms of said license are legal. Thus far there is no reason to believe that licenses which extend control beyond what a copyright grants are legal, and a copyright grants the owner of said copyright control of distribution, it gives no authority over how a work is used once distributed.
Remember, without the copyright ALL the rights would be in the hands of the public. Copyright is the public giving the author/whathaveyou what is essentially a contract allowing them to control distribution for a limited time. The public owns OSX (well technically nobody does, or humankind does, ideas aren't ownable even under our screwed up legal system yet), apple just holds a copyright.
Simply because powerful copyright holders try to claim they own the material doesn't make it true, ideas aren't really ownable.
Because there are people like me who would like to take a peek at this OSX thing people have been talking about?
However they cannot afford to shell out $3k+ for a decent mac and certainly cannot afford to shell out $800 for a piece of shit Mac?
I don't know where you are, but here you see linux, you see windows, but you really just don't see macs anymore.
I see them as more likely to try to shutdown the emulator and if that fails to start revoking licenses (since the OSX license while it may not be truely legal, along with the rest of licenses of this type, says you can't run it on anything but Apple hardware).
"Macs aren't that expensive compared to PCs"
While I agree with the rest of your post, this statement is a bit far fetched (unless you mean specifically in terms of purchasing a pc to emulate a mac).
A technically literate individual can walk out with a decent Beigebox Mac for something to the tune of $2500-$3000. A decent beigebox pc will run you under $800.
You don't define the cost difference by the bottom of the barrel piece of junk joe idiot buys, nor even by the top of the line spare no expense systems.
You define it by the systems someone who has a both a budget and true technical expertise would buy for themselves.
And yes, I do consider it fair to build the pc yourself for the comparison. You still can't piece together a mac cheaper than their sold by the manufacturer and that is due to intentionally inflated prices.
Not anymore, thanks to pci support and third party hardware Macs and hardware aren't QUITE as bad as the pc yet overall. But the only thing saving is them is the amount of work.
For the hardware which does work, it's as bad as windows and you have to load driver disks for everything. Since they have a Unix underpinning though, they may someday achieve the "95% of the time you don't need to manually load or ever be aware of the loading of drivers" linux has out of the box.
Someday maybe linux will achieve the other 5%.
Call me a Zealot if you will, but I fail to see any reason why with such perfect hardware detection and installation of the hardware which is supported under linux, there is any technical failing on that OS's hardware detection. Simply a lack of marketshare to get drivers developed.
My argument against Paypal is that what they do is act like a bank, offer bank services, and pretend your money is safe with them as it would be with a bank.
And hide all statements to the contrary in the very very fine print intentionally with the knowledge nobody will read it.
No the answer isnt' to get everyone to read, it won't happen. The answer to put in large bold letters just above the paypal logo on the site "We are not a Bank and under certain conditions we will confiscate funds held in our accounts."
This of course should be under the link "Pay with paypal" pages on all auction sites as well as the homepage.
Yeah, they'd probably be smart to do that here. But instead the supermarkets and even gas stations have real honest to god big steal vault and all banks in them.
Usually the supermarkets do check cashing but as far as I know there is nothing even especially bank backed about it. You go to the courtesy counter and they cash the payroll check. AFAIK they just do it as a third party check to cash it themselves. Which is why they require it be drawn on a local bank and be issued by a local buisness AND it generally has to be $300 or less.
Now bear in mind I said I've seen them, they aren't rare per say but much more common are supermarkets with ATM machines and check cashing and nothing else.
Believe me I did yell. They refused, after the 4th or 5th supervisor hung up on me I gave up and dropped my account.
oops sorry typo:
When I said they "could tell HER" in regards to my mother in law calling I meant "couldn't tell HER".
This is something all banks do as well. However they charge you an overdraft fee whether they cover the difference or not.
If they don't cover the difference then you'll generally have an additional fee from whoever you wrote the check to.
Most companies run a check twice, since some places automate this (like walmart) and often do it one right after another you'll get two overdraft fees and then another from whoever you wrote the check to.
In the US I've never seen a Supermarket do this.. just about all of them DO however have banks operating in the building.
The supermarket itself generally only does paycheck cashing from local buisnesses up to a realitively low dollar value.
The service agreement is irrelvant, it's extraordinarily wrong, nobody reads them and paypal knows nobody reads them. They offer "secure" bank services, they offer savings accounts, they perform electronic transfers between their accounts and those of other banks, they offer debit cards, they offer paypal credit cards.
They do everything but actually say "we are a bank" on the homepage. What they put in the service agreement is reality, which has nothing to do with implication. Their actual visual and percieved front is what they imply.
Yes in the end they all paid me back. Although in the first case with providian several checks bounced because of it, the charges from those caused the account to below (I had about 15 outstanding checks bounce as a chain effect of the initial charge) and the bank refused to refund the charges for those. It ended up costing me alot more than the wrongful charge was in the end.
My current bank at least didn't give me much trouble, as soon as they discovered I failed to understand why it should be ok for them to charge against my account under someone elses name simply because they've chosen to automate the system they refunded immediately. Only took 2hrs on the phone to get it resolved with them and they refunded instantly once it was.
With all three I had to fight though, my current bank was just the least fight.