But knowing the spoiler doesn't make those movies any less enjoyable to me after the fact. I've seen Fight Club at least 4 times, Usual Suspects a dozen at least (love that movie!)...but I still enjoy watching them.
As do I. I see what you are getting at, but is it possible that by being blown away on the first viewing, your enjoyment is increased on your subsequently viewing of the movies? Kind of like how a song can bring about an emotional response that may be based on what you were doing or how you were feeling the first time you heard it.
If it's the act of having a conversation, then we definitely need to ban communication between passengers in vehicles.
No, because other passengers will be aware when a situation occurs that will require extra attention by the driver and will instinctively not distract the driver during those times. An extra passenger also means an extra pair of eyes to look out for dangers. This isn't to say that a driver will not get distracted by a conversation with a passenger, but it is not as bad as a conversation with someone on the other end of the phone.
...the guy in his 20's STILL had a better reaction time than the guy in his 40's did while stone sober without a phone - so the real lesson is that people over 40 shouldn't be allowed to drive, period (if you want to use reaction times).
People already take this into account. The older driver will tend to drive in a more cautious manner to compensate for their reduced reaction times. This gets to the extreme when you find the really old folk driving at a third of the speed limit.
But once again, the danger of this reduced reaction time is mitigated by people instinctively compensating for it. The problem is that many people do not realise how distracting talking on the phone can be, so there is no instinct telling them to slow down and be more cautious while driving.
Bond movies are not really known for their great storylines. They tend to be set pieces with the barest of plots to string them together. This is especially the case some of the later ones (before the reboot). I can't comment too much on the most recent one because, like you, I found it unwatchable. (Edit: I mean that you found it unwatchable and I did too. I did not mean that I found both the movie and you unwatchable).
Twists do not have to be silly. There have be a couple of movies that had twists that caused me to immediately restart the film and watch it again to look at it in a whole new light. In those cases, knowing the ending would have completely ruined the amazement.
On the other hand, I love stories that show you the end and the go back to tell how it led up to that point as a flashback. I think the difference is that if the spoiler is contained within the story, then you assume that author cleverly constructed it that way for storytelling effect. If someone else just tells you the ending of a book or film then you just feel cheated.
So really, the result of this study should be that people enjoy stories that play with the standard storytelling techniques rather than just the pedestrian beginning, middle and end structure.
It is a geek thing. We wonder if you could run a website from a Commodore 64 (I will be nice and not link to that one), a two-axis panning time lapse rig built from Lego, or build a nuclear reactor. You don't need a practical purpose to do these things. The point is to see if they can be done.
Now I have to agree with the first poster that installing an old version Linux on a 386 doesn't rank too high on the scale of these sorts of things. It would be interesting just to remind us how far things have progressed since then.
I have to admit I have an installation of Windows 3.1 running on DOSBox for this very reason. But that is not too hardcore either. Much more amazing is the fact that I know someone who still actively uses their Windows 3.1 system as their only computer. When you see how capable Word 6 was, it shows that things haven't improved a great deal in the word processing world in all that time.
That's because you do not understand how computer and network security works.
No, you are just a rabid Microsoft basher who can't comprehend doing something in a way that you are not used to. But feel feel free to address any of the points that I raised.
There should never be such a question in the first place. If "Deny" is not the only possible answer, security model is broken.
I disagree. Any security model that makes things that hard to use would fail in the broader community because people would just turn it off. Look at how many people disabled UACs now because they seemed annoying. Imagine how many people would just run as Administrator all the time if it seemed impossible (and not merely annoying) to use all your old software under your proposed security model.
Actually, you do not have to imagine. You just need to look at Windows 2000 or XP for that exact user experience. How many people around around here (who should know better) still claim that it was impractical (or even impossible) or to run as anything less than an administator account? That too much software just fails? That is the perception when running under the security model that you suggest. That is why they did not protect themselves with the sensible security settings that were on offer in the past, and it is also why the vast majority do not use the operating system that does use that model despite the fact that it is free and has a large selection of free software.
Finally, you can still have your prefered security model if you want in Vista and Windows 7. Turn off UACs, run as a limited user and only software that you explicitly start with RunAs would be able to do those things that require UACs now. Or do what I do - set up people's computers as limited user and do not tell them the administator password. They have no option but to click Deny.
Because Microsoft has encouraged such behaviour in the past ('sure, feel free to write any old crap in the program files tree') and now continues to support it so as not to break those badly written applications.
That is incorrect. To get Windows certification you had to save your settings under the user's profile. Doing this lets software run under limited user accounts and allowed for roaming profiles so users could login on any workstation and have their configuration follow them.
Since Windows NT 3.1, Microsoft have proper permissions system so you did not have to run as Administrator. In all the API documentation they told developers what they had to do to work correctly. Unfortunately because Windows 9x was the more popular OS developers could ignore Microsoft's pleas.
It was not Microsoft's fault that developers did the wrong thing. Eventually Microsoft was bound to piss people off by changing the defaults so that their software would stop working. Sure enough, they did it with Vista and everyone got surprised. But they did have a decade's notice of the API change, so the developers only had themselves to blame.
And because UAC messages are absolutely useless in most cases. The most common one seems to be 'Access Hard Disk'. What does that mean? Is it trying to write a config file to its own directory or install a rootkit? How am I supposed to tell?
I agree. It is very frustrating that they do not have an "Advanced" button to let us see what the software is wanting to do. I suppose the problem could be that malicious apps could lie to the OS about what they were going to do with the elevated permissions.
However, that does not mean that the UAC is broken. It gives some protection when running as an admin, but it is even better when running as a limited user as it means you do not need to plan ahead to run some software as an admin user just because you will eventually want to make a system-wide change.
So what should Helly (sic) Kitty Screen Saver do as an alternative then? I suppose it could split up the program into two separate processes running with different credentials, just like other programs do to avoid UACs.
But how is some badly written third party software a symptom of a broken security model?
Illegal file sharing is copyright INFRINGEMENT, not theft!
What are you, a troll? Nobody mentioned theft until you came along. I just browsed at -1 to make sure I didn't miss something, but only occurence of the word happened in the thread that you started. It wasn't in the article and it wasn't in the original submission.
So what possessed you to become so indignant about the term?
Chemistry is clean, is nice, will offer us so many modern conveniences! Now, decades later, our best minds are all saying, "Wow, we didn't think of that."
What crap. Whilst there may be side effects of long term build up of chemicals that are discovered after they are in use, it does not mean that we should forsake all chemicals "just in case". And it is not as if scientists do not put a lot of effort into determining the safety of chemicals. They will never have a 100% success rate, but benefits do outweigh the risks.
Cancer and heart disease of the big killers now, and not just of old people, but children too. Life expectancy for adults has not gone up drastically in the last two centuries, and most of that is due to sanitation and hygiene.
Cancer and heart disease were big killers in the past too, but we didn't understand them. A lot of things killed us in the past that we could not identify. That is why we needed to make up gods to attribute the causes. Just because we now have a better understanding of what is killing us, doesn't mean that these things didn't kill us in the past.
And where do you get the idea that life expectancy has not gone up? That is demonstrably wrong. Here are the stats from my neck of the woods. I would say that better nutrition and medicine plays a bigger part in this increase than sanitation and hygiene as you suggest. You know, the stuff that science gave us.
And all this is despite the extra chemicals, radiation, and automobiles that this century has brought us.
Heres what psychologists have to do before they do an experiment involving humans
This is exactly why the Google car doesn't ask other drivers about their feelings while stopped at lights. The psychologists said it wasn't ethical.
Other than that, the driverless car has as much right to be on the road as any young learner driver just starting out. And how else would this technology ever get tested under real world conditions, because requiring informed consent from all the other drivers is obviously impractical.
Linux and OSX rule the roost here, as they both come with multiple compilers and interpreters out of the box.
Out of the box Windows comes with a JScript interpreter, VBScript interpreter, C# compiler, VB.NET compiler, and JScript compiler. A late enough Windows will also have Powershell interpreter and IDE.
Windows isn't completely in the dark. For instance, you can get the intel reference compiler for free, I think. The experience is more piecemeal, though, I think.
You can also get the free Microsoft command line C++ compiler that comes with the Windows SDK. This is the same compiler that Visual C++ uses. Or you can just get Visual Studio Express, because IDEs do not actually make things harder. IDEs give you error and syntax highlighting, visual layout of user interface (good for tinkering while learning), Intellisense and help.
Yeah.../me rushes out and buys one tonight at Best Buy because, you know, the last fourteen computers, MP3 players and PDAs i've owned all died in the vats of liquid nitrogen around my house - for some stupid reason I keep dropping stuff in those.
That was obviously a reference to climate change. Global warming does not mean that it will get uniformly hotter, but that the temperatures become more extreme at both ends of the range. Hence it will get as cold as liquid nitrogen in Winter and as hot as boiling water in Summer.
So it will be nice to know that our data will survive, even if we won't stand a chance.
It sounds like you watched his recent show Worst-Case Scenario, which was a bit naff. He is better known for the far superior Man vs. Wild. It is worth giving that one a try.
Tell you what, why don't you google it and provide us with the appropriate link showing a financial link since you are the one making the allegation. Repeating press releases doesn't count, because that is why companies write press releases. If that is corruption, then all companies are doing it wrong.
That's your problem? That the protocols that are being discussed are also used by other operating systems? If you are looking at the security of a platform, should you ignore some security holes because they also exist in other platforms too? Or does being an open, cross platform standard somehow make it inherently secure.
If you have a look at iSec Partner's old press releases you can see that they are aware that Kerberos is used by Windows too and that its problems can affect different platforms. With the number of black hat events that these guys participate in, if they did not know what they were talking about then someone more knowledgeable than either of us would have ratted them out before now.
Do you have any evidence to suggest that Microsoft is behind this story in some way? Any at all?
Apparently you've never read about James Plamondon and his "Technical Evangelists".
So the answer is no then.
Surely attempting to demean a study and its researchers by alluding to bad things done by a completely separate group of individuals (without any evidence linking the two) is exactly the kind of behaviour (of Plamondon) that you are decrying. The fact that Microsoft had technical evangelists does not mean that the opposition's products are without criticism, nor that such criticism will be sponsored by Microsoft. I have yet to see any indication that Robert McMillan or iSec Partners are shills for any company.
Wow, you are a bit of a joyless soul, aren't you? Yes, I know I started this metric vs imperial thread, but at least I did it with a joke. And do you really think that I do not know about sayings involving inches and miles? Hell, I used one of those sayings in my original post!
So out of all thesenew features you can't think of anything other than zip support? Then you are not going to be happy to hear that zip support was in XP too.
Slashdot Mirror
But knowing the spoiler doesn't make those movies any less enjoyable to me after the fact. I've seen Fight Club at least 4 times, Usual Suspects a dozen at least (love that movie!)...but I still enjoy watching them.
As do I. I see what you are getting at, but is it possible that by being blown away on the first viewing, your enjoyment is increased on your subsequently viewing of the movies? Kind of like how a song can bring about an emotional response that may be based on what you were doing or how you were feeling the first time you heard it.
Most crazy traffic stunts I get to see are pulled off by middle-aged men, trying to prove themselves that youth is a mental state.
Really? Well, maybe they are actually better at driving, because the accident statistics show middle aged drivers to be the safest age group.
If it's the act of having a conversation, then we definitely need to ban communication between passengers in vehicles.
No, because other passengers will be aware when a situation occurs that will require extra attention by the driver and will instinctively not distract the driver during those times. An extra passenger also means an extra pair of eyes to look out for dangers. This isn't to say that a driver will not get distracted by a conversation with a passenger, but it is not as bad as a conversation with someone on the other end of the phone.
...the guy in his 20's STILL had a better reaction time than the guy in his 40's did while stone sober without a phone - so the real lesson is that people over 40 shouldn't be allowed to drive, period (if you want to use reaction times).
People already take this into account. The older driver will tend to drive in a more cautious manner to compensate for their reduced reaction times. This gets to the extreme when you find the really old folk driving at a third of the speed limit.
But once again, the danger of this reduced reaction time is mitigated by people instinctively compensating for it. The problem is that many people do not realise how distracting talking on the phone can be, so there is no instinct telling them to slow down and be more cautious while driving.
Bond movies are not really known for their great storylines. They tend to be set pieces with the barest of plots to string them together. This is especially the case some of the later ones (before the reboot). I can't comment too much on the most recent one because, like you, I found it unwatchable. (Edit: I mean that you found it unwatchable and I did too. I did not mean that I found both the movie and you unwatchable).
Twists do not have to be silly. There have be a couple of movies that had twists that caused me to immediately restart the film and watch it again to look at it in a whole new light. In those cases, knowing the ending would have completely ruined the amazement.
On the other hand, I love stories that show you the end and the go back to tell how it led up to that point as a flashback. I think the difference is that if the spoiler is contained within the story, then you assume that author cleverly constructed it that way for storytelling effect. If someone else just tells you the ending of a book or film then you just feel cheated.
So really, the result of this study should be that people enjoy stories that play with the standard storytelling techniques rather than just the pedestrian beginning, middle and end structure.
It is a geek thing. We wonder if you could run a website from a Commodore 64 (I will be nice and not link to that one), a two-axis panning time lapse rig built from Lego, or build a nuclear reactor. You don't need a practical purpose to do these things. The point is to see if they can be done.
Now I have to agree with the first poster that installing an old version Linux on a 386 doesn't rank too high on the scale of these sorts of things. It would be interesting just to remind us how far things have progressed since then.
I have to admit I have an installation of Windows 3.1 running on DOSBox for this very reason. But that is not too hardcore either. Much more amazing is the fact that I know someone who still actively uses their Windows 3.1 system as their only computer. When you see how capable Word 6 was, it shows that things haven't improved a great deal in the word processing world in all that time.
That's because you do not understand how computer and network security works.
No, you are just a rabid Microsoft basher who can't comprehend doing something in a way that you are not used to. But feel feel free to address any of the points that I raised.
There should never be such a question in the first place. If "Deny" is not the only possible answer, security model is broken.
I disagree. Any security model that makes things that hard to use would fail in the broader community because people would just turn it off. Look at how many people disabled UACs now because they seemed annoying. Imagine how many people would just run as Administrator all the time if it seemed impossible (and not merely annoying) to use all your old software under your proposed security model.
Actually, you do not have to imagine. You just need to look at Windows 2000 or XP for that exact user experience. How many people around around here (who should know better) still claim that it was impractical (or even impossible) or to run as anything less than an administator account? That too much software just fails? That is the perception when running under the security model that you suggest. That is why they did not protect themselves with the sensible security settings that were on offer in the past, and it is also why the vast majority do not use the operating system that does use that model despite the fact that it is free and has a large selection of free software.
Finally, you can still have your prefered security model if you want in Vista and Windows 7. Turn off UACs, run as a limited user and only software that you explicitly start with RunAs would be able to do those things that require UACs now. Or do what I do - set up people's computers as limited user and do not tell them the administator password. They have no option but to click Deny.
Because Microsoft has encouraged such behaviour in the past ('sure, feel free to write any old crap in the program files tree') and now continues to support it so as not to break those badly written applications.
That is incorrect. To get Windows certification you had to save your settings under the user's profile. Doing this lets software run under limited user accounts and allowed for roaming profiles so users could login on any workstation and have their configuration follow them.
Since Windows NT 3.1, Microsoft have proper permissions system so you did not have to run as Administrator. In all the API documentation they told developers what they had to do to work correctly. Unfortunately because Windows 9x was the more popular OS developers could ignore Microsoft's pleas.
It was not Microsoft's fault that developers did the wrong thing. Eventually Microsoft was bound to piss people off by changing the defaults so that their software would stop working. Sure enough, they did it with Vista and everyone got surprised. But they did have a decade's notice of the API change, so the developers only had themselves to blame.
And because UAC messages are absolutely useless in most cases. The most common one seems to be 'Access Hard Disk'. What does that mean? Is it trying to write a config file to its own directory or install a rootkit? How am I supposed to tell?
I agree. It is very frustrating that they do not have an "Advanced" button to let us see what the software is wanting to do. I suppose the problem could be that malicious apps could lie to the OS about what they were going to do with the elevated permissions.
However, that does not mean that the UAC is broken. It gives some protection when running as an admin, but it is even better when running as a limited user as it means you do not need to plan ahead to run some software as an admin user just because you will eventually want to make a system-wide change.
So what should Helly (sic) Kitty Screen Saver do as an alternative then? I suppose it could split up the program into two separate processes running with different credentials, just like other programs do to avoid UACs.
But how is some badly written third party software a symptom of a broken security model?
Illegal file sharing is copyright INFRINGEMENT, not theft!
What are you, a troll? Nobody mentioned theft until you came along. I just browsed at -1 to make sure I didn't miss something, but only occurence of the word happened in the thread that you started. It wasn't in the article and it wasn't in the original submission.
So what possessed you to become so indignant about the term?
Chemistry is clean, is nice, will offer us so many modern conveniences! Now, decades later, our best minds are all saying, "Wow, we didn't think of that."
What crap. Whilst there may be side effects of long term build up of chemicals that are discovered after they are in use, it does not mean that we should forsake all chemicals "just in case". And it is not as if scientists do not put a lot of effort into determining the safety of chemicals. They will never have a 100% success rate, but benefits do outweigh the risks.
Cancer and heart disease of the big killers now, and not just of old people, but children too. Life expectancy for adults has not gone up drastically in the last two centuries, and most of that is due to sanitation and hygiene.
Cancer and heart disease were big killers in the past too, but we didn't understand them. A lot of things killed us in the past that we could not identify. That is why we needed to make up gods to attribute the causes. Just because we now have a better understanding of what is killing us, doesn't mean that these things didn't kill us in the past.
And where do you get the idea that life expectancy has not gone up? That is demonstrably wrong. Here are the stats from my neck of the woods. I would say that better nutrition and medicine plays a bigger part in this increase than sanitation and hygiene as you suggest. You know, the stuff that science gave us.
And all this is despite the extra chemicals, radiation, and automobiles that this century has brought us.
That's not what I said and that's not something I implied.
So what was the point of the original post then?
Heres what psychologists have to do before they do an experiment involving humans
This is exactly why the Google car doesn't ask other drivers about their feelings while stopped at lights. The psychologists said it wasn't ethical.
Other than that, the driverless car has as much right to be on the road as any young learner driver just starting out. And how else would this technology ever get tested under real world conditions, because requiring informed consent from all the other drivers is obviously impractical.
Linux and OSX rule the roost here, as they both come with multiple compilers and interpreters out of the box.
Out of the box Windows comes with a JScript interpreter, VBScript interpreter, C# compiler, VB.NET compiler, and JScript compiler. A late enough Windows will also have Powershell interpreter and IDE.
Windows isn't completely in the dark. For instance, you can get the intel reference compiler for free, I think. The experience is more piecemeal, though, I think.
You can also get the free Microsoft command line C++ compiler that comes with the Windows SDK. This is the same compiler that Visual C++ uses. Or you can just get Visual Studio Express, because IDEs do not actually make things harder. IDEs give you error and syntax highlighting, visual layout of user interface (good for tinkering while learning), Intellisense and help.
If he was sarcastic, I need to have my sarc meter re-WHOOSHED
The giveaway was the idea that global warming would bring Winters down to -200C and Summer up to 100C. Those figures may be a tad exaggerated.
Yeah ... /me rushes out and buys one tonight at Best Buy because, you know, the last fourteen computers, MP3 players and PDAs i've owned all died in the vats of liquid nitrogen around my house - for some stupid reason I keep dropping stuff in those.
That was obviously a reference to climate change. Global warming does not mean that it will get uniformly hotter, but that the temperatures become more extreme at both ends of the range. Hence it will get as cold as liquid nitrogen in Winter and as hot as boiling water in Summer.
So it will be nice to know that our data will survive, even if we won't stand a chance.
It sounds like you watched his recent show Worst-Case Scenario, which was a bit naff. He is better known for the far superior Man vs. Wild. It is worth giving that one a try.
Tell you what, why don't you google it and provide us with the appropriate link showing a financial link since you are the one making the allegation. Repeating press releases doesn't count, because that is why companies write press releases. If that is corruption, then all companies are doing it wrong.
That's my objective reading of this thread, of course, you are free to add your own bias.
I'm going to assume that this is a joke, although on Slashdot you can never quite tell!
It would make a good signature, though!
It was Service Pack 2 of Windows XP that added that feature.
That's your problem? That the protocols that are being discussed are also used by other operating systems? If you are looking at the security of a platform, should you ignore some security holes because they also exist in other platforms too? Or does being an open, cross platform standard somehow make it inherently secure.
If you have a look at iSec Partner's old press releases you can see that they are aware that Kerberos is used by Windows too and that its problems can affect different platforms. With the number of black hat events that these guys participate in, if they did not know what they were talking about then someone more knowledgeable than either of us would have ratted them out before now.
Do you have any evidence to suggest that Microsoft is behind this story in some way? Any at all?
Apparently you've never read about James Plamondon and his "Technical Evangelists".
So the answer is no then.
Surely attempting to demean a study and its researchers by alluding to bad things done by a completely separate group of individuals (without any evidence linking the two) is exactly the kind of behaviour (of Plamondon) that you are decrying. The fact that Microsoft had technical evangelists does not mean that the opposition's products are without criticism, nor that such criticism will be sponsored by Microsoft. I have yet to see any indication that Robert McMillan or iSec Partners are shills for any company.
I'll just sit frowning at you guys on the sidelines and play snake on my Nokia 1661.
There's an app for that!
Then metric nazis are just a bit much.
Wow, you are a bit of a joyless soul, aren't you? Yes, I know I started this metric vs imperial thread, but at least I did it with a joke. And do you really think that I do not know about sayings involving inches and miles? Hell, I used one of those sayings in my original post!
So out of all these new features you can't think of anything other than zip support? Then you are not going to be happy to hear that zip support was in XP too.