I'm a relatively old fart at 45, but even I use cursive significantly less than heretofore. Sure, it's still invaluable for jotting notes and such, but I don't compose complex stuff in anything but a text editor or wp app (or e-mail editor). It's the text manipulation that wins out.
Perhaps we who fear a cursiveless future remember the PC-less past? Certainly I try to imagine quite possible scenarios where the oil and gas have run dry and where electricity (from whatever remaining source) is available only to a privileged few. What then (apart from being one of the privileged few)?
Ah, paranoia with reality topping - my favourite:)
Half a volt. That's been the standard from hot-vent primordial worms to us humans. When systems work off half a volt, then we're cooking with gas. Metaphorically speaking.
Someone's post just reminded me of a discussion on Usenet some years ago where the PaperCupnString protocol was slugging it out with the incompatible PaperCupnString 2 (wet string) competitor. Must see if it's archived somwhere.
Yeah, the usual suspects will screw Internet users like they screw everything else. What's new? Greed and corruption underpins just about everything in public life these days. Even the administrators of global powers lie and, caught, lie and lie again to protect their weird, twisted agendas.
Disclaimer: Just the ramblings of a miserable old git, you understand.
What was the first spam? AFAIR it was "Make Money Fast" on Usenet when AOL came on line, must've been 1994 or 1995. Everyone's first reaction was anger; that's never really changed.
Anyone else remember their earliest encounter with it?
DOS TIP: Mozilla 1.3 Bayesian spam filtering =:-))
Look at the language and the psychology. "State". "Castle". "Defend". We who look after the networks of large organisations have built them into virtual city-states, with moats and drawbridges. "Out there" is the badlands.
See how different this is to how it was - a joyfully shared resource where, if someone came along and fixed your shoddy config without your say-so, they would incur gratitude and amusement, not wrath. Th'Internet has grown contorted and wretched and now we must play the game of the lowest of the low.
IMHO if you verify your target, send a warning, and there's no response or a negative response, shoot. What's so wrong about that?
sig: I used to think that Slashdot readers had backbone and moral courage. Apparently not.
Nah, y'see, that's what's so bad about Western business ethics (were they worthy of the name).
I know people that trade with Arab nations; deals (for millions) are regularly done on a handshake and honour is paramount - defaulting on the deal is unthinkable. I should add that the same people have tried trading with Israelis and lost their shirts on thick contracts, so go figure.
Yes, that was the estimate at least 10 years ago. AFAIR, there were two competing theories that gave those upper and lower bounds. There's a bit about it in Barrow and Tipler's "Anthropic Cosmological Principle" which is pretty digestible. Excellent book, BTW. Goes into stuff about scale and dinosaur's legs and physical / mechanical limits among many other things. Must locate it in this rubble. Now, where was I..
Well this is a lovely drop of high-octane babble. The Vietnam War finished just over 13 years ago? Yup, 1989. That makes me.. uh.. much younger (hrmmph). Please send me a lid of what you're on, under plain brown wrapper, if you'd be so kind.
IMHE, UNIX systems can be more easily secured than Microsoft systems and have fewer vulnerabilities. In practice, neither type of system has a secured default installation (barring specialist distros), so you're going to see vulnerable boxes of both types on the 'net. That said, the biggest security headache is still with Microsoft systems and applications. Why?
A large part of the problem is that Microsoft just haven't got a monolithic security culture. On the one hand, they now tell us that the Common Internet File System must never be run outside a firewall (and more fool you if you do). On the other, they actively promote products like IM and WLBS which follow no security model at all and are so hellishly difficult to secure, you'd imagine "firewall" was unknown in the MS lexicon.
Microsoft is a very big corporation and the left hand doesn't yet know what the right's doing when it comes to security. This will only improve as (if?) they implement a corporation wide security policy.
Perhaps this goes some way to explaining the frustration many people in security have with Microsoft?
Slashdot Mirror
Yay! Mod parent up!
Heh.
Paradoxical humour. What culture!
--
Q: Who is number 637267?
A: You are, number 637267.
Well said.
:)
I'm a relatively old fart at 45, but even I use cursive significantly less than heretofore. Sure, it's still invaluable for jotting notes and such, but I don't compose complex stuff in anything but a text editor or wp app (or e-mail editor). It's the text manipulation that wins out.
Perhaps we who fear a cursiveless future remember the PC-less past? Certainly I try to imagine quite possible scenarios where the oil and gas have run dry and where electricity (from whatever remaining source) is available only to a privileged few. What then (apart from being one of the privileged few)?
Ah, paranoia with reality topping - my favourite
Half a volt. That's been the standard from hot-vent primordial worms to us humans. When systems work off half a volt, then we're cooking with gas. Metaphorically speaking.
What was the question? Damn that Absolut vodka.
Bring back the Dome of Silence!
Charlie Uniform November Tango
It's hard enough to get decent jackets for wheelchair use. We gonna get fux0red over again?
Hey son, don't wipe on your sleeve... damn, you've Slashdotted your nose again..
Yeah.
ymodem-g was brilliant at pr0n downloads... until you got an error. Wow, did the wheels come off or what?
Someone's post just reminded me of a discussion on Usenet some years ago where the PaperCupnString protocol was slugging it out with the incompatible PaperCupnString 2 (wet string) competitor. Must see if it's archived somwhere.
Yeah, the usual suspects will screw Internet users like they screw everything else. What's new? Greed and corruption underpins just about everything in public life these days. Even the administrators of global powers lie and, caught, lie and lie again to protect their weird, twisted agendas.
Disclaimer: Just the ramblings of a miserable old git, you understand.
What was the first spam? AFAIR it was "Make Money Fast" on Usenet when AOL came on line, must've been 1994 or 1995. Everyone's first reaction was anger; that's never really changed.
:-))
Anyone else remember their earliest encounter with it?
DOS TIP: Mozilla 1.3 Bayesian spam filtering =
Look at the language and the psychology. "State". "Castle". "Defend". We who look after the networks of large organisations have built them into virtual city-states, with moats and drawbridges. "Out there" is the badlands.
See how different this is to how it was - a joyfully shared resource where, if someone came along and fixed your shoddy config without your say-so, they would incur gratitude and amusement, not wrath. Th'Internet has grown contorted and wretched and now we must play the game of the lowest of the low.
IMHO if you verify your target, send a warning, and there's no response or a negative response, shoot. What's so wrong about that?
sig: I used to think that Slashdot readers had backbone and moral courage. Apparently not.
meta-sig: Sheesh!
Nah, y'see, that's what's so bad about Western business ethics (were they worthy of the name).
I know people that trade with Arab nations; deals (for millions) are regularly done on a handshake and honour is paramount - defaulting on the deal is unthinkable. I should add that the same people have tried trading with Israelis and lost their shirts on thick contracts, so go figure.
Happy New Year to all my reader.
Yes, that was the estimate at least 10 years ago. AFAIR, there were two competing theories that gave those upper and lower bounds. There's a bit about it in Barrow and Tipler's "Anthropic Cosmological Principle" which is pretty digestible. Excellent book, BTW. Goes into stuff about scale and dinosaur's legs and physical / mechanical limits among many other things. Must locate it in this rubble. Now, where was I..
Lang may yer lum reek.
Created by P. G. Wodehouse, y'know.
Well this is a lovely drop of high-octane babble. The Vietnam War finished just over 13 years ago? Yup, 1989. That makes me.. uh.. much younger (hrmmph). Please send me a lid of what you're on, under plain brown wrapper, if you'd be so kind.
Offtopic/Troll -1 alsjeblieft
"I come to bash Microsoft, not to praise them."
From a security practitioner's POV -
IMHE, UNIX systems can be more easily secured than Microsoft systems and have fewer vulnerabilities. In practice, neither type of system has a secured default installation (barring specialist distros), so you're going to see vulnerable boxes of both types on the 'net. That said, the biggest security headache is still with Microsoft systems and applications. Why?
A large part of the problem is that Microsoft just haven't got a monolithic security culture. On the one hand, they now tell us that the Common Internet File System must never be run outside a firewall (and more fool you if you do). On the other, they actively promote products like IM and WLBS which follow no security model at all and are so hellishly difficult to secure, you'd imagine "firewall" was unknown in the MS lexicon.
Microsoft is a very big corporation and the left hand doesn't yet know what the right's doing when it comes to security. This will only improve as (if?) they implement a corporation wide security policy.
Perhaps this goes some way to explaining the frustration many people in security have with Microsoft?
Mod Insig