Not really, but that seems to be what happens when anything bad happens concerning any other consumer product, a la ephedrine and the baseball player, and coricidin C&C and kids 'tripping on cough syrup.' Microsoft is now like a bad drug, and needs to at the very least, have a 'use at your own risk' warning stuck on the side of it, if not be available only behind the counter at walmart;)
That's true, ease of use over security, same with lindows. I know for example, that if you disable DCOM in our corporate environment, our software inventory system doesn't work... not to mention a bunch of other things. We need to be able to control our users workstations from a corporate administrative point of view, otherwise, we have to walk to their machines to fix them, and waste millions of dollars a year in troubleshooting time. I need to have MY settings on our network, not microsoft's generic 'how do you do' settings 'please click on turn off the computer'.
but as for home users, that's a different story, if they don't want to opt out of the updates, then they may be better off --
BUT they still have a LOT of bugs to work out.
Look at ms03-026, even their Critical Update, had a flaw in it that often incorrectly identified the patch as installed when the systems were still vulnerable (they revised it and re-released it on August 16th to fix this problem, but the first generation of the fixes may have screwed them over if not for the complainging all over NTBUGTRAQ) They need to be sure that the patches are absolutely 100% functional, and absoulutely will not under any circumstances hose up a system before they go and require it for warranty compliance. Otherwise, the simple result is: they lose their marketshare.
...was temporarily put our Software Update Services server out of commission until the new DNS entry they made for www.msus.windowsupdate.com had enough time to propegate around the world. (or at least as far as my office)
right, point taken. I was too quick to say 'absolutely nothing.' Although, most of the problems described are probably still more to do with crappy receiving rather than transmitting.
Well, I wouldn't be so hard on yourself there killer: the radio astronomers are a good illustration that such things are technically feasable, while not necessarily cost-effective.
the cutoff you describe is actually dependant upon the ability of the receive to discern between the signals. Has absoulutely nothing to do with anything on the broadcasting end. More expensive receivers may be able to tell the difference between 800.0000001 and 800.0000002, but you regular cell might static up from both of these trying to receive on 800.
Most of the WiFi I know of uses 2.4 Ghz band (I know there are others out there though) And there doesn't seem to be a whole hell of a lot of it out there yet. Maybe it will one day be a bigger problem as it's deployment picks up. I'm looking forward to the seeded frequency hopping options rolling out in the long term, which won't cause very many people problems (at least for more than a fraction of a second) The frequency hopping method also adds the 'security by obscurity' slant to the signal as well -- if you don't have the seed and the algorithm by which the frequency is determined, you may have trouble sniffing out the data on the signal. All really neat stuff. I don't see the wireless stuff, at least the internet variety, as being all that useful, (pardon me all of you blackberry junkies) I think wifi has the solution to it all, conceivably (someday) even cellular could just use some of that bandwidth. It's just a matter of changing the infrastructure -- something that seems to take forever with folks like Verizon involved.
I agree with you about microsoft, but accusing someone of "arrogancy", which isn't really a word, may lump you in with the arrogant;) (Just like saying the word 'pontificate' means you're actually 'pontificating.')
actually there is a thing here in the US we call implicit copyright, meaning it's yours to do with as you see fit the instant it takes tangible form. You can choose not to register it, or to change the license to the GPL, but as soon as it exists, it is copyright (c) the creator of the work. This does not invalidate the GPL at all, but does give the original creator the right to make it gpl'd and then, once it is gpl'd it's basically forever that way. Copyrights can be transferred, but one you go GPL, there is no reclaiming exclusive rights to your gpl'd code as a trade secret. So, whoever originally created the code had the rights to it. Somewhere along the lines, they transferred it to what is now SCO. SCO chose as was their right(for the sake of argument) to release it under the GPL. Now they cannot retract a transfer, or change the rules -- that's another thing we have -- a prohibition of Ex Post Facto laws/regulations.
I'm not a lawyer, but I've worked with several on patent/copyright/trademark issues (none dealing specifically with the GPL, but I've read it and as long as you take what it says to have some merit, all of my above conclusions follow)
Hell no, let rabbits grow! Seems about as creative as they usually get. After all, there is the possiblity we're killing innocent rabbits here. It's a wonder that they never stop to think about the fact that the rabbits we'd be killing wouldn't have even existed if it weren't for this experimentation. This not to mention the same applies to all of the Cows I eat at mcdonalds, their lives aren't being cut short by the butchers, their lives are simply created for this purpose. Silly PETA rabbits are for tricks... or something like that
yeah, I guess you're right. The fault would be mostly with Microsoft, and I guess that the users are only buying microsoft becasue they supposedly have an OS that does everything for them. (god forbid they enable auto-updates, and then wind up with incompatible patches)
Another similar issue would be the warnings that microsoft actually does send out make it look like you have to be an idiot in order for an exploit to do it's dirty work on you.
For example:
Mitigating Factors: It will allow arbitrary code to run, but only in the context of the logged on user, so unless you are logged in as an administrator -- which we don't reccommend, logging in as an administrator may enable you to turn off automatic updates. BLAH blah.
I agree, but that is somewhere along the lines of saying that people shouldn't pay the fines for emissions violations on their cars, unless of course they happen to be mechanics. Oh well, when in doubt blame microsoft.
I spent all night with two of my good admin buddies here at work a few weeks ago patching all of our 1400 machines through various differnt scripts etc. Everyone thought I was nuts, but now, we had ZERO infections when the proverbial bomb went off. I wonder how this will look on my performance review. Thanks a million Microsoft! You got me a raise! Now, if I can only show them how switching to linux would save us even more money in the long run, I'd probably get an even bigger raise.
Yeah, and microsofties now have to eat their own hats, (albiet for different reasons -- I always swore I'd never use 'albeit' in conversation, let alone on slashdot)
A relatively old article in Fortune details some of their problems.
If these are the kind of people that the GPL has opposed to it, they're just saying that stuff because they're drowning in it themselves.
...Will Smith and Jeff Goldblum; together they can use a mac powerbook to write a virus that affects even alien asteroid computers, and then use it to spy on the asteroid's built-in doomsday clock. When the asteroid's internal macintosh powered countdown reaches almost zero (of course it's measured in seconds) we then can sick Afleck and Willis on it with a tactical nuke. The world is safe! And we don't need to involve any other Neo's at all. (That would just be ridiculous)
I can't really help you but it seems like you may be on to something here... I wonder if anyone has checked this out... (I'm just a relatively new linux user, and I don't know a lot about revision history tracing...) this issue is really close to my heart lately becasue the more I use linux, the more I love it.
Well, first of all, I wasn't trying to insult you, sorry about the kiddie notes. Second, from your message, it seemed as if you didn't realize the things I was saying beforehand, and were asking the question 'how do you know' blindly -- that's why I considered down modding (leading simple minded people astray.) Now, I'm glad I didn't mod you down, because all you needed to do was clarify yourself, and I agree with you 100%.
Slashdot Mirror
Not really, but that seems to be what happens when anything bad happens concerning any other consumer product, a la ephedrine and the baseball player, and coricidin C&C and kids 'tripping on cough syrup.' Microsoft is now like a bad drug, and needs to at the very least, have a 'use at your own risk' warning stuck on the side of it, if not be available only behind the counter at walmart ;)
Send them a link to this article. http://www.perens.com/SCO/SCOSlideShow.html
See what they have to say.
If it trys to send you to another part of their site, simply hit back, and send it again ;)
I'm sure the 'owners of unix' can handle a slashdotting.
but as for home users, that's a different story, if they don't want to opt out of the updates, then they may be better off --
BUT they still have a LOT of bugs to work out.
Look at ms03-026, even their Critical Update, had a flaw in it that often incorrectly identified the patch as installed when the systems were still vulnerable (they revised it and re-released it on August 16th to fix this problem, but the first generation of the fixes may have screwed them over if not for the complainging all over NTBUGTRAQ) They need to be sure that the patches are absolutely 100% functional, and absoulutely will not under any circumstances hose up a system before they go and require it for warranty compliance. Otherwise, the simple result is: they lose their marketshare.
...was temporarily put our Software Update Services server out of commission until the new DNS entry they made for www.msus.windowsupdate.com had enough time to propegate around the world. (or at least as far as my office)
you can say 'an historic' if you follow the british (sometimes) custom of not pronouncing the 'h'
right, point taken. I was too quick to say 'absolutely nothing.' Although, most of the problems described are probably still more to do with crappy receiving rather than transmitting.
Well, I wouldn't be so hard on yourself there killer: the radio astronomers are a good illustration that such things are technically feasable, while not necessarily cost-effective.
I don't think this is offtopic, actually I think it's kind of funny.
the cutoff you describe is actually dependant upon the ability of the receive to discern between the signals. Has absoulutely nothing to do with anything on the broadcasting end. More expensive receivers may be able to tell the difference between 800.0000001 and 800.0000002, but you regular cell might static up from both of these trying to receive on 800.
Most of the WiFi I know of uses 2.4 Ghz band (I know there are others out there though) And there doesn't seem to be a whole hell of a lot of it out there yet. Maybe it will one day be a bigger problem as it's deployment picks up. I'm looking forward to the seeded frequency hopping options rolling out in the long term, which won't cause very many people problems (at least for more than a fraction of a second) The frequency hopping method also adds the 'security by obscurity' slant to the signal as well -- if you don't have the seed and the algorithm by which the frequency is determined, you may have trouble sniffing out the data on the signal. All really neat stuff. I don't see the wireless stuff, at least the internet variety, as being all that useful, (pardon me all of you blackberry junkies) I think wifi has the solution to it all, conceivably (someday) even cellular could just use some of that bandwidth. It's just a matter of changing the infrastructure -- something that seems to take forever with folks like Verizon involved.
this can't be good for my karma
I'm not a lawyer, but I've worked with several on patent/copyright/trademark issues (none dealing specifically with the GPL, but I've read it and as long as you take what it says to have some merit, all of my above conclusions follow)
This is absolutely insane. But if they are trying to tear apart oss, I guess the GPL is the one link to attack that covers all bases.
Of course now they'll just look silly in front of everyone.
Or experiments, whatever.
Hell no, let rabbits grow! Seems about as creative as they usually get. After all, there is the possiblity we're killing innocent rabbits here. It's a wonder that they never stop to think about the fact that the rabbits we'd be killing wouldn't have even existed if it weren't for this experimentation. This not to mention the same applies to all of the Cows I eat at mcdonalds, their lives aren't being cut short by the butchers, their lives are simply created for this purpose. Silly PETA rabbits are for tricks... or something like that
I wonder if, since mitochondria generate the 'power' for the cell, if this would make a human with a VERY hyper metabolism.
Another similar issue would be the warnings that microsoft actually does send out make it look like you have to be an idiot in order for an exploit to do it's dirty work on you.
For example: Mitigating Factors: It will allow arbitrary code to run, but only in the context of the logged on user, so unless you are logged in as an administrator -- which we don't reccommend, logging in as an administrator may enable you to turn off automatic updates. BLAH blah.
I agree, but that is somewhere along the lines of saying that people shouldn't pay the fines for emissions violations on their cars, unless of course they happen to be mechanics. Oh well, when in doubt blame microsoft.
I spent all night with two of my good admin buddies here at work a few weeks ago patching all of our 1400 machines through various differnt scripts etc. Everyone thought I was nuts, but now, we had ZERO infections when the proverbial bomb went off. I wonder how this will look on my performance review. Thanks a million Microsoft! You got me a raise! Now, if I can only show them how switching to linux would save us even more money in the long run, I'd probably get an even bigger raise.
If these are the kind of people that the GPL has opposed to it, they're just saying that stuff because they're drowning in it themselves.
Spook is slang for federal agent of any kind, most notably the kind who don't tell you which agency they are with, hence they're ghosts. FYI.
...Will Smith and Jeff Goldblum; together they can use a mac powerbook to write a virus that affects even alien asteroid computers, and then use it to spy on the asteroid's built-in doomsday clock. When the asteroid's internal macintosh powered countdown reaches almost zero (of course it's measured in seconds) we then can sick Afleck and Willis on it with a tactical nuke. The world is safe! And we don't need to involve any other Neo's at all. (That would just be ridiculous)
I can't really help you but it seems like you may be on to something here... I wonder if anyone has checked this out... (I'm just a relatively new linux user, and I don't know a lot about revision history tracing...) this issue is really close to my heart lately becasue the more I use linux, the more I love it.
https://signin.directv.com/DTVAPP/glb/Confirm_Feed back.jsp
Tell them what you think. See if they like being slashdotted.
Well, first of all, I wasn't trying to insult you, sorry about the kiddie notes. Second, from your message, it seemed as if you didn't realize the things I was saying beforehand, and were asking the question 'how do you know' blindly -- that's why I considered down modding (leading simple minded people astray.) Now, I'm glad I didn't mod you down, because all you needed to do was clarify yourself, and I agree with you 100%.