Better than a Flash drive would be a portable USB HDD. I have a (designed-for-potability) LaCie 160 GB USB HDD and LaCie do them up to 1TB (but most peeps don't need to carry around *that* much data).
If "1GB F/d" means "1GB floppy disk drive", this is not needed as you can use a Knoppix boot floppy or Smart Boot Manager (a boot mamager that fits into the first sector of a hard or floppy disk) to boot the hard drive if the PC does not boot from USB.
This way, the only people "unjustly" affected are the very small crowd of people who don't watch TV at all
Actually I think you'll find there are an awful lot of people out there (like myself) who are not stupid enough to have a TV, and instead prefer interactive and not totally content-free ways of getting information that don't make them brain-dead like their PCs.
There would be an outcry if this happened in the UK (where I am). Think about it:
If you have a PC it does not mean you have a TV tuner.
If you have a TV tuner it does not mean you use it.
If you use a TV tuner it does not mean you use it to pick up broadcasts.
If you use it to pick up broadcasts it does not mean they are ones by the publically-funded TV stations.
I think you can do this ATM quite easily. I cannot test it because the USB connector has broken on my drive--I may have to solder it back together.
Also, I would have to remaster Knoppix because it would not fit on my drive--I do have an FSF membership card somewhere though that has a very small Live GNU distro on it.
>>Would it not Be possible to partition a dvd. having a boot section and a r/rw section.>any terminals booting from flash drive on usb yet?
Yes. All recent BIOSes & PCs do that where I am (UK). I've done that--you don't even need a recent one becuase you can boot a kernel from a floppy 1st. The trouble is there is no OS that I know of that you can chage all the OS settings for on the fly (after compiling) (i.e. is not Knoppix)and that runs hardware autodetection (like Knoppix) when it boots. I am suggesting the creation of one whichcould be also be booted from USB memory stick or HDD.
>>Don't let them see this thread they'll come get us.
Umm...actually...probably not, as we are giving them good ideas for how to increase their profits by giving them a USP for their products. Aaaaghhh....let's hope they don't read/.;-)
Thanks a lot! I'll download that when I get my own PC set up.(Browsing from Lynx on public Uni terminal now--Uni cannot set up XWindows or Mozilla correctly.)
Actually, there is no such thing as a kilotonne. I'm guessing you mean gigagram--as "tonne" is a non-SI (but SI-acceptable) metric shorthand for a megagram.
They would have to re-design MSW totally from scratch, because it is so badly organised & designed internally that it has to be run off re-writable media (it writes everything to disk all the time) and usually an installation will not work on different (even minor) hardware setups.
>>How long I wonder untill M/S enter this field?
They would have to re-design MSW totally from scratch,because it is so badly organised & designed internally that it has to be run off re-writable media and usually an installation will not work on different (even minor) hardware setups.
I agree with the sentiments, but I cannot get the (old) version of Move working on all the PCs I've tried it on at all. Even if you can get it working you'll probs want to stick with Knoppix or a derivative of that (e.g.: Morphix, home-grown) as it is rock solid and has better software on it.
OT: When is a full downloadable Knoppix DVD-version Iso9660 file coming out (with, like, probs all of Debian free)? That would rock.
OT: I think it would be really useful to have something in-between Knoppix and Debian proper (sharing code from both) which you could put on a writable removable storage device (e.g.: USB mass-storage-device HDD) and would be a full Debian OS (preferably actually an option when installing Debian proper and developed by the Debian project) which you can change all the config/installed progs for, but that also changes all hardware-dependent settings on startup (in the OS and any installed software) using hardware-detection routines. Obviously this could not really be used across major architectures (e.g.: i386) so you would not be able to run the same OS install on a Mac and then a PC--that would be asking too much and is probably practically impossible (but we can dream). I don't know how difficult this would be, but I'd imagine not too so as the hardware autodection routines from Knoppix could probs be canabilised. This could be a real USP (if another is needed) of GNU over MSW--carry your entire OS with you everywhere you go--its like having a laptop but without the practical (and finiancial) difficulties they tend to carry with them.
IN my country (UK), temporary storage (e.g.: RAM) or any modifcation of format is not considered fair use. From reading the copyright act is does not seem entirely clear that thinking about a song (for instance) is not actually copyright infringement.
I am not talking about releasing it under more than one license. I am talking about what the great-grandparent (that I replied to) says about restricting the GNU GPL to certain countries (e.g.: saying "you can use it under the terms of the GNU GPL only if you are a USan otherwise you must use a more restrictive license").
sorry meant to extrans...
They are. When 0.9.2 came out users of 0.9.x (where x2) where warned by the new security-fix/new-version update system that a new version was available. When I was warned I checked the details of the flaw and it told me the only difference was a setting change in the new version so I changed it manually (although I could have downloading a small XPI to automatically fix it or downloaded the whole new version, 0.9.2).
>>Clearly, if the CeCILL license contains the same kind of clause, it too is GPL-compatible. End of story<<
No. (You clearly have not read either my grandparent post in full or the defintion of "compatible" from GNU.Org.)
1. The CeCILL only invokes the "same kind of clause" under a certain set of circumstances (which, incidentally, are only likely to exist if the GPL-ed software was "pirated").
2. Even if it did include the cluase that would only make it compatible one-way--which is not compatible because *both* licenses have to allow the merging/linking of their code to be compatible (otherwise you are "violating" one of them).
3. Anyway CeCILL is a contract not a license so it can never be compatible.
step 3 is not necessary as I have personally seen pages use the onLoad js handler to launch the installation dialogue. I also don't recall having to wait for the dialogue; I seem to remember the install/cancel buttons being available immediately.
Not for me, but I was basing this on Firefox but I think it was the same in SeaMonkey. NB: 1.6 is quite old anyway. The latest milestone and RC versions (even before this fix) where 1.7.1 and 1.8a1.
It worked for me on multiple machines (and a thing appeared in the task bar telling me there was a new version without me checking). Although, I admit it is not working on my current machine ATM, but I'm behind a proxy here.
What I am saying is that this bug (an install dilaog appearing without user's permission) was acording to Bugzilla fixed before the current bug fix. If the page has gone I cannot test it, but current browsers should not do this anymore.
If people are that stupid then they deserve it (and really there is not much you can do to stop them). These are probably the same kind of people who would go right ahead if I told them "try formatting `c:'--it will really speed up your PC".
There is a law of diminishing returns here: is it really worth writing millions of lines of bloated code into a piece of software for the few total idiots in the world? Especially, as it measn the program is slower and more difficult to use for poeple with a modicum of sense.
Also, if someone went through all that then they would probably just as easy add add the WWW site to the new whitelist first as well.
They are. When 0.9.2 came ou,t users of 0.9.x (where x When I was warned I checked the details of the flaw and it told me the only difference was a setting change in the new version so I changed it manually (although I could have downloading a small XPI to automatically fix it or downloaded the whole new version, 0.9.2).
>>But WHY THE HELL IS THERE A shell: SCHEME IN THE BROWSER IN THE FIRST PLACE?<<
There is not a shell: scheme in Mozilla. It is in MSW XP. The security flaw is a bug in MS's software, and actually nothing to do with Mozilla--they just thought they'd fix it. As you shouted, I will too. YOU CANNOT BLAME MOZILLA FOR NOT FIXING FLAWS IN THE FUCKED-UP OS THAT YOU CHOOSE TO USE as quickly as you would like (despite the fact they don't get paid, they did fix it quite quickly and the bg was not in their software). Maybe you should be complaining to MS to get their OS fixed or even better get a real free-software OS: GNU/Linux.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's the /. story.
You could adapt your OS to work, or, better still, thanks to the power of Google, I have found that MandrakeSoft sell a ready-made package including LaCie 40 GB drive with a modified Mandrake 10 installed, manual, support, &c called a Globetrotter
If "1GB F/d" means "1GB floppy disk drive", this is not needed as you can use a Knoppix boot floppy or Smart Boot Manager (a boot mamager that fits into the first sector of a hard or floppy disk) to boot the hard drive if the PC does not boot from USB.
There would be an outcry if this happened in the UK (where I am). Think about it:
I think you can do this ATM quite easily. I cannot test it because the USB connector has broken on my drive--I may have to solder it back together.
Also, I would have to remaster Knoppix because it would not fit on my drive--I do have an FSF membership card somewhere though that has a very small Live GNU distro on it.
>>Would it not Be possible to partition a dvd. having a boot section and a r/rw section.>any terminals booting from flash drive on usb yet? Yes. All recent BIOSes & PCs do that where I am (UK). I've done that--you don't even need a recent one becuase you can boot a kernel from a floppy 1st. The trouble is there is no OS that I know of that you can chage all the OS settings for on the fly (after compiling) (i.e. is not Knoppix)and that runs hardware autodetection (like Knoppix) when it boots. I am suggesting the creation of one whichcould be also be booted from USB memory stick or HDD.
>>Don't let them see this thread they'll come get us.
/. ;-)
Umm...actually...probably not, as we are giving them good ideas for how to increase their profits by giving them a USP for their products. Aaaaghhh....let's hope they don't read
Thanks a lot! I'll download that when I get my own PC set up.(Browsing from Lynx on public Uni terminal now--Uni cannot set up XWindows or Mozilla correctly.)
Actually, there is no such thing as a kilotonne. I'm guessing you mean gigagram--as "tonne" is a non-SI (but SI-acceptable) metric shorthand for a megagram.
Woops!
>>How long I wonder untill M/S enter this field?
They would have to re-design MSW totally from scratch, because it is so badly organised & designed internally that it has to be run off re-writable media (it writes everything to disk all the time) and usually an installation will not work on different (even minor) hardware setups.
>>How long I wonder untill M/S enter this field? They would have to re-design MSW totally from scratch ,because it is so badly organised & designed internally that it has to be run off re-writable media and usually an installation will not work on different (even minor) hardware setups.
I agree with the sentiments, but I cannot get the (old) version of Move working on all the PCs I've tried it on at all. Even if you can get it working you'll probs want to stick with Knoppix or a derivative of that (e.g.: Morphix, home-grown) as it is rock solid and has better software on it.
OT: When is a full downloadable Knoppix DVD-version Iso9660 file coming out (with, like, probs all of Debian free)? That would rock.
OT: I think it would be really useful to have something in-between Knoppix and Debian proper (sharing code from both) which you could put on a writable removable storage device (e.g.: USB mass-storage-device HDD) and would be a full Debian OS (preferably actually an option when installing Debian proper and developed by the Debian project) which you can change all the config/installed progs for, but that also changes all hardware-dependent settings on startup (in the OS and any installed software) using hardware-detection routines. Obviously this could not really be used across major architectures (e.g.: i386) so you would not be able to run the same OS install on a Mac and then a PC--that would be asking too much and is probably practically impossible (but we can dream). I don't know how difficult this would be, but I'd imagine not too so as the hardware autodection routines from Knoppix could probs be canabilised. This could be a real USP (if another is needed) of GNU over MSW--carry your entire OS with you everywhere you go--its like having a laptop but without the practical (and finiancial) difficulties they tend to carry with them.
IN my country (UK), temporary storage (e.g.: RAM) or any modifcation of format is not considered fair use. From reading the copyright act is does not seem entirely clear that thinking about a song (for instance) is not actually copyright infringement.
11. writing implements (e.g.: pen, chalk, rock, stick) 12. carbon paper 13. brains/memory 14. hands
I am not talking about releasing it under more than one license. I am talking about what the great-grandparent (that I replied to) says about restricting the GNU GPL to certain countries (e.g.: saying "you can use it under the terms of the GNU GPL only if you are a USan otherwise you must use a more restrictive license").
sorry meant to extrans... They are. When 0.9.2 came out users of 0.9.x (where x2) where warned by the new security-fix/new-version update system that a new version was available. When I was warned I checked the details of the flaw and it told me the only difference was a setting change in the new version so I changed it manually (although I could have downloading a small XPI to automatically fix it or downloaded the whole new version, 0.9.2).
>>Clearly, if the CeCILL license contains the same kind of clause, it too is GPL-compatible. End of story<<
No. (You clearly have not read either my grandparent post in full or the defintion of "compatible" from GNU.Org.)
1. The CeCILL only invokes the "same kind of clause" under a certain set of circumstances (which, incidentally, are only likely to exist if the GPL-ed software was "pirated").
2. Even if it did include the cluase that would only make it compatible one-way--which is not compatible because *both* licenses have to allow the merging/linking of their code to be compatible (otherwise you are "violating" one of them).
3. Anyway CeCILL is a contract not a license so it can never be compatible.
4. see grandparent post.
It worked for me on multiple machines (and a thing appeared in the task bar telling me there was a new version without me checking). Although, I admit it is not working on my current machine ATM, but I'm behind a proxy here.
JS certainly is. I think XPI is. I was just going to make that clear in a reply.
What I am saying is that this bug (an install dilaog appearing without user's permission) was acording to Bugzilla fixed before the current bug fix. If the page has gone I cannot test it, but current browsers should not do this anymore.
I accept you might not read the article before commenting. I accept you might not read the /. story.
But PLEASE, PLEASE bother to read the title of the /. story before commenting.
There is a law of diminishing returns here: is it really worth writing millions of lines of bloated code into a piece of software for the few total idiots in the world? Especially, as it measn the program is slower and more difficult to use for poeple with a modicum of sense.
Also, if someone went through all that then they would probably just as easy add add the WWW site to the new whitelist first as well.
They are. When 0.9.2 came ou,t users of 0.9.x (where x When I was warned I checked the details of the flaw and it told me the only difference was a setting change in the new version so I changed it manually (although I could have downloading a small XPI to automatically fix it or downloaded the whole new version, 0.9.2).
>>But WHY THE HELL IS THERE A shell: SCHEME IN THE BROWSER IN THE FIRST PLACE?<<
There is not a shell: scheme in Mozilla. It is in MSW XP. The security flaw is a bug in MS's software, and actually nothing to do with Mozilla--they just thought they'd fix it. As you shouted, I will too. YOU CANNOT BLAME MOZILLA FOR NOT FIXING FLAWS IN THE FUCKED-UP OS THAT YOU CHOOSE TO USE as quickly as you would like (despite the fact they don't get paid, they did fix it quite quickly and the bg was not in their software). Maybe you should be complaining to MS to get their OS fixed or even better get a real free-software OS: GNU/Linux.