I don't really understand why is money such an obsession here
Is it naivete or self-righteousness? Money's an obsession because of the overall 60% tax rate in this nation (US). Everyone allows themselves to be impressed with how much larger their base salary is in the US than in other nations and no one ever talks about the higher cost of living or the relatively comparable tax rate. They don't talk about the cost of living because it's obvious. They don't talk about the tax rate because most people have never bothered to sit down and figure out just how much they actually pay.
You live in abject poverty dude, better wake up before you find yourself 60 years old and living paycheck to paycheck in a dingy old apartment eating cup o noodles.
I tried mentioning that very fact to my management when they asked me why I was working so hard trying to get a promotion. They told me,"You should be happy just to have a job!!!"
So, with a__holes like that above me, just how am I supposed to get out of the cup'o'noodles fate?
The fact that only one of several professors I talked to would even admit that the job market was tough was...enlightening
That seems to be a large part of Ph.D. training in any field. I don't think these people actually believe that the job market isn't tough. Rather, they know that the job market is tough but they realize that their existence relies on convincing more and more students that the job market is easy thus ensuring a steady stream of support for their personal pursuits.
So PhDs are not really "intelligent", rather they're "crafty" and skilled in self-preservation at all costs.
believe that the solution to our problem is to grant fewer to PhDs-thats right. Restrict the number of people getting their doctorate and eliminate the glut of people stuck doing multiple post-docs just to land a position at nowhereville state university
Eventually that restriction will be tuned to align more with pedigree than actual talent. That's precisely the problem of the current system.
this kind is here because of their proven track of performanc
Keep drinking the Kool-Aid. I hear it has an ergot derivative in it.
I personally know more
We all do. If you're pampered they let you keep what you know for your own profit. If you're like the average American student they beat it out of you for their own profit.
It is great for pumping out "scientists." But it dosen't encourage science.
On the same tack why should I have extra respect for someone that took an extra six years to learn what I learned in the first four? I'm all for being kind and gentle with the people who ride the short bus but I don't think that the free time and financial suppor that it takes to acquire "Ph.D." should turn an average Joe into a brillionaire.
So fewer white men are going into tech and the difference is more women and minorities?
So is this about the decline of the white male in tech fields or is it about the rise of everyone else in tech fields or is it about how the US is declining in tech fields?
Maybe this is un-PC, but I think you've hit the nail on the head here. This isn't really a reflection of the industry or the quality of a PhD. This really is a reflection of the overall theft of the working white male's money and the funneling of those funds to women and minorities to subsidize their way into graduate programs.
As an aside... what is a PhD? Why should I have extra respect for someone who takes six extra years to learn what I did in the first four? PhDs should be kissing my backside because apparently they've been taking the short bus.
There are two types of foreign students: those who are wealthy enough to be here on their own money and those who are well-connected enough to be here on our money.
In the first case we don't need any more spoiled rich yuppie brats, no matter which nation they're from, we already have plenty of our own. In the second case we have plenty of our own citizens who should be receiving the generosity.
It is, however, Mozilla's responsibility to refuse to use someone else's program when it's been the biggest source of security holes in the entire computer industry over the past ten years
If Moz would leave out the hook to the OS handler they would get spanked by featureware.
You might as well ask "why is it Hilton Hotel's problem not to pump their drinking water out of Boston Harbor".
But it was _NOT_ within Mozilla.org's ability to change the insecure design of the OS URI handler unless they start patching your OS for you. If they don't include the OS URI handler functionality they will always be behind the curve in end-user functionality.
Using Microsoft's protocol handler mechanism for anything but known trusted local content is the equivalent of drinking polluted water
The moment that they would hard code the protocol handler list is the moment that Real, WMP, and everyone else registers new protocols. There is no choice but polluted water. Mozilla is competing to be _THE_ standard desktop browser of choice, not some niche yuppie bottled water.
If you catch a virus out of your email because you looked at the first few lines of the message in the preview pane, do you blame your e-mail client? I blame my email client, personally. And that's the kind of thing we're talking about here... viewing web pages, not downloading and clicking on executables.
The exploit in Outlook was a bona fide exploit. There is no reason for attachments to be executed while viewing the preview pane. Mozilla does _NOT_ do anything it shouldn't be doing. Mozilla is simply following protocol when it follows img src.
I would mod you as funny but I still think you're on the wrong side.
Mozilla developers (carpenters) have known about flaws in Windows security design (controlled by the boss) for many years. They are powerless to fix it. In order to make their browser competitive they _MUST_ have the hook to the OS handler or MS would spank them with featureware. Now you, the users (the homeowners) want to hold the developers (the carpenters) responsible for something that Microsoft (the boss) refuses to fix.
Why is it Mozilla's responsibility to bugfix someone else's problem?
If you catch a virus out of e-mail because you clicked the.exe, do you blame your e-mail client or do you blame your antivirus software? YOU CLICKED THE.EXE! If that virus starts spewing out network packets do you blame your firewall for not stopping them? YOU CLICKED THE.EXE!
Whitelists suck, blacklists suck. Not just for e-mail spam but for protocol handlers as well.
By obeying these protocols, you're making every registered application on the system a component of the firewall that any application MUST erect around any untrusted document
Using your logic allows you to blame anything you choose. Why not blame your firewall? Why not blame your A/V software? They're actually advertised to protect your system. Mozilla's purpose is not to prevent you from doing something which isn't smart. Mozilla's purpose is to enable content transfer.
I'll believe you're not a troll when you file a bug report with McAfee or Norton about this severe vulnerability in their software allowing the arbitrary execution of files on your system.
Because it does it for any registered protocol or MIME type. Mozilla isn't supposed to be your security monitor. Web browsers have evolved to be told by the OS which protocols are supported and handled.
Don't blame Moz because some other app registered the shell: handler.
Do you blame Moz when some virus registers the MIME type for x-application-trojan or the handler for the trojan:// protocol?
The community has lost a lot of trust with me today. Looks like a team that is no longer ready for prime-time
Who do you blame when someone finds a remote code vuln in the default application for ftp://? There was a media stream protocol, I forget what it is... who do you blame when there's a remote code exploit in your favorite media player? How is this different from clicking on an.mp3 which has been specifically crafted to make use of an exploit in your favorite media player?
Mozilla isn't doing anything that it's not supposed to do. Incidentally, I haven't heard anything from MS about this and IE happily submits to all "shell:" links without even a hiccup.
It's not a Mozilla issue. It's an issue with using an OS which keeps a registry. It's an issue with users who demand to be able to open any data format in any application and have the OS automatically spawn the correct application because the users can't be bothered to match data types with applications. It's an issue with the media industry wanting seamless integration of their data to their application without allowing the user to save that data to disk.
The "shell://" handler is only a logical extension of the real issues. Is it a Mozilla issue if clicking on an.mp3 in your web browser exploits your favorite media player? Is it a Mozilla issue if clicking on a.wmv in your web browser exploits your favorite media player?
This wouldn't be an issue if we didn't have users who clamored for seamless idiot-proofing and a corporation who happily gave it to them.
From what I understand Mozilla is only doing what any competent web browser is supposed to do: ask the OS what protocols it knows about. If the OS knows about shell:// then the browser hands it over.
But, then, nothing really compares to Mathematica. It's closest competition is Maple, but if you dig into what you can do with the products, Mathematica is vastly more powerful
We used Mathemagica in Calc and DiffEq and most engineering classes which required graphical representations of output.
We used Maple in classes which required more theoretical manipulation of numbers because Mathcrashica was true to its name on many of those manipulations.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't really understand why is money such an obsession here
Is it naivete or self-righteousness? Money's an obsession because of the overall 60% tax rate in this nation (US). Everyone allows themselves to be impressed with how much larger their base salary is in the US than in other nations and no one ever talks about the higher cost of living or the relatively comparable tax rate. They don't talk about the cost of living because it's obvious. They don't talk about the tax rate because most people have never bothered to sit down and figure out just how much they actually pay.
Someone needs to pay the bills.
You live in abject poverty dude, better wake up before you find yourself 60 years old and living paycheck to paycheck in a dingy old apartment eating cup o noodles.
I tried mentioning that very fact to my management when they asked me why I was working so hard trying to get a promotion. They told me,"You should be happy just to have a job!!!"
So, with a__holes like that above me, just how am I supposed to get out of the cup'o'noodles fate?
The fact that only one of several professors I talked to would even admit that the job market was tough was...enlightening
That seems to be a large part of Ph.D. training in any field. I don't think these people actually believe that the job market isn't tough. Rather, they know that the job market is tough but they realize that their existence relies on convincing more and more students that the job market is easy thus ensuring a steady stream of support for their personal pursuits.
So PhDs are not really "intelligent", rather they're "crafty" and skilled in self-preservation at all costs.
I don't have to suck up to my boss because my industry is a meritocracy
Is that red lipstick you're wearing or is that the LSD-laced Kool-Aid on your lips.
Every company is a "meritocracy" just like every company only hires the "best and brightest". It's in the yearly pep rally.
believe that the solution to our problem is to grant fewer to PhDs-thats right. Restrict the number of people getting their doctorate and eliminate the glut of people stuck doing multiple post-docs just to land a position at nowhereville state university
Eventually that restriction will be tuned to align more with pedigree than actual talent. That's precisely the problem of the current system.
this kind is here because of their proven track of performanc
Keep drinking the Kool-Aid. I hear it has an ergot derivative in it.
I personally know more
We all do. If you're pampered they let you keep what you know for your own profit. If you're like the average American student they beat it out of you for their own profit.
Life is too short to make it just about $
So you'll be happy to work for free, then?
It is great for pumping out "scientists." But it dosen't encourage science.
On the same tack why should I have extra respect for someone that took an extra six years to learn what I learned in the first four? I'm all for being kind and gentle with the people who ride the short bus but I don't think that the free time and financial suppor that it takes to acquire "Ph.D." should turn an average Joe into a brillionaire.
So fewer white men are going into tech and the difference is more women and minorities?
So is this about the decline of the white male in tech fields or is it about the rise of everyone else in tech fields or is it about how the US is declining in tech fields?
Maybe this is un-PC, but I think you've hit the nail on the head here. This isn't really a reflection of the industry or the quality of a PhD. This really is a reflection of the overall theft of the working white male's money and the funneling of those funds to women and minorities to subsidize their way into graduate programs.
As an aside... what is a PhD? Why should I have extra respect for someone who takes six extra years to learn what I did in the first four? PhDs should be kissing my backside because apparently they've been taking the short bus.
There are two types of foreign students: those who are wealthy enough to be here on their own money and those who are well-connected enough to be here on our money.
In the first case we don't need any more spoiled rich yuppie brats, no matter which nation they're from, we already have plenty of our own. In the second case we have plenty of our own citizens who should be receiving the generosity.
What business truely wants, and needs are managers who are creative, intelligent, resourceful, unorthodox
I might stop laughing some time in the next 4 hours.
You could be in the sphere of reality and say what business truly wants are managers who do what the executive board tells them to do.
It is, however, Mozilla's responsibility to refuse to use someone else's program when it's been the biggest source of security holes in the entire computer industry over the past ten years
If Moz would leave out the hook to the OS handler they would get spanked by featureware.
You might as well ask "why is it Hilton Hotel's problem not to pump their drinking water out of Boston Harbor".
But it was _NOT_ within Mozilla.org's ability to change the insecure design of the OS URI handler unless they start patching your OS for you. If they don't include the OS URI handler functionality they will always be behind the curve in end-user functionality.
Using Microsoft's protocol handler mechanism for anything but known trusted local content is the equivalent of drinking polluted water
The moment that they would hard code the protocol handler list is the moment that Real, WMP, and everyone else registers new protocols. There is no choice but polluted water. Mozilla is competing to be _THE_ standard desktop browser of choice, not some niche yuppie bottled water.
If you catch a virus out of your email because you looked at the first few lines of the message in the preview pane, do you blame your e-mail client? I blame my email client, personally. And that's the kind of thing we're talking about here... viewing web pages, not downloading and clicking on executables.
The exploit in Outlook was a bona fide exploit. There is no reason for attachments to be executed while viewing the preview pane. Mozilla does _NOT_ do anything it shouldn't be doing. Mozilla is simply following protocol when it follows img src.
I would mod you as funny but I still think you're on the wrong side.
Mozilla developers (carpenters) have known about flaws in Windows security design (controlled by the boss) for many years. They are powerless to fix it. In order to make their browser competitive they _MUST_ have the hook to the OS handler or MS would spank them with featureware. Now you, the users (the homeowners) want to hold the developers (the carpenters) responsible for something that Microsoft (the boss) refuses to fix.
Why is it Mozilla's responsibility to bugfix someone else's problem?
.exe, do you blame your e-mail client or do you blame your antivirus software? YOU CLICKED THE .EXE! If that virus starts spewing out network packets do you blame your firewall for not stopping them? YOU CLICKED THE .EXE!
If you catch a virus out of e-mail because you clicked the
Whitelists suck, blacklists suck. Not just for e-mail spam but for protocol handlers as well.
By obeying these protocols, you're making every registered application on the system a component of the firewall that any application MUST erect around any untrusted document
Using your logic allows you to blame anything you choose. Why not blame your firewall? Why not blame your A/V software? They're actually advertised to protect your system. Mozilla's purpose is not to prevent you from doing something which isn't smart. Mozilla's purpose is to enable content transfer.
I'll believe you're not a troll when you file a bug report with McAfee or Norton about this severe vulnerability in their software allowing the arbitrary execution of files on your system.
But they haven't. This is a fully patched, up-to-date WinXP and IE happily follows all shell: links.
Because it does it for any registered protocol or MIME type. Mozilla isn't supposed to be your security monitor. Web browsers have evolved to be told by the OS which protocols are supported and handled.
Don't blame Moz because some other app registered the shell: handler.
Do you blame Moz when some virus registers the MIME type for x-application-trojan or the handler for the trojan:// protocol?
It's not up to the Mozilla team to bugfix all of your external applications for you.
Mozilla is not responsible for vulnerabilities in your ftp client. (for handling ftp://)
Mozilla is not responsible for vulnerabilities in your media player. (for handling media streams)
Mozilla is not responsible for vulnerabilities in your libjpg. (for looking at pretty pictures)
The shell: protocol is (just plain dumb) the simplest case scenario but the fact remains that Mozilla isn't doing anything that it shouldn't be doing.
The community has lost a lot of trust with me today. Looks like a team that is no longer ready for prime-time
.mp3 which has been specifically crafted to make use of an exploit in your favorite media player?
Who do you blame when someone finds a remote code vuln in the default application for ftp://? There was a media stream protocol, I forget what it is... who do you blame when there's a remote code exploit in your favorite media player? How is this different from clicking on an
Mozilla isn't doing anything that it's not supposed to do. Incidentally, I haven't heard anything from MS about this and IE happily submits to all "shell:" links without even a hiccup.
I have to agree that this is a Mozilla issue
.mp3 in your web browser exploits your favorite media player? Is it a Mozilla issue if clicking on a .wmv in your web browser exploits your favorite media player?
It's not a Mozilla issue. It's an issue with using an OS which keeps a registry. It's an issue with users who demand to be able to open any data format in any application and have the OS automatically spawn the correct application because the users can't be bothered to match data types with applications. It's an issue with the media industry wanting seamless integration of their data to their application without allowing the user to save that data to disk.
The "shell://" handler is only a logical extension of the real issues. Is it a Mozilla issue if clicking on an
This wouldn't be an issue if we didn't have users who clamored for seamless idiot-proofing and a corporation who happily gave it to them.
which Internet Explorer only started to do sometime this year
IE happily follows all of the links on this page quite happily without popping up any dialog boxes.
This is a fully patched up-to-date XP installation.
Two years of being aware of this issue and doing little or nothing about it seems a bit worrying, IMO
I'm sure MS is aware of this bug and they haven't even bothered to publicly acknowledge it.
Even taking a hard-nose stance Mozilla is the lesser of two evils.
From what I understand Mozilla is only doing what any competent web browser is supposed to do: ask the OS what protocols it knows about. If the OS knows about shell:// then the browser hands it over.
IE does the same thing quite happily.
Mozilla falls down
Mozilla isn't doing anything IE doesn't do. Clicking on shell: links in IE works like a charm.
Did you RTNA? (nice)
But, then, nothing really compares to Mathematica. It's closest competition is Maple, but if you dig into what you can do with the products, Mathematica is vastly more powerful
We used Mathemagica in Calc and DiffEq and most engineering classes which required graphical representations of output.
We used Maple in classes which required more theoretical manipulation of numbers because Mathcrashica was true to its name on many of those manipulations.