> See why I don't like software patents, because they're > stupid and everyone gets hurt.
Well I don't see it this way. Fuck MS and Eolas - they get what they deserve. But of the Eolas patent it is me who had some more job to do. I mean I needed to rework some webpages to use some quirky JavaScript hacks that have broken some other JS code on my sites (hey I am not a real pro and I just want the pages to work). So I've had to do some more labour because of the Eolas case.
Now lets see - MS wins - pushes update that yet again changes plugin behaviour to previous and I will have even more work to do with my websites...
The real ones that get hurt (who in MS got hurt?) are the people that must deal with the technology. MS loves patents cause they give them advantage. And MS can deal with that from time to time some other patent bites their ass - it is like cost of operation.
So my point is basically that MS is no victim here - they love the situation with patents right now.
> but it drives home the importance of keeping good anti-spyware and anti-virus software updated > on both corporate systems as well as systems being used from home.
No. It drives the importance on controlling the flow of public money. If one person be it a president of California or what you call him, can make significant money transfers that are not audited and open that is something wrong with your system. Yes you fscking can make that bank *calls* you to approve any transfer above some ammount. Yes you can make that public transfers are open and visible.
So it is nothing to blame about the software since it is obvious that Windows in hands of non-technical people is insecure. The person making transfers should use different laptop perhaps? The one that IT department cares of not the one that he browses pron from?
It is just an example how retarded and uneucated people who have power to spend public money are.
Of course from practical point of view XP right now is more secure. And I don't mean default install. For example take my company and few facts: - we managed to make the machines behave as we will - we have invested money into third party security software - we have invested time (which equals money) into free (as in speech) third party security software - we have some knowledge and experience into XP security -- after these - what like 7? - years who doesn't?!
Right now we have quite healthly and working infrastructure based on XP and surrounding (like VPNs, IDSs, AVs, proxies, backup, imagining etc.) services. We know how to do it, we have experience.
Now Vista from my standpoint is just big black hole - another system from MS that does not offer me anything significant but opens a can of unknown worms... I don't see any serious businesses building their security infrastructure around brand new shining Vista systems.
Of course in *theory* Vista can be more secure, but from practical standpoint it is new and untested product that has ben rushed to the market.
It really depends on your security definition. Security is not a product - security is a proces in which you have knowledge about what you are doing. In which you have educated users. In which you have policies and audits and so on. Vista isn't anywhere near to be even a stable product from security standpoint.
> I've been thinking about this for quite a while -- why hasn't anyone > brought out an OS that's designed for modern hardware, but has nothing > but speed in mind.
They did. In numerous of ways. It is just that consumers (meaning desktop users) don't want such stuff. Average Joe needs something that is easy (or tends to be) to use. Not assembler shell on raw iron.:)
> I mean -- I want a GUI and all, but nothing slower than fluxbox. > Isn't there a niche for shipping an OS that wrings every last drop > of thrust from yer box while maintaining a semi-pretty user interface > via wmii or something?
Not in consumer area. In professional areas you use such stuff for High Performance Computing or Real Time applications and so on...
I guess the banned channels on cable transmit somekind of watermark signal along with normal TV signal? You can probably easly (with simple $20 device) strip the watermark with somekind of hardware filter on the cable. Am I right?
That could be legal in some cases. I don't know swedish law but in polish law there is something like "fair use". It literally states that if an artwork (tv show, movie, audio recording etc.) was once published to public you can use it (record it, share it with your friends or relatives etc.). This is very old law and was constructed when the net was not reality.
What I want to say is that such things can be legal given that most of intelectual property laws are ancient in age of Internet and given that some countries respect laws that they constructed themselves it can be walking (albeit thin) legal line.
The fact is that we now live in times when laws regarding such stuff will show up.
Well you didn't got me. I meant that doing HTML line-by-line style is old-fashioned. Currently we tend to output HTML elements via XML transformations and so on. Meaning that you do not hand code but the application code generates document nodes/tags automatically. Like (but this is oversimplyfied imagined presentation language).
echo "<title>" echo $title echo "<title>"
vs.
html_render_title($node.title)
The first one is prone to typos (as you type tags by hand), the other one not because function generates proper code in HTML without hand typing.
> Really? Thats considered old fashion? I figured everyone these > days hand coded their HTML with close integration with CSS, > because thats the only way you can really ensure a minimal > amount of code, cross browser compatibility, good SEO, and > ease of updates.
Well I guess this *is* old fashioned. Right now you tend store the content in a database of some form. Some form like XML structure. Then you load this structure and transform it to HTML. The only thing that you handcode is the template for parser that returns HTML code.
Also it is more convinient to wrap everything into parser. Instead of doing something like this (imaginery language):
echo "
" echo $content echo "
"
You do something like:
html_render_p($content)
This way you don't get any mistakes (typos) in HTML code since the parser returns proper code and if the parser is broken you just fix the parser.
JuxtaPhoto is an easy PHP photo album that lets you share and organize images on your website. The features include tagged "smart albums", EXIF information, batch uploads, automatic photo sizing, chronological sorting of photos, slideshows, and easy to modify templates.
Well it is theft in means of intelectual propery. But regarding the law it is not theft. I don't know about other but in Polish law you can't really steal something that is not physicaly existant (like software copy) and you can't steal something that is not movable (like house).
Well it is plain simple - refuse commiting a crime. Piracy is crime. Peroid. If your employer expects from you to commit a crime (or witness or whatever) it is your duty to refuse. If you don't have money for car you don't go steal one - similar here.
This is not some minor issue as using a copy of some obscure cracked shareware for fifteen minutes to do some bizzare stuff which you need to do due to pression of time etc. (that I would tolerate). This is about serious and willingful piracy - using few copies of some expensive software without paying for it.
> Linux has no way in the standard kernel (when I last looked at this) > to differentiate input devices so all mice and keyboards end up > globbed as one input device.
You must have looked at it a long time ago. No patching is needed. It is just a simple matter of configuring Xorg to use different input/video devices for different screens. I am talking about X here. Regarding linux console (text one) you are right.
This should be easy doable with Linux and X server. You need to plug in two video cards, two sets of USB keyboard/mouse and configure it a bit (but it should be not too hard) and it will work.
I don't think there is even legal possibility to do it with standard customer Windows version since it specificaly prohibits multiplexing of input/output devices/user sessions in its EULA.
So you basically have just one route - Linux (or *BSD or other freenix) and X11.
> If it becomes too prevalent to avoid, just reverse-engineer the > damn thing. Or wrap it in some WINE-doohickey or something, I > dunno. We've dealt with getting propriety stuff working in Linux, > we can do it again.
Such hacked (and probably illegal in some countries) method would probably work for geek systems in their parents basements. But who cares. Lack of support for such technologies (if f.e. Linux was lacking PDF support) effectively stops Linux adoption in companies and such. And for such using hacked/illegal software is not an option. It has to be legal and supported.
We've done it already. By *we* I mean not only Free/Open Software Community but entire community that got together and works for better STANDARDS (like vendors, commitees and so on).
There are alternatives such as XUL (Firefox/Mozilla does it), SVG (Fx, Opera do it). For streaming media we have Ogg Theora and upcoming tag for HTML (Opera does it). All is here.
Problem with these alternatives it is not that they are technically worse or smth. - they are open (means little cost to implement), they do what they are supposed to do.
The problem is that Microsoft has MONOPOLY (convicted) on desktop operating systems and is using that monopoly to force their own standards and by these standards MS wishes to marginalize the competition. You have to be fucking blind or stupid to not see that. Ever heard about the browser wars?
> you can copy disks from friends, etc. I'm not saying that piracy is > necessarily a good thing
Mind that in normal countries copying a disk is not a piracy. I can legally copy any disk I own and hand it over to a friend or relative and still it is not a piracy. If the disk (which is MY) itself is protected in such way that it disallows me to copy it I can legally crack it to be able to make a copy of MY disc (which I have paid for). At least this is how it looks here in Poland.
Count in OSX license and it is not so cheap. Apple TV - $300, MacOSX - $150. It means that it costs you $450. For $600 you can get Mac Mini which is far more capable.
But I would love to see Linux running on Apple TV - for ultimate unix/linux hacker minibox Apple TV looks nice.:)
But it was still BAD DESIGN decision to allow websites (untrusted) to load cursors into shell. It is like asking for trouble. The problem is that they introduced something like this. Nobody really used it and they let it alone to rot in few Windows versions. And than *boom* it comes back.
Don't you see a pattern here? Some of Windows flaws come from such legacy stuff (that nobody really used).
Slashdot Mirror
> See why I don't like software patents, because they're
> stupid and everyone gets hurt.
Well I don't see it this way. Fuck MS and Eolas - they get what they deserve. But of the Eolas patent it is me who had some more job to do. I mean I needed to rework some webpages to use some quirky JavaScript hacks that have broken some other JS code on my sites (hey I am not a real pro and I just want the pages to work). So I've had to do some more labour because of the Eolas case.
Now lets see - MS wins - pushes update that yet again changes plugin behaviour to previous and I will have even more work to do with my websites...
The real ones that get hurt (who in MS got hurt?) are the people that must deal with the technology. MS loves patents cause they give them advantage. And MS can deal with that from time to time some other patent bites their ass - it is like cost of operation.
So my point is basically that MS is no victim here - they love the situation with patents right now.
It is possible here where I live (Poland). But I guess such account conditions imply some additional costs.
Sorry I am not a native English speaker. :)
> but it drives home the importance of keeping good anti-spyware and anti-virus software updated
> on both corporate systems as well as systems being used from home.
No. It drives the importance on controlling the flow of public money. If one person be it a president of California or what you call him, can make significant money transfers that are not audited and open that is something wrong with your system. Yes you fscking can make that bank *calls* you to approve any transfer above some ammount. Yes you can make that public transfers are open and visible.
So it is nothing to blame about the software since it is obvious that Windows in hands of non-technical people is insecure. The person making transfers should use different laptop perhaps? The one that IT department cares of not the one that he browses pron from?
It is just an example how retarded and uneucated people who have power to spend public money are.
Imagining like distributing configured system images to workstations.
:P
No funny points for you.
Of course from practical point of view XP right now is more secure. And I don't mean default install. For example take my company and few facts:
- we managed to make the machines behave as we will
- we have invested money into third party security software
- we have invested time (which equals money) into free (as in speech) third party security software
- we have some knowledge and experience into XP security -- after these - what like 7? - years who doesn't?!
Right now we have quite healthly and working infrastructure based on XP and surrounding (like VPNs, IDSs, AVs, proxies, backup, imagining etc.) services. We know how to do it, we have experience.
Now Vista from my standpoint is just big black hole - another system from MS that does not offer me anything significant but opens a can of unknown worms... I don't see any serious businesses building their security infrastructure around brand new shining Vista systems.
Of course in *theory* Vista can be more secure, but from practical standpoint it is new and untested product that has ben rushed to the market.
It really depends on your security definition. Security is not a product - security is a proces in which you have knowledge about what you are doing. In which you have educated users. In which you have policies and audits and so on. Vista isn't anywhere near to be even a stable product from security standpoint.
> I've been thinking about this for quite a while -- why hasn't anyone
:)
> brought out an OS that's designed for modern hardware, but has nothing
> but speed in mind.
They did. In numerous of ways. It is just that consumers (meaning desktop users) don't want such stuff. Average Joe needs something that is easy (or tends to be) to use. Not assembler shell on raw iron.
> I mean -- I want a GUI and all, but nothing slower than fluxbox.
> Isn't there a niche for shipping an OS that wrings every last drop
> of thrust from yer box while maintaining a semi-pretty user interface
> via wmii or something?
Not in consumer area. In professional areas you use such stuff for High Performance Computing or Real Time applications and so on...
> Hey great idea....but why not just download MythTV for free????
Because somebody who uses Windows Media Center probably has reasons to do so (DRMed content).
I guess the banned channels on cable transmit somekind of watermark signal along with normal TV signal? You can probably easly (with simple $20 device) strip the watermark with somekind of hardware filter on the cable. Am I right?
That could be legal in some cases. I don't know swedish law but in polish law there is something like "fair use". It literally states that if an artwork (tv show, movie, audio recording etc.) was once published to public you can use it (record it, share it with your friends or relatives etc.). This is very old law and was constructed when the net was not reality.
What I want to say is that such things can be legal given that most of intelectual property laws are ancient in age of Internet and given that some countries respect laws that they constructed themselves it can be walking (albeit thin) legal line.
The fact is that we now live in times when laws regarding such stuff will show up.
Well you didn't got me. I meant that doing HTML line-by-line style is old-fashioned. Currently we tend to output HTML elements via XML transformations and so on. Meaning that you do not hand code but the application code generates document nodes/tags automatically. Like (but this is oversimplyfied imagined presentation language).
echo "<title>"
echo $title
echo "<title>"
vs.
html_render_title($node.title)
The first one is prone to typos (as you type tags by hand), the other one not because function generates proper code in HTML without hand typing.
> days hand coded their HTML with close integration with CSS,
> because thats the only way you can really ensure a minimal
> amount of code, cross browser compatibility, good SEO, and
> ease of updates.
Well I guess this *is* old fashioned. Right now you tend store the content in a database of some form. Some form like XML structure. Then you load this structure and transform it to HTML. The only thing that you handcode is the template for parser that returns HTML code.
Also it is more convinient to wrap everything into parser. Instead of doing something like this (imaginery language):
echo "
"
"echo $content
echo "
You do something like:
html_render_p($content)
This way you don't get any mistakes (typos) in HTML code since the parser returns proper code and if the parser is broken you just fix the parser.
http://jeffreyharrell.com/projects/juxtaphoto/
JuxtaPhoto
JuxtaPhoto is an easy PHP photo album that lets you share and organize images on your website. The features include tagged "smart albums", EXIF information, batch uploads, automatic photo sizing, chronological sorting of photos, slideshows, and easy to modify templates.
Demo:
http://photos.jeffreyharrell.com/
Well it is theft in means of intelectual propery. But regarding the law it is not theft. I don't know about other but in Polish law you can't really steal something that is not physicaly existant (like software copy) and you can't steal something that is not movable (like house).
Well it is plain simple - refuse commiting a crime. Piracy is crime. Peroid. If your employer expects from you to commit a crime (or witness or whatever) it is your duty to refuse. If you don't have money for car you don't go steal one - similar here.
This is not some minor issue as using a copy of some obscure cracked shareware for fifteen minutes to do some bizzare stuff which you need to do due to pression of time etc. (that I would tolerate). This is about serious and willingful piracy - using few copies of some expensive software without paying for it.
> Linux has no way in the standard kernel (when I last looked at this)
> to differentiate input devices so all mice and keyboards end up
> globbed as one input device.
You must have looked at it a long time ago. No patching is needed. It is just a simple matter of configuring Xorg to use different input/video devices for different screens. I am talking about X here. Regarding linux console (text one) you are right.
http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html
This should be easy doable with Linux and X server. You need to plug in two video cards, two sets of USB keyboard/mouse and configure it a bit (but it should be not too hard) and it will work.
I don't think there is even legal possibility to do it with standard customer Windows version since it specificaly prohibits multiplexing of input/output devices/user sessions in its EULA.
So you basically have just one route - Linux (or *BSD or other freenix) and X11.
> If you have someone else's social security number and driver's
> license, you can most likely apply for a line of credit in their name.
So it is basically flawed since it needs to be a secret and also needs to be known to number of people (like clerks and so on)? Very, very stupid.
Just for the rest of the world please explain. :)
> If it becomes too prevalent to avoid, just reverse-engineer the
> damn thing. Or wrap it in some WINE-doohickey or something, I
> dunno. We've dealt with getting propriety stuff working in Linux,
> we can do it again.
Such hacked (and probably illegal in some countries) method would probably work for geek systems in their parents basements. But who cares. Lack of support for such technologies (if f.e. Linux was lacking PDF support) effectively stops Linux adoption in companies and such. And for such using hacked/illegal software is not an option. It has to be legal and supported.
Isn't free software up to the challenge?
We've done it already. By *we* I mean not only Free/Open Software Community but entire community that got together and works for better STANDARDS (like vendors, commitees and so on).
There are alternatives such as XUL (Firefox/Mozilla does it), SVG (Fx, Opera do it). For streaming media we have Ogg Theora and upcoming tag for HTML (Opera does it). All is here.
Problem with these alternatives it is not that they are technically worse or smth. - they are open (means little cost to implement), they do what they are supposed to do.
The problem is that Microsoft has MONOPOLY (convicted) on desktop operating systems and is using that monopoly to force their own standards and by these standards MS wishes to marginalize the competition. You have to be fucking blind or stupid to not see that. Ever heard about the browser wars?
But the question remains - how does it (that some guys sit on IRC and answer trivial questions) benefit Open Source Community?
> you can copy disks from friends, etc. I'm not saying that piracy is
> necessarily a good thing
Mind that in normal countries copying a disk is not a piracy. I can legally copy any disk I own and hand it over to a friend or relative and still it is not a piracy. If the disk (which is MY) itself is protected in such way that it disallows me to copy it I can legally crack it to be able to make a copy of MY disc (which I have paid for). At least this is how it looks here in Poland.
Count in OSX license and it is not so cheap. Apple TV - $300, MacOSX - $150. It means that it costs you $450. For $600 you can get Mac Mini which is far more capable.
:)
But I would love to see Linux running on Apple TV - for ultimate unix/linux hacker minibox Apple TV looks nice.
OK so maybe some user likes cursors.
But it was still BAD DESIGN decision to allow websites (untrusted) to load cursors into shell. It is like asking for trouble. The problem is that they introduced something like this. Nobody really used it and they let it alone to rot in few Windows versions. And than *boom* it comes back.
Don't you see a pattern here? Some of Windows flaws come from such legacy stuff (that nobody really used).