Only use root when you have to, and never, EVER log into a desktop as root. If you do this, and there's no problem in doing it in Linux, the vulnerability can't hack your box, it can only hack your account.
The loss can only be to your data, which is typically unique and valuable, as opposed to your operating system, which is easily replaced, you mean?
Wow, that's just great. Can we have an OS with proper sandboxing already? Anything you run in its own container, unable to escape? So you really _can_ run programs from the internet, without any fear of the consequences?
Memes can turn into a serious problem for society. Fortunately our future Martian overlords know just how to deal with it, as witnessed here. This is why it is imperative that we visit Mars and set up colonies there...
When tabbing to text boxes, it does not automatically highlight the text, if I want to change values, I have to select the text or delete it.
Everything else I can agree with, but that is a FEATURE damnit! I utterly, completely hate it that text boxes highlight your text when you click on them; it makes it extremely annoying to edit the text that is already there!
Even my non rocket science brain can take the TLEs and figure out that they were passing way too close to each other (I put it at about 500 meters with the latest elements).
I'd put it at about 0.000 meters actually. You can tell from the size of the debris field...
Like... what? A word processor? Mail server? Does it make breakfast? Fetch the paper?
According to Wikipedia YAST is a package manager. If it does "much more than that", doesn't that break the UNIX philosophy of "do one thing and do it half-arsed"? And why would that be good?
Gee, I thought you could already see the entire friggin' planet, not just one tiny island.
Anyway, I'm hoping for much-improved resolutions throughout the globe. Many places certainly don't reach the 50cm resolution that their own spacecraft gives them...
there's another good reason to get rid of it. Microsoft changing your browser string to indicate that this piece of software is installed in your browser. The purpose of this, most likely, is to increase the installed base for this software, and use that as an argument to ush whatever new web technology they're pushing. Now that non-IE browsers account for 30% of the total browsers on the internet, Microsoft is losing their stranglehold on web "standards", and they're pulling this crap to get it back.
This. It doesn't very often happen that a point is so important that I feel the need to quote it entirely and just add a "me too", but this is one of those very rare occasions.
They have just hijacked every Firefox install out there, and are using it to advertise their own product. The only appropriate response would be for Mozilla to automatically refuse it from Firefox with the next Firefox update.
I'm really curious what the opinions on this game are. If you look on metacritic there is an incredible divide between so-called "professional reviews" and the reader comments - with professional reviews having a far more positive opinion than the readers. That does not often happen, so I'm curious what happened.
So what is the reason? Were the professionals all handsomely paid off? Did some readers just not "get it"? What do other/.'ers think about it?
It runs on Linux? So what else? This doesn't mean it will be a good camera. If my previous experiences with Linux are any indication, it sounds to me like it will be slow as molasses, taking eight full seconds from "power on" to "ready to snap".
I suppose you will be modded "-1, we don't like your kind 'round here", but you are absolutely right, and it was also the first thing I thought: "how long will it take to boot?" It is already a problem on my current camera (Kodak), making it any longer is simply unacceptable.
Apparently "other media" can also cause violence! How about DVD's and television? Shouldn't they also come with a big warning? Or is it just those eeeeevil computer games again?
Any station that has violent content should have that warning plastered along the top half of the screen, permanently!
The refugee problem was created by the Arabs. It has consciously and cynically been maintained by most of the Arab countries ever since. The reason they do it is simple. With a population angry over the "Palestinian issue" nobody notices that a huge number of these states are run by corrupt, nasty megalomaniacs who only exploit their population for their own gain.
While I agree with what you are saying, I believe that plenty of people in the arab nations are aware of their own corrupt governments. As to why their anger seems to be aimed only at Israel and the western nations, instead of their own governments, I have no idea. Is it apathy? Fear? Selective reporting?
A leash is not evil. Wearing a leash gives you more control, because I will allow you to be a slave for me! And I will not grant you that opportunity if you do not wear that leash! So wear a leash, it is good for you!
I came in here to make the obvious A380 joke, but I see the summary got their way ahead of me... Next I think I will check the article, see if it makes the same bold suggestion... Of course, checking the article flies in the face of tradition as well. Would that increase or decrease the irony though?
If Obama wants to send a strong signal that he is taking Europe serious again he might just do it. And besides, about half of the A380 is built in the US anyway...
Sounds fair to me... That lawsuit could have been affecting at least 720 people!
I know where you're coming from, but you also have a serious point there: since their goal is to scare as many people as possible into not copying music, I'd say that it is affecting far more people than that.
What is needed are clear terms of usage. If those state the owner of the free service can take the site down with no advance warning and without providing access to the data, they can do so. The site owner in turn can decide whether he wants to deal with such a free service or not.
Because IPv6 was an awful mistake, an abortion created by a project group (IPNG) that had become so politicized that the best people had left.
Wow, you have a lot of big words - but you show very little in the way of concrete facts. WHY is it an awful(sic) mistake? Just because you have to remember a few more hex digits? Boo-hoo, the world is a lot larger than just your back yard you know, and those other people also want to get on the internet.
Just screaming that something is bad without explaining why is not really a convincing debating tactic...
The remaining participants were hardly even the B team; they were F Troop. IPv6 was a mashup of two undergrad-level hacks, Steve's IP and Paul's IP, by Steve Deering and Paul Francis.
...and neither are personal attacks on people who aren't even present to defend themselves.
So IPv6 perpetuates IPv4's mistakes and adds more of its own. It is costly but doesn't fix anything.
Which mistakes does it perpetuate? Which ones does it add? Why is it costly? (I can sort of guess that last one: because there is so much IP4 equipment out there. Well, here is a newsflash: it will be costly to switch to _anything_ other than IP4, whether it is IP6 or something else!)
The existing v4 space is not well utilized. Blocks can be traded/bought/sold in the interim until something smarter than IPv6 comes along. IPv6 at this point is mainly a hack by equipment vendors to make you buy costly new stuff.
So... Let's say I get assigned an IP that was previously unused by AT&T (since they have so many). Do you have any idea of the routing complications if this happened all over the world?
How do you think a "smarter" solution than IP6 will look like? Just give us a general idea, I don't need an RFC right now...
NAT is harmless to any application that is not broken in the first place. There is never justification for putting an IP address inside the application layer. Look at HTTP: It uses names, not addresses. In fact, it was a mistake to have applications resolve DNS; that should be a function of TCP/IP itself.
How can I write an application that connects from one NATted box to another? Ah, right, I can't. So the fundamental principal of end-to-end communication gets thrown out of the window, and the internet is reduced to a television model, with producers (those who have IP addresses) and consumers (those who do not). And that is something we REALLY do not need.
Yeah, the NEXT version of Windows will FIX EVERYTHING!:-)...
Seriously. We have been hearing that since, what? When was Windows 1.0 beta 1 released again? And you still expect people to believe it?
Windows 7, also known as "Vista+", will make a few minor improvements, but its basic architecture is still there: it will still be slow, and it will still consume immense amounts of memory, and it will still annoy people with security popups. You will read everywhere that it is absolutely perfect, that this time Microsoft really got it right - but everyone here knows it will be the same old Vista, with a shiny new paintcoat on top.
Slashdot Mirror
And moral of the story is:
Only use root when you have to, and never, EVER log into a desktop as root. If you do this, and there's no problem in doing it in Linux, the vulnerability can't hack your box, it can only hack your account.
The loss can only be to your data, which is typically unique and valuable, as opposed to your operating system, which is easily replaced, you mean?
Wow, that's just great. Can we have an OS with proper sandboxing already? Anything you run in its own container, unable to escape? So you really _can_ run programs from the internet, without any fear of the consequences?
This wouldn't be a problem if you lived in Australia. When it is night in the USA it is daylight there.
I think I see a flaw in your cunning plan: They don't sell 4,000 mile long extension cords at Home Depot.
Try using the underseas internet cables with the power-over-IP extension!
Memes can turn into a serious problem for society. Fortunately our future Martian overlords know just how to deal with it, as witnessed here. This is why it is imperative that we visit Mars and set up colonies there...
Slashdot trolls can get pretty malicious. But I've yet to see anybody accuse another poster of being a rapist. Did I miss that thread?
Of course you didn't. Rapists at least have sex.
When tabbing to text boxes, it does not automatically highlight the text, if I want to change values, I have to select the text or delete it.
Everything else I can agree with, but that is a FEATURE damnit! I utterly, completely hate it that text boxes highlight your text when you click on them; it makes it extremely annoying to edit the text that is already there!
Even my non rocket science brain can take the TLEs and figure out that they were passing way too close to each other (I put it at about 500 meters with the latest elements).
I'd put it at about 0.000 meters actually. You can tell from the size of the debris field...
...doesn't that break the UNIX philosophy of "do one thing and do it half-arsed"?
Oops, don't know how that slipped through. My apologies, there was no intention to flame...
Yast is far more than a package manager.
Like... what? A word processor? Mail server? Does it make breakfast? Fetch the paper?
According to Wikipedia YAST is a package manager. If it does "much more than that", doesn't that break the UNIX philosophy of "do one thing and do it half-arsed"? And why would that be good?
I'm running out of places to move to.
Try "Washington, DC".
Great Britain is only... erm... 0.14% of the land surface of Earth.
So what's so "Great" about it then?
Their ego's...
Gee, I thought you could already see the entire friggin' planet, not just one tiny island.
Anyway, I'm hoping for much-improved resolutions throughout the globe. Many places certainly don't reach the 50cm resolution that their own spacecraft gives them...
there's another good reason to get rid of it. Microsoft changing your browser string to indicate that this piece of software is installed in your browser. The purpose of this, most likely, is to increase the installed base for this software, and use that as an argument to ush whatever new web technology they're pushing. Now that non-IE browsers account for 30% of the total browsers on the internet, Microsoft is losing their stranglehold on web "standards", and they're pulling this crap to get it back.
This. It doesn't very often happen that a point is so important that I feel the need to quote it entirely and just add a "me too", but this is one of those very rare occasions.
They have just hijacked every Firefox install out there, and are using it to advertise their own product. The only appropriate response would be for Mozilla to automatically refuse it from Firefox with the next Firefox update.
I'm really curious what the opinions on this game are. If you look on metacritic there is an incredible divide between so-called "professional reviews" and the reader comments - with professional reviews having a far more positive opinion than the readers. That does not often happen, so I'm curious what happened.
So what is the reason? Were the professionals all handsomely paid off? Did some readers just not "get it"? What do other /.'ers think about it?
It runs on Linux? So what else? This doesn't mean it will be a good camera. If my previous experiences with Linux are any indication, it sounds to me like it will be slow as molasses, taking eight full seconds from "power on" to "ready to snap".
I suppose you will be modded "-1, we don't like your kind 'round here", but you are absolutely right, and it was also the first thing I thought: "how long will it take to boot?" It is already a problem on my current camera (Kodak), making it any longer is simply unacceptable.
Apparently "other media" can also cause violence! How about DVD's and television? Shouldn't they also come with a big warning? Or is it just those eeeeevil computer games again?
Any station that has violent content should have that warning plastered along the top half of the screen, permanently!
The refugee problem was created by the Arabs. It has consciously and cynically been maintained by most of the Arab countries ever since. The reason they do it is simple. With a population angry over the "Palestinian issue" nobody notices that a huge number of these states are run by corrupt, nasty megalomaniacs who only exploit their population for their own gain.
While I agree with what you are saying, I believe that plenty of people in the arab nations are aware of their own corrupt governments. As to why their anger seems to be aimed only at Israel and the western nations, instead of their own governments, I have no idea. Is it apathy? Fear? Selective reporting?
A leash is not evil. Wearing a leash gives you more control, because I will allow you to be a slave for me! And I will not grant you that opportunity if you do not wear that leash! So wear a leash, it is good for you!
I came in here to make the obvious A380 joke, but I see the summary got their way ahead of me... Next I think I will check the article, see if it makes the same bold suggestion... Of course, checking the article flies in the face of tradition as well. Would that increase or decrease the irony though?
Ah, such tough choices on a saturday afternoon ;-)
If Obama wants to send a strong signal that he is taking Europe serious again he might just do it. And besides, about half of the A380 is built in the US anyway...
Sounds fair to me... That lawsuit could have been affecting at least 720 people!
I know where you're coming from, but you also have a serious point there: since their goal is to scare as many people as possible into not copying music, I'd say that it is affecting far more people than that.
You must have some stories to tell... Any chance of seeing some of them on thedailywtf? They seem to be in need of good WTF's lately.
And I suppose you probably don't want to tell us where you work? :-)
What is needed are clear terms of usage. If those state the owner of the free service can take the site down with no advance warning and without providing access to the data, they can do so. The site owner in turn can decide whether he wants to deal with such a free service or not.
Because IPv6 was an awful mistake, an abortion created by a project group (IPNG) that had become so politicized that the best people had left.
Wow, you have a lot of big words - but you show very little in the way of concrete facts. WHY is it an awful(sic) mistake? Just because you have to remember a few more hex digits? Boo-hoo, the world is a lot larger than just your back yard you know, and those other people also want to get on the internet.
Just screaming that something is bad without explaining why is not really a convincing debating tactic...
The remaining participants were hardly even the B team; they were F Troop. IPv6 was a mashup of two undergrad-level hacks, Steve's IP and Paul's IP, by Steve Deering and Paul Francis.
...and neither are personal attacks on people who aren't even present to defend themselves.
So IPv6 perpetuates IPv4's mistakes and adds more of its own. It is costly but doesn't fix anything.
Which mistakes does it perpetuate? Which ones does it add? Why is it costly? (I can sort of guess that last one: because there is so much IP4 equipment out there. Well, here is a newsflash: it will be costly to switch to _anything_ other than IP4, whether it is IP6 or something else!)
The existing v4 space is not well utilized. Blocks can be traded/bought/sold in the interim until something smarter than IPv6 comes along. IPv6 at this point is mainly a hack by equipment vendors to make you buy costly new stuff.
So... Let's say I get assigned an IP that was previously unused by AT&T (since they have so many). Do you have any idea of the routing complications if this happened all over the world?
How do you think a "smarter" solution than IP6 will look like? Just give us a general idea, I don't need an RFC right now...
NAT is harmless to any application that is not broken in the first place. There is never justification for putting an IP address inside the application layer. Look at HTTP: It uses names, not addresses. In fact, it was a mistake to have applications resolve DNS; that should be a function of TCP/IP itself.
How can I write an application that connects from one NATted box to another? Ah, right, I can't. So the fundamental principal of end-to-end communication gets thrown out of the window, and the internet is reduced to a television model, with producers (those who have IP addresses) and consumers (those who do not). And that is something we REALLY do not need.
Be careful what you say at airports and on planes. Never get irate or argue at airports and on planes.
Sheep.
Home of the brave, what a joke...
Yeah, the NEXT version of Windows will FIX EVERYTHING! :-) ...
Seriously. We have been hearing that since, what? When was Windows 1.0 beta 1 released again? And you still expect people to believe it?
Windows 7, also known as "Vista+", will make a few minor improvements, but its basic architecture is still there: it will still be slow, and it will still consume immense amounts of memory, and it will still annoy people with security popups. You will read everywhere that it is absolutely perfect, that this time Microsoft really got it right - but everyone here knows it will be the same old Vista, with a shiny new paintcoat on top.