Note that this is listed as compensation received by Bezos. If this were security while he were conducting company business, it would not be considered compensation, and would not need to be linked to him. This explains the "in addition to security arrangements provided at business facilities and for business travel". The money is most likely paid to him to compensate him for his personal security expenses, such as the security at his residence.
However, this doesn't mean that the payment is somehow inappropriate, as the summary seems to imply. Bezos' job gives him a very high profile, and the resultant security risks don't go away when he isn't conducting company business. It is quite likely that many other high profile executives are in a similar situation.
I've had the opposite experience. Dell computers from my old university came with more expensive support standard (3 year next-business-day). While the "technical" support doesn't appear to have any understanding of anything technical, they will happily replace whatever I tell them needs replacing, within two or three days (since I am usually too busy to arrange an appointment for the next day). However, this does require that one know what needs to be replaced, and a lot of things do need replacing - in two years, with one laptop (D600), I've needed to have the motherboard replaced twice, the keyboard replaced, and the enclosure housing the LCD replaced (hinge broke). The motherboard and keyboard will most likely need to be replaced again within the next year, and the video card cooling is poorly designed, so any nontrivial 3d program only runs well for around an hour.
I imagine that the economy warranty has the problems you describe, whch might explain why it is so much cheaper.
Best in the business? When my IBook's hard drive started failing (bad blocks), Apple's technical support refused to speak to me without having my credit card number first, so that they charge me after "deciding whether my problem was covered under the warranty", even though it was obvious that the problem was.
When this was finally resolved, Apple returned the Ibook with not only a new hard drive, but also a new screen and new optical drive. However, my DVD/CD-RW drive was replaced with a much cheaper DVD-ROM drive, even though Apple claimed to have replaced it with the same component, thus requiring me to send it back again. Is that "best in the business" technical support, where the company doesn't even trust that I know what is covered under warranty, and then replaces components incorrectly?
During the three years I used the IBook, the power cord had to be replaced FOUR times because the cord would break near the tip of the very thin cord. When an ethernet card pulled up slightly on its plugin, the ethernet stopped working completely. Is this considered durable?
I also had a Powerbook from around 1996 or 97 (not sure, but it had a trackball instead of a pad) that broke around 2-3 years after buying it (new) because opening and closing the lid caused the monitor cable to break due to a design flaw. This was apparently a common problem.
That said, I have very old Apple desktops (Apple SE, PowerMac 7100?) that work perfectly. Perhaps Apple desktops are built to a different standard?
While this may be true, my computer, watch, and every other item with a clock shouldn't need to deal with this.
Why is it harder to adjust working hours to fit the season? Not only would this be much easier from an implementation standpoint, but the changes in hours could be greater in more northern areas that could benefit from larger changes.
I would say that the perceived problem with homework in primary/middle/high schools in the USA stems not from the homework itself, but from the absurd amount of time students spend in classes. Homework allows students to work on subject by themselves, and to show that they understand the material, which is something that usually cannot be effectively done in lectures. But when students are compelled to spend around thirty to fourty hours a week in classes/lectures, they are often too exhausted to then go home and do hours of homework. Since homework is usually assigned every day in many classes, teachers are usually too busy to create useful homework assignments.
By contrast, most universities I know of have students take far fewer hours of classes, and professors usually give homework which, as it is not usually given out every day, can be better thought out. In this situation students spend more time studying and doing homework than in class, and are thus, in my opinion, able to understand the material better, since they are spending significant amounts of time working by themselves, which allows them to find out which concepts they do or do not understand. These things are much more difficult to do in class.
Most universities, at least in the USA, do not allow students to take 30 or 40 hours of classes a week without special permission. Most forms of employment do not entail the employee working full time and then going home and working for 2-4 more hours. The only explanation for the difference that I can think of would be that primary/secondary/high schools in the United States are not designed to teach, but instead to provide childcare for parents working full time, and to teach only as a secondary objective.
Gambling losses can be taken out of income up to gambling winnings. This makes sense, since otherwise a person who won a sizable amount of money gambling and then immediately lost it while gambling further would be expected to pay taxes on the "income" from that win.
The market research is particularly interesting. 52% of respondents to a survey liked having "Featured Products" on the web site? The written responses to that survey are also rather frightening.
This can be terribly annoying - I have seen students in upper-division physics courses clipping their nails in the middle of a lecture while sitting in the front row. Why they feel it is so important to clip their nails at that particular time is quite beyond me.
Iridium still exists, and the phones still work - I used one a few months ago outside Iquitos in Peru.
However, the ~US$1000(?) for the phone and US$1/min charges are rather prohibitive for using it anywhere that a regular cellular phone will work or a regular phone is available. In my opinion, satellite-based internet is very similar - a good option only when nothing else will work.
Hmmm... So in other words, as I am sixteen, due to your rules on IM and email:
1) You would not allow me to do any open source development?
2) You would not allow me to contact the ISPs of people sending me spam?
3) You would not allow me to email the California Attorney General about spam using my email address in the From: header?
Many posts here would disallow IM, email, and sometimes IRC with strangers. And yet, I think it would be much better for you to encourage your children to use common sense in these matters. While I don't think they should give out personal information in general, there are some cases where it might be acceptable. What if they want to become developers for Debian?
In any case, strict rules such as these assume that children are unable to make decisions on their own.
RMS was, in my opinion, speaking of individual utilities: "Individual programmers can contribute by writing a compatible duplicate of some Unix utility and giving it to me." He was saying, in my opinion, that projects which involve a large number of small utilites could be developed in this way. In other words, he thought it would not be hard to coordinate developers each working on a seperate, standard, important program for GNU.
I, on the other hand, am considering projects like Linux, or most other large open source projects, where multiple developers work on the same source code, and even the same parts of the same source code. This is what I believe RMS was saying would be very difficult to coordinate. Of course, to be certain of this, one would have to ask RMS himself.
I apologise for not making this clear in my original post.
It is interesting to look at how the ideas in the post agree and disagree with the state of GNU today.
For example, Stallman states that a kernel is a top priority, yet we still don't have a really stable, working kernel out of GNU (I don't think Mach or Hurd count).
Also interesting - filename completion is mentioned as a possibility. Now it is difficult for many people, including myself, to live without it. Yet Stallman implies that a Lisp-based window system is more important. What became of this idea?
By far, my favorite quote from this is:
For most projects, such
part-time distributed work would be very hard to coordinate; the
independently-written parts would not work together.
Is this not what GNU started? Many projects with part-time distributed workers? This is a quote from RMS, stating that the development model most open source projects now use would be very difficult.
In that case, Google will probably put a link to the infringing material somewhere with a notice that it is infringing, similar to what they did with their search engine results.
As for you saying that they want to censure it, I believe you are incorrect. They must censure it to avoid a very expensive lawsuit.
Sorry, but could you please explain your paper more? I cannot understand what you are saying.
If a system is insecure, and I trust that it is secure, isn't that bad for me? Especially for a voting system, this would be, in my opinion, exactly what a malicious user would want: a system that everyone trusts is secure, but in reality, is not.
This question might be very stupid, but I think it is a rather obvious question that a person not knowledgeable in the area, such as myself, would ask.
In any operating system, what is considered a crash is very subjective. With Linux, for example, there are many different issues:
1) Hardware problems: do we count crashes from buggy hardware? And if we don't, what about situations where the kernel could work around the hardware? Do we count those?
2) User stupidity: do we count users doing stupid things, such as deleting/lib/libc.so.6 or some other important file?
3) Modules: Do we count crashes in third-party modules, like the nvidia drivers? Do we count them only if they bring down the whole system?
The same type of questions could be asked for Windows, and in fact, probably more could be asked. Windows has quite a few vendor-written drivers, and they can crash. Are those counted?
Anyone can write a program that crashes often - this should not reflect upon the quality of the OS. But where do we start counting crashes as being detrimental to the OS?
I haven't seen too many crashes on other people's computers running Windows XP or 2000 (much less than with Windows 98!), but I have seen more than on my Linux machines, at least if you remove crashes from my CVS builds, unstable kernels, etc. I tend not to have any crashes at the kernel, module, or X level at all.
I agree with you here. In fact, I don't think that a capitalist system would be necessary in a society with robotic production. If the robotic production mechanisms could produce enough to satisfy the entire population, which I think would be possible, then the cost of living would go down dramatically. Actually, the essentials of living could be easily provided by the state in this case.
With the elimination of mundane jobs, the education of the populace would rise, as uneducated labour would not be required. Science, art, and other fields which require much thought would flourish, as people who could otherwise not afford an education, or could not afford to work at a badly paying job, would now be free to do what they want to. This system would, of course, probably create many scientists and artists who were not very good, but the point here is that the quantity would be so much higher, it would still help.
Note that this would not necessarily be something like communism and socialism. A robotic society would be more of a utopian society, since a labour force would not be needed.
I am not sure if I make any sense in this post.
Re:Windows or holes in the walls?
on
Qt On DirectFB
·
· Score: 1
Looking at this project, I have decided I will try to help. It would be great if others would decide to as well.
In my opinion, DirectFB does not contain the features necessary to be an X replacement. Fresco does.
Your hard drive must be having problems. As with the other posts, you should look at hdparm.
To give a comparison of speed, my dual Athlon MP 1600+ (1.4 Ghz) with 256 Mb of RAM and two old harddrives from other computers can transfer 438 Mbs in 37.28 seconds using only 19% of my CPU.
I am not a security expert, I know that. In fact, I am not very experienced in security at all.
My point in the part you are referring to is that I can't understand why the first exploit is a problem. I don't remember javascript very well, but doesn't the script just open a popup with some stuff in it, and then put some more stuff in it (sorry, the example is down and I do not have the time to figure out how to run it myself)? If that is the case, what is the point? I think that was intended as a feature. Maybe if the script was putting stuff into another window that it didn't open, it would be bad. Furthermore, if the script can put stuff into the window after a user changed that window to another website, it might be bad. But why would a user use a popup to start browsing other sites?
Certainly, it can be abused, but I don't see how it allows remote command execution, or why everyone should be so scared, or how turning off java is going to fix it. Note this has nothing to do with the other exploits.
I know quite well that a virus wouldn't be designed to be visible. I have never seen any movie on cracking. I do not understand what viruses, process listings, and little frost marks have to do with the first exploit.
for i in/proc/[1-9]; do cat $i/cmdline; echo; done
Might I ask what a economic model has to do with TIA?
These things can be done in any type of government. In fascism, which you seem to be implying, the people wouldn't have a choice. In a democracy, with the right support from the media, it is also possible.
None of the indicators of socialism are present, by the way. On the contrary, we are moving further away from socialism. College costs are rising, health care costs are rising, companies (ie SCO) are very busy suing each other over IP violations, tax cuts are being made...
Please don't use 'socialism' as term for any bad government. Socialism is something very specific, and not what you are talking about.
And why in the world are you saying that 'the terrorists' won? What the US is becoming is the opposite of what terrorists would want. How could a group of terrorists want us to invade their home countries?
Take, for example, the commentary:
There are many, many more issues than I have discussed. The minimal release
is for giving the blackhats time to play.
Furthermore, the language used is like nothing I have ever seen before.
The poster states that this is a Java problem, but then states that any browser with Javascript is vulnerable to remote command execution. He/she then goes on to give an exploit which has nothing to do with either Java or remote command execution.
The first exploit doesn't seem like much of an exploit either. Instead, it seems to that the script opens a popup, and then at some later time, changes its content. What is wrong with that?
As for the other exploits, they don't seem to have anything to do with the first exploit. They seem to be old Java exploits.
At the end, the poster recommends everyone turn off Java. But at the beginning, the poster said that everything with Javascript enabled is vulnerable, and the first exploit has nothing to do with Java.
Overall, I think it is easy to see that this poster was a troll. The general statements that are made, the lack of any specific information, and the mixing of unrelated exploits seem to make this quite obvious.
What is says, if you read the link about the Windows record in the article, is that Linux with 32 older processors is nearly as good as Windows with 64 newer processors. If Linux can get nearly 600,000 with 32 processors, I would think it could add more than 102,000 if running on 64 processors.
I think casinos gain addicted customers by giving small wins to people when they first start using the machine. It seems most people I know who have used a slot machine won something small when they first start using a slot machine. This leads me to believe that the odds of a small win are increased when a machine is not used for a while. Furthermore, the news of an occasional large win spreads between groups of friends, thus making people think that large wins are more probable.
Slashdot Mirror
Note that this is listed as compensation received by Bezos. If this were security while he were conducting company business, it would not be considered compensation, and would not need to be linked to him. This explains the "in addition to security arrangements provided at business facilities and for business travel". The money is most likely paid to him to compensate him for his personal security expenses, such as the security at his residence.
However, this doesn't mean that the payment is somehow inappropriate, as the summary seems to imply. Bezos' job gives him a very high profile, and the resultant security risks don't go away when he isn't conducting company business. It is quite likely that many other high profile executives are in a similar situation.
I've had the opposite experience. Dell computers from my old university came with more expensive support standard (3 year next-business-day). While the "technical" support doesn't appear to have any understanding of anything technical, they will happily replace whatever I tell them needs replacing, within two or three days (since I am usually too busy to arrange an appointment for the next day). However, this does require that one know what needs to be replaced, and a lot of things do need replacing - in two years, with one laptop (D600), I've needed to have the motherboard replaced twice, the keyboard replaced, and the enclosure housing the LCD replaced (hinge broke). The motherboard and keyboard will most likely need to be replaced again within the next year, and the video card cooling is poorly designed, so any nontrivial 3d program only runs well for around an hour.
I imagine that the economy warranty has the problems you describe, whch might explain why it is so much cheaper.
Best in the business? When my IBook's hard drive started failing (bad blocks), Apple's technical support refused to speak to me without having my credit card number first, so that they charge me after "deciding whether my problem was covered under the warranty", even though it was obvious that the problem was.
When this was finally resolved, Apple returned the Ibook with not only a new hard drive, but also a new screen and new optical drive. However, my DVD/CD-RW drive was replaced with a much cheaper DVD-ROM drive, even though Apple claimed to have replaced it with the same component, thus requiring me to send it back again. Is that "best in the business" technical support, where the company doesn't even trust that I know what is covered under warranty, and then replaces components incorrectly?
During the three years I used the IBook, the power cord had to be replaced FOUR times because the cord would break near the tip of the very thin cord. When an ethernet card pulled up slightly on its plugin, the ethernet stopped working completely. Is this considered durable?
I also had a Powerbook from around 1996 or 97 (not sure, but it had a trackball instead of a pad) that broke around 2-3 years after buying it (new) because opening and closing the lid caused the monitor cable to break due to a design flaw. This was apparently a common problem.
That said, I have very old Apple desktops (Apple SE, PowerMac 7100?) that work perfectly. Perhaps Apple desktops are built to a different standard?
While this may be true, my computer, watch, and every other item with a clock shouldn't need to deal with this.
Why is it harder to adjust working hours to fit the season? Not only would this be much easier from an implementation standpoint, but the changes in hours could be greater in more northern areas that could benefit from larger changes.
I would say that the perceived problem with homework in primary/middle/high schools in the USA stems not from the homework itself, but from the absurd amount of time students spend in classes. Homework allows students to work on subject by themselves, and to show that they understand the material, which is something that usually cannot be effectively done in lectures. But when students are compelled to spend around thirty to fourty hours a week in classes/lectures, they are often too exhausted to then go home and do hours of homework. Since homework is usually assigned every day in many classes, teachers are usually too busy to create useful homework assignments.
By contrast, most universities I know of have students take far fewer hours of classes, and professors usually give homework which, as it is not usually given out every day, can be better thought out. In this situation students spend more time studying and doing homework than in class, and are thus, in my opinion, able to understand the material better, since they are spending significant amounts of time working by themselves, which allows them to find out which concepts they do or do not understand. These things are much more difficult to do in class.
Most universities, at least in the USA, do not allow students to take 30 or 40 hours of classes a week without special permission. Most forms of employment do not entail the employee working full time and then going home and working for 2-4 more hours. The only explanation for the difference that I can think of would be that primary/secondary/high schools in the United States are not designed to teach, but instead to provide childcare for parents working full time, and to teach only as a secondary objective.
Gambling losses can be taken out of income up to gambling winnings. This makes sense, since otherwise a person who won a sizable amount of money gambling and then immediately lost it while gambling further would be expected to pay taxes on the "income" from that win.
For more information on this, see http://info.neopets.com/aboutus/pressreleases.phtm l and http://info.neopets.com/aboutus/page06.phtml.
The market research is particularly interesting. 52% of respondents to a survey liked having "Featured Products" on the web site? The written responses to that survey are also rather frightening.
This can be terribly annoying - I have seen students in upper-division physics courses clipping their nails in the middle of a lecture while sitting in the front row. Why they feel it is so important to clip their nails at that particular time is quite beyond me.
Iridium still exists, and the phones still work - I used one a few months ago outside Iquitos in Peru.
However, the ~US$1000(?) for the phone and US$1/min charges are rather prohibitive for using it anywhere that a regular cellular phone will work or a regular phone is available. In my opinion, satellite-based internet is very similar - a good option only when nothing else will work.
Hmmm... So in other words, as I am sixteen, due to your rules on IM and email:
1) You would not allow me to do any open source development?
2) You would not allow me to contact the ISPs of people sending me spam?
3) You would not allow me to email the California Attorney General about spam using my email address in the From: header?
Many posts here would disallow IM, email, and sometimes IRC with strangers. And yet, I think it would be much better for you to encourage your children to use common sense in these matters. While I don't think they should give out personal information in general, there are some cases where it might be acceptable. What if they want to become developers for Debian?
In any case, strict rules such as these assume that children are unable to make decisions on their own.
RMS was, in my opinion, speaking of individual utilities: "Individual programmers can contribute by writing a compatible duplicate of some Unix utility and giving it to me." He was saying, in my opinion, that projects which involve a large number of small utilites could be developed in this way. In other words, he thought it would not be hard to coordinate developers each working on a seperate, standard, important program for GNU.
I, on the other hand, am considering projects like Linux, or most other large open source projects, where multiple developers work on the same source code, and even the same parts of the same source code. This is what I believe RMS was saying would be very difficult to coordinate. Of course, to be certain of this, one would have to ask RMS himself.
I apologise for not making this clear in my original post.
It is interesting to look at how the ideas in the post agree and disagree with the state of GNU today.
For example, Stallman states that a kernel is a top priority, yet we still don't have a really stable, working kernel out of GNU (I don't think Mach or Hurd count).
Also interesting - filename completion is mentioned as a possibility. Now it is difficult for many people, including myself, to live without it. Yet Stallman implies that a Lisp-based window system is more important. What became of this idea?
By far, my favorite quote from this is:
Is this not what GNU started? Many projects with part-time distributed workers? This is a quote from RMS, stating that the development model most open source projects now use would be very difficult.
Look in the Windows Preferences dialog.
In that case, Google will probably put a link to the infringing material somewhere with a notice that it is infringing, similar to what they did with their search engine results.
As for you saying that they want to censure it, I believe you are incorrect. They must censure it to avoid a very expensive lawsuit.
Sorry, but could you please explain your paper more? I cannot understand what you are saying.
If a system is insecure, and I trust that it is secure, isn't that bad for me? Especially for a voting system, this would be, in my opinion, exactly what a malicious user would want: a system that everyone trusts is secure, but in reality, is not.
This question might be very stupid, but I think it is a rather obvious question that a person not knowledgeable in the area, such as myself, would ask.
In any operating system, what is considered a crash is very subjective. With Linux, for example, there are many different issues:
/lib/libc.so.6 or some other important file?
1) Hardware problems: do we count crashes from buggy hardware? And if we don't, what about situations where the kernel could work around the hardware? Do we count those?
2) User stupidity: do we count users doing stupid things, such as deleting
3) Modules: Do we count crashes in third-party modules, like the nvidia drivers? Do we count them only if they bring down the whole system?
The same type of questions could be asked for Windows, and in fact, probably more could be asked. Windows has quite a few vendor-written drivers, and they can crash. Are those counted?
Anyone can write a program that crashes often - this should not reflect upon the quality of the OS. But where do we start counting crashes as being detrimental to the OS?
I haven't seen too many crashes on other people's computers running Windows XP or 2000 (much less than with Windows 98!), but I have seen more than on my Linux machines, at least if you remove crashes from my CVS builds, unstable kernels, etc. I tend not to have any crashes at the kernel, module, or X level at all.
I agree with you here. In fact, I don't think that a capitalist system would be necessary in a society with robotic production. If the robotic production mechanisms could produce enough to satisfy the entire population, which I think would be possible, then the cost of living would go down dramatically. Actually, the essentials of living could be easily provided by the state in this case.
With the elimination of mundane jobs, the education of the populace would rise, as uneducated labour would not be required. Science, art, and other fields which require much thought would flourish, as people who could otherwise not afford an education, or could not afford to work at a badly paying job, would now be free to do what they want to. This system would, of course, probably create many scientists and artists who were not very good, but the point here is that the quantity would be so much higher, it would still help.
Note that this would not necessarily be something like communism and socialism. A robotic society would be more of a utopian society, since a labour force would not be needed.
I am not sure if I make any sense in this post.
Looking at this project, I have decided I will try to help. It would be great if others would decide to as well.
In my opinion, DirectFB does not contain the features necessary to be an X replacement. Fresco does.
Isn't that what Fresco is supposed to become?
Your hard drive must be having problems. As with the other posts, you should look at hdparm.
To give a comparison of speed, my dual Athlon MP 1600+ (1.4 Ghz) with 256 Mb of RAM and two old harddrives from other computers can transfer 438 Mbs in 37.28 seconds using only 19% of my CPU.
I am not a security expert, I know that. In fact, I am not very experienced in security at all.
/proc/[1-9]; do cat $i/cmdline; echo; done
My point in the part you are referring to is that I can't understand why the first exploit is a problem. I don't remember javascript very well, but doesn't the script just open a popup with some stuff in it, and then put some more stuff in it (sorry, the example is down and I do not have the time to figure out how to run it myself)? If that is the case, what is the point? I think that was intended as a feature. Maybe if the script was putting stuff into another window that it didn't open, it would be bad. Furthermore, if the script can put stuff into the window after a user changed that window to another website, it might be bad. But why would a user use a popup to start browsing other sites?
Certainly, it can be abused, but I don't see how it allows remote command execution, or why everyone should be so scared, or how turning off java is going to fix it. Note this has nothing to do with the other exploits.
I know quite well that a virus wouldn't be designed to be visible. I have never seen any movie on cracking. I do not understand what viruses, process listings, and little frost marks have to do with the first exploit.
for i in
Might I ask what a economic model has to do with TIA?
...
These things can be done in any type of government. In fascism, which you seem to be implying, the people wouldn't have a choice. In a democracy, with the right support from the media, it is also possible.
None of the indicators of socialism are present, by the way. On the contrary, we are moving further away from socialism. College costs are rising, health care costs are rising, companies (ie SCO) are very busy suing each other over IP violations, tax cuts are being made
Please don't use 'socialism' as term for any bad government. Socialism is something very specific, and not what you are talking about.
And why in the world are you saying that 'the terrorists' won? What the US is becoming is the opposite of what terrorists would want. How could a group of terrorists want us to invade their home countries?
This message seems very strange.
Take, for example, the commentary:
There are many, many more issues than I have discussed. The minimal release is for giving the blackhats time to play.
Furthermore, the language used is like nothing I have ever seen before.
The poster states that this is a Java problem, but then states that any browser with Javascript is vulnerable to remote command execution. He/she then goes on to give an exploit which has nothing to do with either Java or remote command execution.
The first exploit doesn't seem like much of an exploit either. Instead, it seems to that the script opens a popup, and then at some later time, changes its content. What is wrong with that?
As for the other exploits, they don't seem to have anything to do with the first exploit. They seem to be old Java exploits.
At the end, the poster recommends everyone turn off Java. But at the beginning, the poster said that everything with Javascript enabled is vulnerable, and the first exploit has nothing to do with Java.
Overall, I think it is easy to see that this poster was a troll. The general statements that are made, the lack of any specific information, and the mixing of unrelated exploits seem to make this quite obvious.
What is says, if you read the link about the Windows record in the article, is that Linux with 32 older processors is nearly as good as Windows with 64 newer processors. If Linux can get nearly 600,000 with 32 processors, I would think it could add more than 102,000 if running on 64 processors.
I think casinos gain addicted customers by giving small wins to people when they first start using the machine. It seems most people I know who have used a slot machine won something small when they first start using a slot machine. This leads me to believe that the odds of a small win are increased when a machine is not used for a while. Furthermore, the news of an occasional large win spreads between groups of friends, thus making people think that large wins are more probable.