The link to the AP is still unencrypted then. I don't think Barnes and Nobel sets up a tunnel between you and the AP, so your Facebook chats and msn chats are all wide open for people to see.
The only way around this is to have TWO APs setup. One to GET the access code, or WPA/WEP key, while the other to actually connect to for wireless - but then everyone is using the same encryption key anyways.
My Dell bluetooth keyboard/mouse allows me to. The only thing is that I need to connect them to the dongle they came with (hardware level), as apposed to in the OS. If I don't use the dongle and connect at the OS level, then I can't.
Using the dongle also allows me to boot into multiple OS's without needing to reconnect them every single time.
Yes, but you really need to understand how NAND flash works, because filling your drive up with zeros in dd is very bad for performance. If you write 'zeros' to the entire drive, you're going to get terrible performance afterwards when writing ANTYHING to the drive. It's the same thing that plagues SSDs after using them for a short while. Read up on why we need TRIM.
This is because flash memory's default state is a one. To change a single cell to a 'one', an entire block of cells need to be changed to a 'one' first (which takes a long time in the eyes of flash memory speeds) and explains why an SSD's performance suffers greatly after a long period of use. A single cell can be changed to a zero without this long wait, that clearly shows it's better to write 'ones' from the beginning. This is a currently limitation of MLC memories.
This is just a very, very simple explanation of how it works. I suggest reading one of the in depth articles off anandtech or xbitlabs (I can't remember which one had it).
One of the tricks you can try is erasing the flash device entirely, but you need to realize the "erased state" for flash is when it is filled with all 1's. People regularly make the mistake of filling flash based storage devices with all zeros (as is typically done with real disks) without every realizing what they are doing.
It's still not a 5 minute procedure to get a free signed certificate. You need to confirm the information on the domain, and it also requires a legitimate email address to receive email. This is for a BASIC level certificate anyways. The ssl bar in FireFox3 only shows a blue domain name (the bar would be green and have the full company name: "Paypal Inc. (US)" if it was the highest level, but that costs money).
For my site, the domain in blue is good enough for me. Not receiving any Invalid Certificate popups when I switch between computers is great. All of these certificate signers are still technically regulated, so if one's signing key gets out into the wild, the browsers will simply remove it.
I don't see how disabling the "browser puking" on self-signed certs is better than this either. There is somewhat of a paper trail via this method, as apposed to anybody being able to sign their own certs. Allowing ALL self signed certs would be much, much worse.
If there are only a handful of allowed signing registries, it's still better than not. Assuming they don't give out the private signing keys. It's not easy to get into the Authoritative Certificate servers in the big browsers...
There are sites that allow you to get free SIGNED SSL certificates. I got a StartCom Certificate a number of months back, and people no longer get browser errors on my site. Sure, it's a little bit of a hassle, but in the long term it's worth it.
Everyone that received the patch running XP SP3, yes. However, where I work, they download the patches in the morning and deploy them later on in the evening. So yes, there is a window of attack there, but it saved us from having to go through every SP3 machine and copying the deleted OS file. Basically, everyone else that gets the patches instantly are 'our' guinea pigs.
By the way, another key advantage of E-Ink is energy consumption: it doesn't use battery when static, and uses quite a small amount of energy to redraw the page. Due to this feature, eBooks can run for weeks or even months on a single charge.
As much as I'd like to back this up, it's not entirely true. The "screen" doesn't use any energy in a static state and requires very little power to redraw. However, the device itself stays in a "standby" state and does use (very little) power 24/7.
I have a Sony PRS-505 and absolutely love it. It does drop to half power if I turn it off for 2-3 weeks (there's a REAL way to turn it off, but it takes too long to boot), but that is still much better than the HOURS battery life that the iPad, laptops, and netbooks get. It's simply comparing apples to oranges.
It wouldn't run even on my recently purchased Opteron system (with a $400 dual socket F Supermicro board). My somewhat-new 2344HE Opteron CPU was "unsupported" apparently. This chip apparently has the TLB bug, but the chances of running into it are slim to none.
I have since gone back to an OpenSolaris system with Virtualbox for my VMs. ESXi is still too picky in my books.
At least the 5GHz channels are totally isolated from one another so the chances that EACH person in your neighbourhood is saturating EVERY channel simultaneously is pretty slim. The same cannot be said about the wireless 2.4GHz channels 1-12.
Although Rogers and Fido appear as two separate companies, they are technically the same. Rogers purchased Fido years ago, so they are now the same company. Perhaps the rep you spoke with at Fido was new or just really didn't care to the same extent as the Rogers rep.
Once everyone stops assuming.doc(x) is the de-facto "Standard" for sending typed documents, THEN other options are possible. So until then, you DO have a "gun pointed at your head" if you're in an industry that requires seamless.doc(x) support.
Yes, OpenOffice and other variants are able to open the format, HOWEVER, there is no guarantee that 100% of the time it will open. This is why we need an OPEN FORMAT, so using OpenOffice, Abiword, or MS Office is a moot point.
After-all, lock-in is one of the complaints against Windows 7/Microsoft.
IIRC, Chrome will support both Ogg/Vorbis. Apple is only supporting h264 in Safari, while FFox will only support Ogg/Vorbis. When h264 gets added to a browser, royalties need to be paid (which is why Mozilla won't go that route). Google is happy to pay and Apple doesn't want Ogg/Vorbis because it doesn't support hardware decoding (same reason why iPhone doesn't support flash).
Although I agree another OS would be good to compare with, it wouldn't be using the same Bootcamp driver that Apple provides for Windows. And Apple hasn't released an OSS driver. This would simply show that it's a software issue and not that it's a Windows code issue or a Windows driver issue...
But I do agree with the rest of your comment.. Once people adapt to something, it's impossible to bring them away from it. It's an addiction worse than a heroin junkie - we're all computer and electricity junkies.
And, I also read somewhere that it takes a hell of a lot more brainpower driving a car than it does to even land a moon (shuttle?). With driving, you need to predict traffic around you, people walking near and on the road, traffic lights, signs, and even any issues with the road conditions..
When you're flying, usually you have auto-pilot or you're looking at a few controls to ensure your altitude is good and that you're parallel to the ground. note: IMNAP (I am not a pilot, so I'm sure there are plenty of more things to monitor).
No, I believe they call themselves things like "Redhat" or "Gentoo", etc.
Okay. So why is the name of Gentoo's website "Gentoo Linux -- Gentoo Linux News" then? Because if it was simply called Gentoo, people wouldn't know what the heck it is. A lot of people I come across still don't know what Ubuntu is, but as soon as you throw the term Linux at them, they at least have some idea of what you're talking about.
You just said it: They have different philosophies. I'm answering the question of why, and what's come out of those approaches historically.
The philosophy of Linux is to make a kernel and modules, nothing more. OpenBSD's is to make the kernel, modules, userland and even side projects to benefit everyone (OpenSSH, OpenBGPD, OpenNTPD, OpenCVS), and to be as secure as possible. They have regular code audits to fix up bugs and make it more secure. Sure, this makes it less bleeding edge than say Linux and FreeBSD, but it pays off. Remember, there isn't a one-size-fits-all OS, just like how a Swiss Army Knife doesn't do everything very well.
But, let's not get too off course here... You are still comparing a company that simply makes an engine, versus a company that makes the engine, seats, body and the rest of the car. The number of forks that happen in the Linux community is very high. Maybe the kernel forks aren't, but if you start including the userland (which you should be, to do a proper comparison) the number skyrockets. How many distributions have forked from Debian alone? I know of (but there are plenty more): Ubuntu, Damn Small Linux, Xandros, Knoppix, BackTrack, Linspire, and LinEx. Hell, there are forks of forks of forks as well.
But as another poster mentioned, the past isn't important. Look at things in the present and how well they are going for the OpenBSD team.
They have different philosophies. I really don't know where you're going with that post because isn't very accurate. You can't compare the "Linux Kernel" with OpenBSD's whole. A kernel is pretty much useless without a "userland." OpenBSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD are all operating systems. Linux, sorry to say, is not.
If you want to compare BSD versions to Linux versions, then you'd have to compare with (in no particular order): -Gentoo -Debian - Ubuntu - Xubuntu - Xandros - (how many more are there?) -Slackware -RedHat -Ubuntu.... because I can't even keep track
So, you have a million confusion projects going on based on the code all, called "Linux". How many versions of "OpenBSD" are there out there? Umm, ONE. Sure, someone could go and make their own userland and such, but it cannot be called OpenBSD. So, before you go on a rant about how many times BSD has been forked, please get your facts straight.
Slashdot Mirror
The link to the AP is still unencrypted then. I don't think Barnes and Nobel sets up a tunnel between you and the AP, so your Facebook chats and msn chats are all wide open for people to see.
The only way around this is to have TWO APs setup. One to GET the access code, or WPA/WEP key, while the other to actually connect to for wireless - but then everyone is using the same encryption key anyways.
My Dell bluetooth keyboard/mouse allows me to. The only thing is that I need to connect them to the dongle they came with (hardware level), as apposed to in the OS. If I don't use the dongle and connect at the OS level, then I can't.
Using the dongle also allows me to boot into multiple OS's without needing to reconnect them every single time.
He already has stated it was from a Google IP address.
Yes, but you really need to understand how NAND flash works, because filling your drive up with zeros in dd is very bad for performance. If you write 'zeros' to the entire drive, you're going to get terrible performance afterwards when writing ANTYHING to the drive. It's the same thing that plagues SSDs after using them for a short while. Read up on why we need TRIM.
This is because flash memory's default state is a one. To change a single cell to a 'one', an entire block of cells need to be changed to a 'one' first (which takes a long time in the eyes of flash memory speeds) and explains why an SSD's performance suffers greatly after a long period of use. A single cell can be changed to a zero without this long wait, that clearly shows it's better to write 'ones' from the beginning. This is a currently limitation of MLC memories.
This is just a very, very simple explanation of how it works. I suggest reading one of the in depth articles off anandtech or xbitlabs (I can't remember which one had it).
I'm trigger happy today..
Read: This Article and scroll down to where it shows the "tr '\000' '\377'" dd command
Because a cell's default state isn't a ZERO, but rather a ONE.
You must run this in order to TRULY "reset" the flash drive:
tr '\000' '\377' http://www.undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20100404103735
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Flash doesn't store its data in "zeros", but rather in "ones"
Read this: Undeadly Article
Go down to the part that reads:
One of the tricks you can try is erasing the flash device entirely, but you need to realize the "erased state" for flash is when it is filled with all 1's. People regularly make the mistake of filling flash based storage devices with all zeros (as is typically done with real disks) without every realizing what they are doing.
It's still not a 5 minute procedure to get a free signed certificate. You need to confirm the information on the domain, and it also requires a legitimate email address to receive email. This is for a BASIC level certificate anyways. The ssl bar in FireFox3 only shows a blue domain name (the bar would be green and have the full company name: "Paypal Inc. (US)" if it was the highest level, but that costs money).
For my site, the domain in blue is good enough for me. Not receiving any Invalid Certificate popups when I switch between computers is great. All of these certificate signers are still technically regulated, so if one's signing key gets out into the wild, the browsers will simply remove it.
I don't see how disabling the "browser puking" on self-signed certs is better than this either. There is somewhat of a paper trail via this method, as apposed to anybody being able to sign their own certs. Allowing ALL self signed certs would be much, much worse.
How so?
If there are only a handful of allowed signing registries, it's still better than not. Assuming they don't give out the private signing keys. It's not easy to get into the Authoritative Certificate servers in the big browsers...
There are sites that allow you to get free SIGNED SSL certificates. I got a StartCom Certificate a number of months back, and people no longer get browser errors on my site. Sure, it's a little bit of a hassle, but in the long term it's worth it.
Everyone that received the patch running XP SP3, yes. However, where I work, they download the patches in the morning and deploy them later on in the evening. So yes, there is a window of attack there, but it saved us from having to go through every SP3 machine and copying the deleted OS file. Basically, everyone else that gets the patches instantly are 'our' guinea pigs.
Find the portion that was "plagiarized" and have them redo it. Or find another - similar way to do it?
But put in those shoes, I wouldn't want to rewrite it. So, the answer is still up in the air. Perhaps it depends on how much is identical.
Except in Mexico.. Where the Cartel have bigger guns than the Police/Government.
By the way, another key advantage of E-Ink is energy consumption: it doesn't use battery when static, and uses quite a small amount of energy to redraw the page. Due to this feature, eBooks can run for weeks or even months on a single charge.
As much as I'd like to back this up, it's not entirely true. The "screen" doesn't use any energy in a static state and requires very little power to redraw. However, the device itself stays in a "standby" state and does use (very little) power 24/7.
I have a Sony PRS-505 and absolutely love it. It does drop to half power if I turn it off for 2-3 weeks (there's a REAL way to turn it off, but it takes too long to boot), but that is still much better than the HOURS battery life that the iPad, laptops, and netbooks get. It's simply comparing apples to oranges.
Not too difficult
It wouldn't run even on my recently purchased Opteron system (with a $400 dual socket F Supermicro board). My somewhat-new 2344HE Opteron CPU was "unsupported" apparently. This chip apparently has the TLB bug, but the chances of running into it are slim to none.
I have since gone back to an OpenSolaris system with Virtualbox for my VMs. ESXi is still too picky in my books.
At least the 5GHz channels are totally isolated from one another so the chances that EACH person in your neighbourhood is saturating EVERY channel simultaneously is pretty slim. The same cannot be said about the wireless 2.4GHz channels 1-12.
Although Rogers and Fido appear as two separate companies, they are technically the same. Rogers purchased Fido years ago, so they are now the same company. Perhaps the rep you spoke with at Fido was new or just really didn't care to the same extent as the Rogers rep.
Once everyone stops assuming .doc(x) is the de-facto "Standard" for sending typed documents, THEN other options are possible. So until then, you DO have a "gun pointed at your head" if you're in an industry that requires seamless .doc(x) support.
Yes, OpenOffice and other variants are able to open the format, HOWEVER, there is no guarantee that 100% of the time it will open. This is why we need an OPEN FORMAT, so using OpenOffice, Abiword, or MS Office is a moot point.
After-all, lock-in is one of the complaints against Windows 7/Microsoft.
IIRC, Chrome will support both Ogg/Vorbis. Apple is only supporting h264 in Safari, while FFox will only support Ogg/Vorbis. When h264 gets added to a browser, royalties need to be paid (which is why Mozilla won't go that route). Google is happy to pay and Apple doesn't want Ogg/Vorbis because it doesn't support hardware decoding (same reason why iPhone doesn't support flash).
Although I agree another OS would be good to compare with, it wouldn't be using the same Bootcamp driver that Apple provides for Windows. And Apple hasn't released an OSS driver. This would simply show that it's a software issue and not that it's a Windows code issue or a Windows driver issue...
There ain't no such thing as clean coal
I guess you've never heard of gasification? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasification
But I do agree with the rest of your comment.. Once people adapt to something, it's impossible to bring them away from it. It's an addiction worse than a heroin junkie - we're all computer and electricity junkies.
Agreed..
And, I also read somewhere that it takes a hell of a lot more brainpower driving a car than it does to even land a moon (shuttle?). With driving, you need to predict traffic around you, people walking near and on the road, traffic lights, signs, and even any issues with the road conditions..
When you're flying, usually you have auto-pilot or you're looking at a few controls to ensure your altitude is good and that you're parallel to the ground. note: IMNAP (I am not a pilot, so I'm sure there are plenty of more things to monitor).
No, I believe they call themselves things like "Redhat" or "Gentoo", etc.
Okay. So why is the name of Gentoo's website "Gentoo Linux -- Gentoo Linux News" then? Because if it was simply called Gentoo, people wouldn't know what the heck it is. A lot of people I come across still don't know what Ubuntu is, but as soon as you throw the term Linux at them, they at least have some idea of what you're talking about.
You just said it: They have different philosophies. I'm answering the question of why, and what's come out of those approaches historically.
The philosophy of Linux is to make a kernel and modules, nothing more. OpenBSD's is to make the kernel, modules, userland and even side projects to benefit everyone (OpenSSH, OpenBGPD, OpenNTPD, OpenCVS), and to be as secure as possible. They have regular code audits to fix up bugs and make it more secure. Sure, this makes it less bleeding edge than say Linux and FreeBSD, but it pays off. Remember, there isn't a one-size-fits-all OS, just like how a Swiss Army Knife doesn't do everything very well.
But, let's not get too off course here... You are still comparing a company that simply makes an engine, versus a company that makes the engine, seats, body and the rest of the car. The number of forks that happen in the Linux community is very high. Maybe the kernel forks aren't, but if you start including the userland (which you should be, to do a proper comparison) the number skyrockets. How many distributions have forked from Debian alone? I know of (but there are plenty more): Ubuntu, Damn Small Linux, Xandros, Knoppix, BackTrack, Linspire, and LinEx. Hell, there are forks of forks of forks as well.
But as another poster mentioned, the past isn't important. Look at things in the present and how well they are going for the OpenBSD team.
They have different philosophies. I really don't know where you're going with that post because isn't very accurate. You can't compare the "Linux Kernel" with OpenBSD's whole. A kernel is pretty much useless without a "userland." OpenBSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD are all operating systems. Linux, sorry to say, is not.
If you want to compare BSD versions to Linux versions, then you'd have to compare with (in no particular order): .... because I can't even keep track
-Gentoo
-Debian - Ubuntu - Xubuntu - Xandros - (how many more are there?)
-Slackware
-RedHat
-Ubuntu
So, you have a million confusion projects going on based on the code all, called "Linux". How many versions of "OpenBSD" are there out there? Umm, ONE. Sure, someone could go and make their own userland and such, but it cannot be called OpenBSD. So, before you go on a rant about how many times BSD has been forked, please get your facts straight.
Thanks,