Windows will certainly get just as bloated and suck down all that speed and power. That's how it has always been, and always will be.
I'm waiting for the day that Microsoft Windows GUI will be fully raytrace/radiosity/photon map rendered.
I won't be happy unless I have a glass refracting mouse cursor made up of at least 64,000 triangles, updating at no less than 60fps. It had better be casting both a shadow and also focused light complete with chromatic aberation.
I couldn't tell it was on til I put my ear ON the case.
Curious. Was it being placed under stress for long enough to fire up some fans?
I imagine in the showroom, people will be very impressed with the noise, but when they get it home and push it will some games, 3D rendering or 2D filters, it might suddenly be a lot louder than the user bargained for.
BTW, I'm not trying to put shit on the G5, I'd love one. I'd also love to know how it sounds when the fans are going hard.
When I first heard about this I thought these would be custom boards that would contain a minimum of components, SBC style that plug into a back plane and net boot, with tens of nodes per rack, etc.
Never in my wildest imagination did I think these would be the full Apple G5 desktop's, cases and all.
Those fans in the G5 switch on when the system gets hot. Imagine the noise when this cluster is pegged at 100% CPU occupancy!
It should send itself out, then erase all the FAT tables on a hard drive.
I couldn't agree more. These non stop, short term solutions to fundamentally flawed software design, are far too expensive in the long term. And not just because MS software costs big bucks.
If MS users *really* start hurting due to MS poor security, then maybe a real new World order will come about in software.
I'm still eagerly waiting for the big bad payloads. I hope it's awful!
Not sure why your comment got moderated up so high, since it might confuse people.
I think he is refering to the kill -HUP #####
Which will send the currently running ssh daemon the hangup signal, instructing it to re-read its configuration.
I think it is you who will be doing the confusing.
Anyone who reboots to accomplish this upgrade shouldn't be a sysadmin.
What an absolutely absurd statement. I bet you've just recently figured that you can upgrade a daemon without rebooting, so anyone who upgrades one and reboots cannot be as good as you?
Grow up.
BTW, if you kindly give me your IP address, I will gladly (from one friendly BSD user to another) provide you with a security audit free of charge. I'm sure with your leet skillz, I will be able to give you a glowing report. (psstt, hey, I'll give you a tip first, kill and restart your sshd properly before you give me that IP! If you can't figure out how to do that, just give your machine a reboot).
The stability of Mac OS X begins with Darwin, an Open Source, UNIX-based foundation. Darwin is a complete BSD UNIX implementation, derived from the original 4.4BSD-Lite2 Open Source distribution. Darwin uses a monolithic kernel based on FreeBSD 4.4 and the OSF/mk Mach 3, combining BSD's POSIX support with the fine-grained multithreading and real-time performance of Mach.
It doesn't seem to be very loosely related. In the past it seemed from Apple's site that the FreeBSD component of OSX was mostly in user space with a little in the kernel. But this page seems to suggest FreeBSD plays a much bigger role.
using a remote to erase the programs on your neighbor's VCR does not = "Breaking and Entering"
Unfortunately, these sorts of analogies will be used in the court room in an attempt to provide jurors with some scenario that's meaningful to them.
How stupid or ignorant they and the judge are, versus the effectiveness of each legal council will be what matters ultimately. Worse still, it could set a terrible precedent.
Bad analogies will be used, jurors and judges will eat them up then they won't know of their complete stupidity until after the trial, when they may again peruse the mass media (and read about what a bunch of tools they were to believe the lawyer hype).
I don't feel too much pity for the victim of a robbery if they left their door open. I don't see why this is too much different. I doubt he really had to do much "hacking" at all to do what he did. Is it breaking and entering if you just wander into a building with an open door?
If he had to do any hacking, then the door was not left open. It's more like he picked the lock (perhaps an easy lock to pick) of a closed door. If that is the case, he's circumventing a protection device. This could get really ugly for him.
YOU CANNOT BREAK THE LAW, EVEN FOR GOOD REASONS! IF YOU DO, EXPECT TO GO TO JAIL!
I would bust his skull open with my tire iron, then call the cops.
Okay, so busting this guys skull open is breaking the law for:
a) A good reason. b) A bad reason. c) No reason at all. d) None of the above.
BTW, the thief will sue you from here to eternity. Maybe if you make it out of jail alive some day, you might be able to find a job to pay off that lifetime of debt to him.
; )
You can't just go around breaking open skulls because someone pisses you off. YOU CANNOT BREAK THE LAW, EVEN FOR GOOD REASONS! IF YOU DO, EXPECT TO GO TO JAIL!
1 remote exploit in the system as shipped, in the past SEVEN YEARS.
Plus, the next remote exploit probably won't be capable of much, with all the extra security measures they've made lately with propolice, W^X, privilege separation, gradual elimination of setuid and setgid binaries, now that all kernels are propolice enabled, the modules will be too in 3.4.
Oh, then there is the sheer beauty of pf!
I actually thought for a while there, that within this 6 month dev cycle, we'd see no errata for OpenBSD. Maybe 3.4?
the point of a worm is not to cripple the machine as long as it can be used to infect other computers, right?
That's why payloads are set to start on specific days. Wait till lots of machines are infected before "bad things" happen. The dilema the authors face, is when the code should go malicious. What the malicious writters would want, is to infect as many machines as possible before the problem can get fixed.
Set a date months from now and it will get noticed, a patch and fix will be released and few will be harmed. On the other hand, develop code which propagates really fast and triggers malicious code before it can be fixed... ; )
the point depends on the authors of worms and viruses. : )
I got called by someone because they were infected with this worm.
Windows XP Home, default install, automatic updates enabled, been on the net over a month, never has the auto update applied any patches at all.
I didn't install that system, but it makes me wonder what the hell is wrong with MS. Why they enable RPC by default and why "Windows Update" sometimes doesn't.
Here I was thinking that MS was doing pretty well (comparatively speaking against their past) in security and stability.
No wonder I'm running OpenBSD where I have a choice.
I'm waiting for the day when something as effective as these worms, bring a payload that writes pseudo random data to all your hard drives and even firmware (motherboard, MODEM, hdd, etc) of popular devices.
The reality - how many of us have 2-3 extra old PCs sitting in closets because they're slow, but they never broke down? I have 4 PCs and use one of them, but the other 3 still work.
Amen brother. I've been picking up old PC's off the street. Incredibly none of the solid state bits were broken (mobo's, cards, etc). Everything from i386SX20's to PII's.
Moving parts often tend to be dead though. Really old HDD's and CDROM drives.
Next time think before you say someone doesn't know what they are talking about and make yourself a fool.
You can only make a few words with a single 7 bit value. Words like "a" and "I". You can't just say, "use it over and over" because that arguement doesn't hold any water.
It's kinda like saying, "sure, I've only got a 10GB hard drive, but I can hold Terrabytes if I keep deleting stuff!"
It's all about how much data some finite storage space can hold at one given time.
7 bit binary resolving to 1,500 different things?
on
Incas Used Binary?
·
· Score: -1, Troll
Did you think for one nanosecond that I was going for something other than funny?
Do you beleive that it was shot down with an old hunting rifle? (Propaganda is what I call it, otherwise it is EXTREME luck.)
The AH64 is supposed to be able to take 7.62mm gun fire just to the main rotor.
I looked at the 2nd URL and found nothing about an Apache being 'downed'. However, there was something about a MH-47 Chinook being downed. I guess it must be a pile of crap, what being shot down during war and all.
BTW, are you trying to say that the Apache is a pile of crap because some Apaches have crashed? There have been more than one thousand Apaches built, so you would expect some to have crashed, no? And here's a revelation for you, people pilot them! To make matters worse, THE U.S. Army PILOTS MOST OF THEM!
The fact is, incredible (lucky) things happen and humans (building and piloting) make mistakes. That doesn't make the Apache a pile of crap.
Your post was funny (like you were joking around with me) until you said my post should be considered funny. I'm confused now, am I doing the same thing here? (I expect you'll probably reply with 'Yes') ; )
I was actually thinking "someones going to pull me up on the 'D' bit" as I posted it.
'Longbow' was the name for the AH64's that had the RADAR, but then they decided to call all the Apache's 'Longbow' from memory. Maybe the 'D' designation still actually means something.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but us OS X people will probably get that stuff before you do. :)
I'll get it too, since OSX is on my main machine.
; )
Windows will certainly get just as bloated and suck down all that speed and power. That's how it has always been, and always will be.
I'm waiting for the day that Microsoft Windows GUI will be fully raytrace/radiosity/photon map rendered.
I won't be happy unless I have a glass refracting mouse cursor made up of at least 64,000 triangles, updating at no less than 60fps. It had better be casting both a shadow and also focused light complete with chromatic aberation.
That'll show those OSX zealots!
I couldn't tell it was on til I put my ear ON the case.
Curious. Was it being placed under stress for long enough to fire up some fans?
I imagine in the showroom, people will be very impressed with the noise, but when they get it home and push it will some games, 3D rendering or 2D filters, it might suddenly be a lot louder than the user bargained for.
BTW, I'm not trying to put shit on the G5, I'd love one. I'd also love to know how it sounds when the fans are going hard.
Nobody cares about the noise. It's in a machine room, not office space.
Yeah, I know. I've worked in many a computer room, including huge rooms full of DEC big iron.
I wonder if they'll drown out the air con.
When I first heard about this I thought these would be custom boards that would contain a minimum of components, SBC style that plug into a back plane and net boot, with tens of nodes per rack, etc.
Never in my wildest imagination did I think these would be the full Apple G5 desktop's, cases and all.
Those fans in the G5 switch on when the system gets hot. Imagine the noise when this cluster is pegged at 100% CPU occupancy!
Which will send the currently running ssh daemon the hangup signal, instructing it to re-read its configuration.
Since processes decide themselves what they should do with a hangup signal, in this case I am wrong...
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=sshd
Your attitude still needs some adjustment though.
It should send itself out, then erase all the FAT tables on a hard drive.
I couldn't agree more. These non stop, short term solutions to fundamentally flawed software design, are far too expensive in the long term. And not just because MS software costs big bucks.
If MS users *really* start hurting due to MS poor security, then maybe a real new World order will come about in software.
I'm still eagerly waiting for the big bad payloads. I hope it's awful!
You've got to be cruel to be kind! ; )
Not sure why your comment got moderated up so high, since it might confuse people.
I think he is refering to the kill -HUP #####
Which will send the currently running ssh daemon the hangup signal, instructing it to re-read its configuration.
I think it is you who will be doing the confusing.
Anyone who reboots to accomplish this upgrade shouldn't be a sysadmin.
What an absolutely absurd statement. I bet you've just recently figured that you can upgrade a daemon without rebooting, so anyone who upgrades one and reboots cannot be as good as you?
Grow up.
BTW, if you kindly give me your IP address, I will gladly (from one friendly BSD user to another) provide you with a security audit free of charge. I'm sure with your leet skillz, I will be able to give you a glowing report. (psstt, hey, I'll give you a tip first, kill and restart your sshd properly before you give me that IP! If you can't figure out how to do that, just give your machine a reboot).
Wanker.
Darwin (and therefore MacOS X) is based on the Mach kernel.
t ml
Yes.
It probably has FreeBSD code, and they make efforts to make it FreeBSD compatable in some respects, but it's only loosely related.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/technologies/darwin.h
The stability of Mac OS X begins with Darwin, an Open Source, UNIX-based foundation. Darwin is a complete BSD UNIX implementation, derived from the original 4.4BSD-Lite2 Open Source distribution. Darwin uses a monolithic kernel based on FreeBSD 4.4 and the OSF/mk Mach 3, combining BSD's POSIX support with the fine-grained multithreading and real-time performance of Mach.
It doesn't seem to be very loosely related. In the past it seemed from Apple's site that the FreeBSD component of OSX was mostly in user space with a little in the kernel. But this page seems to suggest FreeBSD plays a much bigger role.
using a remote to erase the programs on your neighbor's VCR does not = "Breaking and Entering"
Unfortunately, these sorts of analogies will be used in the court room in an attempt to provide jurors with some scenario that's meaningful to them.
How stupid or ignorant they and the judge are, versus the effectiveness of each legal council will be what matters ultimately. Worse still, it could set a terrible precedent.
Bad analogies will be used, jurors and judges will eat them up then they won't know of their complete stupidity until after the trial, when they may again peruse the mass media (and read about what a bunch of tools they were to believe the lawyer hype).
I don't feel too much pity for the victim of a robbery if they left their door open. I don't see why this is too much different. I doubt he really had to do much "hacking" at all to do what he did. Is it breaking and entering if you just wander into a building with an open door?
If he had to do any hacking, then the door was not left open. It's more like he picked the lock (perhaps an easy lock to pick) of a closed door. If that is the case, he's circumventing a protection device. This could get really ugly for him.
YOU CANNOT BREAK THE LAW, EVEN FOR GOOD REASONS! IF YOU DO, EXPECT TO GO TO JAIL!
I would bust his skull open with my tire iron, then call the cops.
Okay, so busting this guys skull open is breaking the law for:
a) A good reason.
b) A bad reason.
c) No reason at all.
d) None of the above.
BTW, the thief will sue you from here to eternity. Maybe if you make it out of jail alive some day, you might be able to find a job to pay off that lifetime of debt to him.
; )
You can't just go around breaking open skulls because someone pisses you off. YOU CANNOT BREAK THE LAW, EVEN FOR GOOD REASONS! IF YOU DO, EXPECT TO GO TO JAIL!
If only they woul let me put a 220V outlet in the garage.
220V?! That's nothin! My server only takes 415V 3 phase.
If I put RedHat9 next to Windows Server 2003 I have significantly more updates to apply to my Linux box.
e d_inc_kitchen_sink).
Linux != Red Hat
Red Hat != Linux
Red Hat == Linux(bastardized)+GNU(bastardized)+OSS(bastardiz
Did you install default, BTW? Try installing minimal and then adding what you want. Better still, do the same, but with Debian.
Or even better yet... OpenBSD...
Features added and minor bugs squashed in the last 127 days of OpenBSD development.
Worse, potential security and stability bugs found and squashed in that same time.
1 remote exploit in the system as shipped, in the past SEVEN YEARS.
Plus, the next remote exploit probably won't be capable of much, with all the extra security measures they've made lately with propolice, W^X, privilege separation, gradual elimination of setuid and setgid binaries, now that all kernels are propolice enabled, the modules will be too in 3.4.
Oh, then there is the sheer beauty of pf!
I actually thought for a while there, that within this 6 month dev cycle, we'd see no errata for OpenBSD. Maybe 3.4?
Why not go and pre-order 3.4?
This always frustrates me. Everyone thinks these viruses are terrible, but they're truly tame compared to what _could_ be done.
Pure evil. ; )
the point of a worm is not to cripple the machine as long as it can be used to infect other computers, right?
That's why payloads are set to start on specific days. Wait till lots of machines are infected before "bad things" happen. The dilema the authors face, is when the code should go malicious. What the malicious writters would want, is to infect as many machines as possible before the problem can get fixed.
Set a date months from now and it will get noticed, a patch and fix will be released and few will be harmed. On the other hand, develop code which propagates really fast and triggers malicious code before it can be fixed... ; )
the point depends on the authors of worms and viruses. : )
I'm aware that there has been malicious code written in the past (in the form of viruses, worms and trojans) which erases hard drives and firmware.
But none have infected so many machines in such a short time. That was my point.
I got called by someone because they were infected with this worm.
Windows XP Home, default install, automatic updates enabled, been on the net over a month, never has the auto update applied any patches at all.
I didn't install that system, but it makes me wonder what the hell is wrong with MS. Why they enable RPC by default and why "Windows Update" sometimes doesn't.
Here I was thinking that MS was doing pretty well (comparatively speaking against their past) in security and stability.
No wonder I'm running OpenBSD where I have a choice.
I'm waiting for the day when something as effective as these worms, bring a payload that writes pseudo random data to all your hard drives and even firmware (motherboard, MODEM, hdd, etc) of popular devices.
I can make a rope with the encyclopedia britanica encoded on it given a long enough rope. So how does this not hold water again?
If you are talking about the number of discrete values a certain number of binary bits can resolve, then you should stick to that number of bits!
If you start claiming that we can just "add some bits to resolve more" then your argument moves beyond the question and is not valid.
It's like being asked how much 7 binary bits can resolve and then replying that 500 million of them can hold an encyclopedia.
You are changing the question within your answer.
The reality - how many of us have 2-3 extra old PCs sitting in closets because they're slow, but they never broke down? I have 4 PCs and use one of them, but the other 3 still work.
Amen brother. I've been picking up old PC's off the street. Incredibly none of the solid state bits were broken (mobo's, cards, etc). Everything from i386SX20's to PII's.
Moving parts often tend to be dead though. Really old HDD's and CDROM drives.
Next time think before you say someone doesn't know what they are talking about and make yourself a fool.
You can only make a few words with a single 7 bit value. Words like "a" and "I". You can't just say, "use it over and over" because that arguement doesn't hold any water.
It's kinda like saying, "sure, I've only got a 10GB hard drive, but I can hold Terrabytes if I keep deleting stuff!"
It's all about how much data some finite storage space can hold at one given time.
The prof can't count.
you should be moded funny :-)
Did you think for one nanosecond that I was going for something other than funny?
Do you beleive that it was shot down with an old hunting rifle? (Propaganda is what I call it, otherwise it is EXTREME luck.)
The AH64 is supposed to be able to take 7.62mm gun fire just to the main rotor.
I looked at the 2nd URL and found nothing about an Apache being 'downed'. However, there was something about a MH-47 Chinook being downed. I guess it must be a pile of crap, what being shot down during war and all.
BTW, are you trying to say that the Apache is a pile of crap because some Apaches have crashed? There have been more than one thousand Apaches built, so you would expect some to have crashed, no? And here's a revelation for you, people pilot them! To make matters worse, THE U.S. Army PILOTS MOST OF THEM!
The fact is, incredible (lucky) things happen and humans (building and piloting) make mistakes. That doesn't make the Apache a pile of crap.
Your post was funny (like you were joking around with me) until you said my post should be considered funny. I'm confused now, am I doing the same thing here? (I expect you'll probably reply with 'Yes') ; )
I was actually thinking "someones going to pull me up on the 'D' bit" as I posted it.
'Longbow' was the name for the AH64's that had the RADAR, but then they decided to call all the Apache's 'Longbow' from memory. Maybe the 'D' designation still actually means something.