Let me tell you about my experience with OSH... I go download the plans, run to my local machine shop, machine the parts for my own CNC machine and cobble it together for half the price of the version I can 'buy'.
Then I proceed to use it to make other OSH projects.
The problem with OSH is that the people who give a shit about it being open are just going to build it themselves and not bother buying anything from you.
I've worked at companies with 3 employees and multi million dollar years that still went out of business. $1M/Year revenue isn't impressive unless you still live in the 50s
Heres a better example, I can give you a company with a nearly infinate revenue stream.
Put out a 'bill changer' machine. It takes $20s and gives back $50s.
I promise you as long as I can fill it with $50s, no one one the planet will have higher revenues than me. Of course that doesn't mean the business is viable, but it WILL have kick ass revenue and cash flow.
So I peer with Sprint, and Time Warner. I accept their address space... how exactly do you expect me to communicate with places outside of the US or large portions of the US?
What you're proposing simply isn't the way it works and thank god as it would be nearly impossible to get anywhere that you don't directly peer with otherwise.
On the flip side, how does someone like Cox Cable ever communicate with me since I don't directly peer with them? How about someone on Telia in Europe?
Thanks for your ignorant and completely uninformed idea!
In modern computing... like working with your spreadsheet, thats already a massive speed increase at the same MHZ assuming you have instructions with sane clock cycle counts.
Clock speed doesn't mean shit, in general. I have 20mhz microcontrollers today that STILL can not keep up with an 8088/8086 core.
I've seen one Android phone in the last month... owned by a Google employee.
I can't count the number of iPhones I've seen in the last 2 days.
The fact that I myself have been waitting since January to replaces my 3G with a broken screen for the new one that will be here in a month or so probably has a little to do with it too.
Warping statistics to suit your agenda isn't impressive.
Narrow the scope enough and pick the right time period and you can show just about any product beating out any other product.
Instead of coming here and being a whiney bitch, why don't you see how the others got around it. Flash is out, but there are others that Apple has approved./me looks at Unity...
The fact that I can't even discuss this on the iPhone developer forums without first signing the new developer agreement (and thereby make it illegal for me to continue working on that project) only adds insult to the injury.
You need to reread the developers agreement rather than going by what you read on some website. You're simply wrong on this one.
If you think you're special because you can do that to get around a block then you are confused. If you can use this sort of workaround then your admins are either idiots or don't actually want to stop you, they just want you to go out of your way enough that its obvious you were breaking the rules.
Other than someone working at facebook please show me the line of work that requires you to have a facebook account?
Considering that it didn't exist 10 years ago I highly doubt you'll find any such 'requirement' short of a job made up just so someone could sit there and dick around on facebook.
What? "Culture", better written _core_ utilities, and the open access to the base software rather than the secretive and obscure security models of NT all contribute massively to Linux security by comparison.
Ahhh, another utterly ignorant quote. I've seen most of the NT kernel source and I've never worked for or set foot on an MS campus. Its really not hard to get your hands on as long as you're willing to pay some money and sign an NDA.
Also, while the kernel of NT was based on VMS when David Cutler stole his old work from DEC
No it wasn't. The design was pretty much alike because the same guy designed both, it happens in all sorts of businesses.
These have been a _disaster_ in security terms, and very difficult to address due to the closed nature of the code and difficulty of upgrading other components to preserve compatibility.
The first part is true, the second part is bullshit. Takes about 10 minutes for me to write the script to fix the default permissions on a NT machine. Breaks a lot of shitty apps, but it won't break much of the MS stuff generally.
Some of the most "secure" components of NT, such as Active Directory, are actually due to its integration of far more secure open source components such as Kerberos, and its use of open standards such as DNS, DHCP, and LDAP to replace Microsoft's older versions of "NetBIOS" (which they also did not invent, it came from IBM and IBM discarded it years ago).
Wow. Do you even know what NetBIOS was for? You just compared IP to DNS/DHCP/LDAP.
NetBIOS was the transport layer for other things built on top that handled the actual work. And yes, it was a shitty system, but other than a lack of routablity, it wasn't a whole lot different than IPX
ActiveDirectory on the other hand is the first half way decent directory server implementation on the planet, thanks to it taking a bunch of disparate protocols and turning them into one centrally managed cohesive system. Have you ever managed a large network manually with kerberos? Novell had the directory server thing working pretty well with Netware but the fact that all the tools were written in Java made the entire experience asstastic. When you start managing a 100k users in a kerberos database, you aren't going to be using your standard tools to do it, you'll be using something commercial or home grown on top to make it manageable. There are better backends for some of these services, but the whole package makes up for it unless you're Google which is on a scale big enough to justify writing their own internal tools for pretty much everything.
Guess you've never had to use the 'SYSTEM' account. That is root on an NT machine, it does whatever it wants whenever it wants however it wants (okay, thats an exaggeration). Its not something you can normally get at, it takes a bit of effort... launching a command prompt via the AT command in NT used to work well for that purpose but I suppose they've probably fixed that by now.
Except for the finest granularity in Linux being the group and in NT the user.
Both have user and group permissions, both have ACLs. The only difference is syntax at this point and some obscure differences that give neither side a clear advantage or disadvantage in general, though I'm sure there are some specific exceptions to this but thats the case with everything, and exception to every rule.
Except for the NT ACLs applying to nearly all objects in the OS, and in Linux only things represented in the filesystem.
Except in Unix, pretty much everything is treated as a file, so applying ACLs and permissions to files works perfectly. Its actually somewhat true in NT as well, almost everything is a file if you know where to look, and thats PART of the problem. Thats more of a shim to support Posix I think but none the less, its pretty much the same here too. I doubt you can name anything I can access in NT as a file. The problem is that changing the permissions in one place doesn't always effect the other, which leads to security holes you never saw coming if you don't know the system REALLY well.
You can set an ACL on a COM port object in NT and it doesn't effect the COM port if you access it via the file system, and that my friend results in plenty of exploits.
Except for NT ACLs controlling nearly all ways to manipulate an object and in Linux being limited to read, write and execute.
Simply put, you don't know what you're talking about. Every major unix that anyone bothers to use has had real ACLs for years.
NT's permissions capabilities are a superset of Linux's. If someone understands the latter, then they can implement something *at least* as good on the former with the same amount of effort.
Again, you don't know what you're talking about and I'd be willing to bet money I could own any NT box you setup up without having someone else tell you how. You make WAY too many assumptions for me to think for a second you know what you're talking about on NT.
One of the major problems with NTs security model is its complexity and obscure permissions out of the box. Microsoft has spent at least the last 15 years or so slowly fixing them (and breaking compatibility with poorly written apps along the way) and trying to make it better. Its FAR better than it was a few years back, but if you think NTs security model is good out of the box, or easy, or 'a superset of Linux's' you clearly have no experience with either worth speaking of.
You want to know the best way to get hacked? Tell everyone how bad ass you are. Just ask rootshell.org/com (can't remember, it was ages ago) how well that worked out for them.
Is it really easier to steal a lot of money from one guy who will notice it missing in a matter of minutes, or to steal it from 100k people who won't notice for months?
There are thousands of Windows machines guarding money as well so lets stop pretending that Linux is what people use to 'guard money'
Which is totally profitless to a virus writer. I haven't even seen a virus like that on windows for decades and windows have millions of viruses written for it.
Yes, and Windows virus writers have been stealing plenty of information and running botnets without admin rights as well, you have a very narrow minded view of viruses.
So what if they do? Executing the sudo command is limited to the program you're sudo-ing, not your whole session. A program can't wait in the background and get root when someone types sudo.
Doesn't need to sit around and wait, just needs to setup your login script to cause a custom library to be preloaded and overlay a standard system library, which allows it to hook in to all your terminal IO... and just steal your root password so it can do what it wants. How about the fact that many installations default to allowing you to resudo for a short period of time without reentering your password by default.
Again, you have a very narrow and ignorant view of what can be done.
Also you're side stepping the whole issue that most Linux distributions provide you with all the software you need so the whole running a third party executable is much less likely to happen. The only exceptions I can think of are Google Chrome and Dropbox.
Ahh yes, because all the software in the repos is flawless and not exploitable... you are... oh never mind, whats the point, you're too stuck on 'I'm running Linux, I'm safe!@#!' to be worth my time.
Its not that Linux is 'Just as bad', its not that Linux is better... its that no one gives a shit about infecting Linux machines. Its far too much effort for no practical return on investment. I can sneeze and infect more unpatched Windows machines than there are Linux desktops on the Internet.
Once you have a binary on the machine you can own the user as soon as they run it with the most basic of social engineering. Take over the xlibs so every app you run that loads xlib now forwards all the passwordish looking text off to a file somewhere that can be uploaded later. Modify the path so you can just run your own binary in place of sudo and forward the IO to sudo, again you've stolen the root password.
As long as you are downloading and running someone elses code you are at risk, period, end of story, no exceptions. This applies to EVERY OS, iPhone OS, Linux, Windows *BSD, Solaris, HPUX or whatever you can think of.
Ignorance on slashdot gets modded insightful... thats just classic.
Could you patent lawnmowers? Of course not - patenting the idea of cutting grass can be laughed off by everyone, except for a few lawyers and jurors in East Texas.
Not only are you an idiot, you're ignorant. Once apon a time, lawnmowers of many different designs were patented. Those patents have long since expired which is why everyone and their brother makes one.
You aren't patenting the 'idea of cutting grass' you are patenting the design and/or methods to make a machine that makes it faster than using scissors.
The license for h264 distribution is free until you hit 100k copies, at which point they want 2.5 cents or less per copy you distribute. You need to pay per distributed copy, so yes a DVD and a TV broadcast would count as two (or really the broadcast depends on number of views so in your case, I doubt you'd have to worry about that aspect)
Use it to produce a indie movie, even with "pro" grade equipment and you're not.
By the time they care about your indie movie, you've made enough money that their fee is irrelevant.
Use it to produce a demo reel for your work, and you're not.
You are utterly and completely WRONG, unless you think uploading a video to youtube for the world to see is 'producing a demo reel for your work'. Of course Google already pays the fee and since they are actually the distributer, they are the responsible party.
Only parts of the generation or playback licensing have been paid for- you're on the hook for everything else and they'll enforce if you hit a certain threshold (about $100k of revenue of any kind generated from it...). They'll come mug you for money at that point and it's NOT cheap.
So basically, if you use it to dick around with your own personal stuff, they don't care... but if you start marking a substantial amount of money they expect to get compensated for their work.
As for the price...
Under the terms of the agreement, you have two options: a one-time payment of $2,500 “per AVC transmission encoder” or an annual fee starting at “$2,500 per calendar year per Broadcast Markets of at least 100,000 but no more than 499,999 television households, $5,000 per calendar year per Broadcast Market which includes at least 500,000 but no more than 999,999 television households, and $10,000 per calendar year per Broadcast Market which includes at 1,000,000 or more television households.”
So basically they want 2.5 centsfor each copy of a work you distribute using h264 AFTER 100k copies (Not $100k dollars by the way, so again, you don't know what you're talking about)... Just how fucking cheap do you want it to be? 2.5 fucking cents dude... get the fuck over it. At 1 million copies they want 1 cent.
Funny how people here will get all fucking uppity if someone doesn't like GPL or doesn't abide by GPL because they aren't contributing back... and those same people will rant and rave that they have to give back to someone else in the form of money.
Next time do a brief google search before you start talking about shit you don't know about.
You do realize that encryption is nothing but security through obscurity... right? As is every form of digital signature. While both are based on mathmatical concepts, the security of the system results from the fact that they 'key' is obscure enough that only the valid user(s) know it and no one else can guess it.
By your definition, there is no secure authentication system because every authentication system requires some obscure piece of knowledge (or physical device) that is unique to the owner. Authentication in every form in use today is security through obscurity.
So you're saying that AES, RSA, DSA, PGP, IDEA, and every other encryption, hashing and keying algorithm on the planet isn't secure?
Sigh, stop spouting something you heard someone else somewhere say and acting like you know what you're talking about.
I've never seen a quantum computing device smaller than the size of a small room, so I'm not really sure how fair it is to compare it to a PC.
Really the PC doesn't even use full atoms for calculations, it uses electrons and electron holes in the atoms, and its at least 2000 times smaller than any quantum device I've seen.
You don't really get to say its one molecule when its a device made up of a fuckton of molecules and you are comparing too it a PC which uses subatomic elements to actually do the work.
You have a fast calculator... the size of a room... which I can put 2000 slower and easier to make calculators in and end up faster.
Sure, eventually, they'll make it smaller and smaller, but your comparison is like saying using an f16 to deliver mail is faster than using a postal truck to deliver milk. Just because you make two statements that share a verb doesn't mean you've made a comparison thats in any way meaningful.
I don't buy into the following theories 100% (explanation to follow): Global Warming The big bang theory The earths origin
I do believe in evolution, because I and many others have witnessed it happening on multiple occasions in controlled environments.
No one saw The Big Bang. Its a theory, built on theories about things we've never witnessed or see and are only mathematical concepts, which are in turn build on things we've never witnessed or seen and are only mathematical concepts that we've not been able to disprove. Scientists have determined these things happened based on models we created, not based on reality. Models that are CONSTANTLY being refined to deal with the fact that they are full of unexplainable deviations from the real universe. Its nothing more than a fantasy really, made by through a whole bunch of guesses (I won't even call them educated at this point since the 'education' is likely wrong since we have no direct evidence).
No one saw the Earth form, at least no one thats willing to come show us the time lapse movie of it. The current running theory (pardon me if it changed again this week) is that our solar system formed when particles of matter were compressed by a shockwave from a nearby supernova. We have based this on models we created, based on observations of things we've seen and then extrapolated (more like made up via trial and error) the other bits until our model aligns with the current solar system. The problem is that this theory is pretty much destroyed by the fact that we think the Ort cloud exists, which fucks up the whole model. The reality is, our sun and solar system could be the second round of this solar system. It is entirely possible (admittedly very unlikely) that our star has went nova and recondensed into its current state. You can say 'it doesn't work that way' and I'll just laugh at you since you've got 0 proof and only unproven theories based on unproven theories based on unproven theories (continue this for about 80 iterations). 'How the solar system formed' or 'how the earth formed' is just a guess and nothing more until you show me the picture of it happening.
I've seen more proof of Jesus and God than I've seen of the Big Bang theory or the formation of our planet. It amazes me that so many people detest the idea of a god, but will buy into some of the bullshit that 'scientists' spit out. I can understand not believing in a god, I get that, it just amazes me that most people who don't believe in god will give their reasons why then completely ignore the fact that those same reasons apply to most scientific theories.
These two are examples of scientists being arrogant fucks and the general public just believing what they say as fact rather than just a guess (again, I wouldn't call it an educated one considering our understanding of astrophysics is absolutely shitty)
Global warming is a political scare tactic. I do believe its happening. I have no doubt actually. I just don't buy that we have any real influence on it since its happened before, plenty of times, on this nice pretty cycle... which guess what... we're right in the middle of the hotter part of the cycle... According to science (real science, not this morons who can't keep their data straight and have what I'd argue is the worst fucking record keeping practices on the planet) this 'heat' is part of a perfectly normal cycle that we have no real part in, yet another group, who became much more vocal once this issue got some political mention, thinks the end is near and demands we put effort into furthering their political agenda.
When you have data that contradicts your statements, and your models are models you made up to suit the outcome that you wanted to get, then it becomes very hard for me to give a shit about what you're saying.
I have models showing the Windows never crashes and that Linux crashes every 1.4 seconds after the kernel starts regardless of
So let me get this straight, the argument here is that the iPad isnt effecting netbook sales because the projected number of netbooks to be sold in 2011 hasn't been changed in the last month...
Seriously, someone fucking fire timothy, he hasn't posted anything that wasn't a blatent slashvertisment or flat out obviously wrong in at least 2 years.
Why don't we wait until someone gets some real sales numbers and there has been more than a month before we start talking about how its effecting the market.
I don't think the iPad is going to effect much either, but I don't try to back that up using sales PROJECTIONS made by people who aren't actually doing the selling. The WSJ must be pretty damn smart to predict the future with 0 input to base it on.
Well, I'm not sure if you're correct to laugh at this or not. But all televisions are approximations of something analogue that was captured and in that capturing process, some information was lost. To illustrate, entertain a scenario where I have N standard definition television sets that are displaying footage from standard definition video cameras. I daisy chain them together (each camera directed at the last screen) to record something. As I move from the 0th screen to the Nth screen, I will begin to see degradation as more information is lost and randomness comes into play. The same can be done with HD but since HD captures more information, it can safely be assumed that the sampling and resampling will retain more of the original image.
Yes, if you uncompress and recompress an MP3 multiple times it will turn into shit eventually too, but what you're doing is in no way like what happens in the real world.
Now days the analog signal rapidly turns to digital, more and more often at the first camera. Then in most cases its moved around in a lossless format until it gets to the content distribution networks... i.e. Your cable company, who then compresses the ever living fuck out of it in order to fit more channels on their shitty 'digital' system.
There is very little resampling of data until your local cable company or Dish/DirectTV get their gubby hands on it, at which point it rapidly turns to shit because they over sale so badly cramming 15 different home shopping networks down your throat since they get paid to carry them rather than paying to carry them.
Your example goes analog -> digital -> analog for each N, and thats not what happens in the real world of broadcasting.
I don't know what the fourth color is supposed to buy, I'm unfamiliar with this technology. But the side by side comparison through an SD or HD TV might still be able to demonstrate that the fourth color adds some meaningful information to the image
You can't 'add meaningful information' to the image, you can only remove it from the original. When you start 'adding' to it you no longer have the original image. Its much like all the shitty HDR and BLOOM effects in games. It doesn't make the game look more realistic, but many people find it more 'pleasing'. If thats what you want out of your television than just watch animated/CGI stuff since they can do whatever they want to it without regards to being authentic.
Well, I know that there is a huge photography following that is totally enamored with HDR photography [wikipedia.org] and to many people it makes the images come to life
Yes, many people think photoshoping makes an image 'better' too, but it doesn't and those people are for the most part, idiots following a marketing fad like lemmings.
I'd buy the forth color being useful if the signal was coming in as CYMK, but its not, and they aren't switching to CYMK internally, its RGBY which is some completely different color model they've come up with. So they have to extrapolate or more realistically, simply make up some value for the yellow pixel that is almost certainly wrong by any definition of the word other than a purely subjective test by someone with no clue how to properly analyze an image.
If you buy into this one, you should also buy into thinking 120hz TVs are better and that people can tell the difference between a 10ms ping and 20ms ping in an online game, and that you can tell the difference between a 320kbps mp3 and a 192 (or 128 for most people) mp3 in anything other than a test specifically designed to illustrate the difference.
In short, Marketing bullshit is all it is. Sharp didn't come up with something that millions of other people who are far more concerned with proper color output than someone watching television didn't come up with.
Slashdot Mirror
You and I have entirely different meanings for the word 'stable'
Let me tell you about my experience with OSH ... I go download the plans, run to my local machine shop, machine the parts for my own CNC machine and cobble it together for half the price of the version I can 'buy'.
Then I proceed to use it to make other OSH projects.
The problem with OSH is that the people who give a shit about it being open are just going to build it themselves and not bother buying anything from you.
Now if people would get the point of your statement, most of slashdot would have a heart attack and die.
I've worked at companies with 3 employees and multi million dollar years that still went out of business. $1M/Year revenue isn't impressive unless you still live in the 50s
Heres a better example, I can give you a company with a nearly infinate revenue stream.
Put out a 'bill changer' machine. It takes $20s and gives back $50s.
I promise you as long as I can fill it with $50s, no one one the planet will have higher revenues than me. Of course that doesn't mean the business is viable, but it WILL have kick ass revenue and cash flow.
So I peer with Sprint, and Time Warner. I accept their address space ... how exactly do you expect me to communicate with places outside of the US or large portions of the US?
What you're proposing simply isn't the way it works and thank god as it would be nearly impossible to get anywhere that you don't directly peer with otherwise.
On the flip side, how does someone like Cox Cable ever communicate with me since I don't directly peer with them? How about someone on Telia in Europe?
Thanks for your ignorant and completely uninformed idea!
Z80 = 8 bit
8088/8086 = 16 bit
In modern computing ... like working with your spreadsheet, thats already a massive speed increase at the same MHZ assuming you have instructions with sane clock cycle counts.
Clock speed doesn't mean shit, in general. I have 20mhz microcontrollers today that STILL can not keep up with an 8088/8086 core.
I simply call bullshit.
I've seen one Android phone in the last month ... owned by a Google employee.
I can't count the number of iPhones I've seen in the last 2 days.
The fact that I myself have been waitting since January to replaces my 3G with a broken screen for the new one that will be here in a month or so probably has a little to do with it too.
Warping statistics to suit your agenda isn't impressive.
Narrow the scope enough and pick the right time period and you can show just about any product beating out any other product.
Instead of coming here and being a whiney bitch, why don't you see how the others got around it. Flash is out, but there are others that Apple has approved. /me looks at Unity ...
You need to reread the developers agreement rather than going by what you read on some website. You're simply wrong on this one.
If you think you're special because you can do that to get around a block then you are confused. If you can use this sort of workaround then your admins are either idiots or don't actually want to stop you, they just want you to go out of your way enough that its obvious you were breaking the rules.
Either way, you aren't special.
Citation needed.
Other than someone working at facebook please show me the line of work that requires you to have a facebook account?
Considering that it didn't exist 10 years ago I highly doubt you'll find any such 'requirement' short of a job made up just so someone could sit there and dick around on facebook.
Other than the typical slashdot self-entitlement 'research' you're going to have to give some sort of citation to backup your claim.
I would have to say that the exact opposite has been shown.
Really... massless particles can create pressure now?
You should probably stick to ranting about OSS rather than physics.
Ahhh, another utterly ignorant quote. I've seen most of the NT kernel source and I've never worked for or set foot on an MS campus. Its really not hard to get your hands on as long as you're willing to pay some money and sign an NDA.
No it wasn't. The design was pretty much alike because the same guy designed both, it happens in all sorts of businesses.
The first part is true, the second part is bullshit. Takes about 10 minutes for me to write the script to fix the default permissions on a NT machine. Breaks a lot of shitty apps, but it won't break much of the MS stuff generally.
Wow. Do you even know what NetBIOS was for? You just compared IP to DNS/DHCP/LDAP.
NetBIOS was the transport layer for other things built on top that handled the actual work. And yes, it was a shitty system, but other than a lack of routablity, it wasn't a whole lot different than IPX
ActiveDirectory on the other hand is the first half way decent directory server implementation on the planet, thanks to it taking a bunch of disparate protocols and turning them into one centrally managed cohesive system. Have you ever managed a large network manually with kerberos? Novell had the directory server thing working pretty well with Netware but the fact that all the tools were written in Java made the entire experience asstastic. When you start managing a 100k users in a kerberos database, you aren't going to be using your standard tools to do it, you'll be using something commercial or home grown on top to make it manageable. There are better backends for some of these services, but the whole package makes up for it unless you're Google which is on a scale big enough to justify writing their own internal tools for pretty much everything.
Guess you've never had to use the 'SYSTEM' account. That is root on an NT machine, it does whatever it wants whenever it wants however it wants (okay, thats an exaggeration). Its not something you can normally get at, it takes a bit of effort ... launching a command prompt via the AT command in NT used to work well for that purpose but I suppose they've probably fixed that by now.
Both have user and group permissions, both have ACLs. The only difference is syntax at this point and some obscure differences that give neither side a clear advantage or disadvantage in general, though I'm sure there are some specific exceptions to this but thats the case with everything, and exception to every rule.
Except in Unix, pretty much everything is treated as a file, so applying ACLs and permissions to files works perfectly. Its actually somewhat true in NT as well, almost everything is a file if you know where to look, and thats PART of the problem. Thats more of a shim to support Posix I think but none the less, its pretty much the same here too. I doubt you can name anything I can access in NT as a file. The problem is that changing the permissions in one place doesn't always effect the other, which leads to security holes you never saw coming if you don't know the system REALLY well.
You can set an ACL on a COM port object in NT and it doesn't effect the COM port if you access it via the file system, and that my friend results in plenty of exploits.
Simply put, you don't know what you're talking about. Every major unix that anyone bothers to use has had real ACLs for years.
Again, you don't know what you're talking about and I'd be willing to bet money I could own any NT box you setup up without having someone else tell you how. You make WAY too many assumptions for me to think for a second you know what you're talking about on NT.
One of the major problems with NTs security model is its complexity and obscure permissions out of the box. Microsoft has spent at least the last 15 years or so slowly fixing them (and breaking compatibility with poorly written apps along the way) and trying to make it better. Its FAR better than it was a few years back, but if you think NTs security model is good out of the box, or easy, or 'a superset of Linux's' you clearly have no experience with either worth speaking of.
You want to know the best way to get hacked? Tell everyone how bad ass you are. Just ask rootshell.org/com (can't remember, it was ages ago) how well that worked out for them.
How short sighted.
Is it really easier to steal a lot of money from one guy who will notice it missing in a matter of minutes, or to steal it from 100k people who won't notice for months?
There are thousands of Windows machines guarding money as well so lets stop pretending that Linux is what people use to 'guard money'
Yes, and Windows virus writers have been stealing plenty of information and running botnets without admin rights as well, you have a very narrow minded view of viruses.
Doesn't need to sit around and wait, just needs to setup your login script to cause a custom library to be preloaded and overlay a standard system library, which allows it to hook in to all your terminal IO ... and just steal your root password so it can do what it wants. How about the fact that many installations default to allowing you to resudo for a short period of time without reentering your password by default.
Again, you have a very narrow and ignorant view of what can be done.
Ahh yes, because all the software in the repos is flawless and not exploitable ... you are ... oh never mind, whats the point, you're too stuck on 'I'm running Linux, I'm safe!@#!' to be worth my time.
Its not that Linux is 'Just as bad', its not that Linux is better ... its that no one gives a shit about infecting Linux machines. Its far too much effort for no practical return on investment. I can sneeze and infect more unpatched Windows machines than there are Linux desktops on the Internet.
Once you have a binary on the machine you can own the user as soon as they run it with the most basic of social engineering. Take over the xlibs so every app you run that loads xlib now forwards all the passwordish looking text off to a file somewhere that can be uploaded later. Modify the path so you can just run your own binary in place of sudo and forward the IO to sudo, again you've stolen the root password.
As long as you are downloading and running someone elses code you are at risk, period, end of story, no exceptions. This applies to EVERY OS, iPhone OS, Linux, Windows *BSD, Solaris, HPUX or whatever you can think of.
Ignorance on slashdot gets modded insightful ... thats just classic.
Not only are you an idiot, you're ignorant. Once apon a time, lawnmowers of many different designs were patented. Those patents have long since expired which is why everyone and their brother makes one.
You aren't patenting the 'idea of cutting grass' you are patenting the design and/or methods to make a machine that makes it faster than using scissors.
Yes, going from one extreme to the other and not bothering to even LOOK at the middle ground is always a good idea.
Wrong. Nice FUD there buddy.
The license for h264 distribution is free until you hit 100k copies, at which point they want 2.5 cents or less per copy you distribute. You need to pay per distributed copy, so yes a DVD and a TV broadcast would count as two (or really the broadcast depends on number of views so in your case, I doubt you'd have to worry about that aspect)
Please to be getting a clue about the subject.
By the time they care about your indie movie, you've made enough money that their fee is irrelevant.
You are utterly and completely WRONG, unless you think uploading a video to youtube for the world to see is 'producing a demo reel for your work'. Of course Google already pays the fee and since they are actually the distributer, they are the responsible party.
So basically, if you use it to dick around with your own personal stuff, they don't care ... but if you start marking a substantial amount of money they expect to get compensated for their work.
As for the price ...
So basically they want 2.5 centsfor each copy of a work you distribute using h264 AFTER 100k copies (Not $100k dollars by the way, so again, you don't know what you're talking about) ... Just how fucking cheap do you want it to be? 2.5 fucking cents dude ... get the fuck over it. At 1 million copies they want 1 cent.
Funny how people here will get all fucking uppity if someone doesn't like GPL or doesn't abide by GPL because they aren't contributing back ... and those same people will rant and rave that they have to give back to someone else in the form of money.
Next time do a brief google search before you start talking about shit you don't know about.
Sigh ...
You do realize that encryption is nothing but security through obscurity ... right? As is every form of digital signature. While both are based on mathmatical concepts, the security of the system results from the fact that they 'key' is obscure enough that only the valid user(s) know it and no one else can guess it.
By your definition, there is no secure authentication system because every authentication system requires some obscure piece of knowledge (or physical device) that is unique to the owner. Authentication in every form in use today is security through obscurity.
So you're saying that AES, RSA, DSA, PGP, IDEA, and every other encryption, hashing and keying algorithm on the planet isn't secure?
Sigh, stop spouting something you heard someone else somewhere say and acting like you know what you're talking about.
Obscurity IS security in the digital world.
I've never seen a quantum computing device smaller than the size of a small room, so I'm not really sure how fair it is to compare it to a PC.
Really the PC doesn't even use full atoms for calculations, it uses electrons and electron holes in the atoms, and its at least 2000 times smaller than any quantum device I've seen.
You don't really get to say its one molecule when its a device made up of a fuckton of molecules and you are comparing too it a PC which uses subatomic elements to actually do the work.
You have a fast calculator ... the size of a room ... which I can put 2000 slower and easier to make calculators in and end up faster.
Sure, eventually, they'll make it smaller and smaller, but your comparison is like saying using an f16 to deliver mail is faster than using a postal truck to deliver milk. Just because you make two statements that share a verb doesn't mean you've made a comparison thats in any way meaningful.
I don't buy into the following theories 100% (explanation to follow):
Global Warming
The big bang theory
The earths origin
I do believe in evolution, because I and many others have witnessed it happening on multiple occasions in controlled environments.
No one saw The Big Bang. Its a theory, built on theories about things we've never witnessed or see and are only mathematical concepts, which are in turn build on things we've never witnessed or seen and are only mathematical concepts that we've not been able to disprove. Scientists have determined these things happened based on models we created, not based on reality. Models that are CONSTANTLY being refined to deal with the fact that they are full of unexplainable deviations from the real universe. Its nothing more than a fantasy really, made by through a whole bunch of guesses (I won't even call them educated at this point since the 'education' is likely wrong since we have no direct evidence).
No one saw the Earth form, at least no one thats willing to come show us the time lapse movie of it. The current running theory (pardon me if it changed again this week) is that our solar system formed when particles of matter were compressed by a shockwave from a nearby supernova. We have based this on models we created, based on observations of things we've seen and then extrapolated (more like made up via trial and error) the other bits until our model aligns with the current solar system. The problem is that this theory is pretty much destroyed by the fact that we think the Ort cloud exists, which fucks up the whole model. The reality is, our sun and solar system could be the second round of this solar system. It is entirely possible (admittedly very unlikely) that our star has went nova and recondensed into its current state. You can say 'it doesn't work that way' and I'll just laugh at you since you've got 0 proof and only unproven theories based on unproven theories based on unproven theories (continue this for about 80 iterations). 'How the solar system formed' or 'how the earth formed' is just a guess and nothing more until you show me the picture of it happening.
I've seen more proof of Jesus and God than I've seen of the Big Bang theory or the formation of our planet. It amazes me that so many people detest the idea of a god, but will buy into some of the bullshit that 'scientists' spit out. I can understand not believing in a god, I get that, it just amazes me that most people who don't believe in god will give their reasons why then completely ignore the fact that those same reasons apply to most scientific theories.
These two are examples of scientists being arrogant fucks and the general public just believing what they say as fact rather than just a guess (again, I wouldn't call it an educated one considering our understanding of astrophysics is absolutely shitty)
Global warming is a political scare tactic. I do believe its happening. I have no doubt actually. I just don't buy that we have any real influence on it since its happened before, plenty of times, on this nice pretty cycle ... which guess what ... we're right in the middle of the hotter part of the cycle ... According to science (real science, not this morons who can't keep their data straight and have what I'd argue is the worst fucking record keeping practices on the planet) this 'heat' is part of a perfectly normal cycle that we have no real part in, yet another group, who became much more vocal once this issue got some political mention, thinks the end is near and demands we put effort into furthering their political agenda.
When you have data that contradicts your statements, and your models are models you made up to suit the outcome that you wanted to get, then it becomes very hard for me to give a shit about what you're saying.
I have models showing the Windows never crashes and that Linux crashes every 1.4 seconds after the kernel starts regardless of
So let me get this straight, the argument here is that the iPad isnt effecting netbook sales because the projected number of netbooks to be sold in 2011 hasn't been changed in the last month ...
Seriously, someone fucking fire timothy, he hasn't posted anything that wasn't a blatent slashvertisment or flat out obviously wrong in at least 2 years.
Why don't we wait until someone gets some real sales numbers and there has been more than a month before we start talking about how its effecting the market.
I don't think the iPad is going to effect much either, but I don't try to back that up using sales PROJECTIONS made by people who aren't actually doing the selling. The WSJ must be pretty damn smart to predict the future with 0 input to base it on.
Yes, if you uncompress and recompress an MP3 multiple times it will turn into shit eventually too, but what you're doing is in no way like what happens in the real world.
Now days the analog signal rapidly turns to digital, more and more often at the first camera. Then in most cases its moved around in a lossless format until it gets to the content distribution networks ... i.e. Your cable company, who then compresses the ever living fuck out of it in order to fit more channels on their shitty 'digital' system.
There is very little resampling of data until your local cable company or Dish/DirectTV get their gubby hands on it, at which point it rapidly turns to shit because they over sale so badly cramming 15 different home shopping networks down your throat since they get paid to carry them rather than paying to carry them.
Your example goes analog -> digital -> analog for each N, and thats not what happens in the real world of broadcasting.
You can't 'add meaningful information' to the image, you can only remove it from the original. When you start 'adding' to it you no longer have the original image. Its much like all the shitty HDR and BLOOM effects in games. It doesn't make the game look more realistic, but many people find it more 'pleasing'. If thats what you want out of your television than just watch animated/CGI stuff since they can do whatever they want to it without regards to being authentic.
Yes, many people think photoshoping makes an image 'better' too, but it doesn't and those people are for the most part, idiots following a marketing fad like lemmings.
I'd buy the forth color being useful if the signal was coming in as CYMK, but its not, and they aren't switching to CYMK internally, its RGBY which is some completely different color model they've come up with. So they have to extrapolate or more realistically, simply make up some value for the yellow pixel that is almost certainly wrong by any definition of the word other than a purely subjective test by someone with no clue how to properly analyze an image.
If you buy into this one, you should also buy into thinking 120hz TVs are better and that people can tell the difference between a 10ms ping and 20ms ping in an online game, and that you can tell the difference between a 320kbps mp3 and a 192 (or 128 for most people) mp3 in anything other than a test specifically designed to illustrate the difference.
In short, Marketing bullshit is all it is. Sharp didn't come up with something that millions of other people who are far more concerned with proper color output than someone watching television didn't come up with.