I totally avoid buying sandisk products since my experiences with sandisk cruzer thumb drives at work. It doesn't tell you anywere on the packaging that it forces you into a totally horrible marketing idea....
When you plug in a Sandisk Cruzer it appears as two drives. The first drive is a small read-only drive (presumably a rom) that is configured to auto-install unnecessary windows drivers and other miscellaneous bloatware every time you plug the usb drive in. You can't disable or hide this drive at all. The best you can do is turn off autorun in windows (which was always a crappy idea anyway). The drivers/utilities are totally redundant in that if you never install them you can still access the user drive as normal.
Its particularly annoying of Sandisk to make a product that: a) just assumes you must be using windows. b) Under widnows, the lower drive letter is the ROM, not the user space. c) Its downright rude that it just auto-installs drivers with no user confirmation or control.
>>> "Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow."... The open source community uses this argument to assert that open source software is more secure than proprietary software.
Shawn Herrnan starts off by making the above premise, then proves his own point by ripping his own premise apart...furthermore his own premise is guilty of massive overgeneralisation and incompleteness.
He's clearly trying to get readers to subconsciously associate that this is the ONLY reason why Linux is more secure than Windows, which is baloney. Linux starts out with a much better security model. From the get-go, UNIX (which Linux is based quite directly on) was intended to be a multi-user system. Windows has been a continual kludge of disjointed evolutionary decisions rooted ultimately in single-user DOS.
For real proof, lets just consider directly the actual relative security records of the software itself. Consider the number of Windows security holes compared to Linux. Or just about Opensurce projects generally, lets just start with IE and Firefox.
Clearly his own initial premise is so faulty so and is the only basis of his whole article so his whole article is invalid. Its actual purpose seems clear.... it is (not even very well done) misdirection to promote FUD in those who are not technically savvy, with the side benefit of allowing him to be seen kissing Microsoft butt in public.
Well that just tells you what the black box does and what it is meant to do. It does not tell you anything about how it does it, which is what the OTA needs to know.
I'm glad I emigrated from the UK. I despair how the government have totally undermined any notion of personal rights and freedom and the police are allowed to use military weapons and surveillance against innocent citizens.
The whole "ability to reduce crime" with these things is a cover up. There have been plenty of studies which all (re)discover that the most effective activity to lower crime is simple community policing, meaning cops on foot patrol and on bicycles, explicitly not sat in cars and hiding behind cameras.
Its clear the real reason the police want these is just to extract even more money through bullying motorists. Road users are a soft target with lots of money. They're a lot easier, safer and more profitable to go after than actual criminals.
I really hope everyone in the UK gets busy making EMP devices, and turns hunting these things into a sport like pheasant shooting. Except I already know that nobody will do anything because the British spirit has already been beaten up so badly that the people are divided and conquered, and just totally submissive to anything now.
They're probably just trying to cause Jammie to incur as much legal fees, stress and inconvenience as possible. I really hope the new judge comes down hard on them for subverting the legal system and just being jerks.
In my opinion it would be a better for everyone if public-funded research bodies like NASA( and the equivalent in every other country) made their non defense-related information freely available to all anyway.
Its a hard job to set safety standards for radiation as there really is not any 100% safe level other than absolute 0.
The standards are probably irrationally low for all practical purposes, but regardless of that, there is no dispute that the standards have already been significantly exceeded.
If they were doing their job properly, they simply need to decide to either immediately fix the leak or shut the site down. They can review the safety standards later if they want. To do that properly would require a detailed study, in other words, more time than they have now. I don't even think the NRC has the legal authority to arbitrarily decide to ignore the current safety standards.
The thing that is most scary is the NRC at the highest level apparently believes that weasel words presumably to cover political expediency and cost saving are more appropriate than peoples safety, and a commitment to quickly and properly fix the actual leak.
He says that this hurts retailers of hardcover books, well good. Hardcover books have been subverted into a restrictive market scam to allow them to charge double or more for a book in first the year of publication. I'll be glad to see an alternative to that.
Unfortunately I'm obliged to use it every day at work. I still don't think its innovative. In fact I think its crap.
>> Do you even know what Shadow Copy *is*? Yes
>> Fair enough; though I've never seen a Linux distro with that option enabled.
Debian, Ubuntu and Fedora certainly do. Next time you're running Linux just hit alt-f1 through alt-f7. If you want to do it even easier just open a few terminal windows and do an su to different users inside each.
>> All that aside, fine: tell me what you consider an innovative product? Give me an example.
Ok. The web, Iphone's multitouch, Kindle's e-ink display, toyota prius (first mas-market hybrid) etc etc. Basically something that is the first to come up with a totally new product concept that changes the world, and that people actually want. Sorry but ribbons and a folding mouse just don't cut it, they're really just minor modifications of existing tech. And if thats all a company the size and resources of Microsoft can come up with, then it just underscores my point that they dont innovate.
>> don't you think that the likes of Microsoft and Apple have an awful lot of very fine engineers on their books?
I do... but I also think that all of Microsofts products are pretty crappy, especially given the large amount of good engineers they have. All of their products are horrible to use. Windows has been around for years and is their main cash cow but it still has many really nsaty behaviours. Its like Microsoft just do the bare minimum all the time, while Apple have shown its possible to really produce slick products that work well. Clearly there's something about Microsoft's internal culture that just doesn't capitalise on the people they hire.
Everything you've credited as Microsoft innovations amount to little more than tiny marketing tweaks. I mean the ribbon interface is just a different menubar layout. Hardly earthshattering is it?
Shadow copy has been almost standard practice in the server world way before Microsoft ever did it. Its basically how RAID came about.
>> Fast user switching was in Windows before OS X or Linux had it.
Umm nope. Linux has always supported virtual terminals. You can have multple concurrent sessions under different users going on and switch between them without logging in and out at all. Actually Microsoft's Fast user switching appears to be just a kludge intended to address problems caused by limited thinking/poor performance/poor design in other areas. Hardly innovation is it?
>> I'd say putting a HD inside a game console was a pretty innovative idea, I beleive it was acutally Sony who did it first with the PS2 but reagardless, innovative? really? Given the Xbox is already just a locked-down PC in a gaming case? adding a hard drive is innovative? wow.
Arc Mouse? I'm not ever going to believe that just slightly changing the shape of a mouse is true innovation. I mean it still has the same buttons, wheel etc.
I'll give you the surface table as being innovative. Well I would if it was an actual product people could really buy.
Slashdot Mirror
is that you will need to use a Verizon-supplied (or authorised) client.
The client will either not use encryption or will have some sort of back door.
Yep I had several Amigas.
>> It was an awesome idea back then.
Sorry, but even back then I thought it was a crappy idea because of its potential for abuse.
>> You are a moron:
At least I'm not a rude asshole...
oh wait...
I must be missing something, but why do you need to run a 32 bit version of firefox in the first place?
Uhh.. to take full advantage of your hardware rather than shoot it in the foot?
I'm currently looking to upgrade my phone.
Thanks for helping me to shorten my list by giving me a solid reason to not consider iPhone.
Sorry you're wrong, at least on my Cruzer. The U3 part appears as a separate CD drive.
I totally avoid buying sandisk products since my experiences with sandisk cruzer thumb drives at work.
It doesn't tell you anywere on the packaging that it forces you into a totally horrible marketing idea....
When you plug in a Sandisk Cruzer it appears as two drives. The first drive is a small read-only drive (presumably a rom) that is configured to auto-install unnecessary windows drivers and other miscellaneous bloatware every time you plug the usb drive in. You can't disable or hide this drive at all. The best you can do is turn off autorun in windows (which was always a crappy idea anyway). The drivers/utilities are totally redundant in that if you never install them you can still access the user drive as normal.
Its particularly annoying of Sandisk to make a product that:
a) just assumes you must be using windows.
b) Under widnows, the lower drive letter is the ROM, not the user space.
c) Its downright rude that it just auto-installs drivers with no user confirmation or control.
>>> "Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow."... The open source community uses this argument to assert that open source software is more secure than proprietary software.
Shawn Herrnan starts off by making the above premise, then proves his own point by ripping his own premise apart...furthermore his own premise is guilty of massive overgeneralisation and incompleteness.
He's clearly trying to get readers to subconsciously associate that this is the ONLY reason why Linux is more secure than Windows, which is baloney. Linux starts out with a much better security model. From the get-go, UNIX (which Linux is based quite directly on) was intended to be a multi-user system. Windows has been a continual kludge of disjointed evolutionary decisions rooted ultimately in single-user DOS.
For real proof, lets just consider directly the actual relative security records of the software itself. Consider the number of Windows security holes compared to Linux. Or just about Opensurce projects generally, lets just start with IE and Firefox.
Clearly his own initial premise is so faulty so and is the only basis of his whole article so his whole article is invalid. Its actual purpose seems clear.... it is (not even very well done) misdirection to promote FUD in those who are not technically savvy, with the side benefit of allowing him to be seen kissing Microsoft butt in public.
Rethink it? I _always_ thought musical sampling was plagiarism.
Well that just tells you what the black box does and what it is meant to do. It does not tell you anything about how it does it, which is what the OTA needs to know.
I'm glad I emigrated from the UK. I despair how the government have totally undermined any notion of personal rights and freedom and the police are allowed to use military weapons and surveillance against innocent citizens.
The whole "ability to reduce crime" with these things is a cover up. There have been plenty of studies which all (re)discover that the most effective activity to lower crime is simple community policing, meaning cops on foot patrol and on bicycles, explicitly not sat in cars and hiding behind cameras.
Its clear the real reason the police want these is just to extract even more money through bullying motorists. Road users are a soft target with lots of money. They're a lot easier, safer and more profitable to go after than actual criminals.
I really hope everyone in the UK gets busy making EMP devices, and turns hunting these things into a sport like pheasant shooting. Except I already know that nobody will do anything because the British spirit has already been beaten up so badly that the people are divided and conquered, and just totally submissive to anything now.
They're probably just trying to cause Jammie to incur as much legal fees, stress and inconvenience as possible.
I really hope the new judge comes down hard on them for subverting the legal system and just being jerks.
oh happy memories.
I'm sure you're finding the massive 640x480 resolution just as awesome as I do.
The more they tighten their grip, the more the world will slip through their fingers.
In my opinion it would be a better for everyone if public-funded research bodies like NASA( and the equivalent in every other country) made their non defense-related information freely available to all anyway.
>> Are you some kind of loon? So where in the universe are you going to find 0 radiation?
Uhh did I SAY they need to make it be 0? NO!!! You Dickwad. learn to read and check yourself before insulting others.
Its a hard job to set safety standards for radiation as there really is not any 100% safe level other than absolute 0.
The standards are probably irrationally low for all practical purposes, but regardless of that, there is no dispute that the standards have already been significantly exceeded.
If they were doing their job properly, they simply need to decide to either immediately fix the leak or shut the site down. They can review the safety standards later if they want. To do that properly would require a detailed study, in other words, more time than they have now. I don't even think the NRC has the legal authority to arbitrarily decide to ignore the current safety standards.
The thing that is most scary is the NRC at the highest level apparently believes that weasel words presumably to cover political expediency and cost saving are more appropriate than peoples safety, and a commitment to quickly and properly fix the actual leak.
He says that this hurts retailers of hardcover books, well good.
Hardcover books have been subverted into a restrictive market scam to allow them to charge double or more for a book in first the year of publication. I'll be glad to see an alternative to that.
I can't say, I've never seen one. I dont even know where to go to see one.
I'm not so sure its hard to always win in business when you have a virtual monopoly and more wealth than a small country.
>> Too bad about that tech, though.
totally agree.
>> No, it's not. Try actually using it.
Unfortunately I'm obliged to use it every day at work. I still don't think its innovative. In fact I think its crap.
>> Do you even know what Shadow Copy *is*?
Yes
>> Fair enough; though I've never seen a Linux distro with that option enabled.
Debian, Ubuntu and Fedora certainly do. Next time you're running Linux just hit alt-f1 through alt-f7. If you want to do it even easier just open a few terminal windows and do an su to different users inside each.
>> All that aside, fine: tell me what you consider an innovative product? Give me an example.
Ok. The web, Iphone's multitouch, Kindle's e-ink display, toyota prius (first mas-market hybrid) etc etc. Basically something that is the first to come up with a totally new product concept that changes the world, and that people actually want. Sorry but ribbons and a folding mouse just don't cut it, they're really just minor modifications of existing tech. And if thats all a company the size and resources of Microsoft can come up with, then it just underscores my point that they dont innovate.
>> don't you think that the likes of Microsoft and Apple have an awful lot of very fine engineers on their books?
I do... but I also think that all of Microsofts products are pretty crappy, especially given the large amount of good engineers they have. All of their products are horrible to use. Windows has been around for years and is their main cash cow but it still has many really nsaty behaviours. Its like Microsoft just do the bare minimum all the time, while Apple have shown its possible to really produce slick products that work well. Clearly there's something about Microsoft's internal culture that just doesn't capitalise on the people they hire.
Everything you've credited as Microsoft innovations amount to little more than tiny marketing tweaks. I mean the ribbon interface is just a different menubar layout. Hardly earthshattering is it?
Shadow copy has been almost standard practice in the server world way before Microsoft ever did it. Its basically how RAID came about.
>> Fast user switching was in Windows before OS X or Linux had it.
Umm nope. Linux has always supported virtual terminals. You can have multple concurrent sessions under different users going on and switch between them without logging in and out at all. Actually Microsoft's Fast user switching appears to be just a kludge intended to address problems caused by limited thinking/poor performance/poor design in other areas. Hardly innovation is it?
>> I'd say putting a HD inside a game console was a pretty innovative idea,
I beleive it was acutally Sony who did it first with the PS2 but reagardless, innovative? really? Given the Xbox is already just a locked-down PC in a gaming case? adding a hard drive is innovative? wow.
Arc Mouse? I'm not ever going to believe that just slightly changing the shape of a mouse is true innovation. I mean it still has the same buttons, wheel etc.
I'll give you the surface table as being innovative. Well I would if it was an actual product people could really buy.
I also bury my computer in the yard after every time I'm done using it, so that its safe from nukular war.