Can somebody who actually READ THE ARTICLE tell me how much more moduler than apt-get install packageX it can be?
Sounds to me like a front end "Install Web Server?" "Install Development TOols?" choices that proxy a few packages is all this is about.
Aren't all Linux distros these days already got some sort of package managing that manages every file? Even the base Libc? How more moduler can you get???
Who the fuck cares? This isn't about OSS quality being lower. Nothing you said gives you justification for pirating games. Either buy it, or don't play it. END OF STORY.
Yes. It's called open basic or some such. It is somewhat VBA compatible, but not totally, and lets you do REALLY COOL things with Java. You can write Java classes (which are really easy to write), and import/call them in VBA. Much easier than writing a DLL in VB6 or.Net and registering a COM object and some such.
The "Linux community" you speak about doesn't give one whit what you think. I want source. I won't buy another NVidia product again until I get source. End.
If you have another opinion, that's fine, but don't expect everyone to agree.
Unicast, the company responsible, says the ads will play regardless of pop-up blocking. "The only format that loads completely before it is allowed to play, the Full Screen Superstitial is guaranteed to play perfectly for every consumer, every time."
Maybe your son wasn't particularly good at writing, but totally excelled past other kids at something else? Maybe you should have found that something else. Guess now you never will.
I totally agree. I am in the exact same boat as this guys daughter. I failed almost every class in school, repeatidly. I refused to pay attention to the teacher. School was boring. Most stuff didn't challenge me, most stuff I couldn't care less about.
Regardless, I was of course diagnosed with ADD (my brother had the H). Went on the medication etc. My results were sorta half and half.
The medication helped me focus. However, it removed all desire to focus. Instead of learning at a rapid pace, I just said fuck it and dosed off in class. Eventually I got suicidal, that kinda stuff i suspose lots of people go through.
Don't KNOW if any of that was due to the mediciation of course.:)
Eh, I wish my parents had never gotten me into it. Sure, I might have never done well in school, but I would have had a lot more enjoyment of that part of my life.
This really throws into question what a "disease" is. If 20% of the population suffers from it, can it really be considered a disease? Hasn't 20% been effected throughout history then? It's a not a disease, or a malfunction, or anything of the sort. It's just people being different. Some learn things differently.
Like many posters before me, I support this guys opinion. This isn't a disease, and you should not try to fit your square daughter into the round hole society has prepared for her. Let her learn how she wants to. Find that one think that makes her excited, and latch onto it.
I'm not saying it isn't hard. I was a devil when I was that age. But, weren't we all? And don't just give up on her because you don't have time. This is your DAUGHTER. You only have one chance here.
Really the problem isn't just hte message. It's the Chain Of Trust.
It works as follows: Verisign only (in theory! hah!) issues certificates signed by their CA to organizations that can fax in appropiate identificaton. A browser "trusts" VeriSign to make proper decisions. A browser can be extended to trust other CA's, the real world problem is you can't extend every consumers browsers. Or can you? Hmm.:0
For an office, you can create your own CA, to sign other certificates. You can use this one CA, to sign all your services, web, email, etc. Then install the public key of the CA in every workstation during the installation procedure. Proper trust hierarchy... no annoying messages. That would be the point of the entire thing.
It makes me wonder if you can attempt to install a self signed certificate in IE, will the user care? Is this a valid way to avoid VeriSign? You can do that by directing the user to a.crt file in IE... it will download it, and open it, and prompt the user to install it.
I wonder if there is a way to make this more friendly for the user, through JavaScript for instance.
"Dear Customer: you will be prompted on weither or not you trust Shopping.com's Certificate Authority to establish secure connections to our server. Accepting this is required in order to establish a secure connection to our server."
I wonder if that would go over well....... seems like a easy way to escape VeriSign.
What about if I wander by and notice your door is totally wide open, and tell you about it? They'res are people in jail for just as much in the computer security world.
A remote exploit woudl be an exploit on a service such as Apache, or directly in the kernel's TCP stack. Something which would allow a user who does not have access to the machine to get it.
A local exploit would be an exploit somebody sitting at a shell, or at the keyboard of the system itself, could use to elevate prividiledges he already has.
Imagine this local exploit: A program, that runs as root, creates a temporary file in/tmp, it then reads that file, and processes the information in it. Imagine if you, a hacker, had access to that computer./tmp is for temporary files, anybody can create files in it. You create the file in/tmp that this other program expects, and the other program reads from it, and has some sort of error (vulnerbility) where you can cause it to do whatever you want. You, a normal user, just hijacked another user's (possibly root's) program. A local exploit. To exploit this, you must have access to/tmp. You must be able to run programs on the system.
Windows does not deal with local exploits, ever. Imagine all the programs that create files in C:\WinNT\Temp. All the programs that read from registry entries. I would bet the vast majority of these could be exploited without a thought. There are probably thousands/millions of local exploits in windows. But you never see patches for them. Because nobody cares. Windows isn't designed to be "multiuser". They are trying to shove it into that role, and it won't fit.:0 Or if it fits, it will be disasterous.
Linux on the other hand, commonly has many users. Think of shell accounts where you can telnet/ssh in, and run your programs. How many windows computers can you ssh into?
As MS tries harder and harder to penetrate this market, the market that Unix has historically stood in, they're going to have to radically alter their development methodologies. They have no idea what sort of task they are up against.:0 It'll be fun to watch. When you develop Unix programs, just CLI or GUI programs, these kind of condititions are always taken into consideration. I've never seen a Windows programmer even consider them.
What you described is a "hollow" market. One where no real value is being generated, yet more money is made. Markets such as those should eventually collapse. The justification for such markets is to keep people employeed.
A healthy market would keep people employeed, in highly competitive positions, creating new more efficient technologies, that will make them more money, and save their customers money.
If you release your software under the GPL then yes, you recognize that you only want it used in open source projects that carry the same restrictions. Simple as that. If somebody wants to sell it, they can't. That's a distinction that the releaser of the software has to make for himself and his own works.
The underlying reason for choosing the GPL is if you don't want somebody else "stealing" your code and then selling it to somebody else behind your back in a closed product.
ANd you should read a wee bit furthur, where it talks about the old couple's son in law, who got internet installed, did his music downloading, and then canceled it when he left house.
Theft occured under their account name.
I think the majority of people here would rather you have competence to install an OS. Or at least, please do not connect whatever peice of shit you whip up to the internet to harm the rest of us okay?
Go ask a tech to do it for you, then live with it. That's what grandma's do anyways.
Yes, just like this Exchange flaw happens when you misconfigure exchange by enabling (disabled by default) the guest account.
Uh huh.
It's not a flaw in the software per say... or maybe it is. The software claim that it's so easy that a moron can set it up. That's it's fatal flaw. And regardless what anybody says, it's a flaw. It's like letting people who have no idea how to drive behind the wheel of a car. You just push the peddles!
MS software has to cease to be braindead to be secure. And they can't do that... because then they lose their target market. Ahh stuck between a rock and a hard space.
I do this using a cron job that runs every hour and a little bit of rsync logic.
Our main share is/export/public, every hour/export/public is recreated in/export/public/archive/date-time/. It's not totally recreated though. Files that didn't change since the last run are made as hard links to their previous versions. That way you can go back to any time or date, but only one copy of a file is stored.
The flag is not mandatory. The processing and obay of it is. One cannot sell a device capable of ignoring the flag according to the FCC rules. Sure, GNU Radio can ignore it, but is that legal? Will they be sued? Hmm?
It doesn't matter one bit that more people now use IIS than used to. When analyzing a market such as web server usage, you have to go with comparison averages. Usage of EVERYTHING is increasing. More web sites are being made.
Both IIS and Apache usage are growing. But IIS is LOSING market share. Thats what matters.
Because Apache is not a monoculture.
Think of not only how many versions of Apache there are, but how many different commercial products there are built out of Apache. Custom configurations, custom compiles.
With IIS you use the thing MS tells you to use, when somebody uses Apache, who knows what they're running.
Slashdot Mirror
Can somebody who actually READ THE ARTICLE tell me how much more moduler than apt-get install packageX it can be?
Sounds to me like a front end "Install Web Server?" "Install Development TOols?" choices that proxy a few packages is all this is about.
Aren't all Linux distros these days already got some sort of package managing that manages every file? Even the base Libc? How more moduler can you get???
If Microsoft had that condition in their license, sure they could. They don't though.
Who the fuck cares? This isn't about OSS quality being lower. Nothing you said gives you justification for pirating games. Either buy it, or don't play it. END OF STORY.
Yes. It's called open basic or some such. It is somewhat VBA compatible, but not totally, and lets you do REALLY COOL things with Java. You can write Java classes (which are really easy to write), and import/call them in VBA. Much easier than writing a DLL in VB6 or .Net and registering a COM object and some such.
Tell that to all those people who are or support gay people. This just goes to prove that your opinions are NOT universally unacceptable. :)
Because SUS requires you to run IIS. :) Nuff said. Not all of us run 100% Windows Domains with Active Directory and IIS and servers.
The "Linux community" you speak about doesn't give one whit what you think. I want source. I won't buy another NVidia product again until I get source. End. If you have another opinion, that's fine, but don't expect everyone to agree.
Unicast, the company responsible, says the ads will play regardless of pop-up blocking. "The only format that loads completely before it is allowed to play, the Full Screen Superstitial is guaranteed to play perfectly for every consumer, every time."
That's funny, it doesn't work for me.
yay for first
Maybe your son wasn't particularly good at writing, but totally excelled past other kids at something else? Maybe you should have found that something else. Guess now you never will.
I totally agree. I am in the exact same boat as this guys daughter. I failed almost every class in school, repeatidly. I refused to pay attention to the teacher. School was boring. Most stuff didn't challenge me, most stuff I couldn't care less about.
:)
Regardless, I was of course diagnosed with ADD (my brother had the H). Went on the medication etc. My results were sorta half and half.
The medication helped me focus. However, it removed all desire to focus. Instead of learning at a rapid pace, I just said fuck it and dosed off in class. Eventually I got suicidal, that kinda stuff i suspose lots of people go through.
Don't KNOW if any of that was due to the mediciation of course.
Eh, I wish my parents had never gotten me into it. Sure, I might have never done well in school, but I would have had a lot more enjoyment of that part of my life.
This really throws into question what a "disease" is. If 20% of the population suffers from it, can it really be considered a disease? Hasn't 20% been effected throughout history then? It's a not a disease, or a malfunction, or anything of the sort. It's just people being different. Some learn things differently.
Like many posters before me, I support this guys opinion. This isn't a disease, and you should not try to fit your square daughter into the round hole society has prepared for her. Let her learn how she wants to. Find that one think that makes her excited, and latch onto it.
I'm not saying it isn't hard. I was a devil when I was that age. But, weren't we all? And don't just give up on her because you don't have time. This is your DAUGHTER. You only have one chance here.
Really the problem isn't just hte message. It's the Chain Of Trust. It works as follows: Verisign only (in theory! hah!) issues certificates signed by their CA to organizations that can fax in appropiate identificaton. A browser "trusts" VeriSign to make proper decisions. A browser can be extended to trust other CA's, the real world problem is you can't extend every consumers browsers. Or can you? Hmm. :0
For an office, you can create your own CA, to sign other certificates. You can use this one CA, to sign all your services, web, email, etc. Then install the public key of the CA in every workstation during the installation procedure. Proper trust hierarchy... no annoying messages. That would be the point of the entire thing.
It makes me wonder if you can attempt to install a self signed certificate in IE, will the user care? Is this a valid way to avoid VeriSign? You can do that by directing the user to a .crt file in IE... it will download it, and open it, and prompt the user to install it.
I wonder if there is a way to make this more friendly for the user, through JavaScript for instance.
"Dear Customer: you will be prompted on weither or not you trust Shopping.com's Certificate Authority to establish secure connections to our server. Accepting this is required in order to establish a secure connection to our server."
I wonder if that would go over well....... seems like a easy way to escape VeriSign.
What about if I wander by and notice your door is totally wide open, and tell you about it? They'res are people in jail for just as much in the computer security world.
It's a unclear line.
A remote exploit woudl be an exploit on a service such as Apache, or directly in the kernel's TCP stack. Something which would allow a user who does not have access to the machine to get it.
/tmp, it then reads that file, and processes the information in it. Imagine if you, a hacker, had access to that computer. /tmp is for temporary files, anybody can create files in it. You create the file in /tmp that this other program expects, and the other program reads from it, and has some sort of error (vulnerbility) where you can cause it to do whatever you want. You, a normal user, just hijacked another user's (possibly root's) program. A local exploit. To exploit this, you must have access to /tmp. You must be able to run programs on the system.
:0 Or if it fits, it will be disasterous.
:0 It'll be fun to watch. When you develop Unix programs, just CLI or GUI programs, these kind of condititions are always taken into consideration. I've never seen a Windows programmer even consider them.
A local exploit would be an exploit somebody sitting at a shell, or at the keyboard of the system itself, could use to elevate prividiledges he already has.
Imagine this local exploit: A program, that runs as root, creates a temporary file in
Windows does not deal with local exploits, ever. Imagine all the programs that create files in C:\WinNT\Temp. All the programs that read from registry entries. I would bet the vast majority of these could be exploited without a thought. There are probably thousands/millions of local exploits in windows. But you never see patches for them. Because nobody cares. Windows isn't designed to be "multiuser". They are trying to shove it into that role, and it won't fit.
Linux on the other hand, commonly has many users. Think of shell accounts where you can telnet/ssh in, and run your programs. How many windows computers can you ssh into?
As MS tries harder and harder to penetrate this market, the market that Unix has historically stood in, they're going to have to radically alter their development methodologies. They have no idea what sort of task they are up against.
What you described is a "hollow" market. One where no real value is being generated, yet more money is made. Markets such as those should eventually collapse. The justification for such markets is to keep people employeed. A healthy market would keep people employeed, in highly competitive positions, creating new more efficient technologies, that will make them more money, and save their customers money.
Name one of those things you can do with NT that you can't do with Unix.
If you release your software under the GPL then yes, you recognize that you only want it used in open source projects that carry the same restrictions. Simple as that. If somebody wants to sell it, they can't. That's a distinction that the releaser of the software has to make for himself and his own works. The underlying reason for choosing the GPL is if you don't want somebody else "stealing" your code and then selling it to somebody else behind your back in a closed product.
ANd you should read a wee bit furthur, where it talks about the old couple's son in law, who got internet installed, did his music downloading, and then canceled it when he left house. Theft occured under their account name.
I think the majority of people here would rather you have competence to install an OS. Or at least, please do not connect whatever peice of shit you whip up to the internet to harm the rest of us okay? Go ask a tech to do it for you, then live with it. That's what grandma's do anyways.
Yes, just like this Exchange flaw happens when you misconfigure exchange by enabling (disabled by default) the guest account. Uh huh. It's not a flaw in the software per say... or maybe it is. The software claim that it's so easy that a moron can set it up. That's it's fatal flaw. And regardless what anybody says, it's a flaw. It's like letting people who have no idea how to drive behind the wheel of a car. You just push the peddles! MS software has to cease to be braindead to be secure. And they can't do that... because then they lose their target market. Ahh stuck between a rock and a hard space.
I do this using a cron job that runs every hour and a little bit of rsync logic. Our main share is /export/public, every hour /export/public is recreated in /export/public/archive/date-time/. It's not totally recreated though. Files that didn't change since the last run are made as hard links to their previous versions. That way you can go back to any time or date, but only one copy of a file is stored.
The flag is not mandatory. The processing and obay of it is. One cannot sell a device capable of ignoring the flag according to the FCC rules. Sure, GNU Radio can ignore it, but is that legal? Will they be sued? Hmm?
Okay, usage of Zeus is falling. :) And Netscape stuff. :) You know what I mean.
It doesn't matter one bit that more people now use IIS than used to. When analyzing a market such as web server usage, you have to go with comparison averages. Usage of EVERYTHING is increasing. More web sites are being made. Both IIS and Apache usage are growing. But IIS is LOSING market share. Thats what matters.
Because Apache is not a monoculture. Think of not only how many versions of Apache there are, but how many different commercial products there are built out of Apache. Custom configurations, custom compiles. With IIS you use the thing MS tells you to use, when somebody uses Apache, who knows what they're running.