If I can't, without a manual, install program X onto my computer in 3-6 clicks, it's too hard. "Oh just use the package manager" No. I want to go to their website and click the fucking download button. Then I want to open that downloaded file. Then I want it to install.
Are you kidding? Windows is a nightmare for this. Sure you can download and start the installer like you say. Then you agree to terms of service (scroll down because they won't let you check box), then you can click I agree. Then you set where you want it to install, and where in start menu. Uncheck the place shortcut on desktop and quicklaunch. Uncheck the view readme button and click finish. Adding all the next buttons that's probably a good 20 clicks. Don't even get me started on updates after this.
Compared to ubuntu where it takes fewer clicks to install the program then it takes to open a browser and get to download page on windows.
Typical vaccines can be shipped as a vial and a batch of needles, where only the vials have special handling. Do these patches have to be shipped prepared from factory, boxes full that need to be refrigerated? Do clinics have all the extra refrigeration space this will take? I see this as a niche item for pediatricians.
an online game with single- and multi-player capability that 'allows participants to step into the role of an exploration team member in a futuristic 3-D lunar settlement...'
Copying someone else's work is not a right. period.
Copying is absolutely a right. Exclamation point.
Read the first amendment, freedom of speech. Heck even without government, speech is a natural right, something we're born with and die with... What do you think copying is but a form of speech. Publishers ability to restrict copying is NOT a natural right. It's a voluntary concession of the public. Free Speech has been restricted to allow publishers extra opportunity to make a profit.
So yes, copying is a right. Copyright is a restriction on that right.
Anytime you have "free" equipment, if you don't have a plan in place to replace/repair it when it breaks, it's not worth having - because you will end up depending on the equipment, which will be a disaster when it fails (and you have no money to fix it).
Just learn how to salvage. The majority of my desktops were built from old parts found for $.50 at a garage sale, an old HDD there, an optical drive here, etc. just wipe whatever OS is on there and replace it with a suitable replacement. Puppy Linux is always a good bet.
Are you donating your time to fix it? It's not the equipment that's the problem, they have a glut of junk. The problem is getting the people to support the junk with hundreds of different hardware configurations. A one-off configuration of obsolete hardware is not a gift, it's a liability. If you can donate at least a dozen of the same device, go for it.
I'm at a company picnic and I have 5 employees sitting around. I need 2 more players for the women's volleyball team, so I take 2 of the women away. What is the sex distribution of the rest? The issue is I'm cherrypicking based on a condition. Here the condition is clear: I'm picking based on sex.
The confusion in the Tuesday problem comes in because the condition doesn't appear relevant. Who cares about Tuesday?? The assumption is he picked one of his kids to talk about.
A phone which is able to broadcast your real-time location. A phone which has all your mails, all your texts and logs of all your calls, and a few private photoes to boot. A phone with verified contact information for all your friends, and sellable information on yours and their preferences. A phone that can call any number, including premium-rated ones owned by shady organizations.
Yeah. Who cares is someone else gains control of that?
Worse, how as a user can you even mitigate this risk? You can't stick it behind a firewall (except on wifi) to detect weird traffic patterns. There is no task manager of any kind (yes stock has very limited multitask but malware can jailbreak to rootkit) There is no booting off a bootdisk to get a checksum of firmware. It's like being logged onto windows with a locked down user account, unable to view the OS in any way.
The only thing as a user you can do is monitor your bills closely for unusual patterns.
A pound, or about the same difference as a paperback versus a hardcover. Not an issue for light reading, but big deal for reading sessions that last several hours. Kindle I can hold up naturally for long periods with one hand.
I used to get frustrated when I'd come to tech sites and people are claiming the iPad has the better screen because it's color...
Then I put it in perspective. We're on a tech site dedicated to computer geeks. For the most part they're not looking to read, they're looking to browse the web. When you look at book enthusiast blogs, eInk readers are still highly preferred. The kindle and the like are for hobbiest readers, and serious readers aren't going to put up with an LCD screen. I don't think price is even the biggest issue, hobbies are almost always expensive, but comfort wins. I'm curious what a slashdot poll would show for how much readers spent on their keyboard/mouse.
If you read a few books a year, then you don't need an ereader. If you read a few books a month, you'll want eInk reader, maybe even if it's in addition to the iPad you use for other functions. Borrow one from a friend and try reading on both for a couple hours.
You've already given them the expectation that you will do both positions. So if you try to back off now you appear like a poor sport. The important part is you never let them conflate it as one job, emphasize that they are two separate positions.
You should first ask for a promotion. Don't ask for a raise and don't say your entitled to anything. Simply state that when the position was left vacant you took on the extra responsibilities and proven you're capable of handling that position. Now you want to move up and fill the vacancy. Make it into a "I want career development within the company" instead of "I want more". If you're really feeling lucky ask for a subordinate.
And if they refuse you, show your disappointment that they don't think you can handle the position... and go back to your regular duties. So you can use this as a break from those duties. "I was trying to prove myself until I found out I wasn't being considered for that position."
A skilled attacker will have replaced md5sum so that it returns the hash that corresponds to the good version, and in general installed a rootkit. The remediation advice they provide is broken.
That requires root access (unless your path is wonky or screwed with). One additional thing you can check is put a known good copy of a statically linked md5sum in your home directory and run that. That should protect you from all user-mode rootkits (even with root access). Kernel-mode rootkits are always a possibility to screw you though.
Correct answer is to make a service account, should also not run it as your user account. Otherwise they can add something to your path in your.bashrc and put their md5sum there.
Also a service like ircd is pretty simplistic on what capabilities it needs, so it should have an apparmor or selinux profile. That should prevent practically any possibility of local elevation.
No it's Mozilla's problem. They should make it impossible for anyone to install plugins/extensions without user interaction and further more they should make it impossible for the uninstall button to be disabled. Have a damn "delete plugin dlls" button if nothing else damn it!
So you think Firefox should go from legitimate software to something shady. Software that prevents the OS from performing operations on it. Windows as the OS can decide to change firefox to pink ponies and rainbows and there's nothing Mozilla can do to stop it, nor should they try to. That's the beginning of making a rootkit.
This is exact reason the plugin (versus extension) architecture exists. If it didn't other programs with the authority to modify firefox would do it in unfriendly ways. Then firefox starts crashing because adobe wanted to patch firefox binaries right where microsoft patched them. Just accept that root does what root wants, and expect good times if all your software is running as root.
Heck this is such a problem for windows that it's common practice for A/V programs to modify the kernel. Which is why windows came up with patchguard. Worse yet people accept software using these egregious techniques. Imagine if in linux every program wanted to load kernel modules.
The technology should be completely banned. It's hard enough for those with chemical sensitivities to go about their lives without getting sick as it is. Having billboards distributing fragrances which may or may not make people sick is just wrong. It's bad enough for those of us that just have easily irritated noses, I feel sorry for the people that get really sick.
Agreed. Also what happens when a competitor next door wants to do it, do they just have to try to overpower each other with stronger scents? I think the closest analogy is PA systems/loudspeakers. It's a public common they're trying to usurp, it's one thing when it's incidental smell/noise to their operations and another to pump it out to the public.
Ill challenge the notion that end-users will need retraining. Have you tried to use anything under a Linux Desktop? There would not need to be any retraining as it works the same as the XP, 2000, etc. desktop.
Of course there is retraining. Retraining doesn't always mean classes or instruction, it also means the time for the user to acclimate. If every user spends an hour going through the programs menu just exploring, that's a lot of "retraining" time. If nothing else your users have to learn to use / instead of \ in file paths. If enough users "lose" their files because they can't find them that's a lot of lost productivity. As IT you might see the help tickets showing the wasted time. But that's just the tip of the iceberg compared to the self-training users do that you will never see. For admins this computer familiarization time is considered productive time, for end-users it's lost productivity.
Re:Getting back to the topic...
on
Time To Dump XP?
·
· Score: 1
I agree with you that these people are unemployable and I'd add perhaps replaceable by a machine depending on the position. In fact, in my 12 years as a software engineer, I've found that maybe 20% of company's employees are productive while the other 80% are just dead weight.
There is a lot of people that fit the mold GP stated, but they're often not working "computer" jobs. Your view is slanted by your position, but computer skills aren't a measure of productivity for most jobs. Definitely a medical researcher should know how to use a computer. But there's a lot of very smart medical researchers out there that can be quite productive with the absolute minimum of computer knowledge. Heck I've met renowned computer theorists that could barely operate a computer.
Mechanically minded people sometimes look down on people that don't perform basic car maintenance. People good in kitchen might look down on someone who relies on microwave. When I help a friend fix his computer for what I think are mindboggingly silly mistakes, I remember they have their own skills that I couldn't do. Then I'm thankful when a friend helps me change a tire or brings in homemade coffee cake for the office. This is why teambuilding is important, the IT guy should be respecting the sales guy for how good he is at sales and vice versa.
Re:Back to the original subject...
on
Time To Dump XP?
·
· Score: 1
I agree, as technology workers we're expected to be able to operate computers. I wouldn't want to be the guy that dismissed the mouse/windowing environments in favor of command shell fifteen years back (although I think a lot of computer jobs should still be expected to perform relevant functions from command line). As much distaste I have for multitouch/touchscreens, I consider it professional development to be able to operate devices with it. But that doesn't mean you have to be an early adopter. I still use XP-style UI, partially because a lot of computers are still XP in my office. But part of it is my usage pattern doesn't fit into win7 mold. As I observe how people use win7, I'll pick up enough tricks that eventually it outweighs the consequences and I'll switch.
And that's where I disagree with you, of course you should complain if a feature sucks, but don't write off the whole thing because a minor issue. I'll fall back on one of my biggest windows UI annoyances, personalized menus in XP. I shouldn't have to explain why windows auto-rearranging your start menu is a horrible idea. But it was easy to turn off while leaving the rest of new UI intact.
Now my objections to win7 explorer UI. From your other posts your usage pattern sounds very Win7 friendly. But the UI isn't as friendly to copy/paste of paths on shares with deep folder hierarchy which I spend a lot of time doing. Using back/up buttons can be drastically different and I'll give a common example in my usage pattern. Lets say I'm browsing through//fileshare/myproject/archive/20100525/logs/raw and I want to jump back to 20100524, I can correct that in address bar and press enter. Then I can use back and forward to switch between the two, the breadcrumb view doesn't have constraints against this, but it doesn't feel as friendly to this kind of operation. Especially when that path is sometimes 10+ levels deep and I want to change one character in a high level folder.
That said I may not be the type of person you're addressing, since my preferred solution is still to get a couple xterms up and just glob those directories away unix style (ls 2010052*/logs/raw). Powershell may be greatly improved, but it still is a long way from bash w/ coreutils.
I know the law just fine and I stand by what I said, when the intent is to punish it "should" require beyond reasonable doubt. Should is not the same as does, unfortunately.
And seriously, how about we respond to others' opinions without flaming. There was nothing factually wrong with what I said, just opinions you didn't like.
Why? If you shoplift something, the punishment is more than the cost of what you shoplifted, the penalty for doing illegal things is often greater than the cost of what was lost.
The criminal action is worse. The civil action is usually just banning from the store. Most civil actions aren't used to "punish" but to fix damages done. If you want to punish someone the threshold should be beyond reasonable doubt.
Doesn't FireFox release patches as soon as they are available? Why would you force someone to wait for an update?
Predictable structure when trying to maintain SOP/audits/compliance. A fully patched IE with a critical bug is just fine from a policy perspective and is easy to maintain with scheduled patches (Tuesday is good). Firefox releasing a patch on a friday makes for unhappy admin who would prefer to push it off until after their weekend.
My sister's wife taught English in the rural areas of Nagasaki pref. in the late 90's and she relayed a story about being astonished when she discovered 2chan being browsed on the lab's computers. She tried to have the site blocked but the admin told her it was too popular. For those not in the know imagine 4chan but with even more lolicon, child porn and tentacle rape.
You linked to wikipedia for 2channel or 2ch.net, which is a text-only board so I doubt there's a whole lot of tentacle rape going on. 2Channel is a massive forum (wikipedia says possibly largest in world) and a legitimate internet site, ranked 190th for visits by alexa in world, 17th in Japan. Very unlikely it would ever be blocked. 2Chan.net or Futaba channel on the other hand is a completely unrelated imageboard, still popular but not unblockably so (4505 world, 329JP).
Your mistake is akin to mistaking slashdot for slashfic. Both intended for geeks, but one is good reading and the other is defiling everything I cherish. Identifying which is which is left to the reader.
Either you're trolling or you honestly have no idea why it's a good idea to throw up all sorts of errors on encountering a self-signed certificate.
Clue: SSL is intended to guarantee that nobody can eavesdrop on your connection. As soon as you start to see anomalies in the certificate chain (such as a self-signed certificate), that guarantee cannot be upheld. In fact, there was a bug filed against Firefox a while back now when it did flash up such an error and it transpired that the connection was being eavesdropped.
Yet you're using slashdot without encryption. Treating self-signed certificated as worse then HTTP traffic is broken. Self-signed does provide some protection that HTTP doesn't. Namely it no longer can be passively eavesdropped, it requires MITM. Now go look at how many CA's are in your browser, that's how many organizations you're giving permission to pretend to be whoever they want. There is no silver bullet in security. So you should take the 50% solution over the 0% solution. Yet right now we're telling webservers don't bother with 50% until you can get to 90%.
SSH gets by without any CA, you have no idea if it's not some MITM the first time you connect to host. I guess we should all go back to using telnet.
And the first of these is by getting in bed with the major cable networks and offering an ala carte subscription service. I can get the big 4 over the air. If I can stream Comedy Central, Sci Fi, Cartoon Network, and Discovery I'd gladly pay them a little of the money that I was paying for hundreds of channels I didn't care about with cable
Ala carte channels is an obsolete idea already even though it never existed. It only made sense after digital cable but before widespread On Demand. The same reasons you reject bundling of channels can be extended to why I should reject bundling of shows into channels. If I'm streaming, the whole notion of "channel" is an artificial construct.
Look at hulu for example, you can browse by channel, but it's rare that you'd want to.
You just bought Ford stock an hour ago, and now you just learned that the company is declaring bankruptcy effective 5 o'clock today.
Then your stocks are already worthless, how does it matter if you sell now or at 5? You still have to find someone willing to buy it. Unless you're saying the bankruptcy is not public knowledge, then what you're saying is illegal.
No. All governments that pay the (no doubt substantial) fees to "join the program". And that's the upside: this makes finding "vulnerabilities" a revenue center.
Finding new vulnerabilities is too expensive. They could reduce costs by developing them directly. This would keep the marginal cost of vulnerabilities stable by patching new vulnerabilities in as you patch old ones out!
Slashdot Mirror
If I can't, without a manual, install program X onto my computer in 3-6 clicks, it's too hard. "Oh just use the package manager" No. I want to go to their website and click the fucking download button. Then I want to open that downloaded file. Then I want it to install.
Are you kidding? Windows is a nightmare for this. Sure you can download and start the installer like you say. Then you agree to terms of service (scroll down because they won't let you check box), then you can click I agree. Then you set where you want it to install, and where in start menu. Uncheck the place shortcut on desktop and quicklaunch. Uncheck the view readme button and click finish. Adding all the next buttons that's probably a good 20 clicks. Don't even get me started on updates after this.
Compared to ubuntu where it takes fewer clicks to install the program then it takes to open a browser and get to download page on windows.
Typical vaccines can be shipped as a vial and a batch of needles, where only the vials have special handling. Do these patches have to be shipped prepared from factory, boxes full that need to be refrigerated? Do clinics have all the extra refrigeration space this will take? I see this as a niche item for pediatricians.
an online game with single- and multi-player capability that 'allows participants to step into the role of an exploration team member in a futuristic 3-D lunar settlement...'
17 years too late, we've already had this, it just took place on phobos: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doom_(video_game)
Copying someone else's work is not a right. period.
Copying is absolutely a right. Exclamation point.
Read the first amendment, freedom of speech. Heck even without government, speech is a natural right, something we're born with and die with... What do you think copying is but a form of speech. Publishers ability to restrict copying is NOT a natural right. It's a voluntary concession of the public. Free Speech has been restricted to allow publishers extra opportunity to make a profit.
So yes, copying is a right. Copyright is a restriction on that right.
Anytime you have "free" equipment, if you don't have a plan in place to replace/repair it when it breaks, it's not worth having - because you will end up depending on the equipment, which will be a disaster when it fails (and you have no money to fix it).
Just learn how to salvage. The majority of my desktops were built from old parts found for $.50 at a garage sale, an old HDD there, an optical drive here, etc. just wipe whatever OS is on there and replace it with a suitable replacement. Puppy Linux is always a good bet.
Are you donating your time to fix it? It's not the equipment that's the problem, they have a glut of junk. The problem is getting the people to support the junk with hundreds of different hardware configurations. A one-off configuration of obsolete hardware is not a gift, it's a liability. If you can donate at least a dozen of the same device, go for it.
I'm at a company picnic and I have 5 employees sitting around. I need 2 more players for the women's volleyball team, so I take 2 of the women away. What is the sex distribution of the rest? The issue is I'm cherrypicking based on a condition. Here the condition is clear: I'm picking based on sex.
The confusion in the Tuesday problem comes in because the condition doesn't appear relevant. Who cares about Tuesday?? The assumption is he picked one of his kids to talk about.
A phone which is able to broadcast your real-time location.
A phone which has all your mails, all your texts and logs of all your calls, and a few private photoes to boot.
A phone with verified contact information for all your friends, and sellable information on yours and their preferences.
A phone that can call any number, including premium-rated ones owned by shady organizations.
Yeah. Who cares is someone else gains control of that?
Worse, how as a user can you even mitigate this risk?
You can't stick it behind a firewall (except on wifi) to detect weird traffic patterns.
There is no task manager of any kind (yes stock has very limited multitask but malware can jailbreak to rootkit)
There is no booting off a bootdisk to get a checksum of firmware.
It's like being logged onto windows with a locked down user account, unable to view the OS in any way.
The only thing as a user you can do is monitor your bills closely for unusual patterns.
Why? What's the difference between them.
A pound, or about the same difference as a paperback versus a hardcover. Not an issue for light reading, but big deal for reading sessions that last several hours. Kindle I can hold up naturally for long periods with one hand.
I used to get frustrated when I'd come to tech sites and people are claiming the iPad has the better screen because it's color...
Then I put it in perspective. We're on a tech site dedicated to computer geeks. For the most part they're not looking to read, they're looking to browse the web. When you look at book enthusiast blogs, eInk readers are still highly preferred. The kindle and the like are for hobbiest readers, and serious readers aren't going to put up with an LCD screen. I don't think price is even the biggest issue, hobbies are almost always expensive, but comfort wins. I'm curious what a slashdot poll would show for how much readers spent on their keyboard/mouse.
If you read a few books a year, then you don't need an ereader. If you read a few books a month, you'll want eInk reader, maybe even if it's in addition to the iPad you use for other functions. Borrow one from a friend and try reading on both for a couple hours.
You've already given them the expectation that you will do both positions. So if you try to back off now you appear like a poor sport. The important part is you never let them conflate it as one job, emphasize that they are two separate positions.
You should first ask for a promotion. Don't ask for a raise and don't say your entitled to anything. Simply state that when the position was left vacant you took on the extra responsibilities and proven you're capable of handling that position. Now you want to move up and fill the vacancy. Make it into a "I want career development within the company" instead of "I want more". If you're really feeling lucky ask for a subordinate.
And if they refuse you, show your disappointment that they don't think you can handle the position... and go back to your regular duties. So you can use this as a break from those duties. "I was trying to prove myself until I found out I wasn't being considered for that position."
A skilled attacker will have replaced md5sum so that it returns the hash that corresponds to the good version, and in general installed a rootkit. The remediation advice they provide is broken.
That requires root access (unless your path is wonky or screwed with). One additional thing you can check is put a known good copy of a statically linked md5sum in your home directory and run that. That should protect you from all user-mode rootkits (even with root access). Kernel-mode rootkits are always a possibility to screw you though.
Correct answer is to make a service account, should also not run it as your user account. Otherwise they can add something to your path in your .bashrc and put their md5sum there.
Also a service like ircd is pretty simplistic on what capabilities it needs, so it should have an apparmor or selinux profile. That should prevent practically any possibility of local elevation.
No it's Mozilla's problem. They should make it impossible for anyone to install plugins/extensions without user interaction and further more they should make it impossible for the uninstall button to be disabled. Have a damn "delete plugin dlls" button if nothing else damn it!
So you think Firefox should go from legitimate software to something shady. Software that prevents the OS from performing operations on it. Windows as the OS can decide to change firefox to pink ponies and rainbows and there's nothing Mozilla can do to stop it, nor should they try to. That's the beginning of making a rootkit.
This is exact reason the plugin (versus extension) architecture exists. If it didn't other programs with the authority to modify firefox would do it in unfriendly ways. Then firefox starts crashing because adobe wanted to patch firefox binaries right where microsoft patched them. Just accept that root does what root wants, and expect good times if all your software is running as root.
Heck this is such a problem for windows that it's common practice for A/V programs to modify the kernel. Which is why windows came up with patchguard. Worse yet people accept software using these egregious techniques. Imagine if in linux every program wanted to load kernel modules.
The technology should be completely banned. It's hard enough for those with chemical sensitivities to go about their lives without getting sick as it is. Having billboards distributing fragrances which may or may not make people sick is just wrong. It's bad enough for those of us that just have easily irritated noses, I feel sorry for the people that get really sick.
Agreed. Also what happens when a competitor next door wants to do it, do they just have to try to overpower each other with stronger scents? I think the closest analogy is PA systems/loudspeakers. It's a public common they're trying to usurp, it's one thing when it's incidental smell/noise to their operations and another to pump it out to the public.
Ill challenge the notion that end-users will need retraining. Have you tried to use anything under a Linux Desktop? There would not need to be any retraining as it works the same as the XP, 2000, etc. desktop.
Of course there is retraining. Retraining doesn't always mean classes or instruction, it also means the time for the user to acclimate. If every user spends an hour going through the programs menu just exploring, that's a lot of "retraining" time. If nothing else your users have to learn to use / instead of \ in file paths. If enough users "lose" their files because they can't find them that's a lot of lost productivity. As IT you might see the help tickets showing the wasted time. But that's just the tip of the iceberg compared to the self-training users do that you will never see. For admins this computer familiarization time is considered productive time, for end-users it's lost productivity.
I agree with you that these people are unemployable and I'd add perhaps replaceable by a machine depending on the position. In fact, in my 12 years as a software engineer, I've found that maybe 20% of company's employees are productive while the other 80% are just dead weight.
There is a lot of people that fit the mold GP stated, but they're often not working "computer" jobs. Your view is slanted by your position, but computer skills aren't a measure of productivity for most jobs. Definitely a medical researcher should know how to use a computer. But there's a lot of very smart medical researchers out there that can be quite productive with the absolute minimum of computer knowledge. Heck I've met renowned computer theorists that could barely operate a computer.
Mechanically minded people sometimes look down on people that don't perform basic car maintenance. People good in kitchen might look down on someone who relies on microwave. When I help a friend fix his computer for what I think are mindboggingly silly mistakes, I remember they have their own skills that I couldn't do. Then I'm thankful when a friend helps me change a tire or brings in homemade coffee cake for the office. This is why teambuilding is important, the IT guy should be respecting the sales guy for how good he is at sales and vice versa.
I agree, as technology workers we're expected to be able to operate computers. I wouldn't want to be the guy that dismissed the mouse/windowing environments in favor of command shell fifteen years back (although I think a lot of computer jobs should still be expected to perform relevant functions from command line). As much distaste I have for multitouch/touchscreens, I consider it professional development to be able to operate devices with it. But that doesn't mean you have to be an early adopter. I still use XP-style UI, partially because a lot of computers are still XP in my office. But part of it is my usage pattern doesn't fit into win7 mold. As I observe how people use win7, I'll pick up enough tricks that eventually it outweighs the consequences and I'll switch.
And that's where I disagree with you, of course you should complain if a feature sucks, but don't write off the whole thing because a minor issue. I'll fall back on one of my biggest windows UI annoyances, personalized menus in XP. I shouldn't have to explain why windows auto-rearranging your start menu is a horrible idea. But it was easy to turn off while leaving the rest of new UI intact.
Now my objections to win7 explorer UI. From your other posts your usage pattern sounds very Win7 friendly. But the UI isn't as friendly to copy/paste of paths on shares with deep folder hierarchy which I spend a lot of time doing. Using back/up buttons can be drastically different and I'll give a common example in my usage pattern. Lets say I'm browsing through //fileshare/myproject/archive/20100525/logs/raw and I want to jump back to 20100524, I can correct that in address bar and press enter. Then I can use back and forward to switch between the two, the breadcrumb view doesn't have constraints against this, but it doesn't feel as friendly to this kind of operation. Especially when that path is sometimes 10+ levels deep and I want to change one character in a high level folder.
That said I may not be the type of person you're addressing, since my preferred solution is still to get a couple xterms up and just glob those directories away unix style (ls 2010052*/logs/raw). Powershell may be greatly improved, but it still is a long way from bash w/ coreutils.
I know the law just fine and I stand by what I said, when the intent is to punish it "should" require beyond reasonable doubt. Should is not the same as does, unfortunately.
And seriously, how about we respond to others' opinions without flaming. There was nothing factually wrong with what I said, just opinions you didn't like.
Why? If you shoplift something, the punishment is more than the cost of what you shoplifted, the penalty for doing illegal things is often greater than the cost of what was lost.
The criminal action is worse. The civil action is usually just banning from the store. Most civil actions aren't used to "punish" but to fix damages done. If you want to punish someone the threshold should be beyond reasonable doubt.
Doesn't FireFox release patches as soon as they are available? Why would you force someone to wait for an update?
Predictable structure when trying to maintain SOP/audits/compliance. A fully patched IE with a critical bug is just fine from a policy perspective and is easy to maintain with scheduled patches (Tuesday is good). Firefox releasing a patch on a friday makes for unhappy admin who would prefer to push it off until after their weekend.
My sister's wife taught English in the rural areas of Nagasaki pref. in the late 90's and she relayed a story about being astonished when she discovered 2chan being browsed on the lab's computers. She tried to have the site blocked but the admin told her it was too popular. For those not in the know imagine 4chan but with even more lolicon, child porn and tentacle rape.
You linked to wikipedia for 2channel or 2ch.net, which is a text-only board so I doubt there's a whole lot of tentacle rape going on. 2Channel is a massive forum (wikipedia says possibly largest in world) and a legitimate internet site, ranked 190th for visits by alexa in world, 17th in Japan. Very unlikely it would ever be blocked. 2Chan.net or Futaba channel on the other hand is a completely unrelated imageboard, still popular but not unblockably so (4505 world, 329JP).
Your mistake is akin to mistaking slashdot for slashfic. Both intended for geeks, but one is good reading and the other is defiling everything I cherish. Identifying which is which is left to the reader.
Either you're trolling or you honestly have no idea why it's a good idea to throw up all sorts of errors on encountering a self-signed certificate.
Clue: SSL is intended to guarantee that nobody can eavesdrop on your connection. As soon as you start to see anomalies in the certificate chain (such as a self-signed certificate), that guarantee cannot be upheld. In fact, there was a bug filed against Firefox a while back now when it did flash up such an error and it transpired that the connection was being eavesdropped.
Yet you're using slashdot without encryption. Treating self-signed certificated as worse then HTTP traffic is broken. Self-signed does provide some protection that HTTP doesn't. Namely it no longer can be passively eavesdropped, it requires MITM. Now go look at how many CA's are in your browser, that's how many organizations you're giving permission to pretend to be whoever they want. There is no silver bullet in security. So you should take the 50% solution over the 0% solution. Yet right now we're telling webservers don't bother with 50% until you can get to 90%.
SSH gets by without any CA, you have no idea if it's not some MITM the first time you connect to host. I guess we should all go back to using telnet.
And the first of these is by getting in bed with the major cable networks and offering an ala carte subscription service. I can get the big 4 over the air. If I can stream Comedy Central, Sci Fi, Cartoon Network, and Discovery I'd gladly pay them a little of the money that I was paying for hundreds of channels I didn't care about with cable
Ala carte channels is an obsolete idea already even though it never existed. It only made sense after digital cable but before widespread On Demand. The same reasons you reject bundling of channels can be extended to why I should reject bundling of shows into channels. If I'm streaming, the whole notion of "channel" is an artificial construct.
Look at hulu for example, you can browse by channel, but it's rare that you'd want to.
You just bought Ford stock an hour ago, and now you just learned that the company is declaring bankruptcy effective 5 o'clock today.
Then your stocks are already worthless, how does it matter if you sell now or at 5? You still have to find someone willing to buy it. Unless you're saying the bankruptcy is not public knowledge, then what you're saying is illegal.
No. All governments that pay the (no doubt substantial) fees to "join the program". And that's the upside: this makes finding "vulnerabilities" a revenue center.
Finding new vulnerabilities is too expensive. They could reduce costs by developing them directly. This would keep the marginal cost of vulnerabilities stable by patching new vulnerabilities in as you patch old ones out!