What an asshole you are. This guy gives you real world reasons why requiring multiple ever changing passwords doesn't work, and all you can do is call him names.
His problem isn't that he's using Windows or is too stupid to understand what two-factor authentication means. His problem is that people like you have devised security policies that REQUIRE unmemorizable passwords.
The executives of Enron broke the law. Let me repeat, in case you didn't hear: the executives of Enron broke the law. As a law abiding citizen, who naturally obeys the law just because it is there, that's undoubtedly an alien concept. It certainly is to me. So I will say it again. The executives of Enron broke the law.
Criminals do not obey the law. Sarbanes-Oxley won't prevent another Enron. It's just another law that criminals will ignore but which will punish the law-abiders.
Here's some more FUD for your pipe. True story. The UFW came to a certain central California winery. The demanded access to the workers, which they got. After several failed votes, they finally managed to get the winery unionized. Whereupon the workers rudely discovered that the higher prevailing wages, minus the union dues, was LESS than what they were getting before unionization.
The winner was the union bosses. Who, by the way, have never labored a day in their life.
I've decided to get out my current job. Everyone keeps telling me it's a horrible economy out there. But finding a comparable job is turning out to be easy! I've got three openings lined up for me, all with the same pay, but much more interesting work. They're also all small private companies, not the huge multinational eurocorp I now work for.
I agree with you that corporations are a large part of the problem, but I have to disagree on the solution. The regulations that are supposed to curb large public corporations only end up hurting the small guys who can't afford battalion size legal departments.
Hoping you can shrink large corporations by weighing them down with paperwork isn't working! All it's doing is keeping private companies uncompetitive.
I don't have the answers, but I would take a start at lowering taxes on private companies while raising them on public corproations. As a libertarian I have no problem with this, because public corporations are artificial entities created by government. If they're going to get special privileges from the state, then they should pay for it. Both liberals and conservatives should get behind this. Conservatives because it encourages the small business, and liberals because it discourages concentrations of wealth.
Right on the mark. My last experience with a union was a printer's union. A lady spilled a fifty gallon drum of blue printers ink. She walked away saying "it's not in my job description to clean it up." The worst part about it, no one objected to her walking away. There was only one guy there who took pride in his work, and he was pretty much ostracized by everyone else.
He as talking about GNU+Linux, not GNU by itself, and expecially not individual software projects under GNU. The hypersensitivity of some of you people continues to amaze me.
The two big things I like about FreeBSD are the integration and the documentation. Instead of being just a kernel with dozens of other projects smooshed around it to make a base system, it's all one project. It has a much different feel to it than a distro. Of course, it does use other project's software, like bind, gcc, etc., but overall it has a feel of integration that many Linux distro just do not have.
Second, the documentation is complete. Unlike GNU, which officially despises them, FreeBSD has a man page for every driver and command in the base system. Plus a great handbook and faq. You have all the documentation you need at hand without having to google for it.
No it's not. It is an alternative to journaling. Most people who want journaling just want protection for their data. If softupdates can supply that, then they don't need the journaling.
You still have to run fsck, and yes, it can run in the background, but it *still has to run*.
So what? The use of background fsck makes this a non-issue. Unless you're in the habit, that is, of pulling the plug instead of doing a proper shutdown. If you are, stop.
Sure, sometimes you'll need to do a full fsck. But those times are exceedingly rare. They're so rare it's silly to make it an issue when choosing an OS.
I bet this is as much realtime as Windows XP Embedded is embedded. That is, it probably squeaks by the dictionary definition if you squint hard enough...
...and aims to dumb down installation and daily usage...
Why the hell would I want that? I would like a simplified interface that is easier to use, but no fscking way do I want something that's dumbed down!
p.s. Of course, PC-BSD is not dumbed down. It hasn't been stupidified. The submitter should have read the article and realized that it's 100% hardcore FreeBSD. Unfortunately, the poor choice of adjective will lead many to think that this is just the BSD version of Linspire. Sigh.
If it doesn't run Windows, most companies won't want it. They spent all their money migrating away from Unix big iron, because Gartner showed them a study saying it was cheaper, and now they're too broke to do another switch. All they can afford are high school dropouts with an MCSE, and they're they last people who want near a mainframe.
Re:History should be written by those who remember
on
Gadgets, Then & Now
·
· Score: 1
You're talking about high school. I'm talking about the real world. Some classrooms still had Apple IIs all the way into the late 90's, but so what?
Re:History should be written by those who remember
on
Gadgets, Then & Now
·
· Score: 1
It's still apples versus oranges. Few people use CompactFlash in the same way people used to use floppies. It used to be people would copy files or software to a floppy, and GIVE IT AWAY! At a dollar a pop, it was cheap. When was the last time you heard someone giving away their $480 flashcard? When was the last time you bought some shrinkwrap software that came on CompactFlash?
The floppy should be compared to the CDR instead.
Re:History should be written by those who remember
on
Gadgets, Then & Now
·
· Score: 1
We're talking the late 80's, not the late 70's. In the late 80's the two most popular systems in the US were the IBM PC and the Apple Macintosh.
Huh? The cost of a product isn't its raw materials. Unless it's a commodity, that is, like bread or gasoline. Far more important is the cost of production. That cell phone may be mostly silicon and congealed petroleum, but the cost to produce it in just that particular configuration is much higher.
But even the cost of production doesn't mean much. A price is based on what the producer and consumer can agree on, nothing more. If the cost of production is higher than the price, then the good just doesn't get made.
Re:Holy Honey I Shrunk The Kids, Batman!
on
Gadgets, Then & Now
·
· Score: 1
An engineer with a slide rule is not a computer. A computer was someone who laboriously made all those log tables. They computed ballistic tables in WWII. Tables, tables and more tables. Etc.
Slashdot Mirror
What an asshole you are. This guy gives you real world reasons why requiring multiple ever changing passwords doesn't work, and all you can do is call him names.
His problem isn't that he's using Windows or is too stupid to understand what two-factor authentication means. His problem is that people like you have devised security policies that REQUIRE unmemorizable passwords.
Don't thank Enron, thank the US Congress for punishing you for what Enron did.
it exists to prevent another Enron
The executives of Enron broke the law. Let me repeat, in case you didn't hear: the executives of Enron broke the law. As a law abiding citizen, who naturally obeys the law just because it is there, that's undoubtedly an alien concept. It certainly is to me. So I will say it again. The executives of Enron broke the law.
Criminals do not obey the law. Sarbanes-Oxley won't prevent another Enron. It's just another law that criminals will ignore but which will punish the law-abiders.
I'm only pointing out that unions aren't the sacred infallible organizations people think they are.
Here's some more FUD for your pipe. True story. The UFW came to a certain central California winery. The demanded access to the workers, which they got. After several failed votes, they finally managed to get the winery unionized. Whereupon the workers rudely discovered that the higher prevailing wages, minus the union dues, was LESS than what they were getting before unionization.
The winner was the union bosses. Who, by the way, have never labored a day in their life.
I hate to break the news to you, but webmasters are a dime a dozen. It might be time to make a lateral move.
I've decided to get out my current job. Everyone keeps telling me it's a horrible economy out there. But finding a comparable job is turning out to be easy! I've got three openings lined up for me, all with the same pay, but much more interesting work. They're also all small private companies, not the huge multinational eurocorp I now work for.
I agree with you that corporations are a large part of the problem, but I have to disagree on the solution. The regulations that are supposed to curb large public corporations only end up hurting the small guys who can't afford battalion size legal departments.
Hoping you can shrink large corporations by weighing them down with paperwork isn't working! All it's doing is keeping private companies uncompetitive.
I don't have the answers, but I would take a start at lowering taxes on private companies while raising them on public corproations. As a libertarian I have no problem with this, because public corporations are artificial entities created by government. If they're going to get special privileges from the state, then they should pay for it. Both liberals and conservatives should get behind this. Conservatives because it encourages the small business, and liberals because it discourages concentrations of wealth.
Unions foster mediocrity.
Right on the mark. My last experience with a union was a printer's union. A lady spilled a fifty gallon drum of blue printers ink. She walked away saying "it's not in my job description to clean it up." The worst part about it, no one objected to her walking away. There was only one guy there who took pride in his work, and he was pretty much ostracized by everyone else.
Who said anything about a crime? Customs can only any damned thing they want. Don't blame Bush on it either, because it's been that way since forever.
Especially their libc. Ick.
He as talking about GNU+Linux, not GNU by itself, and expecially not individual software projects under GNU. The hypersensitivity of some of you people continues to amaze me.
There's nothing wrong with it, per se, but there is also nothing amazing either.
That's a damned good endorsement, when you think about it.
The two big things I like about FreeBSD are the integration and the documentation. Instead of being just a kernel with dozens of other projects smooshed around it to make a base system, it's all one project. It has a much different feel to it than a distro. Of course, it does use other project's software, like bind, gcc, etc., but overall it has a feel of integration that many Linux distro just do not have.
Second, the documentation is complete. Unlike GNU, which officially despises them, FreeBSD has a man page for every driver and command in the base system. Plus a great handbook and faq. You have all the documentation you need at hand without having to google for it.
...it isn't close to journalling at all.
No it's not. It is an alternative to journaling. Most people who want journaling just want protection for their data. If softupdates can supply that, then they don't need the journaling.
You still have to run fsck, and yes, it can run in the background, but it *still has to run*.
So what? The use of background fsck makes this a non-issue. Unless you're in the habit, that is, of pulling the plug instead of doing a proper shutdown. If you are, stop.
Sure, sometimes you'll need to do a full fsck. But those times are exceedingly rare. They're so rare it's silly to make it an issue when choosing an OS.
Pick one of a hundred different solitaire packages. My preference is KPatience.
You mean, rather than trying to get manufacturers to release their specs, we should just throw in the towel and wave the white flag.
I bet this is as much realtime as Windows XP Embedded is embedded. That is, it probably squeaks by the dictionary definition if you squint hard enough...
...and aims to dumb down installation and daily usage...
Why the hell would I want that? I would like a simplified interface that is easier to use, but no fscking way do I want something that's dumbed down!
p.s. Of course, PC-BSD is not dumbed down. It hasn't been stupidified. The submitter should have read the article and realized that it's 100% hardcore FreeBSD. Unfortunately, the poor choice of adjective will lead many to think that this is just the BSD version of Linspire. Sigh.
If it doesn't run Windows, most companies won't want it. They spent all their money migrating away from Unix big iron, because Gartner showed them a study saying it was cheaper, and now they're too broke to do another switch. All they can afford are high school dropouts with an MCSE, and they're they last people who want near a mainframe.
You're talking about high school. I'm talking about the real world. Some classrooms still had Apple IIs all the way into the late 90's, but so what?
It's still apples versus oranges. Few people use CompactFlash in the same way people used to use floppies. It used to be people would copy files or software to a floppy, and GIVE IT AWAY! At a dollar a pop, it was cheap. When was the last time you heard someone giving away their $480 flashcard? When was the last time you bought some shrinkwrap software that came on CompactFlash?
The floppy should be compared to the CDR instead.
We're talking the late 80's, not the late 70's. In the late 80's the two most popular systems in the US were the IBM PC and the Apple Macintosh.
Huh? The cost of a product isn't its raw materials. Unless it's a commodity, that is, like bread or gasoline. Far more important is the cost of production. That cell phone may be mostly silicon and congealed petroleum, but the cost to produce it in just that particular configuration is much higher.
But even the cost of production doesn't mean much. A price is based on what the producer and consumer can agree on, nothing more. If the cost of production is higher than the price, then the good just doesn't get made.
An engineer with a slide rule is not a computer. A computer was someone who laboriously made all those log tables. They computed ballistic tables in WWII. Tables, tables and more tables. Etc.