I hope that it would be possible to turn protected filesystem off, to give you access to stuff. Otherwise, ugh, its getting proprietary past closed source! What happens if a trojan gets installed as a protected file? The user has to wait till a patch program comes out before they can disable the trojan. Dumb idea if it cant be turned off.
dude, read the article. they're not talking about the net, they're talking about the web. Hyperlinks are the type of routing that they're talking about.
Okay, but if someone installs something like photoshop on a windows box, and there's a hole found in it of some sort, should microsoft be responcible for letting everyone know about the hole? Similarily, if there's a hole found in bind, is debian/redhat/etc responcible for making everyone know about it? That they even attempt to let users know about it is quite commendable - but for application software bugs, it should be the authors responcibility. *shrug*
Linux distributions keep getting treated as seperate operating systems, released by seperate vendors. Most security holes come up in the services which systems run, not the install packages used to install the systems. Like, what use is it to talk about vendor bug reports? There may be no bugs in the vendor's software, but there may be tonnes in some of the software bundled. I dont know about you, but isnt it the application authors that should be posting bug reports for their apps? Sounds like a better source of info to me. Personally, I run debian, the default install comes with no services, except maybe portmapper (i dont know why they include it in netbase, it should be it's own package really). I mean, they should compare, just to be funny, redhat and others like it, to debian's unstable distribution. I'd say maybe 5 packages are updated a day? sometimes more? hehe. That's a pretty quick bug fix period, and it's on the bleeding edge. Linux dists just dont split along the seperate product division that people keep trying to divide them long.
Listen, anyone who's actually going to use ACLs and capabilities and such, are going to be able to install the utilities needed to use them - ie LIDS. I mean, the linux kernel is capability based, and ACLs are a filesystem thing arent they? LIDS (www.lids.org) offers to expose the kernel's capabilities to admins, and it adds ACLs to the filesystem. Linux security, out of the box, may not be so wonderful, but tell me what OS is totally secure out of the box? None. It doesnt happen. If you want to share files, you've gota do some work security wise - linux is able to do ACLs and capabilities, but only after a little work. More mainstream inclusion of these features is comming anyway.
What makes SETI think that any technological civilization will use radio for very long? Or at least plain radio. I wonder if they can detect encrypted radio signals, or some sort of tunneling microwaves that go faster than light like has been described on slashdot? I mean, what's a few hundred years of radio use compared to the thousands of years that a civilization may exist?
Galleon looked really cool, except that they couldnt include gecko in the download because of licensing, forcing users to download a 25 meg source file from mozilla to get galleon to install. oh well. hopefully that will be resolved.
yah but I'm not really fighting a war. If someone else wants to, go ahead. The 'meaningless' battle has meaning to me, if not most of the rest of the world. If mozilla developers or some other part of the community wants mozilla to be used by the mainstream, then good luck to them. I dont really care a whole lot.
The biggest chance that standards have, is with new developers. New developers are going to be attracted to the word standard, and if the standard has great documentation, and effective tutorials, then such a standard will win over new developers. It can be done. Besides, I dont really care. Most of the sites developing microsofty crap are ones that I dont wana visit - mostly ecommerce and intranet stuff. Somehow I doubt that my interest areas (free software, geeky artistic development) are going to be taken over by microsoft only development.:)
they cant exactly sue the domain operators, since they dont own the domains:)
NSI set themselves up to be sued... remember how everyone was/is mad at them for saying that they OWN all domain names? well, now it's comming back to bite them in the asses:)
I disagree. Once a user is thrown into a semi familiar windowing system (something that lets you click to select, right click for options sorta thing) and they can manage. They'll find a menu, start running stuff, etc. The steep learning curve is not any more than an impression of intimidation. Unix offers sooooo much depth, that people are afraid to swim. Its sort of like people swimming in a deep lake. They can swim just fine on the surface, but are afraid to look down because the water is so deep and dark and scarry.
I am not in any way suggesting that one's views should remain static. A drug, when taken, makes you experience things differently. It tints your experience with the effect of the drug - that tint is why you take the drug. Since your experience is changed, it wont get mapped and related to other experiences the same way in which it would have 'clean'. Thus, you get a warped view of reality - the more drugs that you take, the more warped your view gets. Thats all. I fully advocate experiencing new things - but i dont advocate getting a warped view of reality.
the themes that ive seen dont allow you to change the look, shape, etc of the buttons. Maybe I'm wrong:) As far as I knew, QT didnt allow changes in the shapes of buttons and stuff.
also, if you're experimenting with drugs when you're young, and still learning a lot, you're asking for trouble. What an unsteady base to build upon is one built with drug tainted experience.
I must disagree. I feel that a large proportion of problems related to drugs are personal, and directly related to drug use. Drugs change the way that you view life - ie mind altering drugs (if that doesnt mean changing views, i dont know what does). A neural network is built as relationships between experiences. If you take a chemical to change the way that you percieve things, then new experiences are going to be mapped differently. The more drugs and the more experience, the more that you're going to have two sets of relation processes going on, and you're guna start getting fried. Now, the impacts are going to be on your family, the ways which you interact with others - your wife, parents, children, friends... even if you dont feel that its hurting you, it could be hurting others. I dont have so much of a problem if you're smoking some weed when you're alone, single and dont really care about anyone, but when you've got a family or something, you're treading on unsteady ground. Same goes for alcohol and cigarettes (but to a lesser extent with cigs). Besides, if you want to change the way that you look at things, change it yourself, dont let drugs do it for ya.
Can someone tell me what small group (i hope) of people it is that is so insane?! I mean, who makes these laws? Who is it that drafts these things? Are there not laws against conspiracy to violate the rights of others? I mean, geeeeze, someone find out who these people are and vote them out! If it's the majority of people in congress that are making obscene laws like this, and trying to get them passed underhandedly, then the US and the world have a major problem, and someone needs to hire some nutty mercenaries to go in there with some bombs. geeeze.
I hate the look and feel of kde. If it simply integrated with window managers other than kwm (which it may) and had a good theme set (ability to use pixmaps) I'd use it. Otherwise, I'm going for gnome, simply because it looks a hell of a lot better.
You're being just as self centered, hoping that you can reap benefits of others work when you put no energy into the work. I dont really worry about what Linus and others think (but I will listen to what they have to say, and weigh it). Frankly, if Linux 'lost' in the mainstream desktop market, I'd still use linux, and so would a lot of other people. They'd keep making it better. The linux community is self sustaining, because it's based on hobby work, rather than commercial work. As long as one person is working on some part of linux, it's not dead.
I'm happy if someone does some work that in the end benifits me, and I appreciate it. I will use printer drivers and stuff under linux if i happen to get a printer, but for me it's not a big priority. The original poster said very little useful, and was swearing a lot. Some shitty printer support, and even a 'loss' on the desktop market (which is hardly possible unless some other system with the same or stronger merits comes along) wont kill linux.
maybe it could be used in the hurd or something? hehe.
the big issue would be that not all conf files work like 'key = value'. otherwise, you could have some daemon keep some sort of flat file/database equivilance.
the idea is that once such a system exists, people may be inclined to use it. hehe. it could be something like the proc filesystem. where you have files, which arent really files. you can change them, but the changes really get made in the database. I'd go for that:)
dude, relax. i dont have a printer. a lot of geeks dont. remember linux is primarily designed for geek users, by geek programmers who are also geek users. half of us dont need to print. frankly, I dont care too much if linux doesnt become a primary desktop end user OS in big business. I would rather geeky sys admins and the like use it to get the back end stuff done.
I love textual conf files! It makes backups of my configuration quick and simple and is especially helluh for playing around with the configs. Thats the thing that i hate with windows, configuration is scattered between files with proprietary layouts, the registry, and ini files - who knows what to backup?! How would I backup the entire system config? its hard! Linux lets me do this modularily. Now, the registry isnt a bad idea, and I think that a central configuration registry would be a cool thing for linux - even just a few SQL databases even?
well, sorta. True things that you can back up are a lot easier to defend against. I mean, they may not try to nail you for libel, but it may come up in another case - as with old email records and such. Best to keep things clean and true, rather than to risk anything:)
it's any individual's/corporation's right to have access to the same information that any other member of the public has access to. If they wana spend 5000 dollars to know that I said something unfavorable about them, then it's their loss. It remains legal for me to say anything TRUE about another person or individual. Just keep negative comments about others clear, well supported, and legal. If you dont want a company to know what you think about them, dont write your opionions down in a public forum. If you do, you're asking for it.
Slashdot Mirror
I hope that it would be possible to turn protected filesystem off, to give you access to stuff. Otherwise, ugh, its getting proprietary past closed source! What happens if a trojan gets installed as a protected file? The user has to wait till a patch program comes out before they can disable the trojan. Dumb idea if it cant be turned off.
dude, read the article. they're not talking about the net, they're talking about the web. Hyperlinks are the type of routing that they're talking about.
Okay, but if someone installs something like photoshop on a windows box, and there's a hole found in it of some sort, should microsoft be responcible for letting everyone know about the hole? Similarily, if there's a hole found in bind, is debian/redhat/etc responcible for making everyone know about it? That they even attempt to let users know about it is quite commendable - but for application software bugs, it should be the authors responcibility. *shrug*
okay, what software does it include? most holes occur in third party software... who cares if its secure if it doesnt really do a lot?
"making sure you download the right RPMs."
:)
you mean DEBs
Linux distributions keep getting treated as seperate operating systems, released by seperate vendors. Most security holes come up in the services which systems run, not the install packages used to install the systems. Like, what use is it to talk about vendor bug reports? There may be no bugs in the vendor's software, but there may be tonnes in some of the software bundled. I dont know about you, but isnt it the application authors that should be posting bug reports for their apps? Sounds like a better source of info to me. Personally, I run debian, the default install comes with no services, except maybe portmapper (i dont know why they include it in netbase, it should be it's own package really). I mean, they should compare, just to be funny, redhat and others like it, to debian's unstable distribution. I'd say maybe 5 packages are updated a day? sometimes more? hehe. That's a pretty quick bug fix period, and it's on the bleeding edge. Linux dists just dont split along the seperate product division that people keep trying to divide them long.
Listen, anyone who's actually going to use ACLs and capabilities and such, are going to be able to install the utilities needed to use them - ie LIDS. I mean, the linux kernel is capability based, and ACLs are a filesystem thing arent they? LIDS (www.lids.org) offers to expose the kernel's capabilities to admins, and it adds ACLs to the filesystem. Linux security, out of the box, may not be so wonderful, but tell me what OS is totally secure out of the box? None. It doesnt happen. If you want to share files, you've gota do some work security wise - linux is able to do ACLs and capabilities, but only after a little work. More mainstream inclusion of these features is comming anyway.
What makes SETI think that any technological civilization will use radio for very long? Or at least plain radio. I wonder if they can detect encrypted radio signals, or some sort of tunneling microwaves that go faster than light like has been described on slashdot? I mean, what's a few hundred years of radio use compared to the thousands of years that a civilization may exist?
Galleon looked really cool, except that they couldnt include gecko in the download because of licensing, forcing users to download a 25 meg source file from mozilla to get galleon to install. oh well. hopefully that will be resolved.
yah but I'm not really fighting a war. If someone else wants to, go ahead. The 'meaningless' battle has meaning to me, if not most of the rest of the world. If mozilla developers or some other part of the community wants mozilla to be used by the mainstream, then good luck to them. I dont really care a whole lot.
The biggest chance that standards have, is with new developers. New developers are going to be attracted to the word standard, and if the standard has great documentation, and effective tutorials, then such a standard will win over new developers. It can be done. Besides, I dont really care. Most of the sites developing microsofty crap are ones that I dont wana visit - mostly ecommerce and intranet stuff. Somehow I doubt that my interest areas (free software, geeky artistic development) are going to be taken over by microsoft only development. :)
they cant exactly sue the domain operators, since they dont own the domains :)
:)
NSI set themselves up to be sued... remember how everyone was/is mad at them for saying that they OWN all domain names? well, now it's comming back to bite them in the asses
I disagree. Once a user is thrown into a semi familiar windowing system (something that lets you click to select, right click for options sorta thing) and they can manage. They'll find a menu, start running stuff, etc. The steep learning curve is not any more than an impression of intimidation. Unix offers sooooo much depth, that people are afraid to swim. Its sort of like people swimming in a deep lake. They can swim just fine on the surface, but are afraid to look down because the water is so deep and dark and scarry.
I am not in any way suggesting that one's views should remain static. A drug, when taken, makes you experience things differently. It tints your experience with the effect of the drug - that tint is why you take the drug. Since your experience is changed, it wont get mapped and related to other experiences the same way in which it would have 'clean'. Thus, you get a warped view of reality - the more drugs that you take, the more warped your view gets. Thats all. I fully advocate experiencing new things - but i dont advocate getting a warped view of reality.
the themes that ive seen dont allow you to change the look, shape, etc of the buttons. Maybe I'm wrong :) As far as I knew, QT didnt allow changes in the shapes of buttons and stuff.
also, if you're experimenting with drugs when you're young, and still learning a lot, you're asking for trouble. What an unsteady base to build upon is one built with drug tainted experience.
I must disagree. I feel that a large proportion of problems related to drugs are personal, and directly related to drug use. Drugs change the way that you view life - ie mind altering drugs (if that doesnt mean changing views, i dont know what does). A neural network is built as relationships between experiences. If you take a chemical to change the way that you percieve things, then new experiences are going to be mapped differently. The more drugs and the more experience, the more that you're going to have two sets of relation processes going on, and you're guna start getting fried. Now, the impacts are going to be on your family, the ways which you interact with others - your wife, parents, children, friends... even if you dont feel that its hurting you, it could be hurting others. I dont have so much of a problem if you're smoking some weed when you're alone, single and dont really care about anyone, but when you've got a family or something, you're treading on unsteady ground. Same goes for alcohol and cigarettes (but to a lesser extent with cigs). Besides, if you want to change the way that you look at things, change it yourself, dont let drugs do it for ya.
Can someone tell me what small group (i hope) of people it is that is so insane?! I mean, who makes these laws? Who is it that drafts these things? Are there not laws against conspiracy to violate the rights of others? I mean, geeeeze, someone find out who these people are and vote them out! If it's the majority of people in congress that are making obscene laws like this, and trying to get them passed underhandedly, then the US and the world have a major problem, and someone needs to hire some nutty mercenaries to go in there with some bombs. geeeze.
I hate the look and feel of kde. If it simply integrated with window managers other than kwm (which it may) and had a good theme set (ability to use pixmaps) I'd use it. Otherwise, I'm going for gnome, simply because it looks a hell of a lot better.
You're being just as self centered, hoping that you can reap benefits of others work when you put no energy into the work. I dont really worry about what Linus and others think (but I will listen to what they have to say, and weigh it). Frankly, if Linux 'lost' in the mainstream desktop market, I'd still use linux, and so would a lot of other people. They'd keep making it better. The linux community is self sustaining, because it's based on hobby work, rather than commercial work. As long as one person is working on some part of linux, it's not dead.
I'm happy if someone does some work that in the end benifits me, and I appreciate it. I will use printer drivers and stuff under linux if i happen to get a printer, but for me it's not a big priority. The original poster said very little useful, and was swearing a lot. Some shitty printer support, and even a 'loss' on the desktop market (which is hardly possible unless some other system with the same or stronger merits comes along) wont kill linux.
maybe it could be used in the hurd or something? hehe.
:)
the big issue would be that not all conf files work like 'key = value'. otherwise, you could have some daemon keep some sort of flat file/database equivilance.
the idea is that once such a system exists, people may be inclined to use it. hehe. it could be something like the proc filesystem. where you have files, which arent really files. you can change them, but the changes really get made in the database. I'd go for that
dude, relax. i dont have a printer. a lot of geeks dont. remember linux is primarily designed for geek users, by geek programmers who are also geek users. half of us dont need to print. frankly, I dont care too much if linux doesnt become a primary desktop end user OS in big business. I would rather geeky sys admins and the like use it to get the back end stuff done.
cut down on the swearing, you'll sound smarter.
I love textual conf files! It makes backups of my configuration quick and simple and is especially helluh for playing around with the configs. Thats the thing that i hate with windows, configuration is scattered between files with proprietary layouts, the registry, and ini files - who knows what to backup?! How would I backup the entire system config? its hard! Linux lets me do this modularily. Now, the registry isnt a bad idea, and I think that a central configuration registry would be a cool thing for linux - even just a few SQL databases even?
well, sorta. True things that you can back up are a lot easier to defend against. I mean, they may not try to nail you for libel, but it may come up in another case - as with old email records and such. Best to keep things clean and true, rather than to risk anything :)
it's any individual's/corporation's right to have access to the same information that any other member of the public has access to. If they wana spend 5000 dollars to know that I said something unfavorable about them, then it's their loss. It remains legal for me to say anything TRUE about another person or individual. Just keep negative comments about others clear, well supported, and legal. If you dont want a company to know what you think about them, dont write your opionions down in a public forum. If you do, you're asking for it.