I'm not sure how this fits under this threat, and my guess is that it doesn't. However, I learned a very interesting fact a few days ago, and I'm sure that most Slashdotters would be interested in learning it.
When Windows 95 just came out, I heard about it having a 255-char limit on filenames. My friend in high school (that's where I was at the time, believe it or not) made a comment, which sounded something along the lines of the following. MacOS already provides 32 chars for a filename, and 255 seems like overkill. Is this a pissing contest?
Well, it turns out that the 255-char limit is for the full path of the file, including the drive letter, colon, backslash, path, and the filename. In MacOS (and probably every other decent operating system/file system) you can create a virtually unlimited tree of directories. In Windows, you can't. You're limited by 255 characters.
And one would think that since they were fudging the file system in NT5 (aka W2K) anyway, they might as well fix that limit. Nope. It's still there. I tested it myself. And 255 characters really isn't that much. I got an error on the fifth node of the tree, with slightly longer than average directory names.
There is already an XML-based format. It's called PAD (Portable Application Description), and is available here. Here is an example. Granted, it was developed by ASP (the Association of Shareware Professionals), but I doubt that they have anything against the standard being used for something besides shareware. There are even tools to help you generate PAD files.
Ack! What happened to osOpinion? They changed the page to have the tiny-fonts stuff, not to mention the orange/white/blue/purple tables with lots of little borders everywhere. Quick, change it back!
The solution is very simple: Return to the old copyright system, with its original ideals and goals. Allow me to refresh your memory...
Copyright was originally put into place to benefit the people, as most laws are. It was created so that companies had a limited monopoly as an incentive to create works for the people. At the end of a few years, the copyrighted works became public domain.
However, copyrights have gradually become virtually unlimited (95 years is, IMHO unlimited if you take the length of a human life into account) thanks to endless lobbying by the corporations and ignorance of the people. Most people don't even realize that they are limited.
Actually, there are two different CueCat models. One has two LEDs, and the other has only one. You can see them both (along with a little Perl script to interpret input) here.
Wow, I was about to say the same thing. I reread that paragraph a few times, getting a small rush of joy every time. I was even going to use the word "verb" in my compliment. What a loser I am, posting to Slashdot at 05:04.
Linux has tech support. There's LinuxCare, and most vendors provide it as well. Yes, it does cost money. So does support for everything else out there, except maybe AOL...
how mission-critical is a cell phone? must it be online at all times? must it have zero down time?
How mission-critical the cell phone is depends on who is using it. If it's your average SUV-driving latte-drinking yuppie, then no -- it isn't mission critical at all. But if it's a medical worker on call, it better be considered mission-critical.
The downtime depends on how soon the person notices that the cellphone has crashed.
I simply hate the way people are so used to Windows that they expect instability from an operating system. What happens when silicon becomes even more common? I would hate the day my refrigerator had a GPF...
for a DoS attack to be successful, the point is to flood a server that is required to be online at all times and that denial successfully takes them offline for an extended length of time.
DoS stands for Denial of Service, in case you were wondering. A DoS attack is anything that denies anyone service. Neither does it have to be against a server, nor does it have to be a flood. For example, the Winnuke attack was neither a flood, nor against a server (assuming that people aren't running servers on Windos).
I would call this a simple software glitch that has the unfortunate problem of causing the phone's OS to crash.
Oh sure, let me just reboot my cellphone. That's no problem, right? I mean software was meant to crash. And if my refrigerator (just wait a few years) suddently decides to crash in the middle of the night, I'll just run down and reboot it as well. No problem!
call it a runtime error. call it a macintosh system error. it's just not a DoS
For some reason, they claim that Opera requires 200MB of hard drive space to install. What?! Oh yeah, and according to the screenshot, they were using Beta 3 of Opera 4.0. Since then, and it was a long time ago, five new versions have been released, and they have gotten way better since Beta 3.
Methinks they wrote this a long time ago and were just saving it for the right time...
Slashdot Mirror
When Windows 95 just came out, I heard about it having a 255-char limit on filenames. My friend in high school (that's where I was at the time, believe it or not) made a comment, which sounded something along the lines of the following. MacOS already provides 32 chars for a filename, and 255 seems like overkill. Is this a pissing contest?
Well, it turns out that the 255-char limit is for the full path of the file, including the drive letter, colon, backslash, path, and the filename. In MacOS (and probably every other decent operating system/file system) you can create a virtually unlimited tree of directories. In Windows, you can't. You're limited by 255 characters.
And one would think that since they were fudging the file system in NT5 (aka W2K) anyway, they might as well fix that limit. Nope. It's still there. I tested it myself. And 255 characters really isn't that much. I got an error on the fifth node of the tree, with slightly longer than average directory names.
--
--
<A HREF="http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/N668.SlashDot /B20201;sz=468x60;ord=969347632969347632 ?">
<IMG SRC="http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/N668.SlashDot/B2 0201;sz=468x60;ord=969347632969347632?" BORDER=0
WIDTH=468 HEIGHT=60 ALT="Fast. Native. XML. Click. Software AG."></A>
It seems to be somewhat random, intertwined with their own ads, but it's there. Just reload a page a few times and watch your proxy logs.
D:\ijb20\junkbstr.exe: GPC slashdot.org/x 60;ord=969347632969347632? crunch!9 347632617 crunch!7 632617 crunch!3 2677 crunch!3 2697 crunch!
D:\ijb20\junkbstr.exe: GPC ad.doubleclick.net/ad/N668.SlashDot/B20201;sz=468
D:\ijb20\junkbstr.exe: GPC images2.slashdot.org/Slashdot/pc.gif?/index.pl,96
D:\ijb20\junkbstr.exe: GPC images.slashdot.org/pagecount.gif?/index.pl,96934
D:\ijb20\junkbstr.exe: GPC images.slashdot.org/banner/swag5001en.gif?9693476
D:\ijb20\junkbstr.exe: GPC images.slashdot.org/banner/swag5004en.gif?9693476
All those session variables, too...
(Yes, I'm using NT. Shoot me.)
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
http://slashdot.org/yro/99/11/28/1310259.shtml#235
--
--
--
Copyright was originally put into place to benefit the people, as most laws are. It was created so that companies had a limited monopoly as an incentive to create works for the people. At the end of a few years, the copyrighted works became public domain.
However, copyrights have gradually become virtually unlimited (95 years is, IMHO unlimited if you take the length of a human life into account) thanks to endless lobbying by the corporations and ignorance of the people. Most people don't even realize that they are limited.
--
--
--
--
--
--
- How mission-critical the cell phone is depends on who is using it. If it's your average SUV-driving latte-drinking yuppie, then no -- it isn't mission critical at all. But if it's a medical worker on call, it better be considered mission-critical.
- The downtime depends on how soon the person notices that the cellphone has crashed.
- I simply hate the way people are so used to Windows that they expect instability from an operating system. What happens when silicon becomes even more common? I would hate the day my refrigerator had a GPF...
for a DoS attack to be successful, the point is to flood a server that is required to be online at all times and that denial successfully takes them offline for an extended length of time.DoS stands for Denial of Service, in case you were wondering. A DoS attack is anything that denies anyone service. Neither does it have to be against a server, nor does it have to be a flood. For example, the Winnuke attack was neither a flood, nor against a server (assuming that people aren't running servers on Windos).
I would call this a simple software glitch that has the unfortunate problem of causing the phone's OS to crash.
Oh sure, let me just reboot my cellphone. That's no problem, right? I mean software was meant to crash. And if my refrigerator (just wait a few years) suddently decides to crash in the middle of the night, I'll just run down and reboot it as well. No problem!
call it a runtime error. call it a macintosh system error. it's just not a DoS
See above.
--
Methinks they wrote this a long time ago and were just saving it for the right time...
--