and a Google search revealed no (not *any*) drivers for Linux.
That is unusual, I've lived in many countries over the years and I've managed to get "wireless internet" in every country I've lived in. Currently I have a ZTE MF622, which I had a few problems getting working "out of the box" at first.
1. Create a package for Debian. Create another one for Ubuntu if the Debian one doesn't work on Ubuntu. Create another package for RedHat-based distributions. Create another one for SuSE. Create another one for Mandriva. Create another one for Slackware. Create another one for Gentoo. Etcetera. -OR- 2. Create an installer which works on all of those distributions. -OR- 3. Create a package for only a single Linux distribution, and screw all the others.
4. Create a LSB compliant build in a LSB compliant RPM which the majority of distributions support (I only know of Gentoo that doesn't officially support it - but one can easily get a LSB environment working through portage anyway).
It's irrelevant for routers because they won't have a domain name. But a lot of the people railing against ca-signed certs seem to be under the false impression that they cost hundreds of dollars per year.
But it does. I run numerous domains, many sub domains for different services on each domain, including sub domains like www, mail, mobimail, docs, admin etc.
I would need to purchase a wildcard certificate for the domain. Godaddy currently charges £107 for one. Now, note that I run more than just one domain - No, it's too expensive.
godaddy.com has certs for $29.99/year, and they get cheaper if you buy them for longer than 1 year.
That is for only one FQDN. If you want to be able to use it for your entire domain for things like mail.blah.net www.blah.net admin.blah.net docs.blah.net mobimail.blah.net and so on, you'll end up finding you should get a wildcard certificate for your domain to be able to handle your all sub domains. These start from £107 a year. Too expensive for me, and I have a lot more than just one domain.
Unless you feel like modifying the source and compiling your own Firefox, your only option to turn off this mis-feature is to replace the browser entirely.
It's just two check boxes in the security settings.
If you're a website owner, put up those 10 dollars and stop complaining. Keep your house clean and your certificates valid.
It isn't ten dollars, it's £107 per year to get a wildcard certificate for one domain. I manage more than just one domain.
Either you have security or you don't. Encrypting to someone is useless or even dangerous when you mistake the identity of the receiver.
Considering the fact that you can register with many CA's without any real authentication for their lower class certificates that don't even trigger warnings in browsers - I don't see why the CA's are trusted either.
Every time you want to use self-signed certificates with HTTPS, just use plain HTTP.
That's pretty much what I did, because I got fedup of the warning messages browsers keep spitting out. Now people are entering personal information over a completely insecure website (at least with encryption it stopped the passive listener attacks) which I don't agree with. But it's not like I run this site for profit so I'm not going to go out of my way to buy some expensive certificates to compensate.
They have exactly equivalent security.
Incorrect. It's still vulnerable, but not as vulnerable as being completely unencrypted.
If you can distribute a self-signed certificate securely
Too much work for something I'm not getting paid for and already spend too much time doing.
Many federal departments and agencies use Firefox 2.x on their classified and other autonomous networks where, while authentication is a must, DNS poisoning and pfishing are unlikely threats. If Firefox 3's new nanny could not be suppressed then users of those networks would object to its crying "Wolf!" all the time
Or you could just include the network's signing authority keys/private certificate public keys with the Firefox install to begin with.
The end solution to this problem, since I'm not willing to pay for SSL expensive certificates was to just to convert from self signed certificates to regular HTTP.
Hey please check my email for me. If I have any new mail, please copy/paste the contents here. My password is 'iamalazybum'. Thank you very much kind sirs.
You had only one:
WINNING NOTIFICATION.
We are pleased to inform you of the final announcement of the UK ONLINE PROMO AWARDS, held on the 17TH AUGUST, 2008. You have be awarded the sum of £500,000GBP(Five Hundred thousand Pounds Sterling).
All participants for the online version were selected randomly from the World Wide Web through a computer draw system and extracted from over 100,000 unions, associations, and corporate bodies that are listed online. This promotion takes place weekly.
Please note that your lucky winning number falls within our European booklet representative office in the United Kingdom as indicated in your play coupon. In view of this, your £500,000GBP(Five Hundred thousand Pounds Sterling), would be released to you by any of our payment offices in the United Kingdom.
Please you are advice to complete the form and send it immediately to our Promotion manager through email for prompt collection of your fund.
To process for your claim, you are advise to fill the form below and send to our fiduciary agent for your Claims verification:
Require all participants to wear a neurotranciever. The Borg may find it efficient for communication but it can also serve the purpose of monitoring everyone simultaneously. Just remember, thought crime isn't illegal yet.
I'd recommend Apple because (despite your cherry-picked examples) they make high quality, reliable hardware which meets the performance and durability needs of most of their customers.
I think you're talking about a different Apple than the one I've used over the years.
There's Second Life and OpenSim and Lively and There and IMVU and ActiveWorlds and HiPiHi and Habbo Hotel and...
Jesus christ, you're comparing stuff like Second life and Habbo Hotel and claiming they're the same thing. They have completely different goals and are utterly unrelated.
You're saying, it sounds like, that the ad-hoc system that (I suppose) only geeks can understand is useless for business because it's too complex and people don't spend money in it.
No, I'm saying it's useless because the current platform cannot do anything worthwhile in scripting, building or otherwise. Second life is not ad-hoc, it is entirely centralized by Linden lab. The Opensim non-sense can't even connect to the Second life grid.
it was too complex and there was no way to charge people for it.
Second life has a complete system for charging, the thing is, there is nothing really that useful you can charge people for and make a continuous large amount of money off.
*Sigh*... And this is where you just lost your argument, and confirmed the parents view (bias as it may be) on all the people in SL. I think if you had omitted this little anecdote, the merit of your argument might have still carried weight.
I never denied that. I have been agreeing with each of that person's points, except for the 'boring' argument. But it is exactly true that "There is nothing more for the average user to do than walk around and be a good little virtual consumer of virtual products." and giving answers about why it would interest average Joe, corporations and open source developers.
Do I care about Second life's reputation? No. Do I think that Second life deserves the reputation of having "weirdos" and "sick fucks"? Yes. There are plenty on Second life that advertise it. Do I think Second life is worse than other MMO communities? No, I've encountered worse on MMORPGs
Slashdot Mirror
That is unusual, I've lived in many countries over the years and I've managed to get "wireless internet" in every country I've lived in. Currently I have a ZTE MF622, which I had a few problems getting working "out of the box" at first.
4. Create a LSB compliant build in a LSB compliant RPM which the majority of distributions support (I only know of Gentoo that doesn't officially support it - but one can easily get a LSB environment working through portage anyway).
Precisely, and this is why I name "Linux systems" by their distribution instead of generic terms.
But it does. I run numerous domains, many sub domains for different services on each domain, including sub domains like www, mail, mobimail, docs, admin etc.
I would need to purchase a wildcard certificate for the domain. Godaddy currently charges £107 for one. Now, note that I run more than just one domain - No, it's too expensive.
Tried it in Firefox and I got a warning about a unknown Certificate Authority, same thing in IE.
Incorrect. It's still better than being open to passive reading attacks.
That is for only one FQDN. If you want to be able to use it for your entire domain for things like mail.blah.net www.blah.net admin.blah.net docs.blah.net mobimail.blah.net and so on, you'll end up finding you should get a wildcard certificate for your domain to be able to handle your all sub domains. These start from £107 a year. Too expensive for me, and I have a lot more than just one domain.
It's just two check boxes in the security settings.
This is too complicated and will be difficult for me to devise something that is trivial for the less technically inclined users.
I tried it, I got a security prompt for a unknown CA. So, no it doesn't.
It isn't ten dollars, it's £107 per year to get a wildcard certificate for one domain. I manage more than just one domain.
Considering the fact that you can register with many CA's without any real authentication for their lower class certificates that don't even trigger warnings in browsers - I don't see why the CA's are trusted either.
I would need a wildcard certificate to handle just /one/ of my domains. 149USD is cheaper than Godaddy's £109, but still.. Too expensive.
It is a checkbox set by default on the dialog.
I have seen such sites, they use padlock favicon images and the site has text which says it's secure etc.
The user is successfully fooled by these.
What? You think it's only one FQDN involved? Well it isn't for some of us.
The one for the best price with the number of FQDNs I deal with seems to be £107.09/yr per domain, three domains involved. Uh.. No.
That's pretty much what I did, because I got fedup of the warning messages browsers keep spitting out. Now people are entering personal information over a completely insecure website (at least with encryption it stopped the passive listener attacks) which I don't agree with. But it's not like I run this site for profit so I'm not going to go out of my way to buy some expensive certificates to compensate.
Incorrect. It's still vulnerable, but not as vulnerable as being completely unencrypted.
Too much work for something I'm not getting paid for and already spend too much time doing.
Or you could just include the network's signing authority keys/private certificate public keys with the Firefox install to begin with.
The end solution to this problem, since I'm not willing to pay for SSL expensive certificates was to just to convert from self signed certificates to regular HTTP.
You had only one:
Require all participants to wear a neurotranciever. The Borg may find it efficient for communication but it can also serve the purpose of monitoring everyone simultaneously. Just remember, thought crime isn't illegal yet.
I think you're talking about a different Apple than the one I've used over the years.
Exterminieren! Exterminieren! Halt! Sonnst werden wir Sie exterminieren! Sie sind jetzt ein Gefangener der Slashdotterz!
Jesus christ, you're comparing stuff like Second life and Habbo Hotel and claiming they're the same thing. They have completely different goals and are utterly unrelated.
No, I'm saying it's useless because the current platform cannot do anything worthwhile in scripting, building or otherwise. Second life is not ad-hoc, it is entirely centralized by Linden lab. The Opensim non-sense can't even connect to the Second life grid.
Second life has a complete system for charging, the thing is, there is nothing really that useful you can charge people for and make a continuous large amount of money off.
I don't see what you're arguing. There is a difference between a mess and being completely useless.
I never denied that. I have been agreeing with each of that person's points, except for the 'boring' argument. But it is exactly true that "There is nothing more for the average user to do than walk around and be a good little virtual consumer of virtual products." and giving answers about why it would interest average Joe, corporations and open source developers.
Do I care about Second life's reputation? No.
Do I think that Second life deserves the reputation of having "weirdos" and "sick fucks"? Yes. There are plenty on Second life that advertise it.
Do I think Second life is worse than other MMO communities? No, I've encountered worse on MMORPGs
Oh by the way, I'm a sick furry.