And when that happens your adblocker becomes useless.
No, the current adblockers become obsolete. New approaches will be found, just like spam. Most advertisements look quite different from most normal graphics, and that can be detected. It's an arms race, but so far advertisers are losing badly.
I remember it completely differently. The way I remember it went like this:
Anandtech discovered that write performance on JMICRON controllers (not used by Intel) went to practically zero with time. The writer (and other publications I believe) went looking for the same issue in non-JMICRON controllers, and discovered that while Intel controllers were by far the least affected, they still suffered some degradation. Intel quickly updated their firmware, while everyone else (who had much more severe issues) either fixed it later or not at all.
Disclaimer: I have an X25-M supposedly affected by the issue, and I haven't bothered to upgrade the firmware.
It is not "just as good." I attempted to switch my company from MS Office to Open Office. We came across one spreadsheet it butchered to hell when it opened.
It sounds like OpenOffice did quite a bit better than a different version of MS Office would have done. Exchanging documents between Office versions is a neverending source of "fun".
I think you're coming from this from the wrong angle.
The issues with selling open source software aren't unique to XPilot, and so far it seems to work quite well for e.g. Red Hat. Charging for Free Software is an explicit right that Stallman deliberately ensured that the GPL would grant.
The only thing different about the iPhone is the "No sustainable competitive advantage". If Apple rejects identical apps from the App Store, the people doing the first port have a sustainable competitive advantage even over the original developers. That is something the GPLv2 didn't foresee. The GPLv3 has some provisions which make it harder to make a monopoly App Store with GPLv3 code, but that doesn't help you when XPilot is GPLv2.
(I won't even get into the argument that it's against the GPL to even distribute through the app store, but I'll stay away from that since I think that's sad and better dealt with by lawyers and Apple.)
I think that's actually the only argument that actually matters. The App Store is a large problem for Free Software on the iPhone. Perhaps you should consider switching to GPLv3? That won't help retroactively, of course...
It has always bothered me that keyboard hardware manufacturers brand their hardware with Microsoft's logo when a simple keyboard really should remain OS neutral. I'm sure they are getting paid by MS for this.
It's an extremely useful key though. Having a modifier key which you can dedicate to the window manager with practically zero risk of interfering with application shortcuts is wonderful!
It's possible that Alan was the only one who knew anything about the TTY code and how it worked, but I'd doubt it. I'd be really surprised if the new maintainer comes into the role cold.
The tty layer in Linux is really old. Not all of it, of course, but I would guess it's one of the oldest bits left in Linux. It doesn't need to be high performance, so noone has rewritten it for that. It is a bit brittle in general, and it interacts with e.g. hundreds of serial port drivers on almost as many architectures. Also, lots of applications use it, some of them with a long history on their own. POSIX and the Single Unix Specification have tried to standardize it all, but there's just too much ancient history.
In other words, slowly rewriting it as Alan was doing it WILL break things (which users will notice) and most of the improvement is just in prettier code and therefore less work for the kernel maintainers (which users won't notice). It will probably prevent the occasional OOPS as well, but those are pretty rare already.
If the box just dumps the packets on the floor, the sender will eventually get an error message from their mail server. Of course the mail server will have tried uselessly quite a lot of times (for days, usually) before giving up.
Sure, you can fake your IP address so you get past this filtering, because it just looks at the first packet. It won't help you though, because you can't complete a TCP 3-way handshake from a fake address, and without doing that you can't actually send spam.
SSH has it right. Tiny warning the first time you visit a site, big warning if the key changes later. If you improved that with a GPG-like system where you could see whether your friends/bank/certificate authority trust a particular key, you would get rid of 99% of the warnings. Suddenly the warnings would be a once-a-month (or even once-a-year, if you only browse mainstream sites) event, and the users would click no.
As long as warnings happen all the time, people will ignore them. You can't educate your way out of so many false positives.
As long as you have to give money to dubious companies (Hello Verisign and Comodo) in order to get a certificate, my private site won't be signed. What's the point? All it takes is redirecting mail for my domain ONCE, and the attacker has a valid certificate which won't give any warnings whatsoever.
Slashdot Mirror
And when that happens your adblocker becomes useless.
No, the current adblockers become obsolete. New approaches will be found, just like spam. Most advertisements look quite different from most normal graphics, and that can be detected. It's an arms race, but so far advertisers are losing badly.
Well, that post made it entirely clear that YOU won't notice the gap.
Because the lower court does a lot of work which the higher court just has to review. You don't start over from scratch.
Microsoft probably did quite a bit of usability testing before launching Clippy...
I remember it completely differently. The way I remember it went like this:
Anandtech discovered that write performance on JMICRON controllers (not used by Intel) went to practically zero with time. The writer (and other publications I believe) went looking for the same issue in non-JMICRON controllers, and discovered that while Intel controllers were by far the least affected, they still suffered some degradation. Intel quickly updated their firmware, while everyone else (who had much more severe issues) either fixed it later or not at all.
Disclaimer: I have an X25-M supposedly affected by the issue, and I haven't bothered to upgrade the firmware.
It is not "just as good." I attempted to switch my company from MS Office to Open Office. We came across one spreadsheet it butchered to hell when it opened.
It sounds like OpenOffice did quite a bit better than a different version of MS Office would have done. Exchanging documents between Office versions is a neverending source of "fun".
I think you're coming from this from the wrong angle.
The issues with selling open source software aren't unique to XPilot, and so far it seems to work quite well for e.g. Red Hat. Charging for Free Software is an explicit right that Stallman deliberately ensured that the GPL would grant.
The only thing different about the iPhone is the "No sustainable competitive advantage". If Apple rejects identical apps from the App Store, the people doing the first port have a sustainable competitive advantage even over the original developers. That is something the GPLv2 didn't foresee. The GPLv3 has some provisions which make it harder to make a monopoly App Store with GPLv3 code, but that doesn't help you when XPilot is GPLv2.
(I won't even get into the argument that it's against the GPL to even distribute through the app store, but I'll stay away from that since I think that's sad and better dealt with by lawyers and Apple.)
I think that's actually the only argument that actually matters. The App Store is a large problem for Free Software on the iPhone. Perhaps you should consider switching to GPLv3? That won't help retroactively, of course...
I can charge $1,000,000 for transferring the copy. Nowhere does it say that the fee has to be reasonable.
The FSF itself used to make money from selling special GNU distributions for thousands of dollars. I don't know how many actually bought them.
There are lots of free as in beer applications in the appstore. Most of them crap, but that goes for the commercial ones too.
It has always bothered me that keyboard hardware manufacturers brand their hardware with Microsoft's logo when a simple keyboard really should remain OS neutral. I'm sure they are getting paid by MS for this.
It's an extremely useful key though. Having a modifier key which you can dedicate to the window manager with practically zero risk of interfering with application shortcuts is wonderful!
They're issuing SECURITY certificates and they don't VALIDATE USER INPUT?!?!?
Congratulations, you have discovered that the certificate industry is a scam.
I really think "breaking into other people's networks" shouldn't be called "faking your IP address". They are very different concepts.
The "OP" is the one by physicsphairy. Doesn't specify land ice or sea ice. Hence both Ngarrang's replies are off the mark, and rubicelli is spot on.
It's possible that Alan was the only one who knew anything about the TTY code and how it worked, but I'd doubt it. I'd be really surprised if the new maintainer comes into the role cold.
The tty layer in Linux is really old. Not all of it, of course, but I would guess it's one of the oldest bits left in Linux. It doesn't need to be high performance, so noone has rewritten it for that. It is a bit brittle in general, and it interacts with e.g. hundreds of serial port drivers on almost as many architectures. Also, lots of applications use it, some of them with a long history on their own. POSIX and the Single Unix Specification have tried to standardize it all, but there's just too much ancient history.
In other words, slowly rewriting it as Alan was doing it WILL break things (which users will notice) and most of the improvement is just in prettier code and therefore less work for the kernel maintainers (which users won't notice). It will probably prevent the occasional OOPS as well, but those are pretty rare already.
Anyway, I'm not really a coder, I just read LKML.
Perhaps they should add some disclaimers, just to be completely sure.
No errors. No "marked return to sender".
If the box just dumps the packets on the floor, the sender will eventually get an error message from their mail server. Of course the mail server will have tried uselessly quite a lot of times (for days, usually) before giving up.
Personally I would think that if 10 is 100%
10 isn't 100%. 1 is 100%. That's how % is defined.
IP addresses, he notes, are easy to fake.
Sure, you can fake your IP address so you get past this filtering, because it just looks at the first packet. It won't help you though, because you can't complete a TCP 3-way handshake from a fake address, and without doing that you can't actually send spam.
It's what we're doing. If you propose that we stop, then fair enough, but the Earth in a "natural" state won't support 6 billion people.
I don't think trying to stop the natural planetary cycle would be a good idea.
Why not?
The OP of the message I replied to made no reference to the ice sheets on land.
It also didn't exclude the ice caps on land. It just said "ice caps", which I would imagine includes both kinds.
Nothing is slowed down. Light always goes at the same speed. Guess its name.
True in a vacuum, not true in practically anything else.
My my, did I step on someone's toes?
Let me say it again: Verisign and Comodo are untrustworthy, and "dubious" was really too nice a word anyway.
And: "All it takes is redirecting mail for my domain ONCE, and the attacker has a valid certificate which won't give any warnings whatsoever."
SSH has it right. Tiny warning the first time you visit a site, big warning if the key changes later. If you improved that with a GPG-like system where you could see whether your friends/bank/certificate authority trust a particular key, you would get rid of 99% of the warnings. Suddenly the warnings would be a once-a-month (or even once-a-year, if you only browse mainstream sites) event, and the users would click no.
As long as warnings happen all the time, people will ignore them. You can't educate your way out of so many false positives.
As long as you have to give money to dubious companies (Hello Verisign and Comodo) in order to get a certificate, my private site won't be signed. What's the point? All it takes is redirecting mail for my domain ONCE, and the attacker has a valid certificate which won't give any warnings whatsoever.