these ants have struck the perfect balance between diversity and population. They need one-quarter as many males as females.
There's an appropriate gene combination for every form of significant ecological change the colony has previously encountered. When the ecology changes, the queens and males breed experimental variations of the species. Those that add a new combination that provides the form of worker ant that will keep the colony alive will join the ranks of the self-cloning.
I always end up seeing this life "thing" as coming around back to memes in our genes. Life does what is necessary to keep DNA moving forward through time.
Yah. Didn't I mention I have to trust the source? Microsoft has absolutely broken that trust. It should be impossible for my next computer to be hacked. I know for a fact that Microsoft can not provide that, no matter how hard they try. I have the scars to prove it. I want a safe OS.
I trust Apple. I trust BSD. I mostly trust Linux. The next time -- a matter of months -- I purchase a computer, it will be Apple. The next time after that I expect it to be the system that is locked down as I've described.
It won't be Microsoft. It might be Apple. If KDE or Qt or whatever becomes as beautiful as OSX, and the applications compare, it could be BSD and it might be Linux.
If the three or four groups would agree on a single security kernel, they could compete on other features.
Re:Killer Instinct is Robert Roy Britt?
on
How Ice Melts
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Gosh, I'd thought it was the editor's responsibility to check legitimacy and attribution were correct.
Save us from this continued frigging idiocy of insecure systems, slow networks, stupid frigging reinstallation after reinstallation, closing lame security holes... and frustration.
We're ready to move on. Make the computers do something interesting. Stretch the web. Breathe life into this thing, so that you can breathe life into your things. Let your OS security go to a small core group of professionals who know what they're doing.
The Apple people could do it within months, I'll bet. The Darwin people could do it within a year, I'll bet. The BSD guys... hell, some of them have been damn near there for ages. The Linux guys... gonna have to get your shit together.
No one really gives a damn who really wins. Even us Linux-friendly find the other OSes to be of high quality. Compete on GUI and ease of programming and innovation. Give the kernel and security control of safety.
Oh -- the winning os will also have application qualified (ie. 'this specific executable is allowed to execute') approved at the kernel/security level. It's the only way. Doesn't matter a whit who wrote it, even if you are the programmer! (at least, it won't run on anyone else's os.)
I suppose if you want to be a software developer, you'll need a cert to allow a restricted, pre-decided group to run the code. No one else, ever. You want it to release, it has to be approved via quality and error control. Period. No choice. If you want to market it, I guess you'll have to strike up a helluva deal with a distributor. Or maybe distribution of things that can be run can be made free: they just need to be pre-approved via rigorous security audit.
Undoubtedly, it's a pain in the patootie for the core OS developers in all the OSes. If you want to compete -- and remember, Apple, that this system will be absolfuckinglutely secure at a far deeper level than your OS and it's more secure than OpenBSD, so you are going to have to compete -- you will participate in spreading a sincere meme of the absolute necessity for a level of security preventing the situation described in the grandparent story.
The OS that has that, wins. It's up to those of us who desire a secure internet that eliminates the accustomed pain-in-the-ass asshole behaviour of all the virus punks and worm bitches, to demand that OS by manufacturing the revolution.
"That is very amusing story... and so believable that it should be spread as a virus, via email.
And be serious about it. When the n00bs ask "ooh! really?" tell them yes! It's true. It's all true.
And so the herd stampedes to safety. They choose an OS that is safer and does the stuff they love: the applications.
The applications through this os are, on the whole, smart applications: they know what they shouldn't do. They don't open new executables without a warning and they especially don't open them if a virus scanner doesn't give them the okay. They don't wig out when given a buffer overflow. They have sensible default settings.
The OS that succeeds will support the user in making wise network decisions about the things that really matter: the OS never allows an option to not hassle the user about a new executable, because it can't be risked. Period. Allowing would be like allowing a toddler to play with a loaded gun. And, frankly, like allowing a retarded adult to do the same -- that's you, yes, the high-functioning geek who thinks he knows that he will never ever fuck up a simple "run yes/no" dialog except you only have to do that once and no one is ever perfect.
==--Pay attention to the previous and next paragraphs --==
And check this out: it might not really matter that you know that absolute perfection isn't required to squelch the masses of viruses: if we were all so safety-compliant as you, the problem would probably go away. But there will be so many people that think that they are you, who go to the trouble of disabling the nag, that they'll far, far outnumber you. You'll go down fighting an endless battle of wits. It is too late: we can not win. We need to eliminate choice at the OS level.
I repeat We need to eliminate choice at the OS level.
It is the only way to protect ourselves. We can not allow users to make choices that compromise network security. And for all but the OS I/O kernel functions, the decision is completely and absolutely off-limits. You want to change it, you have to have access to the source code. You have to be technically capable of compiling the kernel correctly, and integrating it with your system. You might even need to be technically capable of overriding your hardware.
And here, let me up the ante even higher: applications need security clearance at the kernel level, with private-key encryption ensuring that only an official OS-kernel-update is ever allowed to be installed.
The security module might well be a second chock-point: the kernel and security module pk-confirm their identify. Both modules are securely encrypted themselves. Magic makes it possible to boot the OS. Once it's up and running -- perhaps after an intensive security check, and well before there is any possibility however remote of foreign bitstreams getting involved.
You don't get a choice. The security kernel and kernel kernel are assigned identity to one-another, and can not be replaced without a huge internal security hullabaloo to ensure the system is superfuckinglutely certain it's perfectly safe.
You don't get to choose to not run a firewall. You don't choose to open ports. You don't get to make any decision that can compromise the absolute security of the OS.
Yes, that sucks. But it's what is necessary:
Spread the meme. Fix the OS. Herd the cattle. Don't let them know. Save us.
There's money in this, I'm sure. Be reasonable, like the OpenOS and OpenApplication people have been. Thanks.
The OSes that can offer wise decisions for all but the most incredibly privileged technical few, will be those OSes that
Were any of the founders of an anti-virus company previously reknown for being an "underworld" virus writer/hacker? It'd be the perfect hoist: a protection racket and no one really notices it!
Dang! Seeing a full-dress businessman in formal suit skateboarding the bowl would be quite the sight. It'd freak out the kiddies, and every passer-by would ogle. It'd be a great stunt.
Having worked in a heli shop, I know of auto-rotating.
And I know what happens when it goes wrong. Icky.
Helicopters plummet. Planes at least can get some decent forward movement going, which makes for a much less sudden deceleration when they impact the planet.
[i]The CarterCopter has a very simple wing, sized much smaller than a conventional aircraft of similar size, because the wing only needs to support the aircraft at high speeds.[/i]
Frankly, I prefer my low-speed lift to be provided by something that is rigidly attached to the craft, and not dependent on a working engine. I take great faith in the ability to glide out of an failure emergency.
...I'm going to release my own GoogleMaps database. First, I'll start with hacking into the Good Vibrations databases and listing everyone that has been purchasing sex toys. Then I'll use information from libraries to identify those sick bastards who read Danielle Steele. Finally, I'm going to identify every g.d. idiot that didn't vote, so that we can go kick the shit of of those idiots.
It is only by directly identifying the addresses of these sick, sick people that we can ensure the safety of our children.
Every real geek can remember the first time they took a soldering iron to the motherboard to piggyback 4k RAM chips in a hack to double the memory of their machine.
AFAIK, Opera is one of the few companies that rolls back bugfixes for their previous versions. I distinctly recall a few of their year-old versions being updated when vulnerabilities were discovered.
You want to watch any of BBC's Attenborough documentaries. Life of Plants blew me away with the sophistication of some plants' ability to use animals as sex/seed distribution slaves. The first Massive episode was incredible, about the collision of sardines, dolphins, sharks, gulls, and seal lions off the coast of Africa.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course! One should always keep an open mind.
Please provide links to the scientifically valid studies. I'm very curious.
The corollary, of course, is that it shouldn't be so open that it falls right out.
Links, please!
Corel Natural Painter. It, too, simulates individual bristles, ink flow, pressure and angle, etcetera.
these ants have struck the perfect balance between diversity and population. They need one-quarter as many males as females.
There's an appropriate gene combination for every form of significant ecological change the colony has previously encountered. When the ecology changes, the queens and males breed experimental variations of the species. Those that add a new combination that provides the form of worker ant that will keep the colony alive will join the ranks of the self-cloning.
I always end up seeing this life "thing" as coming around back to memes in our genes. Life does what is necessary to keep DNA moving forward through time.
"Basically the queen in a nest of either species exists mostly to reproduce. Everything else exists to support that."
That's the same for all species. vis a vis Dave Chappelle's comments re: hot cars and tittyflashes.
Everything exists to propagate the message in DNA.
But I gotta say "Comic Life from Plasq" looks like it raises the art of home slideshow torture to previously unimagined levels of pain and suffering.
Watching home movies makes me want to be exceptionally rude to the host.
Having to read Comic Life home comics would force me to gouge my eyes out with my ragged fingernails.
Face facts, folks: just like Bill Gates, Bezos is clearly looking out for #1, and to hell with the consequences for everyone else.
Quit supporting the asshat. Purchase your books locally.
Yah. Didn't I mention I have to trust the source? Microsoft has absolutely broken that trust. It should be impossible for my next computer to be hacked. I know for a fact that Microsoft can not provide that, no matter how hard they try. I have the scars to prove it. I want a safe OS.
I trust Apple. I trust BSD. I mostly trust Linux. The next time -- a matter of months -- I purchase a computer, it will be Apple. The next time after that I expect it to be the system that is locked down as I've described.
It won't be Microsoft. It might be Apple. If KDE or Qt or whatever becomes as beautiful as OSX, and the applications compare, it could be BSD and it might be Linux.
If the three or four groups would agree on a single security kernel, they could compete on other features.
Gosh, I'd thought it was the editor's responsibility to check legitimacy and attribution were correct.
(Save us from what? you ask...)
Save us from this continued frigging idiocy of insecure systems, slow networks, stupid frigging reinstallation after reinstallation, closing lame security holes... and frustration.
We're ready to move on. Make the computers do something interesting. Stretch the web. Breathe life into this thing, so that you can breathe life into your things. Let your OS security go to a small core group of professionals who know what they're doing.
The Apple people could do it within months, I'll bet. The Darwin people could do it within a year, I'll bet. The BSD guys... hell, some of them have been damn near there for ages. The Linux guys... gonna have to get your shit together.
No one really gives a damn who really wins. Even us Linux-friendly find the other OSes to be of high quality. Compete on GUI and ease of programming and innovation. Give the kernel and security control of safety.
Oh -- the winning os will also have application qualified (ie. 'this specific executable is allowed to execute') approved at the kernel/security level. It's the only way. Doesn't matter a whit who wrote it, even if you are the programmer! (at least, it won't run on anyone else's os.)
I suppose if you want to be a software developer, you'll need a cert to allow a restricted, pre-decided group to run the code. No one else, ever. You want it to release, it has to be approved via quality and error control. Period. No choice. If you want to market it, I guess you'll have to strike up a helluva deal with a distributor. Or maybe distribution of things that can be run can be made free: they just need to be pre-approved via rigorous security audit.
Undoubtedly, it's a pain in the patootie for the core OS developers in all the OSes. If you want to compete -- and remember, Apple, that this system will be absolfuckinglutely secure at a far deeper level than your OS and it's more secure than OpenBSD, so you are going to have to compete -- you will participate in spreading a sincere meme of the absolute necessity for a level of security preventing the situation described in the grandparent story.
The OS that has that, wins. It's up to those of us who desire a secure internet that eliminates the accustomed pain-in-the-ass asshole behaviour of all the virus punks and worm bitches, to demand that OS by manufacturing the revolution.
W00T! I am k-rad.
Read the parent comment, then finish this one.
"That is very amusing story... and so believable that it should be spread as a virus, via email.
And be serious about it. When the n00bs ask "ooh! really?" tell them yes! It's true. It's all true.
And so the herd stampedes to safety. They choose an OS that is safer and does the stuff they love: the applications.
The applications through this os are, on the whole, smart applications: they know what they shouldn't do. They don't open new executables without a warning and they especially don't open them if a virus scanner doesn't give them the okay. They don't wig out when given a buffer overflow. They have sensible default settings.
The OS that succeeds will support the user in making wise network decisions about the things that really matter: the OS never allows an option to not hassle the user about a new executable, because it can't be risked. Period. Allowing would be like allowing a toddler to play with a loaded gun. And, frankly, like allowing a retarded adult to do the same -- that's you, yes, the high-functioning geek who thinks he knows that he will never ever fuck up a simple "run yes/no" dialog except you only have to do that once and no one is ever perfect.
==--Pay attention to the previous and next paragraphs --==
And check this out: it might not really matter that you know that absolute perfection isn't required to squelch the masses of viruses: if we were all so safety-compliant as you, the problem would probably go away. But there will be so many people that think that they are you, who go to the trouble of disabling the nag, that they'll far, far outnumber you. You'll go down fighting an endless battle of wits. It is too late: we can not win. We need to eliminate choice at the OS level.
I repeat We need to eliminate choice at the OS level.
It is the only way to protect ourselves. We can not allow users to make choices that compromise network security. And for all but the OS I/O kernel functions, the decision is completely and absolutely off-limits. You want to change it, you have to have access to the source code. You have to be technically capable of compiling the kernel correctly, and integrating it with your system. You might even need to be technically capable of overriding your hardware.
And here, let me up the ante even higher: applications need security clearance at the kernel level, with private-key encryption ensuring that only an official OS-kernel-update is ever allowed to be installed.
The security module might well be a second chock-point: the kernel and security module pk-confirm their identify. Both modules are securely encrypted themselves. Magic makes it possible to boot the OS. Once it's up and running -- perhaps after an intensive security check, and well before there is any possibility however remote of foreign bitstreams getting involved.
You don't get a choice. The security kernel and kernel kernel are assigned identity to one-another, and can not be replaced without a huge internal security hullabaloo to ensure the system is superfuckinglutely certain it's perfectly safe.
You don't get to choose to not run a firewall. You don't choose to open ports. You don't get to make any decision that can compromise the absolute security of the OS.
Yes, that sucks. But it's what is necessary:
Spread the meme. Fix the OS. Herd the cattle. Don't let them know. Save us.
There's money in this, I'm sure. Be reasonable, like the OpenOS and OpenApplication people have been. Thanks.
The OSes that can offer wise decisions for all but the most incredibly privileged technical few, will be those OSes that
Were any of the founders of an anti-virus company previously reknown for being an "underworld" virus writer/hacker? It'd be the perfect hoist: a protection racket and no one really notices it!
Were any of the anti-virus previously reknown for being a virus writer? It'd be the perfect hoist: a protection racket and no one really notices it!
Dang! Seeing a full-dress businessman in formal suit skateboarding the bowl would be quite the sight. It'd freak out the kiddies, and every passer-by would ogle. It'd be a great stunt.
Having worked in a heli shop, I know of auto-rotating.
And I know what happens when it goes wrong. Icky.
Helicopters plummet. Planes at least can get some decent forward movement going, which makes for a much less sudden deceleration when they impact the planet.
[i]The CarterCopter has a very simple wing, sized much smaller than a conventional aircraft of similar size, because the wing only needs to support the aircraft at high speeds.[/i]
Frankly, I prefer my low-speed lift to be provided by something that is rigidly attached to the craft, and not dependent on a working engine. I take great faith in the ability to glide out of an failure emergency.
Get some exercise.
...I'm going to release my own GoogleMaps database. First, I'll start with hacking into the Good Vibrations databases and listing everyone that has been purchasing sex toys. Then I'll use information from libraries to identify those sick bastards who read Danielle Steele. Finally, I'm going to identify every g.d. idiot that didn't vote, so that we can go kick the shit of of those idiots.
It is only by directly identifying the addresses of these sick, sick people that we can ensure the safety of our children.
Is there any real indication that Apple's desktop machines are going to be quickly changed over to the Intel platform?
'cause I'm thinking its going to be the laptops that go Intel: it solves heat problems that are insurmountable with PowerPC.
In situations where cooling is not a problem, there seems to be little to gain by going Intel at this time.
by drawing it to Microsoft's attention by posting it on Slashdot, one of the sites that most every Microsoft employee monitors for news.
Shhhhheeeyit.
Every real geek can remember the first time they took a soldering iron to the motherboard to piggyback 4k RAM chips in a hack to double the memory of their machine.
AFAIK, Opera is one of the few companies that rolls back bugfixes for their previous versions. I distinctly recall a few of their year-old versions being updated when vulnerabilities were discovered.
I TRUST MSIE... to destroy my system.
Er, no.
No, I meant "and." It may need a "or five days of no requests" clause to deal with latecomers.
There should be TV out on the box. Hence bit re: video client, fwd/back buttons, etc.
You want to watch any of BBC's Attenborough documentaries. Life of Plants blew me away with the sophistication of some plants' ability to use animals as sex/seed distribution slaves. The first Massive episode was incredible, about the collision of sardines, dolphins, sharks, gulls, and seal lions off the coast of Africa.