If he succeeds in interfearing with the BBC does he think that will stop ITV, LeMond, AFZ, NZZ.
That these idiots are in charge of so many content and media corporations is a disgrace and danger to democracy.
Once again, the real blame is to be firmly laid at the door of corrupt and flacid governments and regulators who should have prevented these guys getting a near monopoly in the first place.
Absolutely correct, and in addition, the difference between best and average is __MUCH__ wider than in any other activity I know, except possibly Pure mathematics, and can be a factor of 50+ x.
The basic internet is fine, IPv4 and IPv6 both transmit datagrams, and that is all you need; WHAT we DO NOT need is big government or CORPORATE AMERICA __improving things__.
Goto s can always be eliminated, with a state variable and a __repeated__ test. But at a cost, not a large cost, but extra code and execution both. In fact, the old academic fad against goto was a consequence of the dreadful programs that used to be written in FORTRAN and Cobol, in my view "perform" is far worse.
So more modern languages have specialised goto s, switch, break, try, catch, finally; which are clearer, even though C, C++ confused endcase and break loop from BCPL. Yet some GOTO s remain the clearest way of writing code, I do not like the state-retest one bit more and as for the suggestions that you break an integral piece of logic into 3+ subroutines, I find that crazy. I like the logic, and thus the code to read down the page, to the greatest extent practical, even if you have a 1000 line routine.
I do not like the style of C++ and Java coding where any given bit of logic is spread across 4 files and mandates the use of a code visualizer eg SourceNavigator, or an IDE.
Code should be as simple and as easy to read and understand as possible. Thus puttting things in subroutines should reflect that they are used more than once, and are an execution abstraction.
This is why "ho-hum" rules, and most coding standards and metrics stuff leads to bad code, eg I dont want large block comments, which I can assume were never debugged and are out of date to interrupt the code. If the algorithm is unusual or complex a link, see... surfices.
Having laws that protect peoples privacy is not a police state, and the polizei here are much more polite, and reasonable, than they are in the US, as they report to the geminde leadership or the Kanton.
The privacy officer is making a corporation abide by its agreements, which would also be a good thing in the USA.
The academic idiots, who rarely write big programs have been proselytizing strongly typed languages for 37 years, since Martin Richards devised BCPL so he did not have to teach fortran at MIT.
Put simply, the problem is in the semantics, not syntax/slips, and LISP, Perl and OCaml are far more useful than C++, Java and C#. If you need raw speed use C+Assembler, else use something you feel comfortable to write and debug quickly. Strong typing helps _only_ weak programmers, the rest of us either (a) remember the types of our variables or (b) expect "1" + "2" -> 3, not "12".
We have enough languages, but _not_ enough competent developers, and we will not find them in India or SE Asia.
Microsoft has, once again, tried to treat the courts with disdain, In this case in "Persuing a line of argument that the court has rejected", now its counsel have the right to object, and ensure that the court's ruling is manifest in the transcript for an appeal but they must stop flogging a dead horse when told to otherwise they, and their client face scanctions, and in this case got them!
Given Microsoft's record of persistent misconduct in litigation, eg lying at the Anti-Tust trial, contempt in EU proceedings I am amazed that their senior people have avoided jail time.
If an ordinary litigant had tried blatant perjury they would be in Levenworth.
I, for one, am completely fed-up with polling agencies and the media trying to front-run public debate. We dont allow ballot stuffing, and we should not allow twitter stuffing either, though I do like the sound of that.
The fact that we have endless Astroturfing here tells you that this is a very bad idea. We will soon have the cable news media reporting this crap and the sheeple will lap it up, AGAIN.
The DOJ would be better looking at this than writing amicus curia brief supporting the MPIA/RIAA.
As a NON-American everytime I read one of these stories, or about SCO, or RIAA, or USPTO I cringe, and am thus not surprised about the opposition to the USG having anything to do with health-care.
But it need not be this way, in Switzerland we pay about 13% income tax, it varies from Kanton to Kanton and 7.3% VAT and everything works, the first time. Health is paid for by insurance and social security and is first class in 4/5 languages. What you need is to get control of the Congress and add some direct democracy [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy] so ypu can stop the pork and corruption. You also need term limits in Congress.
This amounts to tying. If you have evidence to support your assertion __PLEASE__ send it to the Head of Anti-Trust at the DOJ and Frau Nellie Kroes at the EEC Commision, in Brussels, Belgium (http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/kroes/index_en.html).
You do not need to, as some careless idiots recently found out. Finger prints are very easy to forge, if you want to plant them. You give someone a clean glass, lift the print with scotch tape, and in many far east cities you can get a finger glove for $10..25. for $100 you can get a set of false prints which go though airport security fine.
This is the age of Snake-Oil security. If your system uses fingerprints you have to secure yours, and that is very hard.
The problem is using biometrics RAW, and as the only authenticator. Sending raw (const) data as part of an authenticator is always very unsafe. So people who do stuff like this are idiots!
If you use the biometric, after Diffie Hellman key exchange as a salt in the challenge that is fine, and helps to defend against replay attacks, BUT all this stuff is in the literature, so there is no excuse for getting it wrong.
People who do, and loose valuable data need their ass sued off!
Security and Windows is an oxymoron anyway. If you can hack away for months at any usable password you can crack it, even if it is fully random, eg 8^256 is small. First you must secure the authentication data.
If you want any real security use a SSL secured challenge-response that can only be effected by a a numbered card, and significant asymetric key, say 4096 bits, and you can implement the response device in software or a PIN protected card+calculator, (eg SWISS E-BANKING).
This is exactly right, and PostIt's should be a firing ofence, at __all__ levels up to and including CEO, given Sarbannes Oxley, next __obvious__ passwords must be screened out, and changing passwords/ageing should __not__ be required.
My singleton laptop often faces the internet un-firewalled but the bastard ssh attacks cannot do password-guessing against really secure passwords like "1", which I have never seen tried, but it will now;-), or "Bawrinced", generated by apg.
People can learn a __few__ strong passwords, remember them and use them in ways that stratify, and "Canary" risk, see John Patrick Ryan.
Especially for internet logins, and for the weakest you can use dictionary words, which helps with the Canary Trap. Hebrew, Maltese and Attic Greek, transliterated into Latin alphabets make very good Canary words, and help you to sue the leaker. Few guess that "Marsaxlokk" is a place name, unless they know Malta, and then you can easily make it harder by spelling it ".M1rs1xlokk.". If you you __consistently__ do this for admin passwords, and make your users pick high entropy passwords, then you have emplaced a good first line of defence; then close all un-necessary ports, and use a scanner eg "nmap" to ensure you have what you intended.
Finally, use iptables to ensure that the open ports are firewalled, so when I put my laptop on a net I dont want 'NO ARP, or ICMP packets' because I dont want to alarm any intrusion detection systems; but I want to allow outgoing PRINTER, SSH, POP3, and in some cases incoming SMTP.
Finally, while it takes more work, it is far more secure to use iptables than a generic firewall writing the rules to be minimal. There are LOTS of brute force SSH attacks, and one must assume SSL also out there. SMTP is no secure so you only want to allow it from your mail-server which should have a static address. Use TLS with fetchmail, and a proxy SMTP sender which caaan be configured to send mail securely to a mail-server. If you are mobile as I am that means, write your own sender that knows about the quirks of your ISPs.
Since most of the ISP inspired SMTP 'improvements' just open up new security holes, thanks Eric. Encrypt everything you can, and certainly anything that is important, or "potentially compromising". Never use commercial mail services, they are totally insecure and like as not have backups that can be _discovered_ in law, to your disadvantage.
Yes, I know, I wrote my PhD thesis in (basic) TeX. The point is to provide a bridge between the M$ Word and WYSIWG worlds, and propertly structured Document formats, in a bi-directional manner, these days one would use LaTeX, as the target on the TeX side but LyX, useful as it is dosn't help idiots who tried to make big documents, think Airbus A380 -1 (ie POA manual, 8 shelf feet of paper) with WORD.
Again, and again, I see PHBs who don't see or understand why, if you can write a 2 page meeting Agenda, or 3 page Talking points brief, you cant write a 200,000 page manual. They all get fired eventually, especially when the WARNING is published, but idiots are endless, and then you need to rescue the 30,000 pages that are written.
Slashdot Mirror
If he succeeds in interfearing with the BBC does he think that will stop ITV, LeMond, AFZ, NZZ.
That these idiots are in charge of so many content and media corporations is a disgrace and danger to democracy.
Once again, the real blame is to be firmly laid at the door of corrupt and flacid governments and regulators who should have prevented these guys getting a near monopoly in the first place.
Absolutely correct, and in addition, the difference between best and average is __MUCH__ wider than in any other activity I know, except possibly Pure mathematics, and can be a factor of 50+ x.
Most methodologies attract only PHBs and MBAs.
The basic internet is fine, IPv4 and IPv6 both transmit datagrams, and that is all you need; WHAT we DO NOT need is big government or CORPORATE AMERICA __improving things__.
Goto s can always be eliminated, with a state variable and a __repeated__ test. But at a cost, not a large cost, but extra code and execution both. In fact, the old academic fad against goto was a consequence of the dreadful programs that used to be written in FORTRAN and Cobol, in my view "perform" is far worse.
... surfices.
So more modern languages have specialised goto s, switch, break, try, catch, finally; which are clearer, even though C, C++ confused endcase and break loop from BCPL. Yet some GOTO s remain the clearest way of writing code, I do not like the state-retest one bit more and as for the suggestions that you break an integral piece of logic into 3+ subroutines, I find that crazy. I like the logic, and thus the code to read down the page, to the greatest extent practical, even if you have a 1000 line routine.
I do not like the style of C++ and Java coding where any given bit of logic is spread across 4 files and mandates the use of a code visualizer eg SourceNavigator, or an IDE.
Code should be as simple and as easy to read and understand as possible. Thus puttting things in subroutines should reflect that they are used more than once, and are an execution abstraction.
This is why "ho-hum" rules, and most coding standards and metrics stuff leads to bad code, eg I dont want large block comments, which I can assume were never debugged and are out of date to interrupt the code. If the algorithm is unusual or complex a link, see
Having laws that protect peoples privacy is not a police state, and the polizei here are much more polite, and reasonable, than they are in the US, as they report to the geminde leadership or the Kanton.
The privacy officer is making a corporation abide by its agreements, which would also be a good thing in the USA.
The academic idiots, who rarely write big programs have been proselytizing strongly typed languages for 37 years, since Martin Richards devised BCPL so he did not have to teach fortran at MIT.
Put simply, the problem is in the semantics, not syntax/slips, and LISP, Perl and OCaml are far more useful than C++, Java and C#. If you need raw speed use C+Assembler, else use something you feel comfortable to write and debug quickly. Strong typing helps _only_ weak programmers, the rest of us either (a) remember the types of our variables or (b) expect "1" + "2" -> 3, not "12".
We have enough languages, but _not_ enough competent developers, and we will not find them in India or SE Asia.
Microsoft has, once again, tried to treat the courts with disdain, In this case in "Persuing a line of argument that the court has rejected", now its counsel have the right to object, and ensure that the court's ruling is manifest in the transcript for an appeal but they must stop flogging a dead horse when told to otherwise they, and their client face scanctions, and in this case got them!
Given Microsoft's record of persistent misconduct in litigation, eg lying at the Anti-Tust trial, contempt in EU proceedings I am amazed that their senior people have avoided jail time.
If an ordinary litigant had tried blatant perjury they would be in Levenworth.
You are and idiot!
I, for one, am completely fed-up with polling agencies and the media trying to front-run public debate. We dont allow ballot stuffing, and we should not allow twitter stuffing either, though I do like the sound of that.
The fact that we have endless Astroturfing here tells you that this is a very bad idea. We will soon have the cable news media reporting this crap and the sheeple will lap it up, AGAIN.
The DOJ would be better looking at this than writing amicus curia brief supporting the MPIA/RIAA.
As a NON-American everytime I read one of these stories, or about SCO, or RIAA, or USPTO I cringe, and am thus not surprised about the opposition to the USG having anything to do with health-care.
But it need not be this way, in Switzerland we pay about 13% income tax, it varies from Kanton to Kanton and 7.3% VAT and everything works, the first time. Health is paid for by insurance and social security and is first class in 4/5 languages. What you need is to get control of the Congress and add some direct democracy [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy] so ypu can stop the pork and corruption. You also need term limits in Congress.
Astroturfer, this nonsense is yet another M$ bad idea that fools no one!
This kind of oppresive nonsense is why no one trusts M$ and do not want to upgrade XP even in Fortune 50.
Will they ever learn, this is just counterproductive. The shareholders should go after the management. Carl?
This amounts to tying. If you have evidence to support your assertion __PLEASE__ send it to the Head of Anti-Trust at the DOJ and Frau Nellie Kroes at the EEC Commision, in Brussels, Belgium (http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/kroes/index_en.html).
You do not need to, as some careless idiots recently found out. Finger prints are very easy to forge, if you want to plant them. You give someone a clean glass, lift the print with scotch tape, and in many far east cities you can get a finger glove for $10..25. for $100 you can get a set of false prints which go though airport security fine.
This is the age of Snake-Oil security. If your system uses fingerprints you have to secure yours, and that is very hard.
I am reasonably secure, I was trying to help, but didnt preview enough.
Try gnupg, I think it even works on Windoze!
The problem is using biometrics RAW, and as the only authenticator. Sending raw (const) data as part of an authenticator is always very unsafe. So people who do stuff like this are idiots!
If you use the biometric, after Diffie Hellman key exchange as a salt in the challenge that is fine, and helps to defend against replay attacks, BUT all this stuff is in the literature, so there is no excuse for getting it wrong.
People who do, and loose valuable data need their ass sued off!
And, in case if compromise, you can force a password change when you havve finished the forensics.
Security and Windows is an oxymoron anyway. If you can hack away for months at any usable password you can crack it, even if it is fully random, eg 8^256 is small. First you must secure the authentication data.
If you want any real security use a SSL secured challenge-response that can only be effected by a a numbered card, and significant asymetric key, say 4096 bits, and you can implement the response device in software or a PIN protected card+calculator, (eg SWISS E-BANKING).
This is exactly right, and PostIt's should be a firing ofence, at __all__ levels up to and including CEO, given Sarbannes Oxley, next __obvious__ passwords must be screened out, and changing passwords/ageing should __not__ be required.
;-), or "Bawrinced", generated by apg.
My singleton laptop often faces the internet un-firewalled but the bastard ssh attacks cannot do password-guessing against really secure passwords like "1", which I have never seen tried, but it will now
People can learn a __few__ strong passwords, remember them and use them in ways that stratify, and "Canary" risk, see John Patrick Ryan.
Especially for internet logins, and for the weakest you can use dictionary words, which helps with the Canary Trap. Hebrew, Maltese and Attic Greek, transliterated into Latin alphabets make very good Canary words, and help you to sue the leaker. Few guess that "Marsaxlokk" is a place name, unless they know Malta, and then you can easily make it harder by spelling it ".M1rs1xlokk.". If you you __consistently__ do this for admin passwords, and make your users pick high entropy passwords, then you have emplaced a good first line of defence; then close all un-necessary ports, and use a scanner eg "nmap" to ensure you have what you intended.
Finally, use iptables to ensure that the open ports are firewalled, so when I put my laptop on a net I dont want 'NO ARP, or ICMP packets' because I dont want to alarm any intrusion detection systems; but I want to allow outgoing PRINTER, SSH, POP3, and in some cases incoming SMTP.
Finally, while it takes more work, it is far more secure to use iptables than a generic firewall writing the rules to be minimal. There are LOTS of brute force SSH attacks, and one must assume SSL also out there. SMTP is no secure so you only want to allow it from your mail-server which should have a static address. Use TLS with fetchmail, and a proxy SMTP sender which caaan be configured to send mail securely to a mail-server. If you are mobile as I am that means, write your own sender that knows about the quirks of your ISPs.
Since most of the ISP inspired SMTP 'improvements' just open up new security holes, thanks Eric. Encrypt everything you can, and certainly anything that is important, or "potentially compromising". Never use commercial mail services, they are totally insecure and like as not have backups that can be _discovered_ in law, to your disadvantage.
Yes, I know, I wrote my PhD thesis in (basic) TeX. The point is to provide a bridge between the M$ Word and WYSIWG worlds, and propertly structured Document formats, in a bi-directional manner, these days one would use LaTeX, as the target on the TeX side but LyX, useful as it is dosn't help idiots who tried to make big documents, think Airbus A380 -1 (ie POA manual, 8 shelf feet of paper) with WORD.
Again, and again, I see PHBs who don't see or understand why, if you can write a 2 page meeting Agenda, or 3 page Talking points brief, you cant write a 200,000 page manual. They all get fired eventually, especially when the WARNING is published, but idiots are endless, and then you need to rescue the 30,000 pages that are written.
Building Reliable Software is possible, see TeX by Knuth.
Get lost, you are a corrupt astroturfer
Arschloch und gehen Bumsen sich an.
Die Bundespräsident, ist jetz die "H. Hans-Rudolf Merz" der Decider und der Käufer, einfach
Nicht gesetzlich und möglicherweise verdorben.
Short of collegial corruption this will be overturned, though challenging the Government here is hard. Especially if you dont speak Swiss German.
But, this violates Swiss law (gesetz) and the Swiss-EU bi-lateral accords dealing with with competition and the single market.