Of course not, they are doing all those stuff for charity. Real success of Google is milking money and increasing profit almost every quarter, yet making people think they are not making money out of their services.
Not actually right. Yes you can make CEO to clean toilets and to make him/her see toughness of working conditions and try to make things better for cleaners. Same for support personal. CEOs and upper management sometimes take decisions on the table, without further thinking about consequences. That's why all Wall Street is sinking deep in shit. Decisions made 'in a smart way' causes bigger problems in mid or long haul even though they look like a good idea in short run. CEOs and upper management people are not gods, so their decisions more likely to be critisized. Thinking of volunteraly migrating someone to totally different environment and expecting to get same kind of performance is silly enough. People are not like goods imported or exported. They have families, ideas, social lifes. And it's not easy to change that day by day.
Maybe it's better to note that Intel recently acquired OpenedHand and OpenedHand developers joined Intel Open Source Labs in order to work on Moblin platform. This looks like the first fruit of this acquisition.
Don't know why, but I started to get annoyed with this notion of 'average people find Linux as a geek toy and it should change this image'. For what reason? It's their ignorance, and sticking to Windows is at their expense. I personally don't care about anyone can't think deep enough to grasp basic foundation of what they use. I doubt any single free software developer does as well. We're producing software for people to use them. If first aim of this effort is to dominate and market our software we would do that in 'regular' fashion. We're trying to create bug free software. We're trying to create a new opportunity for users to make creative work. That's partially for ourselves and partially for others. But if they don't care about it, why should I?
Marketing free software is matter of others. Distribution and free software oriented service companies do that well. They market competitive free software better than proprietary software for most of cases. One day some entrepreneur will see light in Linux desktop and market it better than rivals.
Until that time, thinking about image of free software and it's popularity is just waste of time and pure demotivating action.
If nobody cared about copyright at all then motivation to write books would diminish and your colleagues wouldn't find any book to photocopy at first place. You're talking like those books are gospels. Some people spent valuable time creating them. And what makes them spending years to write/edit those books is their belief in copyright of these books are protected. Anyone can ask for funding for buying text books. Also universities have libraries to offer these books for those who can't afford them. And your colleagues are probably spending much more money elsewhere instead of spending it on books.
Price of knowledge is not the subject here. But even if it's, price of knowledge is much more than price of white paper. Again, you can *live* witout being a great engineer. And benefit you think from having a great engineer is less than cost of un-ethical engineer who justifies his wrong doings with biased excuses.
A lot of downloaders have surprisingly high ethical standards. Some purchase a legal copy, don't install it (because of DRM) and download the cracked version instead.
I'm not supporting DRM, but isn't the illegal sharing of copyrighted materials is the cause of DRM at first place? I don't believe content creators woke up one day and thought making sharing their copyrighted materials harder is needed without any reason. If downloaders don't like DRM, then they should instead find legal ways to get over with DRM (ie. boycott, complain, sue) instead of giving a good claim to those using DRM on their products.
Indeed that research justifies claims of the movie and music industry. Those downloading a copyrighted material illegally are prospective customers, and easier they can be able to get things free, less they would buy them. Not more.
There are always excuses for illegally downloading these stuff. Overpriced materials, willing to preview before buy, outdated media etc. But those are not valid excuses at least these days. You can *live* without listening to every single tune. You can *live* without watching every single movie. If you enjoy watching a movie, and if you enjoy listening to a tune, go buy it. Just like you enjoy eating snacks and need to buy them.
For sure you can be ideologically against policies of movie studios, or labels. Then boycot them by making their products less popular, not by illegally download their content. If you do you're one way or another both infringe laws and making those you're against good.
There're more liberal licenses for distributing copyrighted materials like Creative Commons. Instead support artists releasing content in such a way. But if you don't do that, nothing can be an excuse of infringing copyright of others.
Most responsible party in this long going problem is those distributing content. I blame those download illegal content less than those sharing this stuff. Distributing does not serve any purpose. As I said it does not serve your mission of protesting policies of the movie studios or music labels in case that's what you want in first place. It even helps their domination.
Harm of this illegal sharing of copyrighted material is very huge in developing countries. Their government and public don't understand importance of intellectual property. If developed countries did not have good protection of intellectual properties they would not be able to produce quality music, movies or even software. Developing countries don't give importance to this and at the end of day they don't/can't produce rival products with their own resources, they instead stay addicted to copyrighted products of others.
In my country, Turkey, illegal copying is rampant. And I'll give example not from soft copies, but hard copies, like books. Over here there're lots of universities giving education in English. But you hardly find original books written by professors of local universities. Almost all universities use textbooks from US and/or UK. I'm not talking about grad level courses, but basic physics, mathematics, biology etc. Since most of these books are photocopied by students, professors don't *waste* their time to produce more suitable materials to be used by the local universites and probably rest of the World. They can write better books for their own students. They can give more local examples and students would understand topics better. But students buy illegal copies and somehow manage to pass courses. If they instead complain about expensive books or authority enforce them not to use illegal copies and make them complain anyways, some local professor would produce cheaper and even better materials. Inevitably this not only harm education also make those educated people lazy.
Illegal copying is like using drugs. You don't foresee any problem eary times and even feel good about it. But eventually it harms your body and future.
Mozilla also sponsored GNOME Flagship conference GUADEC first time this year, and hopefully will keep its contribution for Desktop Summit. That's also very nice of them.
I'm not doing my research on my garage but at a university lab, however there's nothing prevent people doing similar research at their basements apart from cost of equipment of gene engineering. It is very similar to working with software, and I believe a good reverse engineer for software can be a good gene engineer as well.
Currently GMO seed and micro organism producers try to put 'copy protection' for their products which prevent breeding new products out of theirs. This is very similar to what software vendors trying to achieve. But as in what current cracking scene doing, in future we'll see 'garage engineers' which would 'crack' those reproduce (read: copy) protections and release reproducible cDNAs.
In past computers were very expensive so it was almost impossible for those hobbiests to work on software. After cost of this equipment diminished and people started to be able to afford them we started to see this kind of activity effectively. For biotech we need similar thing as well and it's very possible that we'll see it. Improving PCR equipments and be able to buy them with an affordable price and also cheapers chemicals and enzymes can easily make this kind of biohacks ubiquitous in future.
I think Google care less about your degree than maybe any other IT company. Since they have a very broad interview process. I don't have Computer Science degree and once Google recruiters crawled my e-mail address from kernel changelogs (hints included) I belive what they checked last is my academic degree. I didn't get the job due to relocation issues, but given three other big IT companies tried to headhunt me, I have to say that having Free Software contribution gives much better chance to get a job than any academic degree at all. I doubt anyone from Google or VmWare would be interested to interview with me since I only got a IT degree.
Re:IDA is a dissassembler
on
The IDA Pro Book
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Better note that with Hex-Ray plugin decompiler functionality can be added to IDA Pro.
Why is that? If using random hashes make a password unbreakable then what's the ground breaking part of this? It's been known for decades that you need a very good random hash (and importance is proven with recent Debian comment-out code including gpg tools).
This application has some 'cool factor' since it would make your shoot pictures of your friends in order to protect your 'important' communication between them, but real problem in here is not hashing, it is password generation algorithm. If it has weaknesses your random hash (ie. salt) won't make it any secure. And also how applications reach/use this password is another factor.
Biometrics have a good 'cool factor' but they indeed put other problems into security. As other posters mentioned you can shoot picture of Alice and Bob, considering it uses facial information, you can mimic it. It is like you could get finger prints left on some fingerprint scanners. Besides libraries using those biometric data need to a lot more time to be proven as secure than textual password algorithm we use today.
I might be a conservative about this but I still believe that even though biometrics can put some additional security, they still need to be harvested with memorized (ie. textual or verbal) passwords. If you don't harvest them, then you add possible attack vector of biometric data encoder to underlying authentication stack code as well.
How can behaviour of people can be associated with their religion? Saying Islam has nothing to do with peace for cultural misbehaving of some people, has same non-sense as saying being into Christianity teachings lead people to child molestation and homosexualism.
Given enough bad intent you can find people sin in behalf of their religion for any religion at all.
Of course baldness is a disease. A minor one at first sight, but it can lower people's self-esteem and cause severe psychological diseases, such as depression.
Not true. It does increase my self-esteem, knowing that my baldness is due to high testosterone. And I believe that bald people are more active in sex than others. Anyone losing their self-esteem due to baldness, just realize that you are more 'male' than non-bald others and cheer up.
There are third party patches to vanilla kernel which increases stability (and maybe security). Almost all mainline distros have changes to vanilla kernel of their own. Also there're patches which are quick fixes for some problems and take weeks to land in vanilla kernel. These after proper testing goes to distro repos as a new revision increased kernel. I guess that's what P meant about reading patches.
Not only easier, but also they don't care about expense which is shown as 'investment' on their balance sheet. Big companies are already profitable bussinesses and instead of paying more tax to government they tend to buy expensive 'site' licenses even though they actually don't need it.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course not, they are doing all those stuff for charity. Real success of Google is milking money and increasing profit almost every quarter, yet making people think they are not making money out of their services.
No, because it's not pysical 3D just an illusion.
Not actually right. Yes you can make CEO to clean toilets and to make him/her see toughness of working conditions and try to make things better for cleaners. Same for support personal. CEOs and upper management sometimes take decisions on the table, without further thinking about consequences. That's why all Wall Street is sinking deep in shit. Decisions made 'in a smart way' causes bigger problems in mid or long haul even though they look like a good idea in short run. CEOs and upper management people are not gods, so their decisions more likely to be critisized. Thinking of volunteraly migrating someone to totally different environment and expecting to get same kind of performance is silly enough. People are not like goods imported or exported. They have families, ideas, social lifes. And it's not easy to change that day by day.
From my garbage Gmail account with swearing and flame. Yes, I do have some free time to waste, as obvious.
Maybe it's better to note that Intel recently acquired OpenedHand and OpenedHand developers joined Intel Open Source Labs in order to work on Moblin platform. This looks like the first fruit of this acquisition.
Don't know why, but I started to get annoyed with this notion of 'average people find Linux as a geek toy and it should change this image'. For what reason? It's their ignorance, and sticking to Windows is at their expense. I personally don't care about anyone can't think deep enough to grasp basic foundation of what they use. I doubt any single free software developer does as well. We're producing software for people to use them. If first aim of this effort is to dominate and market our software we would do that in 'regular' fashion. We're trying to create bug free software. We're trying to create a new opportunity for users to make creative work. That's partially for ourselves and partially for others. But if they don't care about it, why should I?
Marketing free software is matter of others. Distribution and free software oriented service companies do that well. They market competitive free software better than proprietary software for most of cases. One day some entrepreneur will see light in Linux desktop and market it better than rivals.
Until that time, thinking about image of free software and it's popularity is just waste of time and pure demotivating action.
If nobody cared about copyright at all then motivation to write books would diminish and your colleagues wouldn't find any book to photocopy at first place. You're talking like those books are gospels. Some people spent valuable time creating them. And what makes them spending years to write/edit those books is their belief in copyright of these books are protected. Anyone can ask for funding for buying text books. Also universities have libraries to offer these books for those who can't afford them. And your colleagues are probably spending much more money elsewhere instead of spending it on books.
Price of knowledge is not the subject here. But even if it's, price of knowledge is much more than price of white paper. Again, you can *live* witout being a great engineer. And benefit you think from having a great engineer is less than cost of un-ethical engineer who justifies his wrong doings with biased excuses.
A lot of downloaders have surprisingly high ethical standards. Some purchase a legal copy, don't install it (because of DRM) and download the cracked version instead.
I'm not supporting DRM, but isn't the illegal sharing of copyrighted materials is the cause of DRM at first place? I don't believe content creators woke up one day and thought making sharing their copyrighted materials harder is needed without any reason. If downloaders don't like DRM, then they should instead find legal ways to get over with DRM (ie. boycott, complain, sue) instead of giving a good claim to those using DRM on their products.
Indeed that research justifies claims of the movie and music industry. Those downloading a copyrighted material illegally are prospective customers, and easier they can be able to get things free, less they would buy them. Not more.
There are always excuses for illegally downloading these stuff. Overpriced materials, willing to preview before buy, outdated media etc. But those are not valid excuses at least these days. You can *live* without listening to every single tune. You can *live* without watching every single movie. If you enjoy watching a movie, and if you enjoy listening to a tune, go buy it. Just like you enjoy eating snacks and need to buy them.
For sure you can be ideologically against policies of movie studios, or labels. Then boycot them by making their products less popular, not by illegally download their content. If you do you're one way or another both infringe laws and making those you're against good.
There're more liberal licenses for distributing copyrighted materials like Creative Commons. Instead support artists releasing content in such a way. But if you don't do that, nothing can be an excuse of infringing copyright of others.
Most responsible party in this long going problem is those distributing content. I blame those download illegal content less than those sharing this stuff. Distributing does not serve any purpose. As I said it does not serve your mission of protesting policies of the movie studios or music labels in case that's what you want in first place. It even helps their domination.
Harm of this illegal sharing of copyrighted material is very huge in developing countries. Their government and public don't understand importance of intellectual property. If developed countries did not have good protection of intellectual properties they would not be able to produce quality music, movies or even software. Developing countries don't give importance to this and at the end of day they don't/can't produce rival products with their own resources, they instead stay addicted to copyrighted products of others.
In my country, Turkey, illegal copying is rampant. And I'll give example not from soft copies, but hard copies, like books. Over here there're lots of universities giving education in English. But you hardly find original books written by professors of local universities. Almost all universities use textbooks from US and/or UK. I'm not talking about grad level courses, but basic physics, mathematics, biology etc. Since most of these books are photocopied by students, professors don't *waste* their time to produce more suitable materials to be used by the local universites and probably rest of the World. They can write better books for their own students. They can give more local examples and students would understand topics better. But students buy illegal copies and somehow manage to pass courses. If they instead complain about expensive books or authority enforce them not to use illegal copies and make them complain anyways, some local professor would produce cheaper and even better materials. Inevitably this not only harm education also make those educated people lazy.
Illegal copying is like using drugs. You don't foresee any problem eary times and even feel good about it. But eventually it harms your body and future.
Mozilla also sponsored GNOME Flagship conference GUADEC first time this year, and hopefully will keep its contribution for Desktop Summit. That's also very nice of them.
Microsoft is company of none of them. I think going for non-MS environment make least benefit to USA than any other country.
In a perfectly efficient, competitive market, profit goes to zero.
What are you talking about? Being efficient and competitive have nothing to do with profits.
...makes you unpaid advertisers.
I'm not doing my research on my garage but at a university lab, however there's nothing prevent people doing similar research at their basements apart from cost of equipment of gene engineering. It is very similar to working with software, and I believe a good reverse engineer for software can be a good gene engineer as well.
Currently GMO seed and micro organism producers try to put 'copy protection' for their products which prevent breeding new products out of theirs. This is very similar to what software vendors trying to achieve. But as in what current cracking scene doing, in future we'll see 'garage engineers' which would 'crack' those reproduce (read: copy) protections and release reproducible cDNAs.
In past computers were very expensive so it was almost impossible for those hobbiests to work on software. After cost of this equipment diminished and people started to be able to afford them we started to see this kind of activity effectively. For biotech we need similar thing as well and it's very possible that we'll see it. Improving PCR equipments and be able to buy them with an affordable price and also cheapers chemicals and enzymes can easily make this kind of biohacks ubiquitous in future.
I think Google care less about your degree than maybe any other IT company. Since they have a very broad interview process. I don't have Computer Science degree and once Google recruiters crawled my e-mail address from kernel changelogs (hints included) I belive what they checked last is my academic degree. I didn't get the job due to relocation issues, but given three other big IT companies tried to headhunt me, I have to say that having Free Software contribution gives much better chance to get a job than any academic degree at all. I doubt anyone from Google or VmWare would be interested to interview with me since I only got a IT degree.
Better note that with Hex-Ray plugin decompiler functionality can be added to IDA Pro.
Thank you now with this post, /. can be banned as well, and even *without needing court approval*. Since you were offensive to Kemal Ataturk.
Why is that? If using random hashes make a password unbreakable then what's the ground breaking part of this? It's been known for decades that you need a very good random hash (and importance is proven with recent Debian comment-out code including gpg tools).
This application has some 'cool factor' since it would make your shoot pictures of your friends in order to protect your 'important' communication between them, but real problem in here is not hashing, it is password generation algorithm. If it has weaknesses your random hash (ie. salt) won't make it any secure. And also how applications reach/use this password is another factor.
Biometrics have a good 'cool factor' but they indeed put other problems into security. As other posters mentioned you can shoot picture of Alice and Bob, considering it uses facial information, you can mimic it. It is like you could get finger prints left on some fingerprint scanners. Besides libraries using those biometric data need to a lot more time to be proven as secure than textual password algorithm we use today.
I might be a conservative about this but I still believe that even though biometrics can put some additional security, they still need to be harvested with memorized (ie. textual or verbal) passwords. If you don't harvest them, then you add possible attack vector of biometric data encoder to underlying authentication stack code as well.
Good to see where US tax money spent in past.
Someone should change the author of this book and re-distribute that way, then he will learn merits of piracy.
How can behaviour of people can be associated with their religion? Saying Islam has nothing to do with peace for cultural misbehaving of some people, has same non-sense as saying being into Christianity teachings lead people to child molestation and homosexualism.
Given enough bad intent you can find people sin in behalf of their religion for any religion at all.
Of course baldness is a disease. A minor one at first sight, but it can lower people's self-esteem and cause severe psychological diseases, such as depression.
Not true. It does increase my self-esteem, knowing that my baldness is due to high testosterone. And I believe that bald people are more active in sex than others. Anyone losing their self-esteem due to baldness, just realize that you are more 'male' than non-bald others and cheer up.
There are third party patches to vanilla kernel which increases stability (and maybe security). Almost all mainline distros have changes to vanilla kernel of their own. Also there're patches which are quick fixes for some problems and take weeks to land in vanilla kernel. These after proper testing goes to distro repos as a new revision increased kernel. I guess that's what P meant about reading patches.
Not only easier, but also they don't care about expense which is shown as 'investment' on their balance sheet. Big companies are already profitable bussinesses and instead of paying more tax to government they tend to buy expensive 'site' licenses even though they actually don't need it.
Now let's see if they will also push screenshots of Lotus Symphony Microsoft-Free as well.