i may be off on this, but i think a lot of public disclosure only happens after private disclosure. when you find a hole, i thought it was standard/ethical practice to report it to whoever it affects, wait some reasonable period of time, then publically disclose it.
spotlight is more of an extendable metadata search engine. it doesn't simply index the contents - the whats - of files, it can search on the whens and whos as well. and developers will be able to write plugins to have their documents searched intelligently.
this looks pretty cool, but it's a shame they've limited it to a handful of applications.
Q. Do people really have the right to travel anonymously?
There hasn't been a Supreme Court case yet that directly asked the question of whether Americans have the right to travel anonymously inside the United States. We believe that people do have that right, and hope that the courts will choose to say so.
The whole reason it's going to court is to determine the legality. Please pay attention. I think secret laws are bullshit as much as you do, that's not the point I was contesting. I just don't understand such feverent objection to providing identification. I realize there is potential for abuse of this information, but that issue should be dealt with separately - perhaps a privacy policy like everyone else?
I would certainly have an interest if my ticket was stolen and used, and the thief didn't even have to provide identification. The airline already has your name from when you bought the ticket, I don't see what the big deal is in identifying yourself at the terminal. If I buy a service, I would like to know that I'm the only one who can use it.
And I agree that the public should be informed on how the information will be used, and who is authorizing the demand and for what reason. If you don't like it, you can then decide not to comply, and not utilize the services of the airline. But not requiring identification is just not a solution in many cases.
As for the teen, assume they have their older brother's anonymous certification. What's to stop them from using it?
Should I have to sacrifice my anonymity to have a drink? But not to fly in a plane? Where do you draw the lines?
Am I missing something? It seems to me that being asked for identification when traveling is a pretty reasonable request, regardless of current terrorism politics. It serves to validate that you have the right to board. What's to stop a thief from stealing a ticket and simply using it, if they are not asked to prove they are who they say they are? And I don't buy the arguments that not requiring identification would be no less secure - sure it can be done now, but why is making it easier a good idea? Should Microsoft just realize that Windows is an insecure piece of shit, and give up trying?
By the same logic, why even have drivers licenses, if you can simply refuse to produce it? Why not just have an anonymous certification that you are fit to operate a motor vehicle? I'm sure a lot of teenagers would love this sort of argument. "Mister Bouncer, I refuse to show you my ID. Please take my word that I'm 21."
Take off your tin foil hats.
where have we heard this before?
on
NYT on Spam Cops
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
In a twist of weirdness, the Direct Marketing Association is funding investigators who cooperate with the FBI on spam investigations.
sounds like phillip morris funding anti-smoking campaigns.
you may have been kidding, but my friend's band hired me to do their website. in return they delivered a case of beer at the start of each week for a month.
be careful upgrading, as the semantics regarding object assignment have changed from copy to reference. i know some of my code would make use of the old copy-on-assignment semantics.
other than that, looks like version 5 introduces some cool stuff, ala java. abstract classes, exceptions, method visibility, and interfaces to name a few. can't wait to give it a try.
objective-c has it's weak points and strong points like any other language, but it's certainly better than c++. and for those who think it's ugly or confusing, there is really only one syntactical difference from c - using brackets for method calls ( [obj method]; ). it also has the advantage of being able to mix c [and c++ if gcc gets around to it] code seamlessly since it's a superset of c.
more important is the framework - OpenStep, GNUStep, Cocoa, whatever you want to call it. the foundation is already stable, runs on many platforms (GNUStep runs on the BSDs, linux, windows, even osx), and has a large number of applications that could be easily ported. the backend rendering engine is even interchangable. the specification is open, and the GNUstep project has kept up well with Apple's developments in Cocoa. and like the parent said, it would be easy to add bindings for java/python/whatever (already done in osx).
why not stick with something that has been shown to work? i can only imagine the horror of my desktop looking like a swing app. now *thats* blech.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe part of the problem is a certain level of sexual frustration on the part of the stereotypical nerd, but many of us are married, so what gives?
Since when is marriage a cure for sexual frustration?
I'm ashamed to admit it, but I still have a copy of the Hamster Dance. Thanks, Apple.
i may be off on this, but i think a lot of public disclosure only happens after private disclosure. when you find a hole, i thought it was standard/ethical practice to report it to whoever it affects, wait some reasonable period of time, then publically disclose it.
just in case yahoo gets /.ed?
So when talking about Windows, the fact that there are more Windows machines online is not a mitigating factor - Windows is just less secure.
But when talking about Linux, they're hacked more because there are more of them online? I don't think you can have it both ways.
spotlight is more of an extendable metadata search engine. it doesn't simply index the contents - the whats - of files, it can search on the whens and whos as well. and developers will be able to write plugins to have their documents searched intelligently.
this looks pretty cool, but it's a shame they've limited it to a handful of applications.
a FAQ on FAQs... this PA strip comes to mind.
In response to the overwhelming popularity of release theme songs, Microsoft recently announced the Longhorn release theme song.
Q. Do people really have the right to travel anonymously?
There hasn't been a Supreme Court case yet that directly asked the question of whether Americans have the right to travel anonymously inside the United States. We believe that people do have that right, and hope that the courts will choose to say so.
The whole reason it's going to court is to determine the legality. Please pay attention. I think secret laws are bullshit as much as you do, that's not the point I was contesting. I just don't understand such feverent objection to providing identification. I realize there is potential for abuse of this information, but that issue should be dealt with separately - perhaps a privacy policy like everyone else?
I would certainly have an interest if my ticket was stolen and used, and the thief didn't even have to provide identification. The airline already has your name from when you bought the ticket, I don't see what the big deal is in identifying yourself at the terminal. If I buy a service, I would like to know that I'm the only one who can use it.
And I agree that the public should be informed on how the information will be used, and who is authorizing the demand and for what reason. If you don't like it, you can then decide not to comply, and not utilize the services of the airline. But not requiring identification is just not a solution in many cases.
As for the teen, assume they have their older brother's anonymous certification. What's to stop them from using it?
Should I have to sacrifice my anonymity to have a drink? But not to fly in a plane? Where do you draw the lines?
Am I missing something? It seems to me that being asked for identification when traveling is a pretty reasonable request, regardless of current terrorism politics. It serves to validate that you have the right to board. What's to stop a thief from stealing a ticket and simply using it, if they are not asked to prove they are who they say they are? And I don't buy the arguments that not requiring identification would be no less secure - sure it can be done now, but why is making it easier a good idea? Should Microsoft just realize that Windows is an insecure piece of shit, and give up trying?
By the same logic, why even have drivers licenses, if you can simply refuse to produce it? Why not just have an anonymous certification that you are fit to operate a motor vehicle? I'm sure a lot of teenagers would love this sort of argument. "Mister Bouncer, I refuse to show you my ID. Please take my word that I'm 21."
Take off your tin foil hats.
In a twist of weirdness, the Direct Marketing Association is funding investigators who cooperate with the FBI on spam investigations.
sounds like phillip morris funding anti-smoking campaigns.
you may have been kidding, but my friend's band hired me to do their website. in return they delivered a case of beer at the start of each week for a month.
no need, apple is already dead
Go to any local amateur astronomy "star party" next time there's a meteor shower.
just don't drink the kool aid...
be careful upgrading, as the semantics regarding object assignment have changed from copy to reference. i know some of my code would make use of the old copy-on-assignment semantics.
other than that, looks like version 5 introduces some cool stuff, ala java. abstract classes, exceptions, method visibility, and interfaces to name a few. can't wait to give it a try.
objective-c has it's weak points and strong points like any other language, but it's certainly better than c++. and for those who think it's ugly or confusing, there is really only one syntactical difference from c - using brackets for method calls ( [obj method]; ). it also has the advantage of being able to mix c [and c++ if gcc gets around to it] code seamlessly since it's a superset of c.
more important is the framework - OpenStep, GNUStep, Cocoa, whatever you want to call it. the foundation is already stable, runs on many platforms (GNUStep runs on the BSDs, linux, windows, even osx), and has a large number of applications that could be easily ported. the backend rendering engine is even interchangable. the specification is open, and the GNUstep project has kept up well with Apple's developments in Cocoa. and like the parent said, it would be easy to add bindings for java/python/whatever (already done in osx).
why not stick with something that has been shown to work? i can only imagine the horror of my desktop looking like a swing app. now *thats* blech.