How much you want to bet that the new firewall doesn't block ICMP packets?
I'd be willing to bet a great deal of money that it does since the original XP firewall blocks ICMP packets. You can even choose which types of ICMP packets to allow.
Uh huh. I have to accept connections to be exploited? Then explain why I have to patch IE all the time. Or why I had to patch libpng a while ago. Or why it's possible to run arbitrary code on unpatched Mac OS X via Safari (so I hear).
A buffer overflow in software can result in a compromised system whether the software accepts connections or makes them. And given that Windows XP SP2 will have the firewall enabled by default, I suspect we'll see a trend toward security holes in those programs that MAKE connections.
The stats are only meaningless if you did not read the article. In the previous paragraph, they note that there are considering the 36 security advisories from 2003 and 2004. Perhaps you'll try reading the article next time instead of running your mouth.
Yeah, when I was driving down to Florida a couple of weeks ago, we were constantly scanning for APs, and two or three times "flyingj" came up, with multiple APs in each location. In fact, they're using Cisco (i.e. high quality) access points, it would seem. I really wouldn't expect that many truckers to require a high quality 802.11b connection, but I guess you learn something new everyday.
Haha, brilliant scheme. "Let's see. You've got 10 pounds of filet mignon, 99 cents a pound, 8 lobsters at 50 cents each, and 30 bottles of wine at 79 cents each. Ok, Mr. Johnson, have a nice day."
This is offtopic, so I'm avoiding the karma bonus, but I feel that this must be addressed, karma be damned. Does anyone else find the parent's style of posting an excellent model of the most utterly obnoxious, conceited drivel that pervades Slashdot? Let's count:
We've got the "repeat after me" bullshit. What the hell is that? Since when did you merit anyone repeating your thoughts as some kind of divine doctrine? And since when did we all belong to some community that thinks exactly alike. Maybe next time you can just communicate your ideas clearly without resorting to trying to sound smarter than everyone else.
"mmmmkay": What the fuck. Just because you end your sentence with the equivalent of "this is right, you're wrong, you ignorant, slobbering fool" doesn't mean that you have any idea what you're talking about. You're just trying to make yourself sound smarter. We're not convinced.
And then the worthless "rules" that, while seeming insightful, are really just formulated to make any kind of meaningful argument pointless. In this case, we have rules supposedly inherit in UNIX. The poster leaves no room to question the validity of these rules. Then the poster presumes that Linux follows them. Next, he flippantly asserts that Windows does not, apparently without any knowledge of modern (NT-based) Windows design. He concludes, then, that Windows sucks.
This style of posting is nothing but karma whoring, and I'm getting a little tired of it. Don't be fooled by my high user ID number; I have an old account with a UID in the 30k range. This style of post has been around for a long time. It's worse than any troll, since the poster manages to make himself look good AND gain a high visibility spot in the posts. It really needs to stop.
I find it hard to believe someone who confuses "except" and "accept" and generally uses questionable and otherwise ineloquent grammar could possibly have graduated from law school. Attorneys are required to write from time to time, are they not?
Oh shut up. You're obviously looking for reasons to criticize Microsoft. The fact is that they HAVE contributed to open source, albeit in a minor fashion.
YES, SSI is crap. This we know. But Microsoft IS moving in the right direction by using the CPL in some of their minor projects. If those projects are successful, perhaps they will release MORE CPLed source. After all, you can't just open everything overnight.
So sure, be wary around anything Microsoft does. They do deserve it. But you also should give them a chance; your comments are just empty criticism.
IANAL, but I believe prototypes are only required for certain devices, such as perpetual motion machines, that we're pretty darn sure don't exist; thus, the USPTO won't have to waste its time with applications for impossible ideas.
Whaaaaat? This is an option that said users will want to change. GConf contains more dangerous options. Now you mix them all together, and ask users to go mucking around in there. That's a great way to get new users to fuck up their systesm. Nice going, man.
What is so hard to understand? Give the option in a simple preferences dialog. Just do it. Done. End of discussion. There's absolutely no reason NOT to do this. I don't understand why the whole "with OSS you get choice" mantra only applies to those of the programming persuasion.
That's not actually true. There are really three different behaviors I have seen:
1. Credit card number on both. I hate this with a passion, and I always black it out with the pen. This is a common artifact of using an impact printer with the carbon form type of receipt.
2. Credit card number on the merchant's copy. This is not so bad, and there may be good reason for doing this, as you mention.
3. Credit card number on neither. I have seen this enough times to know that they aren't REQUIRED to have a paper copy of the signed receipt with credit card number.
Well, you're right about the tree view; I should not have focused so much on that. But my point is that my father has deep levels of organization, so even when he does not use the tree level view, he does not want to have 10 windows pop up on the screen.
Yes, yes, you can use the Ctrl key to disable spatial browsing. In fact, I want some features of spatial browsing; I do like to the ability to leave icons where I put them, for example. But I want, by default, to be able to have a toolbar and to have one navigation window. Ctrl should take me to "open in a new window", not "open in same window." When I'm too lazy to have my hands on the keyboard, I still want the feature I use the most to work. This is neither a dangerous nor an esoteric preference.
Guys, let's be honest. These developers are not UI experts. They're programmers. There are a few artists that create some icons. But they're not UI experts.
Apple and Microsoft, on the other hand, hire UI experts. They sit down with users and watch what they do. They take notes. They change designs. They have research teams to come up with new concepts.
True, some of Apple's and Microsoft's software obviously didn't get very extensive testing. To this day I wonder about Office -- I think they have to focus on their original design flaws since users would be upset with too many changes. And Apple's Dock clearly isn't designed for much more than a way to sell computers.
But you can bet that the file explorer concept has been researched, tested, and deployed to death by these companies and many others. They have figured out what works. The new versions of OS X have moved away from spatial browsing. Windows has moved away from spatial browsing. GNOME users demand a move away from spatial browsing.
These companies got it right because they listened to their users and they tested different designs. OSS does not have the resources to do such testing, other than to release and see what people say. And that can work, but not in GNOME, KDE, Mozilla, or any other of the giant software packages. There you cannot afford to submit the user to testing each and every release.
So yes, OSS should innovate. But in the realm of UI design, there are models that work theoretically, like spatial browisng, and models that work in practice, like web-style browsing. Apple knows this. Microsoft knows this. OSS should have learned this by now.
That's preposterous. This is not something that only the good old boys are going to want to change. New users to GNOME and Linux will want to have this level of customization too.
My father is a good example of such a user. I see him using Windows Explorer with the tabbed view constantly. He organizes his files very carefully, and he thinks about them in a tree-like structure. But he is not going to want to climb through some kind of registry editor to make this change, since in Windows it has always been as easy as Tools | Folder Options. That's right, it's a preferences dialog right off of the window itself.
Keep the dangerous and esoteric preferences in gconf. But put the common, safe ones in a preferences dialog. Remember: the customer is always right.
Absolute balderdash. Government software should be in the public domain. Here's why:
First of all, companies paid for the software too through taxes. I don't understand why you think that they should be prevented from ADDING VALUE to the software and reselling it. It's not that the company is STEALING the software from the people; the people still have exactly the software that the government created. But when companies ADD VALUE, they should be able to sell that ADDED VALUE at the market price. If they try to sell it at too high a price, then a competitor will enter the market. Or perhaps the government should have finished the job the first time, if they're really releasing the software for the common good. If the government had done a good enough job in the first place, then nobody would pay for the ADDED VALUE.
Secondly, the GPL discourages companies from ADDING VALUE. Without the ability to sell the software at market price, companies have absolutely no incentive to improve upon the government's work to make it more useful to the whole of society. Users of software cannot afford to do inhouse development to fix the GPLed software's problems, and for the types of the software that the government is likely to release, there will probably be no giant community willing to chip in either. Therefore, it makes sense to allow companies to profit by ADDING VALUE to the software, since that makes everyone better off in the end.
I cannot overstate the issue: the GPL does not guarantee that people will ADD VALUE to software, especially in special-purpose software. The public domain allows people to copyright changes, which in turn provides an incentive to ADD VALUE. And finally, companies can only charge as much as the ADDED VALUE is worth; otherwise, people will use the public domain software as-is.
Thus, placing government software in the public domain will better serve the public as a whole.
Choice is cruft because it makes it harder to navigate through the giant list of packages. The more packages there are, the harder it is to find the more common packages, which are generally the ones you want.
Not that it really matters. Debian is not, and should never be, a desktop distro for non-technical users. I run it on my servers and I am very happy.
Yes, but trained dogs are TRAINED to look for things that are out of place; they either do it by default, or they are TRAINED to do it in response to a known word.
This dog heard the new toy's name, a totally unfamiliar word, and, without prior TRAINING, figured out that it must be the toy that it recognized least. It's not any different just because dogs use smell instead of sight as their primary sense for identification. It figured out that "go get your toy" must mean to fetch the toy that it could not otherwise identify.
Oh, and then it remembered the toy's name a month later without hearing the word again. So it didn't even associate the word with "generic unknown toy" -- it associated the word with "the toy that I found."
Maybe I'm just responding to a troll, but I can't help myself. Karma be damned.
I don't really see any facts in your post. Just a lot of foaming at the mouth.
I'm not sure what you really have to say about.NET. Then you shriek about "other compiler collections" as if that's relevant.
Maybe you should point out to us exactly which browsers had autocomplete before IE. Because for "such an obvious idea", it sure wasn't in Netscape 3/4.
I'm not sure what you're really saying about KDE's HTML helpfiles. Something about autogenerating something. And then some foaming about Microsoft "extorting money". Ah, and "ill gotten gains", another gem.
Look, I don't like software patents. I am both a Windows user and a Linux user. I find some of Microsoft's latest patents frustrating at the least. But you need to calm down, move out of your parents' basement, and present your argument more precisely.
I'm a little annoyed by the attitude here. This is a pretty impressive reverse engineering job, but most of Slashdot is just laughing it off because the device was originally created for Pokemon related games.
I mean, I doubt any of the mad PHP coderz around here could do anything these guys just did. I know I couldn't.
Slashdot Mirror
You stay away from my mom.
How much you want to bet that the new firewall doesn't block ICMP packets?
I'd be willing to bet a great deal of money that it does since the original XP firewall blocks ICMP packets. You can even choose which types of ICMP packets to allow.
Yes, how intuitive. How did the reviewer miss that? Heck, my mom could have done that in her sleep.
Uh huh. I have to accept connections to be exploited? Then explain why I have to patch IE all the time. Or why I had to patch libpng a while ago. Or why it's possible to run arbitrary code on unpatched Mac OS X via Safari (so I hear).
A buffer overflow in software can result in a compromised system whether the software accepts connections or makes them. And given that Windows XP SP2 will have the firewall enabled by default, I suspect we'll see a trend toward security holes in those programs that MAKE connections.
Yeah! OS X is teh rox0r!!!!1111
The stats are only meaningless if you did not read the article. In the previous paragraph, they note that there are considering the 36 security advisories from 2003 and 2004. Perhaps you'll try reading the article next time instead of running your mouth.
Bonk! Nobody cares.
Yeah, when I was driving down to Florida a couple of weeks ago, we were constantly scanning for APs, and two or three times "flyingj" came up, with multiple APs in each location. In fact, they're using Cisco (i.e. high quality) access points, it would seem. I really wouldn't expect that many truckers to require a high quality 802.11b connection, but I guess you learn something new everyday.
Haha, brilliant scheme. "Let's see. You've got 10 pounds of filet mignon, 99 cents a pound, 8 lobsters at 50 cents each, and 30 bottles of wine at 79 cents each. Ok, Mr. Johnson, have a nice day."
This is offtopic, so I'm avoiding the karma bonus, but I feel that this must be addressed, karma be damned. Does anyone else find the parent's style of posting an excellent model of the most utterly obnoxious, conceited drivel that pervades Slashdot? Let's count:
We've got the "repeat after me" bullshit. What the hell is that? Since when did you merit anyone repeating your thoughts as some kind of divine doctrine? And since when did we all belong to some community that thinks exactly alike. Maybe next time you can just communicate your ideas clearly without resorting to trying to sound smarter than everyone else.
"mmmmkay": What the fuck. Just because you end your sentence with the equivalent of "this is right, you're wrong, you ignorant, slobbering fool" doesn't mean that you have any idea what you're talking about. You're just trying to make yourself sound smarter. We're not convinced.
And then the worthless "rules" that, while seeming insightful, are really just formulated to make any kind of meaningful argument pointless. In this case, we have rules supposedly inherit in UNIX. The poster leaves no room to question the validity of these rules. Then the poster presumes that Linux follows them. Next, he flippantly asserts that Windows does not, apparently without any knowledge of modern (NT-based) Windows design. He concludes, then, that Windows sucks.
This style of posting is nothing but karma whoring, and I'm getting a little tired of it. Don't be fooled by my high user ID number; I have an old account with a UID in the 30k range. This style of post has been around for a long time. It's worse than any troll, since the poster manages to make himself look good AND gain a high visibility spot in the posts. It really needs to stop.
Thoughts?
I find it hard to believe someone who confuses "except" and "accept" and generally uses questionable and otherwise ineloquent grammar could possibly have graduated from law school. Attorneys are required to write from time to time, are they not?
Quit trolling, liar.
Oh shut up. You're obviously looking for reasons to criticize Microsoft. The fact is that they HAVE contributed to open source, albeit in a minor fashion.
YES, SSI is crap. This we know. But Microsoft IS moving in the right direction by using the CPL in some of their minor projects. If those projects are successful, perhaps they will release MORE CPLed source. After all, you can't just open everything overnight.
So sure, be wary around anything Microsoft does. They do deserve it. But you also should give them a chance; your comments are just empty criticism.
IANAL, but I believe prototypes are only required for certain devices, such as perpetual motion machines, that we're pretty darn sure don't exist; thus, the USPTO won't have to waste its time with applications for impossible ideas.
Whaaaaat? This is an option that said users will want to change. GConf contains more dangerous options. Now you mix them all together, and ask users to go mucking around in there. That's a great way to get new users to fuck up their systesm. Nice going, man.
What is so hard to understand? Give the option in a simple preferences dialog. Just do it. Done. End of discussion. There's absolutely no reason NOT to do this. I don't understand why the whole "with OSS you get choice" mantra only applies to those of the programming persuasion.
That's not actually true. There are really three different behaviors I have seen:
1. Credit card number on both. I hate this with a passion, and I always black it out with the pen. This is a common artifact of using an impact printer with the carbon form type of receipt.
2. Credit card number on the merchant's copy. This is not so bad, and there may be good reason for doing this, as you mention.
3. Credit card number on neither. I have seen this enough times to know that they aren't REQUIRED to have a paper copy of the signed receipt with credit card number.
Well, you're right about the tree view; I should not have focused so much on that. But my point is that my father has deep levels of organization, so even when he does not use the tree level view, he does not want to have 10 windows pop up on the screen.
Yes, yes, you can use the Ctrl key to disable spatial browsing. In fact, I want some features of spatial browsing; I do like to the ability to leave icons where I put them, for example. But I want, by default, to be able to have a toolbar and to have one navigation window. Ctrl should take me to "open in a new window", not "open in same window." When I'm too lazy to have my hands on the keyboard, I still want the feature I use the most to work. This is neither a dangerous nor an esoteric preference.
Guys, let's be honest. These developers are not UI experts. They're programmers. There are a few artists that create some icons. But they're not UI experts.
Apple and Microsoft, on the other hand, hire UI experts. They sit down with users and watch what they do. They take notes. They change designs. They have research teams to come up with new concepts.
True, some of Apple's and Microsoft's software obviously didn't get very extensive testing. To this day I wonder about Office -- I think they have to focus on their original design flaws since users would be upset with too many changes. And Apple's Dock clearly isn't designed for much more than a way to sell computers.
But you can bet that the file explorer concept has been researched, tested, and deployed to death by these companies and many others. They have figured out what works. The new versions of OS X have moved away from spatial browsing. Windows has moved away from spatial browsing. GNOME users demand a move away from spatial browsing.
These companies got it right because they listened to their users and they tested different designs. OSS does not have the resources to do such testing, other than to release and see what people say. And that can work, but not in GNOME, KDE, Mozilla, or any other of the giant software packages. There you cannot afford to submit the user to testing each and every release.
So yes, OSS should innovate. But in the realm of UI design, there are models that work theoretically, like spatial browisng, and models that work in practice, like web-style browsing. Apple knows this. Microsoft knows this. OSS should have learned this by now.
That's preposterous. This is not something that only the good old boys are going to want to change. New users to GNOME and Linux will want to have this level of customization too.
My father is a good example of such a user. I see him using Windows Explorer with the tabbed view constantly. He organizes his files very carefully, and he thinks about them in a tree-like structure. But he is not going to want to climb through some kind of registry editor to make this change, since in Windows it has always been as easy as Tools | Folder Options. That's right, it's a preferences dialog right off of the window itself.
Keep the dangerous and esoteric preferences in gconf. But put the common, safe ones in a preferences dialog. Remember: the customer is always right.
Absolute balderdash. Government software should be in the public domain. Here's why:
First of all, companies paid for the software too through taxes. I don't understand why you think that they should be prevented from ADDING VALUE to the software and reselling it. It's not that the company is STEALING the software from the people; the people still have exactly the software that the government created. But when companies ADD VALUE, they should be able to sell that ADDED VALUE at the market price. If they try to sell it at too high a price, then a competitor will enter the market. Or perhaps the government should have finished the job the first time, if they're really releasing the software for the common good. If the government had done a good enough job in the first place, then nobody would pay for the ADDED VALUE.
Secondly, the GPL discourages companies from ADDING VALUE. Without the ability to sell the software at market price, companies have absolutely no incentive to improve upon the government's work to make it more useful to the whole of society. Users of software cannot afford to do inhouse development to fix the GPLed software's problems, and for the types of the software that the government is likely to release, there will probably be no giant community willing to chip in either. Therefore, it makes sense to allow companies to profit by ADDING VALUE to the software, since that makes everyone better off in the end.
I cannot overstate the issue: the GPL does not guarantee that people will ADD VALUE to software, especially in special-purpose software. The public domain allows people to copyright changes, which in turn provides an incentive to ADD VALUE. And finally, companies can only charge as much as the ADDED VALUE is worth; otherwise, people will use the public domain software as-is.
Thus, placing government software in the public domain will better serve the public as a whole.
That's incorrect. Debian does not force you to create a user. Nor should they. Some of are using LDAP for our user accounts.
Choice is cruft because it makes it harder to navigate through the giant list of packages. The more packages there are, the harder it is to find the more common packages, which are generally the ones you want.
Not that it really matters. Debian is not, and should never be, a desktop distro for non-technical users. I run it on my servers and I am very happy.
Yes, but trained dogs are TRAINED to look for things that are out of place; they either do it by default, or they are TRAINED to do it in response to a known word.
This dog heard the new toy's name, a totally unfamiliar word, and, without prior TRAINING, figured out that it must be the toy that it recognized least. It's not any different just because dogs use smell instead of sight as their primary sense for identification. It figured out that "go get your toy" must mean to fetch the toy that it could not otherwise identify.
Oh, and then it remembered the toy's name a month later without hearing the word again. So it didn't even associate the word with "generic unknown toy" -- it associated the word with "the toy that I found."
Maybe I'm just responding to a troll, but I can't help myself. Karma be damned.
.NET. Then you shriek about "other compiler collections" as if that's relevant.
I don't really see any facts in your post. Just a lot of foaming at the mouth.
I'm not sure what you really have to say about
Maybe you should point out to us exactly which browsers had autocomplete before IE. Because for "such an obvious idea", it sure wasn't in Netscape 3/4.
I'm not sure what you're really saying about KDE's HTML helpfiles. Something about autogenerating something. And then some foaming about Microsoft "extorting money". Ah, and "ill gotten gains", another gem.
Look, I don't like software patents. I am both a Windows user and a Linux user. I find some of Microsoft's latest patents frustrating at the least. But you need to calm down, move out of your parents' basement, and present your argument more precisely.
You think ipchains/iptables/ipfwadm is trivial?
And actually, Windows XP DOES come with a basic firewall. SP2 will come with an even more advanced firewall.
I like Linux too, but you're just spreading Windows FUD.
Who said he was using it for production?
How quickly we jump to conclusions we have already made.
I'm a little annoyed by the attitude here. This is a pretty impressive reverse engineering job, but most of Slashdot is just laughing it off because the device was originally created for Pokemon related games.
I mean, I doubt any of the mad PHP coderz around here could do anything these guys just did. I know I couldn't.
Really, give them some credit.
(Cue posts saying "man, it was a joke.")