If Microsoft had designed Windows with separate administrator and user privileges from the start and made sure that in a default install you got a non-administrator account, the mess that Windows is currently in would never have happened.
You are right that Microsoft is not to blame for errors in 3rd party programs, but they are to blame for starting out with a broken design for an operating system and then hacking bits on as required, instead of doing it properly from the beginning. It's pretty hard for them to change it now because of their backwards compatability requirement.
Perhaps the right antimonopoly measure against MS is to prohibit pre-installation and require the systems be shipped with a clean drive, OS install CD and have the installation protocol fully documented.
This idea won't work unfortunately. Even if the installation process was as simple as 'Insert the installation CD and turn on your computer', this would still be too scary and complicated for many users. 50%* of people would put the CD in the wrong way round (the others just got lucky). A computer should be fully working when you buy it.
Linux was designed from the start to support separation of root and user permissions. Programs that don't need root permissions work fine when you run them with user priveleges.
On Windows, many applications fail to run unless you have Administrator priveleges, simply due to sloppy coding and lack of testing. As a result, almost everyone ordinary Windows user I know runs with administrator priveleges. It's a completely different mind-set.
Linux isn't a silver bullet. A virus can still install itself in user space, and from there it can:
* Delete files
* Read confidential files from that one user (a typical computer might only have 1 or 2 users)
* Send out spam
* Install a keylogger
* Read the users contact list and forward itself to all users on that list.
* Install itself to start up with user priveleges when the computer boots (by modifying the users configuration files)
* Pretty much anything...
However having separate users does limit the damage and it makes it a lot easier to clean up since no executable files are affected, root should be safe, and the system should still be stable and consistent once the virus is removed. (This is not true if the virus has gained root priveleges, and really you should assume that it has, if you really want to be safe).
Much of the security of Linux comes from:
* The peer review process.
* The speed that the most serious holes are patched and the ease of applying these patches on most distribution.
* Vulnerable services are not usually open to attack after a default install.
* 'Biodiversity' - an attack against a specific application will not affect all users.
* New install media with latest bug fixes issued regularly and easy to obtain.
* Large amounts of software is available from the distribution repository so you don't need to download and run installers from third-party web pages.
* Smaller market share gives attackers less incentive to attack.
I'm not saying that ALL software for Linux is secure, and that ALL distributions respond promptly to security vulnerabilities, but it is possible to be reasonably secure if you choose the right vendor and don't be stupid by installing random screensavers from dodgy websites.
Besides, can't you write the same program in a shorter way using APL?
I don't think so otherwise someone would have submitted it.
If you want to obfuscate
I don't. The idea was to make it as short as possible, not as unreadable as possible. If I wanted to make it unreadable, I'd use Perl, like you suggested.
Nice ideas. I've decided to patent them all so please add $1m to all your listed prices, for royalty payments. Thank-you.
Also I am patenting:
Accessing a database in space. Running a webserver in space. Using a mobile phone in space. Listening to music in space. Swinging on a swing in space. Plus many others...
I have a fantastic idea for a new company. I will sue Microsoft for allegedly having Linux code in Windows. Obviously this is going to cost a lot of money so please help by investing in my company. I don't actually have any evidence, but who cares I will just claim they destroyed it! This can't fail! Please donate investments to my Paypal account and if I win you will get a share of the settlement.
Enemy? Just because China is becoming a powerful nation doesn't mean you have to neutralize them before they overtake you. If America can be a powerful nation without fucking up the rest of the world, I'm sure China can do it too. Probably they'd do it a lot better actually. Stop killing everyone and try to learn how to get on with the people around you, even though they may be different to you.
I'm not sure how you inferred that I wasn't going to take an active hand in educating people
I associate 'having faith' with religious nuts that failed to win an argument using logic so they just claim 'This is true, please just accept it and don't think about it any more.'
Sorry if I jumped to a conclusion.
DRM will only fail if everyone (well, enough of the population that it hurts sales figures) takes a stand against it. If DRM becomes successful, vendor lock-in will be even more of a problem than it is today. You can't just leave this something like this to chance. I'm glad that there are at least two of us that will help to educate others about the problems of widespread acceptance of DRM, however I am worried that there are not enough of us.
He doesn't care about hardware support or software support.
He cares as soon as he puts in his World of Warcraft CD in and nothing happens. Then he assumes that the computer is broken, rings his supplier and asks to get a new computer that works 'properly' like his old one did. In other words, he wants Windows back, even if he doesn't know it himself.
Honestly, the idea of DRMs pisses so many people off that they simply can't stay around for long. The consumer hates not being trusted, and won't buy things that have DRMs.
Most people, when they installed the Sony rootkit, did not even know that they had installed DRM on their machine, what it's purpose was, how to remove it, or even why they should care.
DRMs will be a thing of the past in the next decade, I have faith.
My prediction: DRM will be even more common next decade. CD sales will continue to fall and DRM'd content sales will continue to rise. The difference between you and me, is that I will be trying to raise people's awareness rather than just sitting back and letting it happen.
Thurrott will still be ranting and raving about how much Windows is light years ahead of OS X and Linux.
Well, in terms of hardware driver support and software support, it is light years ahead, and that's what matters to most people.
The fact that another option is technologically superior / more attractive / more stable / faster / easier to use / more secure means nothing to AverageJoe if leading hardware/software producers do not support it!
Why would he be outraged? He is trying to sell Windows. He's trying to get people accustomed to the accusations that come from WGA. He's not trying to discourage them from using Windows altogether. It's his job to do this!
I have to admit I never understood what the fuss over the Google Accelerator was. Wasn't it just a proxy server? There are loads of proxy servers already, and I don't see people complaining about those...
Even so Google managed to deflect the anger after a mistake. Sony, Microsoft, etc. seem to be less succesful at doing this.
"The only way DRM will ever be plausable will be if they produce a DRM'd codec that plays on anything."
Doesn't that sort of defeat the purpose of DRM though? If you did that, people could buy songs from one place but a player from another. The whole point of DRM is to stop that happening.
Slashdot Mirror
If Microsoft had designed Windows with separate administrator and user privileges from the start and made sure that in a default install you got a non-administrator account, the mess that Windows is currently in would never have happened.
You are right that Microsoft is not to blame for errors in 3rd party programs, but they are to blame for starting out with a broken design for an operating system and then hacking bits on as required, instead of doing it properly from the beginning. It's pretty hard for them to change it now because of their backwards compatability requirement.
Perhaps the right antimonopoly measure against MS is to prohibit pre-installation and require the systems be shipped with a clean drive, OS install CD and have the installation protocol fully documented.
This idea won't work unfortunately. Even if the installation process was as simple as 'Insert the installation CD and turn on your computer', this would still be too scary and complicated for many users. 50%* of people would put the CD in the wrong way round (the others just got lucky). A computer should be fully working when you buy it.
*OK I admit, I'm exaggerating a bit.
Linux was designed from the start to support separation of root and user permissions. Programs that don't need root permissions work fine when you run them with user priveleges.
On Windows, many applications fail to run unless you have Administrator priveleges, simply due to sloppy coding and lack of testing. As a result, almost everyone ordinary Windows user I know runs with administrator priveleges. It's a completely different mind-set.
Probably some 'factually correct Nazi' will pick me up on this error, so let me correct it now:
* Install itself to start up with user priveleges when the computer boots (by modifying the users configuration files)
Of course, I meant:
* Install itself to start up with user priveleges when the user logs in after a reboot (by modifying the users configuration files)
That's almost the same as what I said originally but not quite. Sorry for the slight error.
Let me see, we need a force to bring the swing back to the center.
:)
Well I could attach a spring to the bottom of the swing and to the floor.
Yay, I'm a genius!! Do I get the patent now?
Or even better, you could just swing from side to side by pulling on the chains! Oh wait, someone already patented that.
Linux isn't a silver bullet. A virus can still install itself in user space, and from there it can:
* Delete files
* Read confidential files from that one user (a typical computer might only have 1 or 2 users)
* Send out spam
* Install a keylogger
* Read the users contact list and forward itself to all users on that list.
* Install itself to start up with user priveleges when the computer boots (by modifying the users configuration files)
* Pretty much anything...
However having separate users does limit the damage and it makes it a lot easier to clean up since no executable files are affected, root should be safe, and the system should still be stable and consistent once the virus is removed. (This is not true if the virus has gained root priveleges, and really you should assume that it has, if you really want to be safe).
Much of the security of Linux comes from:
* The peer review process.
* The speed that the most serious holes are patched and the ease of applying these patches on most distribution.
* Vulnerable services are not usually open to attack after a default install.
* 'Biodiversity' - an attack against a specific application will not affect all users.
* New install media with latest bug fixes issued regularly and easy to obtain.
* Large amounts of software is available from the distribution repository so you don't need to download and run installers from third-party web pages.
* Smaller market share gives attackers less incentive to attack.
I'm not saying that ALL software for Linux is secure, and that ALL distributions respond promptly to security vulnerabilities, but it is possible to be reasonably secure if you choose the right vendor and don't be stupid by installing random screensavers from dodgy websites.
Ordering an item in space and on the Internet.
Shit, I missed that one!
Besides, can't you write the same program in a shorter way using APL?
I don't think so otherwise someone would have submitted it.
If you want to obfuscate
I don't. The idea was to make it as short as possible, not as unreadable as possible. If I wanted to make it unreadable, I'd use Perl, like you suggested.
Nice ideas. I've decided to patent them all so please add $1m to all your listed prices, for royalty payments. Thank-you.
Also I am patenting:
Accessing a database in space.
Running a webserver in space.
Using a mobile phone in space.
Listening to music in space.
Swinging on a swing in space.
Plus many others...
Ruby is great. I cannot imagine what would make you say those things.
---
Help me with my Ruby Sudoku Solver
...but you do realise it was just a joke, I hope...?
I have been looking for an android with a palpable gravitas for a long time. I hope it is fully functional.
I have a fantastic idea for a new company. I will sue Microsoft for allegedly having Linux code in Windows. Obviously this is going to cost a lot of money so please help by investing in my company. I don't actually have any evidence, but who cares I will just claim they destroyed it! This can't fail! Please donate investments to my Paypal account and if I win you will get a share of the settlement.
Enemy? Just because China is becoming a powerful nation doesn't mean you have to neutralize them before they overtake you. If America can be a powerful nation without fucking up the rest of the world, I'm sure China can do it too. Probably they'd do it a lot better actually. Stop killing everyone and try to learn how to get on with the people around you, even though they may be different to you.
Why can't the Chinese set up thier firewalls block this kind sh*t?
That's a ridiculous suggestion. It's not the job of the Chinese government to monitor all traffic going in and out of China.
Oh wait..
why force everyone to wait until the 8th.
;)
The theory is that once the patch is out, crackers will reverse engineer it to make new exploits, increasing the security risk for other companies.
It also gives Microsoft a good excuse to be slow to patch, but that's just my own personal theory.
No, the main problem with DRM ... is how its been implemented. They have tried to tie the media to specific devices on which it plays.
Oh really?? And here was me thinking it was just a way to prevent illegal copying...
I have commented on this before, but it seems that I am the only person on Slashdot that understands that DRM cannot prevent illegal copying.
I'm not sure how you inferred that I wasn't going to take an active hand in educating people
I associate 'having faith' with religious nuts that failed to win an argument using logic so they just claim 'This is true, please just accept it and don't think about it any more.'
Sorry if I jumped to a conclusion.
DRM will only fail if everyone (well, enough of the population that it hurts sales figures) takes a stand against it. If DRM becomes successful, vendor lock-in will be even more of a problem than it is today. You can't just leave this something like this to chance. I'm glad that there are at least two of us that will help to educate others about the problems of widespread acceptance of DRM, however I am worried that there are not enough of us.
He doesn't care about hardware support or software support.
He cares as soon as he puts in his World of Warcraft CD in and nothing happens. Then he assumes that the computer is broken, rings his supplier and asks to get a new computer that works 'properly' like his old one did. In other words, he wants Windows back, even if he doesn't know it himself.
Honestly, the idea of DRMs pisses so many people off that they simply can't stay around for long. The consumer hates not being trusted, and won't buy things that have DRMs.
Most people, when they installed the Sony rootkit, did not even know that they had installed DRM on their machine, what it's purpose was, how to remove it, or even why they should care.
DRMs will be a thing of the past in the next decade, I have faith.
My prediction: DRM will be even more common next decade. CD sales will continue to fall and DRM'd content sales will continue to rise. The difference between you and me, is that I will be trying to raise people's awareness rather than just sitting back and letting it happen.
Thurrott will still be ranting and raving about how much Windows is light years ahead of OS X and Linux.
Well, in terms of hardware driver support and software support, it is light years ahead, and that's what matters to most people.
The fact that another option is technologically superior / more attractive / more stable / faster / easier to use / more secure means nothing to AverageJoe if leading hardware/software producers do not support it!
Why would he be outraged? He is trying to sell Windows. He's trying to get people accustomed to the accusations that come from WGA. He's not trying to discourage them from using Windows altogether. It's his job to do this!
You are completely missing the point. Either:
* The DRM is so strong that you have to remove the DRM before putting it on a P2P network.
or:
* The DRM is so weak that you don't have to remove it before putting it on a P2P network.
In either case the DRM does *nothing* to prevent illegal copying. The only thing it prevents is legal use.
I have to admit I never understood what the fuss over the Google Accelerator was. Wasn't it just a proxy server? There are loads of proxy servers already, and I don't see people complaining about those...
Even so Google managed to deflect the anger after a mistake. Sony, Microsoft, etc. seem to be less succesful at doing this.
"The only way DRM will ever be plausable will be if they produce a DRM'd codec that plays on anything."
Doesn't that sort of defeat the purpose of DRM though? If you did that, people could buy songs from one place but a player from another. The whole point of DRM is to stop that happening.