I'm happy about this new release because I do use one or two programs that use Tcl/Tk and I'd be very happy to see them... well.. look nicer. Coincidentally, for this very reason I was looking at Tile the other day, which is the skinning engine available for Tcl/Tk. I compiled and installed it.. and.. nothing changed.
So, it seems that Tcl/Tk applications have to explicitly use Tile in order to get the skinning, is this correct? In other words, if I install 8.5, it won't change anything (visually) for the applications I'm already using, until they update themselves properly for 8.5, is that right?
Or is there some flag I can set in some configuration file that will enable the skinning engine?
We were doing some research on real-time systems at my company and it happened to turn out that there was a conference on real-time systems in a building not too far away so I attended.
Well, there was one talk entitled "how to choose a real-time system", which sounded like it would give a lot of useful information and seemed like it might have a nice broad overview of the industry. I thought I might get a nice comparison between QNX, embedded Linux, VxWorks, and maybe even a small section on how these solutions compare to WinCE.
The first thing the guy says is, "well, I know this talk was entitled 'how to choose a real-time system', but actually the real subject we're going to discuss is 'how to choose a Microsoft real-time system'. Apologies if there are any unix guys out there.." Underhanded sneaky fuckers. Turns out the company giving the tutorial is completely in bed with MS and the whole discussion is related to comparing CE with embedded XP, both which are mostly entirely uninteresting to me, but by then I was already seated on the opposite end of the room from the door so I sat through it. To this day I wish I'd stormed out of the room..
By the way, as an epilogue, to register for the conference I had to give them my email address. Back then I didn't have the presence of mind to go for a throw-away address, so I gave them my work address. Since then, and to this day, it has become the most spammed-out email address I've ever had the displeasure to use, and a very good portion of the spam is related to real-time systems. I can't change it because it's my work email. I've settled for forwarding it to gmail, which does a damn good job of filtering all the crap, but my spam ratio in that account is like 400-to-1. If I see one more "industry" spam inviting me to a "webinar", I'm going to scream.
Damn it I'm all trying to have a quiet morning here reading slashdot and not waking people in my house, and then you have to post something so funny I practically spit out my coffee...! You had me on the floor by "oh god, spiders and glasses..."
I agree that IRC is an odd medium to get support for a piece of software, but I've personally had the exact opposite experience. I've been getting to know git lately. Seeing as it's a bit of a strange beast, I've run into a few problems occasionally due to using the wrong command or whatever. Twice, I decided to try popping onto freenode (using Pidgin) and had my answer within about 10 seconds.
That said, I personally don't really _expect_ "good support" for FOSS, I usually assume that it's up to me to figure it out, and otherwise, that mailing lists are usually the best place to look. I'd say that about 95% of the time someone else has previously had the same problem and I can get my answer through Google in a few minutes.
Sure, there are times where I have to browse through pages and pages of hits, but often it's a really special corner case, and then I decide to make a post so that my question and answer might be archived somewhere for someone else to find. Don't forget to check newsgroups! Google Groups in particular contains tons of answers.
which could carry out procedures like a player piano.
I'm pretty sure this must be an inaccurate way of describing it. A player piano works open-loop.. no feedback is involved. An open-loop surgical robot would simply carry out the instructed movements in a straight-forward way --- no matter whether it's cutting the right tissue or poking a hole in the wrong place.
I think the article is trying to describe a more intelligent robot which actually uses visual and sensing feedback to tell whether it's doing the right thing. (I certainly hope so anyways.) This is not at all like a player piano.
Note that there is a lot of research going on right now in using high-speed communication to allow a surgeon to STAY in the loop. Communication in both directions allows a person to manipulate a robot remotely, and also to feel when the robot is obstructed somehow. Think of tele-manipulation systems for handling dangerous materials, but over a high-speed network.
I imagine the system described here is for when high-speed communication is an impossibility, so they have to program the robots, basically, to be as intelligent as the surgeon himself. A difficult task for sure.
Anyways what the hell is NASA doing research for Iraq for??? Yay military funding.
I find JavaScript to be a _very_ nice language. The way it's completely prototype-driven is really interesting, and took a while to get my head around. It seems people remain quite frustrated with it, and I can understand, due to all the incompatibilities between browsers. If you actually use JavaScript in a more well-defined environment you'll see the beauty of it. (For example, I've been doing JS code for Max/MSP lately.)
But to all the people commenting that they are "with MS on this one", please keep this in mind: To a large degree, MS is the VERY REASON you hate JavaScript so much. JS itself is fine -- it's IE's terrible non-standard insanity that keeps you going crazy as web developers. So why you would now get behind them in designing yet another ridiculous mind-trap is beyond me. That anyone would trust them to do this properly is totally insane, seeing as they are the very reason there's a problem in the first place. Remember the term "JScript"? That was MS's idea of implementing, but NOT QUITE completely implementing, JavaScript, for no reason other than to PISS YOU OFF.
Just remember these facts when you think about MS redesigning the web with its own languages: THEY broke the standards (purposely), THEY refused to put out an upgrade for IE6's crappy implementation for YEARS, and THEY are to blame for web design being such a difficult job. With cross-browser libraries like Prototype and JQuery things are finally getting easier to do on the web, so let's not go breaking it again, okay?
If one were to follow one's moral principles to a T, what should happen to everyone who bought an illegal copy of these songs? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that if you end up with stolen goods, the moral thing to do is to turn it into the police so it can be given back to the original owner. Yes, you end up losing over this --- as if the thief stole from you. Now in this case, since copying is not the same thing as stealing, what is the right thing to do? Bring it to the police on a USB key? Email it back to EMI? Just delete it? Or just... shrug.. and keep it... because nobody lost anything here. (Assuming EMI will eventually pay the band for the downloads..)
I feel this just further points out the distinction between theft and copyright infringement.
1 : Never heard of the "Juggernaut Bitch" video, don't know which movie you are referring to.... I have heard of a lot of the characters in Final Fantasy and Star Wars? I suspect it is not very notable.....?
I've thought for a while that the "future of social networking" will be an open-source facebook-like program that will get installed on various websites all over the place. I'm hoping that the next big "social network" will be distributed and decentralized.
But then, I don't care enough about "social networking" to design such a beast. But I'm almost sure someone will do it, if not already.
Of course, the answer to this Flash-based player is the same: determine what utility you can use to download the video file, and just do it. Fortunately, Flash even works over http, so no rtsp nonsense to deal with. Once you figure out how to parse the URL, as people have done with YouTube and various other Flash-based services, you just use wget or some Firefox extension. Bets on how long before its added to DownloadHelper?
I suppose they'll still block non-UK access, but I suppose that could be circumvented through a proxy. (Unless they are able to block them?)
You know, only maritimers actually say "aboot". Do you know how small the maritime region is in comparison with the rest of Canada?
I _never_ understood why Americans seemed to think that we say that, when I'd never heard it at all (I'm from Quebec), but now I've totally caught a friend of mine from Halifax saying it more than once now.
Anyways, not only is this completely stupid.. (how many times have Canadian coins been used in commercials and no one's been sued?? surely that's a precedent..), but more importantly WHEN ARE WE GOING TO GET RID OF THE PENNY?
I'm very much willing to round up prices just to get rid of the damn thing. Nickels are the new penny! Pass the word!
"But at least Windows doesn't require you to go to the terminal and type cryptic and scary commands just to fix little problems..." - oft-heard criticism of Linux
I thought "Blink" was by far the best Dr. Who episode this season.. can't believe it wasn't listed there. Anyways, are they really canceling this show after next season?? I do hope it continues.
It is not some "inalienable" God Given right like free speech or freedom of religion.
Freedom of religion and freedom of speech are as much socially-granted rights as fair use. (And happen to be damn good ones.) All three share the quality of being relatively new ideas in society, in the grand scheme of things. You might say we'd like to think that all three of these rights are vast improvements over how things used to work in historical times. I don't see the distinction you are trying to draw here at all.
I find this trend somewhat short-sighted. RFID of course has many uses, but it is known to have several vulnerabilities when used for security purposes. I can imagine what some of them are, but I'm not a security researcher so I won't speculate. However, the reliance specifically on surgically embedded RFID chips may fall quite easily into the trap laid by "security by difficulty."
Most of us agree that "security by obscurity" is a bad thing. Relying on closed code and hidden private keys (cough DRM cough) to ensure security just doesn't work well in the end. However, there is a tendency to have more faith in security which relies entirely on the difficulty of achieving some goal. In the case of mechanical locks, this is quite obvious and locks have been designed this way for centuries, the level of "difficulty" based on current technological knowledge and the known level of skill of lock pickers.
In software, we see "difficulty" being important for public-key encryption, which is the corner stone of many cryptographic paradigms. The difficulty, in this case, is finding a pair of primes which can be multiplied to get the private key. However, in this case we can use mathematics to formally identify the time required, according to current technology, to perform this calculation. Thus, we can have some very good, provable assurance that a particular algorithm won't be broken by brute force methods. (Until the next technological breakthrough... quantum cryptography? But that, we are told, is assuredly still far in the future..)
Now, here we have a tendency to embed an identification chip in a person, so that you can be sure that this person is who they say they are. After all, once a chip is embedded surgically, there's no way it can be wrong, right?
Unfortunately this logic is way too dependent on the current idea that surgery is a difficult thing. Already there exist plastic surgeries that take less than a week to recover from. Even the procedure in question I'm sure is quite minor and takes no time at all. So how does embedding a chip in someone add to the sense of security? It's perfectly imaginable to me that in the near future there will be devices which can easily inject such chips into the skin or remove them without requiring a doctor present at all.
So that is why I fail to understand this idea. Even after considering the man-in-the-middle attacks and several other ways to break RFID security, I cannot see that relying in surgical implantation will help much in terms of security. You may as well just get a magnetic card reader so that employees can use their ID cards to get in, and be done with it. Relying on surgery or even fingerprints/retina identification will only add to a false sense of security, as any of these can be fooled. And yes, someone eager enough to break into a high-tech workplace to steal data is going to be be smart enough to have thought of several ways to do it before breakfast.
I'm afraid that when it comes to physical security, people are still better at doing it than machines, and I believe this will be the case for some time.
There was nothing outside the Big Bang for it to expand out into. Every point in the universe was infinitely closer together.
Although I've understood this for some time, something that I've never quite been able to grasp is the following: How can points be "closer together" when the frame of reference is what you're talking about? It would required an outer frame of reference to be able to say that two points are closer together.
That is, if two points are getting closer together, we say that the distance between them is shrinking. But if distance itself is what is shrinking, how can we say they are getting closer together?
I've had the idea for a while that it would be cool to design some kind of formal language to describe licenses, so that you could apply logical rules to cancel out conflicting requirements and determine whether licenses are compatible with each other.
Sure, legalese is pretty "formal", but it's not computer-science *formal*. How cool would that be to encode laws and legal conditions such that they are provably effective?
Someone must have done something like this...
(That said, I've never really understood why people choose licenses other than BSD or GPL, since these seem to express some basic viewpoints on how F/OSS should work, but I guess people have their own reasons, which is fine with me actually.)
I,Robot, Transformers, all the comic book movies lately..... When is the movie industry going stop pissing all over my childhood?
One would hope that they at least write a decent script this time. From the summary though, I doubt it.
Sorry to be a downer. I just find that this trend of ransacking all our 80's childhood memories is starting to get on my nerves. It feels like they've just made some kind of list, with $$ next to each item, and they will continue down that list until the $$ gets lower than the expenses of creating CG effects. (And the latter is constantly getting lower.)
They don't pick these movies to make based on good scripts, good ideas, or good director/writers, they are just knocking them down one after the other because people will go see something they have good memories of. They're completely taking advantage of everyone's misplaced hope that the next one will be better, because "that was sooo awesome when I was a kid." (Perhaps they have the right to do so... you can only vote with your wallet.) I went to see Transformers hoping it would be something decent, but these movies are constantly disappointing. (X-Men wasn't bad to be completely honest..)
I think, this time around, at the very least I'll wait and heed the reviews instead of going to see it on opening day. (The hard part is finding a reviewer that usually agrees with you.)
Re:Any truly good 3D-programming book...
on
OpenGL SuperBible
·
· Score: 1
.. or the entire book should be done in Stereograms!
"Everyone sees this thing except me. Today's my day. I brought a lunch and a soda.
I'm not gonna leave until I see this sailboat everyone keeps talking about. "
In addition, securing Windows requires keeping the system fully up-to-date on all security patches. Unfortunately, the special circumstances associated with voting systems make it difficult to keep the Windows operating system patched and up-to-date. The Diebold system is tested and certified with a specific version of Windows; changing or upgrading that version might invalidate the certification and may not be permissible.
I find this one of the most interesting issues, because I don't see an easy answer for it. I have a disdain for Windows matching any of the most avid Linux fanboys, but this is one issue that doesn't seem to be Windows-specific. Leaving a machine unpatched and un-upgraded can leave it open to vulnerabilities. Upgrading it can invalidate the certification. Is there any way out of that situation? I think it would be an issue no matter what operating system they used.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm happy about this new release because I do use one or two programs that use Tcl/Tk and I'd be very happy to see them ... well.. look nicer. Coincidentally, for this very reason I was looking at Tile the other day, which is the skinning engine available for Tcl/Tk. I compiled and installed it.. and.. nothing changed.
So, it seems that Tcl/Tk applications have to explicitly use Tile in order to get the skinning, is this correct? In other words, if I install 8.5, it won't change anything (visually) for the applications I'm already using, until they update themselves properly for 8.5, is that right?
Or is there some flag I can set in some configuration file that will enable the skinning engine?
We were doing some research on real-time systems at my company and it happened to turn out that there was a conference on real-time systems in a building not too far away so I attended.
Well, there was one talk entitled "how to choose a real-time system", which sounded like it would give a lot of useful information and seemed like it might have a nice broad overview of the industry. I thought I might get a nice comparison between QNX, embedded Linux, VxWorks, and maybe even a small section on how these solutions compare to WinCE.
The first thing the guy says is, "well, I know this talk was entitled 'how to choose a real-time system', but actually the real subject we're going to discuss is 'how to choose a Microsoft real-time system'. Apologies if there are any unix guys out there.." Underhanded sneaky fuckers. Turns out the company giving the tutorial is completely in bed with MS and the whole discussion is related to comparing CE with embedded XP, both which are mostly entirely uninteresting to me, but by then I was already seated on the opposite end of the room from the door so I sat through it. To this day I wish I'd stormed out of the room..
By the way, as an epilogue, to register for the conference I had to give them my email address. Back then I didn't have the presence of mind to go for a throw-away address, so I gave them my work address. Since then, and to this day, it has become the most spammed-out email address I've ever had the displeasure to use, and a very good portion of the spam is related to real-time systems. I can't change it because it's my work email. I've settled for forwarding it to gmail, which does a damn good job of filtering all the crap, but my spam ratio in that account is like 400-to-1. If I see one more "industry" spam inviting me to a "webinar", I'm going to scream.
Damn it I'm all trying to have a quiet morning here reading slashdot and not waking people in my house, and then you have to post something so funny I practically spit out my coffee...! You had me on the floor by "oh god, spiders and glasses..."
ah, where did i put my 'funny' mod points... :)
I, for one, can attest that I've definitely discovered a few new shows by simply checking the list of most-seeded torrents on some web site.
:)
I've also discovered that it's not always an indication of quality.
I agree that IRC is an odd medium to get support for a piece of software, but I've personally had the exact opposite experience. I've been getting to know git lately. Seeing as it's a bit of a strange beast, I've run into a few problems occasionally due to using the wrong command or whatever. Twice, I decided to try popping onto freenode (using Pidgin) and had my answer within about 10 seconds.
That said, I personally don't really _expect_ "good support" for FOSS, I usually assume that it's up to me to figure it out, and otherwise, that mailing lists are usually the best place to look. I'd say that about 95% of the time someone else has previously had the same problem and I can get my answer through Google in a few minutes.
Sure, there are times where I have to browse through pages and pages of hits, but often it's a really special corner case, and then I decide to make a post so that my question and answer might be archived somewhere for someone else to find. Don't forget to check newsgroups! Google Groups in particular contains tons of answers.
I'm pretty sure this must be an inaccurate way of describing it. A player piano works open-loop.. no feedback is involved. An open-loop surgical robot would simply carry out the instructed movements in a straight-forward way --- no matter whether it's cutting the right tissue or poking a hole in the wrong place.
I think the article is trying to describe a more intelligent robot which actually uses visual and sensing feedback to tell whether it's doing the right thing. (I certainly hope so anyways.) This is not at all like a player piano.
Note that there is a lot of research going on right now in using high-speed communication to allow a surgeon to STAY in the loop. Communication in both directions allows a person to manipulate a robot remotely, and also to feel when the robot is obstructed somehow. Think of tele-manipulation systems for handling dangerous materials, but over a high-speed network.
I imagine the system described here is for when high-speed communication is an impossibility, so they have to program the robots, basically, to be as intelligent as the surgeon himself. A difficult task for sure.
Anyways what the hell is NASA doing research for Iraq for??? Yay military funding.
I find JavaScript to be a _very_ nice language. The way it's completely prototype-driven is really interesting, and took a while to get my head around. It seems people remain quite frustrated with it, and I can understand, due to all the incompatibilities between browsers. If you actually use JavaScript in a more well-defined environment you'll see the beauty of it. (For example, I've been doing JS code for Max/MSP lately.)
But to all the people commenting that they are "with MS on this one", please keep this in mind: To a large degree, MS is the VERY REASON you hate JavaScript so much. JS itself is fine -- it's IE's terrible non-standard insanity that keeps you going crazy as web developers. So why you would now get behind them in designing yet another ridiculous mind-trap is beyond me. That anyone would trust them to do this properly is totally insane, seeing as they are the very reason there's a problem in the first place. Remember the term "JScript"? That was MS's idea of implementing, but NOT QUITE completely implementing, JavaScript, for no reason other than to PISS YOU OFF.
Just remember these facts when you think about MS redesigning the web with its own languages: THEY broke the standards (purposely), THEY refused to put out an upgrade for IE6's crappy implementation for YEARS, and THEY are to blame for web design being such a difficult job. With cross-browser libraries like Prototype and JQuery things are finally getting easier to do on the web, so let's not go breaking it again, okay?
Here's an interesting aspect of this:
If one were to follow one's moral principles to a T, what should happen to everyone who bought an illegal copy of these songs?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that if you end up with stolen goods, the moral thing to do is to turn it into the police so it can be given back to the original owner. Yes, you end up losing over this --- as if the thief stole from you.
Now in this case, since copying is not the same thing as stealing, what is the right thing to do?
Bring it to the police on a USB key?
Email it back to EMI?
Just delete it?
Or just... shrug.. and keep it... because nobody lost anything here.
(Assuming EMI will eventually pay the band for the downloads..)
I feel this just further points out the distinction between theft and copyright infringement.
Yes! I so called this.
Here's a convenient Wikipedia article for you! (3rd hit in Google.)
I've thought for a while that the "future of social networking" will be an open-source facebook-like program that will get installed on various websites all over the place. I'm hoping that the next big "social network" will be distributed and decentralized.
But then, I don't care enough about "social networking" to design such a beast. But I'm almost sure someone will do it, if not already.
Of course, the answer to this Flash-based player is the same: determine what utility you can use to download the video file, and just do it.
Fortunately, Flash even works over http, so no rtsp nonsense to deal with. Once you figure out how to parse the URL, as people have done with YouTube and various other Flash-based services, you just use wget or some Firefox extension. Bets on how long before its added to DownloadHelper?
I suppose they'll still block non-UK access, but I suppose that could be circumvented through a proxy. (Unless they are able to block them?)
I know how you feel.. ;-)
You know, only maritimers actually say "aboot". Do you know how small the maritime region is in comparison with the rest of Canada?
I _never_ understood why Americans seemed to think that we say that, when I'd never heard it at all (I'm from Quebec), but now I've totally caught a friend of mine from Halifax saying it more than once now.
Anyways, not only is this completely stupid.. (how many times have Canadian coins been used in commercials and no one's been sued?? surely that's a precedent..), but more importantly WHEN ARE WE GOING TO GET RID OF THE PENNY?
I'm very much willing to round up prices just to get rid of the damn thing.
Nickels are the new penny! Pass the word!
"But at least Windows doesn't require you to go to the terminal and type cryptic and scary commands just to fix little problems..."
- oft-heard criticism of Linux
I thought "Blink" was by far the best Dr. Who episode this season.. can't believe it wasn't listed there.
Anyways, are they really canceling this show after next season?? I do hope it continues.
Freedom of religion and freedom of speech are as much socially-granted rights as fair use. (And happen to be damn good ones.) All three share the quality of being relatively new ideas in society, in the grand scheme of things. You might say we'd like to think that all three of these rights are vast improvements over how things used to work in historical times. I don't see the distinction you are trying to draw here at all.
I find this trend somewhat short-sighted. RFID of course has many uses, but it is known to have several vulnerabilities when used for security purposes. I can imagine what some of them are, but I'm not a security researcher so I won't speculate. However, the reliance specifically on surgically embedded RFID chips may fall quite easily into the trap laid by "security by difficulty."
Most of us agree that "security by obscurity" is a bad thing. Relying on closed code and hidden private keys (cough DRM cough) to ensure security just doesn't work well in the end. However, there is a tendency to have more faith in security which relies entirely on the difficulty of achieving some goal. In the case of mechanical locks, this is quite obvious and locks have been designed this way for centuries, the level of "difficulty" based on current technological knowledge and the known level of skill of lock pickers.
In software, we see "difficulty" being important for public-key encryption, which is the corner stone of many cryptographic paradigms. The difficulty, in this case, is finding a pair of primes which can be multiplied to get the private key. However, in this case we can use mathematics to formally identify the time required, according to current technology, to perform this calculation. Thus, we can have some very good, provable assurance that a particular algorithm won't be broken by brute force methods. (Until the next technological breakthrough... quantum cryptography? But that, we are told, is assuredly still far in the future..)
Now, here we have a tendency to embed an identification chip in a person, so that you can be sure that this person is who they say they are. After all, once a chip is embedded surgically, there's no way it can be wrong, right?
Unfortunately this logic is way too dependent on the current idea that surgery is a difficult thing. Already there exist plastic surgeries that take less than a week to recover from. Even the procedure in question I'm sure is quite minor and takes no time at all. So how does embedding a chip in someone add to the sense of security? It's perfectly imaginable to me that in the near future there will be devices which can easily inject such chips into the skin or remove them without requiring a doctor present at all.
So that is why I fail to understand this idea. Even after considering the man-in-the-middle attacks and several other ways to break RFID security, I cannot see that relying in surgical implantation will help much in terms of security. You may as well just get a magnetic card reader so that employees can use their ID cards to get in, and be done with it. Relying on surgery or even fingerprints/retina identification will only add to a false sense of security, as any of these can be fooled. And yes, someone eager enough to break into a high-tech workplace to steal data is going to be be smart enough to have thought of several ways to do it before breakfast.
I'm afraid that when it comes to physical security, people are still better at doing it than machines, and I believe this will be the case for some time.
Although I've understood this for some time, something that I've never quite been able to grasp is the following: How can points be "closer together" when the frame of reference is what you're talking about? It would required an outer frame of reference to be able to say that two points are closer together.
That is, if two points are getting closer together, we say that the distance between them is shrinking. But if distance itself is what is shrinking, how can we say they are getting closer together?
In what way is any license not a social instrument?
I've had the idea for a while that it would be cool to design some kind of formal language to describe licenses, so that you could apply logical rules to cancel out conflicting requirements and determine whether licenses are compatible with each other.
Sure, legalese is pretty "formal", but it's not computer-science *formal*. How cool would that be to encode laws and legal conditions such that they are provably effective?
Someone must have done something like this...
(That said, I've never really understood why people choose licenses other than BSD or GPL, since these seem to express some basic viewpoints on how F/OSS should work, but I guess people have their own reasons, which is fine with me actually.)
I,Robot, Transformers, all the comic book movies lately.. ... When is the movie industry going stop pissing all over my childhood?
One would hope that they at least write a decent script this time.
From the summary though, I doubt it.
Sorry to be a downer. I just find that this trend of ransacking all our 80's childhood memories is starting to get on my nerves. It feels like they've just made some kind of list, with $$ next to each item, and they will continue down that list until the $$ gets lower than the expenses of creating CG effects. (And the latter is constantly getting lower.)
They don't pick these movies to make based on good scripts, good ideas, or good director/writers, they are just knocking them down one after the other because people will go see something they have good memories of. They're completely taking advantage of everyone's misplaced hope that the next one will be better, because "that was sooo awesome when I was a kid." (Perhaps they have the right to do so... you can only vote with your wallet.) I went to see Transformers hoping it would be something decent, but these movies are constantly disappointing. (X-Men wasn't bad to be completely honest..)
I think, this time around, at the very least I'll wait and heed the reviews instead of going to see it on opening day. (The hard part is finding a reviewer that usually agrees with you.)
I find this one of the most interesting issues, because I don't see an easy answer for it. I have a disdain for Windows matching any of the most avid Linux fanboys, but this is one issue that doesn't seem to be Windows-specific. Leaving a machine unpatched and un-upgraded can leave it open to vulnerabilities. Upgrading it can invalidate the certification. Is there any way out of that situation? I think it would be an issue no matter what operating system they used.