Yup, that document was funny. I liked this bit: "Additionally, Novell has neglected to be clear about the fact that GroupWise runs on Windows NT and Windows 2000, so patches that apply to Exchange customers also apply to GroupWise customer running a GroupWise system on Windows systems". So Microsoft are arguing that Novel haven't taken full account of the security issues due to Microsoft in a report bashing Microsoft. I am not sure that is an argument that Microsoft should be shouting about!
If this is for hardware it actually makes a lot of sense. Bad hardware drivers can create all kinds of problems and the Microsoft driver signing program appears to include a number of test to check for common problems drivers can cause (I think it tests the drivers with a range of possible inputs to check it copes correctly with them all). When I install some drivers and I see the unsigned driver warning that is often the first sign of trouble.
There are some of these in the URBIS gallery in Manchester. I can't find any pictures from inside the gallery at the moment. It looked like a they were just using a standard video projector in a slightly darkened room. The clever bit was being able to press on the image to select things. I guess this worked using a web cam and some image recognition software (pressing buttons worked but not that well).
Why can't IE run in a process with reduced privaliges? Why does IE need the privalages of the current user on NT/2000 when all it does is browse the web?
Another place to search if MSDN and groups.google.com do give any results is http://www.google.com/microsoft (Google for searching Microsoft related information).
Don't think this counts as a definitive, legitimate study but I did find multiple monitors very useful for developing UI in C++ at my previous job. It was very nice to be able to run the debugger and the application I was developing full screen at the same time. This allowed me to step through rendering and mouse tracking without any of the development tools getting in the way and causing screen redraws etc. The second monitor also came in useful for looking at documentation while I was writing code. Also, as the program I was working on was a commercial Windows app, it was good to be able to test things on a multiple monitor system - it is not unusual to find bits of code that assume screen coordinates are always positive which is not necessarily true on a multiple monitor system.
Why doesn't Microsoft set up software to run in the appropriate security context? When I log on as me, I might have lots of privileges on my computer and network. This does not mean that every application I run should have those privileges. By default applications like Internet Explorer run in the security context of the current user. That means that code in IE can do anything I can do. That does not make much sense most of the time. Ideally all applications (like those in these bug reports) should run with the absolute minimum of security rights. It should then be possible for me to grant applications more security rights as they need it. The problem here is not the technology - that is all there and working - it is the way defaults are set up and the UI for all of this stuff.
Are you saying that we could replace all the Slashdot users with a simple Perl script? In fact, perhaps someone has done this already and I am the only real person. Ahhh.... Maybe I am a Perl script too.
Slashdot is a site for commenting on the news, news.google.com finds the news. What about combining them to make a fully automated news discussion site? All the server would have to do is pick off the top n stories from Google news and feed them into the slash engine (or one of the slash cones). For bonus points, it could divide the news into different areas of interest. Anyone care to lend me some nice fast servers on with a fast Internet connection?
It would appear that this case is very similar to the case where Lotus sued Paperback Software claiming that Paperback Software had breached their copyright by copying their UI. I think in that case there may have been more blatant copying but it seems to come down to a similar issue (it is hard to tell excatly how much was copied from reading the article). There is a bit about the case here and here.
Is there any way of implementing DRM in an open source OS? Supposing there was a trusted body that could hold keys for signing code that were used secure part of the kernel, could this part of the kernel be made secure from changes? Obviously, in an open source OS it would be possible to change the code of both the secure and non secure parts of the kernel but would that automatically mean the system is insecure? I am imaging a system where you would be able to change the code and it would run just as before but with out the code having the signature of the trusted body on it, the code would not be able to decode any protected data.
As far as I can see, this is not possible. If it is not possible to do DRM in an open source OS and Microsoft goes ahead with a DRM enabled OS this could kill Linux as a desktop OS unless all the DRM is done in hardware. If there is a common DRM enabled platform available that works securely, then very few copyright holders would risk releasing their works on a non-DRM platform. If one desktop OS allowed people to watch any films or listen to any music they liked and the other did not, most people are going to choose the OS that does what they want even if it does mean losing control of their PC.
without a DRM OS you can legally play any free things that are available to you and any copyrighted material that the copyright holders choose to make available to you in a non-encoded form
with a DRM OS, you can do all of the things you can with a non-DRM OS and you can also play material that copyright holders choose to only make available in an encoded format
The main problem with a DRM OS is that your are forfeiting control over parts of your PC to provide a platform which copyright holders are happy to distribute there data for. Also, DRM probably locks you into a particular - almost certainly non open source - OS.
Would 'on the fly' editing be possible with normal DVDs? As long as there are no access controls in place, I don't think it would be that hard to take some DVD software and add a scripting engine to it. That way the player could be run with a script along the lines of:
; play start play-sound-and-video 00:00:00 to 00:00:10 ; skip the dull titles screen play-sound-and-video 00:01:00 to 00:10:00 ; replay cool effect with title music play-video 00:09:50 to 00:10:00 play-sound 00:00:00 to 00:00:10 ; etc
There would be lots of nice things that you could do with this for example, quick edits showing a 3 hour film in half an hour (eg 2001), plot edits to make films easier to understand (eg Mememnto) and loads more. The scripts would be tiny compared to the size of the film so they could be easily shared. With Windows there is a DirectShow DVD device that looks like it could do this without the need for any low level work and I am sure there must be something similar for Linux.
Would anyone be intrested in writing this? If you do, could I have a copy?!
I think this is one of the few areas where software patents actually make sence (I assume the people who made this have got some kind of patent for it). Unlike a lot of examples of software patents this is 'non obvious' and (as far as I know) is not a simple extention of someone else's work. Perhaps this could be used as a standard to judge other software patents: If something does not achive this standard of idea it should not be patentable.
Why are space craft always the same way up?
on
Physics in the Movies
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Why, when two spacecraft meet in the middle of space are they always the same way up relative to each other? Surly with no gravity or reference points, it would not be unusual to meet other space craft in space that are upside down etc.
I wondered if the Directron/Super Flower - 201S was a modified Lian Li PC60 case. A lot of the details (apart from the front and side) look very similar.
Some other thing you might want to try: - get the 1.4 version of the BIOS - set 'maxmem' in boot.ini - if you have an nVidia GeForce, make sure you have the most recent drivers - some earlier drivers causes a lot of problems
You might want to try a few searches on groups.google.com for S2460 and the brand of memory you are using. I have a S2460 and I learned the hard way that it is a very fussy board when it comes to what memory you use with it. In particular, Crucial memory can cause problems (although I have now got my board working OK with Crucial memory). The basic rule appears to be that it the memory is not on the Tyan approved list it will be problematic.
If anyone is really addicted to Slashdot they should consider the bulk discount option. When you order 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 units (1000 page blocks) the cost is a mere $49,999,999,999,999,995,805,696.00 instead of the normal $50,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. Order now while stocks last.
One solution would be to have some logo or symbol web sites and software developers could put on thier products to indicate that the licence meets certian minimum standards. For example for web sites this could include: - no spy ware - no abuse of email addresses - no passing of data to third parties This way even if there is a long licence agreement, users of a web site or software could see this logo and have some confidence that they are not signing up for something they don't want or at least the licence agreement is in the bounds specified by the standard.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, clicking the "Checkout" button gives warnings about the secutity certificate not matching the host name which might put some people off.
Yup, that document was funny. I liked this bit: "Additionally, Novell has neglected to be clear about the fact that GroupWise runs on Windows NT and Windows 2000, so patches that apply to Exchange customers also apply to GroupWise customer running a GroupWise system on Windows systems". So Microsoft are arguing that Novel haven't taken full account of the security issues due to Microsoft in a report bashing Microsoft. I am not sure that is an argument that Microsoft should be shouting about!
There is an excelent lecture discussing synesthesia here. It was first broadcast on BBC Radio 4 a few weeks ago. I really recommend listening to it.
Jonathan
If this is for hardware it actually makes a lot of sense. Bad hardware drivers can create all kinds of problems and the Microsoft driver signing program appears to include a number of test to check for common problems drivers can cause (I think it tests the drivers with a range of possible inputs to check it copes correctly with them all). When I install some drivers and I see the unsigned driver warning that is often the first sign of trouble.
There are some of these in the URBIS gallery in Manchester. I can't find any pictures from inside the gallery at the moment. It looked like a they were just using a standard video projector in a slightly darkened room. The clever bit was being able to press on the image to select things. I guess this worked using a web cam and some image recognition software (pressing buttons worked but not that well).
...and the hard disk supplied with the Linux kit and possibly USB storage devices if anyone wants to hack up the kernel to support them.
Why can't IE run in a process with reduced privaliges? Why does IE need the privalages of the current user on NT/2000 when all it does is browse the web?
Another place to search if MSDN and groups.google.com do give any results is http://www.google.com/microsoft (Google for searching Microsoft related information).
Don't think this counts as a definitive, legitimate study but I did find multiple monitors very useful for developing UI in C++ at my previous job. It was very nice to be able to run the debugger and the application I was developing full screen at the same time. This allowed me to step through rendering and mouse tracking without any of the development tools getting in the way and causing screen redraws etc. The second monitor also came in useful for looking at documentation while I was writing code. Also, as the program I was working on was a commercial Windows app, it was good to be able to test things on a multiple monitor system - it is not unusual to find bits of code that assume screen coordinates are always positive which is not necessarily true on a multiple monitor system.
Why doesn't Microsoft set up software to run in the appropriate security context? When I log on as me, I might have lots of privileges on my computer and network. This does not mean that every application I run should have those privileges. By default applications like Internet Explorer run in the security context of the current user. That means that code in IE can do anything I can do. That does not make much sense most of the time. Ideally all applications (like those in these bug reports) should run with the absolute minimum of security rights. It should then be possible for me to grant applications more security rights as they need it. The problem here is not the technology - that is all there and working - it is the way defaults are set up and the UI for all of this stuff.
Are you saying that we could replace all the Slashdot users with a simple Perl script? In fact, perhaps someone has done this already and I am the only real person. Ahhh.... Maybe I am a Perl script too.
Slashdot is a site for commenting on the news, news.google.com finds the news. What about combining them to make a fully automated news discussion site? All the server would have to do is pick off the top n stories from Google news and feed them into the slash engine (or one of the slash cones). For bonus points, it could divide the news into different areas of interest. Anyone care to lend me some nice fast servers on with a fast Internet connection?
...and here.
It would appear that this case is very similar to the case where Lotus sued Paperback Software claiming that Paperback Software had breached their copyright by copying their UI. I think in that case there may have been more blatant copying but it seems to come down to a similar issue (it is hard to tell excatly how much was copied from reading the article). There is a bit about the case here and here.
Is there any way of implementing DRM in an open source OS? Supposing there was a trusted body that could hold keys for signing code that were used secure part of the kernel, could this part of the kernel be made secure from changes? Obviously, in an open source OS it would be possible to change the code of both the secure and non secure parts of the kernel but would that automatically mean the system is insecure? I am imaging a system where you would be able to change the code and it would run just as before but with out the code having the signature of the trusted body on it, the code would not be able to decode any protected data.
As far as I can see, this is not possible. If it is not possible to do DRM in an open source OS and Microsoft goes ahead with a DRM enabled OS this could kill Linux as a desktop OS unless all the DRM is done in hardware. If there is a common DRM enabled platform available that works securely, then very few copyright holders would risk releasing their works on a non-DRM platform. If one desktop OS allowed people to watch any films or listen to any music they liked and the other did not, most people are going to choose the OS that does what they want even if it does mean losing control of their PC.
without a DRM OS you can legally play any free things that are available to you and any copyrighted material that the copyright holders choose to make available to you in a non-encoded form
with a DRM OS, you can do all of the things you can with a non-DRM OS and you can also play material that copyright holders choose to only make available in an encoded format
The main problem with a DRM OS is that your are forfeiting control over parts of your PC to provide a platform which copyright holders are happy to distribute there data for. Also, DRM probably locks you into a particular - almost certainly non open source - OS.
There would be lots of nice things that you could do with this for example, quick edits showing a 3 hour film in half an hour (eg 2001), plot edits to make films easier to understand (eg Mememnto) and loads more. The scripts would be tiny compared to the size of the film so they could be easily shared. With Windows there is a DirectShow DVD device that looks like it could do this without the need for any low level work and I am sure there must be something similar for Linux.
Would anyone be intrested in writing this? If you do, could I have a copy?!
Says a Rep from Texas: 'A mouse can be just as dangerous as a bullet or a bomb.'" ...so he is a track ball fan then?
I think this is one of the few areas where software patents actually make sence (I assume the people who made this have got some kind of patent for it). Unlike a lot of examples of software patents this is 'non obvious' and (as far as I know) is not a simple extention of someone else's work. Perhaps this could be used as a standard to judge other software patents: If something does not achive this standard of idea it should not be patentable.
Why, when two spacecraft meet in the middle of space are they always the same way up relative to each other? Surly with no gravity or reference points, it would not be unusual to meet other space craft in space that are upside down etc.
I wondered if the Directron/Super Flower - 201S was a modified Lian Li PC60 case. A lot of the details (apart from the front and side) look very similar.
(Sorry to reply to my own post)
Some other thing you might want to try:
- get the 1.4 version of the BIOS
- set 'maxmem' in boot.ini
- if you have an nVidia GeForce, make sure you have the most recent drivers - some earlier drivers causes a lot of problems
You might want to try a few searches on groups.google.com for S2460 and the brand of memory you are using. I have a S2460 and I learned the hard way that it is a very fussy board when it comes to what memory you use with it. In particular, Crucial memory can cause problems (although I have now got my board working OK with Crucial memory). The basic rule appears to be that it the memory is not on the Tyan approved list it will be problematic.
If anyone is really addicted to Slashdot they should consider the bulk discount option. When you order 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 units (1000 page blocks) the cost is a mere $49,999,999,999,999,995,805,696.00 instead of the normal $50,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. Order now while stocks last.
One solution would be to have some logo or symbol web sites and software developers could put on thier products to indicate that the licence meets certian minimum standards. For example for web sites this could include:
- no spy ware
- no abuse of email addresses
- no passing of data to third parties
This way even if there is a long licence agreement, users of a web site or software could see this logo and have some confidence that they are not signing up for something they don't want or at least the licence agreement is in the bounds specified by the standard.