They talk about seven recommended (by them) business practices for handling identity, but fail to deal with identity itself. If they don't know what identity is, how are they supposed to deal with it correctly?
Practically the first thing they say is patently false. "The internet was built without a way to knew who and what you are connecting to." IP addresses are not absolutely guaranteed, but neither is the real world.
We recognize things by patterns and by responses. Leaving aside DNS poisoning, IP addresses are as consistent as anything in the real world. The structure of the web site presented to the public is a pattern that may be imitable for a few pages, but is not fully imitable except for completely static pages (where the whole issue of identity becomes meaningless).
DNS poisoning may need to be more fully addressed, but it is not without parallel in the real world. Personation is likewise a problem in the real world.
The first problem is a lack of confirmation. Too much of the internet is built to the click, and too many people click without checking.
The second problem is that the one-click convenience and the graphical presentation has hidden (intentionally?) the means for confirmation. It takes technical knowledge (minimal, but a bother, and many do not know) to reveal the links buried in the source, and many people turn off the URL entry field as if it were noise, and ECMAscript has a way to fake the shown URLs.
So, Microsoft has been busy hiding the tools of identity confirmation in the name of convenience, and now they want to replace what works about as well as the real world with something they can control.
This is _the_ reason I have hated Microsoft from the beginning. The do the things everyone else is too ethical to do and then they sell it. And since they do it, no one else thinks they can afford to not do it.
A few comments on the Objective C angle and a lot of complaints that the OS shouldn't matter by people who apparently missed the Objective C angle or perhaps assume that the GNU support for Objective C is equal to the Darwin/Cocoa support for Objective C.
And nobody seems to be reaching for jokes about Microware's (Radisys) OS-9.
Maybe Microware should have tried harder to defend their trademark after all.
in case you haven't picked that up elsewhere, yet.
Perhaps they are also using Remote Desktop (or whatever that is) to make monitoring more, er, intuitive? The remote would not be a determing feature, but the integration with Objective C would.
110% of what? Negotiated max? Perceived max? The what-I-wanted-to-give max? Expected performance?
Etc.
Different corporate climates have different ways of saying an honest-day's-work. Different employees have different ways of saying the same thing.
But it really bugs me that so many people have gotten to the point of slavery to "information" that they have to have their information gods serviced at all hours of the morning.
(Medical staff are partially exempted from the above accusation.)
then those who ruled by ignorance get phased out by attrition, or the society self-destructs.
Bill G. had one chance to pull the wool over people's eyes, and now the evidence is in front of everybody.
So the GP is right. Either Microsoft throws off the Bill & Steve act, or Microsoft gets plowed into the ground in the next five to ten years as the kids who know _why_ their parent's boxes are full of malware grow up.
And that's not counting the people outside the US and Japan who haven't become numb by constant exposure to MSWindows, who expect computing equipment to actually meet spec.
With PowerPC, it was at least a different set of machine code.
Hopefully, Apple's install procedure will guide the user through creating not just a fully password protected admin account, but a regular unprivileged user account as well, and use some social engineering to push the user to log in and surf as the unpriviliged user.
I'd prefer they also come up with a way to run all the browsers that go out on the web as a third, completely unprivileged user, but I suppose Microsoft's patent on runas might cause enough headaches, and that they won't be able to legally show the precedence of sudo by the time the first Mac OSx86 bachines come out.
I suppose, if I buy any more computers after Apple quits selling PowerPC, I'll probably buy ARM. I'm hoping IBM will have workstation and home server grade (price) Power by then.
Shoot. The way the schools are having to do this ought to be clear evidence in anyone's mind that the RIAA are out of line and out of control and not that far removed from a protection racket.
At least, I'm sorta familiar with Luttrell and Chrome Shift, and the cuts I recognize from the iTunes listing are all stuff I'd rather not waste time in an elevator listening to.
All this arguing about RIAA's monopoly and MSmonopoly and we've got rights, we may be letting the magician fool us into watching the hand that isn't doing the trick.
It may well be that this focus on DRM is simply because it's the easiest place to put the market differentiation right now. Maybe they don't care if it works. Maybe they just want to punch the clock at 5:00 (am?) and go home believing they've done a hard day's work.
If you really understood what that meant, you'd be taking the time to learn Linux. Time cost is higher with Linux, but value outweighs both monetary and time costs. And then you'd learn the BSDs because you'd know where the value comes from.
And then you would no longer be stuck with either Bill Gates's view of the Universe or Steve Jobs's (or Red Hat/Novell/Theo/whoever's).
That's what this freedom stuff is really all about: being able, by investing the effort, to really choose the best tool for the job.
IE being incompatible with standards is like iNTEL futzing the compiler output to re-route the execution path of non-iNTEL processors down the 386 path, or even straight into the wall.
Having PPC and x86 would be better compared to having Firefox and MSIE.
My memory is bad, but, as I recall, the 7.0 install disks included, but did not install, a small DOS floppy reading app. (Maybe it was a control panel?) I also recall reading some CDs with that app. (I don't remember it's name, offhand, and all my old Mac stuff is at home under a pile of my kids textbooks and toys, so I can't go look right now.)
Again, IIRC, 7.1 install disks included, but did not install, an extension that allowed mounting DOS volumes. I think that extension was installed by default from 7.5 on (and was sometimes a source of system instability conflicts).
It was not perfect. One particular trouble was with the way it represented the trash directories. In my projects at the time, I tended to use a directory I called "trash" to dump experimental paths that got lopped off. When I moved an entire project directory over to a DOS volume, DOS/MSWindows machines would go into infinite recursion when trying to read the trash directories. So I changed those directories from "trash" to "junkheap" or just "junk".
(Reminds me. I need to figure subversion out sometime.)
Slashdot Mirror
They talk about seven recommended (by them) business practices for handling identity, but fail to deal with identity itself. If they don't know what identity is, how are they supposed to deal with it correctly?
Practically the first thing they say is patently false. "The internet was built without a way to knew who and what you are connecting to." IP addresses are not absolutely guaranteed, but neither is the real world.
We recognize things by patterns and by responses. Leaving aside DNS poisoning, IP addresses are as consistent as anything in the real world. The structure of the web site presented to the public is a pattern that may be imitable for a few pages, but is not fully imitable except for completely static pages (where the whole issue of identity becomes meaningless).
DNS poisoning may need to be more fully addressed, but it is not without parallel in the real world. Personation is likewise a problem in the real world.
The first problem is a lack of confirmation. Too much of the internet is built to the click, and too many people click without checking.
The second problem is that the one-click convenience and the graphical presentation has hidden (intentionally?) the means for confirmation. It takes technical knowledge (minimal, but a bother, and many do not know) to reveal the links buried in the source, and many people turn off the URL entry field as if it were noise, and ECMAscript has a way to fake the shown URLs.
So, Microsoft has been busy hiding the tools of identity confirmation in the name of convenience, and now they want to replace what works about as well as the real world with something they can control.
This is _the_ reason I have hated Microsoft from the beginning. The do the things everyone else is too ethical to do and then they sell it. And since they do it, no one else thinks they can afford to not do it.
A few comments on the Objective C angle and a lot of complaints that the OS shouldn't matter by people who apparently missed the Objective C angle or perhaps assume that the GNU support for Objective C is equal to the Darwin/Cocoa support for Objective C.
And nobody seems to be reaching for jokes about Microware's (Radisys) OS-9.
Maybe Microware should have tried harder to defend their trademark after all.
about OS-9?
Maybe I just haven't read far enough yet.
in case you haven't picked that up elsewhere, yet.
Perhaps they are also using Remote Desktop (or whatever that is) to make monitoring more, er, intuitive? The remote would not be a determing feature, but the integration with Objective C would.
And I'm wondering about the lack of OS 9 jokes.
As has been noted elsewhere, Objective C is a little more difficult to set up on Linux or BSD, and somewhat less functional.
And, as noted in TFriendlyA, they are using Objective C rather extensively.
is probably more accurate than impossible.
Ergo:
When people start talking about 110%,
talking just doesn't seem to make much
sense anymore.
It's called letting the context slip.
I am putting out 110% of your maximum effort.
Or was it 110% of my minimum effort?
Probably the latter.
Who is it that is defining tear gas as chemical weapons?
110% of what? Negotiated max? Perceived max? The what-I-wanted-to-give max? Expected performance?
Etc.
Different corporate climates have different ways of saying an honest-day's-work. Different employees have different ways of saying the same thing.
But it really bugs me that so many people have gotten to the point of slavery to "information" that they have to have their information gods serviced at all hours of the morning.
(Medical staff are partially exempted from the above accusation.)
Is that what you're trying to say?
(Just want to make sure I understand you.)
to train the sysops on the equipment.
But that actually leaves you with another option -- teach the teachers how to secure their equipment. Just get permission first.
then those who ruled by ignorance get phased out by attrition, or the society self-destructs.
Bill G. had one chance to pull the wool over people's eyes, and now the evidence is in front of everybody.
So the GP is right. Either Microsoft throws off the Bill & Steve act, or Microsoft gets plowed into the ground in the next five to ten years as the kids who know _why_ their parent's boxes are full of malware grow up.
And that's not counting the people outside the US and Japan who haven't become numb by constant exposure to MSWindows, who expect computing equipment to actually meet spec.
buffer overflows, crashing the stack ...
Wine will be there, right?
With PowerPC, it was at least a different set of machine code.
Hopefully, Apple's install procedure will guide the user through creating not just a fully password protected admin account, but a regular unprivileged user account as well, and use some social engineering to push the user to log in and surf as the unpriviliged user.
I'd prefer they also come up with a way to run all the browsers that go out on the web as a third, completely unprivileged user, but I suppose Microsoft's patent on runas might cause enough headaches, and that they won't be able to legally show the precedence of sudo by the time the first Mac OSx86 bachines come out.
I suppose, if I buy any more computers after Apple quits selling PowerPC, I'll probably buy ARM. I'm hoping IBM will have workstation and home server grade (price) Power by then.
Yeah, I'm sure that 9 out of 10 /.ers could put up an equivalent download service in ten minutes.
This is called a creative solution. While RIAA is telling everyone to look at the waving hand, UC is saying, hey, let's be the hand with the rabbit.
from the extortionist.
Shoot. The way the schools are having to do this ought to be clear evidence in anyone's mind that the RIAA are out of line and out of control and not that far removed from a protection racket.
Or maybe they are partnering with more than one service?
At least, I'm sorta familiar with Luttrell and Chrome Shift, and the cuts I recognize from the iTunes listing are all stuff I'd rather not waste time in an elevator listening to.
Or does it?
"Might makes right" has been around for a lot longer than the general argument about people having fundamental rights.
It's part of the human condition to believe that power justifies.
That's a good question.
All this arguing about RIAA's monopoly and MSmonopoly and we've got rights, we may be letting the magician fool us into watching the hand that isn't doing the trick.
It may well be that this focus on DRM is simply because it's the easiest place to put the market differentiation right now. Maybe they don't care if it works. Maybe they just want to punch the clock at 5:00 (am?) and go home believing they've done a hard day's work.
Maybe it's the justification.
If you really understood what that meant, you'd be taking the time to learn Linux. Time cost is higher with Linux, but value outweighs both monetary and time costs. And then you'd learn the BSDs because you'd know where the value comes from.
And then you would no longer be stuck with either Bill Gates's view of the Universe or Steve Jobs's (or Red Hat/Novell/Theo/whoever's).
That's what this freedom stuff is really all about: being able, by investing the effort, to really choose the best tool for the job.
monoculture is great for virii.
IE being incompatible with standards is like iNTEL futzing the compiler output to re-route the execution path of non-iNTEL processors down the 386 path, or even straight into the wall.
Having PPC and x86 would be better compared to having Firefox and MSIE.
Personally, I preferred programming Macintosh System 7.
And OS-9/6809. Can't forget that one. And FORTH!
Heh.
There ain't no such thing as a perfect OS, of course, but I'd personally rather write my own OS from scratch than program for MSWxxx.
(Problem is, I can't get anyone to pay me to write my own OS from scratch.)
My memory is bad, but, as I recall, the 7.0 install disks included, but did not install, a small DOS floppy reading app. (Maybe it was a control panel?) I also recall reading some CDs with that app. (I don't remember it's name, offhand, and all my old Mac stuff is at home under a pile of my kids textbooks and toys, so I can't go look right now.)
Again, IIRC, 7.1 install disks included, but did not install, an extension that allowed mounting DOS volumes. I think that extension was installed by default from 7.5 on (and was sometimes a source of system instability conflicts).
It was not perfect. One particular trouble was with the way it represented the trash directories. In my projects at the time, I tended to use a directory I called "trash" to dump experimental paths that got lopped off. When I moved an entire project directory over to a DOS volume, DOS/MSWindows machines would go into infinite recursion when trying to read the trash directories. So I changed those directories from "trash" to "junkheap" or just "junk".
(Reminds me. I need to figure subversion out sometime.)
Somebody pointed out swallowtail.org's analysis. That analysis includes a description of how to patch around the check for the manufacturer string.
I might guess that many of those who use iNTEL's compilers already patch their binaries?