"In the Wild," is laughable. How did the porn site "get infected"?
I don't think "in the wild" means that the porn site accidentally got infected. "In the wild" means that it is not within a controlled experiment or was not created specifically to be used within a controlled environment. The opposite would be a "proof of concept" trojan that someone might use to demonstrate at a computer security conference.
If it's possible for a Mac to get infected without the user's knowledge, then that qualifies as "in the wild".
Next time you give debian a try, use aptitude instead of dselect. It navigates just like lynx, so it's pretty intuitive.
Yeah, I think Debian has made great strides since 2002. At the time, dselect was the only alternative to dpkg / apt-get.
When I used dselect to select a certain package, I could never tell whether other packages changed status that would be automatically installed or whether I would need to install them. My understanding was the former, but then when I tried to install, it would say, "Hey, you have to install such-and-such a package!" and I thought, "But isn't dselect supposed to do that automatically?"
And then it would come up with unresolved dependencies and I would have no idea what to do. At times it gave me a list and I couldn't tell whether I was suposed to choose one, or install all of them. Thinking back on it now, I realize now that the dependencies were screwed up and it wasn't the fault of my computer at all.
The Debian chatrooms and forums were full of elitists at the time (and, to an extent, still are). By this I don't mean that they were "RTFM" nasty to me, but that they were so familiar with Linux and Debian that they couldn't comprehend the viewpoint of a newbie. For example, there was one file, something like/etc/apt/sources.d (or something like that) that was supposed to contain the line "sources=100000". All the HowTo web pages said that this line had to be added to the file; same thing in the forums, and people told me this in chat. But, for the life of me, I couldn't find the file.
Finally, someone told me, "Well, if the file doesn't exist, you create it." Oh, I'm supposed to make the file myself! Was this supposed to be some minor point that should have been obvious to the newbie?
There were many other things, like the realization that the word "source" could refer to different things, sometimes in the same sentence: the source code of the programs, the location of the Deb packages on the Internet, or the actual "sources.list" file.
I am *very* glad that Ubuntu came along and looked at things from the perspective of the newbie. It made Debian usable. It made things like aptitude, Synaptic and Adept happen. (Yes, I know these aren't exclusive to Ubuntu, but without Ubuntu, I just don't think the Debian project itself would have had anywhere near the same focus on usability.)
I ordered a Wal-Mart Linux PC. I'm using it for a backup server at home right now.
This was back in 2002 or 2003. It was $200, only available by mail-order, and came with a CD-ROM drive and single hard disk (20GB?). I picked up a crummy CRT at the local second-hand computer store and started exploring Linux. I replaced the hard drive with a removable hard drive bracket.
It took me a while to figure out that the CD reader had subtle errors (after 3 different distributions of Linux failed to install) and replaced that too. The thing was, the smaller box (is that called mini-ITX?) would only fit the very smallest CD drives, and both my new CD RW and the removable hard drive bracket protruded out the front in a rather ugly way.
The thing came with Lindows (as it was called at the time). I tried it for 10 minutes and then replaced it with "Pink Tie" Linux, then Mandrake 8.1, then LibraNet Linux. (I tried Debian, too, but that "dselect" thing is way too cryptic.)
Looks like Wal-Mart is back with more PC's for the people. That's great. It will bring more visibility to Ubuntu, and Linux in general. And that's the point of the whole thing: to let Linux have more visibility so that manufacturers, and people in general, won't say, "Hey, we don't have to make our video player compatible with Linux because nobody uses Linux."
If this is the place for suggestions and complaints for Slashdot, may I put in my two cents? Sounds like people have been suggesting a number of new mods and changes to the old ones. Could this be revised? For example:
- separating +1 Funny into "+1 Funny-Raise Karma" and "+1 Funny-Karma Unaffected" - combining -1 Flamebait with -1 Troll - adding -1 Wrong (or -1 Misinformed), the opposite of "+1 Informative" - combining +1 Interesting with +1 Insightful
(In fact, we can have diametrically opposed mods, like Informative/Misinformed, Underrated/Overrated, Insightful/Flamebait, Funny/Rude, etc.... but maybe we'll take it one step at a time.)
And, yes, put in my vote for logging in via HTTPS.
Hmm. Looking at the GP post more carefully, I no longer see the sarcasm that had seemed to be there when I wrote the parent post. Sorry about that. Guess I got fooled by the Funny mod. Anyway, yes, it *is* indeed a good thing that Internet connectivity is now considered part of the essential supplies at a disaster shelter.
Isn't it great that technology like the internet has reached the point of acceptance that when peoples houses are burning down one of the main priorities is to ensure the shelter everyone has to hide in has wireless internet access and that people make sure they at least rescue their laptops and PDAs.
I'm sure it wasn't much more than 5 years ago that people would look at you funny if you turned up in such a place and said "Right, where's the net access?".
Oh, I get it. You're one of those people who thinks, "It's a disaster!" and everything suddenly turns into some post-apocalyptic science fiction movie. So, let me ask you:
Why are the fires a problem? Why is it a disaster that some 150,000 acres of land are burning up and darkening the sky with its smoke? I mean, only one person's *died* from it --heck, people die every day in traffic collisions and heart failure and stuff. So what's the problem?
The two main problems caused by this disaster are: 1) systems get disrupted, and 2) people lose their wealth. You see where the network is so important yet? Perhaps I'll make it clearer.
By "systems", I mean the infrastructure. Roads are closed, stores don't get supplies, needed medical services are diverted to rescue the sick, people can't get to work because they're living in Qualcomm stadium or the Del Mark fairgrounds. The economy of the area takes a huge hit. Also, of course, the phone system gets clogged by people wanting directions --where are the fires now?-- coordinating evacuations and asking after loved ones.
By "wealth", I mean not only material wealth as in homes and businesses, but also intangibles such as documents and insurance policies, etc. And "people" includes businesses.
But suppose people are able to stay connected, to know what's going on. They know that I-15 northbound is closed, so they can plan their evacuation routes. They can contact the sister in El Centro or the in-laws in Temecula, and know that that's available for evacuation (or that they've gone on vacation --try the brother in Yuma instead).
If they have secure Internet banking, they can start selling their stocks and diverting funds from their GIC's to their bank account so the money will be on hand when sudden cash expenditures are called for. Heck, in their spare time they might even be able to complete that company client report that's due the next day for the client living in New Jersey, to whom the disaster is just another story in the news and who doesn't care why the report wasn't done at exactly 9am as demanded. That way maybe the company can live with a 50% decrease in business rather than a 90% drop.
And the more people stay connected, the more quickly they can bounce back from the disaster and resume their lives. 'Cuz, goodness knows, there's a lot of work to be done in that department.
I'm lucky in that I've not been directly affected. But, boy, having that 120GB in the laptop would sure make a huge difference if I were ever to flee from my home.
I've been running Comcast since I left the dorms in '03 and I have a very different experience... In all of this time I have never, not once, noticed throttling
Acknowledged that not every single customer is screwed by Comcast, but unfortunately this doesn't make Comcast any better.
If someone perpetrated a crime --let's say, mugging university students who walk through the campus alone at night-- you wouldn't say, "Well, clearly this is a case-by-case thing, because he didn't mug me when I walked there alone at night."
I think Mandriva is a prime target for Microsoft acquisition. They are well-known within the community. Previously producers of the flagship Mandrake desktop distro, they have been eclipsed by the rising star of Ubuntu. Financially, they've been on rocky ground.
I wouldn't be surprised if there were a few disgruntled staff around, either from the former Conectiva, former Lycorix, or former Mandrake itself, that would drool at the prospect of being snapped up by a huge company, with tons of benefits. The prestige of being part of a transnational company, and being able to participate in in-house Special High Intensity Training for elite developers, would probably set their careers on the fast track for the rest of their lives. Who wouldn't want that?
That's not to say that Francois Bancilhon should turn down an offer by MS, but we'll have to take steps to pass on the torch for Mandriva Linux after they're acquired, publishing the source for the in-house tools (gurpmi, diskdrake, etc.), getting meeting minutes, identifying enthusiastic hackers who are willing to take up the torch and working with them prior to the actual MS acquisition, etc. They need to establish a name that people will equate with Mandriva (since the trademark Mandriva itself will be owned by Microsoft afterward), the way everyone knows CentOS is really RedHat but with a different group supporting it. This way, the momentum will carry on.
No, they aren't really. They are giving the developers lots of money and Microsoft simply won't be an interesting place for them to stay. So, they will be leaving Microsoft after the purchase. Non-competes are hard to enforce, both because courts don't like them and because it's difficult to see how an independently wealthy developer working on this own time would be "competing" with Microsoft.
You're right, I didn't think of the developers being independently wealthy and thus not reliant on continuing to please Microsoft for a living. Still, if I were Microsoft, here's what I would do (and maybe you have a way around this):
Microsoft offers a deal to buy a FLOSS company, say Mandriva. Of course, any time Company A buys Company B, Company A wants to make sure the staff in Company B won't just quit. Thus, it's perfectly reasonable for Microsoft to make the deal contingent on a number of conditions.
First, the enticements: if Microsoft buys Red Hat, all the staff get a nice solid pay raise, with double to triple the income for the executive; great benefits, not all of which are monetary (e.g. MS arranges immigration to US if desired and staff is foreign, or MS will pay for expanding their new home into a "home office", discounts on air travel or healthcare or whatever); a nice title; retirement plan with $20k per year contributed by MS (includes MSFT stock, of course).
Next, the strings: the benefits are only vested if the staff member stays with Microsoft for 2 years; if he leaves before 2 years, he owes MS all the money he was given for that home renovation, etc. Of course, this would also apply if MS terminated the staff for cause.
There is no way a FOSS company (or most other companies, for that matter) would be able to match MS benefits, so the staff stays on, planning to leave after the obligatory 2 years. And they do leave after 2 years, but by that time the wind has been taken out of the sails of whatever project it is --RHEL, or SAMBA if from my earlier example, or whatever. Meanwhile, Microsoft is marketing their EEE strategy like crazy: "See? We have a *better* MS-RHEL and MS-SAMBA. Compare with Original SAMBA, which isn't even under active development any more!"
Even worse, MS assigns the staff to work on proprietary code. "Here's how our SMB system really works. Here's the source code to the NT kernel. And here's the specification for Word97." That would contaminate the developers so that they are no longer allowed to work on any FLOSS related to the proprietary stuff. What if the developers refuse to view the source code? "Hey, it was part of the job description when you signed up to merge with us, so now we shall terminate you for cause!" There goes all the benefits.
Posters are right in that Microsoft buying companies producing Linux or other F/LOSS won't be able to stamp out the competition just by buying them, the way they stamped out Spyglass, Visio, Doublespace, etc. But neither will forking solve the problem completely the way it did with X.org, Beryl or GPG. Yes, the legal rights to the software will remain available to the community thanks to the GPL; but Microsoft is also buying up developer talent.
If MS buys SAMBA, for example, yes, we could fork off the SAMBA codebase and continue development. But somebody would have to carry on the torch after Jeremy Allison starts working at Redmond. That someone wouldn't be as familiar with the codebase and would take some time to come up to speed. He would not be as enthusiastic an advocate for the software. SAMBA development would slow down. What's that, you say? There are other developers on the SAMBA project who are just as good? Fine, Microsoft will hire them off, too. In fact, Microsoft could create an entire department of We Pay You To Sit Around Programming TicTacToe Games to lure off the major FLOSS developers.
(SAMBA was just an example, btw; it could be anything. And if Jeremy does get hired by Microsoft at an exorbitant salary, more power to him. He deserves the recognition.)
We need to take this into account. Just as the theoretical FLOSS advantage of "many eyes make bugs shallow" still needs work to be borne out in practice, so the ability to fork off the codebase is not that useful without enthusiastic developers to carry on the torch.
In this case, Embrace, Extend, Extinguish might not be aimed at the software, but the developers. Microsoft can later point to them and say, "See? Bunch of hippie volunteers! Can't be trusted to carry a software project through to completion!"
After all, what were the lyrics to the Monkeyboy dance again?
Wouldn't it be hilarious if someone pwned their site and replaced little things? Maybe something that they probably wouldn't notice but prospective customers would read carefully and realize how full of it this firm is? Something like
"we also are intimately familiar with the "hacking" industry. In fact, our website gets updated by the hacking industry from time to time."
"We maintain records of IP addresses and other information contained in log files. Soon we will figure out how to actually look at those log files to see what information is contained there."
"We also do not allow any links to our site without our express permission. In fact, you are not allowed to look at our web site without our permission. Hey, are you looking at this site right now? Stop that! Fine, our lawyers will be contacting you shortly."
There is plenty of prior art on this. Other software (notably, the Gimp and probably photoshop) have this feature built into them. It's called 'Save a copy'. It saves the document in an alternate format while leaving the original document untouched. The Gimp even gives you a preview of the export document. The same feature is also often implemented as Export.
You misunderstand. I'm referring to the act of saving to multiple formats at the same time. I am familiar with GIMP's "Save a copy" feature. You can tell GIMP: "Okay, I want to save as usual now," and it will save in (say) XCF format. You can also tell GIMP, "Now Save-A-Copy under a different format (say JPG) without affecting the default format", and it will save as JPG, exporting if necessary. But there is *not* a command that says, "Save to XCF and JPG" which will cause GIMP to save it as XCF and immediately also save a copy as JPG.
In fact, I envision a Save dialogue that will let you select what format under which to save, and that format selection will have checkboxes where you can select more than one (rather than the current practice of choosing only one of several formats), and the program will save as many copies of the files as you have checkboxes, one file for each format you select. Then every time you press Ctrl-S to save, it will automatically re-save in those formats that you have selected. (The titlebar in the GUI window might even say, "MyDocument.doc/odt/rft" or something similar.)
It's a cool idea. One hundred people will think of it independently. Ten people will actually write software that implements it. One person will patent it, and try to screw the rest of us. When that day comes, *please* someone point them to this Slashdot thread.
some people complained that they "had to learn all the new shortcuts," and demanded to have MSO re-installed, then they personally uninstalled OO.
This is a valid complaint. For people who want their computers to "just work", why does the software not allow customized changes to keyboard commands? If OpenOffice wants to replace MS Office, why can't we change OpenOffice to use the keystrokes that we're used to?
Honestly, are we still living in the 1980's or something? WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS allowed remapping of keystrokes before Windows 3.1 came out, for crying out loud. The entire KDE software suite, since v3.1 or before, would let you set not one but up to TWO possible keystrokes for doing various commands (which is the reason I stick with KDE and won't touch GNOME, no matter how "earthy human touchy feely warm fuzzy" it is).
Sometimes I think that, in our desire to "make things better for the user", we forgot to listen to what the user has been saying. </rant>
Saving to multiple formats at the same time. Good idea.
Just watch: someone is going to send the USPTO some 400-page patent application for this. We need to mark this as prior art. <Google metatag="prior art">
I checked the release notes --it looks like there are a few areas where Gutsy is still rather rough around the edges.
For example, what's this about, when you add a new user, suddenly all the old users don't belong to any groups any more, including the administrator group, so that you can't even sudo any more? Compiz conflicts with the "remember currently running apps" feature, so to get around this, the user is advised to just turn off Compiz? If you have an ATI screen, you might be SOL? If you have a Dell Latitude L400, you *are* SOL?
It looks like everyone was scrambling toward a release deadline, and then suddenly when the clock struck midnight, Shuttleworth yelled, "FREEZE!" and everything froze in place, including this pile of component parts that was spilling onto the floor but got frozen in time, suspended in mid-air.
Not taking away from the great accomplishments of the Ubuntu team, and kudos is due especially for the user-friendly way that proprietary software is handled, but since I did not have the urge to download the CVS, betas, and RC's, I think I will similarly wait a while for the rough edges to be smoothed out first.
Previously I had said that I worried about Microsoft running a repository of health data. With Google announcing a similar initiative, I am less worried.
It's not because Microsoft is evil and Google is good. It's because there's competition, so Microsoft can't just run the whole show.
Make no mistake --it's still a worrisome thing. No one entity should have such a large portion of our data.
For those whose warm fuzzy feelings about Google blind them to the danger: the problem is not that Larry Page and Sergey Brin are evil. It's that eventually someone else evil may take the reins. Entities like the USA and Germany used to be good, too, before the "right" (well, wrong) leader took control.
And for those of you trying to spin this as a "look at all the statistical analysis Google can do for the good of the world" --well, good. Google can go purchase the aggregated statistical data from an independent company. There's no need for Google itself to get its hands on individual data points.
Be scared, people. The growing data-aggregation power of Google is as ominous as software patents had been a few years ago: "Yeah, yeah, we know the theoretical danger, but it'll be a long long time before it actually happens." Be very scared.
I agree with the parent and sibling postings that Truecrypt is a great program to have, and I use it all the time. I set all my Truecrypt volume sizes to equal 650MB, so that I can burn it to CD-ROM easily (e.g. archived copies of my finances, etc.). The fixed size means that someday I can pick a few of my Truecrypt volumes to include a hidden volume, but most of them won't have hidden volumes --but any attacker can go spin his wheels trying to look for a hidden volume where there isn't any.
Lately I've been making a lot of backup text/XML files within my Truecrypt volume, approximately some 650MB of text files, but then yesterday something unexpected happened:
I ran out of room.
I was surprised because I thought TrueCrypt would have compressed the text files before encrypting them. I had read that files such as text files have low entropy --that is, high predictability-- and thus the cryptographically secure thing to do is to compress them first before encryption, or else it is a cryptographic flaw that makes the encryption more predictable and thus easier to break.
To be sure, even with this vulnerability, my TrueCrypt volume is probably going to be unbreakable by most standards, but can someone either verify or refute my statement? I had assumed that, for purposes of cryptographic security, TrueCrypt would automatically compress my data, and thus I would be able to stuff a lot more than 650MB of text files into my 650MB volume.
Throughout my university years, I've consistently sold my textbooks for 90% to 95% of original price (after having bought them new from the bookstore). Two main things I did: first, I treated my textbooks very nicely; second, I found a student who was in the year behind me, and basically consistently sold my textbooks to him, so that he didn't have to worry about having to hunt for textbooks (or buying it from the bookstore, with tax --damn GST), and I didn't have to worry about finding a buyer. (Also helped that I gave him advice from time to time about his courses, homework, etc.)
I can imagine that occasionally you'll find a textbook where you can't get 70% of original price, and I suppose that if the text changes to a new text (or new edition) that's required, you'd have trouble selling --but consistently below 70%? I find that surprising.
To view information on this request, please go to the USPTO PAIR access site, choose "Control Number" in the drop-down box, enter: 90/007,946 and press the "Submit" button.
I did as requested, and just got a status screen that said, "We have taken action. It's not final." It doesn't say what the action is. Another tab shows a timeline of action, such as "Checked the data from the re-exam requester," etc. but doesn't say what the result is. It looks like some of those links are to a file that might say what the result of the action was, but I don't have time to download go through that right now. Does anyone have the actual ruling from the USPTO that confirms that the claims were rejected?
Hmm, come to think of it, maybe I'll check Groklaw later on when I have the chance.
BitTorrent slow? Use encryption (and switch ports)
on
RIAA Sues Usenet.com
·
· Score: 1
About a month or so ago, my BitTorrent speeds dropped dramatically. I turned on encryption, and the speeds went up again. Bloody ISP has been spying on my data.
I did not have to switch ports, but as other posters have said, that is something else you can do in addition to get your speeds back up, assuming that it's because of traffic shaping by your ISP.
Parent is informative and interesting, one way to avoid MS tax by reusing licenses. Are half the mods here dropouts from reading comprehension class? Good thing the downmods didn't affect anyone's karma.
You are right, and in fact if the study about planting false memories about a Disneyland visit isn't a classic yet, it will be.
For those who don't know this one, the researchers exposed test subjects to an ad about Disneyland describing warm fuzzy childhood memories about being hugged by the Bugs Bunny character (well, someone dressed in the costume). Later, they found that as many as 1 in 3 people ended up remembering the event as actually happening to them, rather than just something they read in the ad.
(Btw, for those of you who want to ask, "What if it just so happens that the test subject really had been hugged by Bugs Bunny at Disneyland before?", please, go ahead, ask. I'm sure there's more than one Slashdotter who would love to pounce on you for asking.)
I would agree. I tutored a number of students in high school, and one of the things that really made a difference was the feedback that you can get from a tutor while working through problems. It makes a huge difference if you know that you are on the right track. The tutor doesn't necessarily have to do it for you, or even teach you, but if s/he says, "Yes, continue, you are on the right track even though it looks like you're heading down a dead end," that is something that textbooks will never be able to replace.
When searching for "links" on google the fourth result is:
Yes, thanks for pointing that out now, almost five years after I was desperately looking for information. Google, and the Internet, has evolved since then so that relevance, and the way it is measured, has changed. In early 2003, it was a lot harder trying to do a web search for "links" the web browser.
Similarly, Columbus would have had an easier time finding his way to India if he'd just checked Google Earth.
Don't feel bad that you didn't know about Links the web browser. It is generally a good browser, but the unfortunate choice of name has made this piece of software invisible to Google searches --can you imagine searching for "links" on the web? Every single existing web page on the web will turn up. It doesn't help to add the keywords "web" or "browser".
It was because of this that I finally gave up trying to use, get docs for, or otherwise find out more about "links" and switched to elinks, which is a forked project that's probably just as good, but is a lot easier to find on the web.
If you still want to work with "links", the correct keyword to Google for is "Twibright labs" --but of course, if I had no way of knowing that back when I was searching. And nowadays there's the Wikipedia, too.
Slashdot Mirror
If it's possible for a Mac to get infected without the user's knowledge, then that qualifies as "in the wild".
When I used dselect to select a certain package, I could never tell whether other packages changed status that would be automatically installed or whether I would need to install them. My understanding was the former, but then when I tried to install, it would say, "Hey, you have to install such-and-such a package!" and I thought, "But isn't dselect supposed to do that automatically?"
And then it would come up with unresolved dependencies and I would have no idea what to do. At times it gave me a list and I couldn't tell whether I was suposed to choose one, or install all of them. Thinking back on it now, I realize now that the dependencies were screwed up and it wasn't the fault of my computer at all.
The Debian chatrooms and forums were full of elitists at the time (and, to an extent, still are). By this I don't mean that they were "RTFM" nasty to me, but that they were so familiar with Linux and Debian that they couldn't comprehend the viewpoint of a newbie. For example, there was one file, something like
Finally, someone told me, "Well, if the file doesn't exist, you create it." Oh, I'm supposed to make the file myself! Was this supposed to be some minor point that should have been obvious to the newbie?
There were many other things, like the realization that the word "source" could refer to different things, sometimes in the same sentence: the source code of the programs, the location of the Deb packages on the Internet, or the actual "sources.list" file.
I am *very* glad that Ubuntu came along and looked at things from the perspective of the newbie. It made Debian usable. It made things like aptitude, Synaptic and Adept happen. (Yes, I know these aren't exclusive to Ubuntu, but without Ubuntu, I just don't think the Debian project itself would have had anywhere near the same focus on usability.)
I ordered a Wal-Mart Linux PC. I'm using it for a backup server at home right now.
This was back in 2002 or 2003. It was $200, only available by mail-order, and came with a CD-ROM drive and single hard disk (20GB?). I picked up a crummy CRT at the local second-hand computer store and started exploring Linux. I replaced the hard drive with a removable hard drive bracket.
It took me a while to figure out that the CD reader had subtle errors (after 3 different distributions of Linux failed to install) and replaced that too. The thing was, the smaller box (is that called mini-ITX?) would only fit the very smallest CD drives, and both my new CD RW and the removable hard drive bracket protruded out the front in a rather ugly way.
The thing came with Lindows (as it was called at the time). I tried it for 10 minutes and then replaced it with "Pink Tie" Linux, then Mandrake 8.1, then LibraNet Linux. (I tried Debian, too, but that "dselect" thing is way too cryptic.)
Looks like Wal-Mart is back with more PC's for the people. That's great. It will bring more visibility to Ubuntu, and Linux in general. And that's the point of the whole thing: to let Linux have more visibility so that manufacturers, and people in general, won't say, "Hey, we don't have to make our video player compatible with Linux because nobody uses Linux."
If this is the place for suggestions and complaints for Slashdot, may I put in my two cents? Sounds like people have been suggesting a number of new mods and changes to the old ones. Could this be revised? For example:
... but maybe we'll take it one step at a time.)
- separating +1 Funny into "+1 Funny-Raise Karma" and "+1 Funny-Karma Unaffected"
- combining -1 Flamebait with -1 Troll
- adding -1 Wrong (or -1 Misinformed), the opposite of "+1 Informative"
- combining +1 Interesting with +1 Insightful
(In fact, we can have diametrically opposed mods, like Informative/Misinformed, Underrated/Overrated, Insightful/Flamebait, Funny/Rude, etc.
And, yes, put in my vote for logging in via HTTPS.
Hmm. Looking at the GP post more carefully, I no longer see the sarcasm that had seemed to be there when I wrote the parent post. Sorry about that. Guess I got fooled by the Funny mod. Anyway, yes, it *is* indeed a good thing that Internet connectivity is now considered part of the essential supplies at a disaster shelter.
Why are the fires a problem? Why is it a disaster that some 150,000 acres of land are burning up and darkening the sky with its smoke? I mean, only one person's *died* from it --heck, people die every day in traffic collisions and heart failure and stuff. So what's the problem?
The two main problems caused by this disaster are: 1) systems get disrupted, and 2) people lose their wealth. You see where the network is so important yet? Perhaps I'll make it clearer.
By "systems", I mean the infrastructure. Roads are closed, stores don't get supplies, needed medical services are diverted to rescue the sick, people can't get to work because they're living in Qualcomm stadium or the Del Mark fairgrounds. The economy of the area takes a huge hit. Also, of course, the phone system gets clogged by people wanting directions --where are the fires now?-- coordinating evacuations and asking after loved ones.
By "wealth", I mean not only material wealth as in homes and businesses, but also intangibles such as documents and insurance policies, etc. And "people" includes businesses.
But suppose people are able to stay connected, to know what's going on. They know that I-15 northbound is closed, so they can plan their evacuation routes. They can contact the sister in El Centro or the in-laws in Temecula, and know that that's available for evacuation (or that they've gone on vacation --try the brother in Yuma instead).
If they have secure Internet banking, they can start selling their stocks and diverting funds from their GIC's to their bank account so the money will be on hand when sudden cash expenditures are called for. Heck, in their spare time they might even be able to complete that company client report that's due the next day for the client living in New Jersey, to whom the disaster is just another story in the news and who doesn't care why the report wasn't done at exactly 9am as demanded. That way maybe the company can live with a 50% decrease in business rather than a 90% drop.
And the more people stay connected, the more quickly they can bounce back from the disaster and resume their lives. 'Cuz, goodness knows, there's a lot of work to be done in that department.
I'm lucky in that I've not been directly affected. But, boy, having that 120GB in the laptop would sure make a huge difference if I were ever to flee from my home.
If someone perpetrated a crime --let's say, mugging university students who walk through the campus alone at night-- you wouldn't say, "Well, clearly this is a case-by-case thing, because he didn't mug me when I walked there alone at night."
I think Mandriva is a prime target for Microsoft acquisition. They are well-known within the community. Previously producers of the flagship Mandrake desktop distro, they have been eclipsed by the rising star of Ubuntu. Financially, they've been on rocky ground.
I wouldn't be surprised if there were a few disgruntled staff around, either from the former Conectiva, former Lycorix, or former Mandrake itself, that would drool at the prospect of being snapped up by a huge company, with tons of benefits. The prestige of being part of a transnational company, and being able to participate in in-house Special High Intensity Training for elite developers, would probably set their careers on the fast track for the rest of their lives. Who wouldn't want that?
That's not to say that Francois Bancilhon should turn down an offer by MS, but we'll have to take steps to pass on the torch for Mandriva Linux after they're acquired, publishing the source for the in-house tools (gurpmi, diskdrake, etc.), getting meeting minutes, identifying enthusiastic hackers who are willing to take up the torch and working with them prior to the actual MS acquisition, etc. They need to establish a name that people will equate with Mandriva (since the trademark Mandriva itself will be owned by Microsoft afterward), the way everyone knows CentOS is really RedHat but with a different group supporting it. This way, the momentum will carry on.
Microsoft offers a deal to buy a FLOSS company, say Mandriva. Of course, any time Company A buys Company B, Company A wants to make sure the staff in Company B won't just quit. Thus, it's perfectly reasonable for Microsoft to make the deal contingent on a number of conditions.
First, the enticements: if Microsoft buys Red Hat, all the staff get a nice solid pay raise, with double to triple the income for the executive; great benefits, not all of which are monetary (e.g. MS arranges immigration to US if desired and staff is foreign, or MS will pay for expanding their new home into a "home office", discounts on air travel or healthcare or whatever); a nice title; retirement plan with $20k per year contributed by MS (includes MSFT stock, of course).
Next, the strings: the benefits are only vested if the staff member stays with Microsoft for 2 years; if he leaves before 2 years, he owes MS all the money he was given for that home renovation, etc. Of course, this would also apply if MS terminated the staff for cause.
There is no way a FOSS company (or most other companies, for that matter) would be able to match MS benefits, so the staff stays on, planning to leave after the obligatory 2 years. And they do leave after 2 years, but by that time the wind has been taken out of the sails of whatever project it is --RHEL, or SAMBA if from my earlier example, or whatever. Meanwhile, Microsoft is marketing their EEE strategy like crazy: "See? We have a *better* MS-RHEL and MS-SAMBA. Compare with Original SAMBA, which isn't even under active development any more!"
Even worse, MS assigns the staff to work on proprietary code. "Here's how our SMB system really works. Here's the source code to the NT kernel. And here's the specification for Word97." That would contaminate the developers so that they are no longer allowed to work on any FLOSS related to the proprietary stuff. What if the developers refuse to view the source code? "Hey, it was part of the job description when you signed up to merge with us, so now we shall terminate you for cause!" There goes all the benefits.
Posters are right in that Microsoft buying companies producing Linux or other F/LOSS won't be able to stamp out the competition just by buying them, the way they stamped out Spyglass, Visio, Doublespace, etc. But neither will forking solve the problem completely the way it did with X.org, Beryl or GPG. Yes, the legal rights to the software will remain available to the community thanks to the GPL; but Microsoft is also buying up developer talent.
If MS buys SAMBA, for example, yes, we could fork off the SAMBA codebase and continue development. But somebody would have to carry on the torch after Jeremy Allison starts working at Redmond. That someone wouldn't be as familiar with the codebase and would take some time to come up to speed. He would not be as enthusiastic an advocate for the software. SAMBA development would slow down. What's that, you say? There are other developers on the SAMBA project who are just as good? Fine, Microsoft will hire them off, too. In fact, Microsoft could create an entire department of We Pay You To Sit Around Programming TicTacToe Games to lure off the major FLOSS developers.
(SAMBA was just an example, btw; it could be anything. And if Jeremy does get hired by Microsoft at an exorbitant salary, more power to him. He deserves the recognition.)
We need to take this into account. Just as the theoretical FLOSS advantage of "many eyes make bugs shallow" still needs work to be borne out in practice, so the ability to fork off the codebase is not that useful without enthusiastic developers to carry on the torch.
In this case, Embrace, Extend, Extinguish might not be aimed at the software, but the developers. Microsoft can later point to them and say, "See? Bunch of hippie volunteers! Can't be trusted to carry a software project through to completion!"
After all, what were the lyrics to the Monkeyboy dance again?
Wouldn't it be hilarious if someone pwned their site and replaced little things? Maybe something that they probably wouldn't notice but prospective customers would read carefully and realize how full of it this firm is? Something like
"we also are intimately familiar with the "hacking" industry. In fact, our website gets updated by the hacking industry from time to time."
"We maintain records of IP addresses and other information contained in log files. Soon we will figure out how to actually look at those log files to see what information is contained there."
"We also do not allow any links to our site without our express permission. In fact, you are not allowed to look at our web site without our permission. Hey, are you looking at this site right now? Stop that! Fine, our lawyers will be contacting you shortly."
You misunderstand. I'm referring to the act of saving to multiple formats at the same time. I am familiar with GIMP's "Save a copy" feature. You can tell GIMP: "Okay, I want to save as usual now," and it will save in (say) XCF format. You can also tell GIMP, "Now Save-A-Copy under a different format (say JPG) without affecting the default format", and it will save as JPG, exporting if necessary. But there is *not* a command that says, "Save to XCF and JPG" which will cause GIMP to save it as XCF and immediately also save a copy as JPG.
In fact, I envision a Save dialogue that will let you select what format under which to save, and that format selection will have checkboxes where you can select more than one (rather than the current practice of choosing only one of several formats), and the program will save as many copies of the files as you have checkboxes, one file for each format you select. Then every time you press Ctrl-S to save, it will automatically re-save in those formats that you have selected. (The titlebar in the GUI window might even say, "MyDocument.doc/odt/rft" or something similar.)
It's a cool idea. One hundred people will think of it independently. Ten people will actually write software that implements it. One person will patent it, and try to screw the rest of us. When that day comes, *please* someone point them to this Slashdot thread.
This is a valid complaint. For people who want their computers to "just work", why does the software not allow customized changes to keyboard commands? If OpenOffice wants to replace MS Office, why can't we change OpenOffice to use the keystrokes that we're used to?
Honestly, are we still living in the 1980's or something? WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS allowed remapping of keystrokes before Windows 3.1 came out, for crying out loud. The entire KDE software suite, since v3.1 or before, would let you set not one but up to TWO possible keystrokes for doing various commands (which is the reason I stick with KDE and won't touch GNOME, no matter how "earthy human touchy feely warm fuzzy" it is).
Sometimes I think that, in our desire to "make things better for the user", we forgot to listen to what the user has been saying.
</rant>
Saving to multiple formats at the same time. Good idea.
Just watch: someone is going to send the USPTO some 400-page patent application for this. We need to mark this as prior art. <Google metatag="prior art">
I checked the release notes --it looks like there are a few areas where Gutsy is still rather rough around the edges.
For example, what's this about, when you add a new user, suddenly all the old users don't belong to any groups any more, including the administrator group, so that you can't even sudo any more? Compiz conflicts with the "remember currently running apps" feature, so to get around this, the user is advised to just turn off Compiz? If you have an ATI screen, you might be SOL? If you have a Dell Latitude L400, you *are* SOL?
It looks like everyone was scrambling toward a release deadline, and then suddenly when the clock struck midnight, Shuttleworth yelled, "FREEZE!" and everything froze in place, including this pile of component parts that was spilling onto the floor but got frozen in time, suspended in mid-air.
Not taking away from the great accomplishments of the Ubuntu team, and kudos is due especially for the user-friendly way that proprietary software is handled, but since I did not have the urge to download the CVS, betas, and RC's, I think I will similarly wait a while for the rough edges to be smoothed out first.
Previously I had said that I worried about Microsoft running a repository of health data. With Google announcing a similar initiative, I am less worried.
It's not because Microsoft is evil and Google is good. It's because there's competition, so Microsoft can't just run the whole show.
Make no mistake --it's still a worrisome thing. No one entity should have such a large portion of our data.
For those whose warm fuzzy feelings about Google blind them to the danger: the problem is not that Larry Page and Sergey Brin are evil. It's that eventually someone else evil may take the reins. Entities like the USA and Germany used to be good, too, before the "right" (well, wrong) leader took control.
And for those of you trying to spin this as a "look at all the statistical analysis Google can do for the good of the world" --well, good. Google can go purchase the aggregated statistical data from an independent company. There's no need for Google itself to get its hands on individual data points.
Be scared, people. The growing data-aggregation power of Google is as ominous as software patents had been a few years ago: "Yeah, yeah, we know the theoretical danger, but it'll be a long long time before it actually happens." Be very scared.
Something funny happened with my Truecrypt today.
I agree with the parent and sibling postings that Truecrypt is a great program to have, and I use it all the time. I set all my Truecrypt volume sizes to equal 650MB, so that I can burn it to CD-ROM easily (e.g. archived copies of my finances, etc.). The fixed size means that someday I can pick a few of my Truecrypt volumes to include a hidden volume, but most of them won't have hidden volumes --but any attacker can go spin his wheels trying to look for a hidden volume where there isn't any.
Lately I've been making a lot of backup text/XML files within my Truecrypt volume, approximately some 650MB of text files, but then yesterday something unexpected happened:
I ran out of room.
I was surprised because I thought TrueCrypt would have compressed the text files before encrypting them. I had read that files such as text files have low entropy --that is, high predictability-- and thus the cryptographically secure thing to do is to compress them first before encryption, or else it is a cryptographic flaw that makes the encryption more predictable and thus easier to break.
To be sure, even with this vulnerability, my TrueCrypt volume is probably going to be unbreakable by most standards, but can someone either verify or refute my statement? I had assumed that, for purposes of cryptographic security, TrueCrypt would automatically compress my data, and thus I would be able to stuff a lot more than 650MB of text files into my 650MB volume.
Throughout my university years, I've consistently sold my textbooks for 90% to 95% of original price (after having bought them new from the bookstore). Two main things I did: first, I treated my textbooks very nicely; second, I found a student who was in the year behind me, and basically consistently sold my textbooks to him, so that he didn't have to worry about having to hunt for textbooks (or buying it from the bookstore, with tax --damn GST), and I didn't have to worry about finding a buyer. (Also helped that I gave him advice from time to time about his courses, homework, etc.)
I can imagine that occasionally you'll find a textbook where you can't get 70% of original price, and I suppose that if the text changes to a new text (or new edition) that's required, you'd have trouble selling --but consistently below 70%? I find that surprising.
Hmm, come to think of it, maybe I'll check Groklaw later on when I have the chance.
About a month or so ago, my BitTorrent speeds dropped dramatically. I turned on encryption, and the speeds went up again. Bloody ISP has been spying on my data.
I did not have to switch ports, but as other posters have said, that is something else you can do in addition to get your speeds back up, assuming that it's because of traffic shaping by your ISP.
Parent is informative and interesting, one way to avoid MS tax by reusing licenses. Are half the mods here dropouts from reading comprehension class? Good thing the downmods didn't affect anyone's karma.
You are right, and in fact if the study about planting false memories about a Disneyland visit isn't a classic yet, it will be.
For those who don't know this one, the researchers exposed test subjects to an ad about Disneyland describing warm fuzzy childhood memories about being hugged by the Bugs Bunny character (well, someone dressed in the costume). Later, they found that as many as 1 in 3 people ended up remembering the event as actually happening to them, rather than just something they read in the ad.
A report on the study is here.
(Btw, for those of you who want to ask, "What if it just so happens that the test subject really had been hugged by Bugs Bunny at Disneyland before?", please, go ahead, ask. I'm sure there's more than one Slashdotter who would love to pounce on you for asking.)
I would agree. I tutored a number of students in high school, and one of the things that really made a difference was the feedback that you can get from a tutor while working through problems. It makes a huge difference if you know that you are on the right track. The tutor doesn't necessarily have to do it for you, or even teach you, but if s/he says, "Yes, continue, you are on the right track even though it looks like you're heading down a dead end," that is something that textbooks will never be able to replace.
Yes, thanks for pointing that out now, almost five years after I was desperately looking for information. Google, and the Internet, has evolved since then so that relevance, and the way it is measured, has changed. In early 2003, it was a lot harder trying to do a web search for "links" the web browser.
Similarly, Columbus would have had an easier time finding his way to India if he'd just checked Google Earth.
Don't feel bad that you didn't know about Links the web browser. It is generally a good browser, but the unfortunate choice of name has made this piece of software invisible to Google searches --can you imagine searching for "links" on the web? Every single existing web page on the web will turn up. It doesn't help to add the keywords "web" or "browser".
It was because of this that I finally gave up trying to use, get docs for, or otherwise find out more about "links" and switched to elinks, which is a forked project that's probably just as good, but is a lot easier to find on the web.
If you still want to work with "links", the correct keyword to Google for is "Twibright labs" --but of course, if I had no way of knowing that back when I was searching. And nowadays there's the Wikipedia, too.