The operating system, and the applications which run on it, have a lot to do with the security too.
Because Mac OS X, *nix and BSD generally force people to create their own users on the systems, this increases the likelihood that any spyware/malware/scripts will not be run as root, decreasing the likelihood of system corruption.
The other issue is that most apps on these systems are not tied inextricably to the OS, but rather work through some sort of messaging system. This reduces the chance for any malware to exploit user-level apps to infect the system.
That being said, Unix has a longer and more academic development history, while Windows' development is more commercial, consumer-oriented, and far shorter. It is true that Mac OS X is also quite consumer-oriented, but the underlying system is BSD-based, the development of which historically focused a lot of resources on security and stability.
In any case, using AOL has nothing to do with getting exploited. Moreover, I mentioned that the straight answer was a combination of a multitude of factors. It's not a 1-1 thing.
Many malware authors prefer to exploit Windows vulnerabilities because they are published more widely, and the chance of spreading is a lot more, infecting far more, thus increasing the fame of the malware.
However, on the flip side, most *nix users (especially BSD ones) tend to be more tech-savvy, and thus configure and administrate their system a lot better than Windows users. They tend to run their system at the user level rather than at the root level, and thus many scripts cannot be run by them without the specific passwords and security levels. Add to that the obvious premise that each Linux/BSD distro is quite different from any other (the services running, the kernel, the environment, etc.) and you have a harder time attacking a significant number of these systems. Also, *nix systems tend to be more modular than Windows systems (this has changed with NT, which has seen far fewer exploits than say ME or Win98).
The real question is whether a disclaimer is enough for the judge to deem reasonable in "preventing use of the software to commit an unlawful act with respect to a commercial recording or audiovisual work".
No particular group, IMO. The Mozilla Suite will remain for those who prefer it over Firefox, but as for marketing, there was very little marketing by the Mozilla Foundation, and that's unlikely to change.
However, as he said, "I believe that there will continue to be trunk based releases of the Mozilla application suite because there are members of the community who want it to continue and will contribute the resources to make that happen."
For many Mozicianados aficionados, Firefox will never fully replace the experience of Seamonkey. Firefox was targeted primarily at IE users anyway.
"Waking up" to something simply means to take notice of it. Rejecting the obvious truth has nothing to do with it. It's impossible for scientists to keep track of all the minutiae that comprise the universe.
Secondly, I don't think the journalist came up with that conclusion. Scientists did, and the journalist is just reporting it, which incidentally is his job.
The media can be irresponsible at times, and does make mistakes. But reporting the findings of scientists, like this, is not one of them, even if the conclusions they have reached do not agree with yours. After all, if they didn't report it, and thus did not feed the "pop-sci crap" to the public, others would feel they're not doing their job. So relax.
FOr many Mozilla users, it is just the feel of Mozilla that makes it superior to Firefox. Firefox just has a simplified feeling, while Mozilla looks and works like a power browser. I am a long-time Mozilla user, and I've tried Firefox 1.0, but can't stand it. It just feels like an IE replacement rather than a web workhorse.
This feeling is not all that different from those that prefer Windows NT/2000/2003 to Windows ME/XP, or perhaps for aptly for Slashdot, vi vs emacs. There's just something innately gratifying when you're not assumed to be Joe Average.
Firefox is by far more popular, and while many believe Mozilla to be bloated, in my own experience, there was very little difference in memory usage and speed between the two, which was surprising because my Seamonkey had a lot more extensions.
Interestingly, it's not the statistics that matter, but rather the mindset.
There is a certain pleasure many parents get if their children are highly educated, and more so if it's in a field which they respect, such as engineering or law. Many Indian kids feel the need to fulfill the dreams of their parents, because of what their parents sacrificed for them.
Yes, but supporting one's family is *the* goal for many Indians, not happiness. Most who put aside their family for personal happiness and calling would be regarded as greedy and thus "bad" people. Sometimes culture is overvalued, perhaps.
But just to be clear, I took up CS/Engineering because that's what I felt was my calling. I, myself, do not adhere to these principles as held by many Indians. But this is reality for many.
A lot of Indians like to get graduate degrees simply because it offers us security professionally, which is by far the most important thing for us.
For almost any Indian parent, a steady professional job (medicine, business, law, engineering, etc.) is far more attractive than a riskier yet potentially more lucrative job (artist, musician, comedian, etc.)
For most Indians, we are told from a young age to study hard in order not to fail in life. Chinese parents, from my own experience, are quite similar too, in many respects.
Interestingly, US$50K/yr would be a lot in some Asian countries. HK (one of the world's most expensive cities), for example, has a progressive tax rate, and someone in the US$50K/yr bracket would pay about 2-5% tax.
Seems to me that the problem is not the wages and salaries, but the tax.
Why would Google release a Google Desktop Search for Linux or Mac OS X, when both have applications which already provide an equivalent service? Windows was clearly the best choice because Windows' Indexing service is horrendous, and thus Windows would benefit from such a service.
'Do no evil' is not equivalent to 'Do for those that also do no evil'.
The spyware would then need to be bundled with this API, which would increase the size of the spyware, making it more susceptible to detection.
Of course, it would make coding spyware a lot easier, but it would limit the spyware to those who have Google Desktop installed, which is a small minority of all Windows owners. Most spyware is written to reach as large a population as it can, so I don't believe major spyware vendors will limit themselves to Google Desktop. Script kiddies, on the other hand, will most probably use this to their advantage.
In any case, any spyware that actually is on your PC already is dangerous, with or without access to Google Desktop and any related APIs.
I learnt to program with LOGO too, and it is still perhaps the most fun a kid can have with programming (unless he really likes the IOCCC). My younger brother made a whole soccer animation with LOGO, almost as a pre-cursor to the animated gif.
I also was given an old Acorn at school to play games. Then, in high school, I re-learned programming with Pascal. Ever since then, it's been computers non-stop.
If the MPAA wants to stop internet piracy, they should stop releasing movies in Asia at the same time as in the USA. A month delay would do it. But for them the quick bucks are more important than internet piracy.
Actually, many movies are released much later in many Asian countries. However, delaying releases doesn't solve the problem much. Only CAMs will be delayed, and not many people actually download CAMs anyhow.
Slashdot Mirror
The operating system, and the applications which run on it, have a lot to do with the security too.
Because Mac OS X, *nix and BSD generally force people to create their own users on the systems, this increases the likelihood that any spyware/malware/scripts will not be run as root, decreasing the likelihood of system corruption.
The other issue is that most apps on these systems are not tied inextricably to the OS, but rather work through some sort of messaging system. This reduces the chance for any malware to exploit user-level apps to infect the system.
That being said, Unix has a longer and more academic development history, while Windows' development is more commercial, consumer-oriented, and far shorter. It is true that Mac OS X is also quite consumer-oriented, but the underlying system is BSD-based, the development of which historically focused a lot of resources on security and stability.
I didn't say anything about Mac OS X.
In any case, using AOL has nothing to do with getting exploited. Moreover, I mentioned that the straight answer was a combination of a multitude of factors. It's not a 1-1 thing.
The straight answer is a mixture of both.
Many malware authors prefer to exploit Windows vulnerabilities because they are published more widely, and the chance of spreading is a lot more, infecting far more, thus increasing the fame of the malware.
However, on the flip side, most *nix users (especially BSD ones) tend to be more tech-savvy, and thus configure and administrate their system a lot better than Windows users. They tend to run their system at the user level rather than at the root level, and thus many scripts cannot be run by them without the specific passwords and security levels. Add to that the obvious premise that each Linux/BSD distro is quite different from any other (the services running, the kernel, the environment, etc.) and you have a harder time attacking a significant number of these systems. Also, *nix systems tend to be more modular than Windows systems (this has changed with NT, which has seen far fewer exploits than say ME or Win98).
The real question is whether a disclaimer is enough for the judge to deem reasonable in "preventing use of the software to commit an unlawful act with respect to a commercial recording or audiovisual work".
In other news, Al Gore retracts his claim on inventing the internet.
No particular group, IMO. The Mozilla Suite will remain for those who prefer it over Firefox, but as for marketing, there was very little marketing by the Mozilla Foundation, and that's unlikely to change.
However, as he said,
"I believe that there will continue to be trunk based releases of the Mozilla application suite because there are members of the community who want it to continue and will contribute the resources to make that happen."
For many Mozicianados aficionados, Firefox will never fully replace the experience of Seamonkey. Firefox was targeted primarily at IE users anyway.
Bringing Microsoft closer to the opensource community does not mean that the parties involved are any nicer to each other.
If this kind of approach is Microsoft's next battleplan against opensource, then they will get closer, but it won't be pretty.
"Waking up" to something simply means to take notice of it. Rejecting the obvious truth has nothing to do with it. It's impossible for scientists to keep track of all the minutiae that comprise the universe.
Secondly, I don't think the journalist came up with that conclusion. Scientists did, and the journalist is just reporting it, which incidentally is his job.
The media can be irresponsible at times, and does make mistakes. But reporting the findings of scientists, like this, is not one of them, even if the conclusions they have reached do not agree with yours. After all, if they didn't report it, and thus did not feed the "pop-sci crap" to the public, others would feel they're not doing their job. So relax.
I think you mean the simputer.
FOr many Mozilla users, it is just the feel of Mozilla that makes it superior to Firefox. Firefox just has a simplified feeling, while Mozilla looks and works like a power browser. I am a long-time Mozilla user, and I've tried Firefox 1.0, but can't stand it. It just feels like an IE replacement rather than a web workhorse.
This feeling is not all that different from those that prefer Windows NT/2000/2003 to Windows ME/XP, or perhaps for aptly for Slashdot, vi vs emacs. There's just something innately gratifying when you're not assumed to be Joe Average.
Firefox is by far more popular, and while many believe Mozilla to be bloated, in my own experience, there was very little difference in memory usage and speed between the two, which was surprising because my Seamonkey had a lot more extensions.
Interestingly, it's not the statistics that matter, but rather the mindset.
There is a certain pleasure many parents get if their children are highly educated, and more so if it's in a field which they respect, such as engineering or law. Many Indian kids feel the need to fulfill the dreams of their parents, because of what their parents sacrificed for them.
Yes, but supporting one's family is *the* goal for many Indians, not happiness. Most who put aside their family for personal happiness and calling would be regarded as greedy and thus "bad" people. Sometimes culture is overvalued, perhaps.
But just to be clear, I took up CS/Engineering because that's what I felt was my calling. I, myself, do not adhere to these principles as held by many Indians. But this is reality for many.
A lot of Indians like to get graduate degrees simply because it offers us security professionally, which is by far the most important thing for us.
For almost any Indian parent, a steady professional job (medicine, business, law, engineering, etc.) is far more attractive than a riskier yet potentially more lucrative job (artist, musician, comedian, etc.)
For most Indians, we are told from a young age to study hard in order not to fail in life. Chinese parents, from my own experience, are quite similar too, in many respects.
Interestingly, US$50K/yr would be a lot in some Asian countries. HK (one of the world's most expensive cities), for example, has a progressive tax rate, and someone in the US$50K/yr bracket would pay about 2-5% tax.
Seems to me that the problem is not the wages and salaries, but the tax.
The JMCardle test does something similar, but calls this script instead, which just runs in Command Prompt
The iPod is not an invention. Digital music players, perhaps, but that too is just a modification on other forms of audio players.
I didn't have any problems and I'm using Mozilla 1.7.5.
I even tried using the UserAgentSwitchers, and for all browsers (IE, Firefox, Opera) and all OSes, the site worked fine.
Could just be a coincidence?
Perhaps this will change your mind: AMD and Linux: Reaching for the 64-bit Trophy
Why would Google release a Google Desktop Search for Linux or Mac OS X, when both have applications which already provide an equivalent service? Windows was clearly the best choice because Windows' Indexing service is horrendous, and thus Windows would benefit from such a service.
'Do no evil' is not equivalent to 'Do for those that also do no evil'.
The spyware would then need to be bundled with this API, which would increase the size of the spyware, making it more susceptible to detection. Of course, it would make coding spyware a lot easier, but it would limit the spyware to those who have Google Desktop installed, which is a small minority of all Windows owners. Most spyware is written to reach as large a population as it can, so I don't believe major spyware vendors will limit themselves to Google Desktop. Script kiddies, on the other hand, will most probably use this to their advantage. In any case, any spyware that actually is on your PC already is dangerous, with or without access to Google Desktop and any related APIs.
I learnt to program with LOGO too, and it is still perhaps the most fun a kid can have with programming (unless he really likes the IOCCC). My younger brother made a whole soccer animation with LOGO, almost as a pre-cursor to the animated gif.
I also was given an old Acorn at school to play games. Then, in high school, I re-learned programming with Pascal. Ever since then, it's been computers non-stop.
And to think I wanted to be a lawyer.
If the MPAA wants to stop internet piracy, they should stop releasing movies in Asia at the same time as in the USA. A month delay would do it. But for them the quick bucks are more important than internet piracy.
Actually, many movies are released much later in many Asian countries. However, delaying releases doesn't solve the problem much. Only CAMs will be delayed, and not many people actually download CAMs anyhow.
Screeners and Telecines are a lot more popular.
They may not have jurisdiction in foreign countries, but they have information and expertise.
And more importantly, perhaps, not many countries want to anger the US, for economic and political reasons.
PuTTY is listed: Utilities
But they can add Filezilla and SciTE to that list
If you use Mozilla 1.7.x or Firefox, you can install URIid. Then add this line to your userContent.css (or you can get ChromEdit):
Of course, feel free to add any CSS.