Tell the jet pilots their highly refined fuel is less powerful.
Exactly. Do they really care about their milage? Anyone that likes performance will see benefit from ethanol fuel. Yeah, dumb to make it from corn. Smart as hell if I can make my own fuel... does anyone know how to make alcohol? Is it really hard? Is it a crazy new technology? Can't be harder than drilling miles into the earth and turning oil into gasoline, can it? So in a few years it will be easier with engineered critters that can turn grass clippings into moonshine... but until then, we can make do with whatever we can find cheap at the seed store.
You're just not getting it. Yes, there's no need. Let the virus come in... let the scriptkiddies at it! Its not a real computer. Merely assuming your VM has been compromised is all that's necessary, because its considerably FASTER to delete a VM and unzip a clean back up of it than it is to scan it for virus or security issues. So... why bother trying to rid your machine of virus, or even protect it from them... when you can nearly instantly create a new machine from a zipped back up?
No, I'm not, and that's not my assumption. The assumption is a committee or a czar that oversees cyberspace is beyond the scope of the Constitution, as per Amendments 10 & 14. Should a state challenge the "FTC" (did you mean FCC?), on air wave regulation, they might very well win. If a state decides they want control of the airwaves in their state, meaning IN, not coming in or going out, i.e. not interstate, they'll have a case that the Supremes will have to decide.
Also, "cyberspace" is referring to the invisible, objectless internet... meaning, they're not talking about the hard lines and the computers themselves. The Federal government CAN NOT just decide they control the "cyberspace" that is inside, say, a state capital building, or inside a private company that operates only within a state. And, yet, that's what they're trying to do.
freaky... 25 years ago I toured an experimental water hyacinth facility in FL, run by Disney. They were figuring out ways to use the hyacinth for energy production. But I'd swear it was doubling mass faster than every 18 days... a lot faster.
PostScript is not open nor is it effectively open just because of the existence of GhostScript. PostScript is not free for highend imaging manufacturers to implement. It is pretty good at what it does, but many choose to create their own proprietary PostScript-like driven imaging engines. I believe HP does this. It'd be cool if PostScript were free, because if it were, everyone would use it. It's pretty good. I'd go so far as to say its the greatest thing Adobe ever did (& pdf is really just a free PostScript document implementation).
"Bring your own box" education works very well for many tasks, but for others, it is simply not an option. Examples?
Development, game design, animation, engineering, simulation. Anything where the word "computing" might be used. Discipline-wise, that runs the gamut: mathematics, computing, engineering, art, design, business, language.
so... it is simply not an option that a student do (gasp) development on his/her own machine???!!!
it is simply not an option that a student design a game on his/her own machine???!!!
it is simply not an option that a student engage in animation, engineering, or simulation on his/her own machine???!!!
With anything that has to do with computing, math, or art... a student CAN'T use their own computer?
What CAN they do with their own computer?
Glad I'm not a student anymore... because I can do ALL that on my own machine. And its like 5 years old. Insightful mod my ass. The computer labs are now and hitherto unnecessary, and... obsolete. If you get more than 5 students in your lab this month, we'll talk again... but otherwise... just keep the dust off them. Just in case. Thanks.
Of course, he also said our computer labs were obsolete, which was bullshit, so who knows what to believe.
When I first got to the university I attended (late 80's), they bragged they were advanced in computers, had 4 computers per student (at ~18K undergrad), and back then, not every student had a computer. Now I've heard it claimed that they have about 20 computers per student... and the students without their own computers are impossible to find. Assuming you always have bleeding edge computers in your labs... but no one needs them because everyone has a few computers of their own, at what point do the labs become obsolete?
PCLinux is interesting. Forget the implementation, and it epitomizes a driving force behind linux development, and something Microsoft should take advantage of before everyone realizes they got it right.
If the guts (the OS) can be replaced, and compatability is transparent (GUI is familiar, apps work), its an improvement
NT was great. Maybe had it not been for all the asswipe malware authors it could have stayed great... anything Apple can do Microsoft can do almost as good... why Microsoft doesn't abandon it and move on (keeping gui & compat) is beyond me. Microsoft has talent. Imagine Windows 7 having only 3 versions: 1) as it is now, the RC 2) linux w/ choice of MS GUI (Win95,Win98,NT,Win2K,XP,Vista, & Win7), w/ transparent legacy Win compatibility, new official linux versions of all their flagship softwares, Microsoft APIs, libraries and slick dev apps, and 3) a "home" version of 2, simplified launcher for entertainment & such.
Slackware (w/ whatever). I don't run it usually, and don't really know anyone who does... but I have this creepy feeling that they're everywhere... like dark matter or classic rock fans or something
Not only the issue with potentially infected user documents
User docs can be kept remotely and centrally, virus scanned on the server (single machine scanning), instead of all user machines being continuously scanned
but you have the issue of installed software and system updates.
no, no issue. Ignore them, unless some functionality is added and needed. And if you need/want to install them, go ahead, make a new machine. VM's are just files. Once the file is how you want it, you can duplicate it effortlessly and quickly. A large firm wouldn't need to have hundreds of updates applied to hundreds of installations, just a single update on a single installation (which subsequently is duplicated as many times as needed).
While it is nice to have a good solid state to go back to, you may over time want to install new applications and somehow system updates need to be worked into your plan because that static image is going to become far more insecure with each passing day.
Go ahead and keep your static image updated if you feel the need. It still saves oodles of time and processing cycles to keep a single VM as the 'master,' and have it duplicated rather than applying updates to individual machines and keeping track of multiple states on multiple machines.
I really don't see why a virus scanner is such a bad thing.
You really will if you set a non-virus scanner laden machine next to one that has it installed. Virus scanning software, from what I can tell, quadruples boot time. Bajillions of proc cycles are wasted every day every where on virus scanning. Man-decades of time wasted on, effectively, bullshit. I'm not saying viruses aren't a concern, just that it would be wonderful if we could somehow rise above it. I believe virtual computing offers a way to be as secure without ever worrying about virus scanning and definitions and the latest scary worm. Go ahead and infect my machine, because you won't have access to my documents (kept remotely and secure), and my machine will no longer exist in x minutes.
I mean, ideally a well designed, secure OS shouldn't allow escalated privileges to user processes, but nothing is totally secure. Even if something is nailed down tight you can always pry up the nails. The anti malware stuff is getting pretty bloated though and is becoming more intrusive than the malware itself. I like the idea of just having everything in a hardware controlled virtual machine (it would solve some issues for sure),
I'm saying the frequency at which you replace a vm has a direct relation on how secure the user/documents/work done is, that it can be used as a strategy. If you sandbox the attacks, and can replace the sandbox faster than you can detect or prevent the attacks, then do so. Its a strategy that would serve to swallow the attackers resources, because no matter how many virtual machines an attacker can compromise, at the end of the day (or hour, quarter hour, whatever), the attacker has the same number of compromised machines: none.
but if all you want is a non changing bootable environment why not look at Ubuntu or Windows on a thumb drive with write blocking or, you know,
you're missing the point
run a virtual machine on a linux host or something.... I mean wtf?
getting closer to the point... hopefully my answers above will enlighten the matter more
Seriously. There are like a million options out there for what you describe.
O... K... I think NetBoot has similar benefits regarding this method of security, but trashing a vm and restoring it is a much faster process, not as hard on the physical machine, and yeah, there's a handful of VM vendors out there I guess.
The only thing this bios basically doing is taking the hypervisor and moving it to the hardware. If
Once Windows is virtualized, it loses nearly all the security gripes I have against it. When you don't need to run antivirus on it, or any of the security updates, it boots and runs quickly. Here's how I imgaine it: All user docs are kept outside the VM. The VM is destroyed and replaced periodically with a standard image (every day, every hour, or at the whim of the user).
MacGyver didn't need no stinkin' BIOS (obligatory)
on
Phoenix BIOSOS?
·
· Score: 4, Funny
He could boot your OS with a Swiss Army Knife, some duct tape and and old pop top, drawing the electricity needed from a box of old compasses. I guess he's retired from Phoenix by now, though...
It's the conservatives who have tried to limit the federal power.
In general, sure. Conservatives want less government, at the expense of liberties. Liberals want liberties, at the expense of government. In the case of the Commerce Clause and a proposed cybersecurity oversight mechanism, its not so clear cut as which is more government or which is less liberty. It seems to me it would be a conservative idea that cybersecurity needs oversight because inherently such an organization would limit liberties, not protect them. The 2009 Bill S773 was proposed by a Democratic senator, however, and your point is well taken.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
This 'cybersecurity' falls under powers NOT delegated to the US by the Constitution. The Founders really did think of everything.
Well... I have sympathy for the torture you put yourself through... but have hope, because, apparently, the way memory works is we forget the really really bad stuff.
disclaimer: in my gp post, I said 9th (and that might work too) but I meant 10th.
afa the Commerce Clause... they can't use it nowadays... but maybe they can. Rehnquist's Court put a stop to the broad interpretation of the Clause, argueing broad interpretation justifies a federal police state... and no one wants that now that the Republicans are out of office (and losing members left and right). Then again, Rehnquist has been gone a few years... it could swing back, but I doubt it will happen under a liberal administration.
It wasn't a matter of "being tough" or "strong stomached"; something raced from my olfactory nerves to the ancient, reptilian part of my brain which immediately issued the "purge upper GI tract" interrupt.
awesome story... and told well, but...
and shoveling out the re-frozen pigslush with a snowshovel.
why would you do that? Did you keep the deepfreeze? God, man, why?
Thanks to an old man of the stack I read S773, but I didn't need to, nor do you, to KNOW its unconstitutional. Take a look at Amendments 9 & 14 of the US Constitution (something something any powers not specifically set aside for the federal gov. is under the exclusive domain of the States or local gov.s something). They can't create a federal authority for cyberspace out of thin air... they'll need to amend the Constitution to do it. Well, they can, but they'll be destroyed in the courts. If they DO amend the Constitution, making such an appointment legal, then we can go over S773 with a fine toothed 4th Amendment comb... and again find it unconstitutional.
Slashdot Mirror
What is this "net"? Just use the first line as a telegraph line. Hook it up to a lightbulb or something.
or better, loop it back to the power grid and enjoy the savings!
Well, in fact it's a modification of VNC
no, its a secure x windows implementation, not at all VNC, and considerably better, faster than VNC (and I still like/use VNC)
Boycott Swiss Cheese!
Horray for Freedom Cheese!
Tell the jet pilots their highly refined fuel is less powerful.
Exactly. Do they really care about their milage? Anyone that likes performance will see benefit from ethanol fuel. Yeah, dumb to make it from corn. Smart as hell if I can make my own fuel... does anyone know how to make alcohol? Is it really hard? Is it a crazy new technology? Can't be harder than drilling miles into the earth and turning oil into gasoline, can it? So in a few years it will be easier with engineered critters that can turn grass clippings into moonshine... but until then, we can make do with whatever we can find cheap at the seed store.
You're just not getting it.
Yes, there's no need. Let the virus come in... let the scriptkiddies at it! Its not a real computer. Merely assuming your VM has been compromised is all that's necessary, because its considerably FASTER to delete a VM and unzip a clean back up of it than it is to scan it for virus or security issues. So... why bother trying to rid your machine of virus, or even protect it from them... when you can nearly instantly create a new machine from a zipped back up?
No, I'm not, and that's not my assumption. The assumption is a committee or a czar that oversees cyberspace is beyond the scope of the Constitution, as per Amendments 10 & 14. Should a state challenge the "FTC" (did you mean FCC?), on air wave regulation, they might very well win. If a state decides they want control of the airwaves in their state, meaning IN, not coming in or going out, i.e. not interstate, they'll have a case that the Supremes will have to decide.
Also, "cyberspace" is referring to the invisible, objectless internet... meaning, they're not talking about the hard lines and the computers themselves. The Federal government CAN NOT just decide they control the "cyberspace" that is inside, say, a state capital building, or inside a private company that operates only within a state. And, yet, that's what they're trying to do.
freaky... 25 years ago I toured an experimental water hyacinth facility in FL, run by Disney. They were figuring out ways to use the hyacinth for energy production. But I'd swear it was doubling mass faster than every 18 days... a lot faster.
PostScript is not open nor is it effectively open just because of the existence of GhostScript. PostScript is not free for highend imaging manufacturers to implement. It is pretty good at what it does, but many choose to create their own proprietary PostScript-like driven imaging engines. I believe HP does this. It'd be cool if PostScript were free, because if it were, everyone would use it. It's pretty good. I'd go so far as to say its the greatest thing Adobe ever did (& pdf is really just a free PostScript document implementation).
"Bring your own box" education works very well for many tasks, but for others, it is simply not an option. Examples?
Development, game design, animation, engineering, simulation. Anything where the word "computing" might be used. Discipline-wise, that runs the gamut: mathematics, computing, engineering, art, design, business, language.
so... it is simply not an option that a student do (gasp) development on his/her own machine???!!!
it is simply not an option that a student design a game on his/her own machine???!!!
it is simply not an option that a student engage in animation, engineering, or simulation on his/her own machine???!!!
With anything that has to do with computing, math, or art... a student CAN'T use their own computer?
What CAN they do with their own computer?
Glad I'm not a student anymore... because I can do ALL that on my own machine. And its like 5 years old. Insightful mod my ass. The computer labs are now and hitherto unnecessary, and... obsolete. If you get more than 5 students in your lab this month, we'll talk again... but otherwise... just keep the dust off them. Just in case. Thanks.
Of course, he also said our computer labs were obsolete, which was bullshit, so who knows what to believe.
When I first got to the university I attended (late 80's), they bragged they were advanced in computers, had 4 computers per student (at ~18K undergrad), and back then, not every student had a computer. Now I've heard it claimed that they have about 20 computers per student... and the students without their own computers are impossible to find. Assuming you always have bleeding edge computers in your labs... but no one needs them because everyone has a few computers of their own, at what point do the labs become obsolete?
runs stripped-down iPhone OS
yeah, if it weren't for all that bloat in the OS, their phone might acually be successful... what they need is a fancier product that does even less
focal depth, or whatever you want to call it, should be user adjustable. Let ME decide how far away it appears to be.
Spock an Uhura as an item
Actually, Uhura always had a thing for Spock, as did Nurse Chapel. Go rewatch all TOS again or turn in your card.
PCLinux is interesting. Forget the implementation, and it epitomizes a driving force behind linux development, and something Microsoft should take advantage of before everyone realizes they got it right.
If the guts (the OS) can be replaced, and compatability is transparent (GUI is familiar, apps work), its an improvement
NT was great. Maybe had it not been for all the asswipe malware authors it could have stayed great... anything Apple can do Microsoft can do almost as good... why Microsoft doesn't abandon it and move on (keeping gui & compat) is beyond me. Microsoft has talent. Imagine Windows 7 having only 3 versions: 1) as it is now, the RC 2) linux w/ choice of MS GUI (Win95,Win98,NT,Win2K,XP,Vista, & Win7), w/ transparent legacy Win compatibility, new official linux versions of all their flagship softwares, Microsoft APIs, libraries and slick dev apps, and 3) a "home" version of 2, simplified launcher for entertainment & such.
Slackware (w/ whatever). I don't run it usually, and don't really know anyone who does... but I have this creepy feeling that they're everywhere... like dark matter or classic rock fans or something
Not only the issue with potentially infected user documents
User docs can be kept remotely and centrally, virus scanned on the server (single machine scanning), instead of all user machines being continuously scanned
but you have the issue of installed software and system updates.
no, no issue. Ignore them, unless some functionality is added and needed. And if you need/want to install them, go ahead, make a new machine. VM's are just files. Once the file is how you want it, you can duplicate it effortlessly and quickly. A large firm wouldn't need to have hundreds of updates applied to hundreds of installations, just a single update on a single installation (which subsequently is duplicated as many times as needed).
While it is nice to have a good solid state to go back to, you may over time want to install new applications and somehow system updates need to be worked into your plan because that static image is going to become far more insecure with each passing day.
Go ahead and keep your static image updated if you feel the need. It still saves oodles of time and processing cycles to keep a single VM as the 'master,' and have it duplicated rather than applying updates to individual machines and keeping track of multiple states on multiple machines.
I really don't see why a virus scanner is such a bad thing.
You really will if you set a non-virus scanner laden machine next to one that has it installed. Virus scanning software, from what I can tell, quadruples boot time. Bajillions of proc cycles are wasted every day every where on virus scanning. Man-decades of time wasted on, effectively, bullshit. I'm not saying viruses aren't a concern, just that it would be wonderful if we could somehow rise above it. I believe virtual computing offers a way to be as secure without ever worrying about virus scanning and definitions and the latest scary worm. Go ahead and infect my machine, because you won't have access to my documents (kept remotely and secure), and my machine will no longer exist in x minutes.
I mean, ideally a well designed, secure OS shouldn't allow escalated privileges to user processes, but nothing is totally secure. Even if something is nailed down tight you can always pry up the nails. The anti malware stuff is getting pretty bloated though and is becoming more intrusive than the malware itself. I like the idea of just having everything in a hardware controlled virtual machine (it would solve some issues for sure),
I'm saying the frequency at which you replace a vm has a direct relation on how secure the user/documents/work done is, that it can be used as a strategy. If you sandbox the attacks, and can replace the sandbox faster than you can detect or prevent the attacks, then do so. Its a strategy that would serve to swallow the attackers resources, because no matter how many virtual machines an attacker can compromise, at the end of the day (or hour, quarter hour, whatever), the attacker has the same number of compromised machines: none.
but if all you want is a non changing bootable environment why not look at Ubuntu or Windows on a thumb drive with write blocking or, you know,
you're missing the point
run a virtual machine on a linux host or something.... I mean wtf?
getting closer to the point... hopefully my answers above will enlighten the matter more
Seriously. There are like a million options out there for what you describe.
O... K... I think NetBoot has similar benefits regarding this method of security, but trashing a vm and restoring it is a much faster process, not as hard on the physical machine, and yeah, there's a handful of VM vendors out there I guess.
The only thing this bios basically doing is taking the hypervisor and moving it to the hardware. If
Once Windows is virtualized, it loses nearly all the security gripes I have against it. When you don't need to run antivirus on it, or any of the security updates, it boots and runs quickly. Here's how I imgaine it:
All user docs are kept outside the VM.
The VM is destroyed and replaced periodically with a standard image (every day, every hour, or at the whim of the user).
He could boot your OS with a Swiss Army Knife, some duct tape and and old pop top, drawing the electricity needed from a box of old compasses. I guess he's retired from Phoenix by now, though...
It's the conservatives who have tried to limit the federal power.
In general, sure. Conservatives want less government, at the expense of liberties. Liberals want liberties, at the expense of government. In the case of the Commerce Clause and a proposed cybersecurity oversight mechanism, its not so clear cut as which is more government or which is less liberty. It seems to me it would be a conservative idea that cybersecurity needs oversight because inherently such an organization would limit liberties, not protect them. The 2009 Bill S773 was proposed by a Democratic senator, however, and your point is well taken.
Not so.
The 10th Amendment:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
This 'cybersecurity' falls under powers NOT delegated to the US by the Constitution. The Founders really did think of everything.
Well... I have sympathy for the torture you put yourself through... but have hope, because, apparently, the way memory works is we forget the really really bad stuff.
yes they can... but the point is that it won't be around for long, if unconstitutional, someone will take them to the mat... uh, SCOTUS
disclaimer: in my gp post, I said 9th (and that might work too) but I meant 10th.
afa the Commerce Clause... they can't use it nowadays... but maybe they can. Rehnquist's Court put a stop to the broad interpretation of the Clause, argueing broad interpretation justifies a federal police state... and no one wants that now that the Republicans are out of office (and losing members left and right). Then again, Rehnquist has been gone a few years... it could swing back, but I doubt it will happen under a liberal administration.
It wasn't a matter of "being tough" or "strong stomached"; something raced from my olfactory nerves to the ancient, reptilian part of my brain which immediately issued the "purge upper GI tract" interrupt.
awesome story... and told well, but...
and shoveling out the re-frozen pigslush with a snowshovel.
why would you do that? Did you keep the deepfreeze? God, man, why?
Thanks to an old man of the stack I read S773, but I didn't need to, nor do you, to KNOW its unconstitutional. Take a look at Amendments 9 & 14 of the US Constitution (something something any powers not specifically set aside for the federal gov. is under the exclusive domain of the States or local gov.s something). They can't create a federal authority for cyberspace out of thin air... they'll need to amend the Constitution to do it. Well, they can, but they'll be destroyed in the courts. If they DO amend the Constitution, making such an appointment legal, then we can go over S773 with a fine toothed 4th Amendment comb... and again find it unconstitutional.