Hmmm... I don't think Linspire does this at all. Originally Linspire aspired to bring us an OS that could run Windows and Linux software side-by-side. I feel Linspire is just a year old branch of Red Hat Linux...
It runs wine for windows apps, but the ability of this to run all windows apps is dependent on its configuration.. and it certainly does not provide all security flaws of windows (the dlls that provide these flaws exist.. but they aren't sitting there listening to your ports waiting to be exploited.. a hacker has to hack your linux flaws first.. and this would probably lead this theoretical hacker down a very different path than that travelled by a windows hacker... unless you have sql server open for inspection - but does that even run in wine?).
In the topic of the article... it's damn smart of Apple to keep its OS running on MAC. If they let their OS be run on anything, well I'd get one for my PC today... If they don't, I'll wait until the MAC comes in x86 style and I buy one of those.. and run windows, linux and OSX on the same machine... one way they sell an OS for a few hundred $$ the other way they sell a complete hardware package for a few thousand.
http://www.michaelrobertson.com/Michael Robertson's thoughts on Apple's stance is probably fueled from his own endeavour... which is largely his OS versus the MS OS... this is not the case for Apple... Appple is the MAC versus the PC, Apple and MS already have a relationship (with Office, Virtual PC, etc) and the move to intel-MACs will give MACs an advantage in the PC battle.
Already many Unix and Linux users have switched to Mac... this is going to give those that haven't the opportunity to experience MACs without dropping linux from their machine altogether.
This post is simply old... I've been using the Yahoo Firefox toolbar for at least a month now... at work on Windows and at home on Linux.
I also have the Google Firefox toolbar and the Netcraft Firefox Toolbar.
The reason I have the yahoo toolbar is not for search (though I find the yahoo search very comparable to google - and much better at trawling the geocities websites). I use the yahoo myWeb and Yahoo bookmarks which are both available from the toolbar and allow me to save replicas of web pages that I find useful (so that they are cached at the state I want.. not whatever was last trawled by the search engine) and so that my bookmarks can be stored independently of the machine I am using... so links I find at home can be easily accessed from work and vice versa.
Alternatively, The google toolbar is useful for spell checking forms and blogging. And netcraft is just fun...
Yes all these toolbars do clutter my browser more than I like... and I wish I could manipulate the individual buttons more.. take the features I like off each and put on one toolbar... Hmm.. I probably can... I'll look into it and release a toolbar as soon as possible!
But VJ++ was ahead of the league... I've been told the guy who built it had something to do with DELPHI earlier. And M$ got him to go to work on their other VIDEs. Which I have to say, are rather flash.
But apart form my own opinions, this could all be false.
Well it helps to prove that you can get the data...
Of course, if they can see it they can use it... However, I'm from New Zealand and I don't quite understand what the big deal of having someones SSN is. Its not like you can use a number without any other proof of ID is it? So isn't this just a little media scare mongering about identity theft?
Yeah, but you don't have to talk to the recipient if you text them. And you can say the same thing to all your recipients once... without talking to any of them.
Brilliant... so none of my friends know what morse code is?
I don't think I've downloaded a movie thats any good ever. And I think that we should avoid buying/viewing and watching this mainstream rubbish. Go alternative, pay to go to alternative movies.
We don't like mainstream, and alternatives are cheaper anyway.
Add to this mix major commercial music labels... not that copy protection works on linux.
I also read the 60 Minutes as the duration the demonstration lasted... not the TV.
However, even if it doesn't mention the TCV, someone watching it on 60 Minutes and finding it interesting is redundant. Perhaps if they had a reason why they found it interesting?
I think it depends... obviously since he is passing the command as an argument to perl to interpret and providing the full application command line for this to be done... then many people will try and run it to see what it does.
But this is silly two ways, firstly for doing it... secondly for doing it while you are sitting in permission mode that allows you to run it with serious problems evolving.
I.e. if you want to do something stupid to your machine, the very least you could do is set up a test environment on your machine and try it (and anything else you can't resist) there... i.e. a special user with very low permissions or try it in a VMWare session.
Obviously this isn't fool proof, because if you try everything that looks strange, eventually you are going to try something designed to break the sandbox you have created...
However, obfuscated perl (or regular perl) looks interesting.
Javascript API for Server Communication. AJAX seemed to avoid most of the uses of the various technologies the are included in this umbrella.
For example, the communications do not have to be asynchronous and doesn't actually need to have anything to do with XML.
Actually the engine isn't even required to be JavaScript, IE uses ActiveX objects and I have seen an example of an implementation using Java in Opera. However for our API, we are wrapping the engine in a JS object and only implementing in IE and Gecko engined browsers.
I don't really understand this philosophy. Why is it ridiculous to run stable applications at work?
I run the testing release of Debian at home, and have just recieved a few snide remarks about Xorg not existing and XFree86 being prevalent. However who gives? I can still run Doom 3 and UT 2004.
But I really don't see why you would need all the flashest apps on a production machine. Isn't the idea of production that it works and works well? I know management usually through newer and newer hardware at a solution to try and make up for the crap algorithms that have been implemented to make the time frames.. but even then is it really essential that every latest feature of the underlying hardware be supported?
No, its not. Actually its unlikely that every feature of the hardware is ever actually supported. Definately not by a windows box, nor even a Red Hat box.
Though, I disagree with a need for the latest and greatest bells and whistles being installed in production environemnts. I do not disagree with the need for Debian to speed up its release process. I think I have been using Woody as a testing release for over a year now. And though I am happy with what I am using. I'm not really impressed with the process.
I thought he must have meant put good work in one hand and shit work in the other... and see which gets filled first... But that makes as much sense as the original posters comments.
Though I've not previously heard the saying you have quoted...
You mean Google run XP in their offices? Because to my knowledge they run linux with 'the cheap Apache-servers running on low-end servers' for their webservers...
Why isn't there a tool that builds basic UML diagrams from source code... Or is there some [rational?] tool that does exactly this?
Doesn't seem like it would be particularly difficult to build... hmmm.. of course it would be similar to building a compiler... and I suppose some people call that difficult... But it would be easier from something like Java Bytecode.
So you just said that any OS is secure, as long as you set it up sensibly... and then place it behind a *Nix based Firewall?
I disagree... it really does depend what your talking about though. If you are running a Microsoft Web Server... and you are Microsoft, then sure, on occassion you are going to have to protect your services with some good linux or *bsd based firewalls... But for most of the time and for most Windows Desktop users, just setting up their machine sensibly and locking down unused and unrequired ports will be satisfactory.
I am also unsure what the big difference for an end user is between the main BSD's. They seemed pretty similar to me, as far as setup and configuration and compatibility with other *Nix open source projects. But I would be interested in clarification of real differences.
Everybody commits attrocities. However there is an increasing trend for UN troops and the corporations that act as support mechanisms for these troops to perform attrocities in hostile situations that are comparable to the situation that encouraged joe public to support such gross action in the first place.
Unfortunately for internation opinion of the US; most of the world associates UN actions with the US... they do afterall provide a large number of the troops to these 'hotspots'. And often there appears to be some tangible conspiracy theory behind such actions.
The moral really should be similar to that of the failed League of Nations... keep out of everybodies business... unless its your business. In which case ask nicely that they stop.
Firstly, I don't want to increase my knowledge of the facts, ignorance is bliss. Secondly... was I supposed to explain something?
Also your double negative reads poorly; I would have written similar to: "Your reply betrays your ignorance of the facts and fails to explain..."
I think my point is that the UN shouldn't be responsible for stopping cyber-crime...
I think that is largely the american military hardware companies that are sent in to make money off the negative situation... turning it into a more negative situation...
I thought the parent was referring to the username being encrypted? Just like the password.
I mean, if his password looked like some huge chunk of encoded text... how on earth would anybody remember it?? I presume his bank does this client side, then transports it via https?
This way the bank users only have to remember stuff that is possible for joe blogs to remember... but a level of hightened security is still achieved.
... I always thought this was because the '$' looked similar to the 'S'... And because Microsoft and MS were registered trademarks....
It appears that Microsoft is a registered trademark, but MS is not. However, MS-Dos is a registered trademark. Even though other microsoft products are commonly reffered to as MS Excell or MS Word.
I did find one website that states that MS is a trademark of microsoft... but search for "ms" on the microsoft site and the search page will ask if you meant to search for "microsoft".
Slashdot Mirror
Hmmm... I don't think Linspire does this at all. Originally Linspire aspired to bring us an OS that could run Windows and Linux software side-by-side. I feel Linspire is just a year old branch of Red Hat Linux...
It runs wine for windows apps, but the ability of this to run all windows apps is dependent on its configuration.. and it certainly does not provide all security flaws of windows (the dlls that provide these flaws exist.. but they aren't sitting there listening to your ports waiting to be exploited.. a hacker has to hack your linux flaws first.. and this would probably lead this theoretical hacker down a very different path than that travelled by a windows hacker... unless you have sql server open for inspection - but does that even run in wine?).
In the topic of the article... it's damn smart of Apple to keep its OS running on MAC. If they let their OS be run on anything, well I'd get one for my PC today... If they don't, I'll wait until the MAC comes in x86 style and I buy one of those.. and run windows, linux and OSX on the same machine... one way they sell an OS for a few hundred $$ the other way they sell a complete hardware package for a few thousand.
http://www.michaelrobertson.com/Michael Robertson's thoughts on Apple's stance is probably fueled from his own endeavour... which is largely his OS versus the MS OS... this is not the case for Apple... Appple is the MAC versus the PC, Apple and MS already have a relationship (with Office, Virtual PC, etc) and the move to intel-MACs will give MACs an advantage in the PC battle.
Already many Unix and Linux users have switched to Mac... this is going to give those that haven't the opportunity to experience MACs without dropping linux from their machine altogether.
This post is simply old... I've been using the Yahoo Firefox toolbar for at least a month now... at work on Windows and at home on Linux.
I also have the Google Firefox toolbar and the Netcraft Firefox Toolbar.
The reason I have the yahoo toolbar is not for search (though I find the yahoo search very comparable to google - and much better at trawling the geocities websites). I use the yahoo myWeb and Yahoo bookmarks which are both available from the toolbar and allow me to save replicas of web pages that I find useful (so that they are cached at the state I want.. not whatever was last trawled by the search engine) and so that my bookmarks can be stored independently of the machine I am using... so links I find at home can be easily accessed from work and vice versa.
Alternatively, The google toolbar is useful for spell checking forms and blogging. And netcraft is just fun...
Yes all these toolbars do clutter my browser more than I like... and I wish I could manipulate the individual buttons more.. take the features I like off each and put on one toolbar... Hmm.. I probably can... I'll look into it and release a toolbar as soon as possible!
Or perhaps they just factorised their UID... Not that many of them are primes... However 900131 only two factors 29 and 31039... both primes... cool.
This reminds me of the article about good developers and bad spellers...
quite = emphasis of point, not very.
quit = give up.
I'd love to give up work to work on open source projects. But you would have to be very motivated to do that.
M$ didn't decide, they were forced to by Sun.
But VJ++ was ahead of the league... I've been told the guy who built it had something to do with DELPHI earlier. And M$ got him to go to work on their other VIDEs. Which I have to say, are rather flash.
But apart form my own opinions, this could all be false.
So obviously your implying that Scientology stunk ripely from its conception?
See above sibling of parent post.
Well it helps to prove that you can get the data...
Of course, if they can see it they can use it... However, I'm from New Zealand and I don't quite understand what the big deal of having someones SSN is. Its not like you can use a number without any other proof of ID is it? So isn't this just a little media scare mongering about identity theft?
We don't have SSNs in New Zealand.
Yeah, but you don't have to talk to the recipient if you text them. And you can say the same thing to all your recipients once... without talking to any of them.
Brilliant... so none of my friends know what morse code is?
In a way he has...
I don't think I've downloaded a movie thats any good ever. And I think that we should avoid buying/viewing and watching this mainstream rubbish. Go alternative, pay to go to alternative movies.
We don't like mainstream, and alternatives are cheaper anyway.
Add to this mix major commercial music labels... not that copy protection works on linux.
I also read the 60 Minutes as the duration the demonstration lasted... not the TV.
However, even if it doesn't mention the TCV, someone watching it on 60 Minutes and finding it interesting is redundant. Perhaps if they had a reason why they found it interesting?
I think it depends... obviously since he is passing the command as an argument to perl to interpret and providing the full application command line for this to be done... then many people will try and run it to see what it does.
But this is silly two ways, firstly for doing it... secondly for doing it while you are sitting in permission mode that allows you to run it with serious problems evolving.
I.e. if you want to do something stupid to your machine, the very least you could do is set up a test environment on your machine and try it (and anything else you can't resist) there... i.e. a special user with very low permissions or try it in a VMWare session.
Obviously this isn't fool proof, because if you try everything that looks strange, eventually you are going to try something designed to break the sandbox you have created...
However, obfuscated perl (or regular perl) looks interesting.
We decided to call it 'Jasc' at work.
Javascript API for Server Communication. AJAX seemed to avoid most of the uses of the various technologies the are included in this umbrella.
For example, the communications do not have to be asynchronous and doesn't actually need to have anything to do with XML.
Actually the engine isn't even required to be JavaScript, IE uses ActiveX objects and I have seen an example of an implementation using Java in Opera. However for our API, we are wrapping the engine in a JS object and only implementing in IE and Gecko engined browsers.
I don't really understand this philosophy. Why is it ridiculous to run stable applications at work?
I run the testing release of Debian at home, and have just recieved a few snide remarks about Xorg not existing and XFree86 being prevalent. However who gives? I can still run Doom 3 and UT 2004.
But I really don't see why you would need all the flashest apps on a production machine. Isn't the idea of production that it works and works well? I know management usually through newer and newer hardware at a solution to try and make up for the crap algorithms that have been implemented to make the time frames.. but even then is it really essential that every latest feature of the underlying hardware be supported?
No, its not. Actually its unlikely that every feature of the hardware is ever actually supported. Definately not by a windows box, nor even a Red Hat box.
Though, I disagree with a need for the latest and greatest bells and whistles being installed in production environemnts. I do not disagree with the need for Debian to speed up its release process. I think I have been using Woody as a testing release for over a year now. And though I am happy with what I am using. I'm not really impressed with the process.
This isn't offtopic, Fred is the dragon fly mascot.
Perhaps the moderator should know the topic? OK, the post isn't exactly useful.. but its not offtopic.
If your not with us, then your against us!
I thought he must have meant put good work in one hand and shit work in the other... and see which gets filled first... But that makes as much sense as the original posters comments.
Though I've not previously heard the saying you have quoted...
Did you stop to think why they were modded funny?
Light... as a feather... not as a light/torch/beam of...
sheesh. sure, they're not that funny... but hello!
You mean Google run XP in their offices? Because to my knowledge they run linux with 'the cheap Apache-servers running on low-end servers' for their webservers...
Or were you being funny through contradiction?
Why isn't there a tool that builds basic UML diagrams from source code... Or is there some [rational?] tool that does exactly this?
Doesn't seem like it would be particularly difficult to build... hmmm.. of course it would be similar to building a compiler... and I suppose some people call that difficult... But it would be easier from something like Java Bytecode.
Technically Bill Gates has a Technical background...
Sure its not in Linux... but it is in a programming language... if you want to call BASIC that.
Also he isn't a CEO anymore... so this is really offtopic. But it seems like he did a pretty good job of directing Microsoft while he was CEO.
So you just said that any OS is secure, as long as you set it up sensibly... and then place it behind a *Nix based Firewall?
I disagree... it really does depend what your talking about though. If you are running a Microsoft Web Server... and you are Microsoft, then sure, on occassion you are going to have to protect your services with some good linux or *bsd based firewalls... But for most of the time and for most Windows Desktop users, just setting up their machine sensibly and locking down unused and unrequired ports will be satisfactory.
I am also unsure what the big difference for an end user is between the main BSD's. They seemed pretty similar to me, as far as setup and configuration and compatibility with other *Nix open source projects. But I would be interested in clarification of real differences.
Hmmm... as do yours...
Everybody commits attrocities. However there is an increasing trend for UN troops and the corporations that act as support mechanisms for these troops to perform attrocities in hostile situations that are comparable to the situation that encouraged joe public to support such gross action in the first place.
Unfortunately for internation opinion of the US; most of the world associates UN actions with the US... they do afterall provide a large number of the troops to these 'hotspots'. And often there appears to be some tangible conspiracy theory behind such actions.
The moral really should be similar to that of the failed League of Nations... keep out of everybodies business... unless its your business. In which case ask nicely that they stop.
Firstly, I don't want to increase my knowledge of the facts, ignorance is bliss. Secondly... was I supposed to explain something?
Also your double negative reads poorly; I would have written similar to: "Your reply betrays your ignorance of the facts and fails to explain..."
I think my point is that the UN shouldn't be responsible for stopping cyber-crime...
I think that is largely the american military hardware companies that are sent in to make money off the negative situation... turning it into a more negative situation...
I thought the parent was referring to the username being encrypted? Just like the password.
I mean, if his password looked like some huge chunk of encoded text... how on earth would anybody remember it?? I presume his bank does this client side, then transports it via https?
This way the bank users only have to remember stuff that is possible for joe blogs to remember... but a level of hightened security is still achieved.
People commonly use M$ or Micro$oft...
... I always thought this was because the '$' looked similar to the 'S' ... And because Microsoft and MS were registered trademarks....
i ew=en-us&st=b&na=82&qu=ms/
. htm/
It appears that Microsoft is a registered trademark, but MS is not. However, MS-Dos is a registered trademark. Even though other microsoft products are commonly reffered to as MS Excell or MS Word.
I did find one website that states that MS is a trademark of microsoft... but search for "ms" on the microsoft site and the search page will ask if you meant to search for "microsoft".
http://search.microsoft.com/search/results.aspx?v
http://www.hitachi-support.com/trademarks/ename_m
http://www.hwcs.com/company/trademarks.asp/
http://www.snmp.com/company/trademarks.html/