It's just stupid evolution has to be dragged into every single discussion about something biology. When biologists say that they have a scientific consensus about the validity of evolution that means its the same when physicists say this about gravity.
The people denying evolution are not lacking evidence, they are lacking education.
I verified the facts after downloading the 2.9MB pdf file.
At the bottom of the first page you can make out the following words: "IBM Journal - April 1964". It does indeed mention the IBM/360 mainframe! Nice troll in the article.
Hehe. Look. If you look at my comment history, or ask a subscriber, you can see that i never intended to troll.
Well, apart from the attempt to disclaim responsibility for a statement whilst still presenting it as credible (the '_some_ claim' statement), there's the gratuitous insult aimed at provoking others - 'toy'.
Obviously i inserted the '_some_ claim' because i'm not one of them. I was talking about an image, which can be roughly translated as a perception of the mass. I know far more than the mass about Apple, and it's products for me to claim that Macs are toys. I was stating a fact, that some people have that perception about the Mac that it's more of a toy than a real computer. I actually disagree with them, but do you think this latest competition would help convince someone tech-savvy but not familiar with Macs that Apple takes the issue of security seriously? That's what i ment when i said 'this adds up to the toy image'.
If you disagree with someone, reply, as someone did to my original post, but don't moderate me troll just because you don't understand or you don't agree with my opinion.
This adds up to the toy image _some_ claim the Macs have. Why would someone play around with a serious security bug there for 10 years? Well, a mitigating fact is that it was there for 10 years, but still it's bad to delay a fix because of a game.
On the other hand, Microsoft plays this game 24/7, with acknowledging vulnerabilities later.
Who would want to buy a crippled operating system? The capabilities of an operating system should be dependant on two things only: software producing capabilities (you need to write the software after all and it's not an easy job to do) and hardware. Marketing reasons aren't on the list, so that MS could sell it's "normal" operating system on an artificially inflated high price.
Thing is, this "new story" brought nothing new. We knew that he DID drop bitkeeper, from the three 5,informative moderated posts which linked to LKML in the previous story. Now we can read that very LKML announcement in this slashdot story aswell. We knew that he won't pick subversion from the previous story and from the subversion developers aswell.
Um. A mathematical proof is just a sequence. It doesn't have to be accepted to be true. According to the axiomatic method of proving,you just need these things:
An abc (not THE abc, just one)
formulas
derivation rules
An axiom is just a derivation rule which derives from the empty set.
Basically, a proof is, according to the axiomatic method, is just a non-infinite sequence of formulas, which can be created by the allowed derivation rules. The whole point is that a proof for A HUMAN, and mathematical proof is different. The axiomatic system is not perfect, either. The whole Hilbert-plan is proven to be impossible to be done, thus it is not possible to prove that there are no contradictions in the axiomatic system
I think the "MUI" axiom system is commonly used to demonstrate how it works, basically. It is too lengthy, and i'm lazy.
No. I've been talking Apache vs. IIS, you misunderstood me.
This is the classic counter-example for the "has large marketshare so it must have security issues" and the "linux has small marketshare thats why the small number of vulnerabilities".
Those patent which have some idea can prove with a device, or physical object that they do, those who cannot provide such thing shouldn't be there in the first place.
"I have typed up instructions for 'non-computer people'" and "Slashdot - News for nerds"
I believe these statements are slightly in conflict.
About point b), i agree, although i think that c) missed the target audience. Also i would like to point out that there are much better written articles, checklists existing already.
Don't get me wrong, i wouldn't care if i would see 5 stories about this topic next week, i'd just skip them over, the only reason i posted is that i felt a little bit let down. I read the title and i expected that someone came up with a new, experimental, seems-to-be-working, wickedly simple way to do so. Sure, it is maybe new for my grandma but not to 99% of the people here.
Also, if adware/spyware/virus infections are really that big of a problem you can always switch to a better designed system. Like linux (yeah i know).
Still, the best solution would be simply to educate users, specifically educate enough users so that spam/virus infections would not reach critical mass to be able to survive.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, i agree.
It's just stupid evolution has to be dragged into every single discussion about something biology. When biologists say that they have a scientific consensus about the validity of evolution that means its the same when physicists say this about gravity.
The people denying evolution are not lacking evidence, they are lacking education.
fakk. That's "IBM/360" not 3600.
Mod this up!
I verified the facts after downloading the 2.9MB pdf file.
At the bottom of the first page you can make out the following words: "IBM Journal - April 1964". It does indeed mention the IBM/360 mainframe! Nice troll in the article.
360 degree turn! Oh wait...
It is not impossible that other operating systems will be developed in the next 20-30 years, don't you think? :)
This is just sensationalism. If you look at for example the server market, or the governments sector, linux is already beating up windows.
My long term projection would be, that Linux will push Windows into a third of the market, something like 1/3 linux, 1/3 windows and 1/3 else.
Hehe. Look. If you look at my comment history, or ask a subscriber, you can see that i never intended to troll.
Well, apart from the attempt to disclaim responsibility for a statement whilst still presenting it as credible (the '_some_ claim' statement), there's the gratuitous insult aimed at provoking others - 'toy'.
Obviously i inserted the '_some_ claim' because i'm not one of them. I was talking about an image, which can be roughly translated as a perception of the mass. I know far more than the mass about Apple, and it's products for me to claim that Macs are toys. I was stating a fact, that some people have that perception about the Mac that it's more of a toy than a real computer. I actually disagree with them, but do you think this latest competition would help convince someone tech-savvy but not familiar with Macs that Apple takes the issue of security seriously? That's what i ment when i said 'this adds up to the toy image'.
If you disagree with someone, reply, as someone did to my original post, but don't moderate me troll just because you don't understand or you don't agree with my opinion.
Some moderators are on the crack again. Most of the time i have something insightful to say and i think that the parent comment has nothing trollish.
Some people should never be given mod points.
This adds up to the toy image _some_ claim the Macs have. Why would someone play around with a serious security bug there for 10 years? Well, a mitigating fact is that it was there for 10 years, but still it's bad to delay a fix because of a game.
On the other hand, Microsoft plays this game 24/7, with acknowledging vulnerabilities later.
I think i'm starting to see the plot here. Microsoft is using the Chewbacca Defense
Except that this is a stupid deal.
Who would want to buy a crippled operating system? The capabilities of an operating system should be dependant on two things only: software producing capabilities (you need to write the software after all and it's not an easy job to do) and hardware. Marketing reasons aren't on the list, so that MS could sell it's "normal" operating system on an artificially inflated high price.
Thing is, this "new story" brought nothing new. We knew that he DID drop bitkeeper, from the three 5,informative moderated posts which linked to LKML in the previous story. Now we can read that very LKML announcement in this slashdot story aswell. We knew that he won't pick subversion from the previous story and from the subversion developers aswell.
What is new, that Linus wrote his own SCM (README here)
Maybe it will appear in 1-2 days as another slashdot story?
I, for one, welcome our new pancake eating overlords!
And subversion developers themselves say that its not a good idea.
- An abc (not THE abc, just one)
- formulas
- derivation rules
An axiom is just a derivation rule which derives from the empty set.Basically, a proof is, according to the axiomatic method, is just a non-infinite sequence of formulas, which can be created by the allowed derivation rules. The whole point is that a proof for A HUMAN, and mathematical proof is different. The axiomatic system is not perfect, either. The whole Hilbert-plan is proven to be impossible to be done, thus it is not possible to prove that there are no contradictions in the axiomatic system
I think the "MUI" axiom system is commonly used to demonstrate how it works, basically. It is too lengthy, and i'm lazy.
You may use this (info about it here).
It could be another solution.
It gives you a reason to use
Flashblock
No. I've been talking Apache vs. IIS, you misunderstood me.
This is the classic counter-example for the "has large marketshare so it must have security issues" and the "linux has small marketshare thats why the small number of vulnerabilities".
I don't usually do this, but:
l _2005_web_server_survey.html
http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2005/04/01/apri
There is no New Hess,Mayer or Helmholtz though.
(If you don't know already, google for these people and you'll understand.)
Well, i mostly ment the GP post as mockery and sarcasm, for most part.
Replying to your post though, it works like this atm. Patenting something is expensive for the common human being.
erase the online storage
Those patent which have some idea can prove with a device, or physical object that they do, those who cannot provide such thing shouldn't be there in the first place.
I wish it would be this easy...
"I have typed up instructions for 'non-computer people'" and "Slashdot - News for nerds"
I believe these statements are slightly in conflict.
About point b), i agree, although i think that c) missed the target audience. Also i would like to point out that there are much better written articles, checklists existing already.
Don't get me wrong, i wouldn't care if i would see 5 stories about this topic next week, i'd just skip them over, the only reason i posted is that i felt a little bit let down. I read the title and i expected that someone came up with a new, experimental, seems-to-be-working, wickedly simple way to do so. Sure, it is maybe new for my grandma but not to 99% of the people here.
this article gives new information how exactly?
Also, if adware/spyware/virus infections are really that big of a problem you can always switch to a better designed system. Like linux (yeah i know).
Still, the best solution would be simply to educate users, specifically educate enough users so that spam/virus infections would not reach critical mass to be able to survive.