The only downside to your idea is that it's been tried (by Stephen King, no less) and found to be lacking.
People who enjoy getting something for free don't pay for getting the next installment. Not in big enough numbers for a book - see the problem with financing a TV show this way?
One developer whining about his rejection. Shouldn't this have been posted to a blog, or something? Did I miss the memo where/. was turned into YouBlog?
In the vast majority of cases, that is as far from the truth as it gets.
Religion is one of the things that get imprinted very early on, because it has become part of culture. Children are confronted with religion almost from the get go. At that age, they are very, very, very easy to manipulate. In fact, for the first few years of life, a kid will accept anything it learns from a person of trust as truth.
For most kids, that includes the basic facts of life, such as "pain is bad", "mother will feed me", "must listen to father", "don't eat the funny berries" and "god exists and we must worship him".
Just ask people why they choose to believe in their respective deity, and from most of them you'll get funny looks. They never actually choose, religion was just something they picked up along the way.
Toilet failure? That's just news for nerds and only nerds.
It also reminds us that space travel isn't only about the latest engines, the best computers, the rocket science and other esoteric stuff, but about some really basic problems that we still have to solve if we want to really travel into space, not just around our little globe.
'If they truly wanted to elevate the image on the site, they should allow photographers to maintain the copyright.'
Uh, they do? You are not required to assign copyright to Wikipedia.
However, they require that you grant the public a broad selection of rights. That generally doesn't mix with any future attempts to use the same image for commercial purposes, because your customer might just as well take the copy from Wikipedia.
It's a difference. An important one. I would mind terribly if someone else would get the rights to my works. But retaining the rights and granting everyone the right to use my stuff is what sharing (and thus the Creative Commons idea) is all about.
I do consider it important to make the correct claims. "There are X arrests, and such arrests can fuck up a life" is a different statement than "there are X lives fucked up", even if X is the same number.
A bit like saying "20 shots were fired during the school shooting" and "20 people were killed".;-)
To be honest I don't think the exact numbers really matter, the war on drugs is batshit whether it's 18 seconds, minutes or hours.
It is, but numbers do matter. 18 seconds means 4800 arrests a day 18 minutes means 80 arrests a day 18 hours means 1.5 arrests a day
I think that's enough of a difference to care about the numbers. At the very least, as a taxpayer I certainly want to know whether I pay for 1,752,000 new prison cells a year, or for 486.
One american is arrested and has their life ruined every 18 seconds just for smoking pot
As much as I think the "war on drugs" is a dumbfuck idea, I do question your numbers. Summed up to the average life expectancy that would mean ~131 million americans suffer this fate sometime during their lifetime. Which strikes me as kind of out of proportion.
You've probably taken the number of arrests and added the "life ruined" part to make your point, but if memory serves correctly, a large part of these arrests are second, third, etc. offenses, and another large part doesn't lead to anything as bad as a ruined life. It's certainly not a pleasure trip, but you're doing your case no favour by spreading easily disproven "facts".
agnostic: "I don't know if $DEITY exists." atheist: "$DEITY does not exist (with a probability approaching certainty)" antitheist: "There's no $DEITY, period."
Depending on mood of day or the exact question you ask, most of us move freely between these variants. There's also the strict agnostic who really ponders the question deeply and leaves both options entirely open with no preference for either, but he's so rare that he probably deserves to be on the endangered species list.
Deletion is bad enough, I don't think I need to chime in with the other posters on that.
But think a little further. This also allows patching, just delete the old version and replace it with a new one, right? So 1984 has in fact become possible. Your books can not only vanish at any time, they can also change at any time.
Wait until we get our newspapers through electronic readers, and you'll see it happen. I bet.
If you really meant that, you're the rare exception.
The too-simplified average assumption is one of the main problems in many design decisions. Systems are built for an "average user" that simply doesn't exist. The result is abominations like windos - stuff that nobody can use well, but everyone can use badly.
Even a single render node dramatically increases productivity for me.
I'm doing TG2 skybox renders, something that easily takes 12 hours each, and often two, three, four times that. Having a few render nodes (two at the moment) means I can continue working while a few frames are already rendering. That means more of my time is spent productive and less is spent waiting.
My render nodes aren't even dedicated machines, just other machines I have around that are mostly idle.
Hate them - love them - or be indifferent - but they won a lawsuit and they should get what they are owed...and in this case its about 3.2 million.
Sorry, no.
According to your logic, someone convicted in, say, a chinese, iranian or afghanistan/Taliban court deserves to get whatever it is (death, probably). Ignore your hatred for these regimes for a moment! The prosecutors won a lawsuit and they should get to execute the punishment they won.
Taint spreads. In this case, from the case to the debt owed. It is still unjust, end of story.
The majority of people in the world are average, by definition.
It's beside the point, but that's one of the wrong assumptions I just can't leave unchallenged.
The majority of people are not average. In many cases, you will not even find one particular instance of the average. In fact, only some methods of calculating the average guarantee that there's even one actual instance (e.g. the Median).
In distributions following the Bell curve or something like it, you will find a majority of people within a certain distance to the average, but depending on the form of the curve, that distance might be fairly large.
No, the majority of people are not average. They are below or above average, it only averages out in the sum total.
I call bullshit on all of that, and I do have a couple OpenBSD systems installed in a commercial setting.
1.) if you wait for the coders to finish up the "cool", uh, sorry "desperately needed" features, you could just as well put the release date on Independence Day, 2025. Having a fixed date forces the coders to concentrate on the essential, instead of the "cool" stuff.
2.) yes, you need to upgrade rapidly. However, your point is misleading. Upgrading OpenBSD has, in all the many upgrades I have made, been no more problematic than, say, running "apt-get update && apt-get upgrade" on Debian.
3.) it's not a "whole new release". It's minor version numbers every six months. And six months can be a damn short time in the security world.
i've used openbsd in production environment, and it doesn't cut it in hardware support or speed.
So you're lamenting why, exactly? If the release cycle isn't even your main problem?
And because in one unlikely, rare event the thing doesn't work out, that means?
Everything has its downsides. Heck, feeding starving children in Africa probably creates a few fatalities (overeating, getting sick, or being killed when the sack of rice falls on you, whatever). It's just that the net effect is positive.(*)
(*) let's not discuss the Africa example, I know that in some cases it's not positive, local economy and all that.
Sometimes, they're just the result of some actual cop doing some actual thinking and coming up with the idea that driving around and warning people that their car is unlocked or their WLAN open may cost X, while the police actions resulting from these problems will cost Y, and X prevent crime instead of always going after the culprits after something bad has already happened. It's not a very pleasing job, that.
Gaining root on one box shouldn't give you easy access to all others.
Yes, but this statement relates to my original reply in what way?
And brute force IS affected by complexity, in that a lower-case alphabetic password only requires 26 possible combination, while a password using characters from the entire 8-bit set, requires 256 possible combination. That's the base, so brute-force time goes exponential from there depending on range of characters used.
Only if you know that you can limit your search space that way.
Even if you structure your brute-force by initially ignoring special characters, do some math.
8 characters, letters only, assuming at most the initial letter could be a capital: 417654129152 possible combinations, i.e. ~1^12 8 characters, 7-bit set (8-bit is nonsense, most of them are non-printable): 67675234241018881, i.e. ~1^17
But "letters only" allows us to use pronouncable passwords that people can remember. Hf$6o/r^ may be a 1^17 complexity password, but 99% of the average user will write it down. "sophisticated" is a 1^19 complexity password, and a lot easier to remember.
Special characters are way overrated. The idiocity of limiting password length is a lot more harmful. If your attacker knows how long your password can at most be, his brute-forcing becomes a ton easier, because he can estimate how much of the search space he's got. If my password can be anything (because it's hashed anyways, so what do you care?) then he never knows if he's close or not, and he can not estimate how long it will take at most.
Even if you use a dictionary attack, more space is the answer, not special characters. The OED contains about 300,000 words. Adding a special character or number brings the complexity up to only 1^9. But allowing for two words instead of one brings the complexity to 1^12, and is equally easy to remember.
The RIAA does not wish to reveal that the hand they are playing is a busted flush
Actually, what they don't want to reveal is that the hand they bet with (share to the artists) is not the hand they put down when it is called (share to themselves).
If the EU can punish Microsoft because they made it difficult for Windows purchasers by (technically) following the EU's legal orders, then they are even more sideways over there than I thought.
Not at all. This is a very well-known response even in the US. It's called "contempt of court" if it happens within the legal branch, and I'm quite certain there's an equivalent in the executive branch as well.
The purpose of these orders, like court sentences, is not to provide the defendant with a maze of semantics and see how gracefully he can wiggle his way around it. Since there'll always be some that try anyways, there've been long-standing traditions on how to deal with those who think they're king of the world and need a lesson in humility.
There was really no reason for them not to be able to bundle their own software in their own OS. Why isn't Apple being told not to include Safari and iTunes and iCal and iWhateverthefuck in their OS?
Because Apple is not convicted of abusing monopoly powers to control a market.
Next strawman, please. This one is getting old.
If Microsoft were a sole proprietorship and I was the sole proprietor, I would certainly tell the EU to fuck off by making things as hard as possible for them as a result of their stupid decision.
It's generally a very bad idea to piss off the people who can confiscate considerable parts of your property. The EU is a larger market than the US. Telling the EU to "fuck off" is the dumbest business decision a multinational corporation could possibly make.
Script kiddie breaks into system #1, copies hashed password file to local system.
If your system doesn't use shadow passwords, the admin is a fucking idiot.:-)
Hashed passwords being sent over the network, ala SMB... [...] Having a more complex password substantially increases the difficulty of recovering the plain text.
Only against dictionary attacks, not against brute force attacks. In brute force attack, length of your password counts, not complexity.
How it fulfills this obligation is its own responsibility.
bzzzt. wrong.
If you're the guy in charge, it's your duty to make sure things work. You can leave specifics to the contrator if you are sure, but as the saying goes, you can not delegate or outsource responsibility.
Slashdot Mirror
The only downside to your idea is that it's been tried (by Stephen King, no less) and found to be lacking.
People who enjoy getting something for free don't pay for getting the next installment. Not in big enough numbers for a book - see the problem with financing a TV show this way?
One developer whining about his rejection. Shouldn't this have been posted to a blog, or something? Did I miss the memo where /. was turned into YouBlog?
Religion is a choice that people make.
In the vast majority of cases, that is as far from the truth as it gets.
Religion is one of the things that get imprinted very early on, because it has become part of culture. Children are confronted with religion almost from the get go. At that age, they are very, very, very easy to manipulate. In fact, for the first few years of life, a kid will accept anything it learns from a person of trust as truth.
For most kids, that includes the basic facts of life, such as "pain is bad", "mother will feed me", "must listen to father", "don't eat the funny berries" and "god exists and we must worship him".
Just ask people why they choose to believe in their respective deity, and from most of them you'll get funny looks. They never actually choose, religion was just something they picked up along the way.
Toilet failure? That's just news for nerds and only nerds.
It also reminds us that space travel isn't only about the latest engines, the best computers, the rocket science and other esoteric stuff, but about some really basic problems that we still have to solve if we want to really travel into space, not just around our little globe.
'If they truly wanted to elevate the image on the site, they should allow photographers to maintain the copyright.'
Uh, they do? You are not required to assign copyright to Wikipedia.
However, they require that you grant the public a broad selection of rights. That generally doesn't mix with any future attempts to use the same image for commercial purposes, because your customer might just as well take the copy from Wikipedia.
It's a difference. An important one. I would mind terribly if someone else would get the rights to my works. But retaining the rights and granting everyone the right to use my stuff is what sharing (and thus the Creative Commons idea) is all about.
Ok, I'm cool now.
I do consider it important to make the correct claims. "There are X arrests, and such arrests can fuck up a life" is a different statement than "there are X lives fucked up", even if X is the same number.
A bit like saying "20 shots were fired during the school shooting" and "20 people were killed". ;-)
To be honest I don't think the exact numbers really matter, the war on drugs is batshit whether it's 18 seconds, minutes or hours.
It is, but numbers do matter.
18 seconds means 4800 arrests a day
18 minutes means 80 arrests a day
18 hours means 1.5 arrests a day
I think that's enough of a difference to care about the numbers. At the very least, as a taxpayer I certainly want to know whether I pay for 1,752,000 new prison cells a year, or for 486.
One american is arrested and has their life ruined every 18 seconds just for smoking pot
As much as I think the "war on drugs" is a dumbfuck idea, I do question your numbers. Summed up to the average life expectancy that would mean ~131 million americans suffer this fate sometime during their lifetime. Which strikes me as kind of out of proportion.
You've probably taken the number of arrests and added the "life ruined" part to make your point, but if memory serves correctly, a large part of these arrests are second, third, etc. offenses, and another large part doesn't lead to anything as bad as a ruined life. It's certainly not a pleasure trip, but you're doing your case no favour by spreading easily disproven "facts".
Actually, the difference is mostly semantic.
agnostic: "I don't know if $DEITY exists."
atheist: "$DEITY does not exist (with a probability approaching certainty)"
antitheist: "There's no $DEITY, period."
Depending on mood of day or the exact question you ask, most of us move freely between these variants. There's also the strict agnostic who really ponders the question deeply and leaves both options entirely open with no preference for either, but he's so rare that he probably deserves to be on the endangered species list.
Deletion is bad enough, I don't think I need to chime in with the other posters on that.
But think a little further. This also allows patching, just delete the old version and replace it with a new one, right? So 1984 has in fact become possible. Your books can not only vanish at any time, they can also change at any time.
Wait until we get our newspapers through electronic readers, and you'll see it happen. I bet.
If you really meant that, you're the rare exception.
The too-simplified average assumption is one of the main problems in many design decisions. Systems are built for an "average user" that simply doesn't exist. The result is abominations like windos - stuff that nobody can use well, but everyone can use badly.
Even a single render node dramatically increases productivity for me.
I'm doing TG2 skybox renders, something that easily takes 12 hours each, and often two, three, four times that. Having a few render nodes (two at the moment) means I can continue working while a few frames are already rendering. That means more of my time is spent productive and less is spent waiting.
My render nodes aren't even dedicated machines, just other machines I have around that are mostly idle.
Hate them - love them - or be indifferent - but they won a lawsuit and they should get what they are owed...and in this case its about 3.2 million.
Sorry, no.
According to your logic, someone convicted in, say, a chinese, iranian or afghanistan/Taliban court deserves to get whatever it is (death, probably). Ignore your hatred for these regimes for a moment! The prosecutors won a lawsuit and they should get to execute the punishment they won.
Taint spreads. In this case, from the case to the debt owed. It is still unjust, end of story.
The majority of people in the world are average, by definition.
It's beside the point, but that's one of the wrong assumptions I just can't leave unchallenged.
The majority of people are not average. In many cases, you will not even find one particular instance of the average. In fact, only some methods of calculating the average guarantee that there's even one actual instance (e.g. the Median).
In distributions following the Bell curve or something like it, you will find a majority of people within a certain distance to the average, but depending on the form of the curve, that distance might be fairly large.
No, the majority of people are not average. They are below or above average, it only averages out in the sum total.
I call bullshit on all of that, and I do have a couple OpenBSD systems installed in a commercial setting.
1.) if you wait for the coders to finish up the "cool", uh, sorry "desperately needed" features, you could just as well put the release date on Independence Day, 2025. Having a fixed date forces the coders to concentrate on the essential, instead of the "cool" stuff.
2.) yes, you need to upgrade rapidly. However, your point is misleading. Upgrading OpenBSD has, in all the many upgrades I have made, been no more problematic than, say, running "apt-get update && apt-get upgrade" on Debian.
3.) it's not a "whole new release". It's minor version numbers every six months. And six months can be a damn short time in the security world.
i've used openbsd in production environment, and it doesn't cut it in hardware support or speed.
So you're lamenting why, exactly? If the release cycle isn't even your main problem?
And because in one unlikely, rare event the thing doesn't work out, that means?
Everything has its downsides. Heck, feeding starving children in Africa probably creates a few fatalities (overeating, getting sick, or being killed when the sack of rice falls on you, whatever). It's just that the net effect is positive.(*)
(*) let's not discuss the Africa example, I know that in some cases it's not positive, local economy and all that.
Sometimes, things like that are dirty, yes.
Sometimes, they're just the result of some actual cop doing some actual thinking and coming up with the idea that driving around and warning people that their car is unlocked or their WLAN open may cost X, while the police actions resulting from these problems will cost Y, and X prevent crime instead of always going after the culprits after something bad has already happened. It's not a very pleasing job, that.
Gaining root on one box shouldn't give you easy access to all others.
Yes, but this statement relates to my original reply in what way?
And brute force IS affected by complexity, in that a lower-case alphabetic password only requires 26 possible combination, while a password using characters from the entire 8-bit set, requires 256 possible combination. That's the base, so brute-force time goes exponential from there depending on range of characters used.
Only if you know that you can limit your search space that way.
Even if you structure your brute-force by initially ignoring special characters, do some math.
8 characters, letters only, assuming at most the initial letter could be a capital: 417654129152 possible combinations, i.e. ~1^12
8 characters, 7-bit set (8-bit is nonsense, most of them are non-printable): 67675234241018881, i.e. ~1^17
But "letters only" allows us to use pronouncable passwords that people can remember. Hf$6o/r^ may be a 1^17 complexity password, but 99% of the average user will write it down. "sophisticated" is a 1^19 complexity password, and a lot easier to remember.
Special characters are way overrated. The idiocity of limiting password length is a lot more harmful. If your attacker knows how long your password can at most be, his brute-forcing becomes a ton easier, because he can estimate how much of the search space he's got. If my password can be anything (because it's hashed anyways, so what do you care?) then he never knows if he's close or not, and he can not estimate how long it will take at most.
Even if you use a dictionary attack, more space is the answer, not special characters. The OED contains about 300,000 words. Adding a special character or number brings the complexity up to only 1^9. But allowing for two words instead of one brings the complexity to 1^12, and is equally easy to remember.
I know that the European Union is not part of the USA - do you?
And even there, the president is the head of the executive branch. He's not the whole branch all by himself, you know?
The RIAA does not wish to reveal that the hand they are playing is a busted flush
Actually, what they don't want to reveal is that the hand they bet with (share to the artists) is not the hand they put down when it is called (share to themselves).
I would have issued an order striking their complaint, dismissing the case.
But then, we wouldn't see the records, right? Maybe the judge is as curious as you and I regarding what they're trying to hide?
If the EU can punish Microsoft because they made it difficult for Windows purchasers by (technically) following the EU's legal orders, then they are even more sideways over there than I thought.
Not at all. This is a very well-known response even in the US. It's called "contempt of court" if it happens within the legal branch, and I'm quite certain there's an equivalent in the executive branch as well.
The purpose of these orders, like court sentences, is not to provide the defendant with a maze of semantics and see how gracefully he can wiggle his way around it. Since there'll always be some that try anyways, there've been long-standing traditions on how to deal with those who think they're king of the world and need a lesson in humility.
There was really no reason for them not to be able to bundle their own software in their own OS. Why isn't Apple being told not to include Safari and iTunes and iCal and iWhateverthefuck in their OS?
Because Apple is not convicted of abusing monopoly powers to control a market.
Next strawman, please. This one is getting old.
If Microsoft were a sole proprietorship and I was the sole proprietor, I would certainly tell the EU to fuck off by making things as hard as possible for them as a result of their stupid decision.
It's generally a very bad idea to piss off the people who can confiscate considerable parts of your property. The EU is a larger market than the US. Telling the EU to "fuck off" is the dumbest business decision a multinational corporation could possibly make.
Script kiddie breaks into system #1, copies hashed password file to local system.
If your system doesn't use shadow passwords, the admin is a fucking idiot. :-)
Hashed passwords being sent over the network, ala SMB... [...] Having a more complex password substantially increases the difficulty of recovering the plain text.
Only against dictionary attacks, not against brute force attacks. In brute force attack, length of your password counts, not complexity.
How it fulfills this obligation is its own responsibility.
bzzzt. wrong.
If you're the guy in charge, it's your duty to make sure things work. You can leave specifics to the contrator if you are sure, but as the saying goes, you can not delegate or outsource responsibility.