Oh yeah, well I urge Linux users to stick to ext2 for the protection of your data. At least for another year, give ext3 the chance to mature, then, when we are certain ext3 is safe, start using it.
>/sarcasm<
I work in a datacenter with tens of thousands of Linux machines and we see Linux fail in every way imaginable. It's impossible to get any substantially-complex piece of code bug-free, the best anyone can do is "good enough." Sure, everyone has their own definition of "good enough," but I trust the judgement of the kernel and distribution developers in that regard. (Because if I didn't, I'd lobby for using a different OS entirely, anyway.)
Besides, if nobody uses a particular feature out of fear, it can never be tested and proven reliable.
Also, remember to keep backups whether or not you're using a filesystem that's seen recent development.
How many of these vulnerabilities were due to Firefox itself, and how many due to plugins?
Well, the Slashdot article, the "research," and most of the comments here are misleading.
This is a count of how many vulnerabilities were fixed, not how vulnerable in general the software was. It's impossible to concretely quantify how buggy any sufficiently complex body of code is.
I see far more people (at least at this point) complaining about the anti-apple comments than anti-apple comments...
Welcome to The Slashdot Fashion Phenomenon, where the things we collectively laud or eschew change like the seasons.
In the beginning, the trend was anti-Apple because PCs were superior. Then, Jobs came back and the Macintosh became sexy, so the trend was pro-Apple. Then, we came to loathe their closed and litigious behavior, so the trend was anti-Apple. Then, in response to all the anti-Apple sentiment, the trend was anti-anti-Apple. Now, we're starting to see the next emerging trend: anti-anti-anti-Apple comments.
SQL has scaled for years, and I know loads of companies who work with terabytes and terabytes of data on a single database without any issue.
Whenever I hear someone say SQL doesn't scale, I simply point them to Slashdot. It's been running Perl and MySQL since the beginning. No, it's not Digg or Facebook, but it's got higher traffic than 99.99% of all new web development projects ever will see.
Eiland-Hall "appears to the panel to be engaged in a parody of the style or methodology that [Eiland-Hall] appears genuinely to believe is employed by [Beck] in the provision of political commentary, and for that reason [Eiland-Hall] can be said to be making a political statement."
This is pretty weaselly language for a ruling. Is it even enforceable given the complete lack of concrete wording?
Because there is none. Quit confounding parody and satire with humour. Both are often very unfunny
The whole point of parody is to make it clear how absurd the thing being parodied really is. Satire and parody aren't very effective if they're not humorous in some way.
Unless yours servers absolutely must be local, one of the most important factors should be local climate and environmental risk. I've worked in a couple datacenters in Michigan and it's really ideal:
* No state-wide forest fires * No flooding if you're above the flood plain * No hurricanes * Very few tornadoes
On top of that, if the AC units should spontaneously fail all at once, 99% of the time you can just open up all the doors and run a couple of large fans to keep things cool enough to run.
'If I were an attacker and wanted to do strategic damage to the United States, I would either take the cold of winter or the heat of summer,' says McConnell, 'I would probably sack electric power on the US East Coast, maybe the West Coast and attempt to cause a cascading effect.'
Oh yeah, well if I were an attacker, I would build a gravity weapon so powerful that it would pull the moon out of its orbit and crash it into the earth.
OR I would create a poison so potent that just a few drops of it in any lake would kill everyone within a 5-mile radius.
OR I would plant thermonuclear bombs in the capitals of the 10 largest cities in the U.S. and detonate them all at once.
See, Mike McConnell? It's easy to invent terrorist movie plots. If they gave out awards for Most Creative Terrorist Strategies That Would Never Work, you all all of your three-letter agencies would win first prize every time.
I think what's new here is that the babies picked up the patterns of the local language before even being born and incorporated them into their pre-speech sounds. (Cries and general babbling.)
It's a well-known phenomenon that newborns tend to be attuned to the sound of their mother's voice. And from an evolutionary standpoint, it makes perfect sense: A baby depends on her mother for everything from food to physical protection, and the mother (well, most mothers anyway) gets a feeling of immense satisfaction from attending to the needs of the child so that the child can grow up and pass on her genes.
Our daughter is 4 months old and most of the time she wants nothing to do with me if she knows her mother is nearby. Although she seems to recognize me as someone important, she will literally strain to keep mom in her field of view if at all possible.
I don't see why we should force writers to give their work in a format that can be duplicated too easily.
Nobody's forcing the writers to do anything in any case. Even if Lulu didn't offer any DRM formats, writers are perfectly to go find some other company that will publish their work to their specifications.
Re:Just to start us off with a car analogy...
on
Lulu Introduces DRM
·
· Score: 1
DRM is only necessary because piracy is so widespread that it's impossible for humans to police it. If piracy was as rare as murder, then it'd be possible to have humans investigate every case and make a nuanced decision on whether it was legitimate and beneficial or criminal.
Also, there's the minor detail that sharing a copyrighted file does not kill someone.
Let's just dispense with the formalities and bring der Fuhrer into this argument before the analogies get too subtle.
Also, buyers have the choice to not buy DRM products and Lulu doesn't force authors release their works as DRM-encumbered. And finally, if I am not mistaken, Lulu charges more for the DRMified products.
- 1x second-hand 2GB MP3 player (free to me, but may cost up to $20 new) - 1x pair of headphones that I already owned
The best part is that I can even go OUTSIDE with it, and the music is still crystal clear everywhere I go. Better yet, each person occupying the house can have their own multiroom audio configuration operating at the same time with no interference. I listen to music, podcasts, radio stations, whatever, and can even take the whole experience with me when I travel.
Based on my hasty research, the majority of this bill looks like a good idea, but you hit the one thing about it that I am most strongly against. Now, I'm admittedly not the healthiest individual. I don't exercise nearly as much as I should, but I don't drink or gorge myself on soda and onion rings all day either. Point is, I'm in good overall health and there's no way in hell I should be FORCED to subsidize the expensive care and treatment of those who can't be bothered to look after their own well-being.
I don't think it's a coincidence that we're talking about government-mandated health care with nationwide obesity skyrocketing from about 10% to 30% over the course of the last 30 years. (Source.) If we keep this up, literally half the population will be obese in 10-20 more years. Why should these people get a free ticket for all of their self-inflicted bodily harm on my dime? Is there anything in the bill that will address the obesity epidemic directly and lessen the NEED for health care in the first place? I'm still researching the answers, but I'd be very surprised if it did.
I have no problem with the government mandating immediate, unconditional, professional care for all emergency and urgent cases. Even if the patient admits up-front that they are in the country illegally and there is no reprisal (i.e., a friendly visit from INS) for doing so.
I have no problem with employers offering health insurance to all employees, even healthy ones. I don't even have too much of a problem with the government requiring employers to offer health insurance, though there should be a limit on the number of employees and/or the amount of profit that the company makes before those requirements kick in. The company should also be able to reduce the employee's pay according to how much the insurance plan costs them.
But purchasing insurance should not be mandatory, period. If I don't work for a company that provides health insurance gratis, and/or I chose to opt-out of health insurance, I pay a 2.5% penalty on my income taxes according to H.R. 3200. Just what this recession needs.
I'm curious to know what happens to the self-employed, contractors, or freelance types? If they don't go out and deliberately purchase health insurance, are they subject to the 2.5% income tax penalty? I guess the only way to escape paying for something you don't use would be to not make any money at all. Fuck it, I'm going to quit my job and beg on the street corner for change.
Dude, get a clue !!! The bill has no provision that the recipient of health care be a legal resident. Regardless of protestations to the contrary, unwelcome aliens will take full advantage of the U.S. taxpayers.
Claim: Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.
False. That's simply not what the bill says at all. This page includes "SEC. 152. PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION IN HEALTH CARE," which says that "[e]xcept as otherwise explicitly permitted by this Act and by subsequent regulations consistent with this Act, all health care and related services (including insurance coverage and public health activities) covered by this Act shall be provided without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services." However, the bill does explicitly say that illegal immigrants can't get any government money to pay for health care. Page 143 states: "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States." And as we've said before, current law prohibits illegal immigrants from participating in government health care programs.
I ran into this exact same mentality when I started looking into satellite TV. I wanted a solution that I could roll myself, with DVR and the whole bit. It turns out that there's a popular video standard called DVB-S that almost all international satellite providers broadcast in. The hardware is cheap, the video and audio are plain MPEG2. There are lots of DVB tuner cards that go right in your PC and many of them even have Linux drivers.
The first problem I ran into is that whenever I went asking for information in satellite forums, I got yelled at. A lot. It turns out that there's a subculture of individuals in the satellite scene who trade information on cracking the encryption for Dish Network and some Canadian provider. Apparently these two networks use (or used to use?) standard DVB hardware and bolt some kind of weak encryption on top. Out of curiosity, I checked into this a little but and found that they were a pretty hypocritical group: they create tools and hardware to crack Dish Network's encryption so that they can watch premium TV for free, but have a huge problem with other people sharing the same information or cloning their work. One of the most popular forums actually charged a subscription fee for firmware updates to grey-market boxes. (The firmware updates contained "fixes" whenever Dish would change their encryption.)
The TL;DR summary: satellite crackers are about as far away from the actual hacker scene as you can get.
The second problem I ran into is that there's little genuinely free DVB content in the American hemisphere. Except for home shopping and religious channels, the NASA channel is about it. On the other side of the world, you have a lot more options. Once I found this out, I kinda lost interest in the whole thing.
They've started constructing roundabouts here in Michigan. I did some traveling when I was younger so I'm pretty familiar with how to manage a variety of traffic management features, including the roundabout. If you're not from the mid-west, let me tell you something: Until very recently, there were no roundabouts in Michigan. They weren't just rare, they were completely non-existent. They aren't even taught in driver's training. In the last few years, I know of three that have been constructed.
There's one in downtown Lansing that's especially fun. It's been there for a year and every single time I have to go through it, the driver ahead of me stops dead at the entrance for at least 15 seconds before they figure out what to do, even when there's no traffic around. When I finally make it into the roundabout, the other drivers think the Yield sign is merely a suggestion. Or they think that the cars already in the roundabout are supposed to stop and let them enter. And then they honk and/or wave the finger at you when you don't.
What pisses me off the most is that these roundabouts seemed to be put in for looks or to burn up capital more than anything else. On one I-75 exit, they put in two roundabouts on top of a bridge. It was completely unnecessary. Half of the traffic has to navigate two roundabouts right in a row. Not to mention that it's an industrial area and the exit was frequently used by big semi trucks, the natural enemy of the roundabout. And this is in a fairly rural area, too. Green arrows and double-lane turn lanes are about as sophisticated as these drivers can manage.
I can't say how progressive Maryland's drivers are about new traffic management features, but it would be a complete wreck (literally) to roll out roundabouts in many parts of the U.S., even if they can theoretically improve traffic flow.
In fact when I've a floppy of a maximum diameter, When I can call a subroutine of infinite parameter, When I can point to registers and keep their current map around, And when I can prevent the need for mystifying wraparound, When I can update record blocks with minimum of suffering, And when I can afford to use a hundred K for buffering, When I've performed a matrix sort and tested the addition rate, You'll marvel at the speed of my asynchronous transmission rate.
Though all my better programs that self-reference recursively Have only been obtained through expert spying, done subversively, But still for input vegetable, animal, and mineral, I've built a better model than the one at Data General.
He needs thicker skin if he's going to deal with the LKML crowd.
It's fairly well known that the core of LKML is the quintessential definition of an old boy network. Any ideas that didn't start there, aren't usually accepted there. You shouldn't need a "thick skin" just to get some advice or guidance on a patch or proposed feature. The list of good developers who have been flamed off of kernel development is a mile long and goes all the way back to release 0.01.
Cellular networks are ubiquitous but are neither robust nor cheap.
iPhones and kindles are network appliances.
The iPhone's intended core functionality is greatly reduced in the absence of a network, but it's still a general-purpose computer. You can play games, music, video, and run a variety of other applications offline. The Kindle is still perfectly useful when the network goes away, as long as you don't need to buy a new book that very moment.
Slashdot Mirror
No problem. Here you go.
Done.
oh noes, my brackets went the wrong way
Oh yeah, well I urge Linux users to stick to ext2 for the protection of your data. At least for another year, give ext3 the chance to mature, then, when we are certain ext3 is safe, start using it.
>/sarcasm<
I work in a datacenter with tens of thousands of Linux machines and we see Linux fail in every way imaginable. It's impossible to get any substantially-complex piece of code bug-free, the best anyone can do is "good enough." Sure, everyone has their own definition of "good enough," but I trust the judgement of the kernel and distribution developers in that regard. (Because if I didn't, I'd lobby for using a different OS entirely, anyway.)
Besides, if nobody uses a particular feature out of fear, it can never be tested and proven reliable.
Also, remember to keep backups whether or not you're using a filesystem that's seen recent development.
Well, the Slashdot article, the "research," and most of the comments here are misleading.
This is a count of how many vulnerabilities were fixed, not how vulnerable in general the software was. It's impossible to concretely quantify how buggy any sufficiently complex body of code is.
Welcome to The Slashdot Fashion Phenomenon, where the things we collectively laud or eschew change like the seasons.
In the beginning, the trend was anti-Apple because PCs were superior.
Then, Jobs came back and the Macintosh became sexy, so the trend was pro-Apple.
Then, we came to loathe their closed and litigious behavior, so the trend was anti-Apple.
Then, in response to all the anti-Apple sentiment, the trend was anti-anti-Apple.
Now, we're starting to see the next emerging trend: anti-anti-anti-Apple comments.
I love this place.
Whenever I hear someone say SQL doesn't scale, I simply point them to Slashdot. It's been running Perl and MySQL since the beginning. No, it's not Digg or Facebook, but it's got higher traffic than 99.99% of all new web development projects ever will see.
This is pretty weaselly language for a ruling. Is it even enforceable given the complete lack of concrete wording?
The whole point of parody is to make it clear how absurd the thing being parodied really is. Satire and parody aren't very effective if they're not humorous in some way.
Unless yours servers absolutely must be local, one of the most important factors should be local climate and environmental risk. I've worked in a couple datacenters in Michigan and it's really ideal:
* No state-wide forest fires
* No flooding if you're above the flood plain
* No hurricanes
* Very few tornadoes
On top of that, if the AC units should spontaneously fail all at once, 99% of the time you can just open up all the doors and run a couple of large fans to keep things cool enough to run.
Duh, hackers can hack in through phone lines! Don't you know anything???
Oh yeah, well if I were an attacker, I would build a gravity weapon so powerful that it would pull the moon out of its orbit and crash it into the earth.
OR I would create a poison so potent that just a few drops of it in any lake would kill everyone within a 5-mile radius.
OR I would plant thermonuclear bombs in the capitals of the 10 largest cities in the U.S. and detonate them all at once.
See, Mike McConnell? It's easy to invent terrorist movie plots. If they gave out awards for Most Creative Terrorist Strategies That Would Never Work, you all all of your three-letter agencies would win first prize every time.
I think what's new here is that the babies picked up the patterns of the local language before even being born and incorporated them into their pre-speech sounds. (Cries and general babbling.)
It's a well-known phenomenon that newborns tend to be attuned to the sound of their mother's voice. And from an evolutionary standpoint, it makes perfect sense: A baby depends on her mother for everything from food to physical protection, and the mother (well, most mothers anyway) gets a feeling of immense satisfaction from attending to the needs of the child so that the child can grow up and pass on her genes.
Our daughter is 4 months old and most of the time she wants nothing to do with me if she knows her mother is nearby. Although she seems to recognize me as someone important, she will literally strain to keep mom in her field of view if at all possible.
Nobody's forcing the writers to do anything in any case. Even if Lulu didn't offer any DRM formats, writers are perfectly to go find some other company that will publish their work to their specifications.
Also, there's the minor detail that sharing a copyrighted file does not kill someone.
Let's just dispense with the formalities and bring der Fuhrer into this argument before the analogies get too subtle.
The key weakness to your argument is:
DRM != to slave labor
Also, buyers have the choice to not buy DRM products and Lulu doesn't force authors release their works as DRM-encumbered. And finally, if I am not mistaken, Lulu charges more for the DRMified products.
My solution: $20
- 1x second-hand 2GB MP3 player (free to me, but may cost up to $20 new)
- 1x pair of headphones that I already owned
The best part is that I can even go OUTSIDE with it, and the music is still crystal clear everywhere I go. Better yet, each person occupying the house can have their own multiroom audio configuration operating at the same time with no interference. I listen to music, podcasts, radio stations, whatever, and can even take the whole experience with me when I travel.
Man, they should have invented this DECADES ago.
Based on my hasty research, the majority of this bill looks like a good idea, but you hit the one thing about it that I am most strongly against. Now, I'm admittedly not the healthiest individual. I don't exercise nearly as much as I should, but I don't drink or gorge myself on soda and onion rings all day either. Point is, I'm in good overall health and there's no way in hell I should be FORCED to subsidize the expensive care and treatment of those who can't be bothered to look after their own well-being.
I don't think it's a coincidence that we're talking about government-mandated health care with nationwide obesity skyrocketing from about 10% to 30% over the course of the last 30 years. (Source.) If we keep this up, literally half the population will be obese in 10-20 more years. Why should these people get a free ticket for all of their self-inflicted bodily harm on my dime? Is there anything in the bill that will address the obesity epidemic directly and lessen the NEED for health care in the first place? I'm still researching the answers, but I'd be very surprised if it did.
I have no problem with the government mandating immediate, unconditional, professional care for all emergency and urgent cases. Even if the patient admits up-front that they are in the country illegally and there is no reprisal (i.e., a friendly visit from INS) for doing so.
I have no problem with employers offering health insurance to all employees, even healthy ones. I don't even have too much of a problem with the government requiring employers to offer health insurance, though there should be a limit on the number of employees and/or the amount of profit that the company makes before those requirements kick in. The company should also be able to reduce the employee's pay according to how much the insurance plan costs them.
But purchasing insurance should not be mandatory, period. If I don't work for a company that provides health insurance gratis, and/or I chose to opt-out of health insurance, I pay a 2.5% penalty on my income taxes according to H.R. 3200. Just what this recession needs.
I'm curious to know what happens to the self-employed, contractors, or freelance types? If they don't go out and deliberately purchase health insurance, are they subject to the 2.5% income tax penalty? I guess the only way to escape paying for something you don't use would be to not make any money at all. Fuck it, I'm going to quit my job and beg on the street corner for change.
That is a flat-out lie. YOU get a clue.
Claim: Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.
False. That's simply not what the bill says at all. This page includes "SEC. 152. PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION IN HEALTH CARE," which says that "[e]xcept as otherwise explicitly permitted by this Act and by subsequent regulations consistent with this Act, all health care and related services (including insurance coverage and public health activities) covered by this Act shall be provided without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services." However, the bill does explicitly say that illegal immigrants can't get any government money to pay for health care. Page 143 states: "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States." And as we've said before, current law prohibits illegal immigrants from participating in government health care programs.
I ran into this exact same mentality when I started looking into satellite TV. I wanted a solution that I could roll myself, with DVR and the whole bit. It turns out that there's a popular video standard called DVB-S that almost all international satellite providers broadcast in. The hardware is cheap, the video and audio are plain MPEG2. There are lots of DVB tuner cards that go right in your PC and many of them even have Linux drivers.
The first problem I ran into is that whenever I went asking for information in satellite forums, I got yelled at. A lot. It turns out that there's a subculture of individuals in the satellite scene who trade information on cracking the encryption for Dish Network and some Canadian provider. Apparently these two networks use (or used to use?) standard DVB hardware and bolt some kind of weak encryption on top. Out of curiosity, I checked into this a little but and found that they were a pretty hypocritical group: they create tools and hardware to crack Dish Network's encryption so that they can watch premium TV for free, but have a huge problem with other people sharing the same information or cloning their work. One of the most popular forums actually charged a subscription fee for firmware updates to grey-market boxes. (The firmware updates contained "fixes" whenever Dish would change their encryption.)
The TL;DR summary: satellite crackers are about as far away from the actual hacker scene as you can get.
The second problem I ran into is that there's little genuinely free DVB content in the American hemisphere. Except for home shopping and religious channels, the NASA channel is about it. On the other side of the world, you have a lot more options. Once I found this out, I kinda lost interest in the whole thing.
They've started constructing roundabouts here in Michigan. I did some traveling when I was younger so I'm pretty familiar with how to manage a variety of traffic management features, including the roundabout. If you're not from the mid-west, let me tell you something: Until very recently, there were no roundabouts in Michigan. They weren't just rare, they were completely non-existent. They aren't even taught in driver's training. In the last few years, I know of three that have been constructed.
There's one in downtown Lansing that's especially fun. It's been there for a year and every single time I have to go through it, the driver ahead of me stops dead at the entrance for at least 15 seconds before they figure out what to do, even when there's no traffic around. When I finally make it into the roundabout, the other drivers think the Yield sign is merely a suggestion. Or they think that the cars already in the roundabout are supposed to stop and let them enter. And then they honk and/or wave the finger at you when you don't.
What pisses me off the most is that these roundabouts seemed to be put in for looks or to burn up capital more than anything else. On one I-75 exit, they put in two roundabouts on top of a bridge. It was completely unnecessary. Half of the traffic has to navigate two roundabouts right in a row. Not to mention that it's an industrial area and the exit was frequently used by big semi trucks, the natural enemy of the roundabout. And this is in a fairly rural area, too. Green arrows and double-lane turn lanes are about as sophisticated as these drivers can manage.
I can't say how progressive Maryland's drivers are about new traffic management features, but it would be a complete wreck (literally) to roll out roundabouts in many parts of the U.S., even if they can theoretically improve traffic flow.
In fact when I've a floppy of a maximum diameter,
When I can call a subroutine of infinite parameter,
When I can point to registers and keep their current map around,
And when I can prevent the need for mystifying wraparound,
When I can update record blocks with minimum of suffering,
And when I can afford to use a hundred K for buffering,
When I've performed a matrix sort and tested the addition rate,
You'll marvel at the speed of my asynchronous transmission rate.
Though all my better programs that self-reference recursively
Have only been obtained through expert spying, done subversively,
But still for input vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I've built a better model than the one at Data General.
No thanks, we've already got 3 Quake engines and a bunch of quality open-source developed ones. But we greatly appreciate the gesture!
It's fairly well known that the core of LKML is the quintessential definition of an old boy network. Any ideas that didn't start there, aren't usually accepted there. You shouldn't need a "thick skin" just to get some advice or guidance on a patch or proposed feature. The list of good developers who have been flamed off of kernel development is a mile long and goes all the way back to release 0.01.
Tack up a sheet of phone numbers on the fridge
Cellular networks are ubiquitous but are neither robust nor cheap.
The iPhone's intended core functionality is greatly reduced in the absence of a network, but it's still a general-purpose computer. You can play games, music, video, and run a variety of other applications offline. The Kindle is still perfectly useful when the network goes away, as long as you don't need to buy a new book that very moment.