Searching Securityfocus for "Firefox patches" returns only four pages. Searching for "'Internet Explorer' patches" returns 31 pages. More patches for IE means it must be more secure, right?!
No, the chunk of memory used by the Virtual Machine still has to be allocated by the Host OS such that the host OS knows to not allocate it to other applications meaning that you'd still face the 4G total limit unless the host OS also understood 64-bit memory space addressing.
The huge benefit of this is the ability to run 64-bit code with the additional 64-bit wide registers and instructions provided by the AMD64/x86-64 architecture.
For instance with this feature in VMware Workstation, I was able to test 64-bit OS' and software for compatibility issues before I took the plunge of upgrading my 32-bit OS to a 64-bit one.
I refuse to buy anything that's not iTunes Plus (DRM Free 256kbit AAC), though I will from time to time download the free single which IS DRM.
I'm willing to accept DRM on something I don't have to pay for (iTunes Free single of the week) since that seems a fair trade-off (I get the song for free and in return you can limit my usage). I won't however pay full price for something that can be arbitrarily shut off. If the song is not available as iTunes Plus then I'll buy the CD, download the Mp3 from Amazon or Rhapsody, or otherwise find some other higher bitrate DRM-Free source.
They are an audiophile targeted record label and have a nice selection of their music available in DRM Free lossless high definition (24-bit, 88/96khz FLAC)
Point of Contact: David Mould, Office of Public Affairs, 202-358-1898
-----------------
A MESSAGE FROM THE NASA ADMINISTRATOR
A recent report in the Orlando Sentinel suggested that NASA is not cooperating with members of President-elect Obama's transition team currently working at Headquarters. This report, largely supported by anonymous sources and hearsay, is simply wrong.
I would like to reiterate what I have stated in a previous email to all NASA Officials: we must make every effort to "lean forward," to answer questions promptly, openly and accurately.
We are fully cooperating with transition team members. Since mid-November, the agency has provided 414 documents and 185 responses to 191 requests. There are six outstanding responses, and the agency will meet the deadline for those queries.
Also, we strongly urge full and free cooperation by companies performing work for NASA. I am appalled by any accusations of intimidation, and encourage a free and open exchange of information with the contractor community.
The transition team's work is too important to become mired in unsupported and anonymous allegations. The President-elect's transition team deserves everyone's complete cooperation.
"Planet Earth" on Blu-Ray is pretty awesome and really shows off what HD can do. I'm also looking forward to The Discovery Channel's "The NASA Missions" set which should reach store shelves on Blu-Ray shortly too.
Such documentaries are in my opinion where HD Video really exceeds rather then yet another piece of poo Hollywood shined up and released to the masses...
The USDA uses Melwood heavily. They're [mostly] good folks.
Sam
Melwood is used by many Government agencies for custodial services. I have heard them talking about their contracts with HUD and the White House in some of their radio advertisements. And the agency I work for also uses their custodial services.
They send a piece of mail (with their logo on it, so you know it's really them) to you asking you to call a number that could be anyone and ask you to enter your social security number?
It was one of those extra bits of paper that are slipped in with the regularly scheduled bill, so I would way you can have a fairly good idea that it's really Verizon and not Mugabe Fatwan in Nigeria. It only asks for the last four of the Social, billing zip, and the number you wish to "opt out" with. I wish it had an "opt out for all numbers on my account" instead of having to punch in each on individually. Then again, also wish it was opt-in rather than opt-out and that's probably not going to happen either.
"If you went to a game and described the game, your description would also be protected by copyright, but the copyright on your description wouldn't belong to MLB."
Not according to MLB.
If only it were that simple. I live in the Baltimore/Washington metropolitan area. In celebration of the induction into the Baseball hall of fame of Baltimore Oriole player Cal Ripken Jr. last weekend, a local radio station (WBAL) was planning (and advertising) that in the weeks leading up to the ceremony, they would replay THEIR OWN broadcasts of major milestone games in his career.
Keep in mind that these are descriptions of games by WBAL on-air personalities of facts regarding competitions that took place as long as twenty six years ago.
In the past month or so the promotion changed from "relive the major moments in Cal's career AS THEY HAPPENED!" to "WBAL had planned to rebroadcast major milestones from Cal's career but we have been prohibited from doing so by Major League Baseball and the Baltimore Orioles."
In other words, WBAL does not even get rights to their own descriptions and content, if those descriptions and content is directly related to a Major League Baseball game.
These are also the same sports leagues that at least try to, and in some cases succeed in, shutting down bloggers who post live accounts at games in progress.
It basically comes down to the fact that he biggest difference between a Saturn V, or any other rocket used for non-weaponized space access (Atlas, Delta, etc.) and an ICBM is the payload.
Plans to build a rocket capable of sending Americans to the moon can be also be used to build and/or design a rocket that can do a pretty good job of sending (for instance) Chinese or Iranian or North Korean or $other_non-friend_of_US warheads to the United States, or anywhere else on (or near) Earth for that matter.
I've been involved in the development of (civilian/non-military) space flight software and there were all sorts of hoops we had to jump through just to be able to collaborate with our UK colleagues because of the fear from higher-up that such "flight software" could be used to control an enemy warhead and used against the United States and as such, "satellite control software" is firmly under the control of ITAR regulations. (then again, so could Solitaire in theory, imagine bundling something like that with the world's most commonly used Desktop Operating System, imagine the damage that could be done through lost productivity... oh... wait... drat...)
Anyway, rocket designs also firmly sit within the bounds of ITAR as well. This case sounds more like someone got a little over zealous and over reactions on the part of both parties which turned into a sensationalist story. Still, yes, actual technical information (such as blueprints) in regards to space flight hardware can be well within ITAR's tight control.
I didn't comment because it was dumb. First, the odds are constantly improving that a given player will support AAC natively. Second, any number of other converters can do the same job, and there are probably scripts for iTunes that handle it automatically.
No scripts needed, I was able to download an iTunes Plus track and immediately right click to convert it to mp3 within iTunes.
I can't hear the difference.
You entirely missed the point, which was that most new music players can play DRM-free AAC files. The new files sound better on my player than the old ones did because music sounds better than silence. And while many people cannot hear a difference, there are plenty others who CAN hear a difference. There are plenty of people who still would rather have an even higher bitrate lossless encoding.
We've already established that transcoding is trivially easy. So, since you're dead set on converting everything to MP3, you should welcome the higher-quality source material so that the transcoded result will sound better. You don't have to have a golden ear to appreciate that AAC->MP3 doesn't sound great under the best circumstances, so anything to make it less bad is a win.
Which is exactly why I think people who cannot hear the difference should still want the higher bitrate files. Higher Quality source = higher quality output when transcoding, especially when going lossy -> lossy.
lets take a guy at university buys a number of tracks for his girl friend for her ipod.
5 years later they broke up moved to different parts of the world maybe she or the new man in her life decides to share the tracks p2p and then the RIAA comes knocking on the door.
...and iTunes has this nifty "gift this music" link.
I've never actually tried it myself, but I presume that it would generate a code that the other person would use with their iTunes account to redeem that specific music, kinda like the gift certificate codes. Thus, the downloaded music would have the info of the person whom the music was gifted to.
Also, Apple is doing nothing sneaky here, all iTunes purchases have had the Name and email of the purchaser embedded within them from the beginning (Right Click -> Get Info) DRM or not, so as others have pointed out here, this is non-news anyway. It's not a "watermark", it's just a tag in the file with that info.
"Actually, here's a better question: How many americans were killed in terrorist attacks in the year _before_ 9/11? Exactly zero."
Actually, I can think of 17 right off the bat. The U.S.S. Cole was bombed by a small inflatable boat in Yemen in October of 2000, killing 17 American sailors. Bin Ladin was responsible. True it was a military target, but so was the pentagon on 9/11.
"Saying "we haven't had other attacks since then" just begs for the "see? so our paranoid security works!" answer."
We have not had any attacks on American soil (however many have been thwarted). Does this mean that all of our security works? Of course not. But, like in computer security, a good posture is many layers of security and even security measures that might not do much by themselves can provide some layer of deterrent and slow down would be wrongdoers.
That said, I personally know of instances where airport security screeners missed major items like a steak knife in someone's carry-on that should have been immediately caught and maybe even won the carrier a trip to the "secret room" for some questions.
"The fact is, there weren't that many before either. Sure, 9/11 was most unfortunate, but it was by and large a one time event."
More then you seem to remember. There have been only a handful of attacks inside the 50 states, yes. And a number of attacks against US soil overseas (such as embassies which are considered the sovereign soil of the country they represent.)
9/11 was hopefully a "one time event". That attack vector is now well known. The next time someone tries to hijack an aircraft, people will be less inclined to cooperate and quicker to resist and fight back. Sure, they can still blow the planes up, but hijacking them and crashing into buildings is now more unlikely.
The biggest problem in the security is the reactionism. They crash commercial aircraft into skyscrapers, let's reinforce the cockpit, let's make airport security feel like a soviet border crossing, etc. We are essentially turning off ports only after we get port scanned (better late then never I suppose) instead of taking a proactive "what are the best way to protect against threats we have not even thought of?" approach and thinking up more generic and general ways to protect ourselves.
9/11 was new. There had been suspicion and reports about this possible type of attack but it had never been carried out before and most people within Government had no idea or suspicion about a "hijack aircraft full of passengers and fuel and fly them into buildings to knock them down" sort of attack.
The likelihood is good that there will be more attacks on US Soil and abroad. The question is what can we do to secure the attack vector's we've never even thought about because that's where the next major attack is likely going to come from.
I second that. Open Source, Runs on any platform supported by Perl, can synchronize multiple squeezeboxes and softsuqeeze players. supports a boat load of formats, mp3, flac, aac, ogg, you name it. Plenty of plugins and modifications from an active user and developer community, and the CEO of Slimdevices has even been known to posts on the forums, answering user questions, on the weekends.
The Squeezebox is a solid piece of hardware and even when it's turned off it's useful for using it's VFD as an information display. (I have mine set up with a plugin that display weather information as the powered off screensaver, can also do stock quotes, sport scores, there are plugins that can interface with CallerID, etc.)
I love it and was running SlimServer even before I got my first squeezebox (and then second and...)
It's not saying there are 700k lines of code that is not being infringed upon, rather IBM is claiming that THEY own the copyright to 700k lines of code in Linux (things like JFS) that SCO is infringing upon.
FTA:
"Worse, SCO claims control over code copyrighted by IBM, such as JFS, and others. SCO's own experts said SCO has no copyright infringement claim over those."
"Now, on the IBM motion and SCO cross motion regarding IBM's copyright claims, the GPL matters, in contrast to SCO's alleged 326 lines of infringed code, IBM owns about 700,000 lines of code that SCO has infringed, Marriott states."
I have taken a family members Retail RTM Upgrade XP CD that was slipstreamed SP2 after a major upgrade (SP2 is required to for drives over 130G) and had no trouble at all installing or activating.
SP1 did blacklist a couple of volume keys that were wildly distributed online, as well as change some aspects of activation, but valid keys were not invalidated. That said, OEM, Volume, Full Retail, Upgrade all do have different key algorithms and so it's possible you were trying to use one key with a different type of media (Upgrade/Full, OEM/Retail, etc.)
"When Freespire 2.0 arrives in April, it will use Ubuntu as its base, moving off of the current Debian."
Um, last time I checked, Ubuntu was itself a Debian based distro which would mean that even if Freespire were to base itself on Ubuntu, it's roots would still be in Debian.
That would probably be the Windows 98 "Second Edition Updates" which Microsoft sold directly from their site for something around $20 and came in a white box and only updated an existing Win98 system. This is different from the more expensive ~$100 Retail Windows 98SE Upgrade sold in stores that would upgrade a Win3.1/95/98 system by verifying the install disk.
From http://www.windowsgalore.com/windows.98/win982.ind ex.htm "Current users of the Windows 98 operating system can receive the updated functionality by ordering Windows 98 Second Edition Updates on CD-ROM, scheduled to be available from the Microsoft Web site in the summer, for $19.95 plus shipping and handling."
To expand on another poster's comment, check out the following page for step by step instructions for playing online with Red Alert. It discusses RA from the First Decade collection, but the original should work just the same.
For the only external blacklisting organisation on Firefox, and as the provider for possibly the most widely used toolbar ever, they're not taking this seriously enough.
So, let's say we do this and get an actual trusted binary, how do we know that binary is the binary that runs on the machine? cryptographic signatures. The trusted code is signed by an authority such as the state election board. If the machine then has a TPM module and the election board's public key on it and will not run any software that is not appropriately signed then we can be fairly sure that it is running software that was approved and signed by the appropriate authority. Now of course it might be possible to hack the hardware and bypass the check (such as the various XBOX mods)...
No solution is a perfect solution, but there are better solutions out there.
Perhaps, but/etc/ and/home/username don't appear virtually identical within the file browser. I do an ls of etc and an ls of $HOME and it's easy to tell right away which one I am looking at. I often have to double check to be sure I'm in the right section of the registry, HKCU or HKLM. I see a list of Software publishers it's not immidiatly obvious to me which branch of the tree I'm in. I see rc.*, httpd/ sysconfig/, etc. I KNOW I'm looking in/etc. if I see my user files and a pile of.* then I know it's $HOME.
I will agree with you that consistancy is a good thing, but there also often needs to be seperation. How many Windows users do you know (and I'm not talking slashdotters here but typical or even above typical users) that don't run daily as "Administrator"? Most people are running as admins (even if the username is otherwise since Windows tosses initial users into the group). I know plenty of "enterpises" that run their users as local admins since it's easier and some stuff just won't work otherwise. Just about every guide I see that discusses working the registry always has a "WARNING, changing the registry can make your system unbootable!" I've never seen any "warning, modifying httpd.conf can break your system in bad and horrble ways" disclaimers.
I don't know many people who would go through the trouble of rm-rf ing/etc but I know I have deleted plenty of registry keys without any sort of "are you sure?" prompting.
You make my point for me. The only system capable of Windows is Windows, by the time Bart's PE finishes booting I could have loaded a LNX-BBC business card, mounted the partition, edited/etc/rc.local or whatever, and be rebooting the system by the time I get to where I can think about loading regedit. WHY do you need to load a GUI anyway for such a "simple" fix? Why SHOULD I need special software to access the config tree? I can use whatever text editor I like, or use the apps GUI tool if it exists, or RedHat/Mandriva/SuSe/etc's control panel, or whatever. I'm usually either stuch with what the application provides, regedit, or some other tool like X-Setup.
If I need to back it up, I just tar up/etc. If I need to make a backup of a user I tar up their $HOME. If I try to move user files around, oop, can't move NTUSER.DAT, it's in use. log out, NOPE, still open, have to reboot, be careful not to log in as that user again, and THEN make the copy. I suppose you could probably kill the file handle with ProcessExplorer as well, but the point remains.
I'm not saying that UNIX is perfect, nor am I saying it's always implimented right./opt/app/config/usr/local/etc/usr/local/share/app/etc.... WTF?!
but I think when that the concept remains and has stood the test of time for a reason, when done right it works.
You helped me make my point. While Microsoft may only "sanction" the use of Windows Installer, even others within Microsoft disobeys their own rules and guidelines.
Some people, such as you obviously, prefer the single binary store of configuration data in a propriatary format, others, such as myself, prefer everything to be neatly laid out on the filesystem in plaintext formats that can be viewed by anything that understands ASCII text.
Slashdot Mirror
"they won't even bother calling Akamai."
Tell me why then, when I just downloaded it through my TechNet subscription, it used the Akamai downloader...
Searching Securityfocus for "Firefox patches" returns only four pages. Searching for "'Internet Explorer' patches" returns 31 pages. More patches for IE means it must be more secure, right?!
I will pay for this on DVD/BluRay/Download.
I would love to see this taken to completion. This is what I have been hoping for in a "HalfLife Movie".
No, the chunk of memory used by the Virtual Machine still has to be allocated by the Host OS such that the host OS knows to not allocate it to other applications meaning that you'd still face the 4G total limit unless the host OS also understood 64-bit memory space addressing.
The huge benefit of this is the ability to run 64-bit code with the additional 64-bit wide registers and instructions provided by the AMD64/x86-64 architecture.
For instance with this feature in VMware Workstation, I was able to test 64-bit OS' and software for compatibility issues before I took the plunge of upgrading my 32-bit OS to a 64-bit one.
I refuse to buy anything that's not iTunes Plus (DRM Free 256kbit AAC), though I will from time to time download the free single which IS DRM.
I'm willing to accept DRM on something I don't have to pay for (iTunes Free single of the week) since that seems a fair trade-off (I get the song for free and in return you can limit my usage). I won't however pay full price for something that can be arbitrarily shut off. If the song is not available as iTunes Plus then I'll buy the CD, download the Mp3 from Amazon or Rhapsody, or otherwise find some other higher bitrate DRM-Free source.
Now, if only we could get iTunes Plus video...
One place I love to get music from is Linnrecords. http://www.linnrecords.com/
They are an audiophile targeted record label and have a nice selection of their music available in DRM Free lossless high definition (24-bit, 88/96khz FLAC)
"Planet Earth" on Blu-Ray is pretty awesome and really shows off what HD can do. I'm also looking forward to The Discovery Channel's "The NASA Missions" set which should reach store shelves on Blu-Ray shortly too.
Such documentaries are in my opinion where HD Video really exceeds rather then yet another piece of poo Hollywood shined up and released to the masses...
You would be correct!
The USDA uses Melwood heavily. They're [mostly] good folks.
Sam
Melwood is used by many Government agencies for custodial services. I have heard them talking about their contracts with HUD and the White House in some of their radio advertisements. And the agency I work for also uses their custodial services.
It was one of those extra bits of paper that are slipped in with the regularly scheduled bill, so I would way you can have a fairly good idea that it's really Verizon and not Mugabe Fatwan in Nigeria. It only asks for the last four of the Social, billing zip, and the number you wish to "opt out" with. I wish it had an "opt out for all numbers on my account" instead of having to punch in each on individually. Then again, also wish it was opt-in rather than opt-out and that's probably not going to happen either.
Jerry still writes articles which are available online.
m l
http://www.chaosmanorreviews.com/
And he keeps a daily journal.
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/view/currentview.ht
"If you went to a game and described the game, your description would also be protected by copyright, but the copyright on your description wouldn't belong to MLB."
t her-tarnish-their-own-image/
Not according to MLB.
If only it were that simple. I live in the Baltimore/Washington metropolitan area. In celebration of the induction into the Baseball hall of fame of Baltimore Oriole player Cal Ripken Jr. last weekend, a local radio station (WBAL) was planning (and advertising) that in the weeks leading up to the ceremony, they would replay THEIR OWN broadcasts of major milestone games in his career.
Keep in mind that these are descriptions of games by WBAL on-air personalities of facts regarding competitions that took place as long as twenty six years ago.
In the past month or so the promotion changed from "relive the major moments in Cal's career AS THEY HAPPENED!" to "WBAL had planned to rebroadcast major milestones from Cal's career but we have been prohibited from doing so by Major League Baseball and the Baltimore Orioles."
In other words, WBAL does not even get rights to their own descriptions and content, if those descriptions and content is directly related to a Major League Baseball game.
http://mvn.com/mlb-orioles/2007/07/19/orioles-fur
These are also the same sports leagues that at least try to, and in some cases succeed in, shutting down bloggers who post live accounts at games in progress.
It basically comes down to the fact that he biggest difference between a Saturn V, or any other rocket used for non-weaponized space access (Atlas, Delta, etc.) and an ICBM is the payload.
Plans to build a rocket capable of sending Americans to the moon can be also be used to build and/or design a rocket that can do a pretty good job of sending (for instance) Chinese or Iranian or North Korean or $other_non-friend_of_US warheads to the United States, or anywhere else on (or near) Earth for that matter.
I've been involved in the development of (civilian/non-military) space flight software and there were all sorts of hoops we had to jump through just to be able to collaborate with our UK colleagues because of the fear from higher-up that such "flight software" could be used to control an enemy warhead and used against the United States and as such, "satellite control software" is firmly under the control of ITAR regulations. (then again, so could Solitaire in theory, imagine bundling something like that with the world's most commonly used Desktop Operating System, imagine the damage that could be done through lost productivity... oh... wait... drat...)
Anyway, rocket designs also firmly sit within the bounds of ITAR as well. This case sounds more like someone got a little over zealous and over reactions on the part of both parties which turned into a sensationalist story. Still, yes, actual technical information (such as blueprints) in regards to space flight hardware can be well within ITAR's tight control.
While it covers v2.2, it's called "Linux Core Kernel Commentary: Guide to Insider's Knowledge on the Core Kernel of the Linux Code"y -Knowledge/dp/1576104699
ISBN-10: 1576104699
http://www.amazon.com/Linux-Core-Kernel-Commentar
I didn't comment because it was dumb. First, the odds are constantly improving that a given player will support AAC natively. Second, any number of other converters can do the same job, and there are probably scripts for iTunes that handle it automatically.
No scripts needed, I was able to download an iTunes Plus track and immediately right click to convert it to mp3 within iTunes.You entirely missed the point, which was that most new music players can play DRM-free AAC files. The new files sound better on my player than the old ones did because music sounds better than silence. And while many people cannot hear a difference, there are plenty others who CAN hear a difference. There are plenty of people who still would rather have an even higher bitrate lossless encoding.
We've already established that transcoding is trivially easy. So, since you're dead set on converting everything to MP3, you should welcome the higher-quality source material so that the transcoded result will sound better. You don't have to have a golden ear to appreciate that AAC->MP3 doesn't sound great under the best circumstances, so anything to make it less bad is a win.
Which is exactly why I think people who cannot hear the difference should still want the higher bitrate files. Higher Quality source = higher quality output when transcoding, especially when going lossy -> lossy.I've never actually tried it myself, but I presume that it would generate a code that the other person would use with their iTunes account to redeem that specific music, kinda like the gift certificate codes. Thus, the downloaded music would have the info of the person whom the music was gifted to.
Also, Apple is doing nothing sneaky here, all iTunes purchases have had the Name and email of the purchaser embedded within them from the beginning (Right Click -> Get Info) DRM or not, so as others have pointed out here, this is non-news anyway. It's not a "watermark", it's just a tag in the file with that info.
Actually, I can think of 17 right off the bat. The U.S.S. Cole was bombed by a small inflatable boat in Yemen in October of 2000, killing 17 American sailors. Bin Ladin was responsible. True it was a military target, but so was the pentagon on 9/11.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing
"Saying "we haven't had other attacks since then" just begs for the "see? so our paranoid security works!" answer."
We have not had any attacks on American soil (however many have been thwarted). Does this mean that all of our security works? Of course not. But, like in computer security, a good posture is many layers of security and even security measures that might not do much by themselves can provide some layer of deterrent and slow down would be wrongdoers.
That said, I personally know of instances where airport security screeners missed major items like a steak knife in someone's carry-on that should have been immediately caught and maybe even won the carrier a trip to the "secret room" for some questions.
"The fact is, there weren't that many before either. Sure, 9/11 was most unfortunate, but it was by and large a one time event."
More then you seem to remember. There have been only a handful of attacks inside the 50 states, yes. And a number of attacks against US soil overseas (such as embassies which are considered the sovereign soil of the country they represent.)
9/11 was hopefully a "one time event". That attack vector is now well known. The next time someone tries to hijack an aircraft, people will be less inclined to cooperate and quicker to resist and fight back. Sure, they can still blow the planes up, but hijacking them and crashing into buildings is now more unlikely.
The biggest problem in the security is the reactionism. They crash commercial aircraft into skyscrapers, let's reinforce the cockpit, let's make airport security feel like a soviet border crossing, etc. We are essentially turning off ports only after we get port scanned (better late then never I suppose) instead of taking a proactive "what are the best way to protect against threats we have not even thought of?" approach and thinking up more generic and general ways to protect ourselves.
9/11 was new. There had been suspicion and reports about this possible type of attack but it had never been carried out before and most people within Government had no idea or suspicion about a "hijack aircraft full of passengers and fuel and fly them into buildings to knock them down" sort of attack.
The likelihood is good that there will be more attacks on US Soil and abroad. The question is what can we do to secure the attack vector's we've never even thought about because that's where the next major attack is likely going to come from.
I second that. Open Source, Runs on any platform supported by Perl, can synchronize multiple squeezeboxes and softsuqeeze players. supports a boat load of formats, mp3, flac, aac, ogg, you name it. Plenty of plugins and modifications from an active user and developer community, and the CEO of Slimdevices has even been known to posts on the forums, answering user questions, on the weekends.
The Squeezebox is a solid piece of hardware and even when it's turned off it's useful for using it's VFD as an information display. (I have mine set up with a plugin that display weather information as the powered off screensaver, can also do stock quotes, sport scores, there are plugins that can interface with CallerID, etc.)
I love it and was running SlimServer even before I got my first squeezebox (and then second and...)
It's not saying there are 700k lines of code that is not being infringed upon, rather IBM is claiming that THEY own the copyright to 700k lines of code in Linux (things like JFS) that SCO is infringing upon.
FTA:
"Worse, SCO claims control over code copyrighted by IBM, such as JFS, and others. SCO's own experts said SCO has no copyright infringement claim over those."
"Now, on the IBM motion and SCO cross motion regarding IBM's copyright claims, the GPL matters, in contrast to SCO's alleged 326 lines of infringed code, IBM owns about 700,000 lines of code that SCO has infringed, Marriott states."
I have taken a family members Retail RTM Upgrade XP CD that was slipstreamed SP2 after a major upgrade (SP2 is required to for drives over 130G) and had no trouble at all installing or activating.
SP1 did blacklist a couple of volume keys that were wildly distributed online, as well as change some aspects of activation, but valid keys were not invalidated. That said, OEM, Volume, Full Retail, Upgrade all do have different key algorithms and so it's possible you were trying to use one key with a different type of media (Upgrade/Full, OEM/Retail, etc.)
Um, last time I checked, Ubuntu was itself a Debian based distro which would mean that even if Freespire were to base itself on Ubuntu, it's roots would still be in Debian.
That would probably be the Windows 98 "Second Edition Updates" which Microsoft sold directly from their site for something around $20 and came in a white box and only updated an existing Win98 system. This is different from the more expensive ~$100 Retail Windows 98SE Upgrade sold in stores that would upgrade a Win3.1/95/98 system by verifying the install disk.
d ex.htm
From
http://www.windowsgalore.com/windows.98/win982.in
"Current users of the Windows 98 operating system can receive the updated functionality by ordering Windows 98 Second Edition Updates on CD-ROM, scheduled to be available from the Microsoft Web site in the summer, for $19.95 plus shipping and handling."
To expand on another poster's comment, check out the following page for step by step instructions for playing online with Red Alert. It discusses RA from the First Decade collection, but the original should work just the same.
Something like http://www.google.com/safebrowsing/report_phish/ perhaps? Or within Firefox 2.x, Help -> Report Web Forgery?
If you think they need help, (they do) then grab the links from those pfishing emails and report them.
How would you know the binary machine code running on the machine is the same as the source that is "open"?
_ .22Trusting_Trust.22_backdoor_problem as it might seem at first glance.)
This is one case where the proper implimentation of something like TPM might actually be a GOOD thing. Think about it this way. Let's say we have trusted source and a trusted compiler (which isn't as easy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backdoor#The_classic
So, let's say we do this and get an actual trusted binary, how do we know that binary is the binary that runs on the machine? cryptographic signatures. The trusted code is signed by an authority such as the state election board. If the machine then has a TPM module and the election board's public key on it and will not run any software that is not appropriately signed then we can be fairly sure that it is running software that was approved and signed by the appropriate authority. Now of course it might be possible to hack the hardware and bypass the check (such as the various XBOX mods)...
No solution is a perfect solution, but there are better solutions out there.
Perhaps, but /etc/ and /home/username don't appear virtually identical within the file browser. I do an ls of etc and an ls of $HOME and it's easy to tell right away which one I am looking at. I often have to double check to be sure I'm in the right section of the registry, HKCU or HKLM. I see a list of Software publishers it's not immidiatly obvious to me which branch of the tree I'm in. I see rc.*, httpd/ sysconfig/, etc. I KNOW I'm looking in /etc. if I see my user files and a pile of .* then I know it's $HOME.
/etc but I know I have deleted plenty of registry keys without any sort of "are you sure?" prompting.
/etc/rc.local or whatever, and be rebooting the system by the time I get to where I can think about loading regedit. WHY do you need to load a GUI anyway for such a "simple" fix? Why SHOULD I need special software to access the config tree? I can use whatever text editor I like, or use the apps GUI tool if it exists, or RedHat/Mandriva/SuSe/etc's control panel, or whatever. I'm usually either stuch with what the application provides, regedit, or some other tool like X-Setup.
/etc. If I need to make a backup of a user I tar up their $HOME. If I try to move user files around, oop, can't move NTUSER.DAT, it's in use. log out, NOPE, still open, have to reboot, be careful not to log in as that user again, and THEN make the copy. I suppose you could probably kill the file handle with ProcessExplorer as well, but the point remains.
/opt/app/config /usr/local/etc /usr/local/share/app/etc.... WTF?!
I will agree with you that consistancy is a good thing, but there also often needs to be seperation. How many Windows users do you know (and I'm not talking slashdotters here but typical or even above typical users) that don't run daily as "Administrator"? Most people are running as admins (even if the username is otherwise since Windows tosses initial users into the group). I know plenty of "enterpises" that run their users as local admins since it's easier and some stuff just won't work otherwise. Just about every guide I see that discusses working the registry always has a "WARNING, changing the registry can make your system unbootable!" I've never seen any "warning, modifying httpd.conf can break your system in bad and horrble ways" disclaimers.
I don't know many people who would go through the trouble of rm-rf ing
You make my point for me. The only system capable of Windows is Windows, by the time Bart's PE finishes booting I could have loaded a LNX-BBC business card, mounted the partition, edited
If I need to back it up, I just tar up
I'm not saying that UNIX is perfect, nor am I saying it's always implimented right.
but I think when that the concept remains and has stood the test of time for a reason, when done right it works.
You helped me make my point. While Microsoft may only "sanction" the use of Windows Installer, even others within Microsoft disobeys their own rules and guidelines.
Some people, such as you obviously, prefer the single binary store of configuration data in a propriatary format, others, such as myself, prefer everything to be neatly laid out on the filesystem in plaintext formats that can be viewed by anything that understands ASCII text.