Seriously, try shopping for shoes. Anything you bring home will get you shouted at by all women in the family. And there's even no logic there -- the same piece of clothing/footwear/headwear she picked can at any moment turn into "you can't wear this!".
As Barbie said: "Shopping is hard, let's go coding!".
Windows does have an equivalent of ptrace, so how exactly is this a problem? You hook onto the process that's being created (on Windows there's no separation between fork and exec) having it start as traced. It gets mmapped, you check whatever got loaded into that process' address space, detach the trace.
It'd also have double the performance when the file fits into memory: no need to request the file over network twice. And if it doesn't fit, well, page cache is perfectly equipped to deal with this.
Backpedaled not so much, MS removed Control Panel from the right-click start menu in the latest version of Windows 10, even though it still exists. They want you to use the new Settings menu which has fewer controls because they are 10x as large.
They did not return anywhere close to XP or even 7 level of usability, yeah. But compare 8 with 8.1 or 10.
Please tell me when Gnome3 will die. Even Microsoft fairly quickly backpedaled with Metro, while Gnome junk is still being switched to rather than from.
How is the electricity for these electric cars generated? From coal. From oil.
A power plant can burn oil in a more efficient way, with processes that make the exhaust drastically cleaner than anything a car can do. Obviously, you still want to get rid of oil, but in the meantime we want to burn it cleanly. And coal, well, needs to die immediately.
From nuclear.
Nuclear is so much safer and less polluting than any alternative, including those holiest-of-holy "renewables" that I'd call what so-called environmentalists do outright sabotage. Hydro shuts down variations in water level that are vital to many ecosystems, and is devastating when there's a dam failure. Wind kills millions of birds and bats, and produces noise that affects humans and wildlife in a large radius. Solar is only now becoming possible without downsides, and it produces unreliable power.
On the other hand, even 60s era nuclear is orders of magnitude safer than all of the above, and its byproducts come in small nice easy-to-store barrels. Modern nuclear has no real risk of a run-away reaction.
And if we'd care the slightest about environment (rather than just political gains from claiming we do), we'd research fusion a long time ago already.
If it has GNOME on it, no thanks. I have yet to see any sane person to voluntarily choose GNOME for anything; this includes distributions.
For the latter, you have Ubuntu. Most others merely used sort-of usable Gnome 2 then had it mutate into a monstrosity into then.
In Debian, Joey Hess switched us to XFCE but then got overruled by a "rational choice" with a score sheet which looks just like a case of government procurement: requirements tailored towards a specific choice with scoring that's in some cases reversed compared to what anyone without an agenda would pick: for example, "systemd integration" gives +1 -- ie, a desktop environment that is universal and works with any init gets negative score while something systemd-only gets +1 just for that. No score for "media size" despite the promoted answer being massively bloated. A whole -1 for "tasksel quality" which anyone who has seen that DE can make perfect within minutes. And the biggest gem? As of Jessie, GNOME worked on only two architectures (amd64 and i386) at all -- out of 11 primary 12 secondary archs. Even on x86, it suffers from dog-slow software emulation if you try to run it in a VM or anything that has one of supported GPUs. So did GNOME get a RC bug that keeps it from Jessie at all? Meh...
And this doesn't even mention the oh so insignificant question about basic usability and ergonomy. GNOME beats even Win8.0-era Metro in obstructing simplest tasks.
For politicians, revealing their misdeeds means you're an agent of their enemy. Not having any honesty or integrity themselves, they don't entertain the thought someone's agenda might be something else than supporting a particular political party.
The.dev tld is widely used for development and should never have been assigned to Google.
Talk to ICANN. It's them who destroyed the well-working system of TLDs for a quick buck.
If Chrome causes problems.... ditch it.
For 99% of usage, yeah, that's a good idea -- no one wants spyware (ok, other than 99% users, but I don't care about normies). But broken sites which work only on Chrome are too frequent to not have it installed.
So really, the better solution is to actually run Linux on VMWare, VirtualBox, Hyper-V, and so on.
And why would I do that instead of running Windows in qemu-kvm, VirtualBox or even VMWare? You want the more secure system as the host rather than the other way around.
It's generally pretty hard to get any irrefutable facts on things like this. While people are fond of disclosing secrets like this, they never do so when they expect a permanent record.
An example: the author of once-dominant anti-virus program in Poland (mks_vir) used to brag about releasing tens of viruses himself. It was illegal even then, but what can you do? If I'd say "this guy said this to my dad, then my dad repeated this to me", is this a proof good enough? (The guy died in 2004, so at least there's no reputation to tarnish.)
The usual alcohol delivery rule is: somewhen between 22:00 and midnight, you send a person or a team with backpacks to deliver more. They're allowed to go on foot or by bus, obviously not being able to use a bike or car. So no, this is not an "enclosed vehicle". In my times, there was no GPS either, although nowadays probably a cell phone counts.
And how exactly do you tell a hotel who's 100% honest from one that wants to get some extra dime on the side -- be it in gathering data on visitors, displaying ads, or something more nefarious?
It is irritating enough as it is, with my web browsers screaming about invalid certificates and possible MitM attacks when simply trying to pull up a Wifi login screen.
Because it is a MitM attack? The motive isn't relevant here: the hotel tries to intercept your SSL session and present you something that isn't your intended destination.
There's a wee bit of difference between getting drunk for an evening and a week of vacation with no phone coverage at all, in the days most crucial for the company's survival (in this case, getting bought out so they can continue to scam).
It's like a sysape going on a trip right after your company's servers got broken into and wiped, while machines meant for backup are sitting in a closet not even been set up despite having been purchased a year ago.
And that's the reason why this company lost: they didn't tell the employee about the monitoring.
So there'll be a single line added in an obscure place to the pile of paper you're required to sign upon being hired, without even an opportunity to actually read what you're signing.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, try shopping for shoes. Anything you bring home will get you shouted at by all women in the family. And there's even no logic there -- the same piece of clothing/footwear/headwear she picked can at any moment turn into "you can't wear this!".
As Barbie said: "Shopping is hard, let's go coding!".
The "fix" is not what you think. The backdoor is still there, it's just hidden better so some random punk can't exploit it.
If you claim there's really no backdoor, go ahead, prove it! As for Cisco's words, we had them the last time too.
Windows does have an equivalent of ptrace, so how exactly is this a problem? You hook onto the process that's being created (on Windows there's no separation between fork and exec) having it start as traced. It gets mmapped, you check whatever got loaded into that process' address space, detach the trace.
It'd also have double the performance when the file fits into memory: no need to request the file over network twice. And if it doesn't fit, well, page cache is perfectly equipped to deal with this.
Backpedaled not so much, MS removed Control Panel from the right-click start menu in the latest version of Windows 10, even though it still exists. They want you to use the new Settings menu which has fewer controls because they are 10x as large.
They did not return anywhere close to XP or even 7 level of usability, yeah. But compare 8 with 8.1 or 10.
So quite how does "It's terrible, when will it die" and "there's more than just the panel wrong" get to become something a programmer can use?
Are you implying there's a dearth of window managers in the Unix world?
So the Kivis think they can promote their tiny piece of land to a continent just by declaring it one? Whom they think they are, Europe?
There's far more wrong with Gnome than just the panel.
Please tell me when Gnome3 will die. Even Microsoft fairly quickly backpedaled with Metro, while Gnome junk is still being switched to rather than from.
They need FB for the mid terms, and certainly for the 2020 presidential election.
Except that Zuckerberg plans to run, and I don't quite see him letting anyone use his company against him.
Fix the spent nuclear fuel storage problem and I'll be on board. Otherwise we're building a deadly stockpile that lives too long a time.
Compared to CO2 and other pollutants from coal that somehow no one is regulated to store? And nuclear waste is hardly dangerous after mere 100 years.
How is the electricity for these electric cars generated? From coal. From oil.
A power plant can burn oil in a more efficient way, with processes that make the exhaust drastically cleaner than anything a car can do. Obviously, you still want to get rid of oil, but in the meantime we want to burn it cleanly. And coal, well, needs to die immediately.
From nuclear.
Nuclear is so much safer and less polluting than any alternative, including those holiest-of-holy "renewables" that I'd call what so-called environmentalists do outright sabotage. Hydro shuts down variations in water level that are vital to many ecosystems, and is devastating when there's a dam failure. Wind kills millions of birds and bats, and produces noise that affects humans and wildlife in a large radius. Solar is only now becoming possible without downsides, and it produces unreliable power.
On the other hand, even 60s era nuclear is orders of magnitude safer than all of the above, and its byproducts come in small nice easy-to-store barrels. Modern nuclear has no real risk of a run-away reaction.
And if we'd care the slightest about environment (rather than just political gains from claiming we do), we'd research fusion a long time ago already.
Also he forgot one important part. Planning for what to do when the inevitable happens.
Well, he did plan. He wants more funds and power right now, then again when the big attack will happen.
Check out Gemini.
If it has GNOME on it, no thanks. I have yet to see any sane person to voluntarily choose GNOME for anything; this includes distributions.
For the latter, you have Ubuntu. Most others merely used sort-of usable Gnome 2 then had it mutate into a monstrosity into then.
In Debian, Joey Hess switched us to XFCE but then got overruled by a "rational choice" with a score sheet which looks just like a case of government procurement: requirements tailored towards a specific choice with scoring that's in some cases reversed compared to what anyone without an agenda would pick: for example, "systemd integration" gives +1 -- ie, a desktop environment that is universal and works with any init gets negative score while something systemd-only gets +1 just for that. No score for "media size" despite the promoted answer being massively bloated. A whole -1 for "tasksel quality" which anyone who has seen that DE can make perfect within minutes. And the biggest gem? As of Jessie, GNOME worked on only two architectures (amd64 and i386) at all -- out of 11 primary 12 secondary archs. Even on x86, it suffers from dog-slow software emulation if you try to run it in a VM or anything that has one of supported GPUs. So did GNOME get a RC bug that keeps it from Jessie at all? Meh...
And this doesn't even mention the oh so insignificant question about basic usability and ergonomy. GNOME beats even Win8.0-era Metro in obstructing simplest tasks.
For politicians, revealing their misdeeds means you're an agent of their enemy. Not having any honesty or integrity themselves, they don't entertain the thought someone's agenda might be something else than supporting a particular political party.
The .dev tld is widely used for development and should never have been assigned to Google.
Talk to ICANN. It's them who destroyed the well-working system of TLDs for a quick buck.
If Chrome causes problems .... ditch it.
For 99% of usage, yeah, that's a good idea -- no one wants spyware (ok, other than 99% users, but I don't care about normies). But broken sites which work only on Chrome are too frequent to not have it installed.
So really, the better solution is to actually run Linux on VMWare, VirtualBox, Hyper-V, and so on.
And why would I do that instead of running Windows in qemu-kvm, VirtualBox or even VMWare? You want the more secure system as the host rather than the other way around.
It's generally pretty hard to get any irrefutable facts on things like this. While people are fond of disclosing secrets like this, they never do so when they expect a permanent record.
An example: the author of once-dominant anti-virus program in Poland (mks_vir) used to brag about releasing tens of viruses himself. It was illegal even then, but what can you do? If I'd say "this guy said this to my dad, then my dad repeated this to me", is this a proof good enough? (The guy died in 2004, so at least there's no reputation to tarnish.)
People actually use "apps" for Windows? Like for real? As in this isn't a hoax?
I don't think anyone not on Microsoft's marketing team does. And for actual work even they still use programs not apps.
(Seriously, I still think windows "apps" are some kind of extended April Fools gag.)
That's a tragedy not comedy.
The usual alcohol delivery rule is: somewhen between 22:00 and midnight, you send a person or a team with backpacks to deliver more. They're allowed to go on foot or by bus, obviously not being able to use a bike or car. So no, this is not an "enclosed vehicle". In my times, there was no GPS either, although nowadays probably a cell phone counts.
No numb nuts, patents must die.
FTFY.
But it's not a security threat either.
And how exactly do you tell a hotel who's 100% honest from one that wants to get some extra dime on the side -- be it in gathering data on visitors, displaying ads, or something more nefarious?
Will this further break hotel wifi?
Nope, that hotel wifi is already broken.
It is irritating enough as it is, with my web browsers screaming about invalid certificates and possible MitM attacks when simply trying to pull up a Wifi login screen.
Because it is a MitM attack? The motive isn't relevant here: the hotel tries to intercept your SSL session and present you something that isn't your intended destination.
There's a wee bit of difference between getting drunk for an evening and a week of vacation with no phone coverage at all, in the days most crucial for the company's survival (in this case, getting bought out so they can continue to scam).
It's like a sysape going on a trip right after your company's servers got broken into and wiped, while machines meant for backup are sitting in a closet not even been set up despite having been purchased a year ago.
And that's the reason why this company lost: they didn't tell the employee about the monitoring.
So there'll be a single line added in an obscure place to the pile of paper you're required to sign upon being hired, without even an opportunity to actually read what you're signing.