There's a reason for the crappy video in laptops as a general rule:
Heat.
I doubt you want that much heat energy in such a small space...unfortunately, that's reality. And even "fast" video in a laptop is slow.
I think the beige thing was because historically they were business machines...black is far too radical. Maybe beige paint is cheap cheap...not a lot of dye...not a lot of bleach?
They did it to sygate too? Hmmm...I recall they bought the defunct AtGuard firewall and neutered it into their "Internet Security" program...I remember the first (and maybe the second) iteration still had the exact same statistical screen at AtGuard.
Make no mistake, this was all about lining the pockets of the companies that were involved, nothing else.
How could they not know this would fail? Fiasco was written all over it.
Canada had the gun registry that failed miserably. It was supposed to cost about $120mil, but ended up costing the (now poor) tax payers $2 billion. Yep. 2. Billion.
My question is - who got paid...someone did...a lot. Every man, woman and child alive today would have to register two guns for this money to be recuperated.
The same can be found in any government large enough to force tax collection, but the obviousness of it really bothers me.
If you always wait for the next release of that software, that car, or that style shoes you like you'll never end up with anything.
Not true. You'll end up with the stuff that you want, not the stuff that the companies want you to have. Notice the difference?
Firstly, software doesn't expire or age, and is always 100% identical if it's installed in 2002 or in 2009. Even if you buy a used OS, it'll be in 100% working order until the end of time. The only thing of relevance that changes over time is known hacks, and support/updates (maybe price too, but that's less relevant). The only reason to buy a new OS is to appease the licensing gods, or to benefit from new features (or if the activation servers are turned off. MS knows that the biggest threat to the success of subsequent OS sales is any previous OS. When do you think MS will turn off their XP activation servers?). Neither of which are required on most corporate/home networks/computers.
I'm forced to deal with this issue on a regular basis. I find a product that meets my expectations, and I buy it. This can be things from toothpaste, garbage bags, chips, cars, computer parts...everything. I spend the time to decide which product/service is right for me, then I stick to it. I'm extremely loyal to realistically high-quality products/services with an appropriate price tag.
Then the manufacturer/service provider goes pissing around, changing "the formula", source materials, our manufacturing/service process to make it "new and improved".
Then I'm forced to find a different, less desirable/valuable-to-me product, and it pisses me off to no end. I can't be the only person on the planet that feels this way.
Why? I didn't ask for a change, nor do I need one.
Back to your drawing of the line. Imagine you need a large vehicle for some reason (you have 5 kids, your job is to move stuff, whatever). If all the car companies stopped making large cars, what would you do? Make your life difficult or impossible by buying a new small car because you have to draw the line somewhere? No...you'd keep buying large cars, just not brand new.
What's the difference between an OS and my analogy? I don't see much (except the support issue). People should have what they need/want, not what they are told to want.
Oh, and XP is becoming more difficult on new machines?! For whom?! You are aware that MS is continuing sales of XP on netbooks, right?
i can bridge 2 pins on the ecu plug on mine, and its flashes the dash lights in sequence to give me the codes, its just a matter of looking them up. though im not sure if newer cars are still keeping anything like this available.
Also, generally if your engine light comes on, your car will go into limp home mode, which is a cut back operation that uses default configs and ignores either all or some of the sensors just to enable you to get home, or to a workshop somewhere without the working sensors.
That's a GM OBD-I. I had a few cars that could do that...I kept a paperclip handy in the ash tray. The codes provided were pretty standard...maybe 30 different types of codes at most.
Fords of the era had the same idea, but the "flashes" are measured by the pulses of a multimeter via a lead under the hood.
OBD-II is more resilient. Only if there is a severe problem does it go into 'limp' mode. It doesn't have the ability to retrieve codes without some sort of code-reading device. ElmScan is well priced, compatible with any car which conforms to OBD-II (pretty much all 1996 and newer). One needs a computer for those, but the free software available for it is fantastic at deciphering the codes and monitoring various sensors like RPM, O2 sensor voltage, Manifold Absolute Pressure, Calculated Engine Load, Throttle Position. One guy made an app using an ElmScan to calculate an estimated fuel economy based on the Mass Air Flow and Speed sensors. One can also get hand-held readers, which usually have an accompanying manual with all the code meanings included.
Actually, the whole point of the ECU in a car is for emissions control. Pretty much any code that will be set (which will illuminate the MIL) will indicate an emission system problem.
A gas cap with a cracking rubber seal/rusting fuel filler neck can set a code like P3942 - EVAP System Slow Leak Detect (not a real code, I'm just demonstrating the logic). Go in to the dealer for $100 + their $40 OEM gas cap...for something that can be had at a car parts store for $15. Why don't the car companies have a little $50 LCD display that displays diagnostic information?
Where I live, we have (however infrequent) patrols that pull over regular people and check for emissions equipment. It happened to me. The guy was making sure my EGR was on the back of my engine. As he was on my engine a nasty rusting POS Chrysler K car went smokin' (literally) by with his exhaust flopping around on the ground.
I was going to say "instead of hassling me in my 100% non-smokey perfectly-muffled relatively recently made rust-free respectable sedan, you could have been pulling that smog spewing crap box over there", but I decided against it. He could have made my life hell for no reason other than he "suspects" emissions equipment isn't functioning properly. And the ticket is in the $1000 to $2000 range. Ultimately he found nothing wrong, and let me go. I was late for work.
I have read this as well. The article I read went on to say that this could be the reason why women are "so particular" about decorative colors, and why men "don't see the difference". It is likely that they can tell the different between cyan and turquoise, or forest green and dark green. Realistically, I think it's the difference between 24-bit and 32-bit color on our computers. There a difference, but it's subtle.
I think the parent poster meant that one wouldn't see the radio waves as they pass through one's field of vision (i.e. from my cell phone to the tower), even though you could see those waves that reflect directly into one's eyes (i.e. from my cell phone off the conveniently placed Faraday Cage, and then into my eye)...
I have also wondered and contemplated the idea of visualizing radio waves. Quite an interesting prospect. One would have to have some means of wavelength selection. Processing the entire known/used spectrum would be insane. It would likely require some sort of compression of the spectrum to make it visible as well, but, where could one find something as trippy?
From my now current understanding, not many people have such a sensitive sense of hearing...unfortunately (well, sometimes fortunately), I have the same or similar level as you. When I was young, I thought everyone could hear TVs (with the sound muted) just because they were on.
I too, can locate a powered-on television by its high-frequency sound alone. Very annoying when I'm trying to sleep. I can only describe the noise as high-pitch and high-tension. Somewhat like a feeling, more than a sound, because at that point it seems to become omnipresent, directionless. My cousin has a TV bought about 6 years ago, and it emits this high-pitch squeal even after it's turned off! I tried to get him to hear it, when I put my ear up to the top at the back of it, it's mind-numbingly loud. He can't hear it at all...nothing.
There have been times where I picked off a defective motherboard or power supply just by the noise it emitted. I was so happy when I switched too all LCD monitors at my work station (I had 3 19" monster CRTs).
I happen to have a function-generator (frequency generator) that I can hook up to a speaker. It can generate a frequency from 0.02Hz to 2MHz. When I generate a noise in the range of 15kHz, it seems to me that it sounds like the noise from a TV. It could be a bit higher...the upper response limit of the speaker is probably near that. I had my cousin (same one with the TV above) listen. As I approached 14kHz, he said that he couldn't hear it any longer.
Curious...I've always said I dislike crowds, and I've always been sensitive to sound...but never linked the two. I wonder if it's related, for me, as well.
omg...too funny...I know a couple people that do that. During the conversations, I say the brand name back to them, properly. Do you think any of them correct their own mispronunciation?
One that's along the same line is Asus. Most people I know say Eh-sus. In fact it's A-soos. The first time I heard someone pronounce it properly was back in/around 2000 -- my C programming teacher. I actually (incorrectly) corrected him! Of course, I had never called the company (and heard them say their own name) at that time. Asus hadn't advertised anything in North American markets back then. Not many people would have known any better.
As an aside, during that conversation my teacher complained how poorly the Asus board was laid out, over his wonderful Abit board, calling it a masterpiece.
You see, what I don't understand is the logic of the guys. I mean, if it exists in the first place. They are business guys, and have to pay bums-in-seats or at least maintain electronics to call the DNC list. I know it's relatively cheap, but, playing the odds of some PHB handing their money over, wouldn't it be more likely that someone not on the big list would be more apt?
If someone is savvy enough to be on the big list, wouldn't they already be predisposed to saying no to any product/service? So, take a phonebook, subtract the DNC list, and call the rest. At least you know the recipients won't be hostile...
This just makes sense, and it's not hard to figure. I'm not accusing anyone of actually having a brain here, it's just, anyone in business should contact those people that haven't explicitly stated they don't want to be contacted.
Life is only difficult when people make it difficult.
It gets worse than simply ignoring the Do Not Call list. You see, in order to be compliant with government regulations, legitimate marketing firms need to purchase an annual subscription to the DNC list. They then need to purge from their prospect list any number appearing in the DNC list.
Unfortunately, the government sells this list to anyone who asks; thus, Russian telemarketing companies sometimes buy the DNC list as a source of pre-verified, valid phone numbers.
Hmm, pre-verified, valid numbers...sounds sorta like the phonebook would have more than the DNC list...
(Sorry, I know I'm being a smart ass, but, I just had to say it)
*This* is why I don't want the government running businesses (mail, trains, hospitals, schools). The people in power use that power to censor information contrary to their personal beliefs, and they push agendas we are forced to adopt (like the "feel good" philosophy that is failing to teach our kids anything). It's a rigged system, a monopoly, not freedom or liberty.
You're deluding yourself. *Whoever* is running businesses, government or private, will use what whatever power they have to censor information contrary to their personal beliefs or agendas and use whatever power they have to force those beliefs and agendas.
I'll second that idea. Anyone that thinks that any private company will run any public institution with less corruption or self-interest are extremely myopic. At least if it's in the public sector, we have a chance at changing those in charge. Maybe years and years ago there was proper separation between public and private sector...but as far I as see it, the guys in charge don't really want it that way. (Mods that disagree: Before you mark me a troll/flamebait go and look up, as an example, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, and for whom they have worked. Then look at the decisions they have made, and you'll see what I am talking about).
I see. There are so many facets of the exploit conversation that it's not really feasible to discuss it to its necessary conclusion. Essentially, I think you should have said "3 of 5 computer users" because there really is no distinction between the level of technical aptitude between any particular OS's user base. I would even hazard a guess and say that, of all computer users, it is more like 9 out of 10 wouldn't know their computers are infected (14 years ago I might have said the opposite)...and I would go even further and say that this statistic is likely evenly distributed across all platforms, including administrators, technicians, operators, users, etc etc.
Your gun analogy is very close to perfect in relation to this discussion, but not as far as you've gone to imply intent (few people actively attempt suicide, and even fewer actively intend to infect their computer with a virus...and the fact that guns are only used to kill is superfluous to this conversation, so let's look at it as a tool, instead). As a computer user, or gun wielder, one doesn't know it's potential (good or bad) without training, understanding, and knowledge.
Ok Ok, so most people know that a gun will kill/wound whomever is on the business end of it when the trigger is pulled...but why is that? Likely because guns are as old as the hills, and as we grow up we see their effects in movies, and are trained on a regular basis that they are a dangerous tool. Society knows how to properly train its members to stay away from them. Most people have a healthy respect for guns (unfortunately, not yet for computers) Young children (as an example), though, don't have the concept for which to grasp the potential of a gun. This is why we hear about little children that accidentally kill other people. In the same respect, 9 out of 10 people (IMHO) don't understand the full breadth and scope of the operation of a computer.
I don't think we'll ever reach zen, when it comes to teaching the populace in threat avoidance...it's just not reasonable to expect everyone to understand such a technical subject. This is why we have whole industries, paid professionals, and anti-virus/malware programs...an attempt to bridge that gap. The bridged 'gap' for a firearm is "they must be locked up so that kids don't play with them".
I don't necessarily agree with your statement that people deserve to be owned, but they do deserve to pay a (properly) knowledgeable professional to train them in safe-computing. If they ignore proper advice like "don't put a gun to your head and pull the trigger" after they have been properly trained or advised, then there is nothing that could have been done in the first place.
As my sibling poster pointed out, I am referring to the user, not the OS. I recognize that some OSes are more or less secure than others, but that isn't my point. Behaviorally, if a user of a more secure OS operates in a frivolous manner, that box can be infiltrated just as easily as any other.
Perhaps I could have said "much less/little" instead of "nothing", but really, I don't necessarily believe it. If we are going to go down that road, we have to include user apps and configuration. An OS, all by itself, either doesn't do much or is by and large not very useful. Can you agree that most relevant OSes, in their clean and default installation (all of which have a built-in and activated firewall) are pretty much secure as they sit (without any user interaction)? If you can, then you must agree that only when a user interacts with that OS by adding apps, or changing its configuration, does it become less secure...
vs what? 3 out of 5 windows users that don't know how to tell if their machine is part of a botnet?
Nice troll. I wonder how many of the Apple users can tell?
Actually, I don't. My experience (which is 2 decades in the field) is the Apple users are just as clueless as to the operation of their computer as PC users.
Being 0wn3d has nothing to do with the platform, it's about the behavior/knowledge/understanding of the user.
God. Remember TSRs? I remember fighting to get every last bit of conventional memory, and having trouble getting more than 520kb free.
Oh yeah...only now it's only slightly different. Most people have a pile of them loaded in their system tray, so much so that MS had to create a method whereby one doesn't have to see them all the time (system-tray auto-hide, which I hate). What I remember fondly is back in the mid- to late-90's when few companies realized they could pester their users on a daily basis with it. All ink-jet printer companies, I'm looking at you!
Getting > 520kb free conventional memory was fun, and usually easy...getting > 615kb free was the challenge. I think I could squeeze a total of 620kb, even with Double Space. DEVICEHIGH= and LH for the win! And yeah, spending a couple hours rearranging driver/tsr load order actually made a difference...
I recall the amazement I experienced back in the DOS days when I found a few useful programs that could run behind the scenes while other programs were running. What a novel idea! My two favorites were CDPlayer, and a game cheat (I forget what it was called) program that let the user modify memory on the fly, and save entire memory states (in case the game didn't allow for saving between levels). It even made it easy to find the memory locations where game variables were! One could play a game, pause it, record your gold, points, dollars, etc, and break out into the game cheat TSR. There you punch in the value (hex or dec). It would find a bunch of places, so not much use, but the found memory locations get saved...so, go play the game again, have a different value of gold, dollars, etc then break out again, and perform the search again within the previously found memory locations, and bam, it would find the exact memory location. Total genius! Modify, lock, whatever, and go play with essentially unlimited resources.
I learned a lot about signed integers pretty quickly.
I'm with you on the change of nomenclature of control panel applets. It's very infuriating looking for XP's equivalent...precious seconds that could be utilized for more productive tasks.
As for the UI, could you not just change it back to classic style?
And why in the world would MS leave the telnet client out of the default install? The default install is measured in GB...telnet is KB...Do they know how annoying it is to have the command shell not recognize that command? And it takes more than just a couple seconds to install it.
Vista is usually slower than XP - by about 2%. 7 is usually faster than XP - by 2-10%. Everyone who is posting the "I hate MS as much as every other weirdo Slashdot fanatic but it makes sense than XP is the fastest" should cut it out and note instead that 7 is the fastest OS that Microsoft has produced since at least Win2k.
Ok, so I went and looked at the review. It looks like, in general, 7 and XP are really close, by less than a 2% either way, which seems promising (is network traffic still throttled during media playback?). All this is pretty much irrelevant because it's more about the experience than the numbers...and there's no way to capture an overall experience in a number.
Slashdot Mirror
...last I heard it was the cost of the license with no discounts + (3*the cost of the license with no discounts) per machine...
Wouldn't that just be 4 * (The cost of one license)?
Hmmm...that's odd...my sister demands that I install host block on any computer I set up for her.
Odd indeed.
There's a reason for the crappy video in laptops as a general rule:
Heat.
I doubt you want that much heat energy in such a small space...unfortunately, that's reality. And even "fast" video in a laptop is slow.
I think the beige thing was because historically they were business machines...black is far too radical. Maybe beige paint is cheap cheap...not a lot of dye...not a lot of bleach?
No competence required. It's in the file properties dialog. It's as easy as setting read-only, it's in the "advanced" properties.
If one encrypts a directory, any file saved in the directory will be encrypted.
NeoTrace! Yeah, that was a wicked program. It doesn't work anymore, does it?
You say "was" your favorite...does that mean it's not available anymore?
They did it to sygate too? Hmmm...I recall they bought the defunct AtGuard firewall and neutered it into their "Internet Security" program...I remember the first (and maybe the second) iteration still had the exact same statistical screen at AtGuard.
AtGuard was the best.
It does if you use NTFS file encryption in Win2k, XP, Vista, 7.
Make no mistake, this was all about lining the pockets of the companies that were involved, nothing else.
How could they not know this would fail? Fiasco was written all over it.
Canada had the gun registry that failed miserably. It was supposed to cost about $120mil, but ended up costing the (now poor) tax payers $2 billion. Yep. 2. Billion.
My question is - who got paid...someone did...a lot. Every man, woman and child alive today would have to register two guns for this money to be recuperated.
The same can be found in any government large enough to force tax collection, but the obviousness of it really bothers me.
If you always wait for the next release of that software, that car, or that style shoes you like you'll never end up with anything.
Not true. You'll end up with the stuff that you want, not the stuff that the companies want you to have. Notice the difference?
Firstly, software doesn't expire or age, and is always 100% identical if it's installed in 2002 or in 2009. Even if you buy a used OS, it'll be in 100% working order until the end of time. The only thing of relevance that changes over time is known hacks, and support/updates (maybe price too, but that's less relevant). The only reason to buy a new OS is to appease the licensing gods, or to benefit from new features (or if the activation servers are turned off. MS knows that the biggest threat to the success of subsequent OS sales is any previous OS. When do you think MS will turn off their XP activation servers?). Neither of which are required on most corporate/home networks/computers.
I'm forced to deal with this issue on a regular basis. I find a product that meets my expectations, and I buy it. This can be things from toothpaste, garbage bags, chips, cars, computer parts...everything. I spend the time to decide which product/service is right for me, then I stick to it. I'm extremely loyal to realistically high-quality products/services with an appropriate price tag.
Then the manufacturer/service provider goes pissing around, changing "the formula", source materials, our manufacturing/service process to make it "new and improved".
Then I'm forced to find a different, less desirable/valuable-to-me product, and it pisses me off to no end. I can't be the only person on the planet that feels this way.
Why? I didn't ask for a change, nor do I need one.
Back to your drawing of the line. Imagine you need a large vehicle for some reason (you have 5 kids, your job is to move stuff, whatever). If all the car companies stopped making large cars, what would you do? Make your life difficult or impossible by buying a new small car because you have to draw the line somewhere? No...you'd keep buying large cars, just not brand new.
What's the difference between an OS and my analogy? I don't see much (except the support issue). People should have what they need/want, not what they are told to want.
Oh, and XP is becoming more difficult on new machines?! For whom?! You are aware that MS is continuing sales of XP on netbooks, right?
i can bridge 2 pins on the ecu plug on mine, and its flashes the dash lights in sequence to give me the codes, its just a matter of looking them up. though im not sure if newer cars are still keeping anything like this available.
Also, generally if your engine light comes on, your car will go into limp home mode, which is a cut back operation that uses default configs and ignores either all or some of the sensors just to enable you to get home, or to a workshop somewhere without the working sensors.
That's a GM OBD-I. I had a few cars that could do that...I kept a paperclip handy in the ash tray. The codes provided were pretty standard...maybe 30 different types of codes at most.
Fords of the era had the same idea, but the "flashes" are measured by the pulses of a multimeter via a lead under the hood.
OBD-II is more resilient. Only if there is a severe problem does it go into 'limp' mode. It doesn't have the ability to retrieve codes without some sort of code-reading device. ElmScan is well priced, compatible with any car which conforms to OBD-II (pretty much all 1996 and newer). One needs a computer for those, but the free software available for it is fantastic at deciphering the codes and monitoring various sensors like RPM, O2 sensor voltage, Manifold Absolute Pressure, Calculated Engine Load, Throttle Position. One guy made an app using an ElmScan to calculate an estimated fuel economy based on the Mass Air Flow and Speed sensors. One can also get hand-held readers, which usually have an accompanying manual with all the code meanings included.
Yep.
Actually, the whole point of the ECU in a car is for emissions control. Pretty much any code that will be set (which will illuminate the MIL) will indicate an emission system problem.
A gas cap with a cracking rubber seal/rusting fuel filler neck can set a code like P3942 - EVAP System Slow Leak Detect (not a real code, I'm just demonstrating the logic). Go in to the dealer for $100 + their $40 OEM gas cap...for something that can be had at a car parts store for $15. Why don't the car companies have a little $50 LCD display that displays diagnostic information?
Where I live, we have (however infrequent) patrols that pull over regular people and check for emissions equipment. It happened to me. The guy was making sure my EGR was on the back of my engine. As he was on my engine a nasty rusting POS Chrysler K car went smokin' (literally) by with his exhaust flopping around on the ground.
I was going to say "instead of hassling me in my 100% non-smokey perfectly-muffled relatively recently made rust-free respectable sedan, you could have been pulling that smog spewing crap box over there", but I decided against it. He could have made my life hell for no reason other than he "suspects" emissions equipment isn't functioning properly. And the ticket is in the $1000 to $2000 range. Ultimately he found nothing wrong, and let me go. I was late for work.
Joy.
I have read this as well. The article I read went on to say that this could be the reason why women are "so particular" about decorative colors, and why men "don't see the difference". It is likely that they can tell the different between cyan and turquoise, or forest green and dark green. Realistically, I think it's the difference between 24-bit and 32-bit color on our computers. There a difference, but it's subtle.
True true.
I think the parent poster meant that one wouldn't see the radio waves as they pass through one's field of vision (i.e. from my cell phone to the tower), even though you could see those waves that reflect directly into one's eyes (i.e. from my cell phone off the conveniently placed Faraday Cage, and then into my eye)...
I have also wondered and contemplated the idea of visualizing radio waves. Quite an interesting prospect. One would have to have some means of wavelength selection. Processing the entire known/used spectrum would be insane. It would likely require some sort of compression of the spectrum to make it visible as well, but, where could one find something as trippy?
From my now current understanding, not many people have such a sensitive sense of hearing...unfortunately (well, sometimes fortunately), I have the same or similar level as you. When I was young, I thought everyone could hear TVs (with the sound muted) just because they were on.
I too, can locate a powered-on television by its high-frequency sound alone. Very annoying when I'm trying to sleep. I can only describe the noise as high-pitch and high-tension. Somewhat like a feeling, more than a sound, because at that point it seems to become omnipresent, directionless. My cousin has a TV bought about 6 years ago, and it emits this high-pitch squeal even after it's turned off! I tried to get him to hear it, when I put my ear up to the top at the back of it, it's mind-numbingly loud. He can't hear it at all...nothing.
There have been times where I picked off a defective motherboard or power supply just by the noise it emitted. I was so happy when I switched too all LCD monitors at my work station (I had 3 19" monster CRTs).
I happen to have a function-generator (frequency generator) that I can hook up to a speaker. It can generate a frequency from 0.02Hz to 2MHz. When I generate a noise in the range of 15kHz, it seems to me that it sounds like the noise from a TV. It could be a bit higher...the upper response limit of the speaker is probably near that. I had my cousin (same one with the TV above) listen. As I approached 14kHz, he said that he couldn't hear it any longer.
Curious...I've always said I dislike crowds, and I've always been sensitive to sound...but never linked the two. I wonder if it's related, for me, as well.
omg...too funny...I know a couple people that do that. During the conversations, I say the brand name back to them, properly. Do you think any of them correct their own mispronunciation?
One that's along the same line is Asus. Most people I know say Eh-sus. In fact it's A-soos. The first time I heard someone pronounce it properly was back in/around 2000 -- my C programming teacher. I actually (incorrectly) corrected him! Of course, I had never called the company (and heard them say their own name) at that time. Asus hadn't advertised anything in North American markets back then. Not many people would have known any better.
As an aside, during that conversation my teacher complained how poorly the Asus board was laid out, over his wonderful Abit board, calling it a masterpiece.
He was a great C teacher though.
You see, what I don't understand is the logic of the guys. I mean, if it exists in the first place. They are business guys, and have to pay bums-in-seats or at least maintain electronics to call the DNC list. I know it's relatively cheap, but, playing the odds of some PHB handing their money over, wouldn't it be more likely that someone not on the big list would be more apt?
If someone is savvy enough to be on the big list, wouldn't they already be predisposed to saying no to any product/service? So, take a phonebook, subtract the DNC list, and call the rest. At least you know the recipients won't be hostile...
This just makes sense, and it's not hard to figure. I'm not accusing anyone of actually having a brain here, it's just, anyone in business should contact those people that haven't explicitly stated they don't want to be contacted.
Life is only difficult when people make it difficult.
It gets worse than simply ignoring the Do Not Call list. You see, in order to be compliant with government regulations, legitimate marketing firms need to purchase an annual subscription to the DNC list. They then need to purge from their prospect list any number appearing in the DNC list.
Unfortunately, the government sells this list to anyone who asks; thus, Russian telemarketing companies sometimes buy the DNC list as a source of pre-verified, valid phone numbers.
Hmm, pre-verified, valid numbers...sounds sorta like the phonebook would have more than the DNC list...
(Sorry, I know I'm being a smart ass, but, I just had to say it)
You're deluding yourself. *Whoever* is running businesses, government or private, will use what whatever power they have to censor information contrary to their personal beliefs or agendas and use whatever power they have to force those beliefs and agendas.
I'll second that idea. Anyone that thinks that any private company will run any public institution with less corruption or self-interest are extremely myopic. At least if it's in the public sector, we have a chance at changing those in charge. Maybe years and years ago there was proper separation between public and private sector...but as far I as see it, the guys in charge don't really want it that way. (Mods that disagree: Before you mark me a troll/flamebait go and look up, as an example, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, and for whom they have worked. Then look at the decisions they have made, and you'll see what I am talking about).
I see. There are so many facets of the exploit conversation that it's not really feasible to discuss it to its necessary conclusion. Essentially, I think you should have said "3 of 5 computer users" because there really is no distinction between the level of technical aptitude between any particular OS's user base. I would even hazard a guess and say that, of all computer users, it is more like 9 out of 10 wouldn't know their computers are infected (14 years ago I might have said the opposite)...and I would go even further and say that this statistic is likely evenly distributed across all platforms, including administrators, technicians, operators, users, etc etc.
Your gun analogy is very close to perfect in relation to this discussion, but not as far as you've gone to imply intent (few people actively attempt suicide, and even fewer actively intend to infect their computer with a virus...and the fact that guns are only used to kill is superfluous to this conversation, so let's look at it as a tool, instead). As a computer user, or gun wielder, one doesn't know it's potential (good or bad) without training, understanding, and knowledge.
Ok Ok, so most people know that a gun will kill/wound whomever is on the business end of it when the trigger is pulled...but why is that? Likely because guns are as old as the hills, and as we grow up we see their effects in movies, and are trained on a regular basis that they are a dangerous tool. Society knows how to properly train its members to stay away from them. Most people have a healthy respect for guns (unfortunately, not yet for computers) Young children (as an example), though, don't have the concept for which to grasp the potential of a gun. This is why we hear about little children that accidentally kill other people. In the same respect, 9 out of 10 people (IMHO) don't understand the full breadth and scope of the operation of a computer.
I don't think we'll ever reach zen, when it comes to teaching the populace in threat avoidance...it's just not reasonable to expect everyone to understand such a technical subject. This is why we have whole industries, paid professionals, and anti-virus/malware programs...an attempt to bridge that gap. The bridged 'gap' for a firearm is "they must be locked up so that kids don't play with them".
I don't necessarily agree with your statement that people deserve to be owned, but they do deserve to pay a (properly) knowledgeable professional to train them in safe-computing. If they ignore proper advice like "don't put a gun to your head and pull the trigger" after they have been properly trained or advised, then there is nothing that could have been done in the first place.
Go Darwin.
As my sibling poster pointed out, I am referring to the user, not the OS. I recognize that some OSes are more or less secure than others, but that isn't my point. Behaviorally, if a user of a more secure OS operates in a frivolous manner, that box can be infiltrated just as easily as any other.
Perhaps I could have said "much less/little" instead of "nothing", but really, I don't necessarily believe it. If we are going to go down that road, we have to include user apps and configuration. An OS, all by itself, either doesn't do much or is by and large not very useful. Can you agree that most relevant OSes, in their clean and default installation (all of which have a built-in and activated firewall) are pretty much secure as they sit (without any user interaction)? If you can, then you must agree that only when a user interacts with that OS by adding apps, or changing its configuration, does it become less secure...
vs what? 3 out of 5 windows users that don't know how to tell if their machine is part of a botnet?
Nice troll. I wonder how many of the Apple users can tell?
Actually, I don't. My experience (which is 2 decades in the field) is the Apple users are just as clueless as to the operation of their computer as PC users.
Being 0wn3d has nothing to do with the platform, it's about the behavior/knowledge/understanding of the user.
God. Remember TSRs? I remember fighting to get every last bit of conventional memory, and having trouble getting more than 520kb free.
Oh yeah...only now it's only slightly different. Most people have a pile of them loaded in their system tray, so much so that MS had to create a method whereby one doesn't have to see them all the time (system-tray auto-hide, which I hate). What I remember fondly is back in the mid- to late-90's when few companies realized they could pester their users on a daily basis with it. All ink-jet printer companies, I'm looking at you!
Getting > 520kb free conventional memory was fun, and usually easy...getting > 615kb free was the challenge. I think I could squeeze a total of 620kb, even with Double Space. DEVICEHIGH= and LH for the win! And yeah, spending a couple hours rearranging driver/tsr load order actually made a difference...
I recall the amazement I experienced back in the DOS days when I found a few useful programs that could run behind the scenes while other programs were running. What a novel idea! My two favorites were CDPlayer, and a game cheat (I forget what it was called) program that let the user modify memory on the fly, and save entire memory states (in case the game didn't allow for saving between levels). It even made it easy to find the memory locations where game variables were! One could play a game, pause it, record your gold, points, dollars, etc, and break out into the game cheat TSR. There you punch in the value (hex or dec). It would find a bunch of places, so not much use, but the found memory locations get saved...so, go play the game again, have a different value of gold, dollars, etc then break out again, and perform the search again within the previously found memory locations, and bam, it would find the exact memory location. Total genius! Modify, lock, whatever, and go play with essentially unlimited resources.
I learned a lot about signed integers pretty quickly.
I'm with you on the change of nomenclature of control panel applets. It's very infuriating looking for XP's equivalent...precious seconds that could be utilized for more productive tasks.
As for the UI, could you not just change it back to classic style?
And why in the world would MS leave the telnet client out of the default install? The default install is measured in GB...telnet is KB...Do they know how annoying it is to have the command shell not recognize that command? And it takes more than just a couple seconds to install it.
Vista is usually slower than XP - by about 2%. 7 is usually faster than XP - by 2-10%. Everyone who is posting the "I hate MS as much as every other weirdo Slashdot fanatic but it makes sense than XP is the fastest" should cut it out and note instead that 7 is the fastest OS that Microsoft has produced since at least Win2k.
Ok, so I went and looked at the review. It looks like, in general, 7 and XP are really close, by less than a 2% either way, which seems promising (is network traffic still throttled during media playback?). All this is pretty much irrelevant because it's more about the experience than the numbers...and there's no way to capture an overall experience in a number.
I still use Win2k...
You get a +wicked just for that statement.
Oh, and the rest of what you said is bang on.
Hear hear!