You might like the Sideswipe column there. Full of all the REALLY bizarre stuff that isn't quite long enough to qualify for it's own article. Read it religiously myself.
Dude, Orcon is a New Zealand site (obviously), not American. I guess this Slashdot article is why my internet connection is suddenly running so crap. It's like the sudden drain on my ISP's network when U2 tickets went on sale.
Well, that depends. Is there code embedded into the processor to watch for "code tainting"? It's probable that there might be... to prevent you from using third party utilities on Xbox Live. If such is the case, your Xbox might survive, but your hardware ID gets an instaban from XBL.
And Microsoft is in the process of implementing a service whereby you can develop XNA-based Xbox 360 games which will run on the XB360 and Windows, and share them via Live. Well, that service already exists. But what's in progress is the ability for any Joe to create a game with XNA Studio, and SELL it via Live. I think that sort of idea blows both Sony's and Nintendo's out of the water. Think about it... indy games are quite often better than mass-market alternatives (note that they can be extremely crap too), so the ability to get them cheaply and have them just work - without needing the Code Signing that pressed games need - would really lower the barrier of entry to people with kickass ideas but no money (to get an XDK) to implement them. And the icing on the cake is that the same games "just work" on Windows too (NO, not just Vista. XP too).
I think they will be. In case you didn't know, the Microsoft Games Division just this week sent out invitations to join the Games for Windows Live (Xbox Live for Windows) beta to some people who registered interest, which will essentially merge their Windows online gaming division with their Xbox gaming division and have one platform - also allowing things like Halo PC players playing against Xbox Halo players in one environment. I presume we'll see the inclusion of all the arcade style Zone games into the XBLA library.
Does MS force updates for things like this? Yes. As soon as your XB360 attempts to connect to Live (which even without you paying, it will do if you signed up for it) it will demand you update or it will disconnect you (which with Live-connected dashboard accounts signs you out of your local XB360 profile too)
Hmm. From what I've read elsewhere in this thread, doesn't Charter's setup block outbound outside of their relay server? I presume this only applies to residential setups, but I would also assume they don't implement their sitefinder service for business customers. Not being even in the same country as Charter I would have to get someone else to confirm that, but if it's implemented any other way then it's just plain moronic.
Really. And when I typo stuff in IE I get Google search. After upgrading Windows twice. And upgrading IE three times (even through an IE version rollback). And countless numbers of Windows updates. Why? I set Google as the default. Hell, I can even choose to not even see that.
Is that froth coming out of your mouth? Crap, watch it he might have rabies...
Could you be any more misinformed. MSIE drops any nonexistent addresses (assuming you didn't configure it not to) into your default search engine. That can be Live, Google, Yahoo, Altavista, Ask.com, Baidu, even Dogpile if you're crazy. If you prefix it with "http://", then IE will NOT search for you, it will bail with "Cannot find server". There is no money for Microsoft if you a) set a different search engine as your default, b) disable searching from the address bar in Internet Options or c) enter in an address that CLEARLY is a domain name (i.e. has a protocol prefix) but is not correct
Oh, and the consumer likely appreciates Microsoft's approach more. Stop spreading idiocy.
You have no idea what you're talking about. Verisign has NO control beyond administrative. ICANN controls everything, and mandates what the ccTLD registries can do. Verisign only does what ICANN allows. And stop bitching about your USD$9.99 a year. In NZ, our domains are NZD$30 a year (with NZD$2.75 per month going to our central registry, and the infinitesmal profit for the actual registrar)
Mmm, I think Sitefinder only resolved/resolves A records, not MX records. Your mail would STILL bounce with NXDOMAIN, providing I'm right. In Charter's case, that is the case. Not aware of how it worked with Verisign and Earthlink.
The "~" character on XP is just a character in filenames. Example, Program Files is aliased for DOS programs as PROGRA~1. It's not usable as any form of special folder shortcut.
Where is the logic here - the company was ordered to pay $200'000 to Verizon, which already charged their customers $XXX for these text messages. So under the guise of "protecting their customers" they just made another wad of cash. I'll eat my shorts if they credit their customers for this. You guys are charged to RECEIVE text messages in the US? What sort of backwards country IS that? Wow. With three cellphone providers here, not one of them DARES to charge us to receive text messages. And for a capped $10, we can send as many as 500 text messages. Obviously the USA isn't the best place to be if you don't want to suffer rampant overcharging.
You know, I hadn't heard of those before. But yes, those look similar to what I'm talking about. Neither of those two companies are run by artists. They're merely benevolent record labels. A noble goal, to be sure, but not what I was suggesting. If artists banded together to create a label, leveraging their own collective revenue stream to produce records, their royalties would jump to... well, 100%. Think of it as either artists loaning money to each other for production, or loaning money to a collective for the purpose of funding production for it's members. I think it's a viable model if it were possible to get some of the popular artists involved.
Precisely. If the sysadmin isn't braindead, they don't. And Symantec's whole argument goes out the window. I know that with computers in my house, the XP machine I don't use is used by a person who couldn't log in as an admin if they tried. Don't know the domain admin password you see. My own machine is a Vista machine with UAC left enabled. I get less than one message from it per week.
If you ask me, this has something to do with Symantec creating a UAC product. From TFA:
Symantec executives talked up research it was doing on UAC, which may result in software to give users more control over how frequently Vista pops up the alerts. Whitehouse denied that there was any connection between his research and possible UAC-related product plans Yeah right.
If management initiates a project and wants to work on it themselves, you'd be an IDIOT to touch it. Why? Well, for a start, management is actually DOING something for once. Second, they find out you've been messing with their project behind their back... hope you didn't like your job. ESPECIALLY if they find out about the pocketing of money. The reasonable and smart thing to do would have been to explain the benefits (they're management, they think and BREATHE "cost-effectiveness") of the OSS solutions, and if they fail to just throw up their hands and mutter about how they tried.
These types of people give the OSS community a bad name.
From what I just read on their site, pretty much. Although I don't think I would jump on the bandwagon of a company that literally calls itself an unprofitable failure. That's a pretty bad way of marketing themselves to artists.
They don't. Restricted users can only delegate administrative priviledges by entering administrative credentials to a UAC prompt. Stop with the bullshit FUD.
Really. Are you referring to the X bit in the RWX? If so, Windows does have an equivelant in its ACL. Any application on Windows, like *nix, can have its execute right revoked and it can't run anymore (though the message as to why is a little cryptic if you TRY running it). And, like on *nix, --X is allowed by default. So really...
which is one of the reasons that *nix systems are virtually identical to Windows. Programs don't run until their permissions indicate they can run.
Pick something which DOES actually put *nix on a higher level than Windows thanks. I'm pretty sure you can find SOMETHING.
How exactly can they deliberately make it not work when it's open source and on SourceForge? If it is deliberately made to not work, someone will fork and fix it. It's just not in their best interests. In fact, Microsoft has a few projects on SourceForge (such as Wix for Windows Installer)
Slashdot Mirror
You might like the Sideswipe column there. Full of all the REALLY bizarre stuff that isn't quite long enough to qualify for it's own article. Read it religiously myself.
To clarify, Orcon is my ISP. And seems to buckle BADLY when hit by high traffic to one of their hosted sites.
Dude, Orcon is a New Zealand site (obviously), not American. I guess this Slashdot article is why my internet connection is suddenly running so crap. It's like the sudden drain on my ISP's network when U2 tickets went on sale.
Hey moron,
Jan 09, 2007 - vendor releases patch
We're currently in... March. Two months after that date. Yup.
Well, that depends. Is there code embedded into the processor to watch for "code tainting"? It's probable that there might be... to prevent you from using third party utilities on Xbox Live. If such is the case, your Xbox might survive, but your hardware ID gets an instaban from XBL.
And Microsoft is in the process of implementing a service whereby you can develop XNA-based Xbox 360 games which will run on the XB360 and Windows, and share them via Live. Well, that service already exists. But what's in progress is the ability for any Joe to create a game with XNA Studio, and SELL it via Live. I think that sort of idea blows both Sony's and Nintendo's out of the water. Think about it... indy games are quite often better than mass-market alternatives (note that they can be extremely crap too), so the ability to get them cheaply and have them just work - without needing the Code Signing that pressed games need - would really lower the barrier of entry to people with kickass ideas but no money (to get an XDK) to implement them. And the icing on the cake is that the same games "just work" on Windows too (NO, not just Vista. XP too).
I think they will be. In case you didn't know, the Microsoft Games Division just this week sent out invitations to join the Games for Windows Live (Xbox Live for Windows) beta to some people who registered interest, which will essentially merge their Windows online gaming division with their Xbox gaming division and have one platform - also allowing things like Halo PC players playing against Xbox Halo players in one environment. I presume we'll see the inclusion of all the arcade style Zone games into the XBLA library.
Maybe it would, if it weren't already patched. Typical /., reporting on a bug which was fixed two months ago.
In early Macs, that would be the "I'm busy, go away" indicator. In newer Macs, I don't know.
Hmm. From what I've read elsewhere in this thread, doesn't Charter's setup block outbound outside of their relay server? I presume this only applies to residential setups, but I would also assume they don't implement their sitefinder service for business customers. Not being even in the same country as Charter I would have to get someone else to confirm that, but if it's implemented any other way then it's just plain moronic.
Whatever you've been smoking, stop. You don't have enough brain cells left to kill.
Really. And when I typo stuff in IE I get Google search. After upgrading Windows twice. And upgrading IE three times (even through an IE version rollback). And countless numbers of Windows updates. Why? I set Google as the default. Hell, I can even choose to not even see that.
Is that froth coming out of your mouth? Crap, watch it he might have rabies...
Could you be any more misinformed. MSIE drops any nonexistent addresses (assuming you didn't configure it not to) into your default search engine. That can be Live, Google, Yahoo, Altavista, Ask.com, Baidu, even Dogpile if you're crazy. If you prefix it with "http://", then IE will NOT search for you, it will bail with "Cannot find server". There is no money for Microsoft if you a) set a different search engine as your default, b) disable searching from the address bar in Internet Options or c) enter in an address that CLEARLY is a domain name (i.e. has a protocol prefix) but is not correct
Oh, and the consumer likely appreciates Microsoft's approach more. Stop spreading idiocy.
You have no idea what you're talking about. Verisign has NO control beyond administrative. ICANN controls everything, and mandates what the ccTLD registries can do. Verisign only does what ICANN allows. And stop bitching about your USD$9.99 a year. In NZ, our domains are NZD$30 a year (with NZD$2.75 per month going to our central registry, and the infinitesmal profit for the actual registrar)
Mmm, I think Sitefinder only resolved/resolves A records, not MX records. Your mail would STILL bounce with NXDOMAIN, providing I'm right. In Charter's case, that is the case. Not aware of how it worked with Verisign and Earthlink.
The "~" character on XP is just a character in filenames. Example, Program Files is aliased for DOS programs as PROGRA~1. It's not usable as any form of special folder shortcut.
Where is the logic here - the company was ordered to pay $200'000 to Verizon, which already charged their customers $XXX for these text messages. So under the guise of "protecting their customers" they just made another wad of cash. I'll eat my shorts if they credit their customers for this. You guys are charged to RECEIVE text messages in the US? What sort of backwards country IS that? Wow. With three cellphone providers here, not one of them DARES to charge us to receive text messages. And for a capped $10, we can send as many as 500 text messages. Obviously the USA isn't the best place to be if you don't want to suffer rampant overcharging.
You know, I hadn't heard of those before. But yes, those look similar to what I'm talking about. Neither of those two companies are run by artists. They're merely benevolent record labels. A noble goal, to be sure, but not what I was suggesting. If artists banded together to create a label, leveraging their own collective revenue stream to produce records, their royalties would jump to ... well, 100%. Think of it as either artists loaning money to each other for production, or loaning money to a collective for the purpose of funding production for it's members. I think it's a viable model if it were possible to get some of the popular artists involved.
If you ask me, this has something to do with Symantec creating a UAC product. From TFA: Symantec executives talked up research it was doing on UAC, which may result in software to give users more control over how frequently Vista pops up the alerts. Whitehouse denied that there was any connection between his research and possible UAC-related product plans Yeah right.
Pocketed the money? Fire them.
If management initiates a project and wants to work on it themselves, you'd be an IDIOT to touch it. Why? Well, for a start, management is actually DOING something for once. Second, they find out you've been messing with their project behind their back... hope you didn't like your job. ESPECIALLY if they find out about the pocketing of money. The reasonable and smart thing to do would have been to explain the benefits (they're management, they think and BREATHE "cost-effectiveness") of the OSS solutions, and if they fail to just throw up their hands and mutter about how they tried.
These types of people give the OSS community a bad name.
From what I just read on their site, pretty much. Although I don't think I would jump on the bandwagon of a company that literally calls itself an unprofitable failure. That's a pretty bad way of marketing themselves to artists.
They don't. Restricted users can only delegate administrative priviledges by entering administrative credentials to a UAC prompt. Stop with the bullshit FUD.
Really. Are you referring to the X bit in the RWX? If so, Windows does have an equivelant in its ACL. Any application on Windows, like *nix, can have its execute right revoked and it can't run anymore (though the message as to why is a little cryptic if you TRY running it). And, like on *nix, --X is allowed by default. So really...
which is one of the reasons that *nix systems are virtually identical to Windows. Programs don't run until their permissions indicate they can run.
Pick something which DOES actually put *nix on a higher level than Windows thanks. I'm pretty sure you can find SOMETHING.
How exactly can they deliberately make it not work when it's open source and on SourceForge? If it is deliberately made to not work, someone will fork and fix it. It's just not in their best interests. In fact, Microsoft has a few projects on SourceForge (such as Wix for Windows Installer)