...just fixing the damn holes instead? [...] duct tape...
This is an attempt at fixing a hole. Zone-spoofing is a threat and MS realized that. It may not be the best fix but it is a start.
As usual when marketing hype muddies up the terminology, quality suffers and confusion results.
In this case, "zone" is used by Microsoft marketing to mean one thing, and by DNS to mean something else. A DNS "zone" is a particular inherited slice of domain - a group of machines under the same management. An MS "zone" is a set of domains or sites that the user categorizes in the same level of trust. Those are completely different things.
So when Microsoft marketing says a "zone spoofing" attack is thwarted for home users, which "zone" do they mean? To the rest of us, zone spoofing is a DOS attack on a target using DNS servers as unknowing dupes. You spoof the address of the target in a query (claiming you're the target), then the DNS servers respond to the target with a boatload of data. If the target is itself a DNS server, that can create additional attack vectors on the clients, opening the time window for race conditions as the clients time out looking for a DNS server.
What this really is is the IE7 team saying "These 'zone' thingies are stupid enough, but a home intranet zone is really superfluous". It's Window dressing. The dev team didn't fix anything, they just turned off a feature that people didn't use.
Ironically, home networks are really taking off, as more people buy firewall-router-switch combos and use multiple computers at home. Not many home users maintain web sites inside their network, and those who do have them probably don't put ActiveX crap on them.
In short, this is not duct tape. It's taking off your hubcaps so no one steals them.
"80% success rate" may mean that they have to discard 20% of their batches. For instance, if they sample 100 of a batch of 10,000 and 5 of them are bad, maybe they throw out that batch.
On the other hand, maybe they are finding that 2 in 10 are bad.
Even so, I think the failure rate is for initial quality. Longevity is a separate issue, having to do more with the durability of the media, not so much how well it's made. They're also struggling with hard coats for the discs; see here: http://www.manifest-tech.com/media_dvd/hard_coat.h tm
I think you're right in most of what you say, but you're not being fair when you say:
Right now, NASA has become too distracted with political and budget battles to really take space technology to the next level.
I live in a small town in the midwestern U.S. Most folks in these parts don't reckon there's much of a need for travelin' in outer space. ("We went to the moon. Yawn. Who do the Bears play on Sunday?")
Generalizing, there's probably not a lot of constituent pressure on Congress to fund NASA. The President calls for some mission to Mars or whatever, but his base really isn't into it. The Democrats' are more focused on social programs and environmental issues - and whatever they can do to make Mr. Bush look bad. Nobody but nerds really cares about NASA.
So if NASA is too distracted by budget battles, there's probably a good reason for it. No budget, no rockets. Nobody's out there making the case for NASA as an investment in the future of humanity. I thought with all the meteor disaster movies a few years ago that there would be enough public interest in dodging giant interstellar rocks, but I think 9/11 must have captured public attention.
Railroads carry tanks full of lovely chemicals like SO4 and HCl. For commercial efficiency, they often put all the tank cars together. For historical reasons, the railroads, state highways, and interstates often run close together and intersect. Not far from where I am now is an intersection of two interstate highways, two state highways, two US routes, and a railroad.
Take out the tank cars and drive away in any direction.
I do request that you either pull this post or pay me 60% of all profit.
The poster involved in the previous post (not the most recent post but the post which is this post's parent post) has been sacked.
He may be eligible to receive unemployment compensation in the county, state, commonwealth or province in which he was formerly employed, at his former pay grade (the rate at which he was compensated for the aforementioned post)(not the most recent post but the post which is this post's parent post), times 60%.
I'm a former GTE customer. From a customer service and quality standpoint they were the worst company I've ever dealt with. Every time I had to deal with them they botched it.
Since they merged with Bell Atlantic and became Verizon, I'm fairly happy with them. They adopted the policy (for their customer service reps, anyway) that one way or another they wouldn't stop working until your problem was resolved.
Their prices are too high, but at least they fix whatever you tell them is wrong.
But Icahn is just trying to "flip" them, as you would a piece a furniture you got at a garage sale and put on Ebay.
The paper will explain how the IE changes will be implemented and to warn developers that users won't be able to directly interact with Microsoft ActiveX controls loaded by the APPLET, EMBED or OBJECT elements without first activating the user interface with an extra mouse click.
That's what should happen anyway, stupid patent or no stupid patent. You shouldn't be able to go to a web page and have it run whatever it wants to on your computer. This won't protect against tricking the human, but it does raise the bar slightly for classic phishing popups, viruses and spyware.
I'd say Microsoft wised up a little, except that there are probably other ways to get IE to run ActiveX without user intervention.
Do you mean as opposed to its use as a noun, as in "the common good"? I'm not sure who is opposed to turning adjectives into nouns in that way.
Or do you mean good as opposed to well? Both are adjectives. Well is for transitive verbs, but good applies to intransitive verbs. The language nazi in me chuckles to himself when some intellectual says "You look well today." Look is intransitive in that usage.
OTOH, see my frickin' sig:-). Language is a moving target. Teaching it as fixed in stone is unrealistic, but it's useful to civilization for a standard to be taught. We just need to remember that it will change regardless.
C got the rep for being fast and cool, because it was all about Unix, which was fast and cool. Every Unix machine (well, most) had a C compiler.
Pascal has a hand-holding feel, like you're in a little box constantly fighting the language. No pointers or similar mechanism. Abstracted strings.
Why do race cars use a manual transmission? That's why programmers use C(++): more control.
But your basic idea that Americans have a "not invented here" bias against some software is just wrong. If there is documentation in English, we don't care where it originated.
Set up Ssh to allow you in to your usual haunts without a password.
Settle on a window manager, and stick with it until it's not supported any more, and then stick with it some more (until it's just not available). Just pick one, and over time you'll learn all of its little time-savers and other gimmicks.
Learn a scripting language such as perl, bash, or python, depending on what it is you usually want to automate. If you do much sysadmin work, you may need several languages.
Keep your files organized in whatever way allows you to find things without searching for them. Get in the habit of storing things in the place where it will be easiest for you to find them. Make your web browser ask you where to put things, and then force yourself to put them in the right place when saving them.
Keep your current work files backed up where you can get to them without relying on someone (even yourself) to change a tape. Since Linux lacks a Recycle Bin, the wrong mv, rm, or tar command can mean hours of finger-drumming waiting for a restore. (Pet peave: why doesn't unlink(2) move stuff to a filesystem-wide deleted area?)
Why is it so difficult for elected officials to see the necessity of full source code disclosure for voting machines?
It can't be that they're all on the take. It must be simple ignorance, so that when Diebold says they need to keep their source code private so they can make a profit, the officials accept it.
Maybe Google had some effect, but I think they were just part of the more general backlash against such ads.
Nobody but the parasuits liked them. Everyone savvy enough to know how to turn them off did so. I'd wager some people even quit web browsing over them.
Google didn't want them because 1) they slurp bandwidth and B) they can't be tracked for content and $) because they don't fit the Google "no evil" culture.
Those reasons pretty much coincide with how the rest of us saw them, too. Except for the pervs, that is. (Camera to spy on wife in shower? Ooh, baby!)
Slashdot Mirror
But that's not what he did. He made, in effect, an ad hominem argument. He made the debate about the people involved, not about the ideas.
It's dumb to insult your bosses, especially the taxpayers of your state, in email. That's why he had to resign. Academic freedom only goes so far.
The story is really about being careful what you say in email.
I believe that there's need for maybe 5 inexpensive laptops in the world.
In this case, "zone" is used by Microsoft marketing to mean one thing, and by DNS to mean something else. A DNS "zone" is a particular inherited slice of domain - a group of machines under the same management. An MS "zone" is a set of domains or sites that the user categorizes in the same level of trust. Those are completely different things.
So when Microsoft marketing says a "zone spoofing" attack is thwarted for home users, which "zone" do they mean? To the rest of us, zone spoofing is a DOS attack on a target using DNS servers as unknowing dupes. You spoof the address of the target in a query (claiming you're the target), then the DNS servers respond to the target with a boatload of data. If the target is itself a DNS server, that can create additional attack vectors on the clients, opening the time window for race conditions as the clients time out looking for a DNS server.
What this really is is the IE7 team saying "These 'zone' thingies are stupid enough, but a home intranet zone is really superfluous". It's Window dressing. The dev team didn't fix anything, they just turned off a feature that people didn't use.
Ironically, home networks are really taking off, as more people buy firewall-router-switch combos and use multiple computers at home. Not many home users maintain web sites inside their network, and those who do have them probably don't put ActiveX crap on them.
In short, this is not duct tape. It's taking off your hubcaps so no one steals them.
It all depends on their sampling procedures.
h tm
"80% success rate" may mean that they have to discard 20% of their batches. For instance, if they sample 100 of a batch of 10,000 and 5 of them are bad, maybe they throw out that batch.
On the other hand, maybe they are finding that 2 in 10 are bad.
Even so, I think the failure rate is for initial quality. Longevity is a separate issue, having to do more with the durability of the media, not so much how well it's made. They're also struggling with hard coats for the discs; see here: http://www.manifest-tech.com/media_dvd/hard_coat.
I put mine under my keyboard.
I live in a small town in the midwestern U.S. Most folks in these parts don't reckon there's much of a need for travelin' in outer space. ("We went to the moon. Yawn. Who do the Bears play on Sunday?")
Generalizing, there's probably not a lot of constituent pressure on Congress to fund NASA. The President calls for some mission to Mars or whatever, but his base really isn't into it. The Democrats' are more focused on social programs and environmental issues - and whatever they can do to make Mr. Bush look bad. Nobody but nerds really cares about NASA.
So if NASA is too distracted by budget battles, there's probably a good reason for it. No budget, no rockets. Nobody's out there making the case for NASA as an investment in the future of humanity. I thought with all the meteor disaster movies a few years ago that there would be enough public interest in dodging giant interstellar rocks, but I think 9/11 must have captured public attention.
Yaah -- Google is teh trait0r.
Cyberterrorism is a stupid word.
But beyond that, there are easier targets.
Railroads carry tanks full of lovely chemicals like SO4 and HCl. For commercial efficiency, they often put all the tank cars together. For historical reasons, the railroads, state highways, and interstates often run close together and intersect. Not far from where I am now is an intersection of two interstate highways, two state highways, two US routes, and a railroad.
Take out the tank cars and drive away in any direction.
The poster involved in the previous post (not the most recent post but the post which is this post's parent post) has been sacked.
He may be eligible to receive unemployment compensation in the county, state, commonwealth or province in which he was formerly employed, at his former pay grade (the rate at which he was compensated for the aforementioned post)(not the most recent post but the post which is this post's parent post), times 60%.
not GTE, sorry.
I'm a former GTE customer. From a customer service and quality standpoint they were the worst company I've ever dealt with. Every time I had to deal with them they botched it.
Since they merged with Bell Atlantic and became Verizon, I'm fairly happy with them. They adopted the policy (for their customer service reps, anyway) that one way or another they wouldn't stop working until your problem was resolved.
Their prices are too high, but at least they fix whatever you tell them is wrong.
But Icahn is just trying to "flip" them, as you would a piece a furniture you got at a garage sale and put on Ebay.
I'm a father of two, and a Linux/Unix sysadmin.
I put Linux (FC4 currently) on my kids' computers. They like it just fine, and neither of them are nerds.
Strange thing, they do fight over which is better, vi or that other editor.
That's what should happen anyway, stupid patent or no stupid patent. You shouldn't be able to go to a web page and have it run whatever it wants to on your computer. This won't protect against tricking the human, but it does raise the bar slightly for classic phishing popups, viruses and spyware.
I'd say Microsoft wised up a little, except that there are probably other ways to get IE to run ActiveX without user intervention.
Adverbs. "Good" can be either an adjective or an adverb.
Do you mean as opposed to its use as a noun, as in "the common good"? I'm not sure who is opposed to turning adjectives into nouns in that way.
Or do you mean good as opposed to well? Both are adjectives. Well is for transitive verbs, but good applies to intransitive verbs. The language nazi in me chuckles to himself when some intellectual says "You look well today." Look is intransitive in that usage.
OTOH, see my frickin' sig :-). Language is a moving target. Teaching it as fixed in stone is unrealistic, but it's useful to civilization for a standard to be taught. We just need to remember that it will change regardless.
GNOME is the default in Redhat.
C got the rep for being fast and cool, because it was all about Unix, which was fast and cool. Every Unix machine (well, most) had a C compiler.
Pascal has a hand-holding feel, like you're in a little box constantly fighting the language. No pointers or similar mechanism. Abstracted strings.
Why do race cars use a manual transmission? That's why programmers use C(++): more control.
But your basic idea that Americans have a "not invented here" bias against some software is just wrong. If there is documentation in English, we don't care where it originated.
walk into a bar.
IND: We are holding world record for highest balloon pilot now.
PAK: Not you are!
IND: Yes we are. You are still third world country now.
PAK: We will still bomb you with our A-Bomb! You will be glowing ashes, while we will remain the center of human culture.
IND: You will not, you can not do any of that. You are third world country who eats the flesh of animals.
PAK: And you are stupid balloon flyers who answer the phone for your American bosses!
IND: And you are terrorists who eat dead cows! All your base are belong to us, now!
PAK: All you have are balloons to fly. That won't get you a visa to go to your American homeland!
[bouncers with blue helmets arrive, and the conversation continues as it has for centuries]
Sorry, but it did. See, I'm still chuckling oddly to myself.
Reading "good" into a Microsoft ad -- how preposterous!
Think about it.
But only when I'm too drunk to know which is which.
Sadly, the older I get the less often I get that way.
Climate change is more likely to cause greater food production than less. And it will be places like Canada and Russia that benefit the most.
Historically, man does better when it's warm.
The Earth is mostly covered in water. A lot of it is very cold, too cold for humans.
Global warming is change. So what?
I've looked into it. I know what could happen. I'm just not worried about it at all.
But when the Mother Ship is orbiting your puny planet, you will see the error in your decadent ways.
http://www.malcolm-x.org/docs/abt_noix.htm
Why is it so difficult for elected officials to see the necessity of full source code disclosure for voting machines?
It can't be that they're all on the take. It must be simple ignorance, so that when Diebold says they need to keep their source code private so they can make a profit, the officials accept it.
Still, it baffles me.
Maybe Google had some effect, but I think they were just part of the more general backlash against such ads.
Nobody but the parasuits liked them. Everyone savvy enough to know how to turn them off did so. I'd wager some people even quit web browsing over them.
Google didn't want them because 1) they slurp bandwidth and B) they can't be tracked for content and $) because they don't fit the Google "no evil" culture.
Those reasons pretty much coincide with how the rest of us saw them, too. Except for the pervs, that is. (Camera to spy on wife in shower? Ooh, baby!)