A blocklist generated by logging failed attempts would be the best solution for this. Not only would it be fairly successful in blocking known bad-hosts (with a fixed ip address anyway...) it would also be interesting to cross-link the data against known spam-hosts to see if theres any correlation. It would add credence to both blacklists and could decrease the effectiveness of the botnets.
On the other hand this could just be evidence that the spammers are feeling the economic downturn and have found a few cycles to spare. The attacks can easily be optimized; how many ssh servers allow an amanda to login?
This sounds like an upgrade to the 'windows tour/first run' concept. High end peripheral makers will not want to present their brand in the same UI/channel that any usb gimzmo maker can. USB gizmo makers may, of course, unite and provide us with a common (and well documented...!) interface to their toys....
If you thought the stock file chooser was confusing wait until you see the modified abomination found in File Roller (aka Archive Manager on some distros).
Microsoft claim to be all about 'letting the customer choose' when they talk about, well, just about anything really. Why oh why won't they let the customer choose that companies that make shitty installers probably make shitty software too?
I spent an hour trying to install a "signed" Adobe app without any success today. Like everything else MS makes those licenses seem to come with no guarantees whatsoever. If you think this licensing scam is anything but a tax on software developers and intended as a hindrance to free (both libre and gratis) software developers you really need to sit down and think it through again. For all their talk MS has always worked towards a "IT ecosystem" consisting a handful of well entrenched monopolies (both in hardware and software). Even if the bozo that dreamed this one up had good intentions the accountants and shareholders won't fail to see this as a "good thing"
Games companies are obviously in a far more competitive market than MS Windows is and are selling to a different audience. For them it may make sense to punt out their games at cut price before they end support (or even after) in order to gain more interest for the newest version (up to date sport teams/ new graphics/ new adventures etc). You can generally pick up cheaper slightly older versions of antivirius programs in the run up to a new version, etc. etc. It's not uncommon.
However, things are different when your product's main competitor is your old product. If you're a monopolist you'd be pretty stupid to launch a price war on yourself. Especially given that the purpose of the product is merely to run other programs, most people don't need a new OS if all it does is run the same programs they use already. You and I may think of the OS as a mere commodity, a monopolist certainly doesn't and hence there aren't any win2k copies in bucket bins.
Old horizon is indeed great television, as are their BBC Nature programmes for example. It's just their news and current affairs division that galls me really, highly overrated stuff. If all you can get is BBC Prime or World it's worth visiting mvgroup.org and thebox.bz. Most all the shows broadcast by the beeb that are worth seeing are 'broadcast' there, including as I'm happy to note that Richard Feynman interview on mvgroup (thanks for the tip of it's existence, I'm looking forwards to watching it).
As for seeing TV of that quality produced locally, I guess if 'genius' is a term reserved for hookers and props then you're out of luck:D
Microsoft's greatest competitor in the marketplace is Microsoft themselves. Software doesn't age or wear out like a car or a washing machine, so theoretically it's just as good when it's 10 years old as it was new. A retail software company thus needs to give customers a reason to purchase a new license.
This tends to end up in either the form of new features, a new look or by breaking the old one (aka dropping support). If a software company were to franchise it out to a support company they would only be shooting themselves in the foot, as their customers would not have a reason to upgrade to any new version they've released. Major MS upgrades are a boon to both soft- and hardware companies. The hardware industry is happy because new windwos always demands faster pc's. Software companies are given a valid excuse to drop support for old versions. Customer loyalty being what it is this is a great boon for them. Microsoft delaying Vista for long is bound to have pissed off a lot of them, I'm sure they'd all want a far more regular update cycle for this very reason.
RAM expansion could be nice, but given that it has a smaller screen and less/no moving parts than ordinary laptops what I'd really like to see is a longer battery life, 3 hours seems kinda short.
Aye, it's still better than a kick in the teeth, I must confess to watching it regularly. It's atleast 50% good, the guests they get are the ones one would generally like to see and most are media savvy enough to get their point across despite the incessant heckling (or fawning) by Stephen Sackur.
And one more thing: Try to switch from English to Chinese user interfaces in Windows. Even during mid-session! Not possible?
I used to be able to tell when my XP using Chinese colleague attempted to perform this feat by the groans coming from the other side of the office we shared. He used the phrase 'it just works' to describe it, meaning it just about worked but was a total pain in the ass.
Wow, Hardtalk?! I find that one of the most dispicable/vile propaganda shows on the BBC. Their questioning goes right along 'the party line'. It even follows an amusing pattern: people who are critical of the government or the powers that be have their credibility undermined in the opening few minutes, are allowed to attempt to get their point across albeit whilst being heckled with the same vacuous agitprop questions in the middle section the show. The final segment involves summing up the conversation whilst repeating the same pathetic criticism again no matter whether or not those criticisms have been thoroughly debunked by the interviewee. If the interviewee threatens to pull the rug out from under the host with whatever is the realistic answer they'll swiftly change the topic or throw in some negative references.
In the case of them interviewing a government official or some such it's the exact opposite. They'll ask a few mildly criticial questions, the most caustic of which will be about halfway through, but you can guarantee the host will do their damndest to avoid asking the one or two questions that everyone would really like to be asked. Softtalk would be a better name for it in this case.
Hardtalk is glitzy but pandering agitprop that not critical/quality reporting, far more so even than regular BBC reporting. The way it's presented makes it quite insidious, all I can suggest is you try to catch an episode where you know the subject matter and person being interviewed well and you'll see what I mean.
Would someone who thought capitalism was benign have this to say about the central tendency of it:
"All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind." ?
Quote lifted from "AN INQUIRY INTO THE NATURE AND CAUSES OF THE WEALTH OF NATIONS." on project gutenberg.
The parent post could well have been #1 though. All you need to see is the byline (Matt Hartley) to know that the article is going to be complete drivel.
The mistake you're making is the same on the BBC is: thinking in terms of different OS's/vendors. A platform such as a streaming media has no business depending on an OS/vendor. The correct way to think about it is in terms of the underlying technology. To give an example here's an often rehashed argument:
The platform can be OS/vendor based like say.doc(x) is. It depends on XML but also on Office which depends on Windows which, essentially, depends on Intel based chips. It is at the vendor's behest to support other platforms.
The alternative, ODF, also depends on XML. In addition it use various other standards such as SVG, MathML etc. There is no dependency on any particular piece of software or vendor, meaning it is easily implementable by anyone who feels like it. If, for some reason, a particular OS doesn't support one of those standardised technologies then it can be added by the creator/vendor of that OS. If this isn't possible then most likely the OS itself isnt' capable of streaming the media in the first place.
In other words: WTF?? No BBC streams on my BBC Micro???
Same thing happened here. As we're on the topic of confessions anyway, heres another:
I've used somebody elses rfid ID card to enter my workplace for over 6 months. I'm glad to say I've not suffered any harm whatsoever, perhaps I can stop worrying about not wearing a tinfoil hat. I did however, steal the card when I lost mine, proving that the ZDNet blog post that I didn't read is total bunk.
The funniest thing of all is that the MS ttf fonts are freely available, just not freely distributable. On debian they're a mere 'apt-get install msttcorefonts' away, Gentoo calls them something along the lines of ttf-corefonts. In both cases the fonts will be fetched from MS' site and installed/loaded without any further configuration needed. You don't get Tahoma, but I've personally not come across a.doc document that caused problems in OOo because the original author used that font.
Slashdot Mirror
A blocklist generated by logging failed attempts would be the best solution for this. Not only would it be fairly successful in blocking known bad-hosts (with a fixed ip address anyway...) it would also be interesting to cross-link the data against known spam-hosts to see if theres any correlation. It would add credence to both blacklists and could decrease the effectiveness of the botnets.
On the other hand this could just be evidence that the spammers are feeling the economic downturn and have found a few cycles to spare. The attacks can easily be optimized; how many ssh servers allow an amanda to login?
This sounds like an upgrade to the 'windows tour/first run' concept. High end peripheral makers will not want to present their brand in the same UI/channel that any usb gimzmo maker can. USB gizmo makers may, of course, unite and provide us with a common (and well documented...!) interface to their toys....
It's a pity the software testing team doesn't do as good of a job.
But can you unmount the partition windows is installed on when it's in sleep mode??
If you thought the stock file chooser was confusing wait until you see the modified abomination found in File Roller (aka Archive Manager on some distros).
Microsoft claim to be all about 'letting the customer choose' when they talk about, well, just about anything really. Why oh why won't they let the customer choose that companies that make shitty installers probably make shitty software too?
I spent an hour trying to install a "signed" Adobe app without any success today. Like everything else MS makes those licenses seem to come with no guarantees whatsoever. If you think this licensing scam is anything but a tax on software developers and intended as a hindrance to free (both libre and gratis) software developers you really need to sit down and think it through again. For all their talk MS has always worked towards a "IT ecosystem" consisting a handful of well entrenched monopolies (both in hardware and software). Even if the bozo that dreamed this one up had good intentions the accountants and shareholders won't fail to see this as a "good thing"
Indeed, only in MS Office-land does a bug == a feature
Perhaps it's just what the author uses at work or home and he can't be arsed dealing with it/doesn't want to risk infecting himself/his friends.
Games companies are obviously in a far more competitive market than MS Windows is and are selling to a different audience. For them it may make sense to punt out their games at cut price before they end support (or even after) in order to gain more interest for the newest version (up to date sport teams/ new graphics/ new adventures etc). You can generally pick up cheaper slightly older versions of antivirius programs in the run up to a new version, etc. etc. It's not uncommon.
However, things are different when your product's main competitor is your old product. If you're a monopolist you'd be pretty stupid to launch a price war on yourself. Especially given that the purpose of the product is merely to run other programs, most people don't need a new OS if all it does is run the same programs they use already. You and I may think of the OS as a mere commodity, a monopolist certainly doesn't and hence there aren't any win2k copies in bucket bins.
Old horizon is indeed great television, as are their BBC Nature programmes for example. It's just their news and current affairs division that galls me really, highly overrated stuff. If all you can get is BBC Prime or World it's worth visiting mvgroup.org and thebox.bz. Most all the shows broadcast by the beeb that are worth seeing are 'broadcast' there, including as I'm happy to note that Richard Feynman interview on mvgroup (thanks for the tip of it's existence, I'm looking forwards to watching it).
As for seeing TV of that quality produced locally, I guess if 'genius' is a term reserved for hookers and props then you're out of luck :D
Microsoft's greatest competitor in the marketplace is Microsoft themselves. Software doesn't age or wear out like a car or a washing machine, so theoretically it's just as good when it's 10 years old as it was new. A retail software company thus needs to give customers a reason to purchase a new license.
This tends to end up in either the form of new features, a new look or by breaking the old one (aka dropping support). If a software company were to franchise it out to a support company they would only be shooting themselves in the foot, as their customers would not have a reason to upgrade to any new version they've released. Major MS upgrades are a boon to both soft- and hardware companies. The hardware industry is happy because new windwos always demands faster pc's. Software companies are given a valid excuse to drop support for old versions. Customer loyalty being what it is this is a great boon for them. Microsoft delaying Vista for long is bound to have pissed off a lot of them, I'm sure they'd all want a far more regular update cycle for this very reason.
RAM expansion could be nice, but given that it has a smaller screen and less/no moving parts than ordinary laptops what I'd really like to see is a longer battery life, 3 hours seems kinda short.
Aye, it's still better than a kick in the teeth, I must confess to watching it regularly. It's atleast 50% good, the guests they get are the ones one would generally like to see and most are media savvy enough to get their point across despite the incessant heckling (or fawning) by Stephen Sackur.
I don't see how your .Net programming explains how they stifle innovation.... is it mind numbingly boring?
Damn I just ran out of mod points, but here's a +1 Funny/Insightful. Pity the ISP that wants to perform deep packet inspection on patch tuesday!
Wow, Hardtalk?! I find that one of the most dispicable/vile propaganda shows on the BBC. Their questioning goes right along 'the party line'. It even follows an amusing pattern: people who are critical of the government or the powers that be have their credibility undermined in the opening few minutes, are allowed to attempt to get their point across albeit whilst being heckled with the same vacuous agitprop questions in the middle section the show. The final segment involves summing up the conversation whilst repeating the same pathetic criticism again no matter whether or not those criticisms have been thoroughly debunked by the interviewee. If the interviewee threatens to pull the rug out from under the host with whatever is the realistic answer they'll swiftly change the topic or throw in some negative references. In the case of them interviewing a government official or some such it's the exact opposite. They'll ask a few mildly criticial questions, the most caustic of which will be about halfway through, but you can guarantee the host will do their damndest to avoid asking the one or two questions that everyone would really like to be asked. Softtalk would be a better name for it in this case. Hardtalk is glitzy but pandering agitprop that not critical/quality reporting, far more so even than regular BBC reporting. The way it's presented makes it quite insidious, all I can suggest is you try to catch an episode where you know the subject matter and person being interviewed well and you'll see what I mean.
Chuck Norris? Wasn't he popular 30 years ago?? Jeez you are old!
The parent post could well have been #1 though. All you need to see is the byline (Matt Hartley) to know that the article is going to be complete drivel.
Nor any of the previous administrations, for that matter.
The mistake you're making is the same on the BBC is: thinking in terms of different OS's/vendors. A platform such as a streaming media has no business depending on an OS/vendor. The correct way to think about it is in terms of the underlying technology. To give an example here's an often rehashed argument:
The platform can be OS/vendor based like say .doc(x) is. It depends on XML but also on Office which depends on Windows which, essentially, depends on Intel based chips. It is at the vendor's behest to support other platforms.
The alternative, ODF, also depends on XML. In addition it use various other standards such as SVG, MathML etc. There is no dependency on any particular piece of software or vendor, meaning it is easily implementable by anyone who feels like it. If, for some reason, a particular OS doesn't support one of those standardised technologies then it can be added by the creator/vendor of that OS. If this isn't possible then most likely the OS itself isnt' capable of streaming the media in the first place.
In other words: WTF?? No BBC streams on my BBC Micro???
Same thing happened here. As we're on the topic of confessions anyway, heres another:
I've used somebody elses rfid ID card to enter my workplace for over 6 months. I'm glad to say I've not suffered any harm whatsoever, perhaps I can stop worrying about not wearing a tinfoil hat. I did however, steal the card when I lost mine, proving that the ZDNet blog post that I didn't read is total bunk.
The funniest thing of all is that the MS ttf fonts are freely available, just not freely distributable. On debian they're a mere 'apt-get install msttcorefonts' away, Gentoo calls them something along the lines of ttf-corefonts. In both cases the fonts will be fetched from MS' site and installed/loaded without any further configuration needed. You don't get Tahoma, but I've personally not come across a .doc document that caused problems in OOo because the original author used that font.