So the same code that should be removed should be moved instead. OK, I can grok that.
I'm quite a bit older than '95, having cut teeth on Windows 2.x (Excel). I much preferred DOS, as did most of the sane.
But.HLP had its own set of issues, primarily around authoring and maintenance, and the indexing sucked. And under the hood it was basically a case of supporting a bastardised HTML anywhere. I think I prefer having 1 language, and one codebase.
Also it occurred to me after I posted that if you ensure Windows has no method of interpreting HTML out of the box, then you will assuredly end up with tens or hundreds of different HTML engines. Each must be updated, patched and managed. I don't believe this is a reasonable approach. HTML is common enough that I believe it should be a basic part of a client OS.
So wait, you want indexable, cross-linked help with the ability to jump from one useful piece of information to another, just like HTML? And you want MS to remove the HTML renderer?
So, what do you want everyone writing Windows Help to do? Learn another language so you can remove a file that already (mostly) works? What about the 20 billion old help files?
"Sorry Betty, the help for Office 2007 won't work on Windows 9 because linebackn wanted the HTML libraries to be removed from Windows."
Note that there's really not a lot of benefit for anyone to write a replacement for the MSHTML library set that "drops in" and uses Gecko or WebKit. You have to implement every single function in each of the libraries - anything public at least.
Can you sue a college if their email system crashes and the email is not restored till after your paper is due? What kind of question is that? Of course not. Back up your shit if you are that worried.
I think this was the point he was making. With Exchange or Notes I have a completely separate copy of my email that I can use to recover in case of an failure up to (but not including) simultaneous failure of my PC and the server.
So is this true for the three systems being proposed? How do I do it? How hard is it to train the dumb arts student and the barely-technology-literate psychology professor to do it - given that there's not enough time to actually TALK to everyone?
As usual the information is 100% correct but not necessarily helpful.
The disk is marketed as 160GB. GB is an SI unit denoting 10^9 bytes, so you should have at least 160,000,000,000 bytes (which you do).
Your OS is reporting your 160GB disk as 160GB, it's quite clear.
You, however, have calculated that it's 149 GiB, not 149GB.
This does not always increase the security of the content - or at least, not in the ways you would expect. For example, 3DES is 3 lots of 56-bit encryption (in the form Encrypt with key A, Decrypt with key B, Encrypt with key C) yet provides only 112 bits of security not the 168 bits that might be expected.
Because no rootkit on earth could possibly replace dpkg or rpm with its own altered versions that report "Hey, everything's cool man"?
Wouldn't that be the first thing replaced by the rootkit (after inserting itself in the boot sequence)?
... I'm a little bit suspicious of the 'TRACKID' cookie. I don't remember indicating any preference for being associated with an ASCII nonce.
That's true, you didn't indicate that (and nor did I) - since it expires at the end of the session it could just be a session identifier. I don't know why they'd need it, but in two seconds I came up with the idea of caching the search results while you page through them, and storing that information in memory rather than repeating the search for each page, so I'm not too uncomfortable.
The measurement between centimetre and metre is the decimetre - 10cm or about 4 inches.
Bonus fun points, when people ask you for measurements, for using decimetres (10cm) and decametres (10m)...
With current techniques and knowledge, how can you prove that someone actually knew (as opposed to "might or could have known") about something at a given time?
For example, how do you prove that the lawyer who filed the case knew, at the time of filing the case, that the plaintiff was misrepresenting the evidence to the lawyer? The lawyer tells the client not to lie. The client lies anyway (not saying this has happened, I don't know given I'm on the other side of the world). Prove the lawyer knew. Not could have known. Not should have known. Knew.
You'll want a reasonably current version of NoScript - or if you're a Vista user, try downloading the XPI file and then drag and drop the XPI file into Firefox.
I remember having to do that to get it going the first time. After that it's been updated multiple times with no issue.
It's heavily used by Exchange Server, and the other MS products are coming onboard. The value is in the cmdlets.
Now... the delay you're seeing could be that the app is digitally signed, and Windows wants to verify the signature and cert before it starts. We saw installation time on SP1 for Exchange 2007 drop from 35 minutes to 5 minutes just by letting the server out to MS to verify the cert wasn't expired or revoked - and at the same time, PowerShell startup dropped from 30s to 2s.
I can name names, because I'm not under an NDA that applies in this space.
The database software is Oracle.
It's _just barely_ possible to make some Oracle apps run as a standard user. It takes registry hacks, file-system permission changes and a stubborn app packager to make it go, and even then you still have random stuff caused by the installation order.
That's not secure! All it takes is for someone to drain the lake, smash the concrete, blow the safe, install Windows XP Gold and connect it up to the Net without a firewall or router.
That's all child's play to your garden-variety megalo-maniac.
I mean come ON, don't you take your security seriously???
9) The systems architect 10) The dev team leader 11) The design 12) The functional specification 13) The test plan 14) The test team leader 15) The testers 16) The client
Aw crap, I didn't click POTS, AND I clicked the wrong button. @#(%&*@!^(^!!
One word: Security.
How much could you sell that computer time for? $1 per PC hour? What if the "PC" is a 200MHz PPro? A quad 3GHz monster?
Anyway, take out your costs and tell your "supplier" that for every machine they leave:
* Running your service/daemon/application; * With administrative privileges granted to your service/application - because the developers will write for "running as SYSTEM/root"; * With full access through the firewall (because the data to crunch is "out there").
They can have $0.70 per hour - let's say $10 per day.
Wow. Not.
$10 per PC per day to let someone you don't know, can't see and can't audit do anything they like in your network, from multiple PCs at once? Gosh, you're right, I don't know WHY no-one does this already. Yes, I know if there are 10,000 PCs it's $100K per day. But if you have 10,000 PCs your own corporate data, and in fact your company, is probably worth a heckuva lot more than that.
One word: Security.
How much could you sell that computer time for? $1 per PC hour? What if the "PC" is a 200MHz PPro? A quad 3GHz monster?
Anyway, take out your costs and tell your "supplier" that for every machine they leave:
* Running your service/daemon/application;
* With administrative privileges granted to your service/application - because the developers will write for "running as SYSTEM/root";
* With full access through the firewall (because the data to crunch is "out there").
They can have $0.70 per hour - let's say $10 per day.
Wow. Not.
$10 per PC per day to let someone you don't know, can't see and can't audit do anything they like in your network, from multiple PCs at once? Gosh, you're right, I don't know WHY no-one does this already. Yes, I know if there are 10,000 PCs it's $100K per day. But if you have 10,000 PCs your own corporate data, and in fact your company, is probably worth a heckuva lot more than that.
Funnily enough you can just hit the power button, as long as the machine is ACPI capable.
Windows XP sure supports it, as does Vista. I think if the screen is locked, it does not work, but then if it's locked you'd have to log in as admin anyway.
I'm not 100% certain, but I do seem to recall Linux doing the same thing, and it's also possible with *BSD.
So the only cases where "hit the power button" don't work are those in which you have to be root/Administrator. And it's those ones where the user might be running a long task.
Slashdot Mirror
So the same code that should be removed should be moved instead. OK, I can grok that.
I'm quite a bit older than '95, having cut teeth on Windows 2.x (Excel). I much preferred DOS, as did most of the sane.
But .HLP had its own set of issues, primarily around authoring and maintenance, and the indexing sucked. And under the hood it was basically a case of supporting a bastardised HTML anywhere. I think I prefer having 1 language, and one codebase.
Also it occurred to me after I posted that if you ensure Windows has no method of interpreting HTML out of the box, then you will assuredly end up with tens or hundreds of different HTML engines. Each must be updated, patched and managed. I don't believe this is a reasonable approach. HTML is common enough that I believe it should be a basic part of a client OS.
So wait, you want indexable, cross-linked help with the ability to jump from one useful piece of information to another, just like HTML? And you want MS to remove the HTML renderer?
So, what do you want everyone writing Windows Help to do? Learn another language so you can remove a file that already (mostly) works? What about the 20 billion old help files?
"Sorry Betty, the help for Office 2007 won't work on Windows 9 because linebackn wanted the HTML libraries to be removed from Windows."
Note that there's really not a lot of benefit for anyone to write a replacement for the MSHTML library set that "drops in" and uses Gecko or WebKit. You have to implement every single function in each of the libraries - anything public at least.
Can you sue a college if their email system crashes and the email is not restored till after your paper is due? What kind of question is that? Of course not. Back up your shit if you are that worried.
I think this was the point he was making. With Exchange or Notes I have a completely separate copy of my email that I can use to recover in case of an failure up to (but not including) simultaneous failure of my PC and the server.
So is this true for the three systems being proposed? How do I do it? How hard is it to train the dumb arts student and the barely-technology-literate psychology professor to do it - given that there's not enough time to actually TALK to everyone?
Frankly, no.
As usual the information is 100% correct but not necessarily helpful. The disk is marketed as 160GB. GB is an SI unit denoting 10^9 bytes, so you should have at least 160,000,000,000 bytes (which you do). Your OS is reporting your 160GB disk as 160GB, it's quite clear. You, however, have calculated that it's 149 GiB, not 149GB.
This does not always increase the security of the content - or at least, not in the ways you would expect. For example, 3DES is 3 lots of 56-bit encryption (in the form Encrypt with key A, Decrypt with key B, Encrypt with key C) yet provides only 112 bits of security not the 168 bits that might be expected.
Because no rootkit on earth could possibly replace dpkg or rpm with its own altered versions that report "Hey, everything's cool man"? Wouldn't that be the first thing replaced by the rootkit (after inserting itself in the boot sequence)?
That's true, you didn't indicate that (and nor did I) - since it expires at the end of the session it could just be a session identifier. I don't know why they'd need it, but in two seconds I came up with the idea of caching the search results while you page through them, and storing that information in memory rather than repeating the search for each page, so I'm not too uncomfortable.
The measurement between centimetre and metre is the decimetre - 10cm or about 4 inches. Bonus fun points, when people ask you for measurements, for using decimetres (10cm) and decametres (10m) ...
Oh for goodness sake, stop being sensible will you - this is Slashdot!
Actually UAC becomes a lot more usable if you install the Elevation PowerToys:
Oh for goodness sake, stop being sensible will you - this is Slashdot!
Actually UAC becomes a lot more usable if you install the Elevation PowerToys:
Oh for goodness sake, stop being sensible will you - this is Slashdot!
Actually UAC becomes a lot more usable if you install the Elevation PowerToys:
That's easy to answer.
You're not allowed. It's development ONLY. Even if you use it to access your work email, you're in violation of the EULA.
With current techniques and knowledge, how can you prove that someone actually knew (as opposed to "might or could have known") about something at a given time?
For example, how do you prove that the lawyer who filed the case knew, at the time of filing the case, that the plaintiff was misrepresenting the evidence to the lawyer? The lawyer tells the client not to lie. The client lies anyway (not saying this has happened, I don't know given I'm on the other side of the world). Prove the lawyer knew. Not could have known. Not should have known. Knew.
You'll want a reasonably current version of NoScript - or if you're a Vista user, try downloading the XPI file and then drag and drop the XPI file into Firefox.
I remember having to do that to get it going the first time. After that it's been updated multiple times with no issue.
Nah I think the UID is too old to be twitter.
It does cry out for a "-1, Mentally Disturbed" moderation though ...
Machine self-destructs for its own protection.
It's heavily used by Exchange Server, and the other MS products are coming onboard. The value is in the cmdlets.
... the delay you're seeing could be that the app is digitally signed, and Windows wants to verify the signature and cert before it starts. We saw installation time on SP1 for Exchange 2007 drop from 35 minutes to 5 minutes just by letting the server out to MS to verify the cert wasn't expired or revoked - and at the same time, PowerShell startup dropped from 30s to 2s.
Now
I can name names, because I'm not under an NDA that applies in this space.
The database software is Oracle.
It's _just barely_ possible to make some Oracle apps run as a standard user. It takes registry hacks, file-system permission changes and a stubborn app packager to make it go, and even then you still have random stuff caused by the installation order.
That's not secure! All it takes is for someone to drain the lake, smash the concrete, blow the safe, install Windows XP Gold and connect it up to the Net without a firewall or router.
That's all child's play to your garden-variety megalo-maniac.
I mean come ON, don't you take your security seriously???
You forgot:
9) The systems architect
10) The dev team leader
11) The design
12) The functional specification
13) The test plan
14) The test team leader
15) The testers
16) The client
Aw crap, I didn't click POTS, AND I clicked the wrong button. @#(%&*@!^(^!!
One word: Security.
How much could you sell that computer time for? $1 per PC hour? What if the "PC" is a 200MHz PPro? A quad 3GHz monster?
Anyway, take out your costs and tell your "supplier" that for every machine they leave:
* Running your service/daemon/application;
* With administrative privileges granted to your service/application - because the developers will write for "running as SYSTEM/root";
* With full access through the firewall (because the data to crunch is "out there").
They can have $0.70 per hour - let's say $10 per day.
Wow. Not.
$10 per PC per day to let someone you don't know, can't see and can't audit do anything they like in your network, from multiple PCs at once? Gosh, you're right, I don't know WHY no-one does this already. Yes, I know if there are 10,000 PCs it's $100K per day. But if you have 10,000 PCs your own corporate data, and in fact your company, is probably worth a heckuva lot more than that.
One word: Security. How much could you sell that computer time for? $1 per PC hour? What if the "PC" is a 200MHz PPro? A quad 3GHz monster? Anyway, take out your costs and tell your "supplier" that for every machine they leave: * Running your service/daemon/application; * With administrative privileges granted to your service/application - because the developers will write for "running as SYSTEM/root"; * With full access through the firewall (because the data to crunch is "out there"). They can have $0.70 per hour - let's say $10 per day. Wow. Not. $10 per PC per day to let someone you don't know, can't see and can't audit do anything they like in your network, from multiple PCs at once? Gosh, you're right, I don't know WHY no-one does this already. Yes, I know if there are 10,000 PCs it's $100K per day. But if you have 10,000 PCs your own corporate data, and in fact your company, is probably worth a heckuva lot more than that.
Funnily enough you can just hit the power button, as long as the machine is ACPI capable.
Windows XP sure supports it, as does Vista. I think if the screen is locked, it does not work, but then if it's locked you'd have to log in as admin anyway.
I'm not 100% certain, but I do seem to recall Linux doing the same thing, and it's also possible with *BSD.
So the only cases where "hit the power button" don't work are those in which you have to be root/Administrator. And it's those ones where the user might be running a long task.
Yes but you don't own the Eiffel Tower, or its lighting.
These people do own their cars.