I really can't think of any other software where this is the case.
I've seen plenty. It's also what happens just about every time you install from a retail package. And that's the GOOD software that has updates at all.
Just about every binary distribution on windows is doing something similar these days. Short of someone building a proper, open, distributed, secure package manager for windows, they're probably doing the best they can by having updates at all. It's better than having to go check the webpage for corrections.
That said, if this kind of complaint becomes more common, and all software is seen as flawed in this regard, then it'll be a great push towards proper package management on windows.
Is it the code to the Launchpad site itself? Like I could use a copy of it to manage and track bugs and development on my own projects?
Yes.
As far as I can tell from my limited browse of Launchpad, it seems like an alternative to Sourceforge no?
There already were alternatives to sourceforge. Google GNU Savanna, for instance, which is running the same software (sourceforge runs a commercial fork of the original code iirc).
It's seriously scary that this guy was basically in debtors prison for 14 years! Wasn't it a bit obvious after say 6-12 months that the guy either didn't have the money or wasn't going to ever hand it over?
That's not even the scary part. The scary part is that, if you don't believe in the criminal justice system, and refuse to be judged by it (say, without the judge sitting down with you as a reasonable adult and coming to some mutual understanding), they'll just take your life away anyhow. So basically, you're entitled to justice as long as you play along with THEIR definition of justice.
But when the teacher told me that what I said was inappropriate, and I asked my parents about it later, I - at least as far as I could at that time - understood what was up and I didn't do it again. That's all that needed to happen... Kids really can be quite understanding if you give actual explanations beyond "BECAUSE WE SAID SO".
Yep, that's pretty much my view as well. The only difference is that, I've seen parents happily teach kids that it's OK to be hateful or to have destructive coping mechanisms, because they don't see the impact and think "it's all just a bit of fun". I'm just saying, when those situations arise, teachers (and the community as a whole) should be able to step in and educate the parent about how they're raising the child, considering that the child will soon be faced with integrating into the community.
That's pretty unrealistic. That means that the ONLY money he'll make from the game is during the game's development. Three cheers to people who do make open source games and all, but your solution is not really a solution for most people.
I'm not promoting this as a solution. I think the whole proposal the guy's making is pretty unlikely. What I'm doing is pointing out one of the reasons why it won't work.
Indeed. If you were really just funding development (rather than buying a percentage of the rights/profits, which I would not advise) then you'd probably at least want some sort of staged-delivery escrow system. That way, the developer would be paid monthly or whatever, when they meet targets. Without the game being open sourced and hosted openly though with public code auditing and all, all of that paid work could go down the crapper easily. The developers would simply be able to say they've hit a wall, can't continue, and don't want to be paid any more. It's much easier to start a project and work on it for a while, than to actually deliver a finished project.
Which are all valid points, if expressed in an immature style that you'd expect from most teenagers.
Another interesting aspect is that, if any contract was involved... would gamers be bound to it, since many are minors? And if no contract is involved... what guarantees would they have?
The guy wants to make money in advance. To pay for his living expenses etc. WHILE he works on it. But my point is that it's not about everything he wants, if he's asking for community help --- it's about what's good for the community too.
People do pay for games right now, even those that they play once and those that won't be available for their multi-Cell watchphone in 15 years
They certainly do. However, asking people to be venture capitalists for a game project requires a little more in return than just asking them to buy a complete, well tested game that other people have played, reviewed, and said they got something out of. Most venture capitalists would be asking for at least a share of the project's rights (including related trademarks, merchandising, etc), AND its profits.
I agreed with you (but thought it was all very obvious) up to this point:
I remember a friend of mine getting suspended in elementary school for saying "I wish you would die" to someone who had been bullying them.
Actually, I think it IS a horrible and dangerous attitude when a kid says something like that. It may not be much of a threat then, but it shows that the child is being allowed to mature without the necessary coping skills for teenage and adult relationships, which she'll one day have to deal with. I think the parent who taught the kid this kind of attitude should be focused on more than the kid, but definitely, I think kids with this sort of behaviour should be detected, taken aside, and taught a wiser approach to life.
You (and many slashdotters) might think this sounds like some 1984 style central control thing. However, really, if we don't do this, we're quite simply failing in fundamental aspects education that a child needs to know.
Well all they've gotta do is start an open source project for it, like blender, and make sure it's something that can continue to develop so it's worth the investment. No one wants to invest in a projec they play once, or that won't be available for their multi-Cell watchphone in 15 years.
there is simply not enough data in my statement to precisely categorize what I said
Except that you ended your sentence with a full stop which marked your sentence complete...
I will expand on it if it helps you: I do not care what happens to dead bodies, for they are only containers for consciousness.
...making this an entirely different statement. It might well be that it's entirely different only because your initial statement was lazily incomplete, but that's a self-representation issue on your part.
(never mind, fuck it, this conversation got boring.)
No shit;) You didn't really imagine that starting a conversation with "...don't give a shit..." would lead to an interesting follow-up discussion, did you?
Hyper-virtualisation. Running OS's under other OS's. In other words, this is a patch for Linux to make it run well on Microsoft systems, so customers will feel less need to actually install Linux on servers. It's not a friendly gesture to make normal Linux systems work better, as the title suggests.
What's the difference between having a robot eat the guy, and leaving the guy to be eaten by the crows, coyotes, vultures, or whatever other detrivores are common place wherever you are.
Go read some philosophy and/or spirituality if you really want an answer to that (or just debate on it). It's WAY out of scope for this discussion, and frankly, it's something I expect civilised people to have already studied somewhat.
Even neanderthals know that regardless of the application, if someone has acquired physical access to your home you're pretty much fucked.
[citation needed];)
Without doing the math, it seems like it would take a small-ish number of tries to deduce the pattern (since we're only talking about seven segment digits here), but probably more than a normal user would expect to be able to try without being locked out of the system. If they do discover the window, then they have broken the scheme completely. Compare to SecurID, where it would be intractable to figure out the random seed based solely on the tokens generated.
You pretty much made my case for me here.
On the other hand, in both cases it only takes entering in a password/token combo into a phishing site once and the attacker then has a valid password for as long as that code is valid -- ~30s on a SecurID, more than long enough to gain access to the protected system.
Granted, but phishing is an entirely different thing --- more of a social attack that most technologies are susceptible too, than a cryptographic attack. It can and should be separately dealt with through user education, antivirus, proxies, etc.
So while it's not a direct 1:1 replacement for SecurID, it isn't all that much worse, and much better than 1-factor authentication.
Yep, no argument that it's better than 1-factor auth. Especially better than the normal approach of unchanging passwords based on the user's kid's name/DOB. Pretty much anything is better than that though.
Slashdot Mirror
I've seen plenty. It's also what happens just about every time you install from a retail package. And that's the GOOD software that has updates at all.
Just about every binary distribution on windows is doing something similar these days. Short of someone building a proper, open, distributed, secure package manager for windows, they're probably doing the best they can by having updates at all. It's better than having to go check the webpage for corrections.
That said, if this kind of complaint becomes more common, and all software is seen as flawed in this regard, then it'll be a great push towards proper package management on windows.
Yes.
There already were alternatives to sourceforge. Google GNU Savanna, for instance, which is running the same software (sourceforge runs a commercial fork of the original code iirc).
Done. Unfortunately you won't notice judge, because you're bent too.
That's not even the scary part. The scary part is that, if you don't believe in the criminal justice system, and refuse to be judged by it (say, without the judge sitting down with you as a reasonable adult and coming to some mutual understanding), they'll just take your life away anyhow. So basically, you're entitled to justice as long as you play along with THEIR definition of justice.
Why do you think they put a server into every Opera browser?
Yep, that's pretty much my view as well. The only difference is that, I've seen parents happily teach kids that it's OK to be hateful or to have destructive coping mechanisms, because they don't see the impact and think "it's all just a bit of fun". I'm just saying, when those situations arise, teachers (and the community as a whole) should be able to step in and educate the parent about how they're raising the child, considering that the child will soon be faced with integrating into the community.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/377005
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubunet/+bug/375345
I'm not promoting this as a solution. I think the whole proposal the guy's making is pretty unlikely. What I'm doing is pointing out one of the reasons why it won't work.
Indeed. If you were really just funding development (rather than buying a percentage of the rights/profits, which I would not advise) then you'd probably at least want some sort of staged-delivery escrow system. That way, the developer would be paid monthly or whatever, when they meet targets. Without the game being open sourced and hosted openly though with public code auditing and all, all of that paid work could go down the crapper easily. The developers would simply be able to say they've hit a wall, can't continue, and don't want to be paid any more. It's much easier to start a project and work on it for a while, than to actually deliver a finished project.
See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer
I think the general plan is to lament how this could be possible, despite the fact that everyone ignored the possibility.
Which are all valid points, if expressed in an immature style that you'd expect from most teenagers.
Another interesting aspect is that, if any contract was involved... would gamers be bound to it, since many are minors? And if no contract is involved... what guarantees would they have?
The guy wants to make money in advance. To pay for his living expenses etc. WHILE he works on it. But my point is that it's not about everything he wants, if he's asking for community help --- it's about what's good for the community too.
They certainly do. However, asking people to be venture capitalists for a game project requires a little more in return than just asking them to buy a complete, well tested game that other people have played, reviewed, and said they got something out of. Most venture capitalists would be asking for at least a share of the project's rights (including related trademarks, merchandising, etc), AND its profits.
I agreed with you (but thought it was all very obvious) up to this point:
Actually, I think it IS a horrible and dangerous attitude when a kid says something like that. It may not be much of a threat then, but it shows that the child is being allowed to mature without the necessary coping skills for teenage and adult relationships, which she'll one day have to deal with. I think the parent who taught the kid this kind of attitude should be focused on more than the kid, but definitely, I think kids with this sort of behaviour should be detected, taken aside, and taught a wiser approach to life.
You (and many slashdotters) might think this sounds like some 1984 style central control thing. However, really, if we don't do this, we're quite simply failing in fundamental aspects education that a child needs to know.
Well all they've gotta do is start an open source project for it, like blender, and make sure it's something that can continue to develop so it's worth the investment. No one wants to invest in a projec they play once, or that won't be available for their multi-Cell watchphone in 15 years.
Keep telling yourself that ;)
Ahh, the Choruses for Devils Choir. Such sweet tones.
Except that you ended your sentence with a full stop which marked your sentence complete...
No shit ;) You didn't really imagine that starting a conversation with "...don't give a shit..." would lead to an interesting follow-up discussion, did you?
So yeah, let's drop it.
Like most slashdotters then.
Pretty poor actually. At least learn nihilism and do it right.
Hyper-virtualisation. Running OS's under other OS's. In other words, this is a patch for Linux to make it run well on Microsoft systems, so customers will feel less need to actually install Linux on servers. It's not a friendly gesture to make normal Linux systems work better, as the title suggests.
Go read some philosophy and/or spirituality if you really want an answer to that (or just debate on it). It's WAY out of scope for this discussion, and frankly, it's something I expect civilised people to have already studied somewhat.
[citation needed] ;)
You pretty much made my case for me here.
Granted, but phishing is an entirely different thing --- more of a social attack that most technologies are susceptible too, than a cryptographic attack. It can and should be separately dealt with through user education, antivirus, proxies, etc.
Yep, no argument that it's better than 1-factor auth. Especially better than the normal approach of unchanging passwords based on the user's kid's name/DOB. Pretty much anything is better than that though.