Negligence is when your build instructions don't work. so you expect people to test thier build on every version of every linux distro or even every unix-like system out there?
that is one of the downsides of a system like linux, all the distros are different so you can't gaurantee that what works on one will work on all of them.
the difference is that the republicans still have the president and the president still has the veto, it can be overriden but only by a larger majority than the democrats hold.
so the fact that the republicans have the presidency and the dems only have a slim majority in the senate means that neither party can pass a bill without at least some cooperation from the other.
most people at least in the west (i have heared that there is a competing system arround that is better suited to eastern languages but i don't know the details) have thier system set up to resolve ICANN tlds and ONLY ICANN tlds.
so if you want your website visible to most people it has to be under an ICANN tld
this is what prevents the success of the alternative roots
If someone is faking the CC license, chances are they are impersonating the author. Fat lot of good checking with that guy will do you. i'd imagine most people would be far more reluctant to sign a statement knowing they had no right to do so than to slap a similar notice on a website.
Particularly under XP if E: is mapped to a network share and a USB is put in it also mounts to E: meaning the share has to be unmapped for the USB to be accessible. you don't happen to be using netware do you? I was under the impression that particular issue only happened with netware network drives.
you can move your usb drive to a different letter manually fairly easilly (administrative tools-computer management-disk management then right click the parition and select change drive letter and paths), unfortunately though you will have to do this seperately for every different usb drive you plug in.
maybe i was overly harsh, being made to use software that pisses me off tends to make me hate it even more.
the really big issue i remember was it seems that thier error highlighting was treated as if it were selected text so you wen't to fix the error it pointed out and bang your whole line is gone.
there was also the fact it would only report one error per compile cycle.
and the fact that iirc if you forciblly terminated the user app using the control in bluej then bluej had to be restarted before things would start working again.
you might consider theese things small but its issues like that that to me define the difference between software that is a pleasure to use and software that makes me extremely pissed off.
hmm, i was under the impression that express was aimed at home tinkerers, students working at home and possiblly low end in house development.
any educational establishment thats a ms shop will almost certainly have the proper visual studio on thier machines under something like "campus agreement" and may also have it availible for students to install on thier own machines under "msdn acedemic advantage".
yes but lots of software is written by code monkeys.
and even taking those who can learn another platform (i tend to think that systems like java are best considered as thier own platforms), learning a new platform is a lot of work and something people are unlikely to do unless given a compelling reason to do so.
so yes in the grand scheme of things which tools students get taught is very significant.
its also a buggy heap of shit with only one novel feature thats worth having afaict (the ability to create objects and play arround with them through a nice gui)
trouble with penalties like that is if you apply the penalty to the company you just end up with companies creating subsidaries to do all thier patent applications for them.
Does 'Monopoly Suit' mean 'pass' in your world? monopoly suit that was dropped after a new administration took over sure does!
MS hasn't been banned from selling thier stuff anywhere, hasn't payed thier fines imposed by the eu (iirc), was allowed to sell "reduced media edition" at the same price skirting arround the underlying issue and so on.
I'd call that a pass.
Sure they've had to pay some lawyers and make some minor concessions but thats a drop in the bucket compared to the real issue that MS has set themselves up in a position where for many uses there is little choice but to buy thier product (if i point out examples people will just fob them off as "specialist" but the fact is all but the bottom tier of user use something specialist whether its a market specific app or something in house or whatever) and with every release they can slowly crank up the price and the intrusive anti-piracy measures despite the rest of the components in a PC going down.
yeah a more accurate term would be "the major labels", the RIAA and its counterpart organisations arround the world are just the negotiating arms of the major labels cartel.
assuming the padding step is some form of preprocessing that only affects the last block you just do your collision finding on a version of sha1 with the padding step removed, then you add the trailers complete with the correct padding for the length of prefix+random block+trailer
but presumablly if too many people try that the distribution cuircuit will start tripping regularlly and questions will start being asked, probablly resulting in some soloution like current limiting the individual points to a value just big enough to power engine heaters and/or metering the points.
the biggest being that electricity carries HUGE economies of scale.
another being that backup local generation plus third party power most of the time carries a lower total cost than complete local generation, i doubt you could say the same about data systems.
another being that grid electricity at least in the west is amazingly reliable. far far more reliable than most peoples connection to the internet or thier isps connection to googles servers.
the big issue though is that It stuff doesn't just provide you with services it stores your data too. If they leak it how are you to know? if they refuse to give it back then you are in really deep shit.
finally i should note that in most of the world grid electricity is tightly regulated partly because so many people are so reliant on it.
It's because the "suits" mostly come from a background of S&M (sales & marketing) and have a deep-seated resentment being at the mercy of in-house IT from days of their pasts. so what you are saying is that crippling lusers desktops while a good idea short term doesn't turn out to have been such a good idea when those lusers become your management?
if you don't consider "DoS, cause computer to crash with possibility of arbitrary code execution..." to be a serious security issue you have very very low standards. They can crash your machine causing you to lose any data you have open and potentially they can get complete control over your machine instead if they can get the exploit details just right.
i belive there is a working example out there of the technique i just mentioned for MD5 and SHA1 operates on the same basic principles so it should be possible there as well given enough computing power to find a SHA1 collision (which right now is in the realm of possible but hard).
As i said MD5, SHA1 and thier ilk all work in blocks, you take a set of starting values (eqivilent to hashing the previous blocks in your file) and a block of data and you get a new block out the end (there is also a little preprocessing to deal with files that are not a whole number of blocks in length but that doesn't really concern us here)
The result of this is it is no harder to find a collision for two files starting with your header block and following it with a block of random junk than it is to find two blocks that collide when placed at the start of the file.
and if your two files start with the header block followed by one of your colliding blocks followed by the same data those two files will also collide since the starting values for subsequent blocks will be the same.
with md5 and sha you essentially run the process on a block of data at a time using the results from one block as a set of "starting values" when doing the next block.
you choose a format (pdf is a good one) where you can easilly build conditionals into the document structure.
then you prepare a header which is a whole number of blocks in size and run it through your md5 calculator.
Then you run your collision searcher telling it what starting values you want to find a collision for. This then produces two blocks of random data which when added to the end of the headers give the same MD5.
then you prepare the rest of your document which is really two different documents with a conditional to check something in the random blocks and display one or the other. you add this to the end.
the result is two pdfs with contents of your choice which have the same md5.
Slashdot Mirror
98 CDs (at least all the ones i handled, i have heared reports from others that upgrade ones weren't) are bootable.
and when 95 was released i don't think any bioses supported CD booting.
Negligence is when your build instructions don't work.
so you expect people to test thier build on every version of every linux distro or even every unix-like system out there?
that is one of the downsides of a system like linux, all the distros are different so you can't gaurantee that what works on one will work on all of them.
the difference is that the republicans still have the president and the president still has the veto, it can be overriden but only by a larger majority than the democrats hold.
so the fact that the republicans have the presidency and the dems only have a slim majority in the senate means that neither party can pass a bill without at least some cooperation from the other.
most people at least in the west (i have heared that there is a competing system arround that is better suited to eastern languages but i don't know the details) have thier system set up to resolve ICANN tlds and ONLY ICANN tlds.
so if you want your website visible to most people it has to be under an ICANN tld
this is what prevents the success of the alternative roots
If someone is faking the CC license, chances are they are impersonating the author. Fat lot of good checking with that guy will do you.
i'd imagine most people would be far more reluctant to sign a statement knowing they had no right to do so than to slap a similar notice on a website.
Particularly under XP if E: is mapped to a network share and a USB is put in it also mounts to E: meaning the share has to be unmapped for the USB to be accessible.
you don't happen to be using netware do you? I was under the impression that particular issue only happened with netware network drives.
you can move your usb drive to a different letter manually fairly easilly (administrative tools-computer management-disk management then right click the parition and select change drive letter and paths), unfortunately though you will have to do this seperately for every different usb drive you plug in.
i'm assuming here that the flashing software is dos based.
/s
if you have a windows 98 box and a windows 98 driver for your external hdd enclosure then it should be possible to do it.
alternatively get an IDE to laptop IDE adaptor and do it after booting from a windows 98 startup disk
either way use fdisk to partition the drive as one big primary partition
then do format :
the hard drive should now boot with windows 98's version of dos, you can now add anything you like to it.
maybe i was overly harsh, being made to use software that pisses me off tends to make me hate it even more.
the really big issue i remember was it seems that thier error highlighting was treated as if it were selected text so you wen't to fix the error it pointed out and bang your whole line is gone.
there was also the fact it would only report one error per compile cycle.
and the fact that iirc if you forciblly terminated the user app using the control in bluej then bluej had to be restarted before things would start working again.
you might consider theese things small but its issues like that that to me define the difference between software that is a pleasure to use and software that makes me extremely pissed off.
hmm, i was under the impression that express was aimed at home tinkerers, students working at home and possiblly low end in house development.
any educational establishment thats a ms shop will almost certainly have the proper visual studio on thier machines under something like "campus agreement" and may also have it availible for students to install on thier own machines under "msdn acedemic advantage".
yes but lots of software is written by code monkeys.
and even taking those who can learn another platform (i tend to think that systems like java are best considered as thier own platforms), learning a new platform is a lot of work and something people are unlikely to do unless given a compelling reason to do so.
so yes in the grand scheme of things which tools students get taught is very significant.
its also a buggy heap of shit with only one novel feature thats worth having afaict (the ability to create objects and play arround with them through a nice gui)
I imagine if MSFT stock instantly folded he wouldn't be a happy camper.
he'd certainly lose a lot but i'd imagine he'd still be a bloody rich man.
personally i think both first to invent and first to file suck.
independent invention before patent granted nullifies patent would be a much better system.
trouble with penalties like that is if you apply the penalty to the company you just end up with companies creating subsidaries to do all thier patent applications for them.
Does 'Monopoly Suit' mean 'pass' in your world?
monopoly suit that was dropped after a new administration took over sure does!
MS hasn't been banned from selling thier stuff anywhere, hasn't payed thier fines imposed by the eu (iirc), was allowed to sell "reduced media edition" at the same price skirting arround the underlying issue and so on.
I'd call that a pass.
Sure they've had to pay some lawyers and make some minor concessions but thats a drop in the bucket compared to the real issue that MS has set themselves up in a position where for many uses there is little choice but to buy thier product (if i point out examples people will just fob them off as "specialist" but the fact is all but the bottom tier of user use something specialist whether its a market specific app or something in house or whatever) and with every release they can slowly crank up the price and the intrusive anti-piracy measures despite the rest of the components in a PC going down.
yeah a more accurate term would be "the major labels", the RIAA and its counterpart organisations arround the world are just the negotiating arms of the major labels cartel.
because they enjoy it and are either rich enough to pay for it or have the connections/repuatation to not have to pay for it?
that shouldn't be too big a deal
assuming the padding step is some form of preprocessing that only affects the last block you just do your collision finding on a version of sha1 with the padding step removed, then you add the trailers complete with the correct padding for the length of prefix+random block+trailer
trouble is once you get that initial bit of vaporised metal that can start an arc
and arcs can easilly sustain massive currents while producing massive ammounts of heat.
but presumablly if too many people try that the distribution cuircuit will start tripping regularlly and questions will start being asked, probablly resulting in some soloution like current limiting the individual points to a value just big enough to power engine heaters and/or metering the points.
yes and there are a few reasons for that.
the biggest being that electricity carries HUGE economies of scale.
another being that backup local generation plus third party power most of the time carries a lower total cost than complete local generation, i doubt you could say the same about data systems.
another being that grid electricity at least in the west is amazingly reliable. far far more reliable than most peoples connection to the internet or thier isps connection to googles servers.
the big issue though is that It stuff doesn't just provide you with services it stores your data too. If they leak it how are you to know? if they refuse to give it back then you are in really deep shit.
finally i should note that in most of the world grid electricity is tightly regulated partly because so many people are so reliant on it.
It's because the "suits" mostly come from a background of S&M (sales & marketing) and have a deep-seated resentment being at the mercy of in-house IT from days of their pasts.
so what you are saying is that crippling lusers desktops while a good idea short term doesn't turn out to have been such a good idea when those lusers become your management?
if you don't consider "DoS, cause computer to crash with possibility of arbitrary code execution..." to be a serious security issue you have very very low standards. They can crash your machine causing you to lose any data you have open and potentially they can get complete control over your machine instead if they can get the exploit details just right.
i belive there is a working example out there of the technique i just mentioned for MD5 and SHA1 operates on the same basic principles so it should be possible there as well given enough computing power to find a SHA1 collision (which right now is in the realm of possible but hard).
As i said MD5, SHA1 and thier ilk all work in blocks, you take a set of starting values (eqivilent to hashing the previous blocks in your file) and a block of data and you get a new block out the end (there is also a little preprocessing to deal with files that are not a whole number of blocks in length but that doesn't really concern us here)
The result of this is it is no harder to find a collision for two files starting with your header block and following it with a block of random junk than it is to find two blocks that collide when placed at the start of the file.
and if your two files start with the header block followed by one of your colliding blocks followed by the same data those two files will also collide since the starting values for subsequent blocks will be the same.
with md5 and sha you essentially run the process on a block of data at a time using the results from one block as a set of "starting values" when doing the next block.
you choose a format (pdf is a good one) where you can easilly build conditionals into the document structure.
then you prepare a header which is a whole number of blocks in size and run it through your md5 calculator.
Then you run your collision searcher telling it what starting values you want to find a collision for. This then produces two blocks of random data which when added to the end of the headers give the same MD5.
then you prepare the rest of your document which is really two different documents with a conditional to check something in the random blocks and display one or the other. you add this to the end.
the result is two pdfs with contents of your choice which have the same md5.