So your justification is that because other Operating Systems support this service, Microsoft should also support raw sockets?
I don't even need to remind the readers of/. that the market share of MS for the desktop is at least 8 times greater than all other platforms combined.
The reason why these other platforms can continue without removing/restricting this service is because the people developing the tools that abuse the raw socket functionality aren't going to waste their time building variations for systems with a marginal penetration share.
The average joe smith home user is running windows, and joe smith is the target for people who develop infectations that abuse the raw socket services; as such, no virii writer is going to waste his time building his tools to infect these other systems.
As such, microsoft windows is overwhelmingly the primary target for these virii writers. They haev a responsibility to their customers to do they best they can to protect the services used and developed by their paying customers, and this means restricting a service that is used almost soley for infectious behavior.
"The only applications that care deeply about the ability to send over raw sockets are enterprise security applications that use 'fingerprinting' techniques to characterise a host on the network based on its response to carefully crafted packets."
From what I can tell, this guy is upset because his claim to fame rides on the same train as a vast number of tools that use windows to abuse other systems around the world. We are told to urge Microsoft to change their services for his convenience, so he can continue to provide his popular tool to the people who like to discover where they don't belong, and who doesn't lock their virtual doors.
Of course, I have to expect/. to side against MS in all things, even if MS's actions are meant to protect their customers and protect the people who are often targetted by DDOS attacks.
Thanks for reading, ttfn
Since cell phones are so small, I can see new applications like voice recognition tied into the OS. You want to write a report? Talk into your cell phone.
and they feel that theirs is the definitive solution to the question at hand; is commenting more useful than well organized coding arrangements?
In my novice experience with computers and various languages, I have realized that the most important element of handling someone elses' code is the ability to decipher their structure and intent. Sometimes good commenting helps, but in the long run, commenting can also impede the visual flow of my 'reading' the code, and make it more difficult to properly grok. Ultimately, when I handle another person's code, I am more grateful for well structured and defined blocks of code than silly comments that usually just tell me what I can read for myself. Granted, more complex blocks of code make this a bit more work, but I just print out hard copies of that section of code, and use highlighters and reference pointers to think about what the original programmer was doing, and then I usually discover the solution, while simultaneously having a better understanding of how that person's mind works.
After handling 7 or 8 pieces of code this way, I can understand the programmer's coding better, which is a lot better than stating the obvious, which is what *most* commenting really is.
I'm no super guru, and I leave my experience and interpretation of my work up to the community, but in regards to the original post, this is my opinion and justification of such, which is all I am capable of providing.
George Lucas is backing the development of a 350 million dollar studio that will combine the functionality of movie special effects with the equipment for video game animation and design features. By combining these two very closely related fields into one mega-location, G.L. is going to ultimately have an impact on entertainment that goes well beyond the scope of "Star Wars" - but even with that titanian accomplishment, there is little chance he will be remembered as such.
Ultimately, the innovation that gave him his status is the same innovation that will be tagged to his name inside every electronic wikipedia of the future, and he can't do anything to change that.
While many of us rightfully bashed Lucas' work on the first and second (fourth and fifth) Star Wars movies, myself included, he deserves the credit he has earned as a producer and financeer of special effects.
Jar Jar sucks, but G.L. will always be a hero in my book for the contributions he has made to computer animation and special effects over the course of his career.
your attempt at mocking windows loses some of its luster by your misplaced numbers:P 640GB is more than.5TB so you kinda just told the world you didn't know their values in relation to each other:P
Besides, Mr. Clippy provides a valuable service that the/. community needs and clammors for, right?
I would suppose the answer to be that they are attempting to generate publicity, while also encouraging people to look back at the roots of computing and the amazing growth since that time.
Many companies spend millions of dollars on PR campaigns, yet here Intel has put up a reward a fraction of that size and has generated more attention than any Intel commercials I can recall seeing offhand.
This reward is as much publicity stunt as it is a valid reward, but thats how our country works. Props to them on doing it right.
Actually the game is still played today (no, i don't) and from what I see, the parent company is banking quite the profit on it. However, to your original statement, I have to respond by asking if you read the article, or merely scanned for keywords.
Just because they employ 'performers' to enhance the experience does not really approach quantifying this genre so broadly, and a more apt comparison would be to the old dinner-party murder mystery games.
However, thank you for sharing your emotions about other people's hobbies.
Any online game or experience is ultimately what you, the player, makes of the game. The impact of third parties (other players) upon you is limited by how wide you define your boundaries.
If you play the game for your own enjoyment, with your friends or otherwise, and come across a player who is playing the game for some financial motivation, why not just take satisfaction in knowing that you are enjoying yourself, and he is likely forcing himself into his predicament.
However, in the long term, this won't impact the overall experience as much as the doomsayers of/. predict. As the article mentions, exchange servers will not be the default, but merely an option for those who wish to step over into something new.
I myself play World of Warcraft, and have been playing online games for a decade in the form of MUD's and MMORPG's but I am excited about a new legitamite dynamic to an already popular game.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, he said the message will be unhackable, not the code. And using single-proton cryptography, he may be right.
So your justification is that because other Operating Systems support this service, Microsoft should also support raw sockets? I don't even need to remind the readers of /. that the market share of MS for the desktop is at least 8 times greater than all other platforms combined.
The reason why these other platforms can continue without removing/restricting this service is because the people developing the tools that abuse the raw socket functionality aren't going to waste their time building variations for systems with a marginal penetration share.
The average joe smith home user is running windows, and joe smith is the target for people who develop infectations that abuse the raw socket services; as such, no virii writer is going to waste his time building his tools to infect these other systems.
As such, microsoft windows is overwhelmingly the primary target for these virii writers. They haev a responsibility to their customers to do they best they can to protect the services used and developed by their paying customers, and this means restricting a service that is used almost soley for infectious behavior.
"The only applications that care deeply about the ability to send over raw sockets are enterprise security applications that use 'fingerprinting' techniques to characterise a host on the network based on its response to carefully crafted packets."
From what I can tell, this guy is upset because his claim to fame rides on the same train as a vast number of tools that use windows to abuse other systems around the world. We are told to urge Microsoft to change their services for his convenience, so he can continue to provide his popular tool to the people who like to discover where they don't belong, and who doesn't lock their virtual doors.
Of course, I have to expect /. to side against MS in all things, even if MS's actions are meant to protect their customers and protect the people who are often targetted by DDOS attacks.
Thanks for reading, ttfn
Since cell phones are so small, I can see new applications like voice recognition tied into the OS. You want to write a report? Talk into your cell phone.
Like this?
From the site:
VoiceSignal develops state-of-the-art small footprint, speech solutions for wireless mobile devices.
and they feel that theirs is the definitive solution to the question at hand; is commenting more useful than well organized coding arrangements? In my novice experience with computers and various languages, I have realized that the most important element of handling someone elses' code is the ability to decipher their structure and intent. Sometimes good commenting helps, but in the long run, commenting can also impede the visual flow of my 'reading' the code, and make it more difficult to properly grok. Ultimately, when I handle another person's code, I am more grateful for well structured and defined blocks of code than silly comments that usually just tell me what I can read for myself. Granted, more complex blocks of code make this a bit more work, but I just print out hard copies of that section of code, and use highlighters and reference pointers to think about what the original programmer was doing, and then I usually discover the solution, while simultaneously having a better understanding of how that person's mind works. After handling 7 or 8 pieces of code this way, I can understand the programmer's coding better, which is a lot better than stating the obvious, which is what *most* commenting really is. I'm no super guru, and I leave my experience and interpretation of my work up to the community, but in regards to the original post, this is my opinion and justification of such, which is all I am capable of providing.
George Lucas is backing the development of a 350 million dollar studio that will combine the functionality of movie special effects with the equipment for video game animation and design features. By combining these two very closely related fields into one mega-location, G.L. is going to ultimately have an impact on entertainment that goes well beyond the scope of "Star Wars" - but even with that titanian accomplishment, there is little chance he will be remembered as such. Ultimately, the innovation that gave him his status is the same innovation that will be tagged to his name inside every electronic wikipedia of the future, and he can't do anything to change that. While many of us rightfully bashed Lucas' work on the first and second (fourth and fifth) Star Wars movies, myself included, he deserves the credit he has earned as a producer and financeer of special effects. Jar Jar sucks, but G.L. will always be a hero in my book for the contributions he has made to computer animation and special effects over the course of his career.
I can't wait to find torrent trackers seeded on this bandwidth, I can't download star wars fan spoofs fast enough on 6mbps from comcast :(
This just in: Google adopting Windows as primary OS of choice...
your attempt at mocking windows loses some of its luster by your misplaced numbers :P 640GB is more than .5TB so you kinda just told the world you didn't know their values in relation to each other :P
Besides, Mr. Clippy provides a valuable service that the /. community needs and clammors for, right?
I would suppose the answer to be that they are attempting to generate publicity, while also encouraging people to look back at the roots of computing and the amazing growth since that time.
Many companies spend millions of dollars on PR campaigns, yet here Intel has put up a reward a fraction of that size and has generated more attention than any Intel commercials I can recall seeing offhand.
This reward is as much publicity stunt as it is a valid reward, but thats how our country works. Props to them on doing it right.
Actually the game is still played today (no, i don't) and from what I see, the parent company is banking quite the profit on it. However, to your original statement, I have to respond by asking if you read the article, or merely scanned for keywords. Just because they employ 'performers' to enhance the experience does not really approach quantifying this genre so broadly, and a more apt comparison would be to the old dinner-party murder mystery games. However, thank you for sharing your emotions about other people's hobbies.
Any online game or experience is ultimately what you, the player, makes of the game. The impact of third parties (other players) upon you is limited by how wide you define your boundaries.
/. predict. As the article mentions, exchange servers will not be the default, but merely an option for those who wish to step over into something new.
If you play the game for your own enjoyment, with your friends or otherwise, and come across a player who is playing the game for some financial motivation, why not just take satisfaction in knowing that you are enjoying yourself, and he is likely forcing himself into his predicament.
However, in the long term, this won't impact the overall experience as much as the doomsayers of
I myself play World of Warcraft, and have been playing online games for a decade in the form of MUD's and MMORPG's but I am excited about a new legitamite dynamic to an already popular game.
Give it a chance before dooming it to mediocrity.