I don't know why, but when I downloaded and isntalled gimpshop, i happened to notice that the interface seemed to be exactly the same as gimp. The only difference I could see was the loading graphic.
yeah, i should probably have been a little clearer in my post, and I'm prepared to admit that my summary wasn't that great.
Do you vent your anger at gun companies because they make something that could kill people? Or would it be more appropriate to direct it at the people that actually made the choice to take someones life?
No. No I don't. And the reason I don't is because guns can be used for many other things than killing people.
DRM is different. The only use for drm is to limit the rights of consumers. Period. And in my view, that makes Microsoft just as greedy as Napster.
"That wrath should be directed at the people who made that decision, not those that made that functionality possible."
no. Our wrath should be directed as much towards microsoft as towards those who made the decision to restrict our rights.
What you're saying is that just because Microsoft created a DRM system, doesn't make them evil. Well...I'm saying no. A DRM system can be used for only one thing: limiting your rights. So because Microsoft created one, they are guilty of at the very least corporate greed for creating the system so they could license it to others.
Read Human justice for human beings for a lot of great insights about why DRM (and other forms of automatic policing) are such bad things.
but the point is that IE doesn't have them, and it should. It soon will (IE7) and that will be a huge redeeming feature for it.
I know tabs have been invented and put in various places over and over again, but whoever it was that applied tabs to web browsing was a genius. It's often attributed to Opera, but I've read here that maxthon did it first.
Yes, I know that other apps had tabs before web browsers were invented, but applying tabs to web browsing was true innovation - the two do not obviously go together.
the article missed something important. It fogot to point out how friggin' small the product key is printed, and how similar the letters look. I have very limited eyesight, and the 8s and Bs look the same, and there are quite a lot of them in my product key (at least 6). It usually takes me 9 or 10 tries to read the product key correctly.
How much extra would it have cost to print it jsut 1 point bigger?
Normally, the download speed of a file is inversely proportional to the number of people downloading it at a particular time. In other words, the more people downloading, the slower it goes and the longer it takes for all of them. With bittorrent, it's DIRECTLY proportional - the mroe the better.
Firefox? Tabbed browsing. Yes, yes, i know. Firefox wasn't the first browser with that (I read here once that it is infact the IE shell Maxthon). But there are plenty of other innovative things about it. RSS bookmarks? Themes? The layout of the preferences page? to name a few.
since when where perl and.net the only systems on the planet?
There are plenty of perfectly good up-to-date ways to do things, such as with python or PHP. Both of which are at least a capable as.net, but have the added bonus of no platform lock in (PHP and python work equally well on Linux, FreeBSD and Windows servers)
I have no apps except those that are in my apt repositories. Everything I need is there, and if I ever need anything that isn't, I can get it from some other apt repository (eg if i want EFF's Tor I have to add their apt repository)
This is precisely why I'm still running a 2.6.8 kernel. (well, that and there's nothing newer in the testing repositories, but I could always go to the unstable repositories)
that really depends on your distro. I'm still running firefox 1.03, but i'd estimate that within a week 1.04 will be available in the testing repository. However, it is already available in the unstable repository, so if I was running debian (unstable), i would already have it.
But SUSE really sucks in that regard. Last I checked (which was v9.2) things were really outdated.
(Oh btw apt has NEVER had to reboot for me)
Debian (unstable) is always really up to date. Debian (testing) is a bit behind, but only by a couple of weeks, and you stand a lot lower chance of things breaking when you update.
When someone tells you debian's packages are out of date, chances are they are talking about stable. And it is stable, but its out of date...
apt lets you do that as well. There's no reason you can't run an internal apt repository for private use by your company, and only put patches there that you have checked.
does it? Around six months ago I was at a relative's house trying to figure out why excel was showing print previews on A3 even though the paper size was set to A4. So I decided to isntall the lates service packs, and had to go to another website, "Office update" that is seperate from windows update to get them.
(oh btw the problem turned out to be that the DPI wasn't set)
no i wouldn't. I'd consider it a good thing that users of microsoft products have one easy place to go for patching all their software.
Now if microsoft used windows update to replace products on consumers' machines with microsoft alternatives, THEN i would be screaming MONOPOLY at the top of my lungs. But fortunately not even they are that stupid.
you're right, i should have put a bit more thought into that analogy.
But yours isn't much better (or possibly its incomplete). You can accept the gift, but you can't (legally) turn around and engage in wholesale copying of my copyrighted work unless i give you permisison.
Really? The 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade' i did earlier today on my debian (testing) box took less than a minute, and isntalled not just the latest security patches but also the latest versions of all my software. That was pretty-much free.
Conversely, windows update only updates windows (not my other apps), and takes at least 15 minutes every time i run it.
Make sure the access point is very "dumb" - that is, it doesn't have enough memory or OS to allow an attacker who compromises the AP itself to install an SSH M-i-t-M sploit. I use weird Intel and Enterasys boxes (pulled out of dumpsters) that haven't got real OSes anyway.
Hmm, isn't part of the idea of SSH is that you have public AND private keys, so someone would have to obtain the private key before they could do a MITM attack? THey could always send out the same public key as the server, but then they wouldn't be able to decrypt the received data.
Conversely, they could use a new public/private key pair and stick them on the access point. However, SSH clients save keys that are received, and next time you connect, they make sure the keys haven't changed. If the key has changed, it'll throw up huge errors. Last time I did this, the SSH simply refused to connect. I had to go and delete the key file.
not necessarily. If I write a book and leave the manuscript on a street corner and you find it, does that give you the right to copy it? (i know, bad analogy)
but by offering it for download, they would be inducing you to commit a crime. There is a word for this: Entrapment
I think it might not be a bad idea to amend the GPL to insist that no Communism or politically misaligned countries / organizations should be able to use it. This would help combat some of the negative sterotypes facing OSS.
Chances are that the country has no obligation to honour the license. And there's not much you can do about that.
Second, most GPL code is licensed under a "version 2 or (at your option) any later versioN" license. So if a country wanted to use GPLed software, couldn't because of a stupid thing in it saying "no communists", and for some reason couldn't change the law to allow it, they would just license it under an older version of the license.
My laptop is running winXP. on the "Advanced" page for the internal 3com nic, the only option is: "Network Link Selection". This has a drop-down box with "Auto negotiation" as the default and "10mbps half-duplex", "100mbps half duplex", "10mbps full-duplex", etc.
As for my wireless card, there are a lot more options: 802.11G Draft Number Authentication Mode CCX Security Type Desired Basic Rate Set Desired BSS Type Desired IBSS Protection Desired SSID Desired Supported Rate Set Desired Tx Power Desired Tx Rate ELP Support Fragmentation Threshold LeapEnabled LeapUserName Mixed Mode Mode4x MultiRegulatory Domain Network Type Power Mode RTS Threshold Short Preamble Spectrum Management
nothing about mac addresses or anything. And I have never seen a network card where this option does show up on windows.
Later I'll boot up my Linux box, and try changing the MAC address with ifconfig. It'll be interesting to see what MAC address my router reports.
I am looking at the 'Advanced' page of the control panel for my 'D-Link AirPlus G+ DWL-G650+' wireless card right now. on none of the pages is there anything about a hardware address or MAC address.
By going to command prompt and typing ipconfig/all, I can see the MAC address and it is reffered to as the "Physical Address". But there is no way to change it.
As I mentioned earlier, a google search found a software that claimed to be able to change it. But I haven't tested it.
MAC address security might not stop many people, but i'd rather have it (even if I'm using WPA, and especialy if I'm using WEP) than not have it.
uh, do you want to check that? I just checked it on my laptop and there's nothing about changing the mac address in the advanced settings (both for my wireless pcmcia card and the inbuilt wired NIC).
The whole idea of MAC addresses is that they are unique to each particular card, so that two cards on the same network don't conflict with each other.
according to the ccna stuff, the MAC is stored in the cards ROM and is copied into its onbaord RAM after the card performs its POST
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know why, but when I downloaded and isntalled gimpshop, i happened to notice that the interface seemed to be exactly the same as gimp. The only difference I could see was the loading graphic.
if it's "nonlethal", why can't it be deployed for use at big "riots" in america as well?
why is the department of defense putting so little value on human life? (both its own soldiers and residents of iraq)
yeah, i should probably have been a little clearer in my post, and I'm prepared to admit that my summary wasn't that great.
Do you vent your anger at gun companies because they make something that could kill people? Or would it be more appropriate to direct it at the people that actually made the choice to take someones life?
No. No I don't. And the reason I don't is because guns can be used for many other things than killing people.
DRM is different. The only use for drm is to limit the rights of consumers. Period. And in my view, that makes Microsoft just as greedy as Napster.
dam i hate microsoft apologists like you...
"That wrath should be directed at the people who made that decision, not those that made that functionality possible."
no. Our wrath should be directed as much towards microsoft as towards those who made the decision to restrict our rights.
What you're saying is that just because Microsoft created a DRM system, doesn't make them evil. Well...I'm saying no. A DRM system can be used for only one thing: limiting your rights. So because Microsoft created one, they are guilty of at the very least corporate greed for creating the system so they could license it to others.
Read Human justice for human beings for a lot of great insights about why DRM (and other forms of automatic policing) are such bad things.
but the point is that IE doesn't have them, and it should. It soon will (IE7) and that will be a huge redeeming feature for it.
I know tabs have been invented and put in various places over and over again, but whoever it was that applied tabs to web browsing was a genius. It's often attributed to Opera, but I've read here that maxthon did it first.
Yes, I know that other apps had tabs before web browsers were invented, but applying tabs to web browsing was true innovation - the two do not obviously go together.
the article missed something important. It fogot to point out how friggin' small the product key is printed, and how similar the letters look. I have very limited eyesight, and the 8s and Bs look the same, and there are quite a lot of them in my product key (at least 6). It usually takes me 9 or 10 tries to read the product key correctly.
How much extra would it have cost to print it jsut 1 point bigger?
What is innovative about bittorrent?
Normally, the download speed of a file is inversely proportional to the number of people downloading it at a particular time. In other words, the more people downloading, the slower it goes and the longer it takes for all of them. With bittorrent, it's DIRECTLY proportional - the mroe the better.
Firefox? Tabbed browsing. Yes, yes, i know. Firefox wasn't the first browser with that (I read here once that it is infact the IE shell Maxthon). But there are plenty of other innovative things about it. RSS bookmarks? Themes? The layout of the preferences page? to name a few.
since when where perl and .net the only systems on the planet?
.net, but have the added bonus of no platform lock in (PHP and python work equally well on Linux, FreeBSD and Windows servers)
There are plenty of perfectly good up-to-date ways to do things, such as with python or PHP. Both of which are at least a capable as
I have no apps except those that are in my apt repositories. Everything I need is there, and if I ever need anything that isn't, I can get it from some other apt repository (eg if i want EFF's Tor I have to add their apt repository)
This is precisely why I'm still running a 2.6.8 kernel. (well, that and there's nothing newer in the testing repositories, but I could always go to the unstable repositories)
yes in fact you can. You can quite easily modify your sources.list file to only fetch updates from debian's security server.
that really depends on your distro. I'm still running firefox 1.03, but i'd estimate that within a week 1.04 will be available in the testing repository. However, it is already available in the unstable repository, so if I was running debian (unstable), i would already have it.
But SUSE really sucks in that regard. Last I checked (which was v9.2) things were really outdated.
(Oh btw apt has NEVER had to reboot for me)
Debian (unstable) is always really up to date. Debian (testing) is a bit behind, but only by a couple of weeks, and you stand a lot lower chance of things breaking when you update.
When someone tells you debian's packages are out of date, chances are they are talking about stable. And it is stable, but its out of date...
apt lets you do that as well. There's no reason you can't run an internal apt repository for private use by your company, and only put patches there that you have checked.
does it? Around six months ago I was at a relative's house trying to figure out why excel was showing print previews on A3 even though the paper size was set to A4. So I decided to isntall the lates service packs, and had to go to another website, "Office update" that is seperate from windows update to get them.
(oh btw the problem turned out to be that the DPI wasn't set)
no i wouldn't. I'd consider it a good thing that users of microsoft products have one easy place to go for patching all their software.
Now if microsoft used windows update to replace products on consumers' machines with microsoft alternatives, THEN i would be screaming MONOPOLY at the top of my lungs. But fortunately not even they are that stupid.
you're right, i should have put a bit more thought into that analogy.
But yours isn't much better (or possibly its incomplete). You can accept the gift, but you can't (legally) turn around and engage in wholesale copying of my copyrighted work unless i give you permisison.
Really? The 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade' i did earlier today on my debian (testing) box took less than a minute, and isntalled not just the latest security patches but also the latest versions of all my software. That was pretty-much free.
Conversely, windows update only updates windows (not my other apps), and takes at least 15 minutes every time i run it.
Make sure the access point is very "dumb" - that is, it doesn't have enough memory or OS to allow an attacker who compromises the AP itself to install an SSH M-i-t-M sploit. I use weird Intel and Enterasys boxes (pulled out of dumpsters) that haven't got real OSes anyway.
Hmm, isn't part of the idea of SSH is that you have public AND private keys, so someone would have to obtain the private key before they could do a MITM attack? THey could always send out the same public key as the server, but then they wouldn't be able to decrypt the received data.
Conversely, they could use a new public/private key pair and stick them on the access point. However, SSH clients save keys that are received, and next time you connect, they make sure the keys haven't changed. If the key has changed, it'll throw up huge errors. Last time I did this, the SSH simply refused to connect. I had to go and delete the key file.
not necessarily. If I write a book and leave the manuscript on a street corner and you find it, does that give you the right to copy it? (i know, bad analogy)
but by offering it for download, they would be inducing you to commit a crime. There is a word for this: Entrapment
How is being forced to sit through 15 minutes of previews, many for DVDs that I already own, every time I insert a disc unintrusive?
Strange, not a single DVD I own (and I only have about 10) has a signle preview on it in anywhere other than the special features.
(These are all regiaon 4 - Australia)
I think it might not be a bad idea to amend the GPL to insist that no Communism or politically misaligned countries / organizations should be able to use it. This would help combat some of the negative sterotypes facing OSS.
Aside from the fact that it would then no longer be open source (see point #5), I cannot even begin to believe how STUPID and POINTLESS this would be.
Chances are that the country has no obligation to honour the license. And there's not much you can do about that.
Second, most GPL code is licensed under a "version 2 or (at your option) any later versioN" license. So if a country wanted to use GPLed software, couldn't because of a stupid thing in it saying "no communists", and for some reason couldn't change the law to allow it, they would just license it under an older version of the license.
that's strange.
My laptop is running winXP.
on the "Advanced" page for the internal 3com nic, the only option is: "Network Link Selection". This has a drop-down box with "Auto negotiation" as the default and "10mbps half-duplex", "100mbps half duplex", "10mbps full-duplex", etc.
As for my wireless card, there are a lot more options:
802.11G Draft Number
Authentication Mode
CCX Security Type
Desired Basic Rate Set
Desired BSS Type
Desired IBSS Protection
Desired SSID
Desired Supported Rate Set
Desired Tx Power
Desired Tx Rate
ELP Support
Fragmentation Threshold
LeapEnabled
LeapUserName
Mixed Mode
Mode4x
MultiRegulatory Domain
Network Type
Power Mode
RTS Threshold
Short Preamble
Spectrum Management
nothing about mac addresses or anything. And I have never seen a network card where this option does show up on windows.
Later I'll boot up my Linux box, and try changing the MAC address with ifconfig. It'll be interesting to see what MAC address my router reports.
WEP, with a 128 bit key and MAC filtering, and SSID broadcast disabled
yes i know its insecure, but the WPA on my router is buggy (drops out about once every 3 seconds) and its better than nothing.
besides, all its used for is web browsing and IM from my laptop.
(BTW the router is a netgear wgr614 (v4). because of the embedded linux, i will probably replace it with a linksys wrt54g soon)
No i dont consider WPA secure enough for a company. Personally I'd set up an open (unencrypted) wifi hotspot with a VPN server connected.
I am looking at the 'Advanced' page of the control panel for my 'D-Link AirPlus G+ DWL-G650+' wireless card right now. on none of the pages is there anything about a hardware address or MAC address.
By going to command prompt and typing ipconfig/all, I can see the MAC address and it is reffered to as the "Physical Address". But there is no way to change it.
As I mentioned earlier, a google search found a software that claimed to be able to change it. But I haven't tested it.
MAC address security might not stop many people, but i'd rather have it (even if I'm using WPA, and especialy if I'm using WEP) than not have it.
uh, do you want to check that? I just checked it on my laptop and there's nothing about changing the mac address in the advanced settings (both for my wireless pcmcia card and the inbuilt wired NIC).
The whole idea of MAC addresses is that they are unique to each particular card, so that two cards on the same network don't conflict with each other.
according to the ccna stuff, the MAC is stored in the cards ROM and is copied into its onbaord RAM after the card performs its POST