Remaining in the PC world for the moment, let's look at SCO OpenServer. It still has compatibility with Xenix programs written in the early 1980s, before Windows 1.0 was even conceived, let alone released. Then there are mainframe systems today offering compatibility with software going back to the late 1960s.
Legacy support isn't the problem. There are many software products offering legacy support far beyond that of Windows that work just fine, with a relatively good degree of security.
The problem would be poorly written code building upon poorly written code, year after year, decade after decade. That appears to be the case with much of Microsoft's software, save the last five or six years.
The OpenBSD crew was able to perform a security audit of their fairly large codebase, which may very well consist of code that predates anything Microsoft is using today. And remember, they don't have anywhere near the resources that a massive corporation like Microsoft has.
What was the end result of their efforts? An extremely secure operating system. Now, Microsoft probably wouldn't need to take it to that extreme. But even putting out a quarter of the effort of the OpenBSD team could lead to security issues being caught before they are exploited.
Rewriting software from scratch is almost always a bad idea. This "virtual machine" you suggest may very well introduce bugs worse than this WMF vulnerability.
At least the old code, even if fairly poor security-wise, has in many cases had years of testing. It has been modified to handle obscure situations that may not even be remotely considered today. Not only could such a rewrite lead to a vast decrease in compatibility, but it could also lead to a vast increase in insecurity. It could very well cause the problem it is meant to solve.
Say what you want. The fact remains that I'm able to frequently moderate here, and you aren't. So you must have been the one who abused your abilities.
Like it or not, the system here works. It rewards those who do a good job moderating, while at the same time filtering out those who do not. I'm sorry to say that it looks like you got filtered out.
That is not necessarily plagiarism. Not attributing the discovery to Wikipedia users is completely different from taking the story word for word from a Wikipedia article.
Entertainment columnists are often looked down upon by their peers in the journalism trade. While I have never gotten a single answer for why, the reasons often revolve around them covering issues that don't really matter, or which take very little understanding to cover sufficiently.
It may be similar to the situation in the corporate IT world, where Visual BASIC programmers are often looked down upon by those using Java or COBOL, for instance.
You obviously missed the part where I said "Even if it is metered". Of course people pay for electricity! But relative to their other expenditures, the cost of electricity is so low that it is basically free for them, and thus they have no incentive to use it wisely.
The definition you were provided in your Economics 101 course in university is only partially correct. Anyone with a more extensive economics background would know that you can easily have a tragedy of the commons situation even when people are charged for a particular commodity, if the price is extremely low relative to other market prices.
While older mills may be quite loud, any developed within the last 10 to 15 years would be extremely quiet. Denmark is a nation which is on the leading edge of windmill technology. I saw some farms in Denmark with over 30 mills each. It was extremely surprising how quiet they are. You hear some swishing, but that's it. They're a masterpiece compared coal or natural gas plants.
It would be interesting to find out more information regarding the backgrounds of the people involved with the campaign against such technology. Do they have any engineering or scientific backgrounds? Are they even aware of the pros and cons of these windmills?
From what the article presents, it would seem that they're just throwing out knee-jerk responses to a development they do not have the background to sufficiently understand.
It's basically a tragedy of the commons situation. Even if it is metered, electricity is so widely available and so relatively cheap that the people there have very little incentive to make efficient use of it.
Of course, that situation may very well change, if they do not get their act together. Then, like any other scarce resource, electricity will become very wisely efficiently allocated by the market.
"So I guess my final question is: Who do I sue if I have any health problems or my property value decreases because of this project?" asked Patricia Oakes, a Hartsville, New York, resident at a recent meeting.
Innovation and a solid legal system were some of the key ingredients that allowed America to become the most powerful nation on earth during the past half-century or so. Unfortunately, innovation is often at odds with tort law, as shown perfectly by the comment above.
With increasing competition from Europe, Japan, China, India, and other areas and nations, America will have to make a choice. They can choose to continue innovating, and perhaps maintain a lead over other nations. Otherwise, they can choose to let legalities unnecessarily interfere with progress, and they will fall behind those countries who aren't bogged down with pointless and greed-driven lawsuits.
There will still be spyware threats out there if Windows didn't exist.
Recall that spyware is a relatively recent development. While malicious software has existed for decades, spyware didn't come into the picture until less than a decade ago.
Many have pointed out that spyware wasn't a problem while Netscape Navigator was the dominant browser. It has only became a very significant and prevalent problem since many users started using Internet Explorer. Also recall that Navigator was hardly considered a high-quality piece of software, even when dominant. I know many in the field of security who were quite astounded that Internet Explorer could be of an even lower standard than Netscape.
Spyware today is solely a problem with Windows, made possible by the shoddy quality of Internet Explorer. That fact is verified by the fact that those who have switched to Firefox suffer far fewer, if any, browser-related spyware incidents.
I advised them not to buy software from WalMart, or even to download it for themselves. I asked them to contact me, and I'd come over and find something that worked for them. I know I could find software that I know I could trust, or at least have access to the source code to inspect and build myself if I felt there could be security problems. Then again, Kubuntu includes all the software they seem to need.
I haven't heard anything from them regarding cameras and other devices which did not work. I did, however, hear of one grandson bringing over his camera and taking pictures of the seniors so they could email them to their relatives. One of the grandparents who had some PC experience as a secretary told me that she was really surprised how easy it was to get the camera to work. All they did was plug it in, and the storage device on the camera was automatically mounted. They could copy over the files without problem. The kid was reportedly stunned that the seniors could use the system so effectively.
Insult inexperienced users all you want. Frankly, I think that a well-designed system can easily avoid the problems caused by unwitting users. Indeed, any quality software system would be designed in such a way as to completely minimize the harm that an inexperienced user could do. Linux and much open source software appears to do this quite well, and as such spyware just isn't a problem when dealing with Linux systems.
Try a recent Kubuntu release. You may just find that it includes all the drivers you need, even for laptops and other picky systems. I know that for my HP and IBM laptops, I need acquire drivers separately when using Windows XP. It's far less of a hassle to use Kubuntu, knowing that it detects all of the hardware on those systems, and automatically uses drivers/modules that work perfectly fine.
Often times second-hand systems do not include the driver CDs from the system vendor. Again, that leads to a situation where you have to find out what type of hardware the system includes, and then find drivers for it. Why bother finding them when Kubuntu (or other modern Linux distributions) offers them for you right off the bat?
Ideally, everyone would use a system that best suits them. These days, Mac OS X and Linux are very suitable desktops for most users. The one ones who are really left out are those who wish to play games. But for people who run a business or use their computers mainly for non-gaming tasks, a non-Microsoft system will often be superb.
Not only that, but it will be more secure. You attribute it that security to such systems not being targetted as much, but the actual reason is most likely because they are of a higher quality to begin with. While not perfect, they do have a track record of being far more secure and stable, while being just as usable (if not moreso).
That is still one site of every ten which offers software for download. Remember, there are many more sites offering just information or other services than there are offering software for download. If anything, I'd think that 10% of the top million sites is an awfully high percentage to be offering downloadable software.
Have you tried the recent Kubuntu releases? If not, give it a try. It is by far one of the most easiest systems to install these days. Even easier to keep up to date, as well.
I was recently asked to set up some computer systems at a seniors home. Now, many of these people have never used a PC. So we were able to acquire several used PCs for almost no cost, and I installed Kubuntu on their systems. We got them set up so that they could check their email, browse the WWW, use various instant messengers to chat with relatives, and even play games (bridge and backgammon were big favourites).
Now, why did I go with Kubuntu? Mainly because it is free, and it is quality software that is quite easy to use. But more importantly, I wanted these systems to always be available to these people. I know that they might visit malicious sites. I wouldn't want that resulting in their systems being compromised just because of that.
You may deny it, but the fact of the matter is that Linux systems won't get infected with spyware at this time. Sure, that may change in the future, but I'm doubtful about that. The basic (yet significant) differences in code quality and architecture are enough to leave Linux (and other non-Microsoft) systems far more secure and usable, even in the fact of malicious software.
What is their criteria for deciding if a site is within the "top million" on the WWW? Are they using data from a service such as Alexa, or is it mere speculation on their part as to the traffic of the sites they have tested?
The one major lesson we can take from their research is that we should probably not be using Windows.
When you consider how many alternatives (often far cheaper, too) are available, it's a wonder that so many still choose to use software that leaves their systems wide open to exploitation, be it from worms, viruses, or malicious websites.
But perhaps a secondary lesson is that we need to keep an ever-strong vigil. It's perhaps even our duty as computer-competent individuals to inform others of these issues. Not to preach to them, by any means, but do let those less-astute computer users know what is going on. Advise them that such problems exist, and tell them how to avoid such malicious software.
We can easily defeat the problem of spyware. But it will involve people helping each other out. Soon enough the ignorance will fall by the wayside, and we will all be better off.
Come off it, look at the core.Net technologies (before they were re-branded): COM (implementing the multiple interfaces per object idea without multiple inheritance) predates Java, ODBC predates JDBC etc. etc.
And those familiar with 1970s mainframe or minicomputer technology would know of such concepts by different names.
Look at almost any VMS on VAX installation. You'll see interoperability between languages (BLISS, C, COBOL, FORTRAN, PL/1, plus many others) that worked quite well. Frederik Data Products offered a Smalltalk system in the mid 1980s that embodied many of the OO related traits of COM.
Not only that, but products like the DEC MDP database system offered the core concepts and benefits of ODBC far before ODBC did!
Not surprisingly, much leading edge technology was developed in the mainframe/minicomputer world. It was only later that it found its way onto lower-end servers, workstations and desktops.
You most likely lost your moderating rights because you abused them, unintentionally or intentionally. All your talk about the "dictatorial" editors going around stripping people of their moderating privileges for the fun of it is pure bunk.
While not perfect, the system here at Slashdot is far superior to the systems used at other sites. At least you, a regular user, did have the chance to be a moderator (even if you quickly lost that privilege). But even more important, the system automatically removed your moderating privileges when you did abuse them. It would do the same for anyone else, too.
A moderator who incorrectly or unnecessarily moderates legitimate messages (as you apparently did) is often far more harmful to a community than a spammer or a shit disturber.
On one hand, I'm very happy that you were given the chance to be a moderator. Most sites don't allow that. On the other hand, I'm also very glad to know that the system removed those abilities from you when you abused them, something else that is rare amongst other sites.
Either way, the system is very fair, and treats everyone equally, even if you can't or won't see that fact.
What exactly are you suggesting, Barry? That.NET is an implementation of COM? I would hope that you're not, because anyone in the know understands that COM and.NET are completely different beasts.
Do you actually think that such prosecution would take place? I sure don't think so! Why would the AG or a Grand Jury go after one of the most powerful corporations in the state?
Remember, while Microsoft may have only harmed/wronged those in other states or nations, they are an important source of employment in the state of Washinton. Not only that, but they pay taxes. And it does not help the government to purposefully harm anyone who sends it significant chunks of change.
Again, the fact stands that lawsuits or legal action either won't happen, or aren't the best possible ways of dealing with this situation. The best way would be for those affected to boycott Microsoft. It's a far more effective and direct way of handling such an incident. There is no need for legality when the market can easily deal with the situation.
Slashdot Mirror
Remaining in the PC world for the moment, let's look at SCO OpenServer. It still has compatibility with Xenix programs written in the early 1980s, before Windows 1.0 was even conceived, let alone released. Then there are mainframe systems today offering compatibility with software going back to the late 1960s.
Legacy support isn't the problem. There are many software products offering legacy support far beyond that of Windows that work just fine, with a relatively good degree of security.
The problem would be poorly written code building upon poorly written code, year after year, decade after decade. That appears to be the case with much of Microsoft's software, save the last five or six years.
The OpenBSD crew was able to perform a security audit of their fairly large codebase, which may very well consist of code that predates anything Microsoft is using today. And remember, they don't have anywhere near the resources that a massive corporation like Microsoft has.
What was the end result of their efforts? An extremely secure operating system. Now, Microsoft probably wouldn't need to take it to that extreme. But even putting out a quarter of the effort of the OpenBSD team could lead to security issues being caught before they are exploited.
Rewriting software from scratch is almost always a bad idea. This "virtual machine" you suggest may very well introduce bugs worse than this WMF vulnerability.
At least the old code, even if fairly poor security-wise, has in many cases had years of testing. It has been modified to handle obscure situations that may not even be remotely considered today. Not only could such a rewrite lead to a vast decrease in compatibility, but it could also lead to a vast increase in insecurity. It could very well cause the problem it is meant to solve.
Say what you want. The fact remains that I'm able to frequently moderate here, and you aren't. So you must have been the one who abused your abilities.
Like it or not, the system here works. It rewards those who do a good job moderating, while at the same time filtering out those who do not. I'm sorry to say that it looks like you got filtered out.
That is not necessarily plagiarism. Not attributing the discovery to Wikipedia users is completely different from taking the story word for word from a Wikipedia article.
Entertainment columnists are often looked down upon by their peers in the journalism trade. While I have never gotten a single answer for why, the reasons often revolve around them covering issues that don't really matter, or which take very little understanding to cover sufficiently.
It may be similar to the situation in the corporate IT world, where Visual BASIC programmers are often looked down upon by those using Java or COBOL, for instance.
This really makes one wonder how much additional plagiarism is present in the articles and reports presented by the mass media on a daily basis.
This really makes one wonder how much additional plagiarism is present in the articles and reports presented by the mass media on a daily basis.
You obviously missed the part where I said "Even if it is metered". Of course people pay for electricity! But relative to their other expenditures, the cost of electricity is so low that it is basically free for them, and thus they have no incentive to use it wisely.
The definition you were provided in your Economics 101 course in university is only partially correct. Anyone with a more extensive economics background would know that you can easily have a tragedy of the commons situation even when people are charged for a particular commodity, if the price is extremely low relative to other market prices.
California is not upstate New York. New York is able to import massive amounts of hydroelectric power from Quebec, if the need be.
Of course the price will be higher in California, where the supply of electricity is far lower.
While older mills may be quite loud, any developed within the last 10 to 15 years would be extremely quiet. Denmark is a nation which is on the leading edge of windmill technology. I saw some farms in Denmark with over 30 mills each. It was extremely surprising how quiet they are. You hear some swishing, but that's it. They're a masterpiece compared coal or natural gas plants.
It would be interesting to find out more information regarding the backgrounds of the people involved with the campaign against such technology. Do they have any engineering or scientific backgrounds? Are they even aware of the pros and cons of these windmills?
From what the article presents, it would seem that they're just throwing out knee-jerk responses to a development they do not have the background to sufficiently understand.
It's basically a tragedy of the commons situation. Even if it is metered, electricity is so widely available and so relatively cheap that the people there have very little incentive to make efficient use of it.
Of course, that situation may very well change, if they do not get their act together. Then, like any other scarce resource, electricity will become very wisely efficiently allocated by the market.
I noticed this gem in the article:
"So I guess my final question is: Who do I sue if I have any health problems or my property value decreases because of this project?" asked Patricia Oakes, a Hartsville, New York, resident at a recent meeting.
Innovation and a solid legal system were some of the key ingredients that allowed America to become the most powerful nation on earth during the past half-century or so. Unfortunately, innovation is often at odds with tort law, as shown perfectly by the comment above.
With increasing competition from Europe, Japan, China, India, and other areas and nations, America will have to make a choice. They can choose to continue innovating, and perhaps maintain a lead over other nations. Otherwise, they can choose to let legalities unnecessarily interfere with progress, and they will fall behind those countries who aren't bogged down with pointless and greed-driven lawsuits.
There will still be spyware threats out there if Windows didn't exist.
Recall that spyware is a relatively recent development. While malicious software has existed for decades, spyware didn't come into the picture until less than a decade ago.
Many have pointed out that spyware wasn't a problem while Netscape Navigator was the dominant browser. It has only became a very significant and prevalent problem since many users started using Internet Explorer. Also recall that Navigator was hardly considered a high-quality piece of software, even when dominant. I know many in the field of security who were quite astounded that Internet Explorer could be of an even lower standard than Netscape.
Spyware today is solely a problem with Windows, made possible by the shoddy quality of Internet Explorer. That fact is verified by the fact that those who have switched to Firefox suffer far fewer, if any, browser-related spyware incidents.
I advised them not to buy software from WalMart, or even to download it for themselves. I asked them to contact me, and I'd come over and find something that worked for them. I know I could find software that I know I could trust, or at least have access to the source code to inspect and build myself if I felt there could be security problems. Then again, Kubuntu includes all the software they seem to need.
I haven't heard anything from them regarding cameras and other devices which did not work. I did, however, hear of one grandson bringing over his camera and taking pictures of the seniors so they could email them to their relatives. One of the grandparents who had some PC experience as a secretary told me that she was really surprised how easy it was to get the camera to work. All they did was plug it in, and the storage device on the camera was automatically mounted. They could copy over the files without problem. The kid was reportedly stunned that the seniors could use the system so effectively.
Insult inexperienced users all you want. Frankly, I think that a well-designed system can easily avoid the problems caused by unwitting users. Indeed, any quality software system would be designed in such a way as to completely minimize the harm that an inexperienced user could do. Linux and much open source software appears to do this quite well, and as such spyware just isn't a problem when dealing with Linux systems.
Try a recent Kubuntu release. You may just find that it includes all the drivers you need, even for laptops and other picky systems. I know that for my HP and IBM laptops, I need acquire drivers separately when using Windows XP. It's far less of a hassle to use Kubuntu, knowing that it detects all of the hardware on those systems, and automatically uses drivers/modules that work perfectly fine.
Often times second-hand systems do not include the driver CDs from the system vendor. Again, that leads to a situation where you have to find out what type of hardware the system includes, and then find drivers for it. Why bother finding them when Kubuntu (or other modern Linux distributions) offers them for you right off the bat?
Ideally, everyone would use a system that best suits them. These days, Mac OS X and Linux are very suitable desktops for most users. The one ones who are really left out are those who wish to play games. But for people who run a business or use their computers mainly for non-gaming tasks, a non-Microsoft system will often be superb.
Not only that, but it will be more secure. You attribute it that security to such systems not being targetted as much, but the actual reason is most likely because they are of a higher quality to begin with. While not perfect, they do have a track record of being far more secure and stable, while being just as usable (if not moreso).
That is still one site of every ten which offers software for download. Remember, there are many more sites offering just information or other services than there are offering software for download. If anything, I'd think that 10% of the top million sites is an awfully high percentage to be offering downloadable software.
Have you tried the recent Kubuntu releases? If not, give it a try. It is by far one of the most easiest systems to install these days. Even easier to keep up to date, as well.
I was recently asked to set up some computer systems at a seniors home. Now, many of these people have never used a PC. So we were able to acquire several used PCs for almost no cost, and I installed Kubuntu on their systems. We got them set up so that they could check their email, browse the WWW, use various instant messengers to chat with relatives, and even play games (bridge and backgammon were big favourites).
Now, why did I go with Kubuntu? Mainly because it is free, and it is quality software that is quite easy to use. But more importantly, I wanted these systems to always be available to these people. I know that they might visit malicious sites. I wouldn't want that resulting in their systems being compromised just because of that.
You may deny it, but the fact of the matter is that Linux systems won't get infected with spyware at this time. Sure, that may change in the future, but I'm doubtful about that. The basic (yet significant) differences in code quality and architecture are enough to leave Linux (and other non-Microsoft) systems far more secure and usable, even in the fact of malicious software.
What is their criteria for deciding if a site is within the "top million" on the WWW? Are they using data from a service such as Alexa, or is it mere speculation on their part as to the traffic of the sites they have tested?
The one major lesson we can take from their research is that we should probably not be using Windows.
When you consider how many alternatives (often far cheaper, too) are available, it's a wonder that so many still choose to use software that leaves their systems wide open to exploitation, be it from worms, viruses, or malicious websites.
But perhaps a secondary lesson is that we need to keep an ever-strong vigil. It's perhaps even our duty as computer-competent individuals to inform others of these issues. Not to preach to them, by any means, but do let those less-astute computer users know what is going on. Advise them that such problems exist, and tell them how to avoid such malicious software.
We can easily defeat the problem of spyware. But it will involve people helping each other out. Soon enough the ignorance will fall by the wayside, and we will all be better off.
Come off it, look at the core .Net technologies (before they were re-branded): COM (implementing the multiple interfaces per object idea without multiple inheritance) predates Java, ODBC predates JDBC etc. etc.
And those familiar with 1970s mainframe or minicomputer technology would know of such concepts by different names.
Look at almost any VMS on VAX installation. You'll see interoperability between languages (BLISS, C, COBOL, FORTRAN, PL/1, plus many others) that worked quite well. Frederik Data Products offered a Smalltalk system in the mid 1980s that embodied many of the OO related traits of COM.
Not only that, but products like the DEC MDP database system offered the core concepts and benefits of ODBC far before ODBC did!
Not surprisingly, much leading edge technology was developed in the mainframe/minicomputer world. It was only later that it found its way onto lower-end servers, workstations and desktops.
You most likely lost your moderating rights because you abused them, unintentionally or intentionally. All your talk about the "dictatorial" editors going around stripping people of their moderating privileges for the fun of it is pure bunk.
While not perfect, the system here at Slashdot is far superior to the systems used at other sites. At least you, a regular user, did have the chance to be a moderator (even if you quickly lost that privilege). But even more important, the system automatically removed your moderating privileges when you did abuse them. It would do the same for anyone else, too.
A moderator who incorrectly or unnecessarily moderates legitimate messages (as you apparently did) is often far more harmful to a community than a spammer or a shit disturber.
On one hand, I'm very happy that you were given the chance to be a moderator. Most sites don't allow that. On the other hand, I'm also very glad to know that the system removed those abilities from you when you abused them, something else that is rare amongst other sites.
Either way, the system is very fair, and treats everyone equally, even if you can't or won't see that fact.
What exactly are you suggesting, Barry? That .NET is an implementation of COM? I would hope that you're not, because anyone in the know understands that COM and .NET are completely different beasts.
Do you actually think that such prosecution would take place? I sure don't think so! Why would the AG or a Grand Jury go after one of the most powerful corporations in the state?
Remember, while Microsoft may have only harmed/wronged those in other states or nations, they are an important source of employment in the state of Washinton. Not only that, but they pay taxes. And it does not help the government to purposefully harm anyone who sends it significant chunks of change.
Again, the fact stands that lawsuits or legal action either won't happen, or aren't the best possible ways of dealing with this situation. The best way would be for those affected to boycott Microsoft. It's a far more effective and direct way of handling such an incident. There is no need for legality when the market can easily deal with the situation.