You will never compete with ATI/nVidia, and they are ignoring the low-end ($40) market.
There are plenty of Radeon 7000's and Geforce 4 MX's out there in the $30-$40 range if you spend much time looking. Hardly cutting-edge, but they do have the advantage of actually existing, unlike the proposed "open" card under discussion here;)
Stick one of these into someone else's laptop and don't you circumvent the default OS thereby having full access to their filesystem?
Go into the BIOS settings, set a boot password, and then disable USB boot devices. No, it's not totally impenetrable, but it's better than nothing - at least your attacker will be forced to haul out a screwdriver. And for laptops, probably a soldering iron too, which sort of obviates a quick hit-and-run attack while you're away from your desk;)
Say, for instance, someone intentionally marked two candidates for the same position. There's a generally accepted rule that we don't tell people they're "not allowed to vote that way".
If you're bound and determined to put down two candidates for one position, you should at least be told that your vote will not be counted that way.
Ah, well, there's your problem. I've stuck with version 7.51 of NAV CE (corporate edition) for years now, because every version that's come after that has appeared to me to suck shit faster than a shop-vac in a septic tank.
I swear it must scan EVERY file that gets opened, including the registry (which gets accessed a lot during a programming session).
By default, NAV usually scans every file that gets touched. Dunno which version you're using, but buried somewhere in the settings should be a way to switch from "scan on access" to "scan on create".
Seems dumb to me. Email is such a throw-away medium.
What are you talking about? I'm not famous yet, but I do have a "canon of work" behind me - I am the author of such instant classics as The Xerox Will Be Offline From 3-5 PM Today and Your Workstation Is Scheduled For Replacement On 4/22 and Can't Meet You For Lunch Today, Something's Come Up Here. Someday schoolchildren will study these, that's how important and eternal they are...
The ends justify the means. Pardon me if I don't find that a compelling argument either;)
More information = stronger democracy.
How do we get more information out there by restricting how people can disseminate said information? You don't, of course - campaign finance reform doesn't increase the availability of information, it decreases it by decreasing the number of people permitted to speak and decreasing the avenues of speech available to them.
Welcome to the/. groupthink buzzsaw - you had the temerity to hint that maybe injecting cyanide into fetuses in their 100'th trimester wasn't such a hot idea. You are clearly not of the Hive, so you must be punished;)
However, restricting the flow of money does nothing about news reports or talk shows where you can still expound your views.
So now you've put the dissemination of all political information into the hands of the multinational media conglomerates - now Rupert Murdoch and Arthur Sulzburger control what you know, and act as gatekeepers to filter out what they think isn't important to you. And look at how much attention they've been paying to third parties up to this point.
No, that's no solution. Candidates and parties need some way to bypass the press and speak directly to the public as they see fit. The real problem is that virtually everyone's plan to level the field runs afoul of the First Amendment. I'm all for reforming politics, but not at the cost of burning the Constitution.
Requiring me to financially support your your platform regardless of how I feel about it is not me "defending" your right to speak, it's you confiscating my property against my will for your own purposes. I'll defend your right to speak all day long, but when we get into you taking my things to promote some agenda I may not agree with, we've left Voltaire waaayyy behind, contrary to your implication that this is somehow part and parcel of free speech.
Geeks don't tend to do well in federal prison in the first place, and being Martha's "bitch" on top of that sounds to me like cruel and unusual punishment...
Granting free, scheduled time on the publicly owned airwaves...
There is no such thing. It may be free to the candidates or to the parties, but someone somewhere will be picking up the tab - probably you as a taxpayer from the sounds of it. I'm not sure why I should see compelling people to support political platforms that they vehemently disagree with as an expansion of freedom.
It seems to me that, typically, the people who complain the most vociferously about restrictions to political speech are also the ones who complain most vociferously about the presumed influence special-interest money has on the political process. Can't have it both ways. Free and unfettered speech means living with big money, and eliminating money from the equation necessarily means restricting free speech.
So, if you buy an iPod, you get the combined support of 2 American companies: HP and Apple.
You get the support of one company - HP's "support" for everything I've gotten from them in the last ten years has been uniformly worthless, so I hope Apple is prepared to help you.
Who is harmed if I break into your house while you're away, especially if I don't take anything or break anything? No one, obviously, so it must be okay, right?
I don't think so. You are not permitted to treat someone else's property as your own without their permission, no matter how "harmless" you think it might be. It's not your call to make. Period.
I don't suppose you'd like to try getting a bank to volunteer their codebase for you to test our in your closed environment?
We didn't "volunteer" our code to people. We hired professionals, both as employees and as consultants to vet our stuff. Nor did we accept volunteer "consultants" - I assure you, the ICC webmaster was far more generous than my former employers would have been. If it were their systems and their call, the FBI would have been kicking down doors on the CU campus before the ink even dried on their "research paper"
I don't run out and buy $400 video cards on a whim, just so I can have bragging rights about riding the cutting edge. A fast card that crashes hourly is no good to me. A card that runs like a champ on game "X" when I don't play X is not valuable to me, especially if it turns out that it runs like a dog under my favorite game, Y. A card where half of the advanced hardware features are disabled because the drivers don't work yet is no good to me.
Which car review would you put more stock in - the one written by a person who got to take the car home for a couple of weeks and subject it to regular daily usage, or the one written by the guy who got to drive it around the block twice while the salesguy was sitting right next to him? I mean, if all you want is info as fast as possible and you really don't care about the source, well, both ATI and nVidia put their press releases on their websites - just bookmark those pages and call it a day.
... I doubt it will make any real difference unless some of the others adopt a similar position.
...which they, for the most part, won't - there's too many sites out there wrapped up in being the first one to post "SNE4K p33K A+ THe H0t N3W C4Rd OMG 1+ phUck1N9 R0x0ReZ!!!!", and it basically ends up looking like PRNewswire with extra ads on top. Oh, well - if Tommy holds the line on this, the hell with the 0-day reviewers. I know who'll get my page views.
You could set up honeypots, to observe how real bad guys might try to get into a system. You could have someone else set up a test server for you, so that you don't have the advantage of knowing in advance what you're up against.
Or, you know, you can do the whole thing with no more than a phone call - "Hello, Mr. ICC Webmaster? We're computer security researchers at the University of Colorado, and we'd like your permission to try to break into your systems as part of your research. Plus, in exchange, we can help you harden your systems afterward." Would that really have been so difficult? Is that really so unreasonable, that they should ask permission beforehand? Bad guys trespass without permission - that's how we know they're bad guys. Good guys aren't supposed to do that too.
Slashdot Mirror
...cuz you can't have both, Mr. The Rock.
What good are teeth if you can't broadcast, Mr. Anderson?
Stocking a pair of size 13's doesn't usually mean you're forced to throw out two pairs of size 7's, unlike airplane seats.
sincerely,
Your Future
There are plenty of Radeon 7000's and Geforce 4 MX's out there in the $30-$40 range if you spend much time looking. Hardly cutting-edge, but they do have the advantage of actually existing, unlike the proposed "open" card under discussion here ;)
Hmmm, it's not even a bootable device.
Go into the BIOS settings, set a boot password, and then disable USB boot devices. No, it's not totally impenetrable, but it's better than nothing - at least your attacker will be forced to haul out a screwdriver. And for laptops, probably a soldering iron too, which sort of obviates a quick hit-and-run attack while you're away from your desk ;)
If you're bound and determined to put down two candidates for one position, you should at least be told that your vote will not be counted that way.
Ah, well, there's your problem. I've stuck with version 7.51 of NAV CE (corporate edition) for years now, because every version that's come after that has appeared to me to suck shit faster than a shop-vac in a septic tank.
By default, NAV usually scans every file that gets touched. Dunno which version you're using, but buried somewhere in the settings should be a way to switch from "scan on access" to "scan on create".
What are you talking about? I'm not famous yet, but I do have a "canon of work" behind me - I am the author of such instant classics as The Xerox Will Be Offline From 3-5 PM Today and Your Workstation Is Scheduled For Replacement On 4/22 and Can't Meet You For Lunch Today, Something's Come Up Here. Someday schoolchildren will study these, that's how important and eternal they are...
More information = stronger democracy.
How do we get more information out there by restricting how people can disseminate said information? You don't, of course - campaign finance reform doesn't increase the availability of information, it decreases it by decreasing the number of people permitted to speak and decreasing the avenues of speech available to them.
Welcome to the /. groupthink buzzsaw - you had the temerity to hint that maybe injecting cyanide into fetuses in their 100'th trimester wasn't such a hot idea. You are clearly not of the Hive, so you must be punished ;)
So now you've put the dissemination of all political information into the hands of the multinational media conglomerates - now Rupert Murdoch and Arthur Sulzburger control what you know, and act as gatekeepers to filter out what they think isn't important to you. And look at how much attention they've been paying to third parties up to this point.
No, that's no solution. Candidates and parties need some way to bypass the press and speak directly to the public as they see fit. The real problem is that virtually everyone's plan to level the field runs afoul of the First Amendment. I'm all for reforming politics, but not at the cost of burning the Constitution.
Requiring me to financially support your your platform regardless of how I feel about it is not me "defending" your right to speak, it's you confiscating my property against my will for your own purposes. I'll defend your right to speak all day long, but when we get into you taking my things to promote some agenda I may not agree with, we've left Voltaire waaayyy behind, contrary to your implication that this is somehow part and parcel of free speech.
Geeks don't tend to do well in federal prison in the first place, and being Martha's "bitch" on top of that sounds to me like cruel and unusual punishment...
Because it's not in there at all - that line is from Heinlein's "Friday" ;)
There is no such thing. It may be free to the candidates or to the parties, but someone somewhere will be picking up the tab - probably you as a taxpayer from the sounds of it. I'm not sure why I should see compelling people to support political platforms that they vehemently disagree with as an expansion of freedom.
IOW, their collective entity is evil and malevolent, unlike our collective entity, which is devoted to goodness and light ;)
It seems to me that, typically, the people who complain the most vociferously about restrictions to political speech are also the ones who complain most vociferously about the presumed influence special-interest money has on the political process. Can't have it both ways. Free and unfettered speech means living with big money, and eliminating money from the equation necessarily means restricting free speech.
You get the support of one company - HP's "support" for everything I've gotten from them in the last ten years has been uniformly worthless, so I hope Apple is prepared to help you.
I don't think so. You are not permitted to treat someone else's property as your own without their permission, no matter how "harmless" you think it might be. It's not your call to make. Period.
I don't suppose you'd like to try getting a bank to volunteer their codebase for you to test our in your closed environment?
We didn't "volunteer" our code to people. We hired professionals, both as employees and as consultants to vet our stuff. Nor did we accept volunteer "consultants" - I assure you, the ICC webmaster was far more generous than my former employers would have been. If it were their systems and their call, the FBI would have been kicking down doors on the CU campus before the ink even dried on their "research paper"
Which car review would you put more stock in - the one written by a person who got to take the car home for a couple of weeks and subject it to regular daily usage, or the one written by the guy who got to drive it around the block twice while the salesguy was sitting right next to him? I mean, if all you want is info as fast as possible and you really don't care about the source, well, both ATI and nVidia put their press releases on their websites - just bookmark those pages and call it a day.
Or, you know, you can do the whole thing with no more than a phone call - "Hello, Mr. ICC Webmaster? We're computer security researchers at the University of Colorado, and we'd like your permission to try to break into your systems as part of your research. Plus, in exchange, we can help you harden your systems afterward." Would that really have been so difficult? Is that really so unreasonable, that they should ask permission beforehand? Bad guys trespass without permission - that's how we know they're bad guys. Good guys aren't supposed to do that too.