haha I know this is off topic, but...
When clicking on the story to ready it, there was a sun ad saying "With their evil systems, it's no wonder their name rhymes with hell"
All these predictions about firefox and open source about security blah blah blah blah blah blah...
All the reports and studies and bickering don't matter much to me because firefox JUST WORKS.
When I start getting so much spyware and pop ups via firefox that my system is almost unbootable, I'll look for an alternative. For now, I have a browser that works reliably out of the box.
People make a million arguments that it's only seemingly safer because it's less popular. Well fine, until the day comes that it's so popular your predictions come true, I'm going to keep using it. And if your predictions do come true, people will either find another alternative, or force firefox to clean up it's act. Until that day...
Who am I going to trust, a browser that has proven itself historically to be a secure broswer, or one that tells me it is a secure broswer?
Are the underlying libraries that both are based off of seperate projects? I guess my (mis)-understanding of it was the main mozilla tree handled gecko, xul, etc etc. And the browser (and variants) were xul frontends using those backend libraries.
As long as the backend libraries still get development I don't think it's a huge concern...
I agree with some of his points regarding Firefox.
The download box is annoying. It should be attached to the bottom in the same manner the find is. I prefer my find on the bottom (he wants it on top), but I agree you should be able to change it in a preference. And yes, the Go menu is pointless.
The tabs issue is tricky. I love my tabs. I think they are great. My one annoyance is that when there's a dialog you can't change tabs. The dialog should be attached per tab, not for the whole window. but maybe that's something within the toolkit that would need to be changed, not just firefox.
The second article uses literary side-stepping to indicate who is actually comparing google to MS. "Whispers in silicon valley". More like businesses that google is PWNing with superior products, bitching and moaning that pouring money into advertising inferior products isn't working anymore. "Oh crap. Their amazingly awesome and simple to use with mass amounts of storage that takes 30 seconds to sign-up with email service is really cramping our style. Well, competing would cost money. Let's see... we could probably bad mouth them and speculate with no proof until their business turns south. Then, when they are beaten and battered, we introduce our lame gmail clone and advertise it as a great alternative to the evil empire of google."
k thx business n00bs~~ I'm going to stick with google until they give me reason not to trust them. Which they haven't done. In fact, quite the opposite (ala fighting the DMCA).
b
It's completely GAY, however, I possibly forsee google losing. As I remember, certain searches were banned via the DMCA. Google fought it kicking and screaming (and rightly so), but in the end complied.
>> I then predicted that their boss would fire them, and recommended they quit first. Because I can recognize a trap when I see one, especially an IT management trap, designed by a foolhardy boss that will blow up in someone's face. Better the PHB than the earnest young admin. That's not a "whim". That's management science information.
Wow, you can tell all that knowing almost nothing about where he works, his boss, his security officer, or the poster himself. Man, you should start some sort of... future telling business.
First of all, if you read his posts, he is given a reasonable time table. All his boss wants is a rough idea of what needs to be done in the next week. His office's security manager has provided him with ample documentation regarding what needs to be done. He will have help from his security officer. The machine will be network unattached. The only two media available will be CDR's and the hard drive.
The organization providing him with the CAD data is already DoD secure.
For the most part, he's got the computer security issues down. He just needs physical security. Which, since they've got a security manager isn't as big as an issue, because he's an on-staff professional.
omg k thx he's being set up the bomb better quit now before you are fired OMgee the sky is falling tilde~~~~~~~~
How advice like this is seen as insightful is beyond me.
If I quit my job every time I was asked to do something I was unable to do and my employers wouldn't accept "no" as an answer, I would have cycled through many-a-job.
What they are asking of him isn't a terribly difficult or huge thing to do. They are asking him to secure _one_ computer. From reading his posts he already has a pretty good idea of what needs to be done. He also has about a week to come up with at least a gameplan. It really sounds like he's 90% of the way there and was just asking for some tips on others' experiences.
Quitting your job on a whim everytime your told to do something unreasonable is, well... unreasonable.
All I know is, the 3 times I've bought products based on clicking advertisments they've been google ads.
No flashy ads with viral marketing? You don't say...
One of my old bosses said he didn't like using AMD chips because some of his programs didn't run right and would crash. I thought it was b.s., but this does shed some new light on the claim. This was about a year and a half ago he told me this, and he was speaking of experiences from a few years back, so
maybe he was speaking about the sub 1ghz amd cpu's.
Also, I don't think nearly as many people use Intel's compilier as Microsoft's for windows programs and GCC for open source.
Linux uses kernel modules to insert code into a running kernel. Most distributions come shipped with a crapload of modules. They will use an initial ramdisk to do hardware detection and only modprobe modules with hardware present.
To the end user, all they have to do is install their linux distribution and it just works.
I've been using Linux for a while now (Red Hat 6.2 was my first). When I first started, you kinda had to plan your hardware for linux or hope it would work. Today, I don't think twice about linux support. Most times I can plug in my new usb device right out of the box (via hotplug) with no driver disks, update searches, searching HP's website, etc etc.
Obviously there are exceptions, but it's been a looooooooong time that I've bought hardware that doesn't work with Linux.
Slashdot Mirror
My bad, it's because "they run so hot and so slow".
haha I know this is off topic, but...
When clicking on the story to ready it, there was a sun ad saying "With their evil systems, it's no wonder their name rhymes with hell"
haha Classy.
It's a common mistake
The keys are like right next to each other
All these predictions about firefox and open source about security blah blah blah blah blah blah...
All the reports and studies and bickering don't matter much to me because firefox JUST WORKS.
When I start getting so much spyware and pop ups via firefox that my system is almost unbootable, I'll look for an alternative. For now, I have a browser that works reliably out of the box.
People make a million arguments that it's only seemingly safer because it's less popular. Well fine, until the day comes that it's so popular your predictions come true, I'm going to keep using it. And if your predictions do come true, people will either find another alternative, or force firefox to clean up it's act. Until that day...
Who am I going to trust, a browser that has proven itself historically to be a secure broswer, or one that tells me it is a secure broswer?
Are the underlying libraries that both are based off of seperate projects? I guess my (mis)-understanding of it was the main mozilla tree handled gecko, xul, etc etc. And the browser (and variants) were xul frontends using those backend libraries.
As long as the backend libraries still get development I don't think it's a huge concern...
I agree with some of his points regarding Firefox.
The download box is annoying. It should be attached to the bottom in the same manner the find is. I prefer my find on the bottom (he wants it on top), but I agree you should be able to change it in a preference. And yes, the Go menu is pointless.
The tabs issue is tricky. I love my tabs. I think they are great. My one annoyance is that when there's a dialog you can't change tabs. The dialog should be attached per tab, not for the whole window. but maybe that's something within the toolkit that would need to be changed, not just firefox.
254,761 results for "emo" ;)
The second article uses literary side-stepping to indicate who is actually comparing google to MS. "Whispers in silicon valley". More like businesses that google is PWNing with superior products, bitching and moaning that pouring money into advertising inferior products isn't working anymore. "Oh crap. Their amazingly awesome and simple to use with mass amounts of storage that takes 30 seconds to sign-up with email service is really cramping our style. Well, competing would cost money. Let's see... we could probably bad mouth them and speculate with no proof until their business turns south. Then, when they are beaten and battered, we introduce our lame gmail clone and advertise it as a great alternative to the evil empire of google."
k thx business n00bs~~ I'm going to stick with google until they give me reason not to trust them. Which they haven't done. In fact, quite the opposite (ala fighting the DMCA). b
It's completely GAY, however, I possibly forsee google losing. As I remember, certain searches were banned via the DMCA. Google fought it kicking and screaming (and rightly so), but in the end complied.
Kazaa lite search
Scroll to the bottom. I wonder if ALL other search engines have to comply? I mean, it's only fair...
>> I then predicted that their boss would fire them, and recommended they quit first. Because I can recognize a trap when I see one, especially an IT management trap, designed by a foolhardy boss that will blow up in someone's face. Better the PHB than the earnest young admin. That's not a "whim". That's management science information.
Wow, you can tell all that knowing almost nothing about where he works, his boss, his security officer, or the poster himself. Man, you should start some sort of... future telling business.
First of all, if you read his posts, he is given a reasonable time table. All his boss wants is a rough idea of what needs to be done in the next week. His office's security manager has provided him with ample documentation regarding what needs to be done. He will have help from his security officer. The machine will be network unattached. The only two media available will be CDR's and the hard drive.
The organization providing him with the CAD data is already DoD secure.
For the most part, he's got the computer security issues down. He just needs physical security. Which, since they've got a security manager isn't as big as an issue, because he's an on-staff professional.
omg k thx he's being set up the bomb better quit now before you are fired OMgee the sky is falling tilde~~~~~~~~
How advice like this is seen as insightful is beyond me.
If I quit my job every time I was asked to do something I was unable to do and my employers wouldn't accept "no" as an answer, I would have cycled through many-a-job.
What they are asking of him isn't a terribly difficult or huge thing to do. They are asking him to secure _one_ computer. From reading his posts he already has a pretty good idea of what needs to be done. He also has about a week to come up with at least a gameplan. It really sounds like he's 90% of the way there and was just asking for some tips on others' experiences.
Quitting your job on a whim everytime your told to do something unreasonable is, well... unreasonable.
All I know is, the 3 times I've bought products based on clicking advertisments they've been google ads. No flashy ads with viral marketing? You don't say...
One of my old bosses said he didn't like using AMD chips because some of his programs didn't run right and would crash. I thought it was b.s., but this does shed some new light on the claim. This was about a year and a half ago he told me this, and he was speaking of experiences from a few years back, so maybe he was speaking about the sub 1ghz amd cpu's.
Also, I don't think nearly as many people use Intel's compilier as Microsoft's for windows programs and GCC for open source.
Linux uses kernel modules to insert code into a running kernel. Most distributions come shipped with a crapload of modules. They will use an initial ramdisk to do hardware detection and only modprobe modules with hardware present.
To the end user, all they have to do is install their linux distribution and it just works.
I've been using Linux for a while now (Red Hat 6.2 was my first). When I first started, you kinda had to plan your hardware for linux or hope it would work. Today, I don't think twice about linux support. Most times I can plug in my new usb device right out of the box (via hotplug) with no driver disks, update searches, searching HP's website, etc etc.
Obviously there are exceptions, but it's been a looooooooong time that I've bought hardware that doesn't work with Linux.