Could all them them punch holes in Vista's security if the vendors that supplied them don't have engineers as competent as Microsoft's?
Yes, they could.
Show me a vendor with engineers less competent than Microsoft's.
Simple solution. Use a relay and a capacitor. When the device loses power, the relay trips, telling the device to perform its shutdown ritual using power from the capacitor.
Not too dissimmilar from what is being done here, actually; simply using a different signal source and no solar panels.
I think it would have done more good to ask GP whether people should learn how to use and maintain their hammers, screwdrivers, wrenches, or even guns, before being allowed to potentially do serious damage to themselves or others with them.
And with that, I'll pose that question. So, onefriedrice, should they? And, if so, why, then, should they not learn the basics of, and how to use and maintain their multi-ton killing machinnes (vehicles) or machines capable of being hijacked and used to, collectively, cost businesses and governments (read: consumers and citizens, you don't truly believe the B's and G's are conna eat that cost, do you?) billions of dollars?
That's right; botnets not only slow down one person's computer, they slow down, at the very least, an entire network segment of an ISP while they're being used for an attack. They cost that ISP money. If the user is on metered bandwidth, they cost the user money. If they are used to DDoS a government, they cost that government money in bandwidth costs; a business, the same, plus lost sales. If they are used to hack in and steal banking or credit information, they cost untold numbers of people untold amounts of money.
People need to be educated about these things because that money doesn't just appear in their pockets and that loss doesn't disappear from their accounting. The losses are passed directly onto us, citizens and consumers, through higher taxes and prices.
While we're educating, let's make sure they know which end of the gun is supposed to be facing them when they pull the trigger. For some, this will be the muzzle, for others, this will be the butt.
For technical reasons, RAM is sized in powers of 2. One byte is equal to eight bits. Two bits, four bits, eight bits, that's 2^3 bits to make one byte.
While you could, in theory, have 1000 bits in a kilobit, that would give you 125 bytes. 125 is not a power of 2, while 128 is, leaving 128 bytes as 1024 bits, which is why that is a kilobyte. It is not an approximation, it is a technical requirement. It is also the standard when dealing with binary computers because it is the one thing which can not change.
It stands to reason that, for no other reason that simplicity, this standard would be followed universally when dealing with binary computers. Why should I have to convert from KB-of-RAM for KB-of-disk when determining whether the contents of RAM will fit on a disk? If i have 1GB of RAM and 1GB of disk and wish to write out those contents, bit-for-bit, I should know immediately that it will fit.
As for your question about the network connection; no, I would not expect to be able to transfer one gigabyte over a one-gigabit-per-second connection in one second. Not only has networking gone down the same path as disk storage, meaning that what should be 1,073,741,824 bits-per-second is only approximately 93% of that (1,000,000,000 bits-per-second); add to that the fact that a gigabyte is eight gigabits and I would expect it to take roughly eight point six seconds. Of course, this assumes perfect line conditions, completely compatible hardware and no protocol overhead. Realistically, it would take closer to fifteen seconds.
Very true. However, the computer counts them in base 2.
If I have 1GB (2^30) of RAM, I would expect a raw 100GB disk to be able to hold the contents of my RAM 100 times over. If I have a 1GB (2^30) file and the ability to write to a raw 100GB disk as though it were tape, I would expect that disk to be able to hold 100 copies of that file.
Pick one... Higher prices for all Dropping high bandwidth users Capping users monthly bandwidth Throttling the one application which uses 2/3's of the system bandwidth Advertising the limited service as a limited service
Did you read the summary? I did. "You buyt those computers and pay to have Mandriva preloaded, then wipe them and install Windows" doesn't sound like a very competitive bid to me.
Check out Linux again? I run Gutsy on all but my CentOS 4 server and the Windows box I use for my OLD scanner; I almost forgot to mention the laptop next to the couch. The new Epson in the office is great, thank you very much.
The Windows machines in my home have very specific uses. The system next to my TV, with my older HP printer and my HP scanner attatched, is primarily a media center. The associated laptop (8 year old hardware) is used for light web browsing, as an extremely well-featured remote control (via 802.11g) for the media center and to VNC into said media center when the resolution of the TV screen isn't enough for a certain task (or to take the show into the kitchen or restroom, rather than pausing and making the rest of the audience wait while someone grabs a drink, or relieves themselves of one they grabbed before the movie started).
I live in an apartment building and, though I'm the newest tennant, I'm also the loudest and people don't seem to mind. Perhaps that's because i'm only loud when we're all outside; passing the wi-fi-remote-laptop around, each taking a stab at playlist management while we're barbecueing.
Or, maybe it's because my grandparents have managed this place since before I was born. I'd guess that was the reason if anyone other than the two maintenence guys knew it. They don't.
Even my non-geek neighbors (and there's a few geeks living here, as well) take interest when I talk about Linux. They see the system I have set up. They see Windows, because that's what the front-end of it runs on. They, for some sick reason, love to hear about the back-end; they ask about the Linux setup I have running everything behind the scenes, from storage, to routing, to access control, ot the fact that every other computer in the apartment runs Linux.
These are the non-geeks taking interest here. Linux is building a name. I've even had neighbours try and nudge me out from infront of MY laptop so they could see what all the fuss was about.
My neighbours also pay my rent. I fix their computers for them and, as they gain comfort with Linux, have been transitioning them one-by-one. So far, it's been well-recieved; only one of my migrated users relies on windows at all, for Photoshop, which doesn't fare too well under winE.
Thank you for your suggestion. Your heart is in the right place. Might I direct you to change your method, however? It wouldn't take long to read through my post history and learn that I do use Linux regularly and that the scanner in question has been replaced.
Why do I need 2? Simple. What's in my office belongs to my business. What's in the living room can be used by either my fiancee or myself. I have 3 printers, as well. One in the living room, for common use and two in the office; one is for invoices and mailers (mostly service reminders "have you backed up lately?") and one for everything else.
What can I say, I like being well organized. Electronically, at least; I don't do so well on paper.
Does anyone see the irony here? Parent works with *nix servers, but has problems with network connectivity working under Ubuntu.
Now that I've ripped on our AC friend, I have to half-heartedly agree with the last line of the above post.
My computer illiterate mother runs Fiesty. She's asked me for help with it once since switching. My equally savvy fiancee has been running Dapper on the desktop since it was released and just installed Gutsy on her laptop last night with no help from me.
I've seen Windows work as often as I've seen it break and I've seen Linux break as often as I've seen it work. Quite literally, every time I've seen either OS fail catastrophically, it's either been a shoddy driver or failing hardware. You can hardly blame the operating system in either case.
That said, I would like to mention that I wasn't intent on taking a jab at you, AC; I was merely reveling in the irony that abounds in your situation. Let's share a hearty laugh, then let me ask you what network hardware you could not get working properly. Once that information is out there, Linux devs will be able to start in on the problem.
Whether they will or not is another question; not too dissimmilar from the situation with Windows.
I understand that you may have had issues that were caused by linux on incompatible hardware (it's unfortunate, but it happens, just like with Windows).
My question is, did you try Gutsy after its official release about a week ago? If not, do you realize that many of the problems you faced may have been the continuing changes that release of the distro was undergoing up until the official release?
Just to qualify, I've been using Gusty since Herd 1 and yes, it had its moments of horror. I knew, however, to expect them, just as I knew to expect them when I took part in the Vista beta.
Now that both have officially been released, I can tell you that neither are now what they were before. I might offer a suggestion that you try Gutsy again now that it's an official release and many times more stable.
Who knows, maybe Linux just isn't your thing. Or maybe it's just prerelease operating systems that cause problems for you. Only one way to find out.
To further qualify, I'll leave you with this. In the end, you'll use whichever works better for you and that's how it should be. I use both and long to add at least one Mac to my office eventually.
I apologize for not mentioning that I do use both. I prefer Linux, by far, mostly using Windows for development and testing, sometimes for audio work. I was writing that list from the typical user's perspective, not my own.
That said, as a developer, the path the end-suer takes is VERY important to me. This is precisely why I despise Vista. Being a developer also means I see UAC prompts VERY often because I recognize why not to disable them or run as an administrator all the time.
You have to look from more than one point-of-view, often from more than two, when writing for a diverse audience, and address the concerns of every member of that audience or you will quickly find your audience moving on to other shows.
On the contrary, often times it's saying the newest Windows version should be more like Distro X. And yes, it is degrading to Windows.
Until my old scanner gets a working Linux driver, I still have a use for Windows. Hopefully being locked in the basement, fed barely enough to survive and being made to operate specialized equipment, recieving attention only when your work is needed, isn't too degrading. Okay, now I'm starting to feel sorry for Windows.
To the end-user, Windows has "security through obstruction", which annoys and gets disabled. To that same end-user, Linux has "security through obscurity", which stays out of the way.
Yes, I know, open source, all the flaws are right there for everyone to see, not obscured at all. That's not what the end-user sees. The end-user just knows that it's more secure because that's what their geek friend told them; they never see why, they never care why and they never need bother with it. This is a good thing. What doesn't annoy them enough that they go out of their way to disable... I'm sure you see where I'm going with this.
Let's review what we've learned so far this year: Linux - driver issues. Vista - driver issues. Linux - learning curve. Vista - learning curve. Linux - secure until you work around the security in the name of convenience. Vista - secure until you work around the security in the name of convenience. Linux - annoying until you learn it. Vista - annoying until you learn it AND disable the security features.
Re:The average user does not know about usenet
on
RIAA Sues Usenet.com
·
· Score: 1
Simple way to get around the 1GB caps... form an alt.binaries.music.by.album heading and allow new groups to be created under it freely...
alt.binaries.music.by.album.pink.floyd.dark.side.of.the.moon.flac should be well under 1GB of data posted ever, let alone in a day.
Quite amusing. However, I wasn't blindly defending Linux. I was pointing out the fact that Linux can, in fact, play flash files, with an Adobe-created-and-supported player. That the player does not run on a PPC CPU has nothing to do with linux; how much longer will Adobe maintain the PPC/OSX version of flash? Nobody can say for sure, but I wouldn't hope for a PPC/OSX version of Flash 10.
Actually, it would seem that it is that fact that he's running Linux on a G4 that si the root of his inability to play flash videos. It's not ao much a Linux issue, as Adobe has a flash player and plugin for Linux, which works quite well. Pick up all of the details of the situation before forming an argument.
PowerPC... Superior, indeed.
Blast! Now you've got ME trolling, too!
Keep in mind that this figured includes innefficiency in the power supply, as well as power consumed by the tuner, the remote control module, the CPU that runs image filters and any other hardware not related to the screen itself. I would have to guess the screen itself uses maybe a couple of watts, though this would be pure speculation.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, they could.
Show me a vendor with engineers less competent than Microsoft's.
I keed, I keed! Or do I?
Simple solution. Use a relay and a capacitor. When the device loses power, the relay trips, telling the device to perform its shutdown ritual using power from the capacitor. Not too dissimmilar from what is being done here, actually; simply using a different signal source and no solar panels.
And that never happens?
I think it would have done more good to ask GP whether people should learn how to use and maintain their hammers, screwdrivers, wrenches, or even guns, before being allowed to potentially do serious damage to themselves or others with them.
And with that, I'll pose that question. So, onefriedrice, should they? And, if so, why, then, should they not learn the basics of, and how to use and maintain their multi-ton killing machinnes (vehicles) or machines capable of being hijacked and used to, collectively, cost businesses and governments (read: consumers and citizens, you don't truly believe the B's and G's are conna eat that cost, do you?) billions of dollars?
That's right; botnets not only slow down one person's computer, they slow down, at the very least, an entire network segment of an ISP while they're being used for an attack. They cost that ISP money. If the user is on metered bandwidth, they cost the user money. If they are used to DDoS a government, they cost that government money in bandwidth costs; a business, the same, plus lost sales. If they are used to hack in and steal banking or credit information, they cost untold numbers of people untold amounts of money.
People need to be educated about these things because that money doesn't just appear in their pockets and that loss doesn't disappear from their accounting. The losses are passed directly onto us, citizens and consumers, through higher taxes and prices.
While we're educating, let's make sure they know which end of the gun is supposed to be facing them when they pull the trigger. For some, this will be the muzzle, for others, this will be the butt.
Thank you. You just gave me a new sig.
At least someone formatted it so it fits nicely on the screen now.
For technical reasons, RAM is sized in powers of 2. One byte is equal to eight bits. Two bits, four bits, eight bits, that's 2^3 bits to make one byte.
While you could, in theory, have 1000 bits in a kilobit, that would give you 125 bytes. 125 is not a power of 2, while 128 is, leaving 128 bytes as 1024 bits, which is why that is a kilobyte. It is not an approximation, it is a technical requirement. It is also the standard when dealing with binary computers because it is the one thing which can not change.
It stands to reason that, for no other reason that simplicity, this standard would be followed universally when dealing with binary computers. Why should I have to convert from KB-of-RAM for KB-of-disk when determining whether the contents of RAM will fit on a disk? If i have 1GB of RAM and 1GB of disk and wish to write out those contents, bit-for-bit, I should know immediately that it will fit.
As for your question about the network connection; no, I would not expect to be able to transfer one gigabyte over a one-gigabit-per-second connection in one second. Not only has networking gone down the same path as disk storage, meaning that what should be 1,073,741,824 bits-per-second is only approximately 93% of that (1,000,000,000 bits-per-second); add to that the fact that a gigabyte is eight gigabits and I would expect it to take roughly eight point six seconds. Of course, this assumes perfect line conditions, completely compatible hardware and no protocol overhead. Realistically, it would take closer to fifteen seconds.
How do YOU like pedantry, friend?
Very true. However, the computer counts them in base 2.
If I have 1GB (2^30) of RAM, I would expect a raw 100GB disk to be able to hold the contents of my RAM 100 times over. If I have a 1GB (2^30) file and the ability to write to a raw 100GB disk as though it were tape, I would expect that disk to be able to hold 100 copies of that file.
Please, tell me what is unreasonable about that?
Pick one...
Higher prices for all
Dropping high bandwidth users
Capping users monthly bandwidth
Throttling the one application which uses 2/3's of the system bandwidth
Advertising the limited service as a limited service
There, fixed that for ya.
Did you read the summary? I did. "You buyt those computers and pay to have Mandriva preloaded, then wipe them and install Windows" doesn't sound like a very competitive bid to me.
First of all, WTF?
Kubuntu 7.10 - Gutsy Gibbon On the Streets
Thu, 18 Oct 2007
From the front page of the Kubuntu website.
Second, thank you, I did mean Tribe.
Thus why I want to add at least one Mac to the office. I can't appreciate (or agonize over) the nuances of a platform if I don't use it.
Check out Linux again? I run Gutsy on all but my CentOS 4 server and the Windows box I use for my OLD scanner; I almost forgot to mention the laptop next to the couch. The new Epson in the office is great, thank you very much.
The Windows machines in my home have very specific uses. The system next to my TV, with my older HP printer and my HP scanner attatched, is primarily a media center. The associated laptop (8 year old hardware) is used for light web browsing, as an extremely well-featured remote control (via 802.11g) for the media center and to VNC into said media center when the resolution of the TV screen isn't enough for a certain task (or to take the show into the kitchen or restroom, rather than pausing and making the rest of the audience wait while someone grabs a drink, or relieves themselves of one they grabbed before the movie started).
I live in an apartment building and, though I'm the newest tennant, I'm also the loudest and people don't seem to mind. Perhaps that's because i'm only loud when we're all outside; passing the wi-fi-remote-laptop around, each taking a stab at playlist management while we're barbecueing.
Or, maybe it's because my grandparents have managed this place since before I was born. I'd guess that was the reason if anyone other than the two maintenence guys knew it. They don't.
Even my non-geek neighbors (and there's a few geeks living here, as well) take interest when I talk about Linux. They see the system I have set up. They see Windows, because that's what the front-end of it runs on. They, for some sick reason, love to hear about the back-end; they ask about the Linux setup I have running everything behind the scenes, from storage, to routing, to access control, ot the fact that every other computer in the apartment runs Linux.
These are the non-geeks taking interest here. Linux is building a name. I've even had neighbours try and nudge me out from infront of MY laptop so they could see what all the fuss was about.
My neighbours also pay my rent. I fix their computers for them and, as they gain comfort with Linux, have been transitioning them one-by-one. So far, it's been well-recieved; only one of my migrated users relies on windows at all, for Photoshop, which doesn't fare too well under winE.
Thank you for your suggestion. Your heart is in the right place. Might I direct you to change your method, however? It wouldn't take long to read through my post history and learn that I do use Linux regularly and that the scanner in question has been replaced.
Why do I need 2? Simple. What's in my office belongs to my business. What's in the living room can be used by either my fiancee or myself. I have 3 printers, as well. One in the living room, for common use and two in the office; one is for invoices and mailers (mostly service reminders "have you backed up lately?") and one for everything else.
What can I say, I like being well organized. Electronically, at least; I don't do so well on paper.
Does anyone see the irony here? Parent works with *nix servers, but has problems with network connectivity working under Ubuntu.
Now that I've ripped on our AC friend, I have to half-heartedly agree with the last line of the above post.
My computer illiterate mother runs Fiesty. She's asked me for help with it once since switching. My equally savvy fiancee has been running Dapper on the desktop since it was released and just installed Gutsy on her laptop last night with no help from me.
I've seen Windows work as often as I've seen it break and I've seen Linux break as often as I've seen it work. Quite literally, every time I've seen either OS fail catastrophically, it's either been a shoddy driver or failing hardware. You can hardly blame the operating system in either case.
That said, I would like to mention that I wasn't intent on taking a jab at you, AC; I was merely reveling in the irony that abounds in your situation. Let's share a hearty laugh, then let me ask you what network hardware you could not get working properly. Once that information is out there, Linux devs will be able to start in on the problem.
Whether they will or not is another question; not too dissimmilar from the situation with Windows.
Seems a fair game either way.
I understand that you may have had issues that were caused by linux on incompatible hardware (it's unfortunate, but it happens, just like with Windows).
My question is, did you try Gutsy after its official release about a week ago? If not, do you realize that many of the problems you faced may have been the continuing changes that release of the distro was undergoing up until the official release?
Just to qualify, I've been using Gusty since Herd 1 and yes, it had its moments of horror. I knew, however, to expect them, just as I knew to expect them when I took part in the Vista beta.
Now that both have officially been released, I can tell you that neither are now what they were before. I might offer a suggestion that you try Gutsy again now that it's an official release and many times more stable.
Who knows, maybe Linux just isn't your thing. Or maybe it's just prerelease operating systems that cause problems for you. Only one way to find out.
To further qualify, I'll leave you with this. In the end, you'll use whichever works better for you and that's how it should be. I use both and long to add at least one Mac to my office eventually.
I apologize for not mentioning that I do use both. I prefer Linux, by far, mostly using Windows for development and testing, sometimes for audio work. I was writing that list from the typical user's perspective, not my own.
That said, as a developer, the path the end-suer takes is VERY important to me. This is precisely why I despise Vista. Being a developer also means I see UAC prompts VERY often because I recognize why not to disable them or run as an administrator all the time.
You have to look from more than one point-of-view, often from more than two, when writing for a diverse audience, and address the concerns of every member of that audience or you will quickly find your audience moving on to other shows.
On the contrary, often times it's saying the newest Windows version should be more like Distro X. And yes, it is degrading to Windows.
Until my old scanner gets a working Linux driver, I still have a use for Windows. Hopefully being locked in the basement, fed barely enough to survive and being made to operate specialized equipment, recieving attention only when your work is needed, isn't too degrading. Okay, now I'm starting to feel sorry for Windows.
like "First Post"
But this insight came out instead.
To the end-user, Windows has "security through obstruction", which annoys and gets disabled. To that same end-user, Linux has "security through obscurity", which stays out of the way.
Yes, I know, open source, all the flaws are right there for everyone to see, not obscured at all. That's not what the end-user sees. The end-user just knows that it's more secure because that's what their geek friend told them; they never see why, they never care why and they never need bother with it. This is a good thing. What doesn't annoy them enough that they go out of their way to disable... I'm sure you see where I'm going with this.
Let's review what we've learned so far this year:
Linux - driver issues. Vista - driver issues.
Linux - learning curve. Vista - learning curve.
Linux - secure until you work around the security in the name of convenience. Vista - secure until you work around the security in the name of convenience.
Linux - annoying until you learn it. Vista - annoying until you learn it AND disable the security features.
Simple way to get around the 1GB caps... form an alt.binaries.music.by.album heading and allow new groups to be created under it freely... alt.binaries.music.by.album.pink.floyd.dark.side.of.the.moon.flac should be well under 1GB of data posted ever, let alone in a day.
Quite amusing. However, I wasn't blindly defending Linux. I was pointing out the fact that Linux can, in fact, play flash files, with an Adobe-created-and-supported player. That the player does not run on a PPC CPU has nothing to do with linux; how much longer will Adobe maintain the PPC/OSX version of flash? Nobody can say for sure, but I wouldn't hope for a PPC/OSX version of Flash 10.
Actually, it would seem that it is that fact that he's running Linux on a G4 that si the root of his inability to play flash videos. It's not ao much a Linux issue, as Adobe has a flash player and plugin for Linux, which works quite well. Pick up all of the details of the situation before forming an argument. PowerPC... Superior, indeed. Blast! Now you've got ME trolling, too!
Linux doesn't have flash playback on a G4, no. Linux systems running Intel or AMD have had it for some time now, though. Troll.
No, even then, I'm pretty sure it takes several seconds for the RAM to completely discharge and lose its state.
Keep in mind that this figured includes innefficiency in the power supply, as well as power consumed by the tuner, the remote control module, the CPU that runs image filters and any other hardware not related to the screen itself. I would have to guess the screen itself uses maybe a couple of watts, though this would be pure speculation.
Lightning voltages are also many times higher.