It depends on what kind of war you're fighting. The primary useful purpose of an armed populace is to avoid being overrun by a foreign power. Switzerland managed to avoid being invaded by Germany in both world wars, and I'd bet it has something to do with the fact that its entire population (or maybe it's only the men, but that's nearly as effective) is part of its militia. That doesn't mean Switzerland could successfully invade another country.
It seems Windows developers will always trade end-users security to prevent permissions-issue support calls. And *ALL* of them develop and test as administrators. QA'ing with a user account is too much work.
The historical lack of a "Run as user..." command is partly responsible for this.
[sarcasm]Riiight. So what would obviously be even more secure would be to have everyone write their own operating system.[/sarcasm]
It's a trade-off. By having people with above-average competence design the system, you increase the probability that the system will withstand being attacked. On the other hand, by standardizing your operating environment, you increase the likely severity of any successful attack.
If "monocultures" were invariably bad, then we wouldn't have had the AES competition. People would just design their own encryption primitives.
If Shell prevails on that count, sites like Google will have to get online publishers to 'opt in' before they can be crawled, radically changing the nature of Web search.
The funny thing about Punycode is that it isn't even necessary, at least from the perspective of the DNS protocol. Since DNS labels are encoded as length+data, you can theoretically just put arbitrary UTF-8 characters directly into a DNS name. Unfortunately, I think BIND (in its infinite brokenness) didn't handle that very well or something.
Free software can be compared to other development models.
"Free software" is not a development model. It's a category of copyright licensing regimes. "Cathedral" and "bazaar" are development models, the latter of which is often called "open source".
Microsoft isn't completely blameless here. If Microsoft had adopted the same strategy for drivers as the OpenBSD project has (accepting either fully open drivers or no drivers), then somebody (even Microsoft) could make the drivers work on Vista.
This is yet another why open drivers built from publicly-available hardware documentation are better than binary-blob drivers.
Slashdot Mirror
It depends on what kind of war you're fighting. The primary useful purpose of an armed populace is to avoid being overrun by a foreign power. Switzerland managed to avoid being invaded by Germany in both world wars, and I'd bet it has something to do with the fact that its entire population (or maybe it's only the men, but that's nearly as effective) is part of its militia. That doesn't mean Switzerland could successfully invade another country.
Being x-rated (i.e. not rated) is not equivalent to being pornographic.
...but that is the only way it can be clear, workable and enforacable.Your lack of imagination does not exclude all other options.
It's built into Windows 2000? Where?
If people can't find the option, it's not much better.
Good grief, no. Use PICS.
(See also: RFC 3675)
tu.xxx - Penguin Porn!
Apparently you've never watched surgery on TV. Hint: It's not on the Playboy channel.
... like PICS. Of course, this has already been discussed in RFC 3675.
You people are idiots. (Score: -1, Redundant... This is Slashdot, after all.)
Please do the world a favour by tagging this article "rfc3675", then go read it.
That's because you failed to read RFC 3675.
The historical lack of a "Run as user..." command is partly responsible for this.
[sarcasm]Riiight. So what would obviously be even more secure would be to have everyone write their own operating system.[/sarcasm]
It's a trade-off. By having people with above-average competence design the system, you increase the probability that the system will withstand being attacked. On the other hand, by standardizing your operating environment, you increase the likely severity of any successful attack.
If "monocultures" were invariably bad, then we wouldn't have had the AES competition. People would just design their own encryption primitives.
Define what you mean by "secure".
No. You have to actually pass the exams to get a GED.
... which is why she won't prevail.
The funny thing about Punycode is that it isn't even necessary, at least from the perspective of the DNS protocol. Since DNS labels are encoded as length+data, you can theoretically just put arbitrary UTF-8 characters directly into a DNS name. Unfortunately, I think BIND (in its infinite brokenness) didn't handle that very well or something.
We can, but it won't win votes.
Sure you can. You compare the system call APIs.
"Free software" is not a development model. It's a category of copyright licensing regimes. "Cathedral" and "bazaar" are development models, the latter of which is often called "open source".
Or, it suggests that our planet's recent climate changes might have a natural AND human-induced cause.
Right. So you think if Microsoft had made open drivers a requirement for Windows, that NVIDIA would have just gone out of business? Brilliant!
In this case, it's not working because the drivers and hardware documentation aren't open.
I didn't realize you could install extra applications on a flight data recorder!
Microsoft isn't completely blameless here. If Microsoft had adopted the same strategy for drivers as the OpenBSD project has (accepting either fully open drivers or no drivers), then somebody (even Microsoft) could make the drivers work on Vista.
This is yet another why open drivers built from publicly-available hardware documentation are better than binary-blob drivers.