They must sell veeery different chemistry sets where I come from. The chemistry set I had let you make blue crystals and turn blue solutions red etc, the chemicals were the sort of chemicals that you could get an idea of how a couple of concepts and how to use basic equipment, not exactly blow-up-building material. They were mostly salts.
Maybe it was just a baby chemistry set, but it does seem like there are easier ways to learn bomb making, and get the chemicals needed to make bombs. From what little I know about bomb making you can make the cheaper terrorism-level bombs out of quite a household items.
I imagine that when it gets doped it's very difficult to un-dope. I guess that's why the silicon is only being used in photovoltaic cells and isn't suitable to be made into new chips, but I'm a layman.
What I find strange, but have become used to, is that "Trusted Computing" is one of the things that Microsoft really gets a lot of crap whenever Ballmer so much as daydreams about implementing it. But Apple actually already has the hardware in place and ready to go, and no-one so much as mentions it here.
Personally though I actually think Apple is doing the right think in going ahead with Trusted Computing, I think as long as you don't think proprietary software is a crime against humanity Trusted Computing has a lot of excellent applications. (No more worrying about cheaters in multiplayer computer games, etc)
You are smoking some fine crack friend. When the _fuck_ is booting Windows automatically into safe mode user friendly?
Never. It's an unholy fucking nightmare, and non-IT-admin types should NEVER, EVER be dumped to into safe mode in Windows. Spend some time doing tech support for Windows users and you'll know what I'm talking about.
NOTHING in Windows' boot menu should be automatic, it ALL leads to certain doom. You're right, just showing a BSoD is much better. Jobs cares so much about his users he would rather they are shown a BSoD than get booted into safe mode, this is how wise Jobs is.
"A technological error" - An error of misunderstanding the software.
It's not exactly obvious that when you use the "To" field instead of the "Bcc" field the e-mails of everyone on the "To" list is published to everyone else.
"inadvertently disclosed" - It wasn't deliberate.
I don't see where the bullshit is. Would you prefer "We fucked up, our bad. But in our defense what gives with all the e-mails being sent to everyone else if you don't use this "Bcc" field? Seriously what the hell is "Bcc" anyway? Doesn't cc mean carbon copy?"
Generating energy from spirits seems like a good idea, but then spiky haired rebels try and blow up your reactors and massive demons rise out the ground.
Well most other OSes aren't reliant on the GUI to do most tasks. You can do a lot on Windows via the command line with PowerShell, but most people still prefer to use the GUI that they're familiar with to configure servers etc. Also even if Windows did have an SSH interface to PowerShell, it still wouldn't be usable by Linux people because PowerShell is pretty different from sh. (You'd be more familiar coming to PowerShell from *.NET than from *sh)
The reason for this upgrade being mandatory is that it's used by lots of other applications. It's a bit like Apple's spotlight in that it's used by lots of apps. So if I'm using OneNote or Outlook I need Windows Desktop Search or it gives me a message asking for the search service.
The valid complaint, the only valid complaint, is that it does hog up the disk (though not the network) while indexing, and it indexes more than it needs to by default.
I wish there was a tag for these kinds of stories, so we can easily tell when it's interesting news as opposed to interesting (or not so interesting) debate fuel.
You may be blindly following a herd of sheep who believe (but don`t know why) that wearing a suit and tie makes you respectable... It's not about wearing a suit or tie, there's nothing inherently respectable about suits or ties, it's about following the convention.
It's just a simple mark of respect for the audience, showing that the event is something special that is worth preparing for.. This is why people don't go to weddings, funerals, graduations, etc, in dressing gowns (I know I find dressing gowns more comfortable, but I know the father in law would be a little annoyed)
You could say "omg you sheeple if I want to wear rainbow suspenders to your mom's funeral I will, you moron, because I don't follow arbitrary conventions like "wear black". I'm too cool and ironic to show respect and unity."
Seems like by not dressing as other people do he's just adding more nonsense to the mix. Instead of delivering his message by speaking he's causing other people to focus on what he's wearing; generating controversy or trying to give himself a "look", instead of just giving a speech he's giving everyone other things to focus on.
e.g. Here we are, talking about his stupid dress choice, and not about his speech. If he just dressed like everyone else we would be talking about what he said, not how he dressed, but he's taking away from what he said by dressing inappropriately.
GMO does not mean Monsanto. The problems with GMOs are the legal issues, which is why people relate GMOs to Monsanto. If the legal issues around GMOs can be resolved there's nothing worrying about GMOs themselves. GMOs could be the key invention that lets us continue to use more and more arid land to grow crops as global warming happens.
With Parallels you can run Linux on the Mac, and if you don't want to do that but still want Nix software, you can do it. I'm using GIMP, Scribus, Inkscape, Xephem, and other titles I was used to in the Nix world. I've even ran Gnome on top of OSX. What? What does that have to do with anything? Are you from Apple marketing or something? You think we don't know you can run any GTK app on Windows too?
Getting back on topic: "Why didn't Apple release Leopard earlier to capitalize on Vista's poor reception? Apple should hire me so I can decide these things for them. Yes, they really missed an opportunity there, those silly managers at Apple.."
Hmmm, I'm guessing the release coming now, and not months ago, had something to do with Leopard not being ready.
You can say "If HURD 1.0 had been released right after Vista it might have got some extra users", but that doesn't mean the developers can just decide to finish and release HURD 1.0 whenever it plays well against another company's release date.
The parent addressed your other points so I'll just finish off with this:
BTW, since OSX is BSD, then OSX has potentially had anything BSD has, especially things that are "ages" old as the other poster said. OSX forked from BSD a long time ago. OpenBSD has address space randomization, OS X doesn't; you can't get away with saying "because OSX is derived from BSD you can't claim BSD is better in any way".
Safari asks. Most modern browsers have security settings that can do this. No as in any foreign executable, including executables downloaded via network shares, are flagged as foreign. This isn't the same as your browser asking "are you sure you want to download this executable file?"
It is called Little Snitch. It works great. Okay, but it wasn't part of the OS. We're talking about the OS here, not applications for the OS.
Nice feature, but if you were really concerned with security you would have memory encryption enabled anyhow. No problems with this when using encrypted memory. Encrypted memory? Can you elaborate on this? I'm guessing you're talking about encrypted swap files, but that doesn't make it any harder for foreign code to know where in the address space useful libraries are.
Public Key signing anyone? This has been around for decades - even on OSX! Manual public key signing isn't the same as automatic digitally signed binaries. Manual public key signing means that the user has to know to download the digital signature separately and check the executable, which is a big hassle and pretty unrealistic for most users.
These are not things that weren't available on OSX. They weren't gaping holes. Apple just decided to make them easier for the average user by including them out of the box and beefing them up a bit where necessary (like the memory randomization). They were already available? Where in Tiger is memory randomization, digitally signed binaries, flagged-as-new binaries, and the built in application-level firewall?
Were you born yesterday? Seems you know absolutely nothing about OS X.
# Tagging Downloaded Applications
Protect yourself from potential threats. Any application downloaded to your Mac is tagged. Before it runs for the first time, the system asks for your consent -- telling you when it was downloaded, what application was used to download it, and, if applicable, what URL it came from. This was introduced by Microsoft in Windows XP SP2
# Application-Based Firewall
Gain more control over the built-in firewall. Specify the behavior of specific applications to either allow or block incoming connections. You guessed it; Microsoft, SP2 (it was available in third party firewalls before then of course)
# Library Randomization
Defend against attackers with no effort at all. One of the most common security breaches occurs when a hacker's code calls a known memory address to have a system function execute malicious code. Leopard frustrates this plan by relocating system libraries to one of several thousand possible randomly assigned addresses. As the GP said, this has been in lots of OSes for a long time, including Windows Vista.
# Signed Applications
Feel safe with your applications. A digital signature on an application verifies its identity and ensures its integrity. All applications shipped with Leopard are signed by Apple, and third-party software developers can also sign their applications. Again, Microsoft, SP2.
I'm guessing "Well, good ideas should be shared around and used by all kinds of companies", and I agree; but why does it apply to Microsoft security and other internal OS technologies, and workspaces, etc, and not stuff Apple makes?
You're right that this finding does contradict the traditional savannah theory of human evolution, as do many other findings, but it fits right in with the ever increasingly popular aquatic ape theory of human evolution.
The idea is basically that as the climate dried up human ancestors stuck closer to rivers and oceans, where the trees and water were, and ate shellfish and other seafood. (It doesn't mean we became fully aquatic, like mermaids. Just that we became as aquatic as we are now.)
The rich seafood diet has plenty of all the stuff needed to fuel a large brain. It also explains why we can hold our breath and babies can instinctively hold their breath underwater, and why we have no body hair, downward pointing nostrils, webbed fingers, dilute urine, and why we find homo fossils in sediment but not chimpanzee fossils, and why baboons, which came down from the trees and onto the savannah, didn't become human-like, etc, etc.
The savannah theory says that as the climate dried up human ancestors that had previously lived in trees started to move out into the savannah.
I wonder if this is where all that "dark matter" is. Scientist keep talking about how there is so much more matter than what we can detect. Well, we haven't been able to detect this until now. How much more is missing, I wonder.
It amazes me at how much we DON'T know. Maybe these dark holes are proof of string theory, because they formed from strings that resonate at the same frequency and so they all join together and resonate at a larger amplitude, and this is what makes them seem so massive.
Or maybe you and I aren't astrophysicists and we shouldn't talk about how much "we" don't know, and let the people who know what they're talking about do the theorizing.
Yes competition is good. I has caused apple to lower it's price to keep a few of it's customers. It also has caused some music labels to rethink how they sell music. (I know one of them is selling music online with non-DRM). You think Apple lowered the price because of competition? Apple weren't profiting of people's desires to have DRM free music, Jobs said himself that he is opposed to DRM, and that having DRM creates overhead that increases the cost.
If anything, the technical expertise and overhead required to create, operate and update a DRM system has limited the number of participants selling DRM protected music. -- Jobs So of course he wouldn't sell DRM music for extra if he didn't have to. He wouldn't be so hypocritical as to call for everyone to embrace and request DRM-free music, and then charge extra for DRM-free music.
Slashdot Mirror
They must sell veeery different chemistry sets where I come from. The chemistry set I had let you make blue crystals and turn blue solutions red etc, the chemicals were the sort of chemicals that you could get an idea of how a couple of concepts and how to use basic equipment, not exactly blow-up-building material. They were mostly salts.
Maybe it was just a baby chemistry set, but it does seem like there are easier ways to learn bomb making, and get the chemicals needed to make bombs. From what little I know about bomb making you can make the cheaper terrorism-level bombs out of quite a household items.
I imagine that when it gets doped it's very difficult to un-dope. I guess that's why the silicon is only being used in photovoltaic cells and isn't suitable to be made into new chips, but I'm a layman.
What I find strange, but have become used to, is that "Trusted Computing" is one of the things that Microsoft really gets a lot of crap whenever Ballmer so much as daydreams about implementing it. But Apple actually already has the hardware in place and ready to go, and no-one so much as mentions it here.
Personally though I actually think Apple is doing the right think in going ahead with Trusted Computing, I think as long as you don't think proprietary software is a crime against humanity Trusted Computing has a lot of excellent applications. (No more worrying about cheaters in multiplayer computer games, etc)
Never. It's an unholy fucking nightmare, and non-IT-admin types should NEVER, EVER be dumped to into safe mode in Windows. Spend some time doing tech support for Windows users and you'll know what I'm talking about.
NOTHING in Windows' boot menu should be automatic, it ALL leads to certain doom. You're right, just showing a BSoD is much better. Jobs cares so much about his users he would rather they are shown a BSoD than get booted into safe mode, this is how wise Jobs is.
Yes.. The designers of police uniforms incorporate reflections of "erosions of individual rights etc" into their uniforms.
"A technological error" - An error of misunderstanding the software.
It's not exactly obvious that when you use the "To" field instead of the "Bcc" field the e-mails of everyone on the "To" list is published to everyone else.
"inadvertently disclosed" - It wasn't deliberate.
I don't see where the bullshit is. Would you prefer "We fucked up, our bad. But in our defense what gives with all the e-mails being sent to everyone else if you don't use this "Bcc" field? Seriously what the hell is "Bcc" anyway? Doesn't cc mean carbon copy?"
Generating energy from spirits seems like a good idea, but then spiky haired rebels try and blow up your reactors and massive demons rise out the ground.
Well most other OSes aren't reliant on the GUI to do most tasks. You can do a lot on Windows via the command line with PowerShell, but most people still prefer to use the GUI that they're familiar with to configure servers etc. Also even if Windows did have an SSH interface to PowerShell, it still wouldn't be usable by Linux people because PowerShell is pretty different from sh. (You'd be more familiar coming to PowerShell from *.NET than from *sh)
The reason for this upgrade being mandatory is that it's used by lots of other applications. It's a bit like Apple's spotlight in that it's used by lots of apps. So if I'm using OneNote or Outlook I need Windows Desktop Search or it gives me a message asking for the search service.
The valid complaint, the only valid complaint, is that it does hog up the disk (though not the network) while indexing, and it indexes more than it needs to by default.
There's "conformist" and there's "polite".
A handshake is an arbitrary convention, but who says "no I don't shake hands you sheep, what exactly is the purpose of a handshake?"
I hear the Mexican Space program can get a whale to the moon for $100
I wish there was a tag for these kinds of stories, so we can easily tell when it's interesting news as opposed to interesting (or not so interesting) debate fuel.
It's just a simple mark of respect for the audience, showing that the event is something special that is worth preparing for.. This is why people don't go to weddings, funerals, graduations, etc, in dressing gowns (I know I find dressing gowns more comfortable, but I know the father in law would be a little annoyed)
You could say "omg you sheeple if I want to wear rainbow suspenders to your mom's funeral I will, you moron, because I don't follow arbitrary conventions like "wear black". I'm too cool and ironic to show respect and unity."
Seems like by not dressing as other people do he's just adding more nonsense to the mix. Instead of delivering his message by speaking he's causing other people to focus on what he's wearing; generating controversy or trying to give himself a "look", instead of just giving a speech he's giving everyone other things to focus on.
e.g. Here we are, talking about his stupid dress choice, and not about his speech. If he just dressed like everyone else we would be talking about what he said, not how he dressed, but he's taking away from what he said by dressing inappropriately.
GMO does not mean Monsanto. The problems with GMOs are the legal issues, which is why people relate GMOs to Monsanto. If the legal issues around GMOs can be resolved there's nothing worrying about GMOs themselves. GMOs could be the key invention that lets us continue to use more and more arid land to grow crops as global warming happens.
Thank you for that high class joke and the great explanation you gave me (which made it that much funnier).
You rule! Keep it up
Getting back on topic: "Why didn't Apple release Leopard earlier to capitalize on Vista's poor reception? Apple should hire me so I can decide these things for them. Yes, they really missed an opportunity there, those silly managers at Apple.."
Hmmm, I'm guessing the release coming now, and not months ago, had something to do with Leopard not being ready.
You can say "If HURD 1.0 had been released right after Vista it might have got some extra users", but that doesn't mean the developers can just decide to finish and release HURD 1.0 whenever it plays well against another company's release date.
Who calls a universal serial bus integrated flash data storage device a "USB memory stick"?
I'm guessing "Well, good ideas should be shared around and used by all kinds of companies", and I agree; but why does it apply to Microsoft security and other internal OS technologies, and workspaces, etc, and not stuff Apple makes?
You're right that this finding does contradict the traditional savannah theory of human evolution, as do many other findings, but it fits right in with the ever increasingly popular aquatic ape theory of human evolution.
The idea is basically that as the climate dried up human ancestors stuck closer to rivers and oceans, where the trees and water were, and ate shellfish and other seafood. (It doesn't mean we became fully aquatic, like mermaids. Just that we became as aquatic as we are now.)
The rich seafood diet has plenty of all the stuff needed to fuel a large brain. It also explains why we can hold our breath and babies can instinctively hold their breath underwater, and why we have no body hair, downward pointing nostrils, webbed fingers, dilute urine, and why we find homo fossils in sediment but not chimpanzee fossils, and why baboons, which came down from the trees and onto the savannah, didn't become human-like, etc, etc.
The savannah theory says that as the climate dried up human ancestors that had previously lived in trees started to move out into the savannah.
It amazes me at how much we DON'T know.
Maybe these dark holes are proof of string theory, because they formed from strings that resonate at the same frequency and so they all join together and resonate at a larger amplitude, and this is what makes them seem so massive.
Or maybe you and I aren't astrophysicists and we shouldn't talk about how much "we" don't know, and let the people who know what they're talking about do the theorizing.