A press release from Microsoft today is trying to address all the security holes and bugs of its software.
"Apparently, all these holes and bugs are created by one terrorist member who infiltrated our company. We've always been wondering WHY all the holes are found in our software - as you know, we always try produce high quality, flawless software - and this explain where all the bugs come from. They are not our fault."
Yes. I can read Chinese, and I know of a 2 byte character that describes a chinese email every time - much like the "a"/"an"/"the" articles in English. Put it in procmail - boom. ALL Chinese emails are gone. Although you have to have 2 filters, one for traditional and one for simplified.
Why do so many people complain "RPM makes installing from source hard"? Why all the -nodep?
One of the big reasons, may I say, is compiled-in preferences. IMHO, NO kind of reconfiguration of programs should require a recompile. WHY do we need to recompile at all - except for embedded programmers? Harddrives are cheap.
It is what configuration files are for - configuring the app at post-compile time.
What if I run my cable modem and a wireless network, and have a whole bunch of X clients, and have my neighbors all running their own X servers, running MY clients (e.g. Netscape)?
In theory, all the Netscapes are running on MY computer....it is only the DISPLAY that gets transferred thru 802.11b.
What I've observed is, digital technologies tend to become obsolete and forgotten.
At least, pictures stored on film or microfilm can be directly seen by the eyes. Digitally stored, we have to decrypt, decompress, change into analog form...etc before the information can be truely "read".
We are able to study scripts written as far as 4000 years ago. Any sane mind here thinks our digital stuffs can last even one tenth as long?
>But in the end, its still cheaper to replace
>your Athlon once than to go with an equivalent
>Pentium 4
When a CPU dies like this, I sure as hell have to check my motherboard and other hardwares for defects, as a "burnt" component in a box can make another. Also, the moment it comes down it may bring down a lot of data - so obviously it is NOT only the CPU price that counts.
You have to make a choice to live in one of them. Which would you choose?
The moment you have chosen one, you have answered your own question - that the two are not "equally bad" - that one of them is the obvious lesser of the two evils.
>There's a scary thought: When the private sector
>fails to come up with an uncrackable system, the
>government will step in and have a go.
Hm...even if the private sector succeeds in coming up with an uncrackable, the government, specifically the NSA, will STILL step in and have a go...at cracking it.
Maybe after all these, in 2005, when we're all running X on top of DirectFB. You'll notice no difference for your apps and games and videos.
In fact, to the end user, there might be no noticeable difference at all, even speedwise, between building X on top of DirectFB and adding hardware accelerations in XFree.
However, one of these two approaches is a hack. And we all know how hard to maintain codes ridden with hacks. I'd choose a layered implementation with a clean rewrite of X.
>IP is about the question of whether a creator
>can have control over their creation. When you
>copy, you appropriate that control.
No. IP is about the question of whether a creator can have control over *THE REPRODUCTION* of their creation. i.e. "who can make copies". But beyond that, the creator should be powerless.
It is what _copy_right actually means. For example, if I buy a CD, the author does not have the control over how I'm going to listen to it - I might listen only on the left ear, play it backwards, sell it to my friend, or just burn the damn thing into ash.
However, I'm bound to obey on their rules about copying. I do not complain about that and I think it is the right thing to do.
But just "control" or "access control" is too broad. The DMCA says that, if the access control technology only allows you to listen on your right ear, from 7am to 8am for the odd-numbered songs and 5pm to 6pm for the even-numbered songs, you cannot bypass it.
Anti circumvention - same deal. As long as I don't make copies, it is none of your business on how I look into, hack, debug, reverse engineer, whatever your lawyers call it.
If I ran the government, I'd lock people up for the obvious terrorist act of proposing the DMCA.
If it does not restrict how small I can resize the window, I'll be using it a lot more than I do now. I hate when my window must be as least at big as the lined-up buttons.
Programmers, remember: restricting your users is always a bad idea.
Slashdot Mirror
Is what we are using.
To get it:
Go to google, search for "ldap browser" and click "I'm feeling lucky".
Enjoy.
Don't know how to tell you now - too lazy to look up for the ascii. However, it is the single most frequent character. As shown in
http://www.mandarintools.com/flashcard.html
A press release from Microsoft today is trying to address all the security holes and bugs of its software.
"Apparently, all these holes and bugs are created by one terrorist member who infiltrated our company. We've always been wondering WHY all the holes are found in our software - as you know, we always try produce high quality, flawless software - and this explain where all the bugs come from. They are not our fault."
Yes. I can read Chinese, and I know of a 2 byte character that describes a chinese email every time - much like the "a"/"an"/"the" articles in English. Put it in procmail - boom. ALL Chinese emails are gone. Although you have to have 2 filters, one for traditional and one for simplified.
Why do so many people complain "RPM makes installing from source hard"? Why all the -nodep?
One of the big reasons, may I say, is compiled-in preferences. IMHO, NO kind of reconfiguration of programs should require a recompile. WHY do we need to recompile at all - except for embedded programmers? Harddrives are cheap.
It is what configuration files are for - configuring the app at post-compile time.
What if I run my cable modem and a wireless network, and have a whole bunch of X clients, and have my neighbors all running their own X servers, running MY clients (e.g. Netscape)?
In theory, all the Netscapes are running on MY computer....it is only the DISPLAY that gets transferred thru 802.11b.
Would it constitute to "stealing"?
You have your right to be anti-technology if you don't like any of the palm sized devices.
I for one, find keeping addresses on a palm more convenient than on the "notebook (the paper ones)".
I'll never again use the "notebook (the paper one)" to "keep address etc."
Of course you have the right to not like them - the world is divided among different opinions...
However, I think modding the parent as "insightful" is quite a stretch of reality.
>Playing games ?
>With this display you really can't go any
>further then gameboy style one. I don't see
>anyone using them for Quake or DOOM.
For many, gameboy style games are vastly superior to any Quake/Doom incarnations.
If we were talking about 100 years, then I'd have to agree with you.
But "immortality" should at least mean being able to be read even after the demise of our civilization.
Is the digital storage itself, maybe?
What I've observed is, digital technologies tend to become obsolete and forgotten.
At least, pictures stored on film or microfilm can be directly seen by the eyes. Digitally stored, we have to decrypt, decompress, change into analog form...etc before the information can be truely "read".
We are able to study scripts written as far as 4000 years ago. Any sane mind here thinks our digital stuffs can last even one tenth as long?
"-" denotes a backspace.
{Lameness filter bypass}
do not work well if I have
filename---
and
filena-
and you just want to access one of them
I'm not sure if you can still do...
append backspace characters to your filenames, so no others can access it from the shell?
>But in the end, its still cheaper to replace
>your Athlon once than to go with an equivalent
>Pentium 4
When a CPU dies like this, I sure as hell have to check my motherboard and other hardwares for defects, as a "burnt" component in a box can make another. Also, the moment it comes down it may bring down a lot of data - so obviously it is NOT only the CPU price that counts.
Is it possible to write a proxy that reports as MSIE, but converts incoming pages for compatibility for the browsers that connects to it?
Imagine yourself in the crossroad.
To your left is a world of "open monopoly"
To your right is a world of "MS monopoly"
You have to make a choice to live in one of them. Which would you choose?
The moment you have chosen one, you have answered your own question - that the two are not "equally bad" - that one of them is the obvious lesser of the two evils.
But why? HL engine is based on Quake 2, which, even a hard-to-find Riva TNT can handle well.
With that much hardware to play with, optimizations should go to the more demanding games.
>There's a scary thought: When the private sector
>fails to come up with an uncrackable system, the
>government will step in and have a go.
Hm...even if the private sector succeeds in coming up with an uncrackable, the government, specifically the NSA, will STILL step in and have a go...at cracking it.
At least people are disclosing their patents right now, not after a standard has become de-facto. We don't need more companies like Rambuzz.
Maybe after all these, in 2005, when we're all running X on top of DirectFB. You'll notice no difference for your apps and games and videos.
In fact, to the end user, there might be no noticeable difference at all, even speedwise, between building X on top of DirectFB and adding hardware accelerations in XFree.
However, one of these two approaches is a hack. And we all know how hard to maintain codes ridden with hacks. I'd choose a layered implementation with a clean rewrite of X.
Comment out the lameless filter code until your server passes the Turing Test.
Thank you.
>IP is about the question of whether a creator
>can have control over their creation. When you
>copy, you appropriate that control.
No. IP is about the question of whether a creator can have control over *THE REPRODUCTION* of their creation. i.e. "who can make copies". But beyond that, the creator should be powerless.
It is what _copy_right actually means. For example, if I buy a CD, the author does not have the control over how I'm going to listen to it - I might listen only on the left ear, play it backwards, sell it to my friend, or just burn the damn thing into ash.
However, I'm bound to obey on their rules about copying. I do not complain about that and I think it is the right thing to do.
But just "control" or "access control" is too broad. The DMCA says that, if the access control technology only allows you to listen on your right ear, from 7am to 8am for the odd-numbered songs and 5pm to 6pm for the even-numbered songs, you cannot bypass it.
Anti circumvention - same deal. As long as I don't make copies, it is none of your business on how I look into, hack, debug, reverse engineer, whatever your lawyers call it.
If I ran the government, I'd lock people up for the obvious terrorist act of proposing the DMCA.
Microsoft Everywhere.
Linux Everywhere.
Both sounds bad, but one has to sound worse than the other.
RIAA_HAX0R_CLIENT: Request NSync crap song
GNUTELLA_SERVER: Sending...
RIAA_HAX0R_CLIENT: Request NSync crap song
GNUTELLA_SERVER: Sending...
RIAA_HAX0R_CLIENT: Request NSync crap song
GNUTELLA_SERVER: Sorry, too many clients
RIAA_HAX0R_CLIENT: Request NSync crap song
GNUTELLA_SERVER [sending to other GNUTELLA servers]: HAX0R found: RIAA_HAX0R_CLIENT
GNUTELLA_SERVER_A [to RIAA_HAX0R_CLIENT]: Request Nsync another crap song
GNUTELLA_SERVER_A [to RIAA_HAX0R_CLIENT]: Request Nsync another crap song
GNUTELLA_SERVER_B [to RIAA_HAX0R_CLIENT]: Request Nsync another crap song
...
GNUTELLA_SERVER_ZZ [to RIAA_HAX0R_CLIENT]: Request Nsync another crap song
RIAA_HAX0R_CLIENT crashes.
If it does not restrict how small I can resize the window, I'll be using it a lot more than I do now. I hate when my window must be as least at big as the lined-up buttons.
Programmers, remember: restricting your users is always a bad idea.