I also have a feeling he's wrong about the pseudonyms part as well. I'd bet the majority of kernel contributions come from people who are identifiable.
Except that Alan Cox guy, that totally sounds like a fake name:-]
and some interesting comments on security. What are you talking about? His comments on security are completely ridiculous.
First he doesn't even make any coherent points except that: 1. people around Linux use pseudonyms and exaggerate their credentials.
2. No one in the community validates their credentials.
3. Some random comments about Russian spies, wtf ???
First how is that different from most other OSS communities, e.g the BSDs? Is OpenBSD insecure because of this?
Second, I would actually dispute his entire premise. Someone did a study recently looking at kernel contributions and most of them actually came from people employed at various IT firms as part of their job duties. Those people are hired and have their resumes analyzed just like people at Redmond. In fact, it's probably more likely that someone could slip through the cracks at a behemoth like Microsoft than at a small-medium sized IT company.
Also he doesn't even provide evidence that people are exaggerating their credentials other than making reference to Pamela Jones from Groklaw. How many kernel contributions has PJ made? Zero. The fact that she has a fucking blog about linux makes it an insecure OS?
I also have a feeling he's wrong about the pseudonyms part as well. I'd bet the majority of kernel contributions come from people who are identifiable.
ROTFLMAO. As if someone would actually sit through the hours it would take to read (aloud) many of these bills - and even if they would, I doubt they'd notice a change of a few dozen words out of thousands.
So just blindly voting on a bill you haven't read is somehow better? I'd rather they didn't do anything rather than pass shitty laws. Look at the freakin DMCA mess.
Great, it isn't bad enough that the overuse of antibiotics has created resistant strains of bacteria; now we're creating them on purpose to store computer data.
The antibiotic resistance genes have naturally evolved in wild strains of bacteria, we just put them to our use in the lab. Most strains of bacteria used in the lab are pathogenically harmless and engineered so that they lack crucial metabolic genes that would be required for growth in the wild. So in a culture where you've supplemented the media with various factors for growth they grow like gangbusters, but would grow poorly in the environment where they'd compete against wild strains. Even if they did manage to grow, the antibiotic genes are already out there so it's not like we'd be introducing anything new. Btw, this isn't anything especially new for data storage, scientists have been using them for years for research purposes.
Having actually worked with bacteria and done numerous experiments which involved inserting DNA into bacteria, I can tell you it is extremely hard to retain that kind of genetic information if it is not selectively beneficial. In virtually every kind of procedure like this, the gene/sequence of interest is linked to some kind of selectable antibiotic resistance marker (ampicilin, kanamycin, etc). The bacteria are then treated with the corresponding antibiotic and only those bacteria containing the antibiotic resistance gene (and therefore your target gene) grow. Using a selectively neutral sequence would be an exercise in futility. It would basically boil down to a stochastic process where once the neutral sequence is lost in one bacteria it would have a selective advantage over the rest in the culture (less nucleotides to replicate). If you think about it, according to what you're stating, if retaining numerous bits of genetic information was somehow beneficial then bacteria should have infinitely large genomes. In reality their genomes are rather small.
To the OP: From the vague article this sounds basically like a "stable transfection" where the target sequence is inserted into the bacterial chromosome instead of being an extra-chromosomal plasmid (which are gained and lost much more rapidly). I'd bet the target sequence is linked to a selectable antibiotic resistance gene as well, otherwise this would be impossible. Regardless, despite being around for decades this procedure is still horribly inefficient and expensive. You might as well etch your data into platinum coins using a dremel tool and save yourself time and money.
OpenBSD is written in C. Maybe you can show us why OpenBSD is insecure.
The "pending and unverified" status is essential a useless metric because Coverity uses an automated scan which is inherently prone to false-positives. Even so, from their site it looks like it's results are comparable to Apache.
what effect does it have on your heart or your tongue?
It's my understanding that myostatin is only expressed in skeletal muscle, so cardiac muscle would be unaffected by a myostatin inhibitor.
I'm not an expert on it, but my lab has done a lot of research on myostatin and has identified some of the mutations in humans (including some cool papers looking at mutation prevalence in world class body builders).
Frankly I would not at all be surprised. As we all know, lunix is an illegal operating system created by a communist hacker from Finland by the name of Linyos Torovoltos. It hid behind the thinly veiled name *RED* hat in order to creep into the basements of millions of americans homes and corrupt the minds of children with communist propaganda. At least we can know see the beast for what it truly is!
http://www.adequacy.org/public/stories/2001.12.2.4 2056.2147.html
Not exactly the same comparison. We've known for a long time that there are the large repetitive regions in the genome (things like huge alu repeats or arrays of psuedogenes). The very nature of the genome is that much of it was created by "copy and paste" types of mechanisms, so it's not surprising to see that effect when you view the genome in this manner. I think it's interesting in more of a "wow that looks neat" fashion, rather than any new insights. They do mention that they're not sure what some of the patterns are, so it might be interesting in trying to find out what those specific unknown patterns are, but the fact that there are patterns isn't anything new.
Let me preface this by stating that I absolutely believe that teachers are underpaid.
That being said, are you seriously comparing a 2 year teaching certificate with the med school/residency/fellowship that doctors have to complete? Med school is arguably one of the most competitive programs to get into. Most of the people I know who got teaching certs did it because they failed out of graduate school (I know that's not representative of all teachers).
Many tens of thousands of these mistakes result in someone dying. Hundreds of thousands result in serious harm. Please don't imply that doctors have higher standards than plumbers.
I wasn't trying to imply it at all. In fact I'll flat out say that doctors do have higher standards than plumbers (and virtually most other professions). They have to, in order to minimize errors. Which is why even the most minuscule thing must be documented, the words they use when writing orders/notes are extensively analyzed and standardized to prevent errors (many hospitals have regulations against use the greek letter mu when writing ul (microliter) because it easier to confuse with ml. People have actually done studies on that kind of thing. How many plumbers do you know that spend hours after work writing extensive notes on the jobs they did during the day. However, I'm certainly not saying doctors are perfect. They put a lot of effort into trying to be, but they're still human like the rest of us.
It's a more difficult job, but plumbing mistakes are pretty rare in comparison to medical mistakes.
I'd like to see some kind of reference for that. I've had some plumber screw things up pretty bad more than once.
I've had doctors force antibiotics on me for a cold, withhold pain medication with a back injury, suggest expensive and meaningless tests, and so forth.
Note that prescibing antibiotics for colds is largely a results of patients *demanding* they be given something. They don't want to be told "sorry, there's nothing I can really do for that" and family practice docs will often lose patients if they don't.
I realize that everyones experience is different. I can walk today because some guy who used to be an english teacher decided to go into medicine and become a neurosurgeon because he thought he could better help people. He put a shattered vertebrae in my spine back together in an 8 hour procedure and then went in saw patients afterwards. Probably put in a 12-15 hour day.
Your doctor isn't keeping some kind of magic wand hidden in the closet that he/she can wave to magically cure you. Doctors are limited in what they can cure, based on the ability of basic and translational science research to find cures. The reason "no one is bothering to try and cure it" is because it's a relatively mild, non-life threatening disorder (you may not feel that way, but it's true) so it's not as easy to get funding for research compared to things like cancer or heart disease. That being said, there are plenty of people doing research on it.
If the pill doesn't help, stop taking it. In some ways you should be thankfull, there are plenty of horrible, debilitating disorders that there is no "management" for.
Even if you were to get a PhD in engineering or CS, you would still likely spend much less time in school and would owe much less in tuition whe you were done. Then you'd starting making a pretty nice income right away. The fact that the majority engineers and programmers have a bachelors degree means they spend *way* less in time or money. If it were about money, most doctors (with the exception of higher paying specialties like surgeons, derm, etc) would be better off going to law school or business school and making close to 6 figures right out of school instead. I know plenty of physicians who are asshats that only went into it for the money/prestige, but by far the majority of doctors are people who really care about the patients and would rather spend more time with their patients. The OPs sentiments are dead on. They just don't appreciate it when jackasses tell them they're overpaid when they work 60+ hours a week+weekends+holidays, are paying of huge loans for 10 years, and had to sacrifice a lot to get there.
What is it that makes you feel your time is worth $800.00 an hour?
You do realize how little your doctor will ever see of that $800 right?
My plumber is more professional and friendly than any doctor I have ever seen. He comes to my home, does his job and courteously thanks me. He charges less than my doctor. If he can do it, why can't you?
If your plumber fucks up the pipes, he has to come back out and fix the leak. If your doctor fucks up *your* pipes you're dead.
Agreed. This doesn't sound like a really well thought out plan. It's pretty doubtful that anyone doing large scale scanning is doing it directly from their home machine, but rather relay it through hosts on the bot net. So it's likely that they are really going to be accusing grandma and grandpa of cracking because they didn't patch their windows98 machine. I could see if they are trying to do something useful like dshield and informing people that their systems are cracked, but that doesn't sound like it here.
Fetchmail (CVE-2005-2335) assigned 07-21-2005
redhat fixed 07-25-2005
Apple fixed 08-01-2006 (a year later)
Gunzip/Gzip (CVE-2005-0988) assigned 04-06-2005
Redhat fixed 06-13-2005
Apple fixed 08-01-2006 (a year later)
Telnet (CVE-2005-0488) assigned 2-20-2005
Redhat fixed 06-14-2005
Apple fixed 08-01-2006 (a year later)
ClamAV (CVE-2006-1614) assigned 04-05-2006
SuSE fixed 04-11-06 (not a RH package)
Apple fixed 05-11-2006
Libcurl (CVE-2005-4077) assigned 12-08-2005
Redhat fixed 12-20-2005
Apple fixed 05-11-2006
Ruby (CVE-2005-2337) assigned 07-21-2005
Redhat 10-25-2005
Apple fixed 05-11-2006 (almost a year later)
Sudo (CVE-2005-1993) assigned 06-20-2005
Redhat fixed 06-29-2005
Apple fixed 10-29-2005
If you don't care about this and pretend like there isn't an issue, then Apple won't care either. Look at Microsoft, they only made security a priority when their own users started to complain.
You seriously don't have a clue do you? Look at the past security fixes apple has released. For bugs found in both Linux and OSX, look at the CVEs and you can compare when Linux vendors fixed the bug and when the OSX fix was released. Redhat fixed most of the bugs within a day or 2. Apple had release times in months. They are horrible when it comes to timely release of security fixes.
Look at the Security update 11-28-6 for example:
GnuZip (reported 8-24-6)
redhat fixed 9-19-6
Perl (reported 12-01-5) That's a almost a year earlier
redhat fixed 12-20-05
PHP(reported 3-29-6)
redhat fixed 4-25-6
And that is actually not as bad as some of the other security updates. For awhile I was responsible for putting out a security mailing list that required me to manually sort through the bugs to remove duplicates and I always noticed Appple releasing fixes for bugs that I had seen months and months ago in Linux and the other BSDs. The bugs required for a worm are out there (remote arbitrary code execution/privilege escalation). It's surprising that they haven't been taken advantage of, personally I think there aren't as many people interested in writing exploits for Apple products.
I had the same issue happen at the University of Pittsburgh and it wasn't just limited to student software. The volume license key I was given as a student was identical to the one that my department IT administrators had, so this wasn't just an issue of "loaning" it to students. The "real" reason they decided to invalidate the license key was that Microsoft wanted them to start giving out XP disks that had *individual* license keys rather than a volume license so that they could track who was distributing software.
From the U of Pittsburgh's own software distribution site:
"Students are permitted to keep, for their personal use, copies of Microsoft software received under this license upon leaving the University."
Plus I just read the official Products Use Rights statement and their isn't anything about loaning or revoking the license at any time.
Great so once per month the units would change randomly and you'd find yourself sleeping on the couch because your use of centimeter was insensitive.//Married
I recently saw a very cool lecture by Baldomero Olivera, one of the people who discovered these compounds in cone snail venom. Apparently back in the day, they were trying to find the compound in cone snail toxin because it was terribly toxic and a lot of people in the Phillipines died from stepping on snails. So they took some cone snail toxin, fractionated it and then injected individual fractions into mice, expecting to see a single fraction that contained the "toxin" compound of interest. Instead, when they did the experiment they found that a large number of fractions had all kinds of crazy effects on the mice, including behavioral and motor effects. What they discovered was that there are a large number of compounds that make up the cone snail venom, each had a slightly different role in capturing prey. Some worked as short term paralysis agents that allowed the snail to capture its prey while others worked long term and allowed the snail to slowly eat its prey whole. There were also some that had overlapping function, but appeared to work better against different types of prey. Very cool talk considering it was about Cone Snails.
Are you sure? I seem to remember that they did and wikipedia would agree:
"Cabinet officers are nominated by the President and then presented to the United States Senate for confirmation or rejection."
Slashdot Mirror
LOL, you must be a *blast* at parties!
Except that Alan Cox guy, that totally sounds like a fake name
First he doesn't even make any coherent points except that:
1. people around Linux use pseudonyms and exaggerate their credentials.
2. No one in the community validates their credentials.
3. Some random comments about Russian spies, wtf ???
First how is that different from most other OSS communities, e.g the BSDs? Is OpenBSD insecure because of this?
Second, I would actually dispute his entire premise. Someone did a study recently looking at kernel contributions and most of them actually came from people employed at various IT firms as part of their job duties. Those people are hired and have their resumes analyzed just like people at Redmond. In fact, it's probably more likely that someone could slip through the cracks at a behemoth like Microsoft than at a small-medium sized IT company.
Also he doesn't even provide evidence that people are exaggerating their credentials other than making reference to Pamela Jones from Groklaw. How many kernel contributions has PJ made? Zero. The fact that she has a fucking blog about linux makes it an insecure OS?
I also have a feeling he's wrong about the pseudonyms part as well. I'd bet the majority of kernel contributions come from people who are identifiable.
Duh, that's what the robotic spacecraft mechanic mechanic is for. It launches next year.
So just blindly voting on a bill you haven't read is somehow better? I'd rather they didn't do anything rather than pass shitty laws. Look at the freakin DMCA mess.
Here's the proof you so desire:
:-]
http://www.venganza.org/about/open-letter/
For someone with such a low UID I thought you'd be up on your FSM-ology.
Great, it isn't bad enough that the overuse of antibiotics has created resistant strains of bacteria; now we're creating them on purpose to store computer data.
The antibiotic resistance genes have naturally evolved in wild strains of bacteria, we just put them to our use in the lab. Most strains of bacteria used in the lab are pathogenically harmless and engineered so that they lack crucial metabolic genes that would be required for growth in the wild. So in a culture where you've supplemented the media with various factors for growth they grow like gangbusters, but would grow poorly in the environment where they'd compete against wild strains. Even if they did manage to grow, the antibiotic genes are already out there so it's not like we'd be introducing anything new. Btw, this isn't anything especially new for data storage, scientists have been using them for years for research purposes.
Having actually worked with bacteria and done numerous experiments which involved inserting DNA into bacteria, I can tell you it is extremely hard to retain that kind of genetic information if it is not selectively beneficial. In virtually every kind of procedure like this, the gene/sequence of interest is linked to some kind of selectable antibiotic resistance marker (ampicilin, kanamycin, etc). The bacteria are then treated with the corresponding antibiotic and only those bacteria containing the antibiotic resistance gene (and therefore your target gene) grow. Using a selectively neutral sequence would be an exercise in futility. It would basically boil down to a stochastic process where once the neutral sequence is lost in one bacteria it would have a selective advantage over the rest in the culture (less nucleotides to replicate). If you think about it, according to what you're stating, if retaining numerous bits of genetic information was somehow beneficial then bacteria should have infinitely large genomes. In reality their genomes are rather small.
To the OP: From the vague article this sounds basically like a "stable transfection" where the target sequence is inserted into the bacterial chromosome instead of being an extra-chromosomal plasmid (which are gained and lost much more rapidly). I'd bet the target sequence is linked to a selectable antibiotic resistance gene as well, otherwise this would be impossible. Regardless, despite being around for decades this procedure is still horribly inefficient and expensive. You might as well etch your data into platinum coins using a dremel tool and save yourself time and money.
OpenBSD is written in C. Maybe you can show us why OpenBSD is insecure.
The "pending and unverified" status is essential a useless metric because Coverity uses an automated scan which is inherently prone to false-positives. Even so, from their site it looks like it's results are comparable to Apache.
what effect does it have on your heart or your tongue?
d =601788
It's my understanding that myostatin is only expressed in skeletal muscle, so cardiac muscle would be unaffected by a myostatin inhibitor.
I'm not an expert on it, but my lab has done a lot of research on myostatin and has identified some of the mutations in humans (including some cool papers looking at mutation prevalence in world class body builders).
This might be informative reading for you: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/dispomim.cgi?i
Frankly I would not at all be surprised. As we all know, lunix is an illegal operating system created by a communist hacker from Finland by the name of Linyos Torovoltos. It hid behind the thinly veiled name *RED* hat in order to creep into the basements of millions of americans homes and corrupt the minds of children with communist propaganda. At least we can know see the beast for what it truly is! http://www.adequacy.org/public/stories/2001.12.2.4 2056.2147.html
A "cluster bomb" obviously.
Not exactly the same comparison. We've known for a long time that there are the large repetitive regions in the genome (things like huge alu repeats or arrays of psuedogenes). The very nature of the genome is that much of it was created by "copy and paste" types of mechanisms, so it's not surprising to see that effect when you view the genome in this manner. I think it's interesting in more of a "wow that looks neat" fashion, rather than any new insights. They do mention that they're not sure what some of the patterns are, so it might be interesting in trying to find out what those specific unknown patterns are, but the fact that there are patterns isn't anything new.
Let me preface this by stating that I absolutely believe that teachers are underpaid.
That being said, are you seriously comparing a 2 year teaching certificate with the med school/residency/fellowship that doctors have to complete? Med school is arguably one of the most competitive programs to get into. Most of the people I know who got teaching certs did it because they failed out of graduate school (I know that's not representative of all teachers).
I'd like to see some kind of reference for that. I've had some plumber screw things up pretty bad more than once.
Note that prescibing antibiotics for colds is largely a results of patients *demanding* they be given something. They don't want to be told "sorry, there's nothing I can really do for that" and family practice docs will often lose patients if they don't.
I realize that everyones experience is different. I can walk today because some guy who used to be an english teacher decided to go into medicine and become a neurosurgeon because he thought he could better help people. He put a shattered vertebrae in my spine back together in an 8 hour procedure and then went in saw patients afterwards. Probably put in a 12-15 hour day.
Your doctor isn't keeping some kind of magic wand hidden in the closet that he/she can wave to magically cure you. Doctors are limited in what they can cure, based on the ability of basic and translational science research to find cures. The reason "no one is bothering to try and cure it" is because it's a relatively mild, non-life threatening disorder (you may not feel that way, but it's true) so it's not as easy to get funding for research compared to things like cancer or heart disease. That being said, there are plenty of people doing research on it.
If the pill doesn't help, stop taking it. In some ways you should be thankfull, there are plenty of horrible, debilitating disorders that there is no "management" for.
You do realize how little your doctor will ever see of that $800 right?
If your plumber fucks up the pipes, he has to come back out and fix the leak. If your doctor fucks up *your* pipes you're dead.
Agreed. This doesn't sound like a really well thought out plan. It's pretty doubtful that anyone doing large scale scanning is doing it directly from their home machine, but rather relay it through hosts on the bot net. So it's likely that they are really going to be accusing grandma and grandpa of cracking because they didn't patch their windows98 machine. I could see if they are trying to do something useful like dshield and informing people that their systems are cracked, but that doesn't sound like it here.
Fetchmail (CVE-2005-2335) assigned 07-21-2005
redhat fixed 07-25-2005
Apple fixed 08-01-2006 (a year later)
Gunzip/Gzip (CVE-2005-0988) assigned 04-06-2005
Redhat fixed 06-13-2005
Apple fixed 08-01-2006 (a year later)
Telnet (CVE-2005-0488) assigned 2-20-2005
Redhat fixed 06-14-2005
Apple fixed 08-01-2006 (a year later)
ClamAV (CVE-2006-1614) assigned 04-05-2006
SuSE fixed 04-11-06 (not a RH package)
Apple fixed 05-11-2006
Libcurl (CVE-2005-4077) assigned 12-08-2005
Redhat fixed 12-20-2005
Apple fixed 05-11-2006
Ruby (CVE-2005-2337) assigned 07-21-2005
Redhat 10-25-2005
Apple fixed 05-11-2006 (almost a year later)
Sudo (CVE-2005-1993) assigned 06-20-2005
Redhat fixed 06-29-2005
Apple fixed 10-29-2005
If you don't care about this and pretend like there isn't an issue, then Apple won't care either. Look at Microsoft, they only made security a priority when their own users started to complain.
You seriously don't have a clue do you?
Look at the past security fixes apple has released. For bugs found in both Linux and OSX, look at the CVEs and you can compare when Linux vendors fixed the bug and when the OSX fix was released. Redhat fixed most of the bugs within a day or 2. Apple had release times in months. They are horrible when it comes to timely release of security fixes.
Look at the Security update 11-28-6 for example:
GnuZip (reported 8-24-6)
redhat fixed 9-19-6
Perl (reported 12-01-5) That's a almost a year earlier
redhat fixed 12-20-05
PHP(reported 3-29-6)
redhat fixed 4-25-6
And that is actually not as bad as some of the other security updates. For awhile I was responsible for putting out a security mailing list that required me to manually sort through the bugs to remove duplicates and I always noticed Appple releasing fixes for bugs that I had seen months and months ago in Linux and the other BSDs. The bugs required for a worm are out there (remote arbitrary code execution/privilege escalation). It's surprising that they haven't been taken advantage of, personally I think there aren't as many people interested in writing exploits for Apple products.
From the U of Pittsburgh's own software distribution site:
Plus I just read the official Products Use Rights statement and their isn't anything about loaning or revoking the license at any time.
Great so once per month the units would change randomly and you'd find yourself sleeping on the couch because your use of centimeter was insensitive. //Married
I recently saw a very cool lecture by Baldomero Olivera, one of the people who discovered these compounds in cone snail venom. Apparently back in the day, they were trying to find the compound in cone snail toxin because it was terribly toxic and a lot of people in the Phillipines died from stepping on snails. So they took some cone snail toxin, fractionated it and then injected individual fractions into mice, expecting to see a single fraction that contained the "toxin" compound of interest. Instead, when they did the experiment they found that a large number of fractions had all kinds of crazy effects on the mice, including behavioral and motor effects. What they discovered was that there are a large number of compounds that make up the cone snail venom, each had a slightly different role in capturing prey. Some worked as short term paralysis agents that allowed the snail to capture its prey while others worked long term and allowed the snail to slowly eat its prey whole. There were also some that had overlapping function, but appeared to work better against different types of prey. Very cool talk considering it was about Cone Snails.
What bank is this? I *don't* want an account there.
Are you sure? I seem to remember that they did and wikipedia would agree: "Cabinet officers are nominated by the President and then presented to the United States Senate for confirmation or rejection."