Not everyone has DSL. And if you really knew all this, then why the "one datacenter per square mile" quip? Perhaps they really meant "last two miles", given all the caching that is done with ISPs to minimize traffic on the backbone. The point is that the NSA won't sniffing the any episodes of House.
BTW I didn't mean any offense, I just thought the phishing remark would be snarky.
No, I don't remember then. I didn't have any true friends in real life while I was growing up. Being eccentric in a small rural town meant you were the target for all manner of harassment. If someone came up to me and tried to have a conversation face to face, they were probably setting me up for something cruel.
Given the geographical challenge of finding people of similar age and interests as my own, had it not been for the Internet's global reach I might never have found anyone to really socialize with.
I don't know about OP, but facebook scares the shit out of me. People don't respect privacy anymore. Remember when Blizzard's Real ID fiasco hit, and the various employee's family member's facebooks were scraped for personal information?
AIM wasn't so bad. You could make yourself invisible from people you didn't want to talk to. There was no way to google people's AIM information, you pretty much had to know their screen name first. There was no "wall" where everyone could read your conversations, it was pretty much all one-on-one private discussion.
But facebook encourages you to splatter your personal life on the Internet for Google to crawl and low-lifes like Aaron Barr to scrape.
I understand how it was easy to misinterpret what I meant by "serious". It's not to say that the programmers themselves back then were unskilled, tasked as they were with such primitive tools. By serious code, I mean anything that requires interactive debugging of the application in use.
Minimally, you should also consider the paper savings of not having to print out reams of paper for documentation. Such documents are a second monitor of sorts. Could you write serious code without any reference material at all? If your references were jammed onto your programming screen, how might that affect your productivity?
I use three monitors at work, too. And I go home to one. And when I do any coding at home, it hurts. Even if I take the time to precisely arrange and size all the windows on my single monitor, I still find myself alt-tabbing constantly.
If you can do all your coding on one monitor without any productivity loss, you aren't writing serious code.
The premium on vertical space is precisely why two of my three monitors are in Portrait mode instead of Landscape. It is *so* nice to see the full page of a datasheet at 100% size without scrolling.
What if you open windows side-by-side...and you still don't have space?
I design circuit boards. I have three monitors. One is devoted to nothing but toolbars. In fact, it has about 5-10 toolbars, depending on whether I'm looking at a schematic or a PCB.
The second monitor shows the PCB (and a few other toolbars).
The third monitor shows the schematic.
At any time, one of the monitors might be hijacked for displaying a datasheet. Or a manufacturer's web page. Or an embedded C program. Or a bunch of folders. Or a notepad full of notes.
Can you see thieves busting in over the Internet? Do you think these devices have firewalls? Do you think they're patched whenever an exploit is found?
For that matter, are you certain the developers prevented access to the debugging ports?
You keep saying that word - freedom - but it does not mean what you think it means.
The GPL is about asserting control over derivative works. It provides the illusion of freedom, but the source code is not actually free. If it was free, there wouldn't be any restrictions at all.
To say "the GPL protects the freedom of the source code" also implies that if a commercial entity made a derivative work, somehow the original source code is no longer free. That is complete bullshit. The only purpose the GPL has is to control derivative works.
If you want to use the GPL because it works for you, that's fine, go right ahead. But don't fool yourself into thinking that it has anything to do with freedom.
I agree that it's your choice to share the code with whoever you want. Just like it's a company's choice to share their source code or keep it closed.
My point is the idea that "the GPL protects freedom" is a load of BS. It's just another way to lock down code, it just "looks" free because they make the source available. GPL folks should at least admit that it has nothing to do with freedom and everything to do with controlling the source code.
Personally, I think you should be proud if any of your code is used by a commercial entity. It means your code is good. But I guess your moral grandstanding is more important than any sort of recognition.
I hear this "does not preserve the freedoms" thing all the time from pro-GPL folks. It seems like they honestly believe that a commercial company can take existing GPL code, incorporate it into a product, and then magically the GPL code can no longer be used by open-source folks anymore.
Sure, any contribution that the commercial entity made to the GPL'd code base won't be shared back. But they wrote the code, not you, and it should be the developers' prerogative on whether they wish to share any code with anyone. You still have the original source code anyway.
And why should we believe a self-admitted basement dweller such as yourself? The real world lies to you so that you will remain complacent with what is happening.
We are told stories of Good and Evil, and that we must Sacrifice so that we can Destroy Evil, stories needed to reconcile the cognitive dissonance generated by dropping bombs from the sky and blowing up innocent people, so that we spend our blood sweat money and tears carrying out the wishes of our leaders (who are never required to Sacrifice)
And they are told stories of Good and Evil, and that they must Sacrifice so that they can Destroy Evil, stories needed to reconcile the cognitive dissonance generated by strapping a bomb to yourself and blowing up innocent people, so that they spend their lives carrying out the wishes of their leaders (who are never required to Sacrifice).
Was bin Laden worth the trillion or more dollars of war that we spent as a result of him? Was he worth the thousands of US Soldiers who paid with their lives, or the many more who paid with their limbs?
"We will never know how many people were executed or worse" by our wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Yemen....but I'll bet you that it's many orders of magnitude larger than those who were injured as a result of WikiLeaks.
In Windows, software doesn't run as root or system by default, either. Since Vista, there has been UAC, unless you turned it off. Modern Windows applications cannot even write anything to Program Files without elevated permission.
That said, you seem to wrongly think that there are no privilege escalation exploits that allow malware to gain root or system privileges.
lol, even your wiki article itself states that the Navy frigate's PCs failed on account of someone putting a 0 in the wrong field of a database, causing a divide by zero exception. Yeah, that sounds like a fair judgment...blame MS for the database app programmer's failure.
Owning the game and the system changes nothing. The hardware is not abandoned.
Let's say you buy a laptop. It has a legitimate copy of Windows 7. Does this mean you're legally entitled to install pirated Windows 7 on your Desktop?
NES has been abandoned. You cannot buy a retail NES at the store brand new.
GameCube has been abandoned. You cannot buy a retail GameCube at the store brand new.
Neither of these examples are piracy, and if you had bothered to read my post instead of looking for a reason to get mad at someone on the Internet, you might have realized that.
Slashdot Mirror
Not everyone has DSL. And if you really knew all this, then why the "one datacenter per square mile" quip? Perhaps they really meant "last two miles", given all the caching that is done with ISPs to minimize traffic on the backbone. The point is that the NSA won't sniffing the any episodes of House.
BTW I didn't mean any offense, I just thought the phishing remark would be snarky.
You have a three digit slashdot ID and you don't know what "last mile" means?
Did you phish someone's account or something?
Because MojoKid has to drive traffic to his hothardware blog.
A-ha! Sony and MS should get together on a merger and then they could solve each other's problems. And you know the FCC would approve it too!
No, I don't remember then. I didn't have any true friends in real life while I was growing up. Being eccentric in a small rural town meant you were the target for all manner of harassment. If someone came up to me and tried to have a conversation face to face, they were probably setting me up for something cruel.
Given the geographical challenge of finding people of similar age and interests as my own, had it not been for the Internet's global reach I might never have found anyone to really socialize with.
I don't know about OP, but facebook scares the shit out of me. People don't respect privacy anymore. Remember when Blizzard's Real ID fiasco hit, and the various employee's family member's facebooks were scraped for personal information?
AIM wasn't so bad. You could make yourself invisible from people you didn't want to talk to. There was no way to google people's AIM information, you pretty much had to know their screen name first. There was no "wall" where everyone could read your conversations, it was pretty much all one-on-one private discussion.
But facebook encourages you to splatter your personal life on the Internet for Google to crawl and low-lifes like Aaron Barr to scrape.
I understand how it was easy to misinterpret what I meant by "serious". It's not to say that the programmers themselves back then were unskilled, tasked as they were with such primitive tools. By serious code, I mean anything that requires interactive debugging of the application in use.
Minimally, you should also consider the paper savings of not having to print out reams of paper for documentation. Such documents are a second monitor of sorts. Could you write serious code without any reference material at all? If your references were jammed onto your programming screen, how might that affect your productivity?
I use three monitors at work, too. And I go home to one. And when I do any coding at home, it hurts. Even if I take the time to precisely arrange and size all the windows on my single monitor, I still find myself alt-tabbing constantly.
If you can do all your coding on one monitor without any productivity loss, you aren't writing serious code.
The premium on vertical space is precisely why two of my three monitors are in Portrait mode instead of Landscape. It is *so* nice to see the full page of a datasheet at 100% size without scrolling.
What if you open windows side-by-side...and you still don't have space?
I design circuit boards. I have three monitors. One is devoted to nothing but toolbars. In fact, it has about 5-10 toolbars, depending on whether I'm looking at a schematic or a PCB.
The second monitor shows the PCB (and a few other toolbars).
The third monitor shows the schematic.
At any time, one of the monitors might be hijacked for displaying a datasheet. Or a manufacturer's web page. Or an embedded C program. Or a bunch of folders. Or a notepad full of notes.
Can you see thieves busting in over the Internet? Do you think these devices have firewalls? Do you think they're patched whenever an exploit is found?
For that matter, are you certain the developers prevented access to the debugging ports?
LOL I was hoping I wasn't the only person who noticed that...
You keep saying that word - freedom - but it does not mean what you think it means.
The GPL is about asserting control over derivative works. It provides the illusion of freedom, but the source code is not actually free. If it was free, there wouldn't be any restrictions at all.
To say "the GPL protects the freedom of the source code" also implies that if a commercial entity made a derivative work, somehow the original source code is no longer free. That is complete bullshit. The only purpose the GPL has is to control derivative works.
If you want to use the GPL because it works for you, that's fine, go right ahead. But don't fool yourself into thinking that it has anything to do with freedom.
I agree that it's your choice to share the code with whoever you want. Just like it's a company's choice to share their source code or keep it closed.
My point is the idea that "the GPL protects freedom" is a load of BS. It's just another way to lock down code, it just "looks" free because they make the source available. GPL folks should at least admit that it has nothing to do with freedom and everything to do with controlling the source code.
Personally, I think you should be proud if any of your code is used by a commercial entity. It means your code is good. But I guess your moral grandstanding is more important than any sort of recognition.
I hear this "does not preserve the freedoms" thing all the time from pro-GPL folks. It seems like they honestly believe that a commercial company can take existing GPL code, incorporate it into a product, and then magically the GPL code can no longer be used by open-source folks anymore.
Sure, any contribution that the commercial entity made to the GPL'd code base won't be shared back. But they wrote the code, not you, and it should be the developers' prerogative on whether they wish to share any code with anyone. You still have the original source code anyway.
On that note, so is the United States executive branch.
After all, the only evidence they have on PFC Manning is...
A chat log.
The basis of this claim is Dr. Gene Spafford of Purdue University. He was giving testimony before Congress.
If you have proof that this man is lying, then let's see YOU go before Congress and testify.
And why should we believe a self-admitted basement dweller such as yourself? The real world lies to you so that you will remain complacent with what is happening.
We are told stories of Good and Evil, and that we must Sacrifice so that we can Destroy Evil, stories needed to reconcile the cognitive dissonance generated by dropping bombs from the sky and blowing up innocent people, so that we spend our blood sweat money and tears carrying out the wishes of our leaders (who are never required to Sacrifice)
And they are told stories of Good and Evil, and that they must Sacrifice so that they can Destroy Evil, stories needed to reconcile the cognitive dissonance generated by strapping a bomb to yourself and blowing up innocent people, so that they spend their lives carrying out the wishes of their leaders (who are never required to Sacrifice).
Was bin Laden worth the trillion or more dollars of war that we spent as a result of him? Was he worth the thousands of US Soldiers who paid with their lives, or the many more who paid with their limbs?
"We will never know how many people were executed or worse" by our wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Yemen....but I'll bet you that it's many orders of magnitude larger than those who were injured as a result of WikiLeaks.
In Windows, software doesn't run as root or system by default, either. Since Vista, there has been UAC, unless you turned it off. Modern Windows applications cannot even write anything to Program Files without elevated permission.
That said, you seem to wrongly think that there are no privilege escalation exploits that allow malware to gain root or system privileges.
I only see salt1, salt2, transmitted to client, and x being transmitted to server.
Server only stores hash(pw) and salt1.
Or did I miss something?
I feel a disturbance in the financial industry, as if millions of gamer's credit cards were stolen, and then suddenly canceled.
lol, even your wiki article itself states that the Navy frigate's PCs failed on account of someone putting a 0 in the wrong field of a database, causing a divide by zero exception. Yeah, that sounds like a fair judgment...blame MS for the database app programmer's failure.
Even if you own the games and the console, the hardware has not been abandoned and therefore emulators are hardware piracy.
That said, owning the console at least lends a shred of credibility to the owner. Less wrong is still wrong.
Owning the game and the system changes nothing. The hardware is not abandoned.
Let's say you buy a laptop. It has a legitimate copy of Windows 7. Does this mean you're legally entitled to install pirated Windows 7 on your Desktop?
NES has been abandoned. You cannot buy a retail NES at the store brand new.
GameCube has been abandoned. You cannot buy a retail GameCube at the store brand new.
Neither of these examples are piracy, and if you had bothered to read my post instead of looking for a reason to get mad at someone on the Internet, you might have realized that.