Reading your posts today has been a joy. This piece of abject stupidity regarding patent licensing, and your other comments regarding GSM phones, have only proved that towing the/. party line leads directly to mod points, no matter how uninformed you actually are.
Next time you see someone developing something on an automobile computer, let me know. Otherwise, please re-read my lesson - I don't think you understood it.
Let's have a quick lesson in correlation =/= causation, shall we?
Lots of people breathe air. Lots of people get cancer. Therefore, air causes cancer!
Windows is on 95% of the worlds computers. It's not going to be very difficult to find a few businesses that aren't posting the profits they used to that all use Windows in some fashion or another, because Windows is ubiquitous.
What he meant, Twit, is that mentioning Open Source in this debate is disingenuous and completely redundant.
But hey, anything to push your agenda, eh? You remind me of the guys in your government who piggyback their own laws on the back of major bills in Congress. They can't get their ridiculous point of view acknowledged normally so they pin it to a more popular law change in the hope people will associate them.
This is story is about Apple and DRM-free music. Please stop dragging the discussion down into the boggy depths of your personal crusades, kay? Thanks!
Just to inform you, all you did there was sound extremely bitter, and quite frankly pathetic.
Are you going to come up with a real criticism of the tech, other than a lame 'durhur BSOD' joke and some awful conjecture about spilling photos and spam?
I prefer it to the Windows 'feature' that automatically shuts down your PC whether you want it to or not Are we playing the "Let's Make Shit Up" game now?
all with default config. Unless you count actually putting content on your site as changing it's config. Can you point out where it says those are default config? Because, you know, it doesn't. Anywhere. Even the Apache ones don't mention whether you have to have the specific module enabled or not to cause the vulnerability, so they could *all* very well be default config too.
Even given this, when you limit to Apache 2.2.x (IIS/6/ remember) you get 3 vulnerabilities. http://secunia.com/product/9633 Which has been out how long? A year? IIS 6 has been available since 2003, so instead of comparing products with two different lifespans I compared them over timescales. In four years of IIS6 there have been 3 vulnerabilities. In four years of Apache there have been 31.
The rest of your post is mainly composed of logical fallacies that lead the argument nowhere except down what-ifs and possibilities, so let's stick to the facts, shall we? There were 10 times as many public vulnerabilities found in Apache webservers as there were in IIS 6 in the last 4 years. A system that is vulnerable is vulnerable, and you've yet to provide hard evidence that any of the Apache vulnerabilities are as 'silly' as you've said.
Insightful? Puh-lease.
Well the MS ones are along the lines of: the default config is vulnerable (with one arbitrary code execution), and the Apache ones are more like: if the config is really weird and the moon is just right you might be able to DOS it. Only one of those MS vulnerabilities results in arbitrary code execution. 4 Apache vulnerabilities do. Only one of those MS vulnerabilities can result in a DoS attack. 17 Apache vulnerabilities do.
Also, you're getting information that I don't have, because none of those listed vulnerabilities are specifically noted by Secunia to be in the default configuration. Have you got a link that I can read where that information is noted?
Also of course, fewer advisories doesn't mean less secure Can I have your more useful metric, then? Because as far as I'm concerned, a big-ass list of all the vulnerabilities in a piece of software is a pretty good indication of how secure it is.
Hell, one of the Apache vulnerabilities is that a local admin user can get information about the request headers sent to the server. That argument is particularly non-cogent - there's another 30 vulnerabilities to pick out here. One starts a DoS and is pretty trivial to set off.
You could before. Many companies have been selling boxes without an OS on them for years, my local computer store for one. If you couldn't even be bothered to go that far all you have to do is build your own. The parts are practically colour coded.
The myth that you couldn't buy a PC without paying MS has never, ever been true.
Your source for that story 404s and the only other reference is dated to 2004:
Author of Linux Patent Study Says Ballmer Got It Wrong By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols November 19, 2004 And the fact you don't see lawsuits about Linux's use of MP3s is nothing to do with incorrect licensing, because no distro has licensed those patents:
Even though MPEG Audio Layer 3 (MP3) is an ISO standard it is not a free and open standard and is covered by numerous patents. It is not legal to distribute unlicensed MP3 Decoders and Encoders in most countries. And if you would ship an mp3 decoder, you can not link it from GPL software, because this would cause a GPL violation (because of it's additional restrictions). From OpenSuse.org
So in fact, the reason that Linux hasn't lost any lawsuits over their MP3 use is because nobody who uses those patents has any money to sue for. The use of MP3s in Linux is still entirely against the law.
Are you going to clarify that, because I was under the impression that offering the user a Yes/No choice when asking to run something risky was exactly what UAC is.
OO's default is to not run macros. The user get's a warning and has to say "yes" to the thing. This is the best that can be done and still be "compatible" with M$ Office. Isn't this the exact same 'security feature' that you've been saying is so shit about Vista?
Slashdot Mirror
Being a troll yourself, I would have thought you could recognise one on sight - apparently not, eh?
How is any of this relevant to the State of New York issuing public documents in ODF format?
This coming from a guy widely renowned for posting the same comment over and over to whore karma.
People in glass houses shouldn't take up Ultimate Frisbee.
Reading your posts today has been a joy. This piece of abject stupidity regarding patent licensing, and your other comments regarding GSM phones, have only proved that towing the /. party line leads directly to mod points, no matter how uninformed you actually are.
Next time you see someone developing something on an automobile computer, let me know. Otherwise, please re-read my lesson - I don't think you understood it.
I'm always amused by how it's so much easier for you to assume someone works for Microsoft than actually argue the point.
Let's have a quick lesson in correlation =/= causation, shall we?
Lots of people breathe air. Lots of people get cancer. Therefore, air causes cancer!
Windows is on 95% of the worlds computers. It's not going to be very difficult to find a few businesses that aren't posting the profits they used to that all use Windows in some fashion or another, because Windows is ubiquitous.
Another ad hominem, Twit?
I would have thought you'd be sick of them by now.
Ohhh, I see how you twisted it!
What he meant, Twit, is that mentioning Open Source in this debate is disingenuous and completely redundant.
But hey, anything to push your agenda, eh? You remind me of the guys in your government who piggyback their own laws on the back of major bills in Congress. They can't get their ridiculous point of view acknowledged normally so they pin it to a more popular law change in the hope people will associate them.
This is story is about Apple and DRM-free music. Please stop dragging the discussion down into the boggy depths of your personal crusades, kay? Thanks!
Just to inform you, all you did there was sound extremely bitter, and quite frankly pathetic.
Are you going to come up with a real criticism of the tech, other than a lame 'durhur BSOD' joke and some awful conjecture about spilling photos and spam?
I know that, and you know that. I'm here to make sure everyone else does :)
Okay, first I thought you were being serious, but if you drew that conclusion from what I wrote it's pretty clear you're just a persistent troll.
Either grow up or learn to read, whichever is more relevant to you.
So you're telling me that I should swallow blindly what the /. summary has to say instead?
Replacing ignorance with false truth is no better.
Vista has this now, but not a particularly long period for the maximum length of time - something like 4 hours.
The rest of your post is mainly composed of logical fallacies that lead the argument nowhere except down what-ifs and possibilities, so let's stick to the facts, shall we? There were 10 times as many public vulnerabilities found in Apache webservers as there were in IIS 6 in the last 4 years. A system that is vulnerable is vulnerable, and you've yet to provide hard evidence that any of the Apache vulnerabilities are as 'silly' as you've said.
Only one of those MS vulnerabilities can result in a DoS attack. 17 Apache vulnerabilities do.
Also, you're getting information that I don't have, because none of those listed vulnerabilities are specifically noted by Secunia to be in the default configuration. Have you got a link that I can read where that information is noted? Also of course, fewer advisories doesn't mean less secure Can I have your more useful metric, then? Because as far as I'm concerned, a big-ass list of all the vulnerabilities in a piece of software is a pretty good indication of how secure it is. Hell, one of the Apache vulnerabilities is that a local admin user can get information about the request headers sent to the server. That argument is particularly non-cogent - there's another 30 vulnerabilities to pick out here. One starts a DoS and is pretty trivial to set off.
IIS 6 has had only 3 vulnerabilities found since it's release in 2003: Look here.
Apache 2.0.x has had 31 vulnerabilities in the same time period: Here.
What were you saying again?
You could before. Many companies have been selling boxes without an OS on them for years, my local computer store for one. If you couldn't even be bothered to go that far all you have to do is build your own. The parts are practically colour coded.
The myth that you couldn't buy a PC without paying MS has never, ever been true.
And that's just this week.
Isn't that more of an indication that an operating system does far more than a Word clone?
By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
November 19, 2004 And the fact you don't see lawsuits about Linux's use of MP3s is nothing to do with incorrect licensing, because no distro has licensed those patents: Even though MPEG Audio Layer 3 (MP3) is an ISO standard it is not a free and open standard and is covered by numerous patents. It is not legal to distribute unlicensed MP3 Decoders and Encoders in most countries. And if you would ship an mp3 decoder, you can not link it from GPL software, because this would cause a GPL violation (because of it's additional restrictions). From OpenSuse.org
So in fact, the reason that Linux hasn't lost any lawsuits over their MP3 use is because nobody who uses those patents has any money to sue for. The use of MP3s in Linux is still entirely against the law.
Are you going to clarify that, because I was under the impression that offering the user a Yes/No choice when asking to run something risky was exactly what UAC is.