Apt is certainly not deprecated in favour of aptitude, as aptitude is a frontend to apt. One could argue that aptitude is superior to apt-get, but it should be noted that apt-get also has autoremoval, at least in Ubuntu. Try apt-get autoremove.
Personally, I have always used apt-get instead of aptitude.
* Ubuntu used to (in Dapper) put all scripts in/etc/init.d, and then link to them in the/etc/rc*.d directories for each runlevel. However, this is in the process of being moved over to upstart, where everything will be in/etc/event.d.
* In future versions of Ubuntu, start and stop will do this, since/etc/init.d won't exist.
* This isn't entirely true. One can become root via sudo with sudo -i or sudo -s. There is no root password. In reality, I think this is of somewhat dubious value for security.
* Runlevels in Ubuntu are a problem. Some Ubuntu developers apparently believe that Linux without a graphical login is "broken" (at least one has told me this), and therefore crippled runlevels so that one cannot choose between a text and graphical login via runlevel.
* I believe that Dapper has an/etc/inittab. Edgy, as it was intended to be rather experimental, shipped with upstart in a state that wasn't complete. When it is done, I believe that runlevels will be kept around only for compatibility reasons.
* deb and rpm packages can be converted with alien, though the results are not always very usable. The method does tend to work well with third party packages that are largely without dependencies, however, and those tend to be the many of the cases where this is necessary.
Cingular is one of the only providers in the US that uses 850MHz to a significant extent, if I recall correctly. Thus most unlocked phones from outside North America will not work well, since they will not support that frequency. Quad band phones, and tri band phones with 850/1800/1900 support (usually sold to North American markets), shouldn't have any reception problems.
Wikipedia has extensive information on this topic.
This again appears to vary by region. At least in Southern California, T-Mobile's coverage claims seem to be far more conservative. Coverage maps seem to take into account individual towers, and have rather detailed plots of levels of service.
As a specific example, I know that there is no service from any provider in most parts of Palomar Mountain. Yet every provider except T-Mobile claims to have service throughout the area (T-Mobile shows the area as having no service). I also have service with Verizon, and have never been able to make a call from my cabin, or even connect to a tower at all.
Notability (WP:N on Wikipedia) isn't actually a policy, or even a core concept, on Wikipedia, though it tends to be incorrectly presented as such. It is actually a guideline which serves as a more practical explanation of policy. Unfortunately, many people, even on Wikipedia, seem to think that it is a policy, and due to the way the deletion of articles works, it is often used incorrectly to justify deletion. Policy at Wikipedia is a horrible mess, with a multitude of serious contradictions, and large discrepancies between written policy and practised policy.
The actual policy is verifiability (WP:V). The reason for the policy is that topics need to have reputable sources that others can check, or it would be impossible to tell whether the content of the pages were accurate. In practice, this most often leads to long arguments over whether various sources are "reputable", or "reliable". Wikipedia has no way of deciding these arguments, so they generally go on until one side gets tired or banned for other reasons, or until the article in question is deleted, in which case the article is usually created again a year or so later and the whole process starts all over again.
They aren't selling them for $800, they're selling for $99,999,999, which makes standing in line for 24 hours quite worth it!
On a more serious note, does anyone know what happened with this? At first glance it doesn't seem to just be one or two people with new accounts putting in false bids.
The grandparent is guessing that the system will be like headphones on planes. In that case, for US carriers, the price will be for renting the cable, unless you already have one, in which case it will be a "monitor access fee" and will be the exact same price.
No. The AP is sending packets explicitly asking if anyone wants to connect. The laptop then sends packets explicitly asking the AP if it ok to connect, and the AP responds explicitly that it is. This isn't a case of expressions like "leaving a window unlocked" meaning "Come on in!", it is the meaning that one gets from following the protocol. Windows automatically connects to APs that do this, and it is very simple to configure APs to not invite everyone like this. It is unfortunate that they do so by default.
This is more like hiring a guard to be outside your front door. Unfortunately, you make a mistake in your instructions and so the guard tells everyone to come in. When people ask if they really are allowed in, the guard tells them that they most certainly are. This probably isn't what you wanted the guard to do, and people may suspect that, but it still holds that someone who you gave authority to do so did tell the people that they could come in.
What type of university teaches the use of specific programs for courses instead of teaching the basic principles necessary to use any program?
This is why proper CS departments teach languages which usually aren't widely used. It isn't because they expect the students to use the languages in their future, it is because they believe that those languages are most suitable for teaching the principles that the students can then use to learn any language.
Do you mean the Apple technical support which wanted my credit card number before they honoured my warranty, just in case they decided replacing the dead hard drive wasn't covered? And then was rude enough to replace the combo drive in my iBook with a CD-ROM drive, and deny that they had done so afterward, when the drive wasn't even broken in the first place? I'd rather talk to an Indian or Chinese tech support which respects me rather than an American tech support system that treats me like an idiot.
Amazingly, Dell's support is great in this regard. The technicians don't appear to be very knowledgeable and don't speak English very well, but since I've always known what has needed to be replaced on my laptop, they've been more than happy to replace whatever I tell them to within 48 hours, and have never sent me a cheaper replacement (when my hard drive died they sent me an 80GB to replace the 60GB in the laptop). Which is important, because Dells have a tendency to break rather often.
I would suggest getting a next business day on-site warranty in that sort of situation. I've had a Dell laptop which came with a 3 year warranty of that sort, and it has been quite worthwhile. I've had three replacement motherboards, two replacement keyboards, the replacement of the case around the LCD, a heatsink replacement, and a replacement hard drive. Dell's quality is rather horrible. But since, in my situation, problematic hardware is replaced within two to three days of breaking (I generally don't have time for someone to come the next day), it doesn't cause that much of an inconvenience.
I generally make warranty requests over email, and tell technical support exactly what is wrong, and exactly what needs to be replaced. They seem to appreciate this, and have, with one exception, been very efficient and have always replaced whatever I told them needed replacement.
Of course, Dell technical support also seems to steadfastly believe that I am the University of California, and not Constantine Evans. And they now require that I give them the billing and shipping addresses which were on the original PO that the UCSD Bookstore used to purchase the machine. That caused quite a hassle when they started requiring it - whenever I told them that I didn't know the addresses because I had bought the laptop from the bookstore, they just refused to talk to me.
It is quite probable that someone leaking information is going to take enough precautions that they will not be traceable by methods like this. The people who suffer most are those who aren't passing sensitive information along.
Mike Conner specifically ruled out Debian's version being a Community Edition. It wasn't listed as an option because Mozilla didn't consider it an option for Debian.
The forum does not reflect the development of Ubuntu - there are hardly any developers there, and many forumgoers are just users with strong opinions. Such places are where most of the bickering about the issues has been going on - it isn't really considered a large argument elsewhere.
The last post on the developers' mailing list by an authoritative person (Matt Zimmerman) stated that Ubuntu was discussing a resolution of the issue with Mozilla.
Re:My Grandfather the watchmaker...
on
Caller ID Watches
·
· Score: 1
The button press is to send the call to voicemail, not to see the caller information.
If one is a high profile hacker working on projects that the RIAA and MPAA strongly dislike, then yes, they are good reasons to move out of the country.
How is the the fault of Debian? The original bug report on this was filed by a Mozilla representative, essentially saying that if Debian didn't abandon it's principles, start using the real logo, and start submitting every patch for approval (including security fixes for old versions), that the Mozilla Corporation would formally revoke Debian's permission to use the Firefox name. From the tone of the bug report, it seems that Mozilla is also quite willing to take legal action against Debian over the problem.
There have been theoretical legal issues that have been brought up in the past within Debian (involving linking OpenSSL, for example), that have resulted in some developers looking rather like zealots. This is not the same.
How can Debian just start using the logo? Even if the logo were DFSG compliant, Debian would still be required to submit every patch that they make, including critical security fixes, to the Mozilla Foundation for an approval process before being allowed to distribute them. Due to Debian's stability requirements, fixes are backported for old versions of Firefox which are no longer maintained by Mozilla. But the Mozilla Foundation has stated that they don't care about this, and even suggested that Debian start putting new versions into older releases instead of backporting fixes.
I'm nearly certain this is incorrect. As a few specific examples I can think of easily, the manuscript of Benjamin Franklin's autobiography does not follow this, and Bickham's Universal Penman also does not follow what you are saying. Wikipedia's article (Long s) also directly disagrees with what you are saying. Perhaps you meant non-terminal s when you said terminal s?
If I recall correctly, I have also seen a variety of cases where a long s was used as a medial s in situations other than what you are describing in your second paragraph. Every medial s is long in the cover page of Paradise Lost shown on Wikipedia's Long s article. Franklin appears to have switched between using a long s only in ss ligatures during the beginning of his autobiography, to using them for all medial s's, and back to using them only in ligatures by the end. Did you also use internal when you meant terminal in the second paragraph? That would seem to make sense.
I, of course, have no real education in the field, and apologise if I am somehow confused, but it does seem that every source I examine contradicts what you state unless one switches non-terminal for terminal and terminal for internal. Even then, I don't understand the 't'-preceding statement.
If I recall correctly, the proposed attacks can be done without detectable tampering to the seal.
In addition, having a seal to detect tampering when there is no method of recovering votes made on a tampered machine would seem to me to create a very simple method of vote tampering. Why couldn't someone go to vote shortly before a poll closes, and simply break the seal on the machine? Doing so would invalidate the votes made on the machine, since there would be no way to show that they had not been modified, but there also would seem to be no way to recover the votes short of having everyone who voted at that poll vote again. Would this idea work?
Tin foil hat has had protection against keyloggers in general for some time, by allowing the use of a virtual keyboard which changes on every keypress. In that case, screen captures would have to be taken as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Apt is certainly not deprecated in favour of aptitude, as aptitude is a frontend to apt. One could argue that aptitude is superior to apt-get, but it should be noted that apt-get also has autoremoval, at least in Ubuntu. Try apt-get autoremove.
Personally, I have always used apt-get instead of aptitude.
Here are a few responses:
/etc/init.d, and then link to them in the /etc/rc*.d directories for each runlevel. However, this is in the process of being moved over to upstart, where everything will be in /etc/event.d.
/etc/init.d won't exist.
/etc/inittab. Edgy, as it was intended to be rather experimental, shipped with upstart in a state that wasn't complete. When it is done, I believe that runlevels will be kept around only for compatibility reasons.
* Ubuntu used to (in Dapper) put all scripts in
* In future versions of Ubuntu, start and stop will do this, since
* This isn't entirely true. One can become root via sudo with sudo -i or sudo -s. There is no root password. In reality, I think this is of somewhat dubious value for security.
* Runlevels in Ubuntu are a problem. Some Ubuntu developers apparently believe that Linux without a graphical login is "broken" (at least one has told me this), and therefore crippled runlevels so that one cannot choose between a text and graphical login via runlevel.
* I believe that Dapper has an
* deb and rpm packages can be converted with alien, though the results are not always very usable. The method does tend to work well with third party packages that are largely without dependencies, however, and those tend to be the many of the cases where this is necessary.
Cingular is one of the only providers in the US that uses 850MHz to a significant extent, if I recall correctly. Thus most unlocked phones from outside North America will not work well, since they will not support that frequency. Quad band phones, and tri band phones with 850/1800/1900 support (usually sold to North American markets), shouldn't have any reception problems.
Wikipedia has extensive information on this topic.
This again appears to vary by region. At least in Southern California, T-Mobile's coverage claims seem to be far more conservative. Coverage maps seem to take into account individual towers, and have rather detailed plots of levels of service.
As a specific example, I know that there is no service from any provider in most parts of Palomar Mountain. Yet every provider except T-Mobile claims to have service throughout the area (T-Mobile shows the area as having no service). I also have service with Verizon, and have never been able to make a call from my cabin, or even connect to a tower at all.
Notability (WP:N on Wikipedia) isn't actually a policy, or even a core concept, on Wikipedia, though it tends to be incorrectly presented as such. It is actually a guideline which serves as a more practical explanation of policy. Unfortunately, many people, even on Wikipedia, seem to think that it is a policy, and due to the way the deletion of articles works, it is often used incorrectly to justify deletion. Policy at Wikipedia is a horrible mess, with a multitude of serious contradictions, and large discrepancies between written policy and practised policy.
The actual policy is verifiability (WP:V). The reason for the policy is that topics need to have reputable sources that others can check, or it would be impossible to tell whether the content of the pages were accurate. In practice, this most often leads to long arguments over whether various sources are "reputable", or "reliable". Wikipedia has no way of deciding these arguments, so they generally go on until one side gets tired or banned for other reasons, or until the article in question is deleted, in which case the article is usually created again a year or so later and the whole process starts all over again.
According to the bugzilla link, IE 6 and 7 are also affected.
The name.
What would be more interesting would be seeing the sorts of profits that the spammers are making off of this.
They aren't selling them for $800, they're selling for $99,999,999, which makes standing in line for 24 hours quite worth it!
On a more serious note, does anyone know what happened with this? At first glance it doesn't seem to just be one or two people with new accounts putting in false bids.
The grandparent is guessing that the system will be like headphones on planes. In that case, for US carriers, the price will be for renting the cable, unless you already have one, in which case it will be a "monitor access fee" and will be the exact same price.
No. The AP is sending packets explicitly asking if anyone wants to connect. The laptop then sends packets explicitly asking the AP if it ok to connect, and the AP responds explicitly that it is. This isn't a case of expressions like "leaving a window unlocked" meaning "Come on in!", it is the meaning that one gets from following the protocol. Windows automatically connects to APs that do this, and it is very simple to configure APs to not invite everyone like this. It is unfortunate that they do so by default.
This is more like hiring a guard to be outside your front door. Unfortunately, you make a mistake in your instructions and so the guard tells everyone to come in. When people ask if they really are allowed in, the guard tells them that they most certainly are. This probably isn't what you wanted the guard to do, and people may suspect that, but it still holds that someone who you gave authority to do so did tell the people that they could come in.
What type of university teaches the use of specific programs for courses instead of teaching the basic principles necessary to use any program?
This is why proper CS departments teach languages which usually aren't widely used. It isn't because they expect the students to use the languages in their future, it is because they believe that those languages are most suitable for teaching the principles that the students can then use to learn any language.
Do you mean the Apple technical support which wanted my credit card number before they honoured my warranty, just in case they decided replacing the dead hard drive wasn't covered? And then was rude enough to replace the combo drive in my iBook with a CD-ROM drive, and deny that they had done so afterward, when the drive wasn't even broken in the first place? I'd rather talk to an Indian or Chinese tech support which respects me rather than an American tech support system that treats me like an idiot.
Amazingly, Dell's support is great in this regard. The technicians don't appear to be very knowledgeable and don't speak English very well, but since I've always known what has needed to be replaced on my laptop, they've been more than happy to replace whatever I tell them to within 48 hours, and have never sent me a cheaper replacement (when my hard drive died they sent me an 80GB to replace the 60GB in the laptop). Which is important, because Dells have a tendency to break rather often.
I would suggest getting a next business day on-site warranty in that sort of situation. I've had a Dell laptop which came with a 3 year warranty of that sort, and it has been quite worthwhile. I've had three replacement motherboards, two replacement keyboards, the replacement of the case around the LCD, a heatsink replacement, and a replacement hard drive. Dell's quality is rather horrible. But since, in my situation, problematic hardware is replaced within two to three days of breaking (I generally don't have time for someone to come the next day), it doesn't cause that much of an inconvenience.
I generally make warranty requests over email, and tell technical support exactly what is wrong, and exactly what needs to be replaced. They seem to appreciate this, and have, with one exception, been very efficient and have always replaced whatever I told them needed replacement.
Of course, Dell technical support also seems to steadfastly believe that I am the University of California, and not Constantine Evans. And they now require that I give them the billing and shipping addresses which were on the original PO that the UCSD Bookstore used to purchase the machine. That caused quite a hassle when they started requiring it - whenever I told them that I didn't know the addresses because I had bought the laptop from the bookstore, they just refused to talk to me.
They do all of these things, and yet still do not create a paper trail of each vote?
It appears that the machines only create a paper copy of the results at the end of the day...
It is quite probable that someone leaking information is going to take enough precautions that they will not be traceable by methods like this. The people who suffer most are those who aren't passing sensitive information along.
Mike Conner specifically ruled out Debian's version being a Community Edition. It wasn't listed as an option because Mozilla didn't consider it an option for Debian.
The forum does not reflect the development of Ubuntu - there are hardly any developers there, and many forumgoers are just users with strong opinions. Such places are where most of the bickering about the issues has been going on - it isn't really considered a large argument elsewhere.
The last post on the developers' mailing list by an authoritative person (Matt Zimmerman) stated that Ubuntu was discussing a resolution of the issue with Mozilla.
The button press is to send the call to voicemail, not to see the caller information.
If one is a high profile hacker working on projects that the RIAA and MPAA strongly dislike, then yes, they are good reasons to move out of the country.
How is the the fault of Debian? The original bug report on this was filed by a Mozilla representative, essentially saying that if Debian didn't abandon it's principles, start using the real logo, and start submitting every patch for approval (including security fixes for old versions), that the Mozilla Corporation would formally revoke Debian's permission to use the Firefox name. From the tone of the bug report, it seems that Mozilla is also quite willing to take legal action against Debian over the problem.
There have been theoretical legal issues that have been brought up in the past within Debian (involving linking OpenSSL, for example), that have resulted in some developers looking rather like zealots. This is not the same.
How can Debian just start using the logo? Even if the logo were DFSG compliant, Debian would still be required to submit every patch that they make, including critical security fixes, to the Mozilla Foundation for an approval process before being allowed to distribute them. Due to Debian's stability requirements, fixes are backported for old versions of Firefox which are no longer maintained by Mozilla. But the Mozilla Foundation has stated that they don't care about this, and even suggested that Debian start putting new versions into older releases instead of backporting fixes.
I'm nearly certain this is incorrect. As a few specific examples I can think of easily, the manuscript of Benjamin Franklin's autobiography does not follow this, and Bickham's Universal Penman also does not follow what you are saying. Wikipedia's article (Long s) also directly disagrees with what you are saying. Perhaps you meant non-terminal s when you said terminal s?
If I recall correctly, I have also seen a variety of cases where a long s was used as a medial s in situations other than what you are describing in your second paragraph. Every medial s is long in the cover page of Paradise Lost shown on Wikipedia's Long s article. Franklin appears to have switched between using a long s only in ss ligatures during the beginning of his autobiography, to using them for all medial s's, and back to using them only in ligatures by the end. Did you also use internal when you meant terminal in the second paragraph? That would seem to make sense.
I, of course, have no real education in the field, and apologise if I am somehow confused, but it does seem that every source I examine contradicts what you state unless one switches non-terminal for terminal and terminal for internal. Even then, I don't understand the 't'-preceding statement.
If I recall correctly, the proposed attacks can be done without detectable tampering to the seal.
In addition, having a seal to detect tampering when there is no method of recovering votes made on a tampered machine would seem to me to create a very simple method of vote tampering. Why couldn't someone go to vote shortly before a poll closes, and simply break the seal on the machine? Doing so would invalidate the votes made on the machine, since there would be no way to show that they had not been modified, but there also would seem to be no way to recover the votes short of having everyone who voted at that poll vote again. Would this idea work?
Tin foil hat has had protection against keyloggers in general for some time, by allowing the use of a virtual keyboard which changes on every keypress. In that case, screen captures would have to be taken as well.