I have been visiting websites for about 8 years. I have never bought a product from an ad and I have never clicked an ad. So what's the point seeing them?
The ads are there for someone who actually finds them useful. I don't.
If the laptop comes with a "backup" (a la Norton Ghost) Windows CD, then there isn't any other method to install Windows. All the drivers are inside that CD.
This is not altruistic, Wal-Mart gets the money that the electricity company would get. It just happens to be a more "green" solution, good for marketing.
When a company gives you a warranty that their equipment (be it a hard disk, or anything else) will work for 5 years, then it will be a waste of money if that device brakes and they have to give you another one. It doesn't make sense from an economic point of view.
So when you get a warranty for X years, then it will most probably work for that long because otherwise it costs more for the compnay. Either that, or you just don't use this product the way it was designed to (e.g.: more intence use).
If you don't mind losing some of the Ajax functionality, you can switch to "basic HTML format"; it's a link at the bottom of the page. It will now behave a lot more Yahoo webmail.
Oh, and the re-newal minimum credits starts at 10 euros, and these credits will not be lost after one year, you just need to add some more credit just to extend the life-time of the prepaid number.
From what I am reading, the prepaid cell phone market really sucks in the US.
I live in Europe and I have a prepaid cell phone *number* (I can change the device with any other on the market, any time I want) and when I buy pre-paid credits (which can be used either as talk or SMS), it re-news my connection for one year. This means that even if my credits end, I can keep the number (and recieve calls) for one year after the date thar I last added credits.
"Society would be much better served if everyone just stayed home and just 1 out of 100 of the protesters participated in the political process with meaningful and substantive support for their position."'
It is important that the government will see that people are (if they are) against what it (what the government does) or they (the government again) will assume that "all is well". You may have voted for the government (when they were canidates) but when you voted it was because of their promises. If they now brake a promise, or if they do things that wouldn't be predictable to primise about (unforseen issues), then you must protest. And let's not forget about the part of the government that hasn't been elected from the public.
Q: Doesn't closed source help protect against crack attacks?
A: This is exactly backwards, as any cryptographer will tell you. Security through obscurity just does not work.
The reason it doesn't work is that security-breakers are a lot more motivated and persistent than good guys (who have lots of other things to worry about). The bad guys will find the holes whether source is open or closed (for a perfect recent example of this see "The Tao of Windows Buffer Overflow" [1]).
Closed sources do three bad things. One: they create a false sense of security. Two: they mean that the good guys will not find holes and fix them. Three: they make it harder to distribute trustworthy fixes when a hole is revealed.
In fact, open-source operating systems and applications are generally much more security-safe than their closed-source counterparts. When the "Ping o' Death" exploit was revealed in 1997 (for example) Linux had fix patches within hours. Closed-source OSs didn't plug the hole for months.
Alan Cox has written an excellent article on "The Risks of Closed Source Computing" [2].
Install IE7 and use these stand-alone zipped versions to test your site. The trick was to grab all the files in \program files\internet explorer\ and include a iexplore.exe.external (I don't recall that filename very well, it's been some time till I used them).
"No developer has had an excuse for releasing software that writes to places like C:\Windows for ca. 7 - 8 years."
True, but Microsoft should added the user profiles long before. Microsoft may not be responsible for what these developers choose to do, but having multiple users is a security-wise thing. Windows (and DOS) just wasn't designed with that in mind. Bill Gates was quoted saying "the Internet? we are not interested in that".
(sorry, I posted as HTML, please ignore the parent)
I don't want to use a piece of software to do this, so I just create directories.
The first part of the directory's name is the date: 20061121
The second part of the directory's name is the person who took the picture (some of the pictures that I have were taken by someone else): john
The third part of the directory's name is a keyword of the event: grandma-birthday.
And an example of a full name is: 20061121.john.grandma-birthday
I use dots for seperators, but that is just a matter of preferance. I also place a simple text file inside the directory for comments.
I keep adding those directorys in another big directory called "pictures". When the "pictures" directory gets around 4.5GB, I write it in a DVD and put a label on it.
I don't want to use a piece of software to do this, so I just create directories.
The first part of the directory's name is the date: 20061121
The second part of the directory's name is the person who took the picture (some of the pictures that I have were taken by someone else): john
The third part of the directory's name is a keyword of the event: grandma-birthday.
And an example of a full name is: 20061121.john.grandma-birthday; I use dots for seperators, but that is just a matter of preferance. I also place a simple text file inside the directory for comments.
I keep adding those directorys in another big directory called "pictures". When the "pictures" directory gets around 4.5GB, I write it in a DVD and put a label on it.
Simple, efficient, and cross-platform:-P
It's because Microsoft is a monopoly, and because they have an agressive bussiness model (see OEMs), and they try to buy or drive everybody else out of bussiness (but then again, Google buys things from time to time), and they can't accept the fact that someone else is making profit in another market and want to compete (see iTunes).
Ext3 can cover the needs of most home users just fine. Or, you can simply have an Ext3 partition for the files that you want to share. Still better than NTFS (even with the assumption of full write compatibility).
Slashdot Mirror
I have been visiting websites for about 8 years. I have never bought a product from an ad and I have never clicked an ad. So what's the point seeing them?
The ads are there for someone who actually finds them useful. I don't.
One difference, learning how to use the computer has a practical advantage. Just like learning how to use the car.
If the laptop comes with a "backup" (a la Norton Ghost) Windows CD, then there isn't any other method to install Windows. All the drivers are inside that CD.
This is not altruistic, Wal-Mart gets the money that the electricity company would get. It just happens to be a more "green" solution, good for marketing.
Nevertheless, it's a nice move.
When a company gives you a warranty that their equipment (be it a hard disk, or anything else) will work for 5 years, then it will be a waste of money if that device brakes and they have to give you another one. It doesn't make sense from an economic point of view.
So when you get a warranty for X years, then it will most probably work for that long because otherwise it costs more for the compnay. Either that, or you just don't use this product the way it was designed to (e.g.: more intence use).
Children need guidance, not directives.
If you don't mind losing some of the Ajax functionality, you can switch to "basic HTML format"; it's a link at the bottom of the page. It will now behave a lot more Yahoo webmail.
Oh, and the re-newal minimum credits starts at 10 euros, and these credits will not be lost after one year, you just need to add some more credit just to extend the life-time of the prepaid number.
From what I am reading, the prepaid cell phone market really sucks in the US.
I live in Europe and I have a prepaid cell phone *number* (I can change the device with any other on the market, any time I want) and when I buy pre-paid credits (which can be used either as talk or SMS), it re-news my connection for one year. This means that even if my credits end, I can keep the number (and recieve calls) for one year after the date thar I last added credits.
Buy support if you can't support these yourself. It will not cost you a load of cash. Check if Redhat can give you another deal.
"Society would be much better served if everyone just stayed home and just 1 out of 100 of the protesters participated in the political process with meaningful and substantive support for their position."'
It is important that the government will see that people are (if they are) against what it (what the government does) or they (the government again) will assume that "all is well". You may have voted for the government (when they were canidates) but when you voted it was because of their promises. If they now brake a promise, or if they do things that wouldn't be predictable to primise about (unforseen issues), then you must protest. And let's not forget about the part of the government that hasn't been elected from the public.
from http://www.opensource.org/advocacy/faq.php
U S.ISO_8859-1/articles/alan-cox/risks/risks-closed- source/risks.html
Q: Doesn't closed source help protect against crack attacks?
A: This is exactly backwards, as any cryptographer will tell you. Security through obscurity just does not work.
The reason it doesn't work is that security-breakers are a lot more motivated and persistent than good guys (who have lots of other things to worry about). The bad guys will find the holes whether source is open or closed (for a perfect recent example of this see "The Tao of Windows Buffer Overflow" [1]).
Closed sources do three bad things. One: they create a false sense of security. Two: they mean that the good guys will not find holes and fix them. Three: they make it harder to distribute trustworthy fixes when a hole is revealed.
In fact, open-source operating systems and applications are generally much more security-safe than their closed-source counterparts. When the "Ping o' Death" exploit was revealed in 1997 (for example) Linux had fix patches within hours. Closed-source OSs didn't plug the hole for months.
Alan Cox has written an excellent article on "The Risks of Closed Source Computing" [2].
[1] http://www.cultdeadcow.com/cDc_files/cDc-351/
[2] http://www.ibiblio.org/oswg/oswg-nightly/oswg/en_
There you go: http://browsers.evolt.org/?ie/32bit/standalone
Install IE7 and use these stand-alone zipped versions to test your site. The trick was to grab all the files in \program files\internet explorer\ and include a iexplore.exe.external (I don't recall that filename very well, it's been some time till I used them).
"No developer has had an excuse for releasing software that writes to places like C:\Windows for ca. 7 - 8 years."
True, but Microsoft should added the user profiles long before. Microsoft may not be responsible for what these developers choose to do, but having multiple users is a security-wise thing. Windows (and DOS) just wasn't designed with that in mind. Bill Gates was quoted saying "the Internet? we are not interested in that".
I think that he said "or 50" because he had a doubt about 40 (as in "hmmm.. maybe 40 is not enough old") or he meant to say "between 40 and 50".
No problem. Bush will just over-ride the law "For The Good Of All" (TM) and stay in power forever (well, until he dies).
1. Yes, but in what cost for the society as a whole?
2. We choose to scare (and/or chase) the thugs instead of not giving people the motive to be thugs
3. "technical solutions to non technical problems will only lead to insanity"'
(sorry, I posted as HTML, please ignore the parent)
:-P
I don't want to use a piece of software to do this, so I just create directories.
The first part of the directory's name is the date: 20061121
The second part of the directory's name is the person who took the picture (some of the pictures that I have were taken by someone else): john
The third part of the directory's name is a keyword of the event: grandma-birthday.
And an example of a full name is: 20061121.john.grandma-birthday
I use dots for seperators, but that is just a matter of preferance. I also place a simple text file inside the directory for comments.
I keep adding those directorys in another big directory called "pictures". When the "pictures" directory gets around 4.5GB, I write it in a DVD and put a label on it.
Simple, efficient, and cross-platform
I don't want to use a piece of software to do this, so I just create directories. The first part of the directory's name is the date: 20061121 The second part of the directory's name is the person who took the picture (some of the pictures that I have were taken by someone else): john The third part of the directory's name is a keyword of the event: grandma-birthday. And an example of a full name is: 20061121.john.grandma-birthday; I use dots for seperators, but that is just a matter of preferance. I also place a simple text file inside the directory for comments. I keep adding those directorys in another big directory called "pictures". When the "pictures" directory gets around 4.5GB, I write it in a DVD and put a label on it. Simple, efficient, and cross-platform :-P
It's because Microsoft is a monopoly, and because they have an agressive bussiness model (see OEMs), and they try to buy or drive everybody else out of bussiness (but then again, Google buys things from time to time), and they can't accept the fact that someone else is making profit in another market and want to compete (see iTunes).
Ext3 can cover the needs of most home users just fine. Or, you can simply have an Ext3 partition for the files that you want to share. Still better than NTFS (even with the assumption of full write compatibility).
try this, and this
Apple is not a monopoly. Otherwise, no difference.
Good point. I was quick to reply in what I thought as sarcasm.
Wikipedia (its structure, its events) is a much smaller topic than just "sports" or "women sports".