Wow, I'm not sure which is worse - the fact that what he is getting reviled for doing *exactly* the point of the game (heroes and villians, think about it), or that you looked at the evidence and somehow concluded that he was doing it because he wanted to "be a dick on the internet." Sounds to me like he was playing the damn game. He wasn't even talking trash, for crying out loud! Sure, nobody personally likes the guy that kills them in a game, but the correct response is to try and kill him right back (in game), not whine, make insults, or send real-life threats.
The equivalent "next research project" would be going down to the bus station with a wanted list from the police, and calling the cops whenever he sees somebody on that list. Sure, that person might not have done anything to him personally, but they chose a "side" of society that... you know, this whole analogy is absurd. It's a goddamn PvP game, the objective being to pit player against player. Do you play CounterStrike by any chance? I suggest next time you play as one of the terrorists, you try sitting down for a chat with one of your opponents, and maybe suggest seeing who can throw a grenade the furthest (but not *AT* one another, of course!) You might get a "LOL!!" before he shoots you in the face. Probably only after, though. Quite a bunch of dicks, though counter-terrorists, aren't they!
See, that's why I love Eve Online. We (an alliance of over 1000 players on a server with hundreds of thousands) *make* the rules, at least in our own section of space. Jumping a transport through our space as a neutral pilot (we don't know you and have no standings set) will get you killed where we hang out. Want your loot back? Sure, we'll offer it - but we'll put a steep markup on it compared to what we'd ask from the alliance. If you don't like it, stick to NRDS (Not Red, Don't Shoot, i.e. only kill hostile ships) space. On the other hand, if you want to join us, go ahead and ask - we're usually recriuting to some extent or another. We'll even take in new players and help them bet set up, which a lot of alliances have no interest in doing. Why operate this way? It's how we like to play. Don't like it? Stay out of our way (we occupy about a dozen systems, with presence in perhaps a dozen more, out of many hundreds) or get your own alliance together (or join one) and fight us. Seriosuly, bring it - the game is no fun when you have to fly 40 systems away to get an PvP.
I can totally sympathise with this guy. He was just in the wrong game - apparently City of Heroes/Villians is simply overrun with carebears.
Not a fair statement; if that's your experience then you're doing it wrong. Outside of "safe" Empire space (and ignroing war declarations), EVE is a game that *must* be played cooperatively with other players. As a member of an alliance with over 1000 pilots, I'm far safer in our portion of 0.0 "lawless" space than almsot anywhere else - we're big enough that there's almost always a war somewhere, so even empire isn't safe. Anybody who wants to come gank me out here will have to fly through a few hundred PvP-ready pilots allied with me, though.
Of course, getting down to your alliance's space can be dangerous, but again, that's what your corp/alliance mates are for. I'm willing to take time off to fly up to empire in a fast ship, assemble a gang, and escort everybody back down... and they do the same for me. Almost nobody ever tries to mess with 40 armed ships looking to avoid populated areas, and the last time anybody tried we killed 14 battleships in exchange for a couple cruisers. Looting the other side's wrecks, we actually came out of that fight richer, easily enabling the folks who'd lost ships to buy new ones.
We're new enough that people do still come and attack us, but if nobody has done so in the last hour or so, I'll put together some cheap, fast-moving gang and we'll go hunting in neighboring space. Wandering off solo would be suicide, but doing it with a gang at your back is all kinds of fun and hey, if you can't afford to get your ship blown away, don't come. Nobody is forcing you to.
Nowhere near that, sadly. Chemical rockets measure burn times in minutes or seconds. Thermal nuclear engines last longer, but still not long enough (fuel-wise), and we aren't currently developing them. Ion engines can last that long if they have a long-lived power source and enough fuel (yes, they still need some reaction mass) but their thrust is crap; you're unlikely to see 1/1000 of 1G out of one. VASIMR is more powerful and more efficient, but it too needs some fuel... and it reqires a much more powerful energy source (which still needs to run for a year uninterrupted). Nothing we've yet put in any spacecraft could keep even a fairly small VASIMR running continuously; it'll probably take an active nuclear reactor to do it. In return we might see... about 1/1000 G of acceleration.
Liftoff with a VASIMR would require pushing it WELL above the current power limits of any design on the table. The problem is that making the exhaust go faster makes the ship more efficient (less reaction mass needed for a given thrust), but since energy is proportional to the square of velocity (while momentum is only linearly proprtional), and since the mass exhausted is truly miniscule, it would take really incredible amounts of energy to produce enough thrust for liftoff. Pumping out more reaction mass at a lower velocity works to some degree (this is how chemical rockets work, and VASIMR is designed to allow increasing the fuel rate to get some increase in thrust in exchange for less specific impulse) but VASIMR really isn't designed for high mass flow; the baseline speed for the exhaust is measured in 5 digits of m/s. The propellant is heated using RF energy; it basically turns a flowing stream of matter into plasma using a microwave oven. The amount of matter you can do this with is pretty limited.
Actually, to the best that I ever understood it (almost nothing; it wasn't ever explained very much) it's the closest to an "impulse engine" from Star Trek the we've ever seriously considered. For anythign like a "true" impulse drive, you'd probably need to get the fuel mass up a LOT higher - kinetic energy may go up as the square of velocity, but momentum is only lineraly proprtional, and the mass ejected is really, REALLY minimal - but the theoretical speed capabilities aren't too far off.
Actually, given the incredible thrust of a NTR, I can see them being used for short (objects in Earth orbit) trips, rather than designing your spacecraft for switchover to a more efficient engine. That said, the fact that a VASIMR can maintain thrust all the way would make them faster than NTRs for any sufficiently long trip - maybe even for just getting to the moon and back; anybody want to do the math on that?
One advantage that a NTR could offer is maintaining "gravity" from the trust. If you can somehow keep it fueled enough for even a small fraction of 1 G of thrust on a substantial voyage, that may well make it the better option for transporting humans over interplanetary distances (in the somewhat distant future).
You'd still have to haul around a LOT of fuel; they can't sustain thrust for anywhere near the time that a VASIMR could. This is not to say they aren't fantastic, and they CAN produce enough thrust for takeoff from earth (something no rocket using an ionized reaction mass - like a VASIMR - is ever likely to accomplish). Once you're in space, though, a VASIMR is more efficient, lasts longer, and (in the long run) allows much faster travel.
Both are, to some extent. You (and Wikipedia) are correct in that VASIMR engines can change between high-power and high-efficiency (think of it like changing gears in your car; you're much more fuel-efficient cruising in top gear, but can accelerate much harder in low gear). Indeed, that's a fundamental characteristic of the engine, and explains the first two letters of the acronym (VAriable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket). However, the OP is also correct in that VASIMIR engines are extremely efficient in general. Part of this is due to their variability - as with a car, the efficient way to use a rocket is to increase its specific impulse (gear ratio/fuel efficiency) as its speed increases (currently no other rocket engine that I know of can do this). On the other hand, look at the high-end of that specific impulse - it's several times what our best Ion drives produce, while also putting out substantially more thrust. Theoretically, VASIMR engines are strictly superior (in terms of thrust and SIP, at least) to ion engines.
Of course, even at maximum thrust, current VASIMR drive designs produce *maybe* enough thrust to lift about.5 kilos (call it 1 lb) into space from the surface. Since the engine itself masses far more than that, you'll still need something with really high thrust to get it into space in the first place. Based on that, chemical engines will probably be around for a while, unless we can whip up a space elevator while we're at it. Theoretically you could run more power through a VASIMR and get more thrust, but I suspect the practical limit on doing so is far less than would be required for liftoff (if you could even get it to operate in an atmosphere). Even without that, though, it would be an incredible boon to intrasystem travel, or for station-keeping engines on satellites.
Wow, so much aggression. No, I didn't RTFA, sorry if that offends your sense of how the/. community works.
However, the summary stated that this jailbreak "will free your iPhone from the limitations imposed on it by AT&T and Apple" which I took to mean that the carrier lock (certainly a limitation imposed by AT&T) was also lifted. For that matter, SIM unlock is usually relatively easy (for non-smartphones at least) whereas breaking the application lock requires gaining root control of the operating system. I suppose the two features (SIM lock and applicaiton lock) must be seprated somehow.
The real joke was the "finally" in the summary. I suppose to some people it felt like a long time, but they were, after all, looking for an exploitable hole in a very restricted device running an OS based on BSD. I suppose my sarcasm about the "security" didn't come through so well...
Any business/professional-or-above edition of NT (including XP, Vista, and Win7) support at least RAID-1 (the options supported vary by edition; I'm not certain that anything below server supports RAID-5 but I know at least Ultimate supports RAID-0 as well as 1). The problem isn't that the pre-release versions had it and the RTM didn't, it's that the pre-release versions were Ultimate edition, and you downgraded when you got the released version. If you want software RAID in Windows, either get a high-end client edition, or get Windows Home Server (or any other server edition, if you can get them cheap and/or don't mind the cost).
Actually, while this may astound you, the vast majority of people are fundamentally honest, and relatively unlikely to break the law. This doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of people who still do, especially when it comes to file-copying (it's not sharing; when you share you give up something). However, once the law says that it's fine to go out and upload or download to your heart's content, people will. And there's very, very little chance that they will then choose to buy a CD or DVD. They might go to a live show or catch a theatre viewing, but with hard disks as big as they've gotten these days and every computer having a DVD burner anyhow, there's just no reason for the average person to do anything other than download it free.
Also, if 9/10 movies that you see aren't worth it, you're either an idiot (do a little research first) or have serious pattern recognition issues. If you meant that 9/10 of all movies are crap and that's why you don't see movies in the theatre, then you're just an idiot *and* a crappy statistician; by that "logic" you would have be fine having unprotected sex with anybody you want and would never get tested for HIV, since the vast majority (far in excess of 90%) of the world's population don't have it, so why bother? It's a waste of your time right? Judging everything based on the total population, without considering conditional probability, seems like a really bad idea to me, but then, I'm not a statistician; so what do I know? In my experience, most movies that I watch a 2-minute preview of and spend 5 minutes reading reviews or talking to friends, think "this looks good", and go to... well, they're worth it. Max 10 minutes of my time to decide, all completely without downloading some Chinese guy's subtitled movie theatre showing videoed using a smuggled camcorder.
I'm... REALLY tempted to drop that into a debugger. Yeah, I'd be working without symbols, but the relevant assembly probably isn't that hard to figure out. Anything that can make a program crash should be assumed to be an exploitable vulnerability until proved otherwise. What an incredible joke if installing Norton actually opened up a kernel-level security vulnerability! (If it actually brings down the network stack... well, that's running at ring-0, and a driver crash can take down the whole system.)
A few years ago, Norton would crash randomly, typically causing a BSOD when it did. These days it isn't as bad, but one place their record has been fairly good is that the software itself has been secure. If there's a repeatable crash, though... that's a major potential vulnerability right there, especially if you can trigger it with standard user permissions!
Agreed, although I used a N800 (same as the n810 but no hardware keyboard - more expandable storage capacity though). The screen is big enough to read books on, the latest version of the OS (Maemo, a modified Debian) has a very nice PDF reader built in, the browser is Gecko-based and even has things like AdBlock Plus available (since it supports Flash, this is a real benefit). Everything is open source, no jailbreaking required (there's a built-in way to get full control over the device, including a root terminal) and you can install whatever you want on it - other PDF, web, or email software, Skype, the freaking GNU build toolchain even. WiFi and Bluetooth are its primary communication methods.
The fit VERY comfortably in one hand, and if you're just reading books the battery will last 7 hours or so. Fantastic little device.
Cars around most (though not all) of the world are specificlaly designed so that the driver is as close to the middle of the road as possible. This is a safety feature; it makes it easier to control where you are relative to oncoming traffic. After a few years of driving you probably don't even notice anymore (I don't) but new drivers have a real tendency to try and put themselves toward the middle of the lane. On a left-hand drive (in the US) this means they end up taking a bit of the shoulder, or lane going to same direction. Right-hand drive would put them over the center divider.
Wow, try readking the fucking SUMMARY at least. 18mm / 25.4mm/in =.71 in. It's a bit short of 3/4 of an inch thick. Based on similar devices, weight will probably be in the 2-3 lb range. It will have a larger screen and probably much better battery life than a netbook (lots of room inside that case, and netbooks have much poorer battery live than I would have expected when I first heard about them).
Dont' forget Flash support. I don't personally *like* Flash, but it's a pretty important part of the modern web. The fact that the iPhone lacks it (and don't give me any of Jobs' crap as to why; lower-spec ARM devices support it) could be a big deal in promoting this thing. Additionally, the larger (and presumably much higher-res) display should make a big difference... except it's too big for a pocket.
Well, more like it run Chromium (WebKit-based, not Gecko-based). Still sounds pretty cool. Quality of the input is going to be the real gotcha, though - on-screen keyboards can be done well, but usually aren't. They have enough screen real-estate it shouldn't be too hard, though.
OneCare has been discontinued. The scanning engine it was based on, along with definition updates, are now available free. If you'd even bothered to read *anything* about the product related to this article, you'd know that. Windows does ship with a two-way firewall, and it's remarkably powerful and versatile. OneCare was basically a giant patch for those fools still running an 8-year-old OS. "designed Windows better..." You can't fix stupid. The OS itself is pretty damn secure these days, much more so than (for example) OS X - see the Pwn2Own contests and the competitor's comments for an interesting case study. Actually exploiting Windows pretty much requires third-party software, and even then you have to deal with security features that no other os *except* OpenBSD has fully implemented (DEP, ASLR, etc.). What most malware for Windows (and usually for other platforms too) is, these days, is Trojans. Not a lot your OS can do to protect you from those. See the Dancing Pigs (or Bunnies) Problem. Pop up a warning dialog? Users will click right through it. Make them run as non-Administrators? They'll gain whatever rights the program says it needs (in the case of Trojan-infected installers, you would probably need admin rights anyhow). Antivirus provides only a very small amount of protection against this, but I suppose if you're going to have that kind of person online anyhow they should have that protection. If a company wants to charge more to protect against that stupidity, though, I don't see that as being so evil.
Yeah, it's still used. Of course, being a MIPS emulator, it's not exactly going to turn you into an amazing x86 optimizer, but it's a good ISA for learning simple assembly.
Aside from the fact that there *is* no equivalent on Linux (Linux, at its core, has very few libraries at all - multimedia is all done through optional engines like xine or mplayer or whatever), this sounds like a good idea. Users would have to be careful to avoid downloading bad plugins (there are respectable places to get Xvid for WIndows, and there are places where it has Trojan malware), and of course they would probably get all kind of crap... but then, they do already (trying to download the new "ActiveX Video Object" to see this movie!)
ClearType is optional in IE, has been for years. No idea where you got the idea it was forcing you to do anything. Tools -> Internet Options -> Advanced -> First item under Multimedia. It does default to true in IE8, since most people are using flat panels by now and find antialiased text less readable, but it's still optional.
To set IE8's default fonts, click Fonts at the bottom of the General tab in Internet Options. To override page-specified fonts, open Internet Options, click Accessibility (under the General tab), then click "Ignore font styles specified on webpages" and/or other options there.
*Nix has admin rights - you just typically don't use them. No version of Windows released in the last 5 years has even the default account running with Admin privileges either, and even before that the installer suggested creation of additional accounts, which defaulted to standard user permissions.
Linux does nothing at all to "literally force" me not to run as root 24/7, never update, turn off my firewall, run sshd on the default port, and set my root password to "password1." Your claim to the contrary is ridiculous.
Damn near every Linux box has X11 (one of two flavors) and Firefox installed. Most even have Adobe Flash. Many will have Thunderbird and/or Pidgin. Most will also have KDE or GNOME running, either one of which have a number of network-enabled applicaitons. It's certainly not as homogenous as Windows but it's not that hard to find a program that your target runs (even if the "target" is simply a randomly selected IP address). Also, there's the kernel itself.
Windows has security measures that are almost nonexistent in Windows (though OpenBSD has them) such as DEP and ASLR. This means that even if you find a vulnerable program, it is extremely difficult to execute an attack. On Linux a trivial shellcode injection that overwrites the return address works fine.
Program Files (and similar) are not user-writable by default. They are owned by TrustedInstaller and are writable by Administrators, but not by standard users. Users can read, list contents, and execute; that is it. Same for ProgramData (roughly equivalent to/etc; system-wide config files). Among other things, this means that apps which write to their install folders (and some do, though they shouldn't) won't work correctly as a standard user. Installing to a subdirectory your own profile will usually work so long as the application doesn't try to make any global changes (HKLM registry, Windows folder, etc.) although some Windows installers will check the current user and error out if non-Admin.
Your claim about "can't prevent even a limited user from making changes and/or writing files that might be booby traps lying around waiting to be executed by a more privileged user" is complete bullshit. Even ignoring the defaults (where you don't have write permission to the global program files or data at all) NTFS permissions are far more versatile than classic Unix systems have; it is certainly possible to prevent write access to any user on any file, if you are Administrator (you can even prevent SYSTEM from modifying the file if you want, though an Administrator can take control and overwrite permissions for any file - just like root). Heck, if you want, it's possible to permit append but not overwrite or delete.
Linux users on most distros can write to/tmp. The sticky bit on the directory makes this matter less but it's certainly not true that you can't write *anythere* outside your home directory. Usually, an external device will also be mounted writable by users.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, I'm not sure which is worse - the fact that what he is getting reviled for doing *exactly* the point of the game (heroes and villians, think about it), or that you looked at the evidence and somehow concluded that he was doing it because he wanted to "be a dick on the internet." Sounds to me like he was playing the damn game. He wasn't even talking trash, for crying out loud! Sure, nobody personally likes the guy that kills them in a game, but the correct response is to try and kill him right back (in game), not whine, make insults, or send real-life threats.
The equivalent "next research project" would be going down to the bus station with a wanted list from the police, and calling the cops whenever he sees somebody on that list. Sure, that person might not have done anything to him personally, but they chose a "side" of society that... you know, this whole analogy is absurd. It's a goddamn PvP game, the objective being to pit player against player. Do you play CounterStrike by any chance? I suggest next time you play as one of the terrorists, you try sitting down for a chat with one of your opponents, and maybe suggest seeing who can throw a grenade the furthest (but not *AT* one another, of course!) You might get a "LOL!!" before he shoots you in the face. Probably only after, though. Quite a bunch of dicks, though counter-terrorists, aren't they!
See, that's why I love Eve Online. We (an alliance of over 1000 players on a server with hundreds of thousands) *make* the rules, at least in our own section of space. Jumping a transport through our space as a neutral pilot (we don't know you and have no standings set) will get you killed where we hang out. Want your loot back? Sure, we'll offer it - but we'll put a steep markup on it compared to what we'd ask from the alliance. If you don't like it, stick to NRDS (Not Red, Don't Shoot, i.e. only kill hostile ships) space. On the other hand, if you want to join us, go ahead and ask - we're usually recriuting to some extent or another. We'll even take in new players and help them bet set up, which a lot of alliances have no interest in doing. Why operate this way? It's how we like to play. Don't like it? Stay out of our way (we occupy about a dozen systems, with presence in perhaps a dozen more, out of many hundreds) or get your own alliance together (or join one) and fight us. Seriosuly, bring it - the game is no fun when you have to fly 40 systems away to get an PvP.
I can totally sympathise with this guy. He was just in the wrong game - apparently City of Heroes/Villians is simply overrun with carebears.
Not a fair statement; if that's your experience then you're doing it wrong. Outside of "safe" Empire space (and ignroing war declarations), EVE is a game that *must* be played cooperatively with other players. As a member of an alliance with over 1000 pilots, I'm far safer in our portion of 0.0 "lawless" space than almsot anywhere else - we're big enough that there's almost always a war somewhere, so even empire isn't safe. Anybody who wants to come gank me out here will have to fly through a few hundred PvP-ready pilots allied with me, though.
Of course, getting down to your alliance's space can be dangerous, but again, that's what your corp/alliance mates are for. I'm willing to take time off to fly up to empire in a fast ship, assemble a gang, and escort everybody back down... and they do the same for me. Almost nobody ever tries to mess with 40 armed ships looking to avoid populated areas, and the last time anybody tried we killed 14 battleships in exchange for a couple cruisers. Looting the other side's wrecks, we actually came out of that fight richer, easily enabling the folks who'd lost ships to buy new ones.
We're new enough that people do still come and attack us, but if nobody has done so in the last hour or so, I'll put together some cheap, fast-moving gang and we'll go hunting in neighboring space. Wandering off solo would be suicide, but doing it with a gang at your back is all kinds of fun and hey, if you can't afford to get your ship blown away, don't come. Nobody is forcing you to.
Nowhere near that, sadly. Chemical rockets measure burn times in minutes or seconds. Thermal nuclear engines last longer, but still not long enough (fuel-wise), and we aren't currently developing them. Ion engines can last that long if they have a long-lived power source and enough fuel (yes, they still need some reaction mass) but their thrust is crap; you're unlikely to see 1/1000 of 1G out of one. VASIMR is more powerful and more efficient, but it too needs some fuel... and it reqires a much more powerful energy source (which still needs to run for a year uninterrupted). Nothing we've yet put in any spacecraft could keep even a fairly small VASIMR running continuously; it'll probably take an active nuclear reactor to do it. In return we might see... about 1/1000 G of acceleration.
Liftoff with a VASIMR would require pushing it WELL above the current power limits of any design on the table. The problem is that making the exhaust go faster makes the ship more efficient (less reaction mass needed for a given thrust), but since energy is proportional to the square of velocity (while momentum is only linearly proprtional), and since the mass exhausted is truly miniscule, it would take really incredible amounts of energy to produce enough thrust for liftoff. Pumping out more reaction mass at a lower velocity works to some degree (this is how chemical rockets work, and VASIMR is designed to allow increasing the fuel rate to get some increase in thrust in exchange for less specific impulse) but VASIMR really isn't designed for high mass flow; the baseline speed for the exhaust is measured in 5 digits of m/s. The propellant is heated using RF energy; it basically turns a flowing stream of matter into plasma using a microwave oven. The amount of matter you can do this with is pretty limited.
Actually, to the best that I ever understood it (almost nothing; it wasn't ever explained very much) it's the closest to an "impulse engine" from Star Trek the we've ever seriously considered. For anythign like a "true" impulse drive, you'd probably need to get the fuel mass up a LOT higher - kinetic energy may go up as the square of velocity, but momentum is only lineraly proprtional, and the mass ejected is really, REALLY minimal - but the theoretical speed capabilities aren't too far off.
Actually, given the incredible thrust of a NTR, I can see them being used for short (objects in Earth orbit) trips, rather than designing your spacecraft for switchover to a more efficient engine. That said, the fact that a VASIMR can maintain thrust all the way would make them faster than NTRs for any sufficiently long trip - maybe even for just getting to the moon and back; anybody want to do the math on that?
One advantage that a NTR could offer is maintaining "gravity" from the trust. If you can somehow keep it fueled enough for even a small fraction of 1 G of thrust on a substantial voyage, that may well make it the better option for transporting humans over interplanetary distances (in the somewhat distant future).
You'd still have to haul around a LOT of fuel; they can't sustain thrust for anywhere near the time that a VASIMR could. This is not to say they aren't fantastic, and they CAN produce enough thrust for takeoff from earth (something no rocket using an ionized reaction mass - like a VASIMR - is ever likely to accomplish). Once you're in space, though, a VASIMR is more efficient, lasts longer, and (in the long run) allows much faster travel.
Both are, to some extent. You (and Wikipedia) are correct in that VASIMR engines can change between high-power and high-efficiency (think of it like changing gears in your car; you're much more fuel-efficient cruising in top gear, but can accelerate much harder in low gear). Indeed, that's a fundamental characteristic of the engine, and explains the first two letters of the acronym (VAriable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket). However, the OP is also correct in that VASIMIR engines are extremely efficient in general. Part of this is due to their variability - as with a car, the efficient way to use a rocket is to increase its specific impulse (gear ratio/fuel efficiency) as its speed increases (currently no other rocket engine that I know of can do this). On the other hand, look at the high-end of that specific impulse - it's several times what our best Ion drives produce, while also putting out substantially more thrust. Theoretically, VASIMR engines are strictly superior (in terms of thrust and SIP, at least) to ion engines.
Of course, even at maximum thrust, current VASIMR drive designs produce *maybe* enough thrust to lift about .5 kilos (call it 1 lb) into space from the surface. Since the engine itself masses far more than that, you'll still need something with really high thrust to get it into space in the first place. Based on that, chemical engines will probably be around for a while, unless we can whip up a space elevator while we're at it. Theoretically you could run more power through a VASIMR and get more thrust, but I suspect the practical limit on doing so is far less than would be required for liftoff (if you could even get it to operate in an atmosphere). Even without that, though, it would be an incredible boon to intrasystem travel, or for station-keeping engines on satellites.
Wow, so much aggression. No, I didn't RTFA, sorry if that offends your sense of how the /. community works.
However, the summary stated that this jailbreak "will free your iPhone from the limitations imposed on it by AT&T and Apple" which I took to mean that the carrier lock (certainly a limitation imposed by AT&T) was also lifted. For that matter, SIM unlock is usually relatively easy (for non-smartphones at least) whereas breaking the application lock requires gaining root control of the operating system. I suppose the two features (SIM lock and applicaiton lock) must be seprated somehow.
The real joke was the "finally" in the summary. I suppose to some people it felt like a long time, but they were, after all, looking for an exploitable hole in a very restricted device running an OS based on BSD. I suppose my sarcasm about the "security" didn't come through so well...
Wow, that took a long time... is Apple actually putting real security on these things now? Also, what *doesn't* this jailbreak permit?
Any business/professional-or-above edition of NT (including XP, Vista, and Win7) support at least RAID-1 (the options supported vary by edition; I'm not certain that anything below server supports RAID-5 but I know at least Ultimate supports RAID-0 as well as 1). The problem isn't that the pre-release versions had it and the RTM didn't, it's that the pre-release versions were Ultimate edition, and you downgraded when you got the released version. If you want software RAID in Windows, either get a high-end client edition, or get Windows Home Server (or any other server edition, if you can get them cheap and/or don't mind the cost).
Actually, while this may astound you, the vast majority of people are fundamentally honest, and relatively unlikely to break the law. This doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of people who still do, especially when it comes to file-copying (it's not sharing; when you share you give up something). However, once the law says that it's fine to go out and upload or download to your heart's content, people will. And there's very, very little chance that they will then choose to buy a CD or DVD. They might go to a live show or catch a theatre viewing, but with hard disks as big as they've gotten these days and every computer having a DVD burner anyhow, there's just no reason for the average person to do anything other than download it free.
Also, if 9/10 movies that you see aren't worth it, you're either an idiot (do a little research first) or have serious pattern recognition issues. If you meant that 9/10 of all movies are crap and that's why you don't see movies in the theatre, then you're just an idiot *and* a crappy statistician; by that "logic" you would have be fine having unprotected sex with anybody you want and would never get tested for HIV, since the vast majority (far in excess of 90%) of the world's population don't have it, so why bother? It's a waste of your time right? Judging everything based on the total population, without considering conditional probability, seems like a really bad idea to me, but then, I'm not a statistician; so what do I know? In my experience, most movies that I watch a 2-minute preview of and spend 5 minutes reading reviews or talking to friends, think "this looks good", and go to... well, they're worth it. Max 10 minutes of my time to decide, all completely without downloading some Chinese guy's subtitled movie theatre showing videoed using a smuggled camcorder.
I'm... REALLY tempted to drop that into a debugger. Yeah, I'd be working without symbols, but the relevant assembly probably isn't that hard to figure out. Anything that can make a program crash should be assumed to be an exploitable vulnerability until proved otherwise. What an incredible joke if installing Norton actually opened up a kernel-level security vulnerability! (If it actually brings down the network stack... well, that's running at ring-0, and a driver crash can take down the whole system.)
A few years ago, Norton would crash randomly, typically causing a BSOD when it did. These days it isn't as bad, but one place their record has been fairly good is that the software itself has been secure. If there's a repeatable crash, though... that's a major potential vulnerability right there, especially if you can trigger it with standard user permissions!
Agreed, although I used a N800 (same as the n810 but no hardware keyboard - more expandable storage capacity though). The screen is big enough to read books on, the latest version of the OS (Maemo, a modified Debian) has a very nice PDF reader built in, the browser is Gecko-based and even has things like AdBlock Plus available (since it supports Flash, this is a real benefit). Everything is open source, no jailbreaking required (there's a built-in way to get full control over the device, including a root terminal) and you can install whatever you want on it - other PDF, web, or email software, Skype, the freaking GNU build toolchain even. WiFi and Bluetooth are its primary communication methods.
The fit VERY comfortably in one hand, and if you're just reading books the battery will last 7 hours or so. Fantastic little device.
Cars around most (though not all) of the world are specificlaly designed so that the driver is as close to the middle of the road as possible. This is a safety feature; it makes it easier to control where you are relative to oncoming traffic. After a few years of driving you probably don't even notice anymore (I don't) but new drivers have a real tendency to try and put themselves toward the middle of the lane. On a left-hand drive (in the US) this means they end up taking a bit of the shoulder, or lane going to same direction. Right-hand drive would put them over the center divider.
Wow, try readking the fucking SUMMARY at least. .71 in. It's a bit short of 3/4 of an inch thick. Based on similar devices, weight will probably be in the 2-3 lb range. It will have a larger screen and probably much better battery life than a netbook (lots of room inside that case, and netbooks have much poorer battery live than I would have expected when I first heard about them).
18mm / 25.4mm/in =
Dont' forget Flash support. I don't personally *like* Flash, but it's a pretty important part of the modern web. The fact that the iPhone lacks it (and don't give me any of Jobs' crap as to why; lower-spec ARM devices support it) could be a big deal in promoting this thing. Additionally, the larger (and presumably much higher-res) display should make a big difference... except it's too big for a pocket.
Well, more like it run Chromium (WebKit-based, not Gecko-based). Still sounds pretty cool. Quality of the input is going to be the real gotcha, though - on-screen keyboards can be done well, but usually aren't. They have enough screen real-estate it shouldn't be too hard, though.
Your facts are so bizzarely wrong its hilarious.
OneCare has been discontinued. The scanning engine it was based on, along with definition updates, are now available free. If you'd even bothered to read *anything* about the product related to this article, you'd know that.
Windows does ship with a two-way firewall, and it's remarkably powerful and versatile. OneCare was basically a giant patch for those fools still running an 8-year-old OS.
"designed Windows better..." You can't fix stupid. The OS itself is pretty damn secure these days, much more so than (for example) OS X - see the Pwn2Own contests and the competitor's comments for an interesting case study. Actually exploiting Windows pretty much requires third-party software, and even then you have to deal with security features that no other os *except* OpenBSD has fully implemented (DEP, ASLR, etc.). What most malware for Windows (and usually for other platforms too) is, these days, is Trojans. Not a lot your OS can do to protect you from those. See the Dancing Pigs (or Bunnies) Problem. Pop up a warning dialog? Users will click right through it. Make them run as non-Administrators? They'll gain whatever rights the program says it needs (in the case of Trojan-infected installers, you would probably need admin rights anyhow). Antivirus provides only a very small amount of protection against this, but I suppose if you're going to have that kind of person online anyhow they should have that protection. If a company wants to charge more to protect against that stupidity, though, I don't see that as being so evil.
Yeah, it's still used. Of course, being a MIPS emulator, it's not exactly going to turn you into an amazing x86 optimizer, but it's a good ISA for learning simple assembly.
Aside from the fact that there *is* no equivalent on Linux (Linux, at its core, has very few libraries at all - multimedia is all done through optional engines like xine or mplayer or whatever), this sounds like a good idea. Users would have to be careful to avoid downloading bad plugins (there are respectable places to get Xvid for WIndows, and there are places where it has Trojan malware), and of course they would probably get all kind of crap... but then, they do already (trying to download the new "ActiveX Video Object" to see this movie!)
ClearType is optional in IE, has been for years. No idea where you got the idea it was forcing you to do anything. Tools -> Internet Options -> Advanced -> First item under Multimedia. It does default to true in IE8, since most people are using flat panels by now and find antialiased text less readable, but it's still optional.
To set IE8's default fonts, click Fonts at the bottom of the General tab in Internet Options.
To override page-specified fonts, open Internet Options, click Accessibility (under the General tab), then click "Ignore font styles specified on webpages" and/or other options there.
Lets see...
Umm, WTF??
Program Files (and similar) are not user-writable by default. They are owned by TrustedInstaller and are writable by Administrators, but not by standard users. Users can read, list contents, and execute; that is it. Same for ProgramData (roughly equivalent to /etc; system-wide config files). Among other things, this means that apps which write to their install folders (and some do, though they shouldn't) won't work correctly as a standard user. Installing to a subdirectory your own profile will usually work so long as the application doesn't try to make any global changes (HKLM registry, Windows folder, etc.) although some Windows installers will check the current user and error out if non-Admin.
Your claim about "can't prevent even a limited user from making changes and/or writing files that might be booby traps lying around waiting to be executed by a more privileged user" is complete bullshit. Even ignoring the defaults (where you don't have write permission to the global program files or data at all) NTFS permissions are far more versatile than classic Unix systems have; it is certainly possible to prevent write access to any user on any file, if you are Administrator (you can even prevent SYSTEM from modifying the file if you want, though an Administrator can take control and overwrite permissions for any file - just like root). Heck, if you want, it's possible to permit append but not overwrite or delete.
Linux users on most distros can write to /tmp. The sticky bit on the directory makes this matter less but it's certainly not true that you can't write *anythere* outside your home directory. Usually, an external device will also be mounted writable by users.