A further comment claimed that in America, companies have the right to lay you off, and stop your pay -tomorrow- Surely that isn't right?
But I also have the right to walk out on my job tomorrow and leave my employer in a bind trying to replace me. It's cruel both ways, but it all evens out and it's fair.
What would be really screwed up is if the employee could leave at any moment, but the employer was required to pay for their next X weeks anyway.
Actually, Windows XP and OS X already check NTP servers. So did Mac OS 9.x, if I recall correctly. He must be supporting some pretty damned old machines, frankly... not much you can do to help with that.
To repeat my problem for the third time, I'm remote-controlling a Mac using a Windows XP computer. GoToMyPC.com only works on Windows, it's useless for solving my problem. As far as I am aware, VNC is the only option for me.
And all that stuff about SFTP only being secure if it's "configured correctly"... why is that my problem? The makers of Cyberduck (my FTP client) are the ones doing the configuring... that's the entire point of software, to reduce complexity. If I wanted to waste all my time learning arcane command-line crap, I'd switch to Linux instead of using a Mac.
In any case, it's inexcusable that VNC doesn't have any built-in security for as long as its been around.
I'm mostly whining about software developers who HATE to make things plain easy. Securing FTP is easy, there's no reason that doing the exact same for VNC should be hard. Because I don't understand what the grandparent posted, that means I shouldn't have access to security... isn't that what the developers of VNC are saying to me?
Whether you consider it rude or not, as far as I'm concerned, everything he typed was technobabble I don't understand whatsoever, and I'm just letting him know that. Plus, without Windows instructions, it doesn't even answer my question. (There was another reply to my original question that was more helpful with less technobabble in it.)
I think it's more likely there's some chemical in the building that's causing it. Remember all the press coverage gotten by "sick buildings" a few years ago? It wasn't about EMP, but about some of the materials in the building that were either flaking off and getting into the air, or encouraging the growth of dangerous molds that would get in the air.
In one of the Red Mars books, a scientist was dedicating the remainder of his life to solving the problem of human immortality, and there's a passage in the book that's very similar to what you just typed. How there are millions of miles of blood vessels, thousands of chemical reactions, millions of brain cells all firing at just the right moment... and the more you know about how the human body works, the more amazed you are that it works at all.
I think that applies to everything. I'm constantly amazed that the Internet hasn't collapsed under its own weight yet. And thinking about how a car basically powers itself by *exploding* a hundred times a second, and yet the engine will run for decades without major maintenance, blows my mind.
Your entire explanation is complete and utter gibberish to me. To use FTP securely over SSH, all I have to do is change "ftp" to "sftp" or check the little "secure FTP" checkbox in my GUI client... why the hell haven't the VNC people made it easy like that?
Anyway, your Linux instructions might work on my OS X box, but I don't see anything in there about Windows XP.
Would if I could. How do I set that up with a OS X server and a Windows XP client? I'm using OSXVNC on the OS X box and the plain jane VNC Viewer on the Windows XP box. Neither seems to have any options for using SSH.
I mean, giving advice like that is fine, but unless you give us more information on how to set it up, you're basically just saying, "I'm so 1337 I know how to do this, and if you don't know how to do this you're not 1337 enough, newb!"
Also, does anybody know if OSXVNC is vulnerable to this flaw? I wasn't able to test it because the testing site is Slashdotted.
My 314's antenna broke suddenly one day. I went to bed and I had wireless, I woke up and suddenly only the wired ports worked... was very odd. Oh well, the thing was built well and served me well enough.
I replaced it with a Microsoft 700-something, and damned if Microsoft didn't make some killer networking hardware-- pity they stopped making it, but this one is at least as robust as the Netgear one, and runs like a champ without me even thinking about it.
Microsoft just realizes that the Wii isn't targeting the same market that the Xbox 360 targets, it's that simple. I mean, this is like a designer of top-end Audi saying, "sure, if you want a less expensive car, the Toyota Camry's pretty nice." He's not sniping any of his own sales, because people who are looking into buying an Audi are not the same people looking into buying a Camry.
There's no need for all this conspiracy theory crap. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Also remember things like drag&drop, integrated spell-checker, support for text-to-speech code (the "speak text" command in the Edit menu), AppleScript responsiveness... those are all part of the "feel" of Mac OS, and Java doesn't do any of them.
Practical experience on my OS X box leads me to the conclusion that Java is as slow as ever. Take an application like Art of Illusion, and you can see the lagginess in the GUI and the painful slowness of simple operations like "Save."
Azureus looks and runs like crap on OS X. I don't know if that's a fault of the developers of that specific app, or the toolkit it's running on, but saying "quite performant, usable on Windows/Linux/BSD/Mac" doesn't strike me as being particularly true, or at least, Azureus is a bad example.
But even if it looks and feels right on OS X, it still can't use OS X services like the spellchecker or drag&drop. That's why Java GUI apps will always be second-class citizens to native apps.
Even though it came with a super drive, there is now way to exactly copy an audio cd.
Try running the Disk Utility program that came with your computer. You might be impressed. (In case you're dense, yes there's a way to exactly copy with audio CD without any third-party software in OS X.)
1) Amiga didn't come out until after the Macintosh.
2) Macintosh sold a crapload more machines.
I think either way you look at it, Apple had more influence here. Admittedly, though, at the time most companies were working on or releasing GUIs... even programs like GEOS for the Commodore 64.
Re:Protesting a plant != fear of nuclear power
on
"H-Prize" Announced
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The people running Chernobyl certainly prove his point; there were about 10 places in the chain of events that led to that meltdown where somebody should have stood up and said, "no, this is too dangerous, I won't do it." Of course in Communist Russia (tm) that wouldn't have been a politically wise move.
But Three Mile Island is actually proof that the system works. Multiple failures, and no radiation released... that's a GOOD thing.
Say in the future we develop ultra-fusion which produces HUGE amounts of electricity and can solve all of our energy needs. How can we convert that electricity into biofuels to put in people's cars? You can't. But can you take that electricity and produce hydrogen for fuel cells? Easily!
And here's the best part... can you take that biofuel and create hydrogen for fuel cells? Also easily!
Hydrogen isn't a way of generating power, it's a way of storing it and moving it around. Like a battery. You can use your biofuel to create hydrogen fuel cells, or you can use a nuclear plant, or you can use coal, or you can use good old fashioned gasoline. It'd be stupid NOT to use hydrogen.
Yeah, but since environmentalists hate Bush and Republicans in general, you'll never see support for this plan no matter how sensible it is. If the same thing had come from the Clinton administration, they'd be writing about how brilliant it is.
Yes, but you're only looking at HALF of this administration's energy plan. The other half, the half that doesn't get much press coverage, is the building of additional nuclear power plants to create that hydrogen. And I can guarantee that a single nuclear plant creating fuel for 50,000 cars is going to be a ton more efficient than 50,000 cars burning gasoline by many orders of magnitude.
If you want hydrogen to work, support nuclear power. Without nuclear, it's only half the solution.
Ok, fine, my nearest grocery store is about a half mile away. That still doesn't solve the problem of "how do I get these 12 bags of groceries home." I suppose I could steal a cart, but that's against the law and I'd look like a hobo pushing it around.
To make things even better, it's more efficient for me to drive to Costco to do grocery shopping only twice a month, and the money I save covers the additional gas it takes me to get there with a lot of change left over. I suppose in your eyes that makes me "evil" because I'm using gas to save time and money... god forbid!
Just FYI, this administration has been doing everything possible to fast-track the building of new nuclear plants. But 30 years of obstacles from the EPA and every environmentalist group in the US has made it a daunting process, even with full Presidental support.
What we really need to do is convince the environmentalists that nuclear is the best option, thereby getting them to shut the hell up and let people BUILD them.
I don't want to have to pay $7.00 a gallon for public transportation that will never, EVER, come to Snohomish (where I live) and only benefit other people. Right now, Western Washington has a huge "Sound Transit" public transportation plan, and it's entirely useless to me even though I'm paying for it. The closest it's gotten to my house is the train line in Everett, which is a 15-minute highway drive away, and even then it only goes to Seattle, and only once a day. Oh, and the best part? There's nothing in the plan that will *ever* benefit me.
The only way I'd agree to that plan is if the taxes were localized to the county level, or even smaller increments, so I can be sure that the money I pay goes towards a service than benefits me.
I only drive 12 miles a day in a reverse-commute in a relatively-efficient PT Cruiser. I'm not part of the problem, and I don't want to be taxed up the wazzoo to help assholes commuting 40 minutes each way in an Escalade.
Slashdot Mirror
A further comment claimed that in America, companies have the right to lay you off, and stop your pay -tomorrow-
Surely that isn't right?
But I also have the right to walk out on my job tomorrow and leave my employer in a bind trying to replace me. It's cruel both ways, but it all evens out and it's fair.
What would be really screwed up is if the employee could leave at any moment, but the employer was required to pay for their next X weeks anyway.
Actually, Windows XP and OS X already check NTP servers. So did Mac OS 9.x, if I recall correctly. He must be supporting some pretty damned old machines, frankly... not much you can do to help with that.
To repeat my problem for the third time, I'm remote-controlling a Mac using a Windows XP computer. GoToMyPC.com only works on Windows, it's useless for solving my problem. As far as I am aware, VNC is the only option for me.
And all that stuff about SFTP only being secure if it's "configured correctly"... why is that my problem? The makers of Cyberduck (my FTP client) are the ones doing the configuring... that's the entire point of software, to reduce complexity. If I wanted to waste all my time learning arcane command-line crap, I'd switch to Linux instead of using a Mac.
In any case, it's inexcusable that VNC doesn't have any built-in security for as long as its been around.
"text-based MMORPG"? So it's a MUD with a pretentious name?
;)
Also, best one? You're saying it's the best MUD by a mile and a half? How many MUDs have you played?
Not buying any of this, sorry.
I'm mostly whining about software developers who HATE to make things plain easy. Securing FTP is easy, there's no reason that doing the exact same for VNC should be hard. Because I don't understand what the grandparent posted, that means I shouldn't have access to security... isn't that what the developers of VNC are saying to me?
Whether you consider it rude or not, as far as I'm concerned, everything he typed was technobabble I don't understand whatsoever, and I'm just letting him know that. Plus, without Windows instructions, it doesn't even answer my question. (There was another reply to my original question that was more helpful with less technobabble in it.)
I think it's more likely there's some chemical in the building that's causing it. Remember all the press coverage gotten by "sick buildings" a few years ago? It wasn't about EMP, but about some of the materials in the building that were either flaking off and getting into the air, or encouraging the growth of dangerous molds that would get in the air.
To also quote the movie Sparticus: "I am Sparticus!"
How are those two things related? Or do you mean building the model ship *from* the spaghetti? ;)
In one of the Red Mars books, a scientist was dedicating the remainder of his life to solving the problem of human immortality, and there's a passage in the book that's very similar to what you just typed. How there are millions of miles of blood vessels, thousands of chemical reactions, millions of brain cells all firing at just the right moment... and the more you know about how the human body works, the more amazed you are that it works at all.
I think that applies to everything. I'm constantly amazed that the Internet hasn't collapsed under its own weight yet. And thinking about how a car basically powers itself by *exploding* a hundred times a second, and yet the engine will run for decades without major maintenance, blows my mind.
Your entire explanation is complete and utter gibberish to me. To use FTP securely over SSH, all I have to do is change "ftp" to "sftp" or check the little "secure FTP" checkbox in my GUI client... why the hell haven't the VNC people made it easy like that?
Anyway, your Linux instructions might work on my OS X box, but I don't see anything in there about Windows XP.
Would if I could. How do I set that up with a OS X server and a Windows XP client? I'm using OSXVNC on the OS X box and the plain jane VNC Viewer on the Windows XP box. Neither seems to have any options for using SSH.
I mean, giving advice like that is fine, but unless you give us more information on how to set it up, you're basically just saying, "I'm so 1337 I know how to do this, and if you don't know how to do this you're not 1337 enough, newb!"
Also, does anybody know if OSXVNC is vulnerable to this flaw? I wasn't able to test it because the testing site is Slashdotted.
My 314's antenna broke suddenly one day. I went to bed and I had wireless, I woke up and suddenly only the wired ports worked... was very odd. Oh well, the thing was built well and served me well enough.
I replaced it with a Microsoft 700-something, and damned if Microsoft didn't make some killer networking hardware-- pity they stopped making it, but this one is at least as robust as the Netgear one, and runs like a champ without me even thinking about it.
Microsoft just realizes that the Wii isn't targeting the same market that the Xbox 360 targets, it's that simple. I mean, this is like a designer of top-end Audi saying, "sure, if you want a less expensive car, the Toyota Camry's pretty nice." He's not sniping any of his own sales, because people who are looking into buying an Audi are not the same people looking into buying a Camry.
There's no need for all this conspiracy theory crap. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Also remember things like drag&drop, integrated spell-checker, support for text-to-speech code (the "speak text" command in the Edit menu), AppleScript responsiveness... those are all part of the "feel" of Mac OS, and Java doesn't do any of them.
Practical experience on my OS X box leads me to the conclusion that Java is as slow as ever. Take an application like Art of Illusion, and you can see the lagginess in the GUI and the painful slowness of simple operations like "Save."
Azureus looks and runs like crap on OS X. I don't know if that's a fault of the developers of that specific app, or the toolkit it's running on, but saying "quite performant, usable on Windows/Linux/BSD/Mac" doesn't strike me as being particularly true, or at least, Azureus is a bad example.
But even if it looks and feels right on OS X, it still can't use OS X services like the spellchecker or drag&drop. That's why Java GUI apps will always be second-class citizens to native apps.
Even though it came with a super drive, there is now way to exactly copy an audio cd.
Try running the Disk Utility program that came with your computer. You might be impressed. (In case you're dense, yes there's a way to exactly copy with audio CD without any third-party software in OS X.)
1) Amiga didn't come out until after the Macintosh.
2) Macintosh sold a crapload more machines.
I think either way you look at it, Apple had more influence here. Admittedly, though, at the time most companies were working on or releasing GUIs... even programs like GEOS for the Commodore 64.
The people running Chernobyl certainly prove his point; there were about 10 places in the chain of events that led to that meltdown where somebody should have stood up and said, "no, this is too dangerous, I won't do it." Of course in Communist Russia (tm) that wouldn't have been a politically wise move.
But Three Mile Island is actually proof that the system works. Multiple failures, and no radiation released... that's a GOOD thing.
Say in the future we develop ultra-fusion which produces HUGE amounts of electricity and can solve all of our energy needs. How can we convert that electricity into biofuels to put in people's cars? You can't. But can you take that electricity and produce hydrogen for fuel cells? Easily!
And here's the best part... can you take that biofuel and create hydrogen for fuel cells? Also easily!
Hydrogen isn't a way of generating power, it's a way of storing it and moving it around. Like a battery. You can use your biofuel to create hydrogen fuel cells, or you can use a nuclear plant, or you can use coal, or you can use good old fashioned gasoline. It'd be stupid NOT to use hydrogen.
Yeah, but since environmentalists hate Bush and Republicans in general, you'll never see support for this plan no matter how sensible it is. If the same thing had come from the Clinton administration, they'd be writing about how brilliant it is.
Yes, but you're only looking at HALF of this administration's energy plan. The other half, the half that doesn't get much press coverage, is the building of additional nuclear power plants to create that hydrogen. And I can guarantee that a single nuclear plant creating fuel for 50,000 cars is going to be a ton more efficient than 50,000 cars burning gasoline by many orders of magnitude.
If you want hydrogen to work, support nuclear power. Without nuclear, it's only half the solution.
Ok, fine, my nearest grocery store is about a half mile away. That still doesn't solve the problem of "how do I get these 12 bags of groceries home." I suppose I could steal a cart, but that's against the law and I'd look like a hobo pushing it around.
To make things even better, it's more efficient for me to drive to Costco to do grocery shopping only twice a month, and the money I save covers the additional gas it takes me to get there with a lot of change left over. I suppose in your eyes that makes me "evil" because I'm using gas to save time and money... god forbid!
Just FYI, this administration has been doing everything possible to fast-track the building of new nuclear plants. But 30 years of obstacles from the EPA and every environmentalist group in the US has made it a daunting process, even with full Presidental support.
What we really need to do is convince the environmentalists that nuclear is the best option, thereby getting them to shut the hell up and let people BUILD them.
I don't want to have to pay $7.00 a gallon for public transportation that will never, EVER, come to Snohomish (where I live) and only benefit other people. Right now, Western Washington has a huge "Sound Transit" public transportation plan, and it's entirely useless to me even though I'm paying for it. The closest it's gotten to my house is the train line in Everett, which is a 15-minute highway drive away, and even then it only goes to Seattle, and only once a day. Oh, and the best part? There's nothing in the plan that will *ever* benefit me.
The only way I'd agree to that plan is if the taxes were localized to the county level, or even smaller increments, so I can be sure that the money I pay goes towards a service than benefits me.
I only drive 12 miles a day in a reverse-commute in a relatively-efficient PT Cruiser. I'm not part of the problem, and I don't want to be taxed up the wazzoo to help assholes commuting 40 minutes each way in an Escalade.