30 posts • joined Tuesday 16th October 2007 14:36 GMT
So let me get this right...
You attempted to make an article, and issue, out of what is likely a non-issue? Having a little experience with Firewire AND having read the scant details of the penetration I would guess that said laptops had Firewire networking enabled. Also, local admin account having the same credentials as the network admin account?! REALLY?! It sounds like this guy is trying to make a story & get some free PR out of nothing.
So it's ok then...
when others capture, detain & torture? Really now... If you're going to go about making an absurd argument at least make sure you're balanced in it and not coming off as a putz. Raise hell about anything the US does but don't say a word about those who dismember innocent civilians and stone women for sport. GOOD CALL!
I really do wish there were a system of maintaining a minimum IQ & level of common sense on the internet. :(
Treason you say???
You do realize that in order to be found guilty of treason (at least in the US) you have to be a CITIZEN of the US, yes? (Well, it may be true for people on green cards / work visas as well. I'm not sure. But, basically, if you're a foreigner you can't be guilty of treason against the US.)
You do realize that in REAL WORLD environments you'll have subnets much smaller than a /64. Just like you have subnets as small as 2 usable IPs now.
The whole /64 thing is actually the smallest amount that IANA/ARIN will hand out. That doesn't mean that we will all be getting our own /64. And, for right now most anyone can get a /64. But, that won't be a permanent thing either.
@Yes, missing the point.
Do you REALLY REALLY believe that the people involved in wikileaks have the ability to properly vet the intelligence data they are receiving to make sure no individuals are harmed as a result of the illegal leak of data. Beside the fact that the face of Wikileaks is an arrogant b*st*rd that is as reality impaired as the people involved in wikipedia and the "web 2.0 will change the world for the better" crowd.
MIPS measurement methodology?
It would be nice if we knew, or had access to, their MIPS measurement methodology & data sets. Then we could run the data sets with comparable methodology across the multitude of systems out there & see just exactly how well these expensive machines run.
I understand and like the fact that pretty much EVERYTHING in an IBM mainframe is redundant and has HUGE I/O bandwidth. But, I'm curious as to any other benefits of using a mainframe compared to some of today's clustering technologies.
Nick Farell & The Inq?
I had to check the URL to make sure I wasn't reading another sensationalist bollocks anti-Apple article. El Reg, I'm ashamed of you for going this route.
The summary of the report (per your article) is that most vulnerabilities in modern OSes are due to 3rd party code. Then go on to say that this will increasingly be the case. Well...... DUH!
The fact of the matter is, and has been for some time, that the vast majority of security issues in OS X is actually due to third party code. Notice I said "vast majority". Actual Apple code has had security issues as well. But, they haven't been as many as MickeySoft by any means. To be fair, I applaud MS for getting better in the past 2-3 years and would prod Apple to more thoroughly test the included 3rd party code as well as their own.
For video chat on mobile networks to be all encompassing you would need a standardized highly efficient codec in terms of bandwidth and power requirements on ALL video/cell phones. You then would need for the carriers to 1) have enough bandwidth for widespread use 2) have latency low enough so video chat is usable 3)not rape everyone and bandwidth charges.
I don't see those changing much in the next three years. Five years, maybe. But, once it is done it will be a popular feature for the business types and the horny little teenagers that presently send MMS pics of themselves to each other.
As for video chat becoming more popular when it is possible on the iPhone... You had better believe it. The iPhone is considerably more popular than the N95 or most other high end phones. I personally know MANY people that are holding out on an iPhone for two things... 1) video chat 2) get off of AT&T's network ;)
I know this is an UK site, but....
Can you guys even make constructive comments any more? Or, are all of you so bitter with your country's standing in the world that you have to bash others? Really, you are no better than any other western country. As for DARPA and SMITE...
Well, let's just say it is DARPA's duty to try the extraordinary/impossible because just now and then someone finds a way to achieve the extraordinary/impossible.
SMITE is nothing more than an IDS with reactive counter-measure system. This has nothing to do with 1984 or thought policing. Really, guys, get a bit more with reality.
If you want to go on about thought policing just look at your own country and its part in echelon.
Politics & Bribes
It is due to bribes & high upstream rates that allow most "bulletproof" hosts to stay around as long as they do. It is absolutely politics that prevents the IPs from being taken back by the IP assignment agencies. I'm a bit surprised it has never happened as, if i recall correctly, ARIN's agreement with * states they may take IPs back for the nefarious acts of the assignee.
Brains.... I've heard of 'em just not seen them (here)
Really, fellas... Do you really think that giving away the house for free really helped Sun any? Sure, it may have gotten them a little attention from twits that would never pay for anything anyways. But, that doesn't help pay the bills now does it? While, I understand the complaint about hobbyists and Oracle requiring a support contract for Solaris proper, I must say that is what OpenSolaris is for. You get the basic/base OS for free to wet your lips; the rest you get with your wallet. There is absolutely nothing wrong with such a business model. EVERY company needs & deserves to make money. Sun, under the direction of that twit Schwartz, just forgot it had largely become a software house over the past decade as their hardware progressively lost advantage to the x86 world.
Now then... Since it seems that everyone has to bash someone to get their message posted here is mine...
You open-source twits do little to help any enterprise level company. They don't care about you. They shouldn't care about you since you NEVER really contributed to any of their bottom lines. And, personally, you twats that keep bitching about someone wanting to make money can go f*ck yourselves with a tree stump. Grow up and get a life.
Uhm... did we lose all reading comprehension abalities?
Guys, if you actually READ the article fully you will see that IBM is suing the company that is commercializing the open-source project. It is NOT suing the open-source project itself. While you may not see a difference there, there is most definitely a huge difference. My take is that IBM is keeping to their word. I can completely understand their point of view. Now, I only wish they'd permit licenses of os/z to legally run on hercules for education purposes. (I for one would love to tinker and learn os/z, which is impossible to do for 99.9999% of tech people.)
Open-Source is a farce
While I am all for not being raped for essential day to day software, open-source as a business model is a farce. You can count the success stories on one hand. Compare this to the number of successful closed-source companies out there and you can't help but realize that open-source has been and always will be an utopian ideal which will never take over the world. Does it power a number of things? Sure it does. But, the companies using most of it would have bought the software too.
For an open-source company it is just too difficult to turn a reasonable profit selling support.
Author not experienced enough?
IBM is FAR from copying Google. Even the Google Labs comparison is invalid. IBM has been releasing pre-production code & technologies to the masses since AT LEAST the late 90s.
As, Microsoft stole the concept of how a GUI and visual cues from Apple. By the way, you do know that SPARC & the original inventor(s) of the GUI had no intention of ever making a product of it?
Never heard of programming errors?
Maybe they should hire a firm with experience in coding and debugging "complex" software. It isn't beyond the realm of possibility that there is a bug which only occurs with small numbers of systems due to specific conditions which have not been foreseen. Sort of like every other software ever created.
@Neil 7 -- twit
Next time you make a statement you had better check the source you are using to substantiate your statement. Upon viewing the link to the scostman it was impossible to miss that the article was speaking of F-15E aircraft. These are most definitely NOT F-22s. They are updates of 40+ year old aircraft.
Or, you're just another ignorant and arrogant open source/anti-ms ass. Zimbra's cost for a perpetual license for 50 clients is $80.98/client. Its pricing stays on the same scale regardless of clients up to 500 clients. Whereas Exchange Server software is $699 and is always $699 regardless of clients. You only have to pay for the CALs. This in turn makes Exchange cheaper.
Re: registration fees
Apparently most of the people on the net these days have been around very long. The cost and procedures for registering a domain that used to be around in the early days of the internet did exactly this. It just so happened that our gov't is controlled by lobbyists and a particular organization felt it wasn't making enough money with the old way of doing things.
I remember when you had to provide business registration documents along with your fairly large registration fee in order to attain a .com domain, .net domains were only allocated to network providers and .org was mostly assigned to non-profits.
I must be old...
First, for all of you people saying "without a browser install CD how would someone be able to install one," Microsoft has been shipping a FTP client with their OSes for at least the past decade. Secondly, Microsoft's no-browser-at-all version of the OS is meant as a way for them to get numbers to throw claiming that almost no-one wants Windows without IE. Therefore almost everyone wants IE. Just a nice little slight of hand. AND, if the EU wanted to REALLY discourage Microsoft, why don't they make Windows ship without a browser at all and have Microsoft include an application which allows them to select a browser and install it via servers Microsoft is forced to keep online and up to date at all times. This would be a suitable reminder of why not to play greasy little games with consumers.
None of you get it!
First, anyone that wants to trash ANY system because it isn't used in the TOP 500 should really go back to school to understand that such listing REALLY isn't important to typical business uses. MOST businesses don't need to do raw number crunching on the scale that the generally quite large clusters do in the TOP 500. Meanwhile, building traditional systems with the capability to process numbers like most of the TOP 500 would be HIGHLY cost prohibitive. Clusters are NOT single system image deployments. Traditional systems are deployed as a single system image. This means that regardless of the number of CPUs /cabinates/server blades that the whole shebang is 1 system to the hardware/software. DIFFERENT BEASTS FOR DIFFERENT TASKS, TWITS.
Now, as for the Sun T boxes... I haven't had the privilege to work with on yet. But, from what I've read and heard they make excellent boxes for for the majority of the typical server use scenarios. That does not mean they are best for all. There are things that I would still use a Sun e6500 for over one of these Sun T boxes. Data warehousing would be a candidate. Again, DIFFERENT BEASTS FOR DIFFERENT TASKS, TWITS.
So, can we stop this stupid little argument now?
Eventually foreign manufacturing entities will decide to import everything into France instead of building in country as a result of all this insanity. I for one welcome the idea. Now, if there were only a way to make the US unions and big business both get some common sense and a feeling of morale responsibility.
It's all in the wording...
To the grammar police above... You are both incorrect in your statements due to the known meaning of the term when used in said context. But, since you kids obviously have issues with it, I will say that you should have have enough brain mass to determine that the most appropriate replacement would have been the word "decreased."
You do realize that Oracle has something akin to a fixation/stalker love-fest for Solaris, don't you? All of you haters say what you will but, linux is not and never will be as capable or clean as Solaris. There is something to be said for development of software and hardware together. That said, if the rumor of Rock being cancelled it sounds like the death of Sun's high-end server business and it will be nothing more than an x86 commodity & ultrasparc T appliance vendor.
I've *ACTUALLY* used/managed Sun's hardware back from the USII to USIII days and I must say Sun's over product offerings were better overall than anyone else's at the time. Now, where did I put that Sun E6500?
The idea is that the bigger the screen the more "enjoyable" "surfing the net" is for the user. Thus, when they don't have to squint to see details on tiny smartphone screens they are more likely to do more on the internet and therefore use more data. THAT, my friend, is how bigger screens use more data.
It seems all of the non-US readers of the reg think we have some large internet/phone gambling economy. In honesty, we don't. (Not a legal one anyway.) Our government bans online gambling for ANYTHING other than off-track horse betting. And honestly, you pretty much have to go to an off-track betting house for that as well. It isn't as large a market as you would think. Our "limited" physical gambling industry is much much much larger. Casinos are starting up everywhere. (Just about any decent sized body of water or on American Indian lands which are considered sovereign.) Physical casinos have attempted to create online gambling branches in the past in the US and all have been shut down under pressure of the US government. So, it's not so much this concept of "screw the rest of the world" you guys love to think the US is all about as it is about "screw online gambling." Our gov't tends to think that it is easier to launder illicit funds via online gambling facilities than it is physical facilities.
I for one and excitedly awaiting the change in regime from this current White House. We are getting it up the rear violently more than *most* of the rest of the world is. Hell, we can't even get a HS graduate to comprehend anything at a 7th grade level in the past few years. (7th year out of 12 years)
A marketing blurp regarding an award, especially one as vague as that one, doesn't mean much. One of the founders also having donated time/code to FreeBSD also has NOTHING to do with this discussion nor my question.
So, you're saying that even if they took the technology/concept from another environment (say mainframes or databases for the sake of discussion) then they still deserve a patent because they were the first to think of using it in a file system? Honestly, that concept to me is about at sane as Charles Manson. Honestly, the concept of copy-on-write wasn't even innovative back in 92 when the company was founded. The more I think about the actual concept it seems VERY similar if no the same as a basic concept taught in my high school's programming courses. I just don't think it deserves a patent.
In hindsight I think I am starting to lean more and more toward the anti-software patent group these days. It is becoming idiotic. Let's patent everything so no one can compete. Besides, when was the technology first patented and then brought to market? 10-15 years?
Excuse me.... Isn't Azul Systems still around? I do believe they just received an additional round of funding; did they not?
Now, without having the time or the desire to dull my mind, I haven't read the pertinent patents. But, there really are only so many ways to do something. If those methods are patented and they are correspondingly trivial (by USPO standards) then the patents should have never been issued and should be revoked. This is true for any company and any patent. Putting together common sense items and calling it a new innovation and filing for a patent does not a strong patent make.
Journaling file systems would fail a solid review due to their basis on prior technology.
Copy-on-Write doesn't seem innovative to me. It may have been an unique idea to move it to a file system at the time. But, it sounds more like a natural and common sense progression than any true new invention.
So, Anonymous Coward, what exactly is so innovative about the NetApp patents?
I have a gut feeling that all of the "innovation" was borrowed from other realms of the IT sector. Copy-on-Write does truly sound like something that came from the mainframe world. Perhaps we should ask some mainframe folk if they know of anything using this concept outside of NetApp? If this is the core of NetApp's patents that they are claiming infringement on then I have to take a guess that NetApp will settle out of court after making a big scene. After all, storage is ALL NetApp does. I think the ZFS scares NetApp not so much because of possible patent violations but because of the price/performance proposition. After all, from the numbers I have seen, it does appear that ZFS running on a sufficiently quick processor does provide a much better price/performance value.
re: domain squatting
Technically, domain squatting IS still illegal. Rarely is anything done about it, though. Especially since the most recent contract with the US assigned internet governing body let netsol claim ownership of ALL .com and .net domains in the world to do with as they wish in their most recent contract renewal in reward for dropping their lawsuit(s) against the governing body. As always in the US, big corporations when and common sense loses. That being said, it IS quite possible per US and international law for the IFPI to retake the domain under the premise of intellectual property and appropriation of the domain for malicious reasons. It falls under US law because the governing body for the internet is governed by US law. You can like it or not. But, this is how it is. Everyone can argue against the validity of this statement as much as you wish. It really doesn't matter. International law, says such acts are not legal and there is even an UN body established to handle such issues.
I find it amusing that *EVERYONE* has selective memory and likes to tailor the world to their liking regardless of how accurate that is.
- World's OLDEST human DNA found in leg bone – but that's not the only boning going on...
- Lightning strikes USB bosses: Next-gen jacks will be REVERSIBLE
- OHM MY GOD! Move over graphene, here comes '100% PERFECT' stanene
- Pics Brit inventors' GRAVITY POWERED LIGHT ships out after just 1 year
- Beijing leans on Microsoft to maintain Windows XP support