# Posts by eulampios

1102 posts • joined 10 Aug 2011

### Debian Linux, Android share a bed in upcoming distro

#### Double standards

>>are you actually aware that you keep applying double standards and if so what rationalization do you use to justify double standards?

According to my experience, the one who usually talks more about someone else's application of double standards is either doing just the same or worse. I remember how (our) media in Russia was appealing to the American custom of finding a speck in the imaginative Russian eye through their own log about things in Chechnya. Those speck and log are now exchanged, while the Russian log is substituted by a huge baobab trunk, thanks to the idiotic and hysterical anti-Ukrainian, anti-American and anti-Western propaganda.

#### an erratum

s/very few people would draw a little different conclusion from that: /quite a few people would draw a little different conclusion from that:/

#### Re: word count

>>I've been a touch-typist since I was nineteen and can hit 65 words per minute relatively easily

I am from the former Soviet Union, having received a pretty good Math and Science education, however have had no typing courses.

>>If you can't recognize that the Windows security model changed significantly with Vista then you can't understand there's no contradiction.

That's the thing, Paul's post had not as much recognition of that. And BTW, NTFS ACLs were introduced back in 1993 7 years before even XP! Your account of the long evolution from crude to fine is very interesting indeed, however, since the simple and dumb Unix/POSIX file permissions were fine from the get-go, very few people would draw a little different conclusion from that: ACL was too complex for practical security use and hence was a bad substitute for the POSIX file permissions. It's like building a marvelous, super beautiful car out of some platinum-gold alloy that is barely drivable. This is what Paul's post was about.

>>..Appeal To Authority..

"Amicus Plato, sed magis amica est veritas" -- No authorities. Appeal to a well-writ and a witty point, that is it.

>>ACLs have little practical relevance to security? That is jaw droppingly ignorant.

Go ahead pick up that jaw recalculating all the number of years it took from the initial release of NTFS ACLs in 1993 up until the post-Vista era when (according to you) the security got straightened out. If you can measure the "practical relevance" to be tangible or with a positive sign, that would be ignorant.

..dodgy counter-arguments along with your posts being shorter than mine ..

To every one of my word, you'll produce another 3, just can't compete with that typing agility and thus am giving up

#### word count

It was a funny and accurate post so certainly I agreed with it.

It was both funny and witty, yet struck to the core of the subject, it was also substantially shorter than your own post.

That you think it contradicts my own posts in that thread says more on your understanding than it does that post.

Yes, it was disagreeing with your idea how Windows ACLs are superior to the Unix permission system in the context of security. Paul tried to explain that this advantage has had very little practical relevance to security. You mentioned that it was the situation of the past. Of course, everyone but you talk here about the days of yore....

--------------------------------------------

Anyhow, I did a wc analysis on our comments, wc's output format is

 #lines #words #chars

Here is it:



my comment: 4 100 565



The totals are:

mine: [8, 378, 2141]

h4rmony's: [17, 1125, 6308]

---------------------------------------

You're really a winner and I surrender! :)

#### Re: Who invented permissions transparency?

Who came up with something first is only really relevant to those with a football mentality wanting to show one company is more valid than another

It is supposed to be so very relevant for some lawyers, at least Microsoft and Apple lawyers. Have you heard about software patents? This paper has a nice list of things MS claim to have come first and hence demand licensing earning a few billion bucks total some people have surmised. So it seems that football or baseball mentality is shared by one particular IT behemoth.

"Can access Internet", "Can Send Txt Message", et al. would have worked for UNIX / GNU Linux / Windows / OSX?

As far as GNU/Linux and *BSD are concerned, this Android model is inferior to their own model, i.e., having mostly free software packaged in the secure repositories by maintainers. Mac OSX has got Mac ports from *BSD, so it's partially there. MS Windows and Android have the same kind of deficiency in that they don't have the secure repos in the strict sense. Trojans have been a plague on Windows for many years. Google came up with this app API permission model to partially solve it. It is a pity for the Windows users to not have something similar for all of these years.

Also, this is an article about Debian and Android - bringing up Windows just so that you can make some (ill-founded) digs at it is off-topic.

Windows was brought up as a comparison to Android to show that security is not a nightmare. I didn't invite your superfluously prolific off-topic either.

It would be nice to have a full ACL system that is much more capable such as the one in Windows (Vista onwards).

Yes, you gave a very informative comment on it stating exactly the same, however it has been rebuffed by Paul Crawford pretty well the and you even agreed with him. It was the same discussion you're linking. Nevertheless, I was not even touching on the differences of file permissions, I suggested that that it's pretty useful when you can't control the apps as much as with *BSD and GNU/Linux repos. MS and RIM have followed it , adding the validity to that argument.

#### Re: Who invented permissions transparency?

Apples and oranges Tangerines and oranges, you want to say, Mr. Mephistro?

Didn't you know that the Android app permissions are simply gids. Those become visible to a user through the Google's API.

you can't deny an app access to your GPS hardware You will be able to with SELinux soon.

However, don't install an app if it requires something you don't wanna give it or it doesn't need it it for what it is supposed to do.

leaking data to other apps

An API bug which was fixed in the latest versions of Android. Bugs happen, can't see the nightmare in that either.

#### Who invented permissions transparency?

Is that enough for you?

no, it's not. fine grained permissions How fine do you want those grains to be? Have you heard about SELinux on the latest android?

I mean,

1) apps run under separate uid's

2) (various guid's) permissions that you could see before installing every app. It's been from the day one of Android, it's still unheard of with iOS, which also runs on top of a Unix-like kernel and system. Both Blackberry and WP 8 followed it after Android. Unfortunately, this model have never occurred to Microsoft for the last couple decades, users would have been much safer if it did.

#### what's that?

they also fix the nightmare that is Android permissions and security

Can you specify what this nightmare is? Thanks in advance.

### Panic like it's 1999: Microsoft Office macro viruses are BACK

#### math editors

Just a quick reply. Did you notice that in Lomath editor a bottom window allows entering raw text, a pseudo mark-up language somewhat similar to TeX. On your pictures it is not obvious if it is there. Perhaps, the current MSO analog also allows this method of entering the text. In particular, that Heisenberg's principle would be entered like this:

%DELTA x %DELTA p>= {hbar}over{2}

In LaTeX though it would be

$\Delta x\Delta p\geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$

From my own long experience, entering raw text is much faster than clicking on icons, this is one of the reasons why people went TeX and LaTeX. Moreover, my LaTeX documents as any other editing is done in GNU Emacs. With autocomplete mode for LaTeX if type "\De" I get an auto completion prompt if wait for half a second, then I press a tab for it.

AOMF, I had to deal with MS Equations circa 94-96 it was a disaster as an editor. The idea to embed pictures for every single pictographic item was brainless. Not only it was a mouse-driven principle to enter formulas, the fundamental problem with that was that with a 10 page document filled with a few formulas you get a non-editable document. I remember if press save and wait for tens of minutes before it crashes... Just recently a colleague asked to convert her document to LaTeX, since this (a British) journal didn't like the style and the fact it was in MS Word, not that they are not accepting it in doc, but they require a certain style there. It's hard to change style if it's not in (La)TeX, hard to automate it. So, I tried to convert it, but the formulas were all embedded pictures. She was using some version of MSO that didn't have this better approach to formulas. All formulas had to be retyped.

#### h4rmony, you're super-great!

...if they send an attachment you don't approve of, that's attacking them.

Okay, is this is your definition (?), I feel from your comments I am attacking you as well. Since you're a Microsoft advocate here (while still using Debian and CentOS according your other comments, which is supposed to add more value to this, another get the facts business), so it's okay with me.

And, please, don't even try to refute it, at least with me, it won't work.

Calling us "ignorant" is a threat.

If you prefer sending docs in doc, docx, xls etc format when another format is a better way to go, than you are ignorant by my definition. Calling spade a spade is a threat to a spade, I agree with that.

I can write malware using macros in Libre Office that relies on exactly the same principles of user ignorance as macros in MS Office.

AMOF, I was talking about atril document viewer that won't allow all those bad things stupidly allowed by the proprietary Adobe reader, that according to you is mostly in use. I know you also mentioned, that without those scary and dangerous proprietary bits the IT world is devoid of color, beauty and sense. Are you sure it's only MS you're trying to protect here? But the due thanks do indeed go to Adobe, the good part of the company, that created the open standard of PDF and PostScript formats. MS doesn't even deserve one hundredth of this.

As far as your threat is concerned, go ahead and try infecting us, the users of ods, odt and odp format, you'll be praised to be the first one after those hundreds of thousands if not millions of Windows users that have fallen victims to this already. H4rmony is super-great! For myself, I'd call a math paper written in odf "an ignorance attack" as well (even if a person is a Math, Physics genius), for better formatting things should laid out by means of LaTeX or TeX.. Although a LO formula editor is much better adn closer to TeX than that infamous and ignorant MS Equations!

Arguing that PDFs should be more trusted is stupid as they have a known history as a method of malware delivery.

It is stupid if one uses Adobe reader, are you using one?.. on Debian and CentOS, I am sure you're not...

Okay

Okay? No it's great.

Preferring wine, but there is no such icon.

#### Re: @h4rmony

I actually don't see anywhere that you said you weren't talking about security.

Let's see here, did you see me actually talking about security in that post? I also was not talking about many other things. But a comment earlier above I did. I also had to correct you and others on what ISO PDF standard doesn't have.

..but you're just using it as an opportunity to attack people

Attacking people is not my hobby, ignorance is what I like to attack.

And a viewer that doesn't implement common parts of real world PDFs might be more purist and safer, but is going to be frustrating for most users...

So these are "common parts" and "the real world" already? Viruses and trojans are also a common part of the real world as well as virus scanners and antivirus software. There is a simple way to remove these common parts and from everyone's real world: use free, non proprietary software and file formats, period.

PDFs should not be on any preferred list is all that I'm arguing.

I am arguing the opposite, at least, it is good that you are not making my preferred list.

#### @h4rmony

I said it multiple times, "attacked by the ignorance" meant not necessarily security. It's ignorance of existence of free software often of superior quality for specific tasks. Just the phrase I quoted caught me there... Most of the time a text file, djvu or pdf file would be a better choice, attaching an Excel or a Word doc (or not being able to read say djvu) would be an ignorance in my mind.

the overwhelming majority of users wouldn't know what version of PDF standard a file attachment comes in.

For overwhelming majority internet and PC are a very dangerous place to be in already. I was simply arguing that if you use atril document viewer (like me) you're safer and more comfortable. The proprietary extension part of this file would not run, because it's not supported.

...because some versions of the standard are safer is wrong.

Once again, I meant the ISO open standard (versions <=1.7) Your allusion that it's a part of the ISO standard is wrong. A user is safer to use a free PDF viewer recognizing this standard and ignoring non-standard proprietary bits. I think I made it clear.

#### Re: receiving a document in a proprietary format

So fucking why did I get 2 downvotes here, or was it the same ignorance in action I was talking about when mentioning the djvu format?

#### Re: receiving a document in a proprietary format

PDFs have contained malware in the past

Every piece of Windows software might have contained malware in the past. No, I am not referring to proprietary Adobe Distiller specification. To be on a safer side, to create PDF documents, use La(TeX), postscript and pdf tools, conversion by means of a PostScript driver would also help (there is also a generic PS/PDF printer available with CUPS distribution). I also use ImageMagick, fpsed pdf/ps annotator and pdftk suite for various purposes.

Also, OOXML is an open standard, btw.

I hope you weren't born yesterday and know about all the controversies of this standardization, in case, you haven't heard there is an article on it.

#### Re: js and pdf proprietary extension, @big_D

I don't think any recipient of an email attachment is going to know whether RandomFile.pdf is some sub-set of the general PDF files that isn't a risk or if it's not

He or she might not know, that is why I warned against the use of acrobat reader, use a better PDF viewer and tool and don't use MS Windows, since it's complicated to get a decent default PDF reader, at least it's harder than on GNU/Linux or *BSD.

That's the scenario that you gave when you put it on a list with text files, et al. that you were happier to receive as email attachments.

I am not sure which scenario you're alluding to. The list I provided were standard document formats. I haven't heard about some proprietary extensions to djvu, postscript, dvi or text files, but even if those exist viewers that handle those are better off ignoring them.

It's the same as in MS Office.

I did not say it was not the same. Although it was primarily MSO Macro Viruses, I am not sure how LO is susceptible to those. I also mentioned that my reason to ignore MS office formats was not only the security concern.

That is a Windows admin. FYI, the two-dot (or three-dot) sign is called an ellipsis, (ἔλλειψις -- omission). No, I would not recommend that comment as a Windows ad :)

#### js and pdf proprietary extension, @big_D

And ODF has a macro language as well...

Yes it does, it is defaulted to not being active, moreover, a user is warned multiple times, and I was referring to not only this...

as does PDF (you can embed JavaScript in it)

I see that you confuse the standard of PDF 1.0--1.7 with some proprietary inclusions for Adobe Acobrat. No, JavaScript is not a part of generally accepted PDF ISO standard!

And Adobe has more than enought problems with security in PDF documents.

Yes, and Adobe reader sucks the most of all pdf viewers, I remember that when you recompile with pdf(La)TeX and the pdf output is still open, Adobe reader would crash. Evince, kpdf/ocular atril, xpdf or even ghost viewer and X Emacs embedded pdf viewer are much better ways to go, not this piece of lame bloat from Adobe! There are quite a few nice ones for Android as well. And did I mention a non-MSWindows GNU/Linux, Android or *BSD environment?

Please don't take me for a clueless Windows ad.. I mean user.

Your choice has nothing to do with safety.

My choice has nothing to do with your assumptions,I take it.

#### Re: receiving a document in a proprietary format

Shunning proprietary formats is fine until you make money from dealing with them and lose money as all your employees convert to/from them to deal with the rest of the world.

Good Lord, I don't make money by dealing with them... directly :) On another note, with all ridiculous ubiquity of MSO formats, some truly wonderful free formats are sadly unknown to so many. Say, djvu is the best for scanned documents. I get them rejected very often when trying to send scans.

#### mixing what doesn't mix

Putting aside the brainless habit, hopefully in the past, of MS to usually allow a lot of dangerous features to be activated by default including Macros, AutoRun, RDP login, ActveX etc, the main problem with Macros (VBA) in MSO, as was suggested in the previous comment, is mixing executable code and document (formatting) in the same file, while allowing there some potentially dangerous code there. Most other document creation suites are more do distinguish these two different things.

Compare it with Emacs Lisp .el files or the same .tex files, the former might contain some potentially dangerous stuff, like shell-command-to-string function, however, an .el file is NOT a document! While the latter .tex file would not contain anything potentially bad, other than \write operator in TeX. A few precautionary measures are in place though. In case of LaTeX, all the Macro stuff is provided by the .cls and .sty files. Those are not documents though.

#### receiving a document in a proprietary format

If you receive a document with this advice, be aware: you are probably being attacked

Exactly, when I receive mail with an attachment containing a document in a format other than text or other fully open document format, such as pdf, odf, abw, djvu, ps etc., I feel attacked by someone's ignorance. That's why following this advice I put a footnote at the end my own messages:

#Please do not send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork documents. Send OpenDocument instead!

### Adobe Flash: The most INSECURE program on a UK user's PC

#### Re: BBC and YouTube without Flash?

Is there any way to view video on YouTube and BBC news without Flash?

There are many, at least for youtube. I am not sure about BBC. VLC can play many url videos including youtube. Totem on GNU/Linux can do it too. There is also a python program youtube-dl . As the name suggests it can download video from youtube, it can also downlaod videos from other websites. You can try youtube-dl BBC too, try vlc for it too. I myself cannot, I am in the US. wireshark might be another possibility.

For non youtube movies, you might simply examine a page source, when it's hidden, I use tcpdump to determine the url

### NHS delivers swift kick to Microsoft's wallet over fee demands

#### at AC, post #2232775

You're using the sarcasm operator twice, that is effectively negating its action.

...to an OS that 95% of the applications cannot run on

Are you trying to run Windows applications on GNU/Linux or other platform without an emulator or a virtual machine? Well, let me state this, binaries built for two separate systems are incompatible, sometimes they are not even compatible to run on similar systems. I suggest to discover for yourself analogous to those applications that are either the same ones but built for the system in question, or can be used as a substitute for it.

Then there is the cost to retrain the users to use the new OS and applications

This cost should always be accounted for even with new iterations of MSO and Windows 8.

new devices that are supported under the new OS, the cost to remove and wipe the non supported hardware

Are you talking about Windows Vista, 7 or 8?

#### @ Bluenose

Sorry as well, but your own post indicates lack of knowledge about software.

...designed for a specific purpose and crucial to saving lives

And what are those, in particular? I highly doubt that MS Windows based software is indispensable there. AMOF, more so, there have been a lot of instances where MS Windows lags behind other systems (including GNU/Linux) in reliability, speed, ease of deployment and development. To name just a few: top 500 fastest supercomputers, London Stock Exchange and many more examples.

applications that can be used to manage the millions of x-ray images that are generated every year

"Managed" how exactly? Stored and kept in the database? Are you trying to make my shoes laugh at this? :)

Using your analogy of "seeing things through the rose-tinted glasses", I'd say that people that see Microsoft-made and based software as irreplaceable don't use any glasses at all since they just shut their own eyes entirely.

...is beset by difficulties and additional costs to the organisation going that route.

is it the sedative medication costs you're talking about, that help people go through the stress of seeing something new? This would also apply to the constant changes MS have a habit throwing at their loyal users. Have you hear d about UI (r)evolution in MS Office or Windows 8?

Your example reveals that you must have held it ... I mean used this option wrong. What were your specific shortcomings of it?

### Sorry, chaps! We didn't mean to steamroller legit No-IP users – Microsoft

#### exactly

because Microsoft products are being sold and used as zombies

That is the gist of this issue! Sorry, can't upvote you more than once.

As per David Finn, associate general counsel of Redmond's Digital Crimes Unit : "..surreptitiously installed malware on millions of devices without their owners' knowledge..." Some kind of injunction on those malware-loving devices would be very logical.

### Microsoft's anti-malware crusade knackers '4 MILLION' No-IP users

Yes I missed it too, so tell us the stats of how many Android user have willingly installed trojaned apps while 1) allowing to install outside of Google play and 2) having slept through all the obvious warnings presented in the permissions page.

It would be interesting to compare it with those glorious days of the Loveletter, Conficker, Stuxnet et al

#### How dare you?

Don't they already do quite a good job of that?

What is it job, punishing 4 million users while conducting this withch-hunt? This is not a job well done, I am sorry. Or is the fact that they recommend running an anti-virus to be able to protect yourself from the malware?

Significantly better than say OS-X or Linux from the last stats I saw.

Please show me those last stats, since I assure you that there have been millions of users that have fallen victims to a one sort malware infection or another at least once in their life. There are none on GNU/Linux(unless you show me those stats), there are much less people to suffer on Mac OSX, and if you refer to Android, show the stats of actual number of people that got malware, not all those ads run by the AV companies of how many malware strains are available for download, if you don't mind.

What this accident is actually showing that Microsoft out of incompetence yet again have a bad job setting up a secure software infrastructure and are now trying to (ab)use the law to show even more incompetence.

### Using Android 4.3? Don't let malware snatch your private login keys

#### @Taylor 1

Will android for gadgets suffer the same fate as windows for PC?

Not sure it can in the future, so far it has not. Since the "old boss" has been known to

1) lack many security mechanisms, such as, separation of system and apps, separation between apps and, finally, transparent permissions;

2) hold security as an afterthought, that is why trojans have not been the only plague of it, remember those nasty viruses, a user can magically contract?

3) be of a proprietary nature and dependent of one very well known monopoly.

Besides the fact what this article says that this particular bug might not be very easy to exploit, buffer overflows pop up here and there in a lot of types of software and most operating systems. I am not sure if any of the great infections like Loveletter, Conficker or Stuxnet were some sort of consequence of it, however, it's rather insecure design of MS Windows to be blamed there. Conficker vulnerability was patched some time before it started to spread, not too many people bothered with it. The flaw was and still is with it (and partially with Stuxnet), where RPC is allowed it as a service and enabled by default. Remember, that security is an afterthought?

### Microsoft compliance police to NHS: We want your money

#### Re: Only one word for it

It's internet facing and involving customer data. Hardly the place for something so often as hacked / exploited on websites as Linux.

This is bullshit, my friend. Are you suggesting that Linux web-servers get hacked because of some intrinsic vulnerabilities? If they do, it's mostly becuase of some bad practices and often due to the use of some buggy proprietary or in-house software. Windows ecosystem got it too (in a larger scale though) plus you got a constant threat of viruses and trojans. You need to run an antivirus software per Microsoft own recommendation.

#### a few "advantages" of Mac OSX

The problem with linux is, it only does what the developer needed and not what you need

Not true, you don't have to be a developer, lots of regular users are quite happy with GNU/Linux. As a matter of fact, it's more user friendly than Mac OSX. Say, most of GNU/Linux distros have repositories of tons of software available handled trough the single interface (multiple front-ends ad libitum). No side-loading is ever necessary. Mac OSX has mac-ports (bsd distribution ports) which is a pain in the arse to set up.

then it's file a bug time and wait 2 years

Any concrete examples? I do have a counter example though, remember flashback? Apple developers had been sitting and not fixing a severe Java vulnerability for the Mac OSX users for more than six months. It had been fixed already for GNU/Linux almost immediately. A lot of Mac OSX users had to suffer as the result and about 600K of users got infected as a consequence...

#### Re: This kind of nonesense...

but RHEL costs way more ... just to license

Tell us about this license. Dear AC, are you confusing licensing and support, because, besides the support (for which you would pay MS separately from the license) there is only the trademark license? Didn't you know that RHEL source code is available and for absolutely free (as both in beer and freedom)? There is also a few free renowned derivatives, like CentOS or Scientific Linux.

than running Windows Server

Okay, RHEL includes literally gigabytes of software, a hundred maybe a thousand times more than your Windows Server. What it means that it is packaged into repositories it also provides all security and bug updates for you whenever those become available from the actual developers (mostly disjoint from RedHat) or are when RedHat own engineers find security issues within it (thanks to the fact that they are mostly free software).

For a comparison, there are about 5 webservers, 2-3 office suites, a gazillion of text editors, multimedia players, CAS systems, system and general tools, almost complete distribution of Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby TeX/LaTeX and you-name-it....

let alone the TCO

Let alone all the marketing bullshit, or how were they called?... get-the-facts?

#### Re: What is wrong with getting software from someone else?

...that the people responsible for purchasing have some sort of relationship with MS?

And it seems that these people are pretty competent in representing Microsoft, or is it that they are pretty incompetent in representing both the NHS and British taxpayers?

#### Re: Praesumptio innocentiae

But what do I pay? That's the honking big question, and one that's literally impossible to answer.

And yes what do you pay exactly? I can't answer many questions myself. So what?

I tell you I pay with my two (oops it's now three) free gmail accounts: NOT A THING! Because I use good ol' IMAP (with both mutt and, recently, with GNUS clients ) + SMTP handled by Postfix.

As far as MS is concerned there is some price to pay though for their unfair domination and it is not only limited by the Windows Tax which many reluctantly pay with their eyes widely open.

#### Praesumptio innocentiae

Then I found out the google has become the leading lobbyist among high tech companies. In other words, the google is now helping to write the crooked laws. If you know of any evidence to the contrary, let me know

Doesn't that work the other way around, you are supposed to present the evidence of evilness of the defendant?

IMHO, I am trying to say that with Microsoft, Apple and Oracle it's not that hard to be much LESS evil and Google is still one. Who knows if the table turns when/if the "(un)Holy Trinity" is gone ( can the Almighty be that merciful to us?) and Google might take their place.

### Boffins untangle why your software builds fail

#### Re: Errm, Richard...

Right. And isn't it all a poor generalization? The whole "dependency hell" is not a compiler's problem, it's the ./configure script's job or a packaging system pain. Haven't stumbled upon any of those since ... 2007 on both GNU/Linux and FreeBSD systems. In those cases when compilation had failed the make script would be responsible.

Just as of recently the Debian kernel-package designed for the lazy people (like me) to build Linux kernels. The latest 3.15 kernel didn;t produce a .deb image for me, which would be the first failure in ... the 4-5 last years I personally have experienced? No dependency hell at all, this is a bug, a (bad) combination of one kernel commit and kernel-package). More of the former than the latter, I suppose. Yaaawn, I am too lazy to go into the details really, I had to build 3.14.8 version instead.

### Shine on you crazy diamond: Distant dwarf may hide space jewel

#### the confusion and a bad wording

Yes, I got caught up by that too and just simply assumed that it was either an error or a poor wording.

In the second case my wrong guess was that the comparison was referred to the bolometric luminosities somehow that would account for the radii difference (or the square of the ratio to be more precise) ... never did I take the Sun's core into account (as you suggested), yet it most probably was meant by this article at least. Strange comparison indeed , yet there, it's unequivocal on what is compared though. And the comparison is indeed strange, since according to the wikipedia article, you referred to above, the core of a white dwarf might be 10^3 times hotter than the surface.

### Come off it, Moon, Earth. We KNOW you're 60 million years OLDER than we thought

#### some mechanics

Sorry, I might not be understanding your questions exactly, but will try answering to the best of my knowledge.

1) ...must have had different orbital times around the sun before the collision...

According to the 3d Kepler's Law, the period, T, is proportional to the 3/2-nd power of the major axis of the orbit [for the almost-circular orbit that would be the (average) distance to the Sun]. Hence, given the impactors on stable orbits, their periods must be the same. Of course, the 3d KL might not be as accurate, since Kepler's Laws disregards the third body. The closer the impactors get to each other the more they disrupt each others' orbits and should be taken into account besides the central force from the Sun. Apparently, Thea and the Earth collided due to the mutual attraction :) not due to the difference in their orbits.

*With Sir Isaac's own (derivation) explanation of Kepler's Laws for the circular orbit, you can imagine a planet (or a body) as follows:

a=F/m (2nd Newton's Law) so a ~ 1/R^2 (the Univ. Law of Gravitation)

where R is the distance to the Sun. For the circular motion we have also:

a=R*omega^2 ~ R*/T^2, where omega and T are the angular velocity and the period of the orbit, resp., (omega=2Pi/T)

=> Thus T^2 ~ R^3.

2) Would that be faster or slower than post-collision?

If it did, it has to change the orbit and the excess or the loss in potential would be used to do the work for it. However, not because of the impact, more due to the attraction and change in the velocities. The only loss could be in the thermal energy of the collision and the additional proper axial rotation of the Earth received by the impact with an acute angle (as opposite to head-on) . And that is what has been hypothesized to explain a number of rather odd phenomena for the Moon-Earth system.

3) Would it's orbit timing be different after it gathered water than it was before?

?? the mass of the acquired water is negligible w/r to the Earths mass, and again, the orbit of the planet depends on the mass of the Sun not the mass of the planet, however the Sun's own "wobble" does, but it is even more negligible than that.

....

### Office, IE and Windows in line for critical fixes from Redmond

#### Re: I wouldn't class having to reboot...

I booted it up, said it had X number of updates. I updated. It asked to reboot.

Next time you need to update the information what needs to be updated, since it would not check if the list of updates is up-to-date by default, otherwise, wait for some time or force the update manager to check for the latest updates.

#### Re: I fired up my copy of Fedora yesterday.

Shame on you, Jason. You forgot to use yum or the Update manager correctly, ie., you have to refresh it first and find all the latest updates or run the "yum update" command again.

Anyways, on a Debian like system it's either refreshing the list of available updates (alternatively, if you're lazy, waiting some specified time) or running "apt-get update&&apt-get upgrade" command. Unlike on MS Windows, the upgrade is never incremental and always offers you the latest versions and all the available upgrades at the moment.

#### @LDS

Anyway IE patches usually require a reboot

Explain me please, why does it have to? Firefox, Chrome(ium) or any other browser would never do, moreover, on most competitors OS' very rarely do require reboots with very few exceptions.

Office don't - unless your'se so stupid to keep Office open while updating it - but are you using Office on a server?

Explain me this magic again please, can't you just restart the application without restarting everything? And btw, I heard of some very smart MS HPC systems doing all number-crunching in ... MS Excel of course :)

#### Re: Nothing to see here...

Current versions of Windows have fewer security holes that are on average fixed faster than mainstream competitors like OS-X, SUSE or Red Ha

It also have MUCH less software to fix. Come on, MS don't even maintain a pdf viewer of their own, the mentioned competitors have a few dozen or so...

### PC-infecting chat demon quotes THE BIBLE to summon malware plague

#### @ malle-herbert

Because this has nothing to do with windows

Next time when we hear about another sophisticated (or not) Android trojan readily available for users to download , please speak up, and say hat it has nothing to do with the platform.

I would however not agree with you. On Windows unlike on GNU Linux, *BSD or even Android operating systems, users are quite accustomed to install software from various unknown, unverified places. Windows didn't have secure repositories until very recently where a limited number of software has become now available from Windows Store. For the last 20+ years it apparently never occurred to the smartest minds in Redmond to devise a mechanism similar to what Google had done with their transparent permissions system for Android apps.

Even if a mechanism exists (i.e., centralized store, permissions system or repositories) bad habits continue haunting those users. Been there, seen others do silly things...

So you do blame the OS (at least not directly) for this!

### Senate decides patent reform is just too much work, waves white flag

#### @ chr0m4t1c

chr0m4t1c, sorry changed my mind and will downvote you this time, since you're getting more upvotes than this Apple and Microsoft apologia really deserves.

#### Re: who are those companies?

Not downvoting for you, sorry (unlike you perhaps downvoting my post)

pointing out that Microsoft and/or Apple are not being "evil"

Why were you quoting the word "evil"? I am guessing because you put the relative meaning of it there, didn't you?

Apple and Microsoft are both in the "for" camp.

Is this "for" also supposed to be quoted? If everyone was for, why did this all end up broken? I hope you are not learning it from me, but a more disruptive and destructive efficiency of some idea or cause is achieved when one joins it. So this pretentious "for" does make a perfect sense.

Since, the real facts are:

Microsoft: racketeering most Android manufacturers or/and spreading FUD about their infringed patents never publicly disclosing what these patents are.

Apple: attacking Samsung and others for some ridiculous shape patents with a lunatic idea that "they invented everything"

Rockstar: it's not enough for both of them what they achieve individually, so they combine their trolling forces and greed to attack more successful competitors. Plus it's better and more secure to use proxies instead of engaging in more face-to-face, straightforward and open-field attacks. Maybe, so they could join the party for the reforms to better ensure its destruction.

#### who are those companies?

"Regrettably, competing companies on both sides of this issue refused to come to agreement on how to achieve that goal."

Let me guess who those companies are:

for the reform: small IT companies (not small IT trolls), FSF, EFF, Linux Foundation, Google, Red Hat, Samsung et al.

against: small trolls, big trolls (Rockstar is one example), Microsoft and Apple (as superlative and extreme forms of a troll) an the like

### Droid malware cloak outwits Google Bouncer and friends

#### @RyokuMas

It is also inherently the most insecure out-of-the-box, by it's "open" nature.

If freedom holds someone insecure he/she should voluntarily seek shelter in a nearby prison.

### Powershell terminal sucks. Is there a better choice?

#### @Uffe, *nix permissions and more

Before turning to file permissions, I would like find out if you're gonna answer my questions on your alternative of my command and some criticism of it?

Windows NT was a clean-room implementation which had nothing to do with the Win9x line

I know what you mean, but I am sorry, did I ever use "NT" in my statement? that was "MS Windows" in my quote. Do you then mean that Windows 9x line was not labeled 'Windows' or that it never was 'Microsoft' Windows?

Wrong. The *nix systems had me-us-everyone rwx permissions from day one. No ACLs.

True about ACL, however, I was contrasting it with the original Win9x without any rwx at all.

As far as NT is concerned, XP was from that line. yet a lot of people experienced problems with permissions (or the better ACLs). I remember the implementation wasn't without a few kludges, and remember how I tried installing a game and a few applications with admin account and could only run as admin, getting "access denied" errors, that is partly why many people would only use their Windows box out of the Admin account. Whether it was a some system design flaw or 3-d party programmers messed it up, I don't know, however, this wasn't the case with the *nix systems when you had it happen to the userland programs. Maybe acl's were too good and were not understood well by the 3-d party XP programmers.

Also, with all the advantages ACL have before the POSIX permission, as you suggest, I'd want to point out at another fact. The POSIX permissions have their important role: security.

Let's see, how it helped Android and Google there. For the GNU Linux and *BSD there have been software repositories, which users could be installing software from. It's fairly secure with the digital signature and integrity verification and so on. That is why trojan is a "100th class citizen" on those systems :). (Now, Windows 8 got a slightly similar thing not for all software though, Android has it's store too.) Although before 8, what was there since XP (and before) to warn and protect a user, a system against a possible trojan?

Nothing except a warning and advice "to install software from the known sources".

Google came up with a witty yet simple solution of extending POSIX permissions. They divided different tasks and actions into categories (like access to Internet, writing to an sd card and so on) by using groups and mandated all applications to acquire a unique uid thus separating application away from each other and system. Plus granting various permissions categories by having them join the corresponding groups. More so the applications themselves have to disclose those permissions they want, which is achieved by API.

If XP, Vista or even Win7 had it, it would be great and effective, since there was none of that available. I am not sure if ACL are bad or too good, but those were never used to accomplish anything similar.

#### @Uffe Seerup, about my point

Please do not take this the wrong way, but that seems pretty ad-hominem to me.

I hope, I won't, I don't see how you can contribute this in this way though. I felt offended by the tone of h4rmony's. It wasn't the first time it happened to our discussions. 'ad hominem' is what I would describe this ( I wasn't the first to use this Latin term though). It's not a kind of pedantism where "things are pointed out for you ", it's rather when "they are pointed out at you" . Bash, PS or even MS don't have to do with that.

Yes I do not know PS, yet I seem to know a little about the GNU utils, enough to find and point at a few issues others have. Here is a fact, I didn't feel your "pedantic tone" to be insulting the same way, in contrast.

Most of us are anonymous here. I didn't bear insults and swearing at my mom as the user dogged did once to me. I told him, that this is cowardly and if that would be in person, he would be dealt with in manly manner with a physical involvement of both of us. So some of us would end up kicking the the other one's arse.

At least, I am thankful to h4rmony for being formally polite and never swearing at me.

#### @Uffe, on find

That's 2 things already...It is called "find" because it should find files. The UNIX principle would be to leave the "printing" to another tool.

When another tool is known like formatting cmdlet in PS, it might be a good idea. Otherwise, sorry, but find has to print out the information somehow, it can't just dump whatever is possible to a printing utility. In case of PS, cmdlets work together, utilities don't. In fact PS is one program divided into modules. You're alluding to PS cdmlets as independent programs, is that correct? Can I take a dir cmdlet and install in a GNU Linux or a *BSD and use it instead of find or ls? If not, then they are not fully independent.

But even if you want us to ignore it, printf *also* starts and executes new processes. Cookbooks frequently use that capability.

Never heard of this feature of -printf 'to execute' anything. Are we talking about the same find's? Which cookbook are you reffering to? Mine is:

find (GNU findutils) 4.4.2

Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it.

There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.

Written by Eric B. Decker, James Youngman, and Kevin Dalley.

Built using GNU gnulib version e5573b1bad88bfabcda181b9e0125fb0c52b7d3b

Features enabled: D_TYPE O_NOFOLLOW(enabled) LEAF_OPTIMISATION FTS() CBO(level=0)

It has been pointed out to you, that PowerShell has been able to take a responsibility such as finding/locating items and separate it from responsibilities such as managing processes,

Okay, kindly let me know if cmdlets are independent programs. In particular, whether dir (or ls) and Format-Table, date-time are as independent as find, awk, date and Bash? In particular, can I install any of theses cmdlets on my system to work with Bash or Dash? If not, then they are not independent programs and contradict the UNIX principle more than find does.

#### @h4rmony

I am sorry mam, but your pedantic tone is not bearable to me. Most of your post is dedicated to teaching me and telling me how I was wrong and you're right all the way. (I am a teacher myself and this is not my pedagogical method.) This is how our discussions usually end. Unlike Uffe's posts, yours are felt pretty "ad hominem" to me.

I beg your pardon, but I cannot continue in that manner.

All the best.

#### @h4rmony

with all due respect, I would suggest that the manner in which you try to argue would be a little different than this:

"you're proving to me that 5+5=7, while I am trying to showing you that 3+3=6"

Diminishing your opponent doesn't empower your argument, it's does the opposite dialectical job, for an independent onlooker.

every answer given to you has been attacked and I think it is ...

So, I am attacking it? And other just gently and friendly showing tha I was wrong? Again, please look at the difference of tones, you're using.

TheVogon was again using some cryptic language, I was making remarks on that. If he/she suggested how I could protect the signature from being compromised after I offered to install as a system utility, I simply said that you would be done with the whole system. Is it an attack. Or when it was pointed out how portable and universal S, it can be used for no less than 2 systems! I pointed out it was a joke on potability. Again it was an attack....

find ./ -exec ls -l {} \; | awk '{print $3}' | grep . | sort -u instead of: find . -printf "%u\n" | awk '!match(str," "$1){str=str" "$1;print$1 }'

You're forgetting that the final was

find . -printf "%u\n" | sort -u

I also offered AWK because you seemed fixated on AWK in the original post I was responding to and used redundant grep filtering. So you were using 2 redundant pipes plus a redundant command ls instead of just reading man of find.

You are confusing Bash with GNU Utils. find is not "built into Bash",

No I don't, I never said that, I only likened PS cmd-lets to Bash built-ins, get it now?

it's a program and the reason Uffe called it a monster is because it violates seven ways to Sunday the UNIX principle of do one thing well.

How so? It only specializes in finding files and printing information on that. While PS is a jack of all trades, right? Say find is independent of the shell, you can use with pretty much any POSIX shell, while you cannot use dir cmdlet with GNU Bash, on the other hand...

It contains its own print formatting language for example.

It's printf, come-on, it's not "its own" language, escape literals are the same as everywhere, other formatting literals can be looked up via man or info.