OpenSSH trojaned...hmmmm
-
who wants to bet whoever did it was employed or hired by MS? :) -c
To explain Donald Knuth's relevance to computing is like explaining Paul's relevance to the Catholic Church. He isn't God, he isn't the Son of God, but he was sent by God to explain God to the masses.
/. #3848917hehe, well Open Source folk believe that MS devs are incompetent. As such it would be a hard pill to swallow if indeed some MS employee was implicated in breaching THEIR security ;P It was def one of their own though. ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulff
-
But the flipside is that somebody planted a trojan into the source, which has been found, and made known. If a pissed off ms employee planted something nasty into the source of a ms product, what are the chances that anyone would ever notice? -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
benjymous wrote: what are the chances that anyone would ever notice? Of course someone would notice; it isn't M$ that finds all these security flaws we have to continuously download patches for, but users. In this case, though, the unexpected behavior would be redefined as a "feature" or a behavior that is "by design" and ignored until the next SP. :) "Knock, knock." "Who's there?" "Recursion." "Recursion who?" "Knock, knock..."
-
chekit[^] I still maintain that access to the source (via the GPL) is not as wonderful as Open Source advocates claim it is, because the majority of people that will be depending on that code can't do anything with it. Useful for devs, useless for granny. The utlimate irony of course is the fact that basically, the source is tainted (if you have it) while the binaries are all ok, hehe. Bill must be grinning. Senkwe ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulff
Senkwe Chanda wrote: I still maintain that access to the source (via the GPL) is not as wonderful as Open Source advocates claim it is Here we go again. It seems bashing open-source is a hobby for some people. Senkwe: weren't you the one who complained recently about people bashing .Net? Senkwe Chanda wrote: code can't do anything with it. Useful for devs, useless for granny. What's that supposed to mean? That because some ppl don't have time to look over the source then it should not be handed out? And why can't they do anything with it? Senkwe Chanda wrote: Bill must be grinning. If he grins at this kinda news then he's pretty desparate. I think Bill has more important things on his mind. Like for example that recent MS push for bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
-
who wants to bet whoever did it was employed or hired by MS? :) -c
To explain Donald Knuth's relevance to computing is like explaining Paul's relevance to the Catholic Church. He isn't God, he isn't the Son of God, but he was sent by God to explain God to the masses.
/. #3848917 -
Senkwe Chanda wrote: I still maintain that access to the source (via the GPL) is not as wonderful as Open Source advocates claim it is Here we go again. It seems bashing open-source is a hobby for some people. Senkwe: weren't you the one who complained recently about people bashing .Net? Senkwe Chanda wrote: code can't do anything with it. Useful for devs, useless for granny. What's that supposed to mean? That because some ppl don't have time to look over the source then it should not be handed out? And why can't they do anything with it? Senkwe Chanda wrote: Bill must be grinning. If he grins at this kinda news then he's pretty desparate. I think Bill has more important things on his mind. Like for example that recent MS push for bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
Brian Azzopardi wrote: It seems bashing open-source is a hobby for some people Err, yeah I do bash the GPL and Open Source quite a bit. But I bash MS just as much :-D For example, I'm one of the (very) few people that believe Linux will overtake Windows sooner rather than later, which doesn't bother me a bit. Having said that, the few open source apps I've tried have generally sucked (except for Mozilla which is ugly but doesn't suck) So I prefer to play both sides half way. ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulff
-
Senkwe Chanda wrote: I still maintain that access to the source (via the GPL) is not as wonderful as Open Source advocates claim it is Here we go again. It seems bashing open-source is a hobby for some people. Senkwe: weren't you the one who complained recently about people bashing .Net? Senkwe Chanda wrote: code can't do anything with it. Useful for devs, useless for granny. What's that supposed to mean? That because some ppl don't have time to look over the source then it should not be handed out? And why can't they do anything with it? Senkwe Chanda wrote: Bill must be grinning. If he grins at this kinda news then he's pretty desparate. I think Bill has more important things on his mind. Like for example that recent MS push for bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
Brian Azzopardi wrote: bashing open-source is a hobby for some people ME! ME! LET ME JOIN!!! I love to bash open source for lack of a serious business model (besides the Semi-SAS approach) and for their abuse of the word "free".
You don't need to sleep to see a nightmare Anne Clark [sighist]
-
Senkwe Chanda wrote: I still maintain that access to the source (via the GPL) is not as wonderful as Open Source advocates claim it is Here we go again. It seems bashing open-source is a hobby for some people. Senkwe: weren't you the one who complained recently about people bashing .Net? Senkwe Chanda wrote: code can't do anything with it. Useful for devs, useless for granny. What's that supposed to mean? That because some ppl don't have time to look over the source then it should not be handed out? And why can't they do anything with it? Senkwe Chanda wrote: Bill must be grinning. If he grins at this kinda news then he's pretty desparate. I think Bill has more important things on his mind. Like for example that recent MS push for bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
Brian Azzopardi wrote: Here we go again. It seems bashing open-source is a hobby for some people I thought Microsoft-bashing was the hobby!:confused::confused:
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulff -
benjymous wrote: what are the chances that anyone would ever notice? Of course someone would notice; it isn't M$ that finds all these security flaws we have to continuously download patches for, but users. In this case, though, the unexpected behavior would be redefined as a "feature" or a behavior that is "by design" and ignored until the next SP. :) "Knock, knock." "Who's there?" "Recursion." "Recursion who?" "Knock, knock..."
Roger Wright wrote: Of course someone would notice; it isn't M$ that finds all these security flaws we have to continuously download patches for, but users True. The fact is MS has always been sloppy because they had no serious competition. It's going to be hard to shake the habit now. But I always wonder about the speed at which bugs in Open Source software are fixed. It's usually a matter of days. That's pretty quick. Who does the regression testing? Who tests the patches to ensure they don't break something else down the line? ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulff
-
Brian Azzopardi wrote: It seems bashing open-source is a hobby for some people Err, yeah I do bash the GPL and Open Source quite a bit. But I bash MS just as much :-D For example, I'm one of the (very) few people that believe Linux will overtake Windows sooner rather than later, which doesn't bother me a bit. Having said that, the few open source apps I've tried have generally sucked (except for Mozilla which is ugly but doesn't suck) So I prefer to play both sides half way. ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulff
Senkwe Chanda wrote: I'm one of the (very) few people that believe Linux will overtake Windows sooner rather than later Really? Server-side prolly. On the desktop never. What proof do you have to support your belief? Senkwe Chanda wrote: few open source apps I've tried have generally sucked So you think apache sucks? Sendmail sucks? What open source apps did you try? bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
-
Brian Azzopardi wrote: bashing open-source is a hobby for some people ME! ME! LET ME JOIN!!! I love to bash open source for lack of a serious business model (besides the Semi-SAS approach) and for their abuse of the word "free".
You don't need to sleep to see a nightmare Anne Clark [sighist]
peterchen wrote: ME! ME! LET ME JOIN!!! You're proud you bash open source? :confused: You must be a pretty negative/depressed person. peterchen wrote: I love to bash open source for lack of a serious business model And it seems, misinformed too. There is no business in open-source so they don't need a model. peterchen wrote: their abuse of the word "free". If it has managed to escape your notice they actually define pretty well what they mean by "free". Go to gnu.org and read. bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
-
Brian Azzopardi wrote: It seems bashing open-source is a hobby for some people Err, yeah I do bash the GPL and Open Source quite a bit. But I bash MS just as much :-D For example, I'm one of the (very) few people that believe Linux will overtake Windows sooner rather than later, which doesn't bother me a bit. Having said that, the few open source apps I've tried have generally sucked (except for Mozilla which is ugly but doesn't suck) So I prefer to play both sides half way. ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulff
-
Senkwe Chanda wrote: I'm one of the (very) few people that believe Linux will overtake Windows sooner rather than later Really? Server-side prolly. On the desktop never. What proof do you have to support your belief? Senkwe Chanda wrote: few open source apps I've tried have generally sucked So you think apache sucks? Sendmail sucks? What open source apps did you try? bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
Sendmail sucks? :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh: Very much so. Even Unix people agree it is a total hack job. QMail RULEZ!!!! :) Apache sucks? Much of it does. It is functionally great, but that isn't the whole story. It is a total nightmare to configure. But that is more of a legacy issue. The code generally does suck royally. But that tends to be very common for OSS and non-OSS. (What I have started calling "Code Spew") Tim Smith "Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution." Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
-
who wants to bet whoever did it was employed or hired by MS? :) -c
To explain Donald Knuth's relevance to computing is like explaining Paul's relevance to the Catholic Church. He isn't God, he isn't the Son of God, but he was sent by God to explain God to the masses.
/. #3848917Hehe :) I'm willing to bet it was not MS, but who knows? bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
-
Senkwe Chanda wrote: except for Mozilla which is ugly but doesn't suck ... and is dereived from commercially developed sources. :cool:
You don't need to sleep to see a nightmare Anne Clark [sighist]
... and is dereived from commercially developed sources. Sing it brother!!!! It would be a total joke to claim OSS code suffers worse from "code spew" than commercial applications. Apache, sendmail, expat, quake, etc..., all suffer from the same problem of moronic programmers who actually believe this crap about "self documenting" code. An overwhelming amount of code I see is mostly just "code spew". Tim Smith "Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution." Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
-
Sendmail sucks? :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh: Very much so. Even Unix people agree it is a total hack job. QMail RULEZ!!!! :) Apache sucks? Much of it does. It is functionally great, but that isn't the whole story. It is a total nightmare to configure. But that is more of a legacy issue. The code generally does suck royally. But that tends to be very common for OSS and non-OSS. (What I have started calling "Code Spew") Tim Smith "Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution." Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
Sendmail before version 8 had a bunch of security probs. But it's the most widely used MTA in the world. If it sucked that bad it wouldnt be used would it? Tim Smith wrote: It is a total nightmare to configure Do you really think so? Have you ever tried configuring it yourself? Or just becuase it does not have a nice MMC page it confuses your pretty little head? It's a simple, well documented text file. And if thats too hard for you there is a GUI control panel so it's really, really easy for those who can't be bothered to use their brain cells (if any). bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
-
Senkwe Chanda wrote: I'm one of the (very) few people that believe Linux will overtake Windows sooner rather than later Really? Server-side prolly. On the desktop never. What proof do you have to support your belief? Senkwe Chanda wrote: few open source apps I've tried have generally sucked So you think apache sucks? Sendmail sucks? What open source apps did you try? bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
Brian Azzopardi wrote: On the desktop never. What proof do you have to support your belief? Ummm, there's the "free" factor coupled with the fact that KDE is beautiful AND functional. You can no longer say that Linux on the desktop is hard to use, even for novices (such as myself). What's holding Linux back on the desktop right now (in my opinion) is the schism betweeen Gnome and KDE and the resultant lack of interoperability. Brian Azzopardi wrote: What open source apps did you try Lets see, first was Glade on RH 6.2. I was trying to set up a C++ language binding for it and I couldn't do it. You might say I'm lame, but I'd argue that the last thing on my mind when using an MS IDE would be getting it running. I just start it up and use it. I thought that would be the same on Linux. Then there's OpenOffice which I have on my PC right now in fact. I already ranted about it on CP some months ago. And actually I never mentioned the fact that it somehow installed itself as my default app for opening .doc files. I don't remember ever having asked it to do that. I also tried AbiWord. It sucks too but that's forgivable because the Abi folks never claimed it was a "drop in" replacement for Word. Then there was the Gnome desktop itself. Ok, I haven't tried Gnome2 but Gnome was very slow and unstable last time I used Linux. They'll improve no doubt, but last I tried them they sucked. ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulff
-
... and is dereived from commercially developed sources. Sing it brother!!!! It would be a total joke to claim OSS code suffers worse from "code spew" than commercial applications. Apache, sendmail, expat, quake, etc..., all suffer from the same problem of moronic programmers who actually believe this crap about "self documenting" code. An overwhelming amount of code I see is mostly just "code spew". Tim Smith "Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution." Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
Tim Smith wrote: moronic programmers :omg: You really are one sandwich short of a picnic basket dude! You are calling the people who wrote sendmail, quake and apache moronic? If you're such a bloody genius prove it? Otherwise go back to your small little world. bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
-
Sendmail sucks? :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh: Very much so. Even Unix people agree it is a total hack job. QMail RULEZ!!!! :) Apache sucks? Much of it does. It is functionally great, but that isn't the whole story. It is a total nightmare to configure. But that is more of a legacy issue. The code generally does suck royally. But that tends to be very common for OSS and non-OSS. (What I have started calling "Code Spew") Tim Smith "Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution." Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
Tim Smith wrote: Code Spew I hope you haven't patented that term. I'd love to use it if I ever bribe my way into becoming a proj manager :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh: ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulff
-
peterchen wrote: ME! ME! LET ME JOIN!!! You're proud you bash open source? :confused: You must be a pretty negative/depressed person. peterchen wrote: I love to bash open source for lack of a serious business model And it seems, misinformed too. There is no business in open-source so they don't need a model. peterchen wrote: their abuse of the word "free". If it has managed to escape your notice they actually define pretty well what they mean by "free". Go to gnu.org and read. bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
You're proud you bash open source? Actually, yes. GNU is a total joke and it is shocking at masses of sheep who copyleft their software with little or NO understanding of what it means. If you REALLY want open source, then the either public domain it or use the non-adware version of the BSD license. Artistic is also ok for people who would like to maintain a clearing house of modifications. Only then can you claim true free software. GNU isn't free, it is a political statement. Remember, even FSF goes to great pains stating that GNU is NOT about cost but about freedom of use. Then they list pages of legal restrictions. What a joke. Softpanorama: (slightly skeptical) Open Source Software Educational Society[^] Tim Smith "Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution." Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
-
Brian Azzopardi wrote: On the desktop never. What proof do you have to support your belief? Ummm, there's the "free" factor coupled with the fact that KDE is beautiful AND functional. You can no longer say that Linux on the desktop is hard to use, even for novices (such as myself). What's holding Linux back on the desktop right now (in my opinion) is the schism betweeen Gnome and KDE and the resultant lack of interoperability. Brian Azzopardi wrote: What open source apps did you try Lets see, first was Glade on RH 6.2. I was trying to set up a C++ language binding for it and I couldn't do it. You might say I'm lame, but I'd argue that the last thing on my mind when using an MS IDE would be getting it running. I just start it up and use it. I thought that would be the same on Linux. Then there's OpenOffice which I have on my PC right now in fact. I already ranted about it on CP some months ago. And actually I never mentioned the fact that it somehow installed itself as my default app for opening .doc files. I don't remember ever having asked it to do that. I also tried AbiWord. It sucks too but that's forgivable because the Abi folks never claimed it was a "drop in" replacement for Word. Then there was the Gnome desktop itself. Ok, I haven't tried Gnome2 but Gnome was very slow and unstable last time I used Linux. They'll improve no doubt, but last I tried them they sucked. ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulff
First you argue that all the open source apps sucked and then you write Senkwe Chanda wrote: KDE is beautiful AND functional Please make up your mind. If open-source sucked so much why don't you pick an app and improve it. After all, they've given you the code right? I however agree with you that developing a GUI app on Windows is much easier than the pain it is on Linux. I never tried any of the office suites on Linux. What's the point? I just use MS Office. Senkwe Chanda wrote: You can no longer say that Linux on the desktop is hard to use I never said that. What I will say though is that it is percieved to be difficult. And lets face it: if the average joe gets Windows on his PC what real incentive is there for him to change over to Linux? Apache? Windows is great for non-technical people. And its getting better too (Win2k is pretty stable for example ) bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]