If .net and j2ee are so great...

[Jeff Relf]

The Funky Musty .

Hi =^.^= , You say : " ... mmm . Kinky . "


" Suck a Cheetah's Dick "
on " Mr. Magoo Goes to Jail " :

Suck a llama's shitty asshole !
Suck a panda bear's spermy nutsack !
Suck a sloth bear's bootyhole!
Suck a greyhound's musty ass , mothafucka !
....
Polaroid , see what develops .

[Carl Farrington]

Re: _ True _ P2P ?

43 wrote:[color=blue]
> Jeff Relf:
>
>[color=green]
>>Hi 43 , You say :
>> Microsoft is just " glomming on to the P2P bandwagon . "
>>
>>
>>Make that the Pseudo P2P bandwagon .
>>
>>Is the telephone a True P2P device ? I don't think so .[/color]
>
>
> Agreed. YOu know what true P2P ?
>
> windows 3.11 networking using WINS.
>
> every node broadcast its name.
>
> no DNS, no PDC, no 'Active Directory.
>
> plop a pc on the net, give it a name
> and bingo.
>
> thats P2P
>
>
>[/color]

I think you meant windows 3.11 without WINS since WINS is essentially
providing the same service as DNS for the hosts, presuming they are
configured properly to use WINS (hybrid nodes)

[43]

Re: _ True _ P2P ?

Carl Farrington:
[color=blue]
> I think you meant windows 3.11 without WINS since WINS is essentially
> providing the same service as DNS for the hosts, presuming they are
> configured properly to use WINS (hybrid nodes)[/color]

Right! Thanks for the correction.

I guess I am referring to netBios/netBui
networking without WINS.



--

http://home.earthlink.net/~jabailo

finders storyteller

[43]

Smart Mobs

43:
[color=blue]
> Carl Farrington:
>[color=green]
>> I think you meant windows 3.11 without WINS since WINS is essentially
>> providing the same service as DNS for the hosts, presuming they are
>> configured properly to use WINS (hybrid nodes)[/color]
>
> Right! Thanks for the correction.
>
> I guess I am referring to netBios/netBui
> networking without WINS.[/color]

http://www.openp2p.com/pub/a/p2p/2003/03/13/howard.html

(PN: I read the Cory Doctorow work
and it's really worth reading)

The Next Revolution: Smart Mobs
by Richard Koman
03/13/2003


In my most recent piece, Cory Doctorow
described the world he imagines in his book
"Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom." It's a
world that uses reputation as currency, a
world where you're always on the Net, and
where people can be reduced to bits so they
can be downloaded onto disk and poured into
clones when their biological bodies give out.
The way longtime cyberspace social scientist
Howard Rheingold sees it, that world may not
be that far off.

In his new book, Rheingold posits that all the
pieces of a major convergence are upon us.
What do you get when you mix together millions
of cell phones; wireless Internet floating
in the air in cafes, hotels, and neighborhoods;
SMS messaging; real-time blogging; microchips
embedded in everything from cars to clothing;
millions of computers linked together to share
music, disk space, and computing cycles; and
users reviewing not only the products they buy
but also the people they bought them from and
other reviewers of those products? Rheingold
calls the result "Smart Mobs", the title of his
latest book.

"The people who make up smart mobs cooperate
in ways never before possible because they carry
devices that possess both communication and computing
capabilities. Their mobile devices connect them with
other information devices in the environment as well
as with other people's telephones," he says.

The result is a third computing revolution,
after the PC and the Net, in which individuals
once again have the power to put themselves
together in collectives of their own choosing.
Witness, he says, the way the Seattle WTO protests
were organized, and how the anti-Estrada movement
in the Philippines was coordinated by cell phone;
how web sites were being updated from the streets by
Net-connected phone.

Yet, even before we're aware the revolution is
under way, its transformative power is being
undermined and appropriated by the "powers that be,"
as laws are passed and technologies deployed that
make it a crime to use digital content in original,
innovative ways. Already a battle has been joined
over whether users of new computers (cell phones,
PDAs, digital cameras, MP3 players) will become
a major creative force or mere consumers,
"constraine d from innovation and locked into
the technology and business models of entrenched
interests."



--

http://home.earthlink.net/~jabailo

finders storyteller

[43]

Re: If .net and j2ee are so great...

GreyCloud:
[color=blue]
> Chad Myers wrote:[color=green]
>>
>> "GreyCloud" <cumulus@mist.c om> wrote in message
>> news:3F45A153.A 29DD2B0@mist.co m...[color=darkred]
>> > Simon Cooke wrote:[/color]
>>
>> <snip>
>>[color=darkred]
>> > > I stopped programming in Java because I couldn't stand the amount of[/color]
>> memory[color=darkred]
>> > > it was taking up to run simple apps, or the perf hit. It's the same[/color]
>> reason[color=darkred]
>> > > I won't use C#.
>> > >
>> > > That, and the lack of templates.[/color][/color][/color]

http://linux.oreillynet.com/pub/a/linux/2003/05/08/cpp_mm-1.html#choosing

C++ Memory Management: From Fear to Triumph
by George Belotsky
05/08/2003

'It is possible to learn how to use a language such as C++
correctly. On the other hand, trying to get Java's garbage
collector (just to pick one example) to take a specific
action at a certain time is an impossible task. Sometimes
it will work, then break with no explanation. The behavior
will depend on which JVM you are using, so your code will
not be portable. Even on the same platform, JVM upgrades
will unleash mystifying, subtle errors. This is precisely
the kind of nightmare that is typically associated with memory
allocation errors in C++!

Because memory-managed languages seem so automatic at
first glance, many programmers assume that their greatest
worries are over once they choose such a language. Hopefully,
their luck will hold up, and they can live a happy life. For
the multitude that will not be so fortunate, there is a hard
and painful lesson waiting here: errors in memory management
almost always lead to disaster. A memory-managed language does
not change that; it gives you a generic (albeit well-designed)
strategy to deal with the problem. If, however, the generic
strategy is wrong for your project, then you will have made
a memory management error, and you will pay for this error
just as surely as if you had coded it yourself'

--

http://home.earthlink.net/~jabailo

finders storyteller

[GreyCloud]

Re: If .net and j2ee are so great...

Chad Myers wrote:[color=blue]
>
> "GreyCloud" <cumulus@mist.c om> wrote in message
> news:3F47B7F6.C 2DD5A4B@mist.co m...[color=green][color=darkred]
> > >
> > > I mean, you guys seem to have it all figured out
> > > (but not implemented, obviously), so why don't
> > > you let all of us know.
> > >[/color]
> >
> > Tell ya what... read this article:
> >
> > http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11108
> >
> > This will tell you what should be done.[/color]
>
> Not that I would consider anything
> "The Inquirer" said since it's just a
> salacious, sensationalist, piss rag,
> but in this article, they just happen
> to be regurgitating the statements of
> other security experts, so I'll comment.
>[/color]

Tell that to the OpenVMS people in comp.os.vms. You'll get
laughed at.
[color=blue]
> How are these problems (fundamental
> stack problems, memory access problems,
> etc) that much different from other
> Kernel-space/user-space memory model
> OSes? How does Linux protect this,
> since I get the implication that you
> think Linux's model is vastly superior.
>[/color]

You didn't read the article very closely did you.
It was already explained in the article. Go over to
comp.os.vms and look up some of Keith Paris posts about this
topic.
[color=blue]
> I here lots of people bashing on
> Windows for this or that, but the
> problems with Windows are the same
> fundamental problems with lots of other
> OSes, yet no one bashes on them.
> That's what leads me to just ignore
> the dumbasses spewing this stuff
> because they're completely hypocritical.[/color]

I think you are in a deep state of denial. Ever hear of
defcon 9? Where experts cracked into many different systems
using various o/ses? Well, after three days, the time
limit, they couldn't even get into OpenVMS even with a login
account. It took them three minutes to crack into an NT
box.

Like the man said, you can patch windows till your blue in
the face and you'll still get worms and viruses. Only until
M$ does a total rewrite will the problems go away.

[43]

Re: If .net and j2ee are so great...

Chad Myers:
[color=blue]
> .NET also has support for writing files to the disk. Writing
> files to the disk on the server in an enterprise application is
> generally not advisable and will not scale.[/color]

the built in tracing functions insure that
that capability is always there.

also, the ASPNET user seems to have more
rights than he administrator, since, as
i have argued to s. cooke, i can create a
file, write to it, throw an error, and then
not be able to delete the file until
reboot.

--

http://home.earthlink.net/~jabailo

finders storyteller

[Chad Myers]

Re: If .net and j2ee are so great...


"GreyCloud" <cumulus@mist.c om> wrote in message
news:3F490DEC.E 12369AB@mist.co m...[color=blue]
> Chad Myers wrote:[/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
> > Not that I would consider anything
> > "The Inquirer" said since it's just a
> > salacious, sensationalist, piss rag,
> > but in this article, they just happen
> > to be regurgitating the statements of
> > other security experts, so I'll comment.
> >[/color]
>
> Tell that to the OpenVMS people in comp.os.vms. You'll get
> laughed at.[/color]

Not that I would care one bit what OpenVMS people thought...

I mean, I just see so many OpenVMS boxes around, so
they must be doing something right... right?
[color=blue][color=green]
> > How are these problems (fundamental
> > stack problems, memory access problems,
> > etc) that much different from other
> > Kernel-space/user-space memory model
> > OSes? How does Linux protect this,
> > since I get the implication that you
> > think Linux's model is vastly superior.
> >[/color]
>
> You didn't read the article very closely did you.
> It was already explained in the article. Go over to
> comp.os.vms and look up some of Keith Paris posts about this
> topic.[/color]

Again, why should I care what OpenVMS people think?

How come all these organizations and companies I go into
have not a single OpenVMS box? They run Solaris, Windows, Linux,
AIX, and a few others. No OpenVMS.
[color=blue][color=green]
> > I here lots of people bashing on
> > Windows for this or that, but the
> > problems with Windows are the same
> > fundamental problems with lots of other
> > OSes, yet no one bashes on them.
> > That's what leads me to just ignore
> > the dumbasses spewing this stuff
> > because they're completely hypocritical.[/color]
>
> I think you are in a deep state of denial. Ever hear of
> defcon 9? Where experts cracked into many different systems
> using various o/ses? Well, after three days, the time
> limit, they couldn't even get into OpenVMS even with a login
> account. It took them three minutes to crack into an NT
> box.[/color]

What about Linux? Unix (Solaris, AIX, etc)? How did they fair?
How did they get into the NT box? A buffer overflow?

Buffer overflows are not the problem of the OS, they are the
problem of the person who wrote the code that allowed the
OS. It's a fundamental problem with pointer-based coding
like C/C++. When we get away from that and move to managed
frameworks like Java and .NET, those problems will go away
almost completely. The problems, when they arise, will be
easy to fix because there will be just ONE place to patch
it, not thousands.
[color=blue]
> Like the man said, you can patch windows till your blue in
> the face and you'll still get worms and viruses. Only until
> M$ does a total rewrite will the problems go away.[/color]

But the problems are buffer overruns. Doing a rewrite will
not fix this as there will always be bugs and imperfections
because humans cannot make anything perfect.

I fail to see how any OS can protect against this. If you
have a buffer overrun and the EAX pointer in the CPU is
allowed to be overwritten, you're hosed. This situation
is present in, at least, Linux, Windows, all Unix variants,
MacOS (now BSD/Unix based), and almost every other OS.

Does OpenVMS not use pointers or the CPU to set the next
instruction pointer?

-c

[Chad Myers]

Re: If .net and j2ee are so great...


"43" <jabailo@earthl ink.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.0 8.24.19.26.33.4 35366@earthlink .net...[color=blue]
> Chad Myers:
>[color=green]
> > .NET also has support for writing files to the disk. Writing
> > files to the disk on the server in an enterprise application is
> > generally not advisable and will not scale.[/color]
>
> the built in tracing functions insure that
> that capability is always there.
>
> also, the ASPNET user seems to have more
> rights than he administrator, since, as
> i have argued to s. cooke, i can create a
> file, write to it, throw an error, and then
> not be able to delete the file until
> reboot.[/color]

The ASPNET user is one of the least
privileged users.

If the user can open a process which opens/
creates a file and locks the file, the
file is locked and no other process can
delete it (depending on the severity of
the lock, etc).

If you simply restart the IisAdmin service
(using IISReset.exe is the easiest way),
the aspnet_wp.exe process will terminate
and release the file lock.

-c

[43]

Re: .PDF Files .

Jeff Relf:
[color=blue]
> Hi =^.^= , You mentioned .PDF files .
>
>
> Why don't terrorist make themselves more useful ?
> They should attack Adobe .
>
>
> I wish my IE6 allowed me to
> block all launchings of .PDF files .[/color]

That reminds me of a similar point.

Remember the 60's television series
'The Invaders' about an alien race
that invades the earth posing as
humans but with certain physical
limitations ( they have to 'regenerate'
in chambers or they decay, and they
can't bend their pinkies ).

Well, if you watch 'The Invaders'
just about every plot is covered in
an 'X Files' episode. Every one!
'The Invaders' is the real thing.
The 'X Files' is a cheap rip off
of the 'The Invaders'.

Doesn't anybody know that ??!!?!?!?!??!

--

http://home.earthlink.net/~jabailo

finders storyteller

[=^.^=]

Re: .PDF Files .

On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 07:27:20 -0700, Jeff Relf
<___Jeff-Relf@NCPlus.NET > wrote:
[color=blue]
>Hi =^.^= , You mentioned .PDF files .[/color]

and?
[color=blue]
>Why don't terrorist make themselves more useful ?
> They should attack Adobe .[/color]

that already been-done @ The Alamo, looong-ago

just remember my mentors rode with Pancho Villa
[color=blue]
>I wish my IE6 allowed me to
> block all launchings of .PDF files .[/color]

just save to disk and view @ yer liesure

....itz that simple

[Jeff Relf]

Re: .PDF Files .

Hi =^.^= , You say :
" Just save to disk and view @ yer liesure ...
itz that simple . "


I _ Might _ do that , If I knew the link was a .PDF file .

[42]

Re: .PDF Files .

Just remove the file association for .pdf files. No big deal

"Jeff Relf" <___Jeff-Relf@NCPlus.NET > wrote in message
news:27dugk6hy6 qy$.dlg@_Jeff.R elf...[color=blue]
> Hi =^.^= , You mentioned .PDF files .
>
>
> Why don't terrorist make themselves more useful ?
> They should attack Adobe .
>
>
> I wish my IE6 allowed me to
> block all launchings of .PDF files .[/color]

[Fergus Cooney]

Re: - A Strange CPU -

Lol Jeff,

Until I read more posts, I thought you were spouting poetry!!

Regards,
Fergus

[=^.^=]

Re: .PDF Files .

On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 20:50:15 -0700, "42" <jabailo@earthl ink.net>
wrote:
[color=blue]
>Just remove the file association for .pdf files. No big deal[/color]


besides top-posting, yer talking revolutionary shit. users
are not allowed to interfere with the browsers' mechanisms
[color=blue]
>"Jeff Relf" <___Jeff-Relf@NCPlus.NET > wrote in message
>news:27dugk6hy 6qy$.dlg@_Jeff. Relf...[color=green]
>> Hi =^.^= , You mentioned .PDF files .[/color][/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Why don't terrorist make themselves more useful ?
>> They should attack Adobe .[/color][/color]

[color=blue][color=green]
>> I wish my IE6 allowed me to
>> block all launchings of .PDF files .[/color][/color]


gha, this iz truly a hideous article...