Going off on the Windows OS codebase and license in a heartbleed discussion? No personal vendetta detected here, no sir.
Seriously, a discussion on how FOSS dropped the ball so seriously that private keys are being disclosed is not the time to bring up complaints about Windows.
Its not, because some of the areas on the lawn are only hit during the turn-around. And with a circular pattern, you will HAVE to travel over-top of already-done areas in order to hit the corners of the circular path.
Trying to use a circular path to fill in a rectangular area will by necessity involve hitting areas more than once, or going outside of the rectangle.
Causation pertains to elements that cause a thing or event to occur while correlation pertains to elements that occur at the same time but had no part in causing that series of events.
Thats not correct. Correlation is a prerequisite for causation, but it is not indicative. That is: all things that are causally linked are correlated, but not all events that are correlated are necessarily causally linked.
I always tell my wife that dropping a thermonuclear warhead on her hometown would raise Germany's average IQ by 2 points.
It always gives me chills when someone jokes about something like this: Someone out there (probably lots of someones) thinks that would be a great thing to do for the betterment of humanity. Theres probably a number of them here on slashdot, even.
Im pretty sure that
A) he did name those subcultures
B) you know exactly what hes talking about
C) you didnt read his post all the way through.
Because it can massively slow down access to SSL sites.
I think the technical term for his post is "troll". That is, you've been trolled.
How do you know its your bank's public key and not someone elses?
Thats the ENTIRE problem that CAs attempt to solve.
CAs dont control whether a cert can still be used. The client configuration does that.
IIS is not. It uses schannel, not OpenSSL.
Im not clear how it could be "more efficient". Your average speed will be higher on the straight-aways, and no matter what shape you do you will have to mow the entire area of your lawn. How you fill it in doesnt change the amount needing to be done.
You are just not correct.
At my (and Im sure, a LOT of) workplace, there are a few authorized Linux distros. RedHat is one. Redhat fixes require a subscription, and are under the same sort of product life structure that Microsoft is.
When you're dealing with a large organization, getting the patches for free is 1/100th of the issue. The issue is
A) who supports it
B) are the patches kept up to date
C) are they QA'd (can we be confident they wont break stuff)
If you think Linux patches dont break things, you just dont operate in a large scale environment. If you think Mint is in the same ballpark as RedHat, you're in a different world.
It is my understanding that the "obsolete" version of Linux are still working very, very well, with few vulnerabilities
You are suffering from confirmation bias. This is just not true.
http://www.cvedetails.com/vuln...
There are pages of medium and high priority vulnerabilties on that page. If you lump in the browser-- which would have to be a really ancient version of firefox or konqueror-- that number would skyrocket. You would have to be out of your mind to place a 2.4 server on the web or even to use it as a desktop web-browsing box.
Youre using the term obsolete ambiguously. What exactly do you mean? Linux 2.4 and RHEL 3 are both very much "obsolete".
Did you have a real business reason for wanting linux, or are you just pushing an agenda for ideological reasons?
Those who can, do; those who can't, write. Those who can't write work for the Bell Labs Record.
