yes.the point is: ms supports running windows 3.1 apps by providing the virtual machine in a standard os of ms.

that's a devotion to a platform (the previous post complained about ms letting developers stand in the rain).

What? I mean, Nokia announced the death of symbian well in advance (5 years before i stopped using symbian). And remind me - how long could you execute binaries built for Windows 3.1 on the current windows? Oh - allright if it is a 32 bit version of Windows 7/8 then it still may work....

Ironically this disturbed me very much in the beginning. But the desktop still is there.

Yeah, actually i bought OS/2 instead of windoes 3.1/windows 95. In 1993.

You forgot NT 4.0 and NT 3.51

I did not reject windows. I did just not see any reason to switch from linux in the last 20 years and pay for a newly installed computer. I think XP is OK - were are cheap used licenses around.

I find windows 8.1 similar enough and all the features which are mandatory for me are embedded, and the price point of the tablets seems ok.

I am a Unix/Linux user since 1995. I used Symbian and i liked it, and i have several android devices (first was the galazy tab). Now Microsoft killed Nokia. Nokia killed Symbian.

I am looking for a new tablet/PC currently. I tested some Windows 8.1 Tablets (Lenovo and others), and i have to say (besides the colored rectangles on the start screen): Well done
by leaving many things unchanged. For the first time in about 20 years i consider buying a microsoft OS on an new computer (for personal use).

I would be very pleased if the people posting 3 line articles to slashdot would take the time to follow the thread on the mailing list long enough to understand what its all about. It's informative and you learn something about the world.

Beforehand i did not knwo about the red zone, and it sounds like something which i would like to turn off by default, but i more or less understand it's meaning in optimizing the performance of an ABI.

If you follow the thread, it deems only to happen an specific optimization settings Everybody knows that at high optimization settings the assembly output of you compiler may differ significantly from how it looked before, should look, is expected to look like, or even is specified to look like.

I hope that they isolated a test case from this issue.

I hope that more conservative distros compile the kernel using more conservative settings and more conservative compilers.

yeah. as long as the custoemers dont even care about any security, but about a shiny interface and are not willing to pay, focusing on the interface and not on the security of the app seems like a reasonable economic decision to me.

that's too simple. what they found out is that in the moment when the students enroll things are already settled. Tell your 7 year old daughter that she sucks at math but that it's not bad because she is a girl and dont give her technical toys and she will make decisions in choosing hobbies and interests in school based on that. i have seen many attempts at fixing gender imbalance and these programs usually take a half hearted approach at fixing some symptoms of the problem that we as a society still have gender issues deep in the early childhood and childhood education.

What actually disturbs me more is: why should they do this? The answer is simple: They want to determine the most effective non-obvious way of creating filter bubbles to make the user feel well and stay longer.

It is so-to say a "second order filter bubble", i.e. the use of a positive feedback mechanism.

It is fine that they introduced it. It protects against very specific things:

a) S3 data in there to stay, probably for many decades. To me it is a difference if all S3 data is unencrypted if there is a bug in the system at some point, or a new insitutional requirement in the future, or just the data which is accessed during the unfixed bug or after the change in laws.

b) One more layer of safety is never bad. You can use this to transport the key safely to the system of the user and the rest of the requests via normal html.

"Yes officer, he was meant to be beaten"

Slashdot comments dominated by software guys. I can tell you, with the *right* (semi-expensive ~ 10k) equipment, the hardware part of this is fairly trivial. (lets say 1h)

Police and secret services use IMSI catchers and trojan-based attacks on a large scale, so why should they not set up a DVB base station for an attack on a specific target (nevertheless infecting 1 Mio of devices in the target area).

Large-scale phishing attacks could get *much* easier. Imagine a News channel which broadcasts a warning about credit card fraud with a contact number to call.

Imagine a finance stock market TV which broadcasts a sudden warning about a stock on which you placed your bets before.

Criminal easily spend 10000s of $ for bullet-proof hosting, so buying DVB Test devices and applications from Agilent could even reduce their costs. If you earn enoung money with it, it pays off.

Everything which worked via spam now can be done without any chance of blocking it. I am fascinated by the idea that a semi-modern device would accept anything withou authentication. (oh, i forgot, typing in a verification number would be *so inconvenient*, so it would hinder shoveling advertisements up into everybody's ass).

from "no company" to "company delivers a product to customers" is not bad at all.

The implications of a technology like this go far beyond taxi drivers.

In the moment when autonoumous cars go mainstream, half of the car manufacturers will go bancrupt and the other half will have a very good time.

I yet have to see many convincing cases of extensions for browsers (for everyday applications). I am unisg firefox, and the extensions i use are scrapbook, nojs, foxyproxy.