Can this be good for Ubuntu and the whole Linux-on-the-desktop movement? The article states that both Verizon and the college will work with her to ensure that she can use Linux to get what she needs done. So a major company and an educational institution are forced to break out of the mold of Windows, because Linux is now (even if accidentally) crossing over into the non-technical mainstream. The more this happens, especially in the public eye, the more companies will have to start considering Linux as something that has to be supported by default.

The headline has nothing to do with "editor privileges", it was by submitted by a user (me). I agree that there was no server crash; perhaps I should have said "DoS" (there is a character limit you know), but the effect was about the same:

He said the result was "effectively a denial of service as e-mail queues, especially between posts, back up while processing the extra volume of e-mails."

No, the servers didn't crash, but the e-mail system (i.e being able to communicate over email) did. Don't take things so literally; headlines are meant to capture one's attention in a short amount of time.

"It's apparently pretty easy to police - bare bulbs are highly visible from the police helicopter."

I...wow.

Is Dr. Dobb's going to the same digital format as PC Mag? Here's a free trial, which shows you the last issue of PC Mag. I understand the idea is to placate current subscribers, because keeping it in the same format makes the change less severe. I know I get used to consistent magazines layouts, so this makes sense. But I don't know about the implementation; it feels like a zoomed out PDF to me. And if you want to zoom in, you have to go to 200% -- there is nothing in between. That doesn't feel natural to me and in fact, I find it next to impossible to read. Anyone actually like this format?

What do you expect from DarkReading, especially when the quotes are coming from firms trying to sell their various cure-all security offerings?

And, don't forget, Dubai is in the UAE and largely follows their moral standards. Laws are strictly enforced and they do not look the other way for tourists. There are multiple reports of people being arrested or detained for lengthy periods of time. A British couple was put in jail for allegedly having sex on the beach. And another person was imprisoned because a mass-spec machine in the airport detected a microscopic speck of marijuana on his shoe -- the kind you can pick up walking through the airport, or anywhere really. Personally, that does not describe a place I would like to go to relax.

This is a highly ignorant comment. A browser should never crash due to poorly written HTML, or due to anything. From the security angle, this is at least a DoS, but likely something more. Take a look at the IE7 0-day which is affecting millions of users. It is not a buffer overflow; it's a simple crash. However, because of JavaScript, one is able to manipulate ("spray") the heap enough to a point where even a simple crash can be used for code execution. ANY crash in a browser should be taken seriously.