This article could be interesting if it included references to who said what and in which context. Just saying "[[tech]] is a toy." without further developing or even including at least a reference is pointless - one could come up with just about any tech as an example whenever real or not.

This article is unfortunately nothing more than a waste of time :(

I don't really get your comment. Of course you need to trust the signer's key which is what I mean by a "known valid version of the signer's key", and the basis for that is not another user's trust unless you really trust that user as well.

However you can look at multiple sources for the key before giving it some trust (mail archives, wayback machine, which key signed previous versions, etc). Best is to actually verify the signature in person, but that's not always possible.

Note that in any case it can't be worse that relying *only* on the checksum - without a valid signature, the checksum serves only for integrity verification, and if all you need is to check transfer integrity you really don't need anything better than MD5 as although insecure the chances of collisions is way too small for one to occur accidentally.

So no one checks the SHA256 sum then its signature against a known valid version of the signer's public key?

I feel all alone on my small isle.

That thing - coLinux - was the best thing I've ever used in terms of Linux over Windows... I was really sad they couldn't get it running on 64bit hardware.

Just to days short and CNBC would have make fool of itself on April Fool's day! ;)

After researcher on Valve, season is starting early this year.

I have a problem! somebody all my fleshcoins! the whole thing!

Well that sounds like the solution to http://xkcd.com/792/ 's problems...

On a serious note though, I won't shed a tear for CryptoRush.in. Using the same password on a small, no-reputation mining pool as the admin access to a currency exchange!?! That's a huge fail even by the lowest security standards, and these guys should know better.

Then what about getting coins stolen from the hot wallet and not even flagging the loss? What's even the point of an offline wallet when you don't reconcile the hot wallet before adding funds to it?? Another huge neglect on their part.

I actually it's probably a good thing they're now out of business because with that level of laxity, if not now there's no doubt it would have happened later, likely with more users and bigger balances... It's just sad for those who lost their coins in the process.

So they figured they always end up botching every other release, so why not throw away Windows 9 before development even started and go straight to Windows 10?

Indeed - from experience an average computer with standard GPU will do between 2 and 20 Mhash/s (not all GPUs will be usable, and most computers around with usable GPUs will have low-end ones). The best GPU's will make a whooping 600 to 900 Mhash/s, and even with that it'll be pretty hard to compete against the ASIC rigs - there's already devices making 60 Ghash/s (60,000 Mhash/s), and the upcoming rigs will do up to 1,500 Ghash/s (that's 1,500,000 Mhash/s!). In a few months the network difficulty will be so high even the best GPU's won't earn anything from mining....

They might make a little bit of cash now if they can infect a lot of computers, but it won't last for long...

One thing that would be awesome is a 64bit coLinux port!

coLinux is a win32 application with drivers that lets you run a Linux kernel with userspace natively in Windows - it is much lighter than any virtualisation option out there, and using Xming you can easily run GUI apps that launch and run just as well as if they were natively ported to windows.

Unfortunately the drivers were never ported to 64-bit, and thus is it now useless on all but the oldest computers out there. A 64-bit coLinux port would be a requirement to getting this awesome project back on its rails.

See:
http://www.colinux.org/
http://colinux.wikia.com/wiki/Dashboard_for_developing_a_64_bit_coLinux

And also andLinux - which offered an easy way to install and configure coLinux - think of it like coLinux being the Linux kernel and andLinux the Linux distribution...
http://www.andlinux.org/

I would love to be able to use coLinux again on my work PC, which (unfortunately) has to run Windows.

Right. I answered "Post-it Notes", but I didn't count emails. I do exactly the same, and also at the end of the day I take a picture of whatever urgent is left on my post-it's and email myself. Obviously after making sure the image is readable I leave the email unread ;)

I did pretty much that to install a linux distro on a 486 laptop - I compiled the kernel, libraries, etc. - then built a bootdisk and filesystem. I then went on and copied the ~15m filesystem using a bunch of floppies (no network) one disk at a time after booting from the floppy, and finally installed the bootloader.

The Linux From Scratch HOWTO has all instructions for it, although in my case I diverted a little bit from it - for instance I used uClibc instead of Glibc and a 2.2 kernel. Doing it from scratch gives you the best way to select more recent components for some parts while using smaller/older ones elsewhere, so you don't end up with a totally outdated system.

It wouldn't be if they actually had invented the CDN. They's unfortunately about 12 years late...

Actually the problem isn't with browsers, but rather some Web servers that see a difference between "example.com" and "example.com." IIS is one of them, which makes the "issue" quite visible.