Just so you know - someone has read your note. But - I'm not sure if anyone
understands what you want to learn. From the sound of things, you need to
do a lot of reading to learn the basics. Sorry I couldn't help you.
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe,
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 10:08:12 -0700, PeterDu wrote:
Hello,
I have an array including 2000 records in database,
but when fetch all of them, why just get 1500 records?
Does that depend on my computer?
Well, at least you hi-jacked a thread that did not pertain to PHP and
put it back On Topic!
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 23:58 +0100, Björn Bartels wrote:
*rofl*
damn... i love this list... so much for on- ehmmm off-list posts :p ...
It's not just a list... it's a community :)
Cheers,
Rob.
--
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP
--
PHP General Mailing
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 01:57, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
Grumble, grumble... did I mention freshwater falls from the sky and
forms vertical piles outside my home?
You have a camera for a reason, Rob. Snap a few shots and we'll
help pick out the next Interjinn logo. ;-P
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 01:57:09AM -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 05:20 +0200, Paul Scott wrote:
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:15 -0500, Phpster wrote:
-12C in Toronto
Meh! 30C - 35C in Cape Town, South Africa almost every day for the last
month. It has been a
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 02:59 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 01:57, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
Grumble, grumble... did I mention freshwater falls from the sky and
forms vertical piles outside my home?
You have a camera for a reason, Rob. Snap a few
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 03:10 -0500, Paul M Foster wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 01:57:09AM -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 05:20 +0200, Paul Scott wrote:
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:15 -0500, Phpster wrote:
-12C in Toronto
Meh! 30C - 35C in Cape Town, South
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 03:16:34AM -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 03:10 -0500, Paul M Foster wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 01:57:09AM -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 05:20 +0200, Paul Scott wrote:
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:15 -0500, Phpster
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 16:00 -0500, Paul M Foster wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 03:16:34AM -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 03:10 -0500, Paul M Foster wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 01:57:09AM -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 05:20 +0200, Paul
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 16:06, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
Snowball hits sandcastle... promptly melts... washes sandcastle away.
*throws another snowball at you*
I've got LOTS more where they came from.
*danbrown casts Spell of Awe and attains Level 63 Wizard.
*danbrown
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 16:14 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 16:06, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
Snowball hits sandcastle... promptly melts... washes sandcastle away.
*throws another snowball at you*
I've got LOTS more where they came from.
Robert Cummings wrote:
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 16:14 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 16:06, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
Snowball hits sandcastle... promptly melts... washes sandcastle away.
*throws another snowball at you*
I've got LOTS more where they came
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 16:21, Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote:
are you three flirting?
Are you jealous?
--
/Daniel P. Brown
daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print -
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 21:21 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 16:14 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 16:06, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com
wrote:
Snowball hits sandcastle... promptly melts... washes sandcastle away.
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 16:21, Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote:
are you three flirting?
Are you jealous?
*throws snowball too* shut p
when in rome..
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
*rofl*
damn... i love this list... so much for on- ehmmm off-list posts :p ...
Am 10.01.2009 um 22:24 schrieb Nathan Rixham:
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 16:21, Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com
wrote:
are you three flirting?
Are you jealous?
*throws snowball too* shut
On Jan 9, 2009, at 1:55 AM, Robert Cummings wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 22:38 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Skip Evans wrote:
Nathan Rixham wrote:
yup.. all OS's are equally insecure; each OS is as insecure as the
next; no
one OS is more insecure than any other
Wrong, and there is
On Jan 9, 2009, at 2:06 AM, Robert Cummings wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 16:21 -0800, Mattias Thorslund wrote:
I thought this was the PHP list, not the OS vs. OS list?
Is this type of discussion now considered OK here? I recall people
getting flamed for borderline off-topic posts even, just
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 19:21, Mattias Thorslund matt...@thorslund.us wrote:
I thought this was the PHP list, not the OS vs. OS list?
Is this type of discussion now considered OK here? I recall people getting
flamed for borderline off-topic posts even, just a few years ago.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 7:21 PM, Mattias Thorslund matt...@thorslund.us wrote:
I thought this was the PHP list, not the OS vs. OS list?
Is this type of discussion now considered OK here? I recall people getting
flamed for borderline off-topic posts even, just a few years ago.
Mattias
:(
--
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 19:21, Mattias Thorslund matt...@thorslund.us wrote:
I thought this was the PHP list, not the OS vs. OS list?
Is this type of discussion now considered OK here? I recall people getting
flamed for borderline off-topic posts even, just a few years ago.
You're right,
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 12:59 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 19:21, Mattias Thorslund matt...@thorslund.us
wrote:
I thought this was the PHP list, not the OS vs. OS list?
Is this type of discussion now considered OK here? I recall people getting
At 1:39 PM -0500 1/8/09, Robert Cummings wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:13 -0500, tedd wrote:
It's always a safe bet to move towards the center of the herd.
Bah, sheeple! I like to stay away from the herd.
Cheers,
Rob.
I'm sure the feeling is mutual.
A better mouthwash perhaps. :-)
At 1:03 PM -0600 1/8/09, Skip Evans wrote:
Incidentally, I think building their OS on FreeBSD was about the
smartest thing the Apple/Mac people ever did.
Skip
There are bright people at Apple, like Jobs -- exceptional individual.
Compare Job's presentations to Gates' and you have examples
At 7:18 PM + 1/8/09, Nathan Rixham wrote:
if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network
card connected to the internet it's insecure.
It doesn't even have to be connected to the Internet to be insecure.
Cheers,
tedd
--
---
http://sperling.com
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 9:54 AM, tedd tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote:
At 7:18 PM + 1/8/09, Nathan Rixham wrote:
if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card
connected to the internet it's insecure.
It doesn't even have to be connected to the Internet to be
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 07:29 -0800, Mattias Thorslund wrote:
Daniel Brown wrote:
You're right, Mattias. Not only should every one of those folks
be ashamed of themselves for being involved in that thread - they are
also going to hell for it.
By comparison, sending a message -
tedd wrote:
At 7:18 PM + 1/8/09, Nathan Rixham wrote:
if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card
connected to the internet it's insecure.
It doesn't even have to be connected to the Internet to be insecure.
Cheers,
tedd
hence the mention of a keyboard :p
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 11:17, Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote:
tedd wrote:
At 7:18 PM + 1/8/09, Nathan Rixham wrote:
if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card
connected to the internet it's insecure.
It doesn't even have to be connected to the
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 11:17, Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote:
tedd wrote:
At 7:18 PM + 1/8/09, Nathan Rixham wrote:
if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card
connected to the internet it's insecure.
It doesn't even have to be
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 11:56, Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote:
a few years ago when I first met my rach (we met online), we'd have random
conversations stretching several pages on various forums and social site
profiles we had - i'd find it massively amusing to then go in and delete all
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 10:40, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
Lol, I didn't realize it was off-list or I would have posted it back so
that others could throw in their opinions or speak their mind if they
disagreed.
Indeed. I think, especially with the regulars that have been
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 11:56, Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote:
a few years ago when I first met my rach (we met online), we'd have random
conversations stretching several pages on various forums and social site
profiles we had - i'd find it massively amusing to then
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:08 PM, Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote:
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 11:56, Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote:
a few years ago when I first met my rach (we met online), we'd have
random
conversations stretching several pages on various
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:08, Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote:
turns out the official word from php itself is that this list doesn't exist
*oh nos*
br /
bWarning/b: unlink(php-general@lists.php.net) [a
href='function.unlink'function.unlink/a]: No such file or directory
(or did i run
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:34, Andrew Ballard aball...@gmail.com wrote:
Now... you'd have really freaked out if that had actually worked! LOL
Hey, good point, Andrew.
Nate, you do know that was only pseudo-code, right? Don't run
that in production!
--
/Daniel P. Brown
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Daniel Brown danbr...@php.net wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:34, Andrew Ballard aball...@gmail.com wrote:
Now... you'd have really freaked out if that had actually worked! LOL
Hey, good point, Andrew.
Nate, you do know that was only pseudo-code,
Andrew Ballard wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Daniel Brown danbr...@php.net wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:34, Andrew Ballard aball...@gmail.com wrote:
Now... you'd have really freaked out if that had actually worked! LOL
Hey, good point, Andrew.
Nate, you do know that was
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:43, Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote:
actually i ran it in a debugger, in an ide, in a virtual machine :p
in Siberia.
--
/Daniel P. Brown
daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:43, Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote:
actually i ran it in a debugger, in an ide, in a virtual machine :p
in Siberia.
scotland in winter; same thing really
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit:
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:09 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:43, Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote:
actually i ran it in a debugger, in an ide, in a virtual machine :p
in Siberia.
scotland in winter; same thing really
I lived
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 15:31, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
I lived in Scotland for many years... Scottish winters pale in
comparison to northern Canadian winters, and these in turn pale in
comparison to Siberian winters.
Yeah, and from the sounds of it, Rob, you guys are
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 15:47 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 15:31, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
I lived in Scotland for many years... Scottish winters pale in
comparison to northern Canadian winters, and these in turn pale in
comparison to Siberian
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 16:16, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
We're at -13C right now without windchill and this is in Ottawa which is
a lot further south than I've lived in the past (Timmins, Sudbury).
Yeah, no offense, my friend, but you can keep it. We're a balmy
22F (-5C)
On 10/01/2009, at 10:21 AM, Daniel Brown wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 16:16, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com
wrote:
We're at -13C right now without windchill and this is in Ottawa
which is
a lot further south than I've lived in the past (Timmins, Sudbury).
Yeah, no offense, my
-12C in Toronto
Greets from sunny Ontario
Bastien
Sent from my iPod
On Jan 9, 2009, at 5:19 PM, Simon J Welsh si...@welsh.co.nz wrote:
On 10/01/2009, at 10:21 AM, Daniel Brown wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 16:16, Robert Cummings
rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
We're at -13C right now
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:15 -0500, Phpster wrote:
-12C in Toronto
Meh! 30C - 35C in Cape Town, South Africa almost every day for the last
month. It has been a scorcher this year!
-- Paul
All Email originating from UWC is covered by disclaimer
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 05:20 +0200, Paul Scott wrote:
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:15 -0500, Phpster wrote:
-12C in Toronto
Meh! 30C - 35C in Cape Town, South Africa almost every day for the last
month. It has been a scorcher this year!
Grumble, grumble... did I mention freshwater falls from
I only see this in the attachment:
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
bigredli...@yahoo.com wrote:
Please read the document.
Attachment: No Virus found
F-Secure AntiVirus - www.f-secure.com
--
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 17:27 +0800, Allan Arguelles wrote:
I only see this in the attachment:
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
That's because the list software strips attachments to prevent idiots
using windows
Yeah, I was reluctant to open the attachment, but then again I'm on
gentoo :)
I've forgotten about these threats eversince I switched over, didn't
even notice the bounced email(to the sender) as an indication.
-Allan
Robert Cummings wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 17:27 +0800, Allan Arguelles
Allan Arguelles schrieb:
Yeah, I was reluctant to open the attachment, but then again I'm on
gentoo :)
I've forgotten about these threats eversince I switched over, didn't
even notice the bounced email(to the sender) as an indication.
-Allan
Robert Cummings wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at
Carlos Medina wrote:
Allan Arguelles schrieb:
Yeah, I was reluctant to open the attachment, but then again I'm on
gentoo :)
I've forgotten about these threats eversince I switched over, didn't
even notice the bounced email(to the sender) as an indication.
-Allan
Robert Cummings wrote:
On
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 04:53, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
In fact, since the only text in the message other than the stripped
attachment is Please read the document. I am led to strongly suspect
that it was a virus. Additionally, the addition of a supposed anti-virus
check is
I guess its these examples that remind us that we still need to look out
for ourselves. I got used to the idea that theres so little chance that
I'd be a target, as a linux user, I've become less aware of these things.
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 04:53, Robert Cummings
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 09:38, Allan Arguelles al...@arguelles.com.ph wrote:
I guess its these examples that remind us that we still need to look out
for ourselves. I got used to the idea that theres so little chance that
I'd be a target, as a linux user, I've become less aware of these things.
Daniel Brown wrote:
In any case, as Nate R. mentioned, Linux is just as susceptible to
viruses, worms, and other malware. My belief is that it's not so much
an attack on an Evil Empire[TM] of software, but that, if BeOS or RISC
were the single-most popular operating systems in the world,
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:31, Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote:
From my reading I get the impression that the above statement, Linux is
just as susceptible to viruses, worms, and other malware, is inaccurate.
Unfortunately, Skip, it's 100% accurate. No operating system is
Hey Daniel,
It seems that most of your points of disagreement stem from the
potential for poor system administration by homo sapiens (and other
primates who might have access to a console), but I still think that
from a pure design and implementation perspective, *nix systems are more
secure
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:31, Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote:
From my reading I get the impression that the above statement, Linux is
just as susceptible to viruses, worms, and other malware, is inaccurate.
Unfortunately, Skip, it's 100% accurate. No
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 12:38, Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote:
But do you not think the permissions issues with who can run what on *nix
versus XP makes it more secure?
For that and similar reasons, I compromise with the statement
that, by design, *NIX has the potential to be more
At 12:10 PM -0500 1/8/09, Daniel Brown wrote:
Someday there will be a mathematical anomaly, I'm sure,
that will eventually lead to a level of cognition, but we're not there yet.
Don't rely on your level of perception to determine IF software
(they) have reached a level of cognition or not.
At 10:10 AM -0500 1/8/09, Daniel Brown wrote:
When a vast majority is controlled by a like-minded minority,
evolution and advancement will suffer.
Ya think.
I've been saying that for over 20 years.
The problem is that the majority, when in doubt, will follow the majority.
It's always a
At 12:54 PM -0500 1/8/09, Daniel Brown wrote:
That aside, best of luck. If loss is the most painful thing a
heart can endure, the yearning for opportunity is a very close second.
There you go again, making me all teary-eyed and stuff.
Of what is there to know?
For what seems all,
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 10:10 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 09:38, Allan Arguelles al...@arguelles.com.ph wrote:
I guess its these examples that remind us that we still need to look out
for ourselves. I got used to the idea that theres so little chance that
I'd be a
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:02, tedd tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote:
Don't rely on your level of perception to determine IF software (they) have
reached a level of cognition or not. It could be they simply have nothing to
say to us or their level cognition is so foreign to us that we can't detect
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:24, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
Just as susceptible?? Please refer me to some resources where I can
verify this statement.
http://marc.info/?t=10016019247r=1w=2
--
/Daniel P. Brown
daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:21, tedd tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote:
Of what is there to know?
For what seems all, nothing;
But the un-rung bell yearns to rung;
If only to hear its tone;
The tone of being understood.
tedd-1967
So you don't just write in ones and zeroes after all. ;-P
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 12:10 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:31, Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote:
From my reading I get the impression that the above statement, Linux is
just as susceptible to viruses, worms, and other malware, is inaccurate.
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 12:54 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 12:38, Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote:
I certainly wish there were more like you!
If only that woman who lives down the block would give me the opportunity to
make her say that... *sigh*.
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:13 -0500, tedd wrote:
At 10:10 AM -0500 1/8/09, Daniel Brown wrote:
When a vast majority is controlled by a like-minded minority,
evolution and advancement will suffer.
Ya think.
I've been saying that for over 20 years.
The problem is that the majority,
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
He didn't say it had no insecurities... he said it's hard to believe
it's JUST AS insecure. Please provide factual sources to indicate the
validity of your statement.
Counter: please provide factual sources that
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:31 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:24, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
Just as susceptible?? Please refer me to some resources where I can
verify this statement.
http://marc.info/?t=10016019247r=1w=2
--
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:39 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
He didn't say it had no insecurities... he said it's hard to believe
it's JUST AS insecure. Please provide factual sources to indicate the
validity of your
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:41, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:31 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:24, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
Just as susceptible?? Please refer me to some resources where I can
verify this
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:43 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:41, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:31 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:24, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
Just as susceptible?? Please
Hey,
Well, I find the points that *nix by default restricts users to their
own executables and Windows allows anyone to run any program (has this
changed with Vista? I don't follow MS too closely) to be a major reason
by default, as installed, *nix systems are more secure.
I would also bet
Fact is if you want to be secure just disconnect you're machine from
the internet, remove cd/dvd/floppy drives and unplug the keyboard.
You forgot to cut the internal USB cables.
:-)
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:12 +, c...@l-i-e.com wrote:
Fact is if you want to be secure just disconnect you're machine from
the internet, remove cd/dvd/floppy drives and unplug the keyboard.
You forgot to cut the internal USB cables.
And never, EVER forget to don your tinfoil hat and
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:18 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
He didn't say it had no insecurities... he said it's hard to believe
it's JUST AS insecure. Please provide factual sources to indicate the
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
He didn't say it had no insecurities... he said it's hard to believe
it's JUST AS insecure. Please provide factual sources to indicate the
validity of your statement.
Counter: please provide
You could also fill all empty space in the case with a polyurethane
sealing compound for added security, and then bury it in the back yard.
Dang, I could make big bucks as a security consultant!
I'm adding this to my resume!
Skip
c...@l-i-e.com wrote:
Fact is if you want to be secure just
c...@l-i-e.com wrote:
Fact is if you want to be secure just disconnect you're machine from
the internet, remove cd/dvd/floppy drives and unplug the keyboard.
You forgot to cut the internal USB cables.
:-)
when I was younger my friend got a virus on his mothers computer; his
mother
Robert Cummings wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:18 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
He didn't say it had no insecurities... he said it's hard to believe
it's JUST AS insecure. Please
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 10:10 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
Linux is just as susceptible to
viruses, worms, and other malware
I'd beg to differ. While it may be susceptible, I think it is far less
so, just because of the security it has from the off. And also, the type
of people who tend to use
Nathan Rixham wrote:
if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card
connected to the internet it's insecure.
Well of course. That's like saying if it's alive it's dying.
But the question was are *nix systems more secure than Windows, and I
think even Daniel agrees
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:46 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:18 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com
wrote:
He didn't say it had no
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 16:40 -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:46 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:18 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings
2009/1/8 Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:46 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:18 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com
wrote:
Ashley Sheridan wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 16:40 -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:46 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:18 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Daniel Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings
Skip Evans wrote:
Nathan Rixham wrote:
yup.. all OS's are equally insecure; each OS is as insecure as the
next; no
one OS is more insecure than any other
Wrong, and there is experimental data to prove it. Read the first URL
I posted that documents the creation of Linux viruses and the
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 22:38 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Skip Evans wrote:
Nathan Rixham wrote:
yup.. all OS's are equally insecure; each OS is as insecure as the
next; no
one OS is more insecure than any other
Wrong, and there is experimental data to prove it. Read the first URL
Ashley Sheridan wrote:
think about it for a minute; an OS can either be secure (0
vulnerabilities) or insecure (1 or more vulnerabilities); as all OS's
have 1 or more vulnerabilities they are all equally insecure; because
they are all insecure.
What you are saying, in real world terms, not
Ashley Sheridan wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 22:38 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Skip Evans wrote:
Nathan Rixham wrote:
yup.. all OS's are equally insecure; each OS is as insecure as the
next; no
one OS is more insecure than any other
Wrong, and there is experimental data to prove it. Read
Skip Evans wrote:
Ashley Sheridan wrote:
think about it for a minute; an OS can either be secure (0
vulnerabilities) or insecure (1 or more vulnerabilities); as all OS's
have 1 or more vulnerabilities they are all equally insecure; because
they are all insecure.
What you are saying, in
Nathan Rixham wrote:
Or, for another analogy, you're saying that because all cars can
either be sitting still or moving then they are all equally fast.
no, more like your car has a window missing, another car has no locks,
and mine has no door; which is the most insecure?
The one parked
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:44, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote:
I haven't made any claims. I've merely stated beliefs/opinion. You made
claims, thus the onus is on you to provide proof of said claims.
While I really wish you wouldn't talk about my onus in public like
that, I am
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 15:01, Ashley Sheridan a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 10:10 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
Linux is just as susceptible to
viruses, worms, and other malware
I'd beg to differ. While it may be susceptible, I think it is far less
so, just because of
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 18:07, Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote:
Linux Kernel 2.6.x
161 Secunia advisories
286 Vulnerabilities
Unpatched: 6% (10 of 161 Secunia advisories)
http://secunia.com/advisories/product/2719/
Vista:
51 Secunia advisories
80 Vulnerabilities
Unpatched: 12% (6
I thought this was the PHP list, not the OS vs. OS list?
Is this type of discussion now considered OK here? I recall people
getting flamed for borderline off-topic posts even, just a few years ago.
Mattias
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit:
1 - 100 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
