Recent Posts

376

Living Room / Re: FCC ruling on ringtones is... shortsighted

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 24, 2014, 10:13 AM »

This sounds like a Vonage problem.

377

DC Gamer Club / Re: Omerta - City of Gangsters: free on GOG for the next hour (until 3:59pm GMT)

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 24, 2014, 09:56 AM »

I see - I think I missed it because the title went back to being about Magrunner.

378

DC Gamer Club / Omerta - City of Gangsters: free on GOG for the next hour (until 3:59pm GMT)

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 24, 2014, 09:47 AM »

Omerta - City of Gangsters is free on GOG for the next hour (until 3:59pm GMT)

Go to their home page and scroll down until you see the flash sale notice for the game and click it.  You'll need to have an account with GOG, of course.

  - http://www.gog.com/

They have announced that there will be three other giveaways today, too.

379

Developer's Corner / Re: Need help with some string manip in C#

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 21, 2014, 08:09 PM »

I think the following algorithm will get you what you want (or close):

  - remove any characters that are not an alpha, a digit, or a decimal point
  - replace runs of alpha characters with a space

Now you have a space-delimited string of the numbers you're looking for.

Some things that might need work or modification:

  - if you want to allow negative numeric values, then you might need to handle the minus sign specially (you discarded it in my question's example, so I figure you're not interested in negative values)
  - if you want to allow a comma to be used as a decimal separator

But I think the basic idea gets you what you're looking for.

380

Developer's Corner / Re: Need help with some string manip in C#

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 21, 2014, 06:45 PM »

What constitutes an "an improperly formatted decimal number"?  Is it a decimal number that contains spaces (or whitespace characters)?

What would you want to be returned for the following:

    "abc3.-04xta"

or

    "abc6/. 7?8xta"

381

General Software Discussion / Re: TrueCrypt alternative

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 19, 2014, 12:48 PM »

TrueCrypt, like many other public encryption applications, can be cracked with some effort and the right tools.

-Midnight Rambler (June 19, 2014, 11:09 AM)

What kind of effort and tools is he talking about?

TrueCrypt 7.1a is no less secure today than it was before this whole debacle started.  I've heard nothing that indicates that there's a vulnerability. In fact, the audit that so far hasn't found any evidence of a backdoor is far more evidence of no backdoor than any of the other suggested alternatives have (which haven't been looked at by an independent party at all).

I suppose it's possible that all the speculation that TrueCrypt has been weakened by the NSA  - either by planting a backdoor or by having discovered a vulnerability that hasn't been disclosed - is true, but it's all speculation as far as I know.

I doubt that any of the alternatives suggested are any more secure than TrueCrypt 7.1a, and quite possibly less secure. For example, while I don't know if BitLocker has been backdoored by the NSA, I think that a backdoor in BitLocker is at least as likely as a backdoor in TrueCrypt - and probably more likely.

382

General Software Discussion / Re: TrueCrypt alternative

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 12, 2014, 03:05 PM »

I guess I take issue that the article portrays this as an 'open source' problem. It's not. The problem of determining whether or not you can trust the team behind a software project/product is largely independent of whether the software is open source or not.

I think that implying that this is a problem particular to open source software or even just that it's more of a problem for open source software is wrong.

383

General Software Discussion / Re: TrueCrypt alternative

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 12, 2014, 01:58 PM »

I still don't think that purchasing software or having software provided by a well-known entity provides any better trustworthiness.

While not a paid product, Google Reader was offered by a well-known entity.  I know that many people were upset by it being shutdown.

A much smaller, but personal, example: I used to use some software called SafeWallet by SBSH, and I had paid the couple dollars for it. The vendor was as well known or well established as many software vendors I've purchased from. Which is to say, I didn't know much of anything about them. They had a website, they offered software for purchase, and they accepted credit cards for payment.  Other than the huge software vendors like MS, Google, Adobe, Symantec, I think this is a similar level of knowledge that most people have about their software vendors.  The SafeWallet software is no longer supported, and the servers used to sync the data across devices stopped working.  Fortunately, I was able to move on by exporting my local data and getting it read into another password wallet program without too much trouble.

I think that Microsoft actually comes out looking pretty good in this area. While they do abandon software, it seems that generally they give a fair bit of notice. However, even if given a lot of notice many people can still be unhappy. Note that I still read about complaints regarding XP being unsupported.  There's even the occasional complaint I come across about VB6.

Again, I don't think open source vs. closed source plays into this very much, except that with open source you at least have the possibility of self-supporting (even if it would be a lot of effort) if the vendor goes away. With closed source, you don't even get the option.

384

General Software Discussion / Re: TrueCrypt alternative

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 12, 2014, 12:26 PM »

I disagree with the tone of the article about the trustworthiness of free software. At least a couple times, the article says things such as:

I think we’ve all received a wakeup call. We might need to step back and question the source of our open-source software — and in the future, review its pedigree before installing it.

I don't think open source or free software should be called out for this, but not closed source software. This "wakeup call" applies to any software you depend on - whether it's free or paid, open or closed source. Paid-for, closed source software often gets abandoned or has support dropped suddenly - that's not a problem unique to free software.

At least with open source software, the possibility exists of someone/anyone forking the project and continuing to support it if there's a need or demand (keep in mind that as discussions have mentioned before, it's not entirely clear whether the TrueCrypt software is truly open source and possible to legally fork). That possibility doesn't exist for closed source software that gets abandoned.

385

DC Gamer Club / Re: GOG announces DRM-Free game client: GOG Galaxy

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 09, 2014, 04:34 PM »

... another one?  This is past ridiculous.

-wraith808 (June 09, 2014, 09:12 AM)

The nice thing about GOG's client is that if you don't want to mess with it you don't have to.

Unlike most other gaming clients, you'll still be able to play the games you bought on GOG.

-mwb1100 (June 09, 2014, 02:48 PM)

Are we sure about that?  If that becomes their preferred way of downloading then will you have another choice?

-wraith808 (June 09, 2014, 04:23 PM)

Yes. They have clearly stated that the download via your web account will remain.

What will not be moving forward is the current GOG Downloader (which I have never used).  They won't be improving or offering that anymore once Galaxy is released.  If you're currently using the downloader, I'm not sure whether or not it will continue to work.

386

DC Gamer Club / Re: GOG announces DRM-Free game client: GOG Galaxy

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 09, 2014, 02:48 PM »

... another one?  This is past ridiculous.

-wraith808 (June 09, 2014, 09:12 AM)

The nice thing about GOG's client is that if you don't want to mess with it you don't have to.

Unlike most other gaming clients, you'll still be able to play the games you bought on GOG.

387

Found Deals and Discounts / Re: XYplorer lifetime license PRO 50% off

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 07, 2014, 05:13 PM »

Other than to say that it's 64-bit.  I don't think there's any functional reason for it. Or am I missing something?

-mwb1100 (June 06, 2014, 11:05 PM)

There are only minimal, for most user not relevant reasons, like:
- you can't browse to folder "sysnative" (the 64-bit-"system32" folder from the view of a 32-bit program  on 64-bit OS)
- you can't allocated more than 3,5GB RAM for processes launched from a 32-bit program (as in starting a program from within the 32-bit app, which in turns needs many RAM for processing)
- every app started from an 32-bit app will only see the 32-bit environment (as in launching Regedit and you will not see "Syswow6432node")
For such tasks you will have to utilize WinExplorer.
Most user this may not affect, it could only led to confusions if you would look for something above mentioned from within a 32-bit app.


All in all no real reason from standing back from a 32-bit app on 64-bit OS. Most user will never see any differences.

-AbteriX (June 07, 2014, 05:23 AM)

These issues either have been solved by XY or they just don't apply to XY in the first place:

  - Even though it's a 32-bit application, XY will show the 'real' System32 directory without having to use the sysnative alias hack (there are APIs a 32-bit application can use to tell Windows to stop the redirection).  There's a configuration option to turn this behavior on/off ("Show the real System32 directory"), but it's on by default, I think.  So when you navigate to the System32 directory, you will see the same files that are actually in the System32 directory just as if a 64-bit file manager were browsing that directory.

  - being limited to 3.5GB of virtual memory is unlikely to be a limitation to XY. In fact, I'm sure most users would be up in arms if they noticed it using more than a few hundred MB (mine is using around 70MB at the moment).  The virtual memory limitation of a 32-bit process has no bearing on the virtual memory available to processes launched - they get their own allocation of virtual memory that is completely separate from the launching process.

  - again, an app launched from XY has it's own virtual memory allocation and the WOW64 redirection that the OS imposes on 32-bit process has nothing to do with the process that launches an app.  If the newly launched process is 32-bit, then it will get the WOW64 redirections whether or not it is launched from a 64-bit or 32-bit app.  Similarly, a 64-bit app launched from a 32-app will *not* have those redirections applied, and will have the full terabytes-large virtual address space available to it.

So the bottom line is that with XY configured to show 64-bit shell extensions, it's functionally equivalent to a 64-bit file manager as far as I know.  Doing a ton of work to make it a true 64-bit application would be a compete waste of effort for no gain other than to be able to say "XY is a 64-bit app". 

And to waste Don's efforts on that would be a shame.

388

Found Deals and Discounts / Re: XYplorer lifetime license PRO 50% off

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 06, 2014, 11:05 PM »

With the information that 64-bit shell extensions are supported with a config option, I can't think of a reason that the main program needs to be 64-bit.

Other than to say that it's 64-bit.  I don't think there's any functional reason for it. Or am I missing something?

389

Found Deals and Discounts / Re: XYplorer lifetime license PRO 50% off

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 06, 2014, 01:22 AM »

FYI, you can also configure it to show the 64-bit menu immediately.

-DonL (June 06, 2014, 12:48 AM)

Thanks for the tip - I didn't know that (obviously)!

390

Found Deals and Discounts / Re: XYplorer lifetime license PRO 50% off

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 06, 2014, 12:15 AM »

Has there been a 64-bit version released yet? Their site seems to indicate there hasn't.

-Innuendo (June 05, 2014, 09:41 PM)

No 64-bit version, but 64-bit shell extensions are supported.  

Sort of.  You have to select from the initial right-click menu that you want the 64-bit menu, then viola!

So it's not exactly seamless, but it's a step in the right direction if 64-bit extension support is important to you (personally, I consider it a bug for the software that's installing the extension if it doesn't install both the 32-bit and 64-bit extensions on a 64-bit system).

391

General Software Discussion / Re: What's your preferred File Manager

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 04, 2014, 07:22 PM »

I didn't know that FAR was open source (http://code.google.com/p/farmanager/)! For some reason, that makes me want to try it.

392

DC Gamer Club / Sniper Elite V2 free on Steam for one day

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 04, 2014, 12:30 PM »

Sniper Elite V2 is free on Steam today

Sniper Elite V2 is Free on Steam for the next 24 hours (ending 5th June at 10AM PST / 6pm BST)! Download it today for nothing and own it forever, share with your friends and build the ultimate sniping team!

  - http://store.steampowered.com/app/63380/

393

Found Deals and Discounts / Re: XYplorer lifetime license PRO 50% off

« Last post by mwb1100 on June 03, 2014, 10:26 AM »

Did someone say "lifetime" as in "lifetime license"???

Danger Will Robinson!

-40hz (June 03, 2014, 08:46 AM)

I've had one for about 8 years, and when Don has changed his licensing terms (at one point the lifetime license was removed from the purchase options) it was always grandfathered for existing licensees - as it should be.  I think that a lifetime license for XY is one of the least risky lifetime licenses.

394

Living Room / Re: TrueCrypt is Now Abandonware?!

« Last post by mwb1100 on May 30, 2014, 03:21 PM »

I don’t know if he's making it up (as he sometimes does)

-J-Mac (May 30, 2014, 03:12 PM)

At least on this made up posting, he's clear about it:

  - http://steve.grc.com...ruecrypt-developers/

395

Living Room / Re: TrueCrypt is Now Abandonware?!

« Last post by mwb1100 on May 30, 2014, 01:05 PM »

All of the TC licenses have been questioned by various Linux/FOSS groups.

-40hz (May 30, 2014, 11:37 AM)

Just for future reference, here's one of the better posts I came across about problems with the TC license. It's for license version 2.5 in this particular case - I have no idea if any of these issues were addressed by TC license v3.0 used by TC v 7.1a:

  - http://lists.freedes...-October/000276.html

396

Living Room / Re: TrueCrypt is Now Abandonware?!

« Last post by mwb1100 on May 30, 2014, 10:37 AM »

And that license has since been changed. The new license makes no provision for using any part of TC's code (which is available) in (or for) something else.

-40hz (May 30, 2014, 10:15 AM)

The 7.1a release is licensed under the TrueCrypt License Version 3.0, which seems to permit forks (even if it's not truly an open source license due to attribution and renaming clauses or other restrictions).  As far as I know, the license that TrueCrypt 7.2 was released under wouldn't apply to the 7.1a release.

397

Living Room / Re: TrueCrypt is Now Abandonware?!

« Last post by mwb1100 on May 30, 2014, 04:02 AM »

Another problem with that scenario is that while Vista and later support BitLocker, not all editions of Windows support it. You need to have Ultimate or Enterprise (or Pro on Win8). Home, Home Premium, or Pro (on Vista or Win7)  won't cut it.  And that's putting aside the trust issues that people might have with BitLocker.

It's certainly possible that the devs (I thought there were 2 or 3) don't want to work on the project anymore and might not think it's as important as it once was.  But it would be a pretty mean thing to remove people's ability to continue to choose to use the encryption capabilities as they existed in 7.1a just because there are alternatives out there. Then again, they weren't being paid by the users (or if they are, it's donations only), so other than by way of goodwill, there's no reason to expect that the devs should provide anything.

I wouldn't be too surprised if the devs simply resent that the audit effort got a rather large funding pretty quickly (I think that it's possible that the $70K crowdfunded for the audit might be more than the TrueCrypt project received in donations), and decided to pack it in as a result.

398

Living Room / Re: TrueCrypt is Now Abandonware?!

« Last post by mwb1100 on May 29, 2014, 05:39 PM »

I'd suggest keeping whatever downloads of TrueCrypt 7.1a that you might have safe until people figure out what's going on.

At this point I don't think we know if what's happening is due to problems that might be in 7.1a that the devs don't want (or can't) fix, or if 7.1a is OK to just continue using.

Either way, it looks like official downloads of a TrueCrypt that can encrypt data are probably gone for good.

399

Developer's Corner / Re: About the Python 2 to 3 Transition...

« Last post by mwb1100 on May 27, 2014, 06:09 PM »

I would imagine the people who program by writing code have little issues with writing for either version, but the people who program by downloading other peoples libraries and gluing them together will have a problem if google doesn't give them something to solve their problem all in the same version of Python .

-Jibz (May 27, 2014, 01:58 PM)

My problem is that I'm not a Python developer, but I sometimes need to *use* things that are written in Python.  As an end user it's very confusing which version I want or need so that the things that I install that use Python will work.  It's also not clear whether I can or should just install both Python 2 and 3.

Most of the information out there seems to indicate that as an end user, you should install Python 2 unless you know that you need Python 3.  So I've installed Python 2, and things seem to be working OK. But I suspect that there's a bit of cargo-cultism going on here and/or I don't have enough things dependent on Python to have run into a strong version dependency.

I wouldn't be surprised if things would be working OK if I had installed Python 3. I also wouldn't be surprised if things just broke if I did that.  So I'll probably stick with installing Python 2.x until something forces me to install 3.  I'll only be unhappy if doing that breaks something else, but hopefully it won't, or it will be easy to fix if it does.

400

Living Room / Re: All data services on Android off, still got charged roaming in Italy! Bastards!

« Last post by mwb1100 on May 19, 2014, 04:11 PM »

You're saying it just places the call, but the rest is using the cell service?

-superboyac (May 19, 2014, 03:49 PM)

Yup. 

As Deozaan mentioned there were other apps that provided a VOIP integration with GV (in my limited tests, they didn't work all that well), but it seems Google cut them off recently.

What I use GV for is to have a single phone number that gets forwarded to several different phones (my home phone land line, a cell phone at work that I keep at my desk, and my actual cell phone).  I get rings to all those phones when someone dials my GV number. Also, when I dial out of my cell phones, I can have things set up to dial out as my GV number (or not - you can configure it to ask on each call).

This works OK, but I'm not entirely convinced that the complexity is worth the small value I get out of it.

The thing I do like about GV is that I have a phone number that I can use with whatever cell phone and whatever plan - I can change phones or SIMs on a whim and never have to worry about making sure the porting process will go smoothly.