best language for 3D manipulation over web ?

[Amardeep Singh]

On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Attila Feher wrote:

> > > Creating a perfectly secured Unix system is equally extremely hard.

not if you know what you are doing

> Yep, w/o the latest SP (was it 5??) for NT4 it was possible.  _If_ you
> were sitting next to it.  Still, it is _very_ rare that a simple user
> can sit next to an NT Domain Controller and start whatever he wants.
> And if you can crack into an NT workstation...  It is still possible
> that the IT guys on the wire get alarm about every admin login :-)))

and winnt is the only platform where you can get an alarm

> > So the quality of this "code viewing" depends a lot on "who MS chooses" and how
> > many. I still say that more people see UNIX code than MS code (I won't even
> > mention LINUX here, what is seen even by normal users). And the people who are
> > really interesting (hackers and crackers) will not be able to inspect the code
> > of Micro$oft and point out possible problems.
>
> Maybe, maybe not good that many can see the source.  You _never_ know
> that a guy seeing it and finding something (which has about 1E-10 chance
> w/o the soruces) will turn to you or start dialing and make some
> money...

http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/quake-cheats.html
http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-oss.html
http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-9909.html#OpenSourceandSecurity

i cannot convince you otherwise, but perhaps you may rethink

open source is not a guarantee of security, but security through
obscurity idea is dumb in my regard.

"...The reason the closed source model doesn't work is that security -
breakers are a lot more motivated and persistent than good guys (who
have lots of other things to worry about). The bad guys will find the
holes whether source is open or closed.

Closed sources do three bad things. One: they create a false sense of
security. Two: they mean that the good guys will not find holes and fix
them. Three: they make it harder to distribute trustworthy fixes when a
hole is revealed." - Eric Raymond of opensource.org


and quoting from "Unix System Security Tools"
"At best, security through obscurity can provide temporary protection.
But never be lulled by it -- with modest effort and time, secrets can be
discovered. As Deep Throat points out on X-Files: "There's always
someone watching.""


> Blue Screen cannot come from user SW.  That NT runs on a faulty or
> non-supported HW or uses a badly written driver.  Do any of this with a
> UNIX and will get the same, but called kernel panic.

and also when some part of the kernel code is badly written. and you
seem to be so sure that nt kernel is so good, that it cannot cause these
problems. and i wonder what happened in between, that microsoft promised
that win2000 is going to be much more stable, it it actually turned out
so (for my case, and several others whom i know). hardware and drivers
shipped with them were same. but i admit drivers shipped by microsoft
with their os did change

and strangely enough, i always thought windows has much better hardware
support than linux. but those machines which use to crash a lot with nt
did not give any problems with linux and 2000. (i know 2000 is nt, but
here i am referring to nt4 )

> > One of my friends is working in a computer company, which are offering and they
> > run a WinNT web server and he told me that it crashes at least once a month,
> > usually more often. The Solaris server at our university is now running for
> > years and it never crashed even once. It only was rebooted to add new hardware.
>
> Than you must have a real good luck.  I use Solaris here and I know what
> I am talking about :-)))  Reboot is once per day on a test machine where
> "badly behaving" SW can run.

i would say that you have real bad luck

> Yep.  First I gave up trying to use Java when I have installed the the
> JRE and it crashed my whole Windows 95.  I had to reinstall.

interesting. but so sad that such software only exists for windows which
could bring the whole machine down with it.

> > China, one billion people. Computer shops in China sell Linux 200 times more
> > often than Windows. The Chinese government plans to increase the usage of Linux
> > even more (they don't trust Micro$oft, open source rules, as they can make sure
> > there's no spyware inside). BTW downloaded distributions aren't counted here.
>
> Why don't they trust MS? :-)))  I cannot imagine...

Why should i trust M$ :-))) I cannot imagine...

> > Why should 3d access "over web" to a database be limited to x86 or Windows
> > users? Why can't it be for everyone? Why aren't people in China allowed to use
> > it? Because you believe that you can save 5 minutes through a win-only solution
> > (what is not even true)?
>
> Windows NT is not limited to x86...

and which other platforms are supported?

and finally, is this python-list or what