A_Non_eMouse
Re:TrueCrypt suggesting migration to BitLocker?
on Wednesday May 28, 2014 @11:21PM (#7814516)
I meant MSVC 1.52c is 16-bit.
Re:TrueCrypt suggesting migration to BitLocker?
on Wednesday May 28, 2014 @08:46PM (#7813955)
But, being a 16-bit program, it won't run on 64-bit windows. I'm not even sure it would install properly on anything newer than XP. I haven't tried installing it since the 9x days.
There are several things MS has released that don't install on newer systems very well. There are some where the installer depends on an old version of Internet Explorer being installed and which fail miserably on newer versions.
Re:TrueCrypt suggesting migration to BitLocker?
on Wednesday May 28, 2014 @08:42PM (#7813945)
The version of MSVC needed is 1.52c, which was 16-bit, and was the last version able to create 16-bit binaries. It was likely needed for building the bootloader. (Why this couldn't be moved over to a FOSS compiler, I don't know.)
Re:TrueCrypt suggesting migration to BitLocker?
on Wednesday May 28, 2014 @07:42PM (#7813735)
Those two SourceForge blog posts are from January 2011, a year before the release of TrueCrypt 7.1a. The recent forced change was due to infrastructure changes.
Re:YouTube Blocks Game Videos, Industry Offers Help
on Thursday December 12, 2013 @01:50AM (#6893162)
Except that The DMCA requires immediate removal upon complaint. Granted, the automated youtube-internal identification isn't exactly subject to that, but it was created in response to a lawsuit from the media companies about how hard it was for them to find and report infringing content.