Slashdot Mirror


Slashback: VeriSign, Balance, Manifestation

Tonight's Slashback brings updates and clarifications to several previous Slashdot stories, so read on below for information on the (over-stated) recall of Segway scooters, the fate of RAV AntiVirus's Linux development team, VeriSign's Site Finder, the (latest) Lindows v. Microsoft scuffle, and more.

Linux antivirus developers join Kaspersky Labs prostoalex writes "The Linux development team of Romania-based RAV AntiVirus, acquired this June by US-based Microsoft, joined Russia-based Kaspersky Labs. This transition took place after Microsoft confirmed there will be no Linux or Novell version of antivirus software. Kaspersky Labs now works on RAV Migration program for Unix/Linux users, since the company officials deem this market as one of the fastest-growing."

VeriSign must love attention. talon77 writes "Netsys is reporting that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Verisign due to their Sitefinder. It's about time."

And Anonymous Brave Guy writes "VeriSign are in legal trouble yet again, this time for handing over a domain name to a former employee of the former holder. Also some interesting tidbits in here about the impact of the sex.com case, the fact that since July domain names are regarded as property under U.S. law, and the idea that VeriSign might themselves be held accountable for punitive damages awarded against someone who takes over a domain name improperly."

Piling on, Anonymous submits: "Verisign seems to have issues with returning proper response packets for DNS queries on unused domains, so we thought we would give them a quick reminder in case they forgot what the right answer was. You can find pictures here. (This was on their building in Mountain View, and the signs said 'Verisign/Netsol, as if people didn't hate you enough already... How greedy/stupid are you? [Made with figlet/vim/a2ps/poster.c]')"

Update: 10/02 00:37 GMT by T : And (ooops!) this part got chopped off: "Note that the Verisign web search is powered by Inktomi for search and overture for ads, both of which are now owned by Yahoo. You can always vote with your dollars and your clicks."

Ohio uncappers peer at the ToS. Mike writes "Looks like Broadband Reports has posted a follow up to what happened to those Ohio Cable broadband users who had FBI agents confiscate their hardware for uncapping their modems (See original BBR story here, Slashdot story here). Looks like most of the offenders settled for fines and community service, but one took the case all the way, and eventually got it overturned because the cable company's AUP failed to clearly mention their legal stance on uncapping."

Thorn-in-side lessons, part IIXIIXV. jlechem writes "Lindows and Microsoft are at it again. Wired News is running a story about Lindows refusing to take down the settlement website reported on by Slashdot earlier. CEO Michael Robertsone stated 'Our plan is to continue to offer the MSfreePC service in spite of your threats. If required, we will be a voice in the courtroom defending a consumer's right to use technology and an online process to secure their settlement claims.'"

MPAA Scratches Oscar Screeners xstein writes "In a follow up to this story, the major studios have agreed to go along the MPAA's proposal to stop sending out screener tapes and DVDs to Academy members. The agreement would include MPAA's seven studio members, Disney, WB, Sony, Universal, 20th Century Fox, Paramount, and MGM, as well as their affiliates, which include New Line, Miramax, Focus Features and Sony Pictures Classics. Dreamworks, although not an MPAA member, also agreed to the ban. This move scratches a longstanding tradition, and is seen to hurt smaller, independent-minded movies distributed by MPAA members the most, though may allow truly independent studios such as Lions Gate to gain extra attention with their screener tapes. E! Online and Salon.com have the scoop."

Phantom Offices? Ray B writes "On September 18th, Slashdot posted about an article on the Phantom video game console. Of particular note in the primary article investigating the Phantom's founder(s), was that the company did not even have physical offices.

Just four days later, the Phantom email Newsletter #2 is issued, with the first bit of news being:

"Infinium Labs recently signed a five-year lease on 10,000 sq. ft. of prime office space to locate its corporate offices in the Centre Pointe Building in downtown Sarasota, Florida. The Centre Pointe offices are in close proximity to many of the company's early investors, its corporate legal counsel and the industrial design firm that is developing the Phantom Game System(TM) prototypes"

Coincidence or damage control?"

Well, start with the Python then and work your way up. Wolfbone writes "A recent edition of 'Global Business,' a BBC World Service programme available here in RealAudio form, contains an admission that the BBC cannot afford to put it's entire archive online, contradicting an earlier Slashdot story and the BBC's own report. Even though it only has 11.56 Petabytes of the stuff, some of it recorded on wax cylinders, it would be too expensive, apparently, to keep their earlier promise. The rest of the programme is about the more general problems of long term archiving of data and how some organizations still don't trust digital electronic formats and prefer to stick with paper and microfiche."

Segway recall: in and out in 10 minutes! ptorrone writes "I got my Segway HT updated today, the 'recall' is a simple software update, it took 10 minutes and that was about it. To clarify what the recall is ...the HTs are not being sent back, Segway has people in each state of the USA and they update them. So far all owners have been notified and thousands have updated. The update makes it harder for people to ride after numerous low battery alerts (3 people out of 6,000 thought something else). Here are my pictures from the update procedure."

186 comments

  1. I'm a little confused.. by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... What does banning screeners do to affect Indie filmmmakers?

    Sorry if I'm being ignorant here, I'm not having a great day.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
    1. Re:I'm a little confused.. by FocaJonathan · · Score: 1

      Indies are not part of the agreement. Thus they may still send out DVDs. This should give them more attention than in the past, since they will be the only ones sending out the screener DVDs.

    2. Re:I'm a little confused.. by NiceGeek · · Score: 1

      So many movies to see, so little time to attend screenings. Without screeners, some movies simply won't get the attention of the Academy folks.

    3. Re:I'm a little confused.. by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Well, it could possibly help the indies, since there is nothing preventing them from sending out DVD copies of movies up for consideration to Academy members. It's more likely that someone will see your film if you make it more convenient for the prospective watcher.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    4. Re:I'm a little confused.. by exhilaration · · Score: 4, Informative
      and is seen to hurt smaller, independent-minded movies distributed by MPAA members

      He's talking about THAT, and it refers to the exposure that smaller films will lose because of this. Because they never got the same ad budget as the summer blockbusters, smaller films relied on the buzz generated by screeners, or so the blurb would suggest.

    5. Re:I'm a little confused.. by palp · · Score: 1

      If their film has little exposure, and some people at the academy haven't seen it, and don't get a screener copy, then they won't get nominated?

      That's my best guess.

      --
      -palp
    6. Re:I'm a little confused.. by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      I suppose the solution is to move to an independant label, like some musicians are doing.

    7. Re:I'm a little confused.. by Klerck · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Many of the more indie films that happen to be distributed by the MPAA do not see wide release, perhaps only playing in New York or LA. Because of this, not all Academy members may get a chance to see them, and it can hurt the film's chances of being nominated for awards.

      Screeners allowed the Academy members to view movies in the comfort of their own homes or while travelling which means they wouldn't have to go out of their way to see a film that wasn't playing on thousands of screens nationwide.

    8. Re:I'm a little confused.. by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "Because they never got the same ad budget as the summer blockbusters, smaller films relied on the buzz generated by screeners, or so the blurb would suggest."

      Ah, thank you. That's exactly what I was trying to piece together. :)

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    9. Re:I'm a little confused.. by JakiChan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Given the extremely limited distribution that a lot of indie films get and given how hard/expensive it is to make prints and such there is a strong chance that your average Academy voter would be unable to see one of the indie contenders in the theater. If the Academy member's cannot be sent a video or DVD then there's a strong chance they won't see the movie at all...and they probably wouldn't vote for a movie they haven't seen.

      --
      "Where quality is like a dead stinking rat - you just can't miss it."
    10. Re:I'm a little confused.. by Col.+Klink+(retired) · · Score: 3, Funny

      > they probably wouldn't vote for a movie they haven't seen.

      This is where the argument breaks down.

      --

      -- Don't Tase me, bro!

    11. Re:I'm a little confused.. by aminorex · · Score: 2, Informative

      It helps indies because now only the indies
      will be sending out screeners. The majors
      have "banned" them, i.e., will not be sending
      them out. Thus indies will get a lot more
      academy exposure, and win more awards.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    12. Re:I'm a little confused.. by 3terrabyte · · Score: 1

      LOL. You obviously missed the point. By a lot.

      --

      Why are there only 19 people folding@home for slashdot?

    13. Re:I'm a little confused.. by 3terrabyte · · Score: 1

      Wrong. Most indies are still distributed by the Majors, and/or have also been forced to 'agree' with the decision.

      --

      Why are there only 19 people folding@home for slashdot?

    14. Re:I'm a little confused.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why's that? Independent film companies still send out screeners.

  2. 11.56 Petabytes by kriox · · Score: 1

    Is there any digital database that large nowadays?

    1. Re:11.56 Petabytes by Short+Circuit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Library of Congress might fit the bill. Depends on how much of their archive is already digital.

    2. Re:11.56 Petabytes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "You are a sad, sad little man."

      Hope you got your Buzz.

    3. Re:11.56 Petabytes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's only around 20-40 terabytes, which is nothing compared to 11.56 petabytes. Still, 11.56 petabytes isn't "that much" if you think about it - assuming they go with the "cheap and unreliable", that's only a few million for the space and supporting hardware.

      Then again, I am probably wrong. :P

    4. Re:11.56 Petabytes by legoburner · · Score: 1

      wow. For some scale, all of Kazaa is currently approx. 5PB across 3.6 million users. BBC's archive is more than twice that! Time for a 7 million user peer to peer system to store the beeb's content!

    5. Re:11.56 Petabytes by El · · Score: 3, Funny

      I believe the Windows(TM) bug database is fast approaching that size...

      --

      "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

    6. Re:11.56 Petabytes by nytes · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, you're right.

      If the BBC were to use P2P to distribute this work, it would definitely be the case that would legitimize a massive, decentralized P2P network. If some of the stuff were to be controversial (e.g. stuff critical of China) that would also be justification for that same network to provide annonymity.

      Let the MPAA and RIAA try to vilify P2P then.

      --
      -- I have monkeys in my pants.
    7. Re:11.56 Petabytes by Short+Circuit · · Score: 3, Funny

      Patch database, maybe. I believe their bug database is word-of-mouth.

    8. Re:11.56 Petabytes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      all of Kazaa is currently approx. 5PB

      Yeah, but it consists of hundreds of thousands of copies of the same old thing. Even if you wanted to claim that was useful redundancy, it's hideously inefficient compared to a proper coding scheme.

    9. Re:11.56 Petabytes by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1
      I believe the Windows(TM) bug database is fast approaching that size...

      Open source software packages are following closely behind with their "major root exploit of the week" tracking database. OpenSSH, OpenSSL, Proftpd, sendmail, etc. Jesus tap dancin Christ!

    10. Re:11.56 Petabytes by focitrixilous+P · · Score: 1

      I think you mean 115.6x10^5 Pentabytes.

      --
      SAILING MISHAP
    11. Re:11.56 Petabytes by CatPieMan · · Score: 1

      My guess would be any old corporate database.

      Specifically, the pharmaceutical industry. One particular company had a 10 year old database that was stored in one frickin huge database (all connected to a mainframe). They had a room that was about 100 ft x 100 ft filled with disk packs (as they called them, I don't know the technical name) each about 5 x 5 x 8, and each filled with disks.

      They had a problem in the late 90's -- one of the tables (not the data, just the description of what was in the tables) was becoming larger than an entire disk stack. I can imagine how much data was in it b/c they probably recieved at least 50-100MB of data in it per day in errors (stuff that needed user intervention, which accounted for about 3-5% of the data). That is each day for 10 years.

      Beyond that, this was only one of about 50 departments.

      Ok, granted, that is only about 60 Terrabytes, but I would only imagine that I was underestimating it. That, and everything keeps growing each year (people are addicted to [legal] drugs and each sale creates several hundred K of data that has to be kept track of).

      That, and this particular company was fairly small by comparison to some of the other companies in existence at that time.

      Now, remember that each pharmacuetical company has databases of roughly this size per $10billion is sales, and each drug wholesaler has to keep information about contracts for everyone they sell to, each sale and purchase, etc, they have (FDA rules), and each pharmacy (including hospitals) has to keep track of the same, you can imagine that these databases (all together) must be huge.

      Oh, and the company I worked for, this only counts the north american sales, european sales are about equal to these.

      Yeah, pharmacies and the drug industry have to keep a lot of data.

      -CPM

      --
      ---You're all I need, When the water runs deep, You're all I need, Now I cry my soul to sleep -- Collective Soul, Needs
    12. Re:11.56 Petabytes by flamingnight · · Score: 1

      >Let the MPAA and RIAA try to vilify P2P then.

      Oh, they'd find a way...

    13. Re:11.56 Petabytes by petabyte · · Score: 1

      I really have nothing to add but as we've finally made it up to my slashdot UID I felt I should post something.

      "I'd like to thank the Academy and my agent Bob ..."

      Now when they get to my domainname, that'll be impressive :).

    14. Re:11.56 Petabytes by spectrokid · · Score: 1

      The cost doesn't lie in the database, silly! The cost lies in finding those wax-cilinders, digitising them, cataloguing them......

      --

      10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then

    15. Re:11.56 Petabytes by Forge · · Score: 1

      How big is a yottaByte ?

      --
      --= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
    16. Re:11.56 Petabytes by Bombcar · · Score: 1

      Stolen from yottabyte.org:

      yottabyte = 1,208,925,819,614,629,174,706,176 bytes; A terabyte of terabytes. :D

    17. Re:11.56 Petabytes by nacturation · · Score: 1

      I hear the FBI's anti-child porn database is composed of around that many Petafiles.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  3. Phantom Offices by mphase · · Score: 1

    I don't think anything concerning the current state of the Phantom should be believed there is just too much undeniable proof that the guys a 'tard.

    1. Re:Phantom Offices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Invisible offices for an invisible game console.

      Crap like this would have flown in the the 90's dot.com bubble.

      Now, I think it is about to hit the fan.

    2. Re:Phantom Offices by ducomputergeek · · Score: 1

      That chair is more expensive than my desk ($100 from Office Max), Chair ($99 from Office Max), and three 5 self book cases ($60 each from Walmart).

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
  4. So... by Luigi30 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does that mean we can give Shrub a Segway, and he won't fall off this time?

    --
    503 Sig Unavailable

    The Signature could not be accessed. Please try again later or contact the administrator
  5. What is that link? by AEton · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    In the Phantom followup:
    "that the company did not even have physical offices"
    So what's the https://slashdot.org/admin.pl?op=edit&sid=03/09/18 /1544229 ?

    --
    We recently had heard in the office over one of the Yellow Machine that's made by Anthology Solutions.
    1. Re:What is that link? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something is very fishy about that link... it warns me that I'm leaving an encrypted page then forwards me to my profile.

      I dunno if that happened to anyone else, but I changed my password after seeing that.

      Suspicious...

    2. Re:What is that link? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, haven't you ever read Slashcode in Perl?

      admin.pl is the editor interface, unlike article.pl, which is for us, mere mortals.

  6. Irony by cptgrudge · · Score: 1
    Talk about irony. Here I am looking at the pics of the "altered" VeriSign signs, and I have an ad for a VeriSign SSL guide popping up in Opera.

    "The Value of Trust" indeed.

    --
    Qualitas edurus commercium, nullus penitus net rimor, nullus deus beneficium
    1. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean Opera's new Google text ads? It sounds like Google's system of serving you ads based on where you are surfing is working as intended. I don't see the irony at all.

    2. Re:Irony by ShortSpecialBus · · Score: 1

      That's about as ironic as every event in the alanis morrisette song. Perhaps you meant coincidence?

      irony ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-n, r-)
      n. pl. ironies

      1.
      1. The use of words to express something different from and often opposite to their literal meaning.
      2. An expression or utterance marked by a deliberate contrast between apparent and intended meaning.
      3. A literary style employing such contrasts for humorous or rhetorical effect. See Synonyms at wit1.
      2.
      1. Incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs: "Hyde noted the irony of Ireland's copying the nation she most hated" (Richard Kain).
      2. An occurrence, result, or circumstance notable for such incongruity. See Usage Note at ironic.
      3. Dramatic irony.
      4. Socratic irony.

      --
      //FIXME: Bad .sig
    3. Re:Irony by TiggsPanther · · Score: 1
      irony ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-n, r-) n. pl. ironies 1. 1. The use of words to express something different from and often opposite to their literal meaning. 2. An expression or utterance marked by a deliberate contrast between apparent and intended meaning. 3. A literary style employing such contrasts for humorous or rhetorical effect. See Synonyms at wit1. 2. 1. Incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs: "Hyde noted the irony of Ireland's copying the nation she most hated" (Richard Kain). 2. An occurrence, result, or circumstance notable for such incongruity. See Usage Note at ironic.

      Well it looks like it fits. Especially the whole "Value of Trust" thing when appied to VeriSign - especially when applied to a site you're viewing 'cos of a general lack of trust in said company.

      Tiggs
      --
      Tiggs
      "120 chars should be enough for everyone..."
    4. Re:Irony by ShortSpecialBus · · Score: 1

      hmm, perhaps. I still think it's more of a coincidence that you had a verisign ad up rather than irony, but it doesnt really matter.

      I'll leave the semantics games to my english major mother, heh.

      --
      //FIXME: Bad .sig
  7. Segway reminds me of the MS/GM joke by stroustrup · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    maybe cars and transportation equipment are cathing up with software already!! We have bugs and crashes to start with.

    --


    If you lost your job today, don't despair. You may die tomorrow anyway.
  8. Microsoft, buy, absorb, close up by mrd_yaddayadda · · Score: 1

    How often will Microsoft do this rubbish. I don't even use RAV and never have but everytime I hear about their latest asset strip and close down I cringe...

    1. Re:Microsoft, buy, absorb, close up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Linux is so perfectly secure as I keep being told, then why do you need anti-virus software in the first place?

    2. Re:Microsoft, buy, absorb, close up by questionlp · · Score: 1

      If the anti-virus software were running on a mail gateway or file server running Linux or BSD with Windows clients, then I would still want some form of anti-virus protection or filtering on the server.

      Remember that you need to secure your perimeter as well (which is now something that Microsoft is starting to pick up) as your internal systems.

  9. NXDOMAIN by KentoNET · · Score: 1

    Doesn't seem like those signs are terribly visible from afar, but at least the ones who take them down will be able to tell what it says. They might not get the point, though, not that the average passer-by would either.

    --
    "You tried your best and failed miserably. The lesson is...never try. Heh!" -Homer
    1. Re:NXDOMAIN by rootofevil · · Score: 2, Insightful

      yea, they really showed verisign didnt they!

      be nice, or we will tape MORE paper up over your logo, so that people wont know where you work!

      that just screams obey.

      --
      turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
    2. Re:NXDOMAIN by larry+bagina · · Score: 1
      they remind me of the two-line "jokes" you often see on slashdot... that are then followed by a ten-line explanation of why it was allegedly funny.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    3. Re:NXDOMAIN by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      The average reader can't immediately make the intellectual leaps some of these two-line jokes require. :(

    4. Re:NXDOMAIN by Havokmon · · Score: 1
      Doesn't seem like those signs are terribly visible from afar, but at least the ones who take them down will be able to tell what it says. They might not get the point, though, not that the average passer-by would either.

      Ahh yes, the power of figlet/vim/a2ps/poster.c
      (bold will be added in the next version)

      --
      "I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
    5. Re:NXDOMAIN by ePhil_One · · Score: 1
      Personally what I liked is that it seemed to have been printed on a Dot Matrix printer.

      I mean, where does a protest oriented person even FIND one of those thing?!?!?

      Yeah, I know, there's still some things they can do that inkjets/Lasers/etc can't, including printing barely legible protest posters

      --
      You are in a maze of twisted little posts, all alike.
    6. Re:NXDOMAIN by rootofevil · · Score: 1

      pricewatch, ebay, direct from mrfgrs, theres a lot of places. lots of places still roll hard with dot matirx, especially for invoices and such.

      --
      turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
  10. So the obviously American Question... by QuantumRiff · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How do i join the class action. I don't use my site much, just to put pics up for family and friends and stuff.. but the idea behind it really pisses me off. I have spam checkers (and sendmail) going apeshit about all these domains suddenly existing.. I don't really want a portion of the settlement (how unamerican of me) but I'd rather it go to schools. I just want versign to learn in the only way corporations do, with their wallet.

    --

    What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    1. Re:So the obviously American Question... by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      Hmm, this might explain the apparent complete and utter failure of my spam filters. I think I want in on that lawsuit too...

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    2. Re:So the obviously American Question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:So the obviously American Question... by Hard_Code · · Score: 1

      Damn, i visited your site expecting to see photoshopped images of Justice Rhenquist flying around. Ah well.

      --

      It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    4. Re:So the obviously American Question... by Greyfox · · Score: 2, Funny
      It's from Robert Anton Wilson's "Scrodinger's Cat". Buy it, love it, live it :-)

      I used to have a winged penis image on the front page but then I started looking for a job...

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  11. Verisign 'protest' by OverlordQ · · Score: 1

    I thought the banners were a clever idea, although a bit small to make anybody really notice them in my opinion. . .

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    1. Re:Verisign 'protest' by stile · · Score: 1

      Frankly, I thought it was rather childish and accomplished nothing.

  12. VeriSign class action - 404? by Specialist2k · · Score: 5, Insightful
    After quickly scanning the class action document against VeriSign, I am shocked about the incompetence of the plaintiff's lawyers: Their argumentation about 404 error pages has nothing to do with VeriSign's DNS change.

    Is it that hard for a "high technology" law firm to understand how DNS works?

    A s/\"404\"/NXDOMAIN/g; would definitely improve their chances to win the law suit. ;-)

    1. Re:VeriSign class action - 404? by Specialist2k · · Score: 1

      Just in case you are looking for the document I was referring to in the parent posting: Here it goes...

    2. Re:VeriSign class action - 404? by Danny+Rathjens · · Score: 1

      s/\"404\"/NXDOMAIN/g;

      No need to escape those doublequotes. A double quote has no special meaning in a regular expression.
      The less extraneous junk in your code, the easier it is for others(and yourself in 6 months) to understand and maintain, 8^)

    3. Re:VeriSign class action - 404? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The double quotes may have no special meaning in a regexp, but if you're executing that regexp via. E.g. sed on a command line, then you would have to escape the quotes, less your shell becomes churlish and refuse to pass them to sed.

  13. 404 is not the same as domain not found by Clipper · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The actual complaint in the class action law suit has very serious confusion involving the technical issues surrounding the SiteFinder.

    In the introduction, they discuss that the SiteFinder replaces what was previously done with 404 errors. However, as has been previously discussed many times here on SlashDot, 404 errors occur when the domain exists, but the requested document does not exist on the webserver hosting that domain (it is the webserver than returns the 404 HTTP error code). In actually, when a domain didn't exist, you would get an error stating "Could not find domain". The complaint even describes how, in the past, incorrectly typing a URL would give a 404 error (they use the typo "ssyncalot.com" as a typo of "syncalot.com"). This behaviour never occured.

    Although I feel that legal action against Verisign is a good idea, the plaintiffs should perhaps organize their technical facts before appearing in court.

    --
    /<en
    1. Re:404 is not the same as domain not found by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IE use to report a 404 (sometimes, kinda randomly) for an NX. Mozilla and IE nowadays use the same page for 404 and NXDOMAIN, if the webserver doesn't give it's own 404 page. The confusion, while stupid, isn't completely from left field

    2. Re:404 is not the same as domain not found by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      If there's going to be complaints about the 404 error code, someone might take it up with Microsoft why their error page in IE is the same for both HTTP 404 and for an unresponsive server.

      Life sucks here in tech support.

    3. Re:404 is not the same as domain not found by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is totally untrue. The 404 error is determined by the webserver not the browser and it looks nothing like the unresponsive server. Seems like you should go work for this law firm if you don't know that.

    4. Re:404 is not the same as domain not found by LetterJ · · Score: 1

      Actually, if you make your server serve up *real* error pages above a certain size, I believe IE honors them and uses your errors instead of those default, useless pages that differ from each other only in the tiny error code at the very bottom of the page.

    5. Re:404 is not the same as domain not found by cscx · · Score: 1

      No they're different. They look similar (little i icon thingee, text message in verdana font) but the actual text is different.

      "This page cannot be displayed" as opposed to "This page cannot be found" with "HTTP 404 - File not found
      Internet Explorer " at the bottom.

  14. Segway updates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    10 minutes... from a laptop... through a little plug...

    How long before h4xx0rs are offering simple 10-minute updates to make Segways go 20 mph?

    1. Re:Segway updates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      right after h4xx0rs offer a simple 10-minute update to make natalie portman dump hot grits down her pants.

    2. Re:Segway updates by failrate · · Score: 1

      Well, geez, not long now that you gave them the idea

      --
      Voodoo Girl is the bomb!
  15. Phantom Offices by tessaiga · · Score: 3, Funny
    "Infinium Labs recently signed a five-year lease on 10,000 sq. ft. of prime office space to locate its corporate offices in the Centre Pointe Building in downtown Sarasota, Florida. The Centre Pointe offices are in close proximity to many of the company's early investors, its corporate legal counsel and the industrial design firm that is developing the Phantom Game System(TM) prototypes"

    Coincidence or damage control?

    It probably just means that enough investors have bought their hype that Timothy Roberts can now afford to splurge and start living the high life again. Look for the next press release to say that they're loading up on Aeron chairs for the employees.

    (By the way, the link in that article probably should have been this one.)

    --
    The bold print giveth, and the fine print taketh away ...
  16. Antivirus market for Linux the fastest-growing? by mentin · · Score: 1
    Kaspersky Labs now works on RAV Migration program for Unix/Linux users, since the company officials deem this market as one of the fastest-growing

    So does this mean Linux/Unix is going to beat Windows in the championship for most viruses available for the platform?

    --
    MSDOS: 20+ years without remote hole in the default install
    1. Re:Antivirus market for Linux the fastest-growing? by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      Antivirus software in Linux might focus on performing as a safety net for when boxes get rooted. Like forcing a restore of shadow files if they were modified outside an authorized time, or notifying a user and administrator if a file that'd been set to "read-only" was written to anyway.

    2. Re:Antivirus market for Linux the fastest-growing? by kriox · · Score: 1

      Actually, they're many used as anti-virus for windows, cf. the rececent worms and e-mail worms.

    3. Re:Antivirus market for Linux the fastest-growing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The most common use of anti-virus on Linux is for scanning and removing viruses destined for Windows machines.

      Client side scanning isn't as effective as server side virus scanning because people don't update their virus sigs as often as they should. With a server side solution, you can update it every hour, and protect thousands of windows users.

      I doubt Kaspersky is gonna put much of a dent in this market though with their high prices. I see they charge $2045 for their AV product for Linux mailservers, which only covers 500 users.

      With RAV you were good for 2 domains and unlimited users for $300

      I was bit by the shutting down of RAV, but have since moved to BitDefender.
      Their AV solution costs $225

      http://www.bitdefender.com/bd/site/buy1.php

      I use it with sendmail.
      It is easy to set-up, takes less than 5 minutes. Just install the tarball or the RPM, enter in your relay domains and IP addresses. It installs an SMTP proxy and moves sendmail to port 10025

      The smtp proxy accepts the mail scans for viruses and passes it off to sendmail. I have it running on a 266Mhz with 64MB of RAM and it averages around a .3-.6 load for my 2500 email users.

      Even most anti-spam solutions for Linux are ridiculously priced. Some costing thousands of dollars when SpamAssassin/MimeDefang are free, and probably work as good if not better than commercial solutions.

      I set-up MimeDefang and Spamassassin on one of those cheap $400 Dells with the 2.2 celeron. I added half a GIG of memory to it, and it now stops around 120,000 pieces of spam per day with a load average around .6

      My entire anti-spam/anti-virus solution cost me
      less than $800 when I could have easily spent anywheres from $4000-$10,000+ for other solutions.

  17. Oh gee, recalled? by Freston+Youseff · · Score: 1

    Pity. Now those three people who own them are going to have to learn to walk again. What a shame that people have no concept of stored energy and how it's finite. The video of I guess it's GWB falling off of a Segway is damn hilarious.

    --

    1. Re:Oh gee, recalled? by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      Pity. Now those three people who own them are going to have to learn to walk again. What a shame that people have no concept of stored energy and how it's finite.

      For crying out loud dude, this is pathetic. I know it's too much to ask for people to read the articles before commenting, but can't you at the very least read the editors summary?!

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    2. Re:Oh gee, recalled? by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1
      People seem to forget that recall doesn't necessarily (or even usually) mean pulling the prodct off of the market. It's very common that a recall just means a repair of some sort that (usually) increases the safety of a product.

      I have to admit that 'pulling off the market' was my first reaction to the recall announcement. Then I read the original news articles and I hit myself... "Oh yeah -- that kind of a recall."

      --
      Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  18. Okay everone, repeat after me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Repeat after me!

    while true; do wget -O /dev/null http://`dd if=/dev/urandom bs=80 count=1 2>/dev/null | tr -d -c '[:alnum:]'`.com/ ; done
  19. Cyber crime by leeward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I couldn't help but notice the quote from John Weglian, chief of the special units division of the prosecutor's office, when explaing why he is coming down so hard on modem uncappers. Cyber crime is potentially very damaging to society. We are taking a firm position on that type of criminal activity.

    Uh, yea. I guess that is why they are putting virtually no effort into stopping the blatantly criminal spam and viruses that are spewed out every day by the millions. Besides, law enforcement is so busy protecting companies... err I mean society... from uncappers.

    1. Re:Cyber crime by Wilk4 · · Score: 1
      their priorities need some serious work if this is what rates the time of a dozen fbi agents.

      This deserves a fine or payment for the extra bandwidth, or cut-off of service, not having your gear confiscated and all the rest of this.

      I wonder if the one guy who took it all the way to an aquittal can use that ruling to help the others hit by this. anyone know?

  20. Watermarking? by Short+Circuit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wasn't there talk a while back about watermarking each DVD sent to the screeners, so they could track who leaked it?

    For preventative maintenance, they could have set up a DRM solution that depended on a screener's private key.

    They could have embedded the video on a BSD or Linux boot CD with an encrypted FS, so they'd have the DMCA on their side.

  21. BitTorrent? by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

    A sort of BitTorrent-based filesystem would be really useful. A block of data would have both popular and unpopular programming on it, so that both would be equally available. A search through the system would point to the torrent managing that piece of data.

  22. NXDOMAIN signs are embarrassing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh God, how embarrassing are those NXDOMAIN signs! I live around 3 minutes from Middlefield and Ellis, and I drive by there everyday. I didn't see this "protest".

    Maybe, instead of using a dot-matrix printer, which made the letters almost invisible, they should have used a simple Sharpie pen. It would have been so much more visible. And maybe they should have used something else other than their obscure, stupid choice of words.

    I wish I could see this entire debacle unfold:
    1) Nerds spend hours thinking about a clever way of protesting
    2) Nerds dig out their old dot matrix printer and print out their clever sign
    3) Nerds put up sign outside of one of Verisign's buildings, not the HQ
    4) Nerds take pictures thinking about how clever they are, and scamper off
    5) Security guard comes by, sees sign, has no idea what it means, and throws sign in the trash.

    It has zero impact, and makes these nerds look like such losers

    1. Re:NXDOMAIN signs are embarrassing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hear hear. That protest was pretty futile.

      I have a better protest: Embed the following tag at the bottom of every HTML document under your control:

      <img src="http://www.ksdbyugbelkjbyvgfdc.com/" width=1 height=1>

      Change the domain part in the middle. For best results, randomly generate the part in the middle so that it changes with something like this:

      #include <stdio.h>
      #include <stdlib.h>
      #include <time.h>
      #include <unistd.h>
      #include <string.h> /* return random float from 0 to 1 */
      float random_fl(void) {
      float result = (float)rand() / RAND_MAX;
      return(result);
      } /* given random 0 to 1, return int from 0 to x-1 */
      int random_i(float n, int x) {
      int r = (int)(x * n);
      if (r == x) r = x - 1; /* doesn't happen on all platforms */
      return(r);
      } /* generate URL of form "http://www.vreigsinskcus.com/" */
      int main(int argc, char * argv[]) {
      char buf[80];
      int i, numchars, len;
      printf("Content-type: text/html\n\n");
      strcpy(buf, "http://www.");
      srand((int)time(NULL)+getpid());
      numchars = random_i(random_fl(), 5) + 12;
      len = numchars + strlen(buf);
      for (i=strlen(buf);i<len;i++) {
      buf[i] = 'a' + random_i(random_fl(), 26);
      }
      buf[i] = 0;
      strcat(buf, ".com/");
      printf(buf);
      fflush(0);
      exit(0);
      }

      If Verisign wants to intercept and profit from lookups of domains that do not belong to them, lets not disappoint them.

    2. Re:NXDOMAIN signs are embarrassing! by caferace · · Score: 1
      3) Nerds put up sign outside of one of Verisign's buildings, not the HQ

      Well, it is at a pretty busy intersection in the mornings. Sad thing is, that same fountain used to have a Netscape logo on it. ::sniff::

      5) Security guard comes by, sees sign, has no idea what it means, and throws sign in the trash.

      Unlikely. I've been in that fountain before. Security guards would wait until the junior guard comes in, then make him wade into the fountain.

    3. Re:NXDOMAIN signs are embarrassing! by LauraW · · Score: 1
      > Sad thing is, that same fountain used to have a Netscape logo on it. ::sniff::

      The funny thing, though, is that same fountain also used to have water in it. I worked a couple blocks from there until recently, and as of about a month ago the water seems to have disappeared. Maybe Verisign can't afford water anymore? :-)

      Oddly, I know several people at Verisign. I'm hoping they're all in a department that isn't involved in this whole mess, because I'm friends with a couple of them. Of course, their CEO seemed like a nice guy too the couple of times I met him (8 years ago?) so it's hard to tell. At least back then, there was no dripping slime in evidence.

    4. Re:NXDOMAIN signs are embarrassing! by EvilStein · · Score: 1

      Uh, it's had water in it for a long time. :P When I was at Netscape, they'd drain it and clean it every once in a while. :)

  23. MPAA Screeners by complete+loony · · Score: 1

    I thought they would be interested in finding and prosecuting the offenders?
    Couldn't they individually encode the discs so the source of the leak can be traced (I realise this would cost more as you can't use a single master disk)?
    Then again, the RIAA hasn't had too much success with their customers, and this would probably only annoy their members.
    I suppose they'll still need some kind of an alternative for promotions.

    --
    09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
    1. Re:MPAA Screeners by Fiveeight · · Score: 1

      The problem is that clever stuff like watermarking or specially encoding the discs is going to be lost when it's compressed. There aren't that many people trading full DVDs yet, although I've seen a few on usenet. What they already do is put a banner along the bottom or a code number overlayed on the video, but the rippers can just pixel them out if they want to. I suppose it's a compromise between making it hard to rip at good quality, and making it look nice for the reviewers.

  24. Re:Answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    (by the way moderator everyone needs a laugh sometimes)

    You presume to tell ME, the mighty, powerful, and ignorant Slashdot moderator, how to go about modding your comment?

    Offtopic for you! Meddle not in the affairs of moderators, for they are unsubtle, and quick to mod you down without cause.

  25. Download movie in 5 seconds? by Ryu2 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    From the E! Online article:

    Valenti says a new program developed by Caltech researchers allows a movie file to be downloaded in five seconds

    Did I miss something here? Is this some quantum leap in information theory/signal compression? Or maybe Caltech was doing some tests in their labs on a gigabit Ethernet connection, and Valenti thought that it meant that any home user could achieve such download times as well?

    --
    There's 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
    1. Re:Download movie in 5 seconds? by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they actually mean it takes 5 seconds for a stream to start playing, if you're on a really fast connection.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    2. Re:Download movie in 5 seconds? by prostoalex · · Score: 1

      I think he mean this, definitely not this.

    3. Re:Download movie in 5 seconds? by gothicpoet · · Score: 2, Insightful
      You were expecting perhaps that things coming out of Jack Valenti's mouth would have some form of reason to them other than propoganda? That perhaps they would actually make sense?

      pshaw.

      (I always wanted a good use for that word.)

      --
      Quoth he ::
      "It's all academic anyway..."
  26. random domain lookups by jeffmock · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm just thinking, if a few high volume websites were to include links to a 1-pixel GIF at bogus randomly generated domains, wouldn't sitefinder crumble, and zero the value of any collected statistics on domain name typos.

    I think this would be much more entertaining than lawsuits or BIND hacks...

    jeff

    1. Re:random domain lookups by yerricde · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've written a simple C program to do something similar, except it generates Netcraft queries of pseudorandom but legit-looking domain names, thus pushing up Apache's Netcraft rank at the expense of IIS. A competent programmer could probably adapt it to generate HTML that requests a PNG image while rewriting it in one of the Three P's of Dynamic Web Pages (Perl, Python, and PHP).

      --
      Will I retire or break 10K?
    2. Re:random domain lookups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's the JavaScript version, thousands of random lookups a minute and noone will know it's there...

      <script><!-- SiteFinder is evil
      function new_src(){
      chars = "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789";
      len = Math.floor(Math.random() * 10 + 5);
      name = "http://www.";
      for(i=0;i<len;i++){
      ch = chars.substr(Math.floor(Math.random()*(chars.lengt h-1)),1);
      name += ch;
      }
      name += '.com/picture.gif';
      this.src = name;
      }
      i = new Image(1,1);
      i.onload = new_src;
      i.onerror = new_src;
      i.src = "/junk.gif";
      // --></script>

      Now all you need are some high profile sites vulnerable to script injection attacks. :)

    3. Re:random domain lookups by You're+All+Wrong · · Score: 1

      Your gun's too big. All you need's a pea-shooter:

      perl -ne 'm/\w+/&&system"wget http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.apach eis$&.com"' < /usr/share/dict/words

      add options (-w etc.) to taste.

      Wow, www.apacheisabyssmal.com runs on apache -- hypocrites.

      YAW.

      --
      Your head of state is a corrupt weasel, I hope you're happy.
    4. Re:random domain lookups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      perl

      Bad command or file name

      Give me a break. 1. I wrote the program on a machine that didn't have ActiveState Perl or Cygwin Perl installed but did have MinGW installed, and 2. I haven't yet worked through my copy of the llama book.

    5. Re:random domain lookups by Wilk4 · · Score: 1
      that'll hurt your visitors more than verisign...

      besides, they'd probably accuse you of a DOS attack and have the FBI raid you. ;-(

    6. Re:random domain lookups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your gun's too big.

      When will the penis spammers recognize this?

  27. "Wrongful Handling" Of Domain Names? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    I have my doubt about the Optima Technology "wrongful handling" suit against Verisign for handing a "their" domain over to a former employee without "proper authorization."

    The domain was registered in 1990. From my experience, it is much more likely that the former employee, seeing the business benefit of the Internet, registered the domain listing him/herself as the registrant because most companys didn't give a sh*t about domain names in 1990. That was particularly true of startups. As I have done, the former employee was probably doing them a favor, gratis, and after years of use the company thinks that a domain that was never *truly* theirs, was theirs once the realized the worth of it.

    For the record, I turned over the domains (and trademarks) that I registered to my former employer when I left, without them even asking. The schmucks didn't even offer to re-imburse me for the nominal fees.

  28. 11.56 Petabytes by istartedi · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Why does Peta want to byte them? Do they wear fur? /me ducks...

    Linux AV software writers? Maybe they should team up with the Maytag repairman.

    Oh, and for good measure... ummm... I dunno, pour some hot grits on that, make a Beowulf cluster. You're all smart guys, I'm sure you'll think of something.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  29. Mistake.... by buford_tannen · · Score: 1
    it seems to work better if you use [:xdigit:] instead of [:alnum:] ;)
    while true; do wget -O /dev/null http://`dd if=/dev/urandom bs=80 count=1 2>/dev/null | tr -d -c '[:xdigit:]'`.com/ ; done
    --
    Buford "Mad Dog" Tannen
    1. Re:Mistake.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this seems to be better:

      while true; do wget --tries=1 --timeout=5 -O /dev/null http://`dd if=/dev/urandom bs=80 count=1 2>/dev/null | tr -d -c '[:xdigit:]'`.com/ ; done

  30. "MPAA Scratches Oscar Screeners" - Its Ok! Really! by Snaller · · Score: 3, Funny

    The Academy members will just download the movies from the internet instead!

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  31. Complain about VeriSign here! by SEE · · Score: 5, Insightful
    1. The Department of Commerce; VeriSign's contract to operate .com and .org was originally with them.
    2. The Federal Communications Commission, which oversees telecommunications.
    3. The Senate Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Communications; contact the committee itself, the chairman, the ranking member, and any of the other members you'd like.
    4. The House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, including the committee itself, the chairman, the vice-chairman, and the ranking member. Plus any of the other members you feel like contacting.
    5. The Federal Trade Commission, which hears consumer complaints.
    6. Your U.S. Representative
    7. Your Senators
    8. Your Governor
    9. Your State Legislators
    10. ICANN's wildcard comment address
    11. VeriSign itself
    12. Finally, complain to the media. If they get lots of letters on a topic, they'll run stories. Try the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Washington Times, the Los Angeles Times, USA Today, the Wall Street Journal, CNN, Fox News, CBS News, ABC News, NBC News and MSNBC.
    1. Re:Complain about VeriSign here! by Bob+Wehadababyitsabo · · Score: 1

      You forgot to mention your local State Attorney General. Once I sick Mr. Spitzer on VS, they'll start shaking... he's famous for persuing cases that other AGs won't touch.

      --
      fsck -u
    2. Re:Complain about VeriSign here! by Elbow+Macaroni · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Since ICANN doesn't seem to be very good at "stabilizing" the Internet as they were supposed to be doing can't someone sue them for allowing this to go on?

      ICANN was set up to oversee all the registrars but it seems they are just allowing Verisign to get away with whatever it wants to.

      I've had Verisign attempt to hijack domains by pretending they didn't receive payments, I had them actually take domains claiming they were unpaid for when they were, I've had them steal my own domain name, transfer it to another of thier companies and then resell it to me for $1,200.

      Can't ICANN be held responsible for what they are allowing Verisign to get away with?

      --
      -------------------------------------
      Technically, we are beyond survival.
    3. Re:Complain about VeriSign here! by gothicpoet · · Score: 1
      Actually now that the ruling came down in the Sex.com case I think you can sue Netsol (Verisign) for a couple of the things that you just mentioned if true.

      Seems like it might be a good time to talk to a lawyer in your case.

      --
      Quoth he ::
      "It's all academic anyway..."
    4. Re:Complain about VeriSign here! by You're+All+Wrong · · Score: 1

      """
      ICANN was set up to oversee all the registrars
      """

      There's a fine line between oversee, and oversight...

      YAW.

      --
      Your head of state is a corrupt weasel, I hope you're happy.
    5. Re:Complain about VeriSign here! by Elbow+Macaroni · · Score: 1
      No I won't sue them because I can't prove that stuff. They always try to look incompetent so that they can't be sued.

      I'll just tell everyone about what crooks they are anytime anyone mentions their name. Also I like to send ICANN emails everytime Verisign tries to rip off another of my customers. It seems to be the only way to stop their b.s. That and choosing to never ever do business with them in any way.

      I had a lawyer client who wanted to do a class action suit against them but her firm decided against it.

      --
      -------------------------------------
      Technically, we are beyond survival.
  32. He's dead by The+Ape+With+No+Name · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Maybe they should team up with the Maytag repairman.

    Gordon Jump, dude. Gordon Jump.

    --
    Comparing it to Windows will be a moot point, since El Dorado is going to have a 40% larger code base than XP.
  33. Are you fucking retarded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RTFA.

  34. Sony Petasite! by morcheeba · · Score: 1

    It's been around for years. You can buy one surplus for USD$20K. That's just the library and robot handling, not the tape drive.

    sony brochure
    more pictures

  35. Re:ptorrone: STFU about your damn Sagway! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Humm, I guess he and ever Sagway owner(all two of them) have mod points today.

  36. In a related story: Huffy recalls Bicycles... by R2.0 · · Score: 1

    There have apparently been a number of incidents where the riders of the bicycles, having stopped providing the motive force for the gyroscopic stabilization devices that keep the bicycle upright, fell off and sustained minor injuries.

    While a small number of victims required stitches, almost all experienced emotional distress, as evidenced by excessive crying and requiring cuddling and care for their "boo-boo's".

    Huffy is installing a free hardware upgrade in the form of wheeled outriggers known as "Stabilization Pods."

    Oh yeah: Attn: Huffy Corporation and/or Holders of the Huffy Brand name: The above is SATIRE - please don't sue me!

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    1. Re:In a related story: Huffy recalls Bicycles... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lets get one thing straight here. If bicycles, motorcycles and cars stop getting the "force" that pushes it forward, people don't necessarily fall. They merely cruise to a stop. Smegwayz on the other hand WILL FALL FLAT if the batteries fail (unless you're a world class balancing act artist). Not the same thing.

    2. Re:In a related story: Huffy recalls Bicycles... by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "If bicycles, motorcycles ... stop getting the "force" that pushes it forward, people don't necessarily fall. They merely cruise to a stop."

      And what do they do when they stop? They "WILL FALL FLAT" as you so emphatically put it. That is, unless the rider does something about it, like put out their feet or use a kickstand.

      The riders of the "faulty" Segways that got injured didn't put it together that it is the battery keeping the thing upright; they ignored the battery warning light and fell over when a strain was put on the battery. Just like little kids, when first learning to ride w/o training wheels, don't connect forward motion (which turns the wheels, which provides gyroscopic stabilization) with stability: they coast to a stop and promptly fall on their sides with feet firmly planted on the pedals.

      Oh, and "Smegways" don't just fall over; they explode http://www.sluggy.com/daily.php?date=030205

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
  37. ideas... by pr0ntab · · Score: 2, Insightful

    you should surround that system with a fork/forget, and add a timeout to the wget (or use curl with "-m #") so that you don't spawn off too many. (make sure to reap children in the spawning loop).

    I'm sure a machine on a broadband connection could spawn 40 requests in the time it takes one to reply.

    Finally, you should really consider not using the bare URLs in the request because all you really do is hammer your local DNS server.

    instead, make fake requests DIRECTLY to sitefinder-idn.verisign.com. To see what the request ends up looking like, run wget with headers turned on with one of those fake queries.

    Then duplicate the request but substitute that static IP address. Your ISP won't think you're DoS'ing their DNS.

    --
    Fuck Beta. Fuck Dice
    1. Re:ideas... by Davak · · Score: 1

      Bless you guys. I love to know that these ideas are actually being discussed and developed. Get'm boys!

      Davak

    2. Re:ideas... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes me too, I think this work is the best! I wish everyone would do stuff like this to purposly try to skew the statistics of various networks to make even more people think that MS is loosing favour when it isnt. That way I could keep in my dreamland where everything is linux only, where I can pretend that everything linux works even though it doesnt, where I can pretend my productivity is hitting new records even though really my productivity is only 10% of what it was using billy's software.

  38. Phantom Company by IronGorilla · · Score: 1

    Aha. They put a photo of the building online from down the street as if to say "see, we have offices now". Mind you, anyone can take the photo they have. I know that building. I live practically down the street from it. I'll give them a week before I go in with my camera and find out the truth of the matter, hehheh.

    Oogabooga

  39. Uncapping and the Law by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If ignorance of the law is no excuse, then neither is ignorance by the Law.

    I'm amazed at the complete and total lack of technological prowess exhibited by the law enforcement officials in the Buckeye case. Law enfarcement is closer to the mark. Hell, forget the computer skills ... how about some basic common sense? It's just unbelievable. How on EARTH could anyone believe that 23 individuals could appropriate a QUARTER OF A MILLION DOLLARS of bandwidth over cable modems in such a short period? It's not like they were tapping into an OC3 or a major fiber trunk. One would have every right to expect the cops to have at least asked for some evidence that an actual crime was committed! I am truly staggered. Okay, a cable company behaved in an unethical and/or criminal manner (insert sincere expression of surprise here) but the fact that a bunch of supposedly professional "police officers" were so easily taken in is, well, disappointing.

    Somebody higher up in the cops' food chain should have said "WTF? Slap their wrists, say you're sorry, and send these guys home." This is called oversight, and it is supposed to prevent such egregious abuses. I imagine it would probably have been more than sufficient to deter any future "abberrant" behavior. But ... arrests? Seizures? FELONY CHARGES? My God. People speeding in cars who run red lights and might actually kill someone are given more respect. Gang-bangers that shoot people dead in the street can get better treatment! What were these cops thinking? Were they thinking?

    Law enforcement purports to protect us from wrongdoing and frequently does, but this level of irrationality by government officials is just unnerving. I mean, what kind of judge signed the warrants that (I presume) were presented during these raids? Whoever he (or she) was ought to turn in his (or her) robes immediately, and go work in a computer store for a few months and learn a few useful facts before returning to the bench. I would further venture to guess that there are many judges who would benefit from such training. My apologies to any judges in the Slashdot audience, but considering how many poor technology decisions I've seen handed down by the Judiciary lately I feel justified in my opinion. It is no longer enough to simply understand the Law: one must have a good grasp of scientific and engineering principles as well, and a basic understanding of such terms as "bandwidth" probably wouldn't hurt!

    The sad truth is that merely being accused of a crime in this country is punitive in and of itself. The sadder truth is the increasing number of individuals and corporations who abuse that fact for fun, profit, or as a means of intimidation. This reminds me of some older cases involving the Bell System where publicly-available documents that were accessed by crackers were arbitrarily valued at tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars. This was done solely and deliberately to exceed legal minimums on financial damage to enable law enforcement to take action. This kind of behavior is unethical as hell, and should be illegal in and of itself, if it isn't already.

    And I'll further say this: the rest of the nation's cable companies had better start distancing themselves from the Buckeye debacle. If they're smart, they'll indemnify their users from such actions, and limit their own recourse to termination of services, in writing. For most people, broadband is an expensive luxury, yet one that most have felt safe in using (viruses, trojans, hackers and spyware notwithstanding.) At least, we weren't afraid of the service provider itself.

    If the public perception of broadband shifts to one of fear and anxiety (we're already well-past loathing) users will simply put that disposable income into some other avenue of entertainment. If that comes to pass they won't need to worry about bandwidth caps: they'll be out of business, and then were would I get my MP3s?

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    1. Re:Uncapping and the Law by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      One would have every right to expect the cops to have at least asked for some evidence that an actual crime was committed!

      If I walk up to you on an empty street and punch you in the face, then run away, are you going to call for the police to pursue me? After all, there's no evidence that I committed a crime, except your word. In fact, there's no evidence that a crime was committed at all -- you could have gotten that bruised jaw some other way.

      Gang-bangers that shoot people dead in the street can get better treatment!

      OH, BULLSHIT! Show me a case where a murderer plead guilty and got away with just a fine and community service, or else your hyperbole is as groundless and irrational as you think the police and judicial actions seem to be.

      considering how many poor technology decisions I've seen handed down by the Judiciary lately I feel justified in my opinion.

      Maybe you should stop using Slashdot as a primary source for legal news. In fact, maybe you shouldn't read the news at all -- do you think that the 20 times where a judicial decision is technically sound gets anywhere near as much coverage as the one time it's shaky?

      It is no longer enough to simply understand the Law: one must have a good grasp of scientific and engineering principles as well

      Judges might have to preside over a malpractice suit someday, so better make it mandatory for judges to have gone through medical school. Oh, and they should be licensed auto mechanics, airline pilots, and accountants too. Never know when they might need to be experts in THOSE fields, too. And we probably ought to make them kill a guy so they'll have the expertise required to preside over a murder trial, yeah.

      The sad truth is that merely being accused of a crime in this country is punitive in and of itself.

      The sad truth is that this is and has been true of every culture in human history. It's not a defect of the American legal system, it's a defect of Human Nature.

    2. Re:Uncapping and the Law by Wilk4 · · Score: 1
      good points. that story stuck out to me more than the rest in this slashback and I was surprised that so few were commenting on it.

      If I were in that area, I'd certainly be calling the ISP or boycotting them based on such behavior. And writing letters to the FBI and representative about such poor law enforcement responses.

      You'd think the ISP would be better off to say, "ok, you had it uncapped for X hours/days/weeks. We normally charge Y dollars / hour/day/week, so you get an additional charge of X * Y for the extra bandwidth you used, + a fine of $Z. (all of this specified ahead of time in the contract) Calling the FBI to raid is nuts.

      Question: if the limit for the FBI to come in is $250,000 then how can it count to consider 23 separate, unrelated people times X dollars to make that amount? Shouldn't each case be considered separately? If each is estimated at $11,000 'damage' (which seems very high), then shouldn't that number be compared to the 250k limit? What legal justification is there to group them together? (somebody has a buddy at the FBI I think)

      Lastly, why is it that computer "crimes", even minor ones, so often end up with so much gear being confiscated, even unrelated gear? Is this really legal? How much luck do people have in getting their data and computers back? It seems like un-due process to take the means for someone's work without better recourse, particularly for such a minor 'crime' as this.

    3. Re:Uncapping and the Law by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      If I walk up to you on an empty street and punch you in the face, then run away, are you going to call for the police to pursue me? After all, there's no evidence that I committed a crime, except your word. In fact, there's no evidence that a crime was committed at all -- you could have gotten that bruised jaw some other way.

      I don't know what idea you're trying to support with that example, but the puncher in your example would most assuredly get away scott free, and the punchee would be out of luck... unless there were witnesses. So your example supports the parent's argument. The burden of proof is on the accuser.

      Also, your analogy would be more accurate if the pursued puncher in your example were strip searched and his clothes not returned.

    4. Re:Uncapping and the Law by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      The sad truth is that this is and has been true of every culture in human history. It's not a defect of the American legal system, it's a defect of Human Nature.

      Partially true. Yes, other nations exhibit similar problems, if not worse ones, BUT this is very much a defect of the modern American justice system. I use the term "justice" very loosely in this context. Much of what the Founding Fathers agonized over when creating the basis of our legal system involved this very issue: how do we create a legal and governmental system that prevents the worst of your "Human Nature" from rearing its ugly head? How do we place reasonable limits on what the government can do to its citizens, and how do we prevent a mere accusation from becoming a punishment? It was, in fact, the history of a number of other nations (England and France, for example) that drew them to believe that our Constitution was necessary, and what they created was unique in the history of the planet. Why? Because, from the perspective of personal freedom, they wanted us to be better than the rest!

      You mention that other cultures also treat their civilians poorly in this regard. Who the hell cares? This is America, the good old U.S. of A. It is not China or some South American drug fiefdom. Furthermore, it is simply NOT okay for our Law to strip us of our remaining civil rights, outright steal funds and property (you may use the more official-sounding "search and seizure" or "confiscation" if it makes you feel better) and cause significant injury to the lives of our fellow citizens just because a corporate drone says so. That, my friend, is truly bullshit, with a capital "B". And if foolish people continue to accept that kind of behavior by saying "Hey, it's okay ... other governments do it" then you are denying your heritage and denying what it means to be an American (presuming that you are.) You probably would have been very happy in Salem, Massachussetts, once upon a time.

      And I stand by my remarks concerning the Judiciary. You are entitled to disagree (fortunately, as a presumed American you have that right. For the moment.) Decisions made, and precedents set, regarding technological and scientific matters are of far greater importance to society as a whole than the disposition of a single murderer (even if said murderer is an auto mechanic, airline pilot, and accountant all rolled into one.) As a matter of fact, our entire economy and the quality of life of millions of people depend upon the character of those decisions. Consequently I really don't believe it is unreasonable to require our judges (and politicians) to have at least a basic understanding of those issues. An informed decision is almost always a better decision.

      ... or else your hyperbole is as groundless and irrational as you think the police and judicial actions seem to be.

      Their actions were irrational, and I believe the original article summed that up nicely. You've entirely missed the point, which is that the "justice" system should never have subjected these individuals to the such treatment in the first place. That is WRONG, and there are supposed to be safeguards in place to prevent this kind of nonsense from occurring. They failed miserably in this case, the result was shameful, and is one that should be of concern to all of us.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    5. Re:Uncapping and the Law by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      If I were in that area, I'd certainly be calling the ISP or boycotting them based on such behavior. And writing letters to the FBI and representative about such poor law enforcement responses.

      Me too. Looks like they haven't learned much since Waco.

      Question: if the limit for the FBI to come in is $250,000 then how can it count to consider 23 separate, unrelated people times X dollars to make that amount? Shouldn't each case be considered separately? If each is estimated at $11,000 'damage' (which seems very high), then shouldn't that number be compared to the 250k limit? What legal justification is there to group them together? (somebody has a buddy at the FBI I think)

      You know, that's a very interesting question, and it hadn't occurred to me. I really don't have any idea what the specific rules are in such cases, but it certainly seems unreasonable. Whatever the rules, I suspect they don't operate in our favor.

      Lastly, why is it that computer "crimes", even minor ones, so often end up with so much gear being confiscated, even unrelated gear? Is this really legal? How much luck do people have in getting their data and computers back? It seems like un-due process to take the means for someone's work without better recourse, particularly for such a minor 'crime' as this.

      Well, there have been a number of high-profile seizures over the years: one of the big ones was the Steve Jackson Games case ... this was back in the pre-Internet Bulletin Board days. Someone posted something questionable on SJG's BBS, the Secret Service got wind of it and raided the place, taking everything they could get their hands on. I don't know when "smash and grab" became an official law enforcement policy, I guess the idea is to take everything and look for incriminating evidence later. Somehow I think that runs afoul of a number of rulings regarding illegal search and seizure, since it opens up so much potential for abuse.

      It was ironic that in the one Buckeye case they left the computer which had the actual uncapping software on it. Just makes my point that those guys are only marginally competent at fighting "cybercrime." Actually, part of the problem is that law enforcement officials aren't properly trained for this kind of thing, and thus typically accept the word of the supposed "victim". There have been many, many cases such as this. One fellow was poking around a major newspaper's Web site and noticed that he could see some things that he didn't think he should be able to. He called up the CIO of the paper to let him know about it, and the bastard brought in the FBI and had this Good Samaritan brought up on charges.

      I think the problem has to do more with judgment than anything else. As I pointed out to a previous poster, an informed decision is generally a better one, but unfortunately, in potential cybercrime situations cops are rarely well-informed. Consequently, the tendency is to treat any alleged infraction as serious. This is because they simply don't know enough to decide whether it is something relatively minor like the Buckeye uncappers, or something more serious like industrial espionage or malicious hacking. And victims don't help matters one bit by overplaying their hands, such as Buckeye's technology officer did. And referring to my previous posts, without proper oversight of some kind, this problem is only going to get worse with time.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    6. Re:Uncapping and the Law by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Judges might have to preside over a malpractice suit someday, so better make it mandatory for judges to have gone through medical school. Oh, and they should be licensed auto mechanics, airline pilots, and accountants too. Never know when they might need to be experts in THOSE fields, too. And we probably ought to make them kill a guy so they'll have the expertise required to preside over a murder trial, yeah.

      And let me add that, while I don't expect judges to be experts in every field of human knowledge, I certainly do expect them to know their limitations. It really wouldn't have been unreasonable for the judge in the case to have done a little research before signing on the dotted line, since it is a judge's responsibility to refuse to sign baseless warrants. That is, in fact, the very reason why a judge's approval is required! Had that judge done his job, a lot of needless suffering would have been avoided. And if the warrants were served without the proper authorization then they were illegal and the officers responsible should be up on charges and the victims compensated.

      According to your logic, there really is little point in having the judiciary in the loop because they can't be expected to know everything, and are therefore useless for filtering out bad warrants. Which is absolute balderdash. Our taxes pay to provide them with research staff so that they can make informed decisions even on topics of which they know nothing.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  40. An actual reply from the law firm by the_illuminatus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I emailed the law firm involved, and was stunned to actually get an answer:

    The NXDOMAIN issue is part of the case as well - in Federal Court we have
    mere "notice" pleading - frankly we could have simply said "they broke the
    internet and we want the Court to fix it" and that would have been enough to
    get the case started...Slashdot rocks and I do read the postings ;-)

    Ira

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Chris Daniel"
    To:
    Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 6:50 PM
    Subject: Verisign Case

    > It appears you are attempting to sue Verisgn (we applaud you at Slashdot) but are suing them for something completely unrelated: a 404 error. The error that should be discussed is the NXDOMAIN error!

    > Thank you, and best of luck with nailing the bastards.

    --
    knee-jerk? check. post? check. okay, time to read the article.
    1. Re:An actual reply from the law firm by satanami69 · · Score: 1

      attempting to sue Verisgn (we applaud you at Slashdot)

      Normally I don't do the spelling Nazi thing, but I want to hope that you retyped the Original Message, and didn't include a spelling error in an email. On Slashdot, it's forgivable, but email has spell-check. Otherwise, leave off the parenthetical.

      --
      I really hate Dan Patrick.
    2. Re:An actual reply from the law firm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      It's a joke. Try going to verisgn.com. ha ha.

    3. Re:An actual reply from the law firm by You're+All+Wrong · · Score: 1

      "email has spell-check"

      You're nearly as confused as the 404/NXDOMAIN guys.

      Oh, I get it - _your_ e-mail client has a spelling checker, therefore _everyone's_ e-mail client must ipso facto have a spelling checker.

      YAW.

      --
      Your head of state is a corrupt weasel, I hope you're happy.
  41. urk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The link fixed itself a couple of hours after my posting. I guess it's offtopic now -- but that was definitely weird. Sorry for the confusion.
    -AEton posting AC to avoid +1

  42. IIXIIXV? by bahamat · · Score: 1

    Did I miss something?

    I assume that this is suposed to be Roman numerals, but it's not a valid numeric value. I suppose most closely translated it would be "8 8 5" or "8 and 8 and 5". But that doesn't make very much sense.

    If we're suposed to add these values together that would make arabic numerals 29, or XXIX in roman.
    Maybe he means "eight hundred and eighty-five" bot correctly rendered in Roman is DCCCLXXXV.

    Maybe I should just pronounce it as is...eekseeksev, but that sound doesn't homonymistic to any other numeric words that I know.

    Is this an inside joke that I missed? Or does somebody need a refresher course on Roman numerals?

    1. Re:IIXIIXV? by Michael+Hunt · · Score: 1

      The only correct interpretation is 2, 12, 15.
      8, 8, 5 doesn't work as IIX is NOT 8, anymore than IIV is 3. You can have a maximum of ONE lesser value before a greater value to decrement it, for example CM (900), XL (40), etc.

      II XII XV works. IIX IIX V doesn't.

    2. Re:IIXIIXV? by DeathoRatz · · Score: 1

      Hmm, yep you missed it horribly. EG Windows 2000 Sevice Packs 348723643874b. Same kinda joke just in Romans.

    3. Re:IIXIIXV? by Monsieur_F · · Score: 1

      Your interpretation is not the only correct one. Other correct interpretations :
      I I X I I X V : 1 1 10 1 1 10 5
      I I X I I XV : 1 1 10 1 1 15
      I I X I IX V : 1 1 10 1 9 5
      I I X II X V : 1 1 10 2 10 5
      I I X II XV : 1 1 10 2 15
      now that's tiring... I should find an algo to get them all, exhaustively :)

      --
      McCartney fans pay bus tickets. [...] Lennon fans too, with discretion.
  43. Bandwidth and how it's sold... by syukton · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The thing that gets me is that broadband providers never have a minimum speed that they guarantee. If they do, it's something extremely small; ie, Earthlink guarantees 2400bps on its DSL service. However they usually do have a maximum speed which, if exceeded, they'll take notice. The double standard amuses me, "If we're giving the customer piss poor service we don't care but if they're getting really good connection speeds we do." Hmmm...

    --
    Reinvent the wheel only at either a lower cost, greater effectiveness, or your own personal enrichment and satisfaction.
  44. Re: 11.56 Petabyes by araemo · · Score: 1

    It's not called a 'bug database', it's called a 'Manual' or "knowledge base" or "White paper".. by documenting them, bugs are turned into features.

  45. Re:Answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... and you are crunchy, and taste good with ketchup.

  46. vote with your dollars and your clicks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah! Stop using yahoo because they had the gall to sell an ad-server and web-search engine to verisign!

    Good thinking.

    How is yahoo to blame for what verisign uses their technology for? Are all software companies supposed to check what their software will be used for before they sell it?

  47. Re: pictures from the update procedure by Kris_J · · Score: 1
    The Shift Key: It's not just for punctuation anymore.

    I know yours works because of the brackets, try it with some letters too.

  48. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c'mon moderators! Mod this guy up, he put some work into it, and he's got *good* info! (Tosses his 3 non-existant AC mod points on top of this one.)

  49. I should hate sitefinder...... by fusker · · Score: 1


    but it's sending me traffic. For free. Don't get me wrong, I hate NetSol as much as anyone who reserved domains back when they were the only game in town, charged $100, and left you on hold for two hours. And the sitefinder thing is just one more attempt to exploit a monopoly at the expense of would be competitors. But then while I was watching the web logs roll by for my site I spotted a refer from "sitefinder.verisign.com...". Sure enough, when I ran my log analysis, I've gotten 200+ visits from their search engine.

    Now if they just send me another 999,800 more I'll consider myself paid back for my 3 years forced interaction with them.

    1. Re:I should hate sitefinder...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dude, thats probably people doing a typo and then clicking on the link. Probably the same people that would have corrected the mistake manually instead of clicking the link.

  50. Is this an intellectual leap? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The average reader can't immediately make the intellectual leaps some of these two-line jokes require. :(

    There are a few leaps which aren't too hard:

    1. [Insert SCO thought process here]
    2. ???
    3. Profit.
    ____________________

    I for one welcome our [insert evil organization here] overlords....
    ____________________

    In Soviet Russia.....
    ____________________

    "All your [insert prized possession here] are belong to us."
    ____________________

    [insert CowboyNeal one-liner for Poll]

  51. Absolutely brilliant by Quietti · · Score: 1

    A definite gem. Thank you! :)

    --
    Software is not supposed to be about how to work around a useability issue. - Ken Barber
  52. MOD UP PARENT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MOD UP PARENT

  53. Re:"MPAA Scratches Oscar Screeners" - Its Ok! Real by zerocool^ · · Score: 1

    The Academy members will just download the movies from the internet instead!


    Dude, no they won't! Where do you think we got the internet rips?!?

    Seriously, that's how I got my copy of Two Towers before I went out and bought it. Someone ripped the DVD that was given to one of the academy reviewers. Then, instead of compressing it, they put it on the internet as 6 gigs of raw DVD movie file. Weeeeeee! DVD burner, and bam, instant two towers.
    To be honest, I haven't bought it yet, but I'm planning on buying a boxed set. I refuse to purchase 2 copies of the same movie, so I always wait for special editions and boxed sets. Case in point, dogma DVD.

    ~Wx

    --
    sig?
  54. Um... by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 1

    When did it say in the article that indie studios had decided to ban screeners? It didn't.

    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."
  55. Re:verisgn by the_illuminatus · · Score: 1

    you're right, I sent them an email with a typo.

    Kill Me Now!

    --
    knee-jerk? check. post? check. okay, time to read the article.
  56. a *really* short movie... by Wilk4 · · Score: 1

    they didn't say what movie... maybe it's a *really* short movie... ;-)

  57. And don't forget their "sponsors" either... by WEFUNK · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wow, great job tracking down these e-mails. Also, don't forget to contact the companies actually paying for SiteFinder, especially if you or your business have a relationship with them. Here are a few of them (websites only, someone else can find the contacts). Let them know what they're association with VeriSign is contributing to (domain name hijacking, disruption of internet standards, interference with spam filters, etc.) and that you'll encourage others to avoid (boycott) their products where ever possible. Some might not care (the gambling sites, for instance), but some should probably know better (E-bay, Dell, Pixar, etc.), and I bet that most don't have a clue and probably think they're being "net savvy" by promoting their products this way (such as the upcoming movies "Veronica Guerin" and "Brother Bear").

    Let them know that what they're associated with is possibly illegal, is the subject of at least one class action lawsuit, and has some of the largest and active Internet communities and the Internet's governing body up in arms. And if they don't respond, you really should avoid their sites and services, miss their movie, or tell purchasing to avoid their computers as much as possible.

    Sponsored Results For: Travel
    1. www.expedia.com, 2. www.cheaptickets.com, 3. www.orbitz.com, 4. www.vacationstogo.com, 5. www.travelweb.com, 6. tourvacationstogo.com, 7. www.americawestvacations.com, 8. www.hotwire.com, 9. www.priceline.com, 10. www.sidestep.com

    Sponsored Results For: Entertainment
    1. www.entertainment.com, 2. www.mp3grandcentral.net, 3. www.bookingentertainment.com, 4. www.eyeondeals.com, 5. www.entertainment-link.com, 6. www.disney.com, 7. www.applause-tickets.com, 8. www.veronicaguerin.com, 9. www.talentmatch.com, 10. www.findingnemo.com

    Sponsored Results For: Computers
    1. www.dell4me.com, 2. officialseasilver.com, 3. www.gateway.com, 4. www.solutionsplus2000.com, 5. store.microexchange.com, 6. www.micropro.com, 7. www.staples.com, 8. www.ammicro.com, 9. www.northhillsolutions.com, 10. shopper.cnet.com

    Sponsored Results For: Investing
    1. www.harrisdirect.com, 2. www.tdwaterhouse.com, 3. www.brownco-apply.com, 4. www.ameritrade.com, 5. www.ancofutures.com,6. www.sharebuilder.com, 7. www.mostchoice.com, 8. www.catranis.com, 9. www.usagold.net, 10. www.stockcharts.com

    Sponsored Results For: Autos
    1. autos.yahoo.com, 2. www.edmunds.com, 3. www.buyingadvice.com, 4. www.pricequotes.com, 5. www.leasetrading.com, 6. www.carbuyingtips.com, 7. www.automotive.com, 8. www.autoweb.com, 9. www.invoicedealers.com, 10. www.carsdirect.com

    Sponsored Results For: Shopping
    1. www.metareward.com, 2. shopacrosstexas.com, 3. www.officedepot.com, 4. www.iamasmartcustomer.com, 5. www.paulfredrick.com, 6. 247malls.com, 7. www.homecenter.com, 8. coins.to, 9. www.watkinsonline.com, 10. www.ebay.com

    Sponsored Results For: Gifts
    1. www.starnamer.net, 2. www.porta-bote.com, 3. www.winecountrygifts.com, 4. www.aspinaloflondon.com, 5. www.spawish.com, 6. www.hickoryfarms.com, 7. www.smokes-spirits.com, 8. www.pipeshop.com, 9. www.bbtoystore.com, 10. www.hersheygifts.com

    Sponsored Results For: Insurance
    1. www.4-amfam.com, 2. www.esurance.com, 3. www.quotescout.com, 4. www.21st.com, 5. www.gmac123.com, 6. www.progressive.com, 7. www.mostchoice.com, 8. www.allquotesinsurance.com, 9. www.insuranceonly.net, 10. www.westernmutual.com

    Sponsored Results For: Small Business
    1. www.paypal.com, 2. landingstrip.dell.com, 3. www.legalzoom.com, 4. www.mastercardbusiness.com, 5. www.smb.compaq.com,6. www.onlinesmc.com, 7. www.sohobusinesstools.com, 8. www.budgetblinds.com, 9. www.cashnow.com, 10. quantumfunding.com

    Sponsored Results For: Gambling
    1. www.goldenpalace.com, 2. www.desertdollarcasino.com, 3. www.vegaspalmscasino.com, 4. www.30topcasinos.com, 5. www.omnicasino.com, 6. www.sportsinteraction.com, 7. www.casinochecklist.com, 8. www.allstar.com, 9. www.luckynuggget.com, 10. www.casino4gamble.com

    --
    My next sig will be ready soon, but friends can beat the rush!
  58. Verisign madness. by rew · · Score: 1

    Until today, for me the wildcard in .com wasn't much trouble. Everybody was making a lot of noise about basically nothing.

    However, today I mistyped a domainname by one character. I then get redirected to some stupid sitefinder. I realize my mistake and mouse over to the addressbar to correct that single character typo. Not so. I Have to retype the whole thing.

    This annoys me to no end. Crash verisign, crash!

    Roger.

  59. I know where you live. by pr0ntab · · Score: 1

    And I have signed you up for an embarassing number of pornographic magazines and movie clubs.

    I do this so to help you fulfill your dreamland fantasy of being a playa.

    --
    Fuck Beta. Fuck Dice
  60. uncappers story by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 0

    Wow, I had missed the original story on the cable modem uncappers. I used to live in Toledo, and I know how horribly the Block family runs things. The Toledo Blade newspaper was especially bad. The thing that blows me away about that uncapping case was how they got the FBI called in. The FBI policy is (and rightly so) that they don't get involved with cases like that...unless the amount of the theft is over $250,000. It infuriates me how they guy from Buckeye cable "calculated" :P the amount of theft each person stole, and Hey! Whaddaya know? It came out to just over $250,000 so they could call in the federal whoopin' stick. That is a total load of BS. The only "calculation" they did was $250,000 / 23 uncappers = "Yeah, they must have stolen about this much bandwidth." There's no way bandwidth is that expensive. I am totally supporting that Buckeye Cable should have cut their service and/or brought some kind of civil case fine against them, but confiscating their own stuff through a false statement of damage amount is inexcusable.

    --
    We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
  61. Re:"MPAA Scratches Oscar Screeners" - Its Ok! Real by Snaller · · Score: 1

    No great sense of humour, eh? *g*

    How do you find out what is happening in the White House? You bug the Russian Amabassy ;)

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating