Slashdot Mirror
Conficker Worm Strike Reports Start Rolling In
Nieriko writes "Reports are trickling in about the impact from the Conficker worm, as infected systems passed zero hour at midnight and began downloading additional malicious components. Here are a couple of the more notable incidents caused by Conficker so far, according to published reports: — '... shortly after midnight local time, an ATM in the capital city of Reykjavik began spewing 100-Krona notes. ... A nuclear missile installation near Elmendorf Air force Base outside of Anchorage, Alaska briefly went on a full-scale military alert after technicians manning the bunker suspected that several of their control systems were infected with Conficker.'"
It's so hard to tell which ones are too stupid to be true and so stupid they probably are true.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
I hope so, otherwise this is Wargames meets reality. If this is a joke, I didn't laugh because I've been watching this ConFlickr worm closely ever since seeing it in action.
Whoever set this virus up was smart to have things happen on April 1st. I never know if these reports are real or someone is making a joke.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
Would be if Conficker does nothing after all the man-hours spent preparing for it.
Moderation in All Things... Especially Moderation - gurutc
Can slashdot PLEASE implement a "-1 Missed the April Fool's Day Joke" Moderation option?
Whether or not there is some sort of god, I'm not supposed to say/god is a word and the argument ends there-Smog
All may have agendas (not necessarily true), but some are more biased than others (yes, Fox News fits in that category).
university-elitist brainwashing...
Most people call that "learning".
The degree of bias from Fox/CNN/MSNBC is subjectively scored based on how much you agree with whatever slop they're dishing out.
In other words, if you believe MSNBC has no bias, then you will also believe that Fox has an extreme bias. The reverse is also true.
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
Maybe because time and time again Fox News proves to not have any journalistic integrity. They are the station that have whack jobs like Jack Thompson on all the time since he is an "expert" on video game violence. They only present one side. I mean, Obama addressed the nation and you had Bill O'Reily critiquing it. He isn't a journalist at all, just someone pushing his agenda (somewhat hypocritically). CNN had a team of people discussing what Obama talked about on both sides of the aisle. But then again, CNN has conservative air heads like Campbell Brown on. They also used to have commentaries from Glenn Beck. If you think Fox News is anything but a tool to push an agenda, then you really aren't paying attention. It is not news and I wish there was some way to sue them so they have to take that out of their name until they actually meet some basic journalistic standards.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
I never got the whole elitist thing. So Obama is an elitist because he went to a good school and got good grades? I'd love to be an elitist then. How was McCain not an elite with his war hero background and millions of dollars? Do we want sub-elite people running the country? I don't really think the conservatives thought this insult through very well.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
Learning is the mental absorption and retention of information. Whether the information you learned is true or false is something else again, and I think that's the point he was making. Some universities may, in fact, be causing their students to learn false information. Brainwashing is a form of learning too.
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it.
There are two parts to the Fox News Channel: the journalism part and the editorial part. The journalism part is actually pretty "fair and balanced," and that's the part most people refer to when they talk about media bias. Unfortunately, that part comes on while no one is watching.
The editorial part is unabashedly conservative, but even they do a better job than the other channels in at least having someone there to provide token opposition. Their bias is very evident because they provide the contrast right there. Other channels with less obvious bias usually will at best tell you the other side's position in their own words.
This space intentionally left blank.
So conservatives would be okay with a gay couple deciding to get married? Or with decriminalizing marijuana? Or legalizing liquor sales on sundays? What makes the conservatives any less "elitist" for thinking that they can make better decisions for other people? I shouldn't be barred from buying a bottle of wine on Sunday because it might upset a hyper conservative Christian. Or if I was gay, I shouldn't be barred from entering into a simple legally binding contract with another consenting adult who happened to be the same sex. I'd say it's pretty damned "elitist" to make those decisions based on dogmatic values or personal prejudices.
Why only two?