I definitely agree. Linux tends to have a more knowledgeable user base that also understands the implications of poor security.
I also know that Microsoft's constant building executable functionality into every file type imaginable was just asking to be exploited over and over and over.
All I was saying was that just running Linux doesn't mean you haven't been rooted or cracked.
I think a lot of that kind of trouble can be prevented, though.
Patches are just a way of life. If you don't patch, you can end up with a well-known vulnerability that also has attack code available in the wild.
Also, if you run something like Fedora on a production system, you need to accept and upgrade on the same short schedule since Fedora releases aren't maintained for nearly as long as the full Red Hat releases.
You don't say how long your system was cracked, but if it was for a while and you weren't checking logs and such, running something like tripwire and cfengine, or even something as simple as using strong passwords, it might not really be Linux's fault. You don't provide details of the attack so there is no way for us to know.
I agree. I think that overall Linux is much more secure than Windows. The numbers of bug fixes may be more for Linux (I don't know) but that could also be because people are acting fast to make Linux the best it can be.
Also, it now does come with default deny/drop on its firewall (at least the distros I'm familiar with but I would bet all), is basically just more secure due to that developer mindset you mention, and the people running it tend to be a little more technically savvy and probably don't just plug their Linux box right into their cable or DSL modem.
I wasn't trying to say that Linux was just as insecure as Windows. I was just saying that there have been exploits for Linux too, you can misconfigure it, open ports, and run vulnerable services, and people that think just running Linux makes them impervious to attack could end up with a surprise.
12 volts is not enough to break down skin resistance and pump enough current through the human body to cause harm in most circumstances.
I have heard a couple of stories where people have experimented with 12 volts and had very unfortunate results, though:
Some guy jump starting a car that remembered the fun you can have with a 9 volt battery by touching it to your tongue, and touched the jumper cables to his tongue. His tongue exploded. A 9 volt battery has a lot of internal resistance and can't deliver much current through a nice, salty, wet tongue that has very little resistance. A car battery, however, has very little internal resistance and probably dumped hundreds of amps through the guy's tongue.
And another story about some frat guys having fun with a car battery, jumper cables, and two buckets of salt water. They used the salt water to complete a circuit with their forearms and hands and would see how long they could each "take it" with whatever pain or muscle contractions it caused in spite of the skin resistance (which was drastically lowered by immersing their hands and arms into the salt water).
Eventually one of them suffered a heart attack when his heart couldn't take the stress anymore, and he died.
It's not statistics. It's how much current and what waveform across the heart that kills people. It's why sweaty people are much more subject to electrocution than people with dry skin. Or why people wading in water in their flooded basements can drop like a brick if they touch the wrong thing but others, not standing in water, can touch a live circuit and just feel a tingle.
Path through the body will also affect how likely someone is to die. A voltage across the tongue shouldn't directly affect the heart at all. Complete a circuit with your hands and that puts the current directly across the chest. Or complete through a hand and foot and you also are sending current across the chest.
It's also why DC voltage is less likely to interfere with the heart rhythm than AC that comes pretty close to the timing of the heartbeat itself.
There is a very good reason to make this kind of change.
Power is current times voltage (P = I x E)
But power is also current squared times resistance (P = I^2 x R)
Whatever current your load draws sees all the resistance in the wires and connections between it and the power source.
If you double the voltage, the current required to provide some level of power at the load gets cut in half.
By cutting the current in half, you decrease the amount of power wasted as heat in all the connective wiring by a factor of four since power is current squared times resistance. The resistance in the circuit is basically fixed and is set by the wire gauge, the length of the run, the quality of the connections, etc.
So by doubling the voltage, you can reduce parasitic losses in wiring by a factor of four. That's why.
And as has already been pointed out, provided the wiring is rated for the voltage, by decreasing the amount of current for a given power level, it's like getting a wiring upgrade for your house. The same wiring that could handle a 15 or 20 amp circuit (~1500 to ~2000 watts) can now handle twice that power (~3000 to ~4000 watts).
The both of you should probably add "that you know of".
The reality is that Linux boxes are highly prized. Their owners frequently have high speed connections and Linux can do all sorts of fun things.
Linux isn't perfect. There have been any number of security issues that would allow a knowledgeable hacker easy access. It all depends on if you kept your systems up to date and patched, didn't set up and allow unnecessary services, had a good firewall policy with a default deny/drop stance, etc.
Linux comes out of the box now pretty secure but it hasn't always. And individual user habits can also compromise a system. Add to that the fact that one of the big ways into a system now is through add-on things like flash and such, and the knowledge that there have been kernel bugs that let user applications get root with a single command (things like vmsplice), and there is a possibility that your Linux boxes are rooted and you just don't know it.
For the record, I run Linux almost exclusively and am no fan of Windows. But people need to understand that just running Linux is not a guarantee of safety. I'm also not questioning your capabilities. It's just that blanket statements about Linux security should probably be qualified.
Flight Simulator supports the TrackIR head tracking system. It's pretty amazing all set up in the 3-D cockpits to be able to look around just by turning/tilting your head a little.
It takes a little getting used to, but being able to look up and to the right or left as you bank in on final to line up with the runway is a thrill and also extremely useful and natural. I've also flown full-up military sims with full motion, and Microsoft Flight Simulator with Track-IR for head tracking really doesn't suck even compared to the top-end real sims.
And for the person above that noted that Windows 7 will run MSFS, WiiVault is right. There is no need for me to upgrade since Microsoft won't likely be coming out with any more versions of Flight Simulator.
But I guess it's time to start checking out FlightGear and seeing what it's like....
Not for the 9/11 hijackers. They used Microsoft Flight Simulator to practice navigating by landmarks and flying the jets to their targets.
The hijackers didn't care about takeoffs or landings and instead cared only about the flying. It's what raised suspicions at The Airmen in Norman, OK and caused them to contact the FBI.
If they could have only been put in contact with the CIA who knew that bin Laden was planning an attack using airliners, 9/11 could possibly have been prevented. But that's a completely different thread... (see also the August 6 2001 PDB)
For better or worse, that will mean basically starting from scratch. Doing that with a new team would mean a huge step backwards and/or really buggy for some time.
I tend to think that this effectively ends Microsoft Flight Simulator.
Even if they sell the sim to another company, without the people familiar with the code and why things were done the way they were, it's again like starting over.
If MS does decide to resurrect Flight Simulator at some time in the future, it would most likely have few new features but lots of new bugs.
Microsoft Flight Simulator is the ONLY reason I still keep an XP partition on one of my computers.
If I really need to run Microsoft Office, I do that using CodeWeaver's Crossover Office under Linux.
Microsoft's decision to drop Flight Simulator means that I won't have to even consider Windows 7. I'll just disconnect from my network whenever I want to fly so there is no risk to an abandoned XP partition.
I'm one of those that has bought every copy of Flight Simulator even before Microsoft bought it from Bruce Artwick and SubLogic. I flew it when it was a wire frame grid with the profile mountain range to the north. I even wrote a shareware application for it that still can be found in various software repositories on the web. It has evolved into an amazing platform and some enthusiasts have built amazing motion cockpits and even full simulations of jet airliner cockpits.
I also thought every release of Flight Simulator was profitable. For all of Microsoft's other ills, Flight Simulator has been one of the more popular offerings that people preordered, snapped up on release day, etc. there were flawed releases, but Microsoft would release updates that fixed them.
Microsoft Flight Simulator was really a flagship product for them. I don't know what they are thinking. If any of the team read this, I really appreciate all of your fantastic work over the years. You people made magic.
It really has been an amazing product and extremely useful. I know lots of real pilots that use it to stay sharp and/or used it to make their training more effective. I can count myself among the ones who had a flight instructor get frustrated that I was flying more by instruments and less by seat of the pants, doing coordinated procedure turns, holding heading and altitude first time out.
But I wouldn't be surprised if the Linux flight simulators (X-Plane and FlightGear) pick up all the slack. The hard core people will go nuts putting in the hooks for realistic cockpits, added inputs, etc.
It's an end of an era. For me it totally cuts the cord to Redmond, Gates, and Allen.
I'll sure miss updates to Flight Simulator but in a way am kind of relieved that I will never buy another copy of Windows again.
I agree completely. I have one copy of XP on a computer now that is only used to support Flight Simulator.
For everything else, including Microsoft Office, I use Linux. Any Windows software that I need runs fine under Codeweaver's Crossover Office. Even at that, I use OpenOffice almost exclusively now.
I don't understand why anyone bothers with Microsoft Windows any more. Linux is so wonderful now and does everything I need it too with the one exception of Flight Simulator. That's it.
Maybe the uptick in everything. Checked your logs recently?
I know they could be spoofed, but I used to get scanned constantly by various IPs in China. I doubt those are any kind of friendly port scans.
One nice thing, though. I recently updated my DSL modem's firmware which gave me the option to drop ICMP requests. Now that my IP address no longer pings, the port scans from China have stopped - or at least have for now.
There you go again, Mr. Slippery. Confusing them with actual numbers and not letting them gloss over the various consequences of a reactor accident.
Of course, if someone doesn't die immediately, then it can't be blamed on exposure, can it? I guess all the birth defects, mental illnesses, infant deaths in the Ukrane are due to sunspots - or maybe all that mercury that coal plants release.
Wrong-o, Anonymous. Some amount of enrichment is required. Reactors don't run on the natural abundance of the fissionable isotope.
You are confusing no enrichment with the modest amounts required to make a reactor work. The rub comes when you add lots of extra centrifuges (or whatever enrichment technology) so you can more efficiently run up the enrichment to weapons grade.
Don't confuse them with facts, Mr. Slippery. It's much more use to them if they can keep spreading their nuclear platitudes and assurances that the chances of a TMI, Chernobyl, Enrico Fermi, Windscale, Browns Ferry, or other accident are nonexistent - which as you so nicely point out is proven wrong by the fact that we have had these various accidents.
They also like to say that these various reactor designs are "bad" and that we would never build one like that now. Problem with that logic is at the time each was designed, it was thought to be "good" with adequate protections that made them "safe".
Funny how it's only after a major accident that a good design becomes a bad design.
Slashdot Mirror
I definitely agree. Linux tends to have a more knowledgeable user base that also understands the implications of poor security.
I also know that Microsoft's constant building executable functionality into every file type imaginable was just asking to be exploited over and over and over.
All I was saying was that just running Linux doesn't mean you haven't been rooted or cracked.
I think a lot of that kind of trouble can be prevented, though.
Patches are just a way of life. If you don't patch, you can end up with a well-known vulnerability that also has attack code available in the wild.
Also, if you run something like Fedora on a production system, you need to accept and upgrade on the same short schedule since Fedora releases aren't maintained for nearly as long as the full Red Hat releases.
You don't say how long your system was cracked, but if it was for a while and you weren't checking logs and such, running something like tripwire and cfengine, or even something as simple as using strong passwords, it might not really be Linux's fault. You don't provide details of the attack so there is no way for us to know.
I agree. I think that overall Linux is much more secure than Windows. The numbers of bug fixes may be more for Linux (I don't know) but that could also be because people are acting fast to make Linux the best it can be.
Also, it now does come with default deny/drop on its firewall (at least the distros I'm familiar with but I would bet all), is basically just more secure due to that developer mindset you mention, and the people running it tend to be a little more technically savvy and probably don't just plug their Linux box right into their cable or DSL modem.
I wasn't trying to say that Linux was just as insecure as Windows. I was just saying that there have been exploits for Linux too, you can misconfigure it, open ports, and run vulnerable services, and people that think just running Linux makes them impervious to attack could end up with a surprise.
12 volts is not enough to break down skin resistance and pump enough current through the human body to cause harm in most circumstances.
I have heard a couple of stories where people have experimented with 12 volts and had very unfortunate results, though:
Some guy jump starting a car that remembered the fun you can have with a 9 volt battery by touching it to your tongue, and touched the jumper cables to his tongue. His tongue exploded. A 9 volt battery has a lot of internal resistance and can't deliver much current through a nice, salty, wet tongue that has very little resistance. A car battery, however, has very little internal resistance and probably dumped hundreds of amps through the guy's tongue.
And another story about some frat guys having fun with a car battery, jumper cables, and two buckets of salt water. They used the salt water to complete a circuit with their forearms and hands and would see how long they could each "take it" with whatever pain or muscle contractions it caused in spite of the skin resistance (which was drastically lowered by immersing their hands and arms into the salt water).
Eventually one of them suffered a heart attack when his heart couldn't take the stress anymore, and he died.
It's not statistics. It's how much current and what waveform across the heart that kills people. It's why sweaty people are much more subject to electrocution than people with dry skin. Or why people wading in water in their flooded basements can drop like a brick if they touch the wrong thing but others, not standing in water, can touch a live circuit and just feel a tingle.
Path through the body will also affect how likely someone is to die. A voltage across the tongue shouldn't directly affect the heart at all. Complete a circuit with your hands and that puts the current directly across the chest. Or complete through a hand and foot and you also are sending current across the chest.
It's also why DC voltage is less likely to interfere with the heart rhythm than AC that comes pretty close to the timing of the heartbeat itself.
There is a very good reason to make this kind of change.
Power is current times voltage (P = I x E)
But power is also current squared times resistance (P = I^2 x R)
Whatever current your load draws sees all the resistance in the wires and connections between it and the power source.
If you double the voltage, the current required to provide some level of power at the load gets cut in half.
By cutting the current in half, you decrease the amount of power wasted as heat in all the connective wiring by a factor of four since power is current squared times resistance. The resistance in the circuit is basically fixed and is set by the wire gauge, the length of the run, the quality of the connections, etc.
So by doubling the voltage, you can reduce parasitic losses in wiring by a factor of four. That's why.
And as has already been pointed out, provided the wiring is rated for the voltage, by decreasing the amount of current for a given power level, it's like getting a wiring upgrade for your house. The same wiring that could handle a 15 or 20 amp circuit (~1500 to ~2000 watts) can now handle twice that power (~3000 to ~4000 watts).
The both of you should probably add "that you know of".
The reality is that Linux boxes are highly prized. Their owners frequently have high speed connections and Linux can do all sorts of fun things.
Linux isn't perfect. There have been any number of security issues that would allow a knowledgeable hacker easy access. It all depends on if you kept your systems up to date and patched, didn't set up and allow unnecessary services, had a good firewall policy with a default deny/drop stance, etc.
Linux comes out of the box now pretty secure but it hasn't always. And individual user habits can also compromise a system. Add to that the fact that one of the big ways into a system now is through add-on things like flash and such, and the knowledge that there have been kernel bugs that let user applications get root with a single command (things like vmsplice), and there is a possibility that your Linux boxes are rooted and you just don't know it.
For the record, I run Linux almost exclusively and am no fan of Windows. But people need to understand that just running Linux is not a guarantee of safety. I'm also not questioning your capabilities. It's just that blanket statements about Linux security should probably be qualified.
Flight Simulator supports the TrackIR head tracking system. It's pretty amazing all set up in the 3-D cockpits to be able to look around just by turning/tilting your head a little.
It takes a little getting used to, but being able to look up and to the right or left as you bank in on final to line up with the runway is a thrill and also extremely useful and natural. I've also flown full-up military sims with full motion, and Microsoft Flight Simulator with Track-IR for head tracking really doesn't suck even compared to the top-end real sims.
And for the person above that noted that Windows 7 will run MSFS, WiiVault is right. There is no need for me to upgrade since Microsoft won't likely be coming out with any more versions of Flight Simulator.
But I guess it's time to start checking out FlightGear and seeing what it's like....
Not for the 9/11 hijackers. They used Microsoft Flight Simulator to practice navigating by landmarks and flying the jets to their targets.
The hijackers didn't care about takeoffs or landings and instead cared only about the flying. It's what raised suspicions at The Airmen in Norman, OK and caused them to contact the FBI.
If they could have only been put in contact with the CIA who knew that bin Laden was planning an attack using airliners, 9/11 could possibly have been prevented. But that's a completely different thread... (see also the August 6 2001 PDB)
For better or worse, that will mean basically starting from scratch. Doing that with a new team would mean a huge step backwards and/or really buggy for some time.
I tend to think that this effectively ends Microsoft Flight Simulator.
Even if they sell the sim to another company, without the people familiar with the code and why things were done the way they were, it's again like starting over.
If MS does decide to resurrect Flight Simulator at some time in the future, it would most likely have few new features but lots of new bugs.
Microsoft Flight Simulator is the ONLY reason I still keep an XP partition on one of my computers.
If I really need to run Microsoft Office, I do that using CodeWeaver's Crossover Office under Linux.
Microsoft's decision to drop Flight Simulator means that I won't have to even consider Windows 7. I'll just disconnect from my network whenever I want to fly so there is no risk to an abandoned XP partition.
I'm one of those that has bought every copy of Flight Simulator even before Microsoft bought it from Bruce Artwick and SubLogic. I flew it when it was a wire frame grid with the profile mountain range to the north. I even wrote a shareware application for it that still can be found in various software repositories on the web. It has evolved into an amazing platform and some enthusiasts have built amazing motion cockpits and even full simulations of jet airliner cockpits.
I also thought every release of Flight Simulator was profitable. For all of Microsoft's other ills, Flight Simulator has been one of the more popular offerings that people preordered, snapped up on release day, etc. there were flawed releases, but Microsoft would release updates that fixed them.
Microsoft Flight Simulator was really a flagship product for them. I don't know what they are thinking. If any of the team read this, I really appreciate all of your fantastic work over the years. You people made magic.
It really has been an amazing product and extremely useful. I know lots of real pilots that use it to stay sharp and/or used it to make their training more effective. I can count myself among the ones who had a flight instructor get frustrated that I was flying more by instruments and less by seat of the pants, doing coordinated procedure turns, holding heading and altitude first time out.
But I wouldn't be surprised if the Linux flight simulators (X-Plane and FlightGear) pick up all the slack. The hard core people will go nuts putting in the hooks for realistic cockpits, added inputs, etc.
It's an end of an era. For me it totally cuts the cord to Redmond, Gates, and Allen.
I'll sure miss updates to Flight Simulator but in a way am kind of relieved that I will never buy another copy of Windows again.
I don't know. Bill has always looked kind of gay to me. Maybe he likes the old stuff and gets turned on by the British accent?
Settle down, man. This is just another "Mojave" commercial.
Well, with a flat head that holds a couple of beers, there could be some other jobs for that robot... Maybe rename it Rosie... ;-)
At least with Linux I can opt for ext3 and other formats to avoid the link with Hans Reiser.
But this link to Scientology is just another reason to avoid Windows. At least in my opinion.
And a lot of people are switching to Macs.
Especially after they find out that they can run Windows on Macs now - even though many will never bother.
I agree completely. I have one copy of XP on a computer now that is only used to support Flight Simulator.
For everything else, including Microsoft Office, I use Linux. Any Windows software that I need runs fine under Codeweaver's Crossover Office. Even at that, I use OpenOffice almost exclusively now.
I don't understand why anyone bothers with Microsoft Windows any more. Linux is so wonderful now and does everything I need it too with the one exception of Flight Simulator. That's it.
I have a trash can that has a nice big Microsoft "Designed for Windows XP" compatibility badge on it.
;-)
Maybe the uptick in everything. Checked your logs recently?
I know they could be spoofed, but I used to get scanned constantly by various IPs in China. I doubt those are any kind of friendly port scans.
One nice thing, though. I recently updated my DSL modem's firmware which gave me the option to drop ICMP requests. Now that my IP address no longer pings, the port scans from China have stopped - or at least have for now.
Actually, what I can imagine is this thing phoning home and sending duplicate data and programs to its Chinese backdoor masters.
Ok, then MikeV would have to throw a chair at the OP.
;-)
All better now...
Butters? Is that you?
Because they are our advocates fer Freedom(TM) and Democracy(TM) and they are fightin' terra!
There you go again, Mr. Slippery. Confusing them with actual numbers and not letting them gloss over the various consequences of a reactor accident.
Of course, if someone doesn't die immediately, then it can't be blamed on exposure, can it? I guess all the birth defects, mental illnesses, infant deaths in the Ukrane are due to sunspots - or maybe all that mercury that coal plants release.
Wrong-o, Anonymous. Some amount of enrichment is required. Reactors don't run on the natural abundance of the fissionable isotope.
You are confusing no enrichment with the modest amounts required to make a reactor work. The rub comes when you add lots of extra centrifuges (or whatever enrichment technology) so you can more efficiently run up the enrichment to weapons grade.
Don't confuse them with facts, Mr. Slippery. It's much more use to them if they can keep spreading their nuclear platitudes and assurances that the chances of a TMI, Chernobyl, Enrico Fermi, Windscale, Browns Ferry, or other accident are nonexistent - which as you so nicely point out is proven wrong by the fact that we have had these various accidents.
They also like to say that these various reactor designs are "bad" and that we would never build one like that now. Problem with that logic is at the time each was designed, it was thought to be "good" with adequate protections that made them "safe".
Funny how it's only after a major accident that a good design becomes a bad design.