Just for the record: Most of Europe was with the protestors you mentioned before the invasion, forming (iirc) the largest international demonstration to date.
Also, around that date the general perception of the U.S. shifted quite a bit from "the land of the free" to "free^Haking warmongers".
Like where? If I want to quickly copy over a few files from machine a to b, I'll put them on a USB thumbdrive, even at a quarter of the possible bandwidth 50 MB won't take five seconds, so that works out pretty decently.
Ditto for peripherals, compatibility is king, bandwidth issues are so 1999.
If I need to copy big files, I'm not that dumb as to require a special overpowered bus, I'll just use one of those increasingly common eSata ports. The controller is on-board anyways and 3 Gbps without IEEE1394 overhead seems like more than 1.6 Gbps minus IEEE1394 overhead to me.
Also, don't forget about GbE. It's fast, doesn't require you to carry around hard drives and, in general, awesome.
While I generally despise any kind of "advanced" mail format, I'd still like italics or bold to be available. Using/plain-text/ _substitutions_ works, but it isn't quite the same.
That oughntn't be problematic, simply close the connection after the/[1-3]rd 550 (in a row)?/, there are extremely few legitimate cases for trying several recipients (mailing lists, perhaps) and most any correctly configured mail server will just re-connect and try with the remaining addresses.
Also, if you've got cpu cycles and bandwidth to spare: poison the spammer's database - after three 550s, invert 200 and 550 responses >:]
But I have seen 2.5" hard drives with only one USB connector, so they must have been drawing 1A peak on one port's supply line for the few hundred milliseconds spin up time.
Maybe, with some clever use of a capacitor, they just draw 500 mA for twice the few hundred milliseconds.
Flood control ahead of time is good news, makes you feel safe. The safer you feel, the less likely you are to buy into The Newest Threat. In extreme cases, you might even feel so safe to have an own opinion, differing in parts from the paper's opinion. And that, my friend, might lead to freedom and as we all know, Freedom is Slavery and slavery has been abolished in the U.S. and A. for quite some time now.
Hm, that makes me wonder: Slaves typically were black, just like Michael Jackson. If good news turns you into a slave, did MJs plastic surgeries consist mainly of bad news?
Caller ID is spoofed as easily as a MAC address.
Taking names and complaining about this Spit will work just as well as it does for spam. Not. Remember, it's happening on the internet, not POTS.
Collaborative blacklisting will be as difficult as it is for email since most Spitters will be zombies in large botnets.
(I completely forgot one factor: The U.S.' um.. "interesting" system of free calls.)
Unlike the local short-distance POTS (on which you tend to get harassed by robodialers as well as Hillary C.), your cell operator charges the operator of whomever's calling you a few (fractions of) cents per minute, so cells are very likely to be spared.
It's simple economics. Let's assume sending one spam e-mail costs.02 cents to a spammer. A sale of the advertised product brings in $8 while (I'll go with the unlikely case of the spammer actually shipping) costing only $1. Additionally, re-sale of the CC number and personal data bring in another $3.
To make ends meet, the spammer would have to make one sale for every batch of 50,000 messages.
Now using up his airtime/minutes, OTOH, a call may very well cost him $.02, (contrary to what Verizon thinks) a hundredfold difference. Now every 500th person called would need to listen to his babble, be interested in his merchandise and actually go for the sale. Which is rather unlikely, which means he's not going to be calling you.:]
Absolutely not, instead we should distribute measures taken with respect to how many people are negatively affected by something.
Hunger and lethal diseases kill an extreme amount of people, so a relatively large amount of money and should be spent on research and immediate aid just like some "liberties" should be enjoyed with care (waste less food, safer sex against aids etc).
The same goes for traffic safety. There's fewer, though still a lot, of fatalities, so an accordingly smaller amount of money and time should be spent on developing safer cars as well as educating the public about dangers associated with driving. And again, some liberties may have to be given up (e.g. require ABS or airbags on all cars, require a permit to drive, speed limits).
Terrorism ought to be dealt with in the same fashion. With a death toll of less than a tenth of road fatalities [1][2], less than ten percent of the amount of time and research ought to be spent on countermeasures and TWAT (The War Against Terrorism). Equally, less than ten percent of the liberties given up because of traffic safety should be given up because of Terrorism. The U.S.' $500bn spent on Iraq, the billions spent on Afghanistan should be countered by $5tn (+Afghanistan) in traffic safety measures - about a third of the U.S.' GDP. There ought to be ten Guantanamo Bays for DUIs and getting into one's car should require a DHS examination, a background check, several patdowns and standing in line for a week.
I call prior art on the profile switching. There were many more apps similar to this back around '06 when I had my last S60 device.
(Yeah, I know the SoC project didn't involve trying to patent it - just sayin' it ain't all that new and fancy).
Right, The Terrerist and a team of twenty Boeing engineers manage to pack the necessary equipment to steer a plane onto one (we're talking a few duffel bags here, those cockpits have a damn lot of buttons in 'em), then take control of the plane, then somehow get their equipment from the inaccessible storage part of the aircraft, then slash their way through to cabling that's not usually accessible in-flight (and takes hours to get to when grounded), then cuts those cables, reattaches them to their own system and finally get to actually pilot the plane.
Unfortunately, right after that, Chuck Norris roundhouse kicks a tricycle that Bruce Willis rode through Area 51 to save E.T. right up into the stratosphere where it smashes into an exploding asteroid seventeen times the size of the sun, thereby breaking said asteroid into twenty-two pieces. The single large piece proceeds to not hit earth and destroy civilization by four meters (it breaks off the antennas of both the Eiffel Tower and the Empire State Building), the smaller ones are deflected by some jedis with light sabres, only to hit The Terrerist and each one of the Evil Engineers right into the face, killing them. Also, explosions, a sex scene without the girl taking her bra off, a scene in a strip bar and more explosions.
Not to rain on your parade and you've certainly got your history right, but when something as scary as terrorism requires you to think back thirteen years to an event with 168 fatalities, this seems very damn ridiculous to me.
Just as a sad little comparison: On average, each and every 36-hour-period from 1994 through 2007 had more people die in traffic accidents [1] than this huge headline-making bomb. 9/11, OTOH, took almost four weeks to be offset by road fatalities (and caused four^Wseven years of all-out war against freedom (and the middle east)). Strange, eh?
The problem is the huge difference in financial abilities of the likes of Time Warner or the Walt Disney Co. and private citizens.
The difference becomes even larger when considering what's at stake here. I'm sure big media will pay out billions if they can extend copyright duration, enforcement and broadness for significant periods; to counter that the populace would need tens of millions to donate large sums in a coordinated fashion. Which won't happen.
Two standardized hashes in standardized header fields are not much of an issue to adjust after the page has been enhanced with ads.
There are two solutions: Strong encryption or cryptographic signatures (i.e. more computationally expensive to intercept than ads bring in) or custom algorithms (e.g. some javascript comparing a server-generated hash to the delivered page. In this case, "cracking" the JS needs to be more expensive than injecting ads for the period uf unpatchedness would generate).
Also, apart from all the techno-babble: Lawyers, lots of them. Favourably blowing themselves up at 121Media/BT's headquarters or suing the crap out of those companies in court.
Wrong. If there's going to be wide adoption of Linux on the desktop marketplace, most of it is going to be distributed amongst some three to five vendors. From the current situation, those would probably be RedHat, Novell/SuSe, Canonical, maybe Debian. Sun is the most likely contender from the Unix front with the *BSDs catering to the enthusiast crowd, similar to Gentoo or even LFS.
Back with the big distributions we have two competiting package systems (RHT/NOVL with RPM, Debian and offspring with deb), with increasingly similar privilege escalation ("xyz can make changes to your system, please enter your password to continue") mechanisms, the ability to execute ELF binaries and a common autostart facility.
Small infectors can be statically linked and easily packaged into those two formats, bigger projects could even make use of the package mangers' dependency resolution mechanisms.
The situation over in Vistaland is almost the same. UAC spews out a few more warnings for unsigned software and the average user may be a bit less computer-literate, but in Order to actually enable malware to it's full capabilities, a few Warnings will have to be "Continue"d and a prompt for your [Admin] password answered. It's the same, really.
Just to clarify the first bits: Whenever "garbage" is exchanged over BitTorrent, either the.torrent was b0rken from the start, so the actually exchanged data matches the contained hashes or a peer injects bad data to another peer, which is discarded in all modern implementations. Many clients will block repeat offenders.
Now about those hash collisions: I assume they're not in this to do any sort of hash collisions, but just fill all trackers with junk. Since PeerGuardian et al. block their IP ranges, MD tries to abuse trackers who accept random infohashes and spreads the matching torrents everywhere it can, just to dilute quality overall. I couldn't confirm this, but it seems to be the only possibility with any sort of sense.
Not quite. MD's two most important tools are fake torrents and DoS attacks, both to be used only against what they deem immoral^Willegal.
Probably, Rev3's tracker somehow made the list of evil trackers, only to be "attacked" by the first, inexpensive measure: Injecting fake torrents. MD's goal being to dilute the quality of one tracker's torrents to uselessness. Since Rev3's tracker doesn't communicate tracked torrents back to a web site, nobody noticed or downloaded the fakes and everything was good with the exclusion of some wasted cpu cycles and memory on Rev3's side.
Now after Rev3 changed the tracker's policy to no longer accept random injections, MD's system probably recognized it's first measure to be failing and escalated behaviour to the next stage. A purty DDoSing of the torrent, obviously illegal under federal law.
Since this appears to be their software's standard behaviour, blame will probably be shifted on some dumb programmer who merely executed orders from higher-up scum within MediaDefrauder. I demand the heads of all of MD as well as the RIAA and MPAA on silver platters. Also, pepper sauce.:]
Bandwidth and hosting costs can be overlooked as the difference between an ad-supported and a paid-for view is negligible in that respect. For the latter, however, add some money for the infrastructure and an unhealthily large percentage for the payment gateway (e.g. credit card companies).
I'm pretty sure the rates for in-video-ads are a lot higher than normal banners, especially if the content actually is preceded or interrupted for the ad.
Even assuming a tenfold higher ad rate, though, a micropayment model would be feasible. Think Ad supported, YouTube-quality for free (ad income $.13) or something along the lines of 480p for 20-25 cents. Downloading (720p, anyone?) DRM-free for your personal collection and/or Zune could cost another $.50 or so, just like lala (made/. yesterday) does it. Sounds nice, don't it?:)
Slashdot Mirror
s/demonstration/protest. That's what you get for speaking more than one language ;)
Just for the record: Most of Europe was with the protestors you mentioned before the invasion, forming (iirc) the largest international demonstration to date.
Also, around that date the general perception of the U.S. shifted quite a bit from "the land of the free" to "free^Haking warmongers".
> "90'ties".spell
=> "ninety'ties"
Ditto for peripherals, compatibility is king, bandwidth issues are so 1999.
If I need to copy big files, I'm not that dumb as to require a special overpowered bus, I'll just use one of those increasingly common eSata ports. The controller is on-board anyways and 3 Gbps without IEEE1394 overhead seems like more than 1.6 Gbps minus IEEE1394 overhead to me.
Also, don't forget about GbE. It's fast, doesn't require you to carry around hard drives and, in general, awesome.
While I generally despise any kind of "advanced" mail format, I'd still like italics or bold to be available. Using /plain-text/ _substitutions_ works, but it isn't quite the same.
That oughntn't be problematic, simply close the connection after the /[1-3]rd 550 (in a row)?/, there are extremely few legitimate cases for trying several recipients (mailing lists, perhaps) and most any correctly configured mail server will just re-connect and try with the remaining addresses.
Also, if you've got cpu cycles and bandwidth to spare: poison the spammer's database - after three 550s, invert 200 and 550 responses >:]
Flood control ahead of time is good news, makes you feel safe. The safer you feel, the less likely you are to buy into The Newest Threat. In extreme cases, you might even feel so safe to have an own opinion, differing in parts from the paper's opinion. And that, my friend, might lead to freedom and as we all know, Freedom is Slavery and slavery has been abolished in the U.S. and A. for quite some time now.
Hm, that makes me wonder: Slaves typically were black, just like Michael Jackson. If good news turns you into a slave, did MJs plastic surgeries consist mainly of bad news?
Opera had it even firster. >.<
Caller ID is spoofed as easily as a MAC address.
Taking names and complaining about this Spit will work just as well as it does for spam. Not. Remember, it's happening on the internet, not POTS.
Collaborative blacklisting will be as difficult as it is for email since most Spitters will be zombies in large botnets.
(I completely forgot one factor: The U.S.' um.. "interesting" system of free calls.)
Unlike the local short-distance POTS (on which you tend to get harassed by robodialers as well as Hillary C.), your cell operator charges the operator of whomever's calling you a few (fractions of) cents per minute, so cells are very likely to be spared.
It's simple economics. Let's assume sending one spam e-mail costs .02 cents to a spammer. A sale of the advertised product brings in $8 while (I'll go with the unlikely case of the spammer actually shipping) costing only $1. Additionally, re-sale of the CC number and personal data bring in another $3. :]
To make ends meet, the spammer would have to make one sale for every batch of 50,000 messages.
Now using up his airtime/minutes, OTOH, a call may very well cost him $.02, (contrary to what Verizon thinks) a hundredfold difference. Now every 500th person called would need to listen to his babble, be interested in his merchandise and actually go for the sale. Which is rather unlikely, which means he's not going to be calling you.
Absolutely not, instead we should distribute measures taken with respect to how many people are negatively affected by something.
Hunger and lethal diseases kill an extreme amount of people, so a relatively large amount of money and should be spent on research and immediate aid just like some "liberties" should be enjoyed with care (waste less food, safer sex against aids etc). The same goes for traffic safety. There's fewer, though still a lot, of fatalities, so an accordingly smaller amount of money and time should be spent on developing safer cars as well as educating the public about dangers associated with driving. And again, some liberties may have to be given up (e.g. require ABS or airbags on all cars, require a permit to drive, speed limits). Terrorism ought to be dealt with in the same fashion. With a death toll of less than a tenth of road fatalities [1][2], less than ten percent of the amount of time and research ought to be spent on countermeasures and TWAT (The War Against Terrorism). Equally, less than ten percent of the liberties given up because of traffic safety should be given up because of Terrorism. The U.S.' $500bn spent on Iraq, the billions spent on Afghanistan should be countered by $5tn (+Afghanistan) in traffic safety measures - about a third of the U.S.' GDP. There ought to be ten Guantanamo Bays for DUIs and getting into one's car should require a DHS examination, a background check, several patdowns and standing in line for a week.
[1] http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ter_ter_act_200_fat-terrorist-acts-2000-2006-fatalities
[2] http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx
I call prior art on the profile switching. There were many more apps similar to this back around '06 when I had my last S60 device.
(Yeah, I know the SoC project didn't involve trying to patent it - just sayin' it ain't all that new and fancy).
Right, The Terrerist and a team of twenty Boeing engineers manage to pack the necessary equipment to steer a plane onto one (we're talking a few duffel bags here, those cockpits have a damn lot of buttons in 'em), then take control of the plane, then somehow get their equipment from the inaccessible storage part of the aircraft, then slash their way through to cabling that's not usually accessible in-flight (and takes hours to get to when grounded), then cuts those cables, reattaches them to their own system and finally get to actually pilot the plane.
Unfortunately, right after that, Chuck Norris roundhouse kicks a tricycle that Bruce Willis rode through Area 51 to save E.T. right up into the stratosphere where it smashes into an exploding asteroid seventeen times the size of the sun, thereby breaking said asteroid into twenty-two pieces. The single large piece proceeds to not hit earth and destroy civilization by four meters (it breaks off the antennas of both the Eiffel Tower and the Empire State Building), the smaller ones are deflected by some jedis with light sabres, only to hit The Terrerist and each one of the Evil Engineers right into the face, killing them. Also, explosions, a sex scene without the girl taking her bra off, a scene in a strip bar and more explosions.
Not to rain on your parade and you've certainly got your history right, but when something as scary as terrorism requires you to think back thirteen years to an event with 168 fatalities, this seems very damn ridiculous to me.
Just as a sad little comparison: On average, each and every 36-hour-period from 1994 through 2007 had more people die in traffic accidents [1] than this huge headline-making bomb. 9/11, OTOH, took almost four weeks to be offset by road fatalities (and caused four^Wseven years of all-out war against freedom (and the middle east)). Strange, eh?
[1] http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx
It's all in the filename. Torrent sounds like Terrorist already.
The problem is the huge difference in financial abilities of the likes of Time Warner or the Walt Disney Co. and private citizens.
The difference becomes even larger when considering what's at stake here. I'm sure big media will pay out billions if they can extend copyright duration, enforcement and broadness for significant periods; to counter that the populace would need tens of millions to donate large sums in a coordinated fashion. Which won't happen.
Which will help exactly how?
Two standardized hashes in standardized header fields are not much of an issue to adjust after the page has been enhanced with ads.
There are two solutions: Strong encryption or cryptographic signatures (i.e. more computationally expensive to intercept than ads bring in) or custom algorithms (e.g. some javascript comparing a server-generated hash to the delivered page. In this case, "cracking" the JS needs to be more expensive than injecting ads for the period uf unpatchedness would generate).
Also, apart from all the techno-babble: Lawyers, lots of them. Favourably blowing themselves up at 121Media/BT's headquarters or suing the crap out of those companies in court.
Wrong. If there's going to be wide adoption of Linux on the desktop marketplace, most of it is going to be distributed amongst some three to five vendors. From the current situation, those would probably be RedHat, Novell/SuSe, Canonical, maybe Debian. Sun is the most likely contender from the Unix front with the *BSDs catering to the enthusiast crowd, similar to Gentoo or even LFS.
Back with the big distributions we have two competiting package systems (RHT/NOVL with RPM, Debian and offspring with deb), with increasingly similar privilege escalation ("xyz can make changes to your system, please enter your password to continue") mechanisms, the ability to execute ELF binaries and a common autostart facility.
Small infectors can be statically linked and easily packaged into those two formats, bigger projects could even make use of the package mangers' dependency resolution mechanisms.
The situation over in Vistaland is almost the same. UAC spews out a few more warnings for unsigned software and the average user may be a bit less computer-literate, but in Order to actually enable malware to it's full capabilities, a few Warnings will have to be "Continue"d and a prompt for your [Admin] password answered. It's the same, really.
I can confirm Outlook 2003, 2007 and any remotely recent version of The Bat!
Just to clarify the first bits: Whenever "garbage" is exchanged over BitTorrent, either the .torrent was b0rken from the start, so the actually exchanged data matches the contained hashes or a peer injects bad data to another peer, which is discarded in all modern implementations. Many clients will block repeat offenders.
Now about those hash collisions: I assume they're not in this to do any sort of hash collisions, but just fill all trackers with junk. Since PeerGuardian et al. block their IP ranges, MD tries to abuse trackers who accept random infohashes and spreads the matching torrents everywhere it can, just to dilute quality overall. I couldn't confirm this, but it seems to be the only possibility with any sort of sense.
Not quite. MD's two most important tools are fake torrents and DoS attacks, both to be used only against what they deem immoral^Willegal.
:]
Probably, Rev3's tracker somehow made the list of evil trackers, only to be "attacked" by the first, inexpensive measure: Injecting fake torrents. MD's goal being to dilute the quality of one tracker's torrents to uselessness. Since Rev3's tracker doesn't communicate tracked torrents back to a web site, nobody noticed or downloaded the fakes and everything was good with the exclusion of some wasted cpu cycles and memory on Rev3's side.
Now after Rev3 changed the tracker's policy to no longer accept random injections, MD's system probably recognized it's first measure to be failing and escalated behaviour to the next stage. A purty DDoSing of the torrent, obviously illegal under federal law.
Since this appears to be their software's standard behaviour, blame will probably be shifted on some dumb programmer who merely executed orders from higher-up scum within MediaDefrauder. I demand the heads of all of MD as well as the RIAA and MPAA on silver platters. Also, pepper sauce.
Bandwidth and hosting costs can be overlooked as the difference between an ad-supported and a paid-for view is negligible in that respect. For the latter, however, add some money for the infrastructure and an unhealthily large percentage for the payment gateway (e.g. credit card companies). /. yesterday) does it. Sounds nice, don't it? :)
I'm pretty sure the rates for in-video-ads are a lot higher than normal banners, especially if the content actually is preceded or interrupted for the ad.
Even assuming a tenfold higher ad rate, though, a micropayment model would be feasible. Think Ad supported, YouTube-quality for free (ad income $.13) or something along the lines of 480p for 20-25 cents. Downloading (720p, anyone?) DRM-free for your personal collection and/or Zune could cost another $.50 or so, just like lala (made