Oh Lord! The original act was bad enough, but now they want to give The Post Office!!!! (among others) access to traffic data w/o a warrant or anything!
Please, every UK resident who values their privacy use the form to fax your MP, or better yet write a letter (I know; archaic, but it might just get the attention of a technophobe MP or two in a way that a fax wouldn't).
I d/led and installed a (win) version straight from their site a fortnight ago and carefully made sure the 'Run at Startup' option wasn't checked. Even so, it runs stuff at startup, but it's a snap to stop it doing this if you know it's happening (I thought it'd probably still be taking notes from startup so I went looking for it).
Click Start | Run and type 'msconfig'
Click on the Startup tab
Uncheck that prog called fsg-ag_3102 (the program in the file location column that's in the audiogalaxy directory) to neuter the s/w
Sure, it might still be spying when you run the satellite, but otherwise it affords you a little more privacy.
"As far as (Chernobyl) is concerned, the Klez worm is just another file to infect," Weafer said. "It's quite common to see piggybacking effects when you have worms that have been propagating for a long time in the world."
Pure fluke by the looks of things - Chernobyl has been around for ages (4 years) and happened to infect Klez as it would any other file. When you think about it, people who're still catching 4 year old virii are more likely to be propagating the newer stuff too.
Is this the same Tyco that makes radio-controlled toy cars? Their corporate site seems to be/.ed so I can't check.
If it is them, then I can think of a couple of great product crossovers:
Evil Kenivel stunt-rider fire extinguisher.
Toy Fire-trucks that home in on the noise from these balls to put out any patches of fire that the balls didn't get (you could have them patrolling throughout large buildings).
Oooookay; I've got to this one kinda late (I don't check/. nearly as often as I used to), but whilst it's nice to pick up your email over POP3, you've still gotta fire up a mail client if you want to reply (which I usually do).
Besides, although the majority of the audience here isn't going to be phased by a command line, can you imagine explaining to your mother (not specifically your mother; just a generic mom) to type telnet mail.xyz.com 110 into the run box from the Start menu? Never mind getting a 3rd party (i.e. not Windows) telnet client up and running.....
Frankly, I'd prefer to never have to let my parents do anything that they couldn't do by clicking or typing very simple answers into a text box. It's not that they're technically incompetent (far from it - they're now on their 7th home computer having started on a ZX81 back in the day) - it's simply that tasks that we don't even consider tricky can appear obtuse and very unfriendly to most users.
Um, I'm rambling, aren't I? But I guess I've made my points.
If the data was represented a different way (say, using bits instead of bytesize data) then patterns might emerge...
With trulyrandom data there's no pattern to find, assuming you're looking at a large enough sample, which is why everyone else on this thread is talking about the maximum compression for such data being 1:1. However, since "ZeoSync said its scientific team had succeeded on a small scale" it's likely that whatever algorithm they're using works only in limited cases.
Shannon's work on information theory is over 1/2 a century old and has been re-examined by thousands of extremely well-qualified people, so I'm finding it rather hard to accept that ZeoSync aren't talking BS.
As the article says, genetic advantages (like the skier with the high red blood cell count) can occur quite naturally as a result of mutation as well as being engineered into athletes.
How can we be sure that genetic advantages are from cheating (i.e. artificially engineering the DNA to improve the athletic ability of a competitor), and not simply down to a lucky combination of gametes?
So they've gotta get up to Mach 5 before they work? So assuming that they make a working passenger jet based upon this principle, what sort of distance do you have to travel to make this a feasible option?
I assume that it'll take a while to get up to full speed (not least because I don't think passengers would like being squished by a big acceleration). So if you were going, say, London to Paris you're not really going to have much time to get up to speed. What sort of distances do you need to cover before this option becomes worthwhile (i.e. more economical)? Would London to NYC be far enough? How about LA to Tokyo?
What the hell, here's the zip, though since I've only paid for the cheapest hosting option don't be too surprised if it gets/.ed fairly quickly too. I can't be bothered mirroring the story, but pretty much all it says is that it's been released and the Reg like it.
Right, so yet another possible way to store lots of data. We hear about these all the time (holographic memory, molecular storage etc.), but when are we actually going to get some of this - at the moment everyone still seems to be working on Winchester drives and semiconductor memory.
Is all this just pie in the sky, or are people actually producing devices that use these exotic storage methods? I figure this is about the best place to ask.
why wait until now to say something about it.[sic]
The reason he's only just brought this up is because Yahoo! is trying to register their trademark in the field of entertainment - a piece of turf that Mr. Serious has already staked out (well, sort of). When they were just a search engine he could hardly claim there was going to be a lot of confusion, but since they're on his doorstep now he's got a bit more of a case.
Course, the fact that he's not exactly the best known actor ever may prevent most people from being confused since they're unlikely to have heard of him. But since IANAL, I'm going to leave that discussion to the court to decide.
And laugh if he wins.
It's just a shame he didn't change his name to Micro Soft.
Ha, this is great. Napster starts up in response to the RIAA being mofos. They finally (after a long, hard battle that probably gave more publicity to the cause than it would otherwise have received) get it on their leash, and a bunch of other services spring up in it's wake, that all neatly try to skirt the legal issues that plagued Nap.
"Bugger" say the RIAA, and then decied to go after the few p2p options that are now in use. And if/when they finally get those shut down, a load more people will learn from that, and come up with another way to avoid the legal hassles. And all the time more and more regular users find out about the service. Eventually it's going to get to the point where there's more P2P services than there are RIAA lawyers (and a nice bit of collaboration and standardisation should help users seach multiple networks) - when are they going to figure out that this "If it moves and doesn't pay us money, sue it" game-plan isn't working?
Actually, I kinda hope they don't suss that one out.
Thanks, Mr. AC, for making this point before I screamed (or before I made it myself). LA were trying to apply a tax for moveable objects (like trucks) to the satellites. It's got bugger-all to do with where they orbited; it's just that they were owned by a co in LA jurisdiction.
"If LA really needs an extra cash tax it's own inhabitants, not the whole world."
Dude, IIRC LA was planning on taxing the co that owns the satellites who're based inside their jurisdiction. The basis for this was that the satellites constituted "moveable property" of the company (usually applied to calculate tax based on company assets like trucks etc.). If the company had moved out of the jurisdiction area then LA wouldn't have had any grounds for this in the first place, though thankfully it seems that the common-sense solution has been arrived at.
At the risk of finding that my memory is flawed (and looking very stupid), I've gotta say; read the original story.
AFAIK, this is a shared host - if you knock over the box then you'll take down a whole bunch of sites run by people who're totally innocent (not to mention all the innocent people who bank with this company who'll be affected by such an irresponsible attack).
Having checked IPs, my site doesn't seem to be hosted on the same box, but I know I'd be pretty pissed if my visitors couldn't get to my site because someone had decided, with pretty tenuous reasons, to hAx0R the host machine. If you (understandably) feel a need to take action, please try to do it in a more productive manner.
OK, OK, I fed the troll. Hey, it was my last week at work and I had other stuff on my mind. And what the hell, I'm gonna do it again - my point was that I'd trust AOL to not rip me off and if they did I'd expect to be able to pursue them much more easily than some random pornographer.
I assume you're talking about AOL's internet service (rather than just their web site). Last time I checked, they do open various windows within the client they provide. One or two of these may be ads, the rest are stuff like "Buddy List", AOL's internal news/home page, and details about any emails you've received. Most of these are not ads; they're services that AOL provides to their users that don't promote any products (other than maybe AOL itself).
Course, this was in the UK - I can't say for sure what the deal is elsewhere, but I've been led to believe that the situation is similar in North America at least.
And the inactivity time-out is something like 5-10 minutes. It only shows up if no traffic (including stuff outside their client, like an FTP prog or Netscape) has been going between your machine and their server for a while, and it does leave a prompt on your screen (within their client) for a couple of minutes before logging you off.
You're getting a bit trollish there, but since you didn't AC I'll address your points:
Sweeping generalisations - OK, I shouldn't do it. There's probably some pornographers out there who're fine upstanding members of society. But it's undeniable that a lot of porn sites that simply don't seem to have any qualms when it comes to using sneaky tricks to get more traffic.
You undermine your first point by then pre-judging me. I've never really understood why wanting to see attractive adult women with no clothes on is considered perversion - I'm not into hardcore, teens, bondage or any of that other stuff - I'm just following my natural urges in a private manner that doesn't harm anyone. I'd say my tastes were pretty tame really, so calling me a pervert is both childish and unfounded. And suggesting that I'm perfectly willing to let someone rip me off to the tune of $50 is ridiculous. Anyone who'd stand for any company doing that has more money than sense. And I don't doubt that selling porn can make you lots of cash, but if your dot-com is tanking then CC fraud is bound to start looking a lot more attractive. If you're a small company, who're already lacking more scruples than most, then it'd be much easier to commit the fraud then leg it than it would be for AOL.
So, in conclusion, I'll try to avoid sweeping statements in future, and I hope you try to show less prejudice towards people you know nothing about. And I'd still trust AOL more than a porn site, but as it is, neither of them have my CC#.
I recall how my classmates responded to teachers as well. Some classes were the barely controlled anarchy you describe, but others were organised, effecient and fun. Part of the teacher's job is to control those kids.
Unfortunately, the litigious nature of society is making punishment of unruly kids a big no-no. My mum, who's a retired teacher, has remarked that the best way she found to control kids without punishing them was to bribe them. For the promise of an extra five minutes at lunchtime (or whatever) kids would behave like angels.
What makes a good teacher, IMHO, is not just knowing the subject backwards, but knowing the kids and how their minds work and how to get them to learn.
Ah, but even this is a wide definition that needn't always concern the RIAA. OK, so they've a right to demand some money from for copying any copyrighted audio CDs that you didn't own or were planning on distributing.
But what if you were copying software? Or top-secret weapons plans? Or any one of countless more possible illegal uses? Should you really have to pay RIAA for illegally using your CD-RW in a way that has no effect whatsoever on their profits?
OK, so I'm being a bit silly, but the point still stands. Maybe M$ should look at getting a cut of the tax to cover all those illegal copies of Windows or whatever.
Yeah, but Javascript does have it's uses - I prefer people to use it to spice up their pages a bit rather than sticking a Flash animation on there for example (OK, not the greatest example, but it can be quite cool).
I object to having to cripple my browser just to ensure that people don't abuse it. And, I'll admit, I'm kinda lazy too.
Frankly, I think that our friends the pr0nographers are way more untrustworthy than AOL. At least AOL doesn't pop-up and pop-under new windows at every given opportunity, including when you close the current browser window (man, I hate that). And they don't attempt to plant suspicious (and occasionally incriminating) cookies on your HD, or do any of those other wonderful tricks that help your boss/parents/significant other argue that you're not doing anything productive on the net. And I'd sure feel better about giving my CC# to AOL than to pr0n sites (we're just using it to check your age, no really....)
AOL are no saints, but they do seem to have developed some scruples as a sort of reponse to potentially bad publicity.
Option number one sounds like waaaaaay too much work. Hell, I've been trying to get a guestbook working on my website for the past 8 months or so without success, because so far I've only devoted about 4 or hours to it. I don't have time to find out how to set up something like that, never mind actually do it.
And option two would be just fine, except they insist on us using IE 4 at work and have all their machines built with a standard image of NT that locks users out of just about everything (I'm not even supposed to be able to change my screen resolution). God bless the engineering account that I shouldn't really have:)
But I still think it would be unwise to do anything obvious to show up on their radars - they check network traffic and would probably notice (eventually) if I started using a different browser (from requests to the intranet homepage for a start). And once they were onto me they'd no-doubt spot all the other stuff that I probably shouldn't be doing. Like posting to Slashdot.
Which is why the only option that I can see that would help is for webmasters to make their pages look like I'm doing work. Y'see; I've already spent a fair while thinking about it:(
Still, maybe your suggestions will come in useful at some point in the future.
Slashdot Mirror
Please, every UK resident who values their privacy use the form to fax your MP, or better yet write a letter (I know; archaic, but it might just get the attention of a technophobe MP or two in a way that a fax wouldn't).
Click Start | Run and type 'msconfig'
Click on the Startup tab
Uncheck that prog called fsg-ag_3102 (the program in the file location column that's in the audiogalaxy directory) to neuter the s/w
Sure, it might still be spying when you run the satellite, but otherwise it affords you a little more privacy.
From the article:
Pure fluke by the looks of things - Chernobyl has been around for ages (4 years) and happened to infect Klez as it would any other file. When you think about it, people who're still catching 4 year old virii are more likely to be propagating the newer stuff too.
C'mon; you come to /. - surely you're savvy enough to manage that. And surely you didn't expect sympathy from the crowd here :P
If it is them, then I can think of a couple of great product crossovers:
- Evil Kenivel stunt-rider fire extinguisher.
- Toy Fire-trucks that home in on the noise from these balls to put out any patches of fire that the balls didn't get (you could have them patrolling throughout large buildings).
Anyone got any other ideas?Besides, although the majority of the audience here isn't going to be phased by a command line, can you imagine explaining to your mother (not specifically your mother; just a generic mom) to type telnet mail.xyz.com 110 into the run box from the Start menu? Never mind getting a 3rd party (i.e. not Windows) telnet client up and running.....
Frankly, I'd prefer to never have to let my parents do anything that they couldn't do by clicking or typing very simple answers into a text box. It's not that they're technically incompetent (far from it - they're now on their 7th home computer having started on a ZX81 back in the day) - it's simply that tasks that we don't even consider tricky can appear obtuse and very unfriendly to most users.
Um, I'm rambling, aren't I? But I guess I've made my points.
Shannon's work on information theory is over 1/2 a century old and has been re-examined by thousands of extremely well-qualified people, so I'm finding it rather hard to accept that ZeoSync aren't talking BS.
How can we be sure that genetic advantages are from cheating (i.e. artificially engineering the DNA to improve the athletic ability of a competitor), and not simply down to a lucky combination of gametes?
I assume that it'll take a while to get up to full speed (not least because I don't think passengers would like being squished by a big acceleration). So if you were going, say, London to Paris you're not really going to have much time to get up to speed. What sort of distances do you need to cover before this option becomes worthwhile (i.e. more economical)? Would London to NYC be far enough? How about LA to Tokyo?
Get the zip at http://www.club-foot.co.uk/booty/657.zip (90-ish Kb download).
Right, so yet another possible way to store lots of data. We hear about these all the time (holographic memory, molecular storage etc.), but when are we actually going to get some of this - at the moment everyone still seems to be working on Winchester drives and semiconductor memory.
Is all this just pie in the sky, or are people actually producing devices that use these exotic storage methods? I figure this is about the best place to ask.
Course, the fact that he's not exactly the best known actor ever may prevent most people from being confused since they're unlikely to have heard of him. But since IANAL, I'm going to leave that discussion to the court to decide.
And laugh if he wins.
It's just a shame he didn't change his name to Micro Soft.
"Bugger" say the RIAA, and then decied to go after the few p2p options that are now in use. And if/when they finally get those shut down, a load more people will learn from that, and come up with another way to avoid the legal hassles. And all the time more and more regular users find out about the service. Eventually it's going to get to the point where there's more P2P services than there are RIAA lawyers (and a nice bit of collaboration and standardisation should help users seach multiple networks) - when are they going to figure out that this "If it moves and doesn't pay us money, sue it" game-plan isn't working?
Actually, I kinda hope they don't suss that one out.
Someone please mod up the parent.
Dude, IIRC LA was planning on taxing the co that owns the satellites who're based inside their jurisdiction. The basis for this was that the satellites constituted "moveable property" of the company (usually applied to calculate tax based on company assets like trucks etc.). If the company had moved out of the jurisdiction area then LA wouldn't have had any grounds for this in the first place, though thankfully it seems that the common-sense solution has been arrived at.
At the risk of finding that my memory is flawed (and looking very stupid), I've gotta say; read the original story.
Next, Netcraft say it's an NT 4 box.
AFAIK, this is a shared host - if you knock over the box then you'll take down a whole bunch of sites run by people who're totally innocent (not to mention all the innocent people who bank with this company who'll be affected by such an irresponsible attack).
Having checked IPs, my site doesn't seem to be hosted on the same box, but I know I'd be pretty pissed if my visitors couldn't get to my site because someone had decided, with pretty tenuous reasons, to hAx0R the host machine. If you (understandably) feel a need to take action, please try to do it in a more productive manner.
Cheers
Dr_Cheeks
Course, this was in the UK - I can't say for sure what the deal is elsewhere, but I've been led to believe that the situation is similar in North America at least.
And the inactivity time-out is something like 5-10 minutes. It only shows up if no traffic (including stuff outside their client, like an FTP prog or Netscape) has been going between your machine and their server for a while, and it does leave a prompt on your screen (within their client) for a couple of minutes before logging you off.
- Sweeping generalisations - OK, I shouldn't do it. There's probably some pornographers out there who're fine upstanding members of society. But it's undeniable that a lot of porn sites that simply don't seem to have any qualms when it comes to using sneaky tricks to get more traffic.
- You undermine your first point by then pre-judging me. I've never really understood why wanting to see attractive adult women with no clothes on is considered perversion - I'm not into hardcore, teens, bondage or any of that other stuff - I'm just following my natural urges in a private manner that doesn't harm anyone. I'd say my tastes were pretty tame really, so calling me a pervert is both childish and unfounded. And suggesting that I'm perfectly willing to let someone rip me off to the tune of $50 is ridiculous. Anyone who'd stand for any company doing that has more money than sense. And I don't doubt that selling porn can make you lots of cash, but if your dot-com is tanking then CC fraud is bound to start looking a lot more attractive. If you're a small company, who're already lacking more scruples than most, then it'd be much easier to commit the fraud then leg it than it would be for AOL.
So, in conclusion, I'll try to avoid sweeping statements in future, and I hope you try to show less prejudice towards people you know nothing about. And I'd still trust AOL more than a porn site, but as it is, neither of them have my CC#.Unfortunately, the litigious nature of society is making punishment of unruly kids a big no-no. My mum, who's a retired teacher, has remarked that the best way she found to control kids without punishing them was to bribe them. For the promise of an extra five minutes at lunchtime (or whatever) kids would behave like angels.
What makes a good teacher, IMHO, is not just knowing the subject backwards, but knowing the kids and how their minds work and how to get them to learn.
But what if you were copying software? Or top-secret weapons plans? Or any one of countless more possible illegal uses? Should you really have to pay RIAA for illegally using your CD-RW in a way that has no effect whatsoever on their profits?
OK, so I'm being a bit silly, but the point still stands. Maybe M$ should look at getting a cut of the tax to cover all those illegal copies of Windows or whatever.
Perhaps Yahoo! weren't too far behind AOL and M$FT in the ratings.
I object to having to cripple my browser just to ensure that people don't abuse it. And, I'll admit, I'm kinda lazy too.
AOL are no saints, but they do seem to have developed some scruples as a sort of reponse to potentially bad publicity.
And option two would be just fine, except they insist on us using IE 4 at work and have all their machines built with a standard image of NT that locks users out of just about everything (I'm not even supposed to be able to change my screen resolution). God bless the engineering account that I shouldn't really have :)
But I still think it would be unwise to do anything obvious to show up on their radars - they check network traffic and would probably notice (eventually) if I started using a different browser (from requests to the intranet homepage for a start). And once they were onto me they'd no-doubt spot all the other stuff that I probably shouldn't be doing. Like posting to Slashdot.
Which is why the only option that I can see that would help is for webmasters to make their pages look like I'm doing work. Y'see; I've already spent a fair while thinking about it :(
Still, maybe your suggestions will come in useful at some point in the future.