It's great added security from people who don't know the secret, no added security against people who do. In short: security through obscurity.
The same can be said about any common combination-lock combo, but lets anybody who does through.
But once "knock to open" becomnes common, anyone with a sniffer will also be looking for sequences of probes to non-responsive ports (or whatever) and try replaying those as a form of password.
You are supposing that the knock sequence is static - it need not be. I'd suggest that one-time-use knock-sequences are generated from an initial seed value known by both client & server, or from the current time of day valid for 5 minutes either side and one-use-only.
Sniffing then gets you nothing except an already expired (because it's been used) knock sequence.
Way OT I know, but would Glum Losers even work in practice? Seems you would have to have a hard time limit to the auction, otherwise it would never end..
Auctioneer: What bid for this wierd wired widget? Bidder 1 : $50 (this is what he'll pay if nobody else bids) Bidder 2 : $1000 (thinking he won't have to pay) Bidder 1 : $2000 (he doesn't want to pay either) Bidder 2 : $3000 (he can't afford to pay, so had better make sure he wins) Bidder 1 : $4000 (ditto) Bidder 2 : $5000.. and on forever, each topping the other because they can't afford to pay but can bid as high as they like because when they win they don't pay anything.
Erm, the poster was asking when something that does work in Mozilla (& thus Venkman is ok with) does not work in IE.
There is a free MS debugger, you'll have to search around for it though. I've had limited success with it, but at least it gives you a better idea of what the problem is than the standard IE errors.
You underestimate the 'nature' aspect I think. Out on the ocean, there is life, an abundance of it, birds, fish, whales etc... The seas constantly change and are an always present challenge, there are lulls where you can relax, and violent storms where you have to batten the hatches and hope for the best.
On Mars, it's a barren, dry, cold desert. There are some big mountains, and crevases, and I'm sure an abundance of interesting rocks - but without life surrounding you, any life, it wouldn't take long for you to give anything to go home.
On Mars, is a barren, dry, cold desert, and that's all, on the ocean there is, everything.
Now, if I had the chance to go to an inhabited (wether intelligent or not) planet, with flora and fauna, and diversity, and... I'd go even if it meant never leaving that planet again, or death.
There was hardware for at least 4 Energia in the site 112 building, as well as Buran which was atop a fully assembled Energia.
No effort has been made to clear the rubble after the roof collapse and see what, if anything, survived under there.
But whatever the case, Energia did work, it was big, and certainly the designs still exist so there is no reason an Energia (or VKK/Buran for that matter) could not be built again.
It would be better than the American shuttles, although only marginally so (more payload, remote control possible, but apart from that...).
Enterprise and the Falcon are fictional, Energia & Buran actually flew.
Ok, first is to bring it to thier attention - perhaps the higher ups didn't know, perhaps they always intended to rewrite that bit before release but it got overlooked. They may be very apologetic and simply remove the code.
If you want to make money out of it, offer them an alternative licence for a small fee, after you have discussed it with them (you don't want to come off as programmer mafia).
If however they are not apologetic and won't remove the code you need to explain the options to them (assuming it is provable that it is your code).
Thier options are.. 1. Accept that they are using your code with permission under the GPL, but are not complying with the terms of the GPL, in which case thier permission is revoked, and; 2. Accept that they are using your code without permission, and are then in clear breach of copyright.
Those are the only two ways they can be using your code if you did not otherwise licence it to them. In either way they instantly lose the battle (presuming they don't find a loophole in the GPL).
Just be gentlemanly about it, don't get on your high horse. Remember that they are using your code, take that as a compliment; just don't let them take you for granted.
I'd really like to see Venusian landers operating again. Venus is IMHO a much more interesting place than Mars, if only because we can't properly see it without actually going there. And yet it's so close (relatively speaking). Those few pictures that came from the Venera probes are soo tantalising, you just want to reach through, grab the camera and tilt it up.
Sure, it might be a very hostile environment, and not being able to get a good look at possible landing sites is a bit of a bugger, but I'm sure if the old Venera peoples were to use thier experience and modern materials & ideas that they could get a lander on the planet with better (and sustainable) capabilities.
There's no chance of recognisable life on Venus of course, but that doesn't mean there isn't life there at all - bacteria can be quite happy in extreme environments.
Mars is cool and all, but really.. rock, another rock, bit of red dust, rock, oh look a crater. Been there, done that, move on.
Not really. Niue simply could not stay economically afloat without help, New Zealand is that help and quite happily so.
However, if the population of Niue falls too low (due to migration here) then the population of Niue would be better served as being NZ citizens with the rights & privileges that go with that so that we can provide services to the resident population more cheaply.
Like any South Pacific nation/island Niue has it's own identity and culture and understandably they want to keep that, and at the same time grow economically to provide better standard of living for the residents. However like most South Pacific islands thier population is leaving, and thier resources are too few to sustain without aid.
It's not class or ideology, Color, creed, or roots The only thing that unites us Is Dr. Marten's boots
Dr. Marten's boots of the world So that everybody can be free They're classless, matchless, ageless and waterproof And retail for only 19 pounds and 99p
What should everyone be wearing? Those boots with the air-flow soles And your boots will have a meeting And your boots will take control
Thanks to Dr. Marten everyone will have warm feet Thanks to Dr. Marten they'll be dancing in the street No. Don't You Want Me. OK, Boots. Do your stuff!
Dr. Marten's, Dr. Marten's, Dr. Marten's boots Dr. Marten's, Dr. Marten's, Dr. Marten's boots Dr. Marten's, Dr. Marten's, Dr. Marten's boots!
I know that the scientific evidence for a > 24hr bodyclock is disputible, but in my experience I definatly have a > 24 hr clock, not much more but enough that in the 6 months of working for myself from home and not needing to be up at any particular time, I have circumnavigated the clock in a clockwise direction. Some of that advancement can be due to deadlines (pushing to meet them) but in general it's natural.
I go to sleep when I'm sleepy, and I wake up when my body tells me to, I sleep 8 hours, seldom more, seldom less. If I do sleep less I'll often catch it up by taking a nap when I'm sleepy in the middle of the day.
It's just unfortunate that the larger business world is tied into this straight jacket of 9-5 meaning most people have to artificially force thier bodies into a routine it just wasn't designed for and never get to enjoy the less visited times of day.
If a heretofore undiscovered store of smallpox (say, in a library book) is discovered and starts killing people, we would have no source material from which to develop a vaccine.
Except of course the source material that happens to be out in the wild killing people.
They didn't have fuel (100LL) to give him even if they wanted to, the only avgas there was Polly's and not thiers to sell.
This guy was ill prepared he didn't even notify McMurdo that he was going to be attempting a polar overflight and that he would be using thier strip in an emergency. He didn't even call to McMurdo as he passed overhead on his way to the pole.
He may have thought he was prepared, but by the fact that the situation became what it was, he was decidedly unprepared.
I'm not saying he wasn't a good pilot, or his plane wasn't up to the task (it certainly was), or even that he didn't know what he was doing. But he sure as hell didn't let the right people know of his intentions.
Basically Pearse was very stringent on what he would class as flying.
I think if Pearse could be asked he would say that the Wrights and he first "flew" about the same time, but the Wrights were "flying" before him, and indeed that he never attained th goal of "flying".
Above, you point out that he says he set out to attain "aerial navigation" around 1904, which would imply that he had thus "flown" before then and was now working on the larger issue.
He also states that the Wrights achieved "aerial navigation" in 1905, which shows with certainty that he did not believe the Wrights were "flying" in 1903, by his definition of the word.
To Pearse, flying meant being able to usefully go places, not just getting off the ground for a minute or two which was of no use to him at all.
Unfortunatly Pearse was a bit, err, eccentric. He never kept documentation, and didn't consider himself to be flying even when he was able to control the aircraft to an extent - he wanted to be able to go places before he was willing to call it flying.
He never publicised his attempts, he'd just roll the plane out to the road and try it out. If somebody happened to see him they'd shrug it off as the local madman futzing with some contraption again.
As for why eyewitnesses never wrote anything down about the feats, who knows. There is no question that he performed them, only the dates are fuzzy.
Nobody is saying that the Wrights did not perform thier feat independantly. They certainly could not have known about Pearse, and Pearse almost certainly did not know about the Wrights until long after his own exploits.
Wether Pearse was first, or the Wrights, or Dumont, or.... a myriad of other contendors around the world doesn't matter really because at the time there was little if any collaboration between them - they each performed similar aeronautical feats, independantly. That one was before another does not diminish the achievements of either.
The Americans in the world celebrate the Wrights, because they were first.
The New Zealanders celebrate Pearse, because because he was first.
If people consider that which the Wrights achieved as powered, controlled flight, then they should fairly accept Pearse as having also achieved this - it's fairly clear his attempts were on par with the Wrights 17/12/1903 attempts, and were very likely before those. And in absolute certainty totally independant and without knowledge of the Wrights (Waitohi in 2003 is a one horse town, let alone Waitohi of 1903!).
If however you don't accept that 17/12/1903 attempts by the Wrights were powered, controlled flight then you can discard Pearse's attempts as well.
Pearse himself was of the latter opinion, that his attempts were not "flying", he wanted to be able to fly down to the local town and back before he called it "flying". This leads to much of the uncertainty in confirming Pearse's achievements as Pearse's definition is far more stringent than most people would.
It's just unfortunate that Pearse was a bit eccentric really, otherwise his aircraft ideas could really have caused a stir (he had some very advanced ideas).
When it comes down to it, there were a number of people independantly working on the problem in every corner of the world, the Wrights take the honorary prize because thier contraption worked publicly first not because it was better than anybody elses, or necessarily first to perform out of the public eye.
A better analogy would be riding a geared push bike up a hill.
If you start in the low gear, where your legs are "pushing a lot of ground" you are going to have a very hard job even getting started, if you start in a high gear where your legs are going very fast but are not pushing much ground under you per revolution then you can get moving quite easily (you peddle hard, but it's not hard to peddle).
Once you're moving you can drop into a lower gear so that you are not peddling so frantically (and getting very tired) while moving just as much ground under you as before.
Applying that to variable pitch props, when you take off you need a fine pitch so that you can get going more easily (you are not putting huge stress on the engine just turning the prop), when you get to your cruise alt you can then wind the prop out to a coarser pitch ("lower gear") to slow the engine down so it's not going like a bat out of hell but you're still moving just as fast.
Kennedy was mere days away from beginning a rapid pull out from Vietnam, and if he hadn't been assasinated the cold war would have come to an end much sooner as well. More or less as soon as Kennedy was dead the papers were signed to not only stop the intended pull out, but send more troops in, to Vietnam.
He drove your people to space travel, and indeed reach the Moon (although sadly he didn't see that) which united the world in awe.
Kennedy died because it was not good business for the warmongers to have him in power, and there was no other way to remove him.
I'm not saying Kennedy was a great, or good man, only that had he not been cut down that the world would likely be a very different place. It would be hard to do worse than we are now.
Your point of looking for fish seems more analagous to looking for humans. Sure if you're looking for humans then you are best to look for earth like planets, since we know that's the environment humans live in - if you look for fish, look in the ocean, if you look for humans look on an earth like planet.
But the search for ET life is just that, a search for life, not humans - we cannot say that life can only be found on earth like planets, we can't even say that in our solar system life can only be found on earth, it's entirely possible that there is life on other celestial bodies in our neighbourhood.
Even if we take the search for intelligent ET life, it's still a search for an unknown life in an unknown environment, so the fixation on earth-like planets is silly.
Far to often I think we assume that ET life must be like earth life, IMHO it's fairly unlikely, considering the (as far as is known) small percentage of planets that are earth like.
Same as if we were looking for "any" life on earth, where do you look, well, everywhere you don't limit yourself to anything in particular because life can't exist there - it can, life can exist (almost) anywhere on earth, so why not anywhere in the universe?
There is one advantage in looking for earth like planets, they could become useful to our distant descendants in the future, probably as a destination for a many-generational ship.
Slashdot Mirror
Sniffing then gets you nothing except an already expired (because it's been used) knock sequence.
Way OT I know, but would Glum Losers even work in practice? Seems you would have to have a hard time limit to the auction, otherwise it would never end..
.. and on forever, each topping the other because they can't afford to pay but can bid as high as they like because when they win they don't pay anything.
Auctioneer: What bid for this wierd wired widget?
Bidder 1 : $50 (this is what he'll pay if nobody else bids)
Bidder 2 : $1000 (thinking he won't have to pay)
Bidder 1 : $2000 (he doesn't want to pay either)
Bidder 2 : $3000 (he can't afford to pay, so had better make sure he wins)
Bidder 1 : $4000 (ditto)
Bidder 2 : $5000
Jupiter is just a (humungous) ball of gas, there is no land to land on, nor sea to splash in. Just lots and lots of atmosphere to fly through.
Jupiter's moons on the other hand are the present and future targets of many exploratory probes.
So, while the other guys got to gome home, put thier feet up and generally relax, your dad kept working.
Who is the smart one again?
Erm, the poster was asking when something that does work in Mozilla (& thus Venkman is ok with) does not work in IE.
There is a free MS debugger, you'll have to search around for it though. I've had limited success with it, but at least it gives you a better idea of what the problem is than the standard IE errors.
You underestimate the 'nature' aspect I think. Out on the ocean, there is life, an abundance of it, birds, fish, whales etc... The seas constantly change and are an always present challenge, there are lulls where you can relax, and violent storms where you have to batten the hatches and hope for the best.
... I'd go even if it meant never leaving that planet again, or death.
On Mars, it's a barren, dry, cold desert. There are some big mountains, and crevases, and I'm sure an abundance of interesting rocks - but without life surrounding you, any life, it wouldn't take long for you to give anything to go home.
On Mars, is a barren, dry, cold desert, and that's all, on the ocean there is, everything.
Now, if I had the chance to go to an inhabited (wether intelligent or not) planet, with flora and fauna, and diversity, and
If you were channel surfing at all, let alone with a remote control, you are too young to remember Doctor Who.
There was hardware for at least 4 Energia in the site 112 building, as well as Buran which was atop a fully assembled Energia.
No effort has been made to clear the rubble after the roof collapse and see what, if anything, survived under there.
But whatever the case, Energia did work, it was big, and certainly the designs still exist so there is no reason an Energia (or VKK/Buran for that matter) could not be built again.
It would be better than the American shuttles, although only marginally so (more payload, remote control possible, but apart from that...).
Enterprise and the Falcon are fictional, Energia & Buran actually flew.
Ok, first is to bring it to thier attention - perhaps the higher ups didn't know, perhaps they always intended to rewrite that bit before release but it got overlooked. They may be very apologetic and simply remove the code.
If you want to make money out of it, offer them an alternative licence for a small fee, after you have discussed it with them (you don't want to come off as programmer mafia).
If however they are not apologetic and won't remove the code you need to explain the options to them (assuming it is provable that it is your code).
Thier options are..
1. Accept that they are using your code with permission under the GPL, but are not complying with the terms of the GPL, in which case thier permission is revoked, and;
2. Accept that they are using your code without permission, and are then in clear breach of copyright.
Those are the only two ways they can be using your code if you did not otherwise licence it to them. In either way they instantly lose the battle (presuming they don't find a loophole in the GPL).
Just be gentlemanly about it, don't get on your high horse. Remember that they are using your code, take that as a compliment; just don't let them take you for granted.
I'd really like to see Venusian landers operating again. Venus is IMHO a much more interesting place than Mars, if only because we can't properly see it without actually going there. And yet it's so close (relatively speaking). Those few pictures that came from the Venera probes are soo tantalising, you just want to reach through, grab the camera and tilt it up.
Sure, it might be a very hostile environment, and not being able to get a good look at possible landing sites is a bit of a bugger, but I'm sure if the old Venera peoples were to use thier experience and modern materials & ideas that they could get a lander on the planet with better (and sustainable) capabilities.
There's no chance of recognisable life on Venus of course, but that doesn't mean there isn't life there at all - bacteria can be quite happy in extreme environments.
Mars is cool and all, but really.. rock, another rock, bit of red dust, rock, oh look a crater. Been there, done that, move on.
Not really. Niue simply could not stay economically afloat without help, New Zealand is that help and quite happily so.
However, if the population of Niue falls too low (due to migration here) then the population of Niue would be better served as being NZ citizens with the rights & privileges that go with that so that we can provide services to the resident population more cheaply.
Like any South Pacific nation/island Niue has it's own identity and culture and understandably they want to keep that, and at the same time grow economically to provide better standard of living for the residents. However like most South Pacific islands thier population is leaving, and thier resources are too few to sustain without aid.
It's not class or ideology,
Color, creed, or roots
The only thing that unites us
Is Dr. Marten's boots
Dr. Marten's boots of the world
So that everybody can be free
They're classless, matchless, ageless and waterproof
And retail for only 19 pounds and 99p
What should everyone be wearing?
Those boots with the air-flow soles
And your boots will have a meeting
And your boots will take control
Thanks to Dr. Marten everyone will have warm feet
Thanks to Dr. Marten they'll be dancing in the street
No. Don't You Want Me.
OK, Boots. Do your stuff!
Dr. Marten's, Dr. Marten's, Dr. Marten's boots
Dr. Marten's, Dr. Marten's, Dr. Marten's boots
Dr. Marten's, Dr. Marten's, Dr. Marten's boots!
Maybe, maybe not.
I know that the scientific evidence for a > 24hr bodyclock is disputible, but in my experience I definatly have a > 24 hr clock, not much more but enough that in the 6 months of working for myself from home and not needing to be up at any particular time, I have circumnavigated the clock in a clockwise direction. Some of that advancement can be due to deadlines (pushing to meet them) but in general it's natural.
I go to sleep when I'm sleepy, and I wake up when my body tells me to, I sleep 8 hours, seldom more, seldom less. If I do sleep less I'll often catch it up by taking a nap when I'm sleepy in the middle of the day.
It's just unfortunate that the larger business world is tied into this straight jacket of 9-5 meaning most people have to artificially force thier bodies into a routine it just wasn't designed for and never get to enjoy the less visited times of day.
Except of course the source material that happens to be out in the wild killing people.
They didn't have fuel (100LL) to give him even if they wanted to, the only avgas there was Polly's and not thiers to sell.
This guy was ill prepared he didn't even notify McMurdo that he was going to be attempting a polar overflight and that he would be using thier strip in an emergency. He didn't even call to McMurdo as he passed overhead on his way to the pole.
He may have thought he was prepared, but by the fact that the situation became what it was, he was decidedly unprepared.
I'm not saying he wasn't a good pilot, or his plane wasn't up to the task (it certainly was), or even that he didn't know what he was doing. But he sure as hell didn't let the right people know of his intentions.
Basically Pearse was very stringent on what he would class as flying.
I think if Pearse could be asked he would say that the Wrights and he first "flew" about the same time, but the Wrights were "flying" before him, and indeed that he never attained th goal of "flying".
Above, you point out that he says he set out to attain "aerial navigation" around 1904, which would imply that he had thus "flown" before then and was now working on the larger issue.
He also states that the Wrights achieved "aerial navigation" in 1905, which shows with certainty that he did not believe the Wrights were "flying" in 1903, by his definition of the word.
To Pearse, flying meant being able to usefully go places, not just getting off the ground for a minute or two which was of no use to him at all.
Unfortunatly Pearse was a bit, err, eccentric. He never kept documentation, and didn't consider himself to be flying even when he was able to control the aircraft to an extent - he wanted to be able to go places before he was willing to call it flying.
He never publicised his attempts, he'd just roll the plane out to the road and try it out. If somebody happened to see him they'd shrug it off as the local madman futzing with some contraption again.
As for why eyewitnesses never wrote anything down about the feats, who knows. There is no question that he performed them, only the dates are fuzzy.
Nobody is saying that the Wrights did not perform thier feat independantly. They certainly could not have known about Pearse, and Pearse almost certainly did not know about the Wrights until long after his own exploits.
Wether Pearse was first, or the Wrights, or Dumont, or.... a myriad of other contendors around the world doesn't matter really because at the time there was little if any collaboration between them - they each performed similar aeronautical feats, independantly. That one was before another does not diminish the achievements of either.
The Americans in the world celebrate the Wrights, because they were first.
The New Zealanders celebrate Pearse, because because he was first.
etc...
They were all first.
Hit the nail on the head there.
If people consider that which the Wrights achieved as powered, controlled flight, then they should fairly accept Pearse as having also achieved this - it's fairly clear his attempts were on par with the Wrights 17/12/1903 attempts, and were very likely before those. And in absolute certainty totally independant and without knowledge of the Wrights (Waitohi in 2003 is a one horse town, let alone Waitohi of 1903!).
If however you don't accept that 17/12/1903 attempts by the Wrights were powered, controlled flight then you can discard Pearse's attempts as well.
Pearse himself was of the latter opinion, that his attempts were not "flying", he wanted to be able to fly down to the local town and back before he called it "flying". This leads to much of the uncertainty in confirming Pearse's achievements as Pearse's definition is far more stringent than most people would.
It's just unfortunate that Pearse was a bit eccentric really, otherwise his aircraft ideas could really have caused a stir (he had some very advanced ideas).
When it comes down to it, there were a number of people independantly working on the problem in every corner of the world, the Wrights take the honorary prize because thier contraption worked publicly first not because it was better than anybody elses, or necessarily first to perform out of the public eye.
A better analogy would be riding a geared push bike up a hill.
If you start in the low gear, where your legs are "pushing a lot of ground" you are going to have a very hard job even getting started, if you start in a high gear where your legs are going very fast but are not pushing much ground under you per revolution then you can get moving quite easily (you peddle hard, but it's not hard to peddle).
Once you're moving you can drop into a lower gear so that you are not peddling so frantically (and getting very tired) while moving just as much ground under you as before.
Applying that to variable pitch props, when you take off you need a fine pitch so that you can get going more easily (you are not putting huge stress on the engine just turning the prop), when you get to your cruise alt you can then wind the prop out to a coarser pitch ("lower gear") to slow the engine down so it's not going like a bat out of hell but you're still moving just as fast.
Kennedy was mere days away from beginning a rapid pull out from Vietnam, and if he hadn't been assasinated the cold war would have come to an end much sooner as well. More or less as soon as Kennedy was dead the papers were signed to not only stop the intended pull out, but send more troops in, to Vietnam.
He drove your people to space travel, and indeed reach the Moon (although sadly he didn't see that) which united the world in awe.
Kennedy died because it was not good business for the warmongers to have him in power, and there was no other way to remove him.
I'm not saying Kennedy was a great, or good man, only that had he not been cut down that the world would likely be a very different place. It would be hard to do worse than we are now.
Good answer man, tell us you see no replies, but you know how, and then proceed to NOT tell us the details.
BD-5J .. jets don't have to be big, or expensive.
Your point of looking for fish seems more analagous to looking for humans. Sure if you're looking for humans then you are best to look for earth like planets, since we know that's the environment humans live in - if you look for fish, look in the ocean, if you look for humans look on an earth like planet.
But the search for ET life is just that, a search for life, not humans - we cannot say that life can only be found on earth like planets, we can't even say that in our solar system life can only be found on earth, it's entirely possible that there is life on other celestial bodies in our neighbourhood.
Even if we take the search for intelligent ET life, it's still a search for an unknown life in an unknown environment, so the fixation on earth-like planets is silly.
Far to often I think we assume that ET life must be like earth life, IMHO it's fairly unlikely, considering the (as far as is known) small percentage of planets that are earth like.
Same as if we were looking for "any" life on earth, where do you look, well, everywhere you don't limit yourself to anything in particular because life can't exist there - it can, life can exist (almost) anywhere on earth, so why not anywhere in the universe?
There is one advantage in looking for earth like planets, they could become useful to our distant descendants in the future, probably as a destination for a many-generational ship.
I think they realised it's easier and cheaper to pulverise the enemy before they get weapons than to defend against them.