Another funny story about a terrorist bomb premature detonation was one of a car bomb that detonated on a deserted Israeli road.
Its a little sad that you would view someones death by suicide bombing-- even the bomber's-- as funny. Of course during a war / struggle / conflict it is common to demonize the "enemy" in order to make it easier to hate them, but you tend to lose some of your humanity in the process.
Sorry for double post... But I just went and watched the "full" video here, and around 4:35-4:45, I very clearly see a cut. Is that how such videos generally work? Is there any reason to believe that too was not edited, or can we trust that THIS time, it was the full video?
And I thought the point of a site like wikileaks was to be a neutral, thrid party publishing site; sticking orwell quotes onto a video doesnt seem very neutral to me.
My point was that you dont call someone a cheater based on their performance, and it would be foolish to assume that MS, who has billions to spend and full control of the network, servers, and hardware, would use the same "spectate and look for deviations" method that an open source game uses.
Theyre not going to strip achievements without something more; I cannot believe that this kid is the best player in the world, or that better players than him have all been labeled cheaters. Pulling the "he has autism" card proves nothing except that his parents are prepared to use that excuse as a crutch-- and believe you me, that does no favors to the kid.
When you go to the movies, you have not paid for the privilege of owning the movie. You are paying for the big screen, the speakers, the chairs, and the building's rent. Just because you can justify it to yourself does not make it legally justified; whether or not you give a whit about what the law says is up to you.
Except that every story on google results censoring so far has been about auto-complete and instant serach only. Pressing search on google is not censored in any way I am aware of.
(and some game that fails to control max fire rates, now that actual computing power is available)
Detecting turbo has never been an issue of computing power. I have a game for the SNES (Mario RPG) that relies for many abilities on rapid button press, but if you use turbo it simply does nothing at all.
I have never heard of anyone winning a libel court case because for example Blizzard gear-stripped them and labeled them a botter in WoW, or for the equivalent in any other game.
I dont think thats how libel works, as "cheating" is a judgement by the judge of an online game.
Not unless you can point out where the ADA even mentions online gaming as a place where anti-cheating attempts need to be scaled back (ADA guide); and given that MS had no way of knowing about the autism, it would be incorrect to cry "discrimination".
Its wonderful to know that slashdot is still alive and kicking with its anti-MS hatred. All you have to do is post a completely offtopic, flamebait comment about how awful MS is in an article somewhat related to MS, and you get rated "insightful".
One classic, though by no means the only sign, was an instant-flick moment of the crosshair to an enemy, completely out of line with that player's usual mouse-sensitivity.
Are you aware that most good bots, at least these days, can be tuned to whatever sensitivity you desire in order to evade detection?
I play tremulous occasionally, and one of the difficulties of an OS game with no built in anti-cheat is that you never know whos cheating. Is that guy cheating, or is he really able to take people out at close range with a sniper rifle (mass driver)? Is he cheating, or is he consistently taking out top level aliens with the weakest gun due to never missing a bullet?
You can spectate the guy (view game from his PoV), but you never know if he is turning the aimbot on and off, or tweaking its settings, or if he is really that good. You can accuse him of cheating, but the problem is its not wrong to be so good that you can flick your mouse onto someones head; its only cheating if you have a bot do it for you, and there is no rock solid way to detect that by observation.
An ATI 5870 isnt midrange? What about a 6850? Are they low-end?
Last-gen doesnt mean "garbage" or even "low-end"; a coworker bought a 7900GTS about 2 years ago and it would still probably rank as "low-midrange" today.
Yea, Im still trying to sort that out. Hopefully it only applies to older comments?
A work-around I found was (assuming youre using Discussion2) to move the slider off of -1, and then back to it. Apparently this refreshes it and forces it to apply the proper filter.
Thumbs up on the much faster replies, though, and fixed copy-paste.
Obviously we can throw out #1 because it does not at all fit with wikileaks modus operandi and cannot be carried out by their infrastructure.
So let me get this straight. Youve set up a dichotomy (its either WL or the US government), then declare one of the options "doesnt fit" with how you view their methods, and thus it is very likely the other.
To quote the simpsons, "thats some fine police work there, Lou."
For starters, I dont think you can look at it simply as a series of x many positives and y many negatives, or assume that the drive started out at 0 or 1.
For data to be recovered from 'before the wipe', you have to imagine that somehow the wipe was fundamentally different than every other write operation that happened before
As I understand it, lets say WD drives all start with drive initialized to +0.05% magnetic field on every bit. Now you install windows, and the bits that are zeros read as 0.02% and the ones read as 0.97%. If you zero the drive, the 1s will now read as 0.04% and the former zeros will read as 0.002%. You CAN tell something about the previous state of the data from this, though going back further would get progressively harder-- for example, after 2 alternating "every other bit" overwrites, I dont think you could tell what order the overwrites were applied in, but you could certainly know something about the previous state of the data.
In one sense I will grant that it is likely academic, since it seems to get incredibly hard to gather information very quickly; but let us assume you do a simple zeroing of the drive, I think that it starts to become feasable as you KNOW that all bits had the same magnetic field applied to them, and magnetic fields dont just "disappear" AFAIK. Presumably you could do better with random bits, but whos to say that some govt agency with tons of money to spare couldnt look for patterns and recover SOME files?
At the end of the day, if someone asks me for a way to really securely delete their data, Im not going to lecture them on how a zeroing is sufficient, or caveat that with "but Im not really an expert so I dont really know"; Im just going to hand them Darik's Boot and Nuke, tell them "this is good enough for the government", and let that be the end of the story (3 pass PNRG wipe).
Slashdot Mirror
Another funny story about a terrorist bomb premature detonation was one of a car bomb that detonated on a deserted Israeli road.
Its a little sad that you would view someones death by suicide bombing-- even the bomber's-- as funny. Of course during a war / struggle / conflict it is common to demonize the "enemy" in order to make it easier to hate them, but you tend to lose some of your humanity in the process.
Sorry for double post... But I just went and watched the "full" video here, and around 4:35-4:45, I very clearly see a cut. Is that how such videos generally work? Is there any reason to believe that too was not edited, or can we trust that THIS time, it was the full video?
And I thought the point of a site like wikileaks was to be a neutral, thrid party publishing site; sticking orwell quotes onto a video doesnt seem very neutral to me.
Are you dancing around the idea that it is possible to live in a world (inhabited by humans) where no secrets are necessary?
Wikileaks isnt down; Openleaks folks simply werent satisfied with how Assange was running things.
Lets not make this something it isnt.
My point was that you dont call someone a cheater based on their performance, and it would be foolish to assume that MS, who has billions to spend and full control of the network, servers, and hardware, would use the same "spectate and look for deviations" method that an open source game uses.
Theyre not going to strip achievements without something more; I cannot believe that this kid is the best player in the world, or that better players than him have all been labeled cheaters. Pulling the "he has autism" card proves nothing except that his parents are prepared to use that excuse as a crutch-- and believe you me, that does no favors to the kid.
to quote from parent:
- that's not a crime in all jurisdictions
I have yet to see a story about "google censors search terms when you click search".
When you go to the movies, you have not paid for the privilege of owning the movie. You are paying for the big screen, the speakers, the chairs, and the building's rent. Just because you can justify it to yourself does not make it legally justified; whether or not you give a whit about what the law says is up to you.
Good try though.
Except that every story on google results censoring so far has been about auto-complete and instant serach only. Pressing search on google is not censored in any way I am aware of.
So you mean telnet the program, not telnet the protocol-- what the article was about?
Shhh, thats the one question we're not supposed to ask!
Slightly off topic, but...
(and some game that fails to control max fire rates, now that actual computing power is available)
Detecting turbo has never been an issue of computing power. I have a game for the SNES (Mario RPG) that relies for many abilities on rapid button press, but if you use turbo it simply does nothing at all.
So we're supposed to believe a parent and a news show, whose entire argument centers around "but he has autism"?
Why is there even a story to begin with?
I have never heard of anyone winning a libel court case because for example Blizzard gear-stripped them and labeled them a botter in WoW, or for the equivalent in any other game.
I dont think thats how libel works, as "cheating" is a judgement by the judge of an online game.
Not unless you can point out where the ADA even mentions online gaming as a place where anti-cheating attempts need to be scaled back (ADA guide); and given that MS had no way of knowing about the autism, it would be incorrect to cry "discrimination".
Its wonderful to know that slashdot is still alive and kicking with its anti-MS hatred. All you have to do is post a completely offtopic, flamebait comment about how awful MS is in an article somewhat related to MS, and you get rated "insightful".
Isnt slashdot wonderful?
One classic, though by no means the only sign, was an instant-flick moment of the crosshair to an enemy, completely out of line with that player's usual mouse-sensitivity.
Are you aware that most good bots, at least these days, can be tuned to whatever sensitivity you desire in order to evade detection?
I play tremulous occasionally, and one of the difficulties of an OS game with no built in anti-cheat is that you never know whos cheating. Is that guy cheating, or is he really able to take people out at close range with a sniper rifle (mass driver)? Is he cheating, or is he consistently taking out top level aliens with the weakest gun due to never missing a bullet?
You can spectate the guy (view game from his PoV), but you never know if he is turning the aimbot on and off, or tweaking its settings, or if he is really that good. You can accuse him of cheating, but the problem is its not wrong to be so good that you can flick your mouse onto someones head; its only cheating if you have a bot do it for you, and there is no rock solid way to detect that by observation.
An ATI 5870 isnt midrange? What about a 6850? Are they low-end?
Last-gen doesnt mean "garbage" or even "low-end"; a coworker bought a 7900GTS about 2 years ago and it would still probably rank as "low-midrange" today.
Yea, Im still trying to sort that out. Hopefully it only applies to older comments?
A work-around I found was (assuming youre using Discussion2) to move the slider off of -1, and then back to it. Apparently this refreshes it and forces it to apply the proper filter.
Thumbs up on the much faster replies, though, and fixed copy-paste.
But i also have to wonder if our western media isn't exactly the same but just smarter about it?
To be fair, you wont get locked up in the US for doing a piece on Tienanmen square.
Paste not working in chrome is a webkit bug, present in dev versions of chrome (stable should be fine).
Every time you use the word sheep, your credibility drops about 5 notches. Just a heads up.
Depends what mouse youre using and if you need /want to configure mouse buttons to masquerade as hotkeys.
Obviously we can throw out #1 because it does not at all fit with wikileaks modus operandi and cannot be carried out by their infrastructure.
So let me get this straight. Youve set up a dichotomy (its either WL or the US government), then declare one of the options "doesnt fit" with how you view their methods, and thus it is very likely the other.
To quote the simpsons, "thats some fine police work there, Lou."
For starters, I dont think you can look at it simply as a series of x many positives and y many negatives, or assume that the drive started out at 0 or 1.
For data to be recovered from 'before the wipe', you have to imagine that somehow the wipe was fundamentally different than every other write operation that happened before
As I understand it, lets say WD drives all start with drive initialized to +0.05% magnetic field on every bit. Now you install windows, and the bits that are zeros read as 0.02% and the ones read as 0.97%. If you zero the drive, the 1s will now read as 0.04% and the former zeros will read as 0.002%. You CAN tell something about the previous state of the data from this, though going back further would get progressively harder-- for example, after 2 alternating "every other bit" overwrites, I dont think you could tell what order the overwrites were applied in, but you could certainly know something about the previous state of the data.
In one sense I will grant that it is likely academic, since it seems to get incredibly hard to gather information very quickly; but let us assume you do a simple zeroing of the drive, I think that it starts to become feasable as you KNOW that all bits had the same magnetic field applied to them, and magnetic fields dont just "disappear" AFAIK. Presumably you could do better with random bits, but whos to say that some govt agency with tons of money to spare couldnt look for patterns and recover SOME files?
At the end of the day, if someone asks me for a way to really securely delete their data, Im not going to lecture them on how a zeroing is sufficient, or caveat that with "but Im not really an expert so I dont really know"; Im just going to hand them Darik's Boot and Nuke, tell them "this is good enough for the government", and let that be the end of the story (3 pass PNRG wipe).