Bitcoins are only worth anything to those who value them, much the same as digital in-game currencies.
Whether or not they are legal, there do exist places that exchange in-game currency for $US (as well as other currencies).
If Bit-coin is to be outlawed, all it-game currency should be outlawed as well. The Bit-Coin game is boring -- focusing solely on the generation and transactions of bit-coins, but it is essentially the same as any modern MMO game with transferable in-game currency.
Interestingly enough, Bit-coin makes an excellent in-game currency if you don't mind giving up control over the value of the in-game goods, and require players to purchase their starting in-game currency allotment (otherwise you're giving away free bit-coins).
Or, you can turn the whole in-game currency thing on it's ear and just make a free to play MMO with a game client that doubles as a your own personal distributed Bit-Coin mining operation.
I suppose players could subvert your network protocol and claim the bit-coins that their machines generate, but as long as most people don't do this the idea could be "profitable" (providing you can exchange bit-coin for more than enough than the currency required to run the servers that power the game).
Every client has a complete list of all transactions... how can they be called untraceable?
Simple, each bit-coin "wallet" has over 100 keys to use during a transaction. Use the key once & it'll be pretty hard to determine that that other keys you own relate to the key you used once. Even more keys per wallet are also possible, and the wallets are not linked to a person's identity -- Sort of like having a bunch of credit cards under assumed identities, if that were not illegal...
It would be like having 100 different identities and costumes to match -- You go out and buy something in your inspector gadget outfit, and everyone knows who you were (Mr. Gadget), and everyone has a record of your purchase; Later, if you decide to retire that outfit, and instead go out dressed as Bozo the Clown you won't have to worry about being known as the go-go-gadget guy.
Of course, keeping your identity secret is your own responsibility, if you go out as Bozo the Clown and buy a name-badge that says: "Leroy Jenkins", the seller could rat you out and give people your address. Then everyone will know to lynch the clown guy.
Fortunately, you can just don your Mr. T. outfit to make purchases in, but don't be surprised if an angry mob still shows up at the address you had your name badge mailed to.
Coca Cola also can't claim that drinking coke cures cancer, even though anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows it doesn't.
It may not cure cancer, but it used to calm the nerves, cure headaches, and put a smile on your face -- well, back when it was laced with cocaine.
Today, the only things it cures is low blood sugar and headaches due to caffeine addiction withdrawals.
It's really too bad, if we had allowed pharmaceuticals to stay in colas perhaps their massive global revenue reserves would have been available to advance cancer research and discover a cure; Thus, drinking coke would cure cancer.
P.S. To all against legalizing recreational drugs: I expect you to be pushing for the outlawing of caffeine and alcohol or shutting the hell up.
Now RFC1149 for 'IP over avian carriers' needs an addendum. IETF go!
I disagree. We should all get on board with a ready backup plan based on RFC4838. Every town should have an implementation of Delay-tolerant Networking, just in case...
Our local DTN could use shortwave radio, and/or CB with repeaters, etc.
Alas, I fear we will only begin to build the network after it is needed... On a related note: I want the right to bear technology lumped in with the right to bear arms if my strong encryption system is going to be considered munitions.
Considering how Amazon has become known for caving to the slightest pressure from law enforcement or even just a nosy senator, to host such an attack from EC2 seems extraordinarily stupid.
It would make much more sense to launch it from somewhere hosted by a company that doesn't have a reputation for giving up their customer's data and shutting down even legitimate stuff that happens to run afoul of their vague guidelines.
?? Huh?
If you're in the business of stealing credentials, why not use some of the Amazon services those credentials allow you to access in order to get even more credentials?
As a benefit this also allows moronic assumpteers to take a distracting trip down "IP + Credentials == People" or "Shoot the Messenger" lane. If UPS delivers you a bomb or an envelope full of anthrax, it's not UPS's fault -- It's the malcontent that sent the package (Well, it's partially your fault too for accepting mail from a company who's name is "Oops!"). Of course the return address is a fake, unless, you assume the identity thieves are careless with their own identities...
You [realize] that the article is rules of thumb, which themselves are summaries of accepted wisdom, right?
Yes, yes... I see irony is not lost on you.
If anything, going by this article it should be RTFS not RTFA.
Or you could just actually take the effort to understand the tradeoffs you're making instead of following a set of vague general rules which aren't suited to each situation... If it's important, it's worth getting the detail right. Think brain surgery - do you want your brain surgeon ignoring the detail and applying a set of shortcut rules of thumb?
I believe the term you are looking for is RTFM, the father of both RTFS and RTFA...
I concur, RTFM if it's important enough for you to care -- irregardless of TFA's thumb laws; Which, in Slashdot tradition, I have yet to read due to the fact it is pointless to tell someone like me who pays close attention to detail to not consider all the details during my purchases.
Hence, we've arrived at the best metacarpal legislation to date: "Do as I say, not as I do!" (best delivered while pointing and shaking the "index" finger rather than the thumb -- unless you are a master of irony, and you secretly approve of the behavior).
“We will release our software as OPEN SOURCE to allow researchers, teachers, and developers to adapt and extend our software according to their needs and knowledge."
Basically, this means they will give you the source code so that you can make it better for them. They will not give you all the software needed to create your own robotics platform (only releasing portions of the code). The software is touted as being "cross platform", but rest assured that the copyright license restrictions will prevent you from making use of "their code" to power a robotics system not purchased from them.
TL;DR: Pfffft. Let me know when it's released as Free Software.
Re:The question nobody wants to ask....
on
Perl 5.14 Released
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I somewhat agree, however the floating point implementations SUCK at powers of ten -- you should specify epsilon in terms of powers of two. Hell, even my correct decimal text to float/double parsing function is 8 times more complex than the same in hex Why, even C has a hex float/double literal that goes something like this: /[+-]?0x[0-9a-f]+\.?[0-9a-f]*p?[+-]?[0-9a-f]*/i )
The "p" in there stands for "times Nth power of two" similar to the "e" in decimal floats meaning "times Nth power of ten". eg: 0x123p-8 == 0x1.23
Note, hex decimal places act like decimal's do eg: 0x1.23 == (dec) 1 + 35 / 256 == 1.13671875 or (hex) 0x1 + 0x23 / 0x100 == 0x1.23
Specifying floats in the language of the computer's math (binary representable fractions) allows you to actually use equality properly ;-)
Some of my languages have the === operator already, similar to JS's exact match, perhaps ~=~ or =~= or "approx" would be better?
I've thought of adding an "approximate" operator -- esp. for physics simulation & game DSLs.
Although, what's wrong with specifying your required precision? Define your own epsilon (error factor).
print "$a is approx $b\n" if ( $a > ($b - $epsilon) && $a < ($b + $epsilon) );
# Compared to:
print "$a is approx $b\n" if ( $a approx $b );
# Oh, great, now we need another obscure magic special variable to contain epsilon...
# Perhaps$ëwould do? Our English users won't mind using character map...
Note, I'm a coder & technology security researcher. If I ask a "competent" technician to remove malware from my machine, and they don't immediately flash the BIOS, then re-format the drives from a known good boot medium & (re)install a fresh copy of the OS -- I wouldn't call them competent.
Let's say you find out an agent working for you is really a spy -- What can they do to prove their loyalty? Nothing: They're a spy! You can't trust a spy, you have to get rid of them and get a new agent. The agent is your computer (BI)OS.
AV: Is there a rootkit on this machine? RootKit: Nope. AV: All clean!
Now -- How did that user get infected with malware? It could be any of the many THOUSANDS of exploit vectors for the infected OS; Many of which are delivered via image or other media files, and many can infect other such files, or install more malware that does.
I've actually had several experiences of backing up just the "important" data files of a system, then re-installing the OS, Scanning the data files for malware & copying the data files back to the system and re-infecting the system in the process.
In one such occasion the Anti-Virus scanner was the targeted vector! (It had a buffer overflow that allowed a file it scanned to initiate arbitrary code execution). In another occasion the file browser was exploited. In several other cases the AV scanners failed to detect any malicious files because it was new malware, that did not have a signature in the AV databases.
I agree that a customer should be informed that their system will be wiped clean, and perhaps offered the choice of a backup if it's feasible, but the backup should come with a warning "May Re-Infect Your Computer" -- For the most part, it's less hassle to just wipe the system.
IMHO, If you don't explicitly ask for a backup, it should be assumed you don't want one; If you don't expect a format to occur then you're not computer literate enough to understand why it should always be done.
It's not evidence of an incompetent consultant if "Fix this malware problem for me" translates to "Reformat & Re-install the software for me." There is no such thing as "uninstall malware" or "remove malware" short of a full drive (and possibly BIOS) wipe -- and even then I've seen BIOS malware that prevents re-flashing... "Looks like it needs a new motherboard" Bu-but! Softwarecan't harm Hardware ( Fortunately most malware has other aims than gorking your computer -- malware designed for this purpose, can occasionally melt CPUs and/or make the CD/DVD, NIC, and/or motherboard non-functional thanks to flash-able software embedded in the hardware.
P.S. If you have private/personal data on your computer and it's not encrypted then it's not private; In this case smash the disk drive with a mallet and ask the computer tech to install a new one during the "repair" (hint: it should really be a re-build anyhow).
Yeah... that'll show 'em! Everybody make a special point to endorse the distribution of copyright restricted media. (Note: Piracy, much like over the air Radio, promotes sales -- Derp!)
Seriously -- The safe harbor provisions of the DMCA provide Twitter, Facebook, Slashdot, and any other user generated content providers protection against their users' blatant disregard for retarded orders such as these.
Effectively, The Facebook or Twitter staff themselves can't release the info on their home pages / blogs / etc, but we, as users, can post whatever the hell we want (esp. in responce to a blog post by a Twitter or Facebook employee's saying that they have been gaged against releasing the information).
It's the 1st amendment because it's the most important one -- they can't inhibit the spread of information if it wants to be free; To do so is unconstitutional.
I have build a electromechanical non-volatile RAM device in my garage (two of its walls to be precice). The RAM module can store 2048 bits (2Kb, 256 8bit bytes). The contacter relays have been modified to mechanically operate toggle switches that then preserve the relays' state when powered down. Thus, Individual bits can be edited by hand. A computer can access the bit array via parallel port (8 bit module at a time -- the computer selects which byte is returned by first writing a selection byte). It's quite noisy, but simply fascinating when operating (especially in the dark due to sparks between the contacts).
Yes I know it's uselessly slow, and limited, but the kids now know more about, and show more interest in technology than any other subject. The text of a few children's books have traversed the GRAM (Garage RAM), and just for grins bits toggled here and there to see their effects on the familiar stories -- Identifying specific ASCII codes to target was mostly left up to me, but not always: They quickly picked up on the bad habit of identifying the bit #5 as being Caps / Lowercase toggle for letter codes:-) -- A neighbor's child is now very interested in programming due to my simple programmable byte selection system. (Perhaps I shall turn it into a full working computer if interest is not lost with age).
I would like to see MPAA support for a $100 levy per magnet (rare earth, artificially created, or electric), $1,000 levy per relay, $10,000 levy per foot of wire, $1,000,000 levy per kilo of sand, -- Prices given in relation to the chance that the type of component is being used to store copyright restricted information in breach of said information's license. ( It seems they've already done a good enough job on printer ink... ) I believe nothing short of this will rally the general public into making the right choice -- Stop allowing the Government to sell its citizens' freedom of speech rights to the media corporations.
The final frontier is now: how to make it wrappable / roll-in and back again or similar? 10 inches is too big for my pockets..
You can have a fully bendable display once we figure out how to combat the creasing problem. Hint: Paper currency is "wrappable" -- Take a few from your wallet and look at a "straightened" piece of fully bendable currency and you'll get my point.
IMHO, It's more feasible to use projective displays to solve the "too big for my pockets" problem.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Either we're outraged at the level of privacy invasion perpetrated by big business, and should out-law cookies / require a do-not-track opt out -- OR -- We require big business to record the browsing habits of citizens for many years, just in case anyone wants to have a look.... BUT WE CAN'T HAVE BOTH.
Isn't the point of driving a car that it *isn't* optimized? You see a cool store and stop to check it out, go to get groceries, then maybe go for a spirited drive in the country? It's the essence of the american dream, freedom, mobility, and life on your own terms.
I think you fail to recognize that some Americans dream of sitting in their car while it drives them, thus freeing us to get back to our mobile information fixation devices, or other forms of instantaneous gratifications such as the orgasmatron. The cool stores all have websites, grocers deliver (yes, in my neighborhood), much of the "country" I knew in my youth has been paved...
(Speaking of country, that reminds me: While scanning across several stations I came across a "country music" station -- I don't usually like country music, but I appreciate some forms of it -- the song was something like: "I'm sexier on the Internet", at which point I dubbed both "country music" and radio dead to me.)
Personally, I've hated Flash for almost a decade and don't install it if I can avoid it... usually my work machines end up needing it for some 3rd party site they force us to use. But, I don't make a habit of having it enabled.
I'm not sure I can name one instance where I found Flash to be useful or something I'd want. Although, who knows, maybe I'm missing out on something really cool... but my experience with Flash has primarily been about having half a dozen ads on screen that are all in motion.
Well, that and the fact that it's been a gaping security hole since forever.
I agree... Besides, Flash is just like using JavaScript (well... ActionScript) to animate a bunch of graphics primitives or to stream a video. These are things that browsers can do without Flash -- I mean, HTML5 gives you almost all the same featu r e s --- HEY! Shit! We've been dupped into letting the browser makers create their own integrated version of Flash!
Oh, never mind -- It's all OK, it will be codified as a web standard...Just like the current HTML4.01 is -- What could possibly go wrong?
Yeah, 'cos I'm sure with no government getting in the way, the big boys will all agree to play nice. Yes siree, can't see any problem with that.
Patents aren't the problem, stupid patents are the problem.
No, patents are the problem. Let's look at copyright for just a sec: To infringe I have to willfully duplicate all or most of an existing work covered by copyright. Now, back to patents: To infringe I can be clever in a steel box fully detached from the rest of the world and accidentally create something that's mostly similar to something some other sucker got the the patent office first with.
Know why I'm always re-inventing the wheel? Because it's damn simple to do, and blatantly obvious -- Know why I've infringed 4 "clever" patents without even knowing it? Because it was damn simple to do, and blatantly obvious to a clever person.
The purpose of both the copyright and patent system is to help society, not the inventors or authors... Yet, I create and distribute free software that benefits the general public, and can be prevented from distributing due to patents.
It's easy for a software creator like myself to avoid infringing copyright law -- I just don't look at anyone else's code. There is no way to attempt to avoid infringing patents -- I must try to not accidentally think the same as anyone who's been to the patent office in the last 20 years.
In a way you are correct about "stupid patents" being the problem. I put it to you that since patent law exists primarily for the benefit of society the capacity for any given patent to harm society makes them all stupid patents.
I almost wonder if some of these patent trolls are literally surfing through old theses and essays on algorithms from the 60s to the 80s looking for concepts that they can slap a stamp on and send to the patent office. For god's sake, there must be hundreds of examples of garbage-collecting hash tables from that period of time. It's hardly a novel or unique concept.
I'm seriously expect someone to come along and patent Quicksort. If you can patent garbage collection on a hash table, then why not sort algorithms?
It would have to be a quick sort that excludes some items on the fly as it sorts and releases them -- like say, min_sort_val = 10 or something... now THAT would be innovative.
Additionally, I'd just like to point out that the term "Garbage Collection" alludes to a ridiculous analogy. Seriously. When's the last time the garbage man came into your house, decided you didn't use something based on the amount of dust on it, then hauled it away without asking? Never... (GC should be called Maid Service, or perhaps Vengeful Mother-in-Law Disposal instead).
IRL, You decide what you want in the garbage, then place the collection of those items in the designated receptacle prior to a garbage collection pass. Additionally -- DON'T THROW AWAY THE RESOURCES! PLEASE RECYCLE THEM! -- THEY SHOULD NOT END UP IN A LANDFILL! (Garbage Collection would be a more fitting name for a "memory leak")
I am a Controls Engineer and work with HMI interfaces everyday.
We keep seeing more and more things like this in the controls world. Every few months, we hear, this HMI or this controls software has these vulnerabilities and can be owned this way or that. Properly designed controls systems do not touch the internet or extend beyond the controls world.
Place I work at, we have completely separate hardware then IT. Our own switches, our own computers, etc. We keep everything separate specifically to guard against someone hacking into our system and taking it over. Someone can't sit across the world and hack into our system because it doesn't connect. They would have to penetrate our security perimeter first in order to gain access to our controls system. If they do that, then it doesn't really matter which HMI software we are using, we are owned anyway.
It does scare me when I think about some of the other plants and industries make connections to the intranet for reasons from their controls system and trust that their securities will hold.
::sigh:: Stuxnet. Delivered by USB. ANY data allowed in, discs, e-mail, etc, is a liability. You've got an intranet with all your own switches, etc. The air gap get's breached via sneaker net once, and you're toast. There is no such thing as fool-proof.
Slashdot Mirror
Whether or not they are legal, there do exist places that exchange in-game currency for $US (as well as other currencies).
If Bit-coin is to be outlawed, all it-game currency should be outlawed as well. The Bit-Coin game is boring -- focusing solely on the generation and transactions of bit-coins, but it is essentially the same as any modern MMO game with transferable in-game currency.
Interestingly enough, Bit-coin makes an excellent in-game currency if you don't mind giving up control over the value of the in-game goods, and require players to purchase their starting in-game currency allotment (otherwise you're giving away free bit-coins).
Or, you can turn the whole in-game currency thing on it's ear and just make a free to play MMO with a game client that doubles as a your own personal distributed Bit-Coin mining operation.
I suppose players could subvert your network protocol and claim the bit-coins that their machines generate, but as long as most people don't do this the idea could be "profitable" (providing you can exchange bit-coin for more than enough than the currency required to run the servers that power the game).
Every client has a complete list of all transactions... how can they be called untraceable?
Simple, each bit-coin "wallet" has over 100 keys to use during a transaction. Use the key once & it'll be pretty hard to determine that that other keys you own relate to the key you used once. Even more keys per wallet are also possible, and the wallets are not linked to a person's identity -- Sort of like having a bunch of credit cards under assumed identities, if that were not illegal...
It would be like having 100 different identities and costumes to match -- You go out and buy something in your inspector gadget outfit, and everyone knows who you were (Mr. Gadget), and everyone has a record of your purchase; Later, if you decide to retire that outfit, and instead go out dressed as Bozo the Clown you won't have to worry about being known as the go-go-gadget guy.
Of course, keeping your identity secret is your own responsibility, if you go out as Bozo the Clown and buy a name-badge that says: "Leroy Jenkins", the seller could rat you out and give people your address. Then everyone will know to lynch the clown guy.
Fortunately, you can just don your Mr. T. outfit to make purchases in, but don't be surprised if an angry mob still shows up at the address you had your name badge mailed to.
Coca Cola also can't claim that drinking coke cures cancer, even though anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows it doesn't.
It may not cure cancer, but it used to calm the nerves, cure headaches, and put a smile on your face -- well, back when it was laced with cocaine.
Today, the only things it cures is low blood sugar and headaches due to caffeine addiction withdrawals.
It's really too bad, if we had allowed pharmaceuticals to stay in colas perhaps their massive global revenue reserves would have been available to advance cancer research and discover a cure; Thus, drinking coke would cure cancer.
P.S. To all against legalizing recreational drugs: I expect you to be pushing for the outlawing of caffeine and alcohol or shutting the hell up.
Now RFC1149 for 'IP over avian carriers' needs an addendum. IETF go!
I disagree. We should all get on board with a ready backup plan based on RFC4838. Every town should have an implementation of Delay-tolerant Networking, just in case...
NASA has already began testing an implementation of RFC1149 for use in space.
Our local DTN could use shortwave radio, and/or CB with repeaters, etc.
Alas, I fear we will only begin to build the network after it is needed... On a related note: I want the right to bear technology lumped in with the right to bear arms if my strong encryption system is going to be considered munitions.
Considering how Amazon has become known for caving to the slightest pressure from law enforcement or even just a nosy senator, to host such an attack from EC2 seems extraordinarily stupid.
It would make much more sense to launch it from somewhere hosted by a company that doesn't have a reputation for giving up their customer's data and shutting down even legitimate stuff that happens to run afoul of their vague guidelines.
?? Huh?
If you're in the business of stealing credentials, why not use some of the Amazon services those credentials allow you to access in order to get even more credentials?
As a benefit this also allows moronic assumpteers to take a distracting trip down "IP + Credentials == People" or "Shoot the Messenger" lane. If UPS delivers you a bomb or an envelope full of anthrax, it's not UPS's fault -- It's the malcontent that sent the package (Well, it's partially your fault too for accepting mail from a company who's name is "Oops!"). Of course the return address is a fake, unless, you assume the identity thieves are careless with their own identities...
Read TFA, not TFS.
You [realize] that the article is rules of thumb, which themselves are summaries of accepted wisdom, right?
Yes, yes... I see irony is not lost on you.
If anything, going by this article it should be RTFS not RTFA.
Or you could just actually take the effort to understand the tradeoffs you're making instead of following a set of vague general rules which aren't suited to each situation... If it's important, it's worth getting the detail right. Think brain surgery - do you want your brain surgeon ignoring the detail and applying a set of shortcut rules of thumb?
I believe the term you are looking for is RTFM, the father of both RTFS and RTFA...
I concur, RTFM if it's important enough for you to care -- irregardless of TFA's thumb laws; Which, in Slashdot tradition, I have yet to read due to the fact it is pointless to tell someone like me who pays close attention to detail to not consider all the details during my purchases.
Hence, we've arrived at the best metacarpal legislation to date: "Do as I say, not as I do!"
(best delivered while pointing and shaking the "index" finger rather than the thumb -- unless you are a master of irony, and you secretly approve of the behavior).
From TFA:
“We will release our software as OPEN SOURCE to allow researchers, teachers, and developers to adapt and extend our software according to their needs and knowledge."
Basically, this means they will give you the source code so that you can make it better for them. They will not give you all the software needed to create your own robotics platform (only releasing portions of the code). The software is touted as being "cross platform", but rest assured that the copyright license restrictions will prevent you from making use of "their code" to power a robotics system not purchased from them.
TL;DR: Pfffft. Let me know when it's released as Free Software.
Read TFA, not TFS.
I somewhat agree, however the floating point implementations SUCK at powers of ten -- you should specify epsilon in terms of powers of two. Hell, even my correct decimal text to float/double parsing function is 8 times more complex than the same in hex Why, even C has a hex float/double literal that goes something like this:
/[+-]?0x[0-9a-f]+\.?[0-9a-f]*p?[+-]?[0-9a-f]*/i )
The "p" in there stands for "times Nth power of two" similar to the "e" in decimal floats meaning "times Nth power of ten". eg: 0x123p-8 == 0x1.23
Note, hex decimal places act like decimal's do eg:
0x1.23 == (dec) 1 + 35 / 256 == 1.13671875 or (hex) 0x1 + 0x23 / 0x100 == 0x1.23
Specifying floats in the language of the computer's math (binary representable fractions) allows you to actually use equality properly ;-)
Some of my languages have the === operator already, similar to JS's exact match, perhaps ~=~ or =~= or "approx" would be better?
I've thought of adding an "approximate" operator -- esp. for physics simulation & game DSLs.
Although, what's wrong with specifying your required precision? Define your own epsilon (error factor).
print "$a is approx $b\n" if ( $a > ($b - $epsilon) && $a < ($b + $epsilon) );
# Compared to:
print "$a is approx $b\n" if ( $a approx $b );
# Oh, great, now we need another obscure magic special variable to contain epsilon...
# Perhaps $ë would do? Our English users won't mind using character map...
Note, I'm a coder & technology security researcher. If I ask a "competent" technician to remove malware from my machine, and they don't immediately flash the BIOS, then re-format the drives from a known good boot medium & (re)install a fresh copy of the OS -- I wouldn't call them competent.
Let's say you find out an agent working for you is really a spy -- What can they do to prove their loyalty? Nothing: They're a spy! You can't trust a spy, you have to get rid of them and get a new agent. The agent is your computer (BI)OS.
AV: Is there a rootkit on this machine?
RootKit: Nope.
AV: All clean!
Now -- How did that user get infected with malware? It could be any of the many THOUSANDS of exploit vectors for the infected OS; Many of which are delivered via image or other media files, and many can infect other such files, or install more malware that does.
I've actually had several experiences of backing up just the "important" data files of a system, then re-installing the OS, Scanning the data files for malware & copying the data files back to the system and re-infecting the system in the process.
In one such occasion the Anti-Virus scanner was the targeted vector! (It had a buffer overflow that allowed a file it scanned to initiate arbitrary code execution). In another occasion the file browser was exploited. In several other cases the AV scanners failed to detect any malicious files because it was new malware, that did not have a signature in the AV databases.
I agree that a customer should be informed that their system will be wiped clean, and perhaps offered the choice of a backup if it's feasible, but the backup should come with a warning "May Re-Infect Your Computer" -- For the most part, it's less hassle to just wipe the system.
IMHO, If you don't explicitly ask for a backup, it should be assumed you don't want one; If you don't expect a format to occur then you're not computer literate enough to understand why it should always be done.
It's not evidence of an incompetent consultant if "Fix this malware problem for me" translates to "Reformat & Re-install the software for me." There is no such thing as "uninstall malware" or "remove malware" short of a full drive (and possibly BIOS) wipe -- and even then I've seen BIOS malware that prevents re-flashing... "Looks like it needs a new motherboard" Bu-but! Software can't harm Hardware ( Fortunately most malware has other aims than gorking your computer -- malware designed for this purpose, can occasionally melt CPUs and/or make the CD/DVD, NIC, and/or motherboard non-functional thanks to flash-able software embedded in the hardware.
P.S. If you have private/personal data on your computer and it's not encrypted then it's not private; In this case smash the disk drive with a mallet and ask the computer tech to install a new one during the "repair" (hint: it should really be a re-build anyhow).
Yeah... that'll show 'em! Everybody make a special point to endorse the distribution of copyright restricted media. (Note: Piracy, much like over the air Radio, promotes sales -- Derp!)
Seriously -- The safe harbor provisions of the DMCA provide Twitter, Facebook, Slashdot, and any other user generated content providers protection against their users' blatant disregard for retarded orders such as these.
Effectively, The Facebook or Twitter staff themselves can't release the info on their home pages / blogs / etc, but we, as users, can post whatever the hell we want (esp. in responce to a blog post by a Twitter or Facebook employee's saying that they have been gaged against releasing the information).
It's the 1st amendment because it's the most important one -- they can't inhibit the spread of information if it wants to be free; To do so is unconstitutional.
I have build a electromechanical non-volatile RAM device in my garage (two of its walls to be precice). The RAM module can store 2048 bits (2Kb, 256 8bit bytes). The contacter relays have been modified to mechanically operate toggle switches that then preserve the relays' state when powered down. Thus, Individual bits can be edited by hand. A computer can access the bit array via parallel port (8 bit module at a time -- the computer selects which byte is returned by first writing a selection byte). It's quite noisy, but simply fascinating when operating (especially in the dark due to sparks between the contacts).
Yes I know it's uselessly slow, and limited, but the kids now know more about, and show more interest in technology than any other subject. The text of a few children's books have traversed the GRAM (Garage RAM), and just for grins bits toggled here and there to see their effects on the familiar stories -- Identifying specific ASCII codes to target was mostly left up to me, but not always: They quickly picked up on the bad habit of identifying the bit #5 as being Caps / Lowercase toggle for letter codes :-) -- A neighbor's child is now very interested in programming due to my simple programmable byte selection system. (Perhaps I shall turn it into a full working computer if interest is not lost with age).
I would like to see MPAA support for a $100 levy per magnet (rare earth, artificially created, or electric), $1,000 levy per relay, $10,000 levy per foot of wire, $1,000,000 levy per kilo of sand, -- Prices given in relation to the chance that the type of component is being used to store copyright restricted information in breach of said information's license. ( It seems they've already done a good enough job on printer ink... ) I believe nothing short of this will rally the general public into making the right choice -- Stop allowing the Government to sell its citizens' freedom of speech rights to the media corporations.
The final frontier is now: how to make it wrappable / roll-in and back again or similar? 10 inches is too big for my pockets..
You can have a fully bendable display once we figure out how to combat the creasing problem. Hint: Paper currency is "wrappable" -- Take a few from your wallet and look at a "straightened" piece of fully bendable currency and you'll get my point.
IMHO, It's more feasible to use projective displays to solve the "too big for my pockets" problem.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Either we're outraged at the level of privacy invasion perpetrated by big business, and should out-law cookies / require a do-not-track opt out -- OR -- We require big business to record the browsing habits of citizens for many years, just in case anyone wants to have a look.... BUT WE CAN'T HAVE BOTH.
Isn't the point of driving a car that it *isn't* optimized? You see a cool store and stop to check it out, go to get groceries, then maybe go for a spirited drive in the country? It's the essence of the american dream, freedom, mobility, and life on your own terms.
I think you fail to recognize that some Americans dream of sitting in their car while it drives them, thus freeing us to get back to our mobile information fixation devices, or other forms of instantaneous gratifications such as the orgasmatron. The cool stores all have websites, grocers deliver (yes, in my neighborhood), much of the "country" I knew in my youth has been paved...
(Speaking of country, that reminds me: While scanning across several stations I came across a "country music" station -- I don't usually like country music, but I appreciate some forms of it -- the song was something like: "I'm sexier on the Internet", at which point I dubbed both "country music" and radio dead to me.)
Who'd have thought a simple LCD screen with two buttons would have won?
Is Earth is overpopulated?
<Yes> - I recommend euthanization of patient.
<No> - Let's keep it that way by euthanizing the patient.
Or, you don't install it.
Personally, I've hated Flash for almost a decade and don't install it if I can avoid it ... usually my work machines end up needing it for some 3rd party site they force us to use. But, I don't make a habit of having it enabled.
I'm not sure I can name one instance where I found Flash to be useful or something I'd want. Although, who knows, maybe I'm missing out on something really cool ... but my experience with Flash has primarily been about having half a dozen ads on screen that are all in motion.
Well, that and the fact that it's been a gaping security hole since forever.
I agree... Besides, Flash is just like using JavaScript (well... ActionScript) to animate a bunch of graphics primitives or to stream a video. These are things that browsers can do without Flash -- I mean, HTML5 gives you almost all the same featu r e s --- HEY! Shit! We've been dupped into letting the browser makers create their own integrated version of Flash!
Oh, never mind -- It's all OK, it will be codified as a web standard...Just like the current HTML4.01 is -- What could possibly go wrong?
The CiviCRM is too small. I went with the AccorDRM.
Hmm... Bigger's not always better, let's see...
# ll /usr/bin/civicRM /usr/bin/accorDRM /usr/bin/civicRM /usr/bin/accorDRM
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1372737 2011-01-27 16:45
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 8675309 2011-03-22 12:00
# civiCRM
CiviCRM -- A free utility to remove you from your Civic(tm).
Usage: civicRM [options] make [model] [year]
Warning: can not find libeject-seat.so, may cause unexpected results.
# accorDRM
AccorDRM v1.6.66: Digital Restriction Management Suite for
authorization of user space access to new Accords.
Usage: accorDRM user [password]
# accorDRM vortexcortex
Enter Password: ***********
Permission Granted.
Please select from the following options.
1 - Exit AccorDRM installer.
2 - Install AccorDRM daemon.
> 0
Segmentation fault
# _
Meh, it may be larger but it's also a crappy design.
Yeah, 'cos I'm sure with no government getting in the way, the big boys will all agree to play nice. Yes siree, can't see any problem with that.
Patents aren't the problem, stupid patents are the problem.
No, patents are the problem. Let's look at copyright for just a sec: To infringe I have to willfully duplicate all or most of an existing work covered by copyright. Now, back to patents: To infringe I can be clever in a steel box fully detached from the rest of the world and accidentally create something that's mostly similar to something some other sucker got the the patent office first with.
Know why I'm always re-inventing the wheel? Because it's damn simple to do, and blatantly obvious -- Know why I've infringed 4 "clever" patents without even knowing it? Because it was damn simple to do, and blatantly obvious to a clever person.
The purpose of both the copyright and patent system is to help society, not the inventors or authors... Yet, I create and distribute free software that benefits the general public, and can be prevented from distributing due to patents.
It's easy for a software creator like myself to avoid infringing copyright law -- I just don't look at anyone else's code. There is no way to attempt to avoid infringing patents -- I must try to not accidentally think the same as anyone who's been to the patent office in the last 20 years.
In a way you are correct about "stupid patents" being the problem. I put it to you that since patent law exists primarily for the benefit of society the capacity for any given patent to harm society makes them all stupid patents.
I almost wonder if some of these patent trolls are literally surfing through old theses and essays on algorithms from the 60s to the 80s looking for concepts that they can slap a stamp on and send to the patent office. For god's sake, there must be hundreds of examples of garbage-collecting hash tables from that period of time. It's hardly a novel or unique concept.
I'm seriously expect someone to come along and patent Quicksort. If you can patent garbage collection on a hash table, then why not sort algorithms?
It would have to be a quick sort that excludes some items on the fly as it sorts and releases them -- like say, min_sort_val = 10 or something... now THAT would be innovative.
Additionally, I'd just like to point out that the term "Garbage Collection" alludes to a ridiculous analogy. Seriously. When's the last time the garbage man came into your house, decided you didn't use something based on the amount of dust on it, then hauled it away without asking? Never... (GC should be called Maid Service, or perhaps Vengeful Mother-in-Law Disposal instead).
IRL, You decide what you want in the garbage, then place the collection of those items in the designated receptacle prior to a garbage collection pass. Additionally -- DON'T THROW AWAY THE RESOURCES! PLEASE RECYCLE THEM! -- THEY SHOULD NOT END UP IN A LANDFILL! (Garbage Collection would be a more fitting name for a "memory leak")
The cost of doing business is rarely the price of doing business.
Would one expect that overall total infection of Windows machines to increase 10%?
Wouldn't 30% - 20% == 10% ?
Of course not, W7 is the most secure operating system MS has ever made.
I am a Controls Engineer and work with HMI interfaces everyday.
We keep seeing more and more things like this in the controls world. Every few months, we hear, this HMI or this controls software has these vulnerabilities and can be owned this way or that. Properly designed controls systems do not touch the internet or extend beyond the controls world.
Place I work at, we have completely separate hardware then IT. Our own switches, our own computers, etc. We keep everything separate specifically to guard against someone hacking into our system and taking it over. Someone can't sit across the world and hack into our system because it doesn't connect. They would have to penetrate our security perimeter first in order to gain access to our controls system. If they do that, then it doesn't really matter which HMI software we are using, we are owned anyway.
It does scare me when I think about some of the other plants and industries make connections to the intranet for reasons from their controls system and trust that their securities will hold.
::sigh:: Stuxnet. Delivered by USB. ANY data allowed in, discs, e-mail, etc, is a liability. You've got an intranet with all your own switches, etc. The air gap get's breached via sneaker net once, and you're toast. There is no such thing as fool-proof.
Just nuke it from orbit-- oh, wait...