Article seems like a bunch of selective quoting in order to make someone look bad. An anecdote by a speaker, a confused musing by some scientist, and all of a sudden we have faux science created by unabashed nationalism. Right.
Huh - DDoS traffic looks like a virus signature now?! An IDS filters traffic based on (pre-distributed) rules. They look for virusses. DDoS traffic is legit traffic, but just too much of it. I don't see how you could stop a DDoS on a router by turning it into an IDS.
I'm not saying it's the begin-all, end-all solution. I'm just saying that until you have an AI algorithm that can discriminate legit traffic from illegit traffic, you're forced to use something that will, in effect, transfer your firewall rules upstream. It would have to be combined with other measures (monitoring point-of-origin networks, anycast, ISP application specific logic (eg. TCP traffic shaping of ISP client hosts' SMTP traffic)).
Send some sort of ICMP message upstream that indicates your maximum capacity for handling traffic. It's a DOS vector in itself, but you could minimize it.
"Your center detector needs re-calibration (travel anywhere in the world outside the US). All media in the US is right to far-right."
Your rest-of-the-world detector also needs some recalibration: that's old school. The rest of the world is getting significantly more right-wing at the moment, while pubilications such as Slate thrive in the US.
The only thing that foreign aid has helped accomplish so far (the last FORTY years!), is prop up dictators and help them balance their budgets, so as to keep their weapons-buying programs out of harms way. This article sounds like somebody has a cushy job to lose.
Eh.. yeah. But those countries were in Asia. And even there Putin won't be able to pull shit like that any longer, what with China breathing down his neck.
If there really was a 'George Bilt' from MIT leaking classified satelite images, you can bet your ass it would be all over the news. He'd be in Gitmo by now, and his wife would be slobbering over journalists.
Since the attacks were anonymous, how is the victim to know whether or not she previously met them? And if you can't answer this, why do you discard situations where the perpetrator already knew the victim? And if you can't discard those situations, would you be very surprised if the answer to your question were 'last week'?
That's right. If you say 'dumb shit' about a very large online community, you should get rape and death threats, accompanied by your home address - that's just how it works. And if you get those death threats and you respond to them, you should just get more. It's the way of the universe, and totally justified. Oh, and those threats are really meaningless, everybody knows that. When people say 'I'm going to kill you', they're actually saying 'how are you doing'.
IIRC: the Fair Scheduler. In that instance, Linus wasn't disrespectful of a person - he just willfully ignored one of his henchmen (Ingo Molnar) being completely disrespectful of a person (that is, ignore the man and steal his ideas without any accreditation).
"Public debate needs to be held to a higher standard than it currently is. Would you expect to win a debate by having your entire team sign a letter saying no more than, "The other team is wrong"?"
You're assuming there is 'another team'. In this case, there is 'another team' in the same sense that the 'intelligent design' people want you to 'teach the controversy'. There is no 'other team'. There is a bunch of scientists and a bunch of lunatics who claim to be scientists. Forever having society confused about their status, is how they stay alive. You're just feeding into that.
Exactly. If somebody were to publish a populair scientific book on the origins of the universe, misusing and quoting every study out there, and eventually seriously coming to the conclusion that the Sun is made of bananas, and this book were to become popular, you can bet your sweet ass that there would be a public outcry from all the scientists whose work was quoted.
That happens. It's ironic for example, from a sociological standpoint, that one of the areas with the most inbreeding in the UK is the area around Hull. Here, there are two populations that are both terribly inbred: the aboriginals, and the import Pakistani's. They *could* interbreed and resolve their inbreeding, but they won't.
Of course, 'they won't' means that they won't *yet*. Our long years into adulthood gives us terrible oversight of these things. Give it a generation or two and they'll be in bed with each other like rabbits.
That's not insightful, that's dumb: in animal breeding people control every single aspect and criterium of mating. That's just impossible in humans! If only because our resolve to constrain mating are always limited to one or two generations (Berlin wall, anti-miscegenation laws, etc).
Humans will travel, and human males will stick their thing in anything that moves (and doesn't move).
Slashdot Mirror
Article seems like a bunch of selective quoting in order to make someone look bad. An anecdote by a speaker, a confused musing by some scientist, and all of a sudden we have faux science created by unabashed nationalism. Right.
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
Huh - DDoS traffic looks like a virus signature now?! An IDS filters traffic based on (pre-distributed) rules. They look for virusses. DDoS traffic is legit traffic, but just too much of it. I don't see how you could stop a DDoS on a router by turning it into an IDS.
I'm not saying it's the begin-all, end-all solution. I'm just saying that until you have an AI algorithm that can discriminate legit traffic from illegit traffic, you're forced to use something that will, in effect, transfer your firewall rules upstream. It would have to be combined with other measures (monitoring point-of-origin networks, anycast, ISP application specific logic (eg. TCP traffic shaping of ISP client hosts' SMTP traffic)).
Send some sort of ICMP message upstream that indicates your maximum capacity for handling traffic. It's a DOS vector in itself, but you could minimize it.
"Your center detector needs re-calibration (travel anywhere in the world outside the US). All media in the US is right to far-right."
Your rest-of-the-world detector also needs some recalibration: that's old school. The rest of the world is getting significantly more right-wing at the moment, while pubilications such as Slate thrive in the US.
It's much worse. If the NZ authorities fail to turn over Kim DC, the filming of the next Tolkien epic won't be allowed there.
If only it were free.
The only thing that foreign aid has helped accomplish so far (the last FORTY years!), is prop up dictators and help them balance their budgets, so as to keep their weapons-buying programs out of harms way. This article sounds like somebody has a cushy job to lose.
Eh.. yeah. But those countries were in Asia. And even there Putin won't be able to pull shit like that any longer, what with China breathing down his neck.
If there really was a 'George Bilt' from MIT leaking classified satelite images, you can bet your ass it would be all over the news. He'd be in Gitmo by now, and his wife would be slobbering over journalists.
Never mind that the fighter is at such a distance to the airplane, that it would crash into it in 2 - 3 seconds.
Since the attacks were anonymous, how is the victim to know whether or not she previously met them? And if you can't answer this, why do you discard situations where the perpetrator already knew the victim? And if you can't discard those situations, would you be very surprised if the answer to your question were 'last week'?
That's right. If you say 'dumb shit' about a very large online community, you should get rape and death threats, accompanied by your home address - that's just how it works. And if you get those death threats and you respond to them, you should just get more. It's the way of the universe, and totally justified. Oh, and those threats are really meaningless, everybody knows that. When people say 'I'm going to kill you', they're actually saying 'how are you doing'.
Everybody knows that. Right?
With a 70% death rate?
IIRC: the Fair Scheduler. In that instance, Linus wasn't disrespectful of a person - he just willfully ignored one of his henchmen (Ingo Molnar) being completely disrespectful of a person (that is, ignore the man and steal his ideas without any accreditation).
Every hierarchy pyramid has a level at which there are 100 people remaining until the top. His statement was irrefutable, but useless.
Yes but have you tried the resonant frequencies?
The tanks, rockets and armoured vehicles are also just 'on leave and using their personal time to help the separatist movement in Ukraine', I'm sure.
In what kind of country can you just borrow a tank for your own personal endeavours during your holidays?
They experiment with setting up their own cellular networks.
Isn't steel. next to strength, not also known for its superb conductivity of heat?
"Public debate needs to be held to a higher standard than it currently is. Would you expect to win a debate by having your entire team sign a letter saying no more than, "The other team is wrong"?"
You're assuming there is 'another team'. In this case, there is 'another team' in the same sense that the 'intelligent design' people want you to 'teach the controversy'. There is no 'other team'. There is a bunch of scientists and a bunch of lunatics who claim to be scientists. Forever having society confused about their status, is how they stay alive. You're just feeding into that.
Exactly. If somebody were to publish a populair scientific book on the origins of the universe, misusing and quoting every study out there, and eventually seriously coming to the conclusion that the Sun is made of bananas, and this book were to become popular, you can bet your sweet ass that there would be a public outcry from all the scientists whose work was quoted.
That happens. It's ironic for example, from a sociological standpoint, that one of the areas with the most inbreeding in the UK is the area around Hull. Here, there are two populations that are both terribly inbred: the aboriginals, and the import Pakistani's. They *could* interbreed and resolve their inbreeding, but they won't.
Of course, 'they won't' means that they won't *yet*. Our long years into adulthood gives us terrible oversight of these things. Give it a generation or two and they'll be in bed with each other like rabbits.
That's not insightful, that's dumb: in animal breeding people control every single aspect and criterium of mating. That's just impossible in humans! If only because our resolve to constrain mating are always limited to one or two generations (Berlin wall, anti-miscegenation laws, etc).
Humans will travel, and human males will stick their thing in anything that moves (and doesn't move).