Obviously it wouldn't. Though they do not give any specific details as to the application of the product they do say that it is applied in a vacuum which would leads me to believe that is starts in a gaseous state and is pumped into the vacuum to replace the air and coats any surface that would normally be touched by air. Logically one would assume that if any surface touched by air was coated it would be water tight.
Obviously something like a button or a screen on cell phone would not make a difference having the coating rubbed off because the plastic of the button is inherently water tight. The only area in which I could envision them having problems (just as you have) is on the electrical contacts. Such as where the battery leads as so forth, as well as the ear phone jacks where the coating would wear off eventually. Not to mention the fact the stuff has to be none conductive in the first place so how are the leads/jacks working at all? Unless the coating literally seals around where the contact was made, which seems like it would eventually wear down enough to lose that seal.
Anyhow, they have not released any details on the process so your guess is as good as mine. go look at their website for yourself, there are videos of working examples of the coating.
All of the comics I have read showed that the claws were implanted. The only mention of the claws ever being bone were when Magnito pulled all the adamantium out of his body. And that was during the aforementioned weird 90s comic era.
"The court's analysis did not stop there, however. The Court further stated that mathematical algorithms were not a type of subject matter expressly prohibited by  101; rather, unpatentable types of mathematical algorithms represent laws of nature, natural phenomena and abstract ideas. The proper test for determining whether a claim is unpatentable, the court said, is "whether the claimed subject matter as a whole is a disembodied mathematical concept. . . which in essence represents nothing more than a 'law of nature,' 'natural phenomenon,' or 'abstract idea.'" The court said that a claim directed to a combination of interrelated elements' recites a specific machine, not a disembodied concept."
In other words, you can patent an physically embodied concept, but not the concept itself. To cite an old example; you can patent the abacus, but you cant patent the concepts and math that it is based on.
For the most part, I agree. However, this is the realm for a copyright not a patent. Just because your software does a particular thing shouldn't prevent development of similar software simply by the fact that it does the same thing. Its like patenting the process of driving. You can patent a particular technology used in driving, but not the act of driving itself, so to speak. Maybe that was a bad analogy but any reasonable person would get the point.
Well first off, I think some journalist was just spouting off at the mouth regarding the price. When I first heard of the coating it was stated to be around $75-100 for a small device, and going up from there. Which is well worth it in my opinion.
Anyhow, I don't think the intention is to protect things with moving parts. Only the sensitive electronic equipment. The devices they use in their examples (some of which they actually have legit video of) are hand held radios, cell phones (blackberry & iphone), laptops, and a couple other random things without moving parts.
Were they to coat something like a laptop I would imagine they would at least remove the fans first so as to not "clog" the bearings. However they don't clarify this particular point on their site yet.
Its not a spray. Did you even bother reading the other posts, or even the FAQ from the product site itself?
Anyhow, I dont think the intention is for the fans to be working under water in any case, though the fans themselves should technically still working after being coated, as long as the bearing reservoirs are sealed and what not.
Sorry, I've had users install OpenSuse, Fedora, and Ubuntu. All of them successful and on a variety of frakenboxes.
Considering your response to his claims, I would guess you are a troll and a moron. The minute somebody contradicts anything having to do with linux, you tards come out of the woodwork and jump all over them like a bunch of PETA members at a BBQ.
Just because YOU personally had success installing it on your "frankenboxes" does not even remotely imply that it works 100% percent of the time. Your arrogance in thinking otherwise is beyond absurd.
Of course because you had an experience to the contrary of his claims, he's a liar right? I have, in fact, attempted to install various flavors of linux on several older machines that failed miserably, just as he stated above. I guess that makes me a liar as well? Or has it occurred to you that there is a world outside of your mommy's basement? Seriously, pull your head out your ass.
In Texas, you have a legal right to shoot anybody trespassing on your property, regardless of their intent, without your consent. Your only excuse need be that you felt that you were in danger, which your actions must also reflect. In other words, you cant shoot them in the back while they are running away, or if it is obvious they did not intend to cause harm (i.e. a Girl Scout lol), and you have to give warning, either verbal or by a posted sign.
Obviously there are a lot more laws regarding this but most of them are difficult to prove after the fact.
If somebody is in my house when I get home, without my consent, I can reasonably assume he is there to cause harm and have every right to stick a knife in his chest.
I cant imagine that any state would legally protect anybody in entering another persons property without consent as in the situation that you describe.
I'm all for fighting child pornography, as I have a child myself. However, these unanimous approvals of such HUGE amounts of money ALWAYS end up lining some corrupt politicians pockets. Please, fight child porn! Just make sure this money isn't going to end up paying for some guys Ferrari.
Honestly, what do they need to make something like this happen in reality? Or is it even possible? How do they expect to control the flow of millions upon billions of images floating around the internet and filter out only child porn? Let alone investigate and prosecute every single instance that they find? No amount of money is going to make this any more effective than it already is or can be, with the funding they already have, in my opinion.
If they are going to be allocating funding like this based on their own personal feelings on the topic, then they need to make sure that the agencies using this money aren't paying 10 times more for equipment that would otherwise be much cheaper in the real world.
Am I implying corruption?? Why yes, yes I am, because I have worked for the Government before and I have seen it happen. The agency that worked on the floor right below my office got in trouble for similar reasons. Millions of dollars were allocated to improve safety across the state, but instead went to buy things like "company cars" that cost twice as much as they should, and computer equipment that never even made it out in to the field and disappeared immediately upon delivery.
The only reason I rant is because that is a BILLION freakin dollars! Most people cant even fathom that amount of money. And the senate is just throwing it around like our hard earned, reluctantly paid taxes simply fall out of the sky. And yet, somehow, they still cant seem to find money for more simple and obvious necessities.
As another poster stated; Im surprised they are not doing this already. I could see the benefit of this from the military standpoint. Were I a person with the power to make a decision to do such a thing I would have done so a long time ago, as it would infinitely increases my technical capability for reasons previously stated. If they can, they should, use every available method at their disposal within their own infrastructure to gain an advantage.
However, this kind of thing should be limited to only military PCs. If the idea here is to create bots out of ordinary civilian PC's, the results could only be disastrous. It would be susceptible to poisoning and a multitude of other types of attacks. The first thing I thought of after reading this was, Skynet from the Terminator movies.
I read that whole thing! lol I totally understand his frustration I have been in situations like that so many times before (though obviously in different areas). He says a lot of things the way I wish I could have said it. Very amusing read.
Totally agree... I havent paid for a CD/Movie in well over a year, with the exception of some independant lables and artist releases like the new NIN cd. For me, its not an issue of cost its a matter of principle. I refuse to support a hoard of corrupt business men and polititans. I might watch the occasional free broadcast or rent a movie from blockbuster every now and then but I otherwise dont even watch TV.
Honestly, my life otherwise hasnt changed much; its not difficult to boycott the RIAA if you dont require the lastest trendy hits/releases on you IPOD. In fact, I have discovered a whole new wealth of great music and indipendent films by specifically avoiding labels. Buy what you want, not what they want you to buy.
Re:Media production for Linux (And OSX, And Window
on
GPL Edutainment Software
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Its absolutely amazing and a true testament to the power of open source that programs like Blender actually exist. I mean there is obviously hundreds of thousands of hours of dev time behind that program. Competitors sell similar programs for tens of thousand of dollars, and you can go down that for free. Just... awesome.
I'm sure the FBI got a good laugh out of that as it passed through their sniffers. They will be knocking on your door with some handcuffs and a comb in a few moments.
Yes, spectacular game!:) Coincidentally I just found that disc yesterday while rummaging through a stack of old movies. I think I might install it again and give it another go!
Clever troll... or do you just not think before you post?
IIS has its merits, just as apache does. ASP.net and other related technologies are a mainstay in the corporate environment whether you agree with it or not. They lend themselves well to rapid application development, and are well supported. Thus, it is cheap and easy to find talent within the field.
Regardless, your hosting platform will do nothing to fix bad code. The platform in this case, is irrelevent. Dont try to turn this into a soapbox to promote your own biased opinions.
FYI, I run several linux/apache servers as well as IIS/ASP servers. I am not impartial to either, as they each have their place in our environment.
This why you dont run SQL queries on public facing sites, with accounts that have administrative rights. This is like web/database programming rule #1. A little common sense goes a long way.
No worries man, I had a little chuckle myself over that statement.:)
On topic, somewhat; It would be interesting to see how many of Hawkins theories, if any have been debunked by this discovery. He has had an obsession with black holes for quite some time, which has been somewhat of an mystery in the scientific world. Over the last couple months and years however, there have been numerous discovery's made on black holes. Though I probably wont understand half of it, I would like to see what the little robotic voice has to say about this.:)
Who would bring charges against them? The botnet operators?? We could only hope. Even if their methods were illegal, Im not sure anybody would or could press charges for illegally interfering with an already illegal activity.
After reading the article I dont think they did anything illegal. Some might consider it unethical, but certainly not illegal. From the looks of it, all they are doing is poisoning BotNet traffic, even if one of the "bots" is a bank computer or something, their methods are in no way compromising that machine any further than it already is.
This has been in the works for a long time. They announced this several years ago in fact. I think its a good idea for businesses, as the cost would be associated direcly with the amount of people that use it within an office instead of buying a ton of licences that are hard to manage and may not even get used. It would allow a user to access the full office suite at home using the same subscription, which I could see some use in. Obviously it would have to be reasonably priced.
I do not think this will fly at all in the consumer market, however. If MS tries to get people on subscription based services the will be forcing the entire market to search for an alternative. The downloads of OpenOffice for windows will jump 1000 fold in a matter of weeks, or they will see the same thing they saw with vista where 90% of the market is using the old version several years after the new versions release.
Actually on a serious note; I used to work for the Governors Office which we had locked down fairly well behind two firewalls (edge and office), and an active IDS system. When the DCOM viruses started hitting hard we saw an enourmous influx of traffic coming from Department of Defence, Homeland Security, and FBI, networks. Taking a sip from the fire hose with etheral showed that over 98% of it was DCOM exploit attempts coming from well over 1000 unpatched windows boxes, leading me to believe that they had all been massivly infected.
Doesnt speak very highly of the agencies that we are supposed to be relying on to protect us does it? It took them weeks to get things under control. All told, we had ONE infected machine in our network from a laptop that had been off site that was shut down within 5 minutes of being plugged in to the network, and wasnt able to infect even one other machine.
Point is, based on my experience working for the man, and things I have seen both there and within other agencies that I had the opportunity to work with. Anybody with some rudamentary knowledge, and access to metasploit or something, could likely compromise any one of these agencies with ease provided they knew where to plug in. With the exception of a select few agencies such as the NSA, the government in general is not as advanced as people seem to think they are. Once you get past their edge firewalls its pretty much free reign in a surprisingly open network.
The entire state government where I live is on one huge FDDI ring, with one of a hundred thousand places to plug a laptop in that have no checks or boundries on them at all. In fact, half or more of the state agencies dont even have firewalls within the FDDI ring, and use public addresses for their workstations, without even NAT'ing network traffic. Go figure.
Anyhow, Im glad they are finally actually taking a look at these problems.
Slashdot Mirror
Obviously it wouldn't. Though they do not give any specific details as to the application of the product they do say that it is applied in a vacuum which would leads me to believe that is starts in a gaseous state and is pumped into the vacuum to replace the air and coats any surface that would normally be touched by air. Logically one would assume that if any surface touched by air was coated it would be water tight.
Obviously something like a button or a screen on cell phone would not make a difference having the coating rubbed off because the plastic of the button is inherently water tight. The only area in which I could envision them having problems (just as you have) is on the electrical contacts. Such as where the battery leads as so forth, as well as the ear phone jacks where the coating would wear off eventually. Not to mention the fact the stuff has to be none conductive in the first place so how are the leads/jacks working at all? Unless the coating literally seals around where the contact was made, which seems like it would eventually wear down enough to lose that seal.
Anyhow, they have not released any details on the process so your guess is as good as mine. go look at their website for yourself, there are videos of working examples of the coating.
All of the comics I have read showed that the claws were implanted. The only mention of the claws ever being bone were when Magnito pulled all the adamantium out of his body. And that was during the aforementioned weird 90s comic era.
In other words, you can patent an physically embodied concept, but not the concept itself. To cite an old example; you can patent the abacus, but you cant patent the concepts and math that it is based on.
For the most part, I agree. However, this is the realm for a copyright not a patent. Just because your software does a particular thing shouldn't prevent development of similar software simply by the fact that it does the same thing. Its like patenting the process of driving. You can patent a particular technology used in driving, but not the act of driving itself, so to speak. Maybe that was a bad analogy but any reasonable person would get the point.
Well first off, I think some journalist was just spouting off at the mouth regarding the price. When I first heard of the coating it was stated to be around $75-100 for a small device, and going up from there. Which is well worth it in my opinion.
Anyhow, I don't think the intention is to protect things with moving parts. Only the sensitive electronic equipment. The devices they use in their examples (some of which they actually have legit video of) are hand held radios, cell phones (blackberry & iphone), laptops, and a couple other random things without moving parts.
Were they to coat something like a laptop I would imagine they would at least remove the fans first so as to not "clog" the bearings. However they don't clarify this particular point on their site yet.
Who is the kid with the Wolverine like claws in the second part of the trailer? I thought he didn't get the claws until he was older.
Its not a spray. Did you even bother reading the other posts, or even the FAQ from the product site itself? Anyhow, I dont think the intention is for the fans to be working under water in any case, though the fans themselves should technically still working after being coated, as long as the bearing reservoirs are sealed and what not.
Accidentally posted that anonymously, anyhow I am surprised by the lack of research by you people before posting such clueless remarks.
Sorry, I've had users install OpenSuse, Fedora, and Ubuntu. All of them successful and on a variety of frakenboxes.
Considering your response to his claims, I would guess you are a troll and a moron. The minute somebody contradicts anything having to do with linux, you tards come out of the woodwork and jump all over them like a bunch of PETA members at a BBQ.
Just because YOU personally had success installing it on your "frankenboxes" does not even remotely imply that it works 100% percent of the time. Your arrogance in thinking otherwise is beyond absurd.
Of course because you had an experience to the contrary of his claims, he's a liar right? I have, in fact, attempted to install various flavors of linux on several older machines that failed miserably, just as he stated above. I guess that makes me a liar as well? Or has it occurred to you that there is a world outside of your mommy's basement? Seriously, pull your head out your ass.
In Texas, you have a legal right to shoot anybody trespassing on your property, regardless of their intent, without your consent. Your only excuse need be that you felt that you were in danger, which your actions must also reflect. In other words, you cant shoot them in the back while they are running away, or if it is obvious they did not intend to cause harm (i.e. a Girl Scout lol), and you have to give warning, either verbal or by a posted sign.
Obviously there are a lot more laws regarding this but most of them are difficult to prove after the fact.
If somebody is in my house when I get home, without my consent, I can reasonably assume he is there to cause harm and have every right to stick a knife in his chest.
I cant imagine that any state would legally protect anybody in entering another persons property without consent as in the situation that you describe.
I'm all for fighting child pornography, as I have a child myself. However, these unanimous approvals of such HUGE amounts of money ALWAYS end up lining some corrupt politicians pockets. Please, fight child porn! Just make sure this money isn't going to end up paying for some guys Ferrari.
Honestly, what do they need to make something like this happen in reality? Or is it even possible? How do they expect to control the flow of millions upon billions of images floating around the internet and filter out only child porn? Let alone investigate and prosecute every single instance that they find? No amount of money is going to make this any more effective than it already is or can be, with the funding they already have, in my opinion.
If they are going to be allocating funding like this based on their own personal feelings on the topic, then they need to make sure that the agencies using this money aren't paying 10 times more for equipment that would otherwise be much cheaper in the real world.
Am I implying corruption?? Why yes, yes I am, because I have worked for the Government before and I have seen it happen. The agency that worked on the floor right below my office got in trouble for similar reasons. Millions of dollars were allocated to improve safety across the state, but instead went to buy things like "company cars" that cost twice as much as they should, and computer equipment that never even made it out in to the field and disappeared immediately upon delivery.
The only reason I rant is because that is a BILLION freakin dollars! Most people cant even fathom that amount of money. And the senate is just throwing it around like our hard earned, reluctantly paid taxes simply fall out of the sky. And yet, somehow, they still cant seem to find money for more simple and obvious necessities.
As another poster stated; Im surprised they are not doing this already. I could see the benefit of this from the military standpoint. Were I a person with the power to make a decision to do such a thing I would have done so a long time ago, as it would infinitely increases my technical capability for reasons previously stated. If they can, they should, use every available method at their disposal within their own infrastructure to gain an advantage.
However, this kind of thing should be limited to only military PCs. If the idea here is to create bots out of ordinary civilian PC's, the results could only be disastrous. It would be susceptible to poisoning and a multitude of other types of attacks. The first thing I thought of after reading this was, Skynet from the Terminator movies.
Like a CAPTCHA?? lol
I read that whole thing! lol I totally understand his frustration I have been in situations like that so many times before (though obviously in different areas). He says a lot of things the way I wish I could have said it. Very amusing read.
Totally agree... I havent paid for a CD/Movie in well over a year, with the exception of some independant lables and artist releases like the new NIN cd. For me, its not an issue of cost its a matter of principle. I refuse to support a hoard of corrupt business men and polititans. I might watch the occasional free broadcast or rent a movie from blockbuster every now and then but I otherwise dont even watch TV.
Honestly, my life otherwise hasnt changed much; its not difficult to boycott the RIAA if you dont require the lastest trendy hits/releases on you IPOD. In fact, I have discovered a whole new wealth of great music and indipendent films by specifically avoiding labels. Buy what you want, not what they want you to buy.
Its absolutely amazing and a true testament to the power of open source that programs like Blender actually exist. I mean there is obviously hundreds of thousands of hours of dev time behind that program. Competitors sell similar programs for tens of thousand of dollars, and you can go down that for free. Just... awesome.
I'm sure the FBI got a good laugh out of that as it passed through their sniffers. They will be knocking on your door with some handcuffs and a comb in a few moments.
Yes, spectacular game! :) Coincidentally I just found that disc yesterday while rummaging through a stack of old movies. I think I might install it again and give it another go!
Clever troll... or do you just not think before you post?
IIS has its merits, just as apache does. ASP.net and other related technologies are a mainstay in the corporate environment whether you agree with it or not. They lend themselves well to rapid application development, and are well supported. Thus, it is cheap and easy to find talent within the field.
Regardless, your hosting platform will do nothing to fix bad code. The platform in this case, is irrelevent. Dont try to turn this into a soapbox to promote your own biased opinions.
FYI, I run several linux/apache servers as well as IIS/ASP servers. I am not impartial to either, as they each have their place in our environment.
This why you dont run SQL queries on public facing sites, with accounts that have administrative rights. This is like web/database programming rule #1. A little common sense goes a long way.
Didn't he say that matter could NOT escape a black hole?
No worries man, I had a little chuckle myself over that statement. :)
On topic, somewhat; It would be interesting to see how many of Hawkins theories, if any have been debunked by this discovery. He has had an obsession with black holes for quite some time, which has been somewhat of an mystery in the scientific world. Over the last couple months and years however, there have been numerous discovery's made on black holes. Though I probably wont understand half of it, I would like to see what the little robotic voice has to say about this. :)
Who would bring charges against them? The botnet operators?? We could only hope. Even if their methods were illegal, Im not sure anybody would or could press charges for illegally interfering with an already illegal activity.
After reading the article I dont think they did anything illegal. Some might consider it unethical, but certainly not illegal. From the looks of it, all they are doing is poisoning BotNet traffic, even if one of the "bots" is a bank computer or something, their methods are in no way compromising that machine any further than it already is.
This has been in the works for a long time. They announced this several years ago in fact. I think its a good idea for businesses, as the cost would be associated direcly with the amount of people that use it within an office instead of buying a ton of licences that are hard to manage and may not even get used. It would allow a user to access the full office suite at home using the same subscription, which I could see some use in. Obviously it would have to be reasonably priced.
I do not think this will fly at all in the consumer market, however. If MS tries to get people on subscription based services the will be forcing the entire market to search for an alternative. The downloads of OpenOffice for windows will jump 1000 fold in a matter of weeks, or they will see the same thing they saw with vista where 90% of the market is using the old version several years after the new versions release.
Get your Trojans in while there is still time!
Actually on a serious note; I used to work for the Governors Office which we had locked down fairly well behind two firewalls (edge and office), and an active IDS system. When the DCOM viruses started hitting hard we saw an enourmous influx of traffic coming from Department of Defence, Homeland Security, and FBI, networks. Taking a sip from the fire hose with etheral showed that over 98% of it was DCOM exploit attempts coming from well over 1000 unpatched windows boxes, leading me to believe that they had all been massivly infected.
Doesnt speak very highly of the agencies that we are supposed to be relying on to protect us does it? It took them weeks to get things under control. All told, we had ONE infected machine in our network from a laptop that had been off site that was shut down within 5 minutes of being plugged in to the network, and wasnt able to infect even one other machine.
Point is, based on my experience working for the man, and things I have seen both there and within other agencies that I had the opportunity to work with. Anybody with some rudamentary knowledge, and access to metasploit or something, could likely compromise any one of these agencies with ease provided they knew where to plug in. With the exception of a select few agencies such as the NSA, the government in general is not as advanced as people seem to think they are. Once you get past their edge firewalls its pretty much free reign in a surprisingly open network.
The entire state government where I live is on one huge FDDI ring, with one of a hundred thousand places to plug a laptop in that have no checks or boundries on them at all. In fact, half or more of the state agencies dont even have firewalls within the FDDI ring, and use public addresses for their workstations, without even NAT'ing network traffic. Go figure.
Anyhow, Im glad they are finally actually taking a look at these problems.