i belive the point is, how do they simultaneously claim 96% of the netbook market is theirs and that taking loses in the netbook market accounts for their 8% reduction overall?
His answer is pretty vague, but if i know anything about computer security (and i don't), isn't the key thing to decide who your attackers are and what they want! I'd guess that the people running large botnets could DDOS the root DNS servers, but as they have no motive to do that its very unlikely they will. So who would want to take down the internet? Perhaps russia/china/us if they were about to start a world war (possible, but if that were the scenario we'd have bigger problems)?
Really? I know this was a while ago but was the use of a nuclear weapon on a civilian population acceptable even then? Saddam would have known the US weren't prepared to strike civilian targets with excessive force, and so the threat of nuclear weapons was an empty one.
Question: In the first gulf war, why didn't Saddam use chemical weapons against coalition forces?
Answer:He didn't use any chemical/biological weapons because if he had there was no chance of him (or any of his regime) being left in power. He knew he was going to lose the war (begs the question why he caused it), evacuating your air-force is never a smart move.
erm learn to read yo fucking retard lancet: 601,027 violent deaths out of 654,965 excess deaths. Opinion Research Business: 1,033,000 violent deaths as a result of the conflict.
btfs is nice, but i like abstraction, lvm lets me run snapshots and re-sizable volumes over any filesytem format that linux supports (ntfs, reiserfs, ext4, etc). Unless btfs's snapshots offers major performance benefits over lvm's , ill always stick with the filesystem neutral solution.
wheras TF2 (and TF1 before it) seem to connect you to other people hosting games rather than one centralized server,
Afaik all valve games have a proper server-client model, if they are being 'hacked' on the 360 then its because xbox-live is failing to provide this model adequately. I think the problem is the opposite of what your describing, because halo3 was design without a central server in mind, they put far lest trust in the server.
l4d on the other-hand was clearly not ready for multiplayer play, there are so many glitches its not even funny.
Whenever i move the damn thing the HDD locks up and i have no choice but to reboot. (this is my second one of these it appears to be a systematic problem)
FreeBSD *is more secure (apparently, i don't know enough to be sure but they're development model and security results do tend to suggest this) *has zfs, *etc
while linux has other advantages, *hardware support for many newer devices, *faster boot (i think), *lvm (imho when snapshot merging merges, i think it can compete with zfs) *etc
So while I think the biggest difference though is the licensing, there are some pretty big differences that affect users.
They *are* killing millions of their own people right now.
I know their a horrible regime, but countering their propoganda with our own doesn't help anybody.
I'd be surprised as hell if that required the use of nuclear weapons.
That's my point, that the US having nukes doesn't actually help in the north Korea situation, while they defiantly undermine attempts to disarm Iran.
regarding Korea (Not that it matters as we agree there is no need for nuclear power to subdue N.korea) The solution I'd propose is, pretty much what the last couple of administrations have been doing, have enough spies in their to know about their "secret" projects long before they are truly a threat. The best course of action is of course to do nothing and if Kim dies before he becomes a serious threat and "hope"*cough* that the next leader wants to make his mark on history by opening up Korea, however if that isn't possible then destroying their launch capabilities, will be necessary! Unfortunately it won't be "simple" as it will most likely trigger a land war with S.Korea and if Vietnam & Iraq have taught us anything its that home turf advantage really means something, and the war would be a bloody mess. The only thing that can help would be considerable support from inside N.Korea, which is why its much better to wait for the N.Koreans to get fed up of their own leader, than to start a war now.
Wait, after 6 years, you still think Sadam just hid the nukes really well? are you fucking serious! It was clear from the moment we set foot in iraq that it was all a huge fucking bluff!
to encourage nations to abandon their nuclear programs, like Libya did.
You mean we have to blow up an airplane, frame an individual, then pin the blame for the actions of an individual on an entire country, then sanction them to shit? Man if your gonna go that far you might as well invade them, just to be sure! I hear you'll have some spare troops when they get out of Iraq?
The fact is large scale deliberate civilian killing is not acceptable by any democratic country, in the cold war era it was barely acceptable when the US could have been destroyed. MAD doesn't work when your fighting an enemy that are smaller than you and surrounded by innocent people.
The enemy know the US won't use a nuclear weapon on them so it doesn't act as a deterent: *9/11 *Taliban handing over Osama *Both Gulf wars *etc
Nobody takes the threat of the US launching a nuclear attack seriously. The only things that the huge stockpile does: *Cost a fair bit of money *Remove any high ground the US may have, you can't expect other to give up their weapons if you keep yours *Increase the risk of one going missing (minor in the US, but in Israel/Russia/china this is a risk) *Increase the risk of semi-produced materials being stolen (Again lower in the US, but non-trivial elsewhere)
So by starting to reduce the pointless arsenal in America (see above), Obama can try and convince other to follow. Negotiations are just that, and you never get anything by just shouting louder. Even if Obama only convinces the 'good' guys (US/china/russia/uk/france) to disarm, that is still a significant reduction in the risk of one of them inadvertently helping the bad guys (hell in the uk we seam to be losing everything, I wouldn't trust us with a nuke), while simultaneously putting you in a better position to convince the 'bad' countries (Iran) that they should disarm.
The total loss for the US is NOTHING, you can't use the nuclear weapons anyway!
yeah because obama is defiantly fighting a cold war! terrorists leaders don't care about thier people, so launching a nuke against them isn't a threat. Did the 5000 nukes stop osama? NO Did the 5000 nukes, get the taliban to hand over osama? NO Did the 5000 nukes, keep you from having to invade iraq? NO Did the 5000 nukes, stop jim's missile program? err NO Can the US go round killing inocent civilians? NO Can the US even retaliate to the actions of a rouge state using a nuke? NO
So what the fuck do you want them for? other than to lose a moral high ground and mean you have no right to tell others that they shouldn't have them!
bullshit! If ms include an option, they are in no way required to support that option in the next version. This particular hack doesn't even affect the API or driver interfaces so in no way would removing support for it cause any problems.
People with no business fiddling with their computer
Funny last time i checked, if bob buys a computer, then bob can do whatever the fuck he wants with it. If he fancies it he can smash it to bits, its HIS computer not yours!
would mess around with this setting and make their computer less stable.
HOW, how can (not) autodetecting the presence of a floppy make your computer less stable???
"Not Microsoft's Problem" you say? Try telling that to the person who did the fiddling! Won't fly!
stick a suitible warning on it and it isn't Microsoft's Problem
CONFIG_STAGING_EXCLUDE_BUILD:
Are you sure you really want to build the staging drivers? They taint your kernel, don't live up to the normal Linux kernel quality standards, are a bit crufty around the edges, and might go off and kick your dog when you aren't paying attention.
This might void your warranty! changing these advanced settings can be harmful to the stability, security and performance of this application. you should only continue if you are sure of what you are doing.
if you click through either of those you are well aware it is your fault if you mess-up!
In other words, including a feature you have already coded as an option, is easy, especially if at any time in the future can be removed. All side effects can be warned of in advance and as long as a setting is put at the correct reach only users who know what they are doing are going to find it. Treating all your users like idiots just because SOME are, pisses off many who aren't see pidgin/gnome
Slashdot Mirror
i belive the point is, how do they simultaneously claim 96% of the netbook market is theirs and that taking loses in the netbook market accounts for their 8% reduction overall?
Are jail/chroot/other sandboxes so ineffective the only way he can securely browse the web is in a virtual machine?
I know VMs are all the rage nowadays but it seams pretty dumb to rely on them for secuirty instead of designing secure systems.
His answer is pretty vague, but if i know anything about computer security (and i don't), isn't the key thing to decide who your attackers are and what they want! I'd guess that the people running large botnets could DDOS the root DNS servers, but as they have no motive to do that its very unlikely they will. So who would want to take down the internet?
Perhaps russia/china/us if they were about to start a world war (possible, but if that were the scenario we'd have bigger problems)?
I think currency symbols and other Unicode often thrown about in geeky discussions like ^2 would be nice
â euro
£ pound
 squared
 cubed
They have provided you with a way to hide all their stories though.
Really? I know this was a while ago but was the use of a nuclear weapon on a civilian population acceptable even then? Saddam would have known the US weren't prepared to strike civilian targets with excessive force, and so the threat of nuclear weapons was an empty one.
Question: In the first gulf war, why didn't Saddam use chemical weapons against coalition forces?
Answer:He didn't use any chemical/biological weapons because if he had there was no chance of him (or any of his regime) being left in power. He knew he was going to lose the war (begs the question why he caused it), evacuating your air-force is never a smart move.
erm learn to read yo fucking retard
lancet: 601,027 violent deaths out of 654,965 excess deaths.
Opinion Research Business: 1,033,000 violent deaths as a result of the conflict.
btfs is nice, but i like abstraction, lvm lets me run snapshots and re-sizable volumes over any filesytem format that linux supports (ntfs, reiserfs, ext4, etc). Unless btfs's snapshots offers major performance benefits over lvm's , ill always stick with the filesystem neutral solution.
wheras TF2 (and TF1 before it) seem to connect you to other people hosting games rather than one centralized server,
Afaik all valve games have a proper server-client model, if they are being 'hacked' on the 360 then its because xbox-live is failing to provide this model adequately. I think the problem is the opposite of what your describing, because halo3 was design without a central server in mind, they put far lest trust in the server.
l4d on the other-hand was clearly not ready for multiplayer play, there are so many glitches its not even funny.
i have an acer aspire5101, you insensitive clod!
Whenever i move the damn thing the HDD locks up and i have no choice but to reboot. (this is my second one of these it appears to be a systematic problem)
.dll? i thought all Communists used linux!
FreeBSD
*is more secure (apparently, i don't know enough to be sure but they're development model and security results do tend to suggest this)
*has zfs,
*etc
while linux has other advantages,
*hardware support for many newer devices,
*faster boot (i think),
*lvm (imho when snapshot merging merges, i think it can compete with zfs)
*etc
So while I think the biggest difference though is the licensing, there are some pretty big differences that affect users.
Probably not ubuntu only support a subset of what debian supports.
They *are* killing millions of their own people right now.
I know their a horrible regime, but countering their propoganda with our own doesn't help anybody.
I'd be surprised as hell if that required the use of nuclear weapons.
That's my point, that the US having nukes doesn't actually help in the north Korea situation, while they defiantly undermine attempts to disarm Iran.
regarding Korea (Not that it matters as we agree there is no need for nuclear power to subdue N.korea)
The solution I'd propose is, pretty much what the last couple of administrations have been doing, have enough spies in their to know about their "secret" projects long before they are truly a threat. The best course of action is of course to do nothing and if Kim dies before he becomes a serious threat and "hope"*cough* that the next leader wants to make his mark on history by opening up Korea, however if that isn't possible then destroying their launch capabilities, will be necessary! Unfortunately it won't be "simple" as it will most likely trigger a land war with S.Korea and if Vietnam & Iraq have taught us anything its that home turf advantage really means something, and the war would be a bloody mess. The only thing that can help would be considerable support from inside N.Korea, which is why its much better to wait for the N.Koreans to get fed up of their own leader, than to start a war now.
Well, if it is all that it takes to denuclearize a country, well, it sounds like a fair prize...
That is a good, although unpopular point (killing 100+ to potentially save millions)
But don't be too optimistic, it won't be as easy as you propose.
Yeah, pam am went out of business, we'd probably have to bailout the next airline!
right so N.korea has a crazy dictator and your solution is to nuke them, killing millions of innocent people, when they launch a rocket?
Wait, after 6 years, you still think Sadam just hid the nukes really well? are you fucking serious! It was clear from the moment we set foot in iraq that it was all a huge fucking bluff!
to encourage nations to abandon their nuclear programs, like Libya did.
You mean we have to blow up an airplane, frame an individual, then pin the blame for the actions of an individual on an entire country, then sanction them to shit?
Man if your gonna go that far you might as well invade them, just to be sure! I hear you'll have some spare troops when they get out of Iraq?
*some sarcasm may be present
The fact is large scale deliberate civilian killing is not acceptable by any democratic country, in the cold war era it was barely acceptable when the US could have been destroyed. MAD doesn't work when your fighting an enemy that are smaller than you and surrounded by innocent people.
The enemy know the US won't use a nuclear weapon on them so it doesn't act as a deterent:
*9/11
*Taliban handing over Osama
*Both Gulf wars
*etc
Nobody takes the threat of the US launching a nuclear attack seriously. The only things that the huge stockpile does:
*Cost a fair bit of money
*Remove any high ground the US may have, you can't expect other to give up their weapons if you keep yours
*Increase the risk of one going missing (minor in the US, but in Israel/Russia/china this is a risk)
*Increase the risk of semi-produced materials being stolen (Again lower in the US, but non-trivial elsewhere)
So by starting to reduce the pointless arsenal in America (see above), Obama can try and convince other to follow. Negotiations are just that, and you never get anything by just shouting louder. Even if Obama only convinces the 'good' guys (US/china/russia/uk/france) to disarm, that is still a significant reduction in the risk of one of them inadvertently helping the bad guys (hell in the uk we seam to be losing everything, I wouldn't trust us with a nuke), while simultaneously putting you in a better position to convince the 'bad' countries (Iran) that they should disarm.
The total loss for the US is NOTHING, you can't use the nuclear weapons anyway!
yeah because obama is defiantly fighting a cold war! terrorists leaders don't care about thier people, so launching a nuke against them isn't a threat.
Did the 5000 nukes stop osama? NO
Did the 5000 nukes, get the taliban to hand over osama? NO
Did the 5000 nukes, keep you from having to invade iraq? NO
Did the 5000 nukes, stop jim's missile program? err NO
Can the US go round killing inocent civilians? NO
Can the US even retaliate to the actions of a rouge state using a nuke? NO
So what the fuck do you want them for? other than to lose a moral high ground and mean you have no right to tell others that they shouldn't have them!
So you mean the nukes don't act as a deterrent anyway!
Far to late for what? to go in and fuck up another country?
How was iraq a threat to global security in the gulf war? genuine question.
Then they'd have to support it for all eternity.
bullshit! If ms include an option, they are in no way required to support that option in the next version. This particular hack doesn't even affect the API or driver interfaces so in no way would removing support for it cause any problems.
People with no business fiddling with their computer
Funny last time i checked, if bob buys a computer, then bob can do whatever the fuck he wants with it. If he fancies it he can smash it to bits, its HIS computer not yours!
would mess around with this setting and make their computer less stable.
HOW, how can (not) autodetecting the presence of a floppy make your computer less stable???
"Not Microsoft's Problem" you say? Try telling that to the person who did the fiddling! Won't fly!
stick a suitible warning on it and it isn't Microsoft's Problem
CONFIG_STAGING_EXCLUDE_BUILD:
Are you sure you really want to build the staging drivers?
They taint your kernel, don't live up to the normal Linux
kernel quality standards, are a bit crufty around the edges,
and might go off and kick your dog when you aren't paying
attention.
This might void your warranty!
changing these advanced settings can be harmful to the stability, security and performance of this application. you should only continue if you are sure of what you are doing.
if you click through either of those you are well aware it is your fault if you mess-up!
In other words, including a feature you have already coded as an option, is easy, especially if at any time in the future can be removed. All side effects can be warned of in advance and as long as a setting is put at the correct reach only users who know what they are doing are going to find it. Treating all your users like idiots just because SOME are, pisses off many who aren't see pidgin/gnome
I mean if you don't like the chrome EULA or the firefox EULA, take the code compile it yourself and STFU.