Correct. As the first responder to your thoughts had indicated, another assumption is that white hats find the bugs first. If they in fact do, then there is no worry about "zero-day" 'sploits, because for each bug we find, we squash it before announcing it to the world. The problem is that the code (binary and/or source) is already out there, and to assume that someone else won't get to it before you do is just plain dumb.
It's interesting the reasons that some people would resort to spam. In an article recently on Tech Republic, the author interviewed several spammers on the reason(s) they started out as spammers. One had college tuitions to pay off, another just wants quick cash with no regards as to what topics are/aren't off-limits. When you consider why people spam, the knowledge can be used against them in one way or another.
Here they are:
Q299444
Q304158
Q305929
Q312895
Q313829
Q318138
Q320206
Q323172
Q326830
Q328310
And I won't even *THINK* about Q329115 until *AFTER* all ten are in and locked down.
Better yet, for each person who complains, his seat will be bound and folded up until he is unable to breathe. As he is losing consciousness you can play over the loudspeaker, "I find your lack of faith disturbing".
What I like best about these jamming/countersignaling devices is that the person with the cell phone, unless told otherwise, really has no idea that he/she is near one of these devices and thus has no way of retaliating. One of the posters below insists rather vehemently that we "better not take away my rights [to use cell phones]". Well, we can take it away, and he won't know about it, and there is nothing he can do about it either.
Keep in mind the implications of having the motion denied, however: This means that not only does the judge think there is enough for RedHat to go on, but that SCO can't back out of the case anymore. If anything, this is not only very good for RedHat, but also very bad for SCO both from legal and from PR viewpoints.
I like the idea that the judge is playing the cases off each other, probably wanting to see the Utah case as a precedent with which she can then use against SCO. If it doesn't go fast enough, though, she reserves the right (wisely) to proceed without it (probably thinking that SCO doesn't have a chance in Delaware either). In either case SCO may have just hit the point of no return: The hand's stuck in the cookie jar, and now the question is not whether to deny that it did it, but to see how much of their collective hand gets lopped off.
Here is another way of looking at it: Spammers exist because there are idiots out there who fall for "vicod1n" or "pen1s enl@rgement" or what have you. We should have users who are purchasing these products pay an additional "spam tax" on it, to compensate for the wasted bandwidth and so on. Sort of like "shipping and handling fee". Actually, it comes close to the Internet tax idea that Congress is punting about, but applied to spams.
Obligatory Weird Al Reference...
on
Giant Sub-Woofer
·
· Score: 0
I work for a large manufacturer of confectionery products here in the eastern part of the United States, and RFID is an issue that directly speaks to our contractual obligations with our customers who demand, for example, traceability of raw material. Working through RFID and lot assignments, we will be able to tell the customer where this box of candy came from, what time it was shipped, which lot and pallet it came from, and how much of sugar, syrup, and yellow number 5 it used from which buckets. We hope to implement RFID completely in about a year to a year and a half, alongside wireless warehouse tagging (another critical component to modern manufacturing).
I believe it was the movie "The Net" that introduced us to the surreal user interface of "Cathedral", a veritable 3D VR environment where you push/pull/open/close literal objects to access information.
Here is how to dissuade Mr. Soto from buying anymore from spams:
1) Pretend to be a spammer and once in a while send something to him, such as weight-loss pills (heck, he's a 45-year-old grandfather - I guess he is starting to expand horizontally). The rate he's going, he will bite eventually.
2) When he does respond, get his shipping (i.e. residential) address and phone number, and promise him that delivery is scheduled in the next week or two.
3) At this point, you have several options: You can either send him laxatives in disguise (and I do mean the maximum strength stuff, accompanied by directions to use it liberally everyday), or you can show up at his house with some psychos and just pelt his car/house/real estate with rotting spam. Or you can think of some other thing - if you are at his doorstep, the sky's the limit.
4) Repeat as desired, but with another line of product under another contact name.
Slashdot Mirror
'Nuff said.
Correct. As the first responder to your thoughts had indicated, another assumption is that white hats find the bugs first. If they in fact do, then there is no worry about "zero-day" 'sploits, because for each bug we find, we squash it before announcing it to the world. The problem is that the code (binary and/or source) is already out there, and to assume that someone else won't get to it before you do is just plain dumb.
...that hunting down thugs and thieves and terrorists is not necessarily helping the nation's security, so let's not do it. Asinine suggestion.
First the "evil bit", and now the "pr0n bit"???
It's interesting the reasons that some people would resort to spam. In an article recently on Tech Republic, the author interviewed several spammers on the reason(s) they started out as spammers. One had college tuitions to pay off, another just wants quick cash with no regards as to what topics are/aren't off-limits. When you consider why people spam, the knowledge can be used against them in one way or another.
Try "Binary-digits-are-best".
1) Boxers 2) Ice hockey players 3) Rugby players 4) My grandma
The same song over and over and over again...
10 LET AGE=1 20 AGE = AGE+1 30 PRINT AGE 40 GOTO 20
Here they are: Q299444 Q304158 Q305929 Q312895 Q313829 Q318138 Q320206 Q323172 Q326830 Q328310 And I won't even *THINK* about Q329115 until *AFTER* all ten are in and locked down.
You must mean "surrender your chips"...
Better yet, for each person who complains, his seat will be bound and folded up until he is unable to breathe. As he is losing consciousness you can play over the loudspeaker, "I find your lack of faith disturbing".
What I like best about these jamming/countersignaling devices is that the person with the cell phone, unless told otherwise, really has no idea that he/she is near one of these devices and thus has no way of retaliating. One of the posters below insists rather vehemently that we "better not take away my rights [to use cell phones]". Well, we can take it away, and he won't know about it, and there is nothing he can do about it either.
That way, we can watch "Armageddon" from the comfort of our research lab plasma screens.
Keep in mind the implications of having the motion denied, however: This means that not only does the judge think there is enough for RedHat to go on, but that SCO can't back out of the case anymore. If anything, this is not only very good for RedHat, but also very bad for SCO both from legal and from PR viewpoints.
I like the idea that the judge is playing the cases off each other, probably wanting to see the Utah case as a precedent with which she can then use against SCO. If it doesn't go fast enough, though, she reserves the right (wisely) to proceed without it (probably thinking that SCO doesn't have a chance in Delaware either). In either case SCO may have just hit the point of no return: The hand's stuck in the cookie jar, and now the question is not whether to deny that it did it, but to see how much of their collective hand gets lopped off.
Here is another way of looking at it: Spammers exist because there are idiots out there who fall for "vicod1n" or "pen1s enl@rgement" or what have you. We should have users who are purchasing these products pay an additional "spam tax" on it, to compensate for the wasted bandwidth and so on. Sort of like "shipping and handling fee". Actually, it comes close to the Internet tax idea that Congress is punting about, but applied to spams.
Frank's Two Thousand-Inch TV.
I wonder if the bomb is triggered when one of those chickens lays an egg.
Now a real "wardrobe malfunction" could *REALLY* wreck your day...
I work for a large manufacturer of confectionery products here in the eastern part of the United States, and RFID is an issue that directly speaks to our contractual obligations with our customers who demand, for example, traceability of raw material. Working through RFID and lot assignments, we will be able to tell the customer where this box of candy came from, what time it was shipped, which lot and pallet it came from, and how much of sugar, syrup, and yellow number 5 it used from which buckets. We hope to implement RFID completely in about a year to a year and a half, alongside wireless warehouse tagging (another critical component to modern manufacturing).
I believe it was the movie "The Net" that introduced us to the surreal user interface of "Cathedral", a veritable 3D VR environment where you push/pull/open/close literal objects to access information.
'Nuff said.
"I hate you, Dave."
Here is how to dissuade Mr. Soto from buying anymore from spams: 1) Pretend to be a spammer and once in a while send something to him, such as weight-loss pills (heck, he's a 45-year-old grandfather - I guess he is starting to expand horizontally). The rate he's going, he will bite eventually. 2) When he does respond, get his shipping (i.e. residential) address and phone number, and promise him that delivery is scheduled in the next week or two. 3) At this point, you have several options: You can either send him laxatives in disguise (and I do mean the maximum strength stuff, accompanied by directions to use it liberally everyday), or you can show up at his house with some psychos and just pelt his car/house/real estate with rotting spam. Or you can think of some other thing - if you are at his doorstep, the sky's the limit. 4) Repeat as desired, but with another line of product under another contact name.