One guy picked the locks protecting the internal printers and memory cards. Another figured out how to vote more than once - and get away with it. Still another launched a dial-up attack, using his modem to slither through an electronic hole in the State Board of Elections software. Once inside, he could easily change vote totals that come in on Election Day.
It simply doens't matter who, what, when, where, or HOW you vote. If you control the people/machine *COUNTING* the votes, you control the election. So just STFU about the paper receipt and using an optical scanner, etc. Hell it doesn't matter if they were all counted by hand - your count is still just added to the totals on the state board's computer. The problem is still on the final tabulating computer. An insider controls your vote - you don't.
The Advanced Fast Reactor, an improved Integral Fast Reactor/Advanced Liquid Metal Reactor is a modern design that:
- burns it's own waste as fuel.
- is safe (The reactor core will cease to function when it gets to hot).
- could be use current 'nuclear waste' as fuel.
- could use current weapons grade plutonium (think decomissioned warheads).
- the final by products 'nuclear waste' will be as radio-active as normal uranium ore.
I really with the nuclear energy phobic would learn a little bit about modern reactor technology.
High-profile attorney David Boies and his firm still are handling SCO's Unix legal action, SCO said. SCO is paying Boeis' firm with a contingency agreement, under which lawyers are typically paid not by the hour, but with a percentage of their client's case winnings.
Which clearly states that Boeis is still aboard and looking to get his out of the winnings. Good thing he doesn't need the money.
Actuall I have done web and cvs server benchmarks on Sun (UIII/8MB/750Mhz dual) vs Linux PIII/1.26 and Linux HP DL380 dual 2.8 P4 Xeon and guess what?
The sun wan't even close on anything, except under no-load conditions.
Under normal load the 1-CPU Linux box was twice as fast as the Sun with two processes.
Certainly everything I'm testing is low/no FPU, but guess what? That's true for every task done in this F500 company. They been running Solaris for decades and the biggest solaris box they have can be replaced by an Intel machine running linux, except for a few apps written by really dumb companies (Adobe) who haven't figured out that the sun has set.
Oh and that hot-swap-everything bull-shit is on high-end intel based equipment too. If you need hot-sway everything you pay for it, if you don't need it don't waste the ching.
In addition to your self correction (FB is black case of the same monitor) [I have 2 NEC FE950+ and 2 ViewSonic G90f] and the NEC950+ is a far flatter/better monitor in my opinion. The FE950+ is a 19" trinitron tube and has been replaced with a functionally identical tube in a slightly different casing (the back of the monitor is more squared off) There are several of the newer models at work and they are visually identical. You should have no problem finding the NEC 19" Trinitron Tube for the same price as the ViewSonic G90f -- You can get the 'value' version of that tube anywhere as the A90f for about the same price as you would pay on-line for the G90f or the NEC.
Oh and I have a sparc IPX for a monitor stand as well. Bugs the hell out of the IT guys when they see it, cause they think I might power it up, hah.
I still haven't made the move to LCD because the cost/quality isn't there for me. Friends of mine of have gone LCD absolutly swear by it though.
Anyway I can directly compare my NEC FE950+ and ViewSonic G90F and while the ViewSonic is a good monitor I would not hesitate to replace it with the NEC. The NEC is a Trinitron Tube and is far flatter than the 'True-Flat' ViewSonic. My sample size is two of each monitor.
I also have a used 21" Sony that was left on for a long time and it has shown significant fadeout so what ever monitor you choose, you should turn it off when you aren't using it:-).
On a historical note I can also compare the Sony 17SE and the ViewSonic 17PS and the 17SE is also far flatter, looking at the ViewSonic these days reminds me of staring into a crystal ball.
7K lines is a weekend project, and as such does not need to be commented. However you may throw out a README that explains:
The purpose of the project.
The problems it solves.
The general approach/assumptions used.
For small programs I write comments of chiefly two varieties:
What I am writing is intended to be sample code.
Non-obvious code that relies on assumptions made in other parts of the system:
/** * It's okay to this here, see: elsewhere.c * where it is required that the system must XXX. or YYY must have been done. */
For larger programs different rules apply. The comments may be used to generate documentation and/or communicate with other developers about the state of the code or the expected/tested usage.
1 and 2 aren't equivalent, because in 2 you are passing a pointer. I assume it should be foo(*x) and in 1 you are passing an element of array. Also the int in the for loop is, of course, a C++ idiom.
Any C programmer using 2. is guilty of two things.
- Writting ugly code.
- Premature optimization. Both of which are grounds for the Foam Clue Bat of Death.
Actually this shows that a software group *did* design it. Unfortunatly the software group has a total of 0 hours in the hardware domain and simply didn't have a clue as to HOW the product is to be used.
Re:The Clearcast plan is is Out-and-out EVIL
on
Instant Concert CDs?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Clear channel owns about half of the stations. If they don't promote/play bands that don't play along, the bands may feel there is no choice. If the band gets a cut I see no problem with this, but if they don't then it's pretty nasty, imho. I would suck to loose almost half your fans because you didn't like somebody taking some profit off your only opportunity to make some ching. After all, most profits are from T-Shirts, and if CD's take sales from shirts...
The moral of the story is that code reviews are bullshit fed to QA. The only way to be qualified to review code is to have implimented it independantly. Otherwise all ppl do is go, uh-huh, uh-huh, yeah that looks right...
What about Promise RM8000 vs Axus vs SCSI/SCSI?
on
IDE RAID Examined
·
· Score: 1
What I want to see is what is the penalty for these kinds of configurations:
The Promise enclose is based around a fixed 32MB cache and the i960 chip. Where as the axus offerings are somewhat cache configurable (64/128/256) depending... and based around the i80303 chip. It seems more of the higher end stuff is based around the i80303.
axus says the BR-8000 can do 95 MB sustained via the dual U160 interface.
So what's the real performance penalty for SCSI-SCSI for FiberChannel SCSI in this case?
Can a SCSI-SCSI do significanly more than 95MB? or is it a premium for a marginal improvement (as I suspect)?
While I prefer alternate fuels myself. I know that:
Even the worst electric plants are more effecient than the ebst internal combustion engines at producing and transporting the resulting energy.
Is a pile of shit.
All the coal burning electricty generation utilities on the USA generate *TWICE* the pollution of *all* the vehicles.
Against nuclear energy? Or agaist the out moded design of nuclear plants build in the 70's based on 50's nuclear submarine designs.
Ask google about the IFR reactor designs.
Seems they offer red, yellow and blue diamonds. Yellow diamonds are quite common from what I understand - they are usually only used as gem stones when they are very large. Of course the sample colors are much more intense than what is typically referred to as a yellow diamond.... Still they aren't exactly cheap and they are making them > ~.75 caret yet...
Damn. Dunno why I didn't see that. Guess I don't read too well.
So what's to stop WM_TIMER call backs from checking against the cache of call back funcs set via SetTimer() - which is presumably the only way to get WM_TIMER to execute a callback?
Wouldn't that be a reasonable fix for this bug?
Other than GetText()/SetText() and COPYDATA I don't know of any way to cross application memory spaces via the Message Queue. (Other methods are named pipes, memory mapped files, and dde).
It appears to me that GetText()/SetText() calls are the only vector that all win32 gui applications cannot work around.
COPYDATA, DDE, Named Pipes and Memory Mapped are all used for IPC inter-process communication. All those IPC methods require non-trival, non-default support. Not what I would consider a Win32 core vulnerability.
Of course this also means you can't 'trust' any of the core widgets - you have to have your own 'non-conforming' versions that don't respond to GetText() and SetText().
Why do all that work just for WM_TIMER? Why not just go for the throat by sub-classing any window with privs?
SetWindowLongPtr
LONG cbMyProc(HWND hWnd, LONG uMsg, LONG wParam, LONG lParam) { /* Any sploit you like. */ } hwnd = FindWindowWithRoot(); cbProc = SetWindowLongPtr(hwnd, GWLP_WNDPROC, cbMyProc); /* doesn't matter what you send, it call cbMyProc() to process it */ SendMessage( hwnd, msg, wp, lp );
Now cbMyProc is the message handler for all msgs to hwnd, any code in cbMyProc is executed within the memory space, and priv of the target.
Slashdot Mirror
It simply doens't matter who, what, when, where, or HOW you vote. If you control the people/machine *COUNTING* the votes, you control the election. So just STFU about the paper receipt and using an optical scanner, etc. Hell it doesn't matter if they were all counted by hand - your count is still just added to the totals on the state board's computer. The problem is still on the final tabulating computer. An insider controls your vote - you don't.
... Lotus Notes.
The Advanced Fast Reactor, an improved Integral Fast Reactor/Advanced Liquid Metal Reactor is a modern design that:
- burns it's own waste as fuel.
- is safe (The reactor core will cease to function when it gets to hot).
- could be use current 'nuclear waste' as fuel.
- could use current weapons grade plutonium (think decomissioned warheads).
- the final by products 'nuclear waste' will be as radio-active as normal uranium ore.
I really with the nuclear energy phobic would learn a little bit about modern reactor technology.
IFR - http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA378.html
AFR - http://www.rae.anl.gov/research/ardt/afr/
High-profile attorney David Boies and his firm still are handling SCO's Unix legal action, SCO said. SCO is paying Boeis' firm with a contingency agreement, under which lawyers are typically paid not by the hour, but with a percentage of their client's case winnings.
Which clearly states that Boeis is still aboard and looking to get his out of the winnings. Good thing he doesn't need the money.
Actuall I have done web and cvs server benchmarks on Sun (UIII/8MB/750Mhz dual) vs Linux PIII/1.26 and Linux HP DL380 dual 2.8 P4 Xeon and guess what?
The sun wan't even close on anything, except under no-load conditions.
Under normal load the 1-CPU Linux box was twice as fast as the Sun with two processes.
Certainly everything I'm testing is low/no FPU, but guess what? That's true for every task done in this F500 company. They been running Solaris for decades and the biggest solaris box they have can be replaced by an Intel machine running linux, except for a few apps written by really dumb companies (Adobe) who haven't figured out that the sun has set.
Oh and that hot-swap-everything bull-shit is on high-end intel based equipment too. If you need hot-sway everything you pay for it, if you don't need it don't waste the ching.
In addition to your self correction (FB is black case of the same monitor) [I have 2 NEC FE950+ and 2 ViewSonic G90f] and the NEC950+ is a far flatter/better monitor in my opinion. The FE950+ is a 19" trinitron tube and has been replaced with a functionally identical tube in a slightly different casing (the back of the monitor is more squared off) There are several of the newer models at work and they are visually identical.
You should have no problem finding the NEC 19" Trinitron Tube for the same price as the ViewSonic G90f -- You can get the 'value' version of that tube anywhere as the A90f for about the same price as you would pay on-line for the G90f or the NEC.
Oh and I have a sparc IPX for a monitor stand as well. Bugs the hell out of the IT guys when they see it, cause they think I might power it up, hah.
I still haven't made the move to LCD because the cost/quality isn't there for me. Friends of mine of have gone LCD absolutly swear by it though.
:-).
Anyway I can directly compare my NEC FE950+ and ViewSonic G90F and while the ViewSonic is a good monitor I would not hesitate to replace it with the NEC. The NEC is a Trinitron Tube and is far flatter than the 'True-Flat' ViewSonic. My sample size is two of each monitor.
I also have a used 21" Sony that was left on for a long time and it has shown significant fadeout so what ever monitor you choose, you should turn it off when you aren't using it
On a historical note I can also compare the Sony 17SE and the ViewSonic 17PS and the 17SE is also far flatter, looking at the ViewSonic these days reminds me of staring into a crystal ball.
cli: lftp
gui: isn't that what mozilla is?
Burning Xboxen is a crime, like books, right? j/k
- The purpose of the project.
- The problems it solves.
- The general approach/assumptions used.
For small programs I write comments of chiefly two varieties:- What I am writing is intended to be sample code.
- Non-obvious code that relies on assumptions made in other parts of the system:
For larger programs different rules apply. The comments may be used to generate documentation and/or communicate with other developers about the state of the code or the expected/tested usage.Two quick notes:
1 and 2 aren't equivalent, because in 2 you are passing a pointer. I assume it should be foo(*x) and in 1 you are passing an element of array.
Also the int in the for loop is, of course, a C++ idiom.
Any C programmer using 2. is guilty of two things.
- Writting ugly code.
- Premature optimization.
Both of which are grounds for the Foam Clue Bat of Death.
Actually that sounds like the ECS DeskNote
Actually this shows that a software group *did* design it. Unfortunatly the software group has a total of 0 hours in the hardware domain and simply didn't have a clue as to HOW the product is to be used.
Clear channel owns about half of the stations. If they don't promote/play bands that don't play along, the bands may feel there is no choice. If the band gets a cut I see no problem with this, but if they don't then it's pretty nasty, imho. ...
I would suck to loose almost half your fans because you didn't like somebody taking some profit off your only opportunity to make some ching. After all, most profits are from T-Shirts, and if CD's take sales from shirts
Yes, but will the artist get a cut, or get cut out?
'Bachelor Chow' - Just think, a high fibre, low fat, high nutrient generic bulk food that can taste different at every meal! I'm saved!
The moral of the story is that code reviews are bullshit fed to QA.
The only way to be qualified to review code is to have implimented it independantly. Otherwise all ppl do is go, uh-huh, uh-huh, yeah that looks right...
What I want to see is what is the penalty for these kinds of configurations:
r aid.htm
... and based around the i80303 chip. It seems more of the higher end stuff is based around the i80303.
FibreChannel or Ultra 160 to IDE vs SCSI disks
http://www.promise.com
http://www.axus.com.tw/
The Promise enclose is based around a fixed 32MB cache and the i960 chip. Where as the axus offerings are somewhat cache configurable (64/128/256) depending
axus says the BR-8000 can do 95 MB sustained via the dual U160 interface.
So what's the real performance penalty for SCSI-SCSI for FiberChannel SCSI in this case?
Can a SCSI-SCSI do significanly more than 95MB? or is it a premium for a marginal improvement (as I suspect)?
While I prefer alternate fuels myself. I know that:
Even the worst electric plants are more effecient than the ebst internal combustion engines at producing and transporting the resulting energy.
Is a pile of shit.
All the coal burning electricty generation utilities on the USA generate *TWICE* the pollution of *all* the vehicles.
Against nuclear energy? Or agaist the out moded design of nuclear plants build in the 70's based on 50's nuclear submarine designs. Ask google about the IFR reactor designs.
Seems they offer red, yellow and blue diamonds. Yellow diamonds are quite common from what I understand - they are usually only used as gem stones when they are very large. .... ...
Of course the sample colors are much more intense than what is typically referred to as a yellow diamond
Still they aren't exactly cheap and they are making them > ~.75 caret yet
Damn. Dunno why I didn't see that. Guess I don't read too well.
So what's to stop WM_TIMER call backs from checking against the cache of call back funcs set via SetTimer() - which is presumably the only way to get WM_TIMER to execute a callback?
Wouldn't that be a reasonable fix for this bug?
Other than GetText()/SetText() and COPYDATA I don't know of any way to cross application memory spaces via the Message Queue. (Other methods are named pipes, memory mapped files, and dde).
It appears to me that GetText()/SetText() calls are the only vector that all win32 gui applications cannot work around.
COPYDATA, DDE, Named Pipes and Memory Mapped are all used for IPC inter-process communication. All those IPC methods require non-trival, non-default support. Not what I would consider a Win32 core vulnerability.
Of course this also means you can't 'trust' any of the core widgets - you have to have your own 'non-conforming' versions that don't respond to GetText() and SetText().
Why do all that work just for WM_TIMER? Why not just go for the throat by sub-classing any window with privs? SetWindowLongPtr
LONG cbMyProc(HWND hWnd, LONG uMsg, LONG wParam, LONG lParam)
/* Any sploit you like. */
/* doesn't matter what you send,
{
}
hwnd = FindWindowWithRoot();
cbProc = SetWindowLongPtr(hwnd, GWLP_WNDPROC, cbMyProc);
it call cbMyProc() to process it */
SendMessage( hwnd, msg, wp, lp );
Now cbMyProc is the message handler for all msgs to hwnd, any code in cbMyProc is executed within the memory space, and priv of the target.
Site blocked .. data too random?
Have fun.
No windows? No office.
Painfully moronic.
Who marked troll to 3?