and it's your DVD player which is PAL or NTSC, not the disc.
Sort of, but not exactly correct.
When 'NTSC' is used on DVDs this usually means it is Region 1, and I can still play it on my region free player which is connected to a PAL TV.
Incorrect.
I've never seen a DVD labelled 'PAL'.
That may be, but I highly doubt that you've seen every DVD. I own a few DVDs that say PAL on them.
Here are links to the NTSC version and the PAL version of the same film.
PAL DVDs are 720x576 resolution, 25 frames per second; NTSC DVDs are 720x480, 30 frames per second.
If we assume that the DVDs are storing everything in slightly higher quality than analog television streams, each episode should take about 300MB - which is realistic, since the feeds were made for television and are going to be played on televisions.
300MB per episode? How do you come up with that number? We're not talking about burning MPEG4 DivXs onto a DVD-R here; we're talking about MPEG2 DVD video. I've never seen anyone put more than 7 30 minute episodes onto a DVD-9, and even that many is very rare. Usually it's more like 4. Lets say about 7Mbits/second bitrate, 25 minutes per episode--that works out to be about 1300MB per episode.
This comes to you via a posting to the North American Network Operator's Group (NANOG) by Chris Roberts.
Call 0800-032-2101 and select option 2 for Support.
Uh, that's not a North American Numbering Plan phone number. Is it too much to expect a post to the North American Network Operator's Group to give instructions for people in North America?
Frankly I think ICANN should formally seperate the registrars and the root DNS registry.
But they're already separate. The root DNS servers are:
a.root-servers.net. 198.41.0.4 (Network Solutions, Inc.) b.root-servers.net. 128.9.0.107 (Information Sciences Institute) c.root-servers.net. 192.33.4.12 (Performance Systems International Inc.) d.root-servers.net. 128.8.10.90 (University of Maryland) e.root-servers.net. 192.203.230.10 (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) f.root-servers.net. 192.5.5.241 (Internet Software Consortium, Inc.) g.root-servers.net. 192.112.36.4 (Defense Information Systems Agency) h.root-servers.net. 128.63.2.53 (U.S. Army Research Laboratory) i.root-servers.net. 192.36.148.17 (Royal Institute of Technology (Sweden)) j.root-servers.net. 192.58.128.30 (VeriSign Global Registry Services) k.root-servers.net. 193.0.14.129 (LINX, Telehouse, London) l.root-servers.net. 198.32.64.12 (Exchange Point Blocks) m.root-servers.net. 202.12.27.33 (The University of Tokyo)
Verisign runs the.com and.net TLD name servers, not the root servers (well, they run two of the root servers, but not all of them). The.com and.net servers are:
Man, I just upgraded to 3.7 this morning, and now 3.7.1 is out:
Security Changes: =================
All versions of OpenSSH's sshd prior to 3.7.1 contain buffer management errors. It is uncertain whether these errors are potentially exploitable, however, we prefer to see bugs fixed proactively.
Seeing that an eclipse is when the shadow of the {moon,earth} falls on the {earth,moon}, I don't think the sun needs to join eclipses--it's already a key player.
Eh, I don't believe him... there's no such thing as a dual Xenon system--it's probably just a single Xenon. However, in my spare time, I'm working on a 6.022E23 node Xenon Trioxide system... it'll be a blast!
Gasoline ends in "ne" and have that "eeen" pronunciation to them. Xylene. Benzene. Toluene. All come from crude oil and all have a bloody low flash point.
I'm not sure that the English pronunciation of those chemicals have anything to do with their flash points being low:). The "-ene" suffix in chemistry just indicates a double bond. Polystyrene (aka. Styrofoam) ends in "ne" and has that "eeen" pronunciation, but it has a pretty high flash point of around 350 degrees C. Kerosene also fits the pronunciation criteria, but it's not flammable (much to my dismay). It's combustible: the flash point is above 100 degrees F. Pour some kerosene into a small dish and try to light it with a match or a lighter--it won't ignite (unless it's summer and you're in Tucson, Arizona, I guess).
I recently bought and assembled a computer for my dad, and was surprised to see that NewEgg had a Chinese keyboard for $7. Since my dad's Chinese, I got it for him... I doubt if he'll actually use it to type Chinese, but if he ever wants to, he can.
3 days from disclosure to security update is pretty good though.
The SANS report is just a summary of current vulnerabilities. While that issue of the report was published on August 11, the vulnerability itself was first published on July 31. Apple was a bit slow on this one for some reason...
If you read the instructions provided by symantec they ask you to install a patch for the RPC vulnerability. That one patch was available since late March. Why M.S.
Cite please. The instruction I see say, "W32.Blaster.Worm exploits the DCOM RPC vulnerability. This is described in Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-026, and a patch is available there. You must download and install the patch."
The RPC patch from March you're referring to is probably MS03-010, which is a different (and less-severe) problem. It lets you DoS a machine, but doesn't let you actually run any code.
My point is that the patch hasn't been out since March like you've been claiming.
The problem though.. why the f**k should an RPC patch affect whether or not I can open a.gmax file?
That's a good question... for Discreet. They say, "As a result, all.gmax files saved with the Windows Hotfix 823980 installed will no longer load in gmax on systems without the fix," implying that systems that do have the hotfix installed will load the files. Perhaps they're saving the contents of some opaque Windows data structure into.gmax files, hoping that MS will never change the format that structure (my guess is something OLE-related). Bad idea--stick to structs exposed as part of the API.
Windows 2000 and Windows XP have this useful automatic update feature, which I have it set to automatically download, then prompt me to install. I installed the patch described in KB article 823980 via the automatic update on July 17, 2003 20:08:50 CDT. Since I didn't go to http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/, I won't make any claims as to whether or not the update was listed there. However, I have not seen any update pop up in my task bar that wasn't already on Windows Update; it's usually the other way around--critical updates are listed on Windows Update for a while before they're pushed out as automatic updates.
Cat (or any other live being) in a large pool of bromine has a life expectancy of a few minutes. And yes it would sink.
Oh come on... are you calling into question the veracity of the famous MIT experiment? How about some facts? Bromine has a density of 3.12 g/mL--over three times that of water. People have no problem floating in the highly-saline water of the Dead Sea, which has a density of about 1.2 g/mL. So no, it wouldn't sink.
Slashdot Mirror
Incorrect.
DVDs are digital
Correct.
and it's your DVD player which is PAL or NTSC, not the disc.
Sort of, but not exactly correct.
When 'NTSC' is used on DVDs this usually means it is Region 1, and I can still play it on my region free player which is connected to a PAL TV.
Incorrect.
I've never seen a DVD labelled 'PAL'.
That may be, but I highly doubt that you've seen every DVD. I own a few DVDs that say PAL on them. Here are links to the NTSC version and the PAL version of the same film.
PAL DVDs are 720x576 resolution, 25 frames per second; NTSC DVDs are 720x480, 30 frames per second.
300MB per episode? How do you come up with that number? We're not talking about burning MPEG4 DivXs onto a DVD-R here; we're talking about MPEG2 DVD video. I've never seen anyone put more than 7 30 minute episodes onto a DVD-9, and even that many is very rare. Usually it's more like 4. Lets say about 7Mbits/second bitrate, 25 minutes per episode--that works out to be about 1300MB per episode.
Wasaaaaaaaaaabi! Wasabi!
No, Verisign doesn't control and run the root servers. I posted a list of root servers along with who runs them a few days ago.
Still invalid. The "0" in 032 is invalid for NANPA numbers--the "N" in the "NXX" must be between 2-9 inclusive.
Anyone up to finding a root hole in FreSSH, another SSH implementation that nobody's heard of? :)
Shilling for Zone Labs, I see.
But they're already separate. The root DNS servers are:
a.root-servers.net. 198.41.0.4 (Network Solutions, Inc.)
b.root-servers.net. 128.9.0.107 (Information Sciences Institute)
c.root-servers.net. 192.33.4.12 (Performance Systems International Inc.)
d.root-servers.net. 128.8.10.90 (University of Maryland)
e.root-servers.net. 192.203.230.10 (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
f.root-servers.net. 192.5.5.241 (Internet Software Consortium, Inc.)
g.root-servers.net. 192.112.36.4 (Defense Information Systems Agency)
h.root-servers.net. 128.63.2.53 (U.S. Army Research Laboratory)
i.root-servers.net. 192.36.148.17 (Royal Institute of Technology (Sweden))
j.root-servers.net. 192.58.128.30 (VeriSign Global Registry Services)
k.root-servers.net. 193.0.14.129 (LINX, Telehouse, London)
l.root-servers.net. 198.32.64.12 (Exchange Point Blocks)
m.root-servers.net. 202.12.27.33 (The University of Tokyo)
Verisign runs the .com and .net TLD name servers, not the root servers (well, they run two of the root servers, but not all of them). The .com and .net servers are:
a.gtld-servers.net. 192.5.6.30
b.gtld-servers.net. 192.33.14.30
c.gtld-servers.net. 192.26.92.30
d.gtld-servers.net. 192.31.80.30
e.gtld-servers.net. 192.12.94.30
f.gtld-servers.net. 192.35.51.30
g.gtld-servers.net. 192.42.93.30
h.gtld-servers.net. 192.54.112.30
i.gtld-servers.net. 192.43.172.30
j.gtld-servers.net. 192.48.79.30
k.gtld-servers.net. 192.52.178.30
l.gtld-servers.net. 192.41.162.30
m.gtld-servers.net. 192.55.83.30
Those are all run by Verisign Global Registry Services.
I'd say you're missing good observational skills. (Or perhaps you just have decent troll skills, in which case IHBT.)
I haven't seen anything saying that the patch for MS03-026 introduced any of the bugs described in MS03-039. Cite?
This part bugs me everytime I see it... how about changing "Emacs Lite" to MicroEmacs next time?
Seeing that an eclipse is when the shadow of the {moon,earth} falls on the {earth,moon}, I don't think the sun needs to join eclipses--it's already a key player.
Eh, I don't believe him... there's no such thing as a dual Xenon system--it's probably just a single Xenon. However, in my spare time, I'm working on a 6.022E23 node Xenon Trioxide system... it'll be a blast!
I'm not sure that the English pronunciation of those chemicals have anything to do with their flash points being low :). The "-ene" suffix in chemistry just indicates a double bond. Polystyrene (aka. Styrofoam) ends in "ne" and has that "eeen" pronunciation, but it has a pretty high flash point of around 350 degrees C. Kerosene also fits the pronunciation criteria, but it's not flammable (much to my dismay). It's combustible: the flash point is above 100 degrees F. Pour some kerosene into a small dish and try to light it with a match or a lighter--it won't ignite (unless it's summer and you're in Tucson, Arizona, I guess).
I recently bought and assembled a computer for my dad, and was surprised to see that NewEgg had a Chinese keyboard for $7. Since my dad's Chinese, I got it for him... I doubt if he'll actually use it to type Chinese, but if he ever wants to, he can.
The SANS report is just a summary of current vulnerabilities. While that issue of the report was published on August 11, the vulnerability itself was first published on July 31. Apple was a bit slow on this one for some reason...
Cite please. The instruction I see say, "W32.Blaster.Worm exploits the DCOM RPC vulnerability. This is described in Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-026, and a patch is available there. You must download and install the patch."
The RPC patch from March you're referring to is probably MS03-010, which is a different (and less-severe) problem. It lets you DoS a machine, but doesn't let you actually run any code.
My point is that the patch hasn't been out since March like you've been claiming.
That's a good question... for Discreet. They say, "As a result, all .gmax files saved with the Windows Hotfix 823980 installed will no longer load in gmax on systems without the fix," implying that systems that do have the hotfix installed will load the files. Perhaps they're saving the contents of some opaque Windows data structure into .gmax files, hoping that MS will never change the format that structure (my guess is something OLE-related). Bad idea--stick to structs exposed as part of the API.
Windows 2000 and Windows XP have this useful automatic update feature, which I have it set to automatically download, then prompt me to install. I installed the patch described in KB article 823980 via the automatic update on July 17, 2003 20:08:50 CDT. Since I didn't go to http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/, I won't make any claims as to whether or not the update was listed there. However, I have not seen any update pop up in my task bar that wasn't already on Windows Update; it's usually the other way around--critical updates are listed on Windows Update for a while before they're pushed out as automatic updates.
WRONG.
You're an arsole.
Oh come on... are you calling into question the veracity of the famous MIT experiment? How about some facts? Bromine has a density of 3.12 g/mL--over three times that of water. People have no problem floating in the highly-saline water of the Dead Sea, which has a density of about 1.2 g/mL. So no, it wouldn't sink.