Maybe they prefer 1pm court hearings because it takes them a long time to ensure that their SPF 10000 cream is safely and completely on all vulnerable parts AND the Sun is available for "controlled tests" before they leave the safety of their homes.
If they left earlier they wouldn't be able to do the "smoke tests" - no sunlight;).
e.g. "Oops missed a spot there - my pinky is smoking in the sunlight".
In which case why aren't people with earrings getting lots of cancers from them? How about those people who "mod" themselves (studs etc) but not with glass RFIDs?
If it somehow increases the risk of cancer (even minus the RF stuff) more than the usual studs etc then I find that very interesting. Maybe it's the shape or surface of the glass? Could be something useful to learn about cancer from this.
It looks like you are having difficulty understanding more than one sentence, would you like help? * Shiny! * Wow, thank you for that amazing insight [] Don't show me this tip again </clippy>
A computer is NOT a car. And I actually don't blame the users.
Because in my opinion things can actually be a LOT safer.
After so many decades and billions of dollars (in time and real money) all we end up with is a few Unix reimplementations and Microsoft Vista?
Stuff like SELinux is nice, but it's still not "Aunt May" friendly.
What would be good would be something like "sandbox templates". Apparmor is close but not close enough.
While there are zillions of apps, there are a LOT fewer categories of common/popular apps in terms of the permissions and privileges they require.
So I'm saying a real Desktop OS should have a few preset sandbox templates.
Then you have an app request to be run under one of those templates.
And if the app is untrusted the user gets a prompt like "Random Game Someone Emailed" requests "Temporary/Guest Game Privileges"- Allow? Yes/No/Yes and always/More...
And "Guest Game Privileges" would provide a tempory storage (that's just for that app), sound access, windowed graphics (always has a border - so you know whether it really exited or not go figure why;) ), no network access, no access to "My Documents", no access to microphone (eavesdropping).
Even if the game tried to do something naughty the O/S would prevent it.
Whereas if the game requested "Full System Install Privileges" (with the associated big exclamation marks, and big red warnings, requirement of Admin password etc), I'm sure you can easily train your "Aunt May" to not ever click Yes to such stuff.
Naturally O/S makers like Microsoft could do things so that certain signed programs can optionally run without such inconvenient prompts;).
But instead after all these years we have Vista UAC, SELinux or the usual situation of the user having to guess whether something is safe to run or not, which is just as silly as asking "grandpa joe" to solve the "halting problem" - will browsing this website/opening this email turn my machine into a worm infested zombie?
You can say "they shouldn't run anything" - but that's being silly. They want to run their browser and their email app, and I personally think that's reasonable, and at the same time I don't think their web browser should have read access to their personal documents - it should just have "browser access".
Yes, what I'm asking for is hard, but I believe what I'm asking for is far more reasonable than what the O/S people are in effect requiring their users to do - solve the halting problem.
I doubt the Linux distros could pull it off (most can't even decide on a desktop;) ), but Apple or Microsoft (haha) might.
It's just the usual Microsoft doing "version 1.0" of "Influencing Standards Bodies" really badly. Wait till their 4th or 5th try at it.;)
Hardly anyone making new standards is really interested in the good of the industry much less the world.
In the past the geeks made TCP/IP etc because it was just a bunch of geeks who wanted to get things to _work_ and get stuff done.
Nowadays, it's "How can we influence the standard so we can get an advantage".
If someone actually comes up with a decent standard the competitors will just try to come up with something different.
Lots of crap standards nowadays - look at WiFi - they could have taken a leaf from SSL, and had a standard that allowed _secure_anonymous_ connections, but instead you get the huge mess that's WiFi- where it's easy to be open and insecure, and difficult to be secure.
Look at the upcoming HTML standards, all "throttles" and no "brakes", nobody _really_ cares about security. They just tell people to "please drive safely, and you should stay in your lane and not crash please raise a security exception instead", but do they really lift a finger to help?
AMD come up with Hyper Transport? No way is Intel going to support it.
And then there's RDRAM and the whole bunch of people trying to get their patents into standards.
Wasn't there a Dilbert comic strip where Dilbert's company outsources to X who outsources to Y who outsources to.... who outsources to Dilbert's company.
And everyone lies a bit about meeting the SLAs and so quotes cheaper prices.;)
But garbage in, garbage out. If you're in North Korea you wouldn't even have a chance to even know anything else other than propaganda. You can have free will but never know you liked the colour blue if you never had a chance to see it.
Elsewhere you have more freedom but often it seems like nobody knows or cares about what's really going on.
I figure that in democracies you need a majority for something to happen, so if you distract the masses well enough they'll never unite against you or things you consider important. If they start getting united you can _divert_ the masses. And usually you can dodge/deny stuff so enough of the masses might get confused or believe you.
Distract, Divert, Dodge, Deny.
The counters are education and information. But if you notice "enlightened" Govs nowadays are more interested in good grades but not good education;).
Thing is a fair number of Chinese in China actually seem to be getting educated (education has a long tradition in China) BUT are just being fed "different information" by the Gov. So usually what happens normally is the smart citizens go elsewhere and realize things are a bit different and word gets about.
But maybe this time, the Chinese will go elsewhere around the world and see it's not really different from their Glorious Homeland (or even worse). Could end up like the Admiral Cheng Ho/Zheng He who took a huge Chinese fleet around the world in the 1400s and probably word got around in China that people elsewhere were just a bunch of savages.
Why should people expect rebates if they willingly buy some stuff that's overpriced and it gets cheaper a few months later?
If it was faulty or you got less than what was advertised then sure.
WRT rebates for punishing companies, I personally don't think fines/rebates are that effective. Bosses being sent to prison is definitely more effective...
From my reading of Revelations, I suspect there will be a lot of bloody Christians (especially from people killing Christians and unfortunately probably Christians killing other people too - though they shouldn't).
I don't think it's going to be as convenient for everyone.
Go read Revelations.
Here's some stuff to think about: 1) Revelations predicts the Antichrist aka False Messiah. 2) The Jews and Muslims are still waiting for the Messiah, so who knows maybe a Muslim Jew might fit the bill... 3) A fair number of Christians are unlikely to believe that one as the 2nd Coming... 4) Israel is already back where it's supposed to be (and causing problems just like in the old days[1]). 5) The world is already being set up for a Global Government - Laws, Courts etc, just add a nice enough throne for Mr 666.
So, yeah there will be a lot of bloody Christians.
Think I'm wrong?
[1] Israel means "Wrestles/Struggles with God" go figure;).
Main thing is: can those actions be reasonably justifiable by the Muslim/Christian/Scientology "scriptures" e.g. Koran, Bible, CoS copyrighted stuff?
Could anyone with reasonable understanding of the Bible claim that Jesus told his followers to kill nonbelievers and provide the verses that show it?
There are tons of groups that call themselves "Christian". The difference between Christian and "Christian" is one follows Jesus, and one follows someone else (some pastor) or even some_thing_ else (e.g. Money, Power).
Just because someone claims they are a follower of Jesus doesn't mean they are.
Of course, some of us (like me) may not behave very well and be following Jesus from a rather great distance behind. There should hopefully still be a general "drift" in the right direction (brownian though it may seem sometimes;) ).
'This is not always true... many "Christian" groups are very restrictive.'
Sad to say, many "Christian" groups ARE cults.
Here's how Christians tell a Christian group from a "Christian" group. One follows Jesus (or tries anyway, nobody's perfect;) ), and the other follows the Pastor (or whatever the human chooses to call him/herself).
IMO, Darwinian Theory is not in direct conflict with Christianity, and you can be a Christian even if you think that evolution was the likely way humans came about.
Most people are ignorant, and no surprise most Christians are ignorant about their own religion, but the difference is Bible is there for EVERYONE to read (or even made fun of - often by bigots).
Christians can claim that those factions are divergent with backing from the Bible. If you are following Jesus, it is pretty clear you're not supposed to be going around killing other people. You'd have to stretch/twist things to claim that the Bible says it is OK for _Christians_ to kill others.
I'm not sure if Scientologists can do something similar.
As for Judaism and the Torah saying it's OK to kill others, you'd see that: 1) There are bits dealing the Israelites killing others were the Israelites taking the promised land from the Canaanites. There's no expansionist take over the world thing- Israel was God's judgement on the Canaanites. 2) The other bits are laws regulating behaviour and punishments (which include the death penalty) which Israel voluntarily _agreed_ to in their "contract" with God. Israel was to be set apart as special. Even today Israel "sticks out" in the world;). 3) And then there's parts dealing with war in general. War sucks.
It would be good to know which bits of the Koran/Quran say that Muslims are not supposed to kill nonmuslims, might come in handy one day.
1) You know which cell a phone is "in". So you know which area that person is likely to be in. 2) In densely populated areas, cells would normally be small. 3) In "hard to cover areas" you might even know which carpark or lift shaft the person was in. 4) You can even guess if they are travelling in a vehicle especially if it is moving from cell to cell.
For vaguely related information see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handoff
So once you've narrowed down which area that person is in, you bring in the "radar vans" and cops to catch the person (you need much better resolution to catch the person).
I suggest that many crimes could be solved if police had access to records of phone numbers, the cells they were in and the times they were in those cells. Most current criminals may not be smart enough to turn off their phones _way_ before committing a crime.
You do not even need to record the phone conversations, but of course that could be useful as well.
You probably want to adjust your memory overcommit tunables then.
I've got 2GB of RAM, vm.overcommit_ratio=95, vm.overcommit_memory = 2 and swap at 384MB (might be better with _less_, but some processes just allocate memory without using it).
Disk transfers when swapping are usually about 10MB/sec, and so 384MB = more than long enough...
I'd rather have processes get an out of memory error quickly than have my entire machine go into a swap death spiral.
So what if the mail server dies because it can't allocate any more mem (set ulimits accordingly), at least I can still ssh in.
Call me real cynical but the reason why a lot of the stuff is secret is because the rich and powerful don't want "the wrong people" to know how much money they are moving about and where. Same reason why these "holes" are there in the first place.
They don't want to "accidentally" catch the big fish while catching the small fry;).
FWIW I implemented a dhcp server because in my opinion ISC dhcpd sucked, lacked features we needed, and was/is likely to have more security bugs;).
My reading of RFC2131 (4.1) was if a client sets the broadcast flag, that means it wants the server to broadcast the reply back (if replying directly[1]). Seemed fairly clear AND reasonable to me. [1] The server should not broadcast if the reply is to a dhcp relay (giaddr is set) and thus not direct.
So if Vista is using the broadcast flag that way, then it's compliant, and a DHCP server that doesn't like that is one that's buggy and noncompliant (and same goes for the ISP).
In my experience the really non-RFC2131 compliant stuff appear to be some PDAs (some versions of windows mobile+PDA being offenders), I had to make my dhcpd less strict and even then some PDAs still wouldn't work (can't remember but those were probably doing stupid stuff in the vein of sending a dhcprequest for 0.0.0.0).
I also suspect some Macs running Parallels were doing some weird DHCP stuff. Can't remember exactly either but I think it was something like doing dhcp stuff using one hardware address then switching to using another every now and then (but requesting the same IP that was offered to the other hardware address).
Then some flash/shockwave stuff make dhcp requests too with hardware type 0 (not ethernet)- just to look for some flash server thingy or who knows what. Don't know why they have to use(abuse?) dhcp instead of using some other protocol.
It's amazing the stuff that's out there given DHCP is a fairly simple protocol.
Imagine the weirdness and bugs with things more complicated like DNS and IPSEC...
Yeah. It's just as hard to pickup dancing from a book (esp dancing with partners). Similar sort of thing IMO. All that book stuff is not going to work that well if you have to dance with a stranger;).
That said, another thing about training by fighting with people who don't hold back much is you probably got tougher - bones, joints, tendons, skin etc. Well except when things break (like your back muscle);).
Slashdot Mirror
First observation a Boltzmann brain makes: "I am" :).
Second observation most might make (if they live long enough): "oh shit"
Maybe they prefer 1pm court hearings because it takes them a long time to ensure that their SPF 10000 cream is safely and completely on all vulnerable parts AND the Sun is available for "controlled tests" before they leave the safety of their homes.
;).
;).
If they left earlier they wouldn't be able to do the "smoke tests" - no sunlight
e.g. "Oops missed a spot there - my pinky is smoking in the sunlight".
Hey, lawyers were people too
In which case why aren't people with earrings getting lots of cancers from them? How about those people who "mod" themselves (studs etc) but not with glass RFIDs?
If it somehow increases the risk of cancer (even minus the RF stuff) more than the usual studs etc then I find that very interesting. Maybe it's the shape or surface of the glass? Could be something useful to learn about cancer from this.
It looks like you are having difficulty understanding more than one sentence, would you like help?
* Shiny!
* Wow, thank you for that amazing insight
[] Don't show me this tip again
</clippy>
A computer is NOT a car. And I actually don't blame the users.
;) ), no network access, no access to "My Documents", no access to microphone (eavesdropping).
;).
;) ), but Apple or Microsoft (haha) might.
Because in my opinion things can actually be a LOT safer.
After so many decades and billions of dollars (in time and real money) all we end up with is a few Unix reimplementations and Microsoft Vista?
Stuff like SELinux is nice, but it's still not "Aunt May" friendly.
What would be good would be something like "sandbox templates". Apparmor is close but not close enough.
While there are zillions of apps, there are a LOT fewer categories of common/popular apps in terms of the permissions and privileges they require.
So I'm saying a real Desktop OS should have a few preset sandbox templates.
Then you have an app request to be run under one of those templates.
And if the app is untrusted the user gets a prompt like "Random Game Someone Emailed" requests "Temporary/Guest Game Privileges"- Allow? Yes/No/Yes and always/More...
And "Guest Game Privileges" would provide a tempory storage (that's just for that app), sound access, windowed graphics (always has a border - so you know whether it really exited or not go figure why
Even if the game tried to do something naughty the O/S would prevent it.
Whereas if the game requested "Full System Install Privileges" (with the associated big exclamation marks, and big red warnings, requirement of Admin password etc), I'm sure you can easily train your "Aunt May" to not ever click Yes to such stuff.
Naturally O/S makers like Microsoft could do things so that certain signed programs can optionally run without such inconvenient prompts
But instead after all these years we have Vista UAC, SELinux or the usual situation of the user having to guess whether something is safe to run or not, which is just as silly as asking "grandpa joe" to solve the "halting problem" - will browsing this website/opening this email turn my machine into a worm infested zombie?
You can say "they shouldn't run anything" - but that's being silly. They want to run their browser and their email app, and I personally think that's reasonable, and at the same time I don't think their web browser should have read access to their personal documents - it should just have "browser access".
Yes, what I'm asking for is hard, but I believe what I'm asking for is far more reasonable than what the O/S people are in effect requiring their users to do - solve the halting problem.
I doubt the Linux distros could pull it off (most can't even decide on a desktop
All that crap happens all the time nowadays.
;)
It's just the usual Microsoft doing "version 1.0" of "Influencing Standards Bodies" really badly. Wait till their 4th or 5th try at it.
Hardly anyone making new standards is really interested in the good of the industry much less the world.
In the past the geeks made TCP/IP etc because it was just a bunch of geeks who wanted to get things to _work_ and get stuff done.
Nowadays, it's "How can we influence the standard so we can get an advantage".
If someone actually comes up with a decent standard the competitors will just try to come up with something different.
Lots of crap standards nowadays - look at WiFi - they could have taken a leaf from SSL, and had a standard that allowed _secure_anonymous_ connections, but instead you get the huge mess that's WiFi- where it's easy to be open and insecure, and difficult to be secure.
Look at the upcoming HTML standards, all "throttles" and no "brakes", nobody _really_ cares about security. They just tell people to "please drive safely, and you should stay in your lane and not crash please raise a security exception instead", but do they really lift a finger to help?
AMD come up with Hyper Transport? No way is Intel going to support it.
And then there's RDRAM and the whole bunch of people trying to get their patents into standards.
Wasn't there a Dilbert comic strip where Dilbert's company outsources to X who outsources to Y who outsources to .... who outsources to Dilbert's company.
;)
And everyone lies a bit about meeting the SLAs and so quotes cheaper prices.
Of course it doesn't.
;).
;).
But garbage in, garbage out. If you're in North Korea you wouldn't even have a chance to even know anything else other than propaganda. You can have free will but never know you liked the colour blue if you never had a chance to see it.
Elsewhere you have more freedom but often it seems like nobody knows or cares about what's really going on.
I figure that in democracies you need a majority for something to happen, so if you distract the masses well enough they'll never unite against you or things you consider important. If they start getting united you can _divert_ the masses. And usually you can dodge/deny stuff so enough of the masses might get confused or believe you.
Distract, Divert, Dodge, Deny.
The counters are education and information. But if you notice "enlightened" Govs nowadays are more interested in good grades but not good education
Thing is a fair number of Chinese in China actually seem to be getting educated (education has a long tradition in China) BUT are just being fed "different information" by the Gov. So usually what happens normally is the smart citizens go elsewhere and realize things are a bit different and word gets about.
But maybe this time, the Chinese will go elsewhere around the world and see it's not really different from their Glorious Homeland (or even worse). Could end up like the Admiral Cheng Ho/Zheng He who took a huge Chinese fleet around the world in the 1400s and probably word got around in China that people elsewhere were just a bunch of savages.
Just kidding
Why should people expect rebates if they willingly buy some stuff that's overpriced and it gets cheaper a few months later?
If it was faulty or you got less than what was advertised then sure.
WRT rebates for punishing companies, I personally don't think fines/rebates are that effective. Bosses being sent to prison is definitely more effective...
Good at following orders?
:).
What are you doing working for a rebate company? Try the Mafia next time, even if they are a bunch of crooks they have some honour.
you left out advertising and foxnews ;).
It's not "We got nuked, screw the elections we're declaring martial law" time yet is it?
;).
It's always too early for that
I see TWO pancakes.
I suppose that means I don't have
Hey that's a cute bunny!
Thanks for the link! Interesting.
Anyway, I suppose the actions should be good enough to identify Mr 6?6. "If the shoe fits" and all that.
From my reading of Revelations, I suspect there will be a lot of bloody Christians (especially from people killing Christians and unfortunately probably Christians killing other people too - though they shouldn't).
;).
I don't think it's going to be as convenient for everyone.
Go read Revelations.
Here's some stuff to think about:
1) Revelations predicts the Antichrist aka False Messiah.
2) The Jews and Muslims are still waiting for the Messiah, so who knows maybe a Muslim Jew might fit the bill...
3) A fair number of Christians are unlikely to believe that one as the 2nd Coming...
4) Israel is already back where it's supposed to be (and causing problems just like in the old days[1]).
5) The world is already being set up for a Global Government - Laws, Courts etc, just add a nice enough throne for Mr 666.
So, yeah there will be a lot of bloody Christians.
Think I'm wrong?
[1] Israel means "Wrestles/Struggles with God" go figure
Main thing is: can those actions be reasonably justifiable by the Muslim/Christian/Scientology "scriptures" e.g. Koran, Bible, CoS copyrighted stuff?
;) ).
Could anyone with reasonable understanding of the Bible claim that Jesus told his followers to kill nonbelievers and provide the verses that show it?
There are tons of groups that call themselves "Christian". The difference between Christian and "Christian" is one follows Jesus, and one follows someone else (some pastor) or even some_thing_ else (e.g. Money, Power).
Just because someone claims they are a follower of Jesus doesn't mean they are.
Of course, some of us (like me) may not behave very well and be following Jesus from a rather great distance behind. There should hopefully still be a general "drift" in the right direction (brownian though it may seem sometimes
'This is not always true... many "Christian" groups are very restrictive.'
;) ), and the other follows the Pastor (or whatever the human chooses to call him/herself).
Sad to say, many "Christian" groups ARE cults.
Here's how Christians tell a Christian group from a "Christian" group. One follows Jesus (or tries anyway, nobody's perfect
IMO, Darwinian Theory is not in direct conflict with Christianity, and you can be a Christian even if you think that evolution was the likely way humans came about.
Most people are ignorant, and no surprise most Christians are ignorant about their own religion, but the difference is Bible is there for EVERYONE to read (or even made fun of - often by bigots).
Seems that's not true for Scientology.
"I have personally seen many pastors and religious leaders who DO tell their followers such things"
Be careful then - they may be a cult (or might be in the process of turning into one).
Christians can claim that those factions are divergent with backing from the Bible. If you are following Jesus, it is pretty clear you're not supposed to be going around killing other people. You'd have to stretch/twist things to claim that the Bible says it is OK for _Christians_ to kill others.
;).
I'm not sure if Scientologists can do something similar.
As for Judaism and the Torah saying it's OK to kill others, you'd see that:
1) There are bits dealing the Israelites killing others were the Israelites taking the promised land from the Canaanites. There's no expansionist take over the world thing- Israel was God's judgement on the Canaanites.
2) The other bits are laws regulating behaviour and punishments (which include the death penalty) which Israel voluntarily _agreed_ to in their "contract" with God. Israel was to be set apart as special. Even today Israel "sticks out" in the world
3) And then there's parts dealing with war in general. War sucks.
It would be good to know which bits of the Koran/Quran say that Muslims are not supposed to kill nonmuslims, might come in handy one day.
1) You know which cell a phone is "in". So you know which area that person is likely to be in.
2) In densely populated areas, cells would normally be small.
3) In "hard to cover areas" you might even know which carpark or lift shaft the person was in.
4) You can even guess if they are travelling in a vehicle especially if it is moving from cell to cell.
For vaguely related information see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handoff
So once you've narrowed down which area that person is in, you bring in the "radar vans" and cops to catch the person (you need much better resolution to catch the person).
I suggest that many crimes could be solved if police had access to records of phone numbers, the cells they were in and the times they were in those cells. Most current criminals may not be smart enough to turn off their phones _way_ before committing a crime.
You do not even need to record the phone conversations, but of course that could be useful as well.
Yeah the receipt check and bag search thing is one way to check if your cashiers are cheating you.
;). Where X stuff gets delivered but somehow only X - n make it on the shelves...
Because a cashier could collude with a "customer", customer takes X items, but cashier just says it's X - n items and customer pays for X - n.
Then there's losing stuff just after delivery
You probably want to adjust your memory overcommit tunables then.
I've got 2GB of RAM, vm.overcommit_ratio=95, vm.overcommit_memory = 2 and swap at 384MB (might be better with _less_, but some processes just allocate memory without using it).
Disk transfers when swapping are usually about 10MB/sec, and so 384MB = more than long enough...
I'd rather have processes get an out of memory error quickly than have my entire machine go into a swap death spiral.
So what if the mail server dies because it can't allocate any more mem (set ulimits accordingly), at least I can still ssh in.
They do all that monitoring and they let the robber wire money to his bank account FIFTEEN times? Not possible to catch him? Yeah right.
3 2
;).
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/30/03212
Call me real cynical but the reason why a lot of the stuff is secret is because the rich and powerful don't want "the wrong people" to know how much money they are moving about and where. Same reason why these "holes" are there in the first place.
They don't want to "accidentally" catch the big fish while catching the small fry
FWIW I implemented a dhcp server because in my opinion ISC dhcpd sucked, lacked features we needed, and was/is likely to have more security bugs ;).
My reading of RFC2131 (4.1) was if a client sets the broadcast flag, that means it wants the server to broadcast the reply back (if replying directly[1]). Seemed fairly clear AND reasonable to me. [1] The server should not broadcast if the reply is to a dhcp relay (giaddr is set) and thus not direct.
So if Vista is using the broadcast flag that way, then it's compliant, and a DHCP server that doesn't like that is one that's buggy and noncompliant (and same goes for the ISP).
In my experience the really non-RFC2131 compliant stuff appear to be some PDAs (some versions of windows mobile+PDA being offenders), I had to make my dhcpd less strict and even then some PDAs still wouldn't work (can't remember but those were probably doing stupid stuff in the vein of sending a dhcprequest for 0.0.0.0).
I also suspect some Macs running Parallels were doing some weird DHCP stuff. Can't remember exactly either but I think it was something like doing dhcp stuff using one hardware address then switching to using another every now and then (but requesting the same IP that was offered to the other hardware address).
Then some flash/shockwave stuff make dhcp requests too with hardware type 0 (not ethernet)- just to look for some flash server thingy or who knows what. Don't know why they have to use(abuse?) dhcp instead of using some other protocol.
It's amazing the stuff that's out there given DHCP is a fairly simple protocol.
Imagine the weirdness and bugs with things more complicated like DNS and IPSEC...
Yeah. It's just as hard to pickup dancing from a book (esp dancing with partners). Similar sort of thing IMO. All that book stuff is not going to work that well if you have to dance with a stranger ;).
;).
That said, another thing about training by fighting with people who don't hold back much is you probably got tougher - bones, joints, tendons, skin etc. Well except when things break (like your back muscle)