I'm surprised that nobody has come up with an "anti-virus" of sorts. It would utilize the same security hole to download and patch the vulnerability, then periodically scan other machines for the same hole and repeat.
Not only that, but SIPPhone apaprently ignores the entire NAT problem. Vonage uses a VPN to create an open network, but SIPPhone would require all users to turn on port-forwarding. Its not an issue for someone who knows what they are doing, but for the mainstream.... it could produce problems.
BUT, We knew certain information about the Anthrax letters. We knew where they ended up. From that information we could determine which households mail COULD have come in contact with Anthrax. At the time, I remember everyone in the Trenton/Princeton area as being a possible recipient of the spores, and LOTS of people had their mail destroyed, versus people in Minneapolis or Colorado who are not even remotely impacted by it.
Vonage has a service where they give you a router to plug a regular phone into. The router is then plugged into your cablemodem/dsl/whatever and voila, you have a VoIP SIP based phone. They also provide you with a phone number (in just about any area code) and give you great rates on long distance. No need for a Pingtel or SIPhone.
Yes. On top of this, why would you pay that ridiculous premium when you can always host something in the Bahamas or some other sovereign nation with few laws, low taxes and a decent Internet connection? The answer is that you wouldn't...
I have T-Mobile in Boston. 4 out of 5 calls are dropped, especially while in a moving vehicle. I would also say that 2/3 times that I want to make a call, I have no service at all. And this is in a major city!!!
Now this report has T-Mobile with a relatively high score. What a load of bs.
I'd rather have a gas powered one. Electric powered heli's and planes are constructed to be light weight. As a result, they are easily manipulated by the wind, so outdoor use on a breezy day can be annoying. This guy also only runs for a 5 minutes before it requires a charge...
I'm sure many others agree with me when I say that I Don't Care! I don't care about SCO or whatever frivolous lawsuits they bring against "the community". Quite frankly, this is not "news for nerds"... rather its "news for people who obsess about the Linux kernel". Linux isn't going away. SCO won't affect Linux or Linux kernel development, and the topic deserves perhaps 1 or 2 posts, if that. For the love of God post something more interesting, so when I have downtime I have something to Read!!!
Lots of web shops simply won't ship to countries like Hungary. Why? Because there's an overwhelming amount of credit card fraud occurring over the web from third world countries where there is no systems in place to prosecute criminals.
At some point, Visa, Mastercard, etc will tell web shops that they will not accept payment for an item that is destined for those locations.
It (the shuttle) was probably still greatly accelerating at that point, and devoid of thrust, an oddly shaped, and "relatively" light piece of foam would probably gain some relevant kinetic energy by the time it contacted the wing.
Actually, it would LOSE kinetic energy relative to the Shuttle. The foam slowed quickly, while the Shuttle still accelerated. Its kinda like hitting a hitting a rock that falls off the back of a truck on the high way. If you were to drop the rock on the wind shield at rest, it may not do any damage, but when it whacks it in motion, you get a nasty crack!
One interesting fact is that at some point within the last couple years, they switched the type of foam to be more environmentally friendly. It'd be nice to see the results of the old foam fired against the wing...
They do this. Its called re-entry. The problem is that the lower the altitude of the orbit, the faster the object needs to be travelling to maintain that orbit. The lower the altitude, the more air resistence the object encounters. Our atmosphere doesn't have a defined start/end point. It has a gradual density out into space. If the shuttle were attempting to land on the moon, then this would be a realistic posiblity, since there is NO resistence (although slowing down would be a bigger problem). In an Earth orbit, you're at the mercy of the atmosphere, plane and simple.
One thing NASA did not even attempt to do (which I've brought this up before) is to change the re-entry trajectory. The Shuttle will perform a series of rolls (turns) to aid in slowing it down. First to the Right, then to the left. While turning, the majority of the force (and heat) is on the lower wing of the turn. The Shuttle disintegrated just after completing the roll to the right when it had began its roll to the left. Does this mean the Shuttle wouldn't have broken apart if they hadn't rolled to the left? No clue, I don't know enough about the Shuttle's heat shields, but I find this particular point interesting, espcially since none of the media is quick enough to pick up on a detail like this.
If I'm Racist, then so was America when it went to war with the "Japanese" or the "Germans" during WWII. We all know there were Japanese and German Americans living in the country.
So as to suggest that the vast majority of the population of Islam does not view this as a war with America, is simply naive and politically correct. They do. Therefore, we're at war with "Muslims" because it is the only common denominator amongst everyone who runs into a Mall in Jerusalem with TNT vests or crashes planes into buildings.
Bogus. Over riding such a system is not nearly as dangerous as you'd think. If multiple air traffic controllers are required to override the system from the ground, there's virtually ZERO chance of a repeat of 9/11. In order for a plane to get clearence, they would need to communicate with the air traffic controllers, which is something that never happenned on 9/11. Two mumbled Arabic words over the comm channel was enough to tell air traffic controllers what was happenning on the plane, and unless Bob the pilot and Bill the Co-pilot have intentions about suicide, I'm not buying your ridiculous situation.
People will always say this or that doesn't work. A perfect example is the re-enforced cockpit doors. The truth of the matter is that multiple levels of security WORK. Re-enforce the cockpit + soft walls + ground-based autopilot is an excellent idea and their existence themself is a deterrent for terrorists (lets use the proper term: Muslims) to even try.
There's an important variable involved with Open/Closed Source that nearly every OSS advocate blatently ignores. While OSS may have numerous people browsing through source code for a project, only a minute percentage of the OSS projects get the required attention to make them "good code" or "good design". Also, while numerous people may be focussing on a particular OSS project, only a small percentage of them produce the majority of the work for that project, which limits its diversity. To top all of this, only the most popular OSS projects have people devoted to documentation, architecture and other designing involved in software.
On the other hand, commercial software almost always has a defined group of people devoted to design, documentation and implementation full time. While its true that commercial software's "closed source" policy may limit the diversity of the source code, it does not necessarily limit its efficiency or quality. It could easily be shown that commercial software far outweighs OSS in man hours for design, implementation and documentation.
Disclaimer: The minute percentage of OSS projects that successfully benefit from OSS are the ones the majority has a vested interest in, e.g. Linux Kernel, Mozilla, etc. Unfortunately the vast majority of OSS projects are non-standardized libraries and utilities that at the most 1 person maintains.
We're sending vehicles to space weekly. The concept that we couldn't turn around and send a man to the Moon within 5 years is nonsense. The issue is that there's no point to; we've already been there.
3 Payloads worth of Space Shuttle flights would be plenty sufficent material and fuel to put a human on the Moon... again. Probably more efficient as well.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm surprised that nobody has come up with an "anti-virus" of sorts. It would utilize the same security hole to download and patch the vulnerability, then periodically scan other machines for the same hole and repeat.
Could/Would this be illegal and/or dangerous?
They don't make tires either.
I'd be more concerned about InkJet printer manufacturers doing this... oh wait they already do... thats why I have a LaserJet...
Money is a pretty restrictive variable.
Why fly a suitcase bomb when you can drive it or ship it. That sort of weapon doesn't need to be precise.
Not only that, but SIPPhone apaprently ignores the entire NAT problem. Vonage uses a VPN to create an open network, but SIPPhone would require all users to turn on port-forwarding. Its not an issue for someone who knows what they are doing, but for the mainstream.... it could produce problems.
BUT, We knew certain information about the Anthrax letters. We knew where they ended up. From that information we could determine which households mail COULD have come in contact with Anthrax. At the time, I remember everyone in the Trenton/Princeton area as being a possible recipient of the spores, and LOTS of people had their mail destroyed, versus people in Minneapolis or Colorado who are not even remotely impacted by it.
Yes, BUT once they do that, they'll charge a monthly fee.
With a Cisco SIP to PSTN gateway, you can call real numbers. Vonage offers a service like this.
Vonage has a service where they give you a router to plug a regular phone into. The router is then plugged into your cablemodem/dsl/whatever and voila, you have a VoIP SIP based phone. They also provide you with a phone number (in just about any area code) and give you great rates on long distance. No need for a Pingtel or SIPhone.
Yes. On top of this, why would you pay that ridiculous premium when you can always host something in the Bahamas or some other sovereign nation with few laws, low taxes and a decent Internet connection? The answer is that you wouldn't...
I have T-Mobile in Boston. 4 out of 5 calls are dropped, especially while in a moving vehicle. I would also say that 2/3 times that I want to make a call, I have no service at all. And this is in a major city!!!
Now this report has T-Mobile with a relatively high score. What a load of bs.
I'd rather have a gas powered one. Electric powered heli's and planes are constructed to be light weight. As a result, they are easily manipulated by the wind, so outdoor use on a breezy day can be annoying. This guy also only runs for a 5 minutes before it requires a charge...
I'm sure many others agree with me when I say that I Don't Care! I don't care about SCO or whatever frivolous lawsuits they bring against "the community". Quite frankly, this is not "news for nerds"... rather its "news for people who obsess about the Linux kernel". Linux isn't going away. SCO won't affect Linux or Linux kernel development, and the topic deserves perhaps 1 or 2 posts, if that. For the love of God post something more interesting, so when I have downtime I have something to Read!!!
Unfortunately, Perpendicular movement with respect to the Earth is required to even detect these asteroids.
Why would you pay programmers if they're all going to do it for free?
Bogus. In your case, the chain would need to prevent the purchaser from created 700 identical pens by running a script, not from removing it.
Lots of web shops simply won't ship to countries like Hungary. Why? Because there's an overwhelming amount of credit card fraud occurring over the web from third world countries where there is no systems in place to prosecute criminals.
At some point, Visa, Mastercard, etc will tell web shops that they will not accept payment for an item that is destined for those locations.
It (the shuttle) was probably still greatly accelerating at that point, and devoid of thrust, an oddly shaped, and "relatively" light piece of foam would probably gain some relevant kinetic energy by the time it contacted the wing.
Actually, it would LOSE kinetic energy relative to the Shuttle. The foam slowed quickly, while the Shuttle still accelerated. Its kinda like hitting a hitting a rock that falls off the back of a truck on the high way. If you were to drop the rock on the wind shield at rest, it may not do any damage, but when it whacks it in motion, you get a nasty crack!
One interesting fact is that at some point within the last couple years, they switched the type of foam to be more environmentally friendly. It'd be nice to see the results of the old foam fired against the wing...
They do this. Its called re-entry. The problem is that the lower the altitude of the orbit, the faster the object needs to be travelling to maintain that orbit. The lower the altitude, the more air resistence the object encounters. Our atmosphere doesn't have a defined start/end point. It has a gradual density out into space. If the shuttle were attempting to land on the moon, then this would be a realistic posiblity, since there is NO resistence (although slowing down would be a bigger problem). In an Earth orbit, you're at the mercy of the atmosphere, plane and simple.
One thing NASA did not even attempt to do (which I've brought this up before) is to change the re-entry trajectory. The Shuttle will perform a series of rolls (turns) to aid in slowing it down. First to the Right, then to the left. While turning, the majority of the force (and heat) is on the lower wing of the turn. The Shuttle disintegrated just after completing the roll to the right when it had began its roll to the left. Does this mean the Shuttle wouldn't have broken apart if they hadn't rolled to the left? No clue, I don't know enough about the Shuttle's heat shields, but I find this particular point interesting, espcially since none of the media is quick enough to pick up on a detail like this.
If I'm Racist, then so was America when it went to war with the "Japanese" or the "Germans" during WWII. We all know there were Japanese and German Americans living in the country.
So as to suggest that the vast majority of the population of Islam does not view this as a war with America, is simply naive and politically correct. They do. Therefore, we're at war with "Muslims" because it is the only common denominator amongst everyone who runs into a Mall in Jerusalem with TNT vests or crashes planes into buildings.
Bogus. Over riding such a system is not nearly as dangerous as you'd think. If multiple air traffic controllers are required to override the system from the ground, there's virtually ZERO chance of a repeat of 9/11. In order for a plane to get clearence, they would need to communicate with the air traffic controllers, which is something that never happenned on 9/11. Two mumbled Arabic words over the comm channel was enough to tell air traffic controllers what was happenning on the plane, and unless Bob the pilot and Bill the Co-pilot have intentions about suicide, I'm not buying your ridiculous situation.
People will always say this or that doesn't work. A perfect example is the re-enforced cockpit doors. The truth of the matter is that multiple levels of security WORK. Re-enforce the cockpit + soft walls + ground-based autopilot is an excellent idea and their existence themself is a deterrent for terrorists (lets use the proper term: Muslims) to even try.
Fortunately, software quality or usefulness isn't determined by the number of hours needed to produce it.
They don't determine quality or usefulness, they represent the quality and usefulness.
There's an important variable involved with Open/Closed Source that nearly every OSS advocate blatently ignores. While OSS may have numerous people browsing through source code for a project, only a minute percentage of the OSS projects get the required attention to make them "good code" or "good design". Also, while numerous people may be focussing on a particular OSS project, only a small percentage of them produce the majority of the work for that project, which limits its diversity. To top all of this, only the most popular OSS projects have people devoted to documentation, architecture and other designing involved in software.
On the other hand, commercial software almost always has a defined group of people devoted to design, documentation and implementation full time. While its true that commercial software's "closed source" policy may limit the diversity of the source code, it does not necessarily limit its efficiency or quality. It could easily be shown that commercial software far outweighs OSS in man hours for design, implementation and documentation.
Disclaimer: The minute percentage of OSS projects that successfully benefit from OSS are the ones the majority has a vested interest in, e.g. Linux Kernel, Mozilla, etc. Unfortunately the vast majority of OSS projects are non-standardized libraries and utilities that at the most 1 person maintains.
Ok, here's the punch line:
We're sending vehicles to space weekly. The concept that we couldn't turn around and send a man to the Moon within 5 years is nonsense. The issue is that there's no point to; we've already been there.
3 Payloads worth of Space Shuttle flights would be plenty sufficent material and fuel to put a human on the Moon... again. Probably more efficient as well.
In other news...
Djibouti constructed its largest steam powered tractor. Its expected to till 40 tons of soil a year.