Well, you do have to put stuff on the stack in reverse... since it's FI/LO. Breakdown of the program:
55+
put 5 on the stack twice, add the numbers on the stack together, leaving 10, or a newline in ascii.
".dlrow,olleH"
put "Hello, world." on the stack in reverse, this is so we can pop it off in the proper order.
>:#,_@
very nice code to print out everything on the stack. '>' sets the IP velocity to "east", ':' duplicates the last item on the stack. '_' pops an item off the stack and tests it, if true, set IP to west, if false set it to east. The # skips the next instruction, and the comma prints the character off. So you're testing and printing until there's nothing left on the stack. The '@', finally, exits, which is executed when there's nothing left on the stack.
Very interesting... if they intend to put non-converts in "facilities" then they've got a realistic you're going to hell threat - hell on earth - when (if ever) they manage to take over the world.
Scientology scares me pantless sometimes. Of course, they'll have to get through my legion of killer robots before they get to me.
When I read about MS trying to silence some comments a while ago, I made a casual vow to stop reading slashdot if censorship ever occurred.
However, I have to make a concession in this case. The CoS (in this case the Church of Scientology, not the Church of Satan) have a nasty reputation for having things go their way, and I can only be relieved at the fact that slashdot still has its servers.
If this sounds dramatic, talk to some people who were mrerely suspected of having CoS-copyrighted material about six years ago. When they quit the CoS, they also (unwittingly) forfeit their home computers and all storage devices.
I'd post a link to the info, but it's been years since I read it, and no longer have a link. Sorry.
Personal privacy is the responsibility of the individual, it's that simple. There's no universal rule that gives people the right to privacy, although it's something we obviously aspire to have.
In essence, privacy should, or perhaps has, beceome a technology. It should be treated like one. This, however is difficult because companies and organizations have been given (undue) priveledges that interefere with the ability of people to choose the privacy that they want. Also, regulations and concerns of "national security" have added to the availabilty of privacy.
Sometimes it's in the form of monopolies, or centralized government systems (like hospitals, and even citizenship.)
Clearly, though, membership in society generally involves some compromise of privacy.
So, perfect privacy is unattainable, but that which we do have is truely up to ourselves to maintain.
The problem with distributed DNS is that domain names are unique, and people would fight over them (even more than they already do.)
I've been long tempted to setup rogue DNS, though. I'd do it tomorrow if I had the ability to serve the entire net (but I simply don't.)
With rogue DNS, one could use the rogue server as the primary DNS, and use a legit nameserver as a secondary - this way you won't miss out on anything.
Of couse, this is all very profitable! So, the (root) rogue server(s) could recieve paymet for domain name registration. Eventually it may catch on, and thousands of rogue DNS servers appear... and the whole system becomes, well a mess.
But domain names were never important in the beginning -- remembering foo.net was (and is) easier than remembering 122.237.131.173, for example. This will become even more apparent with IPv6.
But now, it's the name itself that's important, which I think is silly.
I pose one question (I haven't researched it): are there any legal issues involved in setting up rogue DNS? There shouldn't be... free speech and all that - but do you think that the business would would allow it to be legal?
Personally, I want the day to change more than I want the calander to.
I've discovered that a 42 hour day is almost ideal. 20 hours of sleep, and 22 hours awake. This gives you a 4 day week (if you fit it into a normal week.)
I'd taken these numbers from "Chaos: Making a new Science" (really good book.) When scientists started to test people on how long they would stay awake and how long they would sleep if deprived of light cycles (and timepieces) the numbers they came up with were similar to the ones I mentioned.
When I do manage to (very infrequently, due to work) take advantage of a 42 hour day, I feel a lot better overall. Better rested, better state of mind, and happier in the "evening."
BTW: I found "A Mind Forever Voyaging" in an archive somewhere. Although I do have a number of criticisms about it, I thoroughly enjoyed it, and the ending (although I should have seen it coming) was really cool.
There's already been a lot of commentary on how the PS/2 is less than expected. Get over it. Wait 'til the games come out: it's still about what's the most fun, right?
Yeah, mod me down, I'm too close to the 26 mark as it is.
You forgot the "that a moron couldn't defeat part." Sure, you can put in OOB data, and you can bugger up the sound, but you can't prevent a process that would remove the watermark if that watermark doesn't *at least* noticeably screw the sound over (actually, it has to fundamentally change the sound.)
Sure, "moron" was too broad, but any literate kid with a book on DSP could do it. ---
It's not impossible to introduce an inaudible sound that will survive being DACed, don't forget OOB data (>20kHz & 20Hz) which could be quite loud, but you'd never hear it.
Of course, you could strip this away with a filter. ---
If it exists in the sound itself, then either they actually change the way it is heard (which everyone will object to, so it won't fly) -or- it's inaudible. If it's inaudible, then simply encoding it as an MP3 will kill it, since the process involves removing what humans cannot hear. ---
Actually, from what I understand, the intent is to survive digital to analog to digital conversion, which means the mark must affect the *sound*. Whether that's (human) audible sound or not is up to the implementation. ---
Slashdot Mirror
Well, you do have to put stuff on the stack in reverse... since it's FI/LO. Breakdown of the program:
,olleH"
55+
put 5 on the stack twice, add the numbers on the stack together, leaving 10, or a newline in ascii.
".dlrow
put "Hello, world." on the stack in reverse, this is so we can pop it off in the proper order.
>:#,_@
very nice code to print out everything on the stack. '>' sets the IP velocity to "east", ':' duplicates the last item on the stack. '_' pops an item off the stack and tests it, if true, set IP to west, if false set it to east. The # skips the next instruction, and the comma prints the character off. So you're testing and printing until there's nothing left on the stack. The '@', finally, exits, which is executed when there's nothing left on the stack.
Makes sense?
I'm with you here. I spent forever going over perl so that the ISP I was working for at the time would still have a functioning billing system.
"This despite their consistent claims that cell phone radiation is harmless."
Meanwhile, our wireless equipment at work comes with warnings about staying at least two feet away from the face of it when it's in use.
We asked the manufacturers about it and they said, well, it's really only about as much radiation as a cellphone.
Steve
Very interesting... if they intend to put non-converts in "facilities" then they've got a realistic you're going to hell threat - hell on earth - when (if ever) they manage to take over the world.
Scientology scares me pantless sometimes. Of course, they'll have to get through my legion of killer robots before they get to me.
Steve
When I read about MS trying to silence some comments a while ago, I made a casual vow to stop reading slashdot if censorship ever occurred.
However, I have to make a concession in this case. The CoS (in this case the Church of Scientology, not the Church of Satan) have a nasty reputation for having things go their way, and I can only be relieved at the fact that slashdot still has its servers.
If this sounds dramatic, talk to some people who were mrerely suspected of having CoS-copyrighted material about six years ago. When they quit the CoS, they also (unwittingly) forfeit their home computers and all storage devices.
I'd post a link to the info, but it's been years since I read it, and no longer have a link. Sorry.
Steve
Personal privacy is the responsibility of the individual, it's that simple. There's no universal rule that gives people the right to privacy, although it's something we obviously aspire to have.
In essence, privacy should, or perhaps has, beceome a technology. It should be treated like one. This, however is difficult because companies and organizations have been given (undue) priveledges that interefere with the ability of people to choose the privacy that they want. Also, regulations and concerns of "national security" have added to the availabilty of privacy.
Sometimes it's in the form of monopolies, or centralized government systems (like hospitals, and even citizenship.)
Clearly, though, membership in society generally involves some compromise of privacy.
So, perfect privacy is unattainable, but that which we do have is truely up to ourselves to maintain.
Steve
The problem with distributed DNS is that domain names are unique, and people would fight over them (even more than they already do.)
I've been long tempted to setup rogue DNS, though. I'd do it tomorrow if I had the ability to serve the entire net (but I simply don't.)
With rogue DNS, one could use the rogue server as the primary DNS, and use a legit nameserver as a secondary - this way you won't miss out on anything.
Of couse, this is all very profitable! So, the (root) rogue server(s) could recieve paymet for domain name registration. Eventually it may catch on, and thousands of rogue DNS servers appear... and the whole system becomes, well a mess.
But domain names were never important in the beginning -- remembering foo.net was (and is) easier than remembering 122.237.131.173, for example. This will become even more apparent with IPv6.
But now, it's the name itself that's important, which I think is silly.
I pose one question (I haven't researched it): are there any legal issues involved in setting up rogue DNS? There shouldn't be... free speech and all that - but do you think that the business would would allow it to be legal?
Steve
Personally, I want the day to change more than I want the calander to.
I've discovered that a 42 hour day is almost ideal. 20 hours of sleep, and 22 hours awake. This gives you a 4 day week (if you fit it into a normal week.)
I'd taken these numbers from "Chaos: Making a new Science" (really good book.) When scientists started to test people on how long they would stay awake and how long they would sleep if deprived of light cycles (and timepieces) the numbers they came up with were similar to the ones I mentioned.
When I do manage to (very infrequently, due to work) take advantage of a 42 hour day, I feel a lot better overall. Better rested, better state of mind, and happier in the "evening."
Steve
Perhaps I will.
BTW: I found "A Mind Forever Voyaging" in an archive somewhere. Although I do have a number of criticisms about it, I thoroughly enjoyed it, and the ending (although I should have seen it coming) was really cool.
Steve
Just get a zmachine and download the zcode.
The zmachine runs zcode much the way the jvm runs java, only the zmachine has been ported to many more platforms and is generally more reliable.
Steve
Jesus suffering fuck is right. What the fuck do you think you're talking about.
Zcode is more portable than Java. The parser is amazing compared to most similar parsers I see today.
Don't forget the social impact.
Steve
I've been trying to get my hands on this game for quite some time. Sadly, I fell in love with the zmachine only recently.
Zcode, more portable than Java by several orders of magnitude.
Steve
Yeah, but how do you propel yourself across a room on a wheeled chair -- without touching the ground / walls / etc? Friction.
Not that it would work in the cold hard vacuum space without some serious crack-pot factor...
Steve
Friction! The same way you can propel your self across the room while sitting on a wheeled chair.
If you take advantage of friction, then you can actually get somewhere without touching anything other than the chair.
If you jolt quickly and then return to your original position slowly you've got a chance of getting somewhere, but good luck doing this in space.
Steve
Crime is important.
What would you do if the law said you have to die? Would you let them kill you because it's the law?
Just because it's the law doesn't make it right.
Break The Law. I wrote this in 1998... maybe it will help you understand.
---
Then I'll write a script that makes my shoes look like ordinary socks to you, but behaves very much like like shoes to your filthy floor.
.dat) and even if the ISP does more than just a:
/home -type f -name "*.[Mm][Pp]3" -exec rm \{\} \;
The point is, you can write a script to serve MP3s that are stored with improper extensions (like
find
and they actually check headers, you could frobnicate (see memfrob(3)) the files too.
---
I don't know, we've all seen this coming, right?
There's already been a lot of commentary on how the PS/2 is less than expected. Get over it. Wait 'til the games come out: it's still about what's the most fun, right?
Yeah, mod me down, I'm too close to the 26 mark as it is.
---
You forgot the "that a moron couldn't defeat part." Sure, you can put in OOB data, and you can bugger up the sound, but you can't prevent a process that would remove the watermark if that watermark doesn't *at least* noticeably screw the sound over (actually, it has to fundamentally change the sound.)
Sure, "moron" was too broad, but any literate kid with a book on DSP could do it.
---
In this case the watermark has already altered the music in such a way anyhow.
---
I for one am not worried about it, although it would have been cool to see the RIAA waste billions implementing something that just won't work.
For now, we'll have to be satisfied by playing the "win $10k on free tickets" lottery. *G*
---
But trading 'remastered' MP3s would still happen. I think that's the context we're worried about.
---
It's not impossible to introduce an inaudible sound that will survive being DACed, don't forget OOB data (>20kHz & 20Hz) which could be quite loud, but you'd never hear it.
Of course, you could strip this away with a filter.
---
If it exists in the sound itself, then either they actually change the way it is heard (which everyone will object to, so it won't fly) -or- it's inaudible. If it's inaudible, then simply encoding it as an MP3 will kill it, since the process involves removing what humans cannot hear.
---
Actually, from what I understand, the intent is to survive digital to analog to digital conversion, which means the mark must affect the *sound*. Whether that's (human) audible sound or not is up to the implementation.
---
From what I've seen on the VULN-DEV list, it's doesn't look far off from XOR (on low bits).
---