Except the integrated graphics on a bunch of 'Vista Capable' laptops DON'T do DirectX10 or Aero... but if a patch to Vista (or Windows 7) will get Aero working on directX10 on the CPU... a buttload of PCs that CAN'T currently do Aero, now CAN.
But at what performance cost. If we are talking about the whole "Vista Capable" debacle, aren't we talking about low spec machines that coughed and wheezed when running the low-end version of the OS. Great, lets add 3D rendering to the processor load on those machines.
I like the idea of rendering the graphics in the CPU rather than an expensive accelerator card for one-off situations, as long as that feature can be turned off. But then, I'm not a gamer, and I'm not into all the eye-candy. If I were a gamer or into eye candy, there's no way this side of hell that I would want to render the graphics in the CPU. I would get the best video card money could buy.
"That is the odd thing... you never hear about the huge attacks on the Chinese, Russian, North Korean, etc."
Not hearing is not the same as not happening. They may and probably DO not talk about those incidents. We live in a free-er society, and this stuff comes out because our press is marginally functional. That is, when it's not being willingly led by the nose by the current 'cause'. And slamming the current administration is always good business for our press.
I would presume that every government is probing other governments' networks, looking for weakness and potential exploits.
Of course we never hear about the attacks on China, Russia, whoever because they are viewed as propaganda. Just as the Russians/Chinese/whoeverans view our reports on such matters as propaganda. If it is mentioned in their press at all, it will be about the negative propaganda we are spreading, rather than the issue that is reported.
He was keen on getting rid of the inspectors so that there would always be an element of doubt with his immediate neighbors that posed a direct threat to his nation. He never thought that the US would invade over the flimsy intelligence, and was more concerned about Iran invading if it were shown that there were no WMDs in country.
They were just testing to see how their servers would handle a good slashdotting in the event that they ever have something of their own to post. Cut them a bit of slack here.:)
Don't know why anyone modded parent as funny. When starting out, you really need someone experienced in the business side of the house. Just make sure that they are smart enough to handle the business affairs and not try to mess with the tech side of the house. Once they start meddling on the tech side, you get the PHBs that you are trying to rid yourself of.
Or simply killing all those whose machines are infected? And if you think that any of those is acceptable then you surely won't have any objection if/when other nations start behaving that way in your country, will you? I know where most of my spam originates.
I have no problem with the infected machines being killed off, regardless of where the attacker that killed the machine is located or who the attacker is. Just leave some indication of why the machine was killed so I can point to it when charging the customer for re-installing their OS and recovering whatever of their files that you are kind enough to leave for them. A nice little README.txt file explaining "Your machine was a spam spewing zombie in the <botnet name> botnet." will be sufficient.
Hasn't any of McDonalds' higher ups ever been to a different eatery that serves burgers. Come on, all places pre-prep the basic condiments/etc that go on their sandwiches. You can easily see the lettuce, tomato, and onion all stacked together ready to drop onto a sandwich. OK, they may have come up with a novel tool which guarantees uniformity, but patent the "Sandwich Uniformity Tool" not the process for making a sandwich.
I guess this is what they mean by "Change you can believe in."
I got the memo about "change", I never got the memo on whether or not the "change" would be beneficial or detrimental. I can only hope for the former, but I fear the latter.
It is not your ethical or moral duty to police a civil contract between two third parties, and if your actions cause a material loss to either party, even if they were in violation of their contract, they can turn around and sue you for damages for tortious interference.
Quite correct, but I am not excluded from pointing out possible violations because I am a third party either. As for my actions causing a material loss to either party, that would only happen if I were providing false information. That scenario could lead to many charges, none of them being "tortious interference". The only way I could be charged with tortious interference is if I do something to actually block the fulfillment of the contract, such as hack in to the alleged offenders machines and commit the TOS violation myself, or hack into the service provider and disconnect the alleged offender myself.
When an upstream provider receives a complaint about one of their clients, they can choose to ignore the complaint, or act upon it. If the provider acts on the complaint without first investigating whether the complaint is legitimate, then it is the provider at fault for breech of contract for not ensuring that there was a TOS violation before terminating the account for a TOS violation.
Damn, no mod points for me. I was wondering if a troll could be modded as "over rated".
If an ISP, or any of their customers, are in violation of the upstream provider's TOS, then it is the upstream provider's decision on what to do about the matter. I would hope that most upstream providers would notify the ISP that they are in violation, and give them the opportunity to correct the situation, but it could also very well end up with the ISP being disconnected. Very likely the contracts in place allow the upstream provider a lot of discretion in how to handle the matter. It was, after all, the upstream providers that pulled the plug after learning of the ISP's nefarious actions. This has nothing to do with criminal law, but rather civil law. If the ISP feels that it was disconnected for TOS violation unfairly, then they have every right to pursue remedy in the civil courts. I fail to see how breach of contract in civil law has anything to do with criminal laws dealing with drugs.
As for what happens when your machine is compromised. You should have known better. There is no way you can legitimately play the innocent victim. You are here on slashdot which implies that you are not a "Joe Luser" that doesn't know how to secure your systems from 99% or more of the malware that is out there. Please don't advocate for "Joe Luser" either. Problems like malware, botnets, and SPAM will continue to grow as long as "Joe Luser" is treated with kid gloves. It would suck to made an example of because of ignorance, but examples need to be made so that other "Joe Lusers" will wake up and learn enough to take care of their machines.
It was a common case of greed letting stupidity override common sense. Happens all the time. If it didn't, why else would the economy be in the shitter because of all the sub-prime and arm loans?
What if someone's computer got a virus, which then downloaded pirated content to no fault of their own? Oops! Strike three! You lost your internet to a virus.:) GENIUS!
Sounds like a great way to reduce spam.
1. Install proxy server on vulnerable spambot.
2. Download all the copyrighted material you want through the spambot.
3. Move to new spambot when the old one gets removed from the internet.
4. Profit
While the Sinowal authors no longer use RBN as a home base, Brady said his team could find no trace of a single Russian victim in the entire database of credentials and identities stolen from customers of hundreds of banks across the United States, Europe and Asia, and at least 27 other countries.
These guys aren't shitting where they eat, so why would the Russians have any incentive to cooperate?
Without the requirement for search warrants (obtained from an impartial judge), the police, FBI, or other government officials/politicians can go from house-to-house-to-house taking PCs simply because they feel like it.
While I agree that going into someones home or business and seizing/searching/imaging their hard drives is a clear 4th amendment violation, I find it surprising that it was applied here. The computer was not seized, it was voluntarily given to law enforcement.
The computer's owner had been evicted from his residence and left the machine behind. The person who got the machine, as a result of the eviction, then handed the machine over to law enforcement as possible evidence. The owner should have known that upon eviction, his stuff would be removed from the property and anything that was there would have the possibility of being made available to anybody. He was just too stupid to take the machine, or pull the hard drives.
The government clearly screwed the pooch by not making a more convincing argument that the machine should not have been subjected to 4th amendment procedures.
If I were to find a large quantity of drugs on the streets and turn it in to the police, would they need a warrant to look for fingerprints or other evidence of who owned the drugs. If I found documents indicating criminal activity, would the police need a warrant to look at the documents after I turned them in. The answer should be no, the they are being voluntarily handed to law enforcement for investigation. The drugs/documents/whatever could then be used to obtain warrants related to the crime.
All this ruling will end up doing is making warrants easier to obtain for law enforcement. Your honor, we need these warrants, because case such and such threw out evidence of child porn for lacking a warrant to search evidence voluntarily handed to law enforcement. Throw whatever extra "protect the children" spin required on to that, and some judges will become rubber stamps for issuing warrants.
The main thing wrong with his reasoning is that in rough economic times, companies are going to be looking for a better value. OSS is a better value. Even if you have to pay for developers to get what you need, that's a one time cost and you get to keep the source code.
Please enlighten me, where was open source even mentioned? I did actually RTFA, (waiting to get modded into oblivion for admitting that), but I cannot see the correlation. I guess what I really want to know is how the fuck posting to youtube, facebook, myspace, <insert next shit social network site here> even remotely equivalent to contributing to open source?
Not the total number of employees, but the number of employees that have access to checked baggage. I don't care about adding the office/admin types to the tally to make the problem seem less than it actually is. Another interesting number would be how many airports have had TSA goons fired for theft.
Yes, the no good thieves in the TSA will make sure that the bags they inspect will have owners called in to witness, etc... It's the bags that they "don't inspect" that all the stuff will disappear from. What's needed is 100% video surveilence of the checked baggage area, and a mandatory 2 person policy, where no one can be alone with the baggage, and the people are rotated so that they don't always have the same partner.
What worries me is that with so many computers doing the bidding of people other than their owners, who knows what kind of traffic is being exchanged.
That actually sounds like a good side-effect to me. What better way to shut down virus infected, spam spewing zombies than to have law enforcement busting down the doors because some machines are also being used as underground child porn servers?
Currently there is very little incentive for Joe Six-Pack to make sure his machine is secure, and there is also little to no punishment if the machine is not secure. If people start getting arrested for child porn that they had no knowledge of, then others, not wanting the same backlash to befall them, will start taking computer security more seriously. Sounds like a win-win situation to me, reduce child porn and stem the flow of spam at the same time.
Slashdot Mirror
Except the integrated graphics on a bunch of 'Vista Capable' laptops DON'T do DirectX10 or Aero... but if a patch to Vista (or Windows 7) will get Aero working on directX10 on the CPU... a buttload of PCs that CAN'T currently do Aero, now CAN.
But at what performance cost. If we are talking about the whole "Vista Capable" debacle, aren't we talking about low spec machines that coughed and wheezed when running the low-end version of the OS. Great, lets add 3D rendering to the processor load on those machines.
I like the idea of rendering the graphics in the CPU rather than an expensive accelerator card for one-off situations, as long as that feature can be turned off. But then, I'm not a gamer, and I'm not into all the eye-candy. If I were a gamer or into eye candy, there's no way this side of hell that I would want to render the graphics in the CPU. I would get the best video card money could buy.
"That is the odd thing... you never hear about the huge attacks on the Chinese, Russian, North Korean, etc."
Not hearing is not the same as not happening. They may and probably DO not talk about those incidents. We live in a free-er society, and this stuff comes out because our press is marginally functional. That is, when it's not being willingly led by the nose by the current 'cause'. And slamming the current administration is always good business for our press.
I would presume that every government is probing other governments' networks, looking for weakness and potential exploits.
Of course we never hear about the attacks on China, Russia, whoever because they are viewed as propaganda. Just as the Russians/Chinese/whoeverans view our reports on such matters as propaganda. If it is mentioned in their press at all, it will be about the negative propaganda we are spreading, rather than the issue that is reported.
He was keen on getting rid of the inspectors so that there would always be an element of doubt with his immediate neighbors that posed a direct threat to his nation. He never thought that the US would invade over the flimsy intelligence, and was more concerned about Iran invading if it were shown that there were no WMDs in country.
For what its worth, I'm not the only one that believes so.
Agent: Hussein was surprised U.S. invaded - cnn.com
OK - now run off and slashdot CNN, then come back and tell us what you think.
They were just testing to see how their servers would handle a good slashdotting in the event that they ever have something of their own to post. Cut them a bit of slack here. :)
Don't know why anyone modded parent as funny. When starting out, you really need someone experienced in the business side of the house. Just make sure that they are smart enough to handle the business affairs and not try to mess with the tech side of the house. Once they start meddling on the tech side, you get the PHBs that you are trying to rid yourself of.
Or simply killing all those whose machines are infected? And if you think that any of those is acceptable then you surely won't have any objection if/when other nations start behaving that way in your country, will you? I know where most of my spam originates.
I have no problem with the infected machines being killed off, regardless of where the attacker that killed the machine is located or who the attacker is. Just leave some indication of why the machine was killed so I can point to it when charging the customer for re-installing their OS and recovering whatever of their files that you are kind enough to leave for them. A nice little README.txt file explaining "Your machine was a spam spewing zombie in the <botnet name> botnet." will be sufficient.
Hasn't any of McDonalds' higher ups ever been to a different eatery that serves burgers. Come on, all places pre-prep the basic condiments/etc that go on their sandwiches. You can easily see the lettuce, tomato, and onion all stacked together ready to drop onto a sandwich. OK, they may have come up with a novel tool which guarantees uniformity, but patent the "Sandwich Uniformity Tool" not the process for making a sandwich.
Houston and New Orleans, hope the inventors put in some kind of check to prevent it from flooding homes in those places.
I think that a large life raft would be better equipped with something more like this.
play online flash games in the browser during downtime?
I guess this is what they mean by "Change you can believe in."
I got the memo about "change", I never got the memo on whether or not the "change" would be beneficial or detrimental. I can only hope for the former, but I fear the latter.
It is not your ethical or moral duty to police a civil contract between two third parties, and if your actions cause a material loss to either party, even if they were in violation of their contract, they can turn around and sue you for damages for tortious interference.
Quite correct, but I am not excluded from pointing out possible violations because I am a third party either. As for my actions causing a material loss to either party, that would only happen if I were providing false information. That scenario could lead to many charges, none of them being "tortious interference". The only way I could be charged with tortious interference is if I do something to actually block the fulfillment of the contract, such as hack in to the alleged offenders machines and commit the TOS violation myself, or hack into the service provider and disconnect the alleged offender myself.
When an upstream provider receives a complaint about one of their clients, they can choose to ignore the complaint, or act upon it. If the provider acts on the complaint without first investigating whether the complaint is legitimate, then it is the provider at fault for breech of contract for not ensuring that there was a TOS violation before terminating the account for a TOS violation.
Damn, no mod points for me. I was wondering if a troll could be modded as "over rated".
If an ISP, or any of their customers, are in violation of the upstream provider's TOS, then it is the upstream provider's decision on what to do about the matter. I would hope that most upstream providers would notify the ISP that they are in violation, and give them the opportunity to correct the situation, but it could also very well end up with the ISP being disconnected. Very likely the contracts in place allow the upstream provider a lot of discretion in how to handle the matter. It was, after all, the upstream providers that pulled the plug after learning of the ISP's nefarious actions. This has nothing to do with criminal law, but rather civil law. If the ISP feels that it was disconnected for TOS violation unfairly, then they have every right to pursue remedy in the civil courts. I fail to see how breach of contract in civil law has anything to do with criminal laws dealing with drugs.
As for what happens when your machine is compromised. You should have known better. There is no way you can legitimately play the innocent victim. You are here on slashdot which implies that you are not a "Joe Luser" that doesn't know how to secure your systems from 99% or more of the malware that is out there. Please don't advocate for "Joe Luser" either. Problems like malware, botnets, and SPAM will continue to grow as long as "Joe Luser" is treated with kid gloves. It would suck to made an example of because of ignorance, but examples need to be made so that other "Joe Lusers" will wake up and learn enough to take care of their machines.
a whole new class of lawsuits to emerge from this type of legal abuse. Lawsuits against litigious extortion.
It was a common case of greed letting stupidity override common sense. Happens all the time. If it didn't, why else would the economy be in the shitter because of all the sub-prime and arm loans?
What if someone's computer got a virus, which then downloaded pirated content to no fault of their own? Oops! Strike three! You lost your internet to a virus. :) GENIUS!
Sounds like a great way to reduce spam.
1. Install proxy server on vulnerable spambot.
2. Download all the copyrighted material you want through the spambot.
3. Move to new spambot when the old one gets removed from the internet.
4. Profit
FTA:
While the Sinowal authors no longer use RBN as a home base, Brady said his team could find no trace of a single Russian victim in the entire database of credentials and identities stolen from customers of hundreds of banks across the United States, Europe and Asia, and at least 27 other countries.
These guys aren't shitting where they eat, so why would the Russians have any incentive to cooperate?
What?!? The articles are meant to be read!!!
I thought that the links were only provided to see if we could slashdot the servers that they are hosted on.
Without the requirement for search warrants (obtained from an impartial judge), the police, FBI, or other government officials/politicians can go from house-to-house-to-house taking PCs simply because they feel like it.
While I agree that going into someones home or business and seizing/searching/imaging their hard drives is a clear 4th amendment violation, I find it surprising that it was applied here. The computer was not seized, it was voluntarily given to law enforcement.
The computer's owner had been evicted from his residence and left the machine behind. The person who got the machine, as a result of the eviction, then handed the machine over to law enforcement as possible evidence. The owner should have known that upon eviction, his stuff would be removed from the property and anything that was there would have the possibility of being made available to anybody. He was just too stupid to take the machine, or pull the hard drives.
The government clearly screwed the pooch by not making a more convincing argument that the machine should not have been subjected to 4th amendment procedures.
If I were to find a large quantity of drugs on the streets and turn it in to the police, would they need a warrant to look for fingerprints or other evidence of who owned the drugs. If I found documents indicating criminal activity, would the police need a warrant to look at the documents after I turned them in. The answer should be no, the they are being voluntarily handed to law enforcement for investigation. The drugs/documents/whatever could then be used to obtain warrants related to the crime.
All this ruling will end up doing is making warrants easier to obtain for law enforcement. Your honor, we need these warrants, because case such and such threw out evidence of child porn for lacking a warrant to search evidence voluntarily handed to law enforcement. Throw whatever extra "protect the children" spin required on to that, and some judges will become rubber stamps for issuing warrants.
I think you need to tweak your sarcasm detectors.
The main thing wrong with his reasoning is that in rough economic times, companies are going to be looking for a better value. OSS is a better value. Even if you have to pay for developers to get what you need, that's a one time cost and you get to keep the source code.
Please enlighten me, where was open source even mentioned? I did actually RTFA, (waiting to get modded into oblivion for admitting that), but I cannot see the correlation. I guess what I really want to know is how the fuck posting to youtube, facebook, myspace, <insert next shit social network site here> even remotely equivalent to contributing to open source?
Not the total number of employees, but the number of employees that have access to checked baggage. I don't care about adding the office/admin types to the tally to make the problem seem less than it actually is. Another interesting number would be how many airports have had TSA goons fired for theft.
With all the new baggage fees and such that the airlines are starting to charge, this is likely to become cheaper than checking your baggage anyway.
Yes, the no good thieves in the TSA will make sure that the bags they inspect will have owners called in to witness, etc... It's the bags that they "don't inspect" that all the stuff will disappear from. What's needed is 100% video surveilence of the checked baggage area, and a mandatory 2 person policy, where no one can be alone with the baggage, and the people are rotated so that they don't always have the same partner.
What worries me is that with so many computers doing the bidding of people other than their owners, who knows what kind of traffic is being exchanged.
That actually sounds like a good side-effect to me. What better way to shut down virus infected, spam spewing zombies than to have law enforcement busting down the doors because some machines are also being used as underground child porn servers?
Currently there is very little incentive for Joe Six-Pack to make sure his machine is secure, and there is also little to no punishment if the machine is not secure. If people start getting arrested for child porn that they had no knowledge of, then others, not wanting the same backlash to befall them, will start taking computer security more seriously. Sounds like a win-win situation to me, reduce child porn and stem the flow of spam at the same time.
Yes, I can be a bit of a troll at times.