. ..it sure is the thing that makes it remotely useful to large numbers of users.
The core of Internet users are invisible to these users.
KFG
Re:I'd prefer to hack open source with FEW AUTHORS
on
Mitnick on OSS
·
· Score: 1
Ah,that is interesting. I've never used a hosting provider so that is an area of ignorance. I shall have to do something about that.
KFG
Re:I'd prefer to hack open source with FEW AUTHORS
on
Mitnick on OSS
·
· Score: 1
Point taken. Still, the value of an exploit is still proportional to the number of systems you can use it against and/or the value of getting into those systems.
And you're far more likely to get into the "Let's Talk About My Kitty" blog in quicker and easier ways than going over code, because someone unsophisticated enough to run this shit code has left all the standard/known holes open anyway, so your first level of attack is going to be against their distro's default install.
So my question remains, who runs this shitware? It's existence is not proportional to its availability to exploit and its availability to exploit is inversely proportional to the value of doing so.
Was the methodology really so bad that they determined the answer in advance?
It's a damned sight easier to dowse for water if you already know exactly where to find it, innit?
KFG
Re:I'd prefer to hack open source with FEW AUTHORS
on
Mitnick on OSS
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
. ..there's lots of open source shitware. ..
Indeed there is, and lack of recognition of this is one of the "weaknesses" of OSS, however, let me ask you this question:
How many people run this shitware?
Not much point in spending who knows how many hours going over code that nobody uses. The Mother of all UNIX Holes was found in GNU emacs, because that was someplace worth looking for one.
Thus the code that everybody uses gets harder faster.
KFG
Re:Securing Open Source Code
on
Mitnick on OSS
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
For Open Source it's not that much better. The only real motivation to write good code is. ..
. . . called "craftsmanship."
KFG
Re:Captain Obvious
on
Mitnick on OSS
·
· Score: 5, Funny
First Corollary:
It's easier for others to see where you are going when they have their eyes open.
Second Corollary:
It's easier for others to see where you might go when they have their eyes open.
. ..just the placing of a subject under observation was a form of power parading as science.
Which is how the polygraph "works." It's just a dowsing device, but useful for interrogations, in a very limited sense, to the extent that the subject believes in the power.
It's basically a "civilized" form of waterboarding.
Speaking of methodology, the test described in the article was not only not done double blind, it wasn't even done blind and there was no control. Everyone involved knew the subject had stolen something a priori, and everyone, including the subject, knew that everyone knew.
If I had been a subject I might well have been inclined to "beat" the system buy fucking with what everyone knew, i.e,, not following directions and taking neither the ring or the watch.
Given the US political system, I think that if it were true and able to be proven in a court of law, the subjects of the "profane articles" would have legally retalliated by this point...
You might think that, but given the US political system this is simply not done.
I believe the word you are looking for is not Fear: an emotion experienced in anticipation of some specific pain or danger, but Disgust: A sickening feeling of revulsion, loathing, or nausea.
If you can't laugh at the serious stuff; and if you can't take the trivial stuff seriously, you've missed the point and are going to have a hell of a time making it through life.
Insert whatever serious/trivial stuff suits you, such as work/play, religious/secular, etc.
Along the way you may discover the First Corollary; that the only difference between the serious stuff and the trivial stuff is whether or not you take it seriously or laugh at it.
It's easy to talk like that afterwards but obviously they did not know or it wouldn't have happened.
Shakespeare wrote a lot of tragedies. Do you know what it is that makes a tragedy?
Loss of life by tsunamis, earthquakes, floods, shit blowing up, you won't find those in Shakespeare (not even in The Tempest), because those are not really tragedies. That's just "Bad Stuff" that happens.
No, what makes a real tragedy a tragedy is that the Bad Stuff that happens is all created by acts of man and that the Bad Stuff is all predictable based on the human acts. That they know and do it anyway, for one "reason" or another that seems more pressing to them at the time, even though at a later time they might ultimately realize that what seemed pressing to them was trivial and meaningless.
And you sit there watching the play, figuratively screaming inside your head, "Dude, change your mind!"
But everybody ends up dead in the last act anyway.
People know. People do it anyway. People die as a result of it. That's a tragedy.
Go read your Shakespeare, then go read your Feynman.
Slashdot Mirror
. . .it certainly wasn't as sophisticated of a design as the Space Shuttle
.
:)
The shuttle is a more complicated design. There is a difference.
If you take the Apollo capsules into account . .
I was very careful not to do that.
The truth is that the Space Shuttle is a marvel of engineering.
In the sense that you look at it and shake your head in wonder and disbelief, yeah.
KFG
20 years of Saturn incidents
There were no operational failures. How's that for a quick statistical comparison?
KFG
This was done by some rogue elements that were too aggressive in their desire to . . .
rid me of that meddlesome priest. Now, where did I put those two, adorable little princes?
KFG
Microsoft is damned
Well, D'oh!
That's what happens when you're . . . evil.
KFG
My brain does not WAD, even when I preview.
KFG
can you give a pointer to this?
Officially classed as a WAD (Works As Designed) by RMS and company:
emacs setuid/movemail exploit Officially classed as a WAD by The GNU Foundation.
The Cuckoo's Egg
KFG
". . . have made sure the user is very knowledgeable about what Mono is, what .NET is, what C# is, and how all of them relate to each other."
In the same manner that the first 5 chapters of The Feynman Lectures on Physics makes one very knowledgeable about physics.
Teach Yourself Programming in Ten Years
KFG
. . .it sure is the thing that makes it remotely useful to large numbers of users.
The core of Internet users are invisible to these users.
KFG
Ah,that is interesting. I've never used a hosting provider so that is an area of ignorance. I shall have to do something about that.
KFG
Point taken. Still, the value of an exploit is still proportional to the number of systems you can use it against and/or the value of getting into those systems.
And you're far more likely to get into the "Let's Talk About My Kitty" blog in quicker and easier ways than going over code, because someone unsophisticated enough to run this shit code has left all the standard/known holes open anyway, so your first level of attack is going to be against their distro's default install.
So my question remains, who runs this shitware? It's existence is not proportional to its availability to exploit and its availability to exploit is inversely proportional to the value of doing so.
KFG
But they'd know you hadn't taken either one.
Was the methodology really so bad that they determined the answer in advance?
It's a damned sight easier to dowse for water if you already know exactly where to find it, innit?
KFG
. . .there's lots of open source shitware. . .
Indeed there is, and lack of recognition of this is one of the "weaknesses" of OSS, however, let me ask you this question:
How many people run this shitware?
Not much point in spending who knows how many hours going over code that nobody uses. The Mother of all UNIX Holes was found in GNU emacs, because that was someplace worth looking for one.
Thus the code that everybody uses gets harder faster.
KFG
For Open Source it's not that much better. The only real motivation to write good code is. . .
. . . called "craftsmanship."
KFG
First Corollary:
It's easier for others to see where you are going when they have their eyes open.
Second Corollary:
It's easier for others to see where you might go when they have their eyes open.
KFG
. . .just the placing of a subject under observation was a form of power parading as science.
Which is how the polygraph "works." It's just a dowsing device, but useful for interrogations, in a very limited sense, to the extent that the subject believes in the power.
It's basically a "civilized" form of waterboarding.
Speaking of methodology, the test described in the article was not only not done double blind, it wasn't even done blind and there was no control. Everyone involved knew the subject had stolen something a priori, and everyone, including the subject, knew that everyone knew.
If I had been a subject I might well have been inclined to "beat" the system buy fucking with what everyone knew, i.e,, not following directions and taking neither the ring or the watch.
KFG
as detecting truth.
What's more, they admit it doesn't actually detect lies, because people beat it; and that's under idealized lab conditions.
Do not go directly to jail.
KFG
I don't like Aristotle much, but anyone can get lucky.
KFG
geospatial technologies
Whooooooooa! They have that on the Intarweb now?
KFG
Given the US political system, I think that if it were true and able to be proven in a court of law, the subjects of the "profane articles" would have legally retalliated by this point...
You might think that, but given the US political system this is simply not done.
KFG
Parent posited specific knowledge gained through experience.
KFG
Everything is simply commmentary on the Tao Te Ching.
However, as Goethe noted: "Everything has been thought of before. The trick is to think of it again."
KFG
I believe the word you are looking for is not Fear: an emotion experienced in anticipation of some specific pain or danger, but Disgust: A sickening feeling of revulsion, loathing, or nausea.
KFG
KFG's Revelation:
If you can't laugh at the serious stuff; and if you can't take the trivial stuff seriously, you've missed the point and are going to have a hell of a time making it through life.
Insert whatever serious/trivial stuff suits you, such as work/play, religious/secular, etc.
Along the way you may discover the First Corollary; that the only difference between the serious stuff and the trivial stuff is whether or not you take it seriously or laugh at it.
KFG
It's easy to talk like that afterwards but obviously they did not know or it wouldn't have happened.
Shakespeare wrote a lot of tragedies. Do you know what it is that makes a tragedy?
Loss of life by tsunamis, earthquakes, floods, shit blowing up, you won't find those in Shakespeare (not even in The Tempest), because those are not really tragedies. That's just "Bad Stuff" that happens.
No, what makes a real tragedy a tragedy is that the Bad Stuff that happens is all created by acts of man and that the Bad Stuff is all predictable based on the human acts. That they know and do it anyway, for one "reason" or another that seems more pressing to them at the time, even though at a later time they might ultimately realize that what seemed pressing to them was trivial and meaningless.
And you sit there watching the play, figuratively screaming inside your head, "Dude, change your mind!"
But everybody ends up dead in the last act anyway.
People know. People do it anyway. People die as a result of it. That's a tragedy.
Go read your Shakespeare, then go read your Feynman.
KFG
. . .software is sold without warranty.
This is incorrect. Software is sold with a EULA which claims no warranty, but a claim need not be a fact.
Everything is sold with a warranty of some sort or other. Software warranties are as yet simply not sufficiently defined.
KFG