They probably closely monitor anyone that they see connecting to an anonymous proxy, to see if you're doing anything they should cancel your connection for.
They most certainly don't. That would open them to an enormous liability. As soon as they start looking at traffic, they become responsible for enforcing regulations upon ALL users. If they screw up and miss something, they are now legally responsible. Who the hell would want to expose themselves to that kind of liability?
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not. Anyway, I'm not saying "God damn, people are stupid," I'm just saying a lot of people have a hard time visualizing what actually happens when electrical current flows. That doesn't make them stupid, but it does hinder an accurate understanding.
And at least for the purposes of understanding electrical current in a conductor, the bouncing-balls view of electrons is just as valid and explanatory as the quantum version.
Yes, but the transfer of a neurotransmitter from axon to dendrite could be thought of as sound, right? Obviously the whole process can't be described as just "sound" but claiming that it is purely electrical isn't right either. If you stop the physical movement of neurotransmitters the neurons are rendered useless.
Because they are working in the realm of definitions, not theories. They are trying to say, "Look, these interactions share such and such characteristics with sound, therefore we believe it is appropriate to refer to these interactions as sound." They are throwing a definition out there, nothing more. People will either accept it or not. They are making no theoretical claims.
Well, the one meter per hour figure refers to the drift velocity. The electrons aren't actually flowing like water in a stream, they are bouncing around like mad at speeds much faster than one meter per hour but they have a slight tendency to drift in the direction of higher voltage. Averaged out, this drift velocity is very small but the electrons themselves are moving much faster.
I think this is why so many people get confused by electricity. The FIELD moves almost the speed of light, but it makes electrons drift very slowly, even though the electrons THEMSELVES are moving rapidly. It's all very hard to visualize at first.
Do you know that incendiary ammunition doesn't leave a light trail, that what you're describing is tracer ammunition?
Actually, he said "incendiary tracer." Such rounds DO exist. Go buy some and have fun. And quit berating people when you clearly have no clue what you're talking about.
Again, mythbusters is TV, do not try to take anything they "prove" as some sort of fact. Half the time, they don't seem to have any real intention of finding out if something can happen, just making a big mess and some explosions. It is entertainment, not science.
I dunno. I think their demonstration with the.50 caliber was pretty conclusive. I don't have a hard time imagining that a supersonic round would disintegrate on impact with water. As you obviously know, a.22 doesn't even compare to that.
The general pattern was that the slower bullets penetrated further. Sure, the "experiment" wasn't exactly scientific but I buy it.
It's okay to fire them in my jurisdiction -- in fact, we were standing right in front of a sheriff while doing so.
In Oregon it is illegal to possess an incendiary destructive device without a permit. An incendiary bullet does not qualify. An incendiary grenade would be a no-no.
Also, it is illegal to "train in the use of an incendiary device" for the purpose of inciting civil unrest. But casual shooting is apparently okay. The rounds are a bit pricey, though.
If you have a wireless card that actually works on Linux, here's a piece of advice: get on your knees and thank the diety of your choice for smiling on you, and not leading you astray into the Purgatory of identical-model-number-but-different-chipsets, or the Hell of alpha-quality drivers. And then, don't mess with anything.
Funny, this hasn't been my experience. I've booted the latest Knoppix live CD on many random PC's and even a Mac Mini and it's never had any trouble using whatever wireless was in the system. Maybe I'm just incredibly lucky to never hit a box with a non-working wireless card?
It most definitely is not. If you had a wormhole that allowed you to travel 1 lightyear in only 1 second, that doesn't mean you traveled faster than light. It means that the distance you traveled was much less than 1 lightyear.
Presently, we have no clue how to construct and maintain a wormhole, much less a wormhole with the exact properties of enabling travel between galaxies. It may never be possible. But there is NOTHING in the known laws of physics that forbids such a thing on principal.
Radioactivity can be extremely "contagious" if a person is contaminated by radioactive material. If I painted my body with radioactive strontium would YOU want to shake my hand?
So the convenience of the admin is more important than the security of the system?
The security of the system is of FUNDAMENTAL importance. It is a failure of the administrator which turns telnet into a vulnerability. Security ultimately derives from actions taken by human beings. If humans don't do what is appropriate and security is compromised, it is the humans who have failed, not the system.
Refraction and reflection are closely related. Light reflects when it strikes a discontinuity in index of refraction. If the IOR is made to vary smoothly, on the other hand, light will not reflect. And that's exactly what they seem to have done here.
Yeah, that was my response when I first heard of this bug/exploit. But the real question is, should systems be shiped with telnet enabled? Obviously the answer is "no", but vendors seem to be slow to get this message.
Why the hell not? Installation of Solaris is not exactly an "end user" type of operations. More likely it would be performed by an IT professional. Having telnet enabled initially makes it easy to setup the system from another location without worrying about making ssh or anything else work.
The real stupidity is the admins who don't care enough to actually do their job and disable telnet. These are the people who should know better. Chances are, Sun has received more calls about why telnet is NOT enabled by default than they have for the opposite. The real lesson is, don't plug a box into an untrusted network with telnet running.
It's true that a degree doesn't imply skill, or vice versa. But why not at least finish buying what you paid for? Right now you owe money for something you don't even have. It's like putting a huge down payment on a car and then walking away without actually buying it. Why would you do that?
They clearly do not have to download the entire file to find a watermark. Also, add a maximum download count for each server, problem solved. That's not to say that I believe the concept is a good idea, but the spider could probably be a half way efficient at looking at files.
I doubt they are watermarking all parts of the file. That would probably degrade sound quality too much. So, they must be putting a watermark at some specific location in the file. If they put it at a FIXED location, that makes it easy to write a program which overwrites and eradicates it. It follows that therefore they must place the watermark at a RANDOM location.
If they place it randomly, this means that on average, they have to download HALF of the file in order to find the watermark.
As this thing crawls the web, suppose it encounters a page on my web site that has links to 50,000 music files. Except they are actually all the same file, a legitimate file which is dynamically served up by the web server when the spider requests it. So there's no storage space issue on my end, but now the spider has to process 50,000 files. That's going to take a damn long time. Maybe I can bog it down so badly that it can't get any real work done.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't see this as being very popular. Does the average Internet user know how to get an umlaut to display?
Yeah. All those people of the world who speak languages that use those characters have no clue how to actually type them in. Are you freaking stupid?
Umm... MACs do not pass over the Internet. The only place your MAC is visible is at the first hop, inside your ISP.
They probably closely monitor anyone that they see connecting to an anonymous proxy, to see if you're doing anything they should cancel your connection for.
They most certainly don't. That would open them to an enormous liability. As soon as they start looking at traffic, they become responsible for enforcing regulations upon ALL users. If they screw up and miss something, they are now legally responsible. Who the hell would want to expose themselves to that kind of liability?
I've never understood the logic behind the American way of writing dates. I'm not trying to troll here, it just seems illogical to me.
Say it out loud: "March 12th, 2007." 3/12/2007.I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not. Anyway, I'm not saying "God damn, people are stupid," I'm just saying a lot of people have a hard time visualizing what actually happens when electrical current flows. That doesn't make them stupid, but it does hinder an accurate understanding.
And at least for the purposes of understanding electrical current in a conductor, the bouncing-balls view of electrons is just as valid and explanatory as the quantum version.
Yes, but the transfer of a neurotransmitter from axon to dendrite could be thought of as sound, right? Obviously the whole process can't be described as just "sound" but claiming that it is purely electrical isn't right either. If you stop the physical movement of neurotransmitters the neurons are rendered useless.
Because they are working in the realm of definitions, not theories. They are trying to say, "Look, these interactions share such and such characteristics with sound, therefore we believe it is appropriate to refer to these interactions as sound." They are throwing a definition out there, nothing more. People will either accept it or not. They are making no theoretical claims.
Well, the one meter per hour figure refers to the drift velocity. The electrons aren't actually flowing like water in a stream, they are bouncing around like mad at speeds much faster than one meter per hour but they have a slight tendency to drift in the direction of higher voltage. Averaged out, this drift velocity is very small but the electrons themselves are moving much faster.
I think this is why so many people get confused by electricity. The FIELD moves almost the speed of light, but it makes electrons drift very slowly, even though the electrons THEMSELVES are moving rapidly. It's all very hard to visualize at first.
Do you know that incendiary ammunition doesn't leave a light trail, that what you're describing is tracer ammunition?
Actually, he said "incendiary tracer." Such rounds DO exist. Go buy some and have fun. And quit berating people when you clearly have no clue what you're talking about.
Again, mythbusters is TV, do not try to take anything they "prove" as some sort of fact. Half the time, they don't seem to have any real intention of finding out if something can happen, just making a big mess and some explosions. It is entertainment, not science.
I dunno. I think their demonstration with the .50 caliber was pretty conclusive. I don't have a hard time imagining that a supersonic round would disintegrate on impact with water. As you obviously know, a .22 doesn't even compare to that.
The general pattern was that the slower bullets penetrated further. Sure, the "experiment" wasn't exactly scientific but I buy it.
It's okay to fire them in my jurisdiction -- in fact, we were standing right in front of a sheriff while doing so.
In Oregon it is illegal to possess an incendiary destructive device without a permit. An incendiary bullet does not qualify. An incendiary grenade would be a no-no.
Also, it is illegal to "train in the use of an incendiary device" for the purpose of inciting civil unrest. But casual shooting is apparently okay. The rounds are a bit pricey, though.
How many others got that one? ;-) I salute you!
Perhaps he is a scuba diver?
If you have a wireless card that actually works on Linux, here's a piece of advice: get on your knees and thank the diety of your choice for smiling on you, and not leading you astray into the Purgatory of identical-model-number-but-different-chipsets, or the Hell of alpha-quality drivers. And then, don't mess with anything.
Funny, this hasn't been my experience. I've booted the latest Knoppix live CD on many random PC's and even a Mac Mini and it's never had any trouble using whatever wireless was in the system. Maybe I'm just incredibly lucky to never hit a box with a non-working wireless card?
But it's still against the laws of physics.
It most definitely is not. If you had a wormhole that allowed you to travel 1 lightyear in only 1 second, that doesn't mean you traveled faster than light. It means that the distance you traveled was much less than 1 lightyear.
Presently, we have no clue how to construct and maintain a wormhole, much less a wormhole with the exact properties of enabling travel between galaxies. It may never be possible. But there is NOTHING in the known laws of physics that forbids such a thing on principal.
Radioactivity can be extremely "contagious" if a person is contaminated by radioactive material. If I painted my body with radioactive strontium would YOU want to shake my hand?
I got a chance to fire some incendiary rounds recently. Talk about sparking.
It seems that even the blackest material in existence is no match for the reflective power of a dupe-posting Slashdot editor.
So the convenience of the admin is more important than the security of the system?
The security of the system is of FUNDAMENTAL importance. It is a failure of the administrator which turns telnet into a vulnerability. Security ultimately derives from actions taken by human beings. If humans don't do what is appropriate and security is compromised, it is the humans who have failed, not the system.
Refraction and reflection are closely related. Light reflects when it strikes a discontinuity in index of refraction. If the IOR is made to vary smoothly, on the other hand, light will not reflect. And that's exactly what they seem to have done here.
That assumes there's a battery in the system somewhere. I have a dynamo which connects directly to a lamp. If I flipped it off, the lamp would go out.
Yeah, that was my response when I first heard of this bug/exploit. But the real question is, should systems be shiped with telnet enabled? Obviously the answer is "no", but vendors seem to be slow to get this message.
Why the hell not? Installation of Solaris is not exactly an "end user" type of operations. More likely it would be performed by an IT professional. Having telnet enabled initially makes it easy to setup the system from another location without worrying about making ssh or anything else work.
The real stupidity is the admins who don't care enough to actually do their job and disable telnet. These are the people who should know better. Chances are, Sun has received more calls about why telnet is NOT enabled by default than they have for the opposite. The real lesson is, don't plug a box into an untrusted network with telnet running.
It's true that a degree doesn't imply skill, or vice versa. But why not at least finish buying what you paid for? Right now you owe money for something you don't even have. It's like putting a huge down payment on a car and then walking away without actually buying it. Why would you do that?
They clearly do not have to download the entire file to find a watermark. Also, add a maximum download count for each server, problem solved. That's not to say that I believe the concept is a good idea, but the spider could probably be a half way efficient at looking at files.
I doubt they are watermarking all parts of the file. That would probably degrade sound quality too much. So, they must be putting a watermark at some specific location in the file. If they put it at a FIXED location, that makes it easy to write a program which overwrites and eradicates it. It follows that therefore they must place the watermark at a RANDOM location.
If they place it randomly, this means that on average, they have to download HALF of the file in order to find the watermark.
As this thing crawls the web, suppose it encounters a page on my web site that has links to 50,000 music files. Except they are actually all the same file, a legitimate file which is dynamically served up by the web server when the spider requests it. So there's no storage space issue on my end, but now the spider has to process 50,000 files. That's going to take a damn long time. Maybe I can bog it down so badly that it can't get any real work done.