What I'm saying is that there should be no "write access" from an outside network.
No, that's not what you're saying. This is what you're saying:
I'm still having a problem with......why ANY nuclear reactor or power plant needs to be directly connected to a computer network. I can see it having say a USB port for upgrades of controller firmware but a network connection? Nope.
If you want to amend that to say that the network should provide read-only access, that may be agreeable. Although no doubt controllers will actually want to manage the reactors from the control room instead of only monitor them.
AFAIK Iran has never advocated the destruction of Israel with a "kill all jews" kind of vibe.
When your conference is called "A World Without Zionism", the "vibe" is pretty obvious.
What is missing from this seemingly exciting fiction of Iran wanting to nuke Israel is the fact that it would be suicide, and no matter what you may have been told or heard, the Iranian leadership is not stupid.
Apparently someone has told you that Muslims are afraid of death or dying. There's a documentary called My Trip To Al-Qaeda by Lawrence Wright, highly recommended. One of the insights he comes out with is that, through his discussions with jihadi fighters, they tell him that one of the differences between them and us is that we love life, and they love death. All of the rewards they will get, all of the salvation and good times, happen after they die, not before. A suicide mission for a jihadi is the way out, that's the reason they're there, that's the end game for them. It's not something they fear, it's something they look forward to. And their people venerate them for that.
Iran obtaining nuclear bombs is the only thing that will pacify the Middle East.
Right, because if there's one thing we know about fundamentalist Muslims, it's how rational and reasonable they are. How many people were killed in the riots in Afghanistan over the possibility of some douche in Florida maybe burning a Koran at some point in the future? Reason and rational discourse don't exactly play a huge role in these people's lives.
If you're afraid of Iran getting the nuke, are you not worried of some nutjob buying/bribing themselves such a device from Pakistan?
Absolutely, but I don't even think that's the biggest threat. I think the biggest threat is the Soviet nukes that are unaccounted for. When the Soviet Union collapsed, there were a lot of local military commanders that were looking to make some cash selling the hardware they controlled.
I'm well aware of the differences between Persians and Arabs, and I'm aware that much of the Iranian population is Persian, though certainly not all of them.
But the government is not Persian, it is Arabic. Throughout their long history, Persians have repeatedly been invaded and conquered. Persia was first conquered by Muslim Arabs in 644. Many Persians refer to the 1979 revolution as the second Arab invasion of Persia.
The deposed Shah of Iran was a Persian. He was replaced with a Muslim Arabic government. This is the current ruling party of Iran, not Persians. The Persians aren't threatening to destroy Israel, Arabs are.
They run everything from nuke plants to little benchtop lathes and aerospace applications. How this person decided that it *had* to be the Iranian nuke plant baffles me.
That's exactly what I first thought, that a country would use its resources (you RTFA'd, right?) to attack benchtop lathes around the world. It must be just a coincidence that the infection started in Iran and that 60% of infected computers are in Iran.
I'm still having a problem with......why ANY nuclear reactor or power plant needs to be directly connected to a computer network. I can see it having say a USB port for upgrades of controller firmware but a network connection? Nope.
So you're saying that you can't see any use for having the two reactors on site both connected to the same control room? I mean, why the hell would people in one central location want to monitor both reactors at once, in real time, right? That's crazy!
What do you think, that when someone needs to shut down or modify the parameters of a reactor or centrifuge that they actually walk up to the component and hit a button on it? What if they need to start 100 centrifuges at the same time, do they have 100 technicians standing there all on a giant conference call waiting for the "go" signal? If they want to check the current core temps or fuel levels, what do they do, call each one and ask them what the gauge says? What the hell do you think all of this equipment is for:
There's one non-secular country in the world that is famous for it's disregard for anyone but itself and its fundamentalist religious belief in their own specialness in the eyes of their own god, which they believe justifies their evil actions.
Fundamentalist Muslims are not limited to one country.
Intolerance isn't exactly limited to borders drawn on a map...
That's a very idealistic view. There are several people who would argue that destroying Iran's nuclear capabilities is actually protecting lives, not destroying them. Of course, that all depends on Iranian government intentions. But considering the many discussions held in Iran about destroying Israel, a world without Israel, etc, it's not exactly a stretch to imagine that Iran would use its nuclear capability to attack Israel. It's also not difficult to imagine that Israel would attack Iran's nuclear program, as they have in the past with Iraq and Syria. Iran's program would be the first operational Arabic nuclear program that hasn't been destroyed by Israel before becoming operational.
Israel does not live in an idealistic world, from their point of view they can't afford to not attack an enemy nuclear installation just because there's a guy there sweeping the floor who may get killed.
Do you realize how many airstrips worldwide are operated by the US? I'm sure they would have no problem launching from Diego Garcia, that was a fine place from where to launch B-52s, KC-135s, and B-2s for their missions to Iraq.
Thanks for the offer, I'll find some time today to post an installation with unminified code and a bunch of test data. I'll email you with the login info.
I would almost need to give you access to one of our client installations, or set up a test installation and just populate it with a lot of data. I can probably find some time to do that if you want to look into it.
Ah, the good old days. Some light warez browsing on the local BBS, followed by a couple games of Legend of the Red Dragon, Usurper, maybe even The Pit.
Zero-day was definitely used to describe several exploits in the early days though, not just warez.
Sadly, it's the only browser out there with Noscript and Adblock.
Yeah, yeah. Firefox is the only browser that supports Firefox extensions. That doesn't mean it's the only browser in which you have mature tools for controlling Javascript execution and ad blocking.
Here you go, here's an ad-blocking proxy that works with all of your browsers, and has been developed for 9 years (that's longer than Firefox has been around, BTW):
I can agree with that, for sure. The main application I work on has a lot of tree and grid controls in it. Out of ~1MB or so of minified interface code, the HTML portion that hosts it is about 2KB, about 98% of the rest is Javascript, and the remainder CSS.
We have some clients who, based on how they use it, end up with some pretty large trees. I have a load mask that appears while the request is going out to the server to get the node structure (also not given as HTML, just plain JSON to be built by the UI library), and the load mask includes a little spinner image.
I can tell when the execution stops and rendering starts because the spinner stops (it's just a regular gif, not controlled programmatically) and Firefox basically freezes. I can hear my CPU fan spin up, and during that time it's trying to render the tree. Rendering takes far and away longer than anything else. And, yeah, IE is surprisingly fast at it.
I would love to see a benchmark that includes things like this, building (and actually rendering) things like trees with many nodes, or grids with many rows, and then doing some drag and drop operations to move entire tree branches or batches of grid rows. I use the ExtJS (Sencha) library to do that, but there are several others. There's a lot of Javascript there, but we aren't just using Javascript for number crunching. The entire point is to display data to the user, let them interact with it intuitively, and send and retrieve data to and from the server.
Blech, there's no worse "statistic" than counting the number of Google results for various terms.
If you compare "bible" with "quran", you can see that there are about 10x the results for "bible". What does that indicate, are there 10x more Christians, or readers of the bible? You can also see that Malawi, Swaziland, Ghana, and Zimbabwe have the highest regional interest for "bible", so what can you conclude about that? Are those the most "Christian" nations? The US isn't even in the top 10, in fact all 10 are African nations. I see that Indonesia is ranked #8 for regional interest in "quran", can we conclude that Indonesia is the 8th most "Islamic" nation?
If you went on only those numbers, you would conclude that followers of the bible greatly outnumber followers of the quran. The actual difference is about 2x, not 10x. You would also conclude that Pakistan, Gambia, and Somalia are the worlds largest Islamic countries, but the largest (by population) is Indonesia.
I know, Dell knowingly sold defective hardware. I'm sure they're the ONLY company in the US that has EVER done that, and I can use my amazing Skills of Induction to reason that ALL their hardware is similarly faulty...
You don't need to be moron about it. All it took was Sony to put rootkits on their audio CDs, or Belkin to randomly redirect their routers to ads. Once you know that a certain company has certain policies, such as a policy to continue selling hardware which they know is bad, I simply lose trust in that company and don't want to do business with them any more. Dell might come out with great-looking products, but that doesn't change the fact that I know that Dell management has a policy of selling crap hardware and denying that it's crap. If I know these people have a policy of trying to sell me crap, then why would I buy from them? I'll give my money to another company that hasn't breached my trust.. yet.
and I know I'm replying to an AC, hehe
Yeah, thanks Slashdot.
if (Math.random() >.5) document.getElementById('post_anon').checked = true;
Oh well though, guess I avoided a troll mod for the crime of pointing out a fact.
I've also noticed that I have some innate ability to make intricate maps of everywhere I go.
You know, I'm sort of the same way. If I spend a couple minutes looking at a map of where I'm going I can generally navigate there without looking at the map again. If I actually drive somewhere, I can typically find my way back to the same place years later without checking directions. I definitely spent a lot of hours when I was younger playing RPGs and other games with maps. Of course, there's no telling how I would be if I hadn't played those games.
So "zero-day" now means "unpatched bug", instead of the original meaning where the vulnerability was being exploited the same day it was discovered? The term "zero-day" now has no temporal meaning, then?
Slashdot Mirror
What I'm saying is that there should be no "write access" from an outside network.
No, that's not what you're saying. This is what you're saying:
I'm still having a problem with......why ANY nuclear reactor or power plant needs to be directly connected to a computer network. I can see it having say a USB port for upgrades of controller firmware but a network connection? Nope.
If you want to amend that to say that the network should provide read-only access, that may be agreeable. Although no doubt controllers will actually want to manage the reactors from the control room instead of only monitor them.
Citation needed.
See above.
AFAIK Iran has never advocated the destruction of Israel with a "kill all jews" kind of vibe.
When your conference is called "A World Without Zionism", the "vibe" is pretty obvious.
What is missing from this seemingly exciting fiction of Iran wanting to nuke Israel is the fact that it would be suicide, and no matter what you may have been told or heard, the Iranian leadership is not stupid.
Apparently someone has told you that Muslims are afraid of death or dying. There's a documentary called My Trip To Al-Qaeda by Lawrence Wright, highly recommended. One of the insights he comes out with is that, through his discussions with jihadi fighters, they tell him that one of the differences between them and us is that we love life, and they love death. All of the rewards they will get, all of the salvation and good times, happen after they die, not before. A suicide mission for a jihadi is the way out, that's the reason they're there, that's the end game for them. It's not something they fear, it's something they look forward to. And their people venerate them for that.
Iran obtaining nuclear bombs is the only thing that will pacify the Middle East.
Right, because if there's one thing we know about fundamentalist Muslims, it's how rational and reasonable they are. How many people were killed in the riots in Afghanistan over the possibility of some douche in Florida maybe burning a Koran at some point in the future? Reason and rational discourse don't exactly play a huge role in these people's lives.
If you're afraid of Iran getting the nuke, are you not worried of some nutjob buying/bribing themselves such a device from Pakistan?
Absolutely, but I don't even think that's the biggest threat. I think the biggest threat is the Soviet nukes that are unaccounted for. When the Soviet Union collapsed, there were a lot of local military commanders that were looking to make some cash selling the hardware they controlled.
Do you have any sources for the "many discussions held in Iran about destroying Israel, a world without Israel"?
http://www.zionism-israel.com/news/world_without_zionism.htm
http://www.zionism-israel.com/ezine/World_Without_Zionism.htm
do you know of any discussions held in Israel about destroying Iran?
No, I don't.
Iran is ruled by Arab Muslims. Those people certainly see themselves as part of the Arab world, even if the Persian population does not.
I'm well aware of the differences between Persians and Arabs, and I'm aware that much of the Iranian population is Persian, though certainly not all of them.
But the government is not Persian, it is Arabic. Throughout their long history, Persians have repeatedly been invaded and conquered. Persia was first conquered by Muslim Arabs in 644. Many Persians refer to the 1979 revolution as the second Arab invasion of Persia.
The deposed Shah of Iran was a Persian. He was replaced with a Muslim Arabic government. This is the current ruling party of Iran, not Persians. The Persians aren't threatening to destroy Israel, Arabs are.
They run everything from nuke plants to little benchtop lathes and aerospace applications. How this person decided that it *had* to be the Iranian nuke plant baffles me.
That's exactly what I first thought, that a country would use its resources (you RTFA'd, right?) to attack benchtop lathes around the world. It must be just a coincidence that the infection started in Iran and that 60% of infected computers are in Iran.
I'm still having a problem with......why ANY nuclear reactor or power plant needs to be directly connected to a computer network. I can see it having say a USB port for upgrades of controller firmware but a network connection? Nope.
So you're saying that you can't see any use for having the two reactors on site both connected to the same control room? I mean, why the hell would people in one central location want to monitor both reactors at once, in real time, right? That's crazy!
What do you think, that when someone needs to shut down or modify the parameters of a reactor or centrifuge that they actually walk up to the component and hit a button on it? What if they need to start 100 centrifuges at the same time, do they have 100 technicians standing there all on a giant conference call waiting for the "go" signal? If they want to check the current core temps or fuel levels, what do they do, call each one and ask them what the gauge says? What the hell do you think all of this equipment is for:
http://www.upi.com/News_Photos/Features/The-Nuclear-Issue-in-Iran/1581/19/
There's one non-secular country in the world that is famous for it's disregard for anyone but itself and its fundamentalist religious belief in their own specialness in the eyes of their own god, which they believe justifies their evil actions.
Fundamentalist Muslims are not limited to one country.
Intolerance isn't exactly limited to borders drawn on a map...
That's a very idealistic view. There are several people who would argue that destroying Iran's nuclear capabilities is actually protecting lives, not destroying them. Of course, that all depends on Iranian government intentions. But considering the many discussions held in Iran about destroying Israel, a world without Israel, etc, it's not exactly a stretch to imagine that Iran would use its nuclear capability to attack Israel. It's also not difficult to imagine that Israel would attack Iran's nuclear program, as they have in the past with Iraq and Syria. Iran's program would be the first operational Arabic nuclear program that hasn't been destroyed by Israel before becoming operational.
Israel does not live in an idealistic world, from their point of view they can't afford to not attack an enemy nuclear installation just because there's a guy there sweeping the floor who may get killed.
Where the hell are you going to launch it from?
Do you realize how many airstrips worldwide are operated by the US? I'm sure they would have no problem launching from Diego Garcia, that was a fine place from where to launch B-52s, KC-135s, and B-2s for their missions to Iraq.
Thanks for the offer, I'll find some time today to post an installation with unminified code and a bunch of test data. I'll email you with the login info.
Interesting results, thanks.
I would almost need to give you access to one of our client installations, or set up a test installation and just populate it with a lot of data. I can probably find some time to do that if you want to look into it.
Ah, the good old days. Some light warez browsing on the local BBS, followed by a couple games of Legend of the Red Dragon, Usurper, maybe even The Pit.
Zero-day was definitely used to describe several exploits in the early days though, not just warez.
It's a DOM structure consisting of divs. Here are some examples of the tree components:
http://dev.sencha.com/deploy/dev/examples/#sample-7
and the grids:
http://dev.sencha.com/deploy/dev/examples/#sample-3
Sadly, it's the only browser out there with Noscript and Adblock.
Yeah, yeah. Firefox is the only browser that supports Firefox extensions. That doesn't mean it's the only browser in which you have mature tools for controlling Javascript execution and ad blocking.
Here you go, here's an ad-blocking proxy that works with all of your browsers, and has been developed for 9 years (that's longer than Firefox has been around, BTW):
http://www.admuncher.com/
That only runs on Windows, but I really doubt you're going to have a hard time finding an open source ad-blocking proxy to run on any OS.
I can agree with that, for sure. The main application I work on has a lot of tree and grid controls in it. Out of ~1MB or so of minified interface code, the HTML portion that hosts it is about 2KB, about 98% of the rest is Javascript, and the remainder CSS.
We have some clients who, based on how they use it, end up with some pretty large trees. I have a load mask that appears while the request is going out to the server to get the node structure (also not given as HTML, just plain JSON to be built by the UI library), and the load mask includes a little spinner image.
I can tell when the execution stops and rendering starts because the spinner stops (it's just a regular gif, not controlled programmatically) and Firefox basically freezes. I can hear my CPU fan spin up, and during that time it's trying to render the tree. Rendering takes far and away longer than anything else. And, yeah, IE is surprisingly fast at it.
I would love to see a benchmark that includes things like this, building (and actually rendering) things like trees with many nodes, or grids with many rows, and then doing some drag and drop operations to move entire tree branches or batches of grid rows. I use the ExtJS (Sencha) library to do that, but there are several others. There's a lot of Javascript there, but we aren't just using Javascript for number crunching. The entire point is to display data to the user, let them interact with it intuitively, and send and retrieve data to and from the server.
What are the chances we could convince you to download IE9 beta and give that a run?
Crome 7.0.517.5 dev - 19849.5ms ...quibbling about a few milliseconds
Firefox 3.6.9 takes 27858.3ms
For extremely large values of "few".
Blech, there's no worse "statistic" than counting the number of Google results for various terms.
If you compare "bible" with "quran", you can see that there are about 10x the results for "bible". What does that indicate, are there 10x more Christians, or readers of the bible? You can also see that Malawi, Swaziland, Ghana, and Zimbabwe have the highest regional interest for "bible", so what can you conclude about that? Are those the most "Christian" nations? The US isn't even in the top 10, in fact all 10 are African nations. I see that Indonesia is ranked #8 for regional interest in "quran", can we conclude that Indonesia is the 8th most "Islamic" nation?
If you went on only those numbers, you would conclude that followers of the bible greatly outnumber followers of the quran. The actual difference is about 2x, not 10x. You would also conclude that Pakistan, Gambia, and Somalia are the worlds largest Islamic countries, but the largest (by population) is Indonesia.
Google "stats" are pretty useless.
You don't need to be moron about it.
Nice. I can see that my proofreading skills are on par with my check-post-anon skills.
I know, Dell knowingly sold defective hardware. I'm sure they're the ONLY company in the US that has EVER done that, and I can use my amazing Skills of Induction to reason that ALL their hardware is similarly faulty ...
You don't need to be moron about it. All it took was Sony to put rootkits on their audio CDs, or Belkin to randomly redirect their routers to ads. Once you know that a certain company has certain policies, such as a policy to continue selling hardware which they know is bad, I simply lose trust in that company and don't want to do business with them any more. Dell might come out with great-looking products, but that doesn't change the fact that I know that Dell management has a policy of selling crap hardware and denying that it's crap. If I know these people have a policy of trying to sell me crap, then why would I buy from them? I'll give my money to another company that hasn't breached my trust.. yet.
and I know I'm replying to an AC, hehe
Yeah, thanks Slashdot.
if (Math.random() > .5) document.getElementById('post_anon').checked = true;
Oh well though, guess I avoided a troll mod for the crime of pointing out a fact.
I've also noticed that I have some innate ability to make intricate maps of everywhere I go.
You know, I'm sort of the same way. If I spend a couple minutes looking at a map of where I'm going I can generally navigate there without looking at the map again. If I actually drive somewhere, I can typically find my way back to the same place years later without checking directions. I definitely spent a lot of hours when I was younger playing RPGs and other games with maps. Of course, there's no telling how I would be if I hadn't played those games.
So "zero-day" now means "unpatched bug", instead of the original meaning where the vulnerability was being exploited the same day it was discovered? The term "zero-day" now has no temporal meaning, then?
The right-wing is more acquainted with logic
You lost me.
"More acquainted" than whom? Everyone else? Does "the right-wing" have some sort of monopoly on rational thought?