Or maybe it will tell you about the terrible pain in all the diodes down its left side and then request that you not talk to it about Life (even though you didn't even mention it)
*grin*
Seriously though, at this stage of our progress on AI, the best they could do is convincingly simulate a good psychological disorder.
I can see it now... The high-tech cat burglar will carry an Abido virus in a small handheld - when he encounters the guard dog, he'll upload his little present via IRDA and suddenly the dog will have an irresistable desire to lead them directly to the hidden jewelry.
As far as I can tell, they launch an iframe on their homepage to install for you automagically... I set my security to "no JavaScript, No ActiveX, and no cookies and visited their site - the only thing there that could possibly be responsible is
I was not able to capture the source of that one, but the thing that leads me to believe this is the culprit is that the "Make Xupiter My HomePage" is merely a link to their home page - nothing special. That kind of says that the code to install their malware is in their index.html page.
Some excellent points - I wonder what it would do to them if someone registered an obviously fake userID and then gave it out on/. and other public sites so that hundreds or thousands of people would suddenly be user #07593146?
Of course, they would probably realize this was happening when they saw that #07593146 was simultaneously logged in from a boatload of different IP addresses. They'd probably institute some detection for it: (We're sorry, but user #07593146 is already logged in. Please feel free to sign up for your own account)
Then users would have to generate a new, random account each time the logged in... so the site would get a whole bunch of demographic data from "one-shot" accounts. To counter this, they could do one of those "We will email an activation code to the address you provided which you will need to enter before viewing the site"
Now users could use those one-time email addresses that some sites are providing, or maybe the algorithm they use to generate the confirmation numbers would be simplistic enough to crack (just ask some w4r3z d00dz how to do it)
etc.. etc...
It all comes down to how much trouble is it worth to you and how much trouble is it worth to them?
Personally, there's 1 program that I have never been able to replace with a Linux equivelant that I like... and that's UltraEdit. Yes, I know there are a zillion text editors out there, but I've never found one that I like enough to make me abandon Windows.
Professionally, I manage whole bunch of Windows servers and desktops, and I'm one of those people who needs to use the product to feel I know it well enough to support it. If this were not the case then it would just be down to that text editor issue. *grin*
Brute Force is Perfectly Acceptable
on
RC5-64 Success
·
· Score: 1
Crypto experts will call an encryption algorithm sound if knowing the full details of that algorithm, the most effective way of cracking it is to try every key. This is what they STRIVE for.
If the best way to break a cryptosystem is to brute force it, they have a very good idea of the real-world usability of that key length.
If the 64 bit key took 4 years with 312,000 or so users with our current technology, then cryptographers know how many real world CPU cycles it takes (why am I thinking of tootsie pops for some reason?) to break. From there, it is simple enough to compare that number of cycles to the current state of computing to determine future crack times.
Look at the Military... if they have a message about an impending operation that is 1 day to 3 years away, and the best effort anyone can bring to bear on decrypting it will take 4 years, then in a practical sense, that message is unbreakable.
However, a secret one plans to keep for say 20 years better have a key length long enough so that even accounting for Moore's law, the key will take longer than that to break... of course, the real problem is that if there is some new mathematical breakthrough that allows radically faster factoring, (quantum computing anyone?) then all these results are meaningless.
The funny thing is that in years to come, more and more people will have to "have it pointed out to them" before they notice... until those become part of the language.
Remember that what is gramatically correct today is not necessarily what was correct years ago. Laguages evolve over time.
The French are so bothered by this that they actively try to fight it.
...when the French Revolution came a law was passed forcing everyone in France to suffer the language of the Parisians. Ever since then, bodies such as the "Acadamie Francaise" have ensured that French does not get infected by English words (such as television), and to retain the "purity" of the French language.
from http://yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au/~mongoose/french/hist ory.html
People can fight the linguistic change if they wish, but in the end, these changes and mutations are Perfectly Normal
I wonder if in this day and age, the Windex people will just sue them into oblivion or even better, buy it all up and never actually sell any.
Of course if it does become available, I wonder if I can get my house made out of this stuff - I'd never have to clean again. Though I suppose I would still not be able to throw rocks. *grin*
Part of me will miss it, that's the part that gets to watch 1/2 hour Battle Bots show in about 7-10 minutes... That 30 second skip button on the ReplayTV is very handy not just for the commercials, but to skip over all that WWF style announcing. I'm not knocking folks who like wrestling and such, but I don't think I would have the patience to sit through a whole 1/2 hour or 1 hour episode of the thing un-skipped.
The show certainly shouldn't cost that much: from what I gather, they shoot the whole thing over the course of a single weekend and then add all taht announcy/interviewy stuff later. I'd love to see TLC or Discovrey Science pick it up without all the fluff. Show us all the matches farther back in the rankings so we can follow the "career" of the bots better.
Too bad I don't get the original British Robot Wars on my local PBS station anymore...
Actually, I called it that specifically because of this: How many times have you told someone you were a news photog and they assume you meant with still cameras for a newspaper or magazine?? I used to get that
J.Random person: "Oh and what do you do for a living?"
Me: "I'm a News Photog at Channel 22"
same J.Random Person: "Oh, I didn't know they took photographs too"
Me: "No, I use a video camera... a Sony Betacam SP camcorder with a fujinon lens"
other J.Random person who thinks they know about everything: "Oh the Beta format died years ago... too bad it was much better than VHS"
Me:.. unintelligible strangling noises..
THAT is why I said videographer instead of Photog... believe me or not, I don't care past making this reply.
I used to work for a television news department... this kind of thing happens all the time:
Reporter and Vidiographer are assigned some fluff or FUD piece, but come back with a story that lands a little too close for the news director's comfort... the piece gets pulled.
Lamo's lucky... with the way lawsuits and "terrorist hacker" charges are flung about nowadays, he should be thankful he's not roomin with some lifer named Bubba right about now.
I used to work in broadcast as a news vidiographer... I could never get it through to some people that Betacam SP was completely different from Betamax.
I think the trouble lies not just in the similar names, but in the form factor of the tape - the cassettes are identical in appearance except for the little label that says Betacam SP.
With Beta, a single cassette could last 2 hours on high speed play... with Betacam, the same size cassette lasted for 20 minutes. The tape moves MUCH faster to give better signal quality (more tape per second= more recording surface per frame=better picture and sound quality) If anyone ever saw the 1 hour Betacam SP tapes, they would not recognize it - they are about 2.5 times the size of a standard Betamax or Betacam SP tape. The betacam camcorders all use the small sized tapes with that Betamax-like form factor... the edit and play decks have a wider slot and can accept both sizes of tape.
Electronic news gathering and story editing is done on the small tapes. Television stations also often use the small Betacam tapes to store their commercials. (ohh those robotic Betacam commercial servers... mmm) but use the larger 1 hour tapes to archive footage and broadcasts.
My company is kind of small, and being that I am the technical catch-all, I never really sit down and interview anybody in the traditional sense... however nearly every person we've hired has been run through the "geek gauntlet" with me during their interview.
With the programmers, I usually ask them about what kind of stuff they hack together on their own time. I'll ask what games they love to play, what their hobbies are... what I am really looking for is to ilicit some kind of really passionate reaction - I want to see their eyes light up as they delve into a description of whatever it is that they love to do. No passion, no thumbs-up from me. People who are dead inside don't make good co-workers and they sure don't hack code until 4am.
Then I always finish with "Coke or Pepsi?" I don't actually change my opinion of them based on this answer, but I get to give 'em a hard time if they say "Pepsi"
Well, there is a simple solution... if you run a web site and don't want links to yours, use Apache and install mod_rewrite. Then it's a simple matter of defining rewrite rules in your base.htaccess file that check the HTTP_REFERER value - if your own domain (or any authorized domain you wish to define) is not in your list, the user can either be redirected to your home page (stop deep linking only) or to a "don't link to us" page, or direct to a 403:
Hree's my favorite - created for a friend who didn't want folks including her images in their siges by link:
This one should just give the bugger a 403 if they link directly to anything on your site - might have to add exclusionary logic for the home page to avoid locking everyone out.
I first played D&D somewhere in late '79 or early '80. Looking at the Acaeum site and seeing the values placed on some of those modules... I still have quite a lot of them... I don't think I could bring myself to ever part with the stuff. It's been years since I've even looked at it, but somehow, it's a part of my life.
I love computers and computer gaming, but I am really quite glad that I was at just the right age to get involved when D&D was at its peak. (God I feel like an old fart for saying this...) Today's kids will never find the intellectual and creative stimulation from their consoles and gameboys and PCs that many of us did from books and dice and mountains of graph paper. (To this day, I still always keep a pad of the stuff nearby)
I've played through Neverwinter Nights, and enjoyed it thoroughly, but as other posts here have said, much of the joy of roleplaying AD&D is just not possible to emulate in a graphically oriented paradigm. Until someone can develop an AI computer that is 1 part actor, 1 part genius, and 2 parts off its rocker, computer based D&D games will never measure up.
I don't know about anyone else, but if you don't capture the EULA text when it shows up on install, I wonder if you can get to them. Do very many products even have a way to view them after the fact?
I just checked my copy of MS Outlook XP and it's actually not to bad (go to Help, then in the contents tab, look for EULA) Yet, when I looked for one on Internet Explorer 5.5, I can't find any mention of the EULA or a license in the help system.
Seems to me the software companies don't go out of their way to call your attention to it once you hurry up and click "ACCEPT" just to get the darn thing installed.
Just like Jack Valente (sp?) claiming that if VCRs were allowed to be sold that the movie industry would go out of business... Microsoft has always had a top-notch FUD machine.
Yeah, I was going to post that one myself, but you beat me to it.
In the movie, the lead character downloads a large (for the time William Gibson wrote the original story anyway) amount of data into a chip implanted in his brain. As the process of downloading nears completion, someone in the room is supposed to press a button that does a screen-grab of the current frame on the TV - this is apparently used to encrypt the data, and only those three images can decrypt the data and get it out of his head.
On the surface, this seems like a good idea, but think about this... Every frame of television programming is recorded - even live shows are taped for rebroadcast and other archival purposes. Therefore, if given the date, time, location, and cable system of the download, one could rule out the vast majority of possible images. Given that the technology represented in the short story and movie are supposedly a bit beyond what we currently have today (Where is my AI personal assistant? Where are my eye implants like Molly Millions?) it seems that knowing the above information would be enough for just about anyone to crack.
I was going to post something to this tune, but you saved me the trouble. I have an acquaintence who is one of those tax protester guys, and I have to say that the truly sad thing is that these people REALLY DO BELIEVE in this stuff.
Even worse, when you take the time and trouble to research their claims and find all the web sites debunking the tax protestor stuff and the conspiracy stuff and show them case after case of decisions smacking these people down for frivolous lawsuits and willful failure etc.. they cover their ears and eyes and say "la la la, I'm not listening"
*sigh*
Ginger Device
on
This is IT?
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
Slashdot Mirror
Or maybe it will tell you about the terrible pain in all the diodes down its left side and then request that you not talk to it about Life (even though you didn't even mention it)
*grin*
Seriously though, at this stage of our progress on AI, the best they could do is convincingly simulate a good psychological disorder.
I can see it now... The high-tech cat burglar will carry an Abido virus in a small handheld - when he encounters the guard dog, he'll upload his little present via IRDA and suddenly the dog will have an irresistable desire to lead them directly to the hidden jewelry.
As far as I can tell, they launch an iframe on their homepage to install for you automagically... I set my security to "no JavaScript, No ActiveX, and no cookies and visited their site - the only thing there that could possibly be responsible is
c om/creative/2|2127102-2 ;iframe?">
<script language="JavaScript"
src="http://ads.addynamix.
I was not able to capture the source of that one, but the thing that leads me to believe this is the culprit is that the "Make Xupiter My HomePage" is merely a link to their home page - nothing special. That kind of says that the code to install their malware is in their index.html page.
Some excellent points - I wonder what it would do to them if someone registered an obviously fake userID and then gave it out on /. and other public sites so that hundreds or thousands of people would suddenly be user #07593146?
Of course, they would probably realize this was happening when they saw that #07593146 was simultaneously logged in from a boatload of different IP addresses. They'd probably institute some detection for it: (We're sorry, but user #07593146 is already logged in. Please feel free to sign up for your own account)
Then users would have to generate a new, random account each time the logged in... so the site would get a whole bunch of demographic data from "one-shot" accounts. To counter this, they could do one of those "We will email an activation code to the address you provided which you will need to enter before viewing the site"
Now users could use those one-time email addresses that some sites are providing, or maybe the algorithm they use to generate the confirmation numbers would be simplistic enough to crack (just ask some w4r3z d00dz how to do it)
etc.. etc...
It all comes down to how much trouble is it worth to you and how much trouble is it worth to them?
Personally, there's 1 program that I have never been able to replace with a Linux equivelant that I like... and that's UltraEdit. Yes, I know there are a zillion text editors out there, but I've never found one that I like enough to make me abandon Windows.
Professionally, I manage whole bunch of Windows servers and desktops, and I'm one of those people who needs to use the product to feel I know it well enough to support it. If this were not the case then it would just be down to that text editor issue. *grin*
Crypto experts will call an encryption algorithm sound if knowing the full details of that algorithm, the most effective way of cracking it is to try every key. This is what they STRIVE for.
If the best way to break a cryptosystem is to brute force it, they have a very good idea of the real-world usability of that key length.
If the 64 bit key took 4 years with 312,000 or so users with our current technology, then cryptographers know how many real world CPU cycles it takes (why am I thinking of tootsie pops for some reason?) to break. From there, it is simple enough to compare that number of cycles to the current state of computing to determine future crack times.
Look at the Military... if they have a message about an impending operation that is 1 day to 3 years away, and the best effort anyone can bring to bear on decrypting it will take 4 years, then in a practical sense, that message is unbreakable.
However, a secret one plans to keep for say 20 years better have a key length long enough so that even accounting for Moore's law, the key will take longer than that to break... of course, the real problem is that if there is some new mathematical breakthrough that allows radically faster factoring, (quantum computing anyone?) then all these results are meaningless.
The funny thing is that in years to come, more and more people will have to "have it pointed out to them" before they notice ... until those become part of the language.
Remember that what is gramatically correct today is not necessarily what was correct years ago. Laguages evolve over time.
The French are so bothered by this that they actively try to fight it.
People can fight the linguistic change if they wish, but in the end, these changes and mutations are Perfectly Normal
I wonder if in this day and age, the Windex people will just sue them into oblivion or even better, buy it all up and never actually sell any.
Of course if it does become available, I wonder if I can get my house made out of this stuff - I'd never have to clean again. Though I suppose I would still not be able to throw rocks. *grin*
Part of me will miss it, that's the part that gets to watch 1/2 hour Battle Bots show in about 7-10 minutes... That 30 second skip button on the ReplayTV is very handy not just for the commercials, but to skip over all that WWF style announcing. I'm not knocking folks who like wrestling and such, but I don't think I would have the patience to sit through a whole 1/2 hour or 1 hour episode of the thing un-skipped.
The show certainly shouldn't cost that much: from what I gather, they shoot the whole thing over the course of a single weekend and then add all taht announcy/interviewy stuff later. I'd love to see TLC or Discovrey Science pick it up without all the fluff. Show us all the matches farther back in the rankings so we can follow the "career" of the bots better.
Too bad I don't get the original British Robot Wars on my local PBS station anymore...
Hey! let's send a manned mission to it so that the conspiracy nuts can have yet another moon mission they can claim was hoaxed.
*grin*
Actually, I called it that specifically because of this: How many times have you told someone you were a news photog and they assume you meant with still cameras for a newspaper or magazine?? I used to get that
.. unintelligible strangling noises..
J.Random person: "Oh and what do you do for a living?"
Me: "I'm a News Photog at Channel 22"
same J.Random Person: "Oh, I didn't know they took photographs too"
Me: "No, I use a video camera... a Sony Betacam SP camcorder with a fujinon lens"
other J.Random person who thinks they know about everything: "Oh the Beta format died years ago... too bad it was much better than VHS"
Me:
THAT is why I said videographer instead of Photog... believe me or not, I don't care past making this reply.
I used to work for a television news department... this kind of thing happens all the time:
Reporter and Vidiographer are assigned some fluff or FUD piece, but come back with a story that lands a little too close for the news director's comfort... the piece gets pulled.
Lamo's lucky... with the way lawsuits and "terrorist hacker" charges are flung about nowadays, he should be thankful he's not roomin with some lifer named Bubba right about now.
Here Here!
I used to work in broadcast as a news vidiographer... I could never get it through to some people that Betacam SP was completely different from Betamax.
I think the trouble lies not just in the similar names, but in the form factor of the tape - the cassettes are identical in appearance except for the little label that says Betacam SP.
With Beta, a single cassette could last 2 hours on high speed play... with Betacam, the same size cassette lasted for 20 minutes. The tape moves MUCH faster to give better signal quality (more tape per second= more recording surface per frame=better picture and sound quality) If anyone ever saw the 1 hour Betacam SP tapes, they would not recognize it - they are about 2.5 times the size of a standard Betamax or Betacam SP tape. The betacam camcorders all use the small sized tapes with that Betamax-like form factor... the edit and play decks have a wider slot and can accept both sizes of tape.
Electronic news gathering and story editing is done on the small tapes. Television stations also often use the small Betacam tapes to store their commercials. (ohh those robotic Betacam commercial servers... mmm) but use the larger 1 hour tapes to archive footage and broadcasts.
My company is kind of small, and being that I am the technical catch-all, I never really sit down and interview anybody in the traditional sense... however nearly every person we've hired has been run through the "geek gauntlet" with me during their interview.
With the programmers, I usually ask them about what kind of stuff they hack together on their own time. I'll ask what games they love to play, what their hobbies are... what I am really looking for is to ilicit some kind of really passionate reaction - I want to see their eyes light up as they delve into a description of whatever it is that they love to do. No passion, no thumbs-up from me. People who are dead inside don't make good co-workers and they sure don't hack code until 4am.
Then I always finish with "Coke or Pepsi?" I don't actually change my opinion of them based on this answer, but I get to give 'em a hard time if they say "Pepsi"
*grin*
Wow, Flaimbait!!?? I post a mostly harmless, somewhat funny comment as a registered user and get Flaimbait? Ouch. Way to go moderators...
Someone PLEASE steal my domain so I can sue for millions (deep pockets only)
www.spleemco.com
(Spleemco... It Doesn't Suck!)
Well, there is a simple solution... if you run a web site and don't want links to yours, use Apache and install mod_rewrite. Then it's a simple matter of defining rewrite rules in your base .htaccess file that check the HTTP_REFERER value - if your own domain (or any authorized domain you wish to define) is not in your list, the user can either be redirected to your home page (stop deep linking only) or to a "don't link to us" page, or direct to a 403:
/image_directory.* [NC] .*\.jpg /graphics/linked.gif
Hree's my favorite - created for a friend who didn't want folks including her images in their siges by link:
RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://foo\.com/.*$ [NC]
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI}
RewriteRule
This one should just give the bugger a 403 if they link directly to anything on your site - might have to add exclusionary logic for the home page to avoid locking everyone out.
RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://foo\.com/.*$ [NC]
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ - [F]
Sounds like a case of the telnet song (control up-arrow q) to me:
http://www.poppyfields.net/filks/00222.html
I first played D&D somewhere in late '79 or early '80. Looking at the Acaeum site and seeing the values placed on some of those modules... I still have quite a lot of them... I don't think I could bring myself to ever part with the stuff. It's been years since I've even looked at it, but somehow, it's a part of my life.
I love computers and computer gaming, but I am really quite glad that I was at just the right age to get involved when D&D was at its peak. (God I feel like an old fart for saying this...) Today's kids will never find the intellectual and creative stimulation from their consoles and gameboys and PCs that many of us did from books and dice and mountains of graph paper. (To this day, I still always keep a pad of the stuff nearby)
I've played through Neverwinter Nights, and enjoyed it thoroughly, but as other posts here have said, much of the joy of roleplaying AD&D is just not possible to emulate in a graphically oriented paradigm. Until someone can develop an AI computer that is 1 part actor, 1 part genius, and 2 parts off its rocker, computer based D&D games will never measure up.
I don't know about anyone else, but if you don't capture the EULA text when it shows up on install, I wonder if you can get to them. Do very many products even have a way to view them after the fact?
I just checked my copy of MS Outlook XP and it's actually not to bad (go to Help, then in the contents tab, look for EULA) Yet, when I looked for one on Internet Explorer 5.5, I can't find any mention of the EULA or a license in the help system.
Seems to me the software companies don't go out of their way to call your attention to it once you hurry up and click "ACCEPT" just to get the darn thing installed.
Site slashdotted... yada yada... Couldn't get all the images before it timed out, but I put a semi decent mirror of the page here
Just like Jack Valente (sp?) claiming that if VCRs were allowed to be sold that the movie industry would go out of business... Microsoft has always had a top-notch FUD machine.
Is it surprising that a company that is pulling stuff like trying to break GPLed software on their OS would go in with guns blazing against Mod chips and Xbox Hacking?
*sigh*
Predictable as it is, it's still kinda sad.
You just don't get it... Time is an illusion: Towel Day doubly so.
*grin*
Yeah, I was going to post that one myself, but you beat me to it.
In the movie, the lead character downloads a large (for the time William Gibson wrote the original story anyway) amount of data into a chip implanted in his brain. As the process of downloading nears completion, someone in the room is supposed to press a button that does a screen-grab of the current frame on the TV - this is apparently used to encrypt the data, and only those three images can decrypt the data and get it out of his head.
On the surface, this seems like a good idea, but think about this... Every frame of television programming is recorded - even live shows are taped for rebroadcast and other archival purposes. Therefore, if given the date, time, location, and cable system of the download, one could rule out the vast majority of possible images. Given that the technology represented in the short story and movie are supposedly a bit beyond what we currently have today (Where is my AI personal assistant? Where are my eye implants like Molly Millions?) it seems that knowing the above information would be enough for just about anyone to crack.
- Just Musing -
I was going to post something to this tune, but you saved me the trouble. I have an acquaintence who is one of those tax protester guys, and I have to say that the truly sad thing is that these people REALLY DO BELIEVE in this stuff.
Even worse, when you take the time and trouble to research their claims and find all the web sites debunking the tax protestor stuff and the conspiracy stuff and show them case after case of decisions smacking these people down for frivolous lawsuits and willful failure etc.. they cover their ears and eyes and say "la la la, I'm not listening"
*sigh*
Somehow, I like Mr. Garison's better