It seems like the idea of the 'information
poisoning' article is similar to one that
Plato proposed: that we have philosopher-
kings to censor information.
The fault of that also came from the
ancients: Who watches the watchmen?
I've been donating spare computing time to
distributed.net
for the past two years (though I'm starting
to reclaim those clock cycles for my own
projects again...) However, I would not
donate spare computer power for any other
project unless either the source code is
available, or it is run out of a sandbox
that I trust it cannot get out of. (It
would also have to be for a good cause.)
We already have such a sandbox which is
multi-platform (including Linux.) Although
it's not the fastest possible implementation,
I'd be much more willing to donate my
spare computing cycles if the program were
written as a Java applet.
The same restrictions that make Java applets
safe also, to me, sound like the
restrictions that would make distributed
computation safe. They have no access to
your local disk. They cannot make network
connections, except to the source of the
code.
Aside that people think of applets only for
displaying graphics, and maintaining one
of them up 24/7 would be difficult, are there
any reasons why Java applets shouldn't be
used for distributed computing?
A two-party system rapidly devolves into
what we have now: two branches, with the
minimum amount separating them, of a
single, centrist party. I believe that
the same happens in any multi-party system
where new parties aren't constantly
created.
On the other hand, I do not believe that
it is possible to eliminate parties. If
two candidates have similar views, they
will band together naturally... and they
will form a party. Independent candidates
have fewer chances to compete against a
bloc of similar-thinking candidates.
My solution? Support the formation of new
parties that match what you feel. Though
they may not themselves be elected, they
are an excellent way to change what is
perceived as the center.
Graphics are beautiful but limited.
They may allow you to choose your character's
general body type, hair color, clothing,
and the like, but until computers are fast
enough to render any number cf objects
doing anything in real time, text
will remain superior for some things.
Furrymuck -- like all social MU*s --
requires more creativity from its participants
than any graphical system now existing.
(I challenge those who disagree with me to
show me a graphical system with player
characters as diverse as a fox-centaur
hybrid, a blue monocerous [not a
unicorn], and a completely created race
[Khromat]. Those examples were just
chosen from some other wizards.)
Actions are far more broad in a text-
based Mu* than in a graphical one. Your
character may have twenty pre-programmed
ways to swing his sword in something
graphical, but I've never seen a graphical
MU* where you can laugh while you
tumble down a hill into a bank of flowers,
or gently stir a placid lake while dragonflies
skitter across the surface.
In short, for most graphical MU*s, you
are exploring what others have created.
In a text-based one... you are the creator.
I'm waiting for
Antitrust
to come to the theatres.
From what I can tell, it's a fictionalized
description of the history of
Microsoft... errr... I mean a software
company where they will do anything to get
ahead.
Most interesting for Slashdot readers in
this movie's site is that the extras
page links to interviews with
Jon 'Maddog' Hall
and
Miguel de Icaza
. (Unfortunately, they're in Quicktime
format.
The only addition to security that a
closed-source software model adds is
security through obscurity. In other words,
it is harder to understand because you
have to read the machine language, rather
than the source code.
Time and time again, security through
obscurity has failed. One article which
goes into this in detail is:
on Slashdot
.
(Or use your favorite search engine for
the phrase
"security through obscurity"
)
If someone
were to make an assembly-language hack
against any open-source system, they would
already have all the tools to hack
any system.
No operating system can prevent physical
hacking of the system. If you have enough
access to a system to insert a boot disk,
then you have enough access to the system to
physically remove the hard drives and
examine them elsewhere at your leisure.
Whoooo... you
know
that a lot of nerds have to be into
S&M...
The computer is the ultimate 'bottom'.
It will do whatever you tell it to, but
only if you tell it every single last detail.
And if you tell it the slightest thing
wrong, at best, it will stop and do
nothing. At worst, it will look like
it's doing everything perfect, until it
can cause the most possible damage...
I freely admit that I'm not an unbiased
observer: I run a
massively multiplayer game
that's been around for ten years.
We've been caught in several government
problems, most notably when our
AUP
and our reaction to the CDA was used
in the Supreme Court case about the
CDA. (Unfotunately, that paper is
no longer available at the
ACLU
website.)
I am firmly opposed to the idea of
the a board from the government having
oversight over massive multiplayer
games for two reasons:
Massively multiplayer games are
businesses (although many are not
for profit.) No business can maximize
whatever it's seeking (profit, number of
players, or fun) if another board is
overseeing it. The board will have
wildly different motives than the
people running the game.
Although privacy concerns are real in
any massively multiplayer game, they
are equally real with any business.
Unless you can show that massively
multiplayer games are worse on
privacy issues than the average
business, I see no need to demand that
they be treated any differently than
any oter business.
A lot of people, above and below, have
suggestions of what might retain your
employees. But I haven't seen the
single
thing that will retain employees.
After a lot of thought, I've already decided
exactly how I would protect my children (when
I have them).
Have the Internet computer in a central
location, where everyone can see what
they're doing.
Have my router record each URL that they
visit. [And review the records!]
In my humble opinion, just having the first,
making the screens large enough and prominent
enough that everyone can see what you're
doing, should be enough to stop 95% of
people seeking porn in a library.
In my opinion, this article was a poor
choice to post to Slashdot. Its shelf life
is low: it's already out of date on the evening
that it's posted. This doesn't happen
frequently in 'real-world' news... but this
is one exception where news outside of
cyberspace is faster than the average turn-
around for Slashdot.
Only a dynamic list of the current state of
the electoral college would be news. And
that is already provided by
most
major
news
sites
.
Slashdot is superb in the space that it
has: it's faster than daily newspapers, but
it's more in-depth than TV or radio news.
However, it still doesn't compete with the
immediacy of TV or radio. Immediate news
reporting is still far better served by
TV and radio.
Just as I wouldn't expect Slashdot to give
me traffic information, I feel that this
article was a weak choice for Slashdot.
I believe that all people should have the same
rights. Just like in Texas, people of Wicca,
Santeria, Shinto, et al have the right to
worship the Christian God in any Christian
church that they please.
It's like I don't believe in any special
rights for homosexuals. Heterosexuals have
the right to marry any person of the opposite
gender that they choose. Homosexuals should
have exactly the same right: to marry anyone
of the opposite gender that they choose.
Mergers have been heavily in the news, from AOL and Time-Warner to the near re-establishment of Standard Oil. Further, Microsoft has a monopoly on desktops.
What is your opinion on the growing monopolization of many products? If you were elected President, what would you do about the monopolies?
One of the toughest things to do is to get
encryption done
right
.
You may have two functions, E and D, and some
text T, where D(E(T)) = T. But how secure is
it, really?
If you made a mistake in the implementation
that doesn't affect the ability to encode or
decode, how would you know? How would you
know that mistake didn't ruin your security?
Also, how closely do you keep up with the
crypto- and security-lists? Do you keep up
with them as much or more than the people
who professionally create encrypting software?
(I know that I don't.) If not, how do you
know that a backdoor wasn't discovered?
In my opinion, writing your own encryption
scheme is good... but examining source code
by people who keep up with security, to me,
is a better solution.
Back years ago, the only reliable way to get
things in and out of the former USSR was by
getting a friendly courier to bring it. If
you know anyone who's going to be visiting
your friend, that might be the most secure and
safe way to get it to him.
My parents had to do that, to get a computer
to some family members in the USSR.
Good luck. You'll need it. Russia is still
a kleptocracy. If it goes through the usual
Russian mail, it won't reach your friend.
The most famous case of 'Cyber-Rape' happened
on LambdaMoo in 1993, not a year or two ago.
A good reference to it was published in the
Village Voice
on December 23, 1993. A copy of the article
can be found
here
I tend to collect unusual music, from other
countries. If you want to stay
away from RIAA companies, the easiest way
is to purchase import albums. (Not all of
them qualify, of course. Arista and Virgin
might be from Great Britain, but they're
both members.)
One album company that I want to feature:
Discipline Global Mobile
is the recording company for
King Crimson
. On the back of their album "The Deception
of the Thrush" is the comment:
The phonographic copyright in these
performances is operated by Discipline
Global Mobile on behalf of the artists,
with whom it resides, contrary to common
practice in the record industry. Discipline
accepts no reason for artists to assign
the copyright interests in their work to
either record company or management by
virtue of a "common practice" which
was always questionable, often improper,
and is now indefensible.
Their
business aims
on their website goes into more detail of
how they apply their philosophy.
(Note: I am not affiliated with Discipline
Global Mobile in any way, except that I love
King Crimson's music.)
A long, long time ago, Microsoft shipped MS-DOS. A separate company, Digital Research, created another operating system called 'DR-DOS'.
Now, DR-DOS was completely 100% compatible with MS-DOS, it was faster than MS-DOS, and it was cheaper. Hardware companies were starting to look at DR-DOS as a replacement for MS-DOS.
Microsoft saw a potential loss of revenue, so it posted its latest Beta of Windows 3.1 with special code: if it was running under DR-DOS, rather than MS-DOS, it would start with an error screen.
Reviewers of the time saw the error message, and strongly advised against running Windows 3.1 under DR-DOS. Hardware companies decided not to purchase DR-DOS. And, in the end, DR-DOS became nothing more than a footnote in history.
One part of the court case documentation can be found here , and the parent directory contains links to more documentation.
What does this mean to Open Windows? Simple. If they succeed in creating a system that -is- 100% Microsoft-compatible, so that people can run, say, Microsoft products... Microsoft will change the products on them, so that they are no longer compatible.
Typing is faster than longhand writing, and much faster than writing in print. However, voice recognition could be faster than either typing or writing.
Although voice recognition is still weak (I've used IBM's ViaVoice to write letters), it's getting closer to general usability, for much text-writing.
It will never be popular with programmers, since we need two-dimensional control of our text. But for the average Joe, a way to point where to add text, and voice recognition software, would be an excellent input combination.
IBM has classified the notes containing the selection criteria at the request of the NSA.... `The NSA told us we had inadvertently reinvented some of the deep secrets it uses to make its own algorithms,' explains Tuchman.
Close to the topic... People have already posted how to use Macs as terminals.
Further Confusion is a yearly science fiction-like convention devoted to anthropomorphics. Since most of the members are computer addicts, we wanted to set up a computer room.
One friend of mine, Richard Penner, heard that the local Weird Stuff Warehouse had a special on old Mac IIs. $5 per machine, as is.
My VW Vanagon was pressed into service, and we filled it with ancient Macintoshes. With each old Mac having about 5 Mhz of power, we barely fit about 350 Mhz of computing power into my van.
Of the seventy, Richard put together about forty fully functional terminals. That, a good Linux server, and a hub, made for a good, cheap terminal room.
Slashdot Mirror
The fault of that also came from the ancients: Who watches the watchmen?
We already have such a sandbox which is multi-platform (including Linux.) Although it's not the fastest possible implementation, I'd be much more willing to donate my spare computing cycles if the program were written as a Java applet.
The same restrictions that make Java applets safe also, to me, sound like the restrictions that would make distributed computation safe. They have no access to your local disk. They cannot make network connections, except to the source of the code.
Aside that people think of applets only for displaying graphics, and maintaining one of them up 24/7 would be difficult, are there any reasons why Java applets shouldn't be used for distributed computing?
On the other hand, I do not believe that it is possible to eliminate parties. If two candidates have similar views, they will band together naturally... and they will form a party. Independent candidates have fewer chances to compete against a bloc of similar-thinking candidates.
My solution? Support the formation of new parties that match what you feel. Though they may not themselves be elected, they are an excellent way to change what is perceived as the center.
Are MU*s dead? I don't think so.
Graphics are beautiful but limited. They may allow you to choose your character's general body type, hair color, clothing, and the like, but until computers are fast enough to render any number cf objects doing anything in real time, text will remain superior for some things.
Furrymuck -- like all social MU*s -- requires more creativity from its participants than any graphical system now existing. (I challenge those who disagree with me to show me a graphical system with player characters as diverse as a fox-centaur hybrid, a blue monocerous [not a unicorn], and a completely created race [Khromat]. Those examples were just chosen from some other wizards.)
Actions are far more broad in a text- based Mu* than in a graphical one. Your character may have twenty pre-programmed ways to swing his sword in something graphical, but I've never seen a graphical MU* where you can laugh while you tumble down a hill into a bank of flowers, or gently stir a placid lake while dragonflies skitter across the surface.
In short, for most graphical MU*s, you are exploring what others have created. In a text-based one... you are the creator.
From what I can tell, it's a fictionalized description of the history of Microsoft... errr... I mean a software company where they will do anything to get ahead.
Most interesting for Slashdot readers in this movie's site is that the extras page links to interviews with Jon 'Maddog' Hall and Miguel de Icaza . (Unfortunately, they're in Quicktime format.
Time and time again, security through obscurity has failed. One article which goes into this in detail is: on Slashdot . (Or use your favorite search engine for the phrase "security through obscurity" )
If someone were to make an assembly-language hack against any open-source system, they would already have all the tools to hack any system.
No operating system can prevent physical hacking of the system. If you have enough access to a system to insert a boot disk, then you have enough access to the system to physically remove the hard drives and examine them elsewhere at your leisure.
The computer is the ultimate 'bottom'. It will do whatever you tell it to, but only if you tell it every single last detail. And if you tell it the slightest thing wrong, at best, it will stop and do nothing. At worst, it will look like it's doing everything perfect, until it can cause the most possible damage...
Drop on by. 150 players is about the minimum that we get nowadays...
We've been caught in several government problems, most notably when our AUP and our reaction to the CDA was used in the Supreme Court case about the CDA. (Unfotunately, that paper is no longer available at the ACLU website.)
I am firmly opposed to the idea of the a board from the government having oversight over massive multiplayer games for two reasons:
That one thing?
Ask your employees exactly what they want.
Then give it to them.
In my humble opinion, just having the first, making the screens large enough and prominent enough that everyone can see what you're doing, should be enough to stop 95% of people seeking porn in a library.
Only a dynamic list of the current state of the electoral college would be news. And that is already provided by most major news sites .
Slashdot is superb in the space that it has: it's faster than daily newspapers, but it's more in-depth than TV or radio news. However, it still doesn't compete with the immediacy of TV or radio. Immediate news reporting is still far better served by TV and radio.
Just as I wouldn't expect Slashdot to give me traffic information, I feel that this article was a weak choice for Slashdot.
Bad URL; care to repost?
I believe that all people should have the same rights. Just like in Texas, people of Wicca, Santeria, Shinto, et al have the right to worship the Christian God in any Christian church that they please.
It's like I don't believe in any special rights for homosexuals. Heterosexuals have the right to marry any person of the opposite gender that they choose. Homosexuals should have exactly the same right: to marry anyone of the opposite gender that they choose.
The elections in the U.S. depend on two things:
Let's be blunt. The differences between Gush and Bore are miniscule, and growing smaller. Candidates race to the center as quickly as they can.
If you're sick of the two major party candidates, then check out the candidate list at Vote Smart . If nothing else, writing in the National Barking Spider Resurgence Party , Church of God Party , Lettuce Party , the Anti-Hypocrisy Party, the Hephzibau, the Corrective Actions Party , or Mike's Party.
A large groundswell for sixth-party candidates would be far more effective of a protest than not voting.
Mergers have been heavily in the news, from AOL and Time-Warner to the near re-establishment of Standard Oil. Further, Microsoft has a monopoly on desktops.
What is your opinion on the growing monopolization of many products? If you were elected President, what would you do about the monopolies?
One of the toughest things to do is to get encryption done right .
You may have two functions, E and D, and some text T, where D(E(T)) = T. But how secure is it, really?
If you made a mistake in the implementation that doesn't affect the ability to encode or decode, how would you know? How would you know that mistake didn't ruin your security?
Also, how closely do you keep up with the crypto- and security-lists? Do you keep up with them as much or more than the people who professionally create encrypting software? (I know that I don't.) If not, how do you know that a backdoor wasn't discovered?
In my opinion, writing your own encryption scheme is good... but examining source code by people who keep up with security, to me, is a better solution.
Back years ago, the only reliable way to get things in and out of the former USSR was by getting a friendly courier to bring it. If you know anyone who's going to be visiting your friend, that might be the most secure and safe way to get it to him.
My parents had to do that, to get a computer to some family members in the USSR.
Good luck. You'll need it. Russia is still a kleptocracy. If it goes through the usual Russian mail, it won't reach your friend.
The most famous case of 'Cyber-Rape' happened on LambdaMoo in 1993, not a year or two ago. A good reference to it was published in the Village Voice on December 23, 1993. A copy of the article can be found here
I tend to collect unusual music, from other countries. If you want to stay away from RIAA companies, the easiest way is to purchase import albums. (Not all of them qualify, of course. Arista and Virgin might be from Great Britain, but they're both members.)
One album company that I want to feature: Discipline Global Mobile is the recording company for King Crimson . On the back of their album "The Deception of the Thrush" is the comment:
Their business aims on their website goes into more detail of how they apply their philosophy.
(Note: I am not affiliated with Discipline Global Mobile in any way, except that I love King Crimson's music.)
A long, long time ago, Microsoft shipped MS-DOS. A separate company, Digital Research, created another operating system called 'DR-DOS'.
Now, DR-DOS was completely 100% compatible with MS-DOS, it was faster than MS-DOS, and it was cheaper. Hardware companies were starting to look at DR-DOS as a replacement for MS-DOS.
Microsoft saw a potential loss of revenue, so it posted its latest Beta of Windows 3.1 with special code: if it was running under DR-DOS, rather than MS-DOS, it would start with an error screen.
Reviewers of the time saw the error message, and strongly advised against running Windows 3.1 under DR-DOS. Hardware companies decided not to purchase DR-DOS. And, in the end, DR-DOS became nothing more than a footnote in history.
One part of the court case documentation can be found here , and the parent directory contains links to more documentation.
What does this mean to Open Windows? Simple. If they succeed in creating a system that -is- 100% Microsoft-compatible, so that people can run, say, Microsoft products... Microsoft will change the products on them, so that they are no longer compatible.
Typing is faster than longhand writing, and much faster than writing in print. However, voice recognition could be faster than either typing or writing.
Although voice recognition is still weak (I've used IBM's ViaVoice to write letters), it's getting closer to general usability, for much text-writing.
It will never be popular with programmers, since we need two-dimensional control of our text. But for the average Joe, a way to point where to add text, and voice recognition software, would be an excellent input combination.
According to the Cryptography FAQ , differential cryptanalysis was first discovered by the NSA, then rediscovered by Shamir. Quoting from the FAQ:
Close to the topic... People have already posted how to use Macs as terminals.
Further Confusion is a yearly science fiction-like convention devoted to anthropomorphics. Since most of the members are computer addicts, we wanted to set up a computer room.
One friend of mine, Richard Penner, heard that the local Weird Stuff Warehouse had a special on old Mac IIs. $5 per machine, as is.
My VW Vanagon was pressed into service, and we filled it with ancient Macintoshes. With each old Mac having about 5 Mhz of power, we barely fit about 350 Mhz of computing power into my van.
Of the seventy, Richard put together about forty fully functional terminals. That, a good Linux server, and a hub, made for a good, cheap terminal room.
My god... it really is true...
On the Internet, no one can tell that you're a dog!
(Grin, duck, and run!)