I am a student at the University of Pittsburgh, and all traffic from residence halls, no matter what it is, is automatically routed over the Internet2 when it is to another university. We do not have an upload cap for this traffic. For all traffic to the "regular Internet", if a connection is made to us, our upload and download speed over that connection is limited to 500 bytes/second or slower. This makes tasks such as AIM Direct Connect useless, and even useful features such as SSH are almost too slow for use. However, any Internet2 traffic, even as an incoming connection to me, runs at several MB/sec upload and download (essentially the full 100mbps connection).
I2hub is used extensively here, and there has been no issues with bandwidth that I am aware of. If it was an issue, the university has shown they have the capabilities to put restrictions in place. Personally, I use i2hub to get legal files (such as Linux ISO images or the TV show that aired last night that I missed, though this is controversial) because the download speed is so fast.
This is not abusing the research network; rather, it is using a network with extreme amounts of bandwidth that would otherwise go unused.
Birds too, I believe, cannot see things that do not move, and birds are believed to be whats left of dinosours as they evolved to today.
I've read that if it were possible for a human to control the natural eye jitteriness and just focus absolutely still, the image you see would fade away to nothing. The eye needs constant movement to be able to keep updating what you are seeing.
This is true in humans, but I do not believe the reason for this limitation in humans is the same as for birds or dinosaurs. The only reason objects would fade is because the pigments in the human eye deteriorate. It is these constant slight movements that give the pigments time to regenerate. Without that movement, everything turns dark.
This is also why when you first go into a dark room, you cannot see anything. Different pigments are used in dark conditions than light conditions (hence why you cannot see color in low-light situations). These pigments are bleached out in normal lighting conditions in the exact same way the other pigments are bleached if there is no eye movement. Once regeneration is complete (usually 30-40 minutes for full regeneration), you can see fine again at night or in the dark.
Back to the topic at hand though, I believe that the idea of dinoraurs being unable to see objects that aren't moving is simply that their visual systems are not as complex as our system or the systems of other animals.
Actually, the default account created by system setup (at least on my Mac running 10.3.5) is a regular user account for the most part. I can access admin sections of the system, but I am prompted for my password first to confirm that I want to do this. This is really no different than having a seperate user for admin rights, and I feel it's a very good solution.
I personally received a GMail invite. However, on my yahoo account I never received the invite. It was sent twice even! It didn't appear in my inbox OR bulk mail folder (I checked, double checked, and triple checked!). The only way I was able to receive it was the sender forwarded me a copy of the invite. Shame on Yahoo for this. I was going to just use the GMail account for novelty, but after a stunt like this I no longer trust Yahoo to be reliable and plan to switch 100% to my GMail address.
Wouldn't it be ironic...
on
More MyDoom Gloom
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
You know, with all the stunts SCO has pulled lately, wouldn't it be ironic if they created this worm themselves or were somehow responsible? According to the article it doesn't DDoS SCO, but even if it did, isn't this in a way what they want? They can now point the finger at the Open Source Movement. They can draw negative media attention toward Linux which may, in their minds, help their court case. If people become under the impression that Linux and Linux users are "bad" than they will be more likely to sympathize with SCO.
This is of course an unlikely situation since if it was discovered SCO was behind the worm then it would all be over for the company. However, it is an interesting thought...
Well, I have a good friend w/ a TDMA Cingular phone. Yesterday the service was flaky. I called him from my Sprint phone and I got a "unreachable" message from Cingular, not his voicemail. I tried a few more times and it went to his voicemail finally, but never actually to his phone. Today it was down all day. He couldn't make or receive calls. Another friend of mine has a GSM Cingular phone and she couldn't receive calls either. I'd get the same message. When I tried calling from a Verizon phone to both phones I got a fast busy signal instead. My friend said he could still receive the text messages I sent him though. At 11:30pm EDT he texted me saying his phone was working again, but I didn't receive the message on my sprint phone until midnight when he sent me another. I called him on his phone and it worked fine at midnight. So I guess whatever the problem was is resolved now.
Actually, I have Sprint Vision and it includes free SMS sending and receiving. Unfortunately I can't say the same for my friends on Cingular who are charged 10c for every message they send and receive.
I'm currently a Junior in high school and a nerd. Despite being top of my class as well as being known throughout the school as the person to come to for computer help (gets me out of class all the time), I do not experience this negative treatment, such as "being shoved into lockers by the football team". Quite the contrary actually. I have become quite popular and my previous boyfriend is our quarterback (neither of us have come out yet. Shhh!). When I go to the basketball games, the cheerleaders all run up to me and give me hugs. Granted, I do run cross country and track, but trust me, we are terrible and cross country especially is laughed at. I am still my geeky self, but people don't seem to notice or care. Although my school is very geared toward athletics, you are looked upon favorably in some cases if you are smart as well. There is a group of "nerds" at my school who fit the stereotype, and I hang out with them on occasion, but no one cares or says anything. Contrary to the article, I don't work to be popular. The key I found out is to simply refrain from talking about something that is over everyone's heads. If you do this, even unintentionally, they think you are trying to show off which leads to the problems many nerds seem to face. People just respect me for who I am, and maybe by some fluke of nature, the Universe has forgotten me and let me become popular, but somehow I don't think that's the case.
While reading this article, I continually asked myself the question: if we eventually use these genetic algorithms to create software and possibly an AI, could this AI be the best at doing its job if it simply appears to do exactly as we want it to do, but then turn on us because it simply hides its true intellence? Think about the Matrix. If we have computers evolve themselves, what better way to be the "fittest" than to appear to do as the humans wanted you to do until you became smart enough by running an internal genetic algorithm to take over and become the dominate species? When creating these genetic algorithms, we must be very careful to be sure that there is not a background task running, for it is quite possible that one exists in a more complex genetic-algorithm-created program than those created thus far, and having no clue how the program works is not a step in the right direction.
I went outside at 9:33, and already is was almost directly overhead. It was a blinking red light, moving quite quickly in a northward direction. I assume it was blinking because the satellite was spinning. Airplanes fly over my house on a daily basis, so I could easily tell that it was not an airplane (plus it was not on the same flight path the airplanes take). Within 2-3 minutes, it was out of sight. Pretty cool stuff.
I must say, I believe that you misunderstand what is meant in this case by self-replicating nanobots. First of all, they wouldn't be machines as you and I know them; no, they will function much in the same way living cells do. Cells are actually nanobots. They are composed of molecules, and move, replicate, accoumulate energy, etc by changing the shapes of, constructing, and taking apart molecules. The first nanobots will most likely resemble something very similar to that of a molecular protein. As nanotechnology advances, we will be able to create nanobots that closer resenbly a cell in its entirity, and hence, be able to reproduce.
Basically, if this were to be passed, it would tell the public that cracking/hacking is considered to be worse than murder. They even go so far as to say that giving advice to a cracker/hacker can yield life in prison! Is it just me, or is something seriously wrong here? I could go off and murder somone and receive less of a punishment than someone who defaced a website, resulting in a few hours of repairs by the administrator and the fixing of a securty hole. I'm sorry, but that's just not right.
(updated from origional post) As I just discovered on the news, the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania possibly flew right over my school. My Morality teacher said she saw a plane flying very low over the school when she went to her car to call her family, but thought it was just a plane making an emergency landing. However, it was confirmed that the plane flew over Youngstown, OH (where my school is) before turning around and crashing in Pennsylvania. That makes me realize that my friends and I easily could have lost our lives today as well.
As I walked into my third period geometry class today, I noticed everyone standing up and staring at the TV. "Humm, a little unusual" I thought, as I turned to my one friend to begin carrying on a conversation, and noticed a look of pure shock on his face. I looked upward toward the TV and saw a split screen image of the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon billowing out clouds of smoke. My first thought was "This can't be real", followed by "My God..." as people around me began crying. I soon learned from the news reporters as well as my fellow classmates that the building had been hit by civilian airplanes. Within 5 minutes, the priest at our school (I attend a Catholic High School) came on the PA and lead an all school prayer. Not long after, we watched in horror as the buildings collapsed, and the thought went through my mind, "Right now, many people are dying. Why was it them and not, say, me?". Many people were laughing, out of sheer shock. Needless to say, in the rest of my classes, no work was done. Several Alumni of my school were in the WTC as it was hit by the planes, so the teachers were even more concerned than most people (thankfully they all made it out before it collapsed). Throughout the day and during lunch, we continued to watch the TVs throughout the school, wondering "Who next? Why did this happen? What can we do?". As I sit here now and attempt to study for my tests tomarrow with no avail, I can't help almost crying when I think about all the people who lost their lives, and all the children returning from school to discover that their parents will never come home from work; never kiss them goodnight; never tell them they love them. As I realize now, the future for America's youth may be very grim indeed, growing up in a world where unmoral and unnecessary terrorism is a daily fear.
This analogy is moot. For one thing, China is not a democracy, therefore, they can do that. The United States, however, is a democracy. The whole point behind a democracy is: A: The people elect leaders to represent them in the government B: The people are free to say whatever they please, without fear of persecution.
I know I am singing to the choir here, but the DMCA violates the First Amendment and the definition of a democracy (at least MY definition as a US citizen). So please, use a proper analogy the next time you state your opinion.
I'm sure they realize that "diablo" means "devil" in Spanish. What if I "trademarked" and sued over someone making a movie called "Sandwich", because my company makes a product called a sandwich? Amazon sued over "one click" (I know "one click" was a patent, but the point is the same). Other companies are doing the same. As more and more companies get away with this, more and more are going to sue over stupid things like this. If no one stops this, one day, we will be sued for talking, because we are speaking words that are trademarks on products. Just my 2 cents...
Since M$ is preoccupied right now with the government trying to split them up and their.NET strategy, they might not attack Linux with their usual force. And even if they do, will it seriously effect Linux's growth? I personally don't think so. From my experience, the main reason why people switch to Linux is because they don't like Microsoft and/or they are tired of Microsoft products crashing on them all the time (ie Windows). M$ attacking Linux won't make their software any better or more stable.
Well, I'm glad somebody is finally doing this. Now if anyone ever needs to prove that something happened or exists during a certain time, it could definately be proved (there must certainly be web sites about everything that is happening). In a court case about something such as Kerberos (sp?), they could get an origional, unchanged version of the document that existed before the case was brought to trial. This was changes the company imposed during or right before the trial will have no effect.
I feel that with all the lawsuits going on and all the laws being passed that are limiting the free information on the internet, we may be in for some major problems. People have already started tracking everything that others do on the internet, from capturing the URL of the site they went to, to getting exact copies of their e-mail. These recent lawsuits are punishing people for exercising their freedem of information on the internet, and hence hurting the internet itself (Slashdot vs. Microsoft is a good example). If these lawsuits and regulations are continued at an uncontrolled rate, then soon they will virtually destroy the internet. Because some countries do not allow free speech, after a few lawsuits and new regulations, there may not even be free speech on the internet. At this point, where everything is controlled and no one can do anything without being constantly servayed, who would actually want to go on the internet? If everything remains at it's constant rate of increase (lawsuits, new regulations, etc), then we have about 10-15 years before this becomes a reality if something isn't done about it. Just compare the internet of 3 years ago to the internet of today and look at the changes (or limitations).
If you seem to think Slashdot sucks so much, then why do you continue visiting it? I personally think Slashdot is one of (if not the best) site on the web.
Slashdot Mirror
It is legal if it if unmodified and not available on DVD yet. Once it becomes available on DVD then it becomes illegal.
I am a student at the University of Pittsburgh, and all traffic from residence halls, no matter what it is, is automatically routed over the Internet2 when it is to another university. We do not have an upload cap for this traffic. For all traffic to the "regular Internet", if a connection is made to us, our upload and download speed over that connection is limited to 500 bytes/second or slower. This makes tasks such as AIM Direct Connect useless, and even useful features such as SSH are almost too slow for use. However, any Internet2 traffic, even as an incoming connection to me, runs at several MB/sec upload and download (essentially the full 100mbps connection).
I2hub is used extensively here, and there has been no issues with bandwidth that I am aware of. If it was an issue, the university has shown they have the capabilities to put restrictions in place. Personally, I use i2hub to get legal files (such as Linux ISO images or the TV show that aired last night that I missed, though this is controversial) because the download speed is so fast.
This is not abusing the research network; rather, it is using a network with extreme amounts of bandwidth that would otherwise go unused.
This is true in humans, but I do not believe the reason for this limitation in humans is the same as for birds or dinosaurs. The only reason objects would fade is because the pigments in the human eye deteriorate. It is these constant slight movements that give the pigments time to regenerate. Without that movement, everything turns dark.
This is also why when you first go into a dark room, you cannot see anything. Different pigments are used in dark conditions than light conditions (hence why you cannot see color in low-light situations). These pigments are bleached out in normal lighting conditions in the exact same way the other pigments are bleached if there is no eye movement. Once regeneration is complete (usually 30-40 minutes for full regeneration), you can see fine again at night or in the dark.
Back to the topic at hand though, I believe that the idea of dinoraurs being unable to see objects that aren't moving is simply that their visual systems are not as complex as our system or the systems of other animals.
Actually, the default account created by system setup (at least on my Mac running 10.3.5) is a regular user account for the most part. I can access admin sections of the system, but I am prompted for my password first to confirm that I want to do this. This is really no different than having a seperate user for admin rights, and I feel it's a very good solution.
I personally received a GMail invite. However, on my yahoo account I never received the invite. It was sent twice even! It didn't appear in my inbox OR bulk mail folder (I checked, double checked, and triple checked!). The only way I was able to receive it was the sender forwarded me a copy of the invite. Shame on Yahoo for this. I was going to just use the GMail account for novelty, but after a stunt like this I no longer trust Yahoo to be reliable and plan to switch 100% to my GMail address.
You know, with all the stunts SCO has pulled lately, wouldn't it be ironic if they created this worm themselves or were somehow responsible? According to the article it doesn't DDoS SCO, but even if it did, isn't this in a way what they want? They can now point the finger at the Open Source Movement. They can draw negative media attention toward Linux which may, in their minds, help their court case. If people become under the impression that Linux and Linux users are "bad" than they will be more likely to sympathize with SCO.
This is of course an unlikely situation since if it was discovered SCO was behind the worm then it would all be over for the company. However, it is an interesting thought...
Well, I have a good friend w/ a TDMA Cingular phone. Yesterday the service was flaky. I called him from my Sprint phone and I got a "unreachable" message from Cingular, not his voicemail. I tried a few more times and it went to his voicemail finally, but never actually to his phone. Today it was down all day. He couldn't make or receive calls. Another friend of mine has a GSM Cingular phone and she couldn't receive calls either. I'd get the same message. When I tried calling from a Verizon phone to both phones I got a fast busy signal instead. My friend said he could still receive the text messages I sent him though. At 11:30pm EDT he texted me saying his phone was working again, but I didn't receive the message on my sprint phone until midnight when he sent me another. I called him on his phone and it worked fine at midnight. So I guess whatever the problem was is resolved now.
Actually, I have Sprint Vision and it includes free SMS sending and receiving. Unfortunately I can't say the same for my friends on Cingular who are charged 10c for every message they send and receive.
I'm currently a Junior in high school and a nerd. Despite being top of my class as well as being known throughout the school as the person to come to for computer help (gets me out of class all the time), I do not experience this negative treatment, such as "being shoved into lockers by the football team". Quite the contrary actually. I have become quite popular and my previous boyfriend is our quarterback (neither of us have come out yet. Shhh!). When I go to the basketball games, the cheerleaders all run up to me and give me hugs. Granted, I do run cross country and track, but trust me, we are terrible and cross country especially is laughed at. I am still my geeky self, but people don't seem to notice or care. Although my school is very geared toward athletics, you are looked upon favorably in some cases if you are smart as well. There is a group of "nerds" at my school who fit the stereotype, and I hang out with them on occasion, but no one cares or says anything. Contrary to the article, I don't work to be popular. The key I found out is to simply refrain from talking about something that is over everyone's heads. If you do this, even unintentionally, they think you are trying to show off which leads to the problems many nerds seem to face. People just respect me for who I am, and maybe by some fluke of nature, the Universe has forgotten me and let me become popular, but somehow I don't think that's the case.
While reading this article, I continually asked myself the question: if we eventually use these genetic algorithms to create software and possibly an AI, could this AI be the best at doing its job if it simply appears to do exactly as we want it to do, but then turn on us because it simply hides its true intellence? Think about the Matrix. If we have computers evolve themselves, what better way to be the "fittest" than to appear to do as the humans wanted you to do until you became smart enough by running an internal genetic algorithm to take over and become the dominate species? When creating these genetic algorithms, we must be very careful to be sure that there is not a background task running, for it is quite possible that one exists in a more complex genetic-algorithm-created program than those created thus far, and having no clue how the program works is not a step in the right direction.
I went outside at 9:33, and already is was almost directly overhead. It was a blinking red light, moving quite quickly in a northward direction. I assume it was blinking because the satellite was spinning. Airplanes fly over my house on a daily basis, so I could easily tell that it was not an airplane (plus it was not on the same flight path the airplanes take). Within 2-3 minutes, it was out of sight. Pretty cool stuff.
I must say, I believe that you misunderstand what is meant in this case by self-replicating nanobots. First of all, they wouldn't be machines as you and I know them; no, they will function much in the same way living cells do. Cells are actually nanobots. They are composed of molecules, and move, replicate, accoumulate energy, etc by changing the shapes of, constructing, and taking apart molecules. The first nanobots will most likely resemble something very similar to that of a molecular protein. As nanotechnology advances, we will be able to create nanobots that closer resenbly a cell in its entirity, and hence, be able to reproduce.
Basically, if this were to be passed, it would tell the public that cracking/hacking is considered to be worse than murder. They even go so far as to say that giving advice to a cracker/hacker can yield life in prison! Is it just me, or is something seriously wrong here? I could go off and murder somone and receive less of a punishment than someone who defaced a website, resulting in a few hours of repairs by the administrator and the fixing of a securty hole. I'm sorry, but that's just not right.
(updated from origional post) As I just discovered on the news, the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania possibly flew right over my school. My Morality teacher said she saw a plane flying very low over the school when she went to her car to call her family, but thought it was just a plane making an emergency landing. However, it was confirmed that the plane flew over Youngstown, OH (where my school is) before turning around and crashing in Pennsylvania. That makes me realize that my friends and I easily could have lost our lives today as well.
As I walked into my third period geometry class today, I noticed everyone standing up and staring at the TV. "Humm, a little unusual" I thought, as I turned to my one friend to begin carrying on a conversation, and noticed a look of pure shock on his face. I looked upward toward the TV and saw a split screen image of the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon billowing out clouds of smoke. My first thought was "This can't be real", followed by "My God..." as people around me began crying. I soon learned from the news reporters as well as my fellow classmates that the building had been hit by civilian airplanes. Within 5 minutes, the priest at our school (I attend a Catholic High School) came on the PA and lead an all school prayer. Not long after, we watched in horror as the buildings collapsed, and the thought went through my mind, "Right now, many people are dying. Why was it them and not, say, me?". Many people were laughing, out of sheer shock. Needless to say, in the rest of my classes, no work was done. Several Alumni of my school were in the WTC as it was hit by the planes, so the teachers were even more concerned than most people (thankfully they all made it out before it collapsed). Throughout the day and during lunch, we continued to watch the TVs throughout the school, wondering "Who next? Why did this happen? What can we do?". As I sit here now and attempt to study for my tests tomarrow with no avail, I can't help almost crying when I think about all the people who lost their lives, and all the children returning from school to discover that their parents will never come home from work; never kiss them goodnight; never tell them they love them. As I realize now, the future for America's youth may be very grim indeed, growing up in a world where unmoral and unnecessary terrorism is a daily fear.
This analogy is moot. For one thing, China is not a democracy, therefore, they can do that. The United States, however, is a democracy. The whole point behind a democracy is:
A: The people elect leaders to represent them in the government
B: The people are free to say whatever they please, without fear of persecution.
I know I am singing to the choir here, but the DMCA violates the First Amendment and the definition of a democracy (at least MY definition as a US citizen). So please, use a proper analogy the next time you state your opinion.
Josh
I'm sure they realize that "diablo" means "devil" in Spanish. What if I "trademarked" and sued over someone making a movie called "Sandwich", because my company makes a product called a sandwich? Amazon sued over "one click" (I know "one click" was a patent, but the point is the same). Other companies are doing the same. As more and more companies get away with this, more and more are going to sue over stupid things like this. If no one stops this, one day, we will be sued for talking, because we are speaking words that are trademarks on products. Just my 2 cents...
Josh
Since M$ is preoccupied right now with the government trying to split them up and their .NET strategy, they might not attack Linux with their usual force. And even if they do, will it seriously effect Linux's growth? I personally don't think so. From my experience, the main reason why people switch to Linux is because they don't like Microsoft and/or they are tired of Microsoft products crashing on them all the time (ie Windows). M$ attacking Linux won't make their software any better or more stable.
Josh
Well, I'm glad somebody is finally doing this. Now if anyone ever needs to prove that something happened or exists during a certain time, it could definately be proved (there must certainly be web sites about everything that is happening). In a court case about something such as Kerberos (sp?), they could get an origional, unchanged version of the document that existed before the case was brought to trial. This was changes the company imposed during or right before the trial will have no effect.
Josh
I feel that with all the lawsuits going on and all the laws being passed that are limiting the free information on the internet, we may be in for some major problems. People have already started tracking everything that others do on the internet, from capturing the URL of the site they went to, to getting exact copies of their e-mail. These recent lawsuits are punishing people for exercising their freedem of information on the internet, and hence hurting the internet itself (Slashdot vs. Microsoft is a good example). If these lawsuits and regulations are continued at an uncontrolled rate, then soon they will virtually destroy the internet. Because some countries do not allow free speech, after a few lawsuits and new regulations, there may not even be free speech on the internet. At this point, where everything is controlled and no one can do anything without being constantly servayed, who would actually want to go on the internet? If everything remains at it's constant rate of increase (lawsuits, new regulations, etc), then we have about 10-15 years before this becomes a reality if something isn't done about it. Just compare the internet of 3 years ago to the internet of today and look at the changes (or limitations).
If you seem to think Slashdot sucks so much, then why do you continue visiting it? I personally think Slashdot is one of (if not the best) site on the web.