That's pretty much the problem with new diseases. People don't know they carry them.
People were used to some STDs, and probably they even took care they don't spread them once they noticed they had them. AIDS is vastly different to them. AIDS does not manifest until years after it's too late. Today, there's a test for it. Back then, there was none. Until the 1990s IIRC there was no way to determine whether you have AIDS until your T-Cells were already gone. That happens, as mentioned before, long after the infection, when AIDS fully manifests.
Most sane countries now have laws that consider it assault or even manslaughter if you know you have AIDS and still engage in unprotected sex with someone else and infect them. Anything past that and accusing people who cannot even know they carry the disease is bullshit.
2/3 of the world not considerate enough to understand it's less burden on the company to keep a sick worker away instead of infecting the rest of the company? That's sad.
Relax. They have the right to say their bullshit, I have the right to ignore their bullshit. Or even ridicule it as the bullshit that it is.
Free speech is self sealing. If you use free speech to say something idiotic, free speech allows others to show you in no uncertain terms that you're an idiot.
I was just thinking that. I know, I'm old, and with age comes laziness, but 5 times a day sounds like a chore, not some fun pastime. That's hard work, people!
Beneficial? Hell no. As far as I'm concerned, shoot them at the border. But that's more my misogyny talking, I'd shoot you too, given free reign and no repercussions for killing.
I'd just like to know where that gang raping is taking place. I have no plans for Saturday and need some entertainment.
Care to tell me what book tells that kind of story? Somehow I have a hunch what publishing house I'll be dealing with...
If that was at least remotely true, the German armies could not have rolled over the borders like there was no resistance. Where were those "massed forces" when the Germans steamrolled all the way past Kiev, Leningrad, Odessa and all the way to Moscow and Stalingrad?
The customers will not demand these features. For them, these aren't features. To them, they're at best useless, at worst a nuisance. Where's the benefit for the user if his device doesn't harm him, only harms others, and he's not responsible for it?
Yes, he should feel responsible. But people are not that way.
Welcome to the wonderful world of egoistic, selfish assholes where nobody gives a fuck if the whole world goes to hell as long as my stuff works. And this is how people are, they don't care that they are a danger to the whole internet and them being knocked off is a service to the world. What they care about is their stupid little gimmicky toy.
These attacks rely on security shortcomings of said devices. Whether they can make one or a million requests per second doesn't change the game, the problem is that there are many such compromised devices, not that a single one of them is causing a lot of traffic.
The problem is actually less the amount of traffic. That amount did increase, yes, but until the IoT became a part of the attack, most of the high volume attacks were reflected DNS attacks or similar that could easily be filtered at scrubbers. You simply run your traffic through a scrubber with a fat pipe, it filters all the DNS replies and presto, instant solution. Doesn't work anymore now that these devices are not reflecting, they actually are numerous enough to run attacks that look like genuine http(s) requests. No chance to filter that. And it doesn't matter whether this single device can be limited to X requests. The problem is the number of compromised devices.
So unless you're willing to cripple the devices to the point where they become essentially useless, this is the wrong approach.
The right approach is to disable the more damaging properties of the device until they are properly set up. The very least this must consist of is a change of the default password. The current batch of attacks is mostly relying on IoT devices connected to the internet with the default password still valid. Most of them because the users never bothered to change it, but sadly there are even devices where "changing" the default password only adds another valid password to the list and the default credentials remain valid.
Of course. There is also ways to create secure devices in the first place. Unfortunately neither is a selling point, manufacturers of those devices are not held responsible for the damage their insecure and impossible to secure devices cause so you won't get it.
In 1941 Russia actually had a few contracts going with Nazi Germany. Molotov-Ribbentrop pact rings a bell? Division of Poland? They had quite a few ties and political cooperation running. And until the end, right up until Germany invaded Russia, Russia upheld every single clause of that contract to letter and spirit.
That was, by the way, also the reason that the German army could advance so quickly in the first few months. Stalin simply didn't believe that they did that. They had contracts, they had pacts, they had agreements, they had basically agreed on a division of Europe. You get this, we get that.
Having something so intricate and complex simply ignored by who you thought of as your partner and being back stabbed does leave a mark. Russia was absolutely not prepared for this attack, and they will never, ever, be caught again with their pants down. Since that day Russia has never entered a contract without at least pondering what to do should the other side break it.
That's the reason for this. Once you understand that trauma, these things start to make sense, and I wouldn't put too much thought into it. They simply don't trust anyone anymore.
Actually, it was more like the USSR guaranteeing our freedoms. As silly as it may sound, but as long as the USSR was around, our politicians had to behave and act like the good guys. I mean, think about it: Domestic spying? Detention without trial? Cutting down on civil liberties? When did that happen before 1990?
Ok. After Hoover.
Hell, if McCarthy existed today, he'd have free reign. There would be nobody who'd stop him, just replace "communist" with "terrorist" in that bastard's speeches and you're set.
Slashdot Mirror
What is the internet?
That's pretty much the problem with new diseases. People don't know they carry them.
People were used to some STDs, and probably they even took care they don't spread them once they noticed they had them. AIDS is vastly different to them. AIDS does not manifest until years after it's too late. Today, there's a test for it. Back then, there was none. Until the 1990s IIRC there was no way to determine whether you have AIDS until your T-Cells were already gone. That happens, as mentioned before, long after the infection, when AIDS fully manifests.
Most sane countries now have laws that consider it assault or even manslaughter if you know you have AIDS and still engage in unprotected sex with someone else and infect them. Anything past that and accusing people who cannot even know they carry the disease is bullshit.
2/3 of the world not considerate enough to understand it's less burden on the company to keep a sick worker away instead of infecting the rest of the company? That's sad.
Relax. They have the right to say their bullshit, I have the right to ignore their bullshit. Or even ridicule it as the bullshit that it is.
Free speech is self sealing. If you use free speech to say something idiotic, free speech allows others to show you in no uncertain terms that you're an idiot.
Anyone else now has a craving for chocolate ice cream?
33.6 hours to seduce them doesn't include fucking. With fucking, telling them they were great and calling them a cab we're up at at least 34 hours!
I was just thinking that. I know, I'm old, and with age comes laziness, but 5 times a day sounds like a chore, not some fun pastime. That's hard work, people!
That's the first good thing I heard in this thread.
By that metric, it's not uncommon to find a adulterous conservative politician.
The only safe sex is virtual one. And I yield the floor to you on that topic, since you are probably the expert on that one.
Classical conditioning. Watch this:
"HOSTS FILE!"
Beneficial? Hell no. As far as I'm concerned, shoot them at the border. But that's more my misogyny talking, I'd shoot you too, given free reign and no repercussions for killing.
I'd just like to know where that gang raping is taking place. I have no plans for Saturday and need some entertainment.
Their former governments. Just like their current governments now invited the US.
Care to tell me what book tells that kind of story? Somehow I have a hunch what publishing house I'll be dealing with...
If that was at least remotely true, the German armies could not have rolled over the borders like there was no resistance. Where were those "massed forces" when the Germans steamrolled all the way past Kiev, Leningrad, Odessa and all the way to Moscow and Stalingrad?
The customers will not demand these features. For them, these aren't features. To them, they're at best useless, at worst a nuisance. Where's the benefit for the user if his device doesn't harm him, only harms others, and he's not responsible for it?
Yes, he should feel responsible. But people are not that way.
Welcome to the wonderful world of egoistic, selfish assholes where nobody gives a fuck if the whole world goes to hell as long as my stuff works. And this is how people are, they don't care that they are a danger to the whole internet and them being knocked off is a service to the world. What they care about is their stupid little gimmicky toy.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
What we need is to grasp the careless morons that made those devices by the balls and squeeze 'til patches materialize.
So people get pissed at the white hats, after all the black hats kept them functional...
And now explain that to the mom that just bought a cam to monitor her baby. I'll bring the popcorn.
These attacks rely on security shortcomings of said devices. Whether they can make one or a million requests per second doesn't change the game, the problem is that there are many such compromised devices, not that a single one of them is causing a lot of traffic.
The problem is actually less the amount of traffic. That amount did increase, yes, but until the IoT became a part of the attack, most of the high volume attacks were reflected DNS attacks or similar that could easily be filtered at scrubbers. You simply run your traffic through a scrubber with a fat pipe, it filters all the DNS replies and presto, instant solution. Doesn't work anymore now that these devices are not reflecting, they actually are numerous enough to run attacks that look like genuine http(s) requests. No chance to filter that. And it doesn't matter whether this single device can be limited to X requests. The problem is the number of compromised devices.
So unless you're willing to cripple the devices to the point where they become essentially useless, this is the wrong approach.
The right approach is to disable the more damaging properties of the device until they are properly set up. The very least this must consist of is a change of the default password. The current batch of attacks is mostly relying on IoT devices connected to the internet with the default password still valid. Most of them because the users never bothered to change it, but sadly there are even devices where "changing" the default password only adds another valid password to the list and the default credentials remain valid.
This is the core of the current problem.
Complain about Windows 10? No way, as long as there is Windows, my job security is guaranteed.
Of course. There is also ways to create secure devices in the first place. Unfortunately neither is a selling point, manufacturers of those devices are not held responsible for the damage their insecure and impossible to secure devices cause so you won't get it.
In 1941 Russia actually had a few contracts going with Nazi Germany. Molotov-Ribbentrop pact rings a bell? Division of Poland? They had quite a few ties and political cooperation running. And until the end, right up until Germany invaded Russia, Russia upheld every single clause of that contract to letter and spirit.
That was, by the way, also the reason that the German army could advance so quickly in the first few months. Stalin simply didn't believe that they did that. They had contracts, they had pacts, they had agreements, they had basically agreed on a division of Europe. You get this, we get that.
Having something so intricate and complex simply ignored by who you thought of as your partner and being back stabbed does leave a mark. Russia was absolutely not prepared for this attack, and they will never, ever, be caught again with their pants down. Since that day Russia has never entered a contract without at least pondering what to do should the other side break it.
That's the reason for this. Once you understand that trauma, these things start to make sense, and I wouldn't put too much thought into it. They simply don't trust anyone anymore.
Heh, what? Please don't tell me they teach that kind of bullshit in US history lessons.
Actually, it was more like the USSR guaranteeing our freedoms. As silly as it may sound, but as long as the USSR was around, our politicians had to behave and act like the good guys. I mean, think about it: Domestic spying? Detention without trial? Cutting down on civil liberties? When did that happen before 1990?
Ok. After Hoover.
Hell, if McCarthy existed today, he'd have free reign. There would be nobody who'd stop him, just replace "communist" with "terrorist" in that bastard's speeches and you're set.