The exieriment needs to be done in a vacuum -- no -- it doesn't alter gravity (and that's the point). The purpose of the experiment is to prove that gravity alters all objects in the same manner...be it a hammer, a feather, or an elephant.
Now, when there's air (or water, nitrogen, helium -- whatever) surrounding an object, it doesn't affect gravitational pull on the object, but it does affect how an object falls -- ie friction, drag, or in some cases, lift (which is why a hammer will hit the ground before a feather). The vacuum removes all the atmosphere, so the only thing affecting the two objects is gravity.
LOL! They don't have to go to the moon to perform the exieriment...do it a a vacuum -- inside of a glass jar so they can observe the hammer (or whatever) and the feather both his the bottom at the same time.
Most physics (even biology) departments have tall glass jars, with lids on them -- and pumps to create the vacuum.
You don't actually qualify a single statement that you make in here. Either you're opinionated just because they're the mose widely used distribution, have no idea what you're talking about, are a troll, or all of the above.
I haven't ever used their distro
So how could you possibly have a valid opinion on the subject?
I believe the "pure" Torvalds kernel is the best choice
This is just plain dumb. Best choice for what? The only "pure" Torvalds kernels are the unstable/development (read: 2.5.x now) kernels (and there are still hundreds of developers contributing to it). You want any kind of journaling filesystem? Touch tacos -- no Torvalds there...RH added EXT3 to their kernel in order to provide JFS with backwards compatibility with EXT2 -- a pretty slick move IMHO. As far as the kernel goes, Linus didn't write the whole damn thing -- and he doesn't manage the stable kernel releases.
what insecurities are you talking about? I mean -- find me a Linux distro that has no exploits. If you really want somehting secure -- go with OpenBSD.
however the way they do things in terms of software quality, security and "usability" seems to be exactly the same as Microsoft
Qualify that. How do they do things the same way as Microsoft?
Why else would everyone insist upon using their packaging format to distribute binaries (now official in the Linux Standard Base) when tar is good enough?
Have you ever used Linux in a professional setting? Package management is essential. Sure -- the BSD ports tree is great, but RPM gives it a pretty good run for its money. Does this mean that you resent.debs too?
It's fine that they use their own internal packaging system, however it's annoying to have that forced upon me when I don't use their distro.
Nothing is being forced on you. You can build and install tar'ed & gziped source just like with any other *nix.
I can go on and on about how dumb your post is, and how unsubstantiated your opinion on RedHat seems to be, but its pretty clear that you're a troll and trying to get a rise out of me. If you're actually serious, please back up your opinion with some facts, rather than spewing out broad generalizations.
t as guns need trigger locks when the user is not in control, so should email clients, or other programs with access to the outside world.
What you suggest sounds like a good chunk of the functionality that a personal firewall (ala ZoneAlarm et al) provides.
If Microsoft put a personal firewall into Windows as a valueadd, their Justice Department (et al) prosecuters would have a field day with MS. Microsoft needs to be real careful about the value-adds that they drop into their OS'es now for fear of being "predatory".
Between Microsoft and Redhat, more internet worms are probably on the way...
OK -- you've got a MS example, but where the hell do you pull RedHat out of? Just because they're the most widely used does not mean that they're necessarily the most evil/insecure/etc.
If Congress wants to pass legislation so bad, let them pass a Consumer's Bill of Rights that gives the consumer fair use rights to make copies of their music as well as legally be able to shift it to other mediums.
I'm with you on the no more legislation stuff. But the way things are going right now, the Consumer's Bill of Rights will end up taking away more rights than it promises. Kind of like Senator Hollings' Online Personal Privacy Act -- its got a nice title, but in the end, the consumer just gets fucked by the copyright holders.
The OEM might want to display Microsoft trademarks to suggest affinity with popular Microsoft software, such as its shipment of a Linux user interface that mimics the Windows user interface (like the Linux KDE interface does).
Well -- no wonder Bart doesn't like KDE -- its just a Windows clone -- and he's an MS basher! ;)
Who have you used, and were they any good? I've used ISS in the past. I liked their service, they came up with a decent proposal, and in the end provided good documentation of what they did (and what they found).
They will try and sell you their product (ISS) -- which you might find useful if you don't have any internet security staff. Just be ready for the sales pitch.
How often should we re-do these audits? Well, if you buy their software, do a monthly internal audit yourselves with that software. Then, depending on how dynamic your environment is (in terms of either changes to software, hardware, or network infrastructure), it would be a good idea to have them come in for an annual audit -- if you make alot of changes -- make it bi-annual audit (or is it semi-annually? I mean every 6 months:) ).
I don't remember the cost of these audits or the cost their software...check it out -- and if it turns out to be more than $60-70k a year (which is shouldn't be by a longshot) -- you may find it valuable to either hire a fulltime security person, replace one of your sysadmins with someone who is familiar with security auditing.
Lastly, regardless of the cost of the contract audit, it may be a good idea to start providing training for one of your current admins in security (and cheaper than getting a new hire).
The MPAA and RIAA are proposing that all hard disk platters be fabricated from carbon nanotubes with an overhead photoflashe builtin -- along with the exclusive right to control over that flash.
If this is successful, it can open up some pretty cool doors.
If video game gambling ever becomes commonplace, the popularity of this broadcast will skyrocket.
Once popularity skyrockets (corprate sponsorships, anyone?) the door opens up for real professional gamers -- getting real money -- enough to support themselves (maybe a little more realistic than the failed US professional gamers league).
Say what you want about "video athletes", but I'd drop my lame-ass IT job in a heartbeat to play UT for a living.
Yeah -- CNN's right -- there's alot of hype about viruses/worms, but I think that they really miss the bigger picture, which is security in general.
Worms like CodeRed show that a well planned, coded, executed worm attack could bring the whole internet to its knees (or at least jam up big parts of the major backbones -- as well as any network with enough machines running OS/Software X). Imagine what would happen if cretin X wrote a worm to exploit a common Cisco vulnerability.
Now, what the article really misses, is that virus companies can do little to fix these. Of course they're capitalizing on stuff like security worms...but these worms really expolit holes in the OS/Software -- and the reasons that the exist are twofold...
1. Software and OS vendors aren't responding to security issues fast enough. 2. (L)users and admins aren't keeping all of their machines properly updated with the fixes.
The virus app vendors really don't do anything to address these issues. Only the vendors and (l)users can fix these...and when everyone finally gets around to doing it right, a major internet security problem gets a whole lot better.
I don't know how much detail that you require from your load test...but for a basic test, this may work.
Write a series of relatively simple perl scripts distributed across -- say 5 or 10 client machines.
Check out cpan for X11 protocol modlues. On each load test host, have your perl script open a bunch of client connections (say, 50-75 per load test client) -- and maybe even launch a few real-world apps (and seed which clients open which apps based on your usage expectations). This will give you a general idea of how well your system runs under load. You can even use perl modules to specific X apps to do some stuff with the client apps that you launch.
You can easily do data drilling on either your client machines or your X server. For basic results, memory utilization, load, etc. For a little more in-depth data, check out response times, connect times, login times, load times -- all on a number-of-concurrent-connections basis.
I think that you missed something. The bill only applies to video-taping in a private residence.
You can still tape the LAPD abusing their power, etc. (Just so long as you don't tape them in their private homes). Accordingly, the state will still secretly tape you without your knowledge or permission.
The setails of the bill are, however, still shady. I can still tape my employees (on private property) without them knowing about it, right?
Not surprised about this bill at all. You aren't allowed to audio tape someone without prior consent, why would you be allowed to video tape someone...
AFAIK that's not necessarily true...with audio taping, its only inadmissable in court if its without consent. Not only that, only one party has to consent/be aware of the audio taping of a phone call. (Remember Linda Tripp/Monica Lewinsky -- it what you suggest were the case, not only would the conversations be inadmissable, but Tripp would have been brought up on criminal charges.)
I'm not 100% sure on this one, but I believe that this bill would make it illegal for you to video tape sex with your boyfriend/girlfriend while having sex...but I don't think that nanny cams are included.
(Discalimer) I only read the synoposis -- not the entire text of the bill.
The law didn't say that -- or even come close to saying that. The law basically gave law enforcement free reign to arrest just about anyone who makes porn. Essentially, the law says that anything that could possibly be constrewed as child porn is child porn. It did address the virtual-kiddie porn, but this was not the major point for the Supreme COurt's overturning of the law.
If your stance is that all forms of pornography shuold be banned because it encourages sexual deviancy, please say it clearly. That is what your article is saying.
As far as the article goes, it does come right out and say that (essentially), all porn should be banned because it encourages sexual deviancy. After reading the first paragraph of the article (ie: spending a day in hell), I couldn't weigh in an ounce of credibility as for the discreditation of the sex researchers (which, paraphrased, says that since one of the sex researchers in question is a self-admitted pedophile, his research has no value). The way that it intrinsically associates pedophilia with homosexuality makes me shudder. Shame on them. That's not good journalism -- its neo-conservative banter.
From the CNN article (reprinted without permission):
"Once the hacker or someone in the underworld has personal information, credit card numbers, social security numbers, address, whatever it may be...has that information and wants to sell it, often they'll go to a hacker chat room, a place on the Web using an Internet Relay Chat which provides them some anonymity and allows them to mention that they have this personal information and they want to trade."
Right -- IRC is a special place on the Web. I can think of a special place where this guy belongs.
What does it take for CNN to call someone an expert? Usually an expert in medicine has to be an MD. An expert in computers (or in this case, computer security, has to be self-described as such).
Lastly, is IRC really the "wild-west" of the internet? Its certianly monitored by federal law enforcement. See this article (actually, the link to the real article is here) about the FBI monitoring IRC as a tool to bust suspected crackers.
I've worked with alot of good/qualified people who have come into the private sector from the military.
My last job was at a high-volume dot-com -- my manager was the head of operations & the majority of his background was working in Naval Intelligence. He knew his shit, and was a good guy to work for.
What frequencies can one listen in on? That's exactly what a radar detector does -- it listens in on frequencies, just like a radio (it is a radio). When it picks up the specific frequency (or range therein), rather than play the frequency through a speaker, it signals the operator with a beep.
Its pretty simple actually.
As far as going 90 MPH in a school zone -- I don't know how you drive, but I use radar detectors -- and I don't do 90 in school zones. I just won't pay tickets based on counties trying to boost revenue by entrapping unsuspecting drivers and issuing speeding tickets. If the police are watching you using electronic equipment (especially for a scam like this) don't you want to know?
Scanners are legal in all 50 states -- and I'm not talking about those.
Yeah -- I forgot that doesn't apply to the rest of the world. I stand corrected.
But then again (to go way off topic) police in Germany don't issue speeding tickets (using radio surveillance) fot the sole purpose of revenue enhancement either.
In any case, outside of my slightly OT Radar rant, it doesn't change the fact that no US court would ever let that fly -- I think its indicitave of how much more progressive europe is in some aspects.
FWIW, there still is some brand equity left in the Napster name...weather or not the service sucks is not the question (we already know this much). Maybe its not an entirely stupid purchase.
Slashdot Mirror
Uhh...
The exieriment needs to be done in a vacuum -- no -- it doesn't alter gravity (and that's the point). The purpose of the experiment is to prove that gravity alters all objects in the same manner...be it a hammer, a feather, or an elephant.
Now, when there's air (or water, nitrogen, helium -- whatever) surrounding an object, it doesn't affect gravitational pull on the object, but it does affect how an object falls -- ie friction, drag, or in some cases, lift (which is why a hammer will hit the ground before a feather). The vacuum removes all the atmosphere, so the only thing affecting the two objects is gravity.
-Turkey
LOL! They don't have to go to the moon to perform the exieriment...do it a a vacuum -- inside of a glass jar so they can observe the hammer (or whatever) and the feather both his the bottom at the same time.
Most physics (even biology) departments have tall glass jars, with lids on them -- and pumps to create the vacuum.
-Turkey
You don't actually qualify a single statement that you make in here. Either you're opinionated just because they're the mose widely used distribution, have no idea what you're talking about, are a troll, or all of the above.
.debs too?
I haven't ever used their distro
So how could you possibly have a valid opinion on the subject?
I believe the "pure" Torvalds kernel is the best choice
This is just plain dumb. Best choice for what? The only "pure" Torvalds kernels are the unstable/development (read: 2.5.x now) kernels (and there are still hundreds of developers contributing to it). You want any kind of journaling filesystem? Touch tacos -- no Torvalds there...RH added EXT3 to their kernel in order to provide JFS with backwards compatibility with EXT2 -- a pretty slick move IMHO. As far as the kernel goes, Linus didn't write the whole damn thing -- and he doesn't manage the stable kernel releases.
what insecurities are you talking about? I mean -- find me a Linux distro that has no exploits. If you really want somehting secure -- go with OpenBSD.
however the way they do things in terms of software quality, security and "usability" seems to be exactly the same as Microsoft
Qualify that. How do they do things the same way as Microsoft?
Why else would everyone insist upon using their packaging format to distribute binaries (now official in the Linux Standard Base) when tar is good enough?
Have you ever used Linux in a professional setting? Package management is essential. Sure -- the BSD ports tree is great, but RPM gives it a pretty good run for its money. Does this mean that you resent
It's fine that they use their own internal packaging system, however it's annoying to have that forced upon me when I don't use their distro.
Nothing is being forced on you. You can build and install tar'ed & gziped source just like with any other *nix.
I can go on and on about how dumb your post is, and how unsubstantiated your opinion on RedHat seems to be, but its pretty clear that you're a troll and trying to get a rise out of me. If you're actually serious, please back up your opinion with some facts, rather than spewing out broad generalizations.
-Turkey
I can get the video-wall like in Total Recall.
-Turkey
t as guns need trigger locks when the user is not in control, so should email clients, or other programs with access to the outside world.
What you suggest sounds like a good chunk of the functionality that a personal firewall (ala ZoneAlarm et al) provides.
If Microsoft put a personal firewall into Windows as a valueadd, their Justice Department (et al) prosecuters would have a field day with MS. Microsoft needs to be real careful about the value-adds that they drop into their OS'es now for fear of being "predatory".
-Turkey
Between Microsoft and Redhat, more internet worms are probably on the way...
OK -- you've got a MS example, but where the hell do you pull RedHat out of? Just because they're the most widely used does not mean that they're necessarily the most evil/insecure/etc.
-Turkey
If Congress wants to pass legislation so bad, let them pass a Consumer's Bill of Rights that gives the consumer fair use rights to make copies of their music as well as legally be able to shift it to other mediums.
I'm with you on the no more legislation stuff. But the way things are going right now, the Consumer's Bill of Rights will end up taking away more rights than it promises. Kind of like Senator Hollings' Online Personal Privacy Act -- its got a nice title, but in the end, the consumer just gets fucked by the copyright holders.
-Turkey
According to Bill Gates' testimony:
;)
The OEM might want to display Microsoft trademarks to suggest affinity with popular Microsoft software, such as its shipment of a Linux user interface that mimics the Windows user interface (like the Linux KDE interface does).
Well -- no wonder Bart doesn't like KDE -- its just a Windows clone -- and he's an MS basher!
-Turkey
Who have you used, and were they any good?
:) ).
I've used ISS in the past. I liked their service, they came up with a decent proposal, and in the end provided good documentation of what they did (and what they found).
They will try and sell you their product (ISS) -- which you might find useful if you don't have any internet security staff. Just be ready for the sales pitch.
How often should we re-do these audits?
Well, if you buy their software, do a monthly internal audit yourselves with that software. Then, depending on how dynamic your environment is (in terms of either changes to software, hardware, or network infrastructure), it would be a good idea to have them come in for an annual audit -- if you make alot of changes -- make it bi-annual audit (or is it semi-annually? I mean every 6 months
I don't remember the cost of these audits or the cost their software...check it out -- and if it turns out to be more than $60-70k a year (which is shouldn't be by a longshot) -- you may find it valuable to either hire a fulltime security person, replace one of your sysadmins with someone who is familiar with security auditing.
Lastly, regardless of the cost of the contract audit, it may be a good idea to start providing training for one of your current admins in security (and cheaper than getting a new hire).
Hope this helps.
-Turkey
In a related story...
The MPAA and RIAA are proposing that all hard disk platters be fabricated from carbon nanotubes with an overhead photoflashe builtin -- along with the exclusive right to control over that flash.
That'll show those damn pirates and "hackers"...
-Turkey
Wow!
If this is successful, it can open up some pretty cool doors.
If video game gambling ever becomes commonplace, the popularity of this broadcast will skyrocket.
Once popularity skyrockets (corprate sponsorships, anyone?) the door opens up for real professional gamers -- getting real money -- enough to support themselves (maybe a little more realistic than the failed US professional gamers league).
Say what you want about "video athletes", but I'd drop my lame-ass IT job in a heartbeat to play UT for a living.
-Turkey
Yeah -- CNN's right -- there's alot of hype about viruses/worms, but I think that they really miss the bigger picture, which is security in general.
Worms like CodeRed show that a well planned, coded, executed worm attack could bring the whole internet to its knees (or at least jam up big parts of the major backbones -- as well as any network with enough machines running OS/Software X). Imagine what would happen if cretin X wrote a worm to exploit a common Cisco vulnerability.
Now, what the article really misses, is that virus companies can do little to fix these. Of course they're capitalizing on stuff like security worms...but these worms really expolit holes in the OS/Software -- and the reasons that the exist are twofold...
1. Software and OS vendors aren't responding to security issues fast enough.
2. (L)users and admins aren't keeping all of their machines properly updated with the fixes.
The virus app vendors really don't do anything to address these issues. Only the vendors and (l)users can fix these...and when everyone finally gets around to doing it right, a major internet security problem gets a whole lot better.
-Turkey
I don't know how much detail that you require from your load test...but for a basic test, this may work.
Write a series of relatively simple perl scripts distributed across -- say 5 or 10 client machines.
Check out cpan for X11 protocol modlues. On each load test host, have your perl script open a bunch of client connections (say, 50-75 per load test client) -- and maybe even launch a few real-world apps (and seed which clients open which apps based on your usage expectations). This will give you a general idea of how well your system runs under load. You can even use perl modules to specific X apps to do some stuff with the client apps that you launch.
You can easily do data drilling on either your client machines or your X server. For basic results, memory utilization, load, etc. For a little more in-depth data, check out response times, connect times, login times, load times -- all on a number-of-concurrent-connections basis.
-Turkey
Looks like I'll have to resort to dumpster diving to weather this economis tech-funk.
Know of any mac-happy companies?
Whaddabout mac-happy companies who are buying new macs and tossing the old? Send their address my way!
-Turkey
Or have I missed something
I think that you missed something. The bill only applies to video-taping in a private residence.
You can still tape the LAPD abusing their power, etc. (Just so long as you don't tape them in their private homes). Accordingly, the state will still secretly tape you without your knowledge or permission.
The setails of the bill are, however, still shady. I can still tape my employees (on private property) without them knowing about it, right?
-Turkey
Not surprised about this bill at all. You aren't allowed to audio tape someone without prior consent, why would you be allowed to video tape someone...
AFAIK that's not necessarily true...with audio taping, its only inadmissable in court if its without consent. Not only that, only one party has to consent/be aware of the audio taping of a phone call. (Remember Linda Tripp/Monica Lewinsky -- it what you suggest were the case, not only would the conversations be inadmissable, but Tripp would have been brought up on criminal charges.)
I'm not 100% sure on this one, but I believe that this bill would make it illegal for you to video tape sex with your boyfriend/girlfriend while having sex...but I don't think that nanny cams are included.
(Discalimer) I only read the synoposis -- not the entire text of the bill.
-Turkey
The law didn't say that -- or even come close to saying that. The law basically gave law enforcement free reign to arrest just about anyone who makes porn. Essentially, the law says that anything that could possibly be constrewed as child porn is child porn. It did address the virtual-kiddie porn, but this was not the major point for the Supreme COurt's overturning of the law.
If your stance is that all forms of pornography shuold be banned because it encourages sexual deviancy, please say it clearly. That is what your article is saying.
As far as the article goes, it does come right out and say that (essentially), all porn should be banned because it encourages sexual deviancy. After reading the first paragraph of the article (ie: spending a day in hell), I couldn't weigh in an ounce of credibility as for the discreditation of the sex researchers (which, paraphrased, says that since one of the sex researchers in question is a self-admitted pedophile, his research has no value). The way that it intrinsically associates pedophilia with homosexuality makes me shudder. Shame on them. That's not good journalism -- its neo-conservative banter.
-Turkey
Let's all hope to god that they get the mosic right (not to mention the Mountain Wumpus).
-Turkey
From the CNN article (reprinted without permission):
"Once the hacker or someone in the underworld has personal information, credit card numbers, social security numbers, address, whatever it may be...has that information and wants to sell it, often they'll go to a hacker chat room, a place on the Web using an Internet Relay Chat which provides them some anonymity and allows them to mention that they have this personal information and they want to trade."
Right -- IRC is a special place on the Web. I can think of a special place where this guy belongs.
What does it take for CNN to call someone an expert? Usually an expert in medicine has to be an MD. An expert in computers (or in this case, computer security, has to be self-described as such).
Lastly, is IRC really the "wild-west" of the internet? Its certianly monitored by federal law enforcement. See this article (actually, the link to the real article is here) about the FBI monitoring IRC as a tool to bust suspected crackers.
-Turkey
This may be a good idea.
I've worked with alot of good/qualified people who have come into the private sector from the military.
My last job was at a high-volume dot-com -- my manager was the head of operations & the majority of his background was working in Naval Intelligence. He knew his shit, and was a good guy to work for.
-Turkey
What frequencies can one listen in on? That's exactly what a radar detector does -- it listens in on frequencies, just like a radio (it is a radio). When it picks up the specific frequency (or range therein), rather than play the frequency through a speaker, it signals the operator with a beep.
Its pretty simple actually.
As far as going 90 MPH in a school zone -- I don't know how you drive, but I use radar detectors -- and I don't do 90 in school zones. I just won't pay tickets based on counties trying to boost revenue by entrapping unsuspecting drivers and issuing speeding tickets. If the police are watching you using electronic equipment (especially for a scam like this) don't you want to know?
Scanners are legal in all 50 states -- and I'm not talking about those.
-Turkey
Yeah -- I forgot that doesn't apply to the rest of the world. I stand corrected.
But then again (to go way off topic) police in Germany don't issue speeding tickets (using radio surveillance) fot the sole purpose of revenue enhancement either.
In any case, outside of my slightly OT Radar rant, it doesn't change the fact that no US court would ever let that fly -- I think its indicitave of how much more progressive europe is in some aspects.
BTW, what does AAMOF stand for?
-Turkey
Its too bad that this won't affect any of our (bad) US legislation.
Hell, we still can't use radar retectors in some states (to listen in on somewhat public frequencies that are used to surveile us).
Even without encryption, I'll bet that just about any US court would rule it illegal to sniff 802.11a/b/d packets.
If you add breaking WEP, it becomes a DMCA issue...again, US courts would be even more likely rule it illegal.
Are there any other capitalist countries out there that are just a little smarter than mine?
-Turkey
FWIW, there still is some brand equity left in the Napster name...weather or not the service sucks is not the question (we already know this much). Maybe its not an entirely stupid purchase.
-Turkey
Does this mean that we'll be able use Napster for scheiser films now? ;)
-turkey