Don't you read [slashdot.org]? It works like this: You report the probing and infection to the ISP, they contact the FBI, and you're arrested.
Ugh. That's insane.
To me, that's akin to being arrested for reporting a drunk driver.
It's *my* highway, too... (I'd argue more so, since I'm not a luser running AOL on Windows 2000 with IIS running by default; *hell*, I used to have a UUCP e-mail address back in 1988, but I've ranted about that enough already). Don't *my* needs for safety on the Information Superhighway count for anything?
Prior to this, I'd always attributed intelligence to the FBI. And, I'd still like to hope that there are some Fox Mulders in the department. Unfortunately, it sounds like this guy has become the victim of an overzealous donut-eater of a prosecutor whose computer illiteracy is eclipsed only by the FBI's Keystone Kops.
Before a brush with the Peel Regional Gestapo where my truck was taken off the road for an alleged safety violation, I had held law enforcement in high regard. I'd always found cops to be friendly, helpful, diplomatic and logical.
<rant>(The truck was really ugly but the steering, brakes, body and lights were all solid and working perfectly, so they decided that they didn't like the way my battery was held down and yanked my license plates. Interestingly enough, the battery was held down exactly the same way as Chrysler held down the battery on all 149,999 other Dodge Rams they made in 1983. I had two mechanics (one of whom works at a restoration shop where they fix $500,000 Bugattis day in and day out) and a mechanical engineer testify for me that the vehicle was absolutely, perfectly safe; even so, the judge upheld the Peel Regional Gestapo's cop (not a licensed mechanic) was capable of making the decision better than two mechanics and an engineer. I considered sneaking into the USA and claiming refugee status as a publicity stunt in retaliation. I took the cop aside afterwards, asked him if he had children, and then told him that I would attend church that Sunday and pray that his wife and children would both be stricken with inoperable bowel cancer. A man like him has no business procreating.)</rant>
With news like that, I start to think that it's time for me to overthrow the government of some small South Pacific island and make LawrenceLand, appointing myself head of state and chief of police. Any cop with more donuts in his squad car than measurable IQ points would be executed, by his victims, in front of the teeming masses.
Ironic that you now face being shunted into Microsoft environments - or out of technology -by the free market that your philosophy extolls as the engine of excellence.
Ironic and sad, yes.
Both laissez-faire capitalism and communism rely on the existence of humans that don't exist yet: the former on perfectly rational, completely informed agents, the latter on completely fair, totally socialized comrades. The failures of each system are based on the fact that humans are not that easy to reinvent.
Congratulations, you have done what few lack the ability to do: change my viewpoint.
Through your concise and relevant comment, you have managed to make me re-think a couple of points. While I'm still fundamentally a Libertarian, there has long been a need to have some sort of government intervention in the Microsoft monopoly, a rare exception to my usual philosophy of letting the free market decide.
But this does reinforce the need for a truly impartial government to oversee all facets of the running of a society; as one of the few moderates who hasn't simply posted "socialism is best" or some other similar rant, your point has reminded me that the balance does remain the best system. Certainly, in Canada, all levels of government provide substantial roadblocks to creating your own business, as an example; controls need to remain (as much as I loathe to admit it), though they should be simpler, more streamlined and efficient than those currently in place.
Welcome to the real world. See that? I'm crying. Oh, woe is you. That's called capitalism. That's the "old economy" for you.
Very, very true. And, based on the karma hits I've taken for espousing a Libertarian philosophy, I do want you to understand that I'm not down about that.
The problem is that tech seems to be a bad word now, especially to headhunters. I don't have 14 university degrees; what I have is a practical hands-on ability, honed by 17 years of computer experience, to make systems work in real-world environments.
Have you been to a headhunter lately? It pains me when they're asking for MCSEs. *MCSEs*. I used to have MCSEs under me; they'd ask me questions like why they have to type an IP address to point to a domain name server, or how to prevent HIMEM.SYS loading when the machine starts up. (I've ranted about this on Slashdot before.) It's a paper qualification, not indicative of any real insight into how a Windows machine works. Nor do I even wish to be trapped in the Windows prison. Yet, headhunters seem to want it. [sigh]
Who the hell came up with this "new economy" slogan anyways? Exactly what is so "new" about it? Nothing, other than the fact that a bunch of young, naive idiots managed to convince some old money that their ideas were "foolproof" as in "you fools can't tell we've got no idea what the hell we're doing."
Engineering saying: Make something foolproof, and someone comes along and builds a better fool.
But here you are whining about your misfortune. Are you mad you were suckered in too? Are you bitter because you feel it was "owed" to you? Do you think you have it hard? You're probably an intelligent person and you can probably actually perform your job duties.
I like to think I'm intelligent. Actually, I did write the Mensa test, and I passed it. Even went to a couple of Mensa meetings, but got bored with hanging around with people who had nothing better to do than attempt to demonstrate to each other how intelligent they are.
No, I didn't get suckered in by the new economy. The problems were evident all the way along. For the most part, it's failing e-tailers that seem to have dragged everything else down. Well, using a mail-order analogy, why would you buy a bag of kitty litter by mail-order when there's a pet store right down the street?
E-tailing, of course, has its merits. Mail order (which is all that e-tailing really is) cannot be beaten as a way of buying specialized items. Antique car parts. Strange transistor types. Even that needlepoint pattern that my best friend's girlfriend has been looking all over for.
In the frucus before the bubble burst, it seemed that people had lost sight of common sense, and we've all been dragged down because of it. I lament *that*, not capitalism.
That alone puts you ahead of most of the other lobos (think lobotomy) "looking" for a job (more accurately, looking for a new job that's exactly like their old job).
Well, I'm not looking for something exactly like my old job, no. I'd prefer something where my combination of electronics, computers and technical writing experience can work together to save/make my new employer money. But, at this point, I have a friend who is a tow truck driver, and I've been moonlighting doing that and a few other things to pay the bills.
Maybe try and industry that isn't part of the "new economy."
Certainly have. There's no aversion for me to work for a bricks-and-mortar company. I've never worked for a start-up. I've always worked for established companies. That's not to say that I wouldn't love the excitement and pace of a new venture - I would. All the run-off from failed dot-coms are swamping every other sector, and that makes it pretty hard for your signal to rise above the noise and reach the ear of a potential employer.
One of the reasons I've been posting to Slashdot a *lot* lately is to get myself heard by like-minded people who might even be in hiring positions. So far, it's worked reasonably well, I've been getting hundreds of hits a day to my website, and many of those hits check out my resume.
Try civil service. Perhaps the police, fire department, military, IRS, FBI, etc. They're not going away any time soon.
I live in Toronto, and I've already done that.
I'm an able-bodied white, anglo-saxon protestant male. WASP. With employment equity in full force across all levels of Canadian government, I submitted my resume, clicked off the boxes asking me my ethnicity and stuff, and received a couple of e-mails back telling me that I didn't reflect the demographics they desired.
If you can't find a job locally, it's time to move. "Oh, I can't move, I love it here." You'll love it too, when you can't pay your rent and you're out on the street.
At this point, gladly. Gladly. I live in Toronto, the heart of all of Canada's commerical and industrial activity. Toronto is Canada's equivalent to New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Detroit all rolled into one. And it's still pretty dead here. Ottawa is the other option, and it's very similar to Silicon Valley; it's even got the nickname, "Silicon Valley North". With Mitel, Corel, Nortel and innumerable failed start-ups, it's hurting even more than Toronto. So, unless an employer were to see my resume and decide that they wished to sponsor me for immigration into the United States, those are my options, and Toronto is decidedly better than Ottawa at the moment.
Take charge of your life.
Of course. I'm motivated almost to the point of obsessiveness about reaching goals.
It's hard to stay optimistic and upbeat when you set a goal of finding a job by the end of the week, and again it doesn't happen.
I've stood at Bay and King (Toronto's equivalent to Wall Street) in my best suit, holding up a sign that says "Computer Geek For Hire.... Will Work For Bandwidth". Because of the humorous and practical approach, I got a lot of attention - even so far as a couple of TV interviews. Got to pass out lots of resumes and follow up with lots of people who gave me business cards.
And from all that, *one* interview. One. I present myself well, and I'm friendly and professional. Needless to say, I didn't get that job. (They were looking for an Assembly language programmer. I haven't written in Assembly in over ten years now.)
Even though I remind myself that it's a numbers game, the truth is that when someone quits a job in the IT department at a bank or something, generally, they don't seem to re-hire.
Computer geeks seem to have become about as desireable as 8-tracks.
You took a chance at (fame and) fortune and you lost. If you don't want to lose, don't play the game.
Don't have much choice, do I? Again, I'm not lamenting capitalism. I'm lamenting the idiocy of those who built the tech bubble up so much that when it burst, it affected companies and people with sound business ideas and skills.
I can see it now. Hungry unemployed IT workers lined up at the @homeless shelter.
Ugh. The wolf is @ our door, boys and girls.
I blame it all on people who were stupid enough to buy shares of a company that promised to save consumers money by FedExing a $4.00, 30lb bag of kitty litter across the country. $21 shipping bill later, two day delivery time, versus going to the local bricks-and-mortar pet shop at the local mall, shelling out $6 and having a happy cat right away.
<sarcasm>There's a good business model. How can it fail?</sarcasm>
<more_sarcasm>Now that e-tailers have been brought back to reality and Napster is dead for all practical purposes, there's still no reason for broadband. No need for the convenience and power of having all the world's information at your fingertips. No reason why an AOL dialup account can't satisfy all your surfing needs.</more_sarcasm>
And now, as a result of idiocy of that scale across virtually the entire stock market, I find myself unemployed and unable to find a decent job. This really sucks.
Re:In The Days Before PC Boards - and Do-It-Yourse
on
A Hardware Threepack
·
· Score: 2
dang it. whenever i have mod points i can never find comments worthy of being modded up. then as soon as they are gone along comes a comment like the above. well if i had some mod points I would have given them to you. simply brill.
Awww, that's so sweet. Thank you.
In The Days Before PC Boards - and Do-It-Yourself!
on
A Hardware Threepack
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Tom's Hardware has a great intro to PCB manufacturing
That was a great intro, well written, and explaining the basics. Not so basic, however, is attempting to make your own PC boards.
It's easy once you've got the practice, and you can get all the stuff you need at Radio Shack (or better places).
Toner transfer is my method of choice. I stuck transparencies, like you'd use in an overhead projector, into my laser printer. I crank up the darkness of the page, so it puts a lot of toner onto the transparency.
Then, I print my board layout, in mirror image, onto the transparency. Rest it on the blank, clean copper-clad board, and run a hot steam iron over it for a few minutes. With some practice, you'll be able to transfer enough of the toner onto the board that when you etch the blank board, your layout comes through.
I've even managed to produce double-sided surface-mount boards for prototyping and testing the high frequency response of a radar video processing system using this technique, before we committed to actually having the boards mass-produced.
Two sheets of transfer sheet, toner side in, aligned very carefully and stapled together, then a nice long pressing.
He thought I was crazy, but I was able to confirm to my boss, before we shelled out $50,000 for the manufacturing run of PC boards, that the layouts we'd designed worked properly.
Multilayer boards, like modern computer components use, are impractical for do-it-yourselfers to attempt, but I once built a 4-layer prototype by carefully aligning two double-sided boards, made as above, over a third (blank, no copper) board, and screwing the whole sandwich together with machine screws. Carefully-installed plate-through holes were accomplished with scraps of wire soldered through. It took four tries before I got the alignment right and made the board useful for building the prototype.
S-40, yep, my brother has one of them. My dad has probably one more on a shelf in the basement, too.
Mine's got some neat proof that hardware hacking didn't originate with computers.
The S-40 had an 80 rectifier tube powering it, about 350V B+ to the rest of the tubes.
Mine, on the other hand, was modified. Nice ceramic socket (different from the rest of the radio's sockets), hole neatly punched into the chassis. The new wiring is almost indistinguishable from the original radio, but it was clearly done when the radio was still nearly new - 1947-1955, somewhere in that range.
The tube that was added is a VR150 gas regulator, and the regulated B+ is fed to the RF amp, local oscillator, IF, AVC and detector stages. The only part of it on non-regulated B+ is the audio amplifier and output.
An electrodynamic speaker (early 1940s vintage) was fitted into the set in place of the original permanent magnet speaker, and the new speaker's field coil is hooked up where a power supply choke would be, if the radio had one.
It's all a very nice hack, looks original, was done with period parts when the radio was new. And it improves stability like you couldn't imagine: pop out the voltage regulator tube and it starts to drift. With the tube in, it's rock-solid stable and steady.
I'm wondering if it was a common hack, maybe covered in QST magazine or something. Do either of your S-40s have that mod?
Last I knew, Outlook wasn't part of IE. Of course, the way MS has been "integrating" things, who knows how long that'll remain true.
Well, beyond that, I was suggesting that this might be another PR move so that people feel like M$ is attempting to fill all their security holes. Of course, that's what they'll claim and get good press for, though of course the underlying reason to kill Netscape plug-ins is to move towards the seeming Microsoft goal of preventing any code that they didn't write from running on your machine.
Carrying along with the M$ line that IE is a core and inextricable part of the operating system, then they can even claim that they're promoting operating system security. And, in fact, they probably are; however, the problem is that their code always seems to have more holes than third-party developers.
Since Outlook is included with every edition of Windows since Windows 95, I'd also argue that because it's burned to the CD, it's also a part of the operating system. Not a core part, but since it's part of the default install, it's fair game when we're making fun of M$ security track record.
And we all know that the only thing with more security holes than IIS is Outlook.
Ergo, if they really cared about security, Outlook would be gone, or substantially re-written. But by disabling third-party Netscape-style browser plug-ins, they get to control the market even more, claim that it's in the interests of security, and keep the Evil Empire looking shiny and nice.
It's kinda like a Roto-Rooter truck in fresh clean orange paint. No matter how pretty it may be, you still know it's full of shit.
(Moderators: Pardon the cussword, but I think it had a place here...)
No, no. Microsoft is just trying to improve security.
Of course, it's all the third party browser plug-ins that make their operating systems insecure. Outlook and buffer overflows have nothing to do with it.
Go to a Hamfest (Amature Radio Swap 'n Shop) and get yourself a tube receiver (Hallicrafters, Hammerlund, Heathkit...), these old beasts still have the lowest noise and best sensitivity.
Oh yeah. I have a 1947 Hallicrafters S-40 shortwave radio. It's an *ugly* beast, but since I've replaced all the capacitors in it and realigned it with the original shop manual, man, it is stable and clean and it can suck in stations from anywhere.
I used to have a balanced rhombic antenna attached to it, and that really helped it. The antenna was aimed right across the American heartland from Ottawa, Canada, and it would pick up Aussie shortwave services without a problem.
Between my old Dodge Ram, my Hallicrafters radio and my old TI-99/4A, I can tell you for sure, they don't build 'em like they used to. [sigh]
Who cares about bang for the MHz when you don't get bang for the buck. A 1.4 GHz T-bird is well under half the cost of a top-end G4 system. MHz simply doesn't matter. You get like 4x the MHz per buck with x86 that you do of a G4.
Yeah, but the Intel and AMD processors we use are just extension after extension to the 1971 Intel 4004 hand calculator chip.
Why are we still trying to handle everything in 64k pages? Isn't the overhead to do that just ridiculous?
While you can get 4x the clock speed for the same price in x86 architecture, I'd suggest to you that the Motorola/PowerPC architecture will provide you at least 4x the power per MHz.
Comparing CPU speeds between Apple and x86 is like comparing apples and oranges. Would you honestly try to benchmark an Alpha or a MIPS or a Sparc by comparing its clock speed to an x86?
Clock speed differences between architectures is irrelevant. Just benchmark the machines to compare their speed.
I was picking up a 6000 Watt North Carolina FM station from near Philly
Today, WRVA, Richmond, Virginia. Crystal clear DX reception in Toronto. On the original made-in-September-1975 Motorola AM radio (with 8-track!) on the dashboard of my 1976 Dodge Ram. Very cool.
Of course it does! Without them to take the lead on everything, we'd still be stuffing 5.25" diskettes onto beige machines without GUIs.
They're the computer industry's metronome. No one wants to admit it, but every other company follows.
I sometimes suspect that 50% of their machines get sold to cults. The other 50% of their machines, of course, are sold to - and reverse engineered by - every other PC manufacturer and software developer.
Now that OS X is a *NIX derivative, an Apple is suddenly as viable as Linux on a PC. Moreso, in fact, since the hardware architecture is so much better and they get so much more bang for a MHz than does an x86.
Phillips is turning to the use of those cute little 3 inch CDs that have been around forever, but never really used for much. Apparently most existing CD burners can already write to them, and the rest can do so with an adapter
That's a great idea! I thought those things were gone forever. I loved their size and found the shape appealing, but always found their capacity to be annoying. Finally, a solution!
Quoted from reply:
They never took off in the US, but I've never seen a CD player incapable of playing them, including slot-loading CD players.
I have exactly two. Ill-fated 3" CD singles - one of Lloyd Price, the other of Fifth Dimension. Bought 'em back in the late '80s, when the cassingle and the 45 RPM record were still about neck and neck. (And there were still some 8-tracks for sale in that store.) They were a pain in the butt because they took up as much space in your CD collection as regular CDs (I keep them in ordinary CD jewel boxes for protection).
I did find a benefit to them. I had an Discman D-33 portable CD player, and I'd occasionally play those CDs in it while I was walking to school. They made the CD player skip far less than ordinary CDs (these were the days before buffered CD players), and I loved them for that.
I guess it makes sense, when you think about it. Ignoring the center hole, A 5" CD has 19.6 square inches of 1mm polycarbonate plastic. A 3" CD has 7.0 square inches of the plastic. (pi x (d/2)^2)
Ratio-wise, the 3" CD is a little less than 1/3rd the area of a 5" CD, and since they're the same plastic, it would make sense that it would weigh about 1/3rd a regular CD.
Why would the lesser weight reduce skipping (and therefore make *any* portable optical disc more practical)?
A CD player has a motor which spins the CD from 500-800 RPM, depending on where on the disc it's reading. The motor is under the computer's control, and has to be a small motor to reduce power consumption and allow the disc to change speed quickly.
Of course, gyroscopic forces affect any rotating mass, and when you move a playing CD player, the effects of the gyroscopic force on the speed of the disc are dependent on the mass of the disc.
If the CD spins too slowly for the CD player to keep the playback buffer full, it will skip.
Because of the speed adjustments to maintain a constant linear velocity during playback, I think there'd also be less battery power wasted trying to make the motor overcome the greater range of disc speeds it would encounter with a 5" disc.
Finally, nothing involved with doing this isn't mass-produced already. You take an ordinary portable CD player, shave the pickup rails down to 3" size, stuff it into a small case with CD-ROM electronics and an MP3 player. Nothing to it, just a really great new application for a forgotten format.
Then, the only thing that I'd lust after is 3" recordable DVDs. All the benefits of the 3" CD-ROM in a player, but think of how many MP3s you could get in your pocket with that.
Okay. Maybe not the only other thing I'd lust after, but well up there.
Raised floor so that you're not tripping over cables anymore.
Suction cups to lift raised floor tiles.
Snow shovel, pushing plow kind, to sweep empty coffee cups and other rubble which accumulates on the floor into the floor prior to the boss coming 'round. (Also great for hiding people, your personal Gnutella server on the company's OC-3, etc.)
Shelving. Lots of shelving. I prefer to recycle old racks, because they usually have nice doors on them to hide the clutter. I weld in brackets to support wooden shelves. (Into one of the old racks, of course, you take the compressor, evaporator and condenser from the fridge and no one will ever steal your lunch because they don't even know that's a fridge.)
Collection of window-box flower pots - you know, the long and rectangular ones. When the crap on your desk gives your mouse no place to roam, stick the flower box on the brackets welded or screwed to the side of your desk. Place the phone, mouse and monitor elsewhere. At this point, the shovel can do double duty and clean your desk as well. Leave the full flower box in a corner for a month. You didn't really need anything which is still in it at the end of the month, and you can readily dispatch the contents by raising a tile and dumping them into the black hole.
Every now and then, dumping a little bit of compost heap activator (available at any gardening store) will help the disposal process.
The only reason you got modded up is because you're one of those techno Jews.
Oy vey, you're so right.
After all, I was born in Cardiff, Wales to a parents who are Irish/Scottish and Scottish/French Hugenot (Hugenot = 'Cajuns who didn't immigrate to the USA).
As you can see, I'm clearly a Yid.
I ain't got nothing against Jews and all, but ya'll tend to stick together and I kinda admire that. You know like the Mafia and shit.
Sure do! My best friend since high school is a Jew. Given that I'm not even Jewish, it's a testament to how well we Jews stick together.
Oh yeah... The only reason I wrote is because I think banjo jokes are dum because they're made up by techno and diamund Jews who ain't never hunted or fished cause thier mama too afraid they gunna get killed by the Klan.
This Yiddohpile has never enjoyed hunting and fishing. My pastimes instead include wandering around rural automotive wrecking yards, collecting parts for my old cars. My mama's more afraid of the fact that I'm going to have another 1971 Chrysler New Yorker fall on me some day.
There are still some folks out there who like manual trannies..:)
I know your pain.
Here's a news article from Yahoo about the decline of the stickshift. Somewhere else (but I can't find it at the moment) I saw a survey which showed that the majority of North American drivers do not know how to drive a stickshift. And, anecdotally, I had to drive my truck onto the hoist at a tire shop, because the guy who was installing my new tires didn't know how to drive it. He attempted, but the smell of burning clutch was more than I could take. In his defense, I've never had someone clean my rims so well - I never have to top up the air in the tires, and he did a great job on the balancing, too.
Some Unices have ACLs, but that's hardly designed from the ground up is it?
Fine. I learned something new.
But I still question the suitability of Windows in a networked environment (which, of course, included AOL on a dial-up modem).
The facts are as follows:
Windows configuration, filesystem and overall structure are based on interoperability with a single-user operating system where security wasn't an issue (DOS).
Windows grew out of DOS with patch after patch after patch to the basic concepts.
When you put a nail through your tire, a patch is probably okay. When there are sufficient patches that they're overlapping, it's probably a good idea to replace the tire.
Networking and security are afterthoughts which were patched on long after the design of many core features.
Code base never gets mature because the marketing department is always too concerned with adding new features which have to be highly integrated into the operating system.
By contrast:
UNIX was designed from the ground up in a day where computers were so expensive that they had to support several users at once in order to be economically viable.
Multi-user operating systems have to be capable of effectively isolating user processes and files from each other and the system.
Networking virtually originated on UNIX.
A multi-user operating system is especially at home in a networked environment.
It's only within the past ten years or so that commodity desktop computers have grown to sufficient power to be able to support the features and overheads of UNIX in a practical way.
Now, considering all those points, I can't imagine why an informed person would choose to attempt to run mission-critical network services on an operating system without the foundations to handle it.
Windows architecture is like building the Empire State Building on a sand dune.
It tests a limited and well defined check list of skills, most having to do with installation and configuration. Only with the Windows 2000 series did the tests begin to measure planning and design skills.
Installation and configuration, huh?
I had another one - employed at a major international airport, no less - ask me how to solve a BSoD on a FIDS computer. Note that this is one of several hundred displays running Windows 95 (I don't want to get into why).
I had to lead him through all the steps. The fault was in VMM.VxD, so it looked right off the bat like bad hardware. Of course, his reflex instinct - reinstall Windows - will automagically repair a bad transistor on the address decode logic of a RAM chip.
Step one, check that the fans are spinning properly. Two, check that the cards, processor and memory are properly seated. Three, run a good memory test. The machine was removed from the suspended ceiling about the flight display monitors it served.
Step Three caused the problem. I gave him a DOS troubleshooting program, and told him that he had to create a system disk and run it without any extended memory drivers loaded. I specifically told him to open a command prompt, stick in the diskette, type "sys a:", then dump the contents of the ZIP file I gave him onto the disk.
Of course, he ignored my instructions, and used the Add/Remove Programs - Create Startup Disk feature in Windows, then dumped the ZIP to it.
Predictably, when the machine started up, HIMEM.SYS was loaded, and trying to start the memory testing program caused only error messages.
He came back to me, walking all the way from the International Departures area to Domestic Arrivals, telling me that it didn't work. Note that, including code-shares, that airport handles over 2,000 flights a day - big airport, long walk. When I saw why it didn't work, I had to remind him that HIMEM.SYS was being loaded because he didn't follow my instructions.
"So, uhh, I have to format the disk and start over?"
Intrigued like a witness to a particularly gruesome lawnmower accident, I led him through a series of questions. How do you control real-mode drivers loaded during startup of DOS and legacy Windows? (CONFIG.SYS, he didn't know)
How do you ensure that no real-mode drivers are loaded up? (Delete CONFIG.SYS, or REM them all out)
Will DOS run without CONFIG.SYS? (Yes, he said no.)
If you edit CONFIG.SYS to remove the line that refers to HIMEM.SYS, will Troubleshooter stop complaining that there's an extended memory driver loaded? (Yes, but he answered no.)
What's another quick and dirty way to stop HIMEM.SYS from loading? (Delete or rename it. Blank, confused stare.)
He eventually deleted it and got it working, but he looked pretty scared at a command prompt. Rather than trusting him to interpret the results of the memory test, I told him to save them to a log file on the diskette. Intermittently bad memory, and knowing what SIMMs were in the machine and doing a bit of quick calculation, I blew him away by even telling which bank had the bad RAM. Oddly enough, Windows was right for once - one of the addresses in the BSoD's core dump was the same as Troubleshooter gave.
Configuration, huh? AUTOEXEC.BAT, CONFIG.SYS and HIMEM.SYS are pretty much the foundations of everything which has happened since. I would pay money to see him sitting in front of the Windows 2000 Recovery Console.
Now, you will, of course, forgive me for feeling superior to an MCSE.
The interesting thing about the article is that it implies that unix worms are written by very smart people, unlike the script kiddies who target windows. Maybe this means it's a bit harder to write a unix worm?
I would think that to write one which would propagate despite the myrid configuration options in UNIX which simply aren't available in Windows, as well as having to find a way for the malicious code to break out of the process' user rights and get root access, would substantially raise the bar in any attempt to make one that is substantially destructive.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't you read [slashdot.org]? It works like this: You report the probing and infection to the ISP, they contact the FBI, and you're arrested.
Ugh. That's insane.
To me, that's akin to being arrested for reporting a drunk driver.
It's *my* highway, too... (I'd argue more so, since I'm not a luser running AOL on Windows 2000 with IIS running by default; *hell*, I used to have a UUCP e-mail address back in 1988, but I've ranted about that enough already). Don't *my* needs for safety on the Information Superhighway count for anything?
Prior to this, I'd always attributed intelligence to the FBI. And, I'd still like to hope that there are some Fox Mulders in the department. Unfortunately, it sounds like this guy has become the victim of an overzealous donut-eater of a prosecutor whose computer illiteracy is eclipsed only by the FBI's Keystone Kops.
Before a brush with the Peel Regional Gestapo where my truck was taken off the road for an alleged safety violation, I had held law enforcement in high regard. I'd always found cops to be friendly, helpful, diplomatic and logical.
<rant>(The truck was really ugly but the steering, brakes, body and lights were all solid and working perfectly, so they decided that they didn't like the way my battery was held down and yanked my license plates. Interestingly enough, the battery was held down exactly the same way as Chrysler held down the battery on all 149,999 other Dodge Rams they made in 1983. I had two mechanics (one of whom works at a restoration shop where they fix $500,000 Bugattis day in and day out) and a mechanical engineer testify for me that the vehicle was absolutely, perfectly safe; even so, the judge upheld the Peel Regional Gestapo's cop (not a licensed mechanic) was capable of making the decision better than two mechanics and an engineer. I considered sneaking into the USA and claiming refugee status as a publicity stunt in retaliation. I took the cop aside afterwards, asked him if he had children, and then told him that I would attend church that Sunday and pray that his wife and children would both be stricken with inoperable bowel cancer. A man like him has no business procreating.)</rant>
With news like that, I start to think that it's time for me to overthrow the government of some small South Pacific island and make LawrenceLand, appointing myself head of state and chief of police. Any cop with more donuts in his squad car than measurable IQ points would be executed, by his victims, in front of the teeming masses.
Ironic that you now face being shunted into Microsoft environments - or out of technology -by the free market that your philosophy extolls as the engine of excellence.
Ironic and sad, yes.
Both laissez-faire capitalism and communism rely on the existence of humans that don't exist yet: the former on perfectly rational, completely informed agents, the latter on completely fair, totally socialized comrades. The failures of each system are based on the fact that humans are not that easy to reinvent.Congratulations, you have done what few lack the ability to do: change my viewpoint.
Through your concise and relevant comment, you have managed to make me re-think a couple of points. While I'm still fundamentally a Libertarian, there has long been a need to have some sort of government intervention in the Microsoft monopoly, a rare exception to my usual philosophy of letting the free market decide.
But this does reinforce the need for a truly impartial government to oversee all facets of the running of a society; as one of the few moderates who hasn't simply posted "socialism is best" or some other similar rant, your point has reminded me that the balance does remain the best system. Certainly, in Canada, all levels of government provide substantial roadblocks to creating your own business, as an example; controls need to remain (as much as I loathe to admit it), though they should be simpler, more streamlined and efficient than those currently in place.
Welcome to the real world. See that? I'm crying. Oh, woe is you. That's called capitalism. That's the "old economy" for you.
Very, very true. And, based on the karma hits I've taken for espousing a Libertarian philosophy, I do want you to understand that I'm not down about that.
The problem is that tech seems to be a bad word now, especially to headhunters. I don't have 14 university degrees; what I have is a practical hands-on ability, honed by 17 years of computer experience, to make systems work in real-world environments.
Have you been to a headhunter lately? It pains me when they're asking for MCSEs. *MCSEs*. I used to have MCSEs under me; they'd ask me questions like why they have to type an IP address to point to a domain name server, or how to prevent HIMEM.SYS loading when the machine starts up. (I've ranted about this on Slashdot before.) It's a paper qualification, not indicative of any real insight into how a Windows machine works. Nor do I even wish to be trapped in the Windows prison. Yet, headhunters seem to want it. [sigh]
Who the hell came up with this "new economy" slogan anyways? Exactly what is so "new" about it? Nothing, other than the fact that a bunch of young, naive idiots managed to convince some old money that their ideas were "foolproof" as in "you fools can't tell we've got no idea what the hell we're doing."Engineering saying: Make something foolproof, and someone comes along and builds a better fool.
But here you are whining about your misfortune. Are you mad you were suckered in too? Are you bitter because you feel it was "owed" to you? Do you think you have it hard? You're probably an intelligent person and you can probably actually perform your job duties.I like to think I'm intelligent. Actually, I did write the Mensa test, and I passed it. Even went to a couple of Mensa meetings, but got bored with hanging around with people who had nothing better to do than attempt to demonstrate to each other how intelligent they are.
No, I didn't get suckered in by the new economy. The problems were evident all the way along. For the most part, it's failing e-tailers that seem to have dragged everything else down. Well, using a mail-order analogy, why would you buy a bag of kitty litter by mail-order when there's a pet store right down the street?
E-tailing, of course, has its merits. Mail order (which is all that e-tailing really is) cannot be beaten as a way of buying specialized items. Antique car parts. Strange transistor types. Even that needlepoint pattern that my best friend's girlfriend has been looking all over for.
In the frucus before the bubble burst, it seemed that people had lost sight of common sense, and we've all been dragged down because of it. I lament *that*, not capitalism.
That alone puts you ahead of most of the other lobos (think lobotomy) "looking" for a job (more accurately, looking for a new job that's exactly like their old job).Well, I'm not looking for something exactly like my old job, no. I'd prefer something where my combination of electronics, computers and technical writing experience can work together to save/make my new employer money. But, at this point, I have a friend who is a tow truck driver, and I've been moonlighting doing that and a few other things to pay the bills.
Maybe try and industry that isn't part of the "new economy."Certainly have. There's no aversion for me to work for a bricks-and-mortar company. I've never worked for a start-up. I've always worked for established companies. That's not to say that I wouldn't love the excitement and pace of a new venture - I would. All the run-off from failed dot-coms are swamping every other sector, and that makes it pretty hard for your signal to rise above the noise and reach the ear of a potential employer.
One of the reasons I've been posting to Slashdot a *lot* lately is to get myself heard by like-minded people who might even be in hiring positions. So far, it's worked reasonably well, I've been getting hundreds of hits a day to my website, and many of those hits check out my resume.
Try civil service. Perhaps the police, fire department, military, IRS, FBI, etc. They're not going away any time soon.I live in Toronto, and I've already done that.
I'm an able-bodied white, anglo-saxon protestant male. WASP. With employment equity in full force across all levels of Canadian government, I submitted my resume, clicked off the boxes asking me my ethnicity and stuff, and received a couple of e-mails back telling me that I didn't reflect the demographics they desired.
If you can't find a job locally, it's time to move. "Oh, I can't move, I love it here." You'll love it too, when you can't pay your rent and you're out on the street.At this point, gladly. Gladly. I live in Toronto, the heart of all of Canada's commerical and industrial activity. Toronto is Canada's equivalent to New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Detroit all rolled into one. And it's still pretty dead here. Ottawa is the other option, and it's very similar to Silicon Valley; it's even got the nickname, "Silicon Valley North". With Mitel, Corel, Nortel and innumerable failed start-ups, it's hurting even more than Toronto. So, unless an employer were to see my resume and decide that they wished to sponsor me for immigration into the United States, those are my options, and Toronto is decidedly better than Ottawa at the moment.
Take charge of your life.Of course. I'm motivated almost to the point of obsessiveness about reaching goals.
It's hard to stay optimistic and upbeat when you set a goal of finding a job by the end of the week, and again it doesn't happen.
I've stood at Bay and King (Toronto's equivalent to Wall Street) in my best suit, holding up a sign that says "Computer Geek For Hire.... Will Work For Bandwidth". Because of the humorous and practical approach, I got a lot of attention - even so far as a couple of TV interviews. Got to pass out lots of resumes and follow up with lots of people who gave me business cards.
And from all that, *one* interview. One. I present myself well, and I'm friendly and professional. Needless to say, I didn't get that job. (They were looking for an Assembly language programmer. I haven't written in Assembly in over ten years now.)
Even though I remind myself that it's a numbers game, the truth is that when someone quits a job in the IT department at a bank or something, generally, they don't seem to re-hire.
Computer geeks seem to have become about as desireable as 8-tracks.
You took a chance at (fame and) fortune and you lost. If you don't want to lose, don't play the game.Don't have much choice, do I? Again, I'm not lamenting capitalism. I'm lamenting the idiocy of those who built the tech bubble up so much that when it burst, it affected companies and people with sound business ideas and skills.
You'll never get rich when you're unemployed.Tell me about it.
I do not dispute that shipping kitty litter across country is a bad idea, though, just that there are no uses for all that bandwidth.
For sure!
Limewire and other Gnutella clients simply don't have the press that Napster got, so most users don't know about them.
Note the sarcasm tags, which your browser would parse if it were HTML 7.0-compliant.
[grin]
I can see it now. Hungry unemployed IT workers lined up at the @homeless shelter.
Ugh. The wolf is @ our door, boys and girls.
I blame it all on people who were stupid enough to buy shares of a company that promised to save consumers money by FedExing a $4.00, 30lb bag of kitty litter across the country. $21 shipping bill later, two day delivery time, versus going to the local bricks-and-mortar pet shop at the local mall, shelling out $6 and having a happy cat right away.
<sarcasm>There's a good business model. How can it fail?</sarcasm>
<more_sarcasm>Now that e-tailers have been brought back to reality and Napster is dead for all practical purposes, there's still no reason for broadband. No need for the convenience and power of having all the world's information at your fingertips. No reason why an AOL dialup account can't satisfy all your surfing needs.</more_sarcasm>
And now, as a result of idiocy of that scale across virtually the entire stock market, I find myself unemployed and unable to find a decent job. This really sucks.
dang it. whenever i have mod points i can never find comments worthy of being modded up. then as soon as they are gone along comes a comment like the above. well if i had some mod points I would have given them to you. simply brill.
Awww, that's so sweet. Thank you.
Tom's Hardware has a great intro to PCB manufacturing
That was a great intro, well written, and explaining the basics. Not so basic, however, is attempting to make your own PC boards.
It's easy once you've got the practice, and you can get all the stuff you need at Radio Shack (or better places).
Toner transfer is my method of choice. I stuck transparencies, like you'd use in an overhead projector, into my laser printer. I crank up the darkness of the page, so it puts a lot of toner onto the transparency.
Then, I print my board layout, in mirror image, onto the transparency. Rest it on the blank, clean copper-clad board, and run a hot steam iron over it for a few minutes. With some practice, you'll be able to transfer enough of the toner onto the board that when you etch the blank board, your layout comes through.
I've even managed to produce double-sided surface-mount boards for prototyping and testing the high frequency response of a radar video processing system using this technique, before we committed to actually having the boards mass-produced.
Two sheets of transfer sheet, toner side in, aligned very carefully and stapled together, then a nice long pressing.
He thought I was crazy, but I was able to confirm to my boss, before we shelled out $50,000 for the manufacturing run of PC boards, that the layouts we'd designed worked properly.
Multilayer boards, like modern computer components use, are impractical for do-it-yourselfers to attempt, but I once built a 4-layer prototype by carefully aligning two double-sided boards, made as above, over a third (blank, no copper) board, and screwing the whole sandwich together with machine screws. Carefully-installed plate-through holes were accomplished with scraps of wire soldered through. It took four tries before I got the alignment right and made the board useful for building the prototype.
If that sounds complicated, you should see how stuff was built before Westinghouse invented printed circuit boards. Imagine a modern computer built like that. Urk.
All this and I'm still unemployed. Hit my page for my resume and stuff.
S-40, yep, my brother has one of them. My dad has probably one more on a shelf in the basement, too.
Mine's got some neat proof that hardware hacking didn't originate with computers.
The S-40 had an 80 rectifier tube powering it, about 350V B+ to the rest of the tubes.
Mine, on the other hand, was modified. Nice ceramic socket (different from the rest of the radio's sockets), hole neatly punched into the chassis. The new wiring is almost indistinguishable from the original radio, but it was clearly done when the radio was still nearly new - 1947-1955, somewhere in that range.
The tube that was added is a VR150 gas regulator, and the regulated B+ is fed to the RF amp, local oscillator, IF, AVC and detector stages. The only part of it on non-regulated B+ is the audio amplifier and output.
An electrodynamic speaker (early 1940s vintage) was fitted into the set in place of the original permanent magnet speaker, and the new speaker's field coil is hooked up where a power supply choke would be, if the radio had one.
It's all a very nice hack, looks original, was done with period parts when the radio was new. And it improves stability like you couldn't imagine: pop out the voltage regulator tube and it starts to drift. With the tube in, it's rock-solid stable and steady.
I'm wondering if it was a common hack, maybe covered in QST magazine or something. Do either of your S-40s have that mod?
Last I knew, Outlook wasn't part of IE. Of course, the way MS has been "integrating" things, who knows how long that'll remain true.
Well, beyond that, I was suggesting that this might be another PR move so that people feel like M$ is attempting to fill all their security holes. Of course, that's what they'll claim and get good press for, though of course the underlying reason to kill Netscape plug-ins is to move towards the seeming Microsoft goal of preventing any code that they didn't write from running on your machine.
Carrying along with the M$ line that IE is a core and inextricable part of the operating system, then they can even claim that they're promoting operating system security. And, in fact, they probably are; however, the problem is that their code always seems to have more holes than third-party developers.
Since Outlook is included with every edition of Windows since Windows 95, I'd also argue that because it's burned to the CD, it's also a part of the operating system. Not a core part, but since it's part of the default install, it's fair game when we're making fun of M$ security track record.
And we all know that the only thing with more security holes than IIS is Outlook.
Ergo, if they really cared about security, Outlook would be gone, or substantially re-written. But by disabling third-party Netscape-style browser plug-ins, they get to control the market even more, claim that it's in the interests of security, and keep the Evil Empire looking shiny and nice.
It's kinda like a Roto-Rooter truck in fresh clean orange paint. No matter how pretty it may be, you still know it's full of shit.
(Moderators: Pardon the cussword, but I think it had a place here...)
Then why do ActiveX controls still work?
Or Outlook?
Sarcasm.
But of course they're just INNOVATING.
No, no. Microsoft is just trying to improve security.
Of course, it's all the third party browser plug-ins that make their operating systems insecure. Outlook and buffer overflows have nothing to do with it.
[sigh]
Go to a Hamfest (Amature Radio Swap 'n Shop) and get yourself a tube receiver (Hallicrafters, Hammerlund, Heathkit...), these old beasts still have the lowest noise and best sensitivity.
Oh yeah. I have a 1947 Hallicrafters S-40 shortwave radio. It's an *ugly* beast, but since I've replaced all the capacitors in it and realigned it with the original shop manual, man, it is stable and clean and it can suck in stations from anywhere.
I used to have a balanced rhombic antenna attached to it, and that really helped it. The antenna was aimed right across the American heartland from Ottawa, Canada, and it would pick up Aussie shortwave services without a problem.
Between my old Dodge Ram, my Hallicrafters radio and my old TI-99/4A, I can tell you for sure, they don't build 'em like they used to. [sigh]
Who cares about bang for the MHz when you don't get bang for the buck. A 1.4 GHz T-bird is well under half the cost of a top-end G4 system.
MHz simply doesn't matter. You get like 4x the MHz per buck with x86 that you do of a G4.
Yeah, but the Intel and AMD processors we use are just extension after extension to the 1971 Intel 4004 hand calculator chip.
Why are we still trying to handle everything in 64k pages? Isn't the overhead to do that just ridiculous?
While you can get 4x the clock speed for the same price in x86 architecture, I'd suggest to you that the Motorola/PowerPC architecture will provide you at least 4x the power per MHz.
Comparing CPU speeds between Apple and x86 is like comparing apples and oranges. Would you honestly try to benchmark an Alpha or a MIPS or a Sparc by comparing its clock speed to an x86?
Clock speed differences between architectures is irrelevant. Just benchmark the machines to compare their speed.
I was picking up a 6000 Watt North Carolina FM station from near Philly
Today, WRVA, Richmond, Virginia. Crystal clear DX reception in Toronto. On the original made-in-September-1975 Motorola AM radio (with 8-track!) on the dashboard of my 1976 Dodge Ram. Very cool.
Our topic is 'Does Apple Matter?'
Of course it does! Without them to take the lead on everything, we'd still be stuffing 5.25" diskettes onto beige machines without GUIs.
They're the computer industry's metronome. No one wants to admit it, but every other company follows.
I sometimes suspect that 50% of their machines get sold to cults. The other 50% of their machines, of course, are sold to - and reverse engineered by - every other PC manufacturer and software developer.
Now that OS X is a *NIX derivative, an Apple is suddenly as viable as Linux on a PC. Moreso, in fact, since the hardware architecture is so much better and they get so much more bang for a MHz than does an x86.
Not to mention, the cases are so cool.
Quoted from Article:
Phillips is turning to the use of those cute little 3 inch CDs that have been around forever, but never really used for much. Apparently most existing CD burners can already write to them, and the rest can do so with an adapterThat's a great idea! I thought those things were gone forever. I loved their size and found the shape appealing, but always found their capacity to be annoying. Finally, a solution!
Quoted from reply:
They never took off in the US, but I've never seen a CD player incapable of playing them, including slot-loading CD players.I have exactly two. Ill-fated 3" CD singles - one of Lloyd Price, the other of Fifth Dimension. Bought 'em back in the late '80s, when the cassingle and the 45 RPM record were still about neck and neck. (And there were still some 8-tracks for sale in that store.) They were a pain in the butt because they took up as much space in your CD collection as regular CDs (I keep them in ordinary CD jewel boxes for protection).
I did find a benefit to them. I had an Discman D-33 portable CD player, and I'd occasionally play those CDs in it while I was walking to school. They made the CD player skip far less than ordinary CDs (these were the days before buffered CD players), and I loved them for that.
I guess it makes sense, when you think about it. Ignoring the center hole, A 5" CD has 19.6 square inches of 1mm polycarbonate plastic. A 3" CD has 7.0 square inches of the plastic. (pi x (d/2)^2)
Ratio-wise, the 3" CD is a little less than 1/3rd the area of a 5" CD, and since they're the same plastic, it would make sense that it would weigh about 1/3rd a regular CD.
Why would the lesser weight reduce skipping (and therefore make *any* portable optical disc more practical)?
A CD player has a motor which spins the CD from 500-800 RPM, depending on where on the disc it's reading. The motor is under the computer's control, and has to be a small motor to reduce power consumption and allow the disc to change speed quickly.
Of course, gyroscopic forces affect any rotating mass, and when you move a playing CD player, the effects of the gyroscopic force on the speed of the disc are dependent on the mass of the disc.
If the CD spins too slowly for the CD player to keep the playback buffer full, it will skip.
Because of the speed adjustments to maintain a constant linear velocity during playback, I think there'd also be less battery power wasted trying to make the motor overcome the greater range of disc speeds it would encounter with a 5" disc.
Finally, nothing involved with doing this isn't mass-produced already. You take an ordinary portable CD player, shave the pickup rails down to 3" size, stuff it into a small case with CD-ROM electronics and an MP3 player. Nothing to it, just a really great new application for a forgotten format.
Then, the only thing that I'd lust after is 3" recordable DVDs. All the benefits of the 3" CD-ROM in a player, but think of how many MP3s you could get in your pocket with that.
Okay. Maybe not the only other thing I'd lust after, but well up there.
Fridge.
Of course! That's a given. But with a twist.
Okay. Here's a list.
Every now and then, dumping a little bit of compost heap activator (available at any gardening store) will help the disposal process.
This big-mouthed kike is sure to be added onto my gassing list.
There, there. After a five minute visit with the Mohel, you'll be feeling a lot better.
The only reason you got modded up is because you're one of those techno Jews.
Oy vey, you're so right.
After all, I was born in Cardiff, Wales to a parents who are Irish/Scottish and Scottish/French Hugenot (Hugenot = 'Cajuns who didn't immigrate to the USA).
As you can see, I'm clearly a Yid.
I ain't got nothing against Jews and all, but ya'll tend to stick together and I kinda admire that. You know like the Mafia and shit.Sure do! My best friend since high school is a Jew. Given that I'm not even Jewish, it's a testament to how well we Jews stick together.
Oh yeah... The only reason I wrote is because I think banjo jokes are dum because they're made up by techno and diamund Jews who ain't never hunted or fished cause thier mama too afraid they gunna get killed by the Klan.This Yiddohpile has never enjoyed hunting and fishing. My pastimes instead include wandering around rural automotive wrecking yards, collecting parts for my old cars. My mama's more afraid of the fact that I'm going to have another 1971 Chrysler New Yorker fall on me some day.
Banjo
The name "banjo" stresses me too much already.
I expect Kermit to start singing any second.
Everyone is excited about building the networks, but the support obligations that the network creates are another question.
Bah. It's not a problem at all.
Set up a DHCP server. Circulate a photocopy:
"Your network connection is through DHCP-addressed Ethernet.
Your e-mail address is $DORM_ROOM@$CAMPUS.$UNIVERSITY.edu.
Your password is ($DORM_ROOM * $SOCIAL_SECURITY_NUMBER) / $MOTHERS_YEAR_OF_BIRTH.
If you can't get it working with these instructions, drop out now and save your parents a whole lot of money.
Welcome to the $UNIVERSITY at $CAMPUS, have an adequate education."
There are still some folks out there who like manual trannies..
I know your pain.
Here's a news article from Yahoo about the decline of the stickshift. Somewhere else (but I can't find it at the moment) I saw a survey which showed that the majority of North American drivers do not know how to drive a stickshift. And, anecdotally, I had to drive my truck onto the hoist at a tire shop, because the guy who was installing my new tires didn't know how to drive it. He attempted, but the smell of burning clutch was more than I could take. In his defense, I've never had someone clean my rims so well - I never have to top up the air in the tires, and he did a great job on the balancing, too.
Some Unices have ACLs, but that's hardly designed from the ground up is it?
Fine. I learned something new.
But I still question the suitability of Windows in a networked environment (which, of course, included AOL on a dial-up modem).
The facts are as follows:
By contrast:
Now, considering all those points, I can't imagine why an informed person would choose to attempt to run mission-critical network services on an operating system without the foundations to handle it.
Windows architecture is like building the Empire State Building on a sand dune.
It tests a limited and well defined check list of skills, most having to do with installation and configuration. Only with the Windows 2000 series did the tests begin to measure planning and design skills.
Installation and configuration, huh?
I had another one - employed at a major international airport, no less - ask me how to solve a BSoD on a FIDS computer. Note that this is one of several hundred displays running Windows 95 (I don't want to get into why).
I had to lead him through all the steps. The fault was in VMM.VxD, so it looked right off the bat like bad hardware. Of course, his reflex instinct - reinstall Windows - will automagically repair a bad transistor on the address decode logic of a RAM chip.
Step one, check that the fans are spinning properly. Two, check that the cards, processor and memory are properly seated. Three, run a good memory test. The machine was removed from the suspended ceiling about the flight display monitors it served.
Step Three caused the problem. I gave him a DOS troubleshooting program, and told him that he had to create a system disk and run it without any extended memory drivers loaded. I specifically told him to open a command prompt, stick in the diskette, type "sys a:", then dump the contents of the ZIP file I gave him onto the disk.
Of course, he ignored my instructions, and used the Add/Remove Programs - Create Startup Disk feature in Windows, then dumped the ZIP to it.
Predictably, when the machine started up, HIMEM.SYS was loaded, and trying to start the memory testing program caused only error messages.
He came back to me, walking all the way from the International Departures area to Domestic Arrivals, telling me that it didn't work. Note that, including code-shares, that airport handles over 2,000 flights a day - big airport, long walk. When I saw why it didn't work, I had to remind him that HIMEM.SYS was being loaded because he didn't follow my instructions.
"So, uhh, I have to format the disk and start over?"
Intrigued like a witness to a particularly gruesome lawnmower accident, I led him through a series of questions. How do you control real-mode drivers loaded during startup of DOS and legacy Windows? (CONFIG.SYS, he didn't know)
How do you ensure that no real-mode drivers are loaded up? (Delete CONFIG.SYS, or REM them all out)
Will DOS run without CONFIG.SYS? (Yes, he said no.)
If you edit CONFIG.SYS to remove the line that refers to HIMEM.SYS, will Troubleshooter stop complaining that there's an extended memory driver loaded? (Yes, but he answered no.)
What's another quick and dirty way to stop HIMEM.SYS from loading? (Delete or rename it. Blank, confused stare.)
He eventually deleted it and got it working, but he looked pretty scared at a command prompt. Rather than trusting him to interpret the results of the memory test, I told him to save them to a log file on the diskette. Intermittently bad memory, and knowing what SIMMs were in the machine and doing a bit of quick calculation, I blew him away by even telling which bank had the bad RAM. Oddly enough, Windows was right for once - one of the addresses in the BSoD's core dump was the same as Troubleshooter gave.
Configuration, huh? AUTOEXEC.BAT, CONFIG.SYS and HIMEM.SYS are pretty much the foundations of everything which has happened since. I would pay money to see him sitting in front of the Windows 2000 Recovery Console.
Now, you will, of course, forgive me for feeling superior to an MCSE.
The interesting thing about the article is that it implies that unix worms are written by very smart people, unlike the script kiddies who target windows. Maybe this means it's a bit harder to write a unix worm?
I would think that to write one which would propagate despite the myrid configuration options in UNIX which simply aren't available in Windows, as well as having to find a way for the malicious code to break out of the process' user rights and get root access, would substantially raise the bar in any attempt to make one that is substantially destructive.