I set up everything to forward to my gmail account. Havent had to use the shoddy interface in a long time.
You are fortunate. In the past few years or so 2005-ish, I think, MSN Hotmail removed the original Hotmail ability to forward mail to any address other than a Hotmail or Hotmail Custom Domains address. To prevent users from forwarding to an outside provider, no doubt.
If I recall correctly that is an "anti spam feature" (officially).
In any case; people I know that use Hotmail cannot do the same.
I wonder how long they will leave legacy forwards in place.
Said study authors should learn what a "peak" is and what peak oil means: after the "peak" there is a decline. So "scientists": come back if there is a steady, continous decline.
No.. a peak is just a local high point; there does not have to be a continuous steady decline just a VALLEY. There are different possible results after a peak has been reached.
It could be a flat graph after the peak is reached, e.g. only a small decrease, and then a straight line; indicating a "cap", after some time at the high point.
More commonly a peak followed by a valley and then another peak, the next peak might be higher or lower than the first peak, or it might be at the same level.
A peak does not indicate a top value reached followed by a continuous decline.
While it's arguably "prettier" I don't see anything wrong with old school redirects though. Either using 302's or "sourceforge" style.
Additional HTTP request round trips = Increased Page Request Latency (time that elapses between when a page is requested and when the response data starts to be received = Slower page loads
No can do. My ISP's DNS redirects unresolvable queries to a bunch of ads.
How long do you think it will be before your ISP uses dynamic packet inspection to transparently intercept DNS response packets you receive from 8.8.8.8 and replace NXDOMAIN responses with a 'fake' A record response for their ad servers?
Actually no it isn't. The students pay his salary by choosing to attend his class.
Last I checked, students pay tuition to the school based on the number of classes taken.
They pay for the privilege of entering that room, not for the privilege to own the class or dictate every aspect of the learning conditions; setting the ground rules to deliver their lesson is the job of the person being paid to teach.
You don't like it, you can leave their class, but probably there are no refunds.
Your suggestion is equivalent to saying the "fans own their sports team" and get to set the rules of gameplay, because choose to buy tickets and watch the game; they pay the referee's salary. If he had no fans watching his games, the league would fire him from his referee job, therefore he must make all the calls that make the majority of fans happy, regardless of what is fair or most proper.
This nutjob is apparently already in the running for a Darwin Award...
But as he is still alive, it did not kill him, thus, he won't be eligible for a darwin award unless he was injured so badly he cannot reproduce, or he winds up dying.
thinks Nintendo and Sony may be getting ahead of themselves with these disclaimers. 'It's hard to say that it'll ruin development,' says Ehrenhaus."
From the Lawyers' perspective, it is probably a really better idea to take a conservative view of exercising caution, and warning customers about possible threats that might not exist.
Than to just throw caution to the wind, let the technology fly, and get sued for billions, if negative effects are discovered later.
By warning up front, the parents will be liable.
It will be as if the technology was known to be able to cause harm if misused, and PROPERLY warned about.
Now if someone overuses 3D games without breaks, and the unstudied effects of excessive use turn out to be harmful,
then Sony/Nintendo's responsibility for the bad thing that happened is less, because they did the responsible thing
by specifically warning that the the excessive usage without breaks MIGHT be harmful, AND structuring of the warnings
as if it was already known harmful.
A less optimistic possibility is Sony/Nintendo know somehow it is in fact harmful, through internal studies, and they're keeping the info secret.
That means Ehrenhaus might not have access to the information required to properly evaluate whether Sony/NES are getting ahead of themselves or not.
Yes, but that's defamation of character. You can't accuse somebody of cheating without having evidence, and a statistical anomaly does not evidence make.
Defamation of character only occurs if you are so reckless that you do not have a private conference with the student to question them and inform them of the allegation.
They can probably ask the student a couple of questions about their work, and know immediately whether the student was capable of answering the question on their own or not.
Defamation can only occur if you inform other people that they are a cheater.
"There is an allegations or information suggesting that they may have cheated" would be a true statement, so it would not be defamation even to repeat.
Yes, you can accuse somebody without evidence. A school is not a court of law.
Yes a statistical anomaly may be evidence.
I doubt that it's really that unusual for somebody to do better on the hard questions than the easy ones. I remember back in college having a tendency to make stupid mistakes on easy questions that I'd never make on harder ones where I was paying closer attention by necessity.
Correlation analysis would not be merely comparing how you did on 'hard' to 'easy' questions; by some observer's opinion about hard and some observer's opinion about easy.
They would look at things like... a very small percentage of students got this question right.
This question requires understanding of concepts P, Q, R, and S, which are tested by 4 simpler questions on the test.
Less than 1% of students got all 4 simpler questions completely wrong, for example, took a completely incorrect method of trying to solve the problem, and got full credit on the more complex question.
The students that did get all 4 wrong, showed a complete lack of knowledge of concepts required to actually answer the hard question.
Then the ones that did perfect on the hard question are very suspicious, and they ought to be called in to explain their solution
The "anomaly" doesn't guarantee cheating; but it tells them where to look.
Kind of like a spam filter tells you what mail is probably spam, by sending it to a Spam folder.
They could assign everyone a few "extra" personalized tests every term and taylor the personalized test based on the statistical information.
With suspected cheaters receiving some questions designed to expose them.
If it is rare enough that a non-cheater is identified as a cheater, for example
Once an anomaly has been found, they can list anomalies as people to scrutinize more closely on the next test.
Especially if they show up as anomalous on more than one test.
They can start comparing answers to people that were near the anomalous tester for similarities, after detecting the statistical anomaly.
Please, don't encrypt passwords. Encryption implies that you can retrieve them if you have the keys, which could have made this much worse.
Only if the keys are compromised.
The correct thing to do is to encrypt each password and protect the key by storing it in a different place; for example, by storing it in a different database, and having a separate application that performs authentications, so no single application has access to both databases.
That way, if the user file / user database is leaked someone cannot simply use a MD5 brute force attempt with some rainbow tables and a dictionary to get everyone's password.
This is most useful when the plaintext version of the password is required for authentication processes such as CHAP or CRAM-MD5 authentication.
When it is not required, you are best off taking a secure crypto hash of the password with a secret salt, and then encrypt the list of SHA1/SHA256 hashes.
If the password file is leaked with the list of SHA256 hashes, they will be useless without the ability to find or guess the salt that was used to compute each password.
including email addresses, first and last names, and an md5 hash representation of user passwords."
How long before we see a file on bittorrent?
With plaintext passwords derived from crack MD5 hash representations.
Time to change your password, if you have an account on Mozilla's website.
Repeat with any other online resources (such as e-mail accounts or accounts with other websites) you used a similar password on.
In the mean-time, while you're spending time making the change subtle enough to be believed, you're letting actual data leak and confusing your friends/family.
If you linked your profile to friends/family members' profiles, then in a way, you have already lost the war.
"Hm... I wonder what (user)'s mother's maiden name is? No problem.... search for user > Mutual Friends > Mother > Info > Relationship History > Marriage Date > Full Name History > Prior Full name
Hey again... Mr Bank Teller... no problem... my mother's maiden name is (blah); please wire the funds to this overseas account National bank of Nigeria, number (blah blah blah).
But like you said, it's undoubtedly journal-like under the hood, so changing and deleting won't achieve anything.
Yeah.. it will... if you change it subtly enough over time, it will become increasingly difficult and eventually impossible to sort out the facts from the fantasy without lots of manual labor by humans.
"If you're protective of your privacy, it might be a good idea to gradually replace all information in your profile with phony information."
(Assuming you already made the mistake of creating a profile)
In grotesque summary of a website's summary at the federal level "The statute is essentially about stealing mail from the Post Office.". In other words the feds pretty much don't care as long as there are no post office employees or post office property directly involved.
The mailbox out front is post-office property. So I suppose, technically, if something arrives at it that has someone else's name on it, if you take that item from the post office box and bring it into your home to open it, you have stolen it, unless there was some sort of implied permission that you do so.
I think if you are married, and you ordinarily do that, then there is implied permission, and not a crime.
According to Title 18, United States Code, Section 1705, residential
mailboxes are indeed considered Federal Property and are protected
under that same code against acts of mail theft, vandalism and
rifling:
Tampering with mailboxes in any fashion is a felony offense:
"Mailboxes are considered federal property, and federal law makes it a
crime to vandalize them (and to injure, deface or destroy any mail
deposited in them)."
Why? I'm an author and composer, and for us, history doesn't stretch back just a year or two -- it stretches back a lifetime. I was very happy to have those ancient electronic sources from 1972 when an ensemble wanted to premiere that composition in Amsterdam in 2003.
If the history is important to you, then why did you delete those files in the first place?
Backups are not archives, and archives are not backups.
If you are deleting your old information so systemically then the tape is not a backup. It has become a "primary" copy in a way.
And tape is notably unreliable for this, especially as it ages.
Backup refers to a second copy of data from a primary medium in case the primary copy should be damaged.
Once the primary medium is intentionally destroyed, or the file is deleted, the backup should be obsolete.
If you regularly destroy information and leave tape as the only copy, then no backup exists, since the tape then is the only copy kept.
If you need to keep historic information, then it should be in an archive or revision control system, that is separately backed up.
Keep the data on a RAID5 array with 8 2TB cheap-o SATA drives.
Thanks to the RAID5, if a hard drive fails, no data is lost,
so there's nothing to worry about.
Use a NTFS volume with volume shadow copy turned on keeping a few old versions of files, in case of accidental deletion/revision.
If someone deletes an important piece of data and doesn't notice it within a few days, that is their problem.
Nothing to worry about, right?
Folks who keep 10 years of backups around are nuts. Do you even have any idea what is in those 10 year old backup tapes?
If it's not on the computer, your company's not making efficient use of the stored info
If the file doesn't exist and hasn't been noticed within a short time, then it really is not important.
Slashdot Mirror
Remember No Press is Bad Press Even Online?
Could this be a copycat effort to boost pagerank ultimately by posting comments containing their domain name?
For contributory infringement, due to having approved a patent whose filing infringes upon IBM's patent rights
Perhaps would teach them a lesson about obvious patents?
Parent doesn't win any awards for originality... lather, rinse, repeat
I set up everything to forward to my gmail account. Havent had to use the shoddy interface in a long time.
You are fortunate. In the past few years or so 2005-ish, I think, MSN Hotmail removed the original Hotmail ability to forward mail to any address other than a Hotmail or Hotmail Custom Domains address. To prevent users from forwarding to an outside provider, no doubt.
If I recall correctly that is an "anti spam feature" (officially). In any case; people I know that use Hotmail cannot do the same. I wonder how long they will leave legacy forwards in place.
But not as bad as the HTC 911 issues
Sending messages to the right contact and making sure 911 calls work are things OS makers should go out of their way to ensure work correctly
Do mobile vendors QA their products anymore?
Said study authors should learn what a "peak" is and what peak oil means: after the "peak" there is a decline. So "scientists": come back if there is a steady, continous decline.
No.. a peak is just a local high point; there does not have to be a continuous steady decline just a VALLEY. There are different possible results after a peak has been reached.
It could be a flat graph after the peak is reached, e.g. only a small decrease, and then a straight line; indicating a "cap", after some time at the high point.
More commonly a peak followed by a valley and then another peak, the next peak might be higher or lower than the first peak, or it might be at the same level.
A peak does not indicate a top value reached followed by a continuous decline.
This applies to tons of GEO-optimized services and has been this way since day one. Really, how is this news?
In this case, I would call it GEO-degraded services.
Presumably some people who have ISPs actually near Google's DNS servers have the same issues even when using their ISP's DNS servers.
This is brokenness.. This is a fuckup that Apple needs to fix, not Google.
While it's arguably "prettier" I don't see anything wrong with old school redirects though. Either using 302's or "sourceforge" style.
Additional HTTP request round trips = Increased Page Request Latency (time that elapses between when a page is requested and when the response data starts to be received = Slower page loads
No can do. My ISP's DNS redirects unresolvable queries to a bunch of ads.
How long do you think it will be before your ISP uses dynamic packet inspection to transparently intercept DNS response packets you receive from 8.8.8.8 and replace NXDOMAIN responses with a 'fake' A record response for their ad servers?
This is a very widespread practice now. Use your own ISP for DNS.
Your ISP uses the same DNS servers nationwide.. so how exactly do you think this is better than using Google or OpenDNS DNS servers?
Actually no it isn't. The students pay his salary by choosing to attend his class.
Last I checked, students pay tuition to the school based on the number of classes taken. They pay for the privilege of entering that room, not for the privilege to own the class or dictate every aspect of the learning conditions; setting the ground rules to deliver their lesson is the job of the person being paid to teach. You don't like it, you can leave their class, but probably there are no refunds.
Your suggestion is equivalent to saying the "fans own their sports team" and get to set the rules of gameplay, because choose to buy tickets and watch the game; they pay the referee's salary. If he had no fans watching his games, the league would fire him from his referee job, therefore he must make all the calls that make the majority of fans happy, regardless of what is fair or most proper.
He has another life, right?
This nutjob is apparently already in the running for a Darwin Award...
But as he is still alive, it did not kill him, thus, he won't be eligible for a darwin award unless he was injured so badly he cannot reproduce, or he winds up dying.
At best he might get an honorable mention.
thinks Nintendo and Sony may be getting ahead of themselves with these disclaimers. 'It's hard to say that it'll ruin development,' says Ehrenhaus."
From the Lawyers' perspective, it is probably a really better idea to take a conservative view of exercising caution, and warning customers about possible threats that might not exist.
Than to just throw caution to the wind, let the technology fly, and get sued for billions, if negative effects are discovered later.
By warning up front, the parents will be liable.
It will be as if the technology was known to be able to cause harm if misused, and PROPERLY warned about.
Now if someone overuses 3D games without breaks, and the unstudied effects of excessive use turn out to be harmful, then Sony/Nintendo's responsibility for the bad thing that happened is less, because they did the responsible thing by specifically warning that the the excessive usage without breaks MIGHT be harmful, AND structuring of the warnings as if it was already known harmful.
A less optimistic possibility is Sony/Nintendo know somehow it is in fact harmful, through internal studies, and they're keeping the info secret. That means Ehrenhaus might not have access to the information required to properly evaluate whether Sony/NES are getting ahead of themselves or not.
Yes, but that's defamation of character. You can't accuse somebody of cheating without having evidence, and a statistical anomaly does not evidence make.
Defamation of character only occurs if you are so reckless that you do not have a private conference with the student to question them and inform them of the allegation. They can probably ask the student a couple of questions about their work, and know immediately whether the student was capable of answering the question on their own or not.
Defamation can only occur if you inform other people that they are a cheater. "There is an allegations or information suggesting that they may have cheated" would be a true statement, so it would not be defamation even to repeat.
Yes, you can accuse somebody without evidence. A school is not a court of law. Yes a statistical anomaly may be evidence.
I doubt that it's really that unusual for somebody to do better on the hard questions than the easy ones. I remember back in college having a tendency to make stupid mistakes on easy questions that I'd never make on harder ones where I was paying closer attention by necessity.
Correlation analysis would not be merely comparing how you did on 'hard' to 'easy' questions; by some observer's opinion about hard and some observer's opinion about easy.
They would look at things like... a very small percentage of students got this question right.
This question requires understanding of concepts P, Q, R, and S, which are tested by 4 simpler questions on the test.
Less than 1% of students got all 4 simpler questions completely wrong, for example, took a completely incorrect method of trying to solve the problem, and got full credit on the more complex question.
The students that did get all 4 wrong, showed a complete lack of knowledge of concepts required to actually answer the hard question.
Then the ones that did perfect on the hard question are very suspicious, and they ought to be called in to explain their solution
The "anomaly" doesn't guarantee cheating; but it tells them where to look. Kind of like a spam filter tells you what mail is probably spam, by sending it to a Spam folder.
They could assign everyone a few "extra" personalized tests every term and taylor the personalized test based on the statistical information. With suspected cheaters receiving some questions designed to expose them.
If it is rare enough that a non-cheater is identified as a cheater, for example
Once an anomaly has been found, they can list anomalies as people to scrutinize more closely on the next test. Especially if they show up as anomalous on more than one test.
They can start comparing answers to people that were near the anomalous tester for similarities, after detecting the statistical anomaly.
Slashdot is NSFW as well; especially the links on it.
Please, don't encrypt passwords. Encryption implies that you can retrieve them if you have the keys, which could have made this much worse.
Only if the keys are compromised.
The correct thing to do is to encrypt each password and protect the key by storing it in a different place; for example, by storing it in a different database, and having a separate application that performs authentications, so no single application has access to both databases.
That way, if the user file / user database is leaked someone cannot simply use a MD5 brute force attempt with some rainbow tables and a dictionary to get everyone's password.
This is most useful when the plaintext version of the password is required for authentication processes such as CHAP or CRAM-MD5 authentication.
When it is not required, you are best off taking a secure crypto hash of the password with a secret salt, and then encrypt the list of SHA1/SHA256 hashes.
If the password file is leaked with the list of SHA256 hashes, they will be useless without the ability to find or guess the salt that was used to compute each password.
including email addresses, first and last names, and an md5 hash representation of user passwords."
How long before we see a file on bittorrent?
With plaintext passwords derived from crack MD5 hash representations.
Time to change your password, if you have an account on Mozilla's website. Repeat with any other online resources (such as e-mail accounts or accounts with other websites) you used a similar password on.
In the mean-time, while you're spending time making the change subtle enough to be believed, you're letting actual data leak and confusing your friends/family.
If you linked your profile to friends/family members' profiles, then in a way, you have already lost the war.
"Hm... I wonder what (user)'s mother's maiden name is? No problem.... search for user > Mutual Friends > Mother > Info > Relationship History > Marriage Date > Full Name History > Prior Full name
Hey again... Mr Bank Teller... no problem... my mother's maiden name is (blah); please wire the funds to this overseas account National bank of Nigeria, number (blah blah blah).
But like you said, it's undoubtedly journal-like under the hood, so changing and deleting won't achieve anything.
Yeah.. it will... if you change it subtly enough over time, it will become increasingly difficult and eventually impossible to sort out the facts from the fantasy without lots of manual labor by humans.
"If you're protective of your privacy, it might be a good idea to gradually replace all information in your profile with phony information." (Assuming you already made the mistake of creating a profile)
There, fixed that for you.
In grotesque summary of a website's summary at the federal level "The statute is essentially about stealing mail from the Post Office.". In other words the feds pretty much don't care as long as there are no post office employees or post office property directly involved.
The mailbox out front is post-office property. So I suppose, technically, if something arrives at it that has someone else's name on it, if you take that item from the post office box and bring it into your home to open it, you have stolen it, unless there was some sort of implied permission that you do so. I think if you are married, and you ordinarily do that, then there is implied permission, and not a crime.
Title 18 US Federal code:
Why? I'm an author and composer, and for us, history doesn't stretch back just a year or two -- it stretches back a lifetime. I was very happy to have those ancient electronic sources from 1972 when an ensemble wanted to premiere that composition in Amsterdam in 2003.
If the history is important to you, then why did you delete those files in the first place? Backups are not archives, and archives are not backups.
If you are deleting your old information so systemically then the tape is not a backup. It has become a "primary" copy in a way. And tape is notably unreliable for this, especially as it ages.
Backup refers to a second copy of data from a primary medium in case the primary copy should be damaged.
Once the primary medium is intentionally destroyed, or the file is deleted, the backup should be obsolete.
If you regularly destroy information and leave tape as the only copy, then no backup exists, since the tape then is the only copy kept.
If you need to keep historic information, then it should be in an archive or revision control system, that is separately backed up.
Backups are for the weak.
Keep the data on a RAID5 array with 8 2TB cheap-o SATA drives.
Thanks to the RAID5, if a hard drive fails, no data is lost, so there's nothing to worry about.
Use a NTFS volume with volume shadow copy turned on keeping a few old versions of files, in case of accidental deletion/revision.
If someone deletes an important piece of data and doesn't notice it within a few days, that is their problem.
Nothing to worry about, right?
Folks who keep 10 years of backups around are nuts. Do you even have any idea what is in those 10 year old backup tapes? If it's not on the computer, your company's not making efficient use of the stored info
If the file doesn't exist and hasn't been noticed within a short time, then it really is not important.