Windows machines can be hardened to a degree, but never as much as it's possible to harden linux or bsd's because they can be streamlined much much more by tossing out all of the unused components and modifying the components you do use to be slightly nonstandard and less succeptible to known attack vectors.
The entire reason the OSS movement started was to bypass the "suits". The frustration and aggravation of letting the "suits" make architectural design decisions, nerf a product so that it could meet some artificial deadline or sabotage a dependent competitors product (often focusing on changing the tech to erect barriers of entry). OSS frees software development from the whimsical vagaries of corporate politics and lets us focus on the technical merits of a design decision.
Claiming that it's the "style" of OSS that's at fault for lack of Corporate uptake is just another way of saying that the "suits" are more concerned by superficial considerations of appearance (corporate politics) then they are by technical considerations. OSS wouldn't exist if the OSS developers felt the same way.
What's necessary isn't that developers adapt to coporate politics, but an intermediate class of OSS Entrepeneurs who are willing and capable of marketing the OSS technology to the "suits" in a way that they will understand and appreciate. Similarly, the OSS culture needs to integrate more artists to help polish clipart and GUI's, and writers to flesh out documentation and instruction manuals.
It is definitely worth the read and will put a lot of these dynamics into perspective. Corporations are slow to realize the need for them to take an active role in exploiting the tech that is now freely available. Their need to shift some of their spending from what would have gone toward off the shelf software toward OSS developers directly to customize what's already available to suit their specific needs.
Does coporate politics hinder this adjustment? Yes. Because of blame game politics. What's necessary then? That middle class of entrepeneurs to sell a Consulting service where they are the business middlemen between the Corporations and the OSS community.
well, the law of large numbers kicks in surpisingly quickly for most systems (in most statistal analysis, the problem tends to be the provability of lack of bias in the sample group more then the sample size).
Further, someone above mentioned that emotions aren't logical. I would say that you're just making that judgement from the wrong perspective. The experience of an emotion might arrest our own consious facilities and the emotional response to any particular stimulus may not be the most optimised behavioral reaction for that particular situation, but emotional response is not optimised to modern life. It's optimised toward species survival across a span of hundreds of thousands (homo sapiens sapiens) to millions (mammalian inheritance) of years.
The discrepencies in the polling data would really just be an interesting anomaly if there weren't so many other corroborating circumstances.
If you read the actual studies that I posted, you would see that while the first study is discussing the statistical unlikelihood of the exit poll results, other studies are noting the statistical correlation between the use of electronic voting machines and nonrandom skewing toward Bush (compared to registered voters, previous trends in the voting area, and results from other areas). Yet another study explores the high correlation between where the errors occured and how important the region was toward securing the electoral vote toward Bush.
There were signifigant nonrandom errors that always skewed toward Bush. They were unprecepended regarding: 1) polling data predictive history 2) correlation with the use of electronc paperles devices 3) correlation with areas in the country that had unusual leverage over electoral votes
IN mid-August (2003), Walden W. O'Dell, the chief executive of Diebold Inc., sat down at his computer to compose a letter inviting 100 wealthy and politically inclined friends to a Republican Party fund-raiser, to be held at his home in a suburb of Columbus, Ohio. ''I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year,'' wrote Mr. O'Dell, whose company is based in Canton, Ohio.
That is hardly unusual for Mr. O'Dell. A longtime Republican, he is a member of President Bush's ''Rangers and Pioneers,'' an elite group of loyalists who have raised at least $100,000 each for the 2004 race.
But it is not the only way that Mr. O'Dell is involved in the election process. Through Diebold Election Systems, a subsidiary in McKinney, Tex., his company is among the country's biggest suppliers of paperless, touch-screen voting machines.
If any process should be open, transparent, and verifiable, shouldn't it be voting? Dismissing concerns over voting irregularity out of a partisan satisfaction that whichever preferred side may have won this time is ridiculously shortsided.
There's other information regarding the votes besides this particular audit. You may consider U.C. Berkely a leftist institution, but their Quantitative Methods Research Team has quite a bit of credentials. U.I.Chicago, Notre Dame, Cortnell, U. Penn., U. of Wisconsin, Stanford, and Princeton might also be in a blue states, but they are also very highly respected. Other schools that have weighed in include Temple, U. of Utah and Southern Methodist U. Mathematical arguments like this may not sway dick and jane, but I would expect them to have more credence with the slashdot crowd:
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/Exit_Pol ls_2004_Edison-Mitofsky.pdf (PDF) The exit pollster of record for the 2004 election was the Edison/Mitofsky consortium. Their national poll results projected a Kerry victory by 3.0%, whereas the official count had Bush winning by 2.5%. Several methods have been used to estimate the probability that the national exit poll results would be as different as they were from the national popular vote by random chance. These estimates range from 1 in 16.5 million to 1 in 1,240. No matter how one calculates it, the discrepancy cannot be attributed to chance.
There are Three Primary Explanations for the Discrepancies: 1. Statistical Sampling Error - or Chance We agree with Edison/Mitofsky that the first possible cause, random statistical sampling error, can be ruled out. 2. Inaccurate Exit Polls This is the theory that Edison/Mitofsky put forth. They hypothesize that the reason the exit polls were so biased towards Kerry was because Bush voters were more reluctant to respond to exit polls than Kerry voters. Edison/Mitofsky did not come close to justifying this position, however, even though they have access to the raw, unadjusted, precinct-specific data set. The data that Edison/Mitofsky did offer in their report show how implausible this theory is. 3. Inaccurate Election Results Edison/Mitofsky did not even consider this hypothesis, and thus made no effort to contradict it. Some of Edison/Mitofsky's exit poll data may be construed as affirmative evidence for inaccurate election results. We conclude that the hypothesis that the voters' intent was not accurately recorded or counted cannot be ruled out and needs further investigation.
http://ucdata.berkeley.edu:7101/
The three counties where the voting anomalies were most prevalent were also the most heavily Democratic: Broward, Palm Beach and Miami-Dade, respectively. Statistical patterns in counties that did not have e-touch voting machines predict a 28,000 vote decrease in President Bush's support in Broward County; machines tallied an increase of 51,000 votes - a net gain of 81,000 for the incumbent. President Bush should have lost 8,900 votes in Palm Beach County, but instead gained 41,000 - a difference of 49,900. He should have gained only 18,400 votes in Miami-Dade County but saw a gain of 37,000 - a difference of 19,300 votes.
"No matter how many factors and variables we took into consideration, the significant correlation in the votes for President Bush and electronic voting cannot be explained," said Hout. "The study shows, that a county's use of electronic voting resulted in a disproportionate increase in votes for President Bush. There is just a trivial probability of evidence like this appearing in a population where the true difference is zero - less than once in a thousand chances."
Unless the "intelligent Designers" are Aliens that themselves evolved at someplace or sometime, the "intelligent design" argument does not lead to a viable theory of how complex systems of biochemistry came to exist. It can only lead to a religious creationist view where the "intelligent designer" (itself a manifestation of a complex system, whether biochemical or not) has the magical property of spontaneous existence.
Well, the article doesn't really state enough information to determine the rate of acceleration.
It could have had a very small amount of acceleration over a long period of time (as is often the case for space flight), or a great deal of acceleration all at once.
That is a very high velocity (from the perspective of earth-at-sea-level experience). and will be a lot of kinetic energy.
google says the speed of sound at sea level is 340.29 m/s
37,000 Kmph is equal to 10277.8 m/s
that would be about mach 30
Kinetic energy =.5(mass)(velocity^2)
1.96476936814824 x 10^10 Joules
Hiroshima was 8.370 x 10^13 Joules
so the impact will be just a fraction of the hiroshima energy (0.000235)
although it will be all kinetic and not thermal (which would be less effective for splitting a big rock in half).
When most kids are growing up, they typically develop social skills because they're motivated to learn from each other and to compete for social status.
Some kids are "introverted" in that they intuitively feel that it is a better use of their mental resources to think things through by themselves then to interact and learn from others. This, unfortunately, tends to mean they don't fully appreciate the necessity of competing for social status.
What helped me, granted this was in college, was analyzing social interaction and using my analytical strength to an advantage in that primarily intuitive realm. Learn the social status markers for a given culture. Understand that body language communicates oceans of information on a subliminal level regarding dominance and sexual issues; realize that most people interact primarily on that level and not in an abstract logical level.
Basically, instead of just trying to develop the intuitive skills that most people develop instinctively, use your analytical mind to analyze the patterns of that interaction and the signals behind the behavior.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't see this trend reversing itself any time soon...
???
You posted a correction to say that the Windows default with SP1 is "secure"
???
Try running nessus or even nmap against it.
Try referring to NSA guidelines for securing a windows 2003 server environment.
http://www.nsa.gov/snac/downloads_win2003.cfm?Men
Or read some of the SANS whitepapers:
http://www.sans.org/rr/whitepapers/windows/
Windows machines can be hardened to a degree, but never as much as it's possible to harden linux or bsd's because they can be streamlined much much more by tossing out all of the unused components and modifying the components you do use to be slightly nonstandard and less succeptible to known attack vectors.
The entire reason the OSS movement started was to bypass the "suits". The frustration and aggravation of letting the "suits" make architectural design decisions, nerf a product so that it could meet some artificial deadline or sabotage a dependent competitors product (often focusing on changing the tech to erect barriers of entry). OSS frees software development from the whimsical vagaries of corporate politics and lets us focus on the technical merits of a design decision.
Claiming that it's the "style" of OSS that's at fault for lack of Corporate uptake is just another way of saying that the "suits" are more concerned by superficial considerations of appearance (corporate politics) then they are by technical considerations. OSS wouldn't exist if the OSS developers felt the same way.
What's necessary isn't that developers adapt to coporate politics, but an intermediate class of OSS Entrepeneurs who are willing and capable of marketing the OSS technology to the "suits" in a way that they will understand and appreciate. Similarly, the OSS culture needs to integrate more artists to help polish clipart and GUI's, and writers to flesh out documentation and instruction manuals.
The best treatise I've read on OSS's role in the Corporate ecology was written by Bruce Perens:
http://perens.com/Articles/Economic.html
It is definitely worth the read and will put a lot of these dynamics into perspective. Corporations are slow to realize the need for them to take an active role in exploiting the tech that is now freely available. Their need to shift some of their spending from what would have gone toward off the shelf software toward OSS developers directly to customize what's already available to suit their specific needs.
Does coporate politics hinder this adjustment? Yes. Because of blame game politics. What's necessary then? That middle class of entrepeneurs to sell a Consulting service where they are the business middlemen between the Corporations and the OSS community.
well, the law of large numbers kicks in surpisingly quickly for most systems (in most statistal analysis, the problem tends to be the provability of lack of bias in the sample group more then the sample size).
Further, someone above mentioned that emotions aren't logical. I would say that you're just making that judgement from the wrong perspective. The experience of an emotion might arrest our own consious facilities and the emotional response to any particular stimulus may not be the most optimised behavioral reaction for that particular situation, but emotional response is not optimised to modern life. It's optimised toward species survival across a span of hundreds of thousands (homo sapiens sapiens) to millions (mammalian inheritance) of years.
The discrepencies in the polling data would really just be an interesting anomaly if there weren't so many other corroborating circumstances.
8 824c.html
If you read the actual studies that I posted, you would see that while the first study is discussing the statistical unlikelihood of the exit poll results, other studies are noting the statistical correlation between the use of electronic voting machines and nonrandom skewing toward Bush (compared to registered voters, previous trends in the voting area, and results from other areas). Yet another study explores the high correlation between where the errors occured and how important the region was toward securing the electoral vote toward Bush.
There were signifigant nonrandom errors that always skewed toward Bush.
They were unprecepended regarding:
1) polling data predictive history
2) correlation with the use of electronc paperles devices
3) correlation with areas in the country that had unusual leverage over electoral votes
The CEO of Diebold had previously been quoted as saying:
http://www.wanttoknow.info/031109nytimes
IN mid-August (2003), Walden W. O'Dell, the chief executive of Diebold Inc., sat down at his computer to compose a letter inviting 100 wealthy and politically inclined friends to a Republican Party fund-raiser, to be held at his home in a suburb of Columbus, Ohio. ''I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year,'' wrote Mr. O'Dell, whose company is based in Canton, Ohio.
That is hardly unusual for Mr. O'Dell. A longtime Republican, he is a member of President Bush's ''Rangers and Pioneers,'' an elite group of loyalists who have raised at least $100,000 each for the 2004 race.
But it is not the only way that Mr. O'Dell is involved in the election process. Through Diebold Election Systems, a subsidiary in McKinney, Tex., his company is among the country's biggest suppliers of paperless, touch-screen voting machines.
Partisans have fought the ability to audit electronic voting machines with every legal argument possible
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/7386582p-729
If any process should be open, transparent, and verifiable, shouldn't it be voting? Dismissing concerns over voting irregularity out of a partisan satisfaction that whichever preferred side may have won this time is ridiculously shortsided.
There's other information regarding the votes besides this particular audit. You may consider U.C. Berkely a leftist institution, but their Quantitative Methods Research Team has quite a bit of credentials. U.I.Chicago, Notre Dame, Cortnell, U. Penn., U. of Wisconsin, Stanford, and Princeton might also be in a blue states, but they are also very highly respected. Other schools that have weighed in include Temple, U. of Utah and Southern Methodist U. Mathematical arguments like this may not sway dick and jane, but I would expect them to have more credence with the slashdot crowd:
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/Exit_Pol ls_2004_Edison-Mitofsky.pdf (PDF)
The exit pollster of record for the 2004 election was the Edison/Mitofsky consortium. Their national
poll results projected a Kerry victory by 3.0%, whereas the official count had Bush winning by 2.5%.
Several methods have been used to estimate the probability that the national exit poll results would be as
different as they were from the national popular vote by random chance. These estimates range from 1
in 16.5 million to 1 in 1,240. No matter how one calculates it, the discrepancy cannot be attributed to
chance.
There are Three Primary Explanations for the Discrepancies:
1. Statistical Sampling Error - or Chance
We agree with Edison/Mitofsky that the first possible cause, random statistical sampling error, can be
ruled out.
2. Inaccurate Exit Polls
This is the theory that Edison/Mitofsky put forth. They hypothesize that the reason the exit polls were so
biased towards Kerry was because Bush voters were more reluctant to respond to exit polls than Kerry
voters. Edison/Mitofsky did not come close to justifying this position, however, even though they have
access to the raw, unadjusted, precinct-specific data set. The data that Edison/Mitofsky did offer in their
report show how implausible this theory is.
3. Inaccurate Election Results
Edison/Mitofsky did not even consider this hypothesis, and thus made no effort to contradict it. Some of
Edison/Mitofsky's exit poll data may be construed as affirmative evidence for inaccurate election
results. We conclude that the hypothesis that the voters' intent was not accurately recorded or counted
cannot be ruled out and needs further investigation.
http://ucdata.berkeley.edu:7101/
The three counties where the voting anomalies were most prevalent were
also the most heavily Democratic: Broward, Palm Beach and Miami-Dade,
respectively. Statistical patterns in counties that did not have e-touch
voting machines predict a 28,000 vote decrease in President Bush's support in
Broward County; machines tallied an increase of 51,000 votes - a net gain of
81,000 for the incumbent. President Bush should have lost 8,900 votes in Palm
Beach County, but instead gained 41,000 - a difference of 49,900. He should
have gained only 18,400 votes in Miami-Dade County but saw a gain of 37,000 -
a difference of 19,300 votes.
"No matter how many factors and variables we took into consideration, the
significant correlation in the votes for President Bush and electronic voting
cannot be explained," said Hout. "The study shows, that a county's use of
electronic voting resulted in a disproportionate increase in votes for
President Bush. There is just a trivial probability of evidence like this
appearing in a population where the true difference is zero - less than once
in a thousand chances."
http://wand.stanford.edu/elections/us/FL2004/WandF lorida2004.pdf (PDF)
Baiman concluded that the probability that these discrepancies would simultaneously occur in just the
most critical st
Unless the "intelligent Designers" are Aliens that themselves evolved at someplace or sometime, the "intelligent design" argument does not lead to a viable theory of how complex systems of biochemistry came to exist. It can only lead to a religious creationist view where the "intelligent designer" (itself a manifestation of a complex system, whether biochemical or not) has the magical property of spontaneous existence.
Well, the article doesn't really state enough information to determine the rate of acceleration.
.5(mass)(velocity^2)
It could have had a very small amount of acceleration over a long period of time (as is often the case for space flight), or a great deal of acceleration all at once.
That is a very high velocity (from the perspective of earth-at-sea-level experience). and will be a lot of kinetic energy.
google says the speed of sound at sea level is 340.29 m/s
37,000 Kmph is equal to 10277.8 m/s
that would be about mach 30
Kinetic energy =
1.96476936814824 x 10^10 Joules
Hiroshima was 8.370 x 10^13 Joules
so the impact will be just a fraction of the hiroshima energy (0.000235)
although it will be all kinetic and not thermal (which would be less effective for splitting a big rock in half).
I wonder what the density of the impactor is...
When most kids are growing up, they typically develop social skills because they're motivated to learn from each other and to compete for social status.
Some kids are "introverted" in that they intuitively feel that it is a better use of their mental resources to think things through by themselves then to interact and learn from others. This, unfortunately, tends to mean they don't fully appreciate the necessity of competing for social status.
What helped me, granted this was in college, was analyzing social interaction and using my analytical strength to an advantage in that primarily intuitive realm. Learn the social status markers for a given culture. Understand that body language communicates oceans of information on a subliminal level regarding dominance and sexual issues; realize that most people interact primarily on that level and not in an abstract logical level.
Basically, instead of just trying to develop the intuitive skills that most people develop instinctively, use your analytical mind to analyze the patterns of that interaction and the signals behind the behavior.