However, this will only affect users who have Windows Scripting Host enabled and certain ActiveX controls, according to MessageLabs.
That's like saying, "this will only affect users who have not yet switched to Linux or MacOS."
I would say that a good 98% of installations have WSHost enabled. Those that are SP2 or up to date might have the latest MS patch that I believe sets a kill bit on the Internet Explorer side of WSHost scripting under all circumstances.
This is also not really anything new. Spy and adware companies have been manipulating hosts files now for at least a year, no doubt phishers have done exactly the same thing, this is just the first reported time of it happening.
One thing you have to keep in mind is that severay so-called security experts are very bright individuals but succumb to what some call: media-whoring. This is a specific instance of a "media-whoring" by Message Labs. Let me explain my proof of this: they use ASP and IIS as opposed to something like PHP and Apache.
They are obviously not very concerned about legitimate security. There's a website that keeps track of the media fanatics: http://www.vmyths.com/
The site is run by a guy who has over a decade of solid security experience. He knows when there is something legit to worry about, and he knows when something is hype.
I suppose the best way to know is years and years of experience. If you read a lot of the security mailing lists, you'd be under the impression that the world was about to revert back to the stone age with the security threats.
But the reality is, a huge amount of idiots exist that love to overhype the security risks when it comes to viruses and worms like "I Love You" and "Sasser". Most of us know when there is going to be a big problem, but there are a huge number of others that like to spread false info.
There are others, like Mikko Hypponen of F-Secure that don't sell media hype, they sensationalize the truth. Yes, there have been instances of zombie-net owners selling their networks to spammers, but I have yet to actually see the sales, and I've been running a honeypot for well over a year now and track nearly a dozen different botnet herders.
For the most part, it looks like botnetting is still used for two things, Americans (north and south america) for File Sharing/FXPing, and Germans for DDoSing. The Russians who have been spamming have been using IE exploits and web controls, not so much IRC connections. Thus, they cannot be truly considered "botnets".
I did a bit on the post above but I'll try to go into more details because I agree that was very confusing.:)
When I say odorless, I mean in the traditional sense. You can tell when you are in a smoker's house, but not an Eclipse smoker's house. Smoker's clothes have that grainy cigarette stench. Eclipse smokers don't have to worry about it.
The only odor (again, the burnt paper odor) that I notice is on my fingertips still for a few minutes after I'm done smoking. The smoke dissipates so fast after exhaling, and it's so dry, that I can't imagine it would actually attach to anything. I've actually found that after two packs of Eclipses, I could not go back to regular smokes. They were too grainy and stunk horribly.
If you have a loved one that absolutely refuses to smoke, but you know can afford an extra 30 cents per pack or so, they should at least try Eclipse cigarettes. Maybe these cigarettes kill faster or something though. I find that I can actually do strenous activity while smoking though, whereas I couldn't before. And regular cigarettes would make me tired, while these do not.
Another oddity is that after smoking these now for four months or so, I actually feel like quitting wouldn't be hard at all. But then again, I've tried to quit before, and that was so horrible and stressful I don't know if I could attempt something like that again.
It is actually kind of weird. Even if you don't smoke you might want to watch someone smoke one sometime. There's no visible smoke that comes off the tip. Only when the smoker exhales, and it dissapates rapidly.
When I say odorless, I'm talking about that moist grainy dirty smell. It doesn't smell like burning, it smells like old man, or your grandfather's house. That's what I attribute most cigarette smells to.
It's not like this is the perfect cigarette. In fact, it is still best to quit, I'm not arguing otherwise. I'm just saying that if someone thought they battery powered smoke simply to get nicotine was a good idea, they might like Eclipse better.:/
I didn't mean to start a smoker vs. nonsmoker debate here. I'm sorry if it offends you, someone who lives probably hundreds or thousands of miles away, that I smoke.
I suppose it probably bothers you that I'm a quiet Christian that occasionally will try to witness to friends and family?
Actually they do that because they don't want to be seen as advertising cigarettes to non-smokers. I know it sounds insane, but if you got slapped with a couple billion dollar lawsuits from state governments, you'd probably decide that it was in your best interest to try to cover every angle.
The best spyware will always be the freest spyware.
I used to be you should run Ad-aware *and* Spybot. This was back when Spybot was in its infancy. Now that is not the case. Spyware is the best.
When news stories like this show up, it's for spyware removal utilities that people never used to begin with. For all I know, it was spyware itself.
I think even MySearch toolbar has a pop-up blocker. There's a lot of incentive for spy and adware to "clean" a users system of other spyware so that they actually do not go download Spybot or Ad-Aware. Don't be fooled, there's only two alternatives, and either one is fine enough for your home use or your corporation.
I'm a smoker of Eclipse cigarettes. While I've quit and started smoking twice in my life, I've found recently that these cigarettes do not inhibit my life at all. They are essentially smokeless cigarettes, the smoke that is produced is odorless (smells like burnt paper) and doesn't come off in thick rings from the end of the cigarette as I smoke it.
Generally speaking, innovations made in producing a 'healthy cigarette' usually involve a lot of cost, but these cigarettes are usually sold at the same price as Marborlo Lights. They also come in menthol.
With 80% less additives, I think I'll stick to these unless the new battery-powered cigarettes actually end up cheaper.
I'm probably going to cancel my account soon, the game just doesn't have much to offer me after 3 or 4 months of playing. I made millions upon millions of credits, I've had most of the cool loot, and it just gets boring after awhile. The only thing I haven't done is make it to jedi, and I'm not about to invest 200+ more hours in the game.
I continue to keep my account simply because I have it run macros in the background to generate millions in credits, which on my server sells for approximately 5 dollars a month per million.
I've expanded on this to provide even more services, now I have a hospital with a doctor inside buffing automatically throughout the day, I have another guy using a personal exploit to mine without a mining installation (must be logged in) and a third computer with a trial account killing meatlumps outside coronet for rug pieces and extremeley rare loot (one every four hours or so).
I figure I'm probably making about a hundred a month off of this, of which, 30 goes to pay for my accounts, and another 15 or so goes to pay for electricity. A physically handicapped guy I know has been using this method to get about a thousand to fifteen hundred bucks a month playing MMORPGs. And it's funny too, cause players in the games he participates in call him "ruthless" and hate that he would "take advantage of poor Ebayers" by giving them what he wants.
As you can imagine, he's a hardcore Libertarian now. Used to be a hardcore Democrat.
As a beta tester, I can tell you right now, I don't know what the reviewers were smoking when they said this game was so cool. I'm sorry, but the fact that you can use a joystick does not impress me. The fact that it *looks* pretty does not impress me. The fact that I can't do anything of even the slightest importance in space *does* effect me. It makes me not want to enter space with my character, and thus I did not.
For those of you who purchased the Planetside "underground" expansion (you can tell what kind of an effect it had on me based upon the fact that I cannot remember its name) you'll know exactly what I'm talking about. JtL introduces a new area that everyone will enjoy for 48 hours, and then they'll go back to the real economy of the game.
Speaking of which, "2500+ buffs! 3.0 hours! 15k!".
Game Gear was actually a decent device. Both it and the Lynx did *not* have nearly the library that the Gameboy did.
Also, back in their time, these devices ran on double a's and triple a's and couldn't be recharged easily. They failed because of the 4-6 hour life, yes, but because not everyone had a battery recharger, and a quick means to recharge them was not available.
I find currently that if I'm not done playing my current GBA after 4-6 hours, then my neck and back generally regret it the next day.
Actually, when it comes to Justices, "conservative" takes a much different meaning. It means that they are *less* likely to overturn a decision (like Roe vs. Wade) and more likely to throw out a new law as unconstitutional.
The change in salinity in the ocean will not be the cause of climate change, at all. It will be another symptom of the underlying problem.
And the problem is far larger than we have, or will, get into in this discussion.
WTH??!!?! Okay then, what specifically is causing the problem then? Everyone I've talked to says salinity of the ocean, but you're obviously concerned about something else. Let's hear what it is.
After all, temperature doesn't rise on average near ice shelves for no reason at all. If conversing with environmentalists has taught me anything; there's gotta be some big fat corporation you want to pin the blame on.
I'm still failing to see any evidence of what you suggest. Do you even know this field or are you one of those repeat enviro-nuts that just repeats verbatim what they read in the paper?
Sure why not. And I know where this is leading, but salinity does not have as large of an effect on climate or environment as you and others suggest.
It'd be ludicrous for me to say that because of a 1% increase in the price of exports in Hong Kong that there is going to be a 40 to 50 percent increase in the cost of computers in the US. Even considering all the different parts that it takes to assemble the computer, there's no extremely complex model that doesn't pass the occam's razor test.
If there were to be a massive shift in weather it would come from the magnetic poles, not the level of salinity. The closing of the ozone is more than likely to be a natural occurance than the presence of CFCs, which were negated immediately by local ozone (smog).
For one, yes, there was a hack, and yes, the source was released. The game *was* overhyped though. I agree that Valve did work secretly, but the problem is that the developers really didn't have much done, as evidenced by the source that Ago supposedly stole.
A good number of people think that it is arguable that he stole it. In fact, the logs from this "unknown" source were never verified. I agree with the article, but I don't think Valve is a great source of underhyping. Peter Molywhatever is pretty well known for hyping, though I don't imagine he ever really intends to hype the games.
Black & White was a horrible game. Dungeon Keeper (not overhyped) was an excellent game. I think development time is what really matters. I get more fun out of playing new games developed for old engines (Freelancer) than new games developed for new engines (Doom3).
I guess I value plot, story, and game interface more than I value all the fancy bells and whistles.
No, I don't find the argument compelling, in fact, I'm having a very hard time even finding a remote argument regarding salinity of the oceans.
97% of the earth's water is saltwater (what I did find). If the entirety of the atmospheric water were to fall to the earth today, there would be a 1 inch rise in sea level. (another one)
I fail to see how the salinity is going to change dramatically, even if all the shelves were to just start breaking off. I've seen estimates that the sea level will rise 70m if the Antartic melted, and the the Antartic contains 90% of the world's ice. But seriously lacking is the figures used to determine such. In fact, it doesn't look as if water density has even been accounted for!
Again, I'll repeat it, I see no negligible effect on climate as you have asserted.
/agreed. And if Murphy's law has anything to do with it, they are going to use the latter of what you described.
What we need to do is refuse to buy the first game that implements this. It won't be too hard for me, the seemingly lackluster games that have come out from some of the big production houses have been rather lame both plot and gameplay wise.
Not to mention they have all been dumbing down the game for the XBox ports. I think Deus Ex: Invisible War is probably the best example of this. That very well may be the last game I buy without playing a demo. So far I've been getting back into trying demos before purchasing again.
If I see ads for anything other than the game I'm playing in the demo, then I'll skip it and head to a different one.
Well, actually, no, I don't believe the north pole is melting. Subs have been surfacing there without trouble since 1959!
http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/08578.htm I find it hard to believe that when someone says, "take a look at this picture! the caps are melting!" is any more than a "chicken little" farse.
Granted, what you have said is much more involving, but I'm not seeing a 40% increase in temperature in that area so I'd question your evidence. In fact, even localized, I see nothing more than a few degrees in temperature change on average even in areas where cities have been expanding and you would think would naturally be quite hotter. The satellite data for Anartica is heavily disputed as well because of the natural lack of an ozone layer. I suppose surface temperatures alone would be enough to scare someone, but where civilization hasn't ravaged the landscape I would also expect to see change, and there just hasn't been any.
My biggest concern is that this is not a man made aberration and that it just happens naturally perhaps every thousand years or so. We don't really have any recorded data, but perhaps we are doomed to the outcomes you mention above no matter what we do. It is very hard to predict a climate based on only maybe a hundred years of accurate data and a recorded history that is only accurate to maybe a few thousand years. The question I'd like to see answered is: What if the caps are "supposed" to be melting? Is it some sort of indication that the poles will shift? Why has the magnetic pole shifted so variably in the last 50 years or so?
Here's another thing I've never had answered: Why is it that ground level ozone, the "smog" we don't like from cars, never goes into the atmosphere and becomes the good ozone? More specifically, why is it that aerosol cans only damage the ozone covering the stratosphere and don't immediately effect the surrounding ozone?
Okay, let me explain for you. UHIE is "Urban Heat Island Effect". Up until the last two years, satellite data and ground surface data have been in direct conflict with each other regarding temperature. Only recently did the satellite data show a temperature increase. In the meantime, ground data readings are skewed because the temperature readers are in locations where there is a ton of asphalt, concrete, and metal. Namely, airports and in the middle of cities.
Bush is great if you're rich, own a major oil or logging company, like to breathe CO2, or look forward to the 23 rise on sea level.
No offense, but I have a hard time believing you ever really were a Republican if you actually buy all that eco-junk science. Global Warming is a religion, not science.
When you hear the "experts" talk about environmentalism it is based on climate models and other data that they can't even agree amongst themselves on. There are so many different "denominations" that the only thing they actually agree on is "there is global warmning". Just like Christians believe "there is a God".
I suggest looking into things like UHIE if you have suddenly decided to abandon your Republican roots and jump on the eco-bandwagon. And btw, in case you are wondering, I'm not a Republican. I'm a Libertarian, so I'm not trying to pull you back into the fold or anything.
And yet, ironically, nothing there addresses your original argument: If I write (and distribute) a program with the express intent of illegally using zombied machines (which is against federal law) is that free speech?
The answer is still a resounding *YES*.
He is WRITING the software to do the supposedly illegal action, not doing the illegal action itself. I know that sounds crazy. Let me give you some insight into how it works.
The Players: Legitimate spammers: legits (My employers, a public institution, ie government) Illegitimate spammers: illegits (Anyone that isn't the government) The reciever: you Individual that compromises the machines: searcher Proxies: Programs (legitimate) that let people connect from one computer to another. Individual that installs the proxies: herder Individual that programs the spam software: coder
The searchers compromise multiple machines including yours via an IE exploit. It does a connect-back to an IRC server where later the botnet herder throws on a proxy and then mitigates the sale to the illegits that send you spam. They then use software created by their coders, or available software used by the legits, to send spam via proxies to you.
The people doing the illegal activity here are the searchers and herders not the illegits and coders.
I would defend them, and you know why? They created my job, they are easy to overcome, and they simply do not effect the majority of bright individuals that use the net.
A good ISP is going to do egress filtering to prevent the first four items from having any impact (save adware, which may open popups). A good OS is not going to let the first four even get installed.
Fake ATM theft is a scam, pure and simple. What you're saying is not to punish the people responsible for doing the actual crime, you're saying the creator of the ATM (or the card reader) is responsible. And that's ridiculous. The person that actually commits the crime has the intent, not the person that creates the tool.
Previous comments have already pointed out the features of this jerk's software that are specifically designed to abrogate my right to not receive unwanted messages.
What right? The same right that protects you from junkmail, spam, telemarketers? You have no guaranteed right to privacy. It's a derived right, and a weak one at that. After all, oh I'm safe from something like SPAM (which I don't have to worry about with greylisting anyway), but I'm not safe from the government databases or FBI, CIA, NSA, wiretaps and survelliance.
If I create a 100 page document revealing nuclear secrets and instructions for successfully bringing down a US airliner, is that free speech?
Yes. Professors do things like this on a regular basis. Granted, they do it ever so subtly, but they don't skirt around what exactly could be done with the information they have provided.
Now, if you are a government employee (which you would pretty much *have* to be to know how nuclear devices work) and write something along those lines, it might very well be sensitive and thus kept a secret, but if you are just a citizen that knows a lot about the field and releases it to the public domain, why wouldn't you be able to write it? It's like pointing out something that *could* be done in a movie and the US gov't patching the whole. You don't see the government suing the creators of say, "Mission Impossible", and there is an actual video, not just words on the Internet or in a book. What makes you think that someone's comments in a written form are going to be any more accurate than an overrated movie?
If I create a list of fellow students I intend to kill on Monday, is that free speech?
Yes. Of course. It's also entirely stupid and entirely a written threat. You're going to go to jail, but not for the fact that you wrote, but for what you threatened to do.
Essentially what you're saying is that *you* know what the intent is, even without having questioned the person. You seem to think that a mythical "majority" of people would agree with you, and thus said statement should be wrong. But, just imagine, you were left out of the loop, and the list was actually a prop in a movie, or better yet, an encrypted message to friends.
I refuse to believe that I am the end all be all of authority on a matter, you however, think you *must* be right. The only problem is, you're not going to be the one making the decisions, so you turn in a paper with a "hitlist" that you claim is someone elses and they claim it is yours in return. You get bent over for doing what you thought was a good thing.
If I write (and distribute) a program with the express intent of DDoS'ing websites (which is illegal), is that free speech?
Here again, you alone are the one determining intent.
Let me rephrase it for you:
If I, Professor Jacob Renin of Cambridge University, write (and distribute) a program of which, the only possible use is DDoS'ing websites (which is illegal), is that free speech?
Also, I'm not entirely certain DDOSing is technically "illegal". It's certainly malicious intent, but I know of no law that simply states, "DDoS'in = illegal".
If I write (and distribute) a program with the express intent of illegally using zombied machines (which is against federal law) is that free speech?
I'm sorry, I'm just going to break down and flat out ask you here, what laws? Show me the laws on "zombied machines" and "DDOSing". Of course, it doesn't have to have those *exact* terms, but it's gotta have that same meaning. AFAIK, there is still nothing straight up illegal about it, and as always, due process is allowed.
He knowingly crossed the line from free speech to criminal activity (more than once) and needs to be held accountable for that.
I disagree, and nothing you've mentioned would seem to indicate that he has directly harmed anyone. I imagine that he has, but writing a tool that someone was inevitably going to write (and was actually the 3rd that I know of, first "public" one though) and writing spam software (of which there are better) and not being the one actually *doing* it, you've got a LONG way to go to convince me something is wrong.
Might as well go out and round up all the crowbar manufacturers.
"Oh please, please! Listen to me, why? Because I alone know the intentions of those using and creating software."
You realize you sound like this, right?
And the CAN-SPAM law is only passed in stupidity by the DMCA. What the CAN-SPAM law may have actually done, is legitimized the actions of thousands of spammers. Which means that our ISPs and mail providers that block this spam could potentially be liable for doing so.
So we should determine legality based upon how something can be used/abused? What about that shiny new DVD decryption software you used just the other day?
Slashdot Mirror
However, this will only affect users who have Windows Scripting Host enabled and certain ActiveX controls, according to MessageLabs.
That's like saying, "this will only affect users who have not yet switched to Linux or MacOS."
I would say that a good 98% of installations have WSHost enabled. Those that are SP2 or up to date might have the latest MS patch that I believe sets a kill bit on the Internet Explorer side of WSHost scripting under all circumstances.
This is also not really anything new. Spy and adware companies have been manipulating hosts files now for at least a year, no doubt phishers have done exactly the same thing, this is just the first reported time of it happening.
One thing you have to keep in mind is that severay so-called security experts are very bright individuals but succumb to what some call: media-whoring. This is a specific instance of a "media-whoring" by Message Labs. Let me explain my proof of this: they use ASP and IIS as opposed to something like PHP and Apache.
They are obviously not very concerned about legitimate security. There's a website that keeps track of the media fanatics: http://www.vmyths.com/
The site is run by a guy who has over a decade of solid security experience. He knows when there is something legit to worry about, and he knows when something is hype.
I suppose the best way to know is years and years of experience. If you read a lot of the security mailing lists, you'd be under the impression that the world was about to revert back to the stone age with the security threats.
But the reality is, a huge amount of idiots exist that love to overhype the security risks when it comes to viruses and worms like "I Love You" and "Sasser". Most of us know when there is going to be a big problem, but there are a huge number of others that like to spread false info.
There are others, like Mikko Hypponen of F-Secure that don't sell media hype, they sensationalize the truth. Yes, there have been instances of zombie-net owners selling their networks to spammers, but I have yet to actually see the sales, and I've been running a honeypot for well over a year now and track nearly a dozen different botnet herders.
For the most part, it looks like botnetting is still used for two things, Americans (north and south america) for File Sharing/FXPing, and Germans for DDoSing. The Russians who have been spamming have been using IE exploits and web controls, not so much IRC connections. Thus, they cannot be truly considered "botnets".
I did a bit on the post above but I'll try to go into more details because I agree that was very confusing. :)
When I say odorless, I mean in the traditional sense. You can tell when you are in a smoker's house, but not an Eclipse smoker's house. Smoker's clothes have that grainy cigarette stench. Eclipse smokers don't have to worry about it.
The only odor (again, the burnt paper odor) that I notice is on my fingertips still for a few minutes after I'm done smoking. The smoke dissipates so fast after exhaling, and it's so dry, that I can't imagine it would actually attach to anything. I've actually found that after two packs of Eclipses, I could not go back to regular smokes. They were too grainy and stunk horribly.
If you have a loved one that absolutely refuses to smoke, but you know can afford an extra 30 cents per pack or so, they should at least try Eclipse cigarettes. Maybe these cigarettes kill faster or something though. I find that I can actually do strenous activity while smoking though, whereas I couldn't before. And regular cigarettes would make me tired, while these do not.
Another oddity is that after smoking these now for four months or so, I actually feel like quitting wouldn't be hard at all. But then again, I've tried to quit before, and that was so horrible and stressful I don't know if I could attempt something like that again.
It is actually kind of weird. Even if you don't smoke you might want to watch someone smoke one sometime. There's no visible smoke that comes off the tip. Only when the smoker exhales, and it dissapates rapidly.
:/
When I say odorless, I'm talking about that moist grainy dirty smell. It doesn't smell like burning, it smells like old man, or your grandfather's house. That's what I attribute most cigarette smells to.
It's not like this is the perfect cigarette. In fact, it is still best to quit, I'm not arguing otherwise. I'm just saying that if someone thought they battery powered smoke simply to get nicotine was a good idea, they might like Eclipse better.
Yikes!
I didn't mean to start a smoker vs. nonsmoker debate here. I'm sorry if it offends you, someone who lives probably hundreds or thousands of miles away, that I smoke.
I suppose it probably bothers you that I'm a quiet Christian that occasionally will try to witness to friends and family?
Actually they do that because they don't want to be seen as advertising cigarettes to non-smokers. I know it sounds insane, but if you got slapped with a couple billion dollar lawsuits from state governments, you'd probably decide that it was in your best interest to try to cover every angle.
The best spyware will always be the freest spyware.
I used to be you should run Ad-aware *and* Spybot. This was back when Spybot was in its infancy. Now that is not the case. Spyware is the best.
When news stories like this show up, it's for spyware removal utilities that people never used to begin with. For all I know, it was spyware itself.
I think even MySearch toolbar has a pop-up blocker. There's a lot of incentive for spy and adware to "clean" a users system of other spyware so that they actually do not go download Spybot or Ad-Aware. Don't be fooled, there's only two alternatives, and either one is fine enough for your home use or your corporation.
I'm a smoker of Eclipse cigarettes. While I've quit and started smoking twice in my life, I've found recently that these cigarettes do not inhibit my life at all. They are essentially smokeless cigarettes, the smoke that is produced is odorless (smells like burnt paper) and doesn't come off in thick rings from the end of the cigarette as I smoke it.
Generally speaking, innovations made in producing a 'healthy cigarette' usually involve a lot of cost, but these cigarettes are usually sold at the same price as Marborlo Lights. They also come in menthol.
With 80% less additives, I think I'll stick to these unless the new battery-powered cigarettes actually end up cheaper.
I'm probably going to cancel my account soon, the game just doesn't have much to offer me after 3 or 4 months of playing. I made millions upon millions of credits, I've had most of the cool loot, and it just gets boring after awhile. The only thing I haven't done is make it to jedi, and I'm not about to invest 200+ more hours in the game.
I continue to keep my account simply because I have it run macros in the background to generate millions in credits, which on my server sells for approximately 5 dollars a month per million.
I've expanded on this to provide even more services, now I have a hospital with a doctor inside buffing automatically throughout the day, I have another guy using a personal exploit to mine without a mining installation (must be logged in) and a third computer with a trial account killing meatlumps outside coronet for rug pieces and extremeley rare loot (one every four hours or so).
I figure I'm probably making about a hundred a month off of this, of which, 30 goes to pay for my accounts, and another 15 or so goes to pay for electricity. A physically handicapped guy I know has been using this method to get about a thousand to fifteen hundred bucks a month playing MMORPGs. And it's funny too, cause players in the games he participates in call him "ruthless" and hate that he would "take advantage of poor Ebayers" by giving them what he wants.
As you can imagine, he's a hardcore Libertarian now. Used to be a hardcore Democrat.
As a beta tester, I can tell you right now, I don't know what the reviewers were smoking when they said this game was so cool. I'm sorry, but the fact that you can use a joystick does not impress me. The fact that it *looks* pretty does not impress me. The fact that I can't do anything of even the slightest importance in space *does* effect me. It makes me not want to enter space with my character, and thus I did not.
For those of you who purchased the Planetside "underground" expansion (you can tell what kind of an effect it had on me based upon the fact that I cannot remember its name) you'll know exactly what I'm talking about. JtL introduces a new area that everyone will enjoy for 48 hours, and then they'll go back to the real economy of the game.
Speaking of which, "2500+ buffs! 3.0 hours! 15k!".
Game Gear was actually a decent device. Both it and the Lynx did *not* have nearly the library that the Gameboy did.
Also, back in their time, these devices ran on double a's and triple a's and couldn't be recharged easily. They failed because of the 4-6 hour life, yes, but because not everyone had a battery recharger, and a quick means to recharge them was not available.
I find currently that if I'm not done playing my current GBA after 4-6 hours, then my neck and back generally regret it the next day.
Actually, when it comes to Justices, "conservative" takes a much different meaning. It means that they are *less* likely to overturn a decision (like Roe vs. Wade) and more likely to throw out a new law as unconstitutional.
The change in salinity in the ocean will not be the cause of climate change, at all. It will be another symptom of the underlying problem.
And the problem is far larger than we have, or will, get into in this discussion.
WTH??!!?! Okay then, what specifically is causing the problem then? Everyone I've talked to says salinity of the ocean, but you're obviously concerned about something else. Let's hear what it is.
After all, temperature doesn't rise on average near ice shelves for no reason at all. If conversing with environmentalists has taught me anything; there's gotta be some big fat corporation you want to pin the blame on.
I'm still failing to see any evidence of what you suggest. Do you even know this field or are you one of those repeat enviro-nuts that just repeats verbatim what they read in the paper?
Sure why not. And I know where this is leading, but salinity does not have as large of an effect on climate or environment as you and others suggest.
It'd be ludicrous for me to say that because of a 1% increase in the price of exports in Hong Kong that there is going to be a 40 to 50 percent increase in the cost of computers in the US. Even considering all the different parts that it takes to assemble the computer, there's no extremely complex model that doesn't pass the occam's razor test.
If there were to be a massive shift in weather it would come from the magnetic poles, not the level of salinity. The closing of the ozone is more than likely to be a natural occurance than the presence of CFCs, which were negated immediately by local ozone (smog).
Regarding the comments made on HL2:
For one, yes, there was a hack, and yes, the source was released. The game *was* overhyped though. I agree that Valve did work secretly, but the problem is that the developers really didn't have much done, as evidenced by the source that Ago supposedly stole.
A good number of people think that it is arguable that he stole it. In fact, the logs from this "unknown" source were never verified. I agree with the article, but I don't think Valve is a great source of underhyping. Peter Molywhatever is pretty well known for hyping, though I don't imagine he ever really intends to hype the games.
Black & White was a horrible game. Dungeon Keeper (not overhyped) was an excellent game. I think development time is what really matters. I get more fun out of playing new games developed for old engines (Freelancer) than new games developed for new engines (Doom3).
I guess I value plot, story, and game interface more than I value all the fancy bells and whistles.
No, I don't find the argument compelling, in fact, I'm having a very hard time even finding a remote argument regarding salinity of the oceans.
97% of the earth's water is saltwater (what I did find). If the entirety of the atmospheric water were to fall to the earth today, there would be a 1 inch rise in sea level. (another one)
I fail to see how the salinity is going to change dramatically, even if all the shelves were to just start breaking off. I've seen estimates that the sea level will rise 70m if the Antartic melted, and the the Antartic contains 90% of the world's ice. But seriously lacking is the figures used to determine such. In fact, it doesn't look as if water density has even been accounted for!
Again, I'll repeat it, I see no negligible effect on climate as you have asserted.
/agreed. And if Murphy's law has anything to do with it, they are going to use the latter of what you described.
What we need to do is refuse to buy the first game that implements this. It won't be too hard for me, the seemingly lackluster games that have come out from some of the big production houses have been rather lame both plot and gameplay wise.
Not to mention they have all been dumbing down the game for the XBox ports. I think Deus Ex: Invisible War is probably the best example of this. That very well may be the last game I buy without playing a demo. So far I've been getting back into trying demos before purchasing again.
If I see ads for anything other than the game I'm playing in the demo, then I'll skip it and head to a different one.
Well, actually, no, I don't believe the north pole is melting. Subs have been surfacing there without trouble since 1959!
http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/08578.htm
I find it hard to believe that when someone says, "take a look at this picture! the caps are melting!" is any more than a "chicken little" farse.
Granted, what you have said is much more involving, but I'm not seeing a 40% increase in temperature in that area so I'd question your evidence. In fact, even localized, I see nothing more than a few degrees in temperature change on average even in areas where cities have been expanding and you would think would naturally be quite hotter. The satellite data for Anartica is heavily disputed as well because of the natural lack of an ozone layer. I suppose surface temperatures alone would be enough to scare someone, but where civilization hasn't ravaged the landscape I would also expect to see change, and there just hasn't been any.
My biggest concern is that this is not a man made aberration and that it just happens naturally perhaps every thousand years or so. We don't really have any recorded data, but perhaps we are doomed to the outcomes you mention above no matter what we do. It is very hard to predict a climate based on only maybe a hundred years of accurate data and a recorded history that is only accurate to maybe a few thousand years. The question I'd like to see answered is: What if the caps are "supposed" to be melting? Is it some sort of indication that the poles will shift? Why has the magnetic pole shifted so variably in the last 50 years or so?
Here's another thing I've never had answered: Why is it that ground level ozone, the "smog" we don't like from cars, never goes into the atmosphere and becomes the good ozone? More specifically, why is it that aerosol cans only damage the ozone covering the stratosphere and don't immediately effect the surrounding ozone?
Okay, let me explain for you. UHIE is "Urban Heat Island Effect". Up until the last two years, satellite data and ground surface data have been in direct conflict with each other regarding temperature. Only recently did the satellite data show a temperature increase. In the meantime, ground data readings are skewed because the temperature readers are in locations where there is a ton of asphalt, concrete, and metal. Namely, airports and in the middle of cities.
Bush is great if you're rich, own a major oil or logging company, like to breathe CO2, or look forward to the 23 rise on sea level.
No offense, but I have a hard time believing you ever really were a Republican if you actually buy all that eco-junk science. Global Warming is a religion, not science.
When you hear the "experts" talk about environmentalism it is based on climate models and other data that they can't even agree amongst themselves on. There are so many different "denominations" that the only thing they actually agree on is "there is global warmning". Just like Christians believe "there is a God".
I suggest looking into things like UHIE if you have suddenly decided to abandon your Republican roots and jump on the eco-bandwagon. And btw, in case you are wondering, I'm not a Republican. I'm a Libertarian, so I'm not trying to pull you back into the fold or anything.
I don't know about "network programming" but Seldon and crew sure did a lot of "networking" in the "Foundations" series.
And yet, ironically, nothing there addresses your original argument: If I write (and distribute) a program with the express intent of illegally using zombied machines (which is against federal law) is that free speech?
The answer is still a resounding *YES*.
He is WRITING the software to do the supposedly illegal action, not doing the illegal action itself. I know that sounds crazy. Let me give you some insight into how it works.
The Players:
Legitimate spammers: legits (My employers, a public institution, ie government)
Illegitimate spammers: illegits (Anyone that isn't the government)
The reciever: you
Individual that compromises the machines: searcher
Proxies: Programs (legitimate) that let people connect from one computer to another.
Individual that installs the proxies: herder
Individual that programs the spam software: coder
The searchers compromise multiple machines including yours via an IE exploit. It does a connect-back to an IRC server where later the botnet herder throws on a proxy and then mitigates the sale to the illegits that send you spam. They then use software created by their coders, or available software used by the legits, to send spam via proxies to you.
The people doing the illegal activity here are the searchers and herders not the illegits and coders.
I would defend them, and you know why? They created my job, they are easy to overcome, and they simply do not effect the majority of bright individuals that use the net.
A good ISP is going to do egress filtering to prevent the first four items from having any impact (save adware, which may open popups). A good OS is not going to let the first four even get installed.
Fake ATM theft is a scam, pure and simple. What you're saying is not to punish the people responsible for doing the actual crime, you're saying the creator of the ATM (or the card reader) is responsible. And that's ridiculous. The person that actually commits the crime has the intent, not the person that creates the tool.
Previous comments have already pointed out the features of this jerk's software that are specifically designed to abrogate my right to not receive unwanted messages.
What right? The same right that protects you from junkmail, spam, telemarketers? You have no guaranteed right to privacy. It's a derived right, and a weak one at that. After all, oh I'm safe from something like SPAM (which I don't have to worry about with greylisting anyway), but I'm not safe from the government databases or FBI, CIA, NSA, wiretaps and survelliance.
What kind of a stupid system is *that*?
If I create a 100 page document revealing nuclear secrets and instructions for successfully bringing down a US airliner, is that free speech?
Yes. Professors do things like this on a regular basis. Granted, they do it ever so subtly, but they don't skirt around what exactly could be done with the information they have provided.
Now, if you are a government employee (which you would pretty much *have* to be to know how nuclear devices work) and write something along those lines, it might very well be sensitive and thus kept a secret, but if you are just a citizen that knows a lot about the field and releases it to the public domain, why wouldn't you be able to write it? It's like pointing out something that *could* be done in a movie and the US gov't patching the whole. You don't see the government suing the creators of say, "Mission Impossible", and there is an actual video, not just words on the Internet or in a book. What makes you think that someone's comments in a written form are going to be any more accurate than an overrated movie?
If I create a list of fellow students I intend to kill on Monday, is that free speech?
Yes. Of course. It's also entirely stupid and entirely a written threat. You're going to go to jail, but not for the fact that you wrote, but for what you threatened to do.
Essentially what you're saying is that *you* know what the intent is, even without having questioned the person. You seem to think that a mythical "majority" of people would agree with you, and thus said statement should be wrong. But, just imagine, you were left out of the loop, and the list was actually a prop in a movie, or better yet, an encrypted message to friends.
I refuse to believe that I am the end all be all of authority on a matter, you however, think you *must* be right. The only problem is, you're not going to be the one making the decisions, so you turn in a paper with a "hitlist" that you claim is someone elses and they claim it is yours in return. You get bent over for doing what you thought was a good thing.
If I write (and distribute) a program with the express intent of DDoS'ing websites (which is illegal), is that free speech?
Here again, you alone are the one determining intent.
Let me rephrase it for you:
If I, Professor Jacob Renin of Cambridge University, write (and distribute) a program of which, the only possible use is DDoS'ing websites (which is illegal), is that free speech?
Also, I'm not entirely certain DDOSing is technically "illegal". It's certainly malicious intent, but I know of no law that simply states, "DDoS'in = illegal".
If I write (and distribute) a program with the express intent of illegally using zombied machines (which is against federal law) is that free speech?
I'm sorry, I'm just going to break down and flat out ask you here, what laws? Show me the laws on "zombied machines" and "DDOSing". Of course, it doesn't have to have those *exact* terms, but it's gotta have that same meaning. AFAIK, there is still nothing straight up illegal about it, and as always, due process is allowed.
He knowingly crossed the line from free speech to criminal activity (more than once) and needs to be held accountable for that.
I disagree, and nothing you've mentioned would seem to indicate that he has directly harmed anyone. I imagine that he has, but writing a tool that someone was inevitably going to write (and was actually the 3rd that I know of, first "public" one though) and writing spam software (of which there are better) and not being the one actually *doing* it, you've got a LONG way to go to convince me something is wrong.
Might as well go out and round up all the crowbar manufacturers.
"Oh please, please! Listen to me, why? Because I alone know the intentions of those using and creating software."
You realize you sound like this, right?
And the CAN-SPAM law is only passed in stupidity by the DMCA. What the CAN-SPAM law may have actually done, is legitimized the actions of thousands of spammers. Which means that our ISPs and mail providers that block this spam could potentially be liable for doing so.
Isn't that fscked up?
So we should determine legality based upon how something can be used/abused? What about that shiny new DVD decryption software you used just the other day?