To be honest, it's a pretty hollow victory. In the aftermath of a nuclear war, as the nuclear winter sets in, whether the nuclear winter was set off by 300kt warheads or 1MT warheads is pretty much academic.
From the point of view of the UK National Grid, wind is NOT considered intermittent. But nuclear is. Why?
From a grid management perspective, if your wind farms are generating 2GW of power now, they will likely be generating 2GW or very near that in 20 minutes time, and it's very predictable over the next few hours what the wind generation is going to do.
However, Sizewell B could go offline in 2 minutes time meaning the grid suddenly loses well over 1GW of generating capacity in one sudden, enormous hit. This never happens with wind, because it's generated by thousands of small generators instead of one huge one, and the wind never *suddenly* stops, it always takes a few hours for the wind to slow down so you have plenty of notice. But you won't have any notice of a sudden shutdown of a large coal or nuclear power station, so you must keep enough spinning reserve online to cope with the possible sudden failure of one or more large power stations. If you don't have enough spinning reserve, well, you end up with something like the great north east blackout a few years ago in the United States if a large power station goes offline.
It's heating a minuscule amount of material, I doubt very much energy is put into the heating, certainly not that'll make you notice more heat coming out of a laptop.
With buffer overflows the way it usually works is that a buffer that is allocated on the stack (let's say, a temporary buffer where some user input goes to have something done on it) isn't properly bounds checked. Local function variables are on the stack. What is below them (on x86 and amd64) will be first the saved base pointer of the calling function, and then the return address of the next instruction in the calling function. So on a 32 bit arch, if we imagine the buffer is the first thing on the stack, the first 4 bytes of the buffer overflow will overwrite the calling function's saved %ebp register, and then the next 4 bytes you overwrite will be the return address of the calling function. When the function finishes and executes the RET statement, what happens is the address put on the stack by the CALL is popped off, and the program counter is set to this address.
Normally, this address is the valid return address, but in this case, where you've been able to overflow the buffer, it's whatever the 4 bytes were set to in the overflowing data. In a userland program, the program will usually crash with "Segmentation fault". In kernel land, you may get a kernel panic.
To exploit this, when the attacker overwrites the return address, if they can have this address point to their code instead, they can then gain control of the machine with whatever privilege level the process they are attacking has. Usually, the whole exploit is in the buffer that's overflowed, the attacker basically has to figure out what the address of their payload will be in the stack, and set the function's return address to this, and voila, they can execute arbitrary code.
A number of things have been done in recent years to frustrate this: randomizing the address of the heap and stack to make it harder to predict the address your attacking code will be at, and also making the stack and heap non-executable if the CPU supports it (or using a software emulation of the NX bit) so even if you do overwrite the return address with the address of your code, the program dies with "Segmentation fault" because the processor won't allow code to execute in that memory page.
It's an implementation problem. It depends on whether Virtualbox has the same issue in its implementation. According to the original CVE for the vulnerability, the cause is a double free of some memory, the crash actually occuring when the system reads a function pointer that is no longer valid.
*Yet*. The vulnerability according to the original CVE is a double free of memory that ends up calling a function pointer in the already-freed block of data. Now if the exploit can change the address to their shellcode, they have just gained unauthorized access.
This might not be easy to do; it might not be possible on some architectures due to the NX bit, but it's possible it could result in a remote execution vulnerability.
It won't be a problem. Britain has never stamped passports for re-entering British citizens, and British citizens don't have a problem with it despite a complete absence of British stamps in their passport.
Incidentally, I have a United States entry stamp in my passport for Dublin, Ireland. If you're wondering how the hell you can have a US stamp for entering Dublin, well, it's actually because the US has immigration in Dublin to do all the immigration and customs stuff BEFORE you leave Ireland, so you arrive in the US in a domestic terminal.
It's already done. Most police cars can do an ANPR lookup, and they automatically pick up cars which have no record of current insurance and/or tax/MOT.
MS being involved also I suppose explains why Microsoft Corporation features so prominently in the timeline of Recent US History (and no other company features at all)
Well train someone who has the innate ability. SPI, I2C etc. are not exactly rocket science. Find an old school hardware engineer who has an ability to learn and you're set. Or a desktop/server developer who has an ability to learn and you're all set.
Once you've booted the operating system (unless you're using DOS) then the BIOS isn't used any more, it doesn't really matter what it supports so long as the OS supports what you want to use.
If life were to be too complex to arise by evolution, and needed an intelligent designer, then surely the intelligent designer would also be too complex to arise naturally.
It could have been much, much worse. If MIME hadn't have come along, we could have all ended up being forced to use X.400, which like all the ISO-OSI networking stuff, horrific. (And which you have to pay a fee and sign an NDA to get the documentation that is the equivalent of an RFC)
What separates them is intent. Teller knew full well he was designing the weapons to end industrial civilization. Teller was deliberately designing stuff to kill people.
Thomas Midgley Jr. didn't know when he was developing the things he was developing that they were anything other than helpful to society.
Have they? I know Ballmer has blustered about vague claims, but to my knowledge, Microsoft has never actually launched a direct patent attack against the Linux kernel.
Because it takes an *awful lot* of effort for society to provide motorists their needs. Cars need a great deal of infrastructure (smooth roads that need frequent maintenance, traffic lights, high quality signage), have many externalities which the driver does not suffer (pollution, noise, the inherent danger of >1000kg of metal hurtling around). In actual fact, the whole transport system is so ridiculously tilted towards car use such that it seems normal to drive 1 mile to the shops but "dangerous" and "strange" to do the same thing on a bicycle. Car drivers also suffer very light penalties for causing death or serious injury by carelessness, and things like road rage are very leniently prosecuted compared to a comparable violent crime performed with, say, a knife or a baseball bat.
The problem is drivers have an unreasonable expectation that the highway in the UK should belong exclusively to them. In reality, those who have a *right* to use the public highway (except for motorways) in the UK are pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders; vehicle drivers do not have the right to be on the highway, instead both the driver must be licensed AND the vehicle. However, they expect to have preference over the road users who actually have a right to be there.
An "advanced motorist" is one who has gone to the effort of extra driving training above and beyond the bare minimum needed to get a driving license. The courses in the UK are adminstered by the IAM.
In Britain, from somewhere in the early-mid 80s on we had Prestel and Micronet. It was a moderate success, from the mid 80s onwards, Micronet was giving a free modem with each new subscription. The modem was "plug in and go" and included built in software - for example, the version for the Sinclair Spectrum had a ROM with the terminal emulation software, and the boot up time for the Spectrum + modem was under two seconds).
Micronet had a lot for home users - you could write your own pages (they called it a "gallery", but think of it as a bit like a rudimentary version of the web space ISPs used to give out), there were multi-user games (example Shades), "chatlines" (think similar to phpbb style forums), you could book airline travel etc., it had email, and you could buy computer games and other programs as online downloads for most of the popular computers at the time (ZX Spectrum, BBC Micro, and I think the Commodore 64 too). It was only a moderate success because:
- To become a Prestel IP (Information Provider), you couldn't just hook up a server to the network like you can on the internet and run a bit of open source server software. Renting space was eyewateringly expensive. So no private individuals would do it, and no one smaller than a very large company could justify it. Because of this bulletin boards run by individuals became more popular. - Per minute charges. During peak hours (9am to 6pm weekdays) they were very high, not only did you have to pay the peak phone charges, you had to pay 6p per minute to Prestel while connected. They later increased this to 7p a minute, and introduced a 1p a minute off peak charge, which hastened its demise. (They did partially back down, and Micronet customers could use the system for free during off peak hours). - Many of the more interesting services attracted per-minute charges. Shades, for instance, attracted a 1p per minute time charge.
Micronet finally went belly up at around the time that the first commercial ISPs were starting up.
I never wear lycra bondage gear to cycle. I don't keep my bike in secure storage. You don't need to do these things to ride a bicycle to the shops. You can wear (believe it or not) normal clothes to ride a bike to the shops.
They will have really good LTE broadband access, since that's what'll be interfering with their TV. They just need to use the iPlayer, SkyPlayer and whatever via LTE. The 10K can pay for a perpetual unlimited LTE connection.
Even if they do ship an assembled bomb, there is the issue of the permissive action link (PAL).
The bomb is assembled in such a way that to physically disable the PAL, what's left afterwards can't actually be detonated and must be rebuilt at the factory to turn it back into a working weapon. Additionally, knowing the code and knowing how to send it to the PAL isn't enough. For a warhead for a missile, the PAL must also sense the hard acceleration of the boost phase, it must also sense the freefall phase and the re-entry phase before it will arm the weapon. You'd also need to steal an ICBM too.
Slashdot Mirror
To be honest, it's a pretty hollow victory. In the aftermath of a nuclear war, as the nuclear winter sets in, whether the nuclear winter was set off by 300kt warheads or 1MT warheads is pretty much academic.
Kent State rather suggests (a). Sadly, this is typically what happens: the soldiers will side with the authorities.
From the point of view of the UK National Grid, wind is NOT considered intermittent. But nuclear is. Why?
From a grid management perspective, if your wind farms are generating 2GW of power now, they will likely be generating 2GW or very near that in 20 minutes time, and it's very predictable over the next few hours what the wind generation is going to do.
However, Sizewell B could go offline in 2 minutes time meaning the grid suddenly loses well over 1GW of generating capacity in one sudden, enormous hit. This never happens with wind, because it's generated by thousands of small generators instead of one huge one, and the wind never *suddenly* stops, it always takes a few hours for the wind to slow down so you have plenty of notice. But you won't have any notice of a sudden shutdown of a large coal or nuclear power station, so you must keep enough spinning reserve online to cope with the possible sudden failure of one or more large power stations. If you don't have enough spinning reserve, well, you end up with something like the great north east blackout a few years ago in the United States if a large power station goes offline.
It's heating a minuscule amount of material, I doubt very much energy is put into the heating, certainly not that'll make you notice more heat coming out of a laptop.
With buffer overflows the way it usually works is that a buffer that is allocated on the stack (let's say, a temporary buffer where some user input goes to have something done on it) isn't properly bounds checked. Local function variables are on the stack. What is below them (on x86 and amd64) will be first the saved base pointer of the calling function, and then the return address of the next instruction in the calling function. So on a 32 bit arch, if we imagine the buffer is the first thing on the stack, the first 4 bytes of the buffer overflow will overwrite the calling function's saved %ebp register, and then the next 4 bytes you overwrite will be the return address of the calling function. When the function finishes and executes the RET statement, what happens is the address put on the stack by the CALL is popped off, and the program counter is set to this address.
Normally, this address is the valid return address, but in this case, where you've been able to overflow the buffer, it's whatever the 4 bytes were set to in the overflowing data. In a userland program, the program will usually crash with "Segmentation fault". In kernel land, you may get a kernel panic.
To exploit this, when the attacker overwrites the return address, if they can have this address point to their code instead, they can then gain control of the machine with whatever privilege level the process they are attacking has. Usually, the whole exploit is in the buffer that's overflowed, the attacker basically has to figure out what the address of their payload will be in the stack, and set the function's return address to this, and voila, they can execute arbitrary code.
A number of things have been done in recent years to frustrate this: randomizing the address of the heap and stack to make it harder to predict the address your attacking code will be at, and also making the stack and heap non-executable if the CPU supports it (or using a software emulation of the NX bit) so even if you do overwrite the return address with the address of your code, the program dies with "Segmentation fault" because the processor won't allow code to execute in that memory page.
It's an implementation problem. It depends on whether Virtualbox has the same issue in its implementation. According to the original CVE for the vulnerability, the cause is a double free of some memory, the crash actually occuring when the system reads a function pointer that is no longer valid.
*Yet*. The vulnerability according to the original CVE is a double free of memory that ends up calling a function pointer in the already-freed block of data. Now if the exploit can change the address to their shellcode, they have just gained unauthorized access.
This might not be easy to do; it might not be possible on some architectures due to the NX bit, but it's possible it could result in a remote execution vulnerability.
It won't be a problem. Britain has never stamped passports for re-entering British citizens, and British citizens don't have a problem with it despite a complete absence of British stamps in their passport.
Incidentally, I have a United States entry stamp in my passport for Dublin, Ireland. If you're wondering how the hell you can have a US stamp for entering Dublin, well, it's actually because the US has immigration in Dublin to do all the immigration and customs stuff BEFORE you leave Ireland, so you arrive in the US in a domestic terminal.
It's already done. Most police cars can do an ANPR lookup, and they automatically pick up cars which have no record of current insurance and/or tax/MOT.
You can zoom using your mouse wheel (both in and out).
MS being involved also I suppose explains why Microsoft Corporation features so prominently in the timeline of Recent US History (and no other company features at all)
Well train someone who has the innate ability. SPI, I2C etc. are not exactly rocket science. Find an old school hardware engineer who has an ability to learn and you're set. Or a desktop/server developer who has an ability to learn and you're all set.
Once you've booted the operating system (unless you're using DOS) then the BIOS isn't used any more, it doesn't really matter what it supports so long as the OS supports what you want to use.
A thought:
If life were to be too complex to arise by evolution, and needed an intelligent designer, then surely the intelligent designer would also be too complex to arise naturally.
Who or what created the creator?
It could have been much, much worse. If MIME hadn't have come along, we could have all ended up being forced to use X.400, which like all the ISO-OSI networking stuff, horrific. (And which you have to pay a fee and sign an NDA to get the documentation that is the equivalent of an RFC)
My guess is that the 'p' is silent so it would be something like:
tie kog rafy
Because of this:
What separates them is intent. Teller knew full well he was designing the weapons to end industrial civilization. Teller was deliberately designing stuff to kill people.
Thomas Midgley Jr. didn't know when he was developing the things he was developing that they were anything other than helpful to society.
Have they? I know Ballmer has blustered about vague claims, but to my knowledge, Microsoft has never actually launched a direct patent attack against the Linux kernel.
Because it takes an *awful lot* of effort for society to provide motorists their needs. Cars need a great deal of infrastructure (smooth roads that need frequent maintenance, traffic lights, high quality signage), have many externalities which the driver does not suffer (pollution, noise, the inherent danger of >1000kg of metal hurtling around). In actual fact, the whole transport system is so ridiculously tilted towards car use such that it seems normal to drive 1 mile to the shops but "dangerous" and "strange" to do the same thing on a bicycle. Car drivers also suffer very light penalties for causing death or serious injury by carelessness, and things like road rage are very leniently prosecuted compared to a comparable violent crime performed with, say, a knife or a baseball bat.
The problem is drivers have an unreasonable expectation that the highway in the UK should belong exclusively to them. In reality, those who have a *right* to use the public highway (except for motorways) in the UK are pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders; vehicle drivers do not have the right to be on the highway, instead both the driver must be licensed AND the vehicle. However, they expect to have preference over the road users who actually have a right to be there.
An "advanced motorist" is one who has gone to the effort of extra driving training above and beyond the bare minimum needed to get a driving license. The courses in the UK are adminstered by the IAM.
In Britain, from somewhere in the early-mid 80s on we had Prestel and Micronet. It was a moderate success, from the mid 80s onwards, Micronet was giving a free modem with each new subscription. The modem was "plug in and go" and included built in software - for example, the version for the Sinclair Spectrum had a ROM with the terminal emulation software, and the boot up time for the Spectrum + modem was under two seconds).
Micronet had a lot for home users - you could write your own pages (they called it a "gallery", but think of it as a bit like a rudimentary version of the web space ISPs used to give out), there were multi-user games (example Shades), "chatlines" (think similar to phpbb style forums), you could book airline travel etc., it had email, and you could buy computer games and other programs as online downloads for most of the popular computers at the time (ZX Spectrum, BBC Micro, and I think the Commodore 64 too). It was only a moderate success because:
- To become a Prestel IP (Information Provider), you couldn't just hook up a server to the network like you can on the internet and run a bit of open source server software. Renting space was eyewateringly expensive. So no private individuals would do it, and no one smaller than a very large company could justify it. Because of this bulletin boards run by individuals became more popular.
- Per minute charges. During peak hours (9am to 6pm weekdays) they were very high, not only did you have to pay the peak phone charges, you had to pay 6p per minute to Prestel while connected. They later increased this to 7p a minute, and introduced a 1p a minute off peak charge, which hastened its demise. (They did partially back down, and Micronet customers could use the system for free during off peak hours).
- Many of the more interesting services attracted per-minute charges. Shades, for instance, attracted a 1p per minute time charge.
Micronet finally went belly up at around the time that the first commercial ISPs were starting up.
I never wear lycra bondage gear to cycle.
I don't keep my bike in secure storage.
You don't need to do these things to ride a bicycle to the shops. You can wear (believe it or not) normal clothes to ride a bike to the shops.
When every party that can possibly form a government has the same policy on fuel -- how can you change it by voting?
They will have really good LTE broadband access, since that's what'll be interfering with their TV. They just need to use the iPlayer, SkyPlayer and whatever via LTE. The 10K can pay for a perpetual unlimited LTE connection.
Even if they do ship an assembled bomb, there is the issue of the permissive action link (PAL).
The bomb is assembled in such a way that to physically disable the PAL, what's left afterwards can't actually be detonated and must be rebuilt at the factory to turn it back into a working weapon. Additionally, knowing the code and knowing how to send it to the PAL isn't enough. For a warhead for a missile, the PAL must also sense the hard acceleration of the boost phase, it must also sense the freefall phase and the re-entry phase before it will arm the weapon. You'd also need to steal an ICBM too.