Well sure, but even a 20 or 30 character long password, assuming only alpha numeric (I'll even leave out changing caps as the average human wouldn't bother) 37 characters possible includeing spaces. 37^20 is 2.3e31 still a whole shitload to brute force. Now that would only be for 1 measly vote, try to brute force the thousands you would need to in order to stuff a balot. Note I'm not mentioning cracking there balot server, as that is obviously the easier method, just pointing out that the pgp signatures is secure enough as it is.
Re:reverse engineering linux / BSD
on
Be on the G4
·
· Score: 2
I wonder though, in a theoretical sense. Reverse engineered code would be different enough from the original source code, that it wouldn't accually be covered by the GPL license. Could you then just hand the source code created by the computer from the process of reverse engineering straight to the designers without the clean-room step as it wouldn't be needed seeing as reverse engineering isn't illigal in a GPL license? I could be so wrong about this I'm not even funny. Just asking for comments
Restrict the # of comments any single IP/Account is allowed to make in a single article. This gets problematic: anyone have a good idea on how to make this fair, that will scale from 1 comment to a thousand?
The fairest way I can imagine would be first, to resist anyone with a low alignment -1 to maby only a handful of first level comments. Also replies within a thread should be limited only by who its in reply too. For instance you should only make maby 3 or 4 direct comments within an individual tree branch. No that doesn't make sense either, basically you should be able to indefinatly continue a thread, for instance if someone replies to something I should be able to reply to that then reply to my replies to reply to other peoples replies. But one should be limited on how many comments he/she can make 1 step down from a specific comment. Give them 3 or 4 mainly in case they forgot a point they where trying to make or correcting typos exedera, but if someone makes a comment on thier comment they automaticaly would want to be able to comment on that. I know I didn't make myself very clear, but its harder to explain, than it would be to program.
One major problem is, if you made campains funded, you would give an obvious boost to anyone who was personally rich. It would be very difficult to tell the person they can't use thier own money for advertising and what not (and would be a whole first amendment problem with that also). So the Ross Perots and Steve Forbes of this world would have huge budgets while the others would be limited to $100,000. Personally I find this completly unfair and quite aristicracical. Also on a side note, the $1,000 cap per donation has shown little to no effect in helping the small canidate get on the field, because you always need upstart capital, which has been comming out of the canidates personal pocket.
Umm, just having a pgp secret key gives you nothing. You also have to have its password. Assuming a decent length password (pgp allows passwords of huge length (tried to create a new key just now and the space for me to type the password never ran out as I just hit random keys till I gave up)) it would be a huge task of breaking said password.
Of course, there IS no way to determine if they're telling the truth or not...:) Well sure there is, if we could reverse engineer it back to source code, put out own key in it, recompile, then try to break in using that key. Only problem is the legallity of such an action, not the mention the difficulty in successfully recompling it. It would still be arguable either way afterwards.
(compare what it takes to get TCP/IP networking work on each platForm, for instance). Control Panel/Network/Add/TCP-IP/ enter ip#,sUbnet,Dns/reboot (ok thats the pathedic step).
an you upgrade a Pentium (586) to a Pentium II? Not really... not directly anyway. Sure, you can stick an 'upgrade' CPU in A PCI slot or retrofit it into the socket7(?), but there needs to be new hardware surrounding the 'upgrade' chip that makes it look like the OLD CPU to the motherboard's chip set. That is the absolute worst way to upgrade. I've never quite understood those products, but anyways. Umm but anyways, You can buy a motherboard and a k6-2:450 for under $200. Though you will have to pay closer to $300 for a pentium II, thats not an architectual problem.
(compare what it takes to get TCP/IP networking work on each platform, for instance). Control Panel/Network/Add/TCP-IP/ enter ip#,subnet,dns/reboot (ok thats the pathedic step). If your talking about getting a network card to work, I'll have to admit that it can be a bitch sometimes. But any network card produced in the last year or so I havn't seen any problems, it was mainly the problem of hardware designers getting their drivers working properly. Most of that has been fixed as far as I can see.
Genesis 1:1 heavens and Earth Basically this was an opening statement, it was a quick synapsis of the whole thing, not part of the order. 1:3 light 1:4 darkness Both are stated as being basically created at the same time, then seperated. Kinda strange I guess, but this could be seen as the stars forming in the galaxy from the expanse of gasses 1:8 Heaven again! 1:9 Earth again! No not again, first time. 1:1 was synapsis remember 1:12 plants on the land 1:14 light again! darkness again too! slight rehash basically you could see the stars now from earth. and the stars where still finding their position in the sky.. things moved pretty fast after the big bang:) 1:16 god calls the moon a light - heh heh! Didn't say such thing, said greater light in day lesser light in night, could be talking about star light, or whatever its really not clear, but still there is light comming from the moon, even if it is reflected. Would you say a sunroof was a "light source" I personally would 1:20 finally sea animals, and birds 1:24 beasts of the earth 1:27 man finally yea.. that pretty much completes the cycle of evolution.. I see no problem here. Just some guy with something to prove.
I wasn't defending creationism (or denying it) I just don't like to see people throw false facts out to try to prove their case. And if you accually read the Atheism FAQ you just pointed me to, it in no way mentiones the theory stated above, much less disproves it. Note: if you wern't replying to me, I apologize, but I see no reason for a rational person atheist or not standing up for ungrounded arguments.
Call me stupid, but I thought mad-cow virus lived in brain tissue. Is there a waiting time or something? cause I can't imagine mad cow staying in your blood stream past a certain amount of time. (though you'd probably be dead by then I guess but thats not the point)
Not true, any form of crypto export is illegal. I could print a book with crypto source code and it would be illegal (except in certain jurisdictions of the second court of appeals, (have to wait till server is completly back up to look that up again))
Stop me if I'm wrong here, I understood the statemnet about newtons theories having almost zero percent chance of being proven wrong. But, then you continued on to say evolution also has about zero percent chance of being proven wrong. HEHEH.. prove it!:)
I'm willing to bet you know about those employees who waist their time on porn from personal experiences with them/complaints you hear from other employees. My point is that usually it does not take a packet sniffer to find out when your employees are waisting their time at porn. I know in my office there is atleast one person who does this. But the management already knows about it, and realizes that if they choose to do something about it, it doesn't require invasion of their privacy to fire them for such acts. (and they don't want to add another stess level to me by forcing me to impliment such a system)
Yea, and hopefully once the floor finds this out the intelligent ones will be looking for a new job. Definate way to see to it that your job is "Done". But as you oviously have had experience doing this and kept the people, I'm very sorry you work at a company with such unspirited individuals.
Well, its more of a preliminaty examination. You wouldn't let a crop duster pilot fly and f14 without giving him a test first. Same as you wanta make sure only the people who can handle the negative effects of installing the newest software will be installing it. You don't want it to crash average joes computer and have him cursing x86 and never using it again do you?
Conservatives, like Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, believe that the BEST government is the LEAST government. While I'm sure you'll get flamed to hell for that whole article, but I accually agreed with you at the risk of being flammed myself.. cause hey, what would liberty be for if we didn't speak up. But anyways, I just wanted to point out that accually ben franklin and jefferson where not considered conservatives. I mean seriously, if you think about it it takes alot of non conservatist ideas to impliment an entire new governmental system. Sadly what people don't seem to realize is that the system they implimented was a wonderful system, and only needs revising given a national crisis (rosevelts "New Deal' for instance, which we have completly destroyed the initial intent and direction of btw). Libralism (for lack of a better word) is needed, but not constantly. Thats why we have a 2 party system. And thats also why the original constitution only setup congress for one month a year, cause if you spend an entire year passing law after law, eventually your gonna overcrowd yourself. Oh well!
What? has S3 lost their minds? don't they know they can't make good video chips. I mean sure S3 makes a decent 2D video card, but common why are they trying to throw themselves into the market instead of just packaging someone elses 3d chip on their card like every other company does.
As I see it, the problem with third parties is that they often hurt one of the two primary parties, but usually not both. So far this has accually not been the case. For example as in the 92 and 96 national elections both times the Republicans, blamed Perot of allowing them to loose the election. It was receitly show (sorry I can't give you a url to look up this information yourself) that based uponn polling, of the people polled who said they voted for perot that it was a 50/50 when asked who would they have voted for had perot not been running. So in effect it didn't change the national election at all, except to give the republican party something to yell about. Also it was oviously a lie when people said you would "waste your vote" because the same guy won who would have won in the first place, (though its slightly possible that if noone had believed they would have wasted their vote Perot could have won, and I'm not going to debate on weither that would have been good or bad)
ho else is frustrated with the assumption that the 2000 race will be Gore vs. Bush? Hey did you know that Alan Keyes (spelling?) won the Alabama straw poll. I was in complete shock myself a black republican income tax abolisionist (spelling?) winning a straw poll in the south (btw just for note this straw poll was suppositivly set up so the money from the parties was pooled together or something like that, basically making it so they couldn't buy the vote like they did in ohio.. or wherever that last one was)
Well its more than what you would think. Slashdot is tuned to the number of users it gets in a day. Latly even slashdot has been going down on rare occasions thats why they are getting new servers. The reason the slashdot effect is so much more hardhitting is the fact that if you take a site that say gets the same number of hits per day as slashdot. Then link to that site from slashdot, assuming you have no crossover (eg persons who would have visited the site anyhow) you have instantly nearly doubled the amount of visits to that site for a short amount of time. This sudden doubling effect generally leads to a very buggy site which causes people to hit the reload button. This increases the page hits by several percent more. Finally bringing the server to its preverbral knees
geez they really don't know how to make windows binaries:) are you just supposed to rename the.1 file to a.exe and run it.. thats what I did and it said it couldn't find a.dll.. which I guess is positive meaning.. well it ran.
Slashdot Mirror
Well sure, but even a 20 or 30 character long password, assuming only alpha numeric (I'll even leave out changing caps as the average human wouldn't bother) 37 characters possible includeing spaces. 37^20 is 2.3e31 still a whole shitload to brute force. Now that would only be for 1 measly vote, try to brute force the thousands you would need to in order to stuff a balot. Note I'm not mentioning cracking there balot server, as that is obviously the easier method, just pointing out that the pgp signatures is secure enough as it is.
I wonder though, in a theoretical sense. Reverse engineered code would be different enough from the original source code, that it wouldn't accually be covered by the GPL license. Could you then just hand the source code created by the computer from the process of reverse engineering straight to the designers without the clean-room step as it wouldn't be needed seeing as reverse engineering isn't illigal in a GPL license? I could be so wrong about this I'm not even funny. Just asking for comments
Restrict the # of comments any single IP/Account is allowed to make in a single article. This gets problematic: anyone have a good idea on how to make this fair, that will scale from 1 comment to a thousand?
The fairest way I can imagine would be first, to resist anyone with a low alignment -1 to maby only a handful of first level comments. Also replies within a thread should be limited only by who its in reply too. For instance you should only make maby 3 or 4 direct comments within an individual tree branch. No that doesn't make sense either, basically you should be able to indefinatly continue a thread, for instance if someone replies to something I should be able to reply to that then reply to my replies to reply to other peoples replies. But one should be limited on how many comments he/she can make 1 step down from a specific comment. Give them 3 or 4 mainly in case they forgot a point they where trying to make or correcting typos exedera, but if someone makes a comment on thier comment they automaticaly would want to be able to comment on that. I know I didn't make myself very clear, but its harder to explain, than it would be to program.
One major problem is, if you made campains funded, you would give an obvious boost to anyone who was personally rich. It would be very difficult to tell the person they can't use thier own money for advertising and what not (and would be a whole first amendment problem with that also). So the Ross Perots and Steve Forbes of this world would have huge budgets while the others would be limited to $100,000. Personally I find this completly unfair and quite aristicracical. Also on a side note, the $1,000 cap per donation has shown little to no effect in helping the small canidate get on the field, because you always need upstart capital, which has been comming out of the canidates personal pocket.
Umm, just having a pgp secret key gives you nothing. You also have to have its password. Assuming a decent length password (pgp allows passwords of huge length (tried to create a new key just now and the space for me to type the password never ran out as I just hit random keys till I gave up)) it would be a huge task of breaking said password.
Of course, there IS no way to determine if they're telling the truth or not... :)
Well sure there is, if we could reverse engineer it back to source code, put out own key in it, recompile, then try to break in using that key. Only problem is the legallity of such an action, not the mention the difficulty in successfully recompling it. It would still be arguable either way afterwards.
(compare what it takes to get TCP/IP networking work on each platForm, for instance).
Control Panel/Network/Add/TCP-IP/
enter ip#,sUbnet,Dns/reboot (ok thats the pathedic step).
an you upgrade a Pentium (586) to a Pentium II? Not really... not directly anyway. Sure, you can stick an 'upgrade' CPU in A PCI slot or retrofit it into the socket7(?), but there needs to be new hardware surrounding the 'upgrade' chip that makes it look like the OLD CPU to the motherboard's chip set.
That is the absolute worst way to upgrade. I've never quite understood those products, but anyways. Umm but anyways, You can buy a motherboard and a k6-2:450 for under $200.
Though you will have to pay closer to $300 for a pentium II, thats not an architectual problem.
(compare what it takes to get TCP/IP networking work on each platform, for instance).
Control Panel/Network/Add/TCP-IP/
enter ip#,subnet,dns/reboot (ok thats the pathedic step).
If your talking about getting a network card to work, I'll have to admit that it can be a bitch sometimes. But any network card produced in the last year or so I havn't seen any problems, it was mainly the problem of hardware designers getting their drivers working properly. Most of that has been fixed as far as I can see.
Genesis 1:1 heavens and Earth :)
Basically this was an opening statement, it was a quick synapsis of the whole thing, not part of the order.
1:3 light
1:4 darkness
Both are stated as being basically created at the same time, then seperated. Kinda strange I guess, but this could be seen as the stars forming in the galaxy from the expanse of gasses
1:8 Heaven again!
1:9 Earth again!
No not again, first time. 1:1 was synapsis remember
1:12 plants on the land
1:14 light again! darkness again too!
slight rehash basically you could see the stars now from earth. and the stars where still finding their position in the sky.. things moved pretty fast after the big bang
1:16 god calls the moon a light - heh heh!
Didn't say such thing, said greater light in day lesser light in night, could be talking about star light, or whatever its really not clear, but still there is light comming from the moon, even if it is reflected. Would you say a sunroof was a "light source" I personally would
1:20 finally sea animals, and birds
1:24 beasts of the earth
1:27 man finally
yea.. that pretty much completes the cycle of evolution.. I see no problem here. Just some guy with something to prove.
I wasn't defending creationism (or denying it) I just don't like to see people throw false facts out to try to prove their case. And if you accually read the Atheism FAQ you just pointed me to, it in no way mentiones the theory stated above, much less disproves it.
Note: if you wern't replying to me, I apologize, but I see no reason for a rational person atheist or not standing up for ungrounded arguments.
Call me stupid, but I thought mad-cow virus lived in brain tissue. Is there a waiting time or something? cause I can't imagine mad cow staying in your blood stream past a certain amount of time. (though you'd probably be dead by then I guess but thats not the point)
Not true, any form of crypto export is illegal. I could print a book with crypto source code and it would be illegal (except in certain jurisdictions of the second court of appeals, (have to wait till server is completly back up to look that up again))
Stop me if I'm wrong here, I understood the statemnet about newtons theories having almost zero percent chance of being proven wrong. But, then you continued on to say evolution also has about zero percent chance of being proven wrong. :)
HEHEH.. prove it!
Just one more piece of proof concerning people who love to spout off irrational ideas. The bible doesn't say that pi = 3. You have to understand the way the hebrew language works to understand what it really says. But just because we translated it wrong, doesn't mean jack.
umm (not a page I would personally recommend but first one I found from searching pi and bible.. but basically explains the problem)
I'm willing to bet you know about those employees who waist their time on porn from personal experiences with them/complaints you hear from other employees. My point is that usually it does not take a packet sniffer to find out when your employees are waisting their time at porn. I know in my office there is atleast one person who does this. But the management already knows about it, and realizes that if they choose to do something about it, it doesn't require invasion of their privacy to fire them for such acts. (and they don't want to add another stess level to me by forcing me to impliment such a system)
Yea, and hopefully once the floor finds this out the intelligent ones will be looking for a new job. Definate way to see to it that your job is "Done". But as you oviously have had experience doing this and kept the people, I'm very sorry you work at a company with such unspirited individuals.
Well, its more of a preliminaty examination. You wouldn't let a crop duster pilot fly and f14 without giving him a test first. Same as you wanta make sure only the people who can handle the negative effects of installing the newest software will be installing it. You don't want it to crash average joes computer and have him cursing x86 and never using it again do you?
HEHE... your thinking screenshot arn't you??.
Conservatives, like Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, believe that the BEST government is the LEAST government.
While I'm sure you'll get flamed to hell for that whole article, but I accually agreed with you at the risk of being flammed myself.. cause hey, what would liberty be for if we didn't speak up. But anyways, I just wanted to point out that accually ben franklin and jefferson where not considered conservatives. I mean seriously, if you think about it it takes alot of non conservatist ideas to impliment an entire new governmental system. Sadly what people don't seem to realize is that the system they implimented was a wonderful system, and only needs revising given a national crisis (rosevelts "New Deal' for instance, which we have completly destroyed the initial intent and direction of btw). Libralism (for lack of a better word) is needed, but not constantly. Thats why we have a 2 party system. And thats also why the original constitution only setup congress for one month a year, cause if you spend an entire year passing law after law, eventually your gonna overcrowd yourself. Oh well!
What? has S3 lost their minds? don't they know they can't make good video chips. I mean sure S3 makes a decent 2D video card, but common why are they trying to throw themselves into the market instead of just packaging someone elses 3d chip on their card like every other company does.
Whoa! you have a 3D card on your sub-$400. WHY?
As I see it, the problem with third parties is that they often hurt one of the two primary parties, but usually not both.
So far this has accually not been the case. For example as in the 92 and 96 national elections both times the Republicans, blamed Perot of allowing them to loose the election. It was receitly show (sorry I can't give you a url to look up this information yourself) that based uponn polling, of the people polled who said they voted for perot that it was a 50/50 when asked who would they have voted for had perot not been running. So in effect it didn't change the national election at all, except to give the republican party something to yell about. Also it was oviously a lie when people said you would "waste your vote" because the same guy won who would have won in the first place, (though its slightly possible that if noone had believed they would have wasted their vote Perot could have won, and I'm not going to debate on weither that would have been good or bad)
ho else is frustrated with the assumption that the 2000 race will be Gore vs. Bush?
Hey did you know that Alan Keyes (spelling?) won the Alabama straw poll. I was in complete shock myself a black republican income tax abolisionist (spelling?) winning a straw poll in the south (btw just for note this straw poll was suppositivly set up so the money from the parties was pooled together or something like that, basically making it so they couldn't buy the vote like they did in ohio.. or wherever that last one was)
Well its more than what you would think. Slashdot is tuned to the number of users it gets in a day. Latly even slashdot has been going down on rare occasions thats why they are getting new servers. The reason the slashdot effect is so much more hardhitting is the fact that if you take a site that say gets the same number of hits per day as slashdot. Then link to that site from slashdot, assuming you have no crossover (eg persons who would have visited the site anyhow) you have instantly nearly doubled the amount of visits to that site for a short amount of time. This sudden doubling effect generally leads to a very buggy site which causes people to hit the reload button. This increases the page hits by several percent more. Finally bringing the server to its preverbral knees
geez they really don't know how to make windows binaries :) are you just supposed to rename the .1 file to a .exe and run it.. thats what I did and it said it couldn't find a .dll .. which I guess is positive meaning.. well it ran.