Which requires root which the virus would give it'self root which requires root.....
This simply means that the virus would have to be two fold, break the os security and break this security issue. If the virus has root access, well, your already screwed. This attack merely makes it much much harder to remove the virus AFTER the damage.
My already screwed what? Or did you mean "you're already screwed"?
A virus with root access can already do damage. The whole point of TFA is that this is not only one more thing that can be done, the damage that can be done will basically brick your laptop. With other viruses all they do is wipe out your hard drive. Once you reinstall the software you can use the laptop again. With this hack and the "permanently" installed battery your laptop is a brick and you're screwed.
Most firmware flashing requires the root password to perform, so I'm assuming that unless you're talking about removing the battery from the computer. So at least authentication is required for this, which lessens the threat considerably.
Right. Because a virus would never give itself root access...
Except, in Florida, if you have a vehicle registered in your name, and there is no current insurance on that vehicle, your drivers' license is automatically suspended by the computer - no questions asked, no notice given, doesn't matter if the vehicle is stored in a closed garage and hasn't seen the light of day since before the insurance lapsed. BTDT.
That only makes a difference with no insurance. If the car is insured but the registered owner has a suspended license, the car can still be legally driven by a different licensed driver. Sure, there are a few situations where the license plate scanning can help. However, the number of false positives when scanning plates (and not drivers) dilutes the utility of this method when used in an enforcement capacity.
This kind of thing would be utter hell on suspended and uninsured drivers. It could help make the roads WAY safer.
One problem there, Ace. All they are doing is tracking the cars. A car belonging to a person with a suspended license can be driven legally by someone with a valid license. Also, some insurance covers you no matter which car you drive so even though the owner may not have insurance on the car the driver may be covered. So yeah, this is really not very helpful.
As long as I can get a cat that will tell me exactly what it wants instead of me having to figure it out, I'm good.
Then they can apply that gene to women.
That's easy. But there's one fatal flaw to this idea. In order to give women the ability to just tell people what they want, you have to insert a Y chromosome. Trouble is, that turns them into a man.
Because most slashdot users still have their first computer in a corner or in the attic.
That must make me somewhat unique. My TRS-80 and PC/XT are long gone. I gave up on the dream of using them again a very long time ago. My single core Athlon is my oldest computer now that I pitched my Pentium III, and all it does is run a disk array I use for bulk storage.
A lot of the projections on population growth assume that nothing will change in the birth and death rates. Two things will change as population density increases, both deriving from the abject poverty brought on by overpopulation in 3rd world countries.
First will be war. A bunch of desperately poor people with nothing to lose are easy to whip up into a frenzy. Despots will have no trouble building an army that will march off to take what little his neighbors have. Conflicts are already flaring up. The scale will only get bigger. And they're not going to just swoop in and take the resources, they're going to kill each other off. We will see more genocide between warring factions. It's only a matter of time.
Second will be disease. People packed into slums living in complete squalor will breed disease. I doubt we'll see a huge super bug that wipes out 90% of the population of the earth overnight. However, simple diseases will proliferate and wipe out whole towns at a time. An influenza strain alone could wipe out hundreds of millions of people in a year. Reports of outbreaks will only get more common as the population grows. As we cure more diseases, they'll evolve into new strains. Any disease that's hideously deadly will probably burn itself out too fast to wipe out the world's population, but we'll still see new and nasty diseases that wipe out large numbers of people.
We can talk all we want about educating women so they don't want to have so many babies. But we don't realize how much it's going to take to actually make that happen. Cultural issues have to be overcome. Someone has to provide that education to a growing population. That's not going to be cheap. We can talk about how third world countries will build themselves up out of the poverty. But that completely ignores the fact that there are some significant impediments to that happening in many parts of the world. Somalia is a good example of how some countries have actually regressed in recent years. (i.e. last 20-30 years) I don't want to say that those things will never happen or won't help. I'm just being pragmatic. It's an uphill battle and there will be many casualties along the way.
I agree... but out of interest, why doesn't Linux satisfy that for you? I can see the argument that Hurd gives you a totally different philosophy to look at to Linux - but if you wanted that, why wouldn't Darwin suit you?
I'm all for developing new kernels anyway. But if we're purely looking at use we don't need it (we've got Linux and Darwin) and if we're looking at contrasting designs we don't *need* it (Linux and Darwin)... but it's still a new design so frankly all power to it. Just I doubt I'll use it myself, at least not for production.
I graduated college before any of the free operating systems had been introduced.
Hurd however is interesting from an academic standpoint, and is entirely worthwhile on that front.
I can certainly agree with this point. It would have been a great thing to have had an open source operating system to study when I was in college. A real, working operating system would be a far better teaching tool (for people like me) than sitting in a classroom hearing lectures about abstract concepts. It took me years to finally understand the real worth of the ideas I was supposed to learn in the classroom. It wasn't until I was able to put them into practice that I really figured it out. Had I been able to dissect an open source operating system in college (with some guidance, of course) I would have had a lot less pain in the real world trying to get things to work.
I haven't been following Hurd for a while. I was sure he was involved because he was ranting about how Linux stole all the GNU tools or something like that. It's been so long and my memory has faded. I'll go and read up on it some more before I make such a grievous error again.
I see Captain Ahab is still chasing after his whale. Don Quixote is still tilting at his windmills. Years after it's far too late to make any difference in the world, Stallman is still obsessed with taking on Linux. I almost feel sorry for the guy at this point...
Naturally, there are others who are so hip they can't see over their pelvis. But they didn't translate to TV or movies very well. So I still have to give props to the Red Dwarf.
It's been my experience that experience does help quite a bit. Those who have been there and done that are able to do that again much better. I know I've learned a lot since I wrote my first program over 30 years ago. But that's the key. I keep learning. I keep exposing myself to new technology and new methods of accomplishing complex tasks. Trouble is, I've found that I tend to be the exception, rather than the rule.
The biggest trap experienced programmers fall into is to get in a rut. It worked that way once so they see no reason to ever think about doing anything else any other way. When change eventually finds them, i.e. when their 30 year old processor, language, and development environment is no longer supported, they have an incredibly difficult time adapting to new technology. I've seen more than once the troubles that come when the old crew refuses to evolve. It can get ugly.
Kids are great at taking up the newest technology and learning the new ways of doing things. Trouble is, they don't have the experience to build upon so they often don't understand how yet to really plan and execute anything on a scale beyond a college class assignment. So they're great for accepting the new ideas on how to do things but you really need some experience to get things done.
I've had the best luck working with people who have a broad range of experience working on several different projects. They've been exposed to different ways of doing different things. They are usually more open to trying to find the best solution rather than stick with one way of solving everything. If I see someone's resume and they've worked at the same place doing the same thing for decades, I'm usually more reluctant to hire them than I am a college grad. I know I'll have to teach both of them but the college grad is usually more open to learning than the dinosaur who's looking for a new job because he has to rather than wanting to.
Crunchy?!? Are you serious?!? Were you dropped on your head as a child? Repeatedly? What kind of bridge dwelling troll would want to break their teeth on those malformed sticks of crap? For any sentient beings, Cheetos puffs are nigh on mana from heaven. Light yet crisp, with the tasty coating that gets on your fingers and lets you enjoy the experience twice. There is no better snack on the face of this earth. I'd venture to say that it is the best snack in the universe.
Heh. Crunchy Cheetos. Maybe good for traction under my tires in the snow but that's about it...
Why is Apple the "obvious example"? It used to be that people felt that way about Linux fanboys, these days I'd say Windows/MS fanboys are actually the worst, possibly because they tend to have the backing of all the "anti-fanboys" who run Windows and hate Linux/Apple (it's especially hilarious when they clearly have never even touched Linux or OS X yet rant angrily about how stupid, homosexual or brainwashed those who don't run Windows are, oh yeah and anyone who's not a Windows user is also extremely smug about it and always rubs it in everyone's face, or so I've been told over and over and over and over again).
Go ahead and wait. You'll crown yourself the victor of a pointless internet debate over semantics. Good on you. I'm going to go outside and enjoy the nice weather tonight and then go sleep with my wife.
Slashdot Mirror
Which requires root which the virus would give it'self root which requires root.....
This simply means that the virus would have to be two fold, break the os security and break this security issue. If the virus has root access, well, your already screwed. This attack merely makes it much much harder to remove the virus AFTER the damage.
My already screwed what? Or did you mean "you're already screwed"?
A virus with root access can already do damage. The whole point of TFA is that this is not only one more thing that can be done, the damage that can be done will basically brick your laptop. With other viruses all they do is wipe out your hard drive. Once you reinstall the software you can use the laptop again. With this hack and the "permanently" installed battery your laptop is a brick and you're screwed.
Most firmware flashing requires the root password to perform, so I'm assuming that unless you're talking about removing the battery from the computer. So at least authentication is required for this, which lessens the threat considerably.
Right. Because a virus would never give itself root access...
Except, in Florida, if you have a vehicle registered in your name, and there is no current insurance on that vehicle, your drivers' license is automatically suspended by the computer - no questions asked, no notice given, doesn't matter if the vehicle is stored in a closed garage and hasn't seen the light of day since before the insurance lapsed. BTDT.
That only makes a difference with no insurance. If the car is insured but the registered owner has a suspended license, the car can still be legally driven by a different licensed driver. Sure, there are a few situations where the license plate scanning can help. However, the number of false positives when scanning plates (and not drivers) dilutes the utility of this method when used in an enforcement capacity.
This kind of thing would be utter hell on suspended and uninsured drivers. It could help make the roads WAY safer.
One problem there, Ace. All they are doing is tracking the cars. A car belonging to a person with a suspended license can be driven legally by someone with a valid license. Also, some insurance covers you no matter which car you drive so even though the owner may not have insurance on the car the driver may be covered. So yeah, this is really not very helpful.
As long as I can get a cat that will tell me exactly what it wants instead of me having to figure it out, I'm good.
Then they can apply that gene to women.
That's easy. But there's one fatal flaw to this idea. In order to give women the ability to just tell people what they want, you have to insert a Y chromosome. Trouble is, that turns them into a man.
The rich have always been in control. Always have been, always will be. It's the golden rule:
He who has the gold makes the rules
Because most slashdot users still have their first computer in a corner or in the attic.
That must make me somewhat unique. My TRS-80 and PC/XT are long gone. I gave up on the dream of using them again a very long time ago. My single core Athlon is my oldest computer now that I pitched my Pentium III, and all it does is run a disk array I use for bulk storage.
So you want to make the Dyson ring out of... gas?
I think I see a minor flaw in your theory.
A lot of the projections on population growth assume that nothing will change in the birth and death rates. Two things will change as population density increases, both deriving from the abject poverty brought on by overpopulation in 3rd world countries.
First will be war. A bunch of desperately poor people with nothing to lose are easy to whip up into a frenzy. Despots will have no trouble building an army that will march off to take what little his neighbors have. Conflicts are already flaring up. The scale will only get bigger. And they're not going to just swoop in and take the resources, they're going to kill each other off. We will see more genocide between warring factions. It's only a matter of time.
Second will be disease. People packed into slums living in complete squalor will breed disease. I doubt we'll see a huge super bug that wipes out 90% of the population of the earth overnight. However, simple diseases will proliferate and wipe out whole towns at a time. An influenza strain alone could wipe out hundreds of millions of people in a year. Reports of outbreaks will only get more common as the population grows. As we cure more diseases, they'll evolve into new strains. Any disease that's hideously deadly will probably burn itself out too fast to wipe out the world's population, but we'll still see new and nasty diseases that wipe out large numbers of people.
We can talk all we want about educating women so they don't want to have so many babies. But we don't realize how much it's going to take to actually make that happen. Cultural issues have to be overcome. Someone has to provide that education to a growing population. That's not going to be cheap. We can talk about how third world countries will build themselves up out of the poverty. But that completely ignores the fact that there are some significant impediments to that happening in many parts of the world. Somalia is a good example of how some countries have actually regressed in recent years. (i.e. last 20-30 years) I don't want to say that those things will never happen or won't help. I'm just being pragmatic. It's an uphill battle and there will be many casualties along the way.
So, where are we going to get the material to build the Dyson Ring?
I agree... but out of interest, why doesn't Linux satisfy that for you? I can see the argument that Hurd gives you a totally different philosophy to look at to Linux - but if you wanted that, why wouldn't Darwin suit you?
I'm all for developing new kernels anyway. But if we're purely looking at use we don't need it (we've got Linux and Darwin) and if we're looking at contrasting designs we don't *need* it (Linux and Darwin)... but it's still a new design so frankly all power to it. Just I doubt I'll use it myself, at least not for production.
I graduated college before any of the free operating systems had been introduced.
Hurd however is interesting from an academic standpoint, and is entirely worthwhile on that front.
I can certainly agree with this point. It would have been a great thing to have had an open source operating system to study when I was in college. A real, working operating system would be a far better teaching tool (for people like me) than sitting in a classroom hearing lectures about abstract concepts. It took me years to finally understand the real worth of the ideas I was supposed to learn in the classroom. It wasn't until I was able to put them into practice that I really figured it out. Had I been able to dissect an open source operating system in college (with some guidance, of course) I would have had a lot less pain in the real world trying to get things to work.
I haven't been following Hurd for a while. I was sure he was involved because he was ranting about how Linux stole all the GNU tools or something like that. It's been so long and my memory has faded. I'll go and read up on it some more before I make such a grievous error again.
I see Captain Ahab is still chasing after his whale. Don Quixote is still tilting at his windmills. Years after it's far too late to make any difference in the world, Stallman is still obsessed with taking on Linux. I almost feel sorry for the guy at this point...
Naturally, there are others who are so hip they can't see over their pelvis. But they didn't translate to TV or movies very well. So I still have to give props to the Red Dwarf.
I always thought that Red Dwarf was the coolest...
The relevant question is: How many days until they come up with an untethered break? I give it no more than 2 weeks, tops.
Yeah, let me know how that works out for you...
It's been my experience that experience does help quite a bit. Those who have been there and done that are able to do that again much better. I know I've learned a lot since I wrote my first program over 30 years ago. But that's the key. I keep learning. I keep exposing myself to new technology and new methods of accomplishing complex tasks. Trouble is, I've found that I tend to be the exception, rather than the rule.
The biggest trap experienced programmers fall into is to get in a rut. It worked that way once so they see no reason to ever think about doing anything else any other way. When change eventually finds them, i.e. when their 30 year old processor, language, and development environment is no longer supported, they have an incredibly difficult time adapting to new technology. I've seen more than once the troubles that come when the old crew refuses to evolve. It can get ugly.
Kids are great at taking up the newest technology and learning the new ways of doing things. Trouble is, they don't have the experience to build upon so they often don't understand how yet to really plan and execute anything on a scale beyond a college class assignment. So they're great for accepting the new ideas on how to do things but you really need some experience to get things done.
I've had the best luck working with people who have a broad range of experience working on several different projects. They've been exposed to different ways of doing different things. They are usually more open to trying to find the best solution rather than stick with one way of solving everything. If I see someone's resume and they've worked at the same place doing the same thing for decades, I'm usually more reluctant to hire them than I am a college grad. I know I'll have to teach both of them but the college grad is usually more open to learning than the dinosaur who's looking for a new job because he has to rather than wanting to.
Chuck Norris won't give you unlimited time...
And yet you will never even come close to approaching the awesomeness of Chuck Norris.
I know you're not disrespecting my cheesy poofs. Melt in your mouth goodness or chip your teeth crap. The choice makes itself. ;)
Crunchy?!? Are you serious ?!? Were you dropped on your head as a child? Repeatedly? What kind of bridge dwelling troll would want to break their teeth on those malformed sticks of crap? For any sentient beings, Cheetos puffs are nigh on mana from heaven. Light yet crisp, with the tasty coating that gets on your fingers and lets you enjoy the experience twice. There is no better snack on the face of this earth. I'd venture to say that it is the best snack in the universe.
Heh. Crunchy Cheetos. Maybe good for traction under my tires in the snow but that's about it...
Why is Apple the "obvious example"? It used to be that people felt that way about Linux fanboys, these days I'd say Windows/MS fanboys are actually the worst, possibly because they tend to have the backing of all the "anti-fanboys" who run Windows and hate Linux/Apple (it's especially hilarious when they clearly have never even touched Linux or OS X yet rant angrily about how stupid, homosexual or brainwashed those who don't run Windows are, oh yeah and anyone who's not a Windows user is also extremely smug about it and always rubs it in everyone's face, or so I've been told over and over and over and over again).
Oh, the irony...
Go ahead and wait. You'll crown yourself the victor of a pointless internet debate over semantics. Good on you. I'm going to go outside and enjoy the nice weather tonight and then go sleep with my wife.