I couldn't find a single hint as to what main processor my camera uses
I'm the type of person that'll constantly go through and see what every single process on my box is. I built my own desktop. I disable things like Autorun on Windows. In short, I like knowing exactly what's happening behind the scenes on stuff I own.
But not once have I ever stopped to think about what's inside of my camera. It'd be kind of neat to see. But I have never tried to 'hack' my camera.
It's a fundamental enough piece of equipment. If my camera sucks, I'm going to return it and get one that doesn't. If I want images to look different than how the camera saves them, I'll fix them in Photoshop.
It has never crossed my mind to screw with the software on my camera. And I still wouldn't dream of it. It's a camera, not a desktop PC.
To each his own; if you want to try to get Linux running on your camera, go for it. But to the question posed, "Does Anyone Care?," I can't honestly say I do care what the internal hardware of my camera is. I care that it takes quality pictures, but that's all.
As it is, they never send the messages from a valid address - so who cares if your replying to their spam with your real address?
Except now you're causing the problem that led to this question in the first place: now you're sending crap out to random people, because, as you yourself just said, they never used a real address. It often ends up going to someone real, though.
I think we simply don't care about a lot of things. In the next few thousand years, a tsunami may occur. It lacks definiteness: will it occur? When? Will it even be in my lifetime? My great-grandchildrens' lifetimes? And when was the last time I even heard about a tsunamic? pfft, who cares?
But now tsunamis are fresh on my mind, as a tremendous catastrophe. It could happen to me!!!
To do the banal, it's a lot like September 11th. If you asked someone on September 10th if they were concerned about terrorism, I bet you they'd tell you that our odds of being attacked were very slim. The average person simply doesn't live their life worrying about these things.
Big disasters make us realize how vulnerable we are. Prior to the tsunamis, this story was probably in the news, but no one really paid much attention. Who cares that there's a chance we'll have a tsunami in a few millennia? And yet I'm now alarmed knowing that it could occur tomorrow.
(Although sources here are saying it's highly unlikely that it'll ever happen?)
How do you propose this be fixed? I think it's important that there be a user with the ability to do anything. This includes the ability to create users with only some administrative-level permissions, or even the ability to delete the root account entirely.
bad historically grown naming ("home", "usr", "var", etc.) and incosequent File System Herarchy Standard
This is one of those systems that's entirely arbitrary to someone new to *nix, and yet it seems entirely intuitive (much like [Esc]:wq to write and quit in vi) once you learn it. I'm not sure what you mean by "incosequent".
I think part of this is backwards-compatability related. dd could be renamed to "DiskDuplicate", and cp could be "Copy," with "rm" renamed to "Delete". But then absolutely, positively everything that uses these commands would explode, and current *nix admins would be entirely confused. I'd like to think that the utilities will keep their names; you can always symlink them to a clearer name if needed. (Some systems try to be friendly to ex-DOS users, by creating, for example, "dir" as a symlink to "ls")
More and more often, though, GUIs are taking the place (for people who aren't hardcore shell users) of cryptically-named commands.
BTW, when you talk about Debian's installation system, do you mean package management (apt-get), or the initial installation of the OS? apt-get was very easy to use, the installation of Debian itself, though, was a nightmare when I tried several years ago.
Several people have proposed scripts that click the links in the e-mails received.
Does this not confirm to the spammers that the address they're hitting is valid? MOST of the spam I get passes some form of variable passed, presumably to uniquely track me.
I'd be very angry if my ISP's mailserver was clicking these links for me.
Sure, if done enough, this will completely ruin the idea of tracking people through link-clicking. But in the period between now and when it's fully-implemented, won't it just make more trouble?
Take a look into Limited Liability Corporations. They're kind of a "light" version of a normal C or S Corporation, which absolves you of your personal liability for the business, but without the hassles of an ordinary corporation. Most states allow one-person LLCs to be formed. You shouldn't face the ghastly taxes corporations face. There's still paperwork, and you'll probably need to consult with a lawyer to draw up an operating agreement. But it's still better than a standard corporation.
my upload speed is still capped. My question is: why?
Call my cynical, but I think the answer is "because they can." All their competitors give you a small upload, so they do it, too, and probably charge more for a bigger upload.
Part of the reasoning might also be to bar you from hosting servers. I have 3 Mbps down (I'm getting 200kbps right now... quality!), but not nearly that much upload. A 'real' 3 Mbps link would let me push about a terabyte of data in a month. Capping my upload lets me download lots, but not run a very busy server.
Not only is this way too Big Brotherish, but there are times when the government can't listen.
Suppose I'm arrested for dealing crack. I e-mail my lawyer (encrypted if I have half a clue), and say, "I'm not sure they can convict me, but I want to cover my bases anyway, since I did do it. I want to rat out my supplier in return for immunity." This is covered under the attorney-client privilege, and cannot be used against me.
Similarly, if I afterwards e-mail my priest, informing him that I've been dealing crack to schoolchildren and would like to repent for my sins, it's also privileged speech. (Actually, it's a bit dubious; what I say in a confession is privileged, but I'm not sure saying something before a confession is, though I believe the courts have often held that if you think you're making a confesswion, they'll view it that way.)
Same goes for when I e-mail my doctor, telling him that I'm a chronic cocaine abuser. Patient-client privilege means you can't bug our conversation and use it against me.
There are times when Big Brother can't listen to me, as much as it'd like. And though it seems we're on a slippery slope, civil liberties haven't been completley outweighed by fear of terrorists yet.
What about physical dark alleys? Two terrorists could walk into a dark alley and talk. And no one would hear them!
How is this any different? People can talk online and the government might not hear it. But two terrorists can just as easily meet in person and not be heard.
Everyone talks about how horribly insecure the touchscreens are.
But in a lot of counties that didn't use them, the results from things like optical scanners were still stored and calculated using GEMS. Which is not too secure.
The problems weren't with touchscreens. They were with GEMS, though. But whoever hacked Florida knew enough to not mess with touchscreens: they went right to the source, and that's also why it wasn't spotted.
And we've all seen this, about the Democrats trying to not let Diebold supply the voting machines to Ohio, after their CEO stated that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President next year"?
I'm still confused as to why no one (in mainstream America) seems to care at all. There was blatant fraud going on, particularly in Florida counties.
I thought the Constitution had an explicit provision that not only allowed us, but required us, to overthrow the government and provide a replacement when it all just fell apart.
Am I the only one that doesn't but CDs anymore? Yeah, it's way easier to just borrow it, but frankly, if I had lots of money to burn, and wanted to be legitimate, I still don't think I'd buy any CDs.
It's crap like this that keeps me from buying CDs.
I'm kind of excited, kind of disappointed. I run a blog with ten different posters running MT. We've been getting slammed with comment spam lately. I just assumed it was in relation to Google starting to move my site up a bit in the ranks. Apparently not.:(
At first, most of the spam was from obviously-fictitious domains. I earned myself weeks of absolute lack of spam by throwing this into/lib/MT/App/Comments.pm -- I started mine a few lines after line 150 in my case:
# If an e-mail address is given... make # it resolve to an IP # Added by suwain_2 require MT::Blog; my $blog = MT::Blog->load($entry->blog_id);
if($q->param('email')) {
my $email = $q->param('email');
my @email = split(/@/, $email);
unless(gethostbyname($email[1])) {
return $app->handle_error($app->translate("You pathetic loser. Your e-mail address doesn't resolve to a domain."));
} }
I don't track how many people are being turned away by this; I still find myself cleaning up spam on a regular basis, but at least at first, I completely stopped spam. I now get a fair deal with 'real' domains that I just clean up by hand.
I also whipped up a little PHP utility that shows the 50 most recent comments; clicking on a field will show all results that match that field. I can easily find people posting under a particular address, or from a certain IP, and delete them. It's pretty crappy, but if people are interested, I'll post it? (Another script I have goes through and auto-rebuilds all the blogs.)
My guess is that, being big into video, he happened to have a large white backdrop to shoot in front of. A lot of shots where you really shouldn't notice the background at all are shot in front of a white (or black, depending) wall / sheet / drape sort of thing.
If you slowly curve it, and are good with the lighting, there are no evident lines (ie, where the wall meets the floor).
He IS a videographer, so this type of stuff probably is part of what he does routinely.
It would be cool, but beside the framebuffer problems you propose, there's also the issue of the fact that you're dynamically generating a big image in rapid succession: this would be bogging the system down as it tries to boot.
.mobi isn't a terrible idea..jobs, though? I don't think that'll be used a lot. "Monster.jobs" doesn't have the same ring to it. There aren't zillions of job sites out there.
But why would Apple think I want them to take a feature OUT of something I already bought? Firmware updates should fix stuff and give me new features, but under no circumstances do I want them to REMOVE functionality that I once had.
CoralCache had a story on Slashdot a while back. There've been a lot of articles that link to it, often posted as a comment when the site starts to get slow.
Not something everyone knows, but it's something a fair amount of people here are familiar with.
Slashdot Mirror
I couldn't find a single hint as to what main processor my camera uses
I'm the type of person that'll constantly go through and see what every single process on my box is. I built my own desktop. I disable things like Autorun on Windows. In short, I like knowing exactly what's happening behind the scenes on stuff I own.
But not once have I ever stopped to think about what's inside of my camera. It'd be kind of neat to see. But I have never tried to 'hack' my camera.
It's a fundamental enough piece of equipment. If my camera sucks, I'm going to return it and get one that doesn't. If I want images to look different than how the camera saves them, I'll fix them in Photoshop.
It has never crossed my mind to screw with the software on my camera. And I still wouldn't dream of it. It's a camera, not a desktop PC.
To each his own; if you want to try to get Linux running on your camera, go for it. But to the question posed, "Does Anyone Care?," I can't honestly say I do care what the internal hardware of my camera is. I care that it takes quality pictures, but that's all.
So taking on a big project to make Linux secure and stable will "undermine efforts to assure people that Linux is secure and stable?"
As it is, they never send the messages from a valid address - so who cares if your replying to their spam with your real address?
Except now you're causing the problem that led to this question in the first place: now you're sending crap out to random people, because, as you yourself just said, they never used a real address. It often ends up going to someone real, though.
I think we simply don't care about a lot of things. In the next few thousand years, a tsunami may occur. It lacks definiteness: will it occur? When? Will it even be in my lifetime? My great-grandchildrens' lifetimes? And when was the last time I even heard about a tsunamic? pfft, who cares?
But now tsunamis are fresh on my mind, as a tremendous catastrophe. It could happen to me!!!
To do the banal, it's a lot like September 11th. If you asked someone on September 10th if they were concerned about terrorism, I bet you they'd tell you that our odds of being attacked were very slim. The average person simply doesn't live their life worrying about these things.
Big disasters make us realize how vulnerable we are. Prior to the tsunamis, this story was probably in the news, but no one really paid much attention. Who cares that there's a chance we'll have a tsunami in a few millennia? And yet I'm now alarmed knowing that it could occur tomorrow.
(Although sources here are saying it's highly unlikely that it'll ever happen?)
the allmighty root (single largest security risk)
:wq to write and quit in vi) once you learn it. I'm not sure what you mean by "incosequent".
How do you propose this be fixed? I think it's important that there be a user with the ability to do anything. This includes the ability to create users with only some administrative-level permissions, or even the ability to delete the root account entirely.
bad historically grown naming ("home", "usr", "var", etc.) and incosequent File System Herarchy Standard
This is one of those systems that's entirely arbitrary to someone new to *nix, and yet it seems entirely intuitive (much like [Esc]
histrically grown elitist utility naming (large anoyance)
I think part of this is backwards-compatability related. dd could be renamed to "DiskDuplicate", and cp could be "Copy," with "rm" renamed to "Delete". But then absolutely, positively everything that uses these commands would explode, and current *nix admins would be entirely confused. I'd like to think that the utilities will keep their names; you can always symlink them to a clearer name if needed. (Some systems try to be friendly to ex-DOS users, by creating, for example, "dir" as a symlink to "ls")
More and more often, though, GUIs are taking the place (for people who aren't hardcore shell users) of cryptically-named commands.
BTW, when you talk about Debian's installation system, do you mean package management (apt-get), or the initial installation of the OS? apt-get was very easy to use, the installation of Debian itself, though, was a nightmare when I tried several years ago.
Several people have proposed scripts that click the links in the e-mails received.
Does this not confirm to the spammers that the address they're hitting is valid? MOST of the spam I get passes some form of variable passed, presumably to uniquely track me.
I'd be very angry if my ISP's mailserver was clicking these links for me.
Sure, if done enough, this will completely ruin the idea of tracking people through link-clicking. But in the period between now and when it's fully-implemented, won't it just make more trouble?
Just FYI.
Insurance and incorporation
Take a look into Limited Liability Corporations. They're kind of a "light" version of a normal C or S Corporation, which absolves you of your personal liability for the business, but without the hassles of an ordinary corporation. Most states allow one-person LLCs to be formed. You shouldn't face the ghastly taxes corporations face. There's still paperwork, and you'll probably need to consult with a lawyer to draw up an operating agreement. But it's still better than a standard corporation.
my upload speed is still capped. My question is: why?
Call my cynical, but I think the answer is "because they can." All their competitors give you a small upload, so they do it, too, and probably charge more for a bigger upload.
Part of the reasoning might also be to bar you from hosting servers. I have 3 Mbps down (I'm getting 200kbps right now... quality!), but not nearly that much upload. A 'real' 3 Mbps link would let me push about a terabyte of data in a month. Capping my upload lets me download lots, but not run a very busy server.
a way to store and retrieve transaction records electronically
Is it just me, or is that the most basic of definitions of a computer "database"?
Why don't we measure time using the epoch?
Get the precise date and time in one concise number!
Not only is this way too Big Brotherish, but there are times when the government can't listen.
Suppose I'm arrested for dealing crack. I e-mail my lawyer (encrypted if I have half a clue), and say, "I'm not sure they can convict me, but I want to cover my bases anyway, since I did do it. I want to rat out my supplier in return for immunity." This is covered under the attorney-client privilege, and cannot be used against me.
Similarly, if I afterwards e-mail my priest, informing him that I've been dealing crack to schoolchildren and would like to repent for my sins, it's also privileged speech. (Actually, it's a bit dubious; what I say in a confession is privileged, but I'm not sure saying something before a confession is, though I believe the courts have often held that if you think you're making a confesswion, they'll view it that way.)
Same goes for when I e-mail my doctor, telling him that I'm a chronic cocaine abuser. Patient-client privilege means you can't bug our conversation and use it against me.
There are times when Big Brother can't listen to me, as much as it'd like. And though it seems we're on a slippery slope, civil liberties haven't been completley outweighed by fear of terrorists yet.
What about physical dark alleys? Two terrorists could walk into a dark alley and talk. And no one would hear them!
How is this any different? People can talk online and the government might not hear it. But two terrorists can just as easily meet in person and not be heard.
Why should the Internet be any different?
Everyone talks about how horribly insecure the touchscreens are.
But in a lot of counties that didn't use them, the results from things like optical scanners were still stored and calculated using GEMS. Which is not too secure.
Read that, and then read this.
The problems weren't with touchscreens. They were with GEMS, though. But whoever hacked Florida knew enough to not mess with touchscreens: they went right to the source, and that's also why it wasn't spotted.
And we've all seen this, about the Democrats trying to not let Diebold supply the voting machines to Ohio, after their CEO stated that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President next year"?
I'm still confused as to why no one (in mainstream America) seems to care at all. There was blatant fraud going on, particularly in Florida counties.
I thought the Constitution had an explicit provision that not only allowed us, but required us, to overthrow the government and provide a replacement when it all just fell apart.
Am I the only one that doesn't but CDs anymore? Yeah, it's way easier to just borrow it, but frankly, if I had lots of money to burn, and wanted to be legitimate, I still don't think I'd buy any CDs.
It's crap like this that keeps me from buying CDs.
I'm kind of excited, kind of disappointed. I run a blog with ten different posters running MT. We've been getting slammed with comment spam lately. I just assumed it was in relation to Google starting to move my site up a bit in the ranks. Apparently not. :(
/lib/MT/App/Comments.pm -- I started mine a few lines after line 150 in my case:
At first, most of the spam was from obviously-fictitious domains. I earned myself weeks of absolute lack of spam by throwing this into
# If an e-mail address is given... make
# it resolve to an IP
# Added by suwain_2
require MT::Blog;
my $blog = MT::Blog->load($entry->blog_id);
if($q->param('email')) {
my $email = $q->param('email');
my @email = split(/@/, $email);
unless(gethostbyname($email[1])) {
return $app->handle_error($app->translate("You pathetic loser. Your e-mail address doesn't resolve to a domain."));
}
}
I don't track how many people are being turned away by this; I still find myself cleaning up spam on a regular basis, but at least at first, I completely stopped spam. I now get a fair deal with 'real' domains that I just clean up by hand.
I also whipped up a little PHP utility that shows the 50 most recent comments; clicking on a field will show all results that match that field. I can easily find people posting under a particular address, or from a certain IP, and delete them. It's pretty crappy, but if people are interested, I'll post it? (Another script I have goes through and auto-rebuilds all the blogs.)
Hope this helps someone?
My friend's first reaction to this quote:
"Those are the people that voted red."
My guess is that, being big into video, he happened to have a large white backdrop to shoot in front of. A lot of shots where you really shouldn't notice the background at all are shot in front of a white (or black, depending) wall / sheet / drape sort of thing.
If you slowly curve it, and are good with the lighting, there are no evident lines (ie, where the wall meets the floor).
He IS a videographer, so this type of stuff probably is part of what he does routinely.
It would be cool, but beside the framebuffer problems you propose, there's also the issue of the fact that you're dynamically generating a big image in rapid succession: this would be bogging the system down as it tries to boot.
It'd look cool, but it'd take forever to boot.
.mobi isn't a terrible idea. .jobs, though? I don't think that'll be used a lot. "Monster.jobs" doesn't have the same ring to it. There aren't zillions of job sites out there.
I love Apple. I hate Real.
But why would Apple think I want them to take a feature OUT of something I already bought? Firmware updates should fix stuff and give me new features, but under no circumstances do I want them to REMOVE functionality that I once had.
The first claim may, in fact, be true.
The second one is posed as a question: "Is she a FAS Baby?"
I'm sure somewhere on that site there's something that could be classified as libel. I just don't think either of these things are.
CoralCache had a story on Slashdot a while back. There've been a lot of articles that link to it, often posted as a comment when the site starts to get slow.
Not something everyone knows, but it's something a fair amount of people here are familiar with.
This is eerily accurate. Wasn't there a report not too long ago about how a lot of child pornography originates in Russia?