... were one of the reasons for the Internet changing from what it was circa 1996.
A laptop still cost $3,600, a PC still cost $2,000, and a Palm cost something like $550.
The Internet was finally starting to change from hourly access to a fixed price (probably the best thing the Internet ever did psuedo-collectively), opening the doors to those who didn't really want to shell out a lot of money for something like the Internet. The Internet was also starting to mature, so those who would generally have a lack of interest became interested.
Then we saw late 1998 and all of 1999 (arguably 'the year of the cable Internet/DSL'), which gave many people a high-speed, affordable, always-on alternative to the T1 or ISDN.
Slashdot has matured as well (unfortunately or fortunately, depending on your stance), and its maturity includes the trolls...
You usually have at least a little bad where there's otherwise a lot of good -- the Internet included.
20/20 had a story about this a few weeks ago. Apparently some would-be reviewer stated "Paul Hogan's back, and the croc rocks!" in his extremely slanted Crocodile Dundee in Los Angeles review.
Upon further investigation, this reviewer and one other (who said "A great family film") seemed to hate nothing. Supposedly, they get paid off to say they love the bombs.
I'm wondering why we would ever dream of trusting these no-name critics. Would you trust a complete stranger to tell you how to spend your money? The only critics I remotely trust to review a movie fairly well are Ebert (he doesn't seem to be too commercially influenced) and my friends.
That said, I always knew Jon Katz used pseudonyms.:)
You can't find anything on it anymore, not even obscure music, because the filters are set to filter just about every song that the RIAA likes or any song that has a title which remotely resembles a RIAA title.
(We fade in on GATES and BALLMER, GATES only a shadow to us in a long robe (much like CATS), and BALLMER smoking a cigarette. They are in a dark room, surrounded by rack mount servers.)
GATES: So gentlemen, all is going perfectly to plan...
BALLMER: Yes, master. We have even trolled Slashdot.
GATES: Excellent!::pinky to mouth:: Does Windows XP have the.. required.. amount of bugs? How about that innovative thing you call a.. software.. firewall.. ? Mmm, I like how that sounds. It will look good on TV. "Windows XP has integrated sec..."
GEEK1: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
(GATES spots a RedHat 6.2 CD in GEEK1's hands.)
GATES: CANCER!
(Two guards fire at the RH CD together. We see it shatter into a thousand pieces.)
GATES: Resistance is futile, young one. Mwhahahaha...
BALLMER: Can you imagine a Beowulf cluster of trolls?
GATES: I am one, drone.
First off, mirror here. It took me a while to get this one, his server is dead slow today.
My servers can't be easily DoSed off the Internet, as I have a (fairly) secure ISP. They know how to administer their routers and have professionals on the job. Does Steve's ISP have professionals on the job? Apparently not.
He has something technically wrong, too. He is always bragging about how he can ignore "ICMP packets completely," but unfortunately, that's kind of impossible. For you to ignore those packets of data, they have to reach your machine. Therefore, you've used the incoming bandwidth anyway. It's still just as effective.
I noticed that he ignored them using the ISP router, which is indeed possible. That way, he's right, he isn't DDoSed. But he's been talking about how he always ignores him at his machine! Blah.
Cat and mouse "guess the IP?" Was he changing his IP address? He might as well have left it to be DDoSed, as nobody's DNS records would have been refreshing fast enough to be able to easily access the site.
He's right though, the Internet wasn't designed to scale like this. It is, in fact, getting to the point where almost anyone could disable any site, large or small.
... Bigelow (may I call you Deuce?), NASA views space as a monopoly? And that's why they resisted to Tito's entering space? I doubt that. They probably resisted to Tito's space journey due to the fact Tito is untrained as an astronaut and could have caused catastrophic damage to the space shuttle, possibly killing the crew, even unintentionally. They wouldn't let anyone else go up, so why make an exception for someone with money?
Also, how safe would this thing be with no space oriented engineers working on it? Would it be redundant like a NASA or Russian Space Program creation? I wouldn't want to visit a flying deathtrap. And, given the right mistakes, that's what this thing would be. It'd make MIR in its final years look like a resort.
I hope that if this guy gets to go through with this that he at least uses some engineers with the proper training (NASA engineers that have lost their job, perhaps?) Otherwise, he could cause the death of hundreds of people. I wouldn't visit it if there's such a thing as a "CAPTAIN'S ESCAPE POD" in the blueprints...
... and it should worry you as well, if you use any of OSDN's services.
That's right, any of them. After all, they're keeping very quiet about it and just about everything of OSDN's is getting cracked lately.
Whoever this is, they must have root or access to sniff network traffic. It seems like whatever they don't already have access to, they can get it.
Should you be worried? Yes. Is it overreacting? No.
We rely on these people to keep our source (relatively) secure and disclose the problems that may be occuring...br>
Will I be using SourceForge to store my code? No. I'll use a local box behind a firewall with no services, except a secure FTP daemon, allowed.
If nothing else, at least keep a local backup, as many people don't seem to be doing this. They may have even installed a trojan into the box to insert code into the applications.
Seems like SourceForge is making no mention of it on their front page.
As a user that hasn't used SourceForge for more than a week, this makes me a bit worrysome. I strongly hope that they used one-way, 128+ bit encryption on the passwords.
SourceForge is a very large operation. Remember that. No big operation is perfect, them included. Even RSA has been cracked (their website, rather.)
No operating system, not even our beloved Linux, is totally secure. It's only secure until the next bug is found. Remember, security is a concept.
Now, I have noticed there are some Windows zealots trolling Slashdot right now about the insecurities of the open source model, a la Microsoft. As a user of Windows 9x/NT, Linux, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, and a number of various other OSes, I can tell you right now that neither is more secure.
It only takes more time to find the holes if the software is closed-source. At least with open source, they're generally found quickly and patched quickly.
Neither closed or open source is more secure. And no OS is completely secure. Not Windows, not Linux -- not even BSD. Sorry!
Re:Katz needs some of Kate Beckinsale's valium...
on
Review: Pearl Harbor
·
· Score: 1
(Metamodders: Not OT)
Woops. Michael Bay AND Jerry Bruckheimer.:bg: They go hand in hand.
Katz needs some of Kate Beckinsale's valium...
on
Review: Pearl Harbor
·
· Score: 1
This is a Disneyfied movie on one of the more horrible things that has happened to the United States of America.
2,403 American soldiers died at Pearl Harbor in a surprise attack that lasted a little less than two hours. This movie lasts three, unfortunately.
You don't expect a flashy-silver-cool-pretty-movie type guy such as Jerry Bruckheimer to make something insightful or deep, do you? I didn't think so.
The way they've promoted this movie, I wouldn't be surprised if Ben Affleck action figures are included in the happy meals.
Anyone who sees this movie sort-of deserves what they get... A bloated, wanna-be war epic about a pretty boy, his friend, and the girl they want.
... Tribes 2 is only fantastic on 700mhz+ with a GeForce 2 graphics card.
And don't come back and tell me that I should upgrade my hardware to be able to play a game where I'm on their (higher up) supported list. And they claim my configuration "should work fine with Tribes 2."
Sorry, it doesn't. And I would hate to see how that game runs on Linux (though it does look fun if you have a fast enough machine.)
(Sorry about the double post, but this is rather interesting)
I bet if you can sniff the data, you can probably also forge it. I doubt those keyboards use any type of authentication and if they do, well, it's easily accessed by sniffing.
That'd be quite bad if somebody sat a few feet away from a terminal with a wireless keyboard, sniffed it, and then "h4x0r3d" the network using forged keyboard data...
No offense, but if you don't use a wireless network because it's not encrypted, what makes you think a keyboard that runs off two AA batteries will be secure?
Maybe because they're 'very friendly' toward AOL, giving their hosts free licenses and ripping off users to give them features everyone that doesn't use AOL already has...
Oooooh well... Looks like AOL-sponsored companies are free from that.
Slashdot Mirror
Arguably, Norton has this feature with any program ::grin::.
:P
Just install it on any Windows machine and it'll do its job within a few days.
Real or not, it ends when you're hit by a car.
(Don't mod this down. Think about it -- it's supposed to be insightful!)
... were one of the reasons for the Internet changing from what it was circa 1996.
A laptop still cost $3,600, a PC still cost $2,000, and a Palm cost something like $550.
The Internet was finally starting to change from hourly access to a fixed price (probably the best thing the Internet ever did psuedo-collectively), opening the doors to those who didn't really want to shell out a lot of money for something like the Internet. The Internet was also starting to mature, so those who would generally have a lack of interest became interested.
Then we saw late 1998 and all of 1999 (arguably 'the year of the cable Internet/DSL'), which gave many people a high-speed, affordable, always-on alternative to the T1 or ISDN.
Slashdot has matured as well (unfortunately or fortunately, depending on your stance), and its maturity includes the trolls...
You usually have at least a little bad where there's otherwise a lot of good -- the Internet included.
20/20 had a story about this a few weeks ago. Apparently some would-be reviewer stated "Paul Hogan's back, and the croc rocks!" in his extremely slanted Crocodile Dundee in Los Angeles review.
:)
Upon further investigation, this reviewer and one other (who said "A great family film") seemed to hate nothing. Supposedly, they get paid off to say they love the bombs.
I'm wondering why we would ever dream of trusting these no-name critics. Would you trust a complete stranger to tell you how to spend your money? The only critics I remotely trust to review a movie fairly well are Ebert (he doesn't seem to be too commercially influenced) and my friends.
That said, I always knew Jon Katz used pseudonyms.
It's Slashdotted.
(Mostly complete) mirror here.
I don't know what good this thing is without a display, which kills the 'portability' feature.
You can't find anything on it anymore, not even obscure music, because the filters are set to filter just about every song that the RIAA likes or any song that has a title which remotely resembles a RIAA title.
A good working alternative to Napster is KaZaA.
(We fade in on GATES and BALLMER, GATES only a shadow to us in a long robe (much like CATS), and BALLMER smoking a cigarette. They are in a dark room, surrounded by rack mount servers.)
::pinky to mouth:: Does Windows XP have the .. required .. amount of bugs? How about that innovative thing you call a .. software .. firewall .. ? Mmm, I like how that sounds. It will look good on TV. "Windows XP has integrated sec..."
GATES: So gentlemen, all is going perfectly to plan...
BALLMER: Yes, master. We have even trolled Slashdot.
GATES: Excellent!
GEEK1: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
(GATES spots a RedHat 6.2 CD in GEEK1's hands.)
GATES: CANCER!
(Two guards fire at the RH CD together. We see it shatter into a thousand pieces.)
GATES: Resistance is futile, young one. Mwhahahaha...
BALLMER: Can you imagine a Beowulf cluster of trolls?
GATES: I am one, drone.
... That wasn't flamebait.
Tito wasn't at the time, and NASA didn't seem to want to take the time to train him, even if he paid. Maybe they had other reasons...
It wasn't toward Tito, but rather toward the guy who made such a statement toward NASA.
Sorry if you thought it was flamebait, it wasn't intended that way. Later!
First off, mirror here. It took me a while to get this one, his server is dead slow today.
My servers can't be easily DoSed off the Internet, as I have a (fairly) secure ISP. They know how to administer their routers and have professionals on the job. Does Steve's ISP have professionals on the job? Apparently not.
He has something technically wrong, too. He is always bragging about how he can ignore "ICMP packets completely," but unfortunately, that's kind of impossible. For you to ignore those packets of data, they have to reach your machine. Therefore, you've used the incoming bandwidth anyway. It's still just as effective.
I noticed that he ignored them using the ISP router, which is indeed possible. That way, he's right, he isn't DDoSed. But he's been talking about how he always ignores him at his machine! Blah.
Cat and mouse "guess the IP?" Was he changing his IP address? He might as well have left it to be DDoSed, as nobody's DNS records would have been refreshing fast enough to be able to easily access the site.
He's right though, the Internet wasn't designed to scale like this. It is, in fact, getting to the point where almost anyone could disable any site, large or small.
... Bigelow (may I call you Deuce?), NASA views space as a monopoly? And that's why they resisted to Tito's entering space? I doubt that. They probably resisted to Tito's space journey due to the fact Tito is untrained as an astronaut and could have caused catastrophic damage to the space shuttle, possibly killing the crew, even unintentionally. They wouldn't let anyone else go up, so why make an exception for someone with money?
Also, how safe would this thing be with no space oriented engineers working on it? Would it be redundant like a NASA or Russian Space Program creation? I wouldn't want to visit a flying deathtrap. And, given the right mistakes, that's what this thing would be. It'd make MIR in its final years look like a resort.
I hope that if this guy gets to go through with this that he at least uses some engineers with the proper training (NASA engineers that have lost their job, perhaps?) Otherwise, he could cause the death of hundreds of people. I wouldn't visit it if there's such a thing as a "CAPTAIN'S ESCAPE POD" in the blueprints...
... and it should worry you as well, if you use any of OSDN's services.
That's right, any of them. After all, they're keeping very quiet about it and just about everything of OSDN's is getting cracked lately.
Whoever this is, they must have root or access to sniff network traffic. It seems like whatever they don't already have access to, they can get it.
Should you be worried? Yes. Is it overreacting? No.
We rely on these people to keep our source (relatively) secure and disclose the problems that may be occuring...br>
Will I be using SourceForge to store my code? No. I'll use a local box behind a firewall with no services, except a secure FTP daemon, allowed.
If nothing else, at least keep a local backup, as many people don't seem to be doing this. They may have even installed a trojan into the box to insert code into the applications.
Or maybe even a trojaned build of 'make.'
You never know...
What do you think Mission to Mars was, huh?
Oh, wait...
Seems like SourceForge is making no mention of it on their front page.
As a user that hasn't used SourceForge for more than a week, this makes me a bit worrysome. I strongly hope that they used one-way, 128+ bit encryption on the passwords.
SourceForge is a very large operation. Remember that. No big operation is perfect, them included. Even RSA has been cracked (their website, rather.)
No operating system, not even our beloved Linux, is totally secure. It's only secure until the next bug is found. Remember, security is a concept.
Now, I have noticed there are some Windows zealots trolling Slashdot right now about the insecurities of the open source model, a la Microsoft. As a user of Windows 9x/NT, Linux, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, and a number of various other OSes, I can tell you right now that neither is more secure.
It only takes more time to find the holes if the software is closed-source. At least with open source, they're generally found quickly and patched quickly.
Neither closed or open source is more secure. And no OS is completely secure. Not Windows, not Linux -- not even BSD. Sorry!
(Metamodders: Not OT)
:bg: They go hand in hand.
Woops. Michael Bay AND Jerry Bruckheimer.
This is a Disneyfied movie on one of the more horrible things that has happened to the United States of America.
2,403 American soldiers died at Pearl Harbor in a surprise attack that lasted a little less than two hours. This movie lasts three, unfortunately.
You don't expect a flashy-silver-cool-pretty-movie type guy such as Jerry Bruckheimer to make something insightful or deep, do you? I didn't think so.
The way they've promoted this movie, I wouldn't be surprised if Ben Affleck action figures are included in the happy meals.
Anyone who sees this movie sort-of deserves what they get... A bloated, wanna-be war epic about a pretty boy, his friend, and the girl they want.
Woowoo, MTV showing at four.
Got mirror?
(This isn't OT, metamodders)
::grin::
Woah, I guessed his configuration. That reviewer is using a 700 mhz Athlon with a 64mb GeForce 2. Who would have guessed?
... Tribes 2 is only fantastic on 700mhz+ with a GeForce 2 graphics card.
And don't come back and tell me that I should upgrade my hardware to be able to play a game where I'm on their (higher up) supported list. And they claim my configuration "should work fine with Tribes 2."
Sorry, it doesn't. And I would hate to see how that game runs on Linux (though it does look fun if you have a fast enough machine.)
I've been INSIDE an Echelon sphere.
I KNOW what's inside! Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck...
Wait, or was that Epcot?
The secret to privacy is a new encryption scheme called ROT13:
(rot13) Be abg... (/rot13) Nobody can crack -- or would want to even TRY to crack -- that! (joking, joking..)
(Sorry about the double post, but this is rather interesting)
I bet if you can sniff the data, you can probably also forge it. I doubt those keyboards use any type of authentication and if they do, well, it's easily accessed by sniffing.
That'd be quite bad if somebody sat a few feet away from a terminal with a wireless keyboard, sniffed it, and then "h4x0r3d" the network using forged keyboard data...
No offense, but if you don't use a wireless network because it's not encrypted, what makes you think a keyboard that runs off two AA batteries will be secure?
Common sense, people... Common sense.
Because then people would be submitting sites like goatse.cx...
Now that I look at it, it appears its name has mysteriously changed to "PowerPlus for AIM."
Go figure.
I'm sorta wondering why AOL hasn't sued the makers of PowerAIM and PowerTools for AOL.
Maybe because they're 'very friendly' toward AOL, giving their hosts free licenses and ripping off users to give them features everyone that doesn't use AOL already has...
Oooooh well... Looks like AOL-sponsored companies are free from that.