"You can bet than many more have been found, and are in use by zombie-net operators right now."
Common sense says that's not true. Aside from posting it on full disclosure, the best way to expose a vulnerability to the public is to use it to exploit a massive numbers of computers. There almost certainly are '0day' vulns for Vista out there, but in order to remain 0day, they cannot be used on a mass scale.
If I were a bot-net herder, I would probably just focus on the vulnerability between the keyboard and chair.
"All the M$ tools are going to be underlining their popularity arguments and slinging mud at all the more secure OS."
What "more secure OS" are you talking about?
The bounty on Vista vulnerabilities was reportedly $25,000 when is was RTM, and in five months only eight vulnerabilities have been exposed. The bounty on the OSX vulnerability was $10,000, and it took less than half a day for someone to collect it.
Wake me up when OSX (or linux or *BSD) are subjected to the same conditions as Windows and then we'll see which is the most secure OS.
The fact that people can be malware-free by using OSs like Linux, *BSD and OSX is a testament to the real value in security by obscurity.
I heard or read somewhere that in some towns in Texas (or all of Texas?) that the law requires that when you go out in public with a holstered pistol, the pistol must be loaded.
Have you heard anything about who is going to be filling out the rest of the band yet? I can't imagine James or D'arcy will be joining back up with Billy, but you never know... Not a clue. The only thing I read about it was a little blurb.
if it was, why is nature, by design, analogue? Food for thought: While a sound wave may be "analogue" (a variable signal continuous in both time and amplitude), our ears use discrete (digital!) methods to capture that sound.
...but I guess that some people would say I can't hear and that I'm biased cos I was brought up on vinyl. Everyone is biased when it comes to listening. When all you have to rely on is your ears and your brain to measure sound, sound becomes, not some "wave" or "signal", but "what you remember hearing".
and "they're" about to come out with a new album and everything! Get with the times, man. Yes. I'm stoked. I'm hoping they go on tour and visit somewhere near me,as I was never able see them before they broke up.
The tone of that album could just "suffocate" your ears. VERY long-winded... and muddy production quality. Yea. The production quality makes it one of those albums best listened to with headphones in a quiet room.
I will always consider that as one of the (many) reasons that Mellon Collie is the better album between the two. Well, it would hard for me to say Melon Collie was "worse" than any other album. I probably prefer Siamese dream because of the stage of life I was at when it came out.
Actually, CDs can carry *more* dynamic range than Vinyl. Historically, the problems with CDs and dynamic range has not been with the format, but with the mastering.
My favorite rock album of all time, The Smashing Pumpkins Siamese Dream, is an example of an album mastered properly for CD. Instead of compressing the hell out of the music, the quiet parts of the songs are left to be...well...*quiet*. When I was a young whipper snapper, the local pizza joint had Siamese Dream in their jukebox. The jukebox would compress the sound on the fly in order to make the volume of the tracks from different albums the same. We noticed that the compression took a couple of seconds to catch up and adjust the volume.
Knowing this, we would play the song Silverfuck whenever we went there. Silverfuck is almost nine minutes long and in the middle, has a long section that is very quiet and almost "trance-like". During this section the jukebox would compensate and raise the volume the track to about three or four times normal, but even with the compression the song was still fairly quiet.
When the song would break back into the loud chorus, everyone who wasn't ready for it would get a shock of their life as the volume would be the roof for a couple of seconds.
After doing that a few times, they ended up taking that CD out.:(
Paddles are needed to avoid things like rocks and fallen trees, and they are especially handy when you want to get to shore to avoid the giant waterfall 200 yards ahead.
Well, I don't like giving out personal information on a public message board! Well then you probably should pay the extra couple of bucks for privacy when you register your domain!:D
And I've never seen any option for "renegotiating" with any of these options. For DSL (in most areas) you can in a way "renegotiate" with providers when your contract expires. I've been doing it for the last three years with SBC/AT&T. In 2004 I signed up for their 3Mb service at 39.99 a month. This was their "introductory" rate. After my contract expired I called up and told them that I wanted the new introductory rate which was 29.99. They gave it to me. A year later I asked for the new introducory rate which was $19.99. This time the support person I spoke to said that they couldn't give me that rate and that I would have to switch over to month to month at 39.99. I told them to please cancel my service when it expired.
A couple of days later, I was all set to switch over to sonic (for 19.99 a month, which was the same rate At&T wouldn't give me) when my wife called them for an unrelated issue and they offered us the new 19.99 intro rate to stay with them.
Now At&T has done away with the contracts completely and offers my 3Mb package for 24.95 a month. It's five more bucks a month that I've paid the last year, but not being bound by the contract makes it a decent deal for me.
Most people don't realize that if they can get DSL they can get it from multiple providers. While all of the providers may offer similar rates, it's still competition. Being able to buy my DSL from sonic or dslextreme is the reason why I've been able to pay less and less to SBC/At&T for the same internet service over the last three years.
Well if you don't have confidence in being at the same or comparable job for five years I can understand your trepidation, but I wouldn't discount the long term value in real estate investment in the future. I watched my mother aquire, rent and sell over a dozen properties throughout my childood, and now retired from the landlord business, she has two homes, both of which are paid for that she would not otherwise be able to afford on her job income today.
You mentioned that homes in your area are much nicer than your apartment. Is it possible to move slightly away to find a home, or do you live a huge metro area?
Don't get all self-righteous when you mislead others about the resolution of your recording, and someone calls you on it. Once again, someone doesn't bother to read my post. What part of, "Though the HD is downsized to 720x480, it still looks much better than SD", is misleading about the resolution of my recording?
Hey, how about telling the truth? Everything I've posted is true.
What a concept! Another great concept is to pay attention to what others say.
Luckily where I live home owners associations are nowhere in sight.
That said, even in areas where the cost of maintaining a property might be high, I don't see how you can argue that renting is cheaper than buying. When you rent, all of the money you are paying to the landlord is going into another person's captial investment. With a home, at least a portion of the money you are paying into your mortgage goes back in your pocket in the form of equity - much moreso if you choose to pay extra into the principal every month. Maintenance costs of a home, while they seem draining, are still not a waste, as they maintain the value of your property, which help maintain and/or increase your equity. Except in the case of severe real estate market declines (which are rare) where prices actually go down, when you decide to move onto a different house, you will almost always make a profit.
I suppose if you insisted on hiring a handyman/contractor to do *all* maintenance work on your house, instead of doing some of it yourself, mortgage+maintenance costs might be more expensive than renting for an equivalent property, but you still have that capital investment that is non-exoistant with renting.
Of course. But the original signal is HD, which makes all the difference in regards to the end result, which the quality of the picture on the screen.
An HD signal downsized to 720x480 looks much better compared to a SD channel.
Perhaps I should make up a new acronym for pedants who get mad when I use the term HD improperly. Perhaps "HDDSD" (High Defenition Downsized to Standard Definition)
Ok. I meant that the drop from 720p to 720x480 (which is the output of the Hauppauge TV tuner card I have) was not that huge. I suppose that if I was accustomed to 1080i/p I might notice, but after watching TV on a 20 year old 30" tube TV for the last 7 years, I guess it doesn't take much to impress me.
When watching a HD channels, I've switched between direct input from my HD receiver and the downscaled output from my MCE PC and I struggle to see the difference.
According to my calculator, 1366x768 is a 1/1.7786458333... ratio, which is pretty close to the standard "1/1.77777777". ratio of 720p.
I don't know why they choose that size instead of the standard 720p dimensions. I watch all my TV through my media center PC which comes in through the VGA port. The resolution is always the native 1366x768 of the TV, so the issue non-native resolution is moot. Even if I didn't watch TV through the VGA port, one of the features of my TV (and most others I would assume) is a built-in up/down scaler that scales the input to the native resolution.
As for aspect ratio, my TV supports the concave stretching that makes SD channels look somewhat proportional when stretched across the entire screen. Windows media center also supports the same trickery. I can't stand bad aspect ratios either, so sometimes I will watch SD channels without any stretching. I don;t mind the lost real estate.
As for HD content. To me, discovery HD Theater is almost worth the extra money for HD alone.
$50.00 you dont even know what you are talking about. An $100.00 says you didn't even read my post.
My Directv HD receiver is hooked to my MCD 2005 box via SVideo. It's not obsolete (I got my vista upgrade coupon with MCE 2005 disc, but chose not to use it) by any stretch of the imagination as it will be supported at least until 2010, at which point I will want a newer box anyway.
The HD video I am able to watch and record through MCE 2005 is downsized to 720x480 (which was noted in my post that you failed to read), but on my smallish 37" HD TV, which only supports 720p anyway, it still looks pretty damn "HD" to me.
HD capture cards are extremely expensive at this point so it's not even worth it to try for true HD capture anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
"You can bet than many more have been found, and are in use by zombie-net operators right now."
Common sense says that's not true. Aside from posting it on full disclosure, the best way to expose a vulnerability to the public is to use it to exploit a massive numbers of computers. There almost certainly are '0day' vulns for Vista out there, but in order to remain 0day, they cannot be used on a mass scale.
If I were a bot-net herder, I would probably just focus on the vulnerability between the keyboard and chair.
"All the M$ tools are going to be underlining their popularity arguments and slinging mud at all the more secure OS."
What "more secure OS" are you talking about?
The bounty on Vista vulnerabilities was reportedly $25,000 when is was RTM, and in five months only eight vulnerabilities have been exposed. The bounty on the OSX vulnerability was $10,000, and it took less than half a day for someone to collect it.
Wake me up when OSX (or linux or *BSD) are subjected to the same conditions as Windows and then we'll see which is the most secure OS.
The fact that people can be malware-free by using OSs like Linux, *BSD and OSX is a testament to the real value in security by obscurity.
Lunch is had with coworkers at the strip club.
I heard or read somewhere that in some towns in Texas (or all of Texas?) that the law requires that when you go out in public with a holstered pistol, the pistol must be loaded.
It might be an urban myth, but makes sense to me.
Sorry, but the iPhone won't run Wordpad either.
heh.
So it's true!
(Mod me down. I deserve it)
...but I guess that some people would say I can't hear and that I'm biased cos I was brought up on vinyl. Everyone is biased when it comes to listening. When all you have to rely on is your ears and your brain to measure sound, sound becomes, not some "wave" or "signal", but "what you remember hearing"."Analog sound quality" is an oxymoron.
Actually, CDs can carry *more* dynamic range than Vinyl. Historically, the problems with CDs and dynamic range has not been with the format, but with the mastering.
:(
My favorite rock album of all time, The Smashing Pumpkins Siamese Dream, is an example of an album mastered properly for CD. Instead of compressing the hell out of the music, the quiet parts of the songs are left to be...well...*quiet*. When I was a young whipper snapper, the local pizza joint had Siamese Dream in their jukebox. The jukebox would compress the sound on the fly in order to make the volume of the tracks from different albums the same. We noticed that the compression took a couple of seconds to catch up and adjust the volume.
Knowing this, we would play the song Silverfuck whenever we went there. Silverfuck is almost nine minutes long and in the middle, has a long section that is very quiet and almost "trance-like". During this section the jukebox would compensate and raise the volume the track to about three or four times normal, but even with the compression the song was still fairly quiet.
When the song would break back into the loud chorus, everyone who wasn't ready for it would get a shock of their life as the volume would be the roof for a couple of seconds.
After doing that a few times, they ended up taking that CD out.
Paddles are needed to avoid things like rocks and fallen trees, and they are especially handy when you want to get to shore to avoid the giant waterfall 200 yards ahead.
That would make a cool movie. It could star Angelina Jolie and Harrison Ford. You need to throw in some ipods though.
A couple of days later, I was all set to switch over to sonic (for 19.99 a month, which was the same rate At&T wouldn't give me) when my wife called them for an unrelated issue and they offered us the new 19.99 intro rate to stay with them.
Now At&T has done away with the contracts completely and offers my 3Mb package for 24.95 a month. It's five more bucks a month that I've paid the last year, but not being bound by the contract makes it a decent deal for me.
Most people don't realize that if they can get DSL they can get it from multiple providers. While all of the providers may offer similar rates, it's still competition. Being able to buy my DSL from sonic or dslextreme is the reason why I've been able to pay less and less to SBC/At&T for the same internet service over the last three years.
Well if you don't have confidence in being at the same or comparable job for five years I can understand your trepidation, but I wouldn't discount the long term value in real estate investment in the future. I watched my mother aquire, rent and sell over a dozen properties throughout my childood, and now retired from the landlord business, she has two homes, both of which are paid for that she would not otherwise be able to afford on her job income today.
You mentioned that homes in your area are much nicer than your apartment. Is it possible to move slightly away to find a home, or do you live a huge metro area?
Luckily where I live home owners associations are nowhere in sight.
That said, even in areas where the cost of maintaining a property might be high, I don't see how you can argue that renting is cheaper than buying. When you rent, all of the money you are paying to the landlord is going into another person's captial investment. With a home, at least a portion of the money you are paying into your mortgage goes back in your pocket in the form of equity - much moreso if you choose to pay extra into the principal every month. Maintenance costs of a home, while they seem draining, are still not a waste, as they maintain the value of your property, which help maintain and/or increase your equity. Except in the case of severe real estate market declines (which are rare) where prices actually go down, when you decide to move onto a different house, you will almost always make a profit.
I suppose if you insisted on hiring a handyman/contractor to do *all* maintenance work on your house, instead of doing some of it yourself, mortgage+maintenance costs might be more expensive than renting for an equivalent property, but you still have that capital investment that is non-exoistant with renting.
Of course. But the original signal is HD, which makes all the difference in regards to the end result, which the quality of the picture on the screen.
An HD signal downsized to 720x480 looks much better compared to a SD channel.
Perhaps I should make up a new acronym for pedants who get mad when I use the term HD improperly. Perhaps "HDDSD" (High Defenition Downsized to Standard Definition)
Ok. I meant that the drop from 720p to 720x480 (which is the output of the Hauppauge TV tuner card I have) was not that huge. I suppose that if I was accustomed to 1080i/p I might notice, but after watching TV on a 20 year old 30" tube TV for the last 7 years, I guess it doesn't take much to impress me. When watching a HD channels, I've switched between direct input from my HD receiver and the downscaled output from my MCE PC and I struggle to see the difference.
More like $600 less - maybe $500 by now, as I bought my shuttle system several months ago.
Since a full blown MythTV/MCE PVR does 10x more than an Apple TV, should it costing more come as a huge surprise?
That's a strange assumption to make. What in my posts indicates that I don't understand the various standards?
It certainly wasn't this one was it?
To hopefully answer some of your questions....
My TV is 1366x768. It's a 37" Viewsonic.
According to my calculator, 1366x768 is a 1/1.7786458333... ratio, which is pretty close to the standard "1/1.77777777". ratio of 720p.
I don't know why they choose that size instead of the standard 720p dimensions. I watch all my TV through my media center PC which comes in through the VGA port. The resolution is always the native 1366x768 of the TV, so the issue non-native resolution is moot. Even if I didn't watch TV through the VGA port, one of the features of my TV (and most others I would assume) is a built-in up/down scaler that scales the input to the native resolution.
As for aspect ratio, my TV supports the concave stretching that makes SD channels look somewhat proportional when stretched across the entire screen. Windows media center also supports the same trickery. I can't stand bad aspect ratios either, so sometimes I will watch SD channels without any stretching. I don;t mind the lost real estate.
As for HD content. To me, discovery HD Theater is almost worth the extra money for HD alone.
My Directv HD receiver is hooked to my MCD 2005 box via SVideo. It's not obsolete (I got my vista upgrade coupon with MCE 2005 disc, but chose not to use it) by any stretch of the imagination as it will be supported at least until 2010, at which point I will want a newer box anyway.
The HD video I am able to watch and record through MCE 2005 is downsized to 720x480 (which was noted in my post that you failed to read), but on my smallish 37" HD TV, which only supports 720p anyway, it still looks pretty damn "HD" to me.
HD capture cards are extremely expensive at this point so it's not even worth it to try for true HD capture anyway.