And, you can try your hand at amateur pornography without getting snickered at, cops called by clueless processing-people, or pics of you and your girlfriend's naked duff, er, misappropriated ('posted to internet' - see snickering issue above) by same.
What it means is, even if a user comes to them with an obvious (simple diagnosis, simple solution) problem such as "I can connect to the Internet but not load any Web sites, and at every boot I get a dialogue about a missing newdot~3.dll", they will not be able to do ANYthing that might encourage the user to remove the offending program or fault, either by directing them to a Web site, pointing the finger where it belongs, recommending a fixit utility, or possibly even directing them to the developer of the offending product (since this would be acknowledging the existance of an unwanted program, which might encourage the user to remove and and possibly violate a software license). In other words, by a reasonable interpretation of the memo it would not even be acceptable to say "Please contact newdotnet support to resolve this issue, their web address is...."
The tech isn't new at all, but I *am* surprised at how seldom I see it. The most common magnetic-induction arrangement is a _large_ loop inductor (e.g. a loop of wire running around the entire perimeter of a room), and a magnetically inducted device, such as a headset, used inside the loop/room. The main advantage of this type of technology is that it operates at "ground zero" of the RF spectrum (from 0 to a few KHz), and is carrierless. With a sufficiently sensitive receiving device (crystal headset) or strong transmitter, the device may not even require its own power source. The disadvantage of course is the short range--the device won't work far outside the loop; with this product (I doubt they instruct the user to run a wire all around the office) the range is only a couple meters--perfect for sitting at a desk without getting tangled, but no good for walking around the house.
The "magnetic bubble ensures privacy" argument is a strange one; the only impediment to eavesdroppers is that couple-meters limited range on the (carrierless) signal. It protects privacy in the same way whispering would, but I would not exactly call it a selling point for those who need a secure line.
What will ultraviolet do to a hard drive? I don't think this would be effective.
If you want to make a drive's data unrecoverable, open up the drive and remove the platters. Smash them into pieces, then incinerate. (Or at least get them up to a temperature where they lose their magnetic domains...)
Someone who could rig a custom interface, and do the code needed would likely be able to charge $75+ for the time they burned on a silly project like this if they had rather used it to do something usefull.
Sounds like a useful application of time to me. How else, at the cost of only some hours burned, do you simultaneously get disassembler and reverse-engineering practice, C++ experience, and your resume in front of 10,000 computer-and-electronics geek eyeballs?:-)
There are 2 parts to developing pictures. The first is to take the roll of film and turn it into negatives. This stuff is VERY light sensitive, you normally can't use the red light or any light for that matter (even for B/W film) -- depending on the speed (sensitivity) of film used, things like luminous watches, ceiling cracks, etc. become a concern. The film is typically loaded in complete darkness onto a reel in a light-sealed container, which is filled with the appropriate developing chemicals.
The second part is, once the negatives are developed, to create the 'positives' (prints) on light-sensitive photo paper. This is much less sensitive, and you can (at least for B/W prints) work with it under the red light for awhile without causing noticable problems. The photo paper is exposed by shining a very BRIGHT light through the negative for a small amount of time.
Despite the cheapo-looking lens assembly (the part it screws into is plastic), the lens itself is a solid, seemingly quality glass-and-metal affair with antiglare coating on both sides. At the proper focal length you can take a surprisingly good picture.
2 AA's - you change them by (surprisingly enough) opening the battery cover on the bottom and letting them fall out, then popping 2 fresh ones in their place. In practice though, you can take a lot of pictures on 1 set of batteries (especially since this cam lacks power-hungry CCD image sensors, backlit color LCD screens, etc.)
Actually, some of these points are not in the articles, and (not surprisingly) seem to be causing some confusion based on some of the comments I have seen above.
1) The cameras are purchased, just like any ordinary (non-digital) disposable camera. There is no rental agreement, nothing to sign, no deposit, etc. Some previous comments have asked about this. Also, the camera IS cheap; the hardware itself costs probably no more than $25-50 to manufacture, and likely pay for themselves in 1 or 2 processings. The big draw is that you can use them in potentially hazardous environments, and if it gets destroyed or stolen, this only sets you back $11 + a few minutes to solder a new connector into a new camera.
2) The batteries are changeable by the user - they are ordinary AA alkalines. They will last much longer than 1 25-picture cycle (I haven't yet managed to exhaust a set), but when they do run down, just open the battery cover and pop in fresh ones.
3) The sensor is actually 1.3 megapixels, not 2MP as claimed on the package.
4) The picture quality is mediocre - but not nearly as bad as these samples would have you believe (I don't know what happened to that guy's cam). Try the samples here and here (middle of page) for other samples. The biggest problem seems to be motion blurs from not holding the camera steady enough (the "shutter speed" is pretty slow). The other problem is that the lens is adjusted to be in-focus at some specific point probably between 4-12 feet from the camera. In practice, your subject will usually not be exactly at the in-focus distance. While you've got the camera open to solder in a little USB socket (or whatever), you can rotate the lens to adjust it for other distances, up to within an inch of the lens.
5) Concerns that this hack will be singlehandedly responsible for driving the cameras off the market, driving Ritz out of business, etc., seem largely unfounded. They will probably go off the market anyway - last time I was in Wolf Camera, the sales associates were actually warning people away from these cameras, saying that they would get slightly better image quality from the film disposables (for less $$, and 27 vs. 25 pictures - it's a no-brainer, come to think of it...)
It's likely that they will get pulled from the stores anyway. The last time I went into a Wolf camera to pick up a couple of these, the employee on duty actually interrupted to dissuade me from buying them, saying I would get better picture quality from a film disposable. They don't seem very impressed with this product, especially as it negates pretty much all of digital photography's advantages (speed, convenince, consumables cost, instant picture review...)
Personally, I think it would have been a much better business model for them to develop the pictures and return the camera to the purchaser directly, rather than sending them back to the manufacturer to be repackaged. The user could then take more pictures and bring it back for proce$$ing over and over, and the manufacturer would not have to deal with recasing all the cameras that people damage, write their names on, etc. Even the batteries will last for several 25-picture cycles (I still haven't exhausted my original set).
>>Also, since the protection racket... er, mechanism in place to keep you from yanking the photos out is probably also the same mechanism that protects the firmware itself.
Actually, there is no 'protection' on the firmware itself - all of the camera's memory (RAM, registers, mapped firmware) can be read with the USB 0x00 command, no differently from other SPCA504x-based cameras.
However, when enabling bulk-transfer mode (allowing the program to slurp an entire file from the camera's memory in one transfer), something is done that MAY constitute a protection--the camera won't transfer unless a mangled version of its own serial number is fed back to it--or, you cheat and just clear the memory byte where it stores the result of the comparison:-)
1) Run HijackThis (covered in a previous thread), find all the New.net references and choose 'Fix'.
2) Run LSP-Fix from http://cexx.org/lspfix.htm (yes, I wrote it, and yes, this is shameless promotion). Click on "I know what I'm doing". Send all New.net entries to the Remove list, then press Finish.
Sounds like it would be easy enough (assuming you could keep USB-org lawyers off your back, if they're against this sort of thing) to set up a sort of 'umbrella company' that pays the $1500 for a VID, then sublicenses individual Product IDs for much less, maybe $5. (The $1500 buys you a VID, which allows you to then make up 0xFFFF (65,536) PIDs for individual devices.)
One could set up a Universal USB Tinkerers Association, or something like that, specifically for this purpose.
Not to say you necessarily should drop the $1500 yourself - this sounds like a simple enough idea, surely someone has done it already, and all you'd have to do is find them.
I don't think they can legally require this until some form of lexical authority publishes a reference definition for the term 'spyware'. Until Merriam-Webster or similar publishes it in a dictionary, I will most likely continue to use the Steve Gibson definition (it's pretty common), under which Gator IS spyware, and will always hold a place in our hearts - let the lawyers come.
Well, it looks like this topic will be overrun by second-rate jokesters cracking wise about the Roomba's name, laziness, etc. In blatant disregard for the Slashdot community, here is something actually relevant to the topic.
In my college years, I had the position of running an underground student newspaper. An issue was released 'every few weeks' when its dedicated editors were free/bored enough to put one together, but one thing everyone thought would be nice would be to commandeer the University (dorm) cable system after-hours for a student-run movie and wierd footage channel. Starting at about midnight or so, this would replace a lame "information channel" text marquee (which was always several weeks out of date and advertising events whose deadlines had come and gone), that was currently occupying a perfectly good cable channel.
We had obtained keys to the main hub room (also the cable feed room), so inserting the signal was not a problem. The student TV footage was intended to begin late at night, when university officials were guaranteed not to be watching, and would be pre-recorded. This presented a minor problem, however: everyone on the 'staff' had early classes and poor memories, and could not be counted on to get into the hub closet after hours to insert the day's programming and press 'play'. Also, while some students (volunteering for the Computer center) did legitimately have access to these areas, students going in and out of there after hours would arouse unnecessary suspicion from campus security.
It was decided that the best solution was to equip the VCR with a 'remote control' of sorts that would allow it to be controlled over the dorm network via the abundant Ethernet connections available in the room. This would allow for automated starting and stopping as well as manual intervention as necessary; footage could then be loaded during the daytime hours at the convenience of those involved.
Making a VCR Internet-ready is not has hard as it sounds. I simply built a board with eight simple Darlington transistor circuits (corresponding to 8 data pins on a parallel port) to drive the important VCR function buttons via this port. A simple Web server (disposable '386) running a perl-based CGI interface allowed Web-based control of the parallel port bits, which in turn operated the disposable VCR with wires soldered into the appropriate front-panel switches.
The tricky part then became finding controversial/interesting/non-stupid, but legal, student-produced content worth displaying, but that's another story.
One thing not covered in the article is proper fuse replacement. One can prevent nuisance blown fuses (such as those caused by grounding the HDD's active bits against the case) by replacing the underrated PSU fuses supplied by the manufacturer with nails of a reasonable thickness. One can distinguish the underrated fuses (placed by the manufacturer to fail prematurely and drive new PSU sales) by their glass or ceramic enclosure.
Slashdot Mirror
Unlimited Access can be construed to refer to time, not bandwidth. Thus, ISP's claiming unlimited access aren't offering no download caps.
Maybe, but once they disconnect the customer for the rest of the month (etc.) they no longer have unlimited access, either.
I think (hope) that they meant 'detection'.
And, you can try your hand at amateur pornography without getting snickered at, cops called by clueless processing-people, or pics of you and your girlfriend's naked duff, er, misappropriated ('posted to internet' - see snickering issue above) by same.
What it means is, even if a user comes to them with an obvious (simple diagnosis, simple solution) problem such as "I can connect to the Internet but not load any Web sites, and at every boot I get a dialogue about a missing newdot~3.dll", they will not be able to do ANYthing that might encourage the user to remove the offending program or fault, either by directing them to a Web site, pointing the finger where it belongs, recommending a fixit utility, or possibly even directing them to the developer of the offending product (since this would be acknowledging the existance of an unwanted program, which might encourage the user to remove and and possibly violate a software license). In other words, by a reasonable interpretation of the memo it would not even be acceptable to say "Please contact newdotnet support to resolve this issue, their web address is...."
The tech isn't new at all, but I *am* surprised at how seldom I see it. The most common magnetic-induction arrangement is a _large_ loop inductor (e.g. a loop of wire running around the entire perimeter of a room), and a magnetically inducted device, such as a headset, used inside the loop/room. The main advantage of this type of technology is that it operates at "ground zero" of the RF spectrum (from 0 to a few KHz), and is carrierless. With a sufficiently sensitive receiving device (crystal headset) or strong transmitter, the device may not even require its own power source. The disadvantage of course is the short range--the device won't work far outside the loop; with this product (I doubt they instruct the user to run a wire all around the office) the range is only a couple meters--perfect for sitting at a desk without getting tangled, but no good for walking around the house.
The "magnetic bubble ensures privacy" argument is a strange one; the only impediment to eavesdroppers is that couple-meters limited range on the (carrierless) signal. It protects privacy in the same way whispering would, but I would not exactly call it a selling point for those who need a secure line.
This is not text. (stupid lameness filter)
But 'Enter', or 'Insert', etc., could be taken in an obscene context as well. Maybe they should all just say 'Disney'.
Gator does not make AD-Aware. Lavasoft makes AD-Aware.
You might be thinking of Spyware Nuker, which was spun off of the company (Lions' Pride Enterprises) that made the "Yo Mama Osama" spyware.
What will ultraviolet do to a hard drive? I don't think this would be effective.
If you want to make a drive's data unrecoverable, open up the drive and remove the platters. Smash them into pieces, then incinerate. (Or at least get them up to a temperature where they lose their magnetic domains...)
Yes, but was that because he was verifying you as a card holder, or because the CD had "explicit lyrics" that require age verification?
Someone who could rig a custom interface, and do the code needed would likely be able to charge $75+ for the time they burned on a silly project like this if they had rather used it to do something usefull.
:-)
Sounds like a useful application of time to me. How else, at the cost of only some hours burned, do you simultaneously get disassembler and reverse-engineering practice, C++ experience, and your resume in front of 10,000 computer-and-electronics geek eyeballs?
There are 2 parts to developing pictures. The first is to take the roll of film and turn it into negatives. This stuff is VERY light sensitive, you normally can't use the red light or any light for that matter (even for B/W film) -- depending on the speed (sensitivity) of film used, things like luminous watches, ceiling cracks, etc. become a concern. The film is typically loaded in complete darkness onto a reel in a light-sealed container, which is filled with the appropriate developing chemicals.
The second part is, once the negatives are developed, to create the 'positives' (prints) on light-sensitive photo paper. This is much less sensitive, and you can (at least for B/W prints) work with it under the red light for awhile without causing noticable problems. The photo paper is exposed by shining a very BRIGHT light through the negative for a small amount of time.
Despite the cheapo-looking lens assembly (the part it screws into is plastic), the lens itself is a solid, seemingly quality glass-and-metal affair with antiglare coating on both sides. At the proper focal length you can take a surprisingly good picture.
2 AA's - you change them by (surprisingly enough) opening the battery cover on the bottom and letting them fall out, then popping 2 fresh ones in their place. In practice though, you can take a lot of pictures on 1 set of batteries (especially since this cam lacks power-hungry CCD image sensors, backlit color LCD screens, etc.)
Actually, some of these points are not in the articles, and (not surprisingly) seem to be causing some confusion based on some of the comments I have seen above.
1) The cameras are purchased, just like any ordinary (non-digital) disposable camera. There is no rental agreement, nothing to sign, no deposit, etc. Some previous comments have asked about this. Also, the camera IS cheap; the hardware itself costs probably no more than $25-50 to manufacture, and likely pay for themselves in 1 or 2 processings. The big draw is that you can use them in potentially hazardous environments, and if it gets destroyed or stolen, this only sets you back $11 + a few minutes to solder a new connector into a new camera.
2) The batteries are changeable by the user - they are ordinary AA alkalines. They will last much longer than 1 25-picture cycle (I haven't yet managed to exhaust a set), but when they do run down, just open the battery cover and pop in fresh ones.
3) The sensor is actually 1.3 megapixels, not 2MP as claimed on the package.
4) The picture quality is mediocre - but not nearly as bad as these samples would have you believe (I don't know what happened to that guy's cam). Try the samples here and here (middle of page) for other samples. The biggest problem seems to be motion blurs from not holding the camera steady enough (the "shutter speed" is pretty slow). The other problem is that the lens is adjusted to be in-focus at some specific point probably between 4-12 feet from the camera. In practice, your subject will usually not be exactly at the in-focus distance. While you've got the camera open to solder in a little USB socket (or whatever), you can rotate the lens to adjust it for other distances, up to within an inch of the lens.
5) Concerns that this hack will be singlehandedly responsible for driving the cameras off the market, driving Ritz out of business, etc., seem largely unfounded. They will probably go off the market anyway - last time I was in Wolf Camera, the sales associates were actually warning people away from these cameras, saying that they would get slightly better image quality from the film disposables (for less $$, and 27 vs. 25 pictures - it's a no-brainer, come to think of it...)
It's likely that they will get pulled from the stores anyway. The last time I went into a Wolf camera to pick up a couple of these, the employee on duty actually interrupted to dissuade me from buying them, saying I would get better picture quality from a film disposable. They don't seem very impressed with this product, especially as it negates pretty much all of digital photography's advantages (speed, convenince, consumables cost, instant picture review...)
Personally, I think it would have been a much better business model for them to develop the pictures and return the camera to the purchaser directly, rather than sending them back to the manufacturer to be repackaged. The user could then take more pictures and bring it back for proce$$ing over and over, and the manufacturer would not have to deal with recasing all the cameras that people damage, write their names on, etc. Even the batteries will last for several 25-picture cycles (I still haven't exhausted my original set).
What, make the digital camera film wind backwards?
>>Also, since the protection racket... er, mechanism in place to keep you from yanking the photos out is probably also the same mechanism that protects the firmware itself.
:-)
Actually, there is no 'protection' on the firmware itself - all of the camera's memory (RAM, registers, mapped firmware) can be read with the USB 0x00 command, no differently from other SPCA504x-based cameras.
However, when enabling bulk-transfer mode (allowing the program to slurp an entire file from the camera's memory in one transfer), something is done that MAY constitute a protection--the camera won't transfer unless a mangled version of its own serial number is fed back to it--or, you cheat and just clear the memory byte where it stores the result of the comparison
Trouble with this, is that you'd be sued/PATRIOTed/anti-hacker-lawed to death the nanosecond you were identified as the creator of this program.
That's the easiest way?
:-)
Here are at least 2 easier ways
1) Run HijackThis (covered in a previous thread), find all the New.net references and choose 'Fix'.
2) Run LSP-Fix from http://cexx.org/lspfix.htm (yes, I wrote it, and yes, this is shameless promotion). Click on "I know what I'm doing". Send all New.net entries to the Remove list, then press Finish.
Sounds like it would be easy enough (assuming you could keep USB-org lawyers off your back, if they're against this sort of thing) to set up a sort of 'umbrella company' that pays the $1500 for a VID, then sublicenses individual Product IDs for much less, maybe $5. (The $1500 buys you a VID, which allows you to then make up 0xFFFF (65,536) PIDs for individual devices.)
One could set up a Universal USB Tinkerers Association, or something like that, specifically for this purpose.
Not to say you necessarily should drop the $1500 yourself - this sounds like a simple enough idea, surely someone has done it already, and all you'd have to do is find them.
I don't think they can legally require this until some form of lexical authority publishes a reference definition for the term 'spyware'. Until Merriam-Webster or similar publishes it in a dictionary, I will most likely continue to use the Steve Gibson definition (it's pretty common), under which Gator IS spyware, and will always hold a place in our hearts - let the lawyers come.
Well, it looks like this topic will be overrun by second-rate jokesters cracking wise about the Roomba's name, laziness, etc. In blatant disregard for the Slashdot community, here is something actually relevant to the topic.
In my college years, I had the position of running an underground student newspaper. An issue was released 'every few weeks' when its dedicated editors were free/bored enough to put one together, but one thing everyone thought would be nice would be to commandeer the University (dorm) cable system after-hours for a student-run movie and wierd footage channel. Starting at about midnight or so, this would replace a lame "information channel" text marquee (which was always several weeks out of date and advertising events whose deadlines had come and gone), that was currently occupying a perfectly good cable channel.
We had obtained keys to the main hub room (also the cable feed room), so inserting the signal was not a problem. The student TV footage was intended to begin late at night, when university officials were guaranteed not to be watching, and would be pre-recorded. This presented a minor problem, however: everyone on the 'staff' had early classes and poor memories, and could not be counted on to get into the hub closet after hours to insert the day's programming and press 'play'. Also, while some students (volunteering for the Computer center) did legitimately have access to these areas, students going in and out of there after hours would arouse unnecessary suspicion from campus security.
It was decided that the best solution was to equip the VCR with a 'remote control' of sorts that would allow it to be controlled over the dorm network via the abundant Ethernet connections available in the room. This would allow for automated starting and stopping as well as manual intervention as necessary; footage could then be loaded during the daytime hours at the convenience of those involved.
Making a VCR Internet-ready is not has hard as it sounds. I simply built a board with eight simple Darlington transistor circuits (corresponding to 8 data pins on a parallel port) to drive the important VCR function buttons via this port. A simple Web server (disposable '386) running a perl-based CGI interface allowed Web-based control of the parallel port bits, which in turn operated the disposable VCR with wires soldered into the appropriate front-panel switches.
The tricky part then became finding controversial/interesting/non-stupid, but legal, student-produced content worth displaying, but that's another story.
One thing not covered in the article is proper fuse replacement. One can prevent nuisance blown fuses (such as those caused by grounding the HDD's active bits against the case) by replacing the underrated PSU fuses supplied by the manufacturer with nails of a reasonable thickness. One can distinguish the underrated fuses (placed by the manufacturer to fail prematurely and drive new PSU sales) by their glass or ceramic enclosure.
log house
brown house
cat house
dog house
mouse house
cat dog mouse
?