You sure you mean this god?
on
Spidergoats
·
· Score: 1
God says that he will do so much evil to the people that whoever learns of it will have ears that tingle. Jer.19:3
God will be "terrible" to humans and will "famish all the gods." Zeph.2:11
God tries to kill Moses. Ex.4:23-25
God makes the Israelites eat flesh until it come out their nostrils. Num.11:19-20
God gets right in and fights with the Israelites. He "slew them with a great slaughter" and even "chased them along the way." What a guy. Jos.10:10
God threw down "great stones from heaven" so that he could kill even more people than the Israelites "slew with the sword." Jos.10:11
God makes the sun and moon stand still so that Joshua could get all his killing done before dark. It was the first Daylight Savings Time. Jos.10:12-13
yawn
ahh... Jesus. so thats it
on
Spidergoats
·
· Score: 1
Jesus mistakenly tells his followers that he will return and establish his kingdom within their lifetime. Mt.16:28, 23:36, 24:34
Jesus falsely prophesies that the high priest would see his second coming. Mt.26:64, Mk.14:62.
Jesus falsely prophesies that the end of the world will come within his listeners' lifetimes. Mk.9:1, 13:30
Jesus falsely predicts that some of his listeners would live to see him return and establish the kingdom of God. Lk.9:27
Now how about YOU read the Nag Hamadi, then come back to me when you see yourself what Jesus wrote and how it differs from all you "think" you know. Its a shame Catholics burnt so many scrolls once upon a time ago what were they hiding?
Before this thread gets on the wrong track, you shouldn't try to preach some biblical stuff to me as I can't point out a few thousand fallacies within the book not to mention the fact that the whole sloppy story is full of myths(e.g. revelations has some wonderous happenings some hollywood producer would make a killing doing the special effects for)
Since you mention children let me point out some biblical family values for you.
Lot [the just and righteous (2 Pet.2:7-8)] offers his daughters to a crowd of angel rapers, Gen.19:8 (what a dad and how righteous he is)
A drunken Lot impregnates his daughters. Gen.19:30-36 (oh know he didn't)
Abraham abandons his first son. Gen.21:10, 12
God tells Abraham to kill his second son for a burnt offering. Gen.22:2, 10 (wow and you still think god is some great guy?)
Jacob, with coaching from his mother, obtains Isaac's blessing by lying. God seems to have been fooled as well. Gen.27:19 (Isn't god supposed to know all?)
Why preach what you can't practice is pretty much what you've stated from what I gather so now I ask the same:
Now lets look at Genesis and see how much contradiction it states there:
Humans were created after the other animals. (1:25-27)
Humans were created before the other animals. (2:18-19)
Ok so which one was it?
The first man and woman were created simultaneously. (1:27)
The man was created first, then the animals, then the woman from the man's rib. (2:18-22)
You'd think the story would have no inconsistencies now wouldn't you
God's clever, talking serpent. Gen.3:1
"And Cain knew his wife." That's nice, but where the hell did she come from? Gen.4:17
The "sons of God" copulated with the "daughters of men," and has sons who became "the mighty men of old, men of renown." Gen.6:2-4
"There were giants in the earth in those days." Gen.6:4
God repents. Gen.6:6-7, Ex.32:14, 1 Chr.21:15
Noah, the just and righteous. Gen.7:1
Noah, the drunk and naked. Gen.9:20-21
Lot [the just and righteous (2 Pet.2:7-8)] offers his daughters to a crowd of angel rapers. Gen.19:8
Jacob goes in unto Leah by mistake. Gen.29:23, 25
God teaches Moses some magic tricks. Ex.4:2-9, 7:8-11, 7:17-20
God tries to kill Moses. Ex.4:23-25
Moses has uncircumcised lips. Ex.6:12, 6:30
God's first plague on the Egyptians: Rivers turned to blood. Ex.7:17-22 (Pharaoh's magicians knew this trick, too.)
Second Plague: Frogs. (Pharaoh's magicians do likewise.) Ex.8:2-7
Third Plague: Lice. (Pharaoh's magicians couldn't do this one!) Ex.8:16-18
In a concrete bunker on a mothballed Air Force base in Plattsburgh, New York, two Nigerian dwarf goats named Mille and Muscade joyfully munch grass and slurp water. Oddly, they are protected from intruders by security guards and razor wire.
Its sad to see that no one will ever question the ethics of the US government and their genetic tests. Surely this isn't the only test they've done, as I'm sure we could all gather at this point a summation of nightmares lurking somewhere.
So what happens when something goes wrong? Who do you point the finger at the scientist or the government? Scientist only do what they're instructed when in military roles, military only follow chains of commands which are so wishy washy when the s##t hits the fan, that you can't pinpoint the finger, or you end up settling for a scapegoat.
Animals were not meant to be bastardized like this and with experiments like these remember the golden rule, what goes around comes around.
Science shouldn't tinker with these types of issues then masquerade them off as if their concerned with finding solutions for life when their solution is based on greed for money. br.
If you signed a no disclosure agreement with the company the could turn around
and say your offering priveledged information on a public place which could
jeapordize their business.
Surely this is not likely the case, but companies are really leery about having
anything negative said about them and will likely attempt to make it seem as if
your somehow slandering them. This can be presented in court in a number of ways
and most of the times a person does not have the resources as the company does
to fight their case and voice their opinions.
Simplicity, use about 3 different proxies, a totally wacked out name, and have
them waste resources proving their case. I've been bullied by some companies
for the spoofs I pull on my site, and
to be honest if someone asked me nicely to remove them I would. But when someone
wants to be bullyish about it, I sit it out knowing it'll cost them more to be
a pr#ck than to just be humane about the situation.
Have you noticed that most of the companies on the web providing free pc to phone internationally have
discontinued this service? Chances are they were only offering this service for the period of time it
took them to establish their service and generate usage by consumers.
This reaks with the word scam on it, but soon we shall find out if this is the case
If you would like to make international phone calls free from your home and if have access to broadband
internet access, you should consider joining the Free World Dialup III project.
Well in order for anyone to use the service Broadband is needed which is not going to be easy
for people to get provided that Broadband isn't as widely available as a dialup is. One thing
to consider is how much your still going to have to pay in Broadband charges to use the service.
Is it feasible to use this over a phone line? At least with Verizon my calls are a one shot price
and even though their service stinks, there are no gimmicks.
Free phone calls? What's the catch?
Broadband and you have to buy their hardware!!
Each person who is connecting to the network will be required to purchase a Free World Dialup node which
will an estimated retail cost of US$ 100 and connect a telephone line (analog POTS) to the RJ-11 jack in
the back of the node. As long the person has "always-on" Broadband access to the Net, the node will
become a qualified FWD Node and free phone calling will be enabled.
Where is Capt Crunch when you need him.
In addition, Free World Dialup will provide an ability for anonymous voice chatting on the Net, together
with our own instant messaging services.
If your accessing via Broadband how are you anonymous?
We are gearing up for our announcement and official launch in March, 2001 and we expect to reach critical
mass by June.
This is a big claim and has anyone taken a quick second to think if this is so legitimate why haven't
the big companies jumped on the badnwagon as they always do, why haven't VC companies dropped heavy
funds on this company? Why don't they even have their own domain?
Anyways enough ramblings although their associates have pretty weird names that reak of scams too
Free PC to Phone (US & Int'l) - Callrewards.com
Free PC to Phone (US & Int'l) - HotTelephone.com
Free PC to Phone (US,UK,Fr) - MyFreeLD.com
Free PC to PC - TrulyGlobal (beta)
Free PC to PC - PalTalk
Free PC to PC - Firetalk.com
Free PC to PC - Visitalk.com
Free PC to PC - Buddyphone
Free PC to PC & Voice Mail (US & Int'l) - BeeCall
Free Internet Call Waiting (US) - BuzMe
Free Internet Call Waiting (US) - WhoIsIt?
Free Internet Call Waiting (US) - CallWave
Free Web based Conference Calling - Conflab.com
I wrote a text from the administrative standpoint on how to pretty much eliminate 80% or so of an attack on a variety of hardware/software based level which can be found at my site.
Now as for the attacks themselves, this wasn't anything new as DDoS became popular after Mixter coded a scriptkiddiot tool, which allowed malicious users to actually implement these attacks on a./script basis.
The foundations for DDoS though are a bit old and could have long been resolved had thorough network's been set up to deny any malicious activity to leave their networks and attack others.
Many admins have the knowledge to do so, but I think theyre resources are tied into making things work right then and there as opposed to doing it right.
Finding a CISSP, CISA, or other won't cut as much as you think it would. See exams are just that an exam, you study study study, but that does not profess your knowledge on the subject. I've met plenty of people with certifications in just about everything who had no real world experience, or lacked the knowledge with experience. Sure the CISSP has a five year clause on whom can take the test which means your going to find someone skilled in a variety of security based settings, could be encyrption, could be medical management, could be forensics. That does not mean they understand networking.
Now those with multiple certifications are the good ones, e.g. CCNA + CISSP = Security Engineer with Networking Experience, CISSP + CISA = nice security auditor.
There are a lot of variables to consider with this question, but the best solution would be for the Network Admins to work along with the security engineer to facilitate the scope of security and engineering on the correct level, not just security and not just networking.
Security Engineers should have input with regards to the network they are securing which means that they will have to somehow get their hands "dirty" in order to do so.
Good network administrators however should have some fundamental skills regarding security procedures and how to implement them without the need for a seperate security engineer, however not all security flaws on a network are network or geek related. Social engineering plays a huge part as does law, encryption, etc., which is something most network administrators don't have time for.
A security engineer should never though as stated in a post above have full blown access to everything as this itself compromises the security policy altogether should that security engineer become an enemy at some point.
In essence their like comparing oranges and tangerines, almost the same but not quite.
The Pentagon's Ballistic Missile Defense Organization also is planning another attempt to shoot down a mock nuclear missile in space, probably in May or June, using the same technologies that produced a spectacular failure last July, the officials said. Two of the last three attempted missile intercepts failed.
Could it be officials here are disturbed because India could jeapordize the US' intentions of getting their Star Wars program back on the map?
The officials, speaking on condition they not be identified, said test preparations are going ahead in the absence of orders to the contrary
from Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.
So Mr. Rumsfeld has himself denounced this but they are still going ahead with it.
Rumsfeld has been briefed in recent days by Ronald Kadish, the Air Force general who runs the missile defense project office.
Aside from the technical issues yet to be resolved, Russian and Chinese officials offered reminders Tuesday that whatever the design
of a U.S. national missile defense, it will be controversial.
In Beijing, Foreign Ministry spokesman Sun Yuxi warned that American missile defense "will have a far-reaching and extensive negative impact on the global and regional strategic balance and stability."
In Moscow, Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev asserted that a U.S. missile defense could easily be defeated by technologies the former Soviet Union developed in the 1980s in response to President
Reagan's Star Wars plan that was a more ambitious attempt to defend against all-out missile attacks.
"We had three mighty programs to asymmetrically counteract U.S. national missile defenses during Reagan's 'Star Wars,"' Sergeyev was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency. He gave no
details. Although the programs were halted, "We still have them and can take them up again," he said.
Just think about that for a second. Russia which has in reality little leadership, they'd have nothing to lose. See: Electro Magnetic Pulse. Russians have been using it for some time on a very low key basis.
At a European security conference in Germany last Saturday, Rumsfeld said President Bush intends to deploy a national missile defense. But first Rumsfeld is reviewing the status of the project the Bush administration inherited from the Clinton administration and is considering how to fulfill Bush's pledge to provide a missile shield that
would cover not only the United States but also its allies.
This is a sham in order to make those who disapprove to think the US would actually give a rats ass in the event of a nuclear war. Its a way for politicians to waste tax dollars in order to get kickbacks. Old old old news.
I could go on but its redundant isn't it;)
Oh well here are some hot chicks aren't you glad you read the whole thing through?
Washington has, over the years, restricted access to technology that might have military applications and slapped significant sanctions on India after its nuclear tests in 1998.
How typical of our country (USA), to place restrictions on others. Cuba, India, Iraq, etc., surely I can see some reasons for our countries motivations (terrorism), but if our politicians and enforcement agencies got it together they could save possibly billions farming out launches to India.
Who knows maybe they won't be so unfortunate to lose "their" rockets when they send them to Mars. Its a nice thought to hear about space exploration, satellites, and how it can improve our lives in the long run however, its sad to see buearucrats feel the need to flaunt their political muscles for nonsense at times.
Call it paranoia if you will but one thing is for sure, encryption has been used for hundreds of years in different methods, so why is the FBI now claiming that because Osama is using encryption then ______ ? Then what?
Sounds to me like a planted seed for future attacks against the public who wants their PGP and encryption mechanisms.
I bet you didn't read the part where I stated "they should make it for those without the overhyped USB".
Now lets look at the majority of PC's and laptops already on the market and do a comparison of those with USB and those without and you will see where I'm coming from, if you took two seconds to actually do some reading yourself there tough guy.
If IBM is indeed releasing this, than its bound to be propietary meaning no one else will probably support it. So if you use it on an IBM Thinkpad, that doesn't mean you'll be able to swap it with any other PC that doesn't support it. So do you want to get lured into an all IBM based solution?
Some things to think about when claiming or even thinking it will become a standard, remember those 120mb SuperDisks the vendor claimed would replace the floppy? Guess what they didn't since it doesn't conform to the cementary like standards everyone has pretty much settled on.
What would be nice, is if they made a kind of SecureID based key for maximum security which would be supported by all including those without the overhyped USB.
Too bad the lameness filter didn't let me post a script for this.
Anyways I wrote a shell script for Linux, BSD*, for those lazy admins, or clue(lessler) admins, who don't know how to fix up DNS in a strong environment.
Maybe someone should create something like an "Organization for Computer Constultants", which members would pay say $30.00 (US) to be listed within a spam free database which those who have used their services can comment on those consultants.
I've seen people in the industry without a clue about their left from their right hands, and what it should come down to, is the person scouting for the person they hired being more thorough instead of just throwing money out of the window.
Within that database, consultants could also post about the companies they've done work for since it is also a two way street and if anyone hasn't noticed, the flurry of dot.com's which went DOA, have left many consultants in the dark with past due bills unpaid. So this topic shouldn't have been solely focused on rip off artists.
Had the recruiter had at least a substantial amount knowledge in the industry, I'm sure it'd be harder to be taken by a con. This again boils down to the company and their standards of procedures (which seem to be none.)
I wish people would stop complaining about Intel replacing Motorola if Apple were to port OSX to x86. For those unfamiliar with the graphic design industry, Apple has become much a standard there and Intel cannot compete on that market. Line of two machines an Intel box and an Apple with the same amounts of mem/disk space, etc, then run photoshop, some 3d programs such as Strata Pro, and you'll see the comparisons.
Apple will probably not be concerned over people sidestepping hardware purchases opting for OSX software to port to cheaper boxes, they already have a major market. Do you think that just because us geeks speak in wonderment and chant OSX OSX OSX, Apple feels threatened to port OSX?
What would be the big gain for Apple here, if they put OSX on the market think of all the free download mirrors that'd pop up causing them to lose money on sales. I don't think its a matter Apple feeling scared or threatened about losing hardware sales, you purchase an Apple comp for, looks, functionality, and its niche in the market, in this instance with OSX and x86, its like buying a Ferrari only to have a Daihitsu engine.
Ethical committees worldwide will argue against this, then those that do think its a good idea passing it will have enemies in the long run. Money talks as we all know and for those who are familiar or remember Pablo Escobar, the billionaire drug kingpin, as a scientist what would you say when he flashes a cold hard million bucks to have a clone of himself. If any remember he had paid millions to someone just to have plastic surgery to look like him.
Anyways aside from that I think you would have to have a big fscking ego to want a clone of yourself.
Think of the downfalls involved:
1) Your wife/girlfriend/ or husband/boyfriend will probably screw them to spite you afterwhich a court of law will decide [WHAT] in order to determine payment?
2) Your clone robs a bank while your a college grad and kills everyone in the bank. (your face, likely your prints)
Then the upsides:
1) Train your clone to be your slave. Work for you, go to school for you, etc., while you partay
2) Screw his girlfriend since you have the right, after all he is your clone.
I'm no scientist but I would say this would be a bad move for AMD. AMD has been doing an OK job on their own, creating creating chips. They have managed to keep out of the news unlike Intel who rumor has it, may be facing the same role as Microsoft with the Department of Justice.
As for Transmeta, they have their own niche in the market and should stick to their focus, many businesses with strong policies on their business models and focusing on those models do rather well, unlike others who try to carry the world on their shoulders such as Lucent who is getting slightly pounded, possibly from jumping into too many different segments and forgetting their core business model. (sounds correct although I am tired)
How significantly would AMD captive anything in the processor sector buy purchasing Transmeta? Not much, they should save the money for hard times and focus on their own stuff instead of trying to have their cake and eating someone else's.
Some dot.com's should follow the E-Bay commercials context and get out of the advertising business.
More companies are in a rush to get their companies known without having a strong company to back it, spending millions for 30 seconds on Super Bowl airtime.
How is a super bowl ad going to help a dot.com when, most of the males watching are in a partylike mood often too drunk to log on to the net and view a web based site they see in a commerical.
Following suit was IBM's commercial where the CEO was clueless. This shows much of the aura of those who were in charge of the now defunct dot.com carnage.
Companies like Pepsi and Budweiser stand to make more no matter how much they spend since their products are geared for the show, while a dot.com is not.
Slashdot Mirror
God says that he will do so much evil to the people that whoever learns of it will have ears that tingle. Jer.19:3
God will be "terrible" to humans and will "famish all the gods." Zeph.2:11
God tries to kill Moses. Ex.4:23-25
God makes the Israelites eat flesh until it come out their nostrils. Num.11:19-20
God gets right in and fights with the Israelites. He "slew them with a great slaughter" and even "chased them along the way." What a guy. Jos.10:10
God threw down "great stones from heaven" so that he could kill even more people than the Israelites "slew with the sword." Jos.10:11
God makes the sun and moon stand still so that Joshua could get all his killing done before dark. It was the first Daylight Savings Time. Jos.10:12-13
yawn
Jesus mistakenly tells his followers that he will return and establish his kingdom within their lifetime. Mt.16:28, 23:36, 24:34
Jesus falsely prophesies that the high priest would see his second coming. Mt.26:64, Mk.14:62.
Jesus falsely prophesies that the end of the world will come within his listeners' lifetimes. Mk.9:1, 13:30
Jesus falsely predicts that some of his listeners would live to see him return and establish the kingdom of God. Lk.9:27
Now how about YOU read the Nag Hamadi, then come back to me when you see yourself what Jesus wrote and how it differs from all you "think" you know. Its a shame Catholics burnt so many scrolls once upon a time ago what were they hiding?
Don't preach it teach it.
Before this thread gets on the wrong track, you shouldn't try to preach some biblical stuff to me as I can't point out a few thousand fallacies within the book not to mention the fact that the whole sloppy story is full of myths(e.g. revelations has some wonderous happenings some hollywood producer would make a killing doing the special effects for)
Since you mention children let me point out some biblical family values for you.
Lot [the just and righteous (2 Pet.2:7-8)] offers his daughters to a crowd of angel rapers, Gen.19:8 (what a dad and how righteous he is)
A drunken Lot impregnates his daughters. Gen.19:30-36 (oh know he didn't)
Abraham abandons his first son. Gen.21:10, 12
God tells Abraham to kill his second son for a burnt offering. Gen.22:2, 10 (wow and you still think god is some great guy?)
Jacob, with coaching from his mother, obtains Isaac's blessing by lying. God seems to have been fooled as well. Gen.27:19 (Isn't god supposed to know all?)
Why preach what you can't practice is pretty much what you've stated from what I gather so now I ask the same:
Now lets look at Genesis and see how much contradiction it states there:
Humans were created after the other animals. (1:25-27)
Humans were created before the other animals. (2:18-19)
Ok so which one was it?
The first man and woman were created simultaneously. (1:27)
The man was created first, then the animals, then the woman from the man's rib. (2:18-22)
You'd think the story would have no inconsistencies now wouldn't you
God's clever, talking serpent. Gen.3:1
"And Cain knew his wife." That's nice, but where the hell did she come from? Gen.4:17
The "sons of God" copulated with the "daughters of men," and has sons who became "the mighty men of old, men of renown." Gen.6:2-4
"There were giants in the earth in those days." Gen.6:4
God repents. Gen.6:6-7, Ex.32:14, 1 Chr.21:15
Noah, the just and righteous. Gen.7:1
Noah, the drunk and naked. Gen.9:20-21
Lot [the just and righteous (2 Pet.2:7-8)] offers his daughters to a crowd of angel rapers. Gen.19:8
Jacob goes in unto Leah by mistake. Gen.29:23, 25
God teaches Moses some magic tricks. Ex.4:2-9, 7:8-11, 7:17-20
God tries to kill Moses. Ex.4:23-25
Moses has uncircumcised lips. Ex.6:12, 6:30
God's first plague on the Egyptians: Rivers turned to blood. Ex.7:17-22 (Pharaoh's magicians knew this trick, too.)
Second Plague: Frogs. (Pharaoh's magicians do likewise.) Ex.8:2-7
Third Plague: Lice. (Pharaoh's magicians couldn't do this one!) Ex.8:16-18
Ahh yes and there a lot more absuridities where your bible came from
In a concrete bunker on a mothballed Air Force base in Plattsburgh, New York, two Nigerian dwarf goats named Mille and Muscade joyfully munch grass and slurp water. Oddly, they are protected from intruders by security guards and razor wire.
Its sad to see that no one will ever question the ethics of the US government and their genetic tests. Surely this isn't the only test they've done, as I'm sure we could all gather at this point a summation of nightmares lurking somewhere.
So what happens when something goes wrong? Who do you point the finger at the scientist or the government? Scientist only do what they're instructed when in military roles, military only follow chains of commands which are so wishy washy when the s##t hits the fan, that you can't pinpoint the finger, or you end up settling for a scapegoat.
Animals were not meant to be bastardized like this and with experiments like these remember the golden rule, what goes around comes around.
Science shouldn't tinker with these types of issues then masquerade them off as if their concerned with finding solutions for life when their solution is based on greed for money.
br.
If you signed a no disclosure agreement with the company the could turn around and say your offering priveledged information on a public place which could jeapordize their business.
Surely this is not likely the case, but companies are really leery about having anything negative said about them and will likely attempt to make it seem as if your somehow slandering them. This can be presented in court in a number of ways and most of the times a person does not have the resources as the company does to fight their case and voice their opinions.
Simplicity, use about 3 different proxies, a totally wacked out name, and have them waste resources proving their case. I've been bullied by some companies for the spoofs I pull on my site, and to be honest if someone asked me nicely to remove them I would. But when someone wants to be bullyish about it, I sit it out knowing it'll cost them more to be a pr#ck than to just be humane about the situation.
Have you noticed that most of the companies on the web providing free pc to phone internationally have discontinued this service? Chances are they were only offering this service for the period of time it took them to establish their service and generate usage by consumers.
This reaks with the word scam on it, but soon we shall find out if this is the case
If you would like to make international phone calls free from your home and if have access to broadband internet access, you should consider joining the Free World Dialup III project.
Well in order for anyone to use the service Broadband is needed which is not going to be easy for people to get provided that Broadband isn't as widely available as a dialup is. One thing to consider is how much your still going to have to pay in Broadband charges to use the service. Is it feasible to use this over a phone line? At least with Verizon my calls are a one shot price and even though their service stinks, there are no gimmicks.
Free phone calls? What's the catch?
Broadband and you have to buy their hardware!!
Each person who is connecting to the network will be required to purchase a Free World Dialup node which will an estimated retail cost of US$ 100 and connect a telephone line (analog POTS) to the RJ-11 jack in the back of the node. As long the person has "always-on" Broadband access to the Net, the node will become a qualified FWD Node and free phone calling will be enabled.
Where is Capt Crunch when you need him.
In addition, Free World Dialup will provide an ability for anonymous voice chatting on the Net, together with our own instant messaging services.
If your accessing via Broadband how are you anonymous?
We are gearing up for our announcement and official launch in March, 2001 and we expect to reach critical mass by June.
This is a big claim and has anyone taken a quick second to think if this is so legitimate why haven't the big companies jumped on the badnwagon as they always do, why haven't VC companies dropped heavy funds on this company? Why don't they even have their own domain?
Anyways enough ramblings although their associates have pretty weird names that reak of scams too
Free PC to Phone (US & Int'l) - Callrewards.com
Free PC to Phone (US & Int'l) - HotTelephone.com
Free PC to Phone (US,UK,Fr) - MyFreeLD.com
Free PC to PC - TrulyGlobal (beta)
Free PC to PC - PalTalk
Free PC to PC - Firetalk.com
Free PC to PC - Visitalk.com
Free PC to PC - Buddyphone
Free PC to PC & Voice Mail (US & Int'l) - BeeCall
Free Internet Call Waiting (US) - BuzMe
Free Internet Call Waiting (US) - WhoIsIt?
Free Internet Call Waiting (US) - CallWave
Free Web based Conference Calling - Conflab.com
I wrote a text from the administrative standpoint on how to pretty much eliminate 80% or so of an attack on a variety of hardware/software based level which can be found at my site.
./script basis.
Now as for the attacks themselves, this wasn't anything new as DDoS became popular after Mixter coded a scriptkiddiot tool, which allowed malicious users to actually implement these attacks on a
The foundations for DDoS though are a bit old and could have long been resolved had thorough network's been set up to deny any malicious activity to leave their networks and attack others.
Many admins have the knowledge to do so, but I think theyre resources are tied into making things work right then and there as opposed to doing it right.
Finding a CISSP, CISA, or other won't cut as much as you think it would. See exams are just that an exam, you study study study, but that does not profess your knowledge on the subject. I've met plenty of people with certifications in just about everything who had no real world experience, or lacked the knowledge with experience. Sure the CISSP has a five year clause on whom can take the test which means your going to find someone skilled in a variety of security based settings, could be encyrption, could be medical management, could be forensics. That does not mean they understand networking.
Now those with multiple certifications are the good ones, e.g. CCNA + CISSP = Security Engineer with Networking Experience, CISSP + CISA = nice security auditor.
There are a lot of variables to consider with this question, but the best solution would be for the Network Admins to work along with the security engineer to facilitate the scope of security and engineering on the correct level, not just security and not just networking.
Security Engineers should have input with regards to the network they are securing which means that they will have to somehow get their hands "dirty" in order to do so.
Good network administrators however should have some fundamental skills regarding security procedures and how to implement them without the need for a seperate security engineer, however not all security flaws on a network are network or geek related. Social engineering plays a huge part as does law, encryption, etc., which is something most network administrators don't have time for.
A security engineer should never though as stated in a post above have full blown access to everything as this itself compromises the security policy altogether should that security engineer become an enemy at some point.
In essence their like comparing oranges and tangerines, almost the same but not quite.
The Pentagon's Ballistic Missile Defense Organization also is planning another attempt to shoot down a mock nuclear missile in space, probably in May or June, using the same technologies that produced a spectacular failure last July, the officials said. Two of the last three attempted missile intercepts failed.
;)
Could it be officials here are disturbed because India could jeapordize the US' intentions of getting their Star Wars program back on the map?
The officials, speaking on condition they not be identified, said test preparations are going ahead in the absence of orders to the contrary from Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.
So Mr. Rumsfeld has himself denounced this but they are still going ahead with it.
Rumsfeld has been briefed in recent days by Ronald Kadish, the Air Force general who runs the missile defense project office.
Aside from the technical issues yet to be resolved, Russian and Chinese officials offered reminders Tuesday that whatever the design of a U.S. national missile defense, it will be controversial.
In Beijing, Foreign Ministry spokesman Sun Yuxi warned that American missile defense "will have a far-reaching and extensive negative impact on the global and regional strategic balance and stability."
In Moscow, Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev asserted that a U.S. missile defense could easily be defeated by technologies the former Soviet Union developed in the 1980s in response to President Reagan's Star Wars plan that was a more ambitious attempt to defend against all-out missile attacks.
"We had three mighty programs to asymmetrically counteract U.S. national missile defenses during Reagan's 'Star Wars,"' Sergeyev was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency. He gave no details. Although the programs were halted, "We still have them and can take them up again," he said.
Just think about that for a second. Russia which has in reality little leadership, they'd have nothing to lose. See: Electro Magnetic Pulse. Russians have been using it for some time on a very low key basis.
At a European security conference in Germany last Saturday, Rumsfeld said President Bush intends to deploy a national missile defense. But first Rumsfeld is reviewing the status of the project the Bush administration inherited from the Clinton administration and is considering how to fulfill Bush's pledge to provide a missile shield that would cover not only the United States but also its allies.
This is a sham in order to make those who disapprove to think the US would actually give a rats ass in the event of a nuclear war. Its a way for politicians to waste tax dollars in order to get kickbacks. Old old old news.
I could go on but its redundant isn't it
Oh well here are some hot chicks aren't you glad you read the whole thing through?
Washington has, over the years, restricted access to technology that might have military applications and slapped significant sanctions on India after its nuclear tests in 1998.
How typical of our country (USA), to place restrictions on others. Cuba, India, Iraq, etc., surely I can see some reasons for our countries motivations (terrorism), but if our politicians and enforcement agencies got it together they could save possibly billions farming out launches to India.
Who knows maybe they won't be so unfortunate to lose "their" rockets when they send them to Mars. Its a nice thought to hear about space exploration, satellites, and how it can improve our lives in the long run however, its sad to see buearucrats feel the need to flaunt their political muscles for nonsense at times.
Call it paranoia if you will but one thing is for sure, encryption has been used for hundreds of years in different methods, so why is the FBI now claiming that because Osama is using encryption then ______ ? Then what?
Sounds to me like a planted seed for future attacks against the public who wants their PGP and encryption mechanisms.
If those same Canadian students hung these from a bridge:
1) George Bush
2) Script Kiddiots
3) Temptation Island cast members
4) Jesse Jackson
5) John Ashcroft
I bet you didn't read the part where I stated "they should make it for those without the overhyped USB".
Now lets look at the majority of PC's and laptops already on the market and do a comparison of those with USB and those without and you will see where I'm coming from, if you took two seconds to actually do some reading yourself there tough guy.
If IBM is indeed releasing this, than its bound to be propietary meaning no one else will probably support it. So if you use it on an IBM Thinkpad, that doesn't mean you'll be able to swap it with any other PC that doesn't support it. So do you want to get lured into an all IBM based solution?
Some things to think about when claiming or even thinking it will become a standard, remember those 120mb SuperDisks the vendor claimed would replace the floppy? Guess what they didn't since it doesn't conform to the cementary like standards everyone has pretty much settled on.
What would be nice, is if they made a kind of SecureID based key for maximum security which would be supported by all including those without the overhyped USB.
killall -9 mytwocents
Sorry Slashdotter's on my prior post I had the link wrong. Its corrected now...
http://www.antioffline.com/secbind.html
Lazy Mans Link
Too bad the lameness filter didn't let me post a script for this.
Anyways I wrote a shell script for Linux, BSD*, for those lazy admins, or clue(lessler) admins, who don't know how to fix up DNS in a strong environment.
http://www.antioffline.com/secbind.html
Maybe someone should create something like an "Organization for Computer Constultants", which members would pay say $30.00 (US) to be listed within a spam free database which those who have used their services can comment on those consultants.
I've seen people in the industry without a clue about their left from their right hands, and what it should come down to, is the person scouting for the person they hired being more thorough instead of just throwing money out of the window.
Within that database, consultants could also post about the companies they've done work for since it is also a two way street and if anyone hasn't noticed, the flurry of dot.com's which went DOA, have left many consultants in the dark with past due bills unpaid. So this topic shouldn't have been solely focused on rip off artists.
Had the recruiter had at least a substantial amount knowledge in the industry, I'm sure it'd be harder to be taken by a con. This again boils down to the company and their standards of procedures (which seem to be none.)
Jessica Alba nude
I wish people would stop complaining about Intel replacing Motorola if Apple were to port OSX to x86. For those unfamiliar with the graphic design industry, Apple has become much a standard there and Intel cannot compete on that market. Line of two machines an Intel box and an Apple with the same amounts of mem/disk space, etc, then run photoshop, some 3d programs such as Strata Pro, and you'll see the comparisons.
Apple will probably not be concerned over people sidestepping hardware purchases opting for OSX software to port to cheaper boxes, they already have a major market. Do you think that just because us geeks speak in wonderment and chant OSX OSX OSX, Apple feels threatened to port OSX?
What would be the big gain for Apple here, if they put OSX on the market think of all the free download mirrors that'd pop up causing them to lose money on sales. I don't think its a matter Apple feeling scared or threatened about losing hardware sales, you purchase an Apple comp for, looks, functionality, and its niche in the market, in this instance with OSX and x86, its like buying a Ferrari only to have a Daihitsu engine.
John Ashcroft replaced by Kathie Lee?
Ethical committees worldwide will argue against this, then those that do think its a good idea passing it will have enemies in the long run. Money talks as we all know and for those who are familiar or remember Pablo Escobar, the billionaire drug kingpin, as a scientist what would you say when he flashes a cold hard million bucks to have a clone of himself. If any remember he had paid millions to someone just to have plastic surgery to look like him.
Anyways aside from that I think you would have to have a big fscking ego to want a clone of yourself.
Think of the downfalls involved:
1) Your wife/girlfriend/ or husband/boyfriend will probably screw them to spite you afterwhich a court of law will decide [WHAT] in order to determine payment?
2) Your clone robs a bank while your a college grad and kills everyone in the bank. (your face, likely your prints)
Then the upsides:
1) Train your clone to be your slave. Work for you, go to school for you, etc., while you partay
2) Screw his girlfriend since you have the right, after all he is your clone.
Pimping ain't easy!
So now they download games to a disk to play them.
So what this means is you will end up spending more money buying more disks in the future.
How promising
I'm no scientist but I would say this would be a bad move for AMD. AMD has been doing an OK job on their own, creating creating chips. They have managed to keep out of the news unlike Intel who rumor has it, may be facing the same role as Microsoft with the Department of Justice.
As for Transmeta, they have their own niche in the market and should stick to their focus, many businesses with strong policies on their business models and focusing on those models do rather well, unlike others who try to carry the world on their shoulders such as Lucent who is getting slightly pounded, possibly from jumping into too many different segments and forgetting their core business model. (sounds correct although I am tired)
How significantly would AMD captive anything in the processor sector buy purchasing Transmeta? Not much, they should save the money for hard times and focus on their own stuff instead of trying to have their cake and eating someone else's.
Home sweet home
Some dot.com's should follow the E-Bay commercials context and get out of the advertising business.
More companies are in a rush to get their companies known without having a strong company to back it, spending millions for 30 seconds on Super Bowl airtime.
How is a super bowl ad going to help a dot.com when, most of the males watching are in a partylike mood often too drunk to log on to the net and view a web based site they see in a commerical.
Following suit was IBM's commercial where the CEO was clueless. This shows much of the aura of those who were in charge of the now defunct dot.com carnage.
Companies like Pepsi and Budweiser stand to make more no matter how much they spend since their products are geared for the show, while a dot.com is not.
killall -9 mytwocents