The files increase exponentially in size for passwords which include numeric characters. While the security risk exists, good password design obviously minimizes it. People aren't going to be lugging around terabyte-sized password database files.
The giant barrier for fuel cells is, and has been, transportation and distribution of fuel. Pure hydrogen is enormously expensive to transport and store since it "leaks" out of most containers (the molecules fit through the walls or something equally frustrating). Strides were made with that (boron?) chemical storage, but it's still pretty labor intensive and would require a vastly different infrastructure. This, however, manages to use the existing system (for diesel fuel) for hydrogen cells. That's a giant breakthrough.
The article describes the technology as being "a four or a five" on a scale where 10 is production-level, so the whole thing is, to an extent, still vapourware. BUT, the transition path to hydrogren is so advantageous, I wouldn't be surprised if we were to see production examples of fuel-cell diesel trucks (apparently the tech works better with diesel...) in a few years domestically. First a transition for trucks, then a gradual increase in diesel/hydrogen fuel availability for the rest of America's car fleet, and finally a total switch to hydrogen tech. All without having to significantly rework the fossil fuel distribution network. This is the stuff of the future and I, for one, look forwards to it eagerly.
I had the iBook backlight problem also. Since I was a cheapo bastard, and didn't bother to purchase the warranty, I was stuck without a fix. I saw it coming, too, since at first it stopped working only at certain angles, and then would die whenever I moved the display...
So what did I do? I bought some guy's iBook screen cable (after he'd fried the computer by spilling coke on it) for $15 and swapped it out with mine. With shipping, the entire fix cost me $35.
The fix was admittedly time consuming, since it took me all of a month to find and purchase one of these cables from someone. It also took some effort to disassemble the whole computer and swap out the hinge/videocable assembly.
However, I think people overplay the the difficulty of working on the iBooks. It is pretty hard compared to, say, the "el capitan" powermac B&WG3/G4 series. But the operation wasn't any harder than helping my friend swap out the internal hard drive on his dell...
You can probably find broken iBooks everywhere you look, since apparently all of them have dead logic boards. (sigh) We only get press from people who don't get theirs fixed, so statistically, it seems like people have unending problems. But they've fixed everything under warranty for my other laptops--admittedly I've bought extended AppleCare on them after I had the iBook problem, but they fixed stuff promptly (for free) under the standard warranty as well.
I wish it were possible to remap keys in software to qwerty or dvorak or different languages...
then I can happily inform you that your desire has already been met. Any modern computer can remap the keyboard...
I happen not to know how to do it in your particular linux distro or windows, but in the Mac OS, open System Preferences, go to "International" (the blue wavy flag with the UN logo on it), and choose "input menu."
Now, on the other hand, if you want to have a toggle switch in hardware, you could simply use a keybinding utility (aka a macro utility) to bind a script to switch from dvorak to qwerty to a little used key combination (like control-alt-shift-tab-space-F8-k) or something similar.
But if you want a hardware toggle switch that actually changes the data sent to the computer, then it is probably not possible to implement reasonably, because you'd have to change the labels on the keys to justify the feature, and dynamic key labling is probably a no-go in the near future due to both the added cost, and the operating system support required (or if you choose to do it entirely on the keyboard, the additional processing power needed in said keyboard).
But rather suggesting that, in general, "resigning on principle" is a bad thing for all involved. Especially when the action is set up so that either the most productive person resigns, or the prominent figureheads resign.
As I said, the organization would likely have been better served by change from within: hiring additional people, re allocating tasks, and so on.
I think that resignations of this sort are not a productive behavior for the company involved. Sure, it may have been the *right thing* for him to do, due to personal issues with the people, but I seriously doubt that his resignation has helped SPI.
It is interesting, however, that you indiscriminately flame me on the suspicion of critizing Martin Schulze. "FUCK YOU" is not really an educated or helpful retort. Saying Martin "contributed a lot" to the program just proves my point--as his leaving can only hurt SPI. As I said, I was not analysing his personal decision, but rather saying that resignations of this sort are bad for the company.
And, again, like I said before, if the entire board resigns, SPI loses credibility and looks ineffectual. If the primary contributor resigns, SPI end up being ineffectual. So it is lose-lose.
when good things run into problems because of personal issues.
And while all parties involved will (of course) deny that the cause is personal issues, it seems rather obvious.
I mean, the VP resigns because he feels the other high ranking officials aren't "dedicated" enough? In whose opinion? And why not appoint other functionaries to do the jobs that need doing?
No, resignations like this (especially the sort where you have "either they all resign or I do...") are almost always personally motivated out of a feeling to "show someone" how much in the wrong they are.
And it almost never helps. This is a lose-lose situation. Imagine if the rest of the board had resigned... credibility would fly out the window.
Like I said, it is always saddening when a good organization has problems because of people not getting along. While I don't know a lot about SPI, it seems they do, uhm open source stuff (:P their website is kinda hard to understand in that it is very very generalized. Slashdot could have the same mission statement as them and not change significantly).
The European Union and the member nations that comprise it are not particularly finnicky about local companies' antitrust issues. However, for non-local companies they are quite harsh. Recall that the heavily subsidized Airbus was started by these people basically because they didn't like having to buy american planes.
The EU also has a long history of setting ridiculous tariffs, or banning, imported products from companies they don't like or that have policies the EU disagrees with.
Remember the whole banana fiasco? and how europe has basically banned american GM food?
I wouldn't count on microsoft getting off easy in europe. They don't have the Bush administration there. OTOH, MS is very willing to sink ridiculous amounts of lobbying $$ to purchase legislators. The EU decisions makers are also not as knowledgable in computer technical issues as even the virtually computer-illiterate american judges.
I can think of a thousand different scenarios in which a person may appear to have an address located in Hong Kong but is in reality in the United States.
care to enumerate any of those?
While I am not he, I'd be willing to name a few (you are in country A, you shall appear to be in country B):
ssh into a box in country B, from country A. Then tunnel the file to your machine.
Think back to SnowCrash, that piece of geek required reading...
(for the uninitiated, the Protagonist of SnowCrash is a uber-hacker of sorts who freelances doing data mining for the library of congress. He also delivers pizza for the Mafia, or did until he crashed his car.)
"Power Consumption is low enough for cel phone type applications"
Only with CmdrTaco:)
On the other hand, acronymfinder lists CEL as possibly being "civilian employment level." In context, this would mean that business phones (as opposed to super-duper black-ops slashdot-effect proof military phones) would get this nifty tech.
So, while the possibility of this not being a spelling mistake exists, it is just not likely. Of course, I might just be led to believe that by the super-duper black-ops people who want to keep the existence of their phones, and the correspondingly nifty tech, out of public knowledge. In fact, I myself might be paid off by the military chaps. So take this whole post with a grain of salt;)
I think this is terrific news. (even though it has been posted before... [groan])
you see, we've been saying for a while that hopefully someone would try and take on a gigantic company with some totally bunk business method patents. Said giant company would enter in a big lawsuit, and the f'd up nature of the USPTO would be exposed.
Only thing that could happen bad is they settle. Which, unfortunately, is fairly common. But as long as they don't, there is really the potential to set legal precedent, because this guy (founder of MercExchange and holder of thee patents) did everything by the book. He tried to negotiate, he tried to agree to terms, he didn't hide his patent, etc. And it seems he was the first to patent this business method (online auction).
So if this is debunked, it won't be because of some petty reason. The overturning of this case could potentially throw into sharp relief the problems with patenting business methods, especially the ease of unassociated rediscovery, and the application of obvious things to the internet (when suddenly, at least according to the patent office, they become "nonobvious" [groan]). At least, it seems the case will show how stupid the USPTO is.
Of course, if the guy wins, none of the above applies. But I am counting on the power of the american legal system to prevail. And by "power," I mean "tendency," and by "prevail" I mean "have the person with the deepest pockets win." It is a fair assumption that ebay is going to out-muscle the guy, since they have a lot more to lose. Anyways, settled, won, or lost, I am hoping this case gets an enormous amount of publicity. Cross your fingers.
you are exactly correct. Unfortunately, people have misinterpreted what you said. I will try to elaborate on what I understand your method of one time pad encryption to be.
Step one: get your message
Step two: take the message, and convert each word or phrase to a number, using a crib sheet
Step three: encode using the onetime pad.
Now, from my understanding the one time pads issued were really and truly "one use only," (or else they are not really secure) and had to be generated by some HQ guy so everyone would be on the same page.
what the above means is that you use the pad sparingly.
e.g.: If 99 means all forces, 01 means attack, and 02 means dawn, then you can encode 990102 in the one time pad, getting something like 168257, or whatever. If they have the same pad, and they decode it, they will get "990102," after which they quickly figure out the message contents.
"990102" is a heckuva lot shorter than even allforcatckdawn: 6 decimal chars vs 15 base 26 chars.
assuming you use one number per letter (base 26 or something), then changing the system to a two digit number used to encode a word is much much more efficient. Since your one time pad is probably used and then tossed, efficiency is critical. The pads are hard to come by and a good compression scheme drastically reduces the amount of pad space a message uses
Summary: Compress messages before encoding with pad to save pad space. Compression != encoding.
Apple killed the clones two ways. First of all, they stopped selling them motherboards. Yes, thats right, many clones used genuine Apple motherboard. At a lower cost to the consumer. Apple decided this was probably a bad idea, since they were doing the R&D, doing the producion and ads, but were getting shafted wrt profits.
Second of all, Apple declined to renew the Mac OS licensing program for the clone makers. This effectively meant that the clone makers could build PPC macs, but they wouldn't get the ROM needed to boot, and wouldn't be allowed to sell Mac OS whatever installed on the machines.
Of course, now that we have open firmware, there is no rom, and, effectively nothing at all keeping clone makers from existing. But it is just not cost feasible for anyone to design their own motherboards. So Apple is the only mac hardware company.
I used to do that to in the late 70's, when I was a teen and first on-line, and raging at all the world (especially authority).
Hmmm... Somehow I doubt you were a teen and online in the early 70s. 80s, yes. 70s, no. The internet didn't really exist then, it was more of a loose conglomeration of DARPA stuff...
Yes, some colleges got access to the arpanet, but even then, it was mainly senior people. So you would have been in your late 20s, minimum.
I really don't understand how this works. I perused their website for a bit, and even downloaded the binary, but it still bewilders me.
So this program creates a whole host of fictional access points? Well, a few points I don't get
How do *you* the correct user, find out which AP is correct?
What keeps the wardriver from doing that?
How does this affect performance?
how does this affect range?
If it doesn't affect either of the two above, then how does it work? It requires, apparently, only one 802.11b card...
Of course, I only run a small wireless network, and I am really not the most technically skilled of people. However, I use whatever security I have (the relatively weak WEP, with a well generated key), and would love having a bit more assurance of network safety.
Anyone who understands this willing to come forwards?
(And not just understanding in principle, i understand their whole schpiel about hiding in plain sight, like an apple in a barrel of apples.)
its true that people need to make points sometimes, but the point they seem to be making is that people who brag about hacking get busted.
Which is nothing particularly new.
Oh, and the governement is better and has more rights than us. See vigiante justice. Lets say you know someone is a criminal. for example, they are pirating mp3s. You cannot do anything about it, other than maybe tell the governement. The governement can bust them, which almost never happens, because its a minor thing. Record companies want to have the "same rights as the governement," as you put it--they want to be able to search your computer, hack it, and basically fuck you up.
There is a reason why joe billy bob next door is not allowed to do the same things the police is allowed to do. Wouldn't it suck if any old bitchy mom could pull you over for speeding and make you pay $150?
See, first they point out that the Governement has flaws. Ooooh, criticising those in power... can be risky...
Then they point out specific, make-people-lose-their-jobs flaws. The kind of thing congressmen would love to jump on in order to criticise incompetency. Do it on a widely-read medium. This pisses more people off.
Then make very clear how you did specific illegal acts, giving those you just pissed off a great and simple way to get back at you.
Why not just walk right into jail...? I mean, its like spitting in the face of a police officer who is holding a gun, insulting them, and then making a threatening move while simultaneously pulling out a joint and smoking it. You might as well hand them the rubber hose...
Why taunt someone and then give them an excuse to hurt you? To gain acclaim? Fame? Real hackers are not out to get publicity, but rather to expose vulnerabilities and try to fix them.
Whats this you say? You sympathise with the "security firm?" well, take this quote into account:
The consultants, inexperienced but armed with free, widely available software, identified unprotected PCs and then roamed at will
I dunno about you, but that would be my definition of script kiddie. Especially someone who then brags about it for publicity.
.Mac is all well and good. Sure, y'all blatantly ripped the name off microsoft's.net initiative, but I guess that doesn't matter significantly. You offer new features, expanded integration, and better windows compatibility. Even better, you multiply the storage space by a factor of 5. But there is a problem. A big problem. You started charging for even the most basic services, charging *after* people got used to using them.
The real issue lies in two things: the email and the support info. Myself, and many many other people, were willing to spend the extra cash requirede for the purchase of a macintosh computer because we felt Apple included many value-adding features. One of these (major) features was iTools. With iTools you got, most significantly, a working pop3 email account for free, with spam-armoring and integration with the OS. So, like many other people, I signed up. My mac.com account is now my main email address, and I use it for everything. If you require people to pay, I would have to cancel my account, which would be very difficult due to the number of people I converse with regularly. A second issue with regard to the.mac rollout would be support. I have often used the support boards and knowledgebase to fix problems with my computer, ensuring a good user experience on my end. If you require paying to access these features, I might as well have bought a windows machine and subscribed to a support plan.
So you see, iTools, and its 'freeness,' was a major factor in why I choose to buy a mac. Remove iTools, and I will likely switch to a PC in the future.
I can envision a new 'Switch' ad... A PC user who deried the exorbiant amounts apple charges for its hardware, pointing out how they continue to add charges at every opportunity. Is this the scenario you want? Think long and hard. Charging for extra storage is great, and many people already pay... however, you should keep the email free, as well as the support boards. Charging for something that people expected to have for free, something that you advertised as free, as part of the bonus of buying a mac, not only is shameful, but stinks of bait-and-switch.
POV Ray is great. I had a quick course in POV-Ray when I was a freshman in high school, and it introduced me to C-like programming, and gavee me a solid understanding of how 3D rendering works. Both have served me well in the years since.
Plus I made cool art:)
POV Ray should be taught to all kids to give an understanding of both how computer programming works, and to dispel the notion that everything computers do (and CG in general) is just 'magic.'
I'd comment on new features, etc etc, except that their website appears to be slashdotted. Maybe in a bit.
Slashdot Mirror
The files increase exponentially in size for passwords which include numeric characters. While the security risk exists, good password design obviously minimizes it. People aren't going to be lugging around terabyte-sized password database files.
pico (symbol is "p") is 10^-12, or one-thousandth of a nano.
femto (symbol is "f") is 10^-15, or one-millionth of a nano.
atto (symbol is "a") is 10^-18, or one-billionth of a nano (nano means one-billionth, so atto is one billionth of a billionth)
zepto (symbol is "z") is 10^-21, or nano divided by one trillion.
yocto (symbol is "y") is 10^-24, or nano divided by one quadrillion.
Yocto would be one-millionth of a billionth of a billionth of a unit. That's very small.
The giant barrier for fuel cells is, and has been, transportation and distribution of fuel. Pure hydrogen is enormously expensive to transport and store since it "leaks" out of most containers (the molecules fit through the walls or something equally frustrating). Strides were made with that (boron?) chemical storage, but it's still pretty labor intensive and would require a vastly different infrastructure. This, however, manages to use the existing system (for diesel fuel) for hydrogen cells. That's a giant breakthrough.
The article describes the technology as being "a four or a five" on a scale where 10 is production-level, so the whole thing is, to an extent, still vapourware. BUT, the transition path to hydrogren is so advantageous, I wouldn't be surprised if we were to see production examples of fuel-cell diesel trucks (apparently the tech works better with diesel...) in a few years domestically. First a transition for trucks, then a gradual increase in diesel/hydrogen fuel availability for the rest of America's car fleet, and finally a total switch to hydrogen tech. All without having to significantly rework the fossil fuel distribution network. This is the stuff of the future and I, for one, look forwards to it eagerly.
I had the iBook backlight problem also. Since I was a cheapo bastard, and didn't bother to purchase the warranty, I was stuck without a fix. I saw it coming, too, since at first it stopped working only at certain angles, and then would die whenever I moved the display...
So what did I do? I bought some guy's iBook screen cable (after he'd fried the computer by spilling coke on it) for $15 and swapped it out with mine. With shipping, the entire fix cost me $35.
The fix was admittedly time consuming, since it took me all of a month to find and purchase one of these cables from someone. It also took some effort to disassemble the whole computer and swap out the hinge/videocable assembly.
However, I think people overplay the the difficulty of working on the iBooks. It is pretty hard compared to, say, the "el capitan" powermac B&WG3/G4 series. But the operation wasn't any harder than helping my friend swap out the internal hard drive on his dell...
You can probably find broken iBooks everywhere you look, since apparently all of them have dead logic boards. (sigh) We only get press from people who don't get theirs fixed, so statistically, it seems like people have unending problems. But they've fixed everything under warranty for my other laptops--admittedly I've bought extended AppleCare on them after I had the iBook problem, but they fixed stuff promptly (for free) under the standard warranty as well.
Apple got certified. It was worth it for them to shell out the cash so they can use that fancy "unix" logo in their advertising.
If you mean something to the effect of : then I can happily inform you that your desire has already been met. Any modern computer can remap the keyboard...
I happen not to know how to do it in your particular linux distro or windows, but in the Mac OS, open System Preferences, go to "International" (the blue wavy flag with the UN logo on it), and choose "input menu."
Now, on the other hand, if you want to have a toggle switch in hardware, you could simply use a keybinding utility (aka a macro utility) to bind a script to switch from dvorak to qwerty to a little used key combination (like control-alt-shift-tab-space-F8-k) or something similar.
But if you want a hardware toggle switch that actually changes the data sent to the computer, then it is probably not possible to implement reasonably, because you'd have to change the labels on the keys to justify the feature, and dynamic key labling is probably a no-go in the near future due to both the added cost, and the operating system support required (or if you choose to do it entirely on the keyboard, the additional processing power needed in said keyboard).
Apple Auto Glass makes Windows.
try audible.com
not used much, and only does audio books. But it is windows and mac fuctional, and supports a variety of MP3 players.
But rather suggesting that, in general, "resigning on principle" is a bad thing for all involved. Especially when the action is set up so that either the most productive person resigns, or the prominent figureheads resign.
As I said, the organization would likely have been better served by change from within: hiring additional people, re allocating tasks, and so on.
I think that resignations of this sort are not a productive behavior for the company involved. Sure, it may have been the *right thing* for him to do, due to personal issues with the people, but I seriously doubt that his resignation has helped SPI.
It is interesting, however, that you indiscriminately flame me on the suspicion of critizing Martin Schulze. "FUCK YOU" is not really an educated or helpful retort. Saying Martin "contributed a lot" to the program just proves my point--as his leaving can only hurt SPI. As I said, I was not analysing his personal decision, but rather saying that resignations of this sort are bad for the company.
And, again, like I said before, if the entire board resigns, SPI loses credibility and looks ineffectual. If the primary contributor resigns, SPI end up being ineffectual. So it is lose - lose.
when good things run into problems because of personal issues.
And while all parties involved will (of course) deny that the cause is personal issues, it seems rather obvious.
I mean, the VP resigns because he feels the other high ranking officials aren't "dedicated" enough? In whose opinion? And why not appoint other functionaries to do the jobs that need doing?
No, resignations like this (especially the sort where you have "either they all resign or I do...") are almost always personally motivated out of a feeling to "show someone" how much in the wrong they are.
And it almost never helps. This is a lose-lose situation. Imagine if the rest of the board had resigned... credibility would fly out the window.
Like I said, it is always saddening when a good organization has problems because of people not getting along. While I don't know a lot about SPI, it seems they do, uhm open source stuff (:P their website is kinda hard to understand in that it is very very generalized. Slashdot could have the same mission statement as them and not change significantly).
I can just see the next step in scoping out insecure networks:
WarHugging
OTOH, I wouldn't mind, ehrm, "exchanging" information in that fashion with several people I know...
And this bodes badly for microsoft.
The European Union and the member nations that comprise it are not particularly finnicky about local companies' antitrust issues. However, for non-local companies they are quite harsh. Recall that the heavily subsidized Airbus was started by these people basically because they didn't like having to buy american planes.
The EU also has a long history of setting ridiculous tariffs, or banning, imported products from companies they don't like or that have policies the EU disagrees with.
Remember the whole banana fiasco? and how europe has basically banned american GM food?
I wouldn't count on microsoft getting off easy in europe. They don't have the Bush administration there. OTOH, MS is very willing to sink ridiculous amounts of lobbying $$ to purchase legislators. The EU decisions makers are also not as knowledgable in computer technical issues as even the virtually computer-illiterate american judges.
ssh into a box in country B, from country A. Then tunnel the file to your machine.
connect to the internet, then connect to a router in country B, ala anonymous browsing services
have a looooong network cable from country B to country A :)
hack into a major internet provider ;)
alter the program which reports the IP, or otherwise spoof the IP address verification
et etc...
Note that there are only two main methods I can think of here:
Going somehow through a machine which actually has the country B IP address
Somehow faking your IP so the verification process is foiled.
Think back to SnowCrash, that piece of geek required reading...
(for the uninitiated, the Protagonist of SnowCrash is a uber-hacker of sorts who freelances doing data mining for the library of congress. He also delivers pizza for the Mafia, or did until he crashed his car.)
"Power Consumption is low enough for cel phone type applications"
:)
;)
Only with CmdrTaco
On the other hand, acronymfinder lists CEL as possibly being "civilian employment level." In context, this would mean that business phones (as opposed to super-duper black-ops slashdot-effect proof military phones) would get this nifty tech.
So, while the possibility of this not being a spelling mistake exists, it is just not likely. Of course, I might just be led to believe that by the super-duper black-ops people who want to keep the existence of their phones, and the correspondingly nifty tech, out of public knowledge. In fact, I myself might be paid off by the military chaps. So take this whole post with a grain of salt
I think this is terrific news. (even though it has been posted before... [groan])
you see, we've been saying for a while that hopefully someone would try and take on a gigantic company with some totally bunk business method patents. Said giant company would enter in a big lawsuit, and the f'd up nature of the USPTO would be exposed.
Only thing that could happen bad is they settle. Which, unfortunately, is fairly common. But as long as they don't, there is really the potential to set legal precedent, because this guy (founder of MercExchange and holder of thee patents) did everything by the book. He tried to negotiate, he tried to agree to terms, he didn't hide his patent, etc. And it seems he was the first to patent this business method (online auction).
So if this is debunked, it won't be because of some petty reason. The overturning of this case could potentially throw into sharp relief the problems with patenting business methods, especially the ease of unassociated rediscovery, and the application of obvious things to the internet (when suddenly, at least according to the patent office, they become "nonobvious" [groan]). At least, it seems the case will show how stupid the USPTO is.
Of course, if the guy wins, none of the above applies. But I am counting on the power of the american legal system to prevail. And by "power," I mean "tendency," and by "prevail" I mean "have the person with the deepest pockets win." It is a fair assumption that ebay is going to out-muscle the guy, since they have a lot more to lose. Anyways, settled, won, or lost, I am hoping this case gets an enormous amount of publicity. Cross your fingers.
The yosemite case does not have an airport antenna in the handles.
I think the yikes case does, though I am not sure. Anyways, his point is valid in the he was referring to the G4 case in general.
Step one: get your message
Step two: take the message, and convert each word or phrase to a number, using a crib sheet
Step three: encode using the onetime pad.
Now, from my understanding the one time pads issued were really and truly "one use only," (or else they are not really secure) and had to be generated by some HQ guy so everyone would be on the same page.
what the above means is that you use the pad sparingly.
e.g.: If 99 means all forces, 01 means attack, and 02 means dawn, then you can encode 990102 in the one time pad, getting something like 168257, or whatever. If they have the same pad, and they decode it, they will get "990102," after which they quickly figure out the message contents.
"990102" is a heckuva lot shorter than even allforcatckdawn: 6 decimal chars vs 15 base 26 chars.
assuming you use one number per letter (base 26 or something), then changing the system to a two digit number used to encode a word is much much more efficient. Since your one time pad is probably used and then tossed, efficiency is critical. The pads are hard to come by and a good compression scheme drastically reduces the amount of pad space a message uses
Summary: Compress messages before encoding with pad to save pad space. Compression != encoding.
you were fine until then. After saying that, your point kind of flopped around uselessly and died.
PPC is an open standard.
Apple killed the clones two ways. First of all, they stopped selling them motherboards. Yes, thats right, many clones used genuine Apple motherboard. At a lower cost to the consumer. Apple decided this was probably a bad idea, since they were doing the R&D, doing the producion and ads, but were getting shafted wrt profits.
Second of all, Apple declined to renew the Mac OS licensing program for the clone makers. This effectively meant that the clone makers could build PPC macs, but they wouldn't get the ROM needed to boot, and wouldn't be allowed to sell Mac OS whatever installed on the machines.
Of course, now that we have open firmware, there is no rom, and, effectively nothing at all keeping clone makers from existing. But it is just not cost feasible for anyone to design their own motherboards. So Apple is the only mac hardware company.
Hmmm... Somehow I doubt you were a teen and online in the early 70s. 80s, yes. 70s, no. The internet didn't really exist then, it was more of a loose conglomeration of DARPA stuff...
Yes, some colleges got access to the arpanet, but even then, it was mainly senior people. So you would have been in your late 20s, minimum.
So this program creates a whole host of fictional access points? Well, a few points I don't get
How do *you* the correct user, find out which AP is correct?
What keeps the wardriver from doing that?
How does this affect performance?
how does this affect range?
If it doesn't affect either of the two above, then how does it work? It requires, apparently, only one 802.11b card...
Of course, I only run a small wireless network, and I am really not the most technically skilled of people. However, I use whatever security I have (the relatively weak WEP, with a well generated key), and would love having a bit more assurance of network safety.
Anyone who understands this willing to come forwards?
(And not just understanding in principle, i understand their whole schpiel about hiding in plain sight, like an apple in a barrel of apples.)
its true that people need to make points sometimes, but the point they seem to be making is that people who brag about hacking get busted.
Which is nothing particularly new.
Oh, and the governement is better and has more rights than us. See vigiante justice. Lets say you know someone is a criminal. for example, they are pirating mp3s. You cannot do anything about it, other than maybe tell the governement. The governement can bust them, which almost never happens, because its a minor thing. Record companies want to have the "same rights as the governement," as you put it--they want to be able to search your computer, hack it, and basically fuck you up.
There is a reason why joe billy bob next door is not allowed to do the same things the police is allowed to do. Wouldn't it suck if any old bitchy mom could pull you over for speeding and make you pay $150?
Then they point out specific, make-people-lose-their-jobs flaws. The kind of thing congressmen would love to jump on in order to criticise incompetency. Do it on a widely-read medium. This pisses more people off.
Then make very clear how you did specific illegal acts, giving those you just pissed off a great and simple way to get back at you.
Why not just walk right into jail...? I mean, its like spitting in the face of a police officer who is holding a gun, insulting them, and then making a threatening move while simultaneously pulling out a joint and smoking it. You might as well hand them the rubber hose...
Why taunt someone and then give them an excuse to hurt you? To gain acclaim? Fame? Real hackers are not out to get publicity, but rather to expose vulnerabilities and try to fix them.
Whats this you say? You sympathise with the "security firm?" well, take this quote into account: I dunno about you, but that would be my definition of script kiddie. Especially someone who then brags about it for publicity.
See, Apple needs to know, now, how pissed we are. I wrote a letter.
feel free to copy and paste it: Venting is the only way to change their mind
POV Ray is great. I had a quick course in POV-Ray when I was a freshman in high school, and it introduced me to C-like programming, and gavee me a solid understanding of how 3D rendering works. Both have served me well in the years since.
:)
Plus I made cool art
POV Ray should be taught to all kids to give an understanding of both how computer programming works, and to dispel the notion that everything computers do (and CG in general) is just 'magic.'
I'd comment on new features, etc etc, except that their website appears to be slashdotted. Maybe in a bit.