I got a machine And I took over the world In one weekend I took over the world With my machine I did it because I was looking for a project And it was either Take over the world or learn French So I took over the world And next weekend I can learn French I got a machine And I took over the world But nothing changed That wouldn't be fair
I use an expansion sleeve (when I need to) with my IPAQ 5455. This gives me two PC-card slots available.
My basic configuration (without the sleeve)gives me 64 Megs RAM. I also have a 512 MB SD-RAM that I leave in with all the programs I run and my day-to-day data, including documents, spreadsheets, and maps for cities that I may visit.
With the expansion sleeve, I can use GPS (with the mapping software that I already loaded), or use my Toshiba 5 GB PC-Card format hard drives. This is very convenient, as they also get popped into my notebook whenever I use them there (most of the time). Easy 5-GB of data transport when the 512-mb SD chip won't do. But, that's pretty rare. Also, the wi-fi that's built-in allows for some networking, and access to files over the Internet. If you use the IPC for VPN-based access (by running a VPN client), you really don't need to carry a drive with you. Leave all your docs on your network, and VPN-in.
It may not be the solution that you are looking for, but it's worked pretty well for me. Still, the use is awkward if you have a large number of music files on the hard drive.
Anyway, I'm pretty happy with my IPAQ\, but any PDA has its limitations.
My suggestion s that if they truly want to prove their claim, they will go after a powerful law firm, with special expertise in contract and corporate law.
Of course, there might not be much left of SCO for long after that... By the way, how's it going with IBM?
People will sell or buy their cars from the next states over...
Actually, I see another problem with this, as well. Some older drivers, as well as Asthmathics may be capable of driving perfectly well, but not capable of blowing for a sustained period into the device.
Also, would it be illegal to have a machine (air compressor?) blow into the device's air intake?
It could be a good item in high-cost systems with stringent weight / space / heat dissipation requirements, where there may not be many good solutions, regardless of cost.
This looks similar to how frequency-hopping is used on secure radios.
Two radios synchronize, based on a key, and both change frequency every so many milliseconds. If you don't know the key, you can't send or receive to either of them.
I would like to see this extended to a port-hopping system for all ports and services. Sure -- it will burn some clock cycles, but I like the approach.
I would recommend looking into the HIPAA security and privacy regulations, that impact the use and implementation of computer systems that are used to test (or develop) medicines, as well as regulating privacy issues for private-practice doctors and hospitals.
Issues that would have to be addressed include computer security, privacy, data integrity, and others.
Best of all, an actual degree in computer science may not be necessary - a graduate certificate, with credits in computer security may do the job. There are also certification programs in computer security.
I would recommend looking into medical compliance with data security / privacy regulations as a possible area for either technical (or policy) consulting.
I am not advocating giving up the day job, but if you could handle the work load / partition your hours, this could be a side-gig, and if it were to take off for you, you could either bring on subordinates, or make a full-time move later.
The original poster of this issue is invited to e-mail me directly.
A while back for holloween, a friend's band was playing at a Bar. I wore my 2600 cap (http://www.2600.com), a hacker T-shirt (http://www.defcon.org), and Jeans. Instant "costume"
I had a few people walk up to me and asked if I had dressed as a hacker. Actually, I ended up having a pretty good technical discussion with someone there, as well.
I don't know if it counts as a costume if that's what you wear regularly, anyway:)
Sam Nitzberg http://www.iamsam.com http://iamsam.com /photos/H2K_July_2000/index.htm
I am still having trouble getting Linux for my older machines.
Nobody has given me a release date yet for punch-card Linux (PCL Linux) for IBM System 370. Damn! I just did the upgrade last year to bring my System 360 up to System 370 specs.
It makes my wonder why I ever got rid of my Univac.
I have wondered this before (too lazy to develop), but...
If someone took a sample of the sound you get when you press a key on an IBM keypunch, relatively simple driver software would allow you to hear that sound every time you press a key on your PC. I think that I would enjoy that very much, especially when working on my notebook in a "modern" computing lab.
Has anyone seen anything like this ? (klunk-klunk-klunk)...
Without "Anonymous Coward"'s declaration and demonstration of expertise of the history of either hollerinth tabulating devices, or the use of computational technologies in WWII, I would be inclined to dismiss his comments. If there are specific and relevant references to be provided, that would be interesting. The IBM book was extremely well put together, and I don't see any of its arguments collapsing here.
My own published review on IBM and the Holocaust is available from http://www.ethix.org
On my web site, I have a picture of one of my punchards (you can also see where the holes are):
http://iamsam.com/images/pnchcard.jpg
I scanned this card in. This card was placed before a program so that when the card reader scanned in several jobs, it would know to whom the job was connected, and what language to use.
This punchcard (80 columns) has my account number for the system that it was used on (N0000), my name, NITZBERG, and the language WATFIV (a dialect of Fortran).
I would presume that any bird flying might be of -some- interest to a hacker, even if it were just flying around and transmitting a beep tone every second.
If your firm genuinely values this satellite, and if this satellite handles data of any value, I wouldn't play any games. If I lacked the in-house knowledge, I would hire a firm with significant satellite experience, e.g. those that have designed several or dozens of satellites, and bring one of them on board for their expertise. Securing this craft shouldn't be seen as a learning experience; any mistakes could be costly, and re-engineering solutions probably wouldn't be met well by senior management later.
If you were planning to build a satellite, I might start a general survey of security techniques, techniques as they apply to your special circumstances, prior to development. Since it is already up, I would get my hands on expert talent (not even just a consultant, but a firm with military satellite experience). Your firm would also learn what it might need for the next craft, and this would be very valuable.
I think that there are significant problems with relying on legal issues or tests alone for establishing or maintaining requirements for software developers, coders, managers, database people, etc...
There are a number of theories regarding why software fails. There are many studies, papers, etc... I have even been involved in a few of them. I don't know of any study or organization who feels that - at the very heart of the problem - is a shortage of licensing. At best, some sort of licensing -- might -- be of some benefit, but I don't believe that should be the first or foremost solution towards addressing software quality problems.
Many years ago, Scientific American magazine had an article on software; this article cited complexity as the reason software fails. I disagree. There are arguments about how complex software is - the difficulties associated with testing all computation branches and [execution] flows through a program (exponention, NP-C problems), testing software and module linkages, data typing and related matters, and many other issues. My experience and understanding is that most software problems relate to poorly thought out requirements, poorly documented changes, work done under time pressure, and a host of what I will call "fundamental" failings from software developers.
I think that advanced training in software - degrees with math components, and formal software engineering training can be genuinely helpful. A great problem is organizations that do not know or care about the consequences of flawed work going out the door.
Ultimately, with or without any form of licensing, I see one major step that would help software quality - ACCOUNTABILITY. There must be legal liability for software that doesn't work, or is purely dangerous. The onus must be on the producers of software to do the job properly.
I know software can be large, and can be complex - but it also often sloppy, poorly thought out, and problems are considered post-release headaches.
My presentation at H2K (Hackers on Planet Earth, 2000) addressed some of these issues. The presentation focused on Ethics in Military and Civilian Software Development. You can find this online from http://www.2600.com, and then following the link to the presentation. I have other papers that discuss this and related issues, also on my web site.
Some basic things can be done to make "secure" or "segregated," or other types of somewhat-more-protected-than-usual environments.
Unfortunately, I think that there are also some very real problems. Some very old military systems (e.g.) SAGE - were secure. The customer (Government) could own and have all code reviewed. All end points were well controlled. The number of nodes and links, etc... were limited. The system was also special, and dedicated - purpose.
There are limits as to how secure any system will be if it will be built on off-the-shelf components, software and hardware components that the gov't can't fully inspect, networking protocols that are not provably secure, and the inevitable... using currently available products to implement solutions, rather than building that which might be necessary.
Most projects are not fundamentally new... They are graphics systems, databases, communications systems components, etc....
Fundamental systems (databases, graphics libraries, languages), we pretty much know how to describe and build - efficiently and well. Of course, what was bid by any given company, what can be done with their labor and expertise, and other issues can upset things....:(
Special and exotic systems, e.g. computerized data interpretation for medical uses, e.g. analyzing mamogram results, especially for the first generation of such systems, can take longer to develop, due to the criticality and novelty of the systems. Next generations of such systems should take less time, as they can operate on a wealth of collected information, samples, and data.
Systems-of-systems can be much more complex and difficult to build, debug, and maintain. These, especially, can be cutting-edge, complex, and contain unforseeable development hazards. They can (and this is where scheduling becomes really difficult), rely on multiple components, each under development, and proper integration, for their timely development.
Most systems - databases for insurance companies, real estate offices, etc..., are relatively routine. The quality and expertise of the software developers (and those bidding the contracts / developing the deal) should greatly affect not just the timeline, but overall satisfaction with the final product...
Years back, an article in Scientific American suggested that complexity was a critical factor in software development problems. I generally disagree, and discussed this in my H2K (Hackers on Planet Earth) panel of Ethics in Military and Civilian Software Development (Audio from this session is available from http://www.2600.com) . Most problems (and some time issues) are really related to (I feel) a basic lack of care and concern for basic software engineering issues, and a lack of respect for what difficulties may be encountered. Careful planning and implementation alone can go a long way...
Best book : The Mythical Man Month, Brooks.
"Adding people to a late software project makes it later..."
Slashdot Mirror
"A,B or C if X,Y or Z happens " is NOT computer science!
:-)
Perhaps not, but it is a good example of a proper logical expression complete with temporal logic
The Machine Lyrics:
I got a machine
And I took over the world
In one weekend
I took over the world
With my machine
I did it because
I was looking for a project
And it was either
Take over the world or learn French
So I took over the world
And next weekend
I can learn French
I got a machine
And I took over the world
But nothing changed
That wouldn't be fair
I use an expansion sleeve (when I need to) with my IPAQ 5455. This gives me two PC-card slots available.
My basic configuration (without the sleeve)gives me 64 Megs RAM. I also have a 512 MB SD-RAM that I leave in with all the programs I run and my day-to-day data, including documents, spreadsheets, and maps for cities that I may visit.
With the expansion sleeve, I can use GPS (with the mapping software that I already loaded), or use my Toshiba 5 GB PC-Card format hard drives. This is very convenient, as they also get popped into my notebook whenever I use them there (most of the time). Easy 5-GB of data transport when the 512-mb SD chip won't do. But, that's pretty rare. Also, the wi-fi that's built-in allows for some networking, and access to files over the Internet. If you use the IPC for VPN-based access (by running a VPN client), you really don't need to carry a drive with you. Leave all your docs on your network, and VPN-in.
It may not be the solution that you are looking for, but it's worked pretty well for me. Still, the use is awkward if you have a large number of music files on the hard drive.
Anyway, I'm pretty happy with my IPAQ\, but any PDA has its limitations.
Also, Because you can also put an RF-amplifier in between your antenna and access point. Result: one massive increase in signal strength.
Groups of unrelated viruses :
Viriis ?
Viriiii ?
viriiiiis?
Viruseses ?
I give up
... Just imagine a beowulf cluster of those ...
As long as they don't get back a response from the Rover.....
"I am Nomad"
I have a quick question...
.exe, but the Pocket PC responded that it wasn't a pocket PC program.
[last night] I tried to install the new MiniStumbler on my HP Ipaq 5450 handheld PC (built-in wireless)...
I downloaded the
Any insights? Thank you...
Sam
I worked with and knew Al Donkin...
His Call Sign?
W2EMF
That's a Catchy Call Sign !
My suggestion s that if they truly want to prove their claim, they will go after a powerful law firm, with special expertise in contract and corporate law.
Of course, there might not be much left of SCO for long after that... By the way, how's it going with IBM?
Didn't IBM systems 360 and 370 seperate memory sections for data and executable code ?
http://www.iamsam.com
People will sell or buy their cars from the next states over...
Actually, I see another problem with this, as well. Some older drivers, as well as Asthmathics may be capable of driving perfectly well, but not capable of blowing for a sustained period into the device.
Also, would it be illegal to have a machine (air compressor?) blow into the device's air intake?
- Sam
http://www.iamsam.com
It could be a good item in high-cost systems with stringent weight / space / heat dissipation requirements, where there may not be many good solutions, regardless of cost.
Sam
http://www.iamsam.com
This looks similar to how frequency-hopping is used on secure radios.
Two radios synchronize, based on a key, and both change frequency every so many milliseconds. If you don't know the key, you can't send or receive to either of them.
I would like to see this extended to a port-hopping system for all ports and services. Sure -- it will burn some clock cycles, but I like the approach.
- Sam
http://www.iamsam.com
I would recommend looking into the HIPAA security and privacy regulations, that impact the use and implementation of computer systems that are used to test (or develop) medicines, as well as regulating privacy issues for private-practice doctors and hospitals.
Issues that would have to be addressed include computer security, privacy, data integrity, and others.
Best of all, an actual degree in computer science may not be necessary - a graduate certificate, with credits in computer security may do the job. There are also certification programs in computer security.
I would recommend looking into medical compliance with data security / privacy regulations as a possible area for either technical (or policy) consulting.
I am not advocating giving up the day job, but if you could handle the work load / partition your hours, this could be a side-gig, and if it were to take off for you, you could either bring on subordinates, or make a full-time move later.
The original poster of this issue is invited to e-mail me directly.
Sam Nitzberg
sam@iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com
Yes, But there is a significant loophole here.
If you are listening to any of William Shatner's recordings, you can claim that it was not for Eductional (or Business) purposes.
No Jury would convict you.
Hacker.
:)
m /photos/H2K_July_2000/index.htm
A while back for holloween, a friend's band was playing at a Bar. I wore my 2600 cap (http://www.2600.com), a hacker T-shirt (http://www.defcon.org), and Jeans. Instant "costume"
I had a few people walk up to me and asked if I had dressed as a hacker. Actually, I ended up having a pretty good technical discussion with someone there, as well.
I don't know if it counts as a costume if that's what you wear regularly, anyway
Sam Nitzberg
http://www.iamsam.com
http://iamsam.co
I am still having trouble getting Linux for my older machines.
Nobody has given me a release date yet for punch-card Linux (PCL Linux) for IBM System 370. Damn! I just did the upgrade last year to bring my System 360 up to System 370 specs.
It makes my wonder why I ever got rid of my Univac.
Sam Nitzberg
sam@iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com
I have wondered this before (too lazy to develop), but...
If someone took a sample of the sound you get when you press a key on an IBM keypunch, relatively simple driver software would allow you to hear that sound every time you press a key on your PC. I think that I would enjoy that very much, especially when working on my notebook in a "modern" computing lab.
Has anyone seen anything like this ? (klunk-klunk-klunk)...
Thanks..
Sam Nitzberg
sam@iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com
Without "Anonymous Coward"'s declaration and demonstration of expertise of the history of either hollerinth tabulating devices, or the use of computational technologies in WWII, I would be inclined to dismiss his comments. If there are specific and relevant references to be provided, that would be interesting. The IBM book was extremely well put together, and I don't see any of its arguments collapsing here.
My own published review on IBM and the Holocaust is available from http://www.ethix.org
Sam Nitzberg
sam@iamsam.com
On my web site, I have a picture of one of my punchards (you can also see where the holes are):
http://iamsam.com/images/pnchcard.jpg
I scanned this card in. This card was placed before a program so that when the card reader scanned in several jobs, it would know to whom the job was connected, and what language to use.
This punchcard (80 columns) has my account number for the system that it was used on (N0000), my name, NITZBERG, and the language WATFIV (a dialect of Fortran).
Enjoy...
Sam Nitzberg
http://www.iamsam.com
sam@iamsam.com
I would presume that any bird flying might be of -some- interest to a hacker, even if it were just flying around and transmitting a beep tone every second.
If your firm genuinely values this satellite, and if this satellite handles data of any value, I wouldn't play any games. If I lacked the in-house knowledge, I would hire a firm with significant satellite experience, e.g. those that have designed several or dozens of satellites, and bring one of them on board for their expertise. Securing this craft shouldn't be seen as a learning experience; any mistakes could be costly, and re-engineering solutions probably wouldn't be met well by senior management later.
If you were planning to build a satellite, I might start a general survey of security techniques, techniques as they apply to your special circumstances, prior to development. Since it is already up, I would get my hands on expert talent (not even just a consultant, but a firm with military satellite experience). Your firm would also learn what it might need for the next craft, and this would be very valuable.
Good luck...
Sam Nitzberg
http://www.iamsam.com
sam@iamsam.com
I think that there are significant problems with relying on legal issues or tests alone for establishing or maintaining requirements for software developers, coders, managers, database people, etc...
There are a number of theories regarding why software fails. There are many studies, papers, etc... I have even been involved in a few of them. I don't know of any study or organization who feels that - at the very heart of the problem - is a shortage of licensing. At best, some sort of licensing -- might -- be of some benefit, but I don't believe that should be the first or foremost solution towards addressing software quality problems.
Many years ago, Scientific American magazine had an article on software; this article cited complexity as the reason software fails. I disagree. There are arguments about how complex software is - the difficulties associated with testing all computation branches and [execution] flows through a program (exponention, NP-C problems), testing software and module linkages, data typing and related matters, and many other issues. My experience and understanding is that most software problems relate to poorly thought out requirements, poorly documented changes, work done under time pressure, and a host of what I will call "fundamental" failings from software developers.
I think that advanced training in software - degrees with math components, and formal software engineering training can be genuinely helpful. A great problem is organizations that do not know or care about the consequences of flawed work going out the door.
Ultimately, with or without any form of licensing, I see one major step that would help software quality - ACCOUNTABILITY. There must be legal liability for software that doesn't work, or is purely dangerous. The onus must be on the producers of software to do the job properly.
I know software can be large, and can be complex - but it also often sloppy, poorly thought out, and problems are considered post-release headaches.
My presentation at H2K (Hackers on Planet Earth, 2000) addressed some of these issues. The presentation focused on Ethics in Military and Civilian Software Development. You can find this online from http://www.2600.com, and then following the link to the presentation. I have other papers that discuss this and related issues, also on my web site.
Sam Nitzberg
sam@iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com
Some basic things can be done to make "secure" or "segregated," or other types of somewhat-more-protected-than-usual environments.
... using currently available products to implement solutions, rather than building that which might be necessary.
Unfortunately, I think that there are also some very real problems. Some very old military systems (e.g.) SAGE - were secure. The customer (Government) could own and have all code reviewed. All end points were well controlled. The number of nodes and links, etc... were limited. The system was also special, and dedicated - purpose.
There are limits as to how secure any system will be if it will be built on off-the-shelf components, software and hardware components that the gov't can't fully inspect, networking protocols that are not provably secure, and the inevitable
Sam Nitzberg
sam@iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com
Most projects are not fundamentally new... They are graphics systems, databases, communications systems components, etc....
:(
Fundamental systems (databases, graphics libraries, languages), we pretty much know how to describe and build - efficiently and well. Of course, what was bid by any given company, what can be done with their labor and expertise, and other issues can upset things....
Special and exotic systems, e.g. computerized data interpretation for medical uses, e.g. analyzing mamogram results, especially for the first generation of such systems, can take longer to develop, due to the criticality and novelty of the systems. Next generations of such systems should take less time, as they can operate on a wealth of collected information, samples, and data.
Systems-of-systems can be much more complex and difficult to build, debug, and maintain. These, especially, can be cutting-edge, complex, and contain unforseeable development hazards. They can (and this is where scheduling becomes really difficult), rely on multiple components, each under development, and proper integration, for their timely development.
Most systems - databases for insurance companies, real estate offices, etc..., are relatively routine. The quality and expertise of the software developers (and those bidding the contracts / developing the deal) should greatly affect not just the timeline, but overall satisfaction with the final product...
Years back, an article in Scientific American suggested that complexity was a critical factor in software development problems. I generally disagree, and discussed this in my H2K (Hackers on Planet Earth) panel of Ethics in Military and Civilian Software Development (Audio from this session is available from http://www.2600.com) . Most problems (and some time issues) are really related to (I feel) a basic lack of care and concern for basic software engineering issues, and a lack of respect for what difficulties may be encountered. Careful planning and implementation alone can go a long way...
Best book : The Mythical Man Month, Brooks.
"Adding people to a late software project makes it later..."
Sam Nitzberg
sam@iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com