this problem is not unique to ssh. any tunneling protocol will suffer the same degradation. seems to me though it should be possible to change the ack timeout or increase the window size for the tunneled tcp connection to smooth out the bumps.
I never said was unique to ssh, besides not any tunneling protocol will suffer the same degradation. Like I said, for example cipe is UDP based simple tunnel.
Sadly in all implementation of TCP that I'm aware of there are no parameters. But when you think about it the whole TCP as-is, was never developed to be run on reliable medium and no simple parametrization will help there. When run on reliable transport the whole sendwindow and timer mechanisms should be altered.
Point being, tcp is not meant for reliable transports and there are no simple tweaks for that either.
I can understand Apple's need to restrist internet streaming but there are those of us who like to stream our tunes from home to office and it seems like fair use to stream your own music to yourself no matter how far apart your computers are.
And that's different to recent uncopyable CD how? I mean I cannot buy these new copyprotected CDs anymore, because they don't work in my CD drives at all. The thing I used to do with CDs was, buy, rip into mp3s and listen at home and also take the mp3s to work and listen there.
They didn't screw my fair use, they screwed my sole use...
For an application yes, but for vpn no (or atleast it's not a good idea). The concept of running ppp over ssh to create a simple vpn is not really as good as it may sound at first glance. The problem arises from two TCP:s being stacked. The TCP always presumes that it's being run on unreliable medium (which is not the case for the TCP that application uses on top the ssh/ppp stacking) where packets are lost incase of congestion.
All this results in the presense of normal net congestion into huge lags and even connection breakage on top level applications.
A lot of references can be found from the net about this issue, I'm not even going to bother quoting here.
Better approach is to place the vpn layer into a medium similar to the medium that IP packets usually experience. Thus approaches like cipe and OpenVPN, both of which use UDP as their transport for the encrypted ip packets and thus preserves the feel of the actual underlying medium. Ipsec, although somewhat different, performs equally well, because there the encryption is brought to the actual IP level, where thus in some sense the IP serves as the transport for the encrypted IP packets.
Bottom line is, ssh port forwarding for actual applications is a handy tool, but to mix vpn into that is not a wise decision. Any 2nd year cs student should understand why, but it's the problems with two tcps stacked is something that most even more experience cs engineers tend to miss.
Why oh why do you focus on the negative aspects of everything you review? I mean, I understand the point of your site, but, frankly, after reading your comments on Ape Escape, Zelda and Max Payne, I am beginning to wonder if there is any game you do enjoy.
I agree with what you say about Max Payne, but I must admit that I rather read such criticism inspite of it not being all that fair. I mean, if I hear someone praising the things I find interesting yet getting stuck mocking some aspects I couldn't care less about (e.g. decorations of a warehouse) I'm really not bothered. Then again hearing someone give full points for some flashing dandy visually appealing and on the only mentions that the playability and feel is not that good, I will steer clear from that...
I'm not impressed with the Radeon 9800 Pro. What I really want is the Radeon 9500 ASC [bbspot.com]. The price is steadily coming down. Mmmmm, I can't wait to play Nethack in full 3D:-)
Had you read the article you're kind enough to quote there. The 9500 ASC does _NOT_ contain 3D accelerator, it contains an ASCII accelerator.
What this means is that Nethack on that baby will look good as ever and then some and thankfully no 3D.
In concluding, I guess what I'm trying to get at is that we don't really understand our own intellegence. How then, are we to evaluate the intellegence of another?
Agreed. I mean, I do have a very scientific view of the brain and all, but indeed we're not quite sure what the term intelligence really means.
And naturally because of that the AI is not well defined either. I mean, people now thinking that chess playing computer is not AI, only reflects the present, because for example some 30 years ago it was very much AI.
Will the future hold similar things for language recognision, learning, humour and other features, until we one day notice that themilestone (pointed by another poster) that the number crunching AI has on it's own produced a being more smarter than him- or itself...
but a machine capable of inventing and creating better versions of itself is THE milestone. An apprentice knows he's ready to work by himself when he does what the master does.
Excellent point! It truly is _THE_ milestone, one that I'm not sure I want to even witness...:)
Nobody got outraged when that new-fangled mechanical auto-mobile contraption started to outpace the world's fastest human runners.
Actually they did, and quite a bit, although in my opinion they shouldn't have, because for example horses (mounted or not) had outrun people for years.
1) Make a computer with true free will. Let's see AI do something it wasn't originally designed to do because it wants to.
How would you measure that? Especially if you knew that in the it boiled down to number crunching with some entropy input. You do remember that the concept of free will is meaningful only subjectively, i.e. from one's own point of view. Although it is widely held that among human kind if one has it then all do, but that does not apply to AI.
2) "True intelligence", at least on par with us, will happen when a computer does everything we do mentally, while having full articulate motor skills, and then takes it upon itself to create an AI that crunches numbers better than it does, beats itself at chess, etc.
Bollocks, the earlier poster said it well. We're just drawing the line further and further, mostly because what we're after is that "well, err, when they're like us" while all along we're not quite sure what that means.
Moreover, the planes is infested with actual human beings that would fail on either of those.
Besides both of your points there are unscientific, neither of which can be measured in any way. That's all there really is to it though. Milestones. Wether a person qualifies that as AI is subjective to the definition of AI, for which here in/. I'm guessing are a myriad of different interpretations.
There are a number of good well defined tests that we can put the AI through, every one of those passed is significant. Especially the forementioned arithmetics and chess should NOT be forgotten, because they indeed were once held high.
I have to take back a bit, ditching shell, login and such applications does indeed make things quite a bit more difficult and may even prevent some remote exploits, but even then incorporating a minimal shell into a buffer-overflow-return-address-trickery should not be too difficult for an experienced cracker.
And don't come telling me that it's worth something to prevent most script kiddies, because that's just not true for two things: 1) preventing only some crackers, however large portion of them, is not a viable solution for most uses. For personal home firewalls perhaps. 2) The scripts kiddies that people often refer to as ignorant and incompetent hackers tend to use also the latest and the finest cracks/hacks. They may not be able to write such buffer-overflow exploits or other more complex attacks themselves, but they sure have their hands on such cracks typically written by more capable hackers.
GCC on a firewall box?! Sounds like a new tool of terror for the scrip7 kiddies.;-) It might be a good idea to delete the compiler after everything has been configured, or even better, don't install it and build any necessary packages on another server, then transfer the binaries to the firewall.
This seems to be a common misconception. Cutting down software present on a fw brings you NO extra security. Even if you're running it from a read-only meadia it makes no difference, because you'd still need some ram mounted rw partition for tmp and similar uses. Totally RO media only helps you _after_ a reboot. Though, usually there's always some nonvolatile rw media that affects startup which yet again results in NO extra security.
The bottom line is that if it gets rooted it gets rooted, period. Because after that adding software there is a walk in a park. Having gcc present or not makes no difference. Theoretically slows things down, because cracker has to bring in cross compiled binaries, which takes what? few seconds?
Re:Right tool for the job
on
Linus on DRM
·
· Score: 1
While I have strong pacifist leanings (I refused to serve in my home country's conscript army and marched against the Gulf War II amongst other things), but I don't have a problem with the fact that my research could find applications in military technology. If I had lived in 1940s and were brilliant enough to parttake in the Manhattan Project, I probably would have done that too. Why? To further the cause of science, not beacuse of the politics -- as far as I can see, Linus is doing exactly the same thing. He's reference to Oppenheimer is actually very apt.
First off, I all for on what Linus just said. His remark on oppenheimer is a tad off though. Oppenheimer's remark about him being an engineer not a politician couldn't have been more phony.
And don't get me wrong, I'm a physicist myself, declined from the conscription also and hate the idea of the gulf war and George W Bush, but putting your money where your mouth is what even men of science should do. Ofcourse Manhattan Project was interesting, I would've been thrilled by it, BUT the bottom line is that it's nothing short of lying trying to say that one's morals are against it yet one's goals and interests drive into another direction.
In such a case, one has little or no morals, or atleast not enough to drive ones goals based on them. Advertising one's morals being "usually against was" sound childish and spineless.
It's like being against animal killing yet being totally happy eating a steak. (and again, I'm not a vegetarian, but atleast I admit that my morals for animal rights are not there enough to keep me away from meat).
I'm sick of people having all sorts of popular morals and ethics when ever having them is cool and beneficial for them, but seeing them also slip away from them whenever that suits them better.
Having principles is NOT easy, but that's what separates mice and men.
Re:Right tool for the job
on
Linus on DRM
·
· Score: 1
When ideals get in the way of actually achieving your goals they are doing more harm than good for the cause.
When your ideals and goals aren't aligned you're f*cked no matter what you do...
Perhaps more importantly, your cable modem is running NAT also (check out traceroute some time) so this would all have to happen on board your modem (unlikely)
This is OT, but no it's not. The IP is gotten dynamically via dhcp but once that is known the box behind cable modem can be accessed from the external network. Most cable modems operate like _modems_, thus they don't even operate as routes/gateways, atleast I've never heard of such a cable modem.
You must mean adsls, which are basically routers/gateways (many adsl boxes also have nat/firewall capabilities for that matter).
But to suggest that taking a "male" user interface, and making it bigger - to adapt it more to the "generic woman" (see above) - I find ludicrous, and a vast underestimation of the task at hand.
Try reading the f*cking article first!
It's not about 2D desktop interface navigation, rather it's about roaming around in a 3D world and that sort of spatial navigation and orientation.
I continue to be astounded by what mplayer and mencoder are capable of, and I shudder to think of what my Linux movie watching experience would be like without them.
Not trying to bash mplayer or anything, I used for quite some time, but how about Xine ? I switched over a few months back and I've been more than happy with that.
I think the approach in Xine is more *nixy like with the marvellous lib and multiple UIs. But that's just my 2 cents...
Unfortunately, he doesn't keep up with technology news, so he's not sure what the most relevant dilemmas are.
And I guess he's not too sure what a "dilemma" is either.
Dilemma is a method of proof in logics (or to be precice a rule of deduction). It goes as follows: i) a => c ii) b => c iii) a AND b THUS c
The best known form in speech is probably the "damned if you do, damned if you don't". I'm guessing that that one also lead to the expression "moral dilemma" which is being used sloppily just like "that's ironic", as is often pointed out here.
"Due to the people at slashdot.org linking to this site without asking the owners or the hosters, asciipr0n.com is offline until further notice. Maybe you guys should start mirroring the sites you link to..."
Now, how lame is that? "Without asking the owners", oh please...
And please give up on the "sole reason = oil" meme. It's old, worn-out, and demonstrably wrong.
Oh, really? Do please demonstrate it then. I'm all ears.
I'll grant you that it's old and worn-out, but still embarrasingly true. Humanitarian reasons or WoMD my ass. They do not explain the thirst towards IRAQ alone. There are tons of countries with worse humanitarian situations. There are countries with worse WoMD.
I never get this. Sure an sms may be cheaper than a one minute call, but you need to send half a dozen in order to say the same amount as you can in a one minute call, especially if you're trying to organise something with the party at the other end.
And you probably never will. Naturally for such circumstances people in Europe still call. But think about these redundant calls "I'm coming home now. Need anything from the store?" or "Happy new year, you old git." or "I'll be 15 minutes late." or "You awake?" etc etc...
It's the calls that would probably last about a minute that are handier with SMS. Moreover there are many many occasions where you just don't want to start chatting with the moron you need to communicate with, then it's just easier to send the one liner and be done with it...
Slashdot Mirror
this problem is not unique to ssh. any tunneling protocol will suffer the same degradation. seems to me though it should be possible to change the ack timeout or increase the window size for the tunneled tcp connection to smooth out the bumps.
I never said was unique to ssh, besides not any tunneling protocol will suffer the same degradation. Like I said, for example cipe
is UDP based simple tunnel.
Sadly in all implementation of TCP that I'm aware of there are no parameters. But when you think about it the whole TCP as-is, was never developed to be run on reliable medium and no simple parametrization will help there. When run on reliable transport the whole sendwindow and timer mechanisms should be altered.
Point being, tcp is not meant for reliable transports and there are no simple tweaks for that either.
I can understand Apple's need to restrist internet streaming but there are those of us who like to stream our tunes from home to office and it seems like fair use to stream your own music to yourself no matter how far apart your computers are.
And that's different to recent uncopyable CD how?
I mean I cannot buy these new copyprotected CDs anymore, because they don't work in my CD drives at all. The thing I used to do with CDs was, buy, rip into mp3s and listen at home and also take the mp3s to work and listen there.
They didn't screw my fair use, they screwed my sole use...
Certainly, or use SSH port forwarding.
For an application yes, but for vpn no (or atleast it's not a good idea). The concept of running ppp over ssh to create a simple vpn is not really as good as it may sound at first glance. The problem arises from two TCP:s being stacked. The TCP always presumes that it's being run on unreliable medium (which is not the case for the TCP that application uses on top the ssh/ppp stacking) where packets are lost incase of congestion.
All this results in the presense of normal net congestion into huge lags and even connection breakage on top level applications.
A lot of references can be found from the net about this issue, I'm not even going to bother quoting here.
Better approach is to place the vpn layer into a medium similar to the medium that IP packets usually experience. Thus approaches like cipe and OpenVPN, both of which use UDP as their transport for the encrypted ip packets and thus preserves the feel of the actual underlying medium. Ipsec, although somewhat different, performs equally well, because there the encryption is brought to the actual IP level, where thus in some sense the IP serves as the transport for the encrypted IP packets.
Bottom line is, ssh port forwarding for actual applications is a handy tool, but to mix vpn into that is not a wise decision. Any 2nd year cs student should understand why, but it's the problems with two tcps stacked is something that most even more experience cs engineers tend to miss.
>> I live in New Zealand. I wish we had electricity :(
>Simple just rub a couple of sheep together.
Didn't you also need an ebony stick for that? Mine's not ebony and because of that barely even a stick...
Why oh why do you focus on the negative aspects of everything you review? I mean, I understand the point of your site, but, frankly, after reading your comments on Ape Escape, Zelda and Max Payne, I am beginning to wonder if there is any game you do enjoy.
I agree with what you say about Max Payne, but I must admit that I rather read such criticism inspite of it not being all that fair. I mean, if I hear someone praising the things I find interesting yet getting stuck mocking some aspects I couldn't care less about (e.g. decorations of a warehouse) I'm really not bothered. Then again hearing someone give full points for some flashing dandy visually appealing and on the only mentions that the playability and feel is not that good, I will steer clear from that...
I'm not impressed with the Radeon 9800 Pro. What I really want is the Radeon 9500 ASC [bbspot.com]. The price is steadily coming down. Mmmmm, I can't wait to play Nethack in full 3D :-)
Had you read the article you're kind enough to quote there. The 9500 ASC does _NOT_ contain 3D accelerator, it contains an ASCII accelerator.
What this means is that Nethack on that baby will look good as ever and then some and thankfully no 3D.
In concluding, I guess what I'm trying to get at is that we don't really understand our own intellegence. How then, are we to evaluate the intellegence of another?
Agreed. I mean, I do have a very scientific view of the brain and all, but indeed we're not quite sure what the term intelligence really means.
And naturally because of that the AI is not well defined either. I mean, people now thinking that chess playing computer is not AI, only reflects the present, because for example some 30 years ago it was very much AI.
Will the future hold similar things for language recognision, learning, humour and other features, until we one day notice that themilestone (pointed by another poster) that the number crunching AI has on it's own produced a being more smarter than him- or itself...
but a machine capable of inventing and creating better versions of itself is THE milestone. An apprentice knows he's ready to work by himself when he does what the master does.
:)
Excellent point! It truly is _THE_ milestone, one that I'm not sure I want to even witness...
Nobody got outraged when that new-fangled mechanical auto-mobile contraption started to outpace the world's fastest human runners.
Actually they did, and quite a bit, although in my opinion they shouldn't have, because for example horses (mounted or not) had outrun people for years.
1) Make a computer with true free will. Let's see AI do something it wasn't originally designed to do because it wants to.
/. I'm guessing are a myriad of different interpretations.
How would you measure that? Especially if you knew that in the it boiled down to number crunching with some entropy input. You do remember that the concept of free will is meaningful only subjectively, i.e. from one's own point of view.
Although it is widely held that among human kind if one has it then all do, but that does not apply to AI.
2) "True intelligence", at least on par with us, will happen when a computer does everything we do mentally, while having full articulate motor skills, and then takes it upon itself to create an AI that crunches numbers better than it does, beats itself at chess, etc.
Bollocks, the earlier poster said it well. We're just drawing the line further and further, mostly because what we're after is that "well, err, when they're like us" while all along we're not quite sure what that means.
Moreover, the planes is infested with actual human beings that would fail on either of those.
Besides both of your points there are unscientific, neither of which can be measured in any way. That's all there really is to it though. Milestones. Wether a person qualifies that as AI is subjective to the definition of AI, for which here in
There are a number of good well defined tests that we can put the AI through, every one of those passed is significant. Especially the forementioned arithmetics and chess should NOT be forgotten, because they indeed were once held high.
I have to take back a bit, ditching shell, login and such applications does indeed make things quite a bit more difficult and may even prevent some remote exploits, but even then incorporating a minimal shell into a buffer-overflow-return-address-trickery should not be too difficult for an experienced cracker.
:
And don't come telling me that it's worth something to prevent most script kiddies, because that's just not true for two things
1) preventing only some crackers, however large portion of them, is not a viable solution for most uses. For personal home firewalls perhaps.
2) The scripts kiddies that people often refer to as ignorant and incompetent hackers tend to use also the latest and the finest cracks/hacks. They may not be able to write such buffer-overflow exploits or other more complex attacks themselves, but they sure have their hands on such cracks typically written by more capable hackers.
GCC on a firewall box?! Sounds like a new tool of terror for the scrip7 kiddies. ;-) It might be a good idea to delete the compiler after everything has been configured, or even better, don't install it and build any necessary packages on another server, then transfer the binaries to the firewall.
This seems to be a common misconception. Cutting down software present on a fw brings you NO extra security. Even if you're running it from a read-only meadia it makes no difference, because you'd still need some ram mounted rw partition for tmp and similar uses. Totally RO media only helps you _after_ a reboot. Though, usually there's always some nonvolatile rw media that affects startup which yet again results in NO extra security.
The bottom line is that if it gets rooted it gets rooted, period. Because after that adding software there is a walk in a park. Having gcc present or not makes no difference. Theoretically slows things down, because cracker has to bring in cross compiled binaries, which takes what? few seconds?
While I have strong pacifist leanings (I refused to serve in my home country's conscript army and marched against the Gulf War II amongst other things), but I don't have a problem with the fact that my research could find applications in military technology. If I had lived in 1940s and were brilliant enough to parttake in the Manhattan Project, I probably would have done that too. Why? To further the cause of science, not beacuse of the politics -- as far as I can see, Linus is doing exactly the same thing. He's reference to Oppenheimer is actually very apt.
First off, I all for on what Linus just said. His remark on oppenheimer is a tad off though. Oppenheimer's remark about him being an engineer not a politician couldn't have been more phony.
And don't get me wrong, I'm a physicist myself,
declined from the conscription also and hate the idea of the gulf war and George W Bush, but putting your money where your mouth is what even men of science should do. Ofcourse Manhattan Project was interesting, I would've been thrilled by it, BUT the bottom line is that it's nothing short of lying trying to say that one's morals are against it yet one's goals and interests drive into another direction.
In such a case, one has little or no morals, or atleast not enough to drive ones goals based on them. Advertising one's morals being "usually against was" sound childish and spineless.
It's like being against animal killing yet being totally happy eating a steak. (and again, I'm not a vegetarian, but atleast I admit that my morals for animal rights are not there enough to keep me away from meat).
I'm sick of people having all sorts of popular morals and ethics when ever having them is cool and beneficial for them, but seeing them also slip away from them whenever that suits them better.
Having principles is NOT easy, but that's what separates mice and men.
When ideals get in the way of actually achieving your goals they are doing more harm than good for the cause.
When your ideals and goals aren't aligned you're f*cked no matter what you do...
Perhaps more importantly, your cable modem is running NAT also (check out traceroute some time) so this would all have to happen on board your modem (unlikely)
This is OT, but no it's not. The IP is gotten dynamically via dhcp but once that is known the box behind cable modem can be accessed from the external network. Most cable modems operate like _modems_, thus they don't even operate as routes/gateways, atleast I've never heard of such a cable modem.
You must mean adsls, which are basically routers/gateways (many adsl boxes also have nat/firewall capabilities for that matter).
But to suggest that taking a "male" user interface, and making it bigger - to adapt it more to the "generic woman" (see above) - I find ludicrous, and a vast underestimation of the task at hand.
Try reading the f*cking article first!
It's not about 2D desktop interface navigation, rather it's about roaming around in a 3D world and that sort of spatial navigation and orientation.
I continue to be astounded by what mplayer and mencoder are capable of, and I shudder to think of what my Linux movie watching experience would be like without them.
Not trying to bash mplayer or anything, I used for quite some time, but how about Xine ? I switched over a few months back and I've been more than happy with that.
I think the approach in Xine is more *nixy like with the marvellous lib and multiple UIs. But that's just my 2 cents...
Unfortunately, he doesn't keep up with technology news, so he's not sure what the most relevant dilemmas are.
And I guess he's not too sure what a "dilemma" is either.
Dilemma is a method of proof in logics (or to be precice a rule of deduction). It goes as follows:
i) a => c
ii) b => c
iii) a AND b
THUS c
The best known form in speech is probably the "damned if you do, damned if you don't". I'm guessing that that one also lead to the expression "moral dilemma" which is being used sloppily just like "that's ironic", as is often pointed out here.
"Due to the people at slashdot.org linking to this site without asking the owners or the hosters, asciipr0n.com is offline until further notice. Maybe you guys should start mirroring the sites you link to..."
Now, how lame is that? "Without asking the owners", oh please...
LOL ;-D
Thanks man, that really cheered me up this morning...
And please give up on the "sole reason = oil" meme. It's old, worn-out, and demonstrably wrong.
Oh, really? Do please demonstrate it then. I'm all ears.
I'll grant you that it's old and worn-out, but still embarrasingly true. Humanitarian reasons or WoMD my ass. They do not explain the thirst towards IRAQ alone. There are tons of countries with worse humanitarian situations. There are countries with worse WoMD.
If this is going to be US funded I thinks it's okay to favor US companies
I'd agree, but US politics are funded by US companies, we can alread see it here. The sole reason US attacked is oil. To hell with the WoMD.
Besides US is lobbying for UN to fund it, which is just great, UN didn't want them to attack and US hasn't payed it's UN bills. Geez...
Or like Afganistan? Us is way behind it's payments there because all of the public interest has ceased...
The reason according to Elke Monssen-Engberding, director of the Ministry for Family Affairs: 'It portrays war as the only way to resolve conflicts.'"
Did EA sell a prerelease to G.W.Bush?
So now it's EA I gotta blame, right?
I never get this. Sure an sms may be cheaper than a one minute call, but you need to send half a dozen in order to say the same amount as you can in a one minute call, especially if you're trying to organise something with the party at the other end.
And you probably never will. Naturally for such circumstances people in Europe still call. But think about these redundant calls "I'm coming home now. Need anything from the store?" or "Happy new year, you old git." or "I'll be 15 minutes late." or "You awake?" etc etc...
It's the calls that would probably last about a minute that are handier with SMS. Moreover there are many many occasions where you just don't want to start chatting with the moron you need to communicate with, then it's just easier to send the one liner and be done with it...
Who cares wether they patent their OC prevention technology? That means only that other CPU vendors cannot use their technolody to prevent OCing.
I mean, when was it in consumers interest to have OC prevention technology in the first place?
And isn't that a little like Sony patenting their copy protection mechanisms?
I must have misunderstood something here...