I sure think some people (like you) said "Ill stick with my sword" When the idea of acctually fire at someone with a rifle surfaced.
Probably because the life expectancy was higher. Did ya know that first European to fire a cannon in combat was also among the first Europeans to die because of cannon fire? specifically, because the cannon blew up.
my guess would be that the most feared enemies in the future are those who never pick up a gun!
Probably right. It'll be all those Serbian hackers uploading virii into the US Arsenal...
The Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Army took far more casualties than the U.S. Army. True enough, but they accomplished their objectives while keeping the US from achieving theirs. All that, and no significant air cover. Ironically, that provides an interesting look back at what was thought to be true: The original F-4 Phantoms where designed without a gun, as it was thought that future air combat would be fought with missiles and radar, and the combatants would never get into gun range. James
Additionally, given the length of the average/. comment, it is unlikely that you could use any meaningful part of them without violating fair use. (voice of Kosh) We are all Anonymous Cowards.
I also remember hearing about solo DoS attacks on 800 numbers in which lone individuals would program their modems to dial the target number repeatedly.
Yes, correct. Unfortunately for said war-dialer, 800 numbers keep track of the phone #'s used to call them. Said war-dialer was sued successfully, and had to pay for the cost of his calls, IIRC.
Keep in mind that is a form of DoS, and is wrong. If it isn't wrong, then neither is spam...
And the hysteria about lawsuits was laughable. Microsoft has a big enough legal budget to tie up class-action lawsuits for years,
The same was said of Big Tobacco.
and its insurance company is already putting aside billions to start drawing interest for the inevitable day when the settlements must be paid.
Wait till they have to make a lump-sum payment of US$300 billion.
Jon, you're making the presumption that MSFT's lawyers are competent, which is a fact not in evidence. Take a look at the trial Judge Jackson presided over, and all of the "mindcrafted" evidence they attempted to submit, much to DoJ's amusement and delight.
Besides, the biggest class of user is going to be the government, both state and federal. The same laws that let them hack on Big Tobacco will be applied to MSFT.
Yes, that's fantastic. Good education could do with another way of weeding out the poor.
CoughCough Had you bothered to check out the costs associated with attending Rose-Hulman, you'd have seen this:
Let's get the bad news over with first. We estimate (see table on left) that the total cost of one year at Rose-Hulman including room, board, tuition, books, supplies, and a night on the town in Terre Haute will run about $29,000.
Even a $5000 laptop would only amount to 4.3% of a four year stay at that fine institution...where, exactly, did you get your education?
The Open Source pot should NOT be calling the Microsoft kettle black... take a look at some of the code from Open Source projects some time. It's some of the worst, inconsistently indented, uncommented, algorithmically brain-damaged on earth.
Perhaps...but one is done by professional programmers and the other by hobbyists, right?
Which one would you expect to be better? wouldn't be the one you're paying money for, would it?
I have an eight year old daughter, and I can certainly find other toys for her besides Barbie dolls.
Does she already have Barbie dolls? If so, your boycott is doomed to failure. You're about to find out that hell hath no fury like a woman denied her Barbie dolls...
I'm not advocating we expose children to pornography, but if you ARE GOING TO COMPARE pornography to hate speech, hate speech is far more damaging to children and society than the freedom of sexual expression.
Oh, I dunno. The beauty of free speech is that you have to use good speech to combat bad speech. The alternative is to *cough*cough* censor it. And that leads us right back to the root cause of all these problems:
Who gets to decide what to view and what to censor?
Sure, you have your view of pr0n. But a feminist is going to come along and claim it is degrading and depicts sexual violence against women. In fact, she may view you as being in the same league as the Klan...you may not think it rational, but there it is...
The downside to persecuting stuff like the Klan is that you drive it out of sight, into the dark corners where it can fester and grow.
I agree with the prediction that things will end up moving more towards centralized computer resources, and lesser-equipped but ubiquitous terminals to access those resources
AAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKK!!!!!!!!! My G*d, man, we fought the Powers That Be for a very long time to decentralize computing resources! Now we're swinging back to it?
Maybe IBM porting linux to an S390 wasn't such a bad idea after all...welcome back, Big Iron!
Is there some fundamental flaw in it that I'm missing?
Yeah, mass of the tether is one. Then you have to find a way to get the blimp thru the jet stream without shreading it. Then you have to have a tether capable of withstanding the stess. And you're going to piss off a bunch of airlines who now have to worry about not hitting your tether. Then you have to deal with atmospheric electrical charges.
And terrorists don't need a rocket that can travel 20 KM up to kill it. They just need to attack the ground station...
The devil is in the details...
James
Re:Hmmm... now all i need...
on
Date Pagers
·
· Score: 1
it would be *so* much fun to get a whole restaurant of single women chasing me!
Yeah, until they caught you and proceeded to beat the snot out of your and your palmpilot...
We need a Perl/CGI module to identify any blocking software that the person viewing your page is using.
That's nice, in theory, but anyone who's actually done CGI knows that anything that the browser sends back should be treated as a lie.
I have perl scripts that identify themselves as: Mozilla/4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.10 i386), how long do you think it'll be before the censorwares do the same?
5) "If you don't defend your copyright you lose it." -- "Somebody has that name copyrighted!" False. Copyright is effectively never lost these days, unless explicitly given away. You also can't "copyright a name" or anything short like that, such as almost all titles. You may be thinking of trade marks, which apply to names, and can be weakened or lost if not defended
I don't have to fsck with the black magic of the sendmail.cf
Dude, there's something called m4. That's the modern, enlightened way of configuring sendmail. If you're mucking around with.cf files, then you get what you deserve...
No, you're right. Your comment won't be moderated into oblivion - it should be promoted to Godhood
Only if you're into hyperbole. Usenet existed about 8 years before it got onto the "internet". They used a different communications mechanism. I'll refer you to uucp(1) for more details.
Scenario: Somebody registers YOUR name, they make money out of things YOU have done. They trade on YOUR brand, on YOUR image (well, maybe not image - Geek!).
You put up your own web page, you put up an explaination of what's going on, and make fun of your "competitor". Get quoted in Wired, and on Slashdot, and elsewhere. There are two types of publicity: good and bad. You can't buy better bad publicity for your competition than if they appear to be mean-spirited and petty.
You'd like that? I mean, recently there was a case of http://www.manchesterunited.co.uk/ - it was registered by a fan of a rival team (Arsenal), for two reasons:
1. To make money (by trading football stuff) 2. To hurt ManUtd (he plans to put propoganda there) 3. To eventually sell to Man Utd.
They could have drilled him into the ground...a pity.
A university connects to another university and this to all the universities in US which in turn connect to the universities in EU and to.gov and so on. This is the internet. You do not PAY for this, you PAY when nobody will give you a link and you need a provider (ISP).
Pardon me all to hell, but who do you think provides the actual, physical lines between institutions? the TCP/IP fairy? they sprouted up on their own?
Here's a clue: they're called Sprint. MCI. Ameritech. UUNet. Even AT&T.
Sheesh...
James -- the TCP/IP fairy needs to get his DSL gang out to my house, the slacker!
Re:SSH, what a misnomer.
on
SSH v. SRP
·
· Score: 2
Just to justify myself, having gotten burned by sshd before (twice even. `8r/), I've included URL's to make you all snuggily happy.
Oh, joy!
Here's a buffer overflow.
Quote:
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 02:38:51 +0200
This message contains information relevant to people who compile ssh with --with-kerberos5. There is one or more potential security problem in the Kerberos code. These issues are not relevant for people who have not explicitly specified --with-kerberos5 on the configure command line.
Here's a bounce attack Here's another one.
Two examples of the same thing, from August and September 1997 and version 1.2.17. You realize that skript kiddies prey upon those who don't keep their software up-to-date?
Now what would happen I used a more current source of attacks? There were a couple on BugTraq a couple months ago...
Some versions of sshd are vulnerable to a buffer overflow that can allow an intruder to influence certain variables internal to the program. This vulnerability alone does not allow an intruder to execute code. However, a vulnerability in RSAREF2, which was discovered and researched by Core SDI, can be used in conjunction with the vulnerability in sshd to allow a remote intruder to execute arbitrary code.
I think the lessons are:
1. Keep your software up-to-date. 2. Don't believe for a moment you're completely protected. 3. Keep informed of the latest in security threats.
The only completely safe computer is one that is incapable of being turned on.
You have no grip on the reality of the business world. You don't market a product and then make demands of your customers. It works the other way around. With that attitude the borg will continue to provide what the business community wants. The market place is not drivin by what the programmers want, but by what the non-technical consumers want. If you want linux to remain a after school club for some geeks to use as a resume builder, fine. But if you want it to succeed in the wold at large, wake up. That's what this article is about!!!
And like the original author, you haven't a clue about linux.
It is about what the programmers want. Many of them have day jobs, where they get told what to do, when to do it by, what it has to do, etc. Then they work on what amuses or otherwise interests them.
If someone has an interest in making a nice, simple, graphical interface, they will. If not, it doesn't happen until someone like RedHat comes along and asks Joe Programmer to write one, at which point they haggle over the licensing and compensation.
Your ability to make demands is non-existent. However, you may ask nicely.
Actually, a more accurate comparison would probably be that AOL spammers are a bigger chunk than ALL @home users, combined.
@Home has permitted full-time pro spammers to inject their trash onto Usenet, and worse, allow them to have accounts there. People like Tom Saylor, who'll cheerfully pump out a few gigabytes of spam over a weekend. And they don't or won't do a thing about it.
@Home had 27 of the top-100 NNTP posting hosts AOL had 3
@Home accounted for 4925 posts and 1301932628 bytes of traffic AOL accounted for 2448 posts and 4150207 bytes of traffic
Don't you think that's a wee bit excessive? They're only spewing about 8 times the traffic AOL is. Do you think they have 8 times the number of subscribers?
Slashdot Mirror
Probably because the life expectancy was higher. Did ya know that first European to fire a cannon in combat was also among the first Europeans to die because of cannon fire? specifically, because the cannon blew up.
my guess would be that the most feared enemies in the future are those who never pick up a gun!
Probably right. It'll be all those Serbian hackers uploading virii into the US Arsenal...
James
The Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Army took far more casualties than the U.S. Army. True enough, but they accomplished their objectives while keeping the US from achieving theirs. All that, and no significant air cover. Ironically, that provides an interesting look back at what was thought to be true: The original F-4 Phantoms where designed without a gun, as it was thought that future air combat would be fought with missiles and radar, and the combatants would never get into gun range. James
James
Yes, correct. Unfortunately for said war-dialer, 800 numbers keep track of the phone #'s used to call them. Said war-dialer was sued successfully, and had to pay for the cost of his calls, IIRC.
Keep in mind that is a form of DoS, and is wrong. If it isn't wrong, then neither is spam...
James
The same was said of Big Tobacco.
and its insurance company is already putting aside billions to start drawing interest for the inevitable day when the settlements must be paid.
Wait till they have to make a lump-sum payment of US$300 billion.
Jon, you're making the presumption that MSFT's lawyers are competent, which is a fact not in evidence. Take a look at the trial Judge Jackson presided over, and all of the "mindcrafted" evidence they attempted to submit, much to DoJ's amusement and delight.
Besides, the biggest class of user is going to be the government, both state and federal. The same laws that let them hack on Big Tobacco will be applied to MSFT.
James
We live in amusing times. :)
James
One could hope.
James
You mean like xterm -fn '-bitstream-courier-bold-r-normal-*-*-220-*-*-m-*- iso8859-1' &?
James
Actually, yes.
whois silicon.com
Registrant:
Network Multimedia Television (SILICON16-DOM)
15-19 Britten Street
London, SW3 3TZ
UK
Hmmm...
James
CoughCough Had you bothered to check out the costs associated with attending Rose-Hulman, you'd have seen this:
Even a $5000 laptop would only amount to 4.3% of a four year stay at that fine institution...where, exactly, did you get your education?James
Perhaps...but one is done by professional programmers and the other by hobbyists, right?
Which one would you expect to be better? wouldn't be the one you're paying money for, would it?
James
Does she already have Barbie dolls? If so, your boycott is doomed to failure. You're about to find out that hell hath no fury like a woman denied her Barbie dolls...
James
Oh, I dunno. The beauty of free speech is that you have to use good speech to combat bad speech. The alternative is to *cough*cough* censor it. And that leads us right back to the root cause of all these problems:
Who gets to decide what to view and what to censor?
Sure, you have your view of pr0n. But a feminist is going to come along and claim it is degrading and depicts sexual violence against women. In fact, she may view you as being in the same league as the Klan...you may not think it rational, but there it is...
The downside to persecuting stuff like the Klan is that you drive it out of sight, into the dark corners where it can fester and grow.
James
AAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKK!!!!!!!!! My G*d, man, we fought the Powers That Be for a very long time to decentralize computing resources! Now we're swinging back to it?
Maybe IBM porting linux to an S390 wasn't such a bad idea after all...welcome back, Big Iron!
James
Yeah, mass of the tether is one. Then you have to find a way to get the blimp thru the jet stream without shreading it. Then you have to have a tether capable of withstanding the stess. And you're going to piss off a bunch of airlines who now have to worry about not hitting your tether. Then you have to deal with atmospheric electrical charges.
And terrorists don't need a rocket that can travel 20 KM up to kill it. They just need to attack the ground station...
The devil is in the details...
James
Yeah, until they caught you and proceeded to beat the snot out of your and your palmpilot...
Who do you think you are, Stef Murky?? :)
James
That's nice, in theory, but anyone who's actually done CGI knows that anything that the browser sends back should be treated as a lie.
I have perl scripts that identify themselves as: Mozilla/4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.10 i386), how long do you think it'll be before the censorwares do the same?
James
What you say is true of trademarks -- which is why 3M prefers you to say "Scotch-brand tape" and not "scotch tape".
However, copyright can only expire or be given up. From 10 Big Myths about copyright:
Just FYI.
James
Dude, there's something called m4. That's the modern, enlightened way of configuring sendmail. If you're mucking around with .cf files, then you get what you deserve...
James
Only if you're into hyperbole. Usenet existed about 8 years before it got onto the "internet". They used a different communications mechanism. I'll refer you to uucp(1) for more details.
Scenario: Somebody registers YOUR name, they make money out of things YOU have done. They trade on YOUR brand, on YOUR image (well, maybe not image - Geek!).
You put up your own web page, you put up an explaination of what's going on, and make fun of your "competitor". Get quoted in Wired, and on Slashdot, and elsewhere. There are two types of publicity: good and bad. You can't buy better bad publicity for your competition than if they appear to be mean-spirited and petty.
They could have drilled him into the ground...a pity.
Remember to remain calm.
James
Pardon me all to hell, but who do you think provides the actual, physical lines between institutions? the TCP/IP fairy? they sprouted up on their own?
Here's a clue: they're called Sprint. MCI. Ameritech. UUNet. Even AT&T.
Sheesh...
James -- the TCP/IP fairy needs to get his DSL gang out to my house, the slacker!
Oh, joy!
Here's a buffer overflow.
Quote:
Here's a bounce attack Here's another one.
Two examples of the same thing, from August and September 1997 and version 1.2.17. You realize that skript kiddies prey upon those who don't keep their software up-to-date?
Now what would happen I used a more current source of attacks? There were a couple on BugTraq a couple months ago...
You mean this CERT advisory dated 13 Dec 1999?
Quote:
I think the lessons are:
1. Keep your software up-to-date.
2. Don't believe for a moment you're completely protected.
3. Keep informed of the latest in security threats.
The only completely safe computer is one that is incapable of being turned on.
James
And like the original author, you haven't a clue about linux.
It is about what the programmers want. Many of them have day jobs, where they get told what to do, when to do it by, what it has to do, etc. Then they work on what amuses or otherwise interests them.
If someone has an interest in making a nice, simple, graphical interface, they will. If not, it doesn't happen until someone like RedHat comes along and asks Joe Programmer to write one, at which point they haggle over the licensing and compensation.
Your ability to make demands is non-existent. However, you may ask nicely.
James
James
@Home has permitted full-time pro spammers to inject their trash onto Usenet, and worse, allow them to have accounts there. People like Tom Saylor, who'll cheerfully pump out a few gigabytes of spam over a weekend. And they don't or won't do a thing about it.
You want some numbers? check out news:slrn87sosl.uh9.sy_nttvr@gurcragnt ba.pbz for the full details, but in summary, for the 4 hour period begining 8 AM 13 Jan 2000:
@Home had 27 of the top-100 NNTP posting hosts
AOL had 3
@Home accounted for 4925 posts and 1301932628 bytes of traffic
AOL accounted for 2448 posts and 4150207 bytes of traffic
Don't you think that's a wee bit excessive? They're only spewing about 8 times the traffic AOL is. Do you think they have 8 times the number of subscribers?
James