When this happened to me, I used to modify the client (my bottom) by increasing the resistance (extra underpants) and return a spoofed result to the server.
I don't remember whether it was my oldest daughter or oldest son who said, quite possibly, the dumbest thing I've ever heard: "Dad, that spanking didn't hurt a bit!"
That would probably be better than all the debris spreading out and remaining in orbit. That debris, now hundreds of individual pieces, is now able to cause trouble to anything trying to pass through its 'air space', including more satellites, etc.
Assuming the two satellites weren't on exactly the same plane, wouldn't a fair amount of the debris get shoved forcefully either downward toward the atmosphere, or upward so that its next orbit would dip lower (again toward the atmosphere)? I don't know much about such things and whether that would "help" the bits disintegrate significantly more quickly.
Off topic, but just in case anyone is curious as to how Hans Reiser is doing in prison... Not particularly well so far
Moral of that incident: sometimes civilization is the only thing keeping you from getting mauled. I imagine that Hans was being Hans in front of people not constrained by the usual societal mores.
Ths typical Mac user likes MacOS because all the software and hardware is beautifully integrated and consistent, and everything Just Works.
I must've thought those exact words a hundred times tonight as I reinstalled OS X on my wife's iMac because it wouldn't recognize her new iPod Touch and that was Apple Tech Support's final suggestion.
I'm curious, too, if it is able to run in a full non-virtual memory
You pretty much never want to run a non-trivial system without virtual memory where a single rogue app can trash the entire system. To be honest, there aren't a lot of reasons to want to get rid of swapping, either. If you're using swap, it's because your system needed the space. Without it you would have just seen random processes dying unexpectedly.
but it does indeed "process them" as soon as it reads them
Nope. It treats them as a block of data to be moved about and makes no attempt to interpret the data beyond what's necessary for mail delivery. Exchange is getting nailed by examining TNEF attachments. Postfix (or Sendmail or qmail) couldn't care less what, if any, attachments are embedded in an email.
A valid analogy to Exchange would be if ClamAV fell to a buffer overflow while trying to scan attachments.
But 10 years from now, the automated reader will probably be indistinguishable from the spoken version.
So what? My monitor is nearly indistinguishable from low-quality print when viewed from the normal distance, but the Author's Guild can screw themselves if they want to equate it with a book.
At which point it would be too late to pursue this line of thinking since copyrights need to be defended early on (IANAL).
You could've skipped the "(IANAL)" because it was blatantly obvious from your take on copyright law.
I think the answer is that, it's not you that committed the infringement, it's Amazon for making it possible. Afterall amazon sells both forms written and audio. Now they are selling both for the price of the DRM written version. You can see why the booksellers are mad.
No I can't. I had an Amiga with a speech synthesizer in 1985 and no jackass would have dared dream that its mere presence would have made Commodore liable for copyright violation. Seriously, people who think like that need to be weeded from the gene pool because they are demonstrably unfit as members of responsible society.
Re:They may have told the current employees...
on
FAA Network Hacked
·
· Score: 1
Stagnation is a desirable job characteristic?
Who said that longevity means stagnation? If your attitude is prevalent, we're all screwed.
Exploits such as the ones mentioned aren't because the system is executing external code intentionally, rather, a carefully crafted message will overflow a buffer and change the values of some CPU registers.
But that overflow would be impossible if Exchange wasn't trying to act on the contents of messages flowing through it. For instance, it's impossible to make Postfix choke on an attachment since it doesn't try to process them (with the minor exception of filtering on the headers of encapsulated emails if you specifically enable that functionality).
Even if it were possible to get access to the Windows kernel code, it sure wouldn't be free.
Sure it is - just download a copy from your favorite warez server. So which do you trust more out in the wild: software meant to be read by everyone, or software that no one is supposed to see. Good guys and hackers have Linux source, for example, but only hackers can see how Windows ticks. Ergo, Windows has all of the alleged security issues as FOSS but without the mitigating factors. How could you possibly trust that?
Investors would be happy if these billions actually were "paying off in radically unforseeable ways", but the fact is that practically none of this investment is paying off at all.
That's kind of how R&D works, though. You keep testing stuff and testing and testing and hope that something interesting comes out. There's never a guarantee, though.
It's not hard to see that they would be much better off if Microsoft hadn't got into gaming, hadn't made the Zune, and had paid zero to bundle Firefox instead of paying staff to write IE.
In retrospect, sure! At the time, though, each of those looked like perfectly reasonable branches to explore. If Sony can make a Playstation, so can MS. The iPod is not perfect (even if my family owns five of 'em). Netscape sucked and MSIE was a good alternative for a while.
I can't really believe I'm defending Microsoft, but it sounds like their R&D is doing what it's supposed to (even if the Powers That Be can't seem to capitalize on their output).
Even as Microsoft celebrates its 10,000th patent, angry shareholders are starting to speak out against what they say is the squandering of billions of dollars on pointless R&D projects.
Investors know that sometimes things won't pay out. These are the whiny little 10%-return-no-risk assholes who sue when a CEO doesn't start layoffs ASAP to pump up the stock price.
Here's news for you: sometimes weird investments pay off in radically unforeseeable ways. If you're the kind of jackass who dismissed the idea because we already had vacuum tubes, then you're the same kind who thinks modern R&D is a waste of money.
As much as I dislove Microsoft, I'm glad they're doing this stuff. Apparently they understand the importance even if a few short term profit-takers are too stupid to see it.
They're not stupid -- in fact, most of the clients I work with do things daily that I could never accomplish -- but they occasionally do stupid things with computers and networks.
I usually prefer "ignorant", which implies that you just don't (yet) know any better. I reserve "stupid" for a special class of mistakes, like expecting servers to work while unplugged.
Put another way, stupid mistakes make you slap your forehead. Ignorant mistakes make you think, "oh, that's interesting!"
Funny.. you do realize that your iPhone will end up costing you well into 3grand after a mere 2 years of service where it will ultimately be long outdated & replaced.
My iPod Touch, with almost the same featureset minus the phone and GPS, costs far less. I'd by a hypothetical "Kindle App" for it.
Slashdot Mirror
When this happened to me, I used to modify the client (my bottom) by increasing the resistance (extra underpants) and return a spoofed result to the server.
I don't remember whether it was my oldest daughter or oldest son who said, quite possibly, the dumbest thing I've ever heard: "Dad, that spanking didn't hurt a bit!"
Otherwise I'd never be able to get the 6'4" kid I live with to do anything, cause I'm pretty sure I can't take him in a fight.
Christopher Titus talking about fighting his father:
That would probably be better than all the debris spreading out and remaining in orbit. That debris, now hundreds of individual pieces, is now able to cause trouble to anything trying to pass through its 'air space', including more satellites, etc.
Assuming the two satellites weren't on exactly the same plane, wouldn't a fair amount of the debris get shoved forcefully either downward toward the atmosphere, or upward so that its next orbit would dip lower (again toward the atmosphere)? I don't know much about such things and whether that would "help" the bits disintegrate significantly more quickly.
Off topic, but just in case anyone is curious as to how Hans Reiser is doing in prison... Not particularly well so far
Moral of that incident: sometimes civilization is the only thing keeping you from getting mauled. I imagine that Hans was being Hans in front of people not constrained by the usual societal mores.
Ths typical Mac user likes MacOS because all the software and hardware is beautifully integrated and consistent, and everything Just Works.
I must've thought those exact words a hundred times tonight as I reinstalled OS X on my wife's iMac because it wouldn't recognize her new iPod Touch and that was Apple Tech Support's final suggestion.
"Just Works" my ass.
I'm curious, too, if it is able to run in a full non-virtual memory
You pretty much never want to run a non-trivial system without virtual memory where a single rogue app can trash the entire system. To be honest, there aren't a lot of reasons to want to get rid of swapping, either. If you're using swap, it's because your system needed the space. Without it you would have just seen random processes dying unexpectedly.
but it does indeed "process them" as soon as it reads them
Nope. It treats them as a block of data to be moved about and makes no attempt to interpret the data beyond what's necessary for mail delivery. Exchange is getting nailed by examining TNEF attachments. Postfix (or Sendmail or qmail) couldn't care less what, if any, attachments are embedded in an email.
A valid analogy to Exchange would be if ClamAV fell to a buffer overflow while trying to scan attachments.
Yeah, that's why yahoo uses it [citation needed] and why it's second most popular MTA [citation needed].
If it supports their specific needs, why not? I'm not going to advocate Notepad just because Yahoo! uses it in some specific situation, though.
But 10 years from now, the automated reader will probably be indistinguishable from the spoken version.
So what? My monitor is nearly indistinguishable from low-quality print when viewed from the normal distance, but the Author's Guild can screw themselves if they want to equate it with a book.
At which point it would be too late to pursue this line of thinking since copyrights need to be defended early on (IANAL).
You could've skipped the "(IANAL)" because it was blatantly obvious from your take on copyright law.
I think the answer is that, it's not you that committed the infringement, it's Amazon for making it possible. Afterall amazon sells both forms written and audio. Now they are selling both for the price of the DRM written version. You can see why the booksellers are mad.
No I can't. I had an Amiga with a speech synthesizer in 1985 and no jackass would have dared dream that its mere presence would have made Commodore liable for copyright violation. Seriously, people who think like that need to be weeded from the gene pool because they are demonstrably unfit as members of responsible society.
Stagnation is a desirable job characteristic?
Who said that longevity means stagnation? If your attitude is prevalent, we're all screwed.
Exploits such as the ones mentioned aren't because the system is executing external code intentionally, rather, a carefully crafted message will overflow a buffer and change the values of some CPU registers.
But that overflow would be impossible if Exchange wasn't trying to act on the contents of messages flowing through it. For instance, it's impossible to make Postfix choke on an attachment since it doesn't try to process them (with the minor exception of filtering on the headers of encapsulated emails if you specifically enable that functionality).
yeah but qmail hasn't :p
Of course, it has about 5% of the features of Exchange or Postfix or Exim or Sendmail or...
Even if it were possible to get access to the Windows kernel code, it sure wouldn't be free.
Sure it is - just download a copy from your favorite warez server. So which do you trust more out in the wild: software meant to be read by everyone, or software that no one is supposed to see. Good guys and hackers have Linux source, for example, but only hackers can see how Windows ticks. Ergo, Windows has all of the alleged security issues as FOSS but without the mitigating factors. How could you possibly trust that?
It made connections to servers without me asking.
Umm, that's the whole point of it.
It also didn't have a loop function.
Please define "loop function" in a way that makes sense in this context.
This time I got Skype spammed as soon as I opened the application. Coincidence? Four Skype spams in three years?
My mailserver rejects several thousand spams per day. Yes: four spams is a coincidence (and not even a big one).
You're funny if you think linux is easier to administer than Windows.
You're funny if you think more than 10 people on Slashdot would agree with your unusual position.
Investors would be happy if these billions actually were "paying off in radically unforseeable ways", but the fact is that practically none of this investment is paying off at all.
That's kind of how R&D works, though. You keep testing stuff and testing and testing and hope that something interesting comes out. There's never a guarantee, though.
It's not hard to see that they would be much better off if Microsoft hadn't got into gaming, hadn't made the Zune, and had paid zero to bundle Firefox instead of paying staff to write IE.
In retrospect, sure! At the time, though, each of those looked like perfectly reasonable branches to explore. If Sony can make a Playstation, so can MS. The iPod is not perfect (even if my family owns five of 'em). Netscape sucked and MSIE was a good alternative for a while.
I can't really believe I'm defending Microsoft, but it sounds like their R&D is doing what it's supposed to (even if the Powers That Be can't seem to capitalize on their output).
If you're the kind of jackass who dismissed the idea of transistors because we already had vacuum tubes
Darn it, hit Submit too quickly.
Even as Microsoft celebrates its 10,000th patent, angry shareholders are starting to speak out against what they say is the squandering of billions of dollars on pointless R&D projects.
Investors know that sometimes things won't pay out. These are the whiny little 10%-return-no-risk assholes who sue when a CEO doesn't start layoffs ASAP to pump up the stock price.
Here's news for you: sometimes weird investments pay off in radically unforeseeable ways. If you're the kind of jackass who dismissed the idea because we already had vacuum tubes, then you're the same kind who thinks modern R&D is a waste of money.
As much as I dislove Microsoft, I'm glad they're doing this stuff. Apparently they understand the importance even if a few short term profit-takers are too stupid to see it.
First, I would like to see comments on Slashdot cease referring to "the Reds" as if the USSR was still in existence.
Yeah, because irony is too hard to grasp for some people.
OK, it wouldn't hurt to stop calling it Darwinism, in the same way that we don't talk about Feynmannism (QED), or Einsteinism (relativity).
We certainly talk about Newtonian mechanics, though. I guess it just never occurred to me that any of this was controversial.
They're not stupid -- in fact, most of the clients I work with do things daily that I could never accomplish -- but they occasionally do stupid things with computers and networks.
I usually prefer "ignorant", which implies that you just don't (yet) know any better. I reserve "stupid" for a special class of mistakes, like expecting servers to work while unplugged.
Put another way, stupid mistakes make you slap your forehead. Ignorant mistakes make you think, "oh, that's interesting!"
I'm typing this on a Mac, genius. Find someone else to get your righteous indignation on with.
Funny.. you do realize that your iPhone will end up costing you well into 3grand after a mere 2 years of service where it will ultimately be long outdated & replaced.
My iPod Touch, with almost the same featureset minus the phone and GPS, costs far less. I'd by a hypothetical "Kindle App" for it.
I sell the RemmeltCar and have exclusive contracts with dealerships. Spare parts can only be had through them or directly from me.
True, but you can't your customers from buying clone parts from someone else.