Wrong side of the problem
on
R.I.P. FTP
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
No protocol is secure if your side aren't. A keylogger, in your pc, not in the remote site, defeats anything that is password based. Trojans that read or steal configurations of common clients (even ssh certificates) also defeats a lot of usually secure solutions. Even installing software that enables remote administration and not worrying ever about announces of remote vulnerabilities is wrong. When worrying about something that can be accesed in internet, remember that you are in internet too.
Where you should start changing things? replacing the ftp protocol? the ssh protocol? tcp protocol? Start changing yourself, securing your desktop in effective ways (drastically lowering odds switching away from windows could be an start), and how you use it.
Dont think that this genetic changes could be done without replacing or growing your liver. And growing... probably means that is not for you (at least not until we have the tech to artifically growing livers et al), but for your still unborn children (or clone). And then comes all the debate about designing your children, like choosing eye color, eliminating potential genetic diseases and so on. This is just a bit more extreme, but fits in the description
Don't be so negative... they said "that is modeled after the underlying concepts of operating system design.". So it probably will be as secure as Microsoft Windows. At last Internet will be safe.
We aren't speaking about the average driver. We are speaking about the guiness book world records champion of car crashing. The one that created not one, but several industries categories to mitigate and try to prevent how badly specifically it crash and how much innocent casualties it provokes.
Now it took a new car, and will start driving again in the highways, promising again as every time before that will not crash, ever. Is so weird to start wondering if will crash again?
There are several desktop applets that shows what happens in more "serious" (or at least massive) monitoring solutions. Nagstamon shows nagios alarms (and let you ssh/vnc or even see nagios reports onproblematic hosts right there), ZApplet shows Zenoss alarms/warnings too.
Speed? Simplicity? Trading app switching for tab switching? One of the reasons people put to say that "linux is hard" is too much choices. This move could make default windows installation giving too much choices. In some way, is putting netbook approach to the maximum, maybe not even having a hard disk, all is browser, and cloud.
If you want to compare it with something, dont go desktops, think in the instant-on alternatives, linux in bios of some netbooks for fast booting and net accesibility.
Once upon a time in that game what mattered was real player skill solving game puzzles. Even if you create a new char or a new account, what matters is your own skill, and you get some sort of status and even better chances of in game profit because of that. Then they added poker and what mattered most was accumulated wealth and puzzles went into second row.
By the time you finally accepted the fact that the full name of the product wasnt "Gmail", but "Gmail Beta", they changed the rules, say that all was a joke, and that the real name was all the time Gmail, that was in beta stage.
My comment was a bit more generic than small D&D parties. In big MMORPGs and similars, with thousands of players, you not only learn theory, but put it in practice, test waters and new ideas, see what works and whats not, and even starts all over if something goes badly wrong. Yes, is a simplified world, but as i said, with real people behind.
Going a bit further in time with this kind of molecules, how them can be used in mass production of quantum computers, if there will be any of such in the future? Genetic engineering?
In games you have a simplified version of reality, but the people behind them are real, so some interactions with them. Games rich enough where you have commerce, in fact a whole economy, politics, things that you can play with, but if you are involved enough in the game you must learn to do it well, with rules that work even in the real world.
Is not an statistical pure sample... is specifically people that wanted to take that survey. Also, is not people good at math, is people that think (or answer) that is good at math. Could perfectly be people that dont care about answers, said that they are great at math without being so and that they dont care about that topic when they do (maybe with a closer example, i.e. what if that was done with their daughter photo?),
Here you have bigger ones (IIS should not count even as a spot compared with the size of i.e. ringworld). But if we put "in the real world, as far as we know", yeah, could be the biggest so far.
Most of the key components of those "closed" platforms were made open by that companies, or being open and already being widely used. What makes them hard to compete with is more pure horsepower, and human factors than them using closed or open source.
Just eat candies, meat, fast food meals, and do the minimal exercise. That way you not only will keep your shape, will improve it till it gets perfectly round.
The danger/damage scales with the size of the attacker? Internet (or at least, some monocultures on it) is so vulnerable that single individuals alone did a lot of damage in the past. And is so big the hole that individuals and very small organizations are swarming to get a share of the cake. Spam, small/medium botnets, phishing, etc are doing pretty well without implying something big behind, and in a way that could be hard to get the people behind it, at least with current freedom, rights to privacy and so on.
Before worrying about the possibility that big organizations, governments, etc trying to do damage you must go to the small fishes, and with current technology you probably can't, at least without harming a lot freedom and privacy in internet worldwide.
When there is no lines separating what is right from what is wrong, anything goes, but the final choice is made by the buyer (client, visitor, whatever). But once put a line somewhere, limiting the freedom of both producer and client, it always ends putting the wrong things in the right places, or being redefined to be more restrictive, but rarely loosened or removed. The same could happen with most things in internet too.
Will the FPS be replaced by FPPS (First Person PhotoShooters)?
Probably one of the most basic features of the web, one that practically defines it, are links. Putting things in internet, and want to artificially forbid linking is against its nature, is like putting a paper in the water and write a law forbidding that it gets wet. If you want that something not get linked, then don't put in internet, use something else (a book, in not electronic format, i.e.).
Just stay around girls called Sarah Connor. A supercomputer of around that size will appear eventually, and you will take as bonus a portable nuclear reactor, and a somewhat aggressive AI. Be sure to erase memory because it surely will contain a nasty trojan horse.
If could be put at near 0 K (and the power to maintain that temperature is not counted) maybe a superconducing supercomputer could get that speed in that size.
The problem is that it don't display "Kill Sarah Connor" but "Buy shoes there!". But anyway, if we ever want to have terminator vision whoever develops it should have some initial funding, and ads seems to be the candy that makes most public advancements possible lately.
Now you can't index the web because somewhere, somehow in all the world wide web someone posted something that in some country could be challenged as illegal. You can't have any kind of input from your users, because some "malicious" (or not with a ring of 3+ international laws degree deep knowledge) could put a link to a place that have content that could be objectionable in some country. Or you must watch and approve at hand with a bunch of lawyers on your side anything that you will show in your site, coming from you, coming from other sites, or coming from visitors.
Why we couldnt just jail all the persons (and their families, of course, peer pressure works) that want that internet in that internet, and keep this actual one for us?
Slashdot Mirror
No protocol is secure if your side aren't. A keylogger, in your pc, not in the remote site, defeats anything that is password based. Trojans that read or steal configurations of common clients (even ssh certificates) also defeats a lot of usually secure solutions. Even installing software that enables remote administration and not worrying ever about announces of remote vulnerabilities is wrong. When worrying about something that can be accesed in internet, remember that you are in internet too.
Where you should start changing things? replacing the ftp protocol? the ssh protocol? tcp protocol? Start changing yourself, securing your desktop in effective ways (drastically lowering odds switching away from windows could be an start), and how you use it.
Dont think that this genetic changes could be done without replacing or growing your liver. And growing... probably means that is not for you (at least not until we have the tech to artifically growing livers et al), but for your still unborn children (or clone). And then comes all the debate about designing your children, like choosing eye color, eliminating potential genetic diseases and so on. This is just a bit more extreme, but fits in the description
Don't be so negative... they said "that is modeled after the underlying concepts of operating system design.". So it probably will be as secure as Microsoft Windows. At last Internet will be safe.
We aren't speaking about the average driver. We are speaking about the guiness book world records champion of car crashing. The one that created not one, but several industries categories to mitigate and try to prevent how badly specifically it crash and how much innocent casualties it provokes.
Now it took a new car, and will start driving again in the highways, promising again as every time before that will not crash, ever. Is so weird to start wondering if will crash again?
There are several desktop applets that shows what happens in more "serious" (or at least massive) monitoring solutions. Nagstamon shows nagios alarms (and let you ssh/vnc or even see nagios reports onproblematic hosts right there), ZApplet shows Zenoss alarms/warnings too.
Speed? Simplicity? Trading app switching for tab switching? One of the reasons people put to say that "linux is hard" is too much choices. This move could make default windows installation giving too much choices. In some way, is putting netbook approach to the maximum, maybe not even having a hard disk, all is browser, and cloud.
If you want to compare it with something, dont go desktops, think in the instant-on alternatives, linux in bios of some netbooks for fast booting and net accesibility.
Once upon a time in that game what mattered was real player skill solving game puzzles. Even if you create a new char or a new account, what matters is your own skill, and you get some sort of status and even better chances of in game profit because of that. Then they added poker and what mattered most was accumulated wealth and puzzles went into second row.
Is a pig flying!
By the time you finally accepted the fact that the full name of the product wasnt "Gmail", but "Gmail Beta", they changed the rules, say that all was a joke, and that the real name was all the time Gmail, that was in beta stage.
My comment was a bit more generic than small D&D parties. In big MMORPGs and similars, with thousands of players, you not only learn theory, but put it in practice, test waters and new ideas, see what works and whats not, and even starts all over if something goes badly wrong. Yes, is a simplified world, but as i said, with real people behind.
Going a bit further in time with this kind of molecules, how them can be used in mass production of quantum computers, if there will be any of such in the future? Genetic engineering?
In games you have a simplified version of reality, but the people behind them are real, so some interactions with them. Games rich enough where you have commerce, in fact a whole economy, politics, things that you can play with, but if you are involved enough in the game you must learn to do it well, with rules that work even in the real world.
Is not an statistical pure sample... is specifically people that wanted to take that survey. Also, is not people good at math, is people that think (or answer) that is good at math. Could perfectly be people that dont care about answers, said that they are great at math without being so and that they dont care about that topic when they do (maybe with a closer example, i.e. what if that was done with their daughter photo?),
Here you have bigger ones (IIS should not count even as a spot compared with the size of i.e. ringworld). But if we put "in the real world, as far as we know", yeah, could be the biggest so far.
Most of the key components of those "closed" platforms were made open by that companies, or being open and already being widely used. What makes them hard to compete with is more pure horsepower, and human factors than them using closed or open source.
"Come and go mad" could get nicely updated in the light of this discovery.
Just eat candies, meat, fast food meals, and do the minimal exercise. That way you not only will keep your shape, will improve it till it gets perfectly round.
The danger/damage scales with the size of the attacker? Internet (or at least, some monocultures on it) is so vulnerable that single individuals alone did a lot of damage in the past. And is so big the hole that individuals and very small organizations are swarming to get a share of the cake. Spam, small/medium botnets, phishing, etc are doing pretty well without implying something big behind, and in a way that could be hard to get the people behind it, at least with current freedom, rights to privacy and so on.
Before worrying about the possibility that big organizations, governments, etc trying to do damage you must go to the small fishes, and with current technology you probably can't, at least without harming a lot freedom and privacy in internet worldwide.
When there is no lines separating what is right from what is wrong, anything goes, but the final choice is made by the buyer (client, visitor, whatever). But once put a line somewhere, limiting the freedom of both producer and client, it always ends putting the wrong things in the right places, or being redefined to be more restrictive, but rarely loosened or removed. The same could happen with most things in internet too. Will the FPS be replaced by FPPS (First Person PhotoShooters)?
According to unofficial sources, the planned "End of Life" for Windows XP will be in December 21 of 2012.
Probably one of the most basic features of the web, one that practically defines it, are links. Putting things in internet, and want to artificially forbid linking is against its nature, is like putting a paper in the water and write a law forbidding that it gets wet. If you want that something not get linked, then don't put in internet, use something else (a book, in not electronic format, i.e.).
Just stay around girls called Sarah Connor. A supercomputer of around that size will appear eventually, and you will take as bonus a portable nuclear reactor, and a somewhat aggressive AI. Be sure to erase memory because it surely will contain a nasty trojan horse.
If could be put at near 0 K (and the power to maintain that temperature is not counted) maybe a superconducing supercomputer could get that speed in that size.
https://help.ubuntu.com/9.04/installation-guide/i386/boot-usb-files.html
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/FromUSBStick
The problem is that it don't display "Kill Sarah Connor" but "Buy shoes there!". But anyway, if we ever want to have terminator vision whoever develops it should have some initial funding, and ads seems to be the candy that makes most public advancements possible lately.
Now you can't index the web because somewhere, somehow in all the world wide web someone posted something that in some country could be challenged as illegal. You can't have any kind of input from your users, because some "malicious" (or not with a ring of 3+ international laws degree deep knowledge) could put a link to a place that have content that could be objectionable in some country.
Or you must watch and approve at hand with a bunch of lawyers on your side anything that you will show in your site, coming from you, coming from other sites, or coming from visitors.
Why we couldnt just jail all the persons (and their families, of course, peer pressure works) that want that internet in that internet, and keep this actual one for us?