Assuming that we are speaking here of room temperature liquid metal, which one? Some are rare, other are not liquid at normal room temperature, but could be when the cpu starts to get hot, or could be an alloy, but aren't so much choices afaik (or they don't specify as any will work).
Laws of physics forbid humanity or at least enough of it to go somewhere else?
We lack the technology to terraform mars (at least now, afaik), but if enough base materials are there, probably would be easier to put something self sustained there than in i.e. moon or a space station. In fact (i think i said exactly this in a prev related discussion) whatever we research to help us live in as extreme environments as mars, could help us to live here too, if things go wrong.
There are maybe more urgent things to solve down here, but if something bad big enough happens, in the end won't matter. Or we can just worry about the present, as always will be something that could be considered more urgent than what really matters.
Last, but not least, sometimes the journey is as important as the destination. Some NASA spinoffs proved that space exploration helped down here in earth. Who knows what Mars could bring.
Earth wasn't always the almost paradise for human-like life that is still a bit today, almost all life was wiped several times in earth history. And that, without our "intelligent" intervention (why wait for a huge asteroid or a snowball earth period if we can destroy it all faster?). Don't waste money in this and humans will become a rich, but unfortunately extinct, race.
One of the ways of having a backup is to be also somewhere else, preferably self-sustained. Exploration could give answers to this, can our life be sustained on Mars? Of all other planets in the solar system, mars is the best bet so far. And if not, could end being a good place to get mass resources (for i.e. building massive enough self-sustained space stations) without worrying about ecology here.
Even without watching it as a future colony, exploration could lead us to new discoveries, new knowledge that could prove to be useful, or even essential, for our future.
Yes, this can be done later, but at some point later will be too late.
Spam can easily go back to gfx form (or other kind of embeddable content, like i.e. pdfs). In that scenario, plain "content" filtering is or incomplete, or enough cpu intensive in busy/underpowered enough servers, AND, the bandwidth needed to do even an early detection will be high.
In the other hand, connection source blocking can cut the connection after receiving a few bytes, but cant do anything again widely used real servers... like gmail.
Complementing this 2 techniques with some sort of user feedback (bayesian, gmail's "report spam", etc) could help to get spam, cpu and bandwidth low.
About updating blocklists based on spam coming from servers risk adding big servers like er... gmail, as spam is originating in their servers from the point of view of the receiver.
Most blocking techniques based on source of connections (black/gray lists/dnsbl, etc) fail against spam originating from real gmail accounts, coming thru their servers. And filtering based on content not only is expensive (requires more cpu at the very least) but also very sensible to whatever trick the spammers are using some day.
But once you have a way to automate creating accounts or at least being able to do it in mass (cracking captchas, or using social engineering, like putting a bunch of people to decipher it for you with tricks like masking it as a game or a way to deliver porn or whatever), no big email provider is safe.
Of course, some behavior can be blocked for sending mail. Making sending thru auth smtp slower, or not letting just subscribed accounts to send to a lot of different people at once, or limiting the amount of receivers per hour, there are a lot of things that can be implemented.
But if a mid-sized botnet targets gmail/hotmail/yahoo/whatever, it could be fast to react to those challenges, so you will not really solve the problem AND will punish your users if they have a somewhat not evil use that hits those restrictions (i.e. autorepliers, mailing/announcement lists, etc)
My firewall logs at least are pretty spammy with what are stopping at all hours.
Not sure if my netblock is relatively quiet or active, but got 14 test of 9 different ips to 9 different ports in a random chosen 10 minutes interval. If any vulnerability was there, i had no need to browse or do anything more than just get connected to get infected/exploited/botnetted.
That a white hat shows that is possible don't exclude the possibility that black hats already found and are actively exploiting it.
Would be interesting to know the line of processors affected, or a tool that shows that one is vulnerable (ok, maybe is not so great idea, lot of malware disguise themselves as vulnerability checkers). Or if there any practical limitation on what they can do (i.e. if it is very dependant on processor model, jvm used, OS version and so on).
And, of course, what can of protection we have in the worst case (that this start to be widely exploited in the wild). Firewalls dont work here, probably antivirus will be useless too, my best bet is noscript and similar programs.
Probably more than small/medium/large the concepts are more like few/couple/handful/lot/basket?/too many.
Maybe their concepts on amounts units are related to the english unit system (at least for me, that i use the metric one), as is based on common objects (i.e. for distance, feet, foot, etc).
What about invading 1st countries where most spammers hide and are somewhat protected by their government? It worked with Afghanistan and Iraq regarding terrorism, so should work with spam too.
According with Spamhaus the top 10 countries the 1st one is US, then at 1/3-1/4 of that amount is china, then Russia, UK, etc. Would be interesting to see UN/US army invading those countries from 1st to last.
Google version of open protocols is usually regarding formats or messaging, not so much on native desktop client application. Think in google talk, the native client from google is for windows, but based all in open specifications to enable developers to do their own implementations.
Anyway, maybe it still didnt reach yet the "open" stage in the life cycle of that product, as is in early beta.
Maybe this Google move is a reply to this last month slashdot story. Integrating virtual worlds with the rest of internet from the browser side looks like the right solution.
Feels uneasy that they think that i must see thru windows to see the (3D) World, maybe that feel closer than seeing it thru googles, but the real (3d) world experience will start when you get really free (sorry, couldnt resist).
You can create subdomains, and maybe be more descriptive with utilitarian names based on what they do or something descriptive enough to be clear, i.e. externalweb.servers.xxx.com, john.desktop.xxx.com or even mail.france.xxx.com.
Or you can keep the funny names, but use different schemes for different places/functions.
"Look how weird this people think, thats obviously malware!"
Thats a big laught, but then sometimes, some people, could consider i.e. Windows itself malware, and could be so deep in our culture that should be ok if we dont stop thinking on that.
Internet used to had that "another world" feeling, with few points of touch with the real, geographical one. Now you can blog, right here, right now, crossing the street, when no car is coming my w
Probably most that are complaining about prices wont refuse to pay the author what he actually get from each sold book. Digital books dont have the printing, distributions, storage, commisions, etc costs attached to phisical ones.
Wonder which percent of the $100+ of a printed book get the actual author of it,
Not meaning that all that does the editorial is riping the author, using its name to get the fat share of the cake for no work. Promotion, correction, selection of what to publish, putting the weight of its name on that book, all of that have a price (even if we dont start to count all related to the phisical media), but maybe digital distribution could cut badly costs if done fairly (i.e. not asking for digital approx the same price than for phisical)
Slashdot Mirror
is what ends being your CPU if your cooler fails.
Assuming that we are speaking here of room temperature liquid metal, which one? Some are rare, other are not liquid at normal room temperature, but could be when the cpu starts to get hot, or could be an alloy, but aren't so much choices afaik (or they don't specify as any will work).
Laws of physics forbid humanity or at least enough of it to go somewhere else?
We lack the technology to terraform mars (at least now, afaik), but if enough base materials are there, probably would be easier to put something self sustained there than in i.e. moon or a space station. In fact (i think i said exactly this in a prev related discussion) whatever we research to help us live in as extreme environments as mars, could help us to live here too, if things go wrong.
There are maybe more urgent things to solve down here, but if something bad big enough happens, in the end won't matter. Or we can just worry about the present, as always will be something that could be considered more urgent than what really matters.
Last, but not least, sometimes the journey is as important as the destination. Some NASA spinoffs proved that space exploration helped down here in earth. Who knows what Mars could bring.
Mars as a backup for Earth is a pipe dream, a crack-pipe dream.
Suggest another one, and is not a backup for earth, just for us.
Short answer: all eggs in one basket.
Earth wasn't always the almost paradise for human-like life that is still a bit today, almost all life was wiped several times in earth history. And that, without our "intelligent" intervention (why wait for a huge asteroid or a snowball earth period if we can destroy it all faster?). Don't waste money in this and humans will become a rich, but unfortunately extinct, race.
One of the ways of having a backup is to be also somewhere else, preferably self-sustained. Exploration could give answers to this, can our life be sustained on Mars? Of all other planets in the solar system, mars is the best bet so far. And if not, could end being a good place to get mass resources (for i.e. building massive enough self-sustained space stations) without worrying about ecology here.
Even without watching it as a future colony, exploration could lead us to new discoveries, new knowledge that could prove to be useful, or even essential, for our future.
Yes, this can be done later, but at some point later will be too late.
... is mainly water vapor.
Ok, unless we speak about software, where is mainly vapor ware.
Spam can easily go back to gfx form (or other kind of embeddable content, like i.e. pdfs). In that scenario, plain "content" filtering is or incomplete, or enough cpu intensive in busy/underpowered enough servers, AND, the bandwidth needed to do even an early detection will be high.
In the other hand, connection source blocking can cut the connection after receiving a few bytes, but cant do anything again widely used real servers... like gmail.
Complementing this 2 techniques with some sort of user feedback (bayesian, gmail's "report spam", etc) could help to get spam, cpu and bandwidth low.
About updating blocklists based on spam coming from servers risk adding big servers like er... gmail, as spam is originating in their servers from the point of view of the receiver.
Most blocking techniques based on source of connections (black/gray lists/dnsbl, etc) fail against spam originating from real gmail accounts, coming thru their servers. And filtering based on content not only is expensive (requires more cpu at the very least) but also very sensible to whatever trick the spammers are using some day.
But once you have a way to automate creating accounts or at least being able to do it in mass (cracking captchas, or using social engineering, like putting a bunch of people to decipher it for you with tricks like masking it as a game or a way to deliver porn or whatever), no big email provider is safe.
Of course, some behavior can be blocked for sending mail. Making sending thru auth smtp slower, or not letting just subscribed accounts to send to a lot of different people at once, or limiting the amount of receivers per hour, there are a lot of things that can be implemented.
But if a mid-sized botnet targets gmail/hotmail/yahoo/whatever, it could be fast to react to those challenges, so you will not really solve the problem AND will punish your users if they have a somewhat not evil use that hits those restrictions (i.e. autorepliers, mailing/announcement lists, etc)
.. for us to stop hiding behind a fake names and reveal our true identity. What we have to hide, after all?
To give the example, i will do that myself: my real name is George W. Bush, and my main Slashdot account is CmdrTaco.
In spanish, nada means nothing. That would sound like "AT&T investing in NOTHING".
My firewall logs at least are pretty spammy with what are stopping at all hours.
Not sure if my netblock is relatively quiet or active, but got 14 test of 9 different ips to 9 different ports in a random chosen 10 minutes interval. If any vulnerability was there, i had no need to browse or do anything more than just get connected to get infected/exploited/botnetted.
At least I know I'm safe because I run... Oh, crap.
ActiveX?
That a white hat shows that is possible don't exclude the possibility that black hats already found and are actively exploiting it.
Would be interesting to know the line of processors affected, or a tool that shows that one is vulnerable (ok, maybe is not so great idea, lot of malware disguise themselves as vulnerability checkers). Or if there any practical limitation on what they can do (i.e. if it is very dependant on processor model, jvm used, OS version and so on).
And, of course, what can of protection we have in the worst case (that this start to be widely exploited in the wild). Firewalls dont work here, probably antivirus will be useless too, my best bet is noscript and similar programs.
Probably more than small/medium/large the concepts are more like few/couple/handful/lot/basket?/too many.
Maybe their concepts on amounts units are related to the english unit system (at least for me, that i use the metric one), as is based on common objects (i.e. for distance, feet, foot, etc).
According with Spamhaus the top 10 countries the 1st one is US, then at 1/3-1/4 of that amount is china, then Russia, UK, etc. Would be interesting to see UN/US army invading those countries from 1st to last.
Google version of open protocols is usually regarding formats or messaging, not so much on native desktop client application. Think in google talk, the native client from google is for windows, but based all in open specifications to enable developers to do their own implementations. Anyway, maybe it still didnt reach yet the "open" stage in the life cycle of that product, as is in early beta.
Feels uneasy that they think that i must see thru windows to see the (3D) World, maybe that feel closer than seeing it thru googles, but the real (3d) world experience will start when you get really free (sorry, couldnt resist).
About the rest of Discworld, they probably will miss a good part of the fun, but will enjoy them.
You can create subdomains, and maybe be more descriptive with utilitarian names based on what they do or something descriptive enough to be clear, i.e. externalweb.servers.xxx.com, john.desktop.xxx.com or even mail.france.xxx.com.
Or you can keep the funny names, but use different schemes for different places/functions.
"Look how weird this people think, thats obviously malware!"
Thats a big laught, but then sometimes, some people, could consider i.e. Windows itself malware, and could be so deep in our culture that should be ok if we dont stop thinking on that.
Is saying a lot, in fact, with this is the 8th time that Microsoft about their current next version of web browser.
Ok, even more, they said that for middle versions like IE 5.5 too.
Barbarian Police Can Legally Place Trojans On PCs
10m/s^2 for some seconds will do the trick, specially after it lands.
Damn it Jim, im a computer-repair technician, not a private investigator.
Internet used to had that "another world" feeling, with few points of touch with the real, geographical one. Now you can blog, right here, right now, crossing the street, when no car is coming my w
Probably most that are complaining about prices wont refuse to pay the author what he actually get from each sold book. Digital books dont have the printing, distributions, storage, commisions, etc costs attached to phisical ones.
Wonder which percent of the $100+ of a printed book get the actual author of it,
Not meaning that all that does the editorial is riping the author, using its name to get the fat share of the cake for no work. Promotion, correction, selection of what to publish, putting the weight of its name on that book, all of that have a price (even if we dont start to count all related to the phisical media), but maybe digital distribution could cut badly costs if done fairly (i.e. not asking for digital approx the same price than for phisical)