Know why? Because we'll get around it. I personally don't plan to run Whistler, and if we're lucky windows will be a niche OS by then anyway.
There are key generators, cracks, and warez versions of *everything* out there, including things that supposedly tie programs to hardware (ie: dongles) or things that tie the software to the machine it's installed on. Sure, this'll hit everyone (if it actually ever happens) at first, but then you'll be able to download the whistler-crack.exe which will remove all serial numbers from the.rars, or something similar.
This has happened before, in other forms, and like the other posters have no doubt said, is not a new idea. Getting around it (for the pirates and inquisitive among you) won't be hard either.
I agree completely.... "best efforts" though. I think that if someone leaves their windows peecee unprotected and it's used somehow, that's not a "chargeable offense". You don't want to see your grandma (who just got cable) hauled off to jail:) However, if you're running a router or server, *especially* a major server like an irc-fscking-network, you should know better.
=Don't you realize that it is impossible, impossible to completely secure any box that has a network connection to the outside? Or, for that matter, a box to which anyone is allowed physical access? It's simply not possible.
"Absolute security is a myth" --someone whose name I don't rembember
Absolutely right, however it is possible to *mostly* secure a box. Beyond plausible deniability as you would. Ie: deny telnet access, put in decent ACLs for your admins for ssh access, remove unwanted/used services, etc. In a lot of cases even doing this will prevent your standard script-kiddies from even bothering you. If you have your ports "stealthed" and their port scans take 10 min apiece, they probably won't even bother with you.
The security on the main servers of anything should be tight. Unless you are running a server that allows public access (ssh and/or telnet) your firewall should only allow access via ssh from various servers (ie: your home/work ips) and nothing more!
Something along the lines of:
ipchains -A input -p tcp --dport 22 -s my.home.ip -j ACCEPT
ipchains -A input -p tcp --dport 22 -s my.work.ip -j ACCEPT
ipchains -A input -p tcp --dport 22 -j DENY
Note I used "DENY" rather than "REJECT". Deny will simply drop the packets, making things like portscans very long, whereas reject sends back a message to the originating server, which can be actually used against you as a DOS (ie: flood the victim by getting them to saturate their bandwidth with reject messages).
I know the code above is probably syntactically incorrect, and a tiny, TINY snippet of a good firewall, but it is however, a start. There are a lot of good ipchains/firewall config tools out there folks, use them!
I already sucked the kernel down from ftp.ca.kernel.org, but since I enjoy those who enjoy anarchy (and I hate your isp too), I'm downloading it from you as well:)
Good points! However, for scenes like: Actor sits in front of a terminal and writes code while camera pans around, sitting someone down at a real terminal, opening up an editor (ok, if you used vim you'd have to hit "a" for them:) and having them look intense and type while the cameraman wanders around them wouldn't be too bad. Depends on the movie I guess... I'll be going to the movie, and I guess we'll see then:)
Good point, however, someone else already pointed out that their treatment of linux is a bit different than other films... that is, they actually mention it!
I haven't had a chance to research the movie much, but maybe the director is a linux (well, unix/gnome) buff and thought "hey, it'd be cool to use this in a movie instead of that obviously fake stuff everyone else has!". A minor point to most people, but it does (or could) raise the film up a bit more in the minds of geeks like us.
Even if they are doctored images, why are they doctored to look like the real thing, instead of the bastardizations that are normally seen, with 2" fonts and big flashing access denie messages? Seems to me if they were going to fake it they could make it look a lot cooler than the default gnome desktop...
There are a few things that we don't know, and can't really know completely. The article says "His failure to get promoted was due solely to race.." and I say bullshit. No, I've never worked at MS, and am as pasty white as they get. But so what if he was passed up for promotions? Maybe he was a jerk? Maybe he thought he was qualified, but really wasn't, or was but there was someone more qualified?
Don't forget, anyone can be an asshole, regardless of their race. If he was purposefully passed over, I'm sure it was on purpose, but I very much doubt that it was due to the color of his skin.
Don't forget the majority of the Internet really is colorblind. The other part are the ones that think that malda is a purple dwarf.:)
What is/was your school life like? Do you have a large group of friends or a small one, and are you in the "cool" or "uncool" category. When I was in school (grad '93) I was a computer geek and definately in the "uncool" category. I was ridiculed in the hallways and most of grade 8 was spent in the library, happy to deal with books instead of people. Lets just say high school wasn't the best time of my life:) It wasn't horribly bad, but if I could go back and do it again I'd definately make some changes.
In being a linux geek in 2000 are there differences? It depends a lot on the character of the person (I was definately a loner and not a "strong" person), but the types of things that you do also reflect strongly I think on how others treat you. Is being a linux and/. geek "cool" these days?
I recently got a new box with a nvidia card, so I thought I'd throw in my $0.02 here.
With X 3.3.6, the voodoo 3 2000 and 3500 (which I have direct experience with) work great. They are fast, provide nice 3d through glide, and quake3 play works wonderfully.
Ditto with X4. Using the tdfx driver, and the tdfx and agppart kernel modules gave me the same performance (and fps) under debian's X 4.0.1.
I upgraded to a K7-900 and nVidia GeForce 2 GTS (32mb) card and have had a chance to play with it. The card dropped into X4 just perfectly, and no great pains were gone through to get it all working.
I have yet to get q3 going under it though. This is party my laziness however. The provided nvidia drivers work fine, but when starting quake, there is serious stuttering (think switching to software gl emulation). I downloaded and threw in the nvidia drivers off their page, and then I was bitched at that the system couldn't find/dev/nv* when it booted up. I assume that that means I should get off my ass and build the kernel module that I downloaded huh? I'm guessing that that will solve my problems.
However, if anyone has any advice to a gamer about what kernels are supported/patched for the nvidia drivers, or which files should be downloaded/installed, I'd appreciate it.
Now, if you mean, OTOH, 'sensible people would realize', well, sensible people should realize that, if it was a joke the kid took seriously, no harm done and pretty good job testing security. Maybe give him extra credit points for the effort.
I wouldn't go that far. Nix the suspension, and wipe any black marks off his record, and congratulate him for getting through.. BUT don't do anything to make him think that hacking is right, or legal, or endorsed out there in the real world. The last thing you want is for him to get a big head and extra credit from school and head off and try to hack say, nasa or something that could get him in REAL trouble.
Agreed. Personlly I use unstable and only once has it bitten me in the ass (when they did some x font changes a while back in 2.0). Other than that, unstable is as up to date as I need to be and as stable as I need.
The stable tree is (I'm guessing) there for people who don't want to update every day and find things are always new. I have servers running old versions of unstable, and have never had a problem.
I think that as advertisers get smarter (read "more annoying") the web is going to get smarter as well. While it proably won't show up on commercial browsers like IE or netscape (and because of their close ties, probably not mozilla either), but on the smaller browers like skipstone, kmeleon, and galeon, I forsee some changes to counter act these advertising practices.
What about an integrated ad blocking service? Yes, it's already here in junk buster, but why not have something just like it built right into the computer. Imagine right clicking on a banner ad and selecting
o never show ads from [server.host.tld]
o never show ads from [*.host.tld]
(or something similar).
How about an icon in the toolbar or status bar that lights up when a pop up is attempting to be displayed. Mousover and it gives you what the address is that is going to be displayed and you have the choice of clicking and displaying the pop up, or not and simply ignoring it. This would be an effective (IMHO) way of dealing with either popups, but still going to sites that have a popup into another page (generally "artsy" pages in my experience, but I digress).
Something similar could be done for forwarding to/from ads (automatically detect and circumvent).
Anyway, I really feel that should ads start going this way, the web will react. Some things are just now coming (or just about here) like disabling the BLINK tag, etc, but I think the smaller, "user" browsers will be resourceful enough to move ahead (or around) this sort of advertising.
Who? Adobe? They own the bits and bytes that make up the book in that format, but they have no claim to the text of the book or what you can do with it.
This may apply to software, when people say "you should open source everything!" I, as a software author have no reason to do that, and if I want to distribute MY software with a license that states it may be used only when standing on your head smoking a 2 year old cuban cigar, I have the right to do that, because it is MY SOFTWARE.
Sadly, unless something has changed that I don't know about, Adobe doesn't own the words to the stories they distribute, and have no rights to say what can and can't be done with the *content*.
Of course, if you were saying that when "they own it" you meant the people who bought the book own the bits and bytes and can read it aloud if they want, I agree with you:)
Slashdot Mirror
Know why? Because we'll get around it. I personally don't plan to run Whistler, and if we're lucky windows will be a niche OS by then anyway.
.rars, or something similar.
There are key generators, cracks, and warez versions of *everything* out there, including things that supposedly tie programs to hardware (ie: dongles) or things that tie the software to the machine it's installed on. Sure, this'll hit everyone (if it actually ever happens) at first, but then you'll be able to download the whistler-crack.exe which will remove all serial numbers from the
This has happened before, in other forms, and like the other posters have no doubt said, is not a new idea. Getting around it (for the pirates and inquisitive among you) won't be hard either.
I agree completely.... "best efforts" though. I think that if someone leaves their windows peecee unprotected and it's used somehow, that's not a "chargeable offense". You don't want to see your grandma (who just got cable) hauled off to jail :) However, if you're running a router or server, *especially* a major server like an irc-fscking-network, you should know better.
=Don't you realize that it is impossible, impossible to completely secure any box that has a network connection to the outside? Or, for that matter, a box to which anyone is allowed physical access? It's simply not possible.
"Absolute security is a myth" --someone whose name I don't rembember
Absolutely right, however it is possible to *mostly* secure a box. Beyond plausible deniability as you would. Ie: deny telnet access, put in decent ACLs for your admins for ssh access, remove unwanted/used services, etc. In a lot of cases even doing this will prevent your standard script-kiddies from even bothering you. If you have your ports "stealthed" and their port scans take 10 min apiece, they probably won't even bother with you.
Maybe leave a severed cable modem in their bed...
The security on the main servers of anything should be tight. Unless you are running a server that allows public access (ssh and/or telnet) your firewall should only allow access via ssh from various servers (ie: your home/work ips) and nothing more!
Something along the lines of:
ipchains -A input -p tcp --dport 22 -s my.home.ip -j ACCEPT
ipchains -A input -p tcp --dport 22 -s my.work.ip -j ACCEPT
ipchains -A input -p tcp --dport 22 -j DENY
Note I used "DENY" rather than "REJECT". Deny will simply drop the packets, making things like portscans very long, whereas reject sends back a message to the originating server, which can be actually used against you as a DOS (ie: flood the victim by getting them to saturate their bandwidth with reject messages).
I know the code above is probably syntactically incorrect, and a tiny, TINY snippet of a good firewall, but it is however, a start. There are a lot of good ipchains/firewall config tools out there folks, use them!
What was your ip again?
clickety click
:)
I already sucked the kernel down from ftp.ca.kernel.org, but since I enjoy those who enjoy anarchy (and I hate your isp too), I'm downloading it from you as well :)
Also, it would really suck to lose your uptime eh?
Also here (bc, canada mirror)
Viva la revolucion, nugga-nootch...
:)
I think you mean "snoochie boochies!"
Good points! However, for scenes like: Actor sits in front of a terminal and writes code while camera pans around, sitting someone down at a real terminal, opening up an editor (ok, if you used vim you'd have to hit "a" for them :) and having them look intense and type while the cameraman wanders around them wouldn't be too bad. Depends on the movie I guess... I'll be going to the movie, and I guess we'll see then :)
Good point, however, someone else already pointed out that their treatment of linux is a bit different than other films... that is, they actually mention it!
I haven't had a chance to research the movie much, but maybe the director is a linux (well, unix/gnome) buff and thought "hey, it'd be cool to use this in a movie instead of that obviously fake stuff everyone else has!". A minor point to most people, but it does (or could) raise the film up a bit more in the minds of geeks like us.
Even if they are doctored images, why are they doctored to look like the real thing, instead of the bastardizations that are normally seen, with 2" fonts and big flashing access denie messages? Seems to me if they were going to fake it they could make it look a lot cooler than the default gnome desktop...
There are a few things that we don't know, and can't really know completely. The article says "His failure to get promoted was due solely to race.." and I say bullshit. No, I've never worked at MS, and am as pasty white as they get. But so what if he was passed up for promotions? Maybe he was a jerk? Maybe he thought he was qualified, but really wasn't, or was but there was someone more qualified?
:)
Don't forget, anyone can be an asshole, regardless of their race. If he was purposefully passed over, I'm sure it was on purpose, but I very much doubt that it was due to the color of his skin.
Don't forget the majority of the Internet really is colorblind. The other part are the ones that think that malda is a purple dwarf.
Here (for the lazy).
What is/was your school life like? Do you have a large group of friends or a small one, and are you in the "cool" or "uncool" category. When I was in school (grad '93) I was a computer geek and definately in the "uncool" category. I was ridiculed in the hallways and most of grade 8 was spent in the library, happy to deal with books instead of people. Lets just say high school wasn't the best time of my life :) It wasn't horribly bad, but if I could go back and do it again I'd definately make some changes.
/. geek "cool" these days?
In being a linux geek in 2000 are there differences? It depends a lot on the character of the person (I was definately a loner and not a "strong" person), but the types of things that you do also reflect strongly I think on how others treat you. Is being a linux and
Yup, Ray Park was his name. He also did the fight scenes for sleepy hollow, as well as toad in X-Men.
I recently got a new box with a nvidia card, so I thought I'd throw in my $0.02 here.
/dev/nv* when it booted up. I assume that that means I should get off my ass and build the kernel module that I downloaded huh? I'm guessing that that will solve my problems.
With X 3.3.6, the voodoo 3 2000 and 3500 (which I have direct experience with) work great. They are fast, provide nice 3d through glide, and quake3 play works wonderfully.
Ditto with X4. Using the tdfx driver, and the tdfx and agppart kernel modules gave me the same performance (and fps) under debian's X 4.0.1.
I upgraded to a K7-900 and nVidia GeForce 2 GTS (32mb) card and have had a chance to play with it. The card dropped into X4 just perfectly, and no great pains were gone through to get it all working.
I have yet to get q3 going under it though. This is party my laziness however. The provided nvidia drivers work fine, but when starting quake, there is serious stuttering (think switching to software gl emulation). I downloaded and threw in the nvidia drivers off their page, and then I was bitched at that the system couldn't find
However, if anyone has any advice to a gamer about what kernels are supported/patched for the nvidia drivers, or which files should be downloaded/installed, I'd appreciate it.
I wouldn't go that far. Nix the suspension, and wipe any black marks off his record, and congratulate him for getting through.. BUT don't do anything to make him think that hacking is right, or legal, or endorsed out there in the real world. The last thing you want is for him to get a big head and extra credit from school and head off and try to hack say, nasa or something that could get him in REAL trouble.
... or a compiler, which has a pretty decent editor built in :)
Agreed. Personlly I use unstable and only once has it bitten me in the ass (when they did some x font changes a while back in 2.0). Other than that, unstable is as up to date as I need to be and as stable as I need.
The stable tree is (I'm guessing) there for people who don't want to update every day and find things are always new. I have servers running old versions of unstable, and have never had a problem.
I think that as advertisers get smarter (read "more annoying") the web is going to get smarter as well. While it proably won't show up on commercial browsers like IE or netscape (and because of their close ties, probably not mozilla either), but on the smaller browers like skipstone, kmeleon, and galeon, I forsee some changes to counter act these advertising practices.
What about an integrated ad blocking service? Yes, it's already here in junk buster, but why not have something just like it built right into the computer. Imagine right clicking on a banner ad and selecting
o never show ads from [server.host.tld]
o never show ads from [*.host.tld]
(or something similar).
How about an icon in the toolbar or status bar that lights up when a pop up is attempting to be displayed. Mousover and it gives you what the address is that is going to be displayed and you have the choice of clicking and displaying the pop up, or not and simply ignoring it. This would be an effective (IMHO) way of dealing with either popups, but still going to sites that have a popup into another page (generally "artsy" pages in my experience, but I digress).
Something similar could be done for forwarding to/from ads (automatically detect and circumvent).
Anyway, I really feel that should ads start going this way, the web will react. Some things are just now coming (or just about here) like disabling the BLINK tag, etc, but I think the smaller, "user" browsers will be resourceful enough to move ahead (or around) this sort of advertising.
Except that the title of the page is probably the users sarcasm about the image he was posting....
I read books as I don't like it when my eyeballs sweat :)
Why? They own it. They can do what they want.
:)
Who? Adobe? They own the bits and bytes that make up the book in that format, but they have no claim to the text of the book or what you can do with it.
This may apply to software, when people say "you should open source everything!" I, as a software author have no reason to do that, and if I want to distribute MY software with a license that states it may be used only when standing on your head smoking a 2 year old cuban cigar, I have the right to do that, because it is MY SOFTWARE.
Sadly, unless something has changed that I don't know about, Adobe doesn't own the words to the stories they distribute, and have no rights to say what can and can't be done with the *content*.
Of course, if you were saying that when "they own it" you meant the people who bought the book own the bits and bytes and can read it aloud if they want, I agree with you
(covering all bases you see)
Yes, but your standard desktop doesn't have to be windows. I have one desktop I use at home and work too, it just happens to be linux.