Then again who knows what he will be able to do outside the Matrix seeing as he came back from the dead. Maybe part of the movie will be discovering powers outside the Matrix.
I would like to see some of the "advocates" here tell me that this guy didn't have problems. On one hand I understand how that kind of discussion is common in inner-city schools. (I've worked in them, so don't say, "you don't know what it's like in the hood" (because I already know that I don't really know)) On the other hand I can see how this could be considered threatening to the teacher and the school. How do you tell between when someone's talking themselves up and when they actually intend to do it? I don't know. Does the story show intent? I don't think so. Could someone who is scared of the kids they're trying to "school" think so? Yes.
I complete disagree with your statement that the Matrix is not supposed to be deep. It is very deep. No, the movie was not decidedly Christian or "anti-Christian". It also was not decidedly Buddhist or Hindu or Taoist, though it had definite influnces from each. I don't feel like giving a lession on philosophy right now, for the Hindu take on it see above for a reply to some guy talking about it refering to the second comming.
I went to see the movie several times with people from different faiths and they each made aware of different profound parts of the movie. One of my friends who is atheist appreciated it because of the existential references. He also pointed out to me, because he is a musician, that the choice of music in certain places was very purposeful.
If you're a "serious Christian" I would hope that you would at least see the themes related to your own religion and find some depth there.
And I really object to casting a pretty poor with no brain as a Christ-figure
Couple of things, what makes you suppose that Jesus was a "genius" or even a "pretty-boy" like Keanu? And, why is it a "Christ-figure", you could just as easily say a "Buddha-figure" or a "Shiva-figure" (though the latter is a less acurate comparison, could a Hindu person correct the reference?) and be a lot more accurate because the whole "Christ" philosophy doesn't center around the world being an illusion. If you really want to appreciate the movie, get up from the computer (or not) and go study some philosophy, especially eastern philosophy and existentialism. They don't have the "there is no spoon" guy in there for no reason.
The question seems to be whether use of a "trademarked phrase" in conversation can be considered trademark infringement. I can't see how it can be (for one thing because it seems utterly stupid). Maybe they're trying to consider chat room messages as "published media" (and yes I know it's not a chat room, but that's what they think).
You misunderstand me. I'm not saying it's "OK" to break into a house and just poke around. I'm saying that a bad thief is more likely to get caught, and hence you'll know that your lock sucks. On the other hand a good thief leaves no trace that they were there (in the case of stealing copies of important documents and such). Neither of these refers to the case of the "destructive" cracker, which I consider to be (philosophically) the least important. They're easy to see and easy to recover from (you do have backups right?). It's the subtle thief / cracker who leaves a way back in who is more dangerious because you don't know that it the crime happened once and that it could happen a second time even easier.
So you have to ask yourself, do you REALLY want a joy-riding hormone handicapped teen drooling over your financial records?
The things is, the person drooling over your financial records isn't going to be some "joy-riding hormone handicapped teen," it's going to be a professional cracker. (Which apparently some people haven't realized exist.) What teen do you know would give a damn about what groceries you bought where? They might care about your credit card numbers, but still, credit card fraud is a little bit beyond where most kids are willing to go I think. So an insecure network is more likely to allow people who would actually care about your personal affairs easier access to them. Those people include business rivals and (surprise, surprise) the government (just in case you might be a criminal). My guess is the "teen" crackers seriously piss off the "professional" crackers because the teens actually get caught and that means holes get plugged. Think about it.
I wonder what would happen if some script kiddies just happened to hack all the members of congress and US Senators private medical and banking records? MAybe that would change something...
Are you suggesting that it would lead to more privacy rights? People tend to see threats (especially threats to them directly) as people abusing the rights they already have. It would more likely lead to stronger restrictions on encyption and a larger intelligence force (because of course the intelligence community only looks for the "bad guys") to make it easier to find the perpetrators. It's a lot simpler to try to make it easy to find the perpetrators rather than hard to get into the system. Anyone who has tried to make a "secure system" knows that secure is a limit problem, there's always something missing. So it comes down to a "postive / negative" action question. Negative meaning that you try and prevent people from getting access to the system (which people can't see). Positive meaning that you "track down criminals and bring them to justice." Politicians usually choose the positive, visible action.
Unless Microsoft embeds it into every Word document you write. (For those who use Word, it does in fact do this. You can download a utility from Microsoft to remove the marks in the files on your disk, but I believe it still adds the MAC address to all new files.)
It seems that people are making the assumption that they're using regular CPUs for the cracking. This is most likely untrue. They're probably using something more like the "DES cracker" that EFF made (don't have the link on hand). I don't know how what the DES cracker did and what an NSA machine might do relate, but the point of the DES cracker was the DES was highly parallizable and able to be brute forced fairly easily.
1 moon.earth.sol.mw (34.21.56) 500.263 ms 601.991 ms 541.324 ms 2 mars.sol.mw (34.25.5) 180400.005 ms 185394.558 ms * 3 jupiter.sol.mw (54.2.3) 3600530.348 ms 3601001.451 ms 3602219.045 ms 4 pluto.sol.mw (68.3.4) 604803040.079 ms 604804356.086 ms *
I wonder how the author of the article sees the ability to threaten people into stopping the flow of any kind of information as a Good Thing (tm). If anyone with enough money (or anyone theoritically) can accomplish this, then there really is something to be concerned about. What if I said that I thought that the author's article should not be posted on the web because it was counter to ideals that I held. Then I went out and called his or her ISP and threatened them in order to get them to shut down the web site. I've accomplished the author's goal of removing information that I'm opposed to, but I've also violated the basic right of free speech. Now I'm not saying that piracy is free speech. I'm saying that the generalizations made in the article lead to some, IMHO, bad conclusions.
It doesn't seem to make sense to tax companies for email sent between users within the same local network. Then the question seems to become, what consitutes a "local network." If a company or groups uses a proprietary email program over a VPN, what then? The whole idea seems rediculous.
Actually they should probably move on to something that is "actually" useful such as searching for Mersenne (sp?) primes or Goloumb rulers. Both of which have practical importance to the world. (Including ironically making it possible to create stronger encryption and position telescopes to receive signals from space more efficiently)
"Old" technology is having a base memory of 640k and then hiding it from the user. "Old" technology is not having true protected memory. Unix has had protected memory for quite a while. On the other hand look at what happens when one program crashes in Windows.
Well it looks like the servers just went down a couple minutes ago. I bet someone called the wrong (or right depending on your point of view) person and the government caught up with whoever was doing it.
The question is what is AOL going to do with them. Does anyone know about AOL and RIAA relations? AOL vs. Real Networks (for streaming audio) could be fun.
The article on Hellmouth misses the point. Or perhaps it makes a point which needs to be questioned. Katz makes the analogy between Nazi camps and schools for "geeks". In one way this analogy is a stretch in that geeks rarely end up dead. They may suffer emotional and psychological harm. Geeks may even experience physical harm on a regular basis, but, if there are cases of geeks getting killed, they are not well published. On the other hand, schools are like Nazi camps in that the unwanted of society are belittled and hurt, both physically and mentally. However, there is a difference. That difference is that the rest of the population is right there watching it. In this case their complacency is direct. It is not because they can't see the people being hurt, it's because they don't care. What's in it for the rest of the people if picking on the geeks keeps the jocks from picking on them? In answer to all of this, Ms. Dark says that it's the geeks own fault. She says that, because they choose to actually be individuals, they deserve what they're getting. I ask, does anyone deserve to be beaten up every day? Does anyone deserve to have their life be made a living hell because they either can't conform or refuse to conform? Does conforming give one some privilege which prevents harm from coming to oneself? I don't think so. If we say that America guarantees individual rights, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, what does that mean for the people who are in the margins, including geeks in schools? Society requires conformity to function. However, it also requires civility. It seems that the mainstream in schools, and perhaps in other places, has the conformity part right without any of the civility which makes a society actually function. Schools (and society) are creating a small population of strongly anti-social people. It then wonders why there are shootings at schools and buildings bombed. The whole situation needs a lot more consideration than meerly saying that "geeks" deserve it because they don't conform.
Games may have a lot of violence in them. However any *rational* human can distinguish between a game and reality (unless it's The Matrix, but that's besides the point). I love playing Quake, however, I will not go on a rampage killing people because I know that killing people in reality is not the same as killing people in a game for several reason. One is that people in real life are really dead, they don't just respawn somewhere else (as far as I know). Second, there are consequences for killing people in real life. Third, I believe that it is morally wrong to kill someone (except under certain circumstances (anger or insanity not being included)). Fourth, I feel no desire to kill people, whether or not I kill them or they kill me in a game. Sorry for the long windedness.
It's stupid to think that LOCs anything to do with productivity. In programming, it's the person who can figure out the problem and how to implement it most quickly and easily who is to be praised, not the one who writes the most code. When it's time to maintain that code, which would you prefer, clear code (long | short) | convoluted code (long | short). Which brings up another point that this does not take into account maintainance of code.
Slashdot Mirror
The GUI is network accessible and cross platform (X and Windows). It's nice too. I'm not a big GUI guy but it is pretty and it is functional.
BSDI has done this for some time. It's actually really handy when you're messing with stuff. Now if it also supported kgdb, that would be even cooler.
Then again who knows what he will be able to do outside the Matrix seeing as he came back from the dead. Maybe part of the movie will be discovering powers outside the Matrix.
I would like to see some of the "advocates" here tell me that this guy didn't have problems. On one hand I understand how that kind of discussion is common in inner-city schools. (I've worked in them, so don't say, "you don't know what it's like in the hood" (because I already know that I don't really know)) On the other hand I can see how this could be considered threatening to the teacher and the school. How do you tell between when someone's talking themselves up and when they actually intend to do it? I don't know. Does the story show intent? I don't think so. Could someone who is scared of the kids they're trying to "school" think so? Yes.
I complete disagree with your statement that the Matrix is not supposed to be deep. It is very deep. No, the movie was not decidedly Christian or "anti-Christian". It also was not decidedly Buddhist or Hindu or Taoist, though it had definite influnces from each. I don't feel like giving a lession on philosophy right now, for the Hindu take on it see above for a reply to some guy talking about it refering to the second comming.
I went to see the movie several times with people from different faiths and they each made aware of different profound parts of the movie. One of my friends who is atheist appreciated it because of the existential references. He also pointed out to me, because he is a musician, that the choice of music in certain places was very purposeful.
If you're a "serious Christian" I would hope that you would at least see the themes related to your own religion and find some depth there.
And I really object to casting a pretty poor with no brain as a Christ-figure
Couple of things, what makes you suppose that Jesus was a "genius" or even a "pretty-boy" like Keanu? And, why is it a "Christ-figure", you could just as easily say a "Buddha-figure" or a "Shiva-figure" (though the latter is a less acurate comparison, could a Hindu person correct the reference?) and be a lot more accurate because the whole "Christ" philosophy doesn't center around the world being an illusion. If you really want to appreciate the movie, get up from the computer (or not) and go study some philosophy, especially eastern philosophy and existentialism. They don't have the "there is no spoon" guy in there for no reason.
The question seems to be whether use of a "trademarked phrase" in conversation can be considered trademark infringement. I can't see how it can be (for one thing because it seems utterly stupid). Maybe they're trying to consider chat room messages as "published media" (and yes I know it's not a chat room, but that's what they think).
It's apparently www.worldforge.org (not com).
You misunderstand me. I'm not saying it's "OK" to break into a house and just poke around. I'm saying that a bad thief is more likely to get caught, and hence you'll know that your lock sucks. On the other hand a good thief leaves no trace that they were there (in the case of stealing copies of important documents and such). Neither of these refers to the case of the "destructive" cracker, which I consider to be (philosophically) the least important. They're easy to see and easy to recover from (you do have backups right?). It's the subtle thief / cracker who leaves a way back in who is more dangerious because you don't know that it the crime happened once and that it could happen a second time even easier.
So you have to ask yourself, do you REALLY want a joy-riding hormone handicapped teen drooling over your financial records?
The things is, the person drooling over your financial records isn't going to be some "joy-riding hormone handicapped teen," it's going to be a professional cracker. (Which apparently some people haven't realized exist.) What teen do you know would give a damn about what groceries you bought where? They might care about your credit card numbers, but still, credit card fraud is a little bit beyond where most kids are willing to go I think. So an insecure network is more likely to allow people who would actually care about your personal affairs easier access to them. Those people include business rivals and (surprise, surprise) the government (just in case you might be a criminal). My guess is the "teen" crackers seriously piss off the "professional" crackers because the teens actually get caught and that means holes get plugged. Think about it.
I wonder what would happen if some script kiddies just happened to hack all the members of congress and US Senators private medical and banking records? MAybe that would change something ...
Are you suggesting that it would lead to more privacy rights? People tend to see threats (especially threats to them directly) as people abusing the rights they already have. It would more likely lead to stronger restrictions on encyption and a larger intelligence force (because of course the intelligence community only looks for the "bad guys") to make it easier to find the perpetrators. It's a lot simpler to try to make it easy to find the perpetrators rather than hard to get into the system. Anyone who has tried to make a "secure system" knows that secure is a limit problem, there's always something missing. So it comes down to a "postive / negative" action question. Negative meaning that you try and prevent people from getting access to the system (which people can't see). Positive meaning that you "track down criminals and bring them to justice." Politicians usually choose the positive, visible action.
Unless Microsoft embeds it into every Word document you write. (For those who use Word, it does in fact do this. You can download a utility from Microsoft to remove the marks in the files on your disk, but I believe it still adds the MAC address to all new files.)
It seems that people are making the assumption that they're using regular CPUs for the cracking. This is most likely untrue. They're probably using something more like the "DES cracker" that EFF made (don't have the link on hand). I don't know how what the DES cracker did and what an NSA machine might do relate, but the point of the DES cracker was the DES was highly parallizable and able to be brute forced fairly easily.
1 moon.earth.sol.mw (34.21.56) 500.263 ms 601.991 ms 541.324 ms
2 mars.sol.mw (34.25.5) 180400.005 ms 185394.558 ms *
3 jupiter.sol.mw (54.2.3) 3600530.348 ms 3601001.451 ms 3602219.045 ms
4 pluto.sol.mw (68.3.4) 604803040.079 ms 604804356.086 ms *
I wonder how the author of the article sees the ability to threaten people into stopping the flow of any kind of information as a Good Thing (tm). If anyone with enough money (or anyone theoritically) can accomplish this, then there really is something to be concerned about. What if I said that I thought that the author's article should not be posted on the web because it was counter to ideals that I held. Then I went out and called his or her ISP and threatened them in order to get them to shut down the web site. I've accomplished the author's goal of removing information that I'm opposed to, but I've also violated the basic right of free speech. Now I'm not saying that piracy is free speech. I'm saying that the generalizations made in the article lead to some, IMHO, bad conclusions.
It doesn't seem to make sense to tax companies for email sent between users within the same local network. Then the question seems to become, what consitutes a "local network." If a company or groups uses a proprietary email program over a VPN, what then? The whole idea seems rediculous.
Actually they should probably move on to something that is "actually" useful such as searching for Mersenne (sp?) primes or Goloumb rulers. Both of which have practical importance to the world. (Including ironically making it possible to create stronger encryption and position telescopes to receive signals from space more efficiently)
"Old" technology is having a base memory of 640k and then hiding it from the user. "Old" technology is not having true protected memory. Unix has had protected memory for quite a while. On the other hand look at what happens when one program crashes in Windows.
Well it looks like the servers just went down a couple minutes ago. I bet someone called the wrong (or right depending on your point of view) person and the government caught up with whoever was doing it.
The question is what is AOL going to do with them. Does anyone know about AOL and RIAA relations? AOL vs. Real Networks (for streaming audio) could be fun.
The poll now asks what game one would most like to see ported to Linux.
I wrote as a letter to editor at Village Voice:
The article on Hellmouth misses the point. Or perhaps it makes a point which needs to be questioned. Katz makes the analogy between Nazi camps and schools for "geeks".
In one way this analogy is a stretch in that geeks rarely end up dead. They may suffer emotional and psychological harm. Geeks may even experience physical harm on a regular basis, but, if there are cases of geeks getting killed, they are not well published. On the other hand, schools are like Nazi camps in that the unwanted of society are belittled and hurt, both physically and mentally. However, there is a difference. That difference is that the rest of the population is right there watching it. In this case their complacency is direct. It is not because they can't see the people being hurt, it's because they don't care. What's in it for the rest of the people if picking on the geeks keeps the jocks from picking on them?
In answer to all of this, Ms. Dark says that it's the geeks own fault. She says that, because they choose to actually be individuals, they deserve what they're getting. I ask, does anyone deserve to be beaten up every day? Does anyone deserve to have their life be made a living hell because they either can't conform or refuse to conform? Does conforming give one some privilege which prevents harm from coming to oneself? I don't think so. If we say that America guarantees individual rights, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, what does that mean for the people who are in the margins, including geeks in schools?
Society requires conformity to function. However, it also requires civility. It seems that the mainstream in schools, and perhaps in other places, has the conformity part right without any of the civility which makes a society actually function. Schools (and society) are creating a small population of strongly anti-social people. It then wonders why there are shootings at schools and buildings bombed. The whole situation needs a lot more consideration than meerly saying that "geeks" deserve it because they don't conform.
Games may have a lot of violence in them. However any *rational* human can distinguish between a game and reality (unless it's The Matrix, but that's besides the point). I love playing Quake, however, I will not go on a rampage killing people because I know that killing people in reality is not the same as killing people in a game for several reason. One is that people in real life are really dead, they don't just respawn somewhere else (as far as I know). Second, there are consequences for killing people in real life. Third, I believe that it is morally wrong to kill someone (except under certain circumstances (anger or insanity not being included)). Fourth, I feel no desire to kill people, whether or not I kill them or they kill me in a game. Sorry for the long windedness.
It's stupid to think that LOCs anything to do with productivity. In programming, it's the person who can figure out the problem and how to implement it most quickly and easily who is to be praised, not the one who writes the most code. When it's time to maintain that code, which would you prefer, clear code (long | short) | convoluted code (long | short). Which brings up another point that this does not take into account maintainance of code.