Of course something will happen, the world is doomed!
In fact, I can prove it: As someone pointed out, '42' in binary is 101010 January 1, 2001 is 01/01/01, or 010101. Now, 42 is the meaning of life, the universe, and everything. 010101 is the inverse of 101010, so January 1, 2001 is the inverse of life. And what is the inverse of life? Death, obviously. Therefore, January 1, 2001 is the end of all life.
You were warned. Y2K is a fools' delusion. Scully was right. I'll be in my bunker.
Perhaps I don't understand correctly, but if DVD is a method of storing data, couldn't the data simply be copied from one DVD to another (given appropriate hardware)? It seems to me the only time the decryption would be needed is when one was actually _playing_ the video. If not, could someone explain? It this key locking the DVD drive at a hardware level? If the keys are only needed for decryption into a mpeg stream, how does this crack have any impact at all on pirateing DVD? A digital copy is the same as the original, and a key shouldn't enter into it. What gives?
-Slackergod
perl is like a pit bull: it may be ugly, but it's damn good at what it does.
I don't mean to insult Construx, I had some when I was little, and played with them alot. They were great for building large structures. But the reason I don't have any anymore (and the main thing I didn't like about them) was that the connectors had a structural flaw in the plastic such that they would split down the center when put under structural stress. So, all my Construx broke by the time I was 9. Course, I was building things like catapults, ones that were able to fling small bricks, etc. ( I had a LOT of Construx ). Anyone else notice that flaw, or was it just me? BTW, Lego blocks integrate better into a structure built with Capsela than with Construx, IMHO.
The American Mentality: I have the right to life (mine, screw yours), I have the right to liberty (who cares about you), and I have the right to happiness (that means I want your money, and more of your money).
Certainly, the US was not established with this in mind. But, to paraphrase a rule from programming, build a better form of government, and I will built a better tyrant. The oppression of the British monoarchy caused the creation of the US government structure to defeat the occurence of such a situtation. Now, we have bred a new and better replacement: the average US citizen, who is responsible for nothing, for they 'obviously' are motivated by horrible scars from their childhood, and so shouldn't have to account for there own actions.
Sure, I'm a US citizen. I'm just ashamed to be one.
Apologies for not being more eloquent, it's late, and I can't write that well.
if the US Gov't taxes sites, can they tax a us citizen buying from a german site? or a german citizen buying from a us site? if not, just route yourself through an anonymizer. If they can, have EVERYONE in the us, who wants to do business, go through an (out-of-US) anonymizer. Certainly there would be enough users/businesses wanting one, you probably setup one, and run in on donations only. I say this because charge a fee would amount to another form of a tax, which is a loophole I want to avoid:) Any thoughts?
...I hereby let out the following scream: "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!PLEASEDON'TMAKEMY AMIGAAWEBTVCLONE!".
This is insane...sure, the idea of household integration is cool, I'll be the first to get one (though don't get me started on the security issues involved in an online toaster). But why does Gateway have to use the Amiga name to foist this product on people? The Amiga has name recognition, sure, but recogition of what depends on who you ask. Most people, if they have even heard of one, think it's an old gaming machine. Anyone affilated with video production probably associates it with the Video Toaster. Then there are the (relatively) few people who actually know about the unqiue architechture (sp?), and admire it for that. It seems to me, though, that none of these images could in ANY way help someone launch what Gateway is apparently now trying to launch. Does anyone have any idea why they choose to piggy-back the Amiga name, instead of launching a brand new product? They can't say "Amiga's back!". One, we've all heard it already. And two, this isn't the Amiga. The Amiga is something you can buy from Antigravity.com, Phase5, etc...so does anyone know why they did this? Also, from a hardware standpoint, what could this new (insert whatever buzzword they're using at this time, I forget) possibly have in common with the old Amiga? From what the article makes it out to be, the 'new' Amiga is going to be a glorified X10 controller, with an X-windows interface. At it would need would be an ARM CPU (not to diss them, I like 'em). And they are certainly going to be cutting costs. So what becomes of the Amiga's sort of asymetric multiprocessing, with graphics/sound/math split into separate cpus, and all the other things from the hw on up that made it the Amiga. This new amiga has more in common with, well, a thinclient tv remote. Arrrghhhhhhhhhhhh, I'm angry. Sorry if this was a vent, having fun moderating me down.
these things were using optical transmissions... faraday cage/etc. wouldn't have any effect. You'd have to make the room really dusty, an really bright, broad spectrum, scattered, changing light sources to confuse them...but then you'd be in a dusty room with a bunch of chaotic strobes lights...oh well
Geek stigma? Shouldn't that affect guys also? I my high school, there were a groups of us geeks, who all took the same classes, sat at the same tables, etc... there were about 25 of us in the group, split about 50/50. Of those, there was a sub group of die-hard CS/MATH students (I consider it the same broad feild), about 5 students. Of these, there were 4 guys and 3 girls. When we went off to college, only one of the guys majored in something unrelated. This was even on top of the fact that all four of the counselors were clueless, and were as stereotypically discouraging as could be expected.
just to add to your response: the generally accepted theory is that while male hunters made many of those stone arrows, the women made their tools out of more perishable items (wood, plant matter, pretty much anything short of stone or metal). As well, how does anyone know who made the arrow heads in prehistoric days? Maybe the hunters were out hunting so much, the women actually made them? Unless someone call tell the gender of a stone tool's maker, you cn prove very much.
Further more, computer programming is not just about tools, it's about symbols, manipulation of abstract thoughts. Perhaps men tend to see it from the tool angle. Even if this was 100% true, the opposite logic would be that women, as "social" creatures (which I think is somewhat of a stereotype, I know a number of antisocial women) would approach programming from a facility in liguistics...how best to say something in order to convey information. Even then, such tendencies are not strongly one gender or another, and even if they were, evolutionary trends SHIFT.
Attention Female Programmers: That AC does not speak for all of us. Personally, I would rather grow old and die with someone who understood all-night programming sessions...not to mention my general mindset. Seriously, I am not saying I would ONLY consider dating a CS major. But the further you move away from the CS / Math majors, the less understanding a person is of the need to code, the beauty of the perfect algorithm, and it's priority over all else. My last girlfriend, for instance, was very intelligent, both in english and math, but simply was not interested in programming. It was at times a strain on the relationship, for she simply could not understand (and even disdained!) my enjoyment of programming.
sure, Chou's method would be writeable only at the factory, but the article also mentioned IBM is working on something similar, which would write the bits one by one... It sounds to me like the technologies are equivalent, and that you could read both by the same method... the Chou's method for mass production, IBM's method as the heart of a personal CDR... though I don't see (easily) how you could get CDRW with these...except maybe by using as a material some polymer which flattened back out under a given electrical charge...hmmm.
I'm not a an anti-government nut, but I think it's kind of obvious that the "enemies" the bill refers to are not international terrorists, child pornographers, or whatever...the "enemies" are the average American public. I don't think the US government is smart enough to engage in a conspiracy, in the words of Bill Maher, "conspiracy? they can't even deliver the mail!". But I do think that they are as smart as the bullies on the school playground...they know who they should fear. Criminals, intellectuals, etc...they aren't a threat, as far as numbers go. But the general american public, the masses, the "sheeple" (love that phrase), must be kept in line. If _they_ get out of line, the government is in trouble. look act the facts: - Export control in the US doesn't affect the outside world at all...numerous postings have made this clear. - Export control does limit US companies from making exportable, strong encryption products. Many therefore won't bother making them at all. - Therefore, "export controls" limit the presence of crypto _within_ the US, without explicitly saying so. No real effect on non-US citizens, but internally, they can now monitor the sheeple, who won't really use encryption unless it's pressed under their maws.
For the note, I'm NOT an elitist. Put me in a large crowd, whip us up to a frenzy against something or other, and we'll all mindlessly move that way without individual thought. The archetype of Star Trek's Borg is but a reflect of the darker side of our minds, wherein we lose individual thought amongst a crowd...the most dangerous thing in the world is a _group_ of angry, cornered prey, especially humans.
personally, when I read that, I got REALLY scared...and still am. As my AP Goverment teacher pointed out to us back in high school, the only way bad US laws really get taken down is when someone makes a fuss about them, challenges them in court, and the Supreme Court eventually rules them unconstitutional. That power right there is the only thing which has managed to keep the corruption of congress from going wild. So now they just pass a bill which states "you can't challenge this in court!", and as soon as Pres. Billy signs it, no one can ever challenge it at all, no matter what is done? Just tack that on to every bill they pass, and the Judicial branch becomes completely irrelevant in the system of checks and balances.
The courts were the last refuge US citizens really have for fighting their government...everyone knows "writing your congressman(woman)" NEVER works.
I'm really scared that someday I'll be arrested, and never be able to challenge the law, because the courts aren't allowed to challenge it.
-A scared US citizen, looking towards Canada. or europe. or, better yet, Antartica.
Probably, if they've been running it for this long on there system, it's "mission critical", and after this amount of time, has been tweaked so that it's so stable on that hardware that they don't feel any need to upgrade: it hides in the closet, and keeps on running.
I don't think queso distinguishes 2.1.x from 2.2.x. Presumeably, the two lines have not been out long enough for a distinguishing characterisitic to emerge for OS fingerprinting. For instance, when my box was 2.0.x, it showed up as that. When it was 2.1.x, it showed up as that. But now that I've got 2.2.x, it stills shows up as 2.1.x.
Strange. Am I the only nerd out there who actually fit in at their high school? Maybe it was because my high school is in a college town, there were actually a number of separate _groups_ of nerds there, enough for an elaborate caste system to evolve. Yes, there were jocks and cheerleaders, but there were WAY more of us, and we actually were COOL. Strange. I seem to have the exact opposite in college. There aren't any groups of nerds to really hang out with, there are no geek girls, no nothing, and here, I am outcast.
Perhaps this event comments more on the nature of human society in general than on the individual, that given the opportunity, ANY of us can become the ones tormenting the smaller group. I, too, fell prey to this at one point, tormenting (with a group of fellow nerds) the jocks in our class. I enjoyed getting back at them for elementary and middle school, but then I felt horribly guilty that I could sink to their level.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course something will happen,
the world is doomed!
In fact, I can prove it:
As someone pointed out,
'42' in binary is 101010
January 1, 2001 is 01/01/01, or 010101.
Now, 42 is the meaning of life, the universe,
and everything.
010101 is the inverse of 101010,
so January 1, 2001 is the inverse of life.
And what is the inverse of life?
Death, obviously.
Therefore, January 1, 2001 is the end of all life.
You were warned. Y2K is a fools' delusion.
Scully was right. I'll be in my bunker.
Perhaps I don't understand correctly,
but if DVD is a method of storing data,
couldn't the data simply be copied from one
DVD to another (given appropriate hardware)?
It seems to me the only time the decryption
would be needed is when one was actually
_playing_ the video.
If not, could someone explain? It this key
locking the DVD drive at a hardware level?
If the keys are only needed for decryption into a mpeg stream, how does this crack have any impact at all on pirateing DVD? A digital copy is the same as the original, and a key shouldn't enter into it. What gives?
-Slackergod
perl is like a pit bull: it may be ugly,
but it's damn good at what it does.
I don't mean to insult Construx,
I had some when I was little, and played with
them alot. They were great for building large
structures. But the reason I don't have any
anymore (and the main thing I didn't like about
them) was that the connectors had a structural
flaw in the plastic such that they would split
down the center when put under structural stress.
So, all my Construx broke by the time I was 9.
Course, I was building things like catapults,
ones that were able to fling small bricks, etc.
( I had a LOT of Construx ). Anyone else notice
that flaw, or was it just me?
BTW, Lego blocks integrate better into a structure
built with Capsela than with Construx, IMHO.
The American Mentality:
I have the right to life (mine, screw yours),
I have the right to liberty (who cares about you),
and I have the right to happiness (that means I want your money, and more of your money).
Certainly, the US was not established with this in mind.
But, to paraphrase a rule from programming, build a
better form of government, and I will built a better tyrant.
The oppression of the British monoarchy caused the creation
of the US government structure to defeat the occurence
of such a situtation. Now, we have bred a new and better
replacement: the average US citizen, who is responsible
for nothing, for they 'obviously' are motivated by horrible
scars from their childhood, and so shouldn't have to account
for there own actions.
Sure, I'm a US citizen. I'm just ashamed to be one.
Apologies for not being more eloquent, it's late,
and I can't write that well.
if the US Gov't taxes sites, :) Any thoughts?
:) a punctuation mark, or does it need a '.'?
can they tax a us citizen buying
from a german site?
or a german citizen buying from a us site?
if not, just route yourself through an
anonymizer.
If they can, have EVERYONE in the us, who
wants to do business, go through an
(out-of-US) anonymizer. Certainly there
would be enough users/businesses wanting
one, you probably setup one, and run in
on donations only. I say this because
charge a fee would amount to another form
of a tax, which is a loophole I want
to avoid
-Slackergod
Is
...I hereby let out the following scream:O OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!PLEASEDON'TMAKEMY AMIGAAWEBTVCLONE!".
"NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
This is insane...sure, the idea of household integration is cool, I'll be the first to get one (though don't get me started on the security issues involved in an online toaster). But why does Gateway have to use the Amiga name to foist this product on people? The Amiga has name recognition, sure, but recogition of what depends on who you ask. Most people, if they have even heard of one, think it's an old gaming machine. Anyone affilated with video production probably associates it with the Video Toaster. Then there are the (relatively) few people who actually know about the unqiue architechture (sp?), and admire it for that.
It seems to me, though, that none of these images could in ANY way help someone launch what Gateway is apparently now trying to launch. Does anyone have any idea why they choose to piggy-back the Amiga name, instead of launching a brand new product? They can't say "Amiga's back!". One, we've all heard it already. And two, this isn't the Amiga. The Amiga is something you can buy from Antigravity.com, Phase5, etc...so does anyone know why they did this?
Also, from a hardware standpoint, what could this new (insert whatever buzzword they're using at this time, I forget) possibly have in common with the old Amiga? From what the article makes it out to be, the 'new' Amiga is going to be a glorified X10 controller, with an X-windows interface. At it would need would be an ARM CPU (not to diss them, I like 'em). And they are certainly going to be cutting costs. So what becomes of the Amiga's sort of asymetric multiprocessing, with graphics/sound/math split into separate cpus, and all the other things from the hw on up that made it the Amiga. This new amiga has more in common with, well, a thinclient tv remote.
Arrrghhhhhhhhhhhh, I'm angry.
Sorry if this was a vent, having fun moderating me down.
these things were using optical transmissions...
faraday cage/etc. wouldn't have any effect.
You'd have to make the room really dusty, an really bright, broad spectrum, scattered, changing light sources to confuse them...but then you'd be in a dusty room with a bunch of chaotic strobes lights...oh well
yeah, but with vmware you can slap windows into a virtual network, behind a linux firewall, which you can control absolutely with ipchains, etc.
Sorry, someone had to say it.
might as well have been me.
Geek stigma?
Shouldn't that affect guys also?
I my high school, there were a groups of
us geeks, who all took the same classes, sat at the same tables, etc...
there were about 25 of us in the group, split about 50/50. Of those, there was a sub group of die-hard CS/MATH students (I consider it the same broad feild), about 5 students. Of these, there were 4 guys and 3 girls. When we went off to college, only one of the guys majored in something unrelated.
This was even on top of the fact that all four of the counselors were clueless, and were as stereotypically discouraging as could be expected.
just to add to your response:
the generally accepted theory is that while
male hunters made many of those stone arrows,
the women made their tools out of more perishable items (wood, plant matter, pretty much anything short of stone or metal). As well, how does anyone know who made the arrow heads in prehistoric days?
Maybe the hunters were out hunting so much, the women actually made them? Unless someone call tell the gender of a stone tool's maker, you cn prove very much.
Further more, computer programming is not just about tools, it's about symbols, manipulation of abstract thoughts.
Perhaps men tend to see it from the tool angle.
Even if this was 100% true, the opposite logic would be that women, as "social" creatures (which I think is somewhat of a stereotype, I know a number of antisocial women) would approach programming from a facility in liguistics...how best to say something in order to convey information. Even then, such tendencies are not strongly one gender or another, and even if they were, evolutionary trends SHIFT.
Attention Female Programmers:
That AC does not speak for all of us.
Personally, I would rather grow old and die
with someone who understood
all-night programming sessions...not to mention
my general mindset.
Seriously, I am not saying I would ONLY consider dating a CS major. But the further you move away from the CS / Math majors, the less understanding a person is of the need to code, the beauty of the perfect algorithm, and it's priority over all else.
My last girlfriend, for instance, was very intelligent, both in english and math, but simply was not interested in programming. It was at times a strain on the relationship, for she simply could not understand (and even disdained!) my enjoyment of programming.
AMEN!
sure, Chou's method would be writeable
only at the factory,
but the article also mentioned IBM is working
on something similar, which would write the bits one by one...
It sounds to me like the technologies are equivalent, and that you could read both by the same method...
the Chou's method for mass production,
IBM's method as the heart of a personal CDR...
though I don't see (easily) how you could get
CDRW with these...except maybe by using as a material some polymer which flattened back out under a given electrical charge...hmmm.
I'm not a an anti-government nut,
but I think it's kind of obvious that the
"enemies" the bill refers to are not international terrorists, child pornographers, or whatever...the "enemies" are the average American public.
I don't think the US government is smart enough to engage in a conspiracy, in the words of Bill Maher, "conspiracy? they can't even deliver the mail!". But I do think that they are as smart as the bullies on the school playground...they know who they should fear. Criminals, intellectuals, etc...they aren't a threat, as far as numbers go. But the general american public, the masses, the "sheeple" (love that phrase), must be kept in line. If _they_ get out of line, the government is in trouble.
look act the facts:
- Export control in the US doesn't affect the outside world at all...numerous postings have made this clear.
- Export control does limit US companies from making exportable, strong encryption products.
Many therefore won't bother making them at all.
- Therefore, "export controls" limit the presence of crypto _within_ the US, without explicitly saying so. No real effect on non-US citizens, but internally, they can now monitor the sheeple, who won't really use encryption unless it's pressed under their maws.
For the note, I'm NOT an elitist.
Put me in a large crowd, whip us up to a frenzy
against something or other, and we'll all
mindlessly move that way without individual
thought. The archetype of Star Trek's Borg is but a reflect of the darker side of our minds, wherein we lose individual thought amongst a crowd...the most dangerous thing in the world is a _group_ of angry, cornered prey, especially humans.
Fear the people.
Just wait for the Ministry of Peace to be established.
personally, when I read that,
I got REALLY scared...and still am.
As my AP Goverment teacher pointed
out to us back in high school, the only
way bad US laws really get taken down
is when someone makes a fuss about them,
challenges them in court, and the
Supreme Court eventually rules them
unconstitutional. That power right there
is the only thing which has managed to
keep the corruption of congress from going
wild. So now they just pass a bill which
states "you can't challenge this in court!",
and as soon as Pres. Billy signs it,
no one can ever challenge it at all,
no matter what is done?
Just tack that on to every bill they pass,
and the Judicial branch becomes completely
irrelevant in the system of checks and balances.
The courts were the last refuge US citizens really have for fighting their government...everyone knows "writing your congressman(woman)" NEVER works.
I'm really scared that someday I'll be arrested,
and never be able to challenge the law, because the courts aren't allowed to challenge it.
-A scared US citizen, looking towards Canada.
or europe. or, better yet, Antartica.
Probably, if they've been running it for this long on there system, it's "mission critical", and after this amount of time, has been tweaked so that it's so stable on that hardware that they don't feel any need to upgrade: it hides in the closet, and keeps on running.
I don't think queso distinguishes 2.1.x from 2.2.x. Presumeably, the two lines have not been out long enough for a distinguishing characterisitic to emerge for OS fingerprinting. For instance, when my box was 2.0.x, it showed up as that. When it was 2.1.x, it showed up as that. But now that I've got 2.2.x, it stills shows up as 2.1.x.
-Jaac (Just Another Anonymous Coward)
Strange.
Am I the only nerd out there who actually
fit in at their high school? Maybe it was because
my high school is in a college town, there were actually a number of separate _groups_ of nerds there, enough for an elaborate caste system to evolve. Yes, there were jocks and cheerleaders, but there were WAY more of us, and we actually
were COOL.
Strange.
I seem to have the exact opposite in college. There aren't any groups of nerds to really hang out with, there are no geek girls, no nothing, and here, I am outcast.
Perhaps this event comments more on the nature of human society in general than on the individual, that given the opportunity, ANY of us can become the ones tormenting the smaller group. I, too, fell prey to this at one point, tormenting (with a group of fellow nerds) the jocks in our class. I enjoyed getting back at them for elementary and middle school, but then I felt horribly guilty that I could sink to their level.
-Jaac (Just Another Anonymous Coward)