FYI, rednecks watch a different kind of car drive in circles. Eurowannabes watch these cars drive in circles, when not pretending to be really passionate Premier League fans.
Warning up front: DO NOT RUN THE CODE IN THE BELOW LINK, YOU HALFWITS!!!
Ok, now a clarification: the code I think you meant to link to is not an exploit for IIS, it deletes the 1337 h4x0r's files. The exchange is a good way to run out the clock on a Friday, at least through:
You are wrong again, it's "Smashing the Stick" you moron. Not smashing the stack. Ask anyone here!
C. elegans has a completely predictable sequence of cell division, which is one of the main reasons (along with transparency, self-fertilization, survival in a freezer and some others) why it's so heavily studied.
This is a really nice piece of work, but they picked some really low-hanging fruit to try out their method. Which is one of the hallmarks of really nice work, of course.
"Microsoft's figure of 40 million Vista OEM licenses sold has less impact when weighed against the expanded size of the PC market, according to IDC numbers.
Ummm, the only reason anyone cares about those numbers is because of their impact when weighed against all the gloating from clowns who were estimating sales in the low three-digits.
What a pathetic excuse for UN-bashing. I challenge you to explain how UN control would affect state censorship of the internet one way or the other.
Today, the system is reasonably open and anonymous (the other guy's whining about the.xxx domain notwithstanding) and censorship requires clumsy, bolted-on measures like running your whole country behind a proxy. Turning the system over to the UN allows censorship to be applied much more fundamentally. China, Iran, Cuba and Zimbabwe were absolutely upfront about wanting UN control for exactly that reason, and the petulant nerd community decided that, no, this was really about the nerd grievance of the moment.
As long as we're posing challenges to patheticness -- perhaps you'd like to explain why on earth Zimbabwe is so concerned with regulating DNS if it's *not* about censorship?
Furthermore, I'd note that most of the countries (Zimbabwe and Cuba, for example) that you geniuses were convinced wanted to improve domain name registration are far more restrictive than many of the names on this list (South Korea, Thailand). I can't find the total set of countries that were included in this study, but I'd guess that "in which testing could be done safely" probably excluded a bunch of them.
Look at it from the interviewer's side. You sit down in his office and say "I was fired because all my old co-workers were incompetent and dishonest and I took the blame for it, and there's nothing I could have done." If you're him, how do you think he estimates the probabilities of:
a) Yeah, I guess that could actually have happened.
b) You're so dense and arrogant that you still don't have the slightest idea why they fired you.
I mean, it sucks and I certainly feel sorry for you if a) is really true but I predict difficulties trying to convince anyone of that.
Maybe if a student is actually pirating interesting stuff -- V for Vendetta, Ghost in the Shell, Firefly, Mythbusters, or take your pick -- it would be part of their education. I don't mean officially, but maybe these kids would actually take something from what they pirate...In other words, piracy would tend to actually challenge and educate students.
Suddenly I'm thinking we maybe do need all those H1-B's, after all...
If you're a programmer in a financial services firm, you might be in a position to backdoor systems for financial gain. I can see why they'd want to make sure you're not a known criminal.
...and if they just went by name, they might hire the wrong Michael Bolton!
Hopefully you IT people can clarify this -- the outsource firms are bringing workers here on HB-1's and then *who* trains them? They do, or American companies do? Either way, I don't see how this makes sense instead of training the workers in India.
What I found, first when most of the literate people here split for Multiply, again when I was offered a moderator spot on another 2.0'ish site, and with other sites since, is that there's now an asumption that users are already familiar with all the generic functionality of delic.io.ous, Flickr, Digg and the rest. No one ever explains how to use "tags" or stuff like that -- it's as taken for granted as clicking on hyperlinks.
The makers seem either unaware of or uninterested in users who aren't already knee-deep in their competitors.
I think it would be a bad precedent to require everybody who has made a contribution to a paper to be on that paper if they don't want to be.
As with everything with scientific authorship, there are the theoretical rules and the real rules. In the real rules, there's nothing wrong with declining authorship because you don't think you deserve it or because you don't think the rest of the work is solid. This is a weird case where forgoing authorship might be regarded as unethical (although the university did clear him on that charge).
The more important error is that Purdue did *not* clear him of all wrongdoing, just of a sketchy authorship complaint. To quote the second and third freaking sentences of the article:
The new inquiry goes beyond the focus of an earlier one, which looked at whether the professor, Rusi P. Taleyarkhan, improperly omitted himself as an author on two scientific papers. For the first time, a committee is examining whether the underlying research might have been fraudulent.
I realized that after posting, but it still begs (or expands) the question -- isn't it odd for the ESA to convene a conference on a field where the "experts" are a bunch of moldy Usenet kooks?
I mean, I was watching the NASA press conference on the supernova finding a few days ago, and I'd bet none of those guys have been fugitives in Canada for six years over a Usenet-related misdemeanor.
If you read the article you link to, you will find that he seems to be driven more by enthusiasm than by rationality.
I was going to say, that Wikipedia article pretty effectively documents Henson as a kook. it seems like a funny thing to defend him with -- maybe it's that AC who is the real, errr, "Operating Thetan"?
The Scientology issue aside, since even the submission can't get the actual charge correct -- why is the European Space Agency requesting guidance from an enthusiast/crackpot with no relevant technical expertise?
Except that it's practically impossible for anything that guy says to be funny.
That's not entirely untrue, but he's also the kindest-hearted guy on the planet and would never say anything genuinely nasty about anyone, not even sysadmins. Not even the sysadmins who tell you that Lotus Notes is fantastic, "it's just a terrible e-mail client".
"To user the desktop metaphor is dead. We don't believe that recreating a Windows paradigm in an open source model will do anything to advance the productivity in the life of users," Stevens added.
And therefore they're reimplementing the Windows 98 Active Desktop...?
Slashdot Mirror
FYI, rednecks watch a different kind of car drive in circles. Eurowannabes watch these cars drive in circles, when not pretending to be really passionate Premier League fans.
Ok, now a clarification: the code I think you meant to link to is not an exploit for IIS, it deletes the 1337 h4x0r's files. The exchange is a good way to run out the clock on a Friday, at least through:
No, but its effects are much, much noisier. I'd be very surprised if they could get a result like this in your namesake.
This is a really nice piece of work, but they picked some really low-hanging fruit to try out their method. Which is one of the hallmarks of really nice work, of course.
Remember this? Or this? Or this?
Ummm, the only reason anyone cares about those numbers is because of their impact when weighed against all the gloating from clowns who were estimating sales in the low three-digits.
Today, the system is reasonably open and anonymous (the other guy's whining about the .xxx domain notwithstanding) and censorship requires clumsy, bolted-on measures like running your whole country behind a proxy. Turning the system over to the UN allows censorship to be applied much more fundamentally. China, Iran, Cuba and Zimbabwe were absolutely upfront about wanting UN control for exactly that reason, and the petulant nerd community decided that, no, this was really about the nerd grievance of the moment.
As long as we're posing challenges to patheticness -- perhaps you'd like to explain why on earth Zimbabwe is so concerned with regulating DNS if it's *not* about censorship?
Furthermore, I'd note that most of the countries (Zimbabwe and Cuba, for example) that you geniuses were convinced wanted to improve domain name registration are far more restrictive than many of the names on this list (South Korea, Thailand). I can't find the total set of countries that were included in this study, but I'd guess that "in which testing could be done safely" probably excluded a bunch of them.
It's sure too bad we didn't turn the control of the Internet over to the UN, like you guys all wanted...
Someone did beat them, pretty hilariously. Not that you'll be reading about it here.
a) Yeah, I guess that could actually have happened.
b) You're so dense and arrogant that you still don't have the slightest idea why they fired you.
I mean, it sucks and I certainly feel sorry for you if a) is really true but I predict difficulties trying to convince anyone of that.
Suddenly I'm thinking we maybe do need all those H1-B's, after all...
...and if they just went by name, they might hire the wrong Michael Bolton!
Hopefully you IT people can clarify this -- the outsource firms are bringing workers here on HB-1's and then *who* trains them? They do, or American companies do? Either way, I don't see how this makes sense instead of training the workers in India.
Indeed, it's more of a certainty than a "WAG". But I'd meant more that it refers to a quantitative estimate, not to "didn't RTFA".
(Incidentally, being unfamiliar with "take a wag", I searched it and found that you're using it incorrectly. HTH.)
That's great, except that their new cash cow is trucks. I don't think Tundras are included in that prediction.
The makers seem either unaware of or uninterested in users who aren't already knee-deep in their competitors.
As with everything with scientific authorship, there are the theoretical rules and the real rules. In the real rules, there's nothing wrong with declining authorship because you don't think you deserve it or because you don't think the rest of the work is solid. This is a weird case where forgoing authorship might be regarded as unethical (although the university did clear him on that charge).
The more important error is that Purdue did *not* clear him of all wrongdoing, just of a sketchy authorship complaint. To quote the second and third freaking sentences of the article:
I mean, I was watching the NASA press conference on the supernova finding a few days ago, and I'd bet none of those guys have been fugitives in Canada for six years over a Usenet-related misdemeanor.
I was going to say, that Wikipedia article pretty effectively documents Henson as a kook. it seems like a funny thing to defend him with -- maybe it's that AC who is the real, errr, "Operating Thetan"?
The Scientology issue aside, since even the submission can't get the actual charge correct -- why is the European Space Agency requesting guidance from an enthusiast/crackpot with no relevant technical expertise?
That's not entirely untrue, but he's also the kindest-hearted guy on the planet and would never say anything genuinely nasty about anyone, not even sysadmins. Not even the sysadmins who tell you that Lotus Notes is fantastic, "it's just a terrible e-mail client".
And therefore they're reimplementing the Windows 98 Active Desktop...?