How is it that something that's intended to become public law should be secret? Are they trying to slip it through congress without anybody knowing? It's very disappointing.
If we're forced to pay for it by one means or another, how is it still illegal to download music? If I'm going to pay the RIAA for something, I better get something out of it from the RIAA.
Give me 1 copy of ghost and 100 empty pcs and toss in a nice little 100Mbps network and I'll hand you back 100 boxes in 5-7 hrs tops that are harder to crack than leather pants off a fat chicks ass.
That's irrelevant. Ghost is not windows. Ghost is not unix either. Ghost is a separate program you can buy. You could set up linux, some unix, bsd, or whatever the heck you want and ghost it to a 100 boxes in the same amount of time.
Group Policy kicks ass. You can completely lock down a machine so that cmd.exe doesn't work no matter what and the only.exe's that do work are the ones you specify.
You're exactly right. You can indeed tell it what programs can run. However there's a rather easy and silly way to beat this. Rename a program you want to run to the name of a program that is allowed to run. Then you run it. That easy. Great for busting guest accounts open.
nice idea but that would be so unbelievably slow unless you overclocked the elevators. overclocked elevators might be fun anyway. whee. *thinks of tower of terror @ mgm*
Browser Rights Management. Like its cousin DRM, BRM would be another "feature" that removes functionality. 10-second full screen ads anybody? You wouldn't be able to skip through that, kinda like the copyright warning on a DVD.
Hmm. That would be interesting. People would start clicking ads for sure. They'd just be clicking the back button too soon after if it'll make the ad go away and save 8 seconds.:)
I figure the way it works is it checks the server's log a few seconds after the first page loads up to see if the popup ad's html page has been loaded first, rather than a piece of javascript. If you have popup ads blocked, the page will never load. A lack of a hit on the ad will equate to a "block" and the page can do whatever it wants with that information. Now whether it's actually a block is another issue. You could have popups blocked, be using lynx, or have an old computer on a 300 bps modem.:)
It seems that a simple way to defeat the antiadblocker would be to make the browser hit the ad page and just not show it. This wouldn't help the dialup users as much, but it would get around that crap, in theory. I'm sure there would be a way to beat that too, like see if the images on the ad load. That in turn could be defeated as well. Just a cat and mouse game.
Actually, Aphex Twin would be good for testing the frequency response of the various codecs. Lots of sounds and noises all over the place. Heck, a few songs have stuff drawn in frequencies. Richard James (the guy behind it all) put a picture of himself in one of the songs, I can't remember which though. You can see it if you run it through an analyzer that scrolls if you have the CD. Supposedly the MP3 version obliterates it because of lost frequencies.
My Kyocera 2035a phone has an option to vibrate first and then ring. I leave it on that all the time, and it's quite nice because you don't make any noise unless you have to. If somebody calls and I'm in some place where I can't answer it, I just silence the "ring" and never make a noise. Their number shows up via CID, and I can call them back later. No excess noise.
We know that sometimes kids who are never exposed to alcohol until they are 19 or 21 can go way overboard the first time... is there a possibility of the same thing happening with violent video games?
This would only restrict the sale of games to minors, not whether or not they're exposed to them. I don't think this is would make a big change in anything. Timmy the 12 y/o wants to buy SoF. He shouldn't be capable of getting into his car, driving to the store, and buying it. He has to have a parent get it for him. Hopefully the parent isn't a minor, but that's a separate matter. The only people this would affect are minors who don't want their parents to know they got the game. Instead they'll just get a copy or borrow it from a friend whose parent did get it.
I've been using Gaim for a while. It lived through the whole A-I-M letters thing and the anti-libfaim stuff. I haven't noticed any glitches in the last day or so. Perhaps they're targeting specific things in Trillian as they did with Gaim back whenever with the checksumming thing. AOL either got tired of looking for things to break or they just ran out.
you know, digital pathogens such as melissa, iloveyou, the....tennis player one whatever her name is, sircam, nimda, etc. have cost us more (so far at least, hopefully it'll stay that way) than a few cases of anthrax. especially with people this alert, anthrax isn't so lethal any more. now now if only things like windows and outlook had an immune system...
fine with me if they block email too. whenever i go to my library the computers are full of people chatting and emailing. i want to look up a stinking book. isnt that was libraries are for? and anyone that is chatting or emailing somehow has a God-given right to ignore the 20 minute rule.
"PS: According to this nifty page at NASA, Mach 7.1 is about 5406 MPH, whereas 260 ft, per 0.03 seconds, is about 5909 MPH."
yeah maybe, but they're probably not flying that thing at sea level either. when you go fly around on an airplane you should notice your ears popping because the air pressure decreases with altitude. the speed of sound decreases as air pressure decreases, so logically mach 7.1 at altitude isn't as fast as mach 7.1 at sea level.
or maybe they just rounded off to the nearest hundredth..03279... would make it 5406 mph.
it doesnt have to be iis, and it doesnt have to be taking control of something. on the other hand, are you willing to bet that it cant be done? how many "secure" ms products (or not even ms products) have flaws like this that appear every once in a while when somebody stumbles across it? too many. code red is achieved within the legal range of values in the protocols involved. without raw sockets, its usually just square pegs in square holes. with raw sockets, you can go into things that cant be done legally according to protocol, so now you can stuff round, triangular, and star shaped pegs through the square hole. things will break. its like trying to run a car on water, or trying to withdraw cash from an atm with the ace of spades. the car wont start, and the atm will reject the card. yes, raw sockets are available to *nix machines, and yes its in w2k, but these things arent widespread among regular people and outside businesses.
perhaps some sort of standardized labeling for software should be implemented, much in the same way that we have a standard recognizable nutrition facts label on all manufactured food products. it would have to spell out exactly whats being put on, separated by component. something like this:
clicking on the [i] would bring up more information on what exactly it is, [u] would bring up complete uninstallation instructions. i doubt anything like this would ever be done but it would sure be nice. besides that some cheating could be done, like the info could read "enhances consumer experience by presenting additional relevant product information" instead of "attaches itself to your browser and reports the web sites you visit so we can guess what you'll buy next"
yes, it means script kiddies can run their little programs with even more ease. syn floods, stealth searches, etc. the classic attacks like ping of death, teardrop, boink, and friends need a raw socket to make malformed packets. although these are not threats any more, similar holes are bound to appear.
my point about raw socket support & code red is that a similar worm could appear, one that requires the use of malformed packets to take control of the IIS server/other microsoft product. it would be able to make these malformed packets by utilizing raw sockets
One record company executive fumed, ``For the past five years, this industry has been endlessly investigated by the government. They find nothing.
And it costs us a fortune.''
they certainly give a lot to politicians. i'm sure they could spare a few bucks. they're certainly not trying to be frugal with their revenue. and they already have an army of lawyers handy to fight off remnants of the terminally ill napster and now everything that has spawned from it.
In the United States, the Justice Department reportedly received complaints from small online music services, which claim to have been refused licenses by MusicNet -- the partnership of streaming-media giant RealNetworks and AOL Time Warner, Bertelsmann AG and EMI Group, according to one source close to the venture.
yeah, shutting out rivals is a nice way to keep your own stuff mainstream. lets go manufacture some more artists and make them the coolest thing ever. for a few months. then if it dries up, get rid of them and manufacture some more artists and make them the big thing.
MusicNet allegedly requires companies to commit to advance payments of as much as $750,000 before entering into licensing talks, according to Roy and others.
aha. they do have the money. and that nice sum is a good way to keep little guys out. better yet there's no guarantee that they'll get their $750k back. lets say someone does rustle up the money to pay admission. certainly the musicnet buddies wont like it. they'll probably bully around the little guy & keep his money too. what a deal.
Slashdot Mirror
How is it that something that's intended to become public law should be secret? Are they trying to slip it through congress without anybody knowing? It's very disappointing.
If we're forced to pay for it by one means or another, how is it still illegal to download music? If I'm going to pay the RIAA for something, I better get something out of it from the RIAA.
I did this on a windows 2k pro machine day before yesterday. It works.
Give me 1 copy of ghost and 100 empty pcs and toss in a nice little 100Mbps network and I'll hand you back 100 boxes in 5-7 hrs tops that are harder to crack than leather pants off a fat chicks ass.
That's irrelevant. Ghost is not windows. Ghost is not unix either. Ghost is a separate program you can buy. You could set up linux, some unix, bsd, or whatever the heck you want and ghost it to a 100 boxes in the same amount of time.Group Policy kicks ass. You can completely lock down a machine so that cmd.exe doesn't work no matter what and the only .exe's that do work are the ones you specify.
You're exactly right. You can indeed tell it what programs can run. However there's a rather easy and silly way to beat this. Rename a program you want to run to the name of a program that is allowed to run. Then you run it. That easy. Great for busting guest accounts open.
nice idea but that would be so unbelievably slow unless you overclocked the elevators. overclocked elevators might be fun anyway. whee. *thinks of tower of terror @ mgm*
Browser Rights Management. Like its cousin DRM, BRM would be another "feature" that removes functionality. 10-second full screen ads anybody? You wouldn't be able to skip through that, kinda like the copyright warning on a DVD. Hmm. That would be interesting. People would start clicking ads for sure. They'd just be clicking the back button too soon after if it'll make the ad go away and save 8 seconds. :)
I figure the way it works is it checks the server's log a few seconds after the first page loads up to see if the popup ad's html page has been loaded first, rather than a piece of javascript. If you have popup ads blocked, the page will never load. A lack of a hit on the ad will equate to a "block" and the page can do whatever it wants with that information. Now whether it's actually a block is another issue. You could have popups blocked, be using lynx, or have an old computer on a 300 bps modem. :)
It seems that a simple way to defeat the antiadblocker would be to make the browser hit the ad page and just not show it. This wouldn't help the dialup users as much, but it would get around that crap, in theory. I'm sure there would be a way to beat that too, like see if the images on the ad load. That in turn could be defeated as well. Just a cat and mouse game.
Actually, Aphex Twin would be good for testing the frequency response of the various codecs. Lots of sounds and noises all over the place. Heck, a few songs have stuff drawn in frequencies. Richard James (the guy behind it all) put a picture of himself in one of the songs, I can't remember which though. You can see it if you run it through an analyzer that scrolls if you have the CD. Supposedly the MP3 version obliterates it because of lost frequencies.
At those bitrates you'd need a golden ear to tell the difference.
My Kyocera 2035a phone has an option to vibrate first and then ring. I leave it on that all the time, and it's quite nice because you don't make any noise unless you have to. If somebody calls and I'm in some place where I can't answer it, I just silence the "ring" and never make a noise. Their number shows up via CID, and I can call them back later. No excess noise.
This would only restrict the sale of games to minors, not whether or not they're exposed to them. I don't think this is would make a big change in anything. Timmy the 12 y/o wants to buy SoF. He shouldn't be capable of getting into his car, driving to the store, and buying it. He has to have a parent get it for him. Hopefully the parent isn't a minor, but that's a separate matter. The only people this would affect are minors who don't want their parents to know they got the game. Instead they'll just get a copy or borrow it from a friend whose parent did get it.
I've been using Gaim for a while. It lived through the whole A-I-M letters thing and the anti-libfaim stuff. I haven't noticed any glitches in the last day or so. Perhaps they're targeting specific things in Trillian as they did with Gaim back whenever with the checksumming thing. AOL either got tired of looking for things to break or they just ran out.
there are linux users that own xboxes? who'da thunk it...
Developers: Microsoft Programmers Stink Even More At Error Handling
they work full time, they get a regular salary, and their best uptimes still cant beat linux's best uptimes. something's just not right.
well if you can use that macsmtp server to send mail, doesn't that completely defeat any "anti-spam" measures they've taken?
you know, digital pathogens such as melissa, iloveyou, the....tennis player one whatever her name is, sircam, nimda, etc. have cost us more (so far at least, hopefully it'll stay that way) than a few cases of anthrax. especially with people this alert, anthrax isn't so lethal any more. now now if only things like windows and outlook had an immune system...
would you like to try the new jumbo biggie whatamac meal?
fine with me if they block email too. whenever i go to my library the computers are full of people chatting and emailing. i want to look up a stinking book. isnt that was libraries are for? and anyone that is chatting or emailing somehow has a God-given right to ignore the 20 minute rule.
"PS: According to this nifty page at NASA, Mach 7.1 is about 5406 MPH, whereas 260 ft, per 0.03 seconds, is about 5909 MPH."
.03279... would make it 5406 mph.
yeah maybe, but they're probably not flying that thing at sea level either. when you go fly around on an airplane you should notice your ears popping because the air pressure decreases with altitude. the speed of sound decreases as air pressure decreases, so logically mach 7.1 at altitude isn't as fast as mach 7.1 at sea level.
or maybe they just rounded off to the nearest hundredth.
it doesnt have to be iis, and it doesnt have to be taking control of something. on the other hand, are you willing to bet that it cant be done? how many "secure" ms products (or not even ms products) have flaws like this that appear every once in a while when somebody stumbles across it? too many. code red is achieved within the legal range of values in the protocols involved. without raw sockets, its usually just square pegs in square holes. with raw sockets, you can go into things that cant be done legally according to protocol, so now you can stuff round, triangular, and star shaped pegs through the square hole. things will break. its like trying to run a car on water, or trying to withdraw cash from an atm with the ace of spades. the car wont start, and the atm will reject the card. yes, raw sockets are available to *nix machines, and yes its in w2k, but these things arent widespread among regular people and outside businesses.
kazaa ------------- 5.0 mb [i][u]
gator ------------- 1.4 mb [i][u]
offercompanion -- 642.0 kb [i][u]
other adware ---- 426.8 kb [i][u]
clicking on the [i] would bring up more information on what exactly it is, [u] would bring up complete uninstallation instructions. i doubt anything like this would ever be done but it would sure be nice. besides that some cheating could be done, like the info could read "enhances consumer experience by presenting additional relevant product information" instead of "attaches itself to your browser and reports the web sites you visit so we can guess what you'll buy next"
my point about raw socket support & code red is that a similar worm could appear, one that requires the use of malformed packets to take control of the IIS server/other microsoft product. it would be able to make these malformed packets by utilizing raw sockets
they certainly give a lot to politicians. i'm sure they could spare a few bucks. they're certainly not trying to be frugal with their revenue. and they already have an army of lawyers handy to fight off remnants of the terminally ill napster and now everything that has spawned from it.
yeah, shutting out rivals is a nice way to keep your own stuff mainstream. lets go manufacture some more artists and make them the coolest thing ever. for a few months. then if it dries up, get rid of them and manufacture some more artists and make them the big thing.
aha. they do have the money. and that nice sum is a good way to keep little guys out. better yet there's no guarantee that they'll get their $750k back. lets say someone does rustle up the money to pay admission. certainly the musicnet buddies wont like it. they'll probably bully around the little guy & keep his money too. what a deal.