I'm worried about losing important functionality in "other stuff". A lot of our development work is either intranet web-based, or uses browser components as UI in some way.
Starting with an empty device and getting to game's title screen:
1. take the back cover off 2. remove the battery 3. insert game 4. put the battery back in 5. replace the back cover 6. hold down the power button 7. open the main menu 8. select the game
While all security problems should be addressed, one should be realistic in assessing the kinds of attacks likely to be faced. While someone could certainly brave our cheap security system to steal our computers in a night time raid, such an action is not worth spending a lot of time worrying about - our data/hardware is just not valuable enough that many would take the risk of being caught.
We, and many other businesses, should continue to focus our security efforts mainly on preventing by-wire attacks from random outsiders, simply because the lack of personal commitment/risk makes these attacks the most likely to be faced.
GSL is usually written G/S/L, and stands for "Goals/Sex/Language?". It's a common question on the "Seven Habits of Highly Effective Daters" chat rooms.
But this is Iran, not 5-years-ago-Iraq. While the government is certainly abusive, I think many people will brave the possible recriminations. Remember that Iran sees a lot of public student protest.
The other thing to remember is that much Internet access isn't from private homes, it's from publically accessible terminals (and access through them would be pretty much completely anonymous).
If nothing else, I applaud the thought and the effort.
It isn't just one set of e-mails. It'll be e-mails from different addresses in different formats pointing to different, boring sounding URL's. If you think the job of filtering this is easy, you should be able to make a fortune in SPAM/porn filters.
There's no way to get the information to citizens without also reaching the government.
The government will certainly be able to block some, and likely most if it really tries. But, short of blocking the whole internet, this service will make it through to some.
An hour and a half before you asked this, I answered pretty much the same, identical question. It wouldn't have been hard to notice this, it was the only other response to my post.
Apparently, you not only can't be bothered to read the article but you're also above reading any of the comments.
The deliberately generic-sounding URLs for the service are publicized over Radio Farda broadcasts and through bulk e-mails that Anonymizer sends to addresses in the country
They did have a program set up for China. That contract has apparently run out now, but (also from the article):
A bill that passed the U.S. House of Representatives last month would create an Office of Global Internet Freedom that would have up to a $50 million annual budget to help citizens of foreign repressive governments skirt Internet censorship.
There's really only two possibilities for a re-assembled cube (assuming stickers were left on cube and middle pivot cubes weren't rearranged) - even and odd.
Learning to solve the cube via the top-middle-bottom method takes about a half hour, and anyone who's done this 10 or 15 times will be able to spot an odd configuration (unsolveable) as soon as they reach bottom (about half way through solve).
I'm no expert on the cube (it takes me a couple minutes), but it seems to me the competition would be very much influenced by "free stuff" (ie. steps in solving that you don't have to do). From a solving perspective, there's all sorts of situations you can run into and they are not equally favorable.
It's also pointless to standardize the number of turns used in randomization. Beyond a trivial number of turns (say, about 10 - maybe 15 for a pro), the cube is randomized enough that you'll be "starting from scratch" (ie, it's likely your first turns will be moving it further from solved, but towards a situation you can deal with).
I've seen someone solve a cube in 13 seconds. They were moving fast, but they also admitted they got lucky.
So this guy, who makes his living selling games, is telling us that having fun is not a good enough reason for doing something. Everything you do should be a grand, creative, non-derivative work (unless you're deriving from a work that was meant to be derived from - which is transcendentally different).
We should all have better things to do, apparently, than mod or play one of his games.
A license can have a great effect on how a game sells. However, what I said was:
Similarly, Star Wars: KOTOR would have been a great game no matter what the subject.
Now, this may not hold for all subjects (your subject has to mesh with the gameplay somewhat), but I think it's true (regardless of whether the resulting great game would have been as successful in terms of sales).
It was bad enough that I couldn't even laugh. I just felt bad, like I felt bad for Jack Tripper when he scheduled a date with two girls on the same night. I felt bad for the actors, and for the people who wrote the scripts. It made me feel bad for everyone else who worked on this game (and did a good job).
Best voice acting? Impossible Mission for the C64: "Another visitor. Stay awhile... STAAAY FOREVER!"
This guy IS the problem. He thinks that a game is about its subject content. The same idiots think they can make another hit like "Grand Theft Auto" by including prostitutes and violence.
A strong license will help a game sell, but in the end what matters is the game (witness the multitude of Star Wars games and their varying success). That's why the last few crops of "original games" have sucked so hard (think "Blix: The Time Sweeper"). While they may not have stolen subject content, their gameplay was derivative and lame.
I can hear someone thinking, somewhere: "Maybe if they would have made Blix a little more edgy it would have been great - they could have hired Todd McFarlane (creater of Spawn) to design enemies."
No! Maybe they could have made it a good game. Similarly, Star Wars: KOTOR would have been a great game no matter what the subject.
No "Star Control II"? I guess they just didn't play it. That's literally the only possible explanation. If you haven't, go download it now - it's available free as "The Ur-Quan Masters" from sourceForge.
using Win XP, but a good firewall helps with most of the problems
Your firewall helps with this? What, by blocking the mail port? Or does your firewall parse SMTP and block viruses (hint: if it did, it might be called a mail filter or something)?
Thunderbird is a good email client and a nice way to avoid the Outlook viruses that people erroneously call email viruses.
This one has nothing to do with an Outlook vulnerability. It's an e-mail trojan horse. Unless your mail client is unabled to receive files with certain extensions, virus checks them, or executes them under a different permission level (unlikely under Windows), then it's vulnerable.
You represent the most dangerous class of computer users - confident and uninformed.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not worried about losing Flash.
I'm worried about losing important functionality in "other stuff". A lot of our development work is either intranet web-based, or uses browser components as UI in some way.
This is a big deal.
Starting with an empty device and getting to game's title screen:
1. take the back cover off
2. remove the battery
3. insert game
4. put the battery back in
5. replace the back cover
6. hold down the power button
7. open the main menu
8. select the game
vs.
1. insert game
2. turn on
"Hey Dear, now that we've got our attention spans back, we're having the Johnsons over to read 'Life of Pi'."
Board games are a popular party activity where I live - I can't imagine a situation where they would be a substitute for reading.
While all security problems should be addressed, one should be realistic in assessing the kinds of attacks likely to be faced. While someone could certainly brave our cheap security system to steal our computers in a night time raid, such an action is not worth spending a lot of time worrying about - our data/hardware is just not valuable enough that many would take the risk of being caught.
We, and many other businesses, should continue to focus our security efforts mainly on preventing by-wire attacks from random outsiders, simply because the lack of personal commitment/risk makes these attacks the most likely to be faced.
When they say "Accepts all compact flash cards, including IBM MicroDrives", they're trying to trick us.
Saying "The sky is green" is not trolling, it's just being stupid.
It gave me quite a few results - first one was relevant: Bizrate
GSL is usually written G/S/L, and stands for "Goals/Sex/Language?". It's a common question on the "Seven Habits of Highly Effective Daters" chat rooms.
But this is Iran, not 5-years-ago-Iraq. While the government is certainly abusive, I think many people will brave the possible recriminations. Remember that Iran sees a lot of public student protest.
The other thing to remember is that much Internet access isn't from private homes, it's from publically accessible terminals (and access through them would be pretty much completely anonymous).
If nothing else, I applaud the thought and the effort.
It isn't just one set of e-mails. It'll be e-mails from different addresses in different formats pointing to different, boring sounding URL's. If you think the job of filtering this is easy, you should be able to make a fortune in SPAM/porn filters.
There's no way to get the information to citizens without also reaching the government.
The government will certainly be able to block some, and likely most if it really tries. But, short of blocking the whole internet, this service will make it through to some.
Use your imagination a little.
An hour and a half before you asked this, I answered pretty much the same, identical question. It wouldn't have been hard to notice this, it was the only other response to my post.
Apparently, you not only can't be bothered to read the article but you're also above reading any of the comments.
The deliberately generic-sounding URLs for the service are publicized over Radio Farda broadcasts and through bulk e-mails that Anonymizer sends to addresses in the country
They did have a program set up for China. That contract has apparently run out now, but (also from the article):
A bill that passed the U.S. House of Representatives last month would create an Office of Global Internet Freedom that would have up to a $50 million annual budget to help citizens of foreign repressive governments skirt Internet censorship.
Apparently, the thing is set up to monitor when traffic dips (likely due to blocking), and they will change to a different IP - daily if necessary.
It'll still be possible to block, but it will be a continuous arms race.
There's really only two possibilities for a re-assembled cube (assuming stickers were left on cube and middle pivot cubes weren't rearranged) - even and odd.
Learning to solve the cube via the top-middle-bottom method takes about a half hour, and anyone who's done this 10 or 15 times will be able to spot an odd configuration (unsolveable) as soon as they reach bottom (about half way through solve).
I'm no expert on the cube (it takes me a couple minutes), but it seems to me the competition would be very much influenced by "free stuff" (ie. steps in solving that you don't have to do). From a solving perspective, there's all sorts of situations you can run into and they are not equally favorable.
It's also pointless to standardize the number of turns used in randomization. Beyond a trivial number of turns (say, about 10 - maybe 15 for a pro), the cube is randomized enough that you'll be "starting from scratch" (ie, it's likely your first turns will be moving it further from solved, but towards a situation you can deal with).
I've seen someone solve a cube in 13 seconds. They were moving fast, but they also admitted they got lucky.
A pinball table. Pinball lends itself to short gaming sessions and friendly competition. It'll also appeal to a wider cross-section of staff.
I play on a Duron 900MHz, with a GeForce 2 MX.
And it's just fine. I can't imagine you'd be able to buy a machine now that wouldn't be able to run ET passably (for non-hardcore players).
Disclaimer: make sure the machines are reasonably similar.
So this guy, who makes his living selling games, is telling us that having fun is not a good enough reason for doing something. Everything you do should be a grand, creative, non-derivative work (unless you're deriving from a work that was meant to be derived from - which is transcendentally different).
We should all have better things to do, apparently, than mod or play one of his games.
A license can have a great effect on how a game sells. However, what I said was:
Similarly, Star Wars: KOTOR would have been a great game no matter what the subject.
Now, this may not hold for all subjects (your subject has to mesh with the gameplay somewhat), but I think it's true (regardless of whether the resulting great game would have been as successful in terms of sales).
I don't even know what to say.
It was bad enough that I couldn't even laugh. I just felt bad, like I felt bad for Jack Tripper when he scheduled a date with two girls on the same night. I felt bad for the actors, and for the people who wrote the scripts. It made me feel bad for everyone else who worked on this game (and did a good job).
Best voice acting? Impossible Mission for the C64: "Another visitor. Stay awhile... STAAAY FOREVER!"
This guy IS the problem. He thinks that a game is about its subject content. The same idiots think they can make another hit like "Grand Theft Auto" by including prostitutes and violence.
A strong license will help a game sell, but in the end what matters is the game (witness the multitude of Star Wars games and their varying success). That's why the last few crops of "original games" have sucked so hard (think "Blix: The Time Sweeper"). While they may not have stolen subject content, their gameplay was derivative and lame.
I can hear someone thinking, somewhere: "Maybe if they would have made Blix a little more edgy it would have been great - they could have hired Todd McFarlane (creater of Spawn) to design enemies."
No! Maybe they could have made it a good game. Similarly, Star Wars: KOTOR would have been a great game no matter what the subject.
No "Star Control II"? I guess they just didn't play it. That's literally the only possible explanation. If you haven't, go download it now - it's available free as "The Ur-Quan Masters" from sourceForge.
Two words: port 135.
I misunderstood your intended context here (viruses in general as opposed to viruses like this one).
After all, why do you need rights if you don't even have a house?
I think they should extend this to people in condos, mobile homes, or with insufficient equity.
using Win XP, but a good firewall helps with most of the problems
Your firewall helps with this? What, by blocking the mail port? Or does your firewall parse SMTP and block viruses (hint: if it did, it might be called a mail filter or something)?
Thunderbird is a good email client and a nice way to avoid the Outlook viruses that people erroneously call email viruses.
This one has nothing to do with an Outlook vulnerability. It's an e-mail trojan horse. Unless your mail client is unabled to receive files with certain extensions, virus checks them, or executes them under a different permission level (unlikely under Windows), then it's vulnerable.
You represent the most dangerous class of computer users - confident and uninformed.