Totally agree. One extra thing to note, when I use a regular keyboard now, the tendons on the backs of my hands hurt really quickly (after a few minutes or so) from being contorted back to the old method of typing.
Gack, let's not go there... I wonder if you lined up all the patches applied to IE over the years (pick any particular version) how much larger than the complete install they would be? lol.
Sorry, but I've been downloading gigs of updates for stability and security to my various *nix flavors for the past 13 years. IIS wasn't enabled by default on my Win2k installs, just as SSH, Apache, et cetera, are not when I install Slack or Mandrake. I don't blame Linux for SSH vulnerabilities, nor Red Hat or any other distribution. Equally, I don't blame Win2K for IIS, but there's always the DCOM hole and 'messenger' service to harp on;).
Good point, not just 2000 but XP too. I would still hazard the assertion that the majority of the security problems were with software and not the OS itself;).
...2000-2003 the fault of applications which happened to run on 2000? I'm not too familiar with 'OS worms'... IIS and SQL worms, oh yeah, lots of those; but, those aren't Windows 2000.
Microsoft does not dominate the OS market because the OS is more secure than Linux, faster than Linux, or *better* in any other way that Linux. Microsoft dominates because of Microsoft Office. Of course, their tendrils would never rest in just that one place, but that IS the core of the company.
Not really. This is more advanced in a legal sense than Freenet. Freenet is still dealing with an easy to track entity. Encryption aside, the file is present on a distribution node in its entirety. People pull linear successions of data from a distribution node, which makes the network traffic analysis identification possible for BSA/MPAA/RIAA.
What I propose is that the file itself is decentralized in that one distribution site doesn't actuall expose (a)a whole file and most importantly for anonymity reasons (b)linear sequences of the file.
Each distribution node would, using a 7 node example, send every 7th byte to a client.
Take that a step further and use an algorithmic non-linear sequence of bytes where a series of distribution nodes can identify themselves as supplying a particular portion of data.
The significance of doing this is that network traffic analysis will not show that "The IP at xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx is serving a zipped/tar'd/arc'd/et cetera file which appears to be our xxx.mp3", a districution network like this would need a bigger 'seeding' upload to get started for a particular file (so that you could introduce enough distribution nodes with enough variation as to make traffic analysis basically useless.)
I'm abstracting the concept of having the file locally for your usage and having the file available for torrenting.
Currently, torrentors are serving a very identifable and complete file which makes it easy for people like the BSA (MPAA/RIAA, add favorite acronym...) to identify via network traffic analysis tools who is serving what file to whom.
If a trackerless torrent system allowed a torrent client/user to download only non-sequential portions of a file, ergo requiring a torrent from (n) differnet torrent suppliers to get the remainder of the data, the BSA/MPAA/RIAA would not be able to use network traffic analysis to ID people. They'd have to write a torrent client that sought out a torrent for downloading (potentially putting them in violation of their own copyrighting.) In otherwords, they'd have to use licensed torrent code (whose license could preclude types of usage) and become a torrent client in order to discern who is serving what file, and end recipients of conglomerated torrents would be difficult to identify as the sequence downloads could be chronologically out of order.
...never actually hosted in its entirety and instead hosts portions of files or intermittent streams of the files. Sort of de-centralizing the file itself.
I wonder how prosecution would work for someone who only had every 3rd byte of a music file which would only be assembled with other byte streams from other torrent locations. Nobody actually hosts the file itself, or even a recognizeable facsimile of the file.
Personally, it's all a toolbox to me, Windows for games and some web services, Linux for most everything else (I love Slack/KDE's ergonomics.)
Nearly every post that references Microsoft in some fashion is written with a ridiculously biased verbiage.
I hate to appear to be defending Microsoft, but most slashdotters come across as zealous (not as zealots, although there are some of those.) Why? What good does that do? Most slashdotters appear to be fairly intelligent and knowledgeable, so what possible benefit is there to such childish behavior? I know Microsoft does everything it can to beat the competition (including illegal suppression and represssion), so does every other public company including Apple, and Red Hat. Personally I dislike Red Hat more than Microsoft because Red Hat is giving industry in America the impression that it alone is 'Linux.'
I'm sorry, I've just done a bit of research and found that poultry have been patented by Jeff Bezos just this past month. No prior art was discovered by the US Patent Office (who were too busy counting greenbacks.)
There have been 2-way haptic feedback systems since the early 90's (and probably before that but I am not personally aware of them.)
I personally used a 20+ sensor cyberglove on an SGI IR that was networked to another modified cyberglove in order to transmit tactile response both to and from the target (in this case a rubber ball.) That was in 1997.
Notice that it is a variant of the same bug reported by Slashdot a few weeks earlier. Both were reported by Secunia, neither had known implementations in the wild at the time (supposition supported by the fact that the security rating was raised later by Secunia precisely because a written exploit was found.)
That's the same hole, frontpaged twice, on Slashdot, without known exploits.
Have to call bull**** on that one m8. Anything remotely resembling an exploit (whether found in the wild or in a research lab) is lauded as the next reason in the series of reasons why IE is the devil's handmaiden...
You know we're biased, I know we're biased, we're somewhat justified in being biased, but let's call a spade a spade, shall we?;)
They keep pushing themselves off as 'AI' when it's simply a brute force if/then/else application.
Quite literally, "if what the user typed matches this question or statement, reply with this."
Total crap. It takes about 5 seconds to make Alice look like an idiot. The only reason it wins the (is it the Loebner?) prize occasionally is because no one cares to win it but them.
Slashdot Mirror
...skin conditions, et cetera. Perhaps they should look at a part of the body that gets beat up less ;).
Totally agree. One extra thing to note, when I use a regular keyboard now, the tendons on the backs of my hands hurt really quickly (after a few minutes or so) from being contorted back to the old method of typing.
You'll absolutely detest it for 3 days, after that you're addicted like crack baby. Guaranteed.
Thank God I made the switch.
Gack, let's not go there... I wonder if you lined up all the patches applied to IE over the years (pick any particular version) how much larger than the complete install they would be? lol.
Sorry, but I've been downloading gigs of updates for stability and security to my various *nix flavors for the past 13 years. IIS wasn't enabled by default on my Win2k installs, just as SSH, Apache, et cetera, are not when I install Slack or Mandrake. I don't blame Linux for SSH vulnerabilities, nor Red Hat or any other distribution. Equally, I don't blame Win2K for IIS, but there's always the DCOM hole and 'messenger' service to harp on ;).
Good point, not just 2000 but XP too. I would still hazard the assertion that the majority of the security problems were with software and not the OS itself ;).
SQL Server is distributed with VS.Net but I don't consider it part of .Net ;)... I did forget about the MSBlast though.
...2000-2003 the fault of applications which happened to run on 2000? I'm not too familiar with 'OS worms'... IIS and SQL worms, oh yeah, lots of those; but, those aren't Windows 2000.
...it is about the software that runs on it.
Microsoft does not dominate the OS market because the OS is more secure than Linux, faster than Linux, or *better* in any other way that Linux. Microsoft dominates because of Microsoft Office. Of course, their tendrils would never rest in just that one place, but that IS the core of the company.
I should have mentioned this in the context of "morality aside regarding file sharing of copyrighted material" ;).
Not really. This is more advanced in a legal sense than Freenet. Freenet is still dealing with an easy to track entity. Encryption aside, the file is present on a distribution node in its entirety. People pull linear successions of data from a distribution node, which makes the network traffic analysis identification possible for BSA/MPAA/RIAA.
What I propose is that the file itself is decentralized in that one distribution site doesn't actuall expose (a)a whole file and most importantly for anonymity reasons (b)linear sequences of the file.
Each distribution node would, using a 7 node example, send every 7th byte to a client.
Take that a step further and use an algorithmic non-linear sequence of bytes where a series of distribution nodes can identify themselves as supplying a particular portion of data.
The significance of doing this is that network traffic analysis will not show that "The IP at xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx is serving a zipped/tar'd/arc'd/et cetera file which appears to be our xxx.mp3", a districution network like this would need a bigger 'seeding' upload to get started for a particular file (so that you could introduce enough distribution nodes with enough variation as to make traffic analysis basically useless.)
Anyhow, I need to think about this some...
I'm abstracting the concept of having the file locally for your usage and having the file available for torrenting.
Currently, torrentors are serving a very identifable and complete file which makes it easy for people like the BSA (MPAA/RIAA, add favorite acronym...) to identify via network traffic analysis tools who is serving what file to whom.
If a trackerless torrent system allowed a torrent client/user to download only non-sequential portions of a file, ergo requiring a torrent from (n) differnet torrent suppliers to get the remainder of the data, the BSA/MPAA/RIAA would not be able to use network traffic analysis to ID people. They'd have to write a torrent client that sought out a torrent for downloading (potentially putting them in violation of their own copyrighting.) In otherwords, they'd have to use licensed torrent code (whose license could preclude types of usage) and become a torrent client in order to discern who is serving what file, and end recipients of conglomerated torrents would be difficult to identify as the sequence downloads could be chronologically out of order.
Hell, I may have to really look into this. LOL.
...never actually hosted in its entirety and instead hosts portions of files or intermittent streams of the files. Sort of de-centralizing the file itself.
I wonder how prosecution would work for someone who only had every 3rd byte of a music file which would only be assembled with other byte streams from other torrent locations. Nobody actually hosts the file itself, or even a recognizeable facsimile of the file.
...can't be objective about Microsoft?
Alienating? LOL.
Personally, it's all a toolbox to me, Windows for games and some web services, Linux for most everything else (I love Slack/KDE's ergonomics.)
Nearly every post that references Microsoft in some fashion is written with a ridiculously biased verbiage.
I hate to appear to be defending Microsoft, but most slashdotters come across as zealous (not as zealots, although there are some of those.) Why? What good does that do? Most slashdotters appear to be fairly intelligent and knowledgeable, so what possible benefit is there to such childish behavior? I know Microsoft does everything it can to beat the competition (including illegal suppression and represssion), so does every other public company including Apple, and Red Hat. Personally I dislike Red Hat more than Microsoft because Red Hat is giving industry in America the impression that it alone is 'Linux.'
Anywho, end rant.
I'm sorry, I've just done a bit of research and found that poultry have been patented by Jeff Bezos just this past month. No prior art was discovered by the US Patent Office (who were too busy counting greenbacks.)
I couldn't get the bloody chickens to cooperate. They kept getting crushed. The ball didn't seem to mind. Stupid poultry...
...'new'?
There have been 2-way haptic feedback systems since the early 90's (and probably before that but I am not personally aware of them.)
I personally used a 20+ sensor cyberglove on an SGI IR that was networked to another modified cyberglove in order to transmit tactile response both to and from the target (in this case a rubber ball.) That was in 1997.
That should be a very slow and somewhat painful death (probalby due to drowning.)
Wow, that was real tough... LOL.
3 7248&tid=172&tid=113&tid=218
:)
Here you go:
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/01/09/07
Notice that it is a variant of the same bug reported by Slashdot a few weeks earlier. Both were reported by Secunia, neither had known implementations in the wild at the time (supposition supported by the fact that the security rating was raised later by Secunia precisely because a written exploit was found.)
That's the same hole, frontpaged twice, on Slashdot, without known exploits.
Thanks for playing.
Have to call bull**** on that one m8. Anything remotely resembling an exploit (whether found in the wild or in a research lab) is lauded as the next reason in the series of reasons why IE is the devil's handmaiden...
;)
You know we're biased, I know we're biased, we're somewhat justified in being biased, but let's call a spade a spade, shall we?
Sigh, where to begin?
First I'd like to point out to the OP that it was recently MAY first, NOT April first.
That would be good for me to know. LOL. Thx.
Just wondering as this differs across countries as well.
...the next version.
Not quite the same thing as "this is in the next version."
They keep pushing themselves off as 'AI' when it's simply a brute force if/then/else application.
Quite literally, "if what the user typed matches this question or statement, reply with this."
Total crap. It takes about 5 seconds to make Alice look like an idiot. The only reason it wins the (is it the Loebner?) prize occasionally is because no one cares to win it but them.