Hmmm...I wonder if you could force the blow-up doll into the vending section with the hose attached, then inflate it and pull the hose off? Assuming you don't actually have keys to the machine, that is...
There's a better one. Set the AutoCorrect (available under Tools > AutoCorrect options, AutoCorrect tab, for those of you who don't want to hunt it down) to replace a period with ', according to the word of our Holy Father.' or something more offensive, if you like. Be sure to check the 'replace text as you type' and 'automatically use suggestions from the spell checker' boxes.
This works especially well for people who are very fast touch-typists who don't read what they are typing as they go. Or for very slow, very old typists who are afraid of their computers.
So...what OSes won't let you configure your dial-out setting to call 911?
Anything a user can manually configure, a program can be written to perform the same actions - and if the user runs the program, regardless of what 'security' is in place, the actions will be performed.
I don't think this has ANYTHING to do with which OS was used (unless it is an indication of the caliber of user) - but it has everything to do with users trusting files that shouldn't have been trusted.
Sorry, but I just have to ask - at what number of people involved does an act actually become terrorism? There's not a numeric qualifier in the definition you quoted in your earlier post. If only part of a society feels threatened by a terrorist act, does that mean it's not really terrorism? For instance, if you didn't live in OKC at the time of the Murrah building bombings, you probably didn't feel the same emotional response that many people in the area felt - just as I doubt that I felt the same response that people living in New York felt after the WTC attacks. Since the Murrah building bombing only affected a small portion of American society on a personal level, does that make the attack not terrorism? Does every act of terrorism have to kill hundreds of people?
I think (and no, I can't read his mind) that he might have thought it would be intimidating to the people he spread this to (which would be a small part of society, but still a part of society) to have the police show up on their doorsteps, claiming that they have been repeatedly calling 911. Course, that's assuming that he THOUGHT about this at all - which I haven't seen any evidence of.
So, yeah, I think he was intending to intimidate people. He wasn't doing it on a mass level, but I don't think there's a petty terrorism charge available.
One person repeatedly calling 911 could tie up a good portion of the resources for a *small* 911 call center, I would think - not to mention, the police have to come out and investigate. Can you imagine the load of shit a police department would get if, shortly after this happened, someone was getting severely beaten, tried to call 911 but couldn't speak, and the 911 call center decided that it was just another one of those damned prank calls and ignored it?
If it were blocking the use of the 911 services for a city, yeah, I think I might call that one terrorism. I consider 911 a public utility sort of thing, so cutting off the service for a city would be similar (in my mind, anyway) to killing the water service or the power for a city.
However, IANAL, etc., this is my opinion, which does not necessarily mean that it reflects the letter of the law.
So...If MyDoom had caused every modem it found to call 911, would you not have considered a danger to public safety? The qualifier here is more that it didn't spread rapidly - which is more an indicator that the author should have been smart enough to make it wait several days before calling 911, so that it would have more time to spread before being found.
If it had waited a while, and, say, jammed a city's 911 call center because several hundred people tried to call in at once, over and over (yes, I know hundreds of people don't use WebTV, but go with the hypothetical here for a minute), would it have been considered more of a danger then?
I think calling anything cyberterrorism makes most people in the tech community take it less seriously - could they have come up with a more asinine label? Makes me think of TRON.
No, generally the pedestrian or the police must actually be able to prove negligence - as long as the driver is exercising due care, he can't be held liable. I researched this several years ago when I almost hit a kid that ran out into an intersection when I had a green light.
It would be unreasonable, for instance, to expect a driver to be able to stop when someone jumps out into the middle of a 45MPH road. That's why jaywalking is illegal, that's why crosswalks exist.
Any lawyers want to jump in with your.02, please feel free - I am too lazy to do the research to provide links this early on a Sunday morning.
In the US (at least in the states I have lived in), if a pedestrian steps into an intersection against the light and gets hit, it's the pedestrian's fault.
I completely agree - everyone in my family has had something really nasty that knocked us all on our tails for upwards of two weeks - including about five days where it was impossible to get off the bed/couch. Plus, my son and I ended up with ear infections, sinus infections and bacterial conjunctivitis as a result - and the ear and sinus infections were resistant to the first set of antibiotics.
AND we all had the flu shot this year - I'm reluctant to think we all got shot up with a bad batch, since we each got our shots from different doctors, about a month apart.
They want superflu, they can come get it - my husband still has the crud in his chest, I'm sure he can hawk up a loogey for them as a starter kit.
We had the same problem - the wiring in the apartment complex we lived in was twenty years old, it couldn't handle DSL - and Qwest seemed uninclined to upgrade it, despite telling us when we moved in that it would be upgraded within three months. When we bought our house, we made sure DSL was available before we made an offer.
I feel the need to make a somewhat offtopic rant about Qwest's customer service right now - they are horrible about passing the buck on whose fault the outage is when your DSL goes down if you don't have Qwest/MSN as your ISP. (The DSL goes down just about every other weekend, and we are fairly certain it's not our ISP because a friend of ours has the contiguous block of IP addresses, and his service remains intact)
Not to mention - I have spent an hour on the phone this week trying to get a replacement cell phone (washed mine - in the washing machine), they are pretty resistant to covering phones under their insurance policy. The first time I called, they insisted that I wait a couple of days to see if the phone would start working again, when it didn't they made me speak to four different representatives to get a replacement, which they won't provide for three days. If it's like any of the other five cell phones they've sent me in the past 8 months (all were defective), when I call to get the new phone activated, they will tell me it can't be activated for 72 hours - meaning I will have paid for 10 days of cell phone service that the phone has not been operational. We're switching to another service as soon as our contracts are up. (Deep breath, OK, I'm done off-topic ranting)
It will be interesting to see what the pricing is on the naked DSL - with the way Qwest bundles stuff, there's a good chance that the $14.95 that you save by not having your phone service with them will be rolled into the naked DSL fee.
If I recall correctly (I am not a historian, and it's been a while since I took a history class), the stock market crash made the depression worse but the US was already heading there anyway. There was a huge problem already in place with poor distribution of wealth and markets that were truly monopolistic (as opposed to today's supposed monopolies, but I am digressing). The government still operated on a gold standard, which meant that it was not easy to just put more paper money into the economy.
It's very important for people who get money to spend money, to keep things flowing. Since a very few people held almost ALL the money, and had no incentive to spend it on much of anything, the economy just slowed down.
The address bar uses whatever is set as your default browser - i.e. I have Firebird as my default browser, Firebird comes up when I type something in the address bar. Just switch their default browser when they're not looking:)
Slashdot Mirror
Hmmm...I wonder if you could force the blow-up doll into the vending section with the hose attached, then inflate it and pull the hose off? Assuming you don't actually have keys to the machine, that is...
There's a better one. Set the AutoCorrect (available under Tools > AutoCorrect options, AutoCorrect tab, for those of you who don't want to hunt it down) to replace a period with ', according to the word of our Holy Father.' or something more offensive, if you like. Be sure to check the 'replace text as you type' and 'automatically use suggestions from the spell checker' boxes.
This works especially well for people who are very fast touch-typists who don't read what they are typing as they go. Or for very slow, very old typists who are afraid of their computers.
Exactly - except it's not should, it's must. 21 CFR Part 11.10 mandates this.
And they say nothing good ever came out of Microsoft...
No, sorry, the definition says usually for some ideological reason, not always.
So...what OSes won't let you configure your dial-out setting to call 911?
Anything a user can manually configure, a program can be written to perform the same actions - and if the user runs the program, regardless of what 'security' is in place, the actions will be performed.
I don't think this has ANYTHING to do with which OS was used (unless it is an indication of the caliber of user) - but it has everything to do with users trusting files that shouldn't have been trusted.
scale up to meet terrorism
how many people have to be involved to make it terrorism?
Sorry, but I just have to ask - at what number of people involved does an act actually become terrorism? There's not a numeric qualifier in the definition you quoted in your earlier post. If only part of a society feels threatened by a terrorist act, does that mean it's not really terrorism? For instance, if you didn't live in OKC at the time of the Murrah building bombings, you probably didn't feel the same emotional response that many people in the area felt - just as I doubt that I felt the same response that people living in New York felt after the WTC attacks. Since the Murrah building bombing only affected a small portion of American society on a personal level, does that make the attack not terrorism? Does every act of terrorism have to kill hundreds of people?
I think (and no, I can't read his mind) that he might have thought it would be intimidating to the people he spread this to (which would be a small part of society, but still a part of society) to have the police show up on their doorsteps, claiming that they have been repeatedly calling 911. Course, that's assuming that he THOUGHT about this at all - which I haven't seen any evidence of.
So, yeah, I think he was intending to intimidate people. He wasn't doing it on a mass level, but I don't think there's a petty terrorism charge available.
One person repeatedly calling 911 could tie up a good portion of the resources for a *small* 911 call center, I would think - not to mention, the police have to come out and investigate. Can you imagine the load of shit a police department would get if, shortly after this happened, someone was getting severely beaten, tried to call 911 but couldn't speak, and the 911 call center decided that it was just another one of those damned prank calls and ignored it?
If it were blocking the use of the 911 services for a city, yeah, I think I might call that one terrorism. I consider 911 a public utility sort of thing, so cutting off the service for a city would be similar (in my mind, anyway) to killing the water service or the power for a city.
However, IANAL, etc., this is my opinion, which does not necessarily mean that it reflects the letter of the law.
So...If MyDoom had caused every modem it found to call 911, would you not have considered a danger to public safety? The qualifier here is more that it didn't spread rapidly - which is more an indicator that the author should have been smart enough to make it wait several days before calling 911, so that it would have more time to spread before being found.
If it had waited a while, and, say, jammed a city's 911 call center because several hundred people tried to call in at once, over and over (yes, I know hundreds of people don't use WebTV, but go with the hypothetical here for a minute), would it have been considered more of a danger then?
I think calling anything cyberterrorism makes most people in the tech community take it less seriously - could they have come up with a more asinine label? Makes me think of TRON.
No, generally the pedestrian or the police must actually be able to prove negligence - as long as the driver is exercising due care, he can't be held liable. I researched this several years ago when I almost hit a kid that ran out into an intersection when I had a green light.
.02, please feel free - I am too lazy to do the research to provide links this early on a Sunday morning.
It would be unreasonable, for instance, to expect a driver to be able to stop when someone jumps out into the middle of a 45MPH road. That's why jaywalking is illegal, that's why crosswalks exist.
Any lawyers want to jump in with your
In the US (at least in the states I have lived in), if a pedestrian steps into an intersection against the light and gets hit, it's the pedestrian's fault.
So does that mean we get a refund?
So you're volunteering to be a test case for this superflu?
Where's my +1 tragic mod when I need it?
I completely agree - everyone in my family has had something really nasty that knocked us all on our tails for upwards of two weeks - including about five days where it was impossible to get off the bed/couch. Plus, my son and I ended up with ear infections, sinus infections and bacterial conjunctivitis as a result - and the ear and sinus infections were resistant to the first set of antibiotics.
AND we all had the flu shot this year - I'm reluctant to think we all got shot up with a bad batch, since we each got our shots from different doctors, about a month apart.
They want superflu, they can come get it - my husband still has the crud in his chest, I'm sure he can hawk up a loogey for them as a starter kit.
$14.95 is the advertised price. You end up paying double with fees.
We had the same problem - the wiring in the apartment complex we lived in was twenty years old, it couldn't handle DSL - and Qwest seemed uninclined to upgrade it, despite telling us when we moved in that it would be upgraded within three months. When we bought our house, we made sure DSL was available before we made an offer.
I feel the need to make a somewhat offtopic rant about Qwest's customer service right now - they are horrible about passing the buck on whose fault the outage is when your DSL goes down if you don't have Qwest/MSN as your ISP. (The DSL goes down just about every other weekend, and we are fairly certain it's not our ISP because a friend of ours has the contiguous block of IP addresses, and his service remains intact)
Not to mention - I have spent an hour on the phone this week trying to get a replacement cell phone (washed mine - in the washing machine), they are pretty resistant to covering phones under their insurance policy. The first time I called, they insisted that I wait a couple of days to see if the phone would start working again, when it didn't they made me speak to four different representatives to get a replacement, which they won't provide for three days. If it's like any of the other five cell phones they've sent me in the past 8 months (all were defective), when I call to get the new phone activated, they will tell me it can't be activated for 72 hours - meaning I will have paid for 10 days of cell phone service that the phone has not been operational. We're switching to another service as soon as our contracts are up. (Deep breath, OK, I'm done off-topic ranting)
It will be interesting to see what the pricing is on the naked DSL - with the way Qwest bundles stuff, there's a good chance that the $14.95 that you save by not having your phone service with them will be rolled into the naked DSL fee.
You had the option to opt out of the class and file your own suit, you know...Nobody forced you to join the class action.
I don't think there's a smell associated with litigious bastards yet...
If I recall correctly (I am not a historian, and it's been a while since I took a history class), the stock market crash made the depression worse but the US was already heading there anyway. There was a huge problem already in place with poor distribution of wealth and markets that were truly monopolistic (as opposed to today's supposed monopolies, but I am digressing). The government still operated on a gold standard, which meant that it was not easy to just put more paper money into the economy.
It's very important for people who get money to spend money, to keep things flowing. Since a very few people held almost ALL the money, and had no incentive to spend it on much of anything, the economy just slowed down.
The address bar uses whatever is set as your default browser - i.e. I have Firebird as my default browser, Firebird comes up when I type something in the address bar. Just switch their default browser when they're not looking :)
There's one digital camera benefit that wouldn't be lost - the ability to see, right now, what I have just taken a picture of.
Tom Ridge is the Director of Homeland Security.
The joke would have been funnier if John Ashcroft had been the target.