Hello, Lexx? Conan O'Brien called.
on
Spielberg's Taken
·
· Score: 1
I couldn't bring myself to watch Lexx: first the blatant "this chick will get the horny geek eyeballs" is so played out. Ok, maybe it's not, but she didn't do it for me.
But most of was that stupid robot head with the live-actor mouth!!
Hello, Lexx? Conan O'Brien called. He wants his bit back.
One infected server finds another infected server (or infects it). It then begins to bombard this server with packets (only 1 IP is being connected to, throttle is happy and does nothing). Those packets contain forged IP headers. The OTHER server seems to receive thousands of INBOUND connections from thousands of random machines. It then REPLIES. Throttle is happy and does nothing.
Some of those random 'replies' happen to infect NEW servers. Repeat.
I assume a server listening for inbound connections and responding to them would not be throttled, only one initiating outbound connections. Of course, this would be one thing that could be manipulated to "trick" the throttle.
I agree. A hoax or an intentional plant on Hussein's part. I immediately thought of the "orgy of evidence" line from Minority Report.
On the other hand, if it's true, whomever "hacked" the account and told the press probably only duplicated a hack already done by the NSA, and caused Saddam to close the hole. Good job, bonehead!
According to Steve van Dulken, who oversees the patent archive at the British Library, 'For every 100 applications lodged, I'd say that 10 are a bit whacky.'
... The other 90 are, of course, blatant attempts to cash in on pre-existing technology.
The one good thing here is that as worms become more complex, there are more holes in THEM which can be exploited. For instance, it seems that one could set up a HoneyPot type worm on machines, which would communicate to the "hive" either that your machines were already infected (so don't bother trying to re-infect) or to force them all to constantly try to reinfect some scapegoat system.
It reminds me of another saying: if you make someone think you are making them think, they'll love you. But if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Don't I already have this on the Zaurus? Is this just a marketing 'trick' since they've ported it to mobile phones, or have they actually developed something newer/cooler than the current Opera scaling (which is pretty sweet IMHO)?
This is why the p2p model that the copyright nazis will succeed. As the world crushes a few servers, p2p sharing will enable the information that people want to see to be shared and replicated so the load is spread thoughout the internet instead of the same damn page being downloaded over the same pipe 70 million times.
I think the Ig-Nobel-winning belly button lint researcher's story would make a more entertaining movie than watching Nappie coding late into the night, then getting crushed under the heel of the RIAA.
It's more than semantics. When you STEAL there is one less CD in the store to sell. Money is lost because there was a pressing, packaging, shipping, and sleeve printing cost for that disk, as well as employee, rent, utility, etc costs for the store.
When you COPY music the original is STILL THERE. The only loss of money comes from a POTENTIAL loss of a sale of that cd IF YOU WOULD HAVE BOUGHT IT.
Personally, there is music I've downloaded that I would never even consider paying $18 for. It's just not worth it. If it weren't for Napster et. al. I just would have gone without the music.
Slashdot Mirror
I couldn't bring myself to watch Lexx: first the blatant "this chick will get the horny geek eyeballs" is so played out. Ok, maybe it's not, but she didn't do it for me.
But most of was that stupid robot head with the live-actor mouth!!
Hello, Lexx? Conan O'Brien called. He wants his bit back.
Imagine infected servers "assisting" each other:
One infected server finds another infected server (or infects it). It then begins to bombard this server with packets (only 1 IP is being connected to, throttle is happy and does nothing). Those packets contain forged IP headers. The OTHER server seems to receive thousands of INBOUND connections from thousands of random machines. It then REPLIES. Throttle is happy and does nothing.
Some of those random 'replies' happen to infect NEW servers. Repeat.
I assume a server listening for inbound connections and responding to them would not be throttled, only one initiating outbound connections. Of course, this would be one thing that could be manipulated to "trick" the throttle.
I agree. A hoax or an intentional plant on Hussein's part. I immediately thought of the "orgy of evidence" line from Minority Report.
On the other hand, if it's true, whomever "hacked" the account and told the press probably only duplicated a hack already done by the NSA, and caused Saddam to close the hole. Good job, bonehead!
The one good thing here is that as worms become more complex, there are more holes in THEM which can be exploited. For instance, it seems that one could set up a HoneyPot type worm on machines, which would communicate to the "hive" either that your machines were already infected (so don't bother trying to re-infect) or to force them all to constantly try to reinfect some scapegoat system.
It reminds me of another saying: if you make someone think you are making them think, they'll love you. But if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Think about it.
I hate you.
Don't I already have this on the Zaurus? Is this just a marketing 'trick' since they've ported it to mobile phones, or have they actually developed something newer/cooler than the current Opera scaling (which is pretty sweet IMHO)?
Gee we've never seen THIS troll on slashdot before.
Anybody with any real insight into the technology of the coming year won't post it to Cringley or Slashdot, they'll run out and get a patent.
Join the fun! patent the obvious next step and sue, sue, sue!
If they're TRULY intelligent, they're working on a planetary cloaking device so we can't find them.
Uh,
This is why the p2p model that the copyright nazis HATE will succeed.
Monday.
This is why the p2p model that the copyright nazis will succeed. As the world crushes a few servers, p2p sharing will enable the information that people want to see to be shared and replicated so the load is spread thoughout the internet instead of the same damn page being downloaded over the same pipe 70 million times.
I think the Ig-Nobel-winning belly button lint researcher's story would make a more entertaining movie than watching Nappie coding late into the night, then getting crushed under the heel of the RIAA.
You're like talking to a SeeNSay. You just keep spouting the same shit. Nobody is saying taking isn't wrong!
It's what's being taken that's under discussion.
I think this article comes from the painfully obvious department ...or ripped from the pages of Duh magazine
If I take a picture of you in a public place, am I stealing your image?
It's more than semantics. When you STEAL there is one less CD in the store to sell. Money is lost because there was a pressing, packaging, shipping, and sleeve printing cost for that disk, as well as employee, rent, utility, etc costs for the store.
When you COPY music the original is STILL THERE. The only loss of money comes from a POTENTIAL loss of a sale of that cd IF YOU WOULD HAVE BOUGHT IT.
Personally, there is music I've downloaded that I would never even consider paying $18 for. It's just not worth it. If it weren't for Napster et. al. I just would have gone without the music.
Of course, I would make MORE money be selling my patented "Scratch-your-eyes-out-to-avoid-seeing-the-Fanning -Rosen-Valenti-Video knitting needle".
Their is a really funny post above this one. The ones who wrote it, there obviously geniuses. They're is clearly a need to mod this up. ;)
What about this:
cat Blues_CDs >> CDs
less CDs
My thoughts exactly. This kind of thing could put Apple's sweet movie placement deals in jeopary. Maybe Tom Cruise will have a Zaurus in M.I. 3....
Despite your line breaks
You are no e. e. cummings.
And it's "you're", not "your".
Just because something makes a good movie of the week doesn't mean it's scientifically important.