Ok, how much copper do I have to buy to stop it? I have to admit that it's freaking me out a bit how easy it is to pickup the screen's radiation after all, and to make sense of it.
Next time you're remodeling your computer room, just put thin copper plate in the walls, ceiling, floor and door. Weld em' together directly, or with copper mesh and buy a few isolation transformers for your power taps. For good measure, never leave the room, or the three letter acronym brigade may sneak in and install a keylogger without your knowledge. Alternatively, get a bunch of old, "not for residential use" 21-inch monitors, remove any pesky metal shielding and build a jammer with a spare box...
My ancient Nokia does a pretty good job on FM reception, I'd hate to see what this program and removing the shielding could do!:)
I wish NASA had actually released the software into the public domain gratis, not through a commercial vendor that's allowed to charge fees in excess of distribution costs. I'm sure it's all reasonably priced (and what I shelled out a few hundred bucks for was indeed reasonably priced). Being a citizen and long-time taxpayer, however, didn't a portion of my hard-earned money pay for this software to be developed?
Ooh, I feel a rant starting, so I'd better leave off before I drift offtopic:)
I think that too many people look to not have a well rounded education. I remember people in my CS classes, where all they wanted to do is learn how to code. The idea of learning how the compiler works they considered a waste of time. Who cares? And the hardware? They really didn't care about that.I recently had a CS from Standford tell me that the I couldn't get the 4th bit from an integer because the computer stores that in decimal.
Ahh, there's the problem! You should be looking for Stanford grads, not Standford! *grin* Reminds me of the Dilbert cartoon where Dilbert's boss introduces a new manager from "Harfurd University."
But seriously, I know these people, too. My upper level CS classes were full of people completely incapable of making simple changes to their.cshrc file without blowing up their environment. They banged out crappy code they mostly stole from the web, cheated on their tests, generally got the same grades as I did, but with a lot less hard work, and some got jobs making $65k+/yr right after graduation. Maybe they learned more from their general ed classes than I learned from Operating Systems, Compiler Construction, File Processing, Programming Languages, Database Systems, Database Theory, etc., etc.
A well-rounded education is one in which other skills are learned that are not necessarily directly related to one's major. Intelligence alone doesn't ensure a well-paying job. A "well-rounded" education teaches you how to think abstractly, analyze complex problems, interact with others, perhaps to even understand them better (and manipulate them to your advantage -- I'm not exactly joking).
I think people look at college as learning the details, it is not about the details, they are unimportant. The idea is that you need to learn the principles.
This is true, but many colleges (mostly public institutions) are pressured by industry to teach "the details" because they don't want to have independent thinkers that want to design the next operating system, ORDBMS, etc., they want productive drones that bang out code, or set up a router, or whatever needs doing for the moment. Students also apply pressure in this direction, because they want to have jobs when they graduate.
The fact that they're passing legislation to add mandatory backdoors is a pretty big clue that they probably can't break some crypto already.
Legislation spurred on by the cloak-and-dagger types in those three-letter organizations that have received untold billions of dollars and seem incapable of protecting our country unless we give up all right to privacy. I don't see how this is going to reduce or eliminate terrorism in the U.S. Do terrorists only purchase off-the-shelf legal encryption programs?
A known backdoor significantly decreases confidence in a crypto-system
I agree wholeheartedly! It's like being required by law to keep your house key under a rock in your yard. Everyone (including the bad guys) knows that it's there, somewhere.
Perhaps our legislators need to be reminded of a rather famous quote: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
According to CBS News, the plane which struck tower 1 was hijacked and coming from Boston. The plane which struck tower 2 had taken off from Newark; no word on whether it was hijacked or stolen. Tower 2 just collapsed 10 minutes ago after a 2nd explosion, damaging another building.
I wasn't really commenting on its readability to outsiders (those who don't program regularly in LISP), but on people who do regularly program in LISP.
Replace bold text with: on its readability to people who do
I wasn't really commenting on its readability to outsiders (those who don't program regularly in LISP), but on people who do regularly program in LISP.
Readability and writeability are two of the criteria used when evaluating a language (usually within the context of a particular problem domain). In general, LISP has good writeability, i.e. - a programmer can express their intent easily in code. However, LISP has fair to poor readability, in that a programmer (many times the same one) cannot easily discern what the code does once it has been written.
Programming in LISP is a breeze, Java slightly less so (at least in my mind). But what about maintenance? Other people debugging your code? Have you ever had the misfortune of modifying a poorly documented LISP program? It's a good deal harder to do than for a poorly documented Java program.
I find the idea "electrical reference measure" a fascinating idea; I just hope the gov't is not wasting millions of dollars trying to implement it.
Well, under our current administration, practically any research not directly related to making Dick & George and their corporate masters richer, is considered waste. Anything that threatens their interests are downright garbage: alternative energy (fusion, solar, etc...), Kyoto Protocol, Nuclear & Coal Energy accountability (Let's limit lawsuits on the next Three Mile Island incident and continue to grandfather filthy old coal plants), and, Treaties. Treaties? Treaties?!? We don't need no steenking Treaties!
Is it necessary science? Probably not, but it is interesting!
Disclaimer: Links provided may contain logic not suitable for cogent reasoning.
Except that Popup Killer is non free [xfx.net]. Does anyone know of a freeware solution?
Turning off ActiveX scripting (for windozers) and JavaShit seems to do the trick. It never hurts to have a (Windows) hosts list with lines like '0.0.0.0 ads.x10.com' or deny them at the NAT box...
is one good reason to code in DirectX. Let's say that your company develops games. Is it safe to say that 80-90% of the market for computer games is for Windows? --you betcha!
What are the advantages to using OpenGL? If you're trying to capture about 10% of the remaining market for your product, and having to sacrifice the quality of the product to do it, you're going to lose a proportionally larger customer base from the Windows users than from the Unix/Linux/OSX users.
Porting to other OSes is going to cost time and money. Sure, having OpenGL as your 3D API makes that aspect easy, but what about sound, input devices and such?
I haven't seen a single game that uses only the standard OpenGL API that could match a DirectX game. Who drives the OpenGL spec? Who drives the DirectX spec?
OpenGL is a nice, clean API (except for so-called "extensions" by video card manufacturers). DirectX is hairy to work with (at least when I last looked at it... DX5) but, it _works_ for games. If I'm writing a serious application (visual modeling, CAD/CAE, etc), then I'd choose OpenGL. If I'm writing the newest FPS, then I'm going with DirectX.
How ridiculous would a crackpot theory have to be if it happened to fit into Star Trek episodes before it wouldn't get posted on/.?
I'd say it would have to be exceptionally unbelievable. I'm still waiting for a theory on those green women that Kirk was always hot for...
Re:Network traffic seems high - is this why?
on
Code Redux
·
· Score: 1
I'm on an @home cable network, and for the last couple of days my little activity light has been blinking at an astonishingly high rate.
No, it isn't. At least according to the helpdesk drones. Level 2 support tries the old, "These are not the IPs you are looking for..." Jedi mindtrick.
It certainly looks like the Code Red activity is to blame for the storm of ARP packets. Makes stealing @Home IPs rather easy right now, seeing as how ARP requests for identical IPs roll in about 1-2 times per minute. If only there were an example of an ARP exploit that could be tweaked to feed my paranoia...
i remember back in the commodore 64 daze, i wanted to copy a game called Summer Games by Epyx. back then, they commonly placed an error on the disk that the game would look for before it would run.
God, I loved copy protection in those days... Write a sector (beyond track 35) while varying power to the write head, and, voila! A sector that every time you read it, comes back with different (bad) data. The down side to this is that your r/w head would slam into the track 35 post a few times each read to do a "realignment" that, over time, damages the drive. Neat idea: we protect our copyright by destroying your hardware.
Glad I have DSL (no lame ass proxy, no wacky use policies, nuthin' but net), and can handle my own networking issues (RFC 1918 allocation, FW issues, etc) at my own residence.
Whatchu talkin' 'bout, Willis? - I've got Crapcast, er, Comcast, and aside from a 4 hour installation by their tech (3 bad cable modems in a row), I'm mostly happy. FreeBSD firewall with NAT, no proxies, no spoofers, no poofters, no problems.
DHCP? No thanks, I'll hardcode it in. AUPs and TOSs? If you think your DSL provider doesn't have one, you're smoking too much crack. But then, nobody cracks down unless you're an asshole. I suppose if I throttled my connection to 20% performance, I wouldn't suck up any more bandwidth than you!:)
Sadly, the support techs are mostly incompetent. But it's not entirely their fault: they're undertrained and overworked. Having been one (a tech, not an incompetent) for a short time, I realize how hard it is to train yourself (after your 2 week "training") for the calls customers actually ask during calls (don't put customer on hold, or let a call last longer than 5 minutes or your boss will rape you for trashing his service levels), between calls (you gotta *LOVE* autoanswer!) or during your time.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, this is all built into a well-rounded course teaching students Computer Science.
Ooh, I hope they also give students a well-rounded education in ethics!
Ok, how much copper do I have to buy to stop it? I have to admit that it's freaking me out a bit how easy it is to pickup the screen's radiation after all, and to make sense of it.
:)
Next time you're remodeling your computer room, just put thin copper plate in the walls, ceiling, floor and door. Weld em' together directly, or with copper mesh and buy a few isolation transformers for your power taps. For good measure, never leave the room, or the three letter acronym brigade may sneak in and install a keylogger without your knowledge. Alternatively, get a bunch of old, "not for residential use" 21-inch monitors, remove any pesky metal shielding and build a jammer with a spare box...
My ancient Nokia does a pretty good job on FM reception, I'd hate to see what this program and removing the shielding could do!
I wish NASA had actually released the software into the public domain gratis, not through a commercial vendor that's allowed to charge fees in excess of distribution costs. I'm sure it's all reasonably priced (and what I shelled out a few hundred bucks for was indeed reasonably priced). Being a citizen and long-time taxpayer, however, didn't a portion of my hard-earned money pay for this software to be developed?
:)
Ooh, I feel a rant starting, so I'd better leave off before I drift offtopic
I think that too many people look to not have a well rounded education. I remember people in my CS classes, where all they wanted to do is learn how to code. The idea of learning how the compiler works they considered a waste of time. Who cares? And the hardware? They really didn't care about that.I recently had a CS from Standford tell me that the I couldn't get the 4th bit from an integer because the computer stores that in decimal.
.cshrc file without blowing up their environment. They banged out crappy code they mostly stole from the web, cheated on their tests, generally got the same grades as I did, but with a lot less hard work, and some got jobs making $65k+/yr right after graduation. Maybe they learned more from their general ed classes than I learned from Operating Systems, Compiler Construction, File Processing, Programming Languages, Database Systems, Database Theory, etc., etc.
Ahh, there's the problem! You should be looking for Stanford grads, not Standford! *grin* Reminds me of the Dilbert cartoon where Dilbert's boss introduces a new manager from "Harfurd University."
But seriously, I know these people, too. My upper level CS classes were full of people completely incapable of making simple changes to their
A well-rounded education is one in which other skills are learned that are not necessarily directly related to one's major. Intelligence alone doesn't ensure a well-paying job. A "well-rounded" education teaches you how to think abstractly, analyze complex problems, interact with others, perhaps to even understand them better (and manipulate them to your advantage -- I'm not exactly joking).
I think people look at college as learning the details, it is not about the details, they are unimportant. The idea is that you need to learn the principles.
This is true, but many colleges (mostly public institutions) are pressured by industry to teach "the details" because they don't want to have independent thinkers that want to design the next operating system, ORDBMS, etc., they want productive drones that bang out code, or set up a router, or whatever needs doing for the moment. Students also apply pressure in this direction, because they want to have jobs when they graduate.
Legislation spurred on by the cloak-and-dagger types in those three-letter organizations that have received untold billions of dollars and seem incapable of protecting our country unless we give up all right to privacy. I don't see how this is going to reduce or eliminate terrorism in the U.S. Do terrorists only purchase off-the-shelf legal encryption programs?
A known backdoor significantly decreases confidence in a crypto-system
I agree wholeheartedly! It's like being required by law to keep your house key under a rock in your yard. Everyone (including the bad guys) knows that it's there, somewhere.
Perhaps our legislators need to be reminded of a rather famous quote: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
According to CBS News, the plane which struck tower 1 was hijacked and coming from Boston. The plane which struck tower 2 had taken off from Newark; no word on whether it was hijacked or stolen. Tower 2 just collapsed 10 minutes ago after a 2nd explosion, damaging another building.
I wasn't really commenting on its readability to outsiders (those who don't program regularly in LISP), but on people who do regularly program in LISP.
Replace bold text with: on its readability to people who do
Readability and writeability are two of the criteria used when evaluating a language (usually within the context of a particular problem domain). In general, LISP has good writeability, i.e. - a programmer can express their intent easily in code. However, LISP has fair to poor readability, in that a programmer (many times the same one) cannot easily discern what the code does once it has been written.
Programming in LISP is a breeze, Java slightly less so (at least in my mind). But what about maintenance? Other people debugging your code? Have you ever had the misfortune of modifying a poorly documented LISP program? It's a good deal harder to do than for a poorly documented Java program.
Well, under our current administration, practically any research not directly related to making Dick & George and their corporate masters richer, is considered waste. Anything that threatens their interests are downright garbage: alternative energy (fusion, solar, etc...), Kyoto Protocol, Nuclear & Coal Energy accountability (Let's limit lawsuits on the next Three Mile Island incident and continue to grandfather filthy old coal plants), and, Treaties. Treaties? Treaties?!? We don't need no steenking Treaties!
Is it necessary science? Probably not, but it is interesting!
Disclaimer: Links provided may contain logic not suitable for cogent reasoning.
Turning off ActiveX scripting (for windozers) and JavaShit seems to do the trick. It never hurts to have a (Windows) hosts list with lines like '0.0.0.0 ads.x10.com' or deny them at the NAT box...
What are the advantages to using OpenGL? If you're trying to capture about 10% of the remaining market for your product, and having to sacrifice the quality of the product to do it, you're going to lose a proportionally larger customer base from the Windows users than from the Unix/Linux/OSX users.
Porting to other OSes is going to cost time and money. Sure, having OpenGL as your 3D API makes that aspect easy, but what about sound, input devices and such?
I haven't seen a single game that uses only the standard OpenGL API that could match a DirectX game. Who drives the OpenGL spec? Who drives the DirectX spec?
OpenGL is a nice, clean API (except for so-called "extensions" by video card manufacturers). DirectX is hairy to work with (at least when I last looked at it... DX5) but, it _works_ for games. If I'm writing a serious application (visual modeling, CAD/CAE, etc), then I'd choose OpenGL. If I'm writing the newest FPS, then I'm going with DirectX.
The one who dies with the most toys wins!
I'd say it would have to be exceptionally unbelievable. I'm still waiting for a theory on those green women that Kirk was always hot for...
No, it isn't. At least according to the helpdesk drones. Level 2 support tries the old, "These are not the IPs you are looking for..." Jedi mindtrick.
It certainly looks like the Code Red activity is to blame for the storm of ARP packets. Makes stealing @Home IPs rather easy right now, seeing as how ARP requests for identical IPs roll in about 1-2 times per minute. If only there were an example of an ARP exploit that could be tweaked to feed my paranoia...
God, I loved copy protection in those days... Write a sector (beyond track 35) while varying power to the write head, and, voila! A sector that every time you read it, comes back with different (bad) data. The down side to this is that your r/w head would slam into the track 35 post a few times each read to do a "realignment" that, over time, damages the drive. Neat idea: we protect our copyright by destroying your hardware.
Whatchu talkin' 'bout, Willis? - I've got Crapcast, er, Comcast, and aside from a 4 hour installation by their tech (3 bad cable modems in a row), I'm mostly happy. FreeBSD firewall with NAT, no proxies, no spoofers, no poofters, no problems.
DHCP? No thanks, I'll hardcode it in. AUPs and TOSs? If you think your DSL provider doesn't have one, you're smoking too much crack. But then, nobody cracks down unless you're an asshole. I suppose if I throttled my connection to 20% performance, I wouldn't suck up any more bandwidth than you! :)
Sadly, the support techs are mostly incompetent. But it's not entirely their fault: they're undertrained and overworked. Having been one (a tech, not an incompetent) for a short time, I realize how hard it is to train yourself (after your 2 week "training") for the calls customers actually ask during calls (don't put customer on hold, or let a call last longer than 5 minutes or your boss will rape you for trashing his service levels), between calls (you gotta *LOVE* autoanswer!) or during your time.