no individual enterpreneur can navigate the minefield of patents and survive. only huge megacorps with vast arsenals of patent WMD can enter new markets anymore. any innovative individual inventor is instantly annhiliated when a corporation feels threatened.
what Lucent does these days is suck money like a black hole.
ILECs used to buy a lot of Lucent hardware -- but now it's all Cisco, Siemens and Nortel.
Lucent laid off their top engineers (or the engineers walked out in disgust) and destroyed most of the successful products they had. Other really promising projects ended up stillborn.
Lucent also used to have a really cool R&D labs in the early 90s (like Xerox's PARC) but they killed that off too.
wouldnt matter. everyone has their price. i doubt he'd care much about political power with a nice cushy retirement fund and sandy beaches with lifetime supply of pina coladas.
the criminals are almost always americans, living in america, under US law enforcement jurisdiction. rarely do they actually physically move out of the US to do their phishing.
it is still quite possible to nab them, it has been done before with US spammers who used offshore hosting, offshore accounts, and offshore compromised machines.
what you wanna bet bendsen votes to approve the legislation monday, then retires wednesday to some tropical island with a huge "retirement fund" which was deposited in his account tuesday.
start a nonprofit opensource patent holding company, and assign patents to it.
then patent every new thing that is built into linux or opensource projects.
it would give opensource some teeth against corporate pricks who try to assert patent infringement against linux, since linux would then have a portfolio to countersue with. mutually assured destruction is the name of the patent game, and it's the deterrent effect which causes entities to stockpile patents.
as long as opensource has no stockpile (or the patent system is reformed), it's vulnerable.
this would help defend (free|net|open)bsd, samba, gcc, etc as well.
most carriers seem to have dropped dialup SMS paging terminals in favor of email. which is of course a catch-22 when your primary internet link goes down...
argus is not bad, is pretty simple to set up, and scales reasonably well.
it's also pretty flexible so you can plug it into just about any paging system and monitor just about any service you can imagine.
it handles heirarchies so you dont get 300 pages at once, etc. and it has a simple, fast, clean web interface which isn't bloated with gigabytes of shiny widgets and is even perfectly usable via lynx.
it has a few rough edges but the overall ease of use and simplicity make up for it.
the problem is not jmp to data segments. the problem largely is executable stacks. which is exactly what stack smashing is about.
the other problem is that executable stacks are required for some legitimate compiler functions such as trampolines.
the real solutions are: _complete_ separation of code and data segments. code is _never_ writable, under any circumstances. data is _never_ executable, under any circumstances. no executable stack. no more mprotect().
this will solve the arbitrary executable code issue, but won't solve other issues such as logic/sql/scripting exploits. it should solve most of the rootshell exploits though.
The odd thing about OpenBSD, which many people never manage to assimilate, is that you have to look at that project through a very narrow gun turret to realize just how much they accomplish by entirely ignoring the whingings from everyone else.
the problem is that in ignoring all input from the outside, they ignore the good ideas along with the bad ones.
the only other developer i know who is as caustic as tdr is djb of qmail infamy. their distinct lack of social skills drive away many really good developers. there's another name for this -- the "yes men" syndrome.
mythbusters already busted this one. decompression simply doesn't happen. don't believe everything you see in the movies.
re: overpowering air marshals -- israel flies multiple air marshals on each plane. undercover. its quite unlikely terrorists would be able to discover them all and overpower all of them at once (which is the point).
re: cockpit doors. afaik they are completely bulletproof. (again, which is the point).
re: egyptian air lines -- the plane ran out of fuel and crashed into the sea because the terrorists were stupid and stubbornly insisted on flying the plane to a destination it couldn't possibly reach.
if anything it makes airlines less safe because it lulls people into a false sense of security.
i don't know about you but i'd really rather the airlines spend their effort on effective means of security, such as armored cockpit doors and armed undercover air marshals.
you're exactly the kind of sheeple the government loves. you believe ID checks would have prevented 9/11. well news for you, they all had valid IDs and they all showed them and it obviously didn't work too well now, did it.
if anything it makes the airlines less safe because it lulls people into a false sense of security, and they're wasting valuable time and effort on completely ineffective means of security instead of focusing on effective ones.
you want to know how to run a safe airline? ask israel. free hint: "having a valid id" doesnt stop terrorists.
Slashdot Mirror
they're still the only consumer devices capable of recording full bandwidth HDTV in realtime to removable media.
hah. then why does panasonic advertise the PV-HD1000 as being able to record DVHS to bog standard SVHS tapes?
mods: +1 insightful? should be +1 funny instead...
there arent any. there are even dvhs units which have the ability to record dvhs onto plain svhs tapes.
the age of the garage inventor is long over.
no individual enterpreneur can navigate the minefield of patents and survive. only huge megacorps with vast arsenals of patent WMD can enter new markets anymore. any innovative individual inventor is instantly annhiliated when a corporation feels threatened.
A former HP tech support agent
So how was bangalore then?
what Lucent does these days is suck money like a black hole.
ILECs used to buy a lot of Lucent hardware -- but now it's all Cisco, Siemens and Nortel.
Lucent laid off their top engineers (or the engineers walked out in disgust) and destroyed most of the successful products they had. Other really promising projects ended up stillborn.
Lucent also used to have a really cool R&D labs in the early 90s (like Xerox's PARC) but they killed that off too.
wouldnt matter. everyone has their price. i doubt he'd care much about political power with a nice cushy retirement fund and sandy beaches with lifetime supply of pina coladas.
my prediction: $0.00
all of it goes to the labels.
artists get nothing except % of sales and residuals, they dont get anything from legal judgements.
the criminals are almost always americans, living in america, under US law enforcement jurisdiction. rarely do they actually physically move out of the US to do their phishing.
it is still quite possible to nab them, it has been done before with US spammers who used offshore hosting, offshore accounts, and offshore compromised machines.
what you wanna bet bendsen votes to approve the legislation monday, then retires wednesday to some tropical island with a huge "retirement fund" which was deposited in his account tuesday.
the danish representatives suddenly turn up "missing" at the next legislative session. that's what happens.
film adapters for flatbed scanners almost always produce horrible results.
get a real film scanner or use a projector.
my condolences.
interesting idea actually.
start a nonprofit opensource patent holding company, and assign patents to it.
then patent every new thing that is built into linux or opensource projects.
it would give opensource some teeth against corporate pricks who try to assert patent infringement against linux, since linux would then have a portfolio to countersue with. mutually assured destruction is the name of the patent game, and it's the deterrent effect which causes entities to stockpile patents.
as long as opensource has no stockpile (or the patent system is reformed), it's vulnerable.
this would help defend (free|net|open)bsd, samba, gcc, etc as well.
most carriers seem to have dropped dialup SMS paging terminals in favor of email. which is of course a catch-22 when your primary internet link goes down...
argus is not bad, is pretty simple to set up, and scales reasonably well.
it's also pretty flexible so you can plug it into just about any paging system and monitor just about any service you can imagine.
it handles heirarchies so you dont get 300 pages at once, etc. and it has a simple, fast, clean web interface which isn't bloated with gigabytes of shiny widgets and is even perfectly usable via lynx.
it has a few rough edges but the overall ease of use and simplicity make up for it.
compilers already do this.
the problem is not jmp to data segments. the problem largely is executable stacks. which is exactly what stack smashing is about.
the other problem is that executable stacks are required for some legitimate compiler functions such as trampolines.
the real solutions are:
_complete_ separation of code and data segments.
code is _never_ writable, under any circumstances.
data is _never_ executable, under any circumstances.
no executable stack.
no more mprotect().
this will solve the arbitrary executable code issue, but won't solve other issues such as logic/sql/scripting exploits. it should solve most of the rootshell exploits though.
er, mips is hardly dead. cisco would be somewhat shocked to hear the chips they use in most of their routers dont actually exist.
The odd thing about OpenBSD, which many people never manage to assimilate, is that you have to look at that project through a very narrow gun turret to realize just how much they accomplish by entirely ignoring the whingings from everyone else.
the problem is that in ignoring all input from the outside, they ignore the good ideas along with the bad ones.
the only other developer i know who is as caustic as tdr is djb of qmail infamy. their distinct lack of social skills drive away many really good developers. there's another name for this -- the "yes men" syndrome.
mythbusters already busted this one. decompression simply doesn't happen. don't believe everything you see in the movies.
re: overpowering air marshals -- israel flies multiple air marshals on each plane. undercover. its quite unlikely terrorists would be able to discover them all and overpower all of them at once (which is the point).
re: cockpit doors. afaik they are completely bulletproof. (again, which is the point).
re: egyptian air lines -- the plane ran out of fuel and crashed into the sea because the terrorists were stupid and stubbornly insisted on flying the plane to a destination it couldn't possibly reach.
showing an ID does not make airlines safer!
if anything it makes airlines less safe because it lulls people into a false sense of security.
i don't know about you but i'd really rather the airlines spend their effort on effective means of security, such as armored cockpit doors and armed undercover air marshals.
you're exactly the kind of sheeple the government loves. you believe ID checks would have prevented 9/11. well news for you, they all had valid IDs and they all showed them and it obviously didn't work too well now, did it.
1) armored cockpit doors.
2) armed undercover air marshals.
ask israel what security measures are effective. id checks isnt of them.
it doesn't make the airlines safer!
if anything it makes the airlines less safe because it lulls people into a false sense of security, and they're wasting valuable time and effort on completely ineffective means of security instead of focusing on effective ones.
you want to know how to run a safe airline? ask israel. free hint: "having a valid id" doesnt stop terrorists.
OP is so completely wrong on so many levels. already been smacked down hard by numerous factual responses, definitely undeserving of +insightful.
do you have a reference?
which television stations or newspapers covered the story?
do you have a copy of the formal apology somewhere?
how about a copy of the video?
or maybe the name of your lawyer?