Maybe, instead of rasing the cap on H1-B visas, it would be wiser to INVEST in our education infrastructure starting at the high school level. I don't know how many HS's are left that even teach things like basic electronics or engineering skills, but the earlier you start such the more likely you are to fire up interest in the students.
This article, despite its clear bias, actually had some positive effects for me, as well as having the opposite effect that the author intended. Far from avoiding what's listed, I'm going to install NoScript the minute I get home this evening.
Besides VHF, jets that are used for overseas (overwater) flights are also, by regulation, equipped with HF radios that can cover any frequency from 2-30MHz (typical). This is because VHF frequencies, even with an airborne transmitter, still have a shorter propagation distance than HF.
Think of it this way: If an amateur radio operator on the ground, with a five-watt transmitter, can get their signal heard on the opposite side of the continent, think what you could do with a 100 watt HF signal at 35,000 feet.
And no... I don't see any possible way that a cellphone could ever interfere with an HF radio. The frequencies are just too far apart (30MHz, tops, vs. 800 or more).
If I may make a suggestion -- I've been with Drizzle Internet for over five years. I run fully self-hosted, including two authoritative DNS boxen, and Drizzle has never had an issue with it.
When I first called them up, I told them "Look, all I want is a DSL pipe and six static IP's. I'll do the rest." They said "No problem... Let me get an installation date for you."
Uptime has been incredible. I've only had two notable outages. First was when some chain-link fence grunts drove a fencepost through an underground phone cable (knocking out everyone in my neighborhood in the process), and the other was a bad network switch in their data center, which was promptly replaced.
As others have pointed out: Symantec is in business to sell "security" software for the Windows platform. Nothing more needs to be said in that regard.
Also, as others have pointed out, the metric of "Number of Patches" released is pretty much worthless. If this was a serious security test of Vista, it would have employed port scanners, malicious web pages, and assorted other threats stacked up against a default installation of the OS, on known hardware, with Vista's "security" features enabled in a known way.
For consistency's sake, the same attacks would need to be carried out against default installs of not just Linux, but OpenBSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD, and others. Then, and ONLY then, if Windows came out unscathed ahead of all those others (HA!) could it possibly be considered "most secure."
For that matter, the term "most secure" is meaningless without context. Most secure as a server? A workstation? With what skill level of user behind it?
This study seems to be, as the Immoral Bird might have put it, "lots of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
In fact, if it showed up on Usenet, it would most likely be considered a lame attempt at trolling, and subsequently killfiled.
Sorry to disappoint you. I'm a lot better with a logic analyzer or O-scope probe than I am with bizarre-looking high-level code.
We all have our different strenths. Someone else pointed out that the code is XML'ish. Considering that I never made a detailed study of XML, I'm not surprised I didn't recognize it.
Let me put it this way: Would you be able to read a document written in Sanskrit, or Hebrew? I certainly couldn't, not without a lot of help.
So, with that said: I hereby send one of those high-quality Bronx cheers that I specialize in manufacturing in your general direction!;-)
From the image in TFA, it looks like they're sending back the Windows version code, and the installation-unique CSID, along with some other stuff that I didn't recognize.
There didn't appear to be any identification of the specific user in there.
It seems to me that it would be easy enough to determine what port WGA is using to send this stuff, and lock down said port at one's firewall. That's the method I'd choose to deal with it (if I were even running anything with WGA installed -- which, thankfully, I'm not).
...And that is when Snopes is going to out this for the hoax that it so obviously has to be.
From TFA: "The data would be gathered using various motion sensors and biometric technology..."
Riiiigght.... And the Bush Administration makes widespread use of electronic mind control, and is covering up evidence of a hidden intelligent civilization on Pluto.
I call "Bulls*it" until and unless I see hard evidence to the contrary.
Not necessarily. The Spamhaus suit was utterly without merit, as no one is forced to use the Spamhaus database. Mail blocking occurs ONLY if (a), the SysAdmin(s) at the ISP or host in question choose to check incoming mail connections against the Spamhaus database; And (b), if Spamhaus has listed the IP address(es) being checked in said database.
For the record: I've used Spamhaus to help protect our network for years. I've gotten NO false positives with their listings. Ever. That's more than I can say for the SPEWS list. I can't even count how many hours they've saved me over the years.
Anyway, back on topic: The only way I can see this causing trouble for Opera is if they don't provide a way for the user to turn the feature off. With that said, I think such a feature should be OFF BY DEFAULT, and left to the user to enable if they wish. The potential for abuse of this system (someone at Opera getting a wild hare up their tail, and listing a site they don't agree with for blocking) is mind-boggling.
Keep the peace(es).
Re:Why would you want an RFID blocking wallet??
on
Top Ten Geek Wallets
·
· Score: 1
The RFID blocker appears to be, as I see it, mainly for the benefit of those with RFID passports.
The vast majority of access-control systems, that I know of, do not employ RFID chips in any case. The most popular proximity system that I'm aware of uses cards and readers made by HID Corporation.
Said readers depend, typically, on either a 125kHz LF or 13.56Mhz HF signal to read a unique pattern coded into each card. Considering the penetrating power of LF and VLF signals (the Navy uses VLF to communicate with submerged subs), I'm curious to see how such a product will affect my own access card (I just ordered one of the wallet/passport case combos).
Once I get the thing, I will conduct a few experiments and post the results here.
"In the end WiLife seemed happy enough with their outsourced manufacturing..."
So they were willing to accept mediocrity over decent quality.
And people wonder why so many electronic items barely last a year or so. Sheesh... Guess I won't be buying a WiLife product any time soon.
Am I just being overly simplistic...
on
IPv6 Essentials
·
· Score: 1
...Or could the problem of supposedly running out of addresses be 'addressed' (sorry) simply by adding another octet to IPv4? If I've done my math right, this would result in a 40-bit address instead of 32.
Example: 192.168.1.2.3
Or is the goal to try and push IPv6 simply because it's "better?"
I will say that V6 certainly seems to have its advantages, but I've tried (and failed) to learn its structure based on reading Lord only knows how many existing FAQs and white papers.
As far as the time frame goes: I'm self-hosted, meaning my ISP gives me a data pipe and six static addresses, and I do the rest (including DNS). When the day comes that said ISP calls me up to tell me "Hey, we're changing over to IPv6 at the end of the month (or year, or whatever), so you need to be ready for it," THEN I will start worrying about how to implement it.
Until then, V4 and NAT are working perfectly well for me, thanks.
From TFA (the FA that you provided the link to)...
"Even before Congress acts, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to shut down three regional libraries by September 30, end public access to research materials, and put up to 80,000 documents in boxes for eventual digitizing..."
Read those last couple of lines again, especially the parts about "end public access" and "EVENTUAL digitizing." (emphasis is mine).
If they can't find the budget to run the libraries, where are they going to find the budget to run all those boxes of docs through scanners, organize the results, and put up a web site for them?
With the current administration, "eventual digitization" probably means "We'll get around to it when the information is no longer potentially embarassing to the White House and our corporate butt-buddies."
I see two very serious potential problems with an overabundance of RF-based wireless peripherals, problems which I believe will insure that wired ones will be with us for some time to come.
First and foremost: Security, and I'll start with wireless keyboards as a great example. There have been lots of articles about keystroke-logging malware, but there seem to have been precious few warning about the fact that wireless keyboards cheerfully broadcast every keystroke whoever uses one types, free for anyone with the right knowledge and hardware to just pluck off the air.
Second issue: Mutual interference. I read just recently (don't recall where) that someone brought home a nice wireless access point for their home network, and they were having a heck of a time getting it to work consistently.
As it turns out, the WAP had been set up right next to the microwave oven in the kitchen. Every time someone started heating up their frozen burrito or whatever, ZAP! The wireless part of their network went down, hard. Yes, microwave ovens and 802.11b/g networks operate right around the same part of the RF spectrum (2.4GHz).
Third point: Hamateur radio folks, commercial radio stations, and (especially!) labs where RF experimentation and development takes place, all need to be extremely leery about wireless peripherals because of the interference the things can cause to non-computer devices. Heck, I've got enough problems trying to filter Ethernet leakage out of my own station without worrying about wireless widgets on my computers adding to the problem!
This doesn't even touch on the possibility of licensed RF devices (such as portable 2-way VHF or UHF radios, or high-power commercial or amateur stations) causing interference to wireless peripherals. Being that such peripherals have to, by law, comply with FCC Part 15 regs, and "accept any interference received, including that which may cause undesired operation," the owners of such devices have four choices in such a case: Work with the licensed radio user, to try and resolve the issue, or try and resolve it themselves; Grin and bear it; Switch to infrared-based wireless devices; Or go back to wired devices.
Do wireless peripherals have their place? Of course they do. However, users of such would do well to remember that the RF spectrum is a very crowded place, and simply getting wireless for the sake of having wireless may not always yield the results that they expect.
What this REALLY means is that if the dryer is porn-surfing, all those socks that mysteriously disappear are going to be magically replaced with a wide variety of kinky garments.
Hey, lose something, get something back. It all balances out in the end. I'm thinking three socks for that red-orange rubbery thing that Mila Jovovich held up to the camera in 'The Fifth Element...'
Physchic (noun); A Physical fitness trainer who dresses in the very latest 'bleeding edge' fashions.
So, let me see if I've got this straight. The guy awoke from (probably) a 19-year long dream about winning every spelling bee on the planet, only to discover that he had become... SUPER BODYBUILDER! (with fashion sense, no less).
J is for Jumpy, from too much caffeine, O is for Others, on whom he must lean. H is for 'Huh?,' your response to his words, N's for the N's in 'ReveNge of the Nerds.'
D is for Diffuse, his view of the world, V is for Velcro. It keeps his pants uncurled. O is for Obvious, at the drop of a hat, R is for Ridiculous. He's almost always that! A is for Apple, in whom he sees odd twists, K's for his keyboard, which hurt my wrists!
Love him, hate him, or anywhere in between, just remember... There's only ONE John Dvorak! (A fact for which we can all probably be eternally grateful...)
If the ONLY measure of who the "best" SysAdmins are is a test of how well they do configuring Sendmail, then the people doing the measuring need to do some serious self-examination.
There's loads more to being a "good" or even the "best" SysAdmin, NetAdmin, or whatever other kind of admin there is than configuring one overly-complex and security-hole-ridden program. No two techies are ever going to have the same strengths and weaknesses.
For my part, I never understood (or really tried to understand, after seeing how horribly complex and obtuse the.cf file was) Sendmail. However, I've done perfectly well with both qmail and Postfix (I finally settled on Postfix, mainly because I like the way it handles blocklists better than how qmail does).
Does this make me (or anyone else who chose a similar path) a "poor" admin? Hardly. I'm still, effectively, my own ISP, thanks to being self-hosted. My upstream gives me six statics over a DSL pipe, and I do the rest (including authoritative DNS for my domains).
Don't blame people for preferring what's simpler (and, apparently, more secure) over what's a configuration nightmare, no matter how much of a "litmus test" it's thought to be.
Slashdot Mirror
"'Jericho' Fans Send Over Nine Tons of Nuts to CBS..."
That certainly explains why the Halls of Congress suddenly turned up empty...
You wrote...
"The key, for the company, is having enough monetary leverage to bring a legal case to bare..."
Oooh, ick! Naked lawyers! Now THAT'S something that should definitely be 'covered' by a NDA!
Maybe, instead of rasing the cap on H1-B visas, it would be wiser to INVEST in our education infrastructure starting at the high school level. I don't know how many HS's are left that even teach things like basic electronics or engineering skills, but the earlier you start such the more likely you are to fire up interest in the students.
Keep the peace(es).
This article, despite its clear bias, actually had some positive effects for me, as well as having the opposite effect that the author intended. Far from avoiding what's listed, I'm going to install NoScript the minute I get home this evening.
;-)
Am I paranoid? Who's asking? And why?
Keep the peace(es).
Besides VHF, jets that are used for overseas (overwater) flights are also, by regulation, equipped with HF radios that can cover any frequency from 2-30MHz (typical). This is because VHF frequencies, even with an airborne transmitter, still have a shorter propagation distance than HF.
Think of it this way: If an amateur radio operator on the ground, with a five-watt transmitter, can get their signal heard on the opposite side of the continent, think what you could do with a 100 watt HF signal at 35,000 feet.
And no... I don't see any possible way that a cellphone could ever interfere with an HF radio. The frequencies are just too far apart (30MHz, tops, vs. 800 or more).
Keep the peace(es).
If I may make a suggestion -- I've been with Drizzle Internet for over five years. I run fully self-hosted, including two authoritative DNS boxen, and Drizzle has never had an issue with it.
When I first called them up, I told them "Look, all I want is a DSL pipe and six static IP's. I'll do the rest." They said "No problem... Let me get an installation date for you."
Uptime has been incredible. I've only had two notable outages. First was when some chain-link fence grunts drove a fencepost through an underground phone cable (knocking out everyone in my neighborhood in the process), and the other was a bad network switch in their data center, which was promptly replaced.
No matter what you decide, happy hunting.
Thank you for sharing your opinion. You can crawl back under your rock now.
As others have pointed out: Symantec is in business to sell "security" software for the Windows platform. Nothing more needs to be said in that regard.
Also, as others have pointed out, the metric of "Number of Patches" released is pretty much worthless. If this was a serious security test of Vista, it would have employed port scanners, malicious web pages, and assorted other threats stacked up against a default installation of the OS, on known hardware, with Vista's "security" features enabled in a known way.
For consistency's sake, the same attacks would need to be carried out against default installs of not just Linux, but OpenBSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD, and others. Then, and ONLY then, if Windows came out unscathed ahead of all those others (HA!) could it possibly be considered "most secure."
For that matter, the term "most secure" is meaningless without context. Most secure as a server? A workstation? With what skill level of user behind it?
This study seems to be, as the Immoral Bird might have put it, "lots of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
In fact, if it showed up on Usenet, it would most likely be considered a lame attempt at trolling, and subsequently killfiled.
Keep the peace(es).
Sorry to disappoint you. I'm a lot better with a logic analyzer or O-scope probe than I am with bizarre-looking high-level code.
;-)
We all have our different strenths. Someone else pointed out that the code is XML'ish. Considering that I never made a detailed study of XML, I'm not surprised I didn't recognize it.
Let me put it this way: Would you be able to read a document written in Sanskrit, or Hebrew? I certainly couldn't, not without a lot of help.
So, with that said: I hereby send one of those high-quality Bronx cheers that I specialize in manufacturing in your general direction!
From the image in TFA, it looks like they're sending back the Windows version code, and the installation-unique CSID, along with some other stuff that I didn't recognize.
There didn't appear to be any identification of the specific user in there.
It seems to me that it would be easy enough to determine what port WGA is using to send this stuff, and lock down said port at one's firewall. That's the method I'd choose to deal with it (if I were even running anything with WGA installed -- which, thankfully, I'm not).
They killed Kenny (the Martian Microbe)!!
...And that is when Snopes is going to out this for the hoax that it so obviously has to be.
From TFA: "The data would be gathered using various motion sensors and biometric technology..."
Riiiigght.... And the Bush Administration makes widespread use of electronic mind control, and is covering up evidence of a hidden intelligent civilization on Pluto.
I call "Bulls*it" until and unless I see hard evidence to the contrary.
Not necessarily. The Spamhaus suit was utterly without merit, as no one is forced to use the Spamhaus database. Mail blocking occurs ONLY if (a), the SysAdmin(s) at the ISP or host in question choose to check incoming mail connections against the Spamhaus database; And (b), if Spamhaus has listed the IP address(es) being checked in said database.
For the record: I've used Spamhaus to help protect our network for years. I've gotten NO false positives with their listings. Ever. That's more than I can say for the SPEWS list. I can't even count how many hours they've saved me over the years.
Anyway, back on topic: The only way I can see this causing trouble for Opera is if they don't provide a way for the user to turn the feature off. With that said, I think such a feature should be OFF BY DEFAULT, and left to the user to enable if they wish. The potential for abuse of this system (someone at Opera getting a wild hare up their tail, and listing a site they don't agree with for blocking) is mind-boggling.
Keep the peace(es).
The RFID blocker appears to be, as I see it, mainly for the benefit of those with RFID passports.
The vast majority of access-control systems, that I know of, do not employ RFID chips in any case. The most popular proximity system that I'm aware of uses cards and readers made by HID Corporation.
Said readers depend, typically, on either a 125kHz LF or 13.56Mhz HF signal to read a unique pattern coded into each card. Considering the penetrating power of LF and VLF signals (the Navy uses VLF to communicate with submerged subs), I'm curious to see how such a product will affect my own access card (I just ordered one of the wallet/passport case combos).
Once I get the thing, I will conduct a few experiments and post the results here.
Keep the peace(es).
...For the multiple explanations. I now understand why simply adding another octet wouldn't gain much of value.
Keep the peace(es).
"In the end WiLife seemed happy enough with their outsourced manufacturing..."
So they were willing to accept mediocrity over decent quality.
And people wonder why so many electronic items barely last a year or so. Sheesh... Guess I won't be buying a WiLife product any time soon.
...Or could the problem of supposedly running out of addresses be 'addressed' (sorry) simply by adding another octet to IPv4? If I've done my math right, this would result in a 40-bit address instead of 32.
Example: 192.168.1.2.3
Or is the goal to try and push IPv6 simply because it's "better?"
I will say that V6 certainly seems to have its advantages, but I've tried (and failed) to learn its structure based on reading Lord only knows how many existing FAQs and white papers.
As far as the time frame goes: I'm self-hosted, meaning my ISP gives me a data pipe and six static addresses, and I do the rest (including DNS). When the day comes that said ISP calls me up to tell me "Hey, we're changing over to IPv6 at the end of the month (or year, or whatever), so you need to be ready for it," THEN I will start worrying about how to implement it.
Until then, V4 and NAT are working perfectly well for me, thanks.
Keep the peace(es).
You utter bastard...
/. for a VERY long time! ;-)
You deserve to be modded up for the best frelling awful pun I've seen on
I don't think so...
From TFA (the FA that you provided the link to)...
"Even before Congress acts, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to shut down three regional libraries by September 30, end public access to research materials, and put up to 80,000 documents in boxes for eventual digitizing..."
Read those last couple of lines again, especially the parts about "end public access" and "EVENTUAL digitizing." (emphasis is mine).
If they can't find the budget to run the libraries, where are they going to find the budget to run all those boxes of docs through scanners, organize the results, and put up a web site for them?
With the current administration, "eventual digitization" probably means "We'll get around to it when the information is no longer potentially embarassing to the White House and our corporate butt-buddies."
In other words, don't hold your breath.
I see two very serious potential problems with an overabundance of RF-based wireless peripherals, problems which I believe will insure that wired ones will be with us for some time to come.
First and foremost: Security, and I'll start with wireless keyboards as a great example. There have been lots of articles about keystroke-logging malware, but there seem to have been precious few warning about the fact that wireless keyboards cheerfully broadcast every keystroke whoever uses one types, free for anyone with the right knowledge and hardware to just pluck off the air.
Second issue: Mutual interference. I read just recently (don't recall where) that someone brought home a nice wireless access point for their home network, and they were having a heck of a time getting it to work consistently.
As it turns out, the WAP had been set up right next to the microwave oven in the kitchen. Every time someone started heating up their frozen burrito or whatever, ZAP! The wireless part of their network went down, hard. Yes, microwave ovens and 802.11b/g networks operate right around the same part of the RF spectrum (2.4GHz).
Third point: Hamateur radio folks, commercial radio stations, and (especially!) labs where RF experimentation and development takes place, all need to be extremely leery about wireless peripherals because of the interference the things can cause to non-computer devices. Heck, I've got enough problems trying to filter Ethernet leakage out of my own station without worrying about wireless widgets on my computers adding to the problem!
This doesn't even touch on the possibility of licensed RF devices (such as portable 2-way VHF or UHF radios, or high-power commercial or amateur stations) causing interference to wireless peripherals. Being that such peripherals have to, by law, comply with FCC Part 15 regs, and "accept any interference received, including that which may cause undesired operation," the owners of such devices have four choices in such a case: Work with the licensed radio user, to try and resolve the issue, or try and resolve it themselves; Grin and bear it; Switch to infrared-based wireless devices; Or go back to wired devices.
Do wireless peripherals have their place? Of course they do. However, users of such would do well to remember that the RF spectrum is a very crowded place, and simply getting wireless for the sake of having wireless may not always yield the results that they expect.
Keep the peace(es).
What this REALLY means is that if the dryer is porn-surfing, all those socks that mysteriously disappear are going to be magically replaced with a wide variety of kinky garments.
Hey, lose something, get something back. It all balances out in the end. I'm thinking three socks for that red-orange rubbery thing that Mila Jovovich held up to the camera in 'The Fifth Element...'
Keep the peace(es).
From TFA...
"The Homeland Security Department, through the Federal Emergency Management Agency, expects to have the system working by the end of next year..."
Sure they will... as long as the FEMA director isn't out having dinner at the time.
Keep the peace(es).
"...You become a physchic..."
Physchic (noun); A Physical fitness trainer who dresses in the very latest 'bleeding edge' fashions.
So, let me see if I've got this straight. The guy awoke from (probably) a 19-year long dream about winning every spelling bee on the planet, only to discover that he had become... SUPER BODYBUILDER! (with fashion sense, no less).
J is for Jumpy, from too much caffeine,
O is for Others, on whom he must lean.
H is for 'Huh?,' your response to his words,
N's for the N's in 'ReveNge of the Nerds.'
D is for Diffuse, his view of the world,
V is for Velcro. It keeps his pants uncurled.
O is for Obvious, at the drop of a hat,
R is for Ridiculous. He's almost always that!
A is for Apple, in whom he sees odd twists,
K's for his keyboard, which hurt my wrists!
Love him, hate him, or anywhere in between, just remember... There's only ONE John Dvorak! (A fact for which we can all probably be eternally grateful...)
Keep the peace(es).
If the ONLY measure of who the "best" SysAdmins are is a test of how well they do configuring Sendmail, then the people doing the measuring need to do some serious self-examination.
.cf file was) Sendmail. However, I've done perfectly well with both qmail and Postfix (I finally settled on Postfix, mainly because I like the way it handles blocklists better than how qmail does).
There's loads more to being a "good" or even the "best" SysAdmin, NetAdmin, or whatever other kind of admin there is than configuring one overly-complex and security-hole-ridden program. No two techies are ever going to have the same strengths and weaknesses.
For my part, I never understood (or really tried to understand, after seeing how horribly complex and obtuse the
Does this make me (or anyone else who chose a similar path) a "poor" admin? Hardly. I'm still, effectively, my own ISP, thanks to being self-hosted. My upstream gives me six statics over a DSL pipe, and I do the rest (including authoritative DNS for my domains).
Don't blame people for preferring what's simpler (and, apparently, more secure) over what's a configuration nightmare, no matter how much of a "litmus test" it's thought to be.