"...Ballmer responded to a question about how Microsoft plans to deal with the remaining 75 percent by saying "We are not winning more than we're losing."
Eeeshhh... Balmy needs to go to work writing for the Firesign Theater. Grammatical talent like that doesn't just (g)roe on trees.;-)
I seem to remember that, back around 1994, there were lots of noises about IPv4 address space becoming depleted. Weren't NAT devices supposed to help with this?
Also... I'm no network expert by a long shot, but I have looked at the docs for IPv6, and they struck me as overly complex at best.
Wouldn't it be possible (and a lot easier) to stave off Impending Doom by adding one or two more octets to the existing IPv4 scheme? If not, fine, but I can't be the only one who's wondered whether it's really that simple.
Technology, as a whole, is a tool. A neutral tool, no matter what form it takes. It can serve to hurt or heal with equal facility, all depending on how it's used. Each individual manufacturer of "censorship software," as it were, is going to have to make their own decision, based on their owner(s) beliefs.
I would add that censorship of this nature is not going to solved by suppressing sales of the necessary software or other technological tools to 'problem' countries. If a repressive regime is shopping for such, and whatever company they approach refuses to sell to them on moral grounds, they're simply going to go elsewhere, waving around progressively larger amounts of dinero until they get what they want. If a large company doesn't want to do it, I'm sure there are many "software consultants" who would be happy to take their cash.
The only way sales of this sort might be stopped is if EVERYone, individuals and companies alike, who is capable of writing such code bands together under one flag and Just Says No (and how likely is that?)
Even then, what's to stop that same regime from buying the raw materials (computers, compilers, etc.) and 'rolling their own?' It's naive to think that U.S. economic sanctions or export regulations would stop whichever country from doing so. You can buy ANYthing if you talk to the right people and throw around enough $$.
No, the only thing that's going to truly stop a repressive regime from being repressive is those who are repressed rising up as a whole, and forcing change. This is usually referred to as 'Revolution.'
Yes, it's sad. Yes, it's ugly. But it is the truth. You don't have to take my word for it either. Look at U.S. history, just as one example.
Let me put this as simply as possible. The Guardian's article isn't worth the fish-wrapper it's printed on. The Guardian itself has all the journalistic integrity of the Weekly World News and the Enquirer put together, and that's on a GOOD day. I don't exactly put a lot of faith in the History Channel either.
You see, I've worked with dolphins at a couple of different parks, and I've done enough book-learning about them to last a lifetime. As if that's not enough, I've been to practically every oceanarium in the States, several foreign ones, and asked detailed questions of a hundred or so trainers and veterinarians over the last couple of decades to help further my knowledge of the critters.
To top off all the above, I have a friend who was a senior animal trainer for the Navy's Marine Mammal Program for nearly 20 years. We've known each other longer than that, so I trust his word a lot more than I trust that of some crank newspaper and its "reliable" source.
More to the point, I asked him once about the very allegations that papers like the Guardian have been making, on and off, for the last couple of decades. I knew that I'd get a straight answer out of him.
I did, and it was pretty much what I expected. Dart-toting or weapon-equipped dolphins are little more than the stuff of (as others have pointed out) B-grade movies. Though the specifics of what he did in the program are classified, he was able to tell me that dolphins and sea lions are used for practice-munitions recovery, search-and-rescue, and similar such missions.
No lasers, no dart guns (toxic or otherwise), no bombs, no robotic arms with nasty-looking grabbers, not even a scary sign. Sorry, folks.
Is it technically possible to train dolphins to do as the Guardian article described? Sure it is. They're smart, playful, generally friendly, and very trainable. Working with them is like working with rowdy third-graders. However, the difficulty of telling friend from foe with 100% reliability (something the military would demand in any such situation) would present a pretty substantial obstacle.
I would add that the weapon-toting dolphin myths are a favorite of animal-rights extremist groups, and are periodically toted out just to try and make headlines. Similar myths about armed dolphins in Camh Ranh Bay, Vietnam, emerged in the 70's (Google has nothing on this, BTW, as it happened long before the Internet was a driving force in the public eye. Check your local library).
I may not have dug deep enough, but I've not seen anyone post this link to snopes.com as yet. They've got a write-up on this myth (and plenty of others).
The only other thing I will add: Show me a live dolphin, equipped with a dart gun strapped to their body, and I will cheerfully STFU.
"...a stand-alone device that allows users a striped down laptop/inflated PDA..."
OK... I want to know which side this device is striped down on, and what color the stripe is, dang it! If it's not done up in Bell System blue/yellow, I don't want anything to do with it.
Would someone please grab a generic image of Tux, and outfit him with a space suit and pogo stick, please? Preferably against a lunar backdrop? I'm away from my Photoshop-equipped system at the moment or I'd give it a shot.
The Best Western hotel chain has made it a companywide policy to provide free WiFi (and, in many cases, hardwired Ethernet) Internet access to any guest, at any of their locations, that wishes to use it. Granted, not all locations are online as yet, but they're working on it.
I can't speak for them, of course, but this amenity is certainly a major reason that I've made BW my 'Lodging of Choice' whenever I'm on the road. I rarely stay anywhere else, and when I do, one of the first things I ask is if they have WiFi or broadband Internet available. If they don't, they get bumped to the bottom of my list.
I don't think anyone can say that the cost of providing such an amenity has hurt BW in the least. In fact, I think it has earned them a lot more business than they might otherwise have gotten.
Though I will admit that I keep the noisiest stuff (my Internet-presence servers and most of the network hardware) in the garage. You think desktop systems are noisy? Try listening to a ProLiant 6500!
"Written examinations? Nobody has to type the Morse anymore? Anyone here who got his license recently care to shed some light on this one?"
If you consider five years ago 'recent,' that's when I upgraded to Extra class after 22 years of being a Tech class licensee. I would be happy to comment.
The Morse code requirements have been fading for some time. At one point, you needed to be able to send/receive at 13WPM to get a General or Advanced class license (the Advanced no longer exists), and 20WPM to get an Extra class.
The FCC eventually dropped the speed requirement to 5WPM (that originally required to get a Novice or Tech class license), so all those who had originally taken the 5WPM Morse Code element (I had, back in 1977, when I was first licensed) were eligible to upgrade simply by passing the higher-level written exam.
I had, as you might imagine, gained quite a bit of experience with electronics and radio after 22 years of being a hamateur, and fixing commercial 2-way radios, so taking the Extra-class exam was the next logical step for me. It's just that I never liked communicating via Morse, so I never practiced it beyond one on-air contact.
The written exams I keep referring to are multiple-choice 50 or 100-question exams which cover basic electronics and radio theory, operating practices, and FCC regs as they pertain to the amateur radio service. They get progressively more difficult as you go up the ladder of the various license levels, making greater knowledge and experience in the radio field a requirement as you try to advance through General to Extra.
If you're interested, now that the Morse requirement is close to being eliminated, you should check in with whatever ham radio club(s) are local to you for license classes. You can find such clubs in your area by searching at this link.
You can find further information on amateur radio, and how to get your license, from this link (RealPlayer or similar required).
I feel compelled to clear a few things up, having read the relevant articles and making some assumptions based on my knowledge of security technology.
The scanners at D-world are NOT, at this time, full fingerprint scanners. If they were, they would not need two fingers, only one, and the process would only take a second or two for each person (I know this -- I've been digitally fingerprinted due to the fact that I work for a law-enforcement agency).
They are, I believe, GEOMETRY scanners which map the approximate shape of two specific fingers, turn them into data points, and associate them with the record of the passholder or patron entering the park. The San Francisco Airport (and other airports) have been using full-hand geometry scanners for decades to do access control; This application appears to be a simplified version of the same thing.
Now, with that said, I do have some thoughts on the issue. On the one wing, Disney parks are, in fact, private property. They belong to a specific corporation. Said corporation does indeed have the right to install any means of access control for their parks that they want to.
On the other wing, and as others have pointed out, this sets a rotten precedent. It would not take much, in the way of hardware and software modification, for this system to be able to record full fingerprints. The scary part is that it could be done transparently, without the visitor even realizing that a lot more data points are being recorded and stored.
This raises the question of how Disney is storing the data, what OTHER data they're associating with the scan, how LONG they're storing it, WHO has access to it, and WHAT they ultimately plan to do with it. If it's strictly an admission-control thing, fine. However, lacking further details, it seems to me that the door is wide open for abuse.
This also raises the question of 'Does it make the park less susceptible to terrorist attack?' The answer is 'of course not!' Anyone who is truly determined to cause harm and mayhem at a theme park will find a way to do so that does not involve getting their hand scanned, or leaving much of any other identity traces.
If I invoke my ultra-paranoid side, and put on my tinfoil hat, I can see another possible scenario. Homeland Security or whoever wants as much data as can be gained on the general population. What better way to gather a whole stack of fingerprints than to let someone else pay for the hardware and software, and then simply pay that someone else (Disney, in this case) under-the-table for copies of the records?
Granted, that's probably a pretty silly idea, but see what happens when I let my imagination off the leash for a bit?
FWIW: I've heard that Universal Studios and Sea World Orlando are going to be deploying similar (if not identical) technology for their gates. As if I needed another reason not to visit either park ever again, especially after that horrible travesty of a whale show...
"Ummm, you can network in dos. It's a pain in the tookus and you are limited to about 20 or so shares, but it's very much possible and actually practical in situations that you'd otherwise have to take floppies between systems.
Now whether you can load the TSRs and still have enough memory for your software is another story..."
Oh, believe me, I know this. The issue, as you so accurately pointed out, is that the software involved is fairly intensive in its memory usage.
I've tried enabling networking with various service software packages loaded. They all crash with the network present.
As for my 'challenge' earlier, I forgot to add one other parameter. Make it all run on a 486-33 motherboard, because most of Motorola's early radio service software packages will not run on anything faster. Even on a 486-33, I have to disable the CPU cache.
Keep the peace(es).
The author is overlooking the industrial arena...
on
The End of a Floppy Era
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
While the floppy may no longer be useful in a "consumer" PC world (and I even have my doubts about that), it is still very much alive and well in the industrial PC arena, and in many electronics labs, just like RS232, RS422, and RS485 serial ports.
This is because good ole' DOS (yes, as in MS-DOS, PC-DOS, whatever DOS you want to call it, complete with command-line interface) is still used in many embedded and dedicated-system applications that work just fine without the bloat and instability that Windows would add.
Example, from my own lab: Programming and servicing many makes of Motorola 2-way radios. I could not do so were it not for a DOS-based system which has no ability to network at all. Many of the Motorola radio service software packages won't run on Windows, mainly because they were written long before Windows was in force and Motorola has chosen not to re-write them. Also, most such programs require direct control of the serial port, something that Windows versions above (I think) 95 do not allow.
Transferring radio data files from my archives to the programming computer is best done with -- you guessed it -- floppies. This includes transfer of files to older (pre-Pentium) portable systems for programming or service work in the field. Again, floppies are incredibly useful for such.
I want to add here that I've grown very tired of supposedly knowledgeable people arbitrarily deciding, just because they think a given technology isn't "very friendly" or that its "usefulness is now gone," that everyone else should kowtow to their "advice" and stop using said technology immediately. If Mr. McCollum truly does find floppies something he's come to "loathe with a passion," then he certainly has my permission to stop using them.
The article itself is really comparing apples and oranges in any case. Floppies were never meant to compete with things like USB drives. They were designed for one purpose, and they serve that purpose very well indeed. Heck, I think the fact that they've stood the Test of Time so well speaks volumes for their continued usefulness.
Here's my challenge to the computing world: Find me a DOS version that supports USB hardware, and a USB storage device that can talk to DOS over said hardware, AND that I can boot DOS from if I need to, and I will consider giving up floppies.
Until then, Mr. McCollum has my most cordial invitation (which I'll post to the actual article site as soon as I get home tonight) to take his myopic and repetitive "Floppies are Dead" editorial, and blow it out his Jump drive.
"I see, so how is one going to practice this? Guess keep the equipment and the antennas up and invest 1000s of dollars into a hobby on the off chance that maybe you'll be able to help one day...but until that day it just sits there unused..."
Personally, I use my radios every day. When I'm in my home area, I use them to chat with other hams during my commute. When I'm in an unfamiliar area, especially Canada, having amateur radio handy has saved my arse more than once, especially when it comes to getting driving directions and traffic advisories from the locals.
I'm proud to say I've been active in ham radio since 1977, and I've learned an awful lot from it, electronics-wise. In fact, I would not be in my current job had it not been for the experience I gained from the hobby.
When the Nisqually Earthquake hit in Feb. 2001, here in the Puget Sound region, the entire cellphone network was overloaded within minutes after the shaking stopped, and landlines were quick to follow.
What kept on working? That's right. Ham radio VHF and UHF repeaters. Emergency-response nets went active in record time, insuring that areas without any other type of communication at that moment suddenly had a way to contact the rest of the area, and to ask for help if it was needed.
When the East Bay Area hills in California suffered a crippling firestorm in 1991, guess what kept on working when cell sites and landlines were overloaded? Right again. Amateur radio.
And let's not forget the now-famous Loma Prieta Earthquake of 1989. Once again, amateur radio equipment kept right on working while cellular and landlines were overcrowded or knocked out entirely.
Want to know something else? I'm a survivor of all three of those disasters. In each and every case, my radio gear and my fellow hams held the only reliable means I had to keep informed on what was happening, and to keep in touch with my family.
I can also tell, by your comments, that you've never taken a serious look at ham radio. You don't need "1000s of dollars" to get started. You can get a simple handheld transceiver for less than $100, and many ham radio clubs offer license classes for free.
Now, is it POSSIBLE to invest thousands into the hobby? Of course it is. I've done it, but I also provide technical services to other hams as part of my side business.
Spending thousands is possible with ANY hobby (just ask a coin or stamp collector). Like any other hobby, you can choose to put as little or as much as you want to into it.
Also, like any other hobby, it gives back exactly what you choose to put into it.
So, before you go assuming that a typical ham's radio gear and antennas just "sits there unused" most of the time, I suggest you go talk to an active hamateur, or perhaps attend a local radio club meeting. You can find listings for clubs at the ARRL's site. You can also find info on how to get started in the hobby if you so choose.
And yes, BPL is most definitely "evil." You'd understand why if you had your ham license.
"She may not know anything about infosec but is this an acceptable practice?.."
Their machines, their network, their rules. The owner/admin(s) for the network and systems in that medical office have absolute and total authority to implement any restrictions they want to.
Not by a long shot. I'm sad to say that I've seen the exact same problem in plenty of other fields, technical and otherwise. You never know where it's going to pop up. I've even seen it in (supposedly) proofread equipment service manuals.
One particularly vivid example that comes to mind is that of Motorola Online, a web site used by Motorola's customers to browse their catalog, with an eye towards ordering parts and accessories for their two-way radio product line.
I have access to this site, being a Motorola reseller. I've seen numerous spelling and grammatical errors, mostly in descriptions of parts ("antanna" as opposed to "antenna," or better yet "raido" as opposed to "radio").
It also shows up in the professional publishing arena in some fantasy novels. The hardcover combo edition of Andre Norton's "Mark of the Cat" and "Year of the Rat" was badly infested with misspellings (mainly of character and place names) in the second story. In fact, I question if it was even proofread at all.
If it had been a COBOL program, it would have crashed on the first line of code.
So, in summary: Rest assured, it's not just you! I'm just waiting to see what happens when something like you describe causes a major problem, as opposed to a little embarassment.
My answers to your original questions, in sequence: I use a Watchguard FireBox II hardware firewall/router combo box. If I were going to go through an actual purchase process, instead of ending up with the FireBox II as a gift, I would purchase either a ZyxelZyWall 5 or one of Netgear'shardwired router/firewall combos.
Your second question: "Is it less than $100?" Only if you get REALLY lucky on the used equipment market. If you're at all serious about protecting your servers, your data, and your LAN, it's far more important to be paranoid than it is to try and be frugal.
In other words: The best possible computer and network security device is sitting right between your ears. Invest in a good solid firewall, yes, and expect to spend more than $100 for it, but also invest in good security policies and procedures for your users to follow. Use a combination of common sense, paranoia, and planning, and you will probably do pretty well.
This is the same industry that wants to put ads on screens above the urinals in restrooms, on electronic screens in shopping carts, and God only knows where else.
Ad blockers are simply a way for 'net users to say "No! You already have enough places to advertise, and I don't want my computer screen to be one of them."
"Call me old-fashioned, but I'm fucking tired of everything I do being made technically illegal, even if it has no tangible effect. I'm not ripping anybody off, I'm not sharing with millions of my closest friends, I'm just trying to record telvision shows when I'm not home, and sometimes watch my DVDs or store my CDs on my computer. I'm not harming anybody, I'm not not paying someone when I should, and so it should. not. be. illegal..."
I don't think you're being old-fashioned at all. In fact, I think that was extremely well-written.
As I've said before, in another post: When Fair Use is outlawed, only outlaws will have Fair Use.
I, for one, am looking forward to being an outlaw.;-)
So what would this mean for those who are self-hosted?
My upstream ISP gives me a DSL pipe and six static IP addresses. I run everything else, and I do mean EVERYthing: Authoritative DNS, web, mail, Usenet leaf node, the works. My upstream, as far as I know, doesn't log my traffic because I'm not using any of their machine resources.
Since I am effectively my own ISP, does that mean I need to start thinking about record retention? I have a grand total of four users, counting myself, and all except one are immediate family members. We don't snoop on each other, and I don't offer Internet service for resale at all.
I know self-hosting is a little unusual to many, but to my eyes it's just an extension of the fact that I ran a FidoNet BBS for many years. If the DoJ expects me to start snooping on family members and a close friend, just because I'm their 'ISP' in the technical sense, I'm afraid they're going to be severely disappointed.
Slashdot Mirror
...Is this memorable quote from TFA:
;-)
"...Ballmer responded to a question about how Microsoft plans to deal with the remaining 75 percent by saying "We are not winning more than we're losing."
Eeeshhh... Balmy needs to go to work writing for the Firesign Theater. Grammatical talent like that doesn't just (g)roe on trees.
Essence, I can just picture it...
Customer: "So I get free wireless for my Nintendo DS now?"
Clerk: "Yes, would you like a Pringles can-tenna with that?"
I seem to remember that, back around 1994, there were lots of noises about IPv4 address space becoming depleted. Weren't NAT devices supposed to help with this?
Also... I'm no network expert by a long shot, but I have looked at the docs for IPv6, and they struck me as overly complex at best.
Wouldn't it be possible (and a lot easier) to stave off Impending Doom by adding one or two more octets to the existing IPv4 scheme? If not, fine, but I can't be the only one who's wondered whether it's really that simple.
Keep the peace(es).
Technology, as a whole, is a tool. A neutral tool, no matter what form it takes. It can serve to hurt or heal with equal facility, all depending on how it's used. Each individual manufacturer of "censorship software," as it were, is going to have to make their own decision, based on their owner(s) beliefs.
I would add that censorship of this nature is not going to solved by suppressing sales of the necessary software or other technological tools to 'problem' countries. If a repressive regime is shopping for such, and whatever company they approach refuses to sell to them on moral grounds, they're simply going to go elsewhere, waving around progressively larger amounts of dinero until they get what they want. If a large company doesn't want to do it, I'm sure there are many "software consultants" who would be happy to take their cash.
The only way sales of this sort might be stopped is if EVERYone, individuals and companies alike, who is capable of writing such code bands together under one flag and Just Says No (and how likely is that?)
Even then, what's to stop that same regime from buying the raw materials (computers, compilers, etc.) and 'rolling their own?' It's naive to think that U.S. economic sanctions or export regulations would stop whichever country from doing so. You can buy ANYthing if you talk to the right people and throw around enough $$.
No, the only thing that's going to truly stop a repressive regime from being repressive is those who are repressed rising up as a whole, and forcing change. This is usually referred to as 'Revolution.'
Yes, it's sad. Yes, it's ugly. But it is the truth. You don't have to take my word for it either. Look at U.S. history, just as one example.
Let me put this as simply as possible. The Guardian's article isn't worth the fish-wrapper it's printed on. The Guardian itself has all the journalistic integrity of the Weekly World News and the Enquirer put together, and that's on a GOOD day. I don't exactly put a lot of faith in the History Channel either.
You see, I've worked with dolphins at a couple of different parks, and I've done enough book-learning about them to last a lifetime. As if that's not enough, I've been to practically every oceanarium in the States, several foreign ones, and asked detailed questions of a hundred or so trainers and veterinarians over the last couple of decades to help further my knowledge of the critters.
To top off all the above, I have a friend who was a senior animal trainer for the Navy's Marine Mammal Program for nearly 20 years. We've known each other longer than that, so I trust his word a lot more than I trust that of some crank newspaper and its "reliable" source.
More to the point, I asked him once about the very allegations that papers like the Guardian have been making, on and off, for the last couple of decades. I knew that I'd get a straight answer out of him.
I did, and it was pretty much what I expected. Dart-toting or weapon-equipped dolphins are little more than the stuff of (as others have pointed out) B-grade movies. Though the specifics of what he did in the program are classified, he was able to tell me that dolphins and sea lions are used for practice-munitions recovery, search-and-rescue, and similar such missions.
No lasers, no dart guns (toxic or otherwise), no bombs, no robotic arms with nasty-looking grabbers, not even a scary sign. Sorry, folks.
Is it technically possible to train dolphins to do as the Guardian article described? Sure it is. They're smart, playful, generally friendly, and very trainable. Working with them is like working with rowdy third-graders. However, the difficulty of telling friend from foe with 100% reliability (something the military would demand in any such situation) would present a pretty substantial obstacle.
I would add that the weapon-toting dolphin myths are a favorite of animal-rights extremist groups, and are periodically toted out just to try and make headlines. Similar myths about armed dolphins in Camh Ranh Bay, Vietnam, emerged in the 70's (Google has nothing on this, BTW, as it happened long before the Internet was a driving force in the public eye. Check your local library).
I may not have dug deep enough, but I've not seen anyone post this link to snopes.com as yet. They've got a write-up on this myth (and plenty of others).
The only other thing I will add: Show me a live dolphin, equipped with a dart gun strapped to their body, and I will cheerfully STFU.
Keep the peace(es).
"...a stand-alone device that allows users a striped down laptop/inflated PDA..."
OK... I want to know which side this device is striped down on, and what color the stripe is, dang it! If it's not done up in Bell System blue/yellow, I don't want anything to do with it.
Or maybe it's an appliance of a different stripe?
Spelling glitches can be such fun...
Would someone please grab a generic image of Tux, and outfit him with a space suit and pogo stick, please? Preferably against a lunar backdrop? I'm away from my Photoshop-equipped system at the moment or I'd give it a shot.
Keep the peace(es).
From the post...
"...It is expected that the probe will return to earth in approximately 50 thousand years..."
It'll be VGER all over again! Alert Paramount!!
The Best Western hotel chain has made it a companywide policy to provide free WiFi (and, in many cases, hardwired Ethernet) Internet access to any guest, at any of their locations, that wishes to use it. Granted, not all locations are online as yet, but they're working on it.
I can't speak for them, of course, but this amenity is certainly a major reason that I've made BW my 'Lodging of Choice' whenever I'm on the road. I rarely stay anywhere else, and when I do, one of the first things I ask is if they have WiFi or broadband Internet available. If they don't, they get bumped to the bottom of my list.
I don't think anyone can say that the cost of providing such an amenity has hurt BW in the least. In fact, I think it has earned them a lot more business than they might otherwise have gotten.
Keep the peace(es).
Oh, good! Glad to know I'm not the only one who:
(a) Actually LIKES fan noise...
(b) Uses it as a sleep aid.
Though I will admit that I keep the noisiest stuff (my Internet-presence servers and most of the network hardware) in the garage. You think desktop systems are noisy? Try listening to a ProLiant 6500!
Keep the peace(es).
"Written examinations? Nobody has to type the Morse anymore? Anyone here who got his license recently care to shed some light on this one?"
If you consider five years ago 'recent,' that's when I upgraded to Extra class after 22 years of being a Tech class licensee. I would be happy to comment.
The Morse code requirements have been fading for some time. At one point, you needed to be able to send/receive at 13WPM to get a General or Advanced class license (the Advanced no longer exists), and 20WPM to get an Extra class.
The FCC eventually dropped the speed requirement to 5WPM (that originally required to get a Novice or Tech class license), so all those who had originally taken the 5WPM Morse Code element (I had, back in 1977, when I was first licensed) were eligible to upgrade simply by passing the higher-level written exam.
I had, as you might imagine, gained quite a bit of experience with electronics and radio after 22 years of being a hamateur, and fixing commercial 2-way radios, so taking the Extra-class exam was the next logical step for me. It's just that I never liked communicating via Morse, so I never practiced it beyond one on-air contact.
The written exams I keep referring to are multiple-choice 50 or 100-question exams which cover basic electronics and radio theory, operating practices, and FCC regs as they pertain to the amateur radio service. They get progressively more difficult as you go up the ladder of the various license levels, making greater knowledge and experience in the radio field a requirement as you try to advance through General to Extra.
Amateur radio is, I think, a fun hobby, despite the naysayers. It is especially useful during natural disasters, as I found out directly during the Bay Area's 'Quake of 89,' the East Bay Hills firestorm of 1991, and the Nisqually earthquake in Washington in 2001.
If you're interested, now that the Morse requirement is close to being eliminated, you should check in with whatever ham radio club(s) are local to you for license classes. You can find such clubs in your area by searching at this link.
You can find further information on amateur radio, and how to get your license, from this link (RealPlayer or similar required).
Keep the peace(es).
The written
I feel compelled to clear a few things up, having read the relevant articles and making some assumptions based on my knowledge of security technology.
The scanners at D-world are NOT, at this time, full fingerprint scanners. If they were, they would not need two fingers, only one, and the process would only take a second or two for each person (I know this -- I've been digitally fingerprinted due to the fact that I work for a law-enforcement agency).
They are, I believe, GEOMETRY scanners which map the approximate shape of two specific fingers, turn them into data points, and associate them with the record of the passholder or patron entering the park. The San Francisco Airport (and other airports) have been using full-hand geometry scanners for decades to do access control; This application appears to be a simplified version of the same thing.
Now, with that said, I do have some thoughts on the issue. On the one wing, Disney parks are, in fact, private property. They belong to a specific corporation. Said corporation does indeed have the right to install any means of access control for their parks that they want to.
On the other wing, and as others have pointed out, this sets a rotten precedent. It would not take much, in the way of hardware and software modification, for this system to be able to record full fingerprints. The scary part is that it could be done transparently, without the visitor even realizing that a lot more data points are being recorded and stored.
This raises the question of how Disney is storing the data, what OTHER data they're associating with the scan, how LONG they're storing it, WHO has access to it, and WHAT they ultimately plan to do with it. If it's strictly an admission-control thing, fine. However, lacking further details, it seems to me that the door is wide open for abuse.
This also raises the question of 'Does it make the park less susceptible to terrorist attack?' The answer is 'of course not!' Anyone who is truly determined to cause harm and mayhem at a theme park will find a way to do so that does not involve getting their hand scanned, or leaving much of any other identity traces.
If I invoke my ultra-paranoid side, and put on my tinfoil hat, I can see another possible scenario. Homeland Security or whoever wants as much data as can be gained on the general population. What better way to gather a whole stack of fingerprints than to let someone else pay for the hardware and software, and then simply pay that someone else (Disney, in this case) under-the-table for copies of the records?
Granted, that's probably a pretty silly idea, but see what happens when I let my imagination off the leash for a bit?
FWIW: I've heard that Universal Studios and Sea World Orlando are going to be deploying similar (if not identical) technology for their gates. As if I needed another reason not to visit either park ever again, especially after that horrible travesty of a whale show...
Keep the peace(es).
"Ummm, you can network in dos. It's a pain in the tookus and you are limited to about 20 or so shares, but it's very much possible and actually practical in situations that you'd otherwise have to take floppies between systems.
Now whether you can load the TSRs and still have enough memory for your software is another story..."
Oh, believe me, I know this. The issue, as you so accurately pointed out, is that the software involved is fairly intensive in its memory usage.
I've tried enabling networking with various service software packages loaded. They all crash with the network present.
As for my 'challenge' earlier, I forgot to add one other parameter. Make it all run on a 486-33 motherboard, because most of Motorola's early radio service software packages will not run on anything faster. Even on a 486-33, I have to disable the CPU cache.
Keep the peace(es).
While the floppy may no longer be useful in a "consumer" PC world (and I even have my doubts about that), it is still very much alive and well in the industrial PC arena, and in many electronics labs, just like RS232, RS422, and RS485 serial ports.
This is because good ole' DOS (yes, as in MS-DOS, PC-DOS, whatever DOS you want to call it, complete with command-line interface) is still used in many embedded and dedicated-system applications that work just fine without the bloat and instability that Windows would add.
Example, from my own lab: Programming and servicing many makes of Motorola 2-way radios. I could not do so were it not for a DOS-based system which has no ability to network at all. Many of the Motorola radio service software packages won't run on Windows, mainly because they were written long before Windows was in force and Motorola has chosen not to re-write them. Also, most such programs require direct control of the serial port, something that Windows versions above (I think) 95 do not allow.
Transferring radio data files from my archives to the programming computer is best done with -- you guessed it -- floppies. This includes transfer of files to older (pre-Pentium) portable systems for programming or service work in the field. Again, floppies are incredibly useful for such.
I want to add here that I've grown very tired of supposedly knowledgeable people arbitrarily deciding, just because they think a given technology isn't "very friendly" or that its "usefulness is now gone," that everyone else should kowtow to their "advice" and stop using said technology immediately. If Mr. McCollum truly does find floppies something he's come to "loathe with a passion," then he certainly has my permission to stop using them.
The article itself is really comparing apples and oranges in any case. Floppies were never meant to compete with things like USB drives. They were designed for one purpose, and they serve that purpose very well indeed. Heck, I think the fact that they've stood the Test of Time so well speaks volumes for their continued usefulness.
Here's my challenge to the computing world: Find me a DOS version that supports USB hardware, and a USB storage device that can talk to DOS over said hardware, AND that I can boot DOS from if I need to, and I will consider giving up floppies.
Until then, Mr. McCollum has my most cordial invitation (which I'll post to the actual article site as soon as I get home tonight) to take his myopic and repetitive "Floppies are Dead" editorial, and blow it out his Jump drive.
Not necessarily. If Herman Melville were alive today, he could re-write one of his most famous stories to fit the "wired world."
.mobi-Dick, starring the ICANN board (collectively, one costume) as the Great White (Wired) Whale.
I'm speaking, in case you hadn't seen it coming, of
(Come on, you HAD to see that coming! That rotten tomato in your hand only confirms it!)
"I see, so how is one going to practice this? Guess keep the equipment and the antennas up and invest 1000s of dollars into a hobby on the off chance that maybe you'll be able to help one day...but until that day it just sits there unused..."
Personally, I use my radios every day. When I'm in my home area, I use them to chat with other hams during my commute. When I'm in an unfamiliar area, especially Canada, having amateur radio handy has saved my arse more than once, especially when it comes to getting driving directions and traffic advisories from the locals.
I'm proud to say I've been active in ham radio since 1977, and I've learned an awful lot from it, electronics-wise. In fact, I would not be in my current job had it not been for the experience I gained from the hobby.
When the Nisqually Earthquake hit in Feb. 2001, here in the Puget Sound region, the entire cellphone network was overloaded within minutes after the shaking stopped, and landlines were quick to follow.
What kept on working? That's right. Ham radio VHF and UHF repeaters. Emergency-response nets went active in record time, insuring that areas without any other type of communication at that moment suddenly had a way to contact the rest of the area, and to ask for help if it was needed.
When the East Bay Area hills in California suffered a crippling firestorm in 1991, guess what kept on working when cell sites and landlines were overloaded? Right again. Amateur radio.
And let's not forget the now-famous Loma Prieta Earthquake of 1989. Once again, amateur radio equipment kept right on working while cellular and landlines were overcrowded or knocked out entirely.
Want to know something else? I'm a survivor of all three of those disasters. In each and every case, my radio gear and my fellow hams held the only reliable means I had to keep informed on what was happening, and to keep in touch with my family.
I can also tell, by your comments, that you've never taken a serious look at ham radio. You don't need "1000s of dollars" to get started. You can get a simple handheld transceiver for less than $100, and many ham radio clubs offer license classes for free.
Now, is it POSSIBLE to invest thousands into the hobby? Of course it is. I've done it, but I also provide technical services to other hams as part of my side business.
Spending thousands is possible with ANY hobby (just ask a coin or stamp collector). Like any other hobby, you can choose to put as little or as much as you want to into it.
Also, like any other hobby, it gives back exactly what you choose to put into it.
So, before you go assuming that a typical ham's radio gear and antennas just "sits there unused" most of the time, I suggest you go talk to an active hamateur, or perhaps attend a local radio club meeting. You can find listings for clubs at the ARRL's site. You can also find info on how to get started in the hobby if you so choose.
And yes, BPL is most definitely "evil." You'd understand why if you had your ham license.
Happy hunting.
"She may not know anything about infosec but is this an acceptable practice?.."
Their machines, their network, their rules. The owner/admin(s) for the network and systems in that medical office have absolute and total authority to implement any restrictions they want to.
So... I would say 'yes' to your question.
Keep the peace(es).
Not by a long shot. I'm sad to say that I've seen the exact same problem in plenty of other fields, technical and otherwise. You never know where it's going to pop up. I've even seen it in (supposedly) proofread equipment service manuals.
One particularly vivid example that comes to mind is that of Motorola Online, a web site used by Motorola's customers to browse their catalog, with an eye towards ordering parts and accessories for their two-way radio product line.
I have access to this site, being a Motorola reseller. I've seen numerous spelling and grammatical errors, mostly in descriptions of parts ("antanna" as opposed to "antenna," or better yet "raido" as opposed to "radio").
It also shows up in the professional publishing arena in some fantasy novels. The hardcover combo edition of Andre Norton's "Mark of the Cat" and "Year of the Rat" was badly infested with misspellings (mainly of character and place names) in the second story. In fact, I question if it was even proofread at all.
If it had been a COBOL program, it would have crashed on the first line of code.
So, in summary: Rest assured, it's not just you! I'm just waiting to see what happens when something like you describe causes a major problem, as opposed to a little embarassment.
My answers to your original questions, in sequence: I use a Watchguard FireBox II hardware firewall/router combo box. If I were going to go through an actual purchase process, instead of ending up with the FireBox II as a gift, I would purchase either a Zyxel ZyWall 5 or one of Netgear's hardwired router/firewall combos.
Your second question: "Is it less than $100?" Only if you get REALLY lucky on the used equipment market. If you're at all serious about protecting your servers, your data, and your LAN, it's far more important to be paranoid than it is to try and be frugal.
In other words: The best possible computer and network security device is sitting right between your ears. Invest in a good solid firewall, yes, and expect to spend more than $100 for it, but also invest in good security policies and procedures for your users to follow. Use a combination of common sense, paranoia, and planning, and you will probably do pretty well.
Happy tweaking.
This is the same industry that wants to put ads on screens above the urinals in restrooms, on electronic screens in shopping carts, and God only knows where else.
Ad blockers are simply a way for 'net users to say "No! You already have enough places to advertise, and I don't want my computer screen to be one of them."
What part of "No!" don't advertisers understand?
Just for once, I'd like to see a phone manufacturer make a product that's really good at one thing, and one thing only: Being a PHONE!
Keep the peace(es).
"Call me old-fashioned, but I'm fucking tired of everything I do being made technically illegal, even if it has no tangible effect. I'm not ripping anybody off, I'm not sharing with millions of my closest friends, I'm just trying to record telvision shows when I'm not home, and sometimes watch my DVDs or store my CDs on my computer. I'm not harming anybody, I'm not not paying someone when I should, and so it should. not. be. illegal..."
;-)
I don't think you're being old-fashioned at all. In fact, I think that was extremely well-written.
As I've said before, in another post: When Fair Use is outlawed, only outlaws will have Fair Use.
I, for one, am looking forward to being an outlaw.
Keep the peace(es).
So what would this mean for those who are self-hosted?
My upstream ISP gives me a DSL pipe and six static IP addresses. I run everything else, and I do mean EVERYthing: Authoritative DNS, web, mail, Usenet leaf node, the works. My upstream, as far as I know, doesn't log my traffic because I'm not using any of their machine resources.
Since I am effectively my own ISP, does that mean I need to start thinking about record retention? I have a grand total of four users, counting myself, and all except one are immediate family members. We don't snoop on each other, and I don't offer Internet service for resale at all.
I know self-hosting is a little unusual to many, but to my eyes it's just an extension of the fact that I ran a FidoNet BBS for many years. If the DoJ expects me to start snooping on family members and a close friend, just because I'm their 'ISP' in the technical sense, I'm afraid they're going to be severely disappointed.
Keep the peace(es).
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
"It will operate autonomously under control of on-board computers, with no ground control..."
This could certainly add new meaning to the phrase "Blue Screen of Death."
I'll wager that they'll never get guv'mint approval to operate without at least one human pilot.
Keep the peace(es).