And if _you_ spent a second thinking about it, you would see that the device probably powers down when it's not doing anything (like when you're reading a page). Palm (among other companies) has mastered automatic low power and no power modes when no/not much computing is needed. I'm sure this device is no different.
Hmm, let me clarify my position. I wasn't saying "you have emotional problems". I was saying "it looks like you turn to sarcasm a lot to express yourself". In my _personal experience_ when I do passive aggressive things like expressing myself via sarcasm, it makes it difficult for me to determine when I'm in the wrong. Hence it makes it difficult for me to correct myself.
I notice that you've put me on your enemies list. This is another indication that you just don't want to listen to anything negative that might be applicable to you. All I'm saying is, you should think hard if that's a position you want to take, because it might not be good for you in the long run.
You're still demonstrating problems with sincerity.
Please tell me where I used ad hominem arguments. Nowhere did I criticize you personally. I did offer advice that you change your behavior.
I should also point out that ad hominem is only a logical fallacy when a point is being argued. You pointed out I was wrong, I agreed and offered advice. No point was being argued.
Well, I sincerely thank you for correcting my understanding. I also sincerely advise you that continually using irony as a defense mechanism is likely to lead you to heartache. You will find it difficult to correct or better yourself if you always use hurtful ways of defending your ego, not to mention difficulties you may have in finding sincere friends.
I know I'm just echoing the AC, but I'm going to bull through anyway:) I have a math degree, and I had a lot of eureka classes. You were taking the wrong ones. In fact, it seems to me you would have to go out of your way to take math classes that were grind instead of eureka.
Differentiation (basic calculus) is a grind. You learn a few simple rules and apply them. Integration, beyond the most basic, is all eureka. You learn a few rules, but they all require insight into how to rearrange the thing you're integrating so it fits a pattern.
My favorite classes were about proofs. A proof is all eureka. A proof is a series of simple, basic steps that takes you from the given to the thing you're trying to prove. However, finding which basic steps go together to get what you want is all eureka. Many times in graduate level math courses I would work on a problem until midnight, go to sleep, wake up at 3am with the solution to the problem, write it down, & finish the problem in the morning. The interesting thing to me about proofs is that virtually always the way to prove the answer you want is to prove something much, much more powerful, of which the answer you want is a minor subset. It's as if your engineering teacher tells you to design a power source that can provide 1.5 volts for a day, and the easiest way you can find to do it is to build a Mr. Fusion. For example, to prove that all groups with 113 members are really the same group with different names for the elements, the easiest way is to prove that all groups with a prime number of elements hold that quality.
That's right. Some rights you can sign away in a contract; some you cannot.
Now, the reality of what rights we have versus what rights we are "guaranteed" by the constitution is another issue - I suspect the one you are trolling me about. It's no fun trolling me on that one, though. I know that the federal government has whittled away at constitutional rights (mostly 10th amendment rights) so that much of the statutory law (which is enforced) conflicts with constitutional law.
where if I buy a house from anyone else, all of the major retailers won't sell me plumbing, fixtures, or even dishes and none of the handymen know how to fix anything.
Yeah, sure, the EULA is a contract I chose to sign. As opposed to all of the other choices I have out there.
In fact, this is getting fixed. For many advanced users, Linux is perfectly capable of providing anything they need. But someone shouldn't be forced to "sign" a crazy contract because they're not a computer expert.
That's ignoring the fact that there are legal restrictions on what rights you can sign away in a contract.
And also ignoring the fact that a EULA ISN'T A CONTRACT. I didn't sign anything - I clicked a button after I already bought a non-refundable item. Some choice.
Regardless of the tool used, I have to run it/use it on a router that's processing the problem packets. It would take more than 5 minutes to get to all of the appropriate routers with a physical device. Once I have it on that router, either fluke or ethereal should find the problem immediately, if I know what port I'm looking for data on.
So how is it better? Can you explain to me how you use it that would make it easier than "ssh -X"ing to the box and running ethereal?
That is a very good point!! I stand corrected. Of course, that means they would have to crack each message individually, but still, a radically easier proposal than I thought.
I use 2048 bit keys. These guys use 2048 bit keys in a free encrypted email service. And I'm not saying the NSA isn't ahead of the curve. I'm saying they don't have some kind of space man science, which is what it would take to crack a reasonable length key.
Anyone who really needs things encrypted should be using 2048 bit keys.
I've never ever heard anything at all reputable, or even anything that had any evidence whatsoever to go with it, that indicated that any secret group has the ability to decrypt strongly encrypted public key email.
So why do so many people believe the NSA can decrypt encrypted materials?
Of course, encrypted emails don't have the destination encrypted (so they can see who's emailing whom) and I don't think the subject is encrypted. And, of course, with PATRIOT, the government can (and I'm fairly sure does) track every single origin/destination combination of every email sent in the US.
But some mysterious ability to crack encrypted mail? I very much doubt it. They probably have enough cpus churning to get many many PC-years per day, and I'm sure they are using all the latest tricks to speed up cracking, but even so there's no way anyone's decrypting your 2048 bit key messages without a major breakthrough in mathematics.
I saw Bubba Hotep. I love Bruce Campbell's stuff, and I really, really wanted BH to be good, but it just wasn't. No plot, crummy special effects, and the direction stunk.
I'll still watch the next thing Bruce is in, though;-)
You should have called the police, this is the kind of crap that they are here for. That sort of phone call, if he kept it up, might count as harassment. And if you are actually worried about him showing up at your house, consider the possibility of becoming a gun owner.
I did, and I am. (I was before this happened.)
The police didn't do anything, nor did I expect them to based on one anonymous phone call. A gun is nice if someone comes into your house, but is of no help if they burn your house down while you're asleep.
Three years ago some jackass from/. thought it would be funny to call up my home phone and leave a nasty drunken message because I disagree with him about the current SUV craze. The reason he was able to do this was because (stupid me) I kept accurate whois information for my domain names. Had I pissed him off enough, there was nothing keeping him from coming to my home.
Requiring public, accurate whois information is idiotic. I think a requirement for accurate information held in confidence by ICAN is a good idea (to be available to the police with a warrant). Before you run out there cheering for accurate public information, think about how you would feel if every email and every web posting you made had your home phone & address on it. If everyone were sane and reasonable, it would be good. Since everyone's not, and someone can anonymously e.g. burn your house down, it's bad.
Spammers are just going to get phones with junk info and PO boxes. This can only hurt, not help.
I'm surprised to see the responses I'm seeing on a site where most people ostensibly argue for free speech and anonymity.
This guy's a troll from K5. He will sometimes post good stuff, but I personally hate the mental effort involved in trying to figure out if someone's espousing something they believe in or just yanking my chain. I recommend ignoring him.
Um, "oh no, market realities force me to give money to a company that I know uses it to fuck me". If it were just that the company gave me a better deal than everyone else, I would have no complaints. It's the fact that I'm trying to buy something from a 3rd unrelated company and I have to pay money to MS for something I don't want that upsets me.
You can easily buy a PC without Windows on it... and if you don't like Microsoft you can use one of the many alternatives.
Bullshit. I write this post on a Dell Inspiron 1100, which I recently purchased new from Dell. I spent half an hour on the phone with their sales support trying to buy the laptop without the crappy XP installed. They told me it couldn't be done. This laptop is $200 cheaper than the nearest alternative I could find.
I don't understand how that can still be the case after the US MS rulings - I thought that was the whole point?
At any rate, I bought the laptop and paid my MS tax like a good little boy, but the thought of it makes my gorge rise. I'm as opposed to Microsoft as they come, and yet I paid them money. Multiply that by a couple of billion people world-wide, and you can see how hard it is to give customers a choice. Even their enemies support them!
Regarding the story about the kids who hacked Bill Gate's CC number... the way you tell the story, it's obvious you want us to feel the kids are deeply in the wrong. "Well sorry buddy" demonstrates a bias and a lack of eloquence disturbing in someone purportedly reporting.
As you tell it, I can't see that they did anything that should be criminal, quite honestly. If the three million dollars in damages is because they bought things with the credit cards, or because they used them maliciously, then that's one thing. If the three million dollars is because now the companies they cracked have to clean up their security, and the CC holders have to get new numbers, that's quite another.
What would you say should be done when someone reports to a company "your site is insecure; anyone could steal from your customers" and they ignore it? Just assume the company will do the right thing? Or do something to make the companies take notice?
The crackers may well have been doing something illegal and immoral. But when I read a story with such obvious bias and leaving out critical details, I assume the writer left out the details because they don't support his bias.
Slashdot Mirror
And if _you_ spent a second thinking about it, you would see that the device probably powers down when it's not doing anything (like when you're reading a page). Palm (among other companies) has mastered automatic low power and no power modes when no/not much computing is needed. I'm sure this device is no different.
Hmm, let me clarify my position. I wasn't saying "you have emotional problems". I was saying "it looks like you turn to sarcasm a lot to express yourself". In my _personal experience_ when I do passive aggressive things like expressing myself via sarcasm, it makes it difficult for me to determine when I'm in the wrong. Hence it makes it difficult for me to correct myself.
I notice that you've put me on your enemies list. This is another indication that you just don't want to listen to anything negative that might be applicable to you. All I'm saying is, you should think hard if that's a position you want to take, because it might not be good for you in the long run.
You're still demonstrating problems with sincerity.
Please tell me where I used ad hominem arguments. Nowhere did I criticize you personally. I did offer advice that you change your behavior.
I should also point out that ad hominem is only a logical fallacy when a point is being argued. You pointed out I was wrong, I agreed and offered advice. No point was being argued.
Well, I sincerely thank you for correcting my understanding. I also sincerely advise you that continually using irony as a defense mechanism is likely to lead you to heartache. You will find it difficult to correct or better yourself if you always use hurtful ways of defending your ego, not to mention difficulties you may have in finding sincere friends.
It's called sarcasm. Your sig is sarcastic, not ironic. Oh, the irony.
I know I'm just echoing the AC, but I'm going to bull through anyway :) I have a math degree, and I had a lot of eureka classes. You were taking the wrong ones. In fact, it seems to me you would have to go out of your way to take math classes that were grind instead of eureka.
Differentiation (basic calculus) is a grind. You learn a few simple rules and apply them. Integration, beyond the most basic, is all eureka. You learn a few rules, but they all require insight into how to rearrange the thing you're integrating so it fits a pattern.
My favorite classes were about proofs. A proof is all eureka. A proof is a series of simple, basic steps that takes you from the given to the thing you're trying to prove. However, finding which basic steps go together to get what you want is all eureka. Many times in graduate level math courses I would work on a problem until midnight, go to sleep, wake up at 3am with the solution to the problem, write it down, & finish the problem in the morning. The interesting thing to me about proofs is that virtually always the way to prove the answer you want is to prove something much, much more powerful, of which the answer you want is a minor subset. It's as if your engineering teacher tells you to design a power source that can provide 1.5 volts for a day, and the easiest way you can find to do it is to build a Mr. Fusion. For example, to prove that all groups with 113 members are really the same group with different names for the elements, the easiest way is to prove that all groups with a prime number of elements hold that quality.
That's right. Some rights you can sign away in a contract; some you cannot.
Now, the reality of what rights we have versus what rights we are "guaranteed" by the constitution is another issue - I suspect the one you are trolling me about. It's no fun trolling me on that one, though. I know that the federal government has whittled away at constitutional rights (mostly 10th amendment rights) so that much of the statutory law (which is enforced) conflicts with constitutional law.
where if I buy a house from anyone else, all of the major retailers won't sell me plumbing, fixtures, or even dishes and none of the handymen know how to fix anything.
Yeah, sure, the EULA is a contract I chose to sign. As opposed to all of the other choices I have out there.
In fact, this is getting fixed. For many advanced users, Linux is perfectly capable of providing anything they need. But someone shouldn't be forced to "sign" a crazy contract because they're not a computer expert.
That's ignoring the fact that there are legal restrictions on what rights you can sign away in a contract.
And also ignoring the fact that a EULA ISN'T A CONTRACT. I didn't sign anything - I clicked a button after I already bought a non-refundable item. Some choice.
Disclaimer: IANANA (I am not a network admin)
Regardless of the tool used, I have to run it/use it on a router that's processing the problem packets. It would take more than 5 minutes to get to all of the appropriate routers with a physical device. Once I have it on that router, either fluke or ethereal should find the problem immediately, if I know what port I'm looking for data on.
So how is it better? Can you explain to me how you use it that would make it easier than "ssh -X"ing to the box and running ethereal?
That is a very good point!! I stand corrected. Of course, that means they would have to crack each message individually, but still, a radically easier proposal than I thought.
I use 2048 bit keys. These guys use 2048 bit keys in a free encrypted email service. And I'm not saying the NSA isn't ahead of the curve. I'm saying they don't have some kind of space man science, which is what it would take to crack a reasonable length key.
Anyone who really needs things encrypted should be using 2048 bit keys.
I've never ever heard anything at all reputable, or even anything that had any evidence whatsoever to go with it, that indicated that any secret group has the ability to decrypt strongly encrypted public key email.
So why do so many people believe the NSA can decrypt encrypted materials?
Of course, encrypted emails don't have the destination encrypted (so they can see who's emailing whom) and I don't think the subject is encrypted. And, of course, with PATRIOT, the government can (and I'm fairly sure does) track every single origin/destination combination of every email sent in the US.
But some mysterious ability to crack encrypted mail? I very much doubt it. They probably have enough cpus churning to get many many PC-years per day, and I'm sure they are using all the latest tricks to speed up cracking, but even so there's no way anyone's decrypting your 2048 bit key messages without a major breakthrough in mathematics.
I saw Bubba Hotep. I love Bruce Campbell's stuff, and I really, really wanted BH to be good, but it just wasn't. No plot, crummy special effects, and the direction stunk.
;-)
I'll still watch the next thing Bruce is in, though
Why don't you just use vpn over your wireless to the PC with the landline?
Also sprach die Anonymous Coward.
You should have called the police, this is the kind of crap that they are here for. That sort of phone call, if he kept it up, might count as harassment. And if you are actually worried about him showing up at your house, consider the possibility of becoming a gun owner.
I did, and I am. (I was before this happened.)
The police didn't do anything, nor did I expect them to based on one anonymous phone call. A gun is nice if someone comes into your house, but is of no help if they burn your house down while you're asleep.
Three years ago some jackass from /. thought it would be funny to call up my home phone and leave a nasty drunken message because I disagree with him about the current SUV craze. The reason he was able to do this was because (stupid me) I kept accurate whois information for my domain names. Had I pissed him off enough, there was nothing keeping him from coming to my home.
Requiring public, accurate whois information is idiotic. I think a requirement for accurate information held in confidence by ICAN is a good idea (to be available to the police with a warrant). Before you run out there cheering for accurate public information, think about how you would feel if every email and every web posting you made had your home phone & address on it. If everyone were sane and reasonable, it would be good. Since everyone's not, and someone can anonymously e.g. burn your house down, it's bad.
Spammers are just going to get phones with junk info and PO boxes. This can only hurt, not help.
I'm surprised to see the responses I'm seeing on a site where most people ostensibly argue for free speech and anonymity.
And if my limited understanding of IPV6 is correct, after it's in place you wouldn't even have the morphing IP problem.
This guy's a troll from K5. He will sometimes post good stuff, but I personally hate the mental effort involved in trying to figure out if someone's espousing something they believe in or just yanking my chain. I recommend ignoring him.
I wish I still had points to give ya.
Um, "oh no, market realities force me to give money to a company that I know uses it to fuck me". If it were just that the company gave me a better deal than everyone else, I would have no complaints. It's the fact that I'm trying to buy something from a 3rd unrelated company and I have to pay money to MS for something I don't want that upsets me.
You can easily buy a PC without Windows on it... and if you don't like Microsoft you can use one of the many alternatives.
Bullshit. I write this post on a Dell Inspiron 1100, which I recently purchased new from Dell. I spent half an hour on the phone with their sales support trying to buy the laptop without the crappy XP installed. They told me it couldn't be done. This laptop is $200 cheaper than the nearest alternative I could find.
I don't understand how that can still be the case after the US MS rulings - I thought that was the whole point?
At any rate, I bought the laptop and paid my MS tax like a good little boy, but the thought of it makes my gorge rise. I'm as opposed to Microsoft as they come, and yet I paid them money. Multiply that by a couple of billion people world-wide, and you can see how hard it is to give customers a choice. Even their enemies support them!
Damn, I shoulda thunka that.
Well, here was my reply to the article...
Regarding the story about the kids who hacked Bill Gate's CC number... the way you tell the story, it's obvious you want us to feel the kids are deeply in the wrong. "Well sorry buddy" demonstrates a bias and a lack of eloquence disturbing in someone purportedly reporting.
As you tell it, I can't see that they did anything that should be criminal, quite honestly. If the three million dollars in damages is because they bought things with the credit cards, or because they used them maliciously, then that's one thing. If the three million dollars is because now the companies they cracked have to clean up their security, and the CC holders have to get new numbers, that's quite another.
What would you say should be done when someone reports to a company "your site is insecure; anyone could steal from your customers" and they ignore it? Just assume the company will do the right thing? Or do something to make the companies take notice?
The crackers may well have been doing something illegal and immoral. But when I read a story with such obvious bias and leaving out critical details, I assume the writer left out the details because they don't support his bias.
The linked story says 6 megabytes of memory, we don't believe 'em.
When you are expressing two complete thoughts (that could stand on their own as sentences) in one sentence, you separate them with a semicolon.
Like this: The linked story says 6 megabytes of memory; we don't believe 'em.