I've long thought that quantum entanglements may have something to do with the impressive ability of many twins to feel what their twin is doing...shoot, it isn't that hard to believe that some of the source matter for the embyos was in an entangled state and thus incorporated into the growing fetus. I don't have any firm views on this...just wanted to throw it out there.
Really? Hrm...seems to be a taint of the we find and fix all flaws in record time belief that Open Source advocates hold so dear...maybe there are things that can't be done by the community. Yes, I know record time isn't the same as instantly.
Yeah? Wrong, unless you use some pretty aggressive settings. The time it takes software to detect the problem is 5 times longer than it takes an Athlon to self destruct. Tom's reported a rise of a few hundred degrees per second...no software solution will catch it, unless you've found or written one in the last three days. That said, I still choose AMD over Intel...I know how to keep the cooler locked on and finctioning.
This is probably gonna sound silly, but you could do what my parents did- "read your book and shut up!"
That worked for me and my younger brother, but our older brother and sister couldn't...reading in the car makes them terribly carsick. I think they learned to sleep on demand, though. And I hate the idea of kids (people) having yet another piece of electronic garbage swallow every free moment. I realize we *must* constantly be entertained, but damn, get a grip. There's an actual world out there.
He reinforced my belief in the value of a competitive market...without AMD, Intel would have a lock on all of our business. It's interesting how destructive human nature can be...logically, the thing to do is run a single company that can leverage suppliers, research, manufacturing, distribution, administration, etc. This would reduce all the redundancies in the market and allow for superior products at reasonable prices. Advertising could be focused on actual products, not competitive differentation. If something new was developed by this company, they would only need make the value known...no more blue men. INstead of this utopia, when a single company gains the majority of the market they tend to maximize profit instead of customer value. It's a hell of a world, isn't it?
That's excellent! Change from a Windows compatability layer to a Windows vulnerability layer. Of course it should work...as I recall, Sircam is a virus targeted a MS applications...so anything that can run Windows apps ought to run it, right?
Seems to me everyone is forgetting Operation Phoenix, which utterly destroyed the Viet Cong as a fighting force. Kill them and their friends one at a time until there are none left. The VC was incapable of significant combat by the time the US left Vietnam. Notice it took the NVA to conquer Saigon.
Enough time and casualties and either volunteer becomes conscript or the army backs out.
I can only assume you are basing this on the Vietnam experience...if that is correct, bear in mind that the central reason for the size of the US draft was the rotation policy.
it was Bush's bombing of Iraq that made Bin Laden hate us in the first place.
Now, maybe you know something that's hidden from the rest of us, but everyone seems to agree that it was the American presence in Saudi Arabia (home of Mecca, remember?) that hardened his anger. I tend to think he just wanted an enemy and we provided him an excuse, but I could be wrong. Usually am.
The water was drained and the fuselage examined. The investigators were horrified to find a split in the fuselage. It began with a small fracture in the corner of an escape hatch window and extended for eight feet. Metal fatigue! Had the Comet not been under water, the cabin would have exploded like a bomb.
Yes, it was a window. However, it started small and got real big real fast. Hence the explosive in explosive decompression.
If the software is sold as a proprietary software, then the company is responsible for any damages the use of it might incur to its users.
If the software is open, i.e. not proprietary, then no one would be responsible for any damages using it might incur. Hey! It's open who are you
going to sue anyway!
There's broken logic here, but I've got a patch for it... Why not hold the manufacturer responsible in BOTH cases? If it's closed, sue the shop...if it's open, sue the USER. That's right, hold the one who is inflicting their software upon the world accountable. Shoot, if you want to play with the code you'd best make it harmless...notice I do believe the creator of the program is responsible. But not just the closed folks.
All that said, it's really the assholes pumping these worms, virii, etc that are the problem. If Microsoft is the environment then MS is the target. I know, *nix are more likely to be stable and secure...but if they become the predominate life forms then they will begin to suffer the majority of infections.
I may stand corrected. In the book To Engineer Is Human Henry Petroski tells the story of the Comet. He writes that in the tank compression testing that revealed the window flaw the deadly crack propagated near the speed of sound, starting with a microscopic fracture and ending in destruction almost instantaneously. Perhaps I don't understand the implications of that process.
Here's a true story that makes clear the consequences of a hole in a pressurized cabin. The first jetliner ever put into commercial service was a runaway success...but some of them exploded in midflight due to, you guessed it, explosive decompression. Now, this isn't the be all and end all, but arming passengers isn't the best answer. Yes, I can tell the difference between humor and earnest suggestion, but I thought ya'll might find the story interesting.
back door: n. [common] A hole in the security of a system deliberately left in place by designers or maintainers. The motivation for such holes is not always sinister; some operating systems, for example, come out of the box with privileged accounts intended for use by field service technicians or the vendor's maintenance programmers. Syn. trap door; may also be called a `wormhole'. See also iron box, cracker, worm, logic bomb. Historically, back doors have often lurked in systems longer than anyone expected or planned, and a few have become widely known. Ken Thompson's 1983 Turing Award lecture to the ACM admitted the existence of a back door in early Unix versions that may have
qualified as the most fiendishly clever security hack of all time. In this scheme, the C compiler contained code that would recognize when the `login' command was being recompiled and insert some code recognizing a password chosen by Thompson, giving him entry to the system whether or not an account had been created for him. Normally such a back door could be removed by removing it from the source code for the compiler and recompiling the compiler. But to recompile the compiler, you have to _use_ the compiler -- so Thompson also arranged that the compiler would _recognize when it was compiling a version of itself_, and insert into the recompiled compiler the code to insert into the recompiled `login' the code to allow Thompson entry -- and, of course, the code to recognize itself and do the whole thing again the next time around! And having done this once, he was then able to recompile the compiler from the original sources; the hack perpetuated itself invisibly, leaving the back door in place and active but with no trace in the sources. The talk that suggested this truly moby hack was published as "Reflections on Trusting Trust", "Communications of the ACM 27", 8 (August 1984), pp. 761-763 (text available at http://www.acm.org/classics). Ken Thompson has since confirmed that this hack was implemented and that the Trojan Horse code did appear in the login binary of a Unix Support group machine. Ken says the crocked compiler was never distributed. Your editor has heard two separate reports that suggest that the crocked login did make it out of Bell Labs, notably to BBN, and that it enabled at least one late-night login across the network by someone using the login name `kt'.
I'm guessing what most all of us would support is a law that makes it an offense to refuse to divulge keys when so ordered by a court under the same rules that govern search warrants for property.
I think that's an excellent idea. Shoot, there's even some precedence...contempt of court and the like. I think traffic analysis is the way for the government to go, with this sort of thing as a "next-step" for escalation. Of course, if I fail to produce the key to my home then the steel ram bashes down the door...something like that would happen if I didn't provide the decrypting key. Slap the messages into a dedicated system and rip 'em open...innocent contents or no I'd still be on the hook for failure to provide the key when properly subpoenaed.
Are you kidding? Anonymity is not freedom. It is cowardice. I don't want the government in my home, but I am willing to have my email read. First, I'm intelligent enough to not send sensetive information, second, I'm not sure that they don't do it already, third, I don't care if they can find me. If they want to hurt me they'll die trying. I do know how to shoot. Part of the responsibility of being armed is being registered, New Hampshire (as I recall) being a notable exception. I am NOT saying that I want to be hooked up to a nutrient drip with a television feed implanted into my brain. No rational person wants to be a spongy biomass for the government to feed on. Depending on others to protect me is absolutely necessary when I am attacked by more than a few assailants. I can shoot or strike one, two, five people. I can't watch the borders, I can't field an army. I have to depend on those around me, they have to depend on me. I used to work as a cashier on the overnight shift. Company and economic policy dictated no firearms. Accepting that as the environment I considered how to survive various situations. None arose, but in the event of a threat to my life I was fully prepared to fight to the death. Again, I can protect myself from individual threats. But AmFo bombs and airliners are beyond my capabilities.
Are you replying to me or to the above post? If you are directing this towards me then I think you misunderstand my intent. Soldiers fight for a cause. Martyrs die for one. I'm not willing to be martyred for your privacy. I am willing to fight for your survival. If I'm killed at my desk because someone was unwilling to take precautions then his freedom was more important than my life. I would not want someone dead as a result of my desire to be anonymous. There is a tremendous difference between those who fought and died and those who simply died.
Before we start sending off thousands of our own ground troops into a death trap, will you, pro-war person, enlist before the powers feel it necessary to draft I, 21 anti-war year old?
Of course I will. Will you read up on the responsibilities of Conscientious Objectors, then on the responsibilities of citizens? It isn't just about what the individual wants...by living in this nation you implicitly agree to abide by the rules of this nation. One of those rules is that the government, under certain cercumstances, is permitted to compel you to defend the country. Taking the harvest others planted obligates you to work the plow on occasion.
Nothing scares me worse than the fear of losing freedoms
Really? Choosing between a lake of burning jet fuel and jumping 1,000 feeet to my death scares me more than the fear of losing freedoms. Worrying that every ship, plane, truck, car, briefcase, letter I see is a bomb scares me more than the fear of losing freedoms. There are some things more precious than privacy. If it can be conclusively proven that the threat to my safety can be mitigated at the cost of some privacy, take my privacy. My privacy is not worth your life. Your privacy is not worth mine.
Slashdot Mirror
Ships. They're called ships. Boats are submarines. And the difference between a boat and a submarine is simple...ships are targets.
I've long thought that quantum entanglements may have something to do with the impressive ability of many twins to feel what their twin is doing...shoot, it isn't that hard to believe that some of the source matter for the embyos was in an entangled state and thus incorporated into the growing fetus.
I don't have any firm views on this...just wanted to throw it out there.
Really? Hrm...seems to be a taint of the we find and fix all flaws in record time belief that Open Source advocates hold so dear...maybe there are things that can't be done by the community.
Yes, I know record time isn't the same as instantly.
...force convicted hackers to give the government DNA samples...
All he has to do is save what comes out when he gets done blowing me. All the DNA he can use.
Yeah? Wrong, unless you use some pretty aggressive settings. The time it takes software to detect the problem is 5 times longer than it takes an Athlon to self destruct.
Tom's reported a rise of a few hundred degrees per second...no software solution will catch it, unless you've found or written one in the last three days.
That said, I still choose AMD over Intel...I know how to keep the cooler locked on and finctioning.
This is probably gonna sound silly, but you could do what my parents did- "read your book and shut up!"
That worked for me and my younger brother, but our older brother and sister couldn't...reading in the car makes them terribly carsick.
I think they learned to sleep on demand, though.
And I hate the idea of kids (people) having yet another piece of electronic garbage swallow every free moment.
I realize we *must* constantly be entertained, but damn, get a grip. There's an actual world out there.
I went to the base URL, then looked for the article...that seemed to work fine.
He reinforced my belief in the value of a competitive market...without AMD, Intel would have a lock on all of our business. It's interesting how destructive human nature can be...logically, the thing to do is run a single company that can leverage suppliers, research, manufacturing, distribution, administration, etc. This would reduce all the redundancies in the market and allow for superior products at reasonable prices.
Advertising could be focused on actual products, not competitive differentation. If something new was developed by this company, they would only need make the value known...no more blue men.
INstead of this utopia, when a single company gains the majority of the market they tend to maximize profit instead of customer value.
It's a hell of a world, isn't it?
That's excellent!
Change from a Windows compatability layer to a Windows vulnerability layer.
Of course it should work...as I recall, Sircam is a virus targeted a MS applications...so anything that can run Windows apps ought to run it, right?
Seems to me everyone is forgetting Operation Phoenix, which utterly destroyed the Viet Cong as a fighting force. Kill them and their friends one at a time until there are none left. The VC was incapable of significant combat by the time the US left Vietnam. Notice it took the NVA to conquer Saigon.
Enough time and casualties and either volunteer becomes conscript or the army backs out.
I can only assume you are basing this on the Vietnam experience...if that is correct, bear in mind that the central reason for the size of the US draft was the rotation policy.
it was Bush's bombing of Iraq that made Bin Laden hate us in the first place.
Now, maybe you know something that's hidden from the rest of us, but everyone seems to agree that it was the American presence in Saudi Arabia (home of Mecca, remember?) that hardened his anger. I tend to think he just wanted an enemy and we provided him an excuse, but I could be wrong. Usually am.
Damn, I wish I had mod points. I do have a printer. I'm putting this up on my cubelet. Very nice. Thanks.
The water was drained and the fuselage examined. The investigators were horrified to find a split in the fuselage. It began with a small fracture in the corner of an escape hatch window and extended for eight feet. Metal fatigue! Had the Comet not been under water, the cabin would have exploded like a bomb.
Yes, it was a window. However, it started small and got real big real fast. Hence the explosive in explosive decompression.
If the software is sold as a proprietary software, then the company is responsible for any damages the use of it might incur to its users. If the software is open, i.e. not proprietary, then no one would be responsible for any damages using it might incur. Hey! It's open who are you going to sue anyway!
There's broken logic here, but I've got a patch for it...
Why not hold the manufacturer responsible in BOTH cases? If it's closed, sue the shop...if it's open, sue the USER. That's right, hold the one who is inflicting their software upon the world accountable. Shoot, if you want to play with the code you'd best make it harmless...notice I do believe the creator of the program is responsible. But not just the closed folks.
All that said, it's really the assholes pumping these worms, virii, etc that are the problem. If Microsoft is the environment then MS is the target. I know, *nix are more likely to be stable and secure...but if they become the predominate life forms then they will begin to suffer the majority of infections.
I may stand corrected. In the book To Engineer Is Human Henry Petroski tells the story of the Comet. He writes that in the tank compression testing that revealed the window flaw the deadly crack propagated near the speed of sound, starting with a microscopic fracture and ending in destruction almost instantaneously.
Perhaps I don't understand the implications of that process.
Here's a true story that makes clear the consequences of a hole in a pressurized cabin. The first jetliner ever put into commercial service was a runaway success...but some of them exploded in midflight due to, you guessed it, explosive decompression.
Now, this isn't the be all and end all, but arming passengers isn't the best answer. Yes, I can tell the difference between humor and earnest suggestion, but I thought ya'll might find the story interesting.
http://www.science.uva.nl/~mes/jargon/b/backdoor.h tml
back door: n. [common] A hole in the security of a system deliberately left in place by designers or maintainers. The motivation for such holes is not always sinister; some operating systems, for example, come out of the box with privileged accounts intended for use by field service technicians or the vendor's maintenance programmers. Syn. trap door; may also be called a `wormhole'. See also iron box, cracker, worm, logic bomb. Historically, back doors have often lurked in systems longer than anyone expected or planned, and a few have become widely known.
Ken Thompson's 1983 Turing Award lecture to the ACM admitted the existence of a back door in early Unix versions that may have qualified as the most fiendishly clever security hack of all time. In this scheme, the C compiler contained code that would recognize when the `login' command was being recompiled and insert some code recognizing a password chosen by Thompson, giving him entry to the system whether or not an account had been created for him.
Normally such a back door could be removed by removing it from the source code for the compiler and recompiling the compiler. But to recompile the compiler, you have to _use_ the compiler -- so Thompson also arranged that the compiler would _recognize when it was compiling a version of itself_, and insert into the recompiled compiler the code to insert into the recompiled `login' the code to allow Thompson entry -- and, of course, the code to recognize itself and do the whole thing again the next time around! And having done this once, he was then able to recompile the compiler from the original sources; the hack perpetuated itself invisibly, leaving the back door in place and active but with no trace in the sources.
The talk that suggested this truly moby hack was published as "Reflections on Trusting Trust", "Communications of the ACM 27", 8 (August 1984), pp. 761-763 (text available at http://www.acm.org/classics). Ken Thompson has since confirmed that this hack was implemented and that the Trojan Horse code did appear in the login binary of a Unix Support group machine. Ken says the crocked compiler was never distributed. Your editor has heard two separate reports that suggest that the crocked login did make it out of Bell Labs, notably to BBN, and that it enabled at least one late-night login across the network by someone using the login name `kt'.
I'm guessing what most all of us would support is a law that makes it an offense to refuse to divulge keys when so ordered by a court under the same rules that govern search warrants for property.
I think that's an excellent idea. Shoot, there's even some precedence...contempt of court and the like. I think traffic analysis is the way for the government to go, with this sort of thing as a "next-step" for escalation.
Of course, if I fail to produce the key to my home then the steel ram bashes down the door...something like that would happen if I didn't provide the decrypting key. Slap the messages into a dedicated system and rip 'em open...innocent contents or no I'd still be on the hook for failure to provide the key when properly subpoenaed.
Are you kidding? Anonymity is not freedom. It is cowardice. I don't want the government in my home, but I am willing to have my email read. First, I'm intelligent enough to not send sensetive information, second, I'm not sure that they don't do it already, third, I don't care if they can find me. If they want to hurt me they'll die trying. I do know how to shoot. Part of the responsibility of being armed is being registered, New Hampshire (as I recall) being a notable exception. I am NOT saying that I want to be hooked up to a nutrient drip with a television feed implanted into my brain. No rational person wants to be a spongy biomass for the government to feed on. Depending on others to protect me is absolutely necessary when I am attacked by more than a few assailants. I can shoot or strike one, two, five people. I can't watch the borders, I can't field an army. I have to depend on those around me, they have to depend on me.
I used to work as a cashier on the overnight shift. Company and economic policy dictated no firearms. Accepting that as the environment I considered how to survive various situations. None arose, but in the event of a threat to my life I was fully prepared to fight to the death. Again, I can protect myself from individual threats. But AmFo bombs and airliners are beyond my capabilities.
Are you replying to me or to the above post? If you are directing this towards me then I think you misunderstand my intent.
Soldiers fight for a cause. Martyrs die for one. I'm not willing to be martyred for your privacy. I am willing to fight for your survival.
If I'm killed at my desk because someone was unwilling to take precautions then his freedom was more important than my life. I would not want someone dead as a result of my desire to be anonymous.
There is a tremendous difference between those who fought and died and those who simply died.
More emotional might have been nice, but when's the last time you heard a sitting president refer to wanting someone Dead or Alive?
Before we start sending off thousands of our own ground troops into a death trap, will you, pro-war person, enlist before the powers feel it necessary to draft I, 21 anti-war year old?
Of course I will. Will you read up on the responsibilities of Conscientious Objectors, then on the responsibilities of citizens? It isn't just about what the individual wants...by living in this nation you implicitly agree to abide by the rules of this nation. One of those rules is that the government, under certain cercumstances, is permitted to compel you to defend the country. Taking the harvest others planted obligates you to work the plow on occasion.
Nothing scares me worse than the fear of losing freedoms
Really? Choosing between a lake of burning jet fuel and jumping 1,000 feeet to my death scares me more than the fear of losing freedoms. Worrying that every ship, plane, truck, car, briefcase, letter I see is a bomb scares me more than the fear of losing freedoms.
There are some things more precious than privacy. If it can be conclusively proven that the threat to my safety can be mitigated at the cost of some privacy, take my privacy. My privacy is not worth your life. Your privacy is not worth mine.
Simulation software will let users test their code before letting it loose on Hoap-1.
Let's hope it's good stuff. How stupid would you feel being strangled by a rogue bot?