You don't need malware or anything else to get a router's MAC address, it's in every packet the router sends out.
You need malware if you aren't on the local network. The MAC address only makes sense at the IP layer. And the packet the router sends out on the Ethernet side is going to have the wrong MAC address anyway.
And the MAC address does have a use if you can map it to a location.
NON-IT managed SuSE distro (this was 1999) and it scoured the servers (Unix and windows) and filled up my login screen with an icon and user name of OVER *400* employees and counting
Just think if those icons had gotten loose!! You would have had some serious explaining to do. I always encrypt my icons with md5.
You forget our success is in part due to the freedom to have our own property and to be left alone in large measure.
That's all fine and good, except that the property that is a limited resource was taken from someone else with force. Why should you get to keep it? You think people didn't take land with force and then hand it down through the generations? Give all of North America back to the indians and then get back on your high horse about property rights. You can't get around the fact that all property "rights" are based on might makes right.
Try out their plugin. It tells you exactly why a given site is marked harmful. Things aren't marked red unless the have some seriously bad behavior. Cross-domain cookies are not marked as red. I'm not positive, but i think yellow contains things like automatically changing your browser home page, or adware in a download that doesn't actually harm you.
You're a complete idiot. If you are running IE there are sites out there that will compromise your computer. Their plug-in is a free (as in beer) and you get access to why exactly a site is marked as dangerous. They will even show you which downloads they think are bad -- go download them and deal with the exploits and malware if you really think it is BS.
Sure they are selling security software, but why don't you at least check it out before shooting your mouth off?
Clearly the.ru TLD is more likely to cause troubles.
But only if you look at it in a stupid way. If i'm browsing to get two different websites one in the.hk TLD and one in the.ru TLD, I'm more likely to be harmed at a randomly selected.hk site.
There were 700 incidents in the entire previous decade; 70 incidents per year. Considering the huge numbers of coffee customers of McDonalds worldwide, incidents were almost nonexistent
Bzzzt. Wrong! 700 reported litigated incidents. That number is only important to show that McDonalds was aware of the problem. Since those are the ones that are bad enough to be reported, you can bet they follow a distribution that would have at least double that in unreported serious burns and maybe 10 times that in 2nd degree burns that weren't reported.
It's the Fight club equation: if the cost of an out of court settlement * the average cost of a settlement is less then a recall; we won't do a recall.
They thought that they could make more money serving scalding hot coffee and paying settlements rather then lowering the temperature and being safer. They happened to miscalculate the cost of the settlement is all.
I don't think you understand negligence though. Even if hundreds of visitors don't fall in the pit trap you have in your back yard, you will get sued by the person that does fall into it.
I think SCO might have been distributing copyrighted software.
Don't you need to be breaking one of the things that copyright law actually covers to get in trouble with copyright law? I mean next you'll be telling me
"(b) claim the EULA is invalid, in which case you have no license to breed muskrats, and then it is a copyright violation."
but it doesn't mean that McDonalds was to blame for her misfortune.
Unless that McDonalds was warned and reprimanded many times for selling dangerously hot coffee, choose to ignore the danger it was clearly aware of, and failed to stop its behavior. That case must have been so easy to win with such gross negligence.
I love when people present false dichotomies. If you don't like this comment, don't read slashdot. Or better yet, don't read at all!! Oh and i almost forgot, move to canada if you don't like it!
Plane flights are bad enough without people chatting on their cell for hours on end.
You were on the right track but how about this?
"Plane flights are bad enough without people chatting for hours on end."
Ball gags should be mandatory if talking is your problem. Let's not patch around the problem. Cell phones should be legal, but everyone has to wear ball gags. I never understood the people that were fine with people gabbing to each other, but hate people that talk on cell phones.
McCain - just playing to the media to try to look strong till he gets in, then we'll see a more pragmatic and ethical side to him.
So he has been playing the media for the last 8 years while Bush pushed his "ethics" on all of us? If he didn't cave to the bush administration i might believe him a little more, but he sacrificed some sacred values to get where he is. He'll continue to sacrifice conservatism whenever it gets him what he wants.
You mean like a precedent on dealing with copyright violations? The GPL is powerful in that if it is proven invalid then copyright law takes over. The GPL only gives you an exception, a license, to distribute someone else's copyright. If that exception evaporates or is gone, then the infringer has no right to distribute the copyrighted work.
I'm not suggesting that teachers should be teaching the Bible, but to censor them from teaching anything other than what is in the textbook is just that, censorship.
Try again. That's not what censorship is. Perhaps in your homeschool that is what you were taught but it is not true.
However, the theory of evolution is just that, a theory. It is not proven.
I hope you enjoyed homeschooling. Welcome to the real world. Maybe you should put the bible down and learn about science just a little before spouting things you don't know the least about. Start by trying to understand what a scientific theory is. By agreeing that it is a theory means that you are agreeing with evolutionists.
Theories ARE the highest truth in science. I wouldn't be so short with you, but you must be trying to be ignorant about basic science.
I'll be generous and allow you to start with a single celled organism, you don't have to go find some primordial soup to start. When you get to man, let me know so that we can review your documentation on every step thoroughly.
You fail. go learn what evolution is and then come back here.
Slashdot Mirror
How are they defending their trademark?
You mean like corporate lawyers?
I thought you were asking about iphone 2.0 at first and then realized that it makes calls fine (usually) it just happens to drop them.
You need malware if you aren't on the local network. The MAC address only makes sense at the IP layer. And the packet the router sends out on the Ethernet side is going to have the wrong MAC address anyway.
And the MAC address does have a use if you can map it to a location.
You are thinking of Wal*Mart.
Just think if those icons had gotten loose!! You would have had some serious explaining to do. I always encrypt my icons with md5.
That's all fine and good, except that the property that is a limited resource was taken from someone else with force. Why should you get to keep it? You think people didn't take land with force and then hand it down through the generations? Give all of North America back to the indians and then get back on your high horse about property rights. You can't get around the fact that all property "rights" are based on might makes right.
if(programingLanguage.hasStatement("next")) {next;}
Does menstealia do any Kinison or Hicks these days?
Try out their plugin. It tells you exactly why a given site is marked harmful. Things aren't marked red unless the have some seriously bad behavior. Cross-domain cookies are not marked as red. I'm not positive, but i think yellow contains things like automatically changing your browser home page, or adware in a download that doesn't actually harm you.
You're a complete idiot. If you are running IE there are sites out there that will compromise your computer. Their plug-in is a free (as in beer) and you get access to why exactly a site is marked as dangerous. They will even show you which downloads they think are bad -- go download them and deal with the exploits and malware if you really think it is BS.
Sure they are selling security software, but why don't you at least check it out before shooting your mouth off?
But only if you look at it in a stupid way. If i'm browsing to get two different websites one in the
Bzzzt. Wrong! 700 reported litigated incidents. That number is only important to show that McDonalds was aware of the problem. Since those are the ones that are bad enough to be reported, you can bet they follow a distribution that would have at least double that in unreported serious burns and maybe 10 times that in 2nd degree burns that weren't reported.
It's the Fight club equation: if the cost of an out of court settlement * the average cost of a settlement is less then a recall; we won't do a recall.
They thought that they could make more money serving scalding hot coffee and paying settlements rather then lowering the temperature and being safer. They happened to miscalculate the cost of the settlement is all.
I don't think you understand negligence though. Even if hundreds of visitors don't fall in the pit trap you have in your back yard, you will get sued by the person that does fall into it.
I think SCO might have been distributing copyrighted software.
Don't you need to be breaking one of the things that copyright law actually covers to get in trouble with copyright law? I mean next you'll be telling me
"(b) claim the EULA is invalid, in which case you have no license to breed muskrats, and then it is a copyright violation."
Unless that McDonalds was warned and reprimanded many times for selling dangerously hot coffee, choose to ignore the danger it was clearly aware of, and failed to stop its behavior. That case must have been so easy to win with such gross negligence.
Please provide some links to back up this assertion.
Until then, wake up and smell the world revolving around us.
I love when people present false dichotomies. If you don't like this comment, don't read slashdot. Or better yet, don't read at all!! Oh and i almost forgot, move to canada if you don't like it!
And that is different then those gabby older women who talk really loud and screechingly laugh even louder?
I think the really annoying part for most people is that they can't eavesdrop on both ends of the conversation....
Funny Larry David clip: http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/clips/how-to-deal-with-obnoxious-bluetooth-headset-talkers-321179.php
You mean like a precedent on dealing with copyright violations? The GPL is powerful in that if it is proven invalid then copyright law takes over. The GPL only gives you an exception, a license, to distribute someone else's copyright. If that exception evaporates or is gone, then the infringer has no right to distribute the copyrighted work.
I know you're a troll, but how does enforcing your copyright the same as: "lower yourself to other litigious morons and abuse tort"?
I guess you're one of those people who really doesn't understand what FOSS is?
What do forks have do to with open source?
Theories ARE the highest truth in science. I wouldn't be so short with you, but you must be trying to be ignorant about basic science.