Yes, and I don't want to pay for VOD. Why is a PVR regarded differently than a VCR?
Your point is flawed in that: What if everyone watched that TNT show on the first airing? Or, how is it any different than if I recorded that first showing with my VCR?
This bullshit with PVR is nothing new. Viewers not watching commercials is nothing new. That's what the fast-forward button on the VCR remote is for - to skip over them.
Once again, we've got hot-shot suit types in Hollywood and the cable industry holding the U.S. back in the technology department.
I disagree. I think it's easier for a less educated person to get a job if they are motivated enough - comparitively speaking...
Those that are well educated are less likely to go for trade jobs (masonary, construction, etc...) because of their degree. So this limits the number of jobs to those that require degrees - which is usually a corporation of some sort - which is (lately) going through staff reduction... Meanwhile, the trade industry is booming.
So, I think if a less educated person is motivated enough they can find a trade job or something that doesn't require a formal degree. There are many jobs out there, but who is willing to work them?
...ridiculous to not have is a paper trail. There needs to be a mechanism for a manual recount in case of computer error or claims of fraud.
Well, we are all addressing the wrong issue then, aren't we? It's the manual recount of the paper trail that doesn't work reliably. A ballot with more than one chad punched out should be disqualified - there should be no interpretation of that ballot. I guess that is where our true problem lies.
And the answer is, "Why not?"
It's a perfect case for technology, considering paper ballots don't exactly work reliably. (ie, chad and his gang, incomplete pencil markings, write-ins that are already listed, etc...)
Would you get more of a productive response posting these questions on Usenet? In the spirit of "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters," I don't think this applies. Does it? Write a database for your records. I mean, what are you really looking for from this group of people?
Yeah... They will start calling it BSOV for Blue Screen of Value, where they will start to incorporate advertising, jokes of the day, news headlines from around the world, or whatever they feel would add value to their shoddy products when they crash...
Why aren't the new Pioneer radios (DEH....) with organic displays in color?? All of the photos are monotone. My older Pioneer organic display had at least some color to it... With today's technology, why can't they make them full color?
I guess that's why I need to integrate a laptop into my vehicle.
Phil
What are you talking about?? The first place RH hits is FTP... What the hell is "live evaluation?" You aren't speaking of RH, are you? The FTP version is COMPLETE. Everything can be downloaded. Period.
Yes, except those were feeding on port 80 being open. The NTP client will open a random port - get its data - and then close the port...
The likelyhood that someone would be doing a port scan that was searching an open port at the exact time that NTP polled its server is extremely unlikely. Even so, then this still isn't any worse off than any other client software that opens a port - http requests for instance...
Besides, the beauty of stateful firewalling and reverse-lookups would prevent your case from happening...
Yeah, but you don't have anything listening on the client side - only when a request for info is initiated. Right?! So, with that, is the concern with the stratum machine? Because how does the Internet know that you are running an NTP client behind a firewall?
If you are an NTP client behind an appropriate firewall, are you vulnerable to NTP based attacks? One would think not. At least not anymore than normal.
Just use NTP and be done with it. Besides, it's much easier to implement. Hell, use one server as the public NTP client, and then have the rest of your servers poll the previous machine. You could do that a couple of times considering the machines that are all over the US...
I still don't understand the question - at least what the issue *really* is. Besides, wouldn't the GPS solution cost a bit more?
The only legal pressure could come from their customers if they want to access the RIAA website for some reason.
Why would that be a problem? With a stateful firewall, there would be no problem letting their customers visit the RIAA's website. BUT, RIAA would have an extreme problem trying to connect to those user's machines.
-Outbound (customer) traffic is unrestricted. -Inbound (Internet) traffic could be restricted to allow everything but RIAA's domains/IPs.
Besides, that setup would really be a slap in the face to RIAA. Na-na-na-na-na... I can see you, but you can't see me!
They don't have to pay Compuserve... That's not what came out of the.gif hoopla. As long as the software they used to create the gifs is licensed with Compuserve, they are legal...
Yes, but anti-deep-linking legislation is completely against the way the Internet works... The whole premise is that we can link to another page, thereby spinning a web of documents. If we couldn't "deep-link," then I presume that Google, et al., will have to shut down, considering the links they produce are "deep-linked." Wouldn't you say?
And I disagree with you as to why we abide "No Trespassing" signs. It's because I don't want to get my a$$ shot off by some looney character with a shotgun in his lap.
A better analogy might be the other way around... Take a look at research papers written MANY years ago. Take a look at their bibliography page. Is that not "deep-linking?" Thought so...
That's all we need is more frigg'n legislation to protect some ignorant people who are only comfortable if they're bitching about something. Face it, deep-linking has been around for years. It makes me so sick that these people (that are new to the Internet) think they own the damn thing. Christ, perhaps the elders of the 'net need to speak up. I know I've been on since it was commercialized mainstream around 1993/94 and frankly, I'm appauled as to where this is all heading.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, and I don't want to pay for VOD. Why is a PVR regarded differently than a VCR?
Your point is flawed in that: What if everyone watched that TNT show on the first airing? Or, how is it any different than if I recorded that first showing with my VCR?
This bullshit with PVR is nothing new. Viewers not watching commercials is nothing new. That's what the fast-forward button on the VCR remote is for - to skip over them.
Once again, we've got hot-shot suit types in Hollywood and the cable industry holding the U.S. back in the technology department.
I disagree. I think it's easier for a less educated person to get a job if they are motivated enough - comparitively speaking...
Those that are well educated are less likely to go for trade jobs (masonary, construction, etc...) because of their degree. So this limits the number of jobs to those that require degrees - which is usually a corporation of some sort - which is (lately) going through staff reduction... Meanwhile, the trade industry is booming.
So, I think if a less educated person is motivated enough they can find a trade job or something that doesn't require a formal degree. There are many jobs out there, but who is willing to work them?
Why would you post such a high price? You can get it much cheaper... $23.95.
BTW, the $ symbol tells everyone it is US currency, hence the US is redundant in your price post.
f("javascript:c1.Click();c2.Click();c3.Click();");
Too bad that won't work. Where is c3?
"It's irresponsible to post a working exploit prior to notifying the code maintainer of the existence of the problem."
Did you read the bugtraq post? He did notify the vendor. So back off.
Phil
Wouldn't this paper be in violation of the DMCA?
...ridiculous to not have is a paper trail. There needs to be a mechanism for a manual recount in case of computer error or claims of fraud.
Well, we are all addressing the wrong issue then, aren't we? It's the manual recount of the paper trail that doesn't work reliably. A ballot with more than one chad punched out should be disqualified - there should be no interpretation of that ballot. I guess that is where our true problem lies.
And the answer is, "Why not?" It's a perfect case for technology, considering paper ballots don't exactly work reliably. (ie, chad and his gang, incomplete pencil markings, write-ins that are already listed, etc...)
signed by internet and tech industry pioneers
So, does that mean that Al Gore signed this letter? I mean, after all, he is the father of the Internet.
Phil
Barrel markings change over the life of the gun, so how feasible is it with respect to that aspect? I don't think it is at all.
Phil
They've picked up support for it, or they are going to (documented). But maybe those don't fit your definition of companies.
-Phil
Unless you like looking at hairy ass.
Would you get more of a productive response posting these questions on Usenet? In the spirit of "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters," I don't think this applies. Does it? Write a database for your records. I mean, what are you really looking for from this group of people?
Phil
Yeah... They will start calling it BSOV for Blue Screen of Value, where they will start to incorporate advertising, jokes of the day, news headlines from around the world, or whatever they feel would add value to their shoddy products when they crash...
Phil
Why aren't the new Pioneer radios (DEH....) with organic displays in color?? All of the photos are monotone. My older Pioneer organic display had at least some color to it... With today's technology, why can't they make them full color?
I guess that's why I need to integrate a laptop into my vehicle.
Phil
I think you mean Canon 1D... Nikon makes the D1 digital camera... Of which I would very much like to own.
Phil
Newark Electronics sells them...
Here's your fuse
Phil
For the love of [fill in with your applicable god-like figure], please don't use IIS... I thought the whole concept of this conversation was security?
Phil
What are you talking about?? The first place RH hits is FTP... What the hell is "live evaluation?" You aren't speaking of RH, are you? The FTP version is COMPLETE. Everything can be downloaded. Period.
Phil
Yes, except those were feeding on port 80 being open. The NTP client will open a random port - get its data - and then close the port...
The likelyhood that someone would be doing a port scan that was searching an open port at the exact time that NTP polled its server is extremely unlikely. Even so, then this still isn't any worse off than any other client software that opens a port - http requests for instance...
Besides, the beauty of stateful firewalling and reverse-lookups would prevent your case from happening...
Phil
Yeah, but you don't have anything listening on the client side - only when a request for info is initiated. Right?! So, with that, is the concern with the stratum machine? Because how does the Internet know that you are running an NTP client behind a firewall?
Phil
If you are an NTP client behind an appropriate firewall, are you vulnerable to NTP based attacks? One would think not. At least not anymore than normal.
Just use NTP and be done with it. Besides, it's much easier to implement. Hell, use one server as the public NTP client, and then have the rest of your servers poll the previous machine. You could do that a couple of times considering the machines that are all over the US...
I still don't understand the question - at least what the issue *really* is. Besides, wouldn't the GPS solution cost a bit more?
Phil
The only legal pressure could come from their customers if they want to access the RIAA website for some reason.
Why would that be a problem? With a stateful firewall, there would be no problem letting their customers visit the RIAA's website. BUT, RIAA would have an extreme problem trying to connect to those user's machines.
-Outbound (customer) traffic is unrestricted.
-Inbound (Internet) traffic could be restricted to allow everything but RIAA's domains/IPs.
Besides, that setup would really be a slap in the face to RIAA. Na-na-na-na-na... I can see you, but you can't see me!
Phil
They don't have to pay Compuserve... That's not what came out of the .gif hoopla. As long as the software they used to create the gifs is licensed with Compuserve, they are legal...
Phil
Yes, but anti-deep-linking legislation is completely against the way the Internet works... The whole premise is that we can link to another page, thereby spinning a web of documents. If we couldn't "deep-link," then I presume that Google, et al., will have to shut down, considering the links they produce are "deep-linked." Wouldn't you say?
And I disagree with you as to why we abide "No Trespassing" signs. It's because I don't want to get my a$$ shot off by some looney character with a shotgun in his lap.
A better analogy might be the other way around... Take a look at research papers written MANY years ago. Take a look at their bibliography page. Is that not "deep-linking?" Thought so...
That's all we need is more frigg'n legislation to protect some ignorant people who are only comfortable if they're bitching about something. Face it, deep-linking has been around for years. It makes me so sick that these people (that are new to the Internet) think they own the damn thing. Christ, perhaps the elders of the 'net need to speak up. I know I've been on since it was commercialized mainstream around 1993/94 and frankly, I'm appauled as to where this is all heading.
Phil