Won't this severly decrease the effective lifetime of the drive. Each right cycle brings it closer to doom, and you are talking about multiple cycles on all free space once a week.
Some parts of the disk are rewritten multiple times a day already. Anyway, HD's commonly have a MTBF of over 300,000 hours (34 years), and I think Seagate is offering 5 year warranties now.
>Then again, it would be a handy program to have if you're expecting a knock on your door from a cops' battering ram.
Heard of the undelete command? How about Norton Unerase or RunTime's GetDataBack?
Considering the magnitude of the fines, physically smashing the disk seems the best option. Keep it in one of those removable HD carriers, yank it out and smash with a hammer. Or no doubt people will come up with more elegant panic switches that can inject acid, dust or whatever when necessary.
OTOH, you could use disk-level encryption, as long as you were confident you wouldnt crack when they demanded the keys.
Another inaccuracy: TFA says the German Enigma code was broken before WWII. Well, it was understood before the war, the Poles had actual Enigma machines and knew how they worked, but it still wasn't easy -- you needed to find the key being used for each message. A lot of this was down to finding or stealing codebooks. Of course the geeks at Bletchley Park then needed to decode the messages, and when keys weren't available, try to deduce them by various means, such as noticing that a certain station always began their daily message with a weather report, etc, and reverse-engineering the key. It's been said, and I'm no authority, that if the Germans had followed good coding discipline that their codes could never have been cracked in any useful time (it's rather pointless to decode military movements weeks after the event).
Re:The freezer trick does work though
on
Creative Data Loss
·
· Score: 1
RTFA. How many of those files you recovered had been deleted by the user beforehand? Note that the drive was in perfect working order BEFORE the guy put it in the freezer.
Okay, let's RTFA: this is the entire quote: "One user put his hard drive in a freezer, after reading on the internet that this can fix malfunctioning hardware."
Where does it say it was "in perfect working order", or that he was trying to recover deleted files?
Opinion will vary between those that think Word sucks, those that think Word blows, and those that think Word sucks AND blows.
This is true, for anyone who's actually used both -- should be "insightful", not (just) funny.
As for WP, it could be arcane, but if you RTFM, it was logical consistent and very efficient. Word has so many interacting features that you have to do major research to find out why it's doing some weird or undesirable thing, in the mistaken and arrogant belief by MS that you're too stupid to understand these features or don't know what you want to do.
Not clear what they are monitoring?
What am I missing? Couldn't somebody just install the program and sniff the information out of the packets?
Yes, but nobody has yet. I read this on the newsgroup last week; the two articles in the Slashdot "summary" obviously haven't investigated it beyond quoting these articles.
Just the other day I purchased a new Lexmark X5250 All-in-one printer. I installed it as per the instructions and monitored the install with Norton as I do with all new software.
On reviewing the install log I noticed a program called Lx_CATS had been placed in the c:\program files directory. I investigated and found a data log and an initialisation file called Lx_CATS.ini. Further investigation of this file showed that Lexmark had, without my permission, loaded a Trojan backdoor on to my computer. Furthermore, it is embedded into the system registry, so average users would likely never know it was there and active.
This Lexmark Trojan was programmed to monitor my use of the printer by way of data collected from two DLLs in the c:\program files\lexmark500 folder. The Trojan would then send information on printer usage, including types of print activity, scanning activity, OCR activity etc., back to a hidden URL at 30 day intervals.
The URL, www.lxkcc1.com, is identified as being owned by Lexmark.
When I called and spoke with Lexmark support, they denied all knowledge of any such program, and suggested I had somehow been infected by a virus. When I challenged them with the facts, they ultimately aknowleged that this was indeed activity tracking software that reported printer and cartridge use back to them for "survey" purposes. Lexmark said that "no personal data" was relayed by the program, and that I could not be personally identified by it. However - the program transmits the printer serial number, and when I registered the warranty with Lexmark, they recorded my personal information along with the serial number. How much effort does it take to match the two?
I call it spying! I was not advised of this part of the installation, nor was I asked to agree to be part of any such data gathering activity. I see this as a breach of my privacy, and as deplorable behaviour by Lexmark.
Lexmark users beware! But, they may not be the only ones stealing your private information.
. However having an employee do something they shouldn't is VERY different from willful infringement.
Yes; but the BSA, which is dominated by Microsoft, has no sympathy for that argument when a company is "audited" and found to be in violation of its licenses, when it's quite plausible that he company merely is poor at record keeping and most likely has actually paid for the licences; or left unused copies of software installed on machines when swapping hardware around, and so on. They still get the whole cavity search, perp walk and massive fine (or compulsory purchase to avoid such) treatment.
No, As I said, it's getting me out of a place that's going to be dangerous when the cars lurch forward on the green light.
in deliberately antogonizing
No, despite what some drivers think, bicyclists as a whole don't make decisions based on what pisses off drivers. OTOH, I've had plenty of hostility and threats of violence -- being brushed past at high speed is a joke for a driver, it's terrifying for a cyclist who can lose control in the slipstream if he doesn't get creamed outright, had things thrown at me, not to mention having the horn blared at me inappropriately; usually because I was "taking up space on their road.
As for somthing easy to blow off killing/maiming someone; of course not. And I'd rather not be killed either, even if the feelings of the driver weren't hurt. I just sometimes decide that breaking the law is the safer option, as most laws (and roads) were designed without regard for cyclists, and me trying to follow them blindly is MORE LIKELY to get me killed. The stakes are very high, any accident is likely to do serious damage to me. Thus I don't care if the machsimo of drivers is injured by seeing me evade traffic problems and "beating" them in whatever game they imagine we're playing. I'm not playing, I'm surviving.
I've noticed that bikers want it both ways. You want to use the roads the same as cars, yet you'll split lanes at red lights and ignore other traffic signals. Either you accept your renegade status and the risks it comes with, or you follow all rules like a car.
Car drivers take advantage of the fact that if they hit a bike the cyclist will probably be killed, so they can intimidate cyclists from asserting their rights to use public roads. The situations you mention annoy drivers who feel chagrined when a bicycle takes advantage of their smaller size and greater agility to get ahead of traffic or sneak through an intersection. I do it, and only watch out for cops. Not just to save time, but because it's safer for me to get away from the accelerating and jockeying for position that drivers do when starting from a red light. They'll pass me in a few minutes, in a place where the traffic is calmer, so what's your problem? If I make an error of judgement when breaking the letter of the law, it's my life that's lost. When a car driver breaks the rules, it's the cyclist whose body is crushed.
Actually, isn't Clone Wars almost this? Though those were more like 5 minutes, IIRC. And those Animatrix cartoons. Back in the silent days, one of the first movie serials, The Perils of Pauline (remembered for the protagoist being tied to railway tracks by the villain) was 20 episodes of 10 or so minutes. One minute though, is a bit too Max Headroom to contemplate. Jack can certainly kill a few people in that time though.
#1 Western Europe isn't the rest of the world.
#2 The Western European media is so leftist that even CNN seems right-wing.
Really, it IS the rest of the world. I'm neither American nor European, and I gave up on CNN back in the first Gulf War for their cheerleading. Similary for Time Magazine, the NYT, 60 Minutes. The thought that other US media is MORE conservative, like Fox by all reports, which I've never seen personally, is frightening.
Does anyone really believe that in the long run Exxon/Mobil will be better off when the world wakes up to what they've been doing?
The longer they delay replacement of oil with other fuels, the more money they make. However fucked the world becomes, they'll still be rich and happy. The execs can move to higher ground, turn up the AC, and watch their large-screen TVs.
Look at tobacco, for God's sake. For 50 years it's been an indisputable fact that it kills half the people who use it. Is anyone at Philip Morris concerned beyond setting a few percent of their income aside to keep legislators and lawyers happy? Big Oil is 10 times bigger than Big Tobacco.
The My Lai Massacre? Are you kidding me? This happened during the middle of a nasty war. The Lieutenant who ordered the attack was charged with murder. No one in our government condones what happened.
William Calley was charged, and convicted, but got "house arrest" for a few years. His actions were apparently condoned by your then-president, who set him loose. They were just gooks, after all.
Calley ordered the men of Charlie Company, 1st Battalion, American Division to shoot everyone in the village.
He was initially sentenced to life in prison, but President Richard Nixon ordered him released from prison. Calley served 3 1/2 years of house arrest in his quarters at Fort Benning, Georgia and was then released in 1974 by a federal judge.
Why would you want to have a default to yes if you don't respond?
"You" don't have to respond, it's the registry that must respond in 5 days. If you'd RTFA, you'd know the reason is that some registrars resist attempts, by the domain owners, to change registries, and delay and obstruct the process. That's what this measure is directed against.
I am a domain name registrar, and you are wrong. I can easily change ownership during a transfer.
If you're an unscrupulous registrar you could do a lot of things. I suspect you'd be soon out of business though. I was pointing out that the 90% of posts that followed the implication in the sumbitter's article that anyone could hijack a domain by sending a notice and if it wasn't replied to in 5 days, take it, were wrong. A differerent registrar could take it from the orignal one, and then, as you say, do just about anything, but they'd be in a lot of legal trouble.
The only difference between Jaynes and a bank robber is that he didn't use a gun in his crime.
In my mind this is an enormous difference. Crimes of violence should have a much higher penalty.
In this case I expect he'll actually serve one or two years at most, the 9 years may be a lever to get that rather than the slap on the wrist spammers have gotten heretofore.
The Fucking Article (and even more so the editorial comments here) is WRONG.
The linked Icann paper's first line is "Registered Name Holders must be able to transfer their domain name registrations between Registrars". NOTHING TO DO with transferring ownership of domains; but of the registrars. Could be nasty, and even a first step to having the domain hijacked, but the ownership of the domain is unaffected.
I think Communusts are genrally counted as "left". The (former) USSR, the PRC, and our friends in the DPRK are/were firmly left and very much in favour of nuclear power, and of course weapons.
It's in the porn merchants' interests to be easily filtered out
Rubbish. They DON'T want to be easily filtered out, because they'd be filtered upstream from the consumer; ISPs woudl be almost obliged to do so by default unless you asked (or paid more likely) to have the block taken off, thus violating your privacy.
If porn merchants want to be filterd out, why do they buy up all those deceptive domain names, or recently expired ones, or make link farms to catch searches for almost any product you might be looking for?
Slashdot Mirror
When they're drunk they will regardless of who's watching. Though those who aren't quite plastered might take more care.
Except if it's installed by your mother, or your school, etc.
Some parts of the disk are rewritten multiple times a day already. Anyway, HD's commonly have a MTBF of over 300,000 hours (34 years), and I think Seagate is offering 5 year warranties now.
Heard of the undelete command? How about Norton Unerase or RunTime's GetDataBack?
Considering the magnitude of the fines, physically smashing the disk seems the best option. Keep it in one of those removable HD carriers, yank it out and smash with a hammer. Or no doubt people will come up with more elegant panic switches that can inject acid, dust or whatever when necessary.
OTOH, you could use disk-level encryption, as long as you were confident you wouldnt crack when they demanded the keys.
Another inaccuracy: TFA says the German Enigma code was broken before WWII. Well, it was understood before the war, the Poles had actual Enigma machines and knew how they worked, but it still wasn't easy -- you needed to find the key being used for each message. A lot of this was down to finding or stealing codebooks. Of course the geeks at Bletchley Park then needed to decode the messages, and when keys weren't available, try to deduce them by various means, such as noticing that a certain station always began their daily message with a weather report, etc, and reverse-engineering the key. It's been said, and I'm no authority, that if the Germans had followed good coding discipline that their codes could never have been cracked in any useful time (it's rather pointless to decode military movements weeks after the event).
Okay, let's RTFA: this is the entire quote: "One user put his hard drive in a freezer, after reading on the internet that this can fix malfunctioning hardware."
Where does it say it was "in perfect working order", or that he was trying to recover deleted files?
I liked www.imdb.com/title/tt0090056/
Arguably because MS kept back the information that was necessary to do it right, and the Word team could get any hacks they needed put into Windows.
This is true, for anyone who's actually used both -- should be "insightful", not (just) funny.
As for WP, it could be arcane, but if you RTFM, it was logical consistent and very efficient. Word has so many interacting features that you have to do major research to find out why it's doing some weird or undesirable thing, in the mistaken and arrogant belief by MS that you're too stupid to understand these features or don't know what you want to do.
Yes, but nobody has yet. I read this on the newsgroup last week; the two articles in the Slashdot "summary" obviously haven't investigated it beyond quoting these articles.
The news posting in full is:
Appreciated; when I saw your reply I was expecting a flame fest....
Yes; but the BSA, which is dominated by Microsoft, has no sympathy for that argument when a company is "audited" and found to be in violation of its licenses, when it's quite plausible that he company merely is poor at record keeping and most likely has actually paid for the licences; or left unused copies of software installed on machines when swapping hardware around, and so on. They still get the whole cavity search, perp walk and massive fine (or compulsory purchase to avoid such) treatment.
No, As I said, it's getting me out of a place that's going to be dangerous when the cars lurch forward on the green light.
in deliberately antogonizing
No, despite what some drivers think, bicyclists as a whole don't make decisions based on what pisses off drivers. OTOH, I've had plenty of hostility and threats of violence -- being brushed past at high speed is a joke for a driver, it's terrifying for a cyclist who can lose control in the slipstream if he doesn't get creamed outright, had things thrown at me, not to mention having the horn blared at me inappropriately; usually because I was "taking up space on their road.
As for somthing easy to blow off killing/maiming someone; of course not. And I'd rather not be killed either, even if the feelings of the driver weren't hurt. I just sometimes decide that breaking the law is the safer option, as most laws (and roads) were designed without regard for cyclists, and me trying to follow them blindly is MORE LIKELY to get me killed. The stakes are very high, any accident is likely to do serious damage to me. Thus I don't care if the machsimo of drivers is injured by seeing me evade traffic problems and "beating" them in whatever game they imagine we're playing. I'm not playing, I'm surviving.
Car drivers take advantage of the fact that if they hit a bike the cyclist will probably be killed, so they can intimidate cyclists from asserting their rights to use public roads. The situations you mention annoy drivers who feel chagrined when a bicycle takes advantage of their smaller size and greater agility to get ahead of traffic or sneak through an intersection. I do it, and only watch out for cops. Not just to save time, but because it's safer for me to get away from the accelerating and jockeying for position that drivers do when starting from a red light. They'll pass me in a few minutes, in a place where the traffic is calmer, so what's your problem? If I make an error of judgement when breaking the letter of the law, it's my life that's lost. When a car driver breaks the rules, it's the cyclist whose body is crushed.
Actually, isn't Clone Wars almost this? Though those were more like 5 minutes, IIRC. And those Animatrix cartoons. Back in the silent days, one of the first movie serials, The Perils of Pauline (remembered for the protagoist being tied to railway tracks by the villain) was 20 episodes of 10 or so minutes. One minute though, is a bit too Max Headroom to contemplate. Jack can certainly kill a few people in that time though.
Really, it IS the rest of the world. I'm neither American nor European, and I gave up on CNN back in the first Gulf War for their cheerleading. Similary for Time Magazine, the NYT, 60 Minutes. The thought that other US media is MORE conservative, like Fox by all reports, which I've never seen personally, is frightening.
The longer they delay replacement of oil with other fuels, the more money they make. However fucked the world becomes, they'll still be rich and happy. The execs can move to higher ground, turn up the AC, and watch their large-screen TVs.
Look at tobacco, for God's sake. For 50 years it's been an indisputable fact that it kills half the people who use it. Is anyone at Philip Morris concerned beyond setting a few percent of their income aside to keep legislators and lawyers happy? Big Oil is 10 times bigger than Big Tobacco.
William Calley was charged, and convicted, but got "house arrest" for a few years. His actions were apparently condoned by your then-president, who set him loose. They were just gooks, after all.
http://www.vietnam-war.info
"You" don't have to respond, it's the registry that must respond in 5 days. If you'd RTFA, you'd know the reason is that some registrars resist attempts, by the domain owners, to change registries, and delay and obstruct the process. That's what this measure is directed against.
If you're an unscrupulous registrar you could do a lot of things. I suspect you'd be soon out of business though. I was pointing out that the 90% of posts that followed the implication in the sumbitter's article that anyone could hijack a domain by sending a notice and if it wasn't replied to in 5 days, take it, were wrong. A differerent registrar could take it from the orignal one, and then, as you say, do just about anything, but they'd be in a lot of legal trouble.
In my mind this is an enormous difference. Crimes of violence should have a much higher penalty.
In this case I expect he'll actually serve one or two years at most, the 9 years may be a lever to get that rather than the slap on the wrist spammers have gotten heretofore.
Just to restate this in even simpler terms:
The Fucking Article (and even more so the editorial comments here) is WRONG.
The linked Icann paper's first line is "Registered Name Holders must be able to transfer their domain name registrations between Registrars". NOTHING TO DO with transferring ownership of domains; but of the registrars. Could be nasty, and even a first step to having the domain hijacked, but the ownership of the domain is unaffected.
I think Communusts are genrally counted as "left". The (former) USSR, the PRC, and our friends in the DPRK are/were firmly left and very much in favour of nuclear power, and of course weapons.
Obviously animals that hibernate don't have that problem. That's one reason to study hibernation, as opposed to sleep.
Rubbish. They DON'T want to be easily filtered out, because they'd be filtered upstream from the consumer; ISPs woudl be almost obliged to do so by default unless you asked (or paid more likely) to have the block taken off, thus violating your privacy.
If porn merchants want to be filterd out, why do they buy up all those deceptive domain names, or recently expired ones, or make link farms to catch searches for almost any product you might be looking for?