From the article: Kleine suggests that in previous studies, researchers came up with formation times that were twice as long because they had less accurate determinations of the amount of tungsten-182 in meteorites.
It has nothing to do with the accuracy of the radioactive dating, but rather the sampling techniques used in the original estimates.
Maybe I'm missing something, but I actually like watching commercials! Sometimes, I do find them to be insulting, especially the ones that treat me like a child -- however I also find some commercials to be humorous, entertaining, or thought provoking. I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way, right?
We were shocked at some network file transfer speeds here -- if you are doing network copies and are shocked at how slow it is, make sure that your switch and your NIC agree about whether or not your connection is half- or full-duplex.
Remedy is the obvious answer here, because it does provide not only a wintel client, but also a web interface. I believe that the web interface is also fairly complete. Remedy also provides many modules for asset management, change management, etc.
Just remember -- Remedy is targetted as a desktop tool -- using remedy for change management or asset management can be done for non-desktop environments (think networks, firewalls, etc), but it's not a clean fit.
Also, Remedy installations are only as good as their configuration and customization. We learned at my place of business that the out-of-the-box remedy implementation needs a good bit of help and customization. As long as you're willing to spend time, energy, and money on it, it can be a very good solution.
It's my understanding that anything compiled with OpenSSL (which includes OpenSSH) would need to be re-compiled with the new versions of the libraries. Though, if OpenSSH used dynamic libraries rather than static ones, you should just have to upgrade the OpenSSL libs. I'm not sure if the libraries are statically compiled in tho, for security.
The problem is that many of the protesters are just young teenagers trying to get out of school. If they went up to the average protester and said "Why are you protesting?", I'm sure the response would be along the lines of:
"Well dude, there's like, this world bank, and it's just wrong man, it's so wrong!"
There are dumb folks on both sides, but the media at least is shooting for higher ratings, which prevents tripe like that from making it on the air.
Ahh -- but that's not CRACKING encryption. That's working from within the boundaries of the system to achieve a goal. Cracking OpenSSL would be like cracking WEP -- if you give me enough data, I could crack the key and start decrypting traffic. This is VERY different.
The point is that the actual method of encryption itself, the mathematical formulas and principles, are still very valid and relevent. It just means that you can't leave the backdoor unlocked.
I agree with you that people tend to be more confident in making "secure" transactions over the internet because the little key icon in their MSIE window.
Yes, the transaction itself (which contains your CC number) might go over the internet securely, but if I wanted your CC#, I wouldn't be sniffing the OC-48 backbones, I'd pop the database that stores it so next time you buy a book or what-not, you don't have to type it in again.
I agree that people need to realize that good security is implemented in a layered approach, and that a secure system is only as strong as it's weakest link. However, I think that your initial post was somewhat immature. "Oh, what the heck -- your box is going to get cracked anyway, just run telnet, ftp, finger, and allow rlogin. It's the same anyway."
OK -- I understand your pain -- I know that you feel it's difficult to keep up with things, especially when it seems like they aren't achieving the end they purport.
But, it's important to note here that a buffer or stack overflow is DIFFERENT than cracking the encryption algorithm used. These are buffer overflows, which introduces a DoS condition, or possible remote shell attack. The data transiting the network that is encrypted, however, is still encrypted.
You should check out www.elance.com -- though I've heard lately that it's getting flooded with lots of entry level people doing the low-bid-wins-regardless-of-output sort of thing.
You know, investment funds always say "Past performance is not an indicator of future performance", but they know you make your decision based on how well the fund has done over the past 10 years.
Trusting the government is the same way. Let's look at their security record over the past few years:
1. The Clipper Chip 2. Carnivore 3. Expanded rights for home surveillance
There are more, and I'm sure if we all sit down we can think of a list that's truly huge. But, looking at past performance, what am I to extrapolate about this move? The government should have no real interest in my personal PC. There hasn't been a large public outcry for the government to get involved in securing end-user's desktops. So, it seems pretty clear to me that this is a way for the government to get a foothold in every windows PC inside the US. No one has asked for this, but it's an easy way for them to get in and make us think it's for our own good.
Besides, it's not always about what their intentions are right now. Social Security numbers were never invented to be completely unique identifiers used for everything from customer numbers at Jiffy Lube to student ID's at colleges, but that's how it turned out. Why? Because power corrupts. If the government has software on every PC in the US, and there is another terrorist attack, how long before people cry out to add some backdoors that allow good old uncle sam to read your email?
It's all in the interest of national security, and anyone who opposes it must be a terrorist. Any logical american who has nothing to hide wouldn't mind, right? We're trying to look out for everyone else? Granted, I doubt that Uncle Same will say "You know, once the threat is over, we'll get rid of this monitoring, because we don't need it anymore."
Instead of being so quick to dismiss the protectors of liberty as being right-wing nutcases, maybe you should read some history and try to think of their motives. Not everyone in the government is a saint with your best interests in mind.
Is anyone else really happy with this move? I think that this is a great move forward for the open-source community. You've got an enterprise-strength application, one that a company charged money not only for the application itself (no source included), but also for maintenance contracts, installation, etc.
This company has realized that the benefits of releasing the source out to everyone outweigh the benefits of keeping it inside.
MMMm....
First off, I wonder what interface format they will use between the disk and the motherboard? SCSI? IDE? Something completely different? Anyway, whatever they use, I'd love to see a level-0 stripe right across 4 or so of these babies;) Speed and storage!
Re:This could mean an end to war... think about it
on
The Next Generation
·
· Score: 1
Do you really want to live forever? Think about all of the side-effects of this -- extreme overpopulation, new diseases to ravage the body (but not kill it), all sorts of things we can't even imagine. Personally, I don't want to live forever. What would you do? I get bored at work with the internet in only 8 hours a day. I get bored at home.
Besides, If I had to live forever and could procrastinate things as long as I wanted, I would never get anything done;)
China has one of the most active intelligence operations of any country in the world -- check http://www.afio.com/sections/book_reviews/reviews/ chinese_intel_ops.html -- it's a great book with lots of good info
The difference is that this article talks about restricting your own home, as well:
"In the privacy of our own homes, none of us should have to wonder whether or not we're being secretly watched-- and even recorded," said Senator Landrieu. "Unfortunately, our laws haven't kept up with the new technology that makes this kind of invasion of privacy very easy to accomplish. This act of "video voyeurism" is not addressed by our federal legal system and in most states, it's not even a crime. The legislation I am introducing today helps fill this gaping hole in our privacy laws, so that if someone is secretly watching you, under this bill it will be a crime punishable by law."
What if my 18 year-old daughter, who lives in my home, sues me because I have a secret camera in my living room?
Isn't this a little something known as entrapment? If you happen to have a camera set up in a room and observe someone stealing something, that's one thing -- but I think it's totally different if you place a camera and then put "bait" in front of it to get the result you want.
Re:Drake is wrong, for the following reasons
on
Rare Earth
·
· Score: 1
Jovian planets may seem more common than earth-like plants, simply because we don't know how to look for earth-like planets as well yet.
Slashdot Mirror
Further research on my part:
From the article:
Kleine suggests that in previous studies, researchers came up with formation times that were twice as long because they had less accurate determinations of the amount of tungsten-182 in meteorites.
It has nothing to do with the accuracy of the radioactive dating, but rather the sampling techniques used in the original estimates.
How does this raise any questions about radioactive dating? As far as I can tell, that's not even part of this conversation!
Maybe I'm missing something, but I actually like watching commercials! Sometimes, I do find them to be insulting, especially the ones that treat me like a child -- however I also find some commercials to be humorous, entertaining, or thought provoking. I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way, right?
We were shocked at some network file transfer speeds here -- if you are doing network copies and are shocked at how slow it is, make sure that your switch and your NIC agree about whether or not your connection is half- or full-duplex.
Makes a HUGE difference.
Remedy is the obvious answer here, because it does provide not only a wintel client, but also a web interface. I believe that the web interface is also fairly complete. Remedy also provides many modules for asset management, change management, etc.
Just remember -- Remedy is targetted as a desktop tool -- using remedy for change management or asset management can be done for non-desktop environments (think networks, firewalls, etc), but it's not a clean fit.
Also, Remedy installations are only as good as their configuration and customization. We learned at my place of business that the out-of-the-box remedy implementation needs a good bit of help and customization. As long as you're willing to spend time, energy, and money on it, it can be a very good solution.
It's my understanding that anything compiled with OpenSSL (which includes OpenSSH) would need to be re-compiled with the new versions of the libraries. Though, if OpenSSH used dynamic libraries rather than static ones, you should just have to upgrade the OpenSSL libs. I'm not sure if the libraries are statically compiled in tho, for security.
The problem is that many of the protesters are just young teenagers trying to get out of school. If they went up to the average protester and said "Why are you protesting?", I'm sure the response would be along the lines of:
"Well dude, there's like, this world bank, and it's just wrong man, it's so wrong!"
There are dumb folks on both sides, but the media at least is shooting for higher ratings, which prevents tripe like that from making it on the air.
Ahh -- but that's not CRACKING encryption. That's working from within the boundaries of the system to achieve a goal. Cracking OpenSSL would be like cracking WEP -- if you give me enough data, I could crack the key and start decrypting traffic. This is VERY different.
The point is that the actual method of encryption itself, the mathematical formulas and principles, are still very valid and relevent. It just means that you can't leave the backdoor unlocked.
I agree with you that people tend to be more confident in making "secure" transactions over the internet because the little key icon in their MSIE window.
Yes, the transaction itself (which contains your CC number) might go over the internet securely, but if I wanted your CC#, I wouldn't be sniffing the OC-48 backbones, I'd pop the database that stores it so next time you buy a book or what-not, you don't have to type it in again.
I agree that people need to realize that good security is implemented in a layered approach, and that a secure system is only as strong as it's weakest link. However, I think that your initial post was somewhat immature. "Oh, what the heck -- your box is going to get cracked anyway, just run telnet, ftp, finger, and allow rlogin. It's the same anyway."
Just my opinion.
OK -- I understand your pain -- I know that you feel it's difficult to keep up with things, especially when it seems like they aren't achieving the end they purport.
But, it's important to note here that a buffer or stack overflow is DIFFERENT than cracking the encryption algorithm used. These are buffer overflows, which introduces a DoS condition, or possible remote shell attack. The data transiting the network that is encrypted, however, is still encrypted.
You should check out www.elance.com -- though I've heard lately that it's getting flooded with lots of entry level people doing the low-bid-wins-regardless-of-output sort of thing.
You know, investment funds always say "Past performance is not an indicator of future performance", but they know you make your decision based on how well the fund has done over the past 10 years.
Trusting the government is the same way. Let's look at their security record over the past few years:
1. The Clipper Chip
2. Carnivore
3. Expanded rights for home surveillance
There are more, and I'm sure if we all sit down we can think of a list that's truly huge. But, looking at past performance, what am I to extrapolate about this move? The government should have no real interest in my personal PC. There hasn't been a large public outcry for the government to get involved in securing end-user's desktops. So, it seems pretty clear to me that this is a way for the government to get a foothold in every windows PC inside the US. No one has asked for this, but it's an easy way for them to get in and make us think it's for our own good.
Besides, it's not always about what their intentions are right now. Social Security numbers were never invented to be completely unique identifiers used for everything from customer numbers at Jiffy Lube to student ID's at colleges, but that's how it turned out. Why? Because power corrupts. If the government has software on every PC in the US, and there is another terrorist attack, how long before people cry out to add some backdoors that allow good old uncle sam to read your email?
It's all in the interest of national security, and anyone who opposes it must be a terrorist. Any logical american who has nothing to hide wouldn't mind, right? We're trying to look out for everyone else? Granted, I doubt that Uncle Same will say "You know, once the threat is over, we'll get rid of this monitoring, because we don't need it anymore."
Instead of being so quick to dismiss the protectors of liberty as being right-wing nutcases, maybe you should read some history and try to think of their motives. Not everyone in the government is a saint with your best interests in mind.
Is anyone else really happy with this move? I think that this is a great move forward for the open-source community. You've got an enterprise-strength application, one that a company charged money not only for the application itself (no source included), but also for maintenance contracts, installation, etc.
This company has realized that the benefits of releasing the source out to everyone outweigh the benefits of keeping it inside.
Congratulations, SAP! I wish the best for you!
MMMm.... First off, I wonder what interface format they will use between the disk and the motherboard? SCSI? IDE? Something completely different? Anyway, whatever they use, I'd love to see a level-0 stripe right across 4 or so of these babies ;) Speed and storage!
Do you really want to live forever? Think about all of the side-effects of this -- extreme overpopulation, new diseases to ravage the body (but not kill it), all sorts of things we can't even imagine. Personally, I don't want to live forever. What would you do? I get bored at work with the internet in only 8 hours a day. I get bored at home. Besides, If I had to live forever and could procrastinate things as long as I wanted, I would never get anything done ;)
Sorry, http://www.afio.com/sections/book_reviews/reviews/ chinese_intel_ops.html
China has one of the most active intelligence operations of any country in the world -- check http://www.afio.com/sections/book_reviews/reviews/ chinese_intel_ops.html -- it's a great book with lots of good info
The difference is that this article talks about restricting your own home, as well: "In the privacy of our own homes, none of us should have to wonder whether or not we're being secretly watched-- and even recorded," said Senator Landrieu. "Unfortunately, our laws haven't kept up with the new technology that makes this kind of invasion of privacy very easy to accomplish. This act of "video voyeurism" is not addressed by our federal legal system and in most states, it's not even a crime. The legislation I am introducing today helps fill this gaping hole in our privacy laws, so that if someone is secretly watching you, under this bill it will be a crime punishable by law." What if my 18 year-old daughter, who lives in my home, sues me because I have a secret camera in my living room?
Isn't this a little something known as entrapment? If you happen to have a camera set up in a room and observe someone stealing something, that's one thing -- but I think it's totally different if you place a camera and then put "bait" in front of it to get the result you want.
Jovian planets may seem more common than earth-like plants, simply because we don't know how to look for earth-like planets as well yet.