Kryptonite today announced it will provide free product upgrades
From what I have read, the upgrade will replace the lock core with one of a smaller diameter. This isn't really a long term fix - someone will probably discover a different brand of pen that will open the new locks as well.
I have tried the Bic pen on my own Krypto lock - and it's really easy. The strange thing is, this isn't some design flaw with the lock. Everyone (hopefully) knows that all locks can be picked. But, it should be hard, requiring specialized tools and some skill. The Bic pen seems to have just the right magical combination of size, and balance of hard/soft plastic, that it makes an astonishingly effective lock pick. After opening my lock, the pen barrel had divots in it from the pins that looked just like my key. The plastic seems hard enough to push the pins down until they set, but then soft enough to hold the pin in that position.
There are probably a million ways to tamper with email ballots... One could even use the linux iptables "mangle" module, for an election-tampering router.
Did you? The black Tuesday in this article refers to the day Microsoft releases it's security patches (the second Tuesday of each month). This schedule is part of their "trusted computing" initiave.
It's a black day because the patches reveal the existance of vulnerabilities, which malware authors use to take advantage of unpatches systems.
Are they saying that they had to remove these words because of he evil Bush government? Those words haven't been "allowed" for many years now. Really, this whole thing is absolute crap. "Chilling censorship" my ass.
As it stands, the message of either group would prompt me to change the channel. Listening to inane bullshit isn't something I like to spend much time doing.
The superbowl ad that I was referring to is hardly far from mainstream - it said fairly simply "Our children will have to pay for Bush's huge budget deficit". Is this "inane bullshit"? How about all the ads for credit cards, erectile dysfunction, or the White House ad promoting the war on drugs, claiming that casual marijuana use funds global terrorism? That is inane bullshit, that ought to cause any thinking person to change the channel (or shoot their TV, right before gouging their eyes out). But the networks will run these ads.
No, I think it's naive to think they refused the ads because they were afraid of losing viewers. More likely, they are afraid of pissing off other big-spending advertisers (like the Bush campaign).
Why should they refuse ads from Microsoft? Aren't the readers smart
enough to make up their own minds about the benefits of Linux? This
reminds me of a recent "outrage" when The Nation ran some full-page ads for
Faux News. Most of their readers
just laughed at Fox for throwing their money away.
I'd rather that organizations who sell ad space have less editorial control. For instance, Adbusters and the MoveOn PAC have repeatedly been denied airtime on network TV, even though they are able to pay for it, simply because the network execs don't like their message. This is a far greater injustice.
I thought McDonald's was supposed to start promoting it's more healthier meals now?
I saw the funniest thing at a McDonald's last weekend... they were selling an "Adult Happy Meal". It was a bunch of iceberg lettuce, a bottle of water, and a pedometer!
It would be sort of like you clicking "I Do Not Agree" on a Windows installation, then somehow getting the software installed anyway. Microsoft wouldn't RETRACT your license, rather, they'd sue you because you're using the software without one.
At least in the United States, you do not need a license to use software, only to make copies. Section 117 of copyright laws says:
Sec. 117. - Limitations on exclusive rights: Computer programs
(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy. -
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:
(1)
that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner, or
(2)
that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful.
Essentially, loading the software onto a disk and into memory isn't considered infringement (even though it's technically a copy). This is why you can use GPL'd software (or any other software that you legally obtained, for that matter) without accepting the license. I have heard that it is possible to bypass Microsoft's EULA this way, though I don't know if any court has ruled on whether or not it's infringement.
Open source code which can only submitted while obfuscated (thus preserving its signature) is not open source any more, so I don't buy this as a benefit of the technology.
Yes, I was puzzled by his statements about watermarking open-source code. You would still have to distribute the original, unobfuscated source to allow people to make changes. The GPL even explicitly forbids distributing obfuscated code. It says something the like the code must be distributed in the "preferred format for making changes".
Well, this has been tried before against directv (they were suing people who had purchased smart card readers). The judge (in Texas IIRC) ruled that speech related to litigation was protected, and not racketeering.
So unless you're ex-military, you'd have yourself a $9 million lawn ornament.
Perhaps, but it seems there are some vets out there with money. Here's an interesting article about the Czech-built L39 Albatros (among others) being flown as a civilian sport jet.
And how do you enforce charging people who you may or may not be able to track, the proposal to charge for spam based on the reciever's choice is absolutely ridiculous.
This is not so hard at all; you simply require the payment be placed in an escrow account before the mail server will accept the message. The sender would include some unique token in the message headers that corresponds to the escrow funds.
Read about it here: Selling Interrupt Rgihts. The article is from 2002, btw, this is hardly a new concept.
the same stuff that brings you cheaper prices in the supermarket is what you need to have more food in starving countries.
This is Myth #1 about world hunger. There is plenty of food; the problem is inequitable distribution. From the FoodFirst site:
Reality: Abundance, not scarcity, best describes the world's food supply. Enough wheat, rice and other grains are produced to provide every human being with 3,500 calories a day. That doesn't even count many other commonly eaten foods-vegetables, beans, nuts, root crops, fruits, grass-fed meats, and fish. Enough food is available to provide at least 4.3 pounds of food per person a day worldwide: two and half pounds of grain, beans and nuts, about a pound of fruits and vegetables, and nearly another pound of meat, milk and eggs-enough to make most people fat! The problem is that many people are too poor to buy readily available food. Even most "hungry countries" have enough food for all their people right now. Many are net exporters of food and other agricultural products.
go ahead and try to wire tap my dorm's P2P WEP protected 802.11g WiFi network
You do know that WEP can be easily cracked, right? I realize that some access point vendors have tweaked their firmware to not send weak IVs, but as I understand it the attack is still possible (especially if you have a way of injecting extra traffic into the network).
Let's face it - hard usage caps annoy users, however with P2P traffic currently taking 60-70% of ISPs bandwidth they have to do something.
The fact that 70% (??) is p2p isn't important, the real problem is allocating scarce bandwidth among all users equitably. There is a routing algorithm called fair queueing that does this - essentially a user's priority is related to their usage. "Bandwidth hogs" gradually drop lower on the priority scale when there is contention.
IMO, this is more fair than level 7 traffic shaping - why should the ISP decide that P2P packets are less important than say, someone using massive amounts of bandwith connecting to an office VPN? Both users have paid for the same service. And fair queueing would sure beat invisible caps and customer harrassment.
I get 2,753 years out of this calculation (I think you lost a zero somewhere)... But expecting users to chose passwords like that is probably unrealistic. Even one weak password could compromise a system, even if all the others had really strong passwords.
It stupidity that oozes from that sentence is frightening.
I don't necessarily disagree with their decision to ban the glowfish, but that is a horribly stupid non-reason. I could accept something more like "The glowfish pose an unknown, potentially serious risk to the environment, and I think taking such risks for something frivalous and ornamental is wrong." But saying it's not about science... is just absurd. I'd tolerate that kind of statement from the pope, but not a fish and game commisioner.
Slashdot Mirror
Kryptonite today announced it will provide free product upgrades
From what I have read, the upgrade will replace the lock core with one of a smaller diameter. This isn't really a long term fix - someone will probably discover a different brand of pen that will open the new locks as well.
I have tried the Bic pen on my own Krypto lock - and it's really easy. The strange thing is, this isn't some design flaw with the lock. Everyone (hopefully) knows that all locks can be picked. But, it should be hard, requiring specialized tools and some skill. The Bic pen seems to have just the right magical combination of size, and balance of hard/soft plastic, that it makes an astonishingly effective lock pick. After opening my lock, the pen barrel had divots in it from the pins that looked just like my key. The plastic seems hard enough to push the pins down until they set, but then soft enough to hold the pin in that position.
Also, this isn't exactly breaking news.
* opens ~/2004-election/.procmailrc *
There are probably a million ways to tamper with email ballots... One could even use the linux iptables "mangle" module, for an election-tampering router.
Hey, if you don't like it, just don't vote!
Here's one on usenet from 2001...
If you still have some gmail intives, could you send one to dylan@io.com (I fear no spam harvesting-bot). Thanks!
You didn't even try, did you?
Did you? The black Tuesday in this article refers to the day Microsoft releases it's security patches (the second Tuesday of each month). This schedule is part of their "trusted computing" initiave.
It's a black day because the patches reveal the existance of vulnerabilities, which malware authors use to take advantage of unpatches systems.
Are they saying that they had to remove these words because of he evil Bush government? Those words haven't been "allowed" for many years now. Really, this whole thing is absolute crap. "Chilling censorship" my ass.
I don't watch PBS (I don't have a TV), but Google turns up a lot of hits on PBS for "fuck". At least some of these search results are transcripts from TV shows that were broadcast.
Just use NAT
Actually, I think the IP equivalent of fixing the allocation problem is CIDR (Classless Inter-Domain Routing).
As it stands, the message of either group would prompt me to change the channel. Listening to inane bullshit isn't something I like to spend much time doing.
The superbowl ad that I was referring to is hardly far from mainstream - it said fairly simply "Our children will have to pay for Bush's huge budget deficit". Is this "inane bullshit"? How about all the ads for credit cards, erectile dysfunction, or the White House ad promoting the war on drugs, claiming that casual marijuana use funds global terrorism? That is inane bullshit, that ought to cause any thinking person to change the channel (or shoot their TV, right before gouging their eyes out). But the networks will run these ads.
No, I think it's naive to think they refused the ads because they were afraid of losing viewers. More likely, they are afraid of pissing off other big-spending advertisers (like the Bush campaign).
Why should they refuse ads from Microsoft? Aren't the readers smart enough to make up their own minds about the benefits of Linux? This reminds me of a recent "outrage" when The Nation ran some full-page ads for Faux News. Most of their readers just laughed at Fox for throwing their money away.
I'd rather that organizations who sell ad space have less editorial control. For instance, Adbusters and the MoveOn PAC have repeatedly been denied airtime on network TV, even though they are able to pay for it, simply because the network execs don't like their message. This is a far greater injustice.
I thought McDonald's was supposed to start promoting it's more healthier meals now?
I saw the funniest thing at a McDonald's last weekend... they were selling an "Adult Happy Meal". It was a bunch of iceberg lettuce, a bottle of water, and a pedometer!
I wish I was making this up... but it's true.
I mean, has the man EVER held ANY elective office?
Well, he has sued most of them...
At least in the United States, you do not need a license to use software, only to make copies. Section 117 of copyright laws says:
Essentially, loading the software onto a disk and into memory isn't considered infringement (even though it's technically a copy). This is why you can use GPL'd software (or any other software that you legally obtained, for that matter) without accepting the license. I have heard that it is possible to bypass Microsoft's EULA this way, though I don't know if any court has ruled on whether or not it's infringement.
Open source code which can only submitted while obfuscated (thus preserving its signature) is not open source any more, so I don't buy this as a benefit of the technology.
Yes, I was puzzled by his statements about watermarking open-source code. You would still have to distribute the original, unobfuscated source to allow people to make changes. The GPL even explicitly forbids distributing obfuscated code. It says something the like the code must be distributed in the "preferred format for making changes".
Well, this has been tried before against directv (they were suing people who had purchased smart card readers). The judge (in Texas IIRC) ruled that speech related to litigation was protected, and not racketeering.
I doubt this suit will fare much better.
So unless you're ex-military, you'd have yourself a $9 million lawn ornament.
Perhaps, but it seems there are some vets out there with money. Here's an interesting article about the Czech-built L39 Albatros (among others) being flown as a civilian sport jet.
And how do you enforce charging people who you may or may not be able to track, the proposal to charge for spam based on the reciever's choice is absolutely ridiculous.
This is not so hard at all; you simply require the payment be placed in an escrow account before the mail server will accept the message. The sender would include some unique token in the message headers that corresponds to the escrow funds.
Read about it here: Selling Interrupt Rgihts. The article is from 2002, btw, this is hardly a new concept.
This is Myth #1 about world hunger. There is plenty of food; the problem is inequitable distribution. From the FoodFirst site:
go ahead and try to wire tap my dorm's P2P WEP protected 802.11g WiFi network
You do know that WEP can be easily cracked, right? I realize that some access point vendors have tweaked their firmware to not send weak IVs, but as I understand it the attack is still possible (especially if you have a way of injecting extra traffic into the network).
it would be like the government deciding that they should collect tax on sales of drugs while simultaneously prosecting the people selling the drugs.
Buy your drug tax stamps here.
Let's face it - hard usage caps annoy users, however with P2P traffic currently taking 60-70% of ISPs bandwidth they have to do something.
The fact that 70% (??) is p2p isn't important, the real problem is allocating scarce bandwidth among all users equitably. There is a routing algorithm called fair queueing that does this - essentially a user's priority is related to their usage. "Bandwidth hogs" gradually drop lower on the priority scale when there is contention.
IMO, this is more fair than level 7 traffic shaping - why should the ISP decide that P2P packets are less important than say, someone using massive amounts of bandwith connecting to an office VPN? Both users have paid for the same service. And fair queueing would sure beat invisible caps and customer harrassment.
Clicking on that link shows short data from 10-Nov-03. If it's not showing it for you, I have no idea why.
;( Thanks.
Stupid caching proxy...
According to Yahoo! Finances, they're up to 1.62M shares shorted...
How do you get current data from yahoo? When I look there, the "shares short" statistics are from Oct. 8. Thanks.
It stupidity that oozes from that sentence is frightening.
I don't necessarily disagree with their decision to ban the glowfish, but that is a horribly stupid non-reason. I could accept something more like "The glowfish pose an unknown, potentially serious risk to the environment, and I think taking such risks for something frivalous and ornamental is wrong." But saying it's not about science... is just absurd. I'd tolerate that kind of statement from the pope, but not a fish and game commisioner.