Safari and Camino block all these popups except the ones that happen when you click on a link. This kind is about the closest you can come to legitimate. So, I would say they passed. I would assume that Camino and Firefox use the same engine for this, as they're both based on Mozilla, but I could be wrong there.
Not satisfied with your performance?
on
Spam as Poetry
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Enlarge your organ!
Add multiple stops! Up to 8' and more! Improve your tone! Produce richer, fuller cadences! No pills, no pumps! Uses existing bellows system. All natural! Mean tone tempered in C major. 100% Money Back Guarantee!
Bach and Sons Organ Enlargement
Rated No. 1 Organ Enlargement Program On The Market!
Yes. The 5.x branch is slower, though, at least on some machines (dunno about SMP ones). GEOM slows down disk accesses slightly, and the extra locks they added to get rid of Giant can seriously slow down firewalling and some other activities. So don't use it to firewall a gigabit connection.
NB this is not my experience, it comes from the -current mailing list. My -current build is slow, but it has WITNESS and other debug options and these machines don't.
It would also be nice if they could get mounted snapshots to be stable, instead of hanging the machine on shutdown and risking random deadlocks as well.
It's pretty hard to compare algorithms, at least ones that might work, such as chi squared (SpamBayes) vs Bayesian (Plan for Spam, CRM114, lots more) vs point totals (SpamAssassin) vs cluster analysis (Mail.app).
As for implementations, CRM114 kicks the shit out of Mail.app's filter, at least on my and my roommate's mixes. About the only thing that CRM114 hasn't caught for me is those 1-line virus spams with a.zip attached, and new classes of spam (last week I received my first stock spam). The false positive rate is very low and generally confined to advertisements that I don't want to read, but are from other students over the house lists, or the like. I've been considering retraining those as spam anyway.
The author claims 99.984% filtering rate, which is higher than I get... but then, I don't get as much spam as he does, and I use whitelists, which are said to hurt the accuracy in favor of zero false positives from that segment.
This amazing new product allows you to punch a hole through the DVD, allowing you to use BOTH sides of the media. Use your Single-Side as Double-Side disks without paying extra.
Why would I buy that? Most DVDs that I get already have a hole in them...
Personally I use GPG. It's open source, has lots of users, and is very intensely reviewed.
However, if you're sending an archive to a Windows user, and you trust your archiver's encryption, why would you want to mess with some external tool? They quite possibly don't have PGP or Kremlin or whatever, and they do almost certainly have WinZip. It's simpler just to check the relevent options there instead of running it through some other program.
Of course, in any of the various Unices, it's as simple as tar -czf- files | gpg --encrypt.
Look, you don't have to start a flame war. While perhaps the grandparent didn't know as much about FreeNet as you, he did go to the effort to run it on what sounds like a pretty substantial pipe for a long time, and I would imagine that he did, in fact, at least try re-seeding and look at the documentation. Most geeks do.
Furthermore, since there exist (crappy) search engines for FreeNet, your search engine rant seems to fall flat. But if there weren't, and couldn't be, the lack of search engines would a major problem with the network, and a strong disincentive towards using it. Similarly, the fact that it is still alpha after a long time, whether or not its development could have been speeded up, is a shortcoming.
Finally, I would imagine since he was so patient with it, and unless he's lying is in a fairly visible position, I don't think he was using it for piracy. Some people do things as a public service.
When I run a FreeNet node, items of data from other people are placed, in part, on my hard drive. If one of these items is part of a copyright-protected work, then the original distributor has committed copyright infringment. However, that is only the first copy. Any time someone else retrieves that item there is a chance that my PC will now supply some parts of the item, making another copy and thus infringing copyright.
Essentially any FreeNet user has a high probability of committing copyright infringment and cannot control this as he or she has no idea what data is all hashed up and encrypted in the data store. By this reasoning, it could be argued that it is in fact illegal to use FreeNet. I don't necessarily agree, but the fact that this possible argument exists could cause problems for anonymous peer-to-peer networks in the future.
By that logic, running a router is illegal because it contributes to the distribution of illegal materials. The fact of the matter is that you are not, because you have no reasonable means to block them while still providing your service, and your service is used for legal things as well. In the case of FreeNet, the files are encrypted and you don't have the key, so there really isn't much you can do.
While I'm sure there are some pirates on FreeNet, the massive overhead of the system makes it inconvenient for sending around large files. It's much better for text/html and the like.
I expect that these "hard to track" systems are more efficient, if perhaps slighly less robust, and are designed primarily for infringers. If you are using them, you are probably infringing anyway.
Anyone who still doesn't think AL Qaeda and Iraq have links after the beheading of a kidnapped American and the Jordanian bomb plot is self-delusional.
I've read articles which claim that the war in Iraq was a tremendous mistake in this regard. The analysis goes, that the war in Afghanistan was quite effective against al Qaeda, in that it dried up much of their money supply and supporters, and ruined their training camps.
But Saddam didn't particularly like al Qaeda, and they had very little activity in Iraq. Now that we've "liberated" them and pissed them off, there's lots more opportunity for evil terrorist types to train and recruit, and plenty of bad feeling to fuel them.
I'm one of many who has dropped Apache in favor of thttpd.
So the next time you're setting up a webserver and Apache is being a pain in the ass - kill it and switch to thttpd. You'll thank me.
Well, thttpd is certainly faster and probably easier for images and other static files, but it is also certainly not faster for PHP and many other dynamic types. It also doesn't support SSL, which is a must in many cases.
Lets apply your argument to a different medium. Most people break traffic laws. So lets outlaw driving. That is what your are suggesting? Am I not correct?
You are not, in fact, correct. I'm suggesting that if 99.99% of the time someone got into a car, it was for illegal drag racing, then we should outlaw driving, or at least heavily restrict it.
My argument is precisely that since much (I would argue most) computer use is legal, computers shouldn't be outlawed even under my grandparent's argument.
On the other hand, the vast majority untracked peer-to-peer access is illegal, it would not be unreasonable to outlaw them. This is why many states outlaw lock picks: they are much more likely to be used illegally than legally.
Given that WinNY is quite obviously designed for the illegal sharing of files and basically nothing else, it isn't unreasonable to charge the designer with contributory infringement, just as if you sell lock picks in a dark alley, it's not unreasonable to charge you for aiding thieves.
The problem with your counterargument is that most computers are used for purposes other than piracy. For instance, college students (some of the worst pirates out there!) use their computers to write papers, communicate with friends, family and professors, do research (google, scirus, etc), write programs for class, develop things outside of class, compute things (Mathematica), do listening for music classes and watch movies for film classes. Not to mention play games, which are in many cases legally purchased.
Compare this to most P2P systems. Let's exclude the Internet itself as a "peer-to-peer" system, and BitTorrent as well because it requires a tracker; we'll focus on stuff like Win(MX|NY), KaZaA, Gnutella, Hotline. Very rarely are legitimate files to be found on such P2P systems which are not more readily available on the web or BitTorrent, and very rarely do people use these programs to download material that they have permission to use.
Why is it unreasonable that such systems be outlawed, but computers still allowed?
I've seen other pomo style buildings. MIT also has that weird dorm building that looks like a cross between a sponge and a retarded sponge. Harvard has some other dorm that looks a little more normal, but still not that appealing to me.
And VIA's EPIA processors are all named after Old Testament prophets: Samuel, Ezra, Nehemiah...
Properly, VIA's processor cores are named after Old Testament books which are named after people. That's why there was a I Samuel and a II Samuel core. (Dunno why no Joshua, though).
The next core to come out is Esther, who wasn't properly a prophet(ess), but rather a queen.
As a side-note, the preliminary specs on Esther are quite impressive: lower transistor count than Nehemiah (= cheap, small die), 90nm, 2GHz @ 5W (fewer IPC than a Pentium though), integrated RNG, AES, SHA-1... looking forward to using one of these in a quiet, low-power personal server and firewall.
Yes, they know this, which is why they don't crack down too hard. They want to make piracy easy to do the first time, but a recurring headache, so that pirates will be more likely to buy the OS later.
Yep. In my experience, newbie rogues tend to be the worst about it. From a slave-escape campaign I recently DMed:
DM: You run out the door, and see your master standing off against these guys with a dagger and a lightning-gun. Joe: I'll use my pickpocket skill to try to disarm him. DM: You sure about that? Joe: Yes. DM: He stabs you in the gut, then shoots you with the lightning gun. You're at [rollroll] -3 hit points.
(later, the slaves execute a brilliant ambush against two pursuers, and are now looting the bodies) Jim: Anything else of interest on the bodies? DM: You've taken everything but their clothes, hats and some minor trinkets. Jim: Hmmm... are these guys about my size? DM: One of them is. Jim: I take the clothes, hat and trinkets and put them on. DM: OK. This takes you a few minutes. You begin to hear hoofbeats in the distance. Jim: I get up on the guy's horse, and adjust my hat. How do I look? DM: [rolls disguise check] Just like him... except you're black. Jim: Oh, shit.
Err. Read your own link? His conclusion frome those benchmarks were that OpenBSD is slow. He says specifically:
Linux 2.6 scales O(1) in all benchmarks. Words fail me on how impressive this is. If you are using Linux 2.4 right now, switch to Linux 2.6 now!
FreeBSD 5.1 has very impressive performance and scalability. I foolishly assumed all BSDs to play in the same league performance-wise, because they all share a lot of code and can incorporate each other's code freely. I was wrong. FreeBSD has by far the best performance of the BSDs and it comes close to Linux 2.6. If you run another BSD on x86, you should switch to FreeBSD!
His only major complaint about FreeBSD was its mmap performance: the system seems to do more work ahead of time than is actually necessary. It's not clear to me that his benchmark is actually relevant, since he measured the cost of mmapping 10000 pages, but only reading one (in which FreeBSD thrashed all the other systems), whereas one generally reads most of the pages mmapped anyway.
In many of the benchmarks, FreeBSD beat Linux 2.6 by a sizeable margin, in particular the "many files" and connections benchmarks.
And what a thing it would be! The nice thing about silicon chips is that the access time is constant (IIRC each bit is activated in parallel?) across the storage unit. You can read bits 1, 2 and then 3 with the same latency as bits 1, 1583945856 and then 393758273589235892253. With a "three dimensional matrix" of discrete units, you first have to find your bit before it can be read! Imagine with current mass-use technology... a read head housing 4 lasers (as in the 4 dye example in the article) trying to access a bit at the "start" of the data, then one that's physically 1.5cm away, and then again, and again, and again.... the latency would be huge!! Maybe I don't know enough about...
You probably don't. Silicon chips aren't truly random access anymore, at least for large RAMs. , They do have a seek time, due to the northbridge and to the way that DRAM works in general. These days it's on the order of 50-100 nanoseconds (for a CPU, that's 200 clock cyles). While the bandwidth is impressive (gigs per second), that latency to RAM from the CPU is large, and it's what hyperthreading is all about: when you miss cache and have to go to RAM, let the other thread run.
The same is true for hard drives, but on a larger scale: seeks take miliseconds, but bandwidth is large. So while this new polymer won't enable solid-state storage, it might be able to compete with hard drive eventually.
Yeah, I do something like that. I used to use separate weak passwords for sites that I don't give a damn about, but I found that it's much easier to have one weak password for all such accounts.
So that's for my my Slashdot, Starcraft, hotmail spam account, etc etc.
For root and otherwise important UNIX accounts, 8-character random alnum.
For paypal (which has like 10 bucks on it), and the like, 3-word diceware.
For real banking, 5-word diceware.
For PGP master key (controls encrypted list of passwords), 7-word diceware.
I use diceware because it produces passwords that are strong, easy to remember, and fast to type (especially on Dvorak, which is optimized for English words).
(CRT) monitors make plenty of radiation, but most of that is absorbed by their lead shielding. That's why they're so heavy and such a pain to get rid of.
Slashdot Mirror
Safari and Camino block all these popups except the ones that happen when you click on a link. This kind is about the closest you can come to legitimate. So, I would say they passed. I would assume that Camino and Firefox use the same engine for this, as they're both based on Mozilla, but I could be wrong there.
Enlarge your organ!
Add multiple stops! Up to 8' and more!
Improve your tone! Produce richer, fuller cadences!
No pills, no pumps! Uses existing bellows system.
All natural! Mean tone tempered in C major.
100% Money Back Guarantee!
Bach and Sons Organ Enlargement
Rated No. 1 Organ Enlargement Program On The Market!
Yes. The 5.x branch is slower, though, at least on some machines (dunno about SMP ones). GEOM slows down disk accesses slightly, and the extra locks they added to get rid of Giant can seriously slow down firewalling and some other activities. So don't use it to firewall a gigabit connection.
NB this is not my experience, it comes from the -current mailing list. My -current build is slow, but it has WITNESS and other debug options and these machines don't.
It would also be nice if they could get mounted snapshots to be stable, instead of hanging the machine on shutdown and risking random deadlocks as well.
It's pretty hard to compare algorithms, at least ones that might work, such as chi squared (SpamBayes) vs Bayesian (Plan for Spam, CRM114, lots more) vs point totals (SpamAssassin) vs cluster analysis (Mail.app).
.zip attached, and new classes of spam (last week I received my first stock spam). The false positive rate is very low and generally confined to advertisements that I don't want to read, but are from other students over the house lists, or the like. I've been considering retraining those as spam anyway.
As for implementations, CRM114 kicks the shit out of Mail.app's filter, at least on my and my roommate's mixes. About the only thing that CRM114 hasn't caught for me is those 1-line virus spams with a
The author claims 99.984% filtering rate, which is higher than I get... but then, I don't get as much spam as he does, and I use whitelists, which are said to hurt the accuracy in favor of zero false positives from that segment.
This amazing new product allows you to punch a hole through the DVD, allowing you to use BOTH sides of the media. Use your Single-Side as Double-Side disks without paying extra.
Why would I buy that? Most DVDs that I get already have a hole in them...
Personally I use GPG. It's open source, has lots of users, and is very intensely reviewed.
However, if you're sending an archive to a Windows user, and you trust your archiver's encryption, why would you want to mess with some external tool? They quite possibly don't have PGP or Kremlin or whatever, and they do almost certainly have WinZip. It's simpler just to check the relevent options there instead of running it through some other program.
Of course, in any of the various Unices, it's as simple as tar -czf- files | gpg --encrypt.
Look, you don't have to start a flame war. While perhaps the grandparent didn't know as much about FreeNet as you, he did go to the effort to run it on what sounds like a pretty substantial pipe for a long time, and I would imagine that he did, in fact, at least try re-seeding and look at the documentation. Most geeks do.
Furthermore, since there exist (crappy) search engines for FreeNet, your search engine rant seems to fall flat. But if there weren't, and couldn't be, the lack of search engines would a major problem with the network, and a strong disincentive towards using it. Similarly, the fact that it is still alpha after a long time, whether or not its development could have been speeded up, is a shortcoming.
Finally, I would imagine since he was so patient with it, and unless he's lying is in a fairly visible position, I don't think he was using it for piracy. Some people do things as a public service.
When I run a FreeNet node, items of data from other people are placed, in part, on my hard drive. If one of these items is part of a copyright-protected work, then the original distributor has committed copyright infringment. However, that is only the first copy. Any time someone else retrieves that item there is a chance that my PC will now supply some parts of the item, making another copy and thus infringing copyright.
Essentially any FreeNet user has a high probability of committing copyright infringment and cannot control this as he or she has no idea what data is all hashed up and encrypted in the data store. By this reasoning, it could be argued that it is in fact illegal to use FreeNet. I don't necessarily agree, but the fact that this possible argument exists could cause problems for anonymous peer-to-peer networks in the future.
By that logic, running a router is illegal because it contributes to the distribution of illegal materials. The fact of the matter is that you are not, because you have no reasonable means to block them while still providing your service, and your service is used for legal things as well. In the case of FreeNet, the files are encrypted and you don't have the key, so there really isn't much you can do.
While I'm sure there are some pirates on FreeNet, the massive overhead of the system makes it inconvenient for sending around large files. It's much better for text/html and the like.
I expect that these "hard to track" systems are more efficient, if perhaps slighly less robust, and are designed primarily for infringers. If you are using them, you are probably infringing anyway.
Anyone who still doesn't think AL Qaeda and Iraq have links after the beheading of a kidnapped American and the Jordanian bomb plot is self-delusional.
I've read articles which claim that the war in Iraq was a tremendous mistake in this regard. The analysis goes, that the war in Afghanistan was quite effective against al Qaeda, in that it dried up much of their money supply and supporters, and ruined their training camps.
But Saddam didn't particularly like al Qaeda, and they had very little activity in Iraq. Now that we've "liberated" them and pissed them off, there's lots more opportunity for evil terrorist types to train and recruit, and plenty of bad feeling to fuel them.
It can play Duke Nukem, but only until it runs out of batteries.
Astrophysics is dominated by Suns...
Somehow, this doesn't seem surprising...
I'm one of many who has dropped Apache in favor of thttpd.
So the next time you're setting up a webserver and Apache is being a pain in the ass - kill it and switch to thttpd. You'll thank me.
Well, thttpd is certainly faster and probably easier for images and other static files, but it is also certainly not faster for PHP and many other dynamic types. It also doesn't support SSL, which is a must in many cases.
Lets apply your argument to a different medium. Most people break traffic laws. So lets outlaw driving. That is what your are suggesting? Am I not correct?
You are not, in fact, correct. I'm suggesting that if 99.99% of the time someone got into a car, it was for illegal drag racing, then we should outlaw driving, or at least heavily restrict it.
My argument is precisely that since much (I would argue most) computer use is legal, computers shouldn't be outlawed even under my grandparent's argument.
On the other hand, the vast majority untracked peer-to-peer access is illegal, it would not be unreasonable to outlaw them. This is why many states outlaw lock picks: they are much more likely to be used illegally than legally.
Given that WinNY is quite obviously designed for the illegal sharing of files and basically nothing else, it isn't unreasonable to charge the designer with contributory infringement, just as if you sell lock picks in a dark alley, it's not unreasonable to charge you for aiding thieves.
The problem with your counterargument is that most computers are used for purposes other than piracy. For instance, college students (some of the worst pirates out there!) use their computers to write papers, communicate with friends, family and professors, do research (google, scirus, etc), write programs for class, develop things outside of class, compute things (Mathematica), do listening for music classes and watch movies for film classes. Not to mention play games, which are in many cases legally purchased.
Compare this to most P2P systems. Let's exclude the Internet itself as a "peer-to-peer" system, and BitTorrent as well because it requires a tracker; we'll focus on stuff like Win(MX|NY), KaZaA, Gnutella, Hotline. Very rarely are legitimate files to be found on such P2P systems which are not more readily available on the web or BitTorrent, and very rarely do people use these programs to download material that they have permission to use.
Why is it unreasonable that such systems be outlawed, but computers still allowed?
Sounds great, but tell me... how would they target ads to this?
I've seen other pomo style buildings. MIT also has that weird dorm building that looks like a cross between a sponge and a retarded sponge. Harvard has some other dorm that looks a little more normal, but still not that appealing to me.
Dammit, we like our Swiss-cheese-concrete dorm.
And VIA's EPIA processors are all named after Old Testament prophets: Samuel, Ezra, Nehemiah...
Properly, VIA's processor cores are named after Old Testament books which are named after people. That's why there was a I Samuel and a II Samuel core. (Dunno why no Joshua, though).
The next core to come out is Esther, who wasn't properly a prophet(ess), but rather a queen.
As a side-note, the preliminary specs on Esther are quite impressive: lower transistor count than Nehemiah (= cheap, small die), 90nm, 2GHz @ 5W (fewer IPC than a Pentium though), integrated RNG, AES, SHA-1... looking forward to using one of these in a quiet, low-power personal server and firewall.
Yes, they know this, which is why they don't crack down too hard. They want to make piracy easy to do the first time, but a recurring headache, so that pirates will be more likely to buy the OS later.
Yep. In my experience, newbie rogues tend to be the worst about it. From a slave-escape campaign I recently DMed:
DM: You run out the door, and see your master standing off against these guys with a dagger and a lightning-gun.
Joe: I'll use my pickpocket skill to try to disarm him.
DM: You sure about that?
Joe: Yes.
DM: He stabs you in the gut, then shoots you with the lightning gun. You're at [rollroll] -3 hit points.
(later, the slaves execute a brilliant ambush against two pursuers, and are now looting the bodies)
Jim: Anything else of interest on the bodies?
DM: You've taken everything but their clothes, hats and some minor trinkets.
Jim: Hmmm... are these guys about my size?
DM: One of them is.
Jim: I take the clothes, hat and trinkets and put them on.
DM: OK. This takes you a few minutes. You begin to hear hoofbeats in the distance.
Jim: I get up on the guy's horse, and adjust my hat. How do I look?
DM: [rolls disguise check] Just like him... except you're black.
Jim: Oh, shit.
Err. Read your own link? His conclusion frome those benchmarks were that OpenBSD is slow. He says specifically:
Linux 2.6 scales O(1) in all benchmarks. Words fail me on how impressive this is. If you are using Linux 2.4 right now, switch to Linux 2.6 now!
FreeBSD 5.1 has very impressive performance and scalability. I foolishly assumed all BSDs to play in the same league performance-wise, because they all share a lot of code and can incorporate each other's code freely. I was wrong. FreeBSD has by far the best performance of the BSDs and it comes close to Linux 2.6. If you run another BSD on x86, you should switch to FreeBSD!
His only major complaint about FreeBSD was its mmap performance: the system seems to do more work ahead of time than is actually necessary. It's not clear to me that his benchmark is actually relevant, since he measured the cost of mmapping 10000 pages, but only reading one (in which FreeBSD thrashed all the other systems), whereas one generally reads most of the pages mmapped anyway.
In many of the benchmarks, FreeBSD beat Linux 2.6 by a sizeable margin, in particular the "many files" and connections benchmarks.
And what a thing it would be! The nice thing about silicon chips is that the access time is constant (IIRC each bit is activated in parallel?) across the storage unit. You can read bits 1, 2 and then 3 with the same latency as bits 1, 1583945856 and then 393758273589235892253. With a "three dimensional matrix" of discrete units, you first have to find your bit before it can be read! Imagine with current mass-use technology... a read head housing 4 lasers (as in the 4 dye example in the article) trying to access a bit at the "start" of the data, then one that's physically 1.5cm away, and then again, and again, and again.... the latency would be huge!! Maybe I don't know enough about...
:-(
You probably don't. Silicon chips aren't truly random access anymore, at least for large RAMs. , They do have a seek time, due to the northbridge and to the way that DRAM works in general. These days it's on the order of 50-100 nanoseconds (for a CPU, that's 200 clock cyles). While the bandwidth is impressive (gigs per second), that latency to RAM from the CPU is large, and it's what hyperthreading is all about: when you miss cache and have to go to RAM, let the other thread run.
The same is true for hard drives, but on a larger scale: seeks take miliseconds, but bandwidth is large. So while this new polymer won't enable solid-state storage, it might be able to compete with hard drive eventually.
That said, I think it's vaporware too
Yeah, I do something like that. I used to use separate weak passwords for sites that I don't give a damn about, but I found that it's much easier to have one weak password for all such accounts.
So that's for my my Slashdot, Starcraft, hotmail spam account, etc etc.
For root and otherwise important UNIX accounts, 8-character random alnum.
For paypal (which has like 10 bucks on it), and the like, 3-word diceware.
For real banking, 5-word diceware.
For PGP master key (controls encrypted list of passwords), 7-word diceware.
I use diceware because it produces passwords that are strong, easy to remember, and fast to type (especially on Dvorak, which is optimized for English words).
This was exactly his point.
Not only that, if what they're watching is mostly Linux... I wonder which OS they'll see the most break-ins on?
(CRT) monitors make plenty of radiation, but most of that is absorbed by their lead shielding. That's why they're so heavy and such a pain to get rid of.