I don't trust any of it. Advertising by the "hip" youth is no better than that created by the corporation. It all looks the same, has the same message, and still smells lame.
I mean, if the URU is just a number or a short character string, what's the point? I might as well ditch the URU and have a password. I think it may even be better to have a passphrase, because then I can have one for each site I do business with, not to mention I can change it easily if I think someone is on to it.
I'm guessing you have to call the URU organization if you want to change your ID. How do they know it's you on the phone? Can't use the URU, then someone could get yours and change it. You'd be screwed. How about by a credit card number? Name? Address? I need those things to verify myself online now. Name + address + ccn = a new URU. So why not just use the name and address system? Seems kinda silly to me.
One could argue that the point of the URU is to have a way to identify yourself without having to give out your name and address. I suppose that's a valid point and think that's all the ID would be good for. But think about it for a second. What sites need the URU? Online stores banks, and auctions for example. They need the name address, and ccn anyways. What about sites like slashdot? I don't want them to have my URU! I would refuse if they asked me. My username and password is all you need to know about me.. thanks. Oh, slashdot won't use my URU execpt to verify it's me? I wouldn't want my URU to be sent out all over the net for somthing that I'm too crazy about protecting (slashdot login).
I don't know. For the average Joe, it might save some time and password resets. For me... It's just a waste of time. I would rather the man spend all this money on somthing worth while.
This may be just a little off topic, but the thing is that I always have to go through all my mail by hand to make sure I didn't miss anything important anyways. No anti-spam software out there seems to save me this hassle... So to this day I haven't stuck with any. It doesn't look like this will be better.
Google uses page ranks to sort the results of a search. It doesn't use that information to include or exclude sites. If you search for somthing specific, you'll get a hundred or so links which will then be sorted based upon popularity. What's wrong with that? Google's search is actually pretty advanced with good options and filters. It could be better, but when it comes to real world useage, Google gives me the best results. That simple.
Well, most of it was in german... But yeah, there were a few games on there. SOF II, some movies and the like. The big trouble was they somehow made some 1GB+ files on my comp that I couldn't delete. I don't know how they corrupted the filesystem, but they managed. I had to the a whole drive reformat as microsoft scandisk was worthless. Yet another reason microsoft sux..
While you can talk about all the work that is being put into making Microsoft products secure and bug free all day long, it really is pointless.
Think about the read world. I set up a new box with Windows XP server. I got the new service pack and all the latest patches from windows update. IIS on my box was hacked within 2 weeks. I was hosting a warez ftp that I had no clue about. I don't trust Microsoft worth shit anymore.
I read the patent (#6,525,747)... Again this is somthing that really does not deserve a patent. Many of the patents I see granted these days seem to cover the most basic ideas. It's like someone is thinking "I want my web page and my page alone to look this spcecial way, so I'll patent the layout of my page." After a while A person might have to licence the right to make a page because all the available "layouts" are used...
When I was in high school, I was a member of the "computer repair" team. I ran around the school fixing things for about 2 hours a day. The actuall paid staff came by once every few months and then only if a serious problem occured. If my school had a few linux boxes, the support would cost the same; I or the other students would be the ones doing it. In the end, it would teach some highschool kids a thing or two about linux, and save the school a little cash on software costs. I think it's a great idea.
Also, our school actually did buy a few linux boxes. One or two that would boot off a CD. Nothing to maintain really. ROM bios, boots off a CD. Easy as hell to upgrade! Just pop a new CD in the drive and turn it on! These were ideal for internet stations. Well, that's my two cents.
I keep hearing all this bs about the 4GB limit. I keep hearing how this is what 64 bits will fix. Sure you could have a larger memory with 64 address bits, but that's not all you get! In fact, that's not even half of it.
I wrote a little library that strings together a bunch of unsigned longs. It in effect creates an X-bit system in software for doing precise addition, subtraction, etc. This library would be considerably faster if I could string 64 bit chunks together instead of 32 bit chunks. Does no one on/. ever want to do anything with large numbers? Does no one want to be accurate to more than 32 bits?
What about bitwise actions like XOR, NOR, and NOT. You can now perform these operations on twice as many bits in one clock cycle. I'm not really into encryption, but I think this can speed things up there.
Many OS's (file systems) limit the size of a file to 4GB. This is WAY crazy too small! This again stems from the use of 32 bit numbers. When the adoption of 64 bit machines is complete, this limit will be removed as well. Again, 32 bits isn't just about ram.
I could really go on all day. The point is this: Twice the bits means twice the math getting done in the same amount of time (in some situations). So if a person were to write their code smart to take advantage of it, you would have all around faster code and a larger memory size. Sounds like a nice package to me.
Really, give the 4GB limit a rest. Lets talk about some of the exciting optimizations we can do to our code to get a speed boost!
Well, that's not really my point. Lets suppose, for the sake of example, that I'm one sick motherfucker. I could kill someone with my bare hands and be sent to jail for a while. Now, consider what would happen if I shot him to death. I would be charged with more crimes (not just the murder, but the assault with my "deadly weapon" as well; if I was 17, I'd be charged with illegal posession of a firearm) and sentenced to more jail time accordingly. The same crime was commited, but in my first example (the less painfull for my victim) I would have less time in prison.
That's what my point was. Cyber criminals face more laws for the same actions. Theft isn't theft anymore. It's theft, DMCA violations for bypassing copy prevention (That's what network security is) on copyrighted works, homeland security violations (you're a terrorist you know), if you planned it, conspiring to commit a fellony.... gah, the list goes on.
The lawyers think cyber crimes are being punnished more harshly; this is why. We don't need any more laws. We have too many already thank you.
If I break into someone's house, I'll be charged with breaking and entering, and with trespassing.
If I hack into someone's network and don't even do anything but look around, I'm charged with causing losses of millions. I'm charged with stealing any sensitive content I gained access to whether or not I even looked at it. Not to mention they'll slap all the cybercrime and terrorism laws they can find down on me too. It has nothing to do with the severity of the laws, just that you get pinned with so many of them.
If you would read your page, you would see that it is giving a name to a number of arguments. These arguments / statments are called "slippery slope" statments. Saying that an action would put people in a percarious situation is not false: "This sort of approach starts us down a slipperly slope." A "slippery slope" is a metaphore for a dangerous position. It is not false for the writer of that statment to say he/she feels the approach would put people in said dangerous situation.
Personally, I feel this is entirely the wrong approach. Someone hosts child porn and you just have the ISP block them? I'm pretty sure that in the US hosting a page that contains child porn is illegal... One shouldn't just block them, they should be tried in a court and if found guilty sent to jail. Blocking the site is not the answer at all, especially when you could be taking a legitimate site off the net at the same time.
Call me a wus, but I almost cried when I read this. My father and I used to have some great times building and launching these rockets. It's part of my childhood I'll never forget as it was so speacial to me. I was hoping to share some of the same moments with my kids... I guess I'm a terrorist now.
They know my schedule, my name, address, credit history, SSN (on my passport anyways), my food prefrences, and nationality....
That's just silly. It doesn't matter what they know about me, I could still get myself on a plane and kill all the motherfuckers on it. This makes the flight safer how? Grr..
While this restriction may stop someone who was not otherwise planning an attack from getting an idea, it will IN NO WAY remove potentially harmful information from terrorists. All it takes is common sense and an internet connection to find step by step bomb building instructions. Personnaly I think the US could use an ANTI-Bullshit dept.
Ah, what a great idea. When I sit down to read an article with terms I'm not familliar with, I often do a few google searches to clarify things. That really is a great idea, and I think more sites shouuld adopt it.
How would organic material from earth make it into the center of an object like this? Can the force of the impact explain that some how?
Just want to know : )
Slashdot Mirror
I don't trust any of it. Advertising by the "hip" youth is no better than that created by the corporation. It all looks the same, has the same message, and still smells lame.
I mean, if the URU is just a number or a short character string, what's the point? I might as well ditch the URU and have a password. I think it may even be better to have a passphrase, because then I can have one for each site I do business with, not to mention I can change it easily if I think someone is on to it.
I'm guessing you have to call the URU organization if you want to change your ID. How do they know it's you on the phone? Can't use the URU, then someone could get yours and change it. You'd be screwed. How about by a credit card number? Name? Address? I need those things to verify myself online now. Name + address + ccn = a new URU. So why not just use the name and address system? Seems kinda silly to me.
One could argue that the point of the URU is to have a way to identify yourself without having to give out your name and address. I suppose that's a valid point and think that's all the ID would be good for. But think about it for a second. What sites need the URU? Online stores banks, and auctions for example. They need the name address, and ccn anyways. What about sites like slashdot? I don't want them to have my URU! I would refuse if they asked me. My username and password is all you need to know about me.. thanks. Oh, slashdot won't use my URU execpt to verify it's me? I wouldn't want my URU to be sent out all over the net for somthing that I'm too crazy about protecting (slashdot login).
I don't know. For the average Joe, it might save some time and password resets. For me... It's just a waste of time. I would rather the man spend all this money on somthing worth while.
Here's a link if anyone is too lazy...
t ml
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/display/AM550L.jh
This may be just a little off topic, but the thing is that I always have to go through all my mail by hand to make sure I didn't miss anything important anyways. No anti-spam software out there seems to save me this hassle... So to this day I haven't stuck with any. It doesn't look like this will be better.
Google uses page ranks to sort the results of a search. It doesn't use that information to include or exclude sites. If you search for somthing specific, you'll get a hundred or so links which will then be sorted based upon popularity. What's wrong with that? Google's search is actually pretty advanced with good options and filters. It could be better, but when it comes to real world useage, Google gives me the best results. That simple.
Sorry, I meant Win2k Server. (sp3 if you want to know) I was typing in auto mode, sorry.
Well, most of it was in german... But yeah, there were a few games on there. SOF II, some movies and the like. The big trouble was they somehow made some 1GB+ files on my comp that I couldn't delete. I don't know how they corrupted the filesystem, but they managed. I had to the a whole drive reformat as microsoft scandisk was worthless. Yet another reason microsoft sux..
While you can talk about all the work that is being put into making Microsoft products secure and bug free all day long, it really is pointless.
Think about the read world. I set up a new box with Windows XP server. I got the new service pack and all the latest patches from windows update. IIS on my box was hacked within 2 weeks. I was hosting a warez ftp that I had no clue about. I don't trust Microsoft worth shit anymore.
Did I get a first post?
I read the patent (#6,525,747)... Again this is somthing that really does not deserve a patent. Many of the patents I see granted these days seem to cover the most basic ideas. It's like someone is thinking "I want my web page and my page alone to look this spcecial way, so I'll patent the layout of my page." After a while A person might have to licence the right to make a page because all the available "layouts" are used...
When I was in high school, I was a member of the "computer repair" team. I ran around the school fixing things for about 2 hours a day. The actuall paid staff came by once every few months and then only if a serious problem occured. If my school had a few linux boxes, the support would cost the same; I or the other students would be the ones doing it. In the end, it would teach some highschool kids a thing or two about linux, and save the school a little cash on software costs. I think it's a great idea.
Also, our school actually did buy a few linux boxes. One or two that would boot off a CD. Nothing to maintain really. ROM bios, boots off a CD. Easy as hell to upgrade! Just pop a new CD in the drive and turn it on! These were ideal for internet stations. Well, that's my two cents.
I keep hearing all this bs about the 4GB limit. I keep hearing how this is what 64 bits will fix. Sure you could have a larger memory with 64 address bits, but that's not all you get! In fact, that's not even half of it.
/. ever want to do anything with large numbers? Does no one want to be accurate to more than 32 bits?
I wrote a little library that strings together a bunch of unsigned longs. It in effect creates an X-bit system in software for doing precise addition, subtraction, etc. This library would be considerably faster if I could string 64 bit chunks together instead of 32 bit chunks. Does no one on
What about bitwise actions like XOR, NOR, and NOT. You can now perform these operations on twice as many bits in one clock cycle. I'm not really into encryption, but I think this can speed things up there.
Many OS's (file systems) limit the size of a file to 4GB. This is WAY crazy too small! This again stems from the use of 32 bit numbers. When the adoption of 64 bit machines is complete, this limit will be removed as well. Again, 32 bits isn't just about ram.
I could really go on all day. The point is this: Twice the bits means twice the math getting done in the same amount of time (in some situations). So if a person were to write their code smart to take advantage of it, you would have all around faster code and a larger memory size. Sounds like a nice package to me.
Really, give the 4GB limit a rest. Lets talk about some of the exciting optimizations we can do to our code to get a speed boost!
We can only hope against hope that they won't suck.
That's what I'm thinking... They never seem to get these kind of things quite right...
Well, that's not really my point. Lets suppose, for the sake of example, that I'm one sick motherfucker. I could kill someone with my bare hands and be sent to jail for a while. Now, consider what would happen if I shot him to death. I would be charged with more crimes (not just the murder, but the assault with my "deadly weapon" as well; if I was 17, I'd be charged with illegal posession of a firearm) and sentenced to more jail time accordingly. The same crime was commited, but in my first example (the less painfull for my victim) I would have less time in prison.
That's what my point was. Cyber criminals face more laws for the same actions. Theft isn't theft anymore. It's theft, DMCA violations for bypassing copy prevention (That's what network security is) on copyrighted works, homeland security violations (you're a terrorist you know), if you planned it, conspiring to commit a fellony.... gah, the list goes on.
The lawyers think cyber crimes are being punnished more harshly; this is why. We don't need any more laws. We have too many already thank you.
If I break into someone's house, I'll be charged with breaking and entering, and with trespassing.
If I hack into someone's network and don't even do anything but look around, I'm charged with causing losses of millions. I'm charged with stealing any sensitive content I gained access to whether or not I even looked at it. Not to mention they'll slap all the cybercrime and terrorism laws they can find down on me too. It has nothing to do with the severity of the laws, just that you get pinned with so many of them.
Read the page pointed to by your own damn link.
If you would read your page, you would see that it is giving a name to a number of arguments. These arguments / statments are called "slippery slope" statments. Saying that an action would put people in a percarious situation is not false: "This sort of approach starts us down a slipperly slope." A "slippery slope" is a metaphore for a dangerous position. It is not false for the writer of that statment to say he/she feels the approach would put people in said dangerous situation.
Personally, I feel this is entirely the wrong approach. Someone hosts child porn and you just have the ISP block them? I'm pretty sure that in the US hosting a page that contains child porn is illegal... One shouldn't just block them, they should be tried in a court and if found guilty sent to jail. Blocking the site is not the answer at all, especially when you could be taking a legitimate site off the net at the same time.
Call me a wus, but I almost cried when I read this. My father and I used to have some great times building and launching these rockets. It's part of my childhood I'll never forget as it was so speacial to me. I was hoping to share some of the same moments with my kids... I guess I'm a terrorist now.
They know my schedule, my name, address, credit history, SSN (on my passport anyways), my food prefrences, and nationality....
That's just silly. It doesn't matter what they know about me, I could still get myself on a plane and kill all the motherfuckers on it. This makes the flight safer how? Grr..
> while(reading_slashdot){++nerdiness;--social_life }
:smiles:
Much better :)
could be better:
while(reading_slashdot) ++nerdiness, --social_life;
While this restriction may stop someone who was not otherwise planning an attack from getting an idea, it will IN NO WAY remove potentially harmful information from terrorists. All it takes is common sense and an internet connection to find step by step bomb building instructions. Personnaly I think the US could use an ANTI-Bullshit dept.
How much will it cost the RIAA and MPAA to send out all these letters? How much money will they save/make by stopping the "theft"?
Ah, what a great idea. When I sit down to read an article with terms I'm not familliar with, I often do a few google searches to clarify things. That really is a great idea, and I think more sites shouuld adopt it.
How would organic material from earth make it into the center of an object like this? Can the force of the impact explain that some how? Just want to know : )