My product reflects the world : it can give you a precise solar time. Local time is a purely artificial human legal invention that reflects LESS the world with DST than without. But that's ok, I am not complaining about the additional complexity because of the additional work it gives me. I charge $$$/day anyway and I love complex problems. I am just saying that this nonsense is wasting money and is making it necessary to increase machines that could be simpler if not for this artificial dogma.
A bit like China that refuses any product that contains a map indicating Taiwan as a country. It is silly but computer are powerful enough machines to account for such childish demands.
Another way to fight against copyright : let greed go to increased and increased madness, let them copyright ideas, let them copyright words. Then new works will be impossible to copyright, they will have to be released anonymous and for free. Let the world without copyright come from the greed of right holders (or grand-grand-children of copyright holders)
I have yet to see one single study that finds economical benefits in using DST. Actually, in the programmers' world, we see a lot of systems costing more because of this : Because DST regulations change almost every year (and I am not talking about leap seconds) the only away to have an accurate local time on a device is to have either regular maintenance or to link the device on internet to receive updates (and add some work to ensure the security of this, which can cost a lot on critical systems). I wish politician computed this cost. They manages to make the simple task of telling the local time too hard for a computer to compute on its own. That is really an achievement on their part.
I may add that while Phalanx turrets have had some success at intercepting some anti-ship missiles, the worries comes exactly from the kind of missiles described : a ballistic missile. As a reminder, "ballistic" means that the missile is just falling down. You can destroy its guidance systems, engines, etc... without changing its trajectory. It is basically several tons of metal and explosives falling down on the ship.
Recent missiles have the ability to escape detection until close range (by staying close to the sea) and make a very quick manoeuver (turn 90 degrees up in a very tight turn) so as to go ballistic just a few seconds after the anti-missile system has had a chace to detect it. This is your interception window, bullets and missiles are too slow to be effective in these conditions, laser is your only chance. You have to destroy guidance systems during the stealth-to-ballistic manoeuver.
Well, feel free to link on your thesis. The fact that there are missiles that can escape detection until very close range and switch into ballistic mode before even bullets can reach them seems like good things to be worried about.
Even before reading about it I personally was more worried about the possibility to overwhelm a ship's anti-missile defenses with thousands of missiles/decoys at the same time. If you can sink a ship with a missile budget that is 1/10th of the ship's cost, the ships becomes actually a standing target.
So please tell us what possible ways of escaping a ballistic missile have US navy ships ?
This is very interesting and I think the point is not to shoot down ICBMs but to shoot down anti-ship missiles. Right now, there are simply no way to stop a recent missile before it gets to the ship. Aircraft carriers are currently little more than overpriced targets. This kind of research is vital to the navy.
Emphasize mine. Looks to me like the exchange is getting the flack for a couple of amateurish (or saboteurish?) vendors.
So you mean they asked their vendors to change a communication protocol and never tested before day 1 ? Honestly, that not how you test such a development. Sure, one can blame vendors for not correctly implementing a spec, but this is regular, expectable error in the software world. The real mistake is the lack of a test with the various sources.
Actually on of the Egyptian's ISP stood up, giving internet access to ~6% of Egyptians during the blackout. Someone there probably understood exactly that.
...by blocking DNS. If you have the website address and a decent DNS cache/mirror, the website is still working.
Right now governments think that you shut down a website by removing DNS entries, but on a news for nerds weblog, we should know better than that, shan't we ?
When you say "bulldozing people's homes", by people you mean the family of suicide bombers whom encourage their children to carry out suicide attacks for large cash payments?
Yep, those. They would have encouraged their children to go to the regular army (and get paid to risk their life killing other countries citizens) like any patriotic citizen of a free country but their country is forbidden to have a regular army.
And when you say "Attacking schools with helicopter gunships when the children are outside playing" by 'outside playing', did you perchance mean to say 'playing human shield for the Hezbollah terrorists with mortars and rocket launchers'?
Yep, those. Because children being used as human shields does not make them ethical targets to shoot at. It is considered bad practice to shoot hostages down to kill the terrorists.
Arrive late with a name like Nokia and their reputation for reliability ? We have seen worse situations.
Late means that they can learn from the mistakes of their competitors and have a mature product from the beginning.
On the other hand, there are several languages that forbid the direct manipulation of pointers and make it impossible to have out-of-bounds calls without crashing.
Buffer overflows are really linked to low-level languages (which I include C++ in, which is debattable I agree).
It describes an attack on BGP routers. From its abstract (that could be the f***ing summary of an article of a "news for nerds" website):
Through simulations we show that
botnets on the order of 250, 000 nodes can increase process-
ing delays from orders of microseconds to orders of hours.
But also what sensationalist newspaper will NEVER publish short of death threaths:
We also propose and validate a defense against CXPST.
Through simulation we demonstrate that current defenses
are insufficient to stop CXPST. We propose an alternative,
low cost, defense that is successful against CXPST, even if
only the top 10% of Autonomous Systems by degree deploy
it. Additionally, we consider more long term defenses that
stop not only CXPST, but similar attacks as well.
Maybe there could be some arguing about the definition of a "PC". From the wording, ti makes it clear that it is the number of computer running windows that is to be considered. I am pretty sure that one could argue that "linux computer" != "PC as defined in the Microsoft contract"
When you are in a company that forces you to write DRMs, but that shamelessly pirate other softwares or integrate GPL code without mentioning it, I can see why employees would report them.
Conspiracy is when some people secretly agree on a plan of action, usually against some other people.
Assange's essay about that was taking as a basic assumption that we don't want that, that it is dangerous and that by making them harder to form, the world would become a better place.
The recipe is intuitively known to politician since ages. All you have to do is put together sentences that are grammatically correct and that put close to each others words that you want people to make an association between. "Freedom" and "intervention", "islamic" and "terrorism", "surgical" and "strike".
Of course, logic is irrelevant in those sentences. Better : if they are illogically irrelevant, your adversaries will be tempted to expose the fallacy, which is usually done thanks to long sentences that will make it hard to use the same trick.
Slashdot Mirror
My product reflects the world : it can give you a precise solar time. Local time is a purely artificial human legal invention that reflects LESS the world with DST than without. But that's ok, I am not complaining about the additional complexity because of the additional work it gives me. I charge $$$/day anyway and I love complex problems. I am just saying that this nonsense is wasting money and is making it necessary to increase machines that could be simpler if not for this artificial dogma.
A bit like China that refuses any product that contains a map indicating Taiwan as a country. It is silly but computer are powerful enough machines to account for such childish demands.
Where's the benefit to society from that?
Benefit : you get this new work for free.
Another way to fight against copyright : let greed go to increased and increased madness, let them copyright ideas, let them copyright words. Then new works will be impossible to copyright, they will have to be released anonymous and for free. Let the world without copyright come from the greed of right holders (or grand-grand-children of copyright holders)
I am on about making a device that accomodates for DST on every timezone. UK changes every 40 years ? Fine. How many countries have DST do you think ?
I have yet to see one single study that finds economical benefits in using DST. Actually, in the programmers' world, we see a lot of systems costing more because of this : Because DST regulations change almost every year (and I am not talking about leap seconds) the only away to have an accurate local time on a device is to have either regular maintenance or to link the device on internet to receive updates (and add some work to ensure the security of this, which can cost a lot on critical systems). I wish politician computed this cost. They manages to make the simple task of telling the local time too hard for a computer to compute on its own. That is really an achievement on their part.
I may add that while Phalanx turrets have had some success at intercepting some anti-ship missiles, the worries comes exactly from the kind of missiles described : a ballistic missile. As a reminder, "ballistic" means that the missile is just falling down. You can destroy its guidance systems, engines, etc... without changing its trajectory. It is basically several tons of metal and explosives falling down on the ship.
Recent missiles have the ability to escape detection until close range (by staying close to the sea) and make a very quick manoeuver (turn 90 degrees up in a very tight turn) so as to go ballistic just a few seconds after the anti-missile system has had a chace to detect it. This is your interception window, bullets and missiles are too slow to be effective in these conditions, laser is your only chance. You have to destroy guidance systems during the stealth-to-ballistic manoeuver.
Well, feel free to link on your thesis. The fact that there are missiles that can escape detection until very close range and switch into ballistic mode before even bullets can reach them seems like good things to be worried about.
Even before reading about it I personally was more worried about the possibility to overwhelm a ship's anti-missile defenses with thousands of missiles/decoys at the same time. If you can sink a ship with a missile budget that is 1/10th of the ship's cost, the ships becomes actually a standing target.
So please tell us what possible ways of escaping a ballistic missile have US navy ships ?
Why post that on slashdot ? It is dead since digg appeared.
Readers are only part of the problem. Encoders is another. Do be just a consumer, also be a producer.
This is very interesting and I think the point is not to shoot down ICBMs but to shoot down anti-ship missiles. Right now, there are simply no way to stop a recent missile before it gets to the ship. Aircraft carriers are currently little more than overpriced targets. This kind of research is vital to the navy.
Emphasize mine. Looks to me like the exchange is getting the flack for a couple of amateurish (or saboteurish?) vendors.
So you mean they asked their vendors to change a communication protocol and never tested before day 1 ? Honestly, that not how you test such a development. Sure, one can blame vendors for not correctly implementing a spec, but this is regular, expectable error in the software world. The real mistake is the lack of a test with the various sources.
Actually, when I first so the report of these on twitter, they said "Libya's internet has been mubaraked".
http://randomoverload.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/952ec538fb11b141.jpg.jpg
Wouldn't praying for them in a spirit of love work better?
You mean it would stop them from being assholes at the funerals of homosexuals ? How exactly would it achieve that ?
I think the idea is to overwhelm the target websites with love.
Something like 100,000 kind prayers a second.
Actually on of the Egyptian's ISP stood up, giving internet access to ~6% of Egyptians during the blackout. Someone there probably understood exactly that.
...by blocking DNS. If you have the website address and a decent DNS cache/mirror, the website is still working. Right now governments think that you shut down a website by removing DNS entries, but on a news for nerds weblog, we should know better than that, shan't we ?
Has anyone ever been tried for running a home server ?
When you say "bulldozing people's homes", by people you mean the family of suicide bombers whom encourage their children to carry out suicide attacks for large cash payments?
Yep, those. They would have encouraged their children to go to the regular army (and get paid to risk their life killing other countries citizens) like any patriotic citizen of a free country but their country is forbidden to have a regular army.
And when you say "Attacking schools with helicopter gunships when the children are outside playing" by 'outside playing', did you perchance mean to say 'playing human shield for the Hezbollah terrorists with mortars and rocket launchers'?
Yep, those. Because children being used as human shields does not make them ethical targets to shoot at. It is considered bad practice to shoot hostages down to kill the terrorists.
Arrive late with a name like Nokia and their reputation for reliability ? We have seen worse situations.
Late means that they can learn from the mistakes of their competitors and have a mature product from the beginning.
On the other hand, there are several languages that forbid the direct manipulation of pointers and make it impossible to have out-of-bounds calls without crashing.
Buffer overflows are really linked to low-level languages (which I include C++ in, which is debattable I agree).
The paper making this madness appear on the news is apparently this one : http://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~schuch/papers/lci-ndss.pdf
It describes an attack on BGP routers. From its abstract (that could be the f***ing summary of an article of a "news for nerds" website)
Through simulations we show that botnets on the order of 250, 000 nodes can increase process- ing delays from orders of microseconds to orders of hours.
But also what sensationalist newspaper will NEVER publish short of death threaths :
We also propose and validate a defense against CXPST. Through simulation we demonstrate that current defenses are insufficient to stop CXPST. We propose an alternative, low cost, defense that is successful against CXPST, even if only the top 10% of Autonomous Systems by degree deploy it. Additionally, we consider more long term defenses that stop not only CXPST, but similar attacks as well.
Maybe there could be some arguing about the definition of a "PC". From the wording, ti makes it clear that it is the number of computer running windows that is to be considered. I am pretty sure that one could argue that "linux computer" != "PC as defined in the Microsoft contract"
When you are in a company that forces you to write DRMs, but that shamelessly pirate other softwares or integrate GPL code without mentioning it, I can see why employees would report them.
Say it once. Say it twice. Say it many times, until they ask "what the hell ? WHO is repeating this ?"
Conspiracy is when some people secretly agree on a plan of action, usually against some other people.
Assange's essay about that was taking as a basic assumption that we don't want that, that it is dangerous and that by making them harder to form, the world would become a better place.
The recipe is intuitively known to politician since ages. All you have to do is put together sentences that are grammatically correct and that put close to each others words that you want people to make an association between. "Freedom" and "intervention", "islamic" and "terrorism", "surgical" and "strike".
Of course, logic is irrelevant in those sentences. Better : if they are illogically irrelevant, your adversaries will be tempted to expose the fallacy, which is usually done thanks to long sentences that will make it hard to use the same trick.