If some hacker manages to steal one million dollars from a Mexican drug gang, they would probably have to pay another hacker to track down who did it. The person they hire can finger someone in China, probably pick some script kiddie as a target. The drug gang can then hire someone in China to kill that person. But then they would never know if they really did it or not. I'm guessing that it is not practical to hire someone to get the hacker to return the money, seems too easy to keep it for themselves and claim that the target wouldn't cooperate and that he got hit by a car when they were chasing him. Seems like they are just going to lose even more money.
I would think that if a hacker stole money from one of their bank accounts, it would be simpler for them to hold the bank responsible, and if the bank did not give them their money back, they would have some way of convincing them to change their minds. There are plenty of easy targets for them. Let the banks deal with the hackers, they're the ones who made it possible.
If they were afraid of getting caught, they wouldn't be going after most of the targets they have hit already. They have already angered government agencies that probably have a much better chance of tracking them down. They'll probably have to trespass on someone else's turf to even touch them.
They don't have the skills to even handle such a task. They would probably have to hire someone to do it for them, and that person would probably just frame some random hacker, how would they know?
The problem with Solaris zones is that a kernel panic takes everything down. They have a lot less overhead than a hyperviser solution, but the cost is stability. I first hated Solaris zones when a ZFS filesystem caused a kernel panic and brought all of the zones down. Then, through the miracle of Solaris Cluster, it was brought up on another machine and when the ZFS filesystem was imported, another kernel panic and all of those zones went down as well!
It's not the OS that failed, it's the applications. Different applications want the system settings changed to what they think is best, and you can't make them all happy. Granted, it should be possible, but today's application developers can be total idiots who have an egocentric view of the OS. I have Oracle support telling us we should increase the maxuproc to 16384, when it's obvious that the system will die long before that many oracle processes are running, which is defeating the purpose of maxuproc. "It's good practice", no it's not you checklist jockey. Networking settings are hard to set globally for everyone. You would think that any decent application would use setsockopt, but not too many do.
Another problem is applying patches. If you have too many applications running in the same virtual machine, forget about finding a common window to apply them. A lot of vendors aren't that quick about supporting the OS at the latest patch level, you can even have multiple applications that can't run on the same version of Linux or AIX because one requires the latest version and another hasn't been certified on the latest so they still only support a much older version.
Disciplining a child with autism in way that doesn't take into account that the child has autism and doesn't understand that they did something wrong, is abuse. You should try to understand the nature of the problem and to do that you would have to acknowledge that autism is an actual neurological disorder, and not a "fad in personality disorders".
The poster was obviously an uneducated person who has little respect for "engineers", "psychologists", and 'professionals "who know better"'.
Looking at this quote.
The non engineering parents with the lower rates of autism usually don't bother with taking the child to the doctor because they don't see a need for it, they realize that kids will be kids and they use a modicum of discipline to address the behavior issue.
They make it clear that they think that "non-engineering" parents understand children better. They stated "they realize that kids will be kids", which implies that they think this is the obviously correct answer. Then they state that the solution was " a modicum of discipline to address the behavior issue." Now, keep in mind that we are not talking about your standard "temper tantrum" or "not wanting to go to bed" behavioral issues. This person obviously doesn't respect the existence of neurological disorders and thinks they are "made up disorders".
Do you think discipline can cure a neurological disorder?
I agree. Most people don't realize that a proper OS shouldn't need virtualization for security. They're basically saying that it's impossible to make an OS secure, and then they create a solution that is really an OS that can run other OSes. Except this OS is "different".
I can understand virtualization being used to consolidate multiple servers onto larger servers, you can use less network adapters and even aggregate them, decrease the network cabling/switch infrastructure. You can have multiple megaservers and move virtual servers to balance workloads or to recover from hardware failures or to migrate from old hardware to new. Essentially, you're replacing bulky infrastructure with chips.
But to use for security? That's as lame as installing anti-virus software because you know your OS can't handle security. And since Mcafee is in favor of this, I'm sure it's a scam to get companies to pay for yet another layer that can cause system problems that nobody can figure out.
If you think that treating neurological or psychiatric disorders in children is just a matter of discipline, then you're mistaken. Eventually you are going to realize it's not working and either admit that you were wrong and seek professional help for your children or you can get frustrated and start upping the discipline until you cause physical and/or mental damage. There are a lot of children with autism/depression/adhd/dyslexia that have ended up hurt and in the hospital because their parents were too incompetent to realize they were out of their league.
Most parents today, especially those in a "professional" capacity, will rarely discpline their kids or even act like parents at all, most cases of autism I have dealt with are merely children acting out because the boundaries are not clearly defined by their parents and the parents not having any fucking clue what to do with the kids.
Obviously, they don't spend enough time drinking moonshine and beating their kinds until they behave properly. You know what else works? Beating them until their grades improve! Put enough spikes in that paddle and they'll be getting a straight A average, damn betcha!! You can't beat them to be better looking though, my daddy damn near killed me trying, actually made me even uglier! But I is damn smart now, thanks to my beatings!
Are you depressed? Come here! I'll give you something to be depressed about! I'll whup that depression out of ya. You're autistic and won't talk? I'll get ya talking! You'll be screaming the ABCs when I'm done with you! I'll smack you around until you're a properly behaving genius like I is! You betch yah!
If they're stupid enough to use Windows, why should we expect them to be smart about anything else? I was hoping the military would be more sensible than to use an OS with a history of security issues. It's only a matter of time before terrorists manage to hit us with our own weapons. It's pretty pathetic when we grow up in a computer centric culture and yet we allow people without adequate computer knowledge manage IT in the military as well as companies.
Networking engineers tend to be fairly braindead. They seem to think that as long as their switches are up and you can ping a server, it can't be a problem with the network. This seems to be universal.
But that's just a computer-generated illusion, not a reflection of reality.
Technically, any picture you take with a digital camera is just a "computer-generated illusion", even in raw format. It's not reality. It's a programmer's interpretation of the data from camera's sensors. The camera's sensors detect a different range of light than the human eye, filters are used to try to keep it within the human range. And when you view the picture, what are you going to use to view it with so that the picture is displayed in it's truest form?
Even the images you see with your own eyes are subject to the way your brain handles the data from your organic optical sensors. And then there's the issue with how your brain handles storage of that image. When you view a picture on your monitor, there's probably at least three levels of virtualization separating you from reality.
You'll go crazy trying to record reality, and eventually you'll find it's overrated.
And who do you think is going to maintain those automated defenses? It's not like the aristocracy are technical geniuses. They'll need to pay their weapons admins a lot of money, otherwise those weapons might suddenly self destruct. And if they don't figure out how to hire highly qualified people, instead of losing money, they'll lose their heads.
Cool-to-be-dumb? Too late, that ship has sailed. Why else do they make fun of the smarter kids calling them nerds, eggheads, computer geeks, poindexter, etc.
If the kids who scored better on the tests got rewarded enough, then maybe it would be cool to be smart. There are many kids who could do better, but studying is not as cool as smoking dope and drinking beers and going to wild parties.
Maybe they shouldn't even be using MS Word. There's a lot of silly ways one could leave information in a document after they thought they removed it. And even if they did everything correctly, a bug in MS Word could still leave it in. Oops, don't worry, just apply this update and that problem won't happen again.
Are you saying it's possible to "honestly" earn $20 million/ year? Are CEOs 200 times smarter than an engineer or are they 500 times stronger than the laborers? People who earn that kind of money do it at the expense of other workers salary. They resist giving workers decent raises and take the difference for themselves and then they rationalize that they are special and deserve to make that much money.
Personally, I'm sick of special people! Tax em till it hurts, maybe they'll have to give up one of their insanely expensive yachts or maybe they'll have to give up one of their private jets. They're not buying a million toasters or 100,000 televisions, they don't need to earn more money than 10 families. The people who work just as hard should be able to spend money too and they can't when these special crooks hoard all the money for themselves and then whine whenever someone wants to tax them more.
What really kills me is that if the government is going to pull a set amount of money from the people, and the poor can't pay much in taxes, and the rich find loopholes to pay less taxes, then that means the middleclass have to pay the difference. So...., should we squeeze even more money from the middleclass, or should we get more money from the rich? When the middleclass can barely make ends meet, do you think they are going to help the economy by running out and purchase lots of product?
Please name one example from the last 20 years where a "little guy" invented something, patented it, and made a fortune.
If I can go back further than 20 years, Bette Nesmith Graham and "Liquid Paper".
I agree that Branding/Trademarks are important, I often make my decisions based on the Brand because I want quality. But that also might mean that the larger company that has a good reputation for high quality products can profit from someone else's idea, people might prefer the larger company's product, it might even be better.
Another factor regarding copying someone else's idea is that even if reverse-engineering cost as much as inventing the idea, there's still the case that the copycat can choose to only reverse-engineer the ideas/products that sell. Also, corporate espionage/bribery will probably increase. This could be cheaper than reverse-engineering and if patents aren't an issue, it will be easier to use the stolen ideas. Also, some ideas are very hard to discover, but easy to copy. For example, optimal shape for a car so that it is aerodynamic or maybe the shape of a propeller.
I agree that the current patent system sucks, but it seems like we should be able to make it better. I do not think you should be able to patent "Math". Also, if an eight year old can work it out, it shouldn't be patentable.
The more innovative the longer it will take to reverse engineer and ramp up production. There is no need for a legal monopoly. If you bring a super cool product to market you have a limited time in which you can sell at a premium before your competition can take those ideas and build it cheaper.
Let's make it legal for China to reverse engineer other people's ideas and then use slave labor to pump out cheap knockoffs at a much lower price. You can enjoy your couple of weeks monopoly, then close shop and work on your next idea.
The best part is that all of the risks are taken by the inventor. The copycats can wait and see if the idea is any good, and if it is, they can use it themselves to make a huge profit! If a big company comes up with a new idea and uses cheap labor to mass produce it, I don't see how the the little guy can compete by reverse engineering and copying it, but I can see how a big company can steal the little guy's idea then copy it and drive him out of business.
Did it occur to you that with missiles, you can't say, "It was an accident."
This is exactly what I was thinking of. If they accidentally landed it on the United States, they would claim oops, and nobody else would stand up to them.
1 It is the responsibility of the Father to A support his children B keep his [redacted} fly shut PERIOD
I think it has been repeatedly proven that a lot of potential father and mothers cannot be expected to act responsibly when it comes to procreation. To not acknowledge this fact would irresponsible in itself.
My problem with the "Conservative Mindset" is that they tend to be against all forms of birth control and instead preach abstinence as a way of preventing unwanted pregnancies. To actually believe that teenagers have full control while experiencing the peak of hormones that they have only a few years experience with is irresponsible. They want to set people up to fail with their short sighted doctrines, and then when the expected mistake happens, they place all the blame on the teenagers without taking any of the blame themselves. I'm not saying that the teenagers are blameless, but if it was possible to neutralize their hormones before they went out on a date, I'm guessing they might have a better chance.
If the Conservatives are incapable of taking responsibly for the end result of the laws they want to impose on others, then why should the victims of their laws be considered responsible for the end result? I would love to see the Conservatives(and only the Conservatives) forced to pay for all child care/education/etc. If they can handle paying for what they wanted, I would respect them a lot more.
Slashdot Mirror
Government agencies are at least suppose to work within the law. Criminals have no such restrictions.
They also have intelligence agencies that employ espionage agents in other countries, and those agents do not follow the law.
If some hacker manages to steal one million dollars from a Mexican drug gang, they would probably have to pay another hacker to track down who did it. The person they hire can finger someone in China, probably pick some script kiddie as a target. The drug gang can then hire someone in China to kill that person. But then they would never know if they really did it or not. I'm guessing that it is not practical to hire someone to get the hacker to return the money, seems too easy to keep it for themselves and claim that the target wouldn't cooperate and that he got hit by a car when they were chasing him. Seems like they are just going to lose even more money.
I would think that if a hacker stole money from one of their bank accounts, it would be simpler for them to hold the bank responsible, and if the bank did not give them their money back, they would have some way of convincing them to change their minds. There are plenty of easy targets for them. Let the banks deal with the hackers, they're the ones who made it possible.
If they were afraid of getting caught, they wouldn't be going after most of the targets they have hit already. They have already angered government agencies that probably have a much better chance of tracking them down. They'll probably have to trespass on someone else's turf to even touch them.
They don't have the skills to even handle such a task. They would probably have to hire someone to do it for them, and that person would probably just frame some random hacker, how would they know?
X server runs as root because it needs to directly access your video hardware.
The problem with Solaris zones is that a kernel panic takes everything down. They have a lot less overhead than a hyperviser solution, but the cost is stability. I first hated Solaris zones when a ZFS filesystem caused a kernel panic and brought all of the zones down. Then, through the miracle of Solaris Cluster, it was brought up on another machine and when the ZFS filesystem was imported, another kernel panic and all of those zones went down as well!
It's not the OS that failed, it's the applications. Different applications want the system settings changed to what they think is best, and you can't make them all happy. Granted, it should be possible, but today's application developers can be total idiots who have an egocentric view of the OS. I have Oracle support telling us we should increase the maxuproc to 16384, when it's obvious that the system will die long before that many oracle processes are running, which is defeating the purpose of maxuproc. "It's good practice", no it's not you checklist jockey. Networking settings are hard to set globally for everyone. You would think that any decent application would use setsockopt, but not too many do.
Another problem is applying patches. If you have too many applications running in the same virtual machine, forget about finding a common window to apply them. A lot of vendors aren't that quick about supporting the OS at the latest patch level, you can even have multiple applications that can't run on the same version of Linux or AIX because one requires the latest version and another hasn't been certified on the latest so they still only support a much older version.
Disciplining a child with autism in way that doesn't take into account that the child has autism and doesn't understand that they did something wrong, is abuse. You should try to understand the nature of the problem and to do that you would have to acknowledge that autism is an actual neurological disorder, and not a "fad in personality disorders".
The poster was obviously an uneducated person who has little respect for "engineers", "psychologists", and 'professionals "who know better"'.
Looking at this quote.
The non engineering parents with the lower rates of autism usually don't bother with taking the child to the doctor because they don't see a need for it, they realize that kids will be kids and they use a modicum of discipline to address the behavior issue.
They make it clear that they think that "non-engineering" parents understand children better. They stated "they realize that kids will be kids", which implies that they think this is the obviously correct answer. Then they state that the solution was " a modicum of discipline to address the behavior issue." Now, keep in mind that we are not talking about your standard "temper tantrum" or "not wanting to go to bed" behavioral issues. This person obviously doesn't respect the existence of neurological disorders and thinks they are "made up disorders".
Do you think discipline can cure a neurological disorder?
I agree. Most people don't realize that a proper OS shouldn't need virtualization for security. They're basically saying that it's impossible to make an OS secure, and then they create a solution that is really an OS that can run other OSes. Except this OS is "different".
I can understand virtualization being used to consolidate multiple servers onto larger servers, you can use less network adapters and even aggregate them, decrease the network cabling/switch infrastructure. You can have multiple megaservers and move virtual servers to balance workloads or to recover from hardware failures or to migrate from old hardware to new. Essentially, you're replacing bulky infrastructure with chips.
But to use for security? That's as lame as installing anti-virus software because you know your OS can't handle security. And since Mcafee is in favor of this, I'm sure it's a scam to get companies to pay for yet another layer that can cause system problems that nobody can figure out.
If you think that treating neurological or psychiatric disorders in children is just a matter of discipline, then you're mistaken. Eventually you are going to realize it's not working and either admit that you were wrong and seek professional help for your children or you can get frustrated and start upping the discipline until you cause physical and/or mental damage. There are a lot of children with autism/depression/adhd/dyslexia that have ended up hurt and in the hospital because their parents were too incompetent to realize they were out of their league.
And how do you mistaken autism for "acting up"?
Most parents today, especially those in a "professional" capacity, will rarely discpline their kids or even act like parents at all, most cases of autism I have dealt with are merely children acting out because the boundaries are not clearly defined by their parents and the parents not having any fucking clue what to do with the kids.
Obviously, they don't spend enough time drinking moonshine and beating their kinds until they behave properly. You know what else works? Beating them until their grades improve! Put enough spikes in that paddle and they'll be getting a straight A average, damn betcha!! You can't beat them to be better looking though, my daddy damn near killed me trying, actually made me even uglier! But I is damn smart now, thanks to my beatings!
Are you depressed? Come here! I'll give you something to be depressed about! I'll whup that depression out of ya. You're autistic and won't talk? I'll get ya talking! You'll be screaming the ABCs when I'm done with you! I'll smack you around until you're a properly behaving genius like I is! You betch yah!
If they're stupid enough to use Windows, why should we expect them to be smart about anything else? I was hoping the military would be more sensible than to use an OS with a history of security issues. It's only a matter of time before terrorists manage to hit us with our own weapons. It's pretty pathetic when we grow up in a computer centric culture and yet we allow people without adequate computer knowledge manage IT in the military as well as companies.
Networking engineers tend to be fairly braindead. They seem to think that as long as their switches are up and you can ping a server, it can't be a problem with the network. This seems to be universal.
But that's just a computer-generated illusion, not a reflection of reality.
Technically, any picture you take with a digital camera is just a "computer-generated illusion", even in raw format. It's not reality. It's a programmer's interpretation of the data from camera's sensors. The camera's sensors detect a different range of light than the human eye, filters are used to try to keep it within the human range. And when you view the picture, what are you going to use to view it with so that the picture is displayed in it's truest form?
Even the images you see with your own eyes are subject to the way your brain handles the data from your organic optical sensors. And then there's the issue with how your brain handles storage of that image. When you view a picture on your monitor, there's probably at least three levels of virtualization separating you from reality.
You'll go crazy trying to record reality, and eventually you'll find it's overrated.
And who do you think is going to maintain those automated defenses? It's not like the aristocracy are technical geniuses. They'll need to pay their weapons admins a lot of money, otherwise those weapons might suddenly self destruct. And if they don't figure out how to hire highly qualified people, instead of losing money, they'll lose their heads.
Cool-to-be-dumb? Too late, that ship has sailed. Why else do they make fun of the smarter kids calling them nerds, eggheads, computer geeks, poindexter, etc.
If the kids who scored better on the tests got rewarded enough, then maybe it would be cool to be smart. There are many kids who could do better, but studying is not as cool as smoking dope and drinking beers and going to wild parties.
Maybe they shouldn't even be using MS Word. There's a lot of silly ways one could leave information in a document after they thought they removed it. And even if they did everything correctly, a bug in MS Word could still leave it in. Oops, don't worry, just apply this update and that problem won't happen again.
Are you saying it's possible to "honestly" earn $20 million/ year? Are CEOs 200 times smarter than an engineer or are they 500 times stronger than the laborers? People who earn that kind of money do it at the expense of other workers salary. They resist giving workers decent raises and take the difference for themselves and then they rationalize that they are special and deserve to make that much money.
Personally, I'm sick of special people! Tax em till it hurts, maybe they'll have to give up one of their insanely expensive yachts or maybe they'll have to give up one of their private jets. They're not buying a million toasters or 100,000 televisions, they don't need to earn more money than 10 families. The people who work just as hard should be able to spend money too and they can't when these special crooks hoard all the money for themselves and then whine whenever someone wants to tax them more.
What really kills me is that if the government is going to pull a set amount of money from the people, and the poor can't pay much in taxes, and the rich find loopholes to pay less taxes, then that means the middleclass have to pay the difference. So...., should we squeeze even more money from the middleclass, or should we get more money from the rich? When the middleclass can barely make ends meet, do you think they are going to help the economy by running out and purchase lots of product?
OS? I'm guessing he's planning to run Emacs on it. It should be just enough to get it working and a web browser at the same time.
Unless emacs was your web browser :)
Please name one example from the last 20 years where a "little guy" invented something, patented it, and made a fortune.
If I can go back further than 20 years, Bette Nesmith Graham and "Liquid Paper".
I agree that Branding/Trademarks are important, I often make my decisions based on the Brand because I want quality. But that also might mean that the larger company that has a good reputation for high quality products can profit from someone else's idea, people might prefer the larger company's product, it might even be better.
Another factor regarding copying someone else's idea is that even if reverse-engineering cost as much as inventing the idea, there's still the case that the copycat can choose to only reverse-engineer the ideas/products that sell. Also, corporate espionage/bribery will probably increase. This could be cheaper than reverse-engineering and if patents aren't an issue, it will be easier to use the stolen ideas. Also, some ideas are very hard to discover, but easy to copy. For example, optimal shape for a car so that it is aerodynamic or maybe the shape of a propeller.
I agree that the current patent system sucks, but it seems like we should be able to make it better. I do not think you should be able to patent "Math". Also, if an eight year old can work it out, it shouldn't be patentable.
The more innovative the longer it will take to reverse engineer and ramp up production. There is no need for a legal monopoly. If you bring a super cool product to market you have a limited time in which you can sell at a premium before your competition can take those ideas and build it cheaper.
Let's make it legal for China to reverse engineer other people's ideas and then use slave labor to pump out cheap knockoffs at a much lower price. You can enjoy your couple of weeks monopoly, then close shop and work on your next idea.
The best part is that all of the risks are taken by the inventor. The copycats can wait and see if the idea is any good, and if it is, they can use it themselves to make a huge profit! If a big company comes up with a new idea and uses cheap labor to mass produce it, I don't see how the the little guy can compete by reverse engineering and copying it, but I can see how a big company can steal the little guy's idea then copy it and drive him out of business.
I wonder how much it weighs? Should I start exercising my neck muscles now so I'll be ready? Who's the pencil neck now?
Did it occur to you that with missiles, you can't say, "It was an accident."
This is exactly what I was thinking of. If they accidentally landed it on the United States, they would claim oops, and nobody else would stand up to them.
I know the 2011 Prius uses an electric motor for the A/C. No belts are used, except for the seat belts.
That's a pretty good list!
Can I add a couple?
1 It is the responsibility of the Father to A support his children B keep his [redacted} fly shut PERIOD
I think it has been repeatedly proven that a lot of potential father and mothers cannot be expected to act responsibly when it comes to procreation. To not acknowledge this fact would irresponsible in itself.
My problem with the "Conservative Mindset" is that they tend to be against all forms of birth control and instead preach abstinence as a way of preventing unwanted pregnancies. To actually believe that teenagers have full control while experiencing the peak of hormones that they have only a few years experience with is irresponsible. They want to set people up to fail with their short sighted doctrines, and then when the expected mistake happens, they place all the blame on the teenagers without taking any of the blame themselves. I'm not saying that the teenagers are blameless, but if it was possible to neutralize their hormones before they went out on a date, I'm guessing they might have a better chance.
If the Conservatives are incapable of taking responsibly for the end result of the laws they want to impose on others, then why should the victims of their laws be considered responsible for the end result? I would love to see the Conservatives(and only the Conservatives) forced to pay for all child care/education/etc. If they can handle paying for what they wanted, I would respect them a lot more.
I think the appeal of Android is more about the freedom to install what you want.
If you thought it was because it was cheaper, then I am thinking someone was proven correct.