Looks like an interesting book.
on
Hacking the XBox
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Some of the stuff seems alright; putting a green LED on the XBOX instead of the blue one is pretty innocous. But I'm kind of wondering if he's trudging into the grey area with putting a real USB cable on.
It doesn't seem logical that we shouldn't be able to modify hardware that we buy, but from the business perspective these consoles are being sold at a loss -- if we can turn them into PCs, both the console manufacturer and the PC manufacturers are going to feel the hurt. Not that I'm arguing that the DMCA makes sense, but some of this information probably shouldn't be widely known (thinking of the IDE card that could be changed into a RAID card at one soldier point for 1/5th of the cost of the RAID card from the company.)
Most of my friends agree that the SCO tactics raise questions about their underlying evidence. If you've got the trump card against IBM, why wouldn't you play it right away instead of engaging in this kind of game they've been playing? But you know, given some of the history here I'm starting to wonder if they've got something that's slam dunk against Linux. I doubt it, but I can't imagine they'd try to bluff IBM, let alone the raging Linux community.
It could be that they've got a solid case. It could be that they're working out some great shenanigans. Irregardless, I'm starting to wonder if Linux should be open to the average user to contribute, or if perhaps it should be restricted to a core group of companies and Linus who can afford lawyers to vet the code. Things are getting pretty scary in the open source world, particularly with the lawyers getting involved...
The Navy already uses Windows almost exclusively for its day-to-day computing, and it seems to be working out alright. Admittedly, it isn't cheaper out of the box, but I could see the total cost of ownership easily being lower given that they can procure much of what they need rather than depending on somebody in house to design it.
They aren't a business. They can't afford to code up every little thing when they need it and they need to know that they can depend on somebody else to fix any problems that might come up. It's a variant of the "Who do you sue" problem. Microsoft's stuff is easily usable and ultimately gets the job done, which lets them focus on what's important.
I'd hate to think that our fighting forces are futzing around for weeks on end trying to figure out how to get fonts to anti-alias, let alone getting the whole "enterprise" to work. Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP Professional streamline enterprise activities.
Isn't it extremely dangerous to modify the hard drive? I thought they assembled those things in special dust-free environments that would be impossible to duplicate in the average workroom (if Forensic Files is any indication, anyway.)
A friend picked up the game. It isn't worth it. A chuckle here or there at off-color humor, a gasp or two at being able to set somebody on fire then urinate on them to put it out, etc.
It's like the 2 Live Crew of video games. While greatly appreciative of the fact that they've fought on behalf of free speech, I have to say that neither is all that great once you actually get a chance to purchase it. GTA3 is probably the 'edgiest' game that has managed to provide a good gaming experience (although I'm open to hearing about others).
Per your last question, probably not. I was looking through the site and as an individual user you've got to be affiliated with an organization that is on the PlanetLab network. They unhelpfully mention that you can achieve this by persuading your organization to join.
If you're shielding Windows: I'd block the various Windows ports (137-139, some others introduced with Windows 2000 that I forget) unless you're using file/printer shares over the Internet. There may be other programs that leak packets out without your knowledge that you'd like to stop as well, although these are most easily identified with firewall software on the machine that raises an alert when traffic is attempted that you didn't explicitly allow (Norton's firewall seems to do alright.)
I can't imagine that he was being paid that badly, either. Most people would kill to get bought out by AOL (or Microsoft for that matter), so what's wrong with taking the money and leaving it to the college students to write the piracy apps?
When you can afford most of the things you want, why is WASTE so important?
I was looking at this sort of concept about four years ago, but was stymied by issues that were only recently addressed by artifical intelligence. One of the techniques that showed promise is ruminant nomination -- being able to abstract everything to a set of individual but similar (comparable) characteristics is a must. Unfortunately, such an algorithm was nearly uncomputable at the time, and bubblesort just won't cut it.
What's interesting about Haystack is that it seems to take advantage of such an algorithm, and in such a manner as to permit multiple feeds simultaneously on harvested data. Hopefully, the source is available somewhere to check out, because I'm curious about how they managed it.
This was one of the more interesting comments I've read, but it isn't likely to make it into the official interview for obvious reasons. Despite this, I think there is some seriously thought-provoking content here.
I've been a big fan of Fyodor's nmap from the moment I discovered it in Phrack -- thought the OS fingerprinting scheme was pretty damned novel for one thing -- and it's made it into my standard security kit. But this event, if true, is pretty disturbing (from both sides!) and deserves elaboration. No other field in the computer industry requires the level of trust placed in our security professionals, the best of which ironically honing their skills on blackhat activities, and this makes me reconsider the trust I've had in nmap.
Did this really happen?
They needed three days to figure this out?
on
Spam Meeting Wrap-up
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
The technology obviously hasn't caught up because my mailbox is full. The laws can't because the First Amendment is crystal clear on the issue (and all the spam from overseas makes our laws irrelevant). The future is Bayesian.
For many who contribute, the only compensation they see is in recognition. Everybody knows who Linux is, but how about the guy that put sed together?
I would like to propose that, in addition to the mandatory screensaver displaying the credits, that every fifth time you run a utility its name, version number, date of creation, and author are read through the speaker. This way, people can truly appreciate the donation of software by others. To celebrate Free Software's global approach towards solving problems, this should be subtitled on the screen in the user's native language. This way, we can truly feel the joy of helping people without compensation while being compensated for it.
FreeS/WAN is definitely on the cutting edge of things, and anything they can do to reduce the complexity of cryptography makes it more likely that a larger audience can realize the benefits of encryption. I applaud this for security reasons, because the less information floating around out the more secure we all are.
However, this is not yet a complete solution for the average user. For one thing, it's Linux only, which puts it out of reach of the majority. Secondly, and this I absolutely cannot believe, they've killed off Trinity in their Matrix sequel. But most importantly, you've got to have access to DNS to make it properly work!? Why can't a new ICMP handshake be used to exchange keys between a new connection (and queue them) so that this doesn't have to rely on a third-party?
So, while this is a good first step, I think there are greater things that will yet be accomplished.
to be honest, I spend a whole lot more time doing patching and regression testing on my Linux systems than I do on the WinXP machine. Granted, the end result is usually more stable on Linux, but it better be for all the mucking about I have to do in/etc and playing line-up-the-library-versions.
Sometimes I wish there was the equivalent of Windows Update for Linux. If it wasn't worth the effort I wouldn't be using it, of course, but the asymmetry between the Windows patches and Linux patches doesn't seem to matter much when all the Windows patches are applied in one go and the Linux patches require individual attention.
Our current methods of informing the public and the government about the evils of the DMCA seem to be reactive and passive -- defending a lawsuit, writing public responses to the librarian of Congress periodically about the DMCA, setting up resources where the public if they were so inclined could stop by and learn about the problem.
Do you feel that it would be a good time for a shift in strategy towards more active measures such as forming a group to lobby representatives directly, issuing mailings about the DMCA particularly to those whose representatives support legislation like the DMCA/UCITA/SSSCA, or beginning a television ad campaign? Such an endeavor is bound to cost a bit, but I can't help but feel that particularly with 2004 coming up having a bit of organized PR on our side of the debate would be quite helpful.
I was just looking for a player that could handle DivX and happened across this page of comments from users who already have one of these units. Sounds interesting, although hopefully the codec support can be upgraded by the user.
If you weren't born yesterday (or, say, 70s or later) you'd be aware that the link between the practice of Zen and the hippie lifestyle were inexorably linked in American pop culture, both having been introduced around the same time and with no small degree of overlap what with the beat culture of the 50s evolving into the hippie lifestyle of the 60s and all. It makes for a pretty interesting read, and you can get your start here or here.
I was referring to the "by adding value, you take away value" line in the writeup, and apologize for not making this clear. I certainly didn't mean to make digs at either the writeup or the site, I was just making a witty observation without the wit.
HTH, and have a nice day.
Are they technological-age hippies?
on
World of Ends
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Because (at least by the writeup) it sounds like they're delivering some sort of Zen-style analysis from within a cloud of blue smoke. How well does the sound of a hand stream over the Internet?
At $.99/song, this has got to be heavily crippled in some manner. I'll place my bet now that the format will be restricted in some manner, such as one low-quality CD burn or transfer to iPod for $.99 with a bunch of DRM designed to tie the content to one system, and/or the offerings will be laughably slim.
Basically, I'll believe it when I see it, and even then I won't be able to buy in because I don't have a Mac. Has one of these services so far failed to disappoint?
Whether or not you can secure rights to a verb, you have to make an effort to stop dilution of your intellectual property if you want to keep it. Google is just protecting their turf.
The radical growth of the Internet has been achieved largely because of the freedom of its developers to use the tools they felt necessary to implement the services that have become standards. While it is true that Free Software to a large part has been helpful to the process, I feel that forcing developers to avoid technologies that are patent-encumbered will promote the Free Software agenda at the expense of freedom: freedom to create the very technologies that allowed Free Software to thrive in the first place!
Isn't this an example of putting the cart before the horse? Free Software is great and all, but true freedom comes from not handing control of everything to one faction... something I would think would be obvious to other supporters of open source software. A monopoly over the Internet is just as bad in the hands of OSS developers as it would be in the hands of Microsoft.
I've got a couple of RCA VCR's that have lasted for seven years. On the other hand, we've had three RCA TV sets die and the display on my RCA stereo burn out within two years of purchase.
Like others, I was initially inclined to dismiss Jim DeLong's article on the basis that his research wasn't thorough enough to differentiate Craig Mundie's comments from Richard Stallman's. Upon further reading, I've decided instead to dismiss it because he's not factoring anything into his arguments besides the business perspective, and even that appears to be flawed when you consider the issue.
For example, if the government needs an inventory system built, pays a professional to do it, and turns the results back to the public, then how is the quality of the system affected by the fact that the end result is open source? After identifying the groups with an interest in open source, DeLong spends the rest of the article explaining how such a system can only pale in quality over the long run in comparison to a commercial system -- without ever noting that the difference between open source procurement vs. commercial procurement will in most cases only determine whether or not the public will have access to the results of software design done for the government.
On a related note, some background on the think-tank he works for. In some ways, this is like having Richard Stallman arguing the merits for copy-protection.
Slashdot Mirror
It doesn't seem logical that we shouldn't be able to modify hardware that we buy, but from the business perspective these consoles are being sold at a loss -- if we can turn them into PCs, both the console manufacturer and the PC manufacturers are going to feel the hurt. Not that I'm arguing that the DMCA makes sense, but some of this information probably shouldn't be widely known (thinking of the IDE card that could be changed into a RAID card at one soldier point for 1/5th of the cost of the RAID card from the company.)
It could be that they've got a solid case. It could be that they're working out some great shenanigans. Irregardless, I'm starting to wonder if Linux should be open to the average user to contribute, or if perhaps it should be restricted to a core group of companies and Linus who can afford lawyers to vet the code. Things are getting pretty scary in the open source world, particularly with the lawyers getting involved...
They aren't a business. They can't afford to code up every little thing when they need it and they need to know that they can depend on somebody else to fix any problems that might come up. It's a variant of the "Who do you sue" problem. Microsoft's stuff is easily usable and ultimately gets the job done, which lets them focus on what's important.
I'd hate to think that our fighting forces are futzing around for weeks on end trying to figure out how to get fonts to anti-alias, let alone getting the whole "enterprise" to work. Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP Professional streamline enterprise activities.
Isn't it extremely dangerous to modify the hard drive? I thought they assembled those things in special dust-free environments that would be impossible to duplicate in the average workroom (if Forensic Files is any indication, anyway.)
It's like the 2 Live Crew of video games. While greatly appreciative of the fact that they've fought on behalf of free speech, I have to say that neither is all that great once you actually get a chance to purchase it. GTA3 is probably the 'edgiest' game that has managed to provide a good gaming experience (although I'm open to hearing about others).
Per your last question, probably not. I was looking through the site and as an individual user you've got to be affiliated with an organization that is on the PlanetLab network. They unhelpfully mention that you can achieve this by persuading your organization to join.
If you're shielding Windows: I'd block the various Windows ports (137-139, some others introduced with Windows 2000 that I forget) unless you're using file/printer shares over the Internet. There may be other programs that leak packets out without your knowledge that you'd like to stop as well, although these are most easily identified with firewall software on the machine that raises an alert when traffic is attempted that you didn't explicitly allow (Norton's firewall seems to do alright.)
When you can afford most of the things you want, why is WASTE so important?
What's interesting about Haystack is that it seems to take advantage of such an algorithm, and in such a manner as to permit multiple feeds simultaneously on harvested data. Hopefully, the source is available somewhere to check out, because I'm curious about how they managed it.
I've been a big fan of Fyodor's nmap from the moment I discovered it in Phrack -- thought the OS fingerprinting scheme was pretty damned novel for one thing -- and it's made it into my standard security kit. But this event, if true, is pretty disturbing (from both sides!) and deserves elaboration. No other field in the computer industry requires the level of trust placed in our security professionals, the best of which ironically honing their skills on blackhat activities, and this makes me reconsider the trust I've had in nmap.
Did this really happen?
The technology obviously hasn't caught up because my mailbox is full. The laws can't because the First Amendment is crystal clear on the issue (and all the spam from overseas makes our laws irrelevant). The future is Bayesian.
I would like to propose that, in addition to the mandatory screensaver displaying the credits, that every fifth time you run a utility its name, version number, date of creation, and author are read through the speaker. This way, people can truly appreciate the donation of software by others. To celebrate Free Software's global approach towards solving problems, this should be subtitled on the screen in the user's native language. This way, we can truly feel the joy of helping people without compensation while being compensated for it.
However, this is not yet a complete solution for the average user. For one thing, it's Linux only, which puts it out of reach of the majority. Secondly, and this I absolutely cannot believe, they've killed off Trinity in their Matrix sequel. But most importantly, you've got to have access to DNS to make it properly work!? Why can't a new ICMP handshake be used to exchange keys between a new connection (and queue them) so that this doesn't have to rely on a third-party?
So, while this is a good first step, I think there are greater things that will yet be accomplished.
Sometimes I wish there was the equivalent of Windows Update for Linux. If it wasn't worth the effort I wouldn't be using it, of course, but the asymmetry between the Windows patches and Linux patches doesn't seem to matter much when all the Windows patches are applied in one go and the Linux patches require individual attention.
Colloidal silver is a cure for having skin that isn't gray enough. You should recommend a yogurt enema and syrup of ipecac while you're at it.
Do you feel that it would be a good time for a shift in strategy towards more active measures such as forming a group to lobby representatives directly, issuing mailings about the DMCA particularly to those whose representatives support legislation like the DMCA/UCITA/SSSCA, or beginning a television ad campaign? Such an endeavor is bound to cost a bit, but I can't help but feel that particularly with 2004 coming up having a bit of organized PR on our side of the debate would be quite helpful.
I was just looking for a player that could handle DivX and happened across this page of comments from users who already have one of these units. Sounds interesting, although hopefully the codec support can be upgraded by the user.
I was referring to the "by adding value, you take away value" line in the writeup, and apologize for not making this clear. I certainly didn't mean to make digs at either the writeup or the site, I was just making a witty observation without the wit.
HTH, and have a nice day.
Because (at least by the writeup) it sounds like they're delivering some sort of Zen-style analysis from within a cloud of blue smoke. How well does the sound of a hand stream over the Internet?
Screw you chumps, it's Gnutella time.
Basically, I'll believe it when I see it, and even then I won't be able to buy in because I don't have a Mac. Has one of these services so far failed to disappoint?
Whether or not you can secure rights to a verb, you have to make an effort to stop dilution of your intellectual property if you want to keep it. Google is just protecting their turf.
Isn't this an example of putting the cart before the horse? Free Software is great and all, but true freedom comes from not handing control of everything to one faction... something I would think would be obvious to other supporters of open source software. A monopoly over the Internet is just as bad in the hands of OSS developers as it would be in the hands of Microsoft.
I've got a couple of RCA VCR's that have lasted for seven years. On the other hand, we've had three RCA TV sets die and the display on my RCA stereo burn out within two years of purchase.
For example, if the government needs an inventory system built, pays a professional to do it, and turns the results back to the public, then how is the quality of the system affected by the fact that the end result is open source? After identifying the groups with an interest in open source, DeLong spends the rest of the article explaining how such a system can only pale in quality over the long run in comparison to a commercial system -- without ever noting that the difference between open source procurement vs. commercial procurement will in most cases only determine whether or not the public will have access to the results of software design done for the government.
On a related note, some background on the think-tank he works for. In some ways, this is like having Richard Stallman arguing the merits for copy-protection.