...when governments get too much power. No offense to any Koreans that are loyal, but you really ought to consider a coup. Personal liberty and the right to vehemently question one's leadership shouldn't be questioned, regardless of what type of place you live in. If where you live thinks the idea of free speech is "wrong" then you live int he wrong place or the leaders are fucktards. Take your pick.
I play poorly, in general terms am possessed of "suckage." But I don't cheat. What I do when my ass is being handed to me is find a server with less qualified and capable players. Usually I can find a group with skill levels similar to mine. Then we play--it's great...until the lamer cheater shows up (or the guy who's like god with a railgun.) Then I go find another server. I only wish there were a way to measure someone's ability beforehand and lock them out (for non-cheaters). UT tries this, but it really was subjective, anyway I never liked its ranking system that much. Gaming shouldn't be subjected to assholes, in the end I have to blame the creators of the game for not making tight code.
just as long as they find something. I would dearly love the idea that there's something else out there and that we're not it, because if we were it that would truly suck.
True, but as asimov's ftp archive is practically universally known about, and since nobody has bothered to shut asimov down, and coupled with the age of the software, and its lack of modern utility, I don't think anyone will mind.
I can't believe that people would assume that a large, multi-national company, like MS, is capable, with the bureaucracy that is inevitably in place (as is with all such organizations) will always be able to act in a perfectly timed manner so as to get one email destined for one department but mis-routed over to the correct destination. Additionally, the "bug hunter" that found this bug (a) sent the bug (numerous times, apparently) to the WRONG ADDRESS (just like if you mail your mortgate to the wrong address--funny things will happen, like it getting lost or discarded); and (b) allowed for less than 1 day for the communication to be routed. Common sense says that's insane, and common bug reporting protocol gives 3 days. Ergo, the bug hunter is a dork who fucked up. MS, as you know, did respond and acted in a manner correct to the severity of the situation. The situation is clear to anyone who knows these things.
Wrong. He didn't send emails to the correct address. There is only ONE correct email address to contact MS about security issues, and he failed to do so. Clearly his fault, impatience, and unwillignness to "do the right [as in "correct"] thing."
That was an awefully long-winded response in order to go to the length of proving your troll-ness. Get a clue. Picking on someone becuase of typos is gay. Only 3rd grade mentalities do that, and there's an ass-load of it on the Net. Learn to deal with it or go home to mommy.
"Tell me something - do you have a business case to handle the econmomic depression that we are in that no one wants to talk about?"
Yup. It's called "pull up the britches" plan.
(1) cut government spending by 20%
(2) eliminate the Department of Homeland Security, (3) freeze tax rates at current level, (4) decrease additional defense spending by 5%, (6) enact amendment to balance budget and pay off at least 1 trillion of national debt, (7) pump additional "liberated" funds into arctic oil drilling and the tech sector, (8) incentives for business growth, (9) let the States legislate themselves on Internet sales taxation
Nobody said the fix would be easy. But sometimes drastic problems require drastic solutions.
They'll ask you "Why go with Solaris over any other Unix variant?" Better have that answer.
They'll ask you "Why not Linux?" Have an asnwer.
They'll ask you "Will it work with our existing Windows infrastructure?" Answer that as well.
They'll ask "How much will the rollout cost?" Better have those figures handy.
They'll want to know "Why not just stick with Windows, especially since Windows 2003 is about to ship?" Have a retort ready for that.
They'll want to know (if they're savvy) how the data crunching numbers will compare UNIX to Windows, MySQL to MS SQL. You'll want that handy, too.
And finally, they'll want to know why should they switch to a different platform when they're already so heavily invested in Windows. Got an answer other than "Windows sucks"? You better know those things, becuase bosses aren't about to "just take your word for it" they demand facts, figures, and spreadsheets for proof--and if anything goes wrong it's your ass. Switching is fine, but you better be ready for the backlash and have oodles of proof ready or the resistance will be an unsurmountable chasm.
"What about when ISPs (perhaps as eventually enforced by law) require you to use a "secure OS" to access the net?"
Every OS vendor, beit MS, or the kernel group for Linux, UNIX, Mac, etc., will all come out with an upgrade path that will fix that problem. Just like with IPv6. Choice will remain the same as it is now. And I recall the "no access to BIOS" crap MS wanted...the hardware vendors looked at them and simply said "no." The result was what it should have been all the time. I have no idea what MS was smoking when they wrote that spec up...must have been good weed, that's for sure.
I believe that there will be 2 choices: on or off. That will be sufficient for 90% of the world. If you are "Joe User" sitting at home, playing Doom, DRM won't mean squat to you and if it's on or off won't matter to you; but to a business or state, local, or federal agency DRM might be important to have on, which makes that a valuable option; now if you're in group 3 (your a home user but need to access DRM protected works from time to time) it will allow you to turn it on--access the data--then turn it back off.
I don't see that as being a big deal. On the other hand, there isn't a feature or ability of Windows that I haven't been able to either turn on or off or get around in a normal way, so my appreciation of the situation may be different than your's.
The SQL Slammer vulnerability had been patched for MONTHS prior to the appearance of Slammer....how the hell is MS liable for thie sysadmins not having the freaking brains to patch their software? I give this the finger.
A quote from the interview: "JORDAN: They said I'm guilty of contributory copyright infringement, which would mean that I assist people in downloading copyrighted material and direct infringement."
What about Google, Yahoo, Lycos, and the rest of the search engines? Those do the same damn thing but on an even greater scale!
Allow me to clarify the "So you're saying you may have routinely violated state laws in regards to recording?" statement a bit.
Where I live, in Iowa, at that time, there was only the one law that needed to be obeyed, that being only one member of the call needed to be aware of the recording (i.e.: us). Since the call was placed in our state (Iowa) only Iowa law at that time was relevent, now we have TCPA and all sorts of other messes that makes that sort of thing illegal, but at that time TCPA hadn't even been drafted (this was a long time ago.)
And on the topic of dead-air calls: yes, I know how that system works, but I can't prosecute them since I never get transferred to a rep...after about 4 seconds the call is auto-terminated on their end. I have talked to the phone company numerous times and they can't/will not give me any info on who the last caller was and *69 doesn't work. Personally, I'm of the opinion that caller ID blocker is a violation of DCMA--it obfuscates the origin of a communication, does it not? But that's neither here nor there.
I used to work for a telemarketing firm (yes, I'm still filled with self-loathing over it, thank you very much--you know, the scent never leaves?) and routinely we would record our calls (for verification)--standard procedure. If we ever called anyone and they said that they were going to record the conversation, we were under orders to terminate the call immediately and remove them from the calling list.
Worth a try, I've never used it because I only get calls that are just dead air...must be the Illuminati or something.
Have one IE window open, then right-click on the page you want to go to (with the nasty lines of code), select open in new window, and only that new window will die.
Not as big a deal as I had thought. I figured it would kill all instances of IE in use (and probably explorer as well.)
Slashdot Mirror
...when governments get too much power. No offense to any Koreans that are loyal, but you really ought to consider a coup. Personal liberty and the right to vehemently question one's leadership shouldn't be questioned, regardless of what type of place you live in. If where you live thinks the idea of free speech is "wrong" then you live int he wrong place or the leaders are fucktards. Take your pick.
I play poorly, in general terms am possessed of "suckage." But I don't cheat. What I do when my ass is being handed to me is find a server with less qualified and capable players. Usually I can find a group with skill levels similar to mine. Then we play--it's great...until the lamer cheater shows up (or the guy who's like god with a railgun.) Then I go find another server. I only wish there were a way to measure someone's ability beforehand and lock them out (for non-cheaters). UT tries this, but it really was subjective, anyway I never liked its ranking system that much. Gaming shouldn't be subjected to assholes, in the end I have to blame the creators of the game for not making tight code.
just as long as they find something. I would dearly love the idea that there's something else out there and that we're not it, because if we were it that would truly suck.
True, but as asimov's ftp archive is practically universally known about, and since nobody has bothered to shut asimov down, and coupled with the age of the software, and its lack of modern utility, I don't think anyone will mind.
For me, my love of the Apple ][ was the games. There wasn't anything like that before. Ultima...all of them, Airheart, man those were the days!
Visit the Asimov.net FTP archive. Emulators, games, practically everything. Fun stuff...
If it's a security issue, as this bug clearly was, you send a message to secure@microsoft.com, as indicated in the story.
I can't believe that people would assume that a large, multi-national company, like MS, is capable, with the bureaucracy that is inevitably in place (as is with all such organizations) will always be able to act in a perfectly timed manner so as to get one email destined for one department but mis-routed over to the correct destination. Additionally, the "bug hunter" that found this bug (a) sent the bug (numerous times, apparently) to the WRONG ADDRESS (just like if you mail your mortgate to the wrong address--funny things will happen, like it getting lost or discarded); and (b) allowed for less than 1 day for the communication to be routed. Common sense says that's insane, and common bug reporting protocol gives 3 days. Ergo, the bug hunter is a dork who fucked up. MS, as you know, did respond and acted in a manner correct to the severity of the situation. The situation is clear to anyone who knows these things.
Wrong. He didn't send emails to the correct address. There is only ONE correct email address to contact MS about security issues, and he failed to do so. Clearly his fault, impatience, and unwillignness to "do the right [as in "correct"] thing."
Passport Security Issue. MS was listening, Muhammad Faisal Rauf was just too impatient. Probably just wanted credit as being "kewl," or something.
That was an awefully long-winded response in order to go to the length of proving your troll-ness. Get a clue. Picking on someone becuase of typos is gay. Only 3rd grade mentalities do that, and there's an ass-load of it on the Net. Learn to deal with it or go home to mommy.
Yup. It's called "pull up the britches" plan. Nobody said the fix would be easy. But sometimes drastic problems require drastic solutions.
They'll ask you "Why go with Solaris over any other Unix variant?" Better have that answer.
They'll ask you "Why not Linux?" Have an asnwer.
They'll ask you "Will it work with our existing Windows infrastructure?" Answer that as well.
They'll ask "How much will the rollout cost?" Better have those figures handy.
They'll want to know "Why not just stick with Windows, especially since Windows 2003 is about to ship?" Have a retort ready for that.
They'll want to know (if they're savvy) how the data crunching numbers will compare UNIX to Windows, MySQL to MS SQL. You'll want that handy, too.
And finally, they'll want to know why should they switch to a different platform when they're already so heavily invested in Windows. Got an answer other than "Windows sucks"? You better know those things, becuase bosses aren't about to "just take your word for it" they demand facts, figures, and spreadsheets for proof--and if anything goes wrong it's your ass. Switching is fine, but you better be ready for the backlash and have oodles of proof ready or the resistance will be an unsurmountable chasm.
"What about when ISPs (perhaps as eventually enforced by law) require you to use a "secure OS" to access the net?"
Every OS vendor, beit MS, or the kernel group for Linux, UNIX, Mac, etc., will all come out with an upgrade path that will fix that problem. Just like with IPv6. Choice will remain the same as it is now. And I recall the "no access to BIOS" crap MS wanted...the hardware vendors looked at them and simply said "no." The result was what it should have been all the time. I have no idea what MS was smoking when they wrote that spec up...must have been good weed, that's for sure.
I believe that there will be 2 choices: on or off. That will be sufficient for 90% of the world. If you are "Joe User" sitting at home, playing Doom, DRM won't mean squat to you and if it's on or off won't matter to you; but to a business or state, local, or federal agency DRM might be important to have on, which makes that a valuable option; now if you're in group 3 (your a home user but need to access DRM protected works from time to time) it will allow you to turn it on--access the data--then turn it back off.
I don't see that as being a big deal. On the other hand, there isn't a feature or ability of Windows that I haven't been able to either turn on or off or get around in a normal way, so my appreciation of the situation may be different than your's.
Don't fear the toga-wearers, dude. They're just looking to get laid...wait, maybe you should fear them after all! ;)
What part of "you can turn it off" didn't sink in to your heads?
The SQL Slammer vulnerability had been patched for MONTHS prior to the appearance of Slammer....how the hell is MS liable for thie sysadmins not having the freaking brains to patch their software? I give this the finger.
A quote from the interview: "JORDAN: They said I'm guilty of contributory copyright infringement, which would mean that I assist people in downloading copyrighted material and direct infringement."
What about Google, Yahoo, Lycos, and the rest of the search engines? Those do the same damn thing but on an even greater scale!
ohh. that's better! Wish I thought of it... crap.
Too bad the MPAA don't know you like I do, Bellocq.
Yes, you could warn them if only you spoke MPAA...
Allow me to clarify the "So you're saying you may have routinely violated state laws in regards to recording?" statement a bit.
Where I live, in Iowa, at that time, there was only the one law that needed to be obeyed, that being only one member of the call needed to be aware of the recording (i.e.: us). Since the call was placed in our state (Iowa) only Iowa law at that time was relevent, now we have TCPA and all sorts of other messes that makes that sort of thing illegal, but at that time TCPA hadn't even been drafted (this was a long time ago.)
And on the topic of dead-air calls: yes, I know how that system works, but I can't prosecute them since I never get transferred to a rep...after about 4 seconds the call is auto-terminated on their end. I have talked to the phone company numerous times and they can't/will not give me any info on who the last caller was and *69 doesn't work. Personally, I'm of the opinion that caller ID blocker is a violation of DCMA--it obfuscates the origin of a communication, does it not? But that's neither here nor there.
The CIA doesn't ahve domestic charter, that's what the FBI is for. I bet they meant the FBI not the CIA.
I used to work for a telemarketing firm (yes, I'm still filled with self-loathing over it, thank you very much--you know, the scent never leaves?) and routinely we would record our calls (for verification)--standard procedure. If we ever called anyone and they said that they were going to record the conversation, we were under orders to terminate the call immediately and remove them from the calling list.
Worth a try, I've never used it because I only get calls that are just dead air...must be the Illuminati or something.
Have one IE window open, then right-click on the page you want to go to (with the nasty lines of code), select open in new window, and only that new window will die.
Not as big a deal as I had thought. I figured it would kill all instances of IE in use (and probably explorer as well.)