hopefully this doesn't start some sort of national MAC address registry,..()
Well, AFAIK, since it's possible to change the MAC address on Ethernet cards in both Win2k and Linux the effect of such a registry is doubtful.
The obviuos firearm analogy: A national gun registry would be meaningless if you could transform your gun into an fully automatic rifle.
Trying to registry something that it's possible to transform or change is just plain stupid.
To me it looks like Sun x86 are competing with Sun SPARC with this move.
Who wants to buy a Sun Fire V240 at $6495 when they can this Sun Fire V65x at $4595?
Lets look at the specs:
V240 (SPARC),2U 2*1GHz UltraSPARC3, 1 MB Cache pr.CPU, 2 GB RAM max 8GB, 2 x 36 GB max 4, 4 x1Gb Ethernet, Solaris 8.
V65x (x86),2U 2*3GHz Xeon, 512 KB Cache pr.CPU, 1 GB RAM max 12GB, 1 x 36 GB, max 6, 2 x1Gb Ethernet, Solaris 9 or Linux.
Maybe the SPARC have better "troughput" for some applications, but it looks as if the V65x is better overall especially for CPU intensive tasks.
Since the volume of total SPARC CPU's will go further down as more Sun machines are sold with Intel CPU's they will become even more expensive.
Rumors has it that some girls use some technique known as "flashing" to get others attention. But being a nerd I have not had the pleasure to experience such an attack yet.*
(*Well actually I have, but that don't fit into my slashdot-image and would not make this joke funny.)
Found a nice new not yet official released video of Half-Life2.
Some nice moves and stuff that shows that they have been working a lot with the physichs engine. Looks like its possible to interact a lot with the environment, like for example shoot of fragments of the walls etc.
Rumors has it that it is the physics engine from Havok. The last months Havok have listed a "yet to be announced game" from Valve under the tab "Developers using the Havok physics engine.
Yeah; the video: Here
It's a high speed download through Akamai so you should be able to get it fast. Actually, this video is probably about to get released trough a lot of registartion over at Gamespot...
I got it on IRC(Quakenet), so I guessed someone snooped around testing possible url's until they found this one.
Now they're saying there will be subtle changes every few years, so in another decade there will be like 4 different versions of the $20 bill, ALL LEGAL. If you saw a fifth version, which was counterfeit, would it be obvious to you?
[trollmode]
You live in a banana republic with almost an banana economy; so what did you expect?;-)
Several different versions of the same bill is so thirdworldish.
[/trollmode]
The other day I searched Google for some radio stuff. (helping my father find some equipment).
Then I noticed that Radio Userland appeared very high on Google. In fact, when you search for "radio"* they get a #5 at Google. As far as i know they only existed for a year. And their popularity, as it appears on google, looks very inflated because of extremly many links in blogs.
Checked out Daypop.com, which ranks articles/links based on the number of links in blogs. This is what I got: Searching All Weblogs for link:radio.userland.com... Found 3260 pages matching query.
Thats insane. When so many blogs links to the same page their ranking on google gets very high based only on blog-popularity.
*Searching for only radio is obvious a bad idea as google returns some 40 m. hits.
..looks like a great way to fry those RFID-tags for the paranoid of us. 1kW with high directinality should do the job.
Yeah, you can use a microwave oven but putting tires inside the oven is kind of hard.
This would probably work on those automatic traffic controller systems with digital cameras that take pictures of speeding to...
The best thing that the open source community can do for these users is try to make that perfect toaster work better for less.
If MS wants to make hardware, so be it. If they make great hardware, fine. If its good, someone will create a clone. Our job is to make it cost less and run better by writing better software for it.
If Microsoft starts to sell these units with a loss like they have done with the XBox(selling at 65-85% of what they where built to cost) it could become hard to create a better alternative.
But not impossible thoug; by using of the shelf hardware like the VIA CPU and EPIA M-ITX board, standard M-ITX case, generic RAM, CDROM, mouse, LCD etc. and stripped GNU/Linux distro of choice it's possible to create complete units with LCD-screen for $500.
After all you can get low-quality 15" LCD's as low as $221 (pricewatch.com)Within 6-months it's probably possible to buy medium quality 15" LCD for $200.
When I talk, I normally (95% of the cases) use "linux", the "gnu" thing is kind of hard to use in normal daily sitiations. But when I write something I try to remember to use GNU/Linux.
By doing this I at least acknowledge that there are more to GNU/Linux than just the kernel.
For example: In Debian; GNU/Linux is an essential part of the name on the distro.
Even though this Exec Shield Owerflow Protection is great; where is the Executive owerflow protection that will protect me from my boss when he wants to execute me?
...., so when threat is imminent they can shut down the GPS bands in the area.
Which of the to following scenarios sounds most likely:
1.
Radar operator in military:-God damit! OMFG! There is CM heading for the Washington prob. the White House! I'm caling the President RIGHT NOW so he can shut down the civilian GPS system.
*Calls White House by dialing 666-WWHITE HOUSE EMERGENCY HOT-LINE*
President: -Howdy! What's up sergeant?
*Radar op. explains*
President: -Ok. I press the button that triggers the civil GPS-system on and of, it right here om my side on the desk.
*President push button and civil GPS-system is offline. Terrorist CM crash.*
Total time from detection to shutdown: Less than 2 min.
or
2.
Radar operator in military:-God damit! OMFG! There is CM heading for the Washington prob. the White House! I'm caling my [Insert highest ranking officer he can call].
*Calls [highest ranking officer]*
Highest ranking fficer: -Holy shit! OMFG this ain't no test or exercise!
*trigger all the possible terrorist alarms*
*Calls Chief of Staff in Pentagon (or whoever is in charge there)*
Chief of Staff: -Holy shit. OMFG we are running out of time, fuck the President, not time to get in touch with him. I'm taking the decision: We have to shut down the civil GPS system who guids the CM.
*Calls [whatever agency who is in charge of this system]
Chief of Staff: -Incomming terorist CM in Washington. Sut down the civil GPS system NOW!
At the agency: The techdude: -OK.
*Techdude writes on his keyboard : "shutdown -h now" (or similar command)*
*Civil GPS system goes down and CM crash*
Total time from detection to shutdown: Somewhere between 10 and 15 minutes. (wildly guessed)
how do we prevent terrorist from using this kind of stuff ?
You can't protect yourself 100% from the fact that terrorist could construct and use a LCCM. The illusion of security is something that you just have top deal with. The illusion that a nation can protect itself 100% from a terrorist attack is quite naive.
limiting acces to knowledge (with DMCA style laws)?
Won't work. The information someone needs to do this is already public. Everything one needs about electronics, mechanics, jet engines, physics, math, rochet science etc.; it's all avalible as for someone to "piece togheter".
creating a orwellian policial state where all are suspect ans subject to vigilance (and who controls the vigilantes) ?
With PATRIOT ACT and the enchanced PATRIOT II you will probably get there faster than you know of..
limitating the publication of (now) public-domain stuff ('cause it can be used to devilish ends) ?
Well I doubt that would work since someone who wants the information could get it from Europe, Russia or/and Asia.
And the cost of putting a limit on informatin in areas such as electronics or rocket science would be *way* over what anyone would accept.
The best way to prevent a terrorist attack with LCCM's is to keep an eye on who's who in rocket scienc, jet propulsion and turbo jets.
The powerplant on the rocket is the one single component that i difficault to get(buy) or construct.
Or better (like thats gonna happen); try to eliminate the reason behind the fact that there actually are (probably) somone who wants to fire a LCCM on New York.
Mod parent up; my mod points are all gone. But I would definitely modded this up as Insightful if I could.
I agree on what you write with one exception:
This helps the consumer because, assuming we buy, we're buying more quality music and less crap. (Quality meaning, what we want, not any objective standard.)
Even if we get the music that we want and that means higher quality for us (higher quality in an subjective way); the result of this way of shopping music won't be only good.
The focus will (on longterm) shift even more from good albums an the total music experience with a good album to even more focus in singles.
Many "classic" rock and pop albums are good because of the combination of songs. Take for example some Metallica albums or Beatles, Radiohead, Massive Attack or Queen albums. Of course many of these albums have great singles but not all good albums have this.
Particularly interesting are IBM's positions regarding SCO's claims of ownership over Unix. For example, IBM disputes SCO's claims that Unix was originally developed by AT&T's Bell Laboratories; AT&T used to license Unix to other companies; AT&T licensed Unix to IBM; all commercial Unix flavors in use today are based on SCO's System V Unix technology; SCO owns the rights in and to all underlying, original Unix software code developed by AT&T Bell Laboratories; SCO is the authorized successor in interest to and the owner of all the contractual rights arising from the AT&T Unix agreements.
IBM also outright denies that its AIX flavor of Unix is a modification of SCO's licensed Unix.
If the case boils down to who owns UNIX and different flavours off it then I guess this case could drag out for years with endless lawsuits.
Since SCO can't afford that, and IBM can; SCO will probably go Chapter 11.
What is so fundamentally different about 802.11 from other forms of networking that is making it so hard to secure?
It's the simplicity.
Anyone who can open a Internet Explorer window can instal, configure and "secure" a 802.11 device or network.
Even my aunt, who don't understand anything about computers managed to get her new SMC Barricade Turbo Wireless up and running with Win2k. (She forgot to enable the 256-bit WEP, but I did that for her.)
This means that there a tons of peolpe out there without any understanding about what they are really doing.
Yup, you can call me an elitist, but the fact is that most people are really stupid when it comes to network security.
Imagine the caos if someone came up with a new invention, electrical power transfered through the air:
"The wireless and easy home setup of yor own power network. Connect all your electrical devices to this new and easy(again) power grid(buzzword compliant.)"
It's Matrix dude. What did you expect?;-)
After all; "The Matrix has you".
You staring at it in the shop:
"Have you ever stood and stared at it....marvelled at it's beauty....it's genius?"
You calling tech-support:
"What is The Matrix...."
tech support trying to get a grip on Linux:
"That was you on my computer. How did you do that?
"
Tech support reply:
"What good is a phone call, if you are unable to speeeaaaakkk?"
You replying to the evil tech-support:
"I know you're out there. I can feel you now. I know that you're afraid...you're afraid of us...you're afraid of change. I don't know the future, I didn't come here to tell you how this is going to end. I came here to tell you how it's going to begin. I'm going to hang up this phone and then I'm going to show these people what you don't want them to see...I'm going to show them a world...without you. A world without rules and controls, without borders or boundaries. A world where anything is possible. Where we go from there is a choice I leave to you!"
Actually, copyright is not covered by the UN Declaration of Human Rights.
If you are thinking of article 17....;
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
... it covers as you see property, as in houses, farms, cars, companies etc. NOT copyrights.
Of course Iraq needs proper legislation/laws on this subject, but if you think they (US administartion)are doing this to protect Iraqi copyright holders I think you SERIOUSLY need to rethink your opinion.
I thinks thinks [INSERT disclaimer that maybe the Reg. article aint correct] that this with other stories; for example USA protecting one Minstry in Bagdad; the Minestry of Oil, shows what the real motivation behind the Iraq-war was.
No, I'm not saying that the invasion came because of copyrights or oil alone, thats just a bonus. When someone invade acountry they get to decide the legislation/laws inside that country. But selecting, among others; Hillary Rosen to help doing this says a lot about the current administartion.
After the defeat/collapse of the Third Reich/Nazi-Germany it probably went over a year befor they though about copyrights. IMHO that probably was a good thing. Other needs are far more important than copyrights right now. People are dying inside Iraq and you are thinking on copyrights?
Shame on you.
Ignore them....good idea. This idea is what allowed Hitler to gain power and start a world war. The Cold War was NOT ignoring the Soviet Union.
Read my other post to see what i meant by ignoring. (In short, ignoring here means to avoid direct military action or sanctions.)
The fact that you can call the war in Vietnam a little war makes me sick. What is your definition of a "little war"....less than 100,000 casualties? How do you define WWII? A "big war"?
With all respect off those who died in those wars; compared to a possible nuclear WWIII between USA and Soviet with probably more than 100 million casualties even the 100,000 casualties in the Vietnam war becomes small.
Sanctions do work....but only if they are applied and the issue is resolved in the short term. Sanctions are meant to be a warning and shouldn't remain in place for decades while the people the sanctions are designed to displace remain in power.
I think wee agrre here. See my other post.
I think the numbers you quote above are incorrect.....either way, the world community did its best to prevent innocents from suffering. Remember....the UN eased the sanctions to allow Iraq to sell oil to buy food and medicine. What did Saddam do with the money? He used it to equip his military in violation of an agreement that he made with the UN.
Numbers: They are from a UN-report. I think it was the UN foof agency (?) It's an estimate but its the best estimate yet.
Saddam did not use the money from this programm to military or luxary. See my other post.
I have not yet seen any evidence that Saddam equiped his millitary in violation of the agreements with UN.
How long do you propose that we wait next time?
As long as i takes. If USA wanted weapon inspections to find any possible WMD they could have voted for a continuing of the inspections.
You have bought in too strongly to the idea that if we curl up in our shell and ignore the bad things in the world, they will go away. This will never happen. The US learned awhile ago (Pearl Harbor) and recently (9/11) that an isolation policy does not ensure security.
I'm not a US citizen so I might have a different wiew on this than what you have.
But neither Pearl Harbour or 9.11 happend due to isolationism. Pearl Harbour happened because of Japan whanted to expand their territory, nearly impossible to guard onself against that happening sometimes.
I you think 9.11 took place because USA isolated itself from the rest of the world i think you serious need to cosider the way you look at the world. 9.11 happened beacause of US involvment in the Middle East; not beacuse of isolationism.
There is a option in the middle between isolationism and preventive(pre-emptive warfare.
We did EVERYTHING we could to force them in to economic ruin. "Ignoring" was never an option.
My point was that you don't have to go to military action or start with sanctions to crush a country.
I wrote: "*Ignoring here means not going to war or placing sanctions, not to ignore it completly or quit paying attention to a country."
Yeah. Say more. Like the part where Cuba suffers from such an economic burden that it can in no way be a threat to the US.
Where they ever a treat to US? Yah, maybe 40 yeas ago during the Cubile missile crisis. (you started the whole thing by placing nukes in Turkey BTW. But the Soviet Union did not start with sanctions agaist them even though they also was a country pretty close with a diffrient type of government di they?
But, you know what? I Castro wanted to blow Miami to pices with a warhead today ( he don't as far as I know) he could probably done it.
While luxury palaces were built and funds skimmed off the "oil for food" programs. Yeah, that was the USs fault. It did do quite a bit to keep them from rebuilding their miltary to any great degree.
The luxary palaces was not build from money from the oil-for food prog. UN has stated that 95% of the money in the programm where used correctly (food, aid, drugs etc.) The remaining 5% went for UN admnistration of the program.
If Saddam built any major new palaces after '91 it was probably from money either from smuggling or from taxes
Yes, the sanctions worked in keeping them from rebuilding their military. But putting sanctions on a country is not a long term sollution on a problem as it hurts the people of the country more than the government.
Dealing with whoms fault it is... USA supported Saddams regime greatly (economic support,political and weapons as chemical and biological)during the eighties when it served US interest. Running away and saying it's all one mad mans faullt is to easy.
Then you missed my point. I said AFTER diplomacy fails. What I dont like about YOUR rethoric is that diplomacy seems to be the ONLY option. It's not.
I have never said that diplomacy is the only way of handling conflicts. But in many conflict even after diplomacy has ended is it possible to solving problems without the use of millitary.
In the recent case of Iraq it was your goverment who did not want to continue with inspections. In some cases the use of military force is legitimate, in some it's not.
And the UN is so good at working things out, huh? There's a huge number of dead in Rwanda, the Balkens, Ivory Coast, etc... that might disagree with you -- were they alive to voice their opinion. The UN is a good place to TRY and work out deals, but it's not the END of the road when it fails.
UN is nothing more then what it members wants it to be. Noone have ever said its a perfect system.
In the recent case of Iraq it was in fact USA who did not want to continue with pressure on Iraq and continuing of weapon inspections. Probably because they would not have been able to remove Saddam that way. The UN sanctions where made to keep Saddam from getting WMD, not to remove him.
According to the UN charter when diplomacy fails and the security council faills to agrre on a resolutions that is the end of the road per se. The fact that your country choose to ignore this and attack Iraq anyway says alot about the USA today.
12 years of the UN unwillingness to either hard pressure Iraq or otherwise force Iraq to disarm should be a CLEAR example of this. 17 resolutions... 17. A piece of paper doesn't do anything to destroy poison gas -- but 250,000 highly armed soldiers sure do.
In those 12 years Iraq never attacked any of their neighbours or used any WMD. As long as the inspections had continud it is also unlikly that Iraq would have been able to build, import or use WMD.
An please show me where that poison gas is hidden will you?
There are three basic ways you can deal with a country that is unfriendly or just plain mean -- once diplomatic pressure fails.
Where is this obsession on "dealing" with a country come from? Why do you have to deal with a country? Ignoring* a "evil" country/regime/place worked fine in the case of USA vs. Soviet Union. Eventually Soviet Union broke down inside by itself without any serious war.
Think about this: If the Soviet Union had existed today it would probably be one of the Axis of Evil- states. Bush-administration plans for preventive/pre-emptive warfare probably would have resulted in an attack on this "evil empire". Imagien the result if every other country on earth should start to "deal" with counties they don't like?
China would have started to deal with Taiwan, Japan and India. India would follow up with Pakistan. Russia would deal with some former republics... And Africa and the Middle East would be in total chaos.
*Ignoring here means not going to war or placing sanctions, not to ignore it completly or quit paying attention to a country.
(1) Ignore them (Has little effect al la China)
Wored fine on Soviet Union. (in this context a little war over Vietnam/Afghanistan/some South-American contries don't count) It will probablly work on China in some years too.
(2) Sanctions (Cuba, Iraq, Libia)
Cuba: Castro still rules...Do I really need to say more?
Iraq: 600000 childrens dead under the sanctions; didn't work, Instead they strnghtened Saddams regime.
Libia: I would call it even. Sanctions have crippled their economy, but Ghadaffi still in power.
(3) War
Going to war over every disagreement ain't a long term solution in conflicts.
Do you have any suggestions? Remember, "dealing" with people goes both ways. All the worlds problems aren't the fault of the US.
I agree. I think this is the problem with some parts of the corrent US administration; failing to see that they don't have to try t correct (in terms of correcting with military force) every regime they don't like.
But what I don't like about about your rethoric is that you try to limit the possible actions USA can take against other countries into two possibillities; either
1. Do nothing. When some republicans talk about this option on dubius radio shows they make it look like this is bound to result in every fucking country whom disagree with US will start supplying Osama with nukes.
2. Harsh reactions like sanctions or war.
When you do that, you and everyone following your rhetoric fail to see that there are other options; such as trying to work out a deal trough UN.
Re:power consumption/size
on
Mini-Box M-100
·
· Score: 1
Interestingly, a desktop harddrive consumes about 17 watts in typical operation. So the 10 Watt figure is likely optimistic and/or when no peripheral devices are being used.
Maybe I'm nitpicking but I think 17 watts is a bit high. A Seagate Barracuda V (typical harddrive for a homebox/mediabox setup; high capacity, low price and low noice) has these power requirements:
+12 VDC +/-10% (amps typ operating) 2.8
+5 VDC +/-5% (amps typ operating) 0.844
If I remember right Fujitsu have a series of harddrives with even lower power requirements; down towards 10 watts as max power consumtion. Or you can get a hard-drive made for mobile computers; they have power consumption below 6 watts (lower capacity though).
Why bother doing social engineering at all?
Probably well over 50% of users use a common password within the top 10 category. (source silicon.com and Egg (UK bank))
Top 10 list:
1. Blank
2. password.
3. Cartoon(s).
4. Footbal team or player.
5. Pets.
6. Date of birth.
7. Girfriend name.
8. Something nasty; words like sex, fu** or prOn.
9. Sci-fi or fantasy (Gandalf, Yoda, etc.).
10. Company name.
Other common alternatives:
-Names on children
-qwerty and asdf
-Same password and login (root and root)
It's sad; but Joe-users are (generally) very ignorant about this problem.
Slashdot Mirror
I am already at the Guantanamo Bay; and all the cells are already occupied you unsensitive clod!
The obviuos firearm analogy: A national gun registry would be meaningless if you could transform your gun into an fully automatic rifle.
Trying to registry something that it's possible to transform or change is just plain stupid.
To me it looks like Sun x86 are competing with Sun SPARC with this move.
Who wants to buy a Sun Fire V240 at $6495 when they can this Sun Fire V65x at $4595?
Lets look at the specs:
V240 (SPARC),2U 2*1GHz UltraSPARC3, 1 MB Cache pr.CPU, 2 GB RAM max 8GB, 2 x 36 GB max 4, 4 x1Gb Ethernet, Solaris 8.
V65x (x86),2U 2*3GHz Xeon, 512 KB Cache pr.CPU, 1 GB RAM max 12GB, 1 x 36 GB, max 6, 2 x1Gb Ethernet, Solaris 9 or Linux.
Maybe the SPARC have better "troughput" for some applications, but it looks as if the V65x is better overall especially for CPU intensive tasks.
Since the volume of total SPARC CPU's will go further down as more Sun machines are sold with Intel CPU's they will become even more expensive.
(*Well actually I have, but that don't fit into my slashdot-image and would not make this joke funny.)
Some nice moves and stuff that shows that they have been working a lot with the physichs engine. Looks like its possible to interact a lot with the environment, like for example shoot of fragments of the walls etc.
Rumors has it that it is the physics engine from Havok. The last months Havok have listed a "yet to be announced game" from Valve under the tab "Developers using the Havok physics engine.
Yeah; the video: Here
It's a high speed download through Akamai so you should be able to get it fast. Actually, this video is probably about to get released trough a lot of registartion over at Gamespot...
I got it on IRC(Quakenet), so I guessed someone snooped around testing possible url's until they found this one.
You live in a banana republic with almost an banana economy; so what did you expect?
Several different versions of the same bill is so thirdworldish.
[/trollmode]
Then I noticed that Radio Userland appeared very high on Google. In fact, when you search for "radio"* they get a #5 at Google. As far as i know they only existed for a year. And their popularity, as it appears on google, looks very inflated because of extremly many links in blogs.
Checked out Daypop.com, which ranks articles/links based on the number of links in blogs. This is what I got:
Searching All Weblogs for link:radio.userland.com... Found 3260 pages matching query.
Thats insane. When so many blogs links to the same page their ranking on google gets very high based only on blog-popularity.
*Searching for only radio is obvious a bad idea as google returns some 40 m. hits.
Yeah, you can use a microwave oven but putting tires inside the oven is kind of hard.
This would probably work on those automatic traffic controller systems with digital cameras that take pictures of speeding to...
But not impossible thoug; by using of the shelf hardware like the VIA CPU and EPIA M-ITX board, standard M-ITX case, generic RAM, CDROM, mouse, LCD etc. and stripped GNU/Linux distro of choice it's possible to create complete units with LCD-screen for $500.
After all you can get low-quality 15" LCD's as low as $221 (pricewatch.com)Within 6-months it's probably possible to buy medium quality 15" LCD for $200.
When I talk, I normally (95% of the cases) use "linux", the "gnu" thing is kind of hard to use in normal daily sitiations.
But when I write something I try to remember to use GNU/Linux.
By doing this I at least acknowledge that there are more to GNU/Linux than just the kernel.
For example: In Debian; GNU/Linux is an essential part of the name on the distro.
Even though this Exec Shield Owerflow Protection is great; where is the Executive owerflow protection that will protect me from my boss when he wants to execute me?
1.
Radar operator in military:-God damit! OMFG! There is CM heading for the Washington prob. the White House! I'm caling the President RIGHT NOW so he can shut down the civilian GPS system.
*Calls White House by dialing 666-WWHITE HOUSE EMERGENCY HOT-LINE*
President: -Howdy! What's up sergeant?
*Radar op. explains*
President: -Ok. I press the button that triggers the civil GPS-system on and of, it right here om my side on the desk.
*President push button and civil GPS-system is offline. Terrorist CM crash.*
Total time from detection to shutdown: Less than 2 min.
or
2.
Radar operator in military:-God damit! OMFG! There is CM heading for the Washington prob. the White House! I'm caling my [Insert highest ranking officer he can call].
*Calls [highest ranking officer]* Highest ranking fficer: -Holy shit! OMFG this ain't no test or exercise!
*trigger all the possible terrorist alarms*
*Calls Chief of Staff in Pentagon (or whoever is in charge there)*
Chief of Staff: -Holy shit. OMFG we are running out of time, fuck the President, not time to get in touch with him. I'm taking the decision: We have to shut down the civil GPS system who guids the CM.
*Calls [whatever agency who is in charge of this system]
Chief of Staff: -Incomming terorist CM in Washington. Sut down the civil GPS system NOW!
At the agency: The techdude: -OK.
*Techdude writes on his keyboard : "shutdown -h now" (or similar command)*
*Civil GPS system goes down and CM crash*
Total time from detection to shutdown: Somewhere between 10 and 15 minutes. (wildly guessed)
And the cost of putting a limit on informatin in areas such as electronics or rocket science would be *way* over what anyone would accept.
The best way to prevent a terrorist attack with LCCM's is to keep an eye on who's who in rocket scienc, jet propulsion and turbo jets.
The powerplant on the rocket is the one single component that i difficault to get(buy) or construct.
Or better (like thats gonna happen); try to eliminate the reason behind the fact that there actually are (probably) somone who wants to fire a LCCM on New York.
He is obvious trolling with quotes like:
Moderators who moderated this up: Get a clue.
I agree on what you write with one exception:
Even if we get the music that we want and that means higher quality for us (higher quality in an subjective way); the result of this way of shopping music won't be only good.The focus will (on longterm) shift even more from good albums an the total music experience with a good album to even more focus in singles.
Many "classic" rock and pop albums are good because of the combination of songs. Take for example some Metallica albums or Beatles, Radiohead, Massive Attack or Queen albums. Of course many of these albums have great singles but not all good albums have this.
If the case boils down to who owns UNIX and different flavours off it then I guess this case could drag out for years with endless lawsuits.
Since SCO can't afford that, and IBM can; SCO will probably go Chapter 11.
Anyone who can open a Internet Explorer window can instal, configure and "secure" a 802.11 device or network.
Even my aunt, who don't understand anything about computers managed to get her new SMC Barricade Turbo Wireless up and running with Win2k. (She forgot to enable the 256-bit WEP, but I did that for her.)
This means that there a tons of peolpe out there without any understanding about what they are really doing.
Yup, you can call me an elitist, but the fact is that most people are really stupid when it comes to network security.
Imagine the caos if someone came up with a new invention, electrical power transfered through the air:
"The wireless and easy home setup of yor own power network. Connect all your electrical devices to this new and easy(again) power grid(buzzword compliant.)"
After all; "The Matrix has you".
You staring at it in the shop:
"Have you ever stood and stared at it....marvelled at it's beauty....it's genius?"
You calling tech-support:
"What is The Matrix...."
tech support trying to get a grip on Linux:
"That was you on my computer. How did you do that? "
Tech support reply:
"What good is a phone call, if you are unable to speeeaaaakkk?"
You replying to the evil tech-support:
"I know you're out there. I can feel you now. I know that you're afraid...you're afraid of us...you're afraid of change. I don't know the future, I didn't come here to tell you how this is going to end. I came here to tell you how it's going to begin. I'm going to hang up this phone and then I'm going to show these people what you don't want them to see...I'm going to show them a world...without you. A world without rules and controls, without borders or boundaries. A world where anything is possible. Where we go from there is a choice I leave to you!"
If you are thinking of article 17....;
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
Of course Iraq needs proper legislation/laws on this subject, but if you think they (US administartion)are doing this to protect Iraqi copyright holders I think you SERIOUSLY need to rethink your opinion.
I thinks thinks [INSERT disclaimer that maybe the Reg. article aint correct] that this with other stories; for example USA protecting one Minstry in Bagdad; the Minestry of Oil, shows what the real motivation behind the Iraq-war was.
No, I'm not saying that the invasion came because of copyrights or oil alone, thats just a bonus. When someone invade acountry they get to decide the legislation/laws inside that country. But selecting, among others; Hillary Rosen to help doing this says a lot about the current administartion.
After the defeat/collapse of the Third Reich/Nazi-Germany it probably went over a year befor they though about copyrights. IMHO that probably was a good thing. Other needs are far more important than copyrights right now. People are dying inside Iraq and you are thinking on copyrights?
Shame on you.
Saddam did not use the money from this programm to military or luxary. See my other post.
I have not yet seen any evidence that Saddam equiped his millitary in violation of the agreements with UN. As long as i takes. If USA wanted weapon inspections to find any possible WMD they could have voted for a continuing of the inspections. I'm not a US citizen so I might have a different wiew on this than what you have.
But neither Pearl Harbour or 9.11 happend due to isolationism. Pearl Harbour happened because of Japan whanted to expand their territory, nearly impossible to guard onself against that happening sometimes.
I you think 9.11 took place because USA isolated itself from the rest of the world i think you serious need to cosider the way you look at the world. 9.11 happened beacause of US involvment in the Middle East; not beacuse of isolationism.
There is a option in the middle between isolationism and preventive(pre-emptive warfare.
I wrote: "*Ignoring here means not going to war or placing sanctions, not to ignore it completly or quit paying attention to a country." Where they ever a treat to US? Yah, maybe 40 yeas ago during the Cubile missile crisis. (you started the whole thing by placing nukes in Turkey BTW. But the Soviet Union did not start with sanctions agaist them even though they also was a country pretty close with a diffrient type of government di they?
But, you know what? I Castro wanted to blow Miami to pices with a warhead today ( he don't as far as I know) he could probably done it. The luxary palaces was not build from money from the oil-for food prog. UN has stated that 95% of the money in the programm where used correctly (food, aid, drugs etc.) The remaining 5% went for UN admnistration of the program.
If Saddam built any major new palaces after '91 it was probably from money either from smuggling or from taxes
Yes, the sanctions worked in keeping them from rebuilding their military. But putting sanctions on a country is not a long term sollution on a problem as it hurts the people of the country more than the government.
Dealing with whoms fault it is... USA supported Saddams regime greatly (economic support,political and weapons as chemical and biological)during the eighties when it served US interest. Running away and saying it's all one mad mans faullt is to easy. I have never said that diplomacy is the only way of handling conflicts. But in many conflict even after diplomacy has ended is it possible to solving problems without the use of millitary.
In the recent case of Iraq it was your goverment who did not want to continue with inspections. In some cases the use of military force is legitimate, in some it's not. UN is nothing more then what it members wants it to be. Noone have ever said its a perfect system.
In the recent case of Iraq it was in fact USA who did not want to continue with pressure on Iraq and continuing of weapon inspections. Probably because they would not have been able to remove Saddam that way. The UN sanctions where made to keep Saddam from getting WMD, not to remove him.
According to the UN charter when diplomacy fails and the security council faills to agrre on a resolutions that is the end of the road per se. The fact that your country choose to ignore this and attack Iraq anyway says alot about the USA today.
In those 12 years Iraq never attacked any of their neighbours or used any WMD. As long as the inspections had continud it is also unlikly that Iraq would have been able to build, import or use WMD.An please show me where that poison gas is hidden will you?
Where is this obsession on "dealing" with a country come from? Why do you have to deal with a country?
Ignoring* a "evil" country/regime/place worked fine in the case of USA vs. Soviet Union. Eventually Soviet Union broke down inside by itself without any serious war.
Think about this: If the Soviet Union had existed today it would probably be one of the Axis of Evil- states. Bush-administration plans for preventive/pre-emptive warfare probably would have resulted in an attack on this "evil empire". Imagien the result if every other country on earth should start to "deal" with counties they don't like?
China would have started to deal with Taiwan, Japan and India. India would follow up with Pakistan. Russia would deal with some former republics... And Africa and the Middle East would be in total chaos.
*Ignoring here means not going to war or placing sanctions, not to ignore it completly or quit paying attention to a country.
Wored fine on Soviet Union. (in this context a little war over Vietnam/Afghanistan/some South-American contries don't count) It will probablly work on China in some years too. Cuba: Castro still rules...Do I really need to say more?Iraq: 600000 childrens dead under the sanctions; didn't work, Instead they strnghtened Saddams regime.
Libia: I would call it even. Sanctions have crippled their economy, but Ghadaffi still in power. Going to war over every disagreement ain't a long term solution in conflicts. I agree. I think this is the problem with some parts of the corrent US administration; failing to see that they don't have to try t correct (in terms of correcting with military force) every regime they don't like.
But what I don't like about about your rethoric is that you try to limit the possible actions USA can take against other countries into two possibillities; either
1. Do nothing. When some republicans talk about this option on dubius radio shows they make it look like this is bound to result in every fucking country whom disagree with US will start supplying Osama with nukes.
2. Harsh reactions like sanctions or war.
When you do that, you and everyone following your rhetoric fail to see that there are other options; such as trying to work out a deal trough UN.
Maybe I'm nitpicking but I think 17 watts is a bit high. A Seagate Barracuda V (typical harddrive for a homebox/mediabox setup; high capacity, low price and low noice) has these power requirements:
+12 VDC +/-10% (amps typ operating) 2.8
+5 VDC +/-5% (amps typ operating) 0.844
Power Management (watts)
Seek 13
Read/Write 12
Idle 9.5
Standby 0.7
If I remember right Fujitsu have a series of harddrives with even lower power requirements; down towards 10 watts as max power consumtion.
Or you can get a hard-drive made for mobile computers; they have power consumption below 6 watts (lower capacity though).
Word. /. I clicked on it aprox. 2.44; 2 min after launch and the server was gone beyond imagination.
Extremly fast
Probably well over 50% of users use a common password within the top 10 category. (source silicon.com and Egg (UK bank))
Top 10 list:
1. Blank
2. password.
3. Cartoon(s).
4. Footbal team or player.
5. Pets.
6. Date of birth.
7. Girfriend name.
8. Something nasty; words like sex, fu** or prOn.
9. Sci-fi or fantasy (Gandalf, Yoda, etc.).
10. Company name.
Other common alternatives:
-Names on children
-qwerty and asdf
-Same password and login (root and root)
It's sad; but Joe-users are (generally) very ignorant about this problem.