Then what? Full sized sedans. A monte carlo will crush your hybrid civic, after all.
Then, make all the guard rails out of fucking NERF foam, because this solar car wouldn't have survived that either. And ban telephone poles and signs and trees. Then pave the entire earth so it's full of nothing but solar powered bumper cars that cant go more than 10mph and harmlessly bounce off of each other.
It's completely impractical. I know the green nuts cant accept it, but there are practical uses for SUVs, pickup trucks, and minivans. Most people that I know who drive any of them drive them for those reasons. Landscapers or other workers, people with families, etc.
How about, instead, we put safety above greenpeace rhetoric? Why dont you RAISE the bumpers on your ultra compacts. Why cant that be done? Why couldnt the bumber be above the radiator grille? No reason at all, it's just aesthetic. Honda would rather have you die in a crash than make it's car look "funny", a design inherent in the new hybrids.
No, they'd be worse. Both drivers would have been killed.
You'd be basically unprotected. You may as well be in a cardboard box. Hit just about anything at 50, 60 mph, and you're pretty much fucked.
Just like motorcyclists get killed all the time. It's nigh on impossible to survive a bike crash at highway speeds, whether you hit something, or just lost control and wiped out on the pavement.
But we have motorcycles. It's not so much the structure of the vehicle, IMO, but the fact that he lost control of it. Why? What was wrong that he'd lose control as described in the article? Did they skimp on the steering/braking mechanisms to save on weight too?
You pay 40 bucks a month for "new and improved radio" after real radio was ruined, and you cant record it.
How gaylicious.
Who listens to the radio anyways? It's a dead medium. Video killed the radio star.
Seriously, would you rather listen to Britney Spears or look at her? Oh wait, this is slashdot. Would you rather listen to Justin Timberlake or look at him? Thats better.
By not posting SCO stories unless there's actual news. Like a final judgement that actually means something.
Everytime one of their lawyers cuts wind theres a/. story about it.
Don't give them the chance to astroturf. Simple enough. Just regurgitate more marketing text about the awesome power of the iPod or Tivo instead. It all goes to the same place.
If a company hired good programmers, then they'd realize that the difference between languages is mostly syntactical, and a fairly shallow learning curve. That is, to a good (experienced) programmer.
I've never learned python, but I can read through some of the tutorials and nothing about it scares me or seems radically new. Just some new syntax and keywords, ho-hum. Such a silly thing to argue about.
Though computer geeks argue about much sillier things. Ie; the flamewars on "hardcore techie" websites about whether Panaflo or Vantec makes the quieter 80mm case fan are fun to read when you're bored.
I was thinking of the gigabytes upon gigabytes of DVD quality full length porn DivX's on the samba server I set up. I need much faster wireless if I'm to stream them all simultaneously and achieve total sensory overload.
Well if pretty source code is what matters, why dont you just use VB?
For each Object in Collection
Object.DoSomething Next Object
That's more "readable" than either of your examples, even readable by someone who's never coded anything in their lives.
Frankly, I wouldn't call it a better tool than either, though that might depend on the requirements of the project.
You have to assume your code is going to be read by someone with an understanding of the language. If you don't know that a C program starts at int main(int argc, char **argv) then it's not the coders fault, for example.
Good programmers are good programmers period, and the best programmers dont crusade for their "favorite language". If routine/application X is best accomplished in ASM, C, Java, Snobol, Python, or brainfuck, then so be it.
And what's so compelling about his "Java programmers are dum Python programmers are 1337" thesis?
Sounds like flamebait to me.
Besides, everyone knows.NET programmers are smarter, stronger, better looking, and more well groomed than Python or Java programmers anyways. Its obvious, because they aren't looking for only financial benefits and better tools, but also for sex with members of the opposite sex. Therefore they bathe, use deoderant, and are more likely to go to the gym once in a while.
Now anyone who needs to use nmap will have to run it from linux. Which shouldn't be a problem for anyone who uses it legitimately (hell, they probably aready are using linux).
Hell, run it from coLinux, it'll take all of 10 minutes to install.
It also means the script kiddies will need to learn linux, which eliminates 99% of them right there. Woohoo.
They didn't actually eliminate raw sockets, they just changed the rules. No raw TCP, and no raw UDP with a source address that isn't currently bound to an interface on your machine.
Hmm, someone as smart as fyodor could easily put his spoofed IP onto a virtual TAP adapter, and the API should let him use that address. Something to play with.
What versions of windows supported raw sockets, anyways? Anyone know? I thought it was introduced in 2000, but I'm not sure.
This guy drives me nuts. I can't stand FUD and lies.
I'm talking about the "shields up" thing. It claims if you're in "stealth mode" then your machine is invisible. This is idiotic.
Dropping incoming packets doesnt make you "invisible". If you were "invisible" and I tried to ping you, I'd get a "destination unreachable" error. If I get timeouts, I know you're there and dropping my packets. If you replied to my pings with "destination unreahables" you might trick me, unless I noticed that the destination unreachable messages were coming from the IP I was pinging (duh!).
It's as false as the "your machine is broadcasting an IP!" popups.
Fuck him and his crusade to break the internet by trying to convince people there's something to be gained by dropping incoming packets, instead of responding with a proper RST packet or ICMP message.
Linux folks, set your default firewall properties to DENY, and not DROP. It doesn't make you vulnerable, it doesn't allow SYN floods (which attack by spawning multiple server threads on a local port - an application vulnerability not a TCP/IP one).
It doesn't "hide" you from scanners, as he claims.
It doesn't prevent DDoS attacks, if I have enough bandwidth to clog your downstream, it doesnt matter what you do with all the crap I flood you with.
Actually, heh, he is doing a spin on the old "your machine is broadcasting an IP address" scam:
Many Internet connection IP addresses are associated with a DNS machine name. (But yours is not.) The presence of "Reverse DNS", which allows the machine name to be retrieved from the IP address, can represent a privacy and possible security concern for Internet consumers since it may uniquely and persistently identify your Internet account -- and therefore you -- and may disclose other information, such as your geographic location.
Uhhh, I can get that from the numeric IP, who cares about the reverse DNS. Do the RIAA do reverse DNS lookups when they launch all those suits against IPs?
This machine does have a static IP and proper DNS, so I dont know why his tool says it doesnt. Though, I don't really care.
Not only that, the majority of those boxes borked because of a preexisting trojan that tries to disable firewalls/antivirus/etc.
Great, all those grandmas can take their machines back to Best Buy who will reformat and reinstall for them.
Remember, we dont like those infected machines on our internet.
The instructions say to do your virus scanning and make sure your box is clean before proceeding, and it warns you to make a backup before starting, so I have no tears to shed for the lazy folks who didn't.
Nothing wrong with running messenger if it isn't listening on your public interface. It's useful to send out broadcast messages on the local lan (NET SEND * "SERVER WILL REBOOT IN 5 MINUTES")
I have a view. It hasnt caused a problem on any machine in my office, and I can only say that my personal machine at least "feels" more responsive.
Look, this is slashdot. They aren't going to be objective. For years the whine has been "MSFT default security is teh suck". MS releases a service pack that locks the boxes down reasonably well. Now that's something to complain about: "my kazaa is teh broked!"
Limiting outbound TCP connections to something sane make sense. Let the extreme P2P kiddies relax the rules manually. On the majority of desktops (not SERVERS) out there, an inordinate amount of outbound traffic is a sign of something bad, like a backdoored spam relay or the machine has been taken over as a DDoS drone.
SP2 crashed a lot of machines that were already exploited. Good. They were already broken. Now those guys can go to Best Buy, who will format and reinstall for them, juice them up with SP2, and there's one less source of SPAM/DDoS/Worms/stupidness.
IMO, SP2 was a huge step in the right direction, and confirmation to me that MSFT is doing more than paying lip service to security.
Of course, this is slashdot, and everything they do is wrong.
It's worth noting that I've never borked a windows box installing a service pack, all the way back to win 95. On the other hand, I've lost track of how much time I've spent cleaning up after typing "emerge -uD world". I thought I'd mention that so I can ensure I'll be modded troll. It's true, though, I swear it.
Because firefox does an Im Feeling Lucky search on everything up to the semicolon. It does this for any non-valid URL. microsoft.com just happens to be the first hit for the string "http;"
I'm sure if it tried to start a VNC server on a port you've already bound, it would fail like anything else. All they'd have to do, though, is specifiy another port.
This will be over the head of the average script kiddy. The metasploit guys better write some code to automatically choose an open port and report it back to the kiddy in words he can understand, like "point your vnc client to 192.168.1.1:1321" (yeah, I used an rfc1918 IP for my example, suck it)
The easier it is for any 13 year old asshat to exploit these vulnerabilities, the more the value of self-titled "security experts" goes up. Then they can jack small businesses for a 5 grand "consulting fee" to recommend they install a firewall.
They're creating a problem in the hopes they'll be paid to solve it, in short.
Kind of like a windshield salesman going around daring/encouraging neighbourhood kids to throw rocks at passing cars.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, and all the semi's, RV's and cube vans.
Then what? Full sized sedans. A monte carlo will crush your hybrid civic, after all.
Then, make all the guard rails out of fucking NERF foam, because this solar car wouldn't have survived that either. And ban telephone poles and signs and trees. Then pave the entire earth so it's full of nothing but solar powered bumper cars that cant go more than 10mph and harmlessly bounce off of each other.
It's completely impractical. I know the green nuts cant accept it, but there are practical uses for SUVs, pickup trucks, and minivans. Most people that I know who drive any of them drive them for those reasons. Landscapers or other workers, people with families, etc.
How about, instead, we put safety above greenpeace rhetoric? Why dont you RAISE the bumpers on your ultra compacts. Why cant that be done? Why couldnt the bumber be above the radiator grille? No reason at all, it's just aesthetic. Honda would rather have you die in a crash than make it's car look "funny", a design inherent in the new hybrids.
No, they'd be worse. Both drivers would have been killed.
You'd be basically unprotected. You may as well be in a cardboard box. Hit just about anything at 50, 60 mph, and you're pretty much fucked.
Just like motorcyclists get killed all the time. It's nigh on impossible to survive a bike crash at highway speeds, whether you hit something, or just lost control and wiped out on the pavement.
But we have motorcycles. It's not so much the structure of the vehicle, IMO, but the fact that he lost control of it. Why? What was wrong that he'd lose control as described in the article? Did they skimp on the steering/braking mechanisms to save on weight too?
You pay 40 bucks a month for "new and improved radio" after real radio was ruined, and you cant record it.
How gaylicious.
Who listens to the radio anyways? It's a dead medium. Video killed the radio star.
Seriously, would you rather listen to Britney Spears or look at her? Oh wait, this is slashdot. Would you rather listen to Justin Timberlake or look at him? Thats better.
It is the mormons.
Apparantly through some twisted variation on natural selection, some of them lost an "M".
As long as you dont badmouth the iPod or Tivo, you're safe around here.
I keep making the mistake of mentioning what a ridiculous waste of money I think that both devices are.
By not posting SCO stories unless there's actual news. Like a final judgement that actually means something.
/. story about it.
Everytime one of their lawyers cuts wind theres a
Don't give them the chance to astroturf. Simple enough. Just regurgitate more marketing text about the awesome power of the iPod or Tivo instead. It all goes to the same place.
If a company hired good programmers, then they'd realize that the difference between languages is mostly syntactical, and a fairly shallow learning curve. That is, to a good (experienced) programmer.
I've never learned python, but I can read through some of the tutorials and nothing about it scares me or seems radically new. Just some new syntax and keywords, ho-hum. Such a silly thing to argue about.
Though computer geeks argue about much sillier things. Ie; the flamewars on "hardcore techie" websites about whether Panaflo or Vantec makes the quieter 80mm case fan are fun to read when you're bored.
I was thinking of the gigabytes upon gigabytes of DVD quality full length porn DivX's on the samba server I set up. I need much faster wireless if I'm to stream them all simultaneously and achieve total sensory overload.
If a design goal was "any attempt to reverse engineer the source will drive the person attempting to do so completely insane", then perhaps.
Well if pretty source code is what matters, why dont you just use VB?
For each Object in Collection
Object.DoSomething
Next Object
That's more "readable" than either of your examples, even readable by someone who's never coded anything in their lives.
Frankly, I wouldn't call it a better tool than either, though that might depend on the requirements of the project.
You have to assume your code is going to be read by someone with an understanding of the language. If you don't know that a C program starts at int main(int argc, char **argv) then it's not the coders fault, for example.
Good programmers are good programmers period, and the best programmers dont crusade for their "favorite language". If routine/application X is best accomplished in ASM, C, Java, Snobol, Python, or brainfuck, then so be it.
And what's so compelling about his "Java programmers are dum Python programmers are 1337" thesis?
.NET programmers are smarter, stronger, better looking, and more well groomed than Python or Java programmers anyways. Its obvious, because they aren't looking for only financial benefits and better tools, but also for sex with members of the opposite sex. Therefore they bathe, use deoderant, and are more likely to go to the gym once in a while.
Sounds like flamebait to me.
Besides, everyone knows
Can you imagine a wireless network being used for something other than being able to browse internet porn while sitting in the bathroom?
If this works as advertised, it may actually be a real replacement for 100mbit wired lans.
Install coLinux, bridged mode.
Install nmap on colinux. Run nmap.
Heck, isntall cygwin X server, and run the fancy GUI nmap.
It just raises the bar a little bit. Over the heads of a lot of the script kiddies out there, I'd bet.
Boo hoo.
Now anyone who needs to use nmap will have to run it from linux. Which shouldn't be a problem for anyone who uses it legitimately (hell, they probably aready are using linux).
Hell, run it from coLinux, it'll take all of 10 minutes to install.
It also means the script kiddies will need to learn linux, which eliminates 99% of them right there. Woohoo.
They didn't actually eliminate raw sockets, they just changed the rules. No raw TCP, and no raw UDP with a source address that isn't currently bound to an interface on your machine.
Hmm, someone as smart as fyodor could easily put his spoofed IP onto a virtual TAP adapter, and the API should let him use that address. Something to play with.
What versions of windows supported raw sockets, anyways? Anyone know? I thought it was introduced in 2000, but I'm not sure.
I thought it was:
Windows Messenger = the Messenger Service
MSN Messenger = the chat client
This guy drives me nuts. I can't stand FUD and lies.
I'm talking about the "shields up" thing. It claims if you're in "stealth mode" then your machine is invisible. This is idiotic.
Dropping incoming packets doesnt make you "invisible". If you were "invisible" and I tried to ping you, I'd get a "destination unreachable" error. If I get timeouts, I know you're there and dropping my packets. If you replied to my pings with "destination unreahables" you might trick me, unless I noticed that the destination unreachable messages were coming from the IP I was pinging (duh!).
It's as false as the "your machine is broadcasting an IP!" popups.
Fuck him and his crusade to break the internet by trying to convince people there's something to be gained by dropping incoming packets, instead of responding with a proper RST packet or ICMP message.
Linux folks, set your default firewall properties to DENY, and not DROP. It doesn't make you vulnerable, it doesn't allow SYN floods (which attack by spawning multiple server threads on a local port - an application vulnerability not a TCP/IP one).
It doesn't "hide" you from scanners, as he claims.
It doesn't prevent DDoS attacks, if I have enough bandwidth to clog your downstream, it doesnt matter what you do with all the crap I flood you with.
Actually, heh, he is doing a spin on the old "your machine is broadcasting an IP address" scam:
Many Internet connection IP addresses are associated with a DNS machine name. (But yours is not.) The presence of "Reverse DNS", which allows the machine name to be retrieved from the IP address, can represent a privacy and possible security concern for Internet consumers since it may uniquely and persistently identify your Internet account -- and therefore you -- and may disclose other information, such as your geographic location.
Uhhh, I can get that from the numeric IP, who cares about the reverse DNS. Do the RIAA do reverse DNS lookups when they launch all those suits against IPs?
This machine does have a static IP and proper DNS, so I dont know why his tool says it doesnt. Though, I don't really care.
Your slashdot reality distortion field is broken. Noone ever says anything positive about MSFT, evar!!!!11!1!
Not only that, the majority of those boxes borked because of a preexisting trojan that tries to disable firewalls/antivirus/etc.
Great, all those grandmas can take their machines back to Best Buy who will reformat and reinstall for them.
Remember, we dont like those infected machines on our internet.
The instructions say to do your virus scanning and make sure your box is clean before proceeding, and it warns you to make a backup before starting, so I have no tears to shed for the lazy folks who didn't.
Chances are extremely high that machine was already exploited, and deserved to die, IMO.
Nothing wrong with running messenger if it isn't listening on your public interface. It's useful to send out broadcast messages on the local lan (NET SEND * "SERVER WILL REBOOT IN 5 MINUTES")
I have a view. It hasnt caused a problem on any machine in my office, and I can only say that my personal machine at least "feels" more responsive.
Look, this is slashdot. They aren't going to be objective. For years the whine has been "MSFT default security is teh suck". MS releases a service pack that locks the boxes down reasonably well. Now that's something to complain about: "my kazaa is teh broked!"
Limiting outbound TCP connections to something sane make sense. Let the extreme P2P kiddies relax the rules manually. On the majority of desktops (not SERVERS) out there, an inordinate amount of outbound traffic is a sign of something bad, like a backdoored spam relay or the machine has been taken over as a DDoS drone.
SP2 crashed a lot of machines that were already exploited. Good. They were already broken. Now those guys can go to Best Buy, who will format and reinstall for them, juice them up with SP2, and there's one less source of SPAM/DDoS/Worms/stupidness.
IMO, SP2 was a huge step in the right direction, and confirmation to me that MSFT is doing more than paying lip service to security.
Of course, this is slashdot, and everything they do is wrong.
It's worth noting that I've never borked a windows box installing a service pack, all the way back to win 95. On the other hand, I've lost track of how much time I've spent cleaning up after typing "emerge -uD world". I thought I'd mention that so I can ensure I'll be modded troll. It's true, though, I swear it.
Because firefox does an Im Feeling Lucky search on everything up to the semicolon. It does this for any non-valid URL. microsoft.com just happens to be the first hit for the string "http;"
I'm sure if it tried to start a VNC server on a port you've already bound, it would fail like anything else. All they'd have to do, though, is specifiy another port.
This will be over the head of the average script kiddy. The metasploit guys better write some code to automatically choose an open port and report it back to the kiddy in words he can understand, like "point your vnc client to 192.168.1.1:1321" (yeah, I used an rfc1918 IP for my example, suck it)
No, it's quite simple.
/encouraging neighbourhood kids to throw rocks at passing cars.
The easier it is for any 13 year old asshat to exploit these vulnerabilities, the more the value of self-titled "security experts" goes up. Then they can jack small businesses for a 5 grand "consulting fee" to recommend they install a firewall.
They're creating a problem in the hopes they'll be paid to solve it, in short.
Kind of like a windshield salesman going around daring