If we effectively kill off every port on the internet.. what is the point of having the TCP layer protocol? And if we killed it, wouldn't a lot of devices simply stop working? So I ask.. WHY!?
Personally, I love the idea of having ports. It allows a lot of intrasystem communication, even if it isn't the best way of doing it, and it allows many many services to run on one machine. hell, without TCP, we wouldnt have IMAP or POP3 or SMTP etc.. (unless someone did them from a web front, sorta like yahoo, but then it's the same thing on their end....) Somewhere down the line, people have gotta realize, fixing the problem doesn't mean you have to break something else in the first place. ISP's need to let the users deal with viruses, even if they are 100% computer illiterate. Maybe they should offer a service where they will patch your system for a price, instead of simply blocking a port that someone may have been using constructively. This really outrages me, because Adelphia, my Cable provider, has killed so many ports due to virus outbreakes (Codered killed 80, MSBlaster killed 135, 139, 4444, and a bunch of UDP ports), ports that I would have liked to use (port 80 mainly). I have to redirect to 8080, and not many people will know how to do that. Please people, think before doing something so drastic as cutting off all the ports... There are much better solutions.
I assure you that you have no idea what you are talking about. That quote PROVES our point.
The "mobile Intel Pentium 4 processor-M" is better known as Pentium 4-M. The processor we are talking about here is better known as Banias, a part of Centrino technology, and it offically called by Intel: Pentium M. Notice Penitum M DOES NOT EQUAL Pentium 4-M. There are likenesses, but they are two, completely different processors.
This confusion is the exact reason Intel branded it under the name Centrino. With the addition of a WiFi card, the Pentium M becomes Centrino-compliant, and is marketed under that name. Once again, I ask you to know what the fu you are talking about. Thanks!
Ok, I will say this once again. Pentium 4 Pentium M Pentium 4-M. Each is it's own processor. The Pentium 4-M is the mobile component of the Pentium 4 class. The Pentium M is a mobile component of the Pentium _3_ class, but it has been upgraded with the good parts of the Pentium 4. And secondly, I checked the links before I replied to this.. that's how I knew they were Pentium 4 M and not Pentium M. Thanks.
There are two different processors right now in Intel's Mobile fleet. One is called the Pentium 4-M, the other is simply Pentium M. The one we are discussing is the Pentium M. The boards you linked to are the Pentium 4-M. The difference is that they took technology from the Pentium 4 and applied it to a chopped down version of the Pentium 3's core. Things such as the 400MHz processor bus, the Micro ops L1, and other chip level micro enhancements were copied back to the Pentium 3 (tualitin). This makes the Pentium M really something like Pentium 3.5, but they really couldn't name it that, so they simply dropped the number and it became Pentium M.
Recent delays in Prescott make me think they are probably doing that to a more developed level to the Pentium 4's core so that the "Pentium 5" won't run as hot. Prescott definitely won't see the advantages of the copying, but Tejas, or possibly even a Prescott b revision, will.
It's a port for a WiFi card to make it a completely Centrino-compliant platform. They really couldn't have chosen a worse place for it though, and they didn't do a good job labling it on the website either. But I hope that answers your question;)
I mean like a BIOS rom, the software is physically stored on the chip instead of a logical representation on a hard drive. this makes the data much more secure against user stupidity and file modifiying viruses..
by this i mean like my pda, it has a rom chip that is flashable: ie it can be updated but for the most part it is non-editable, making a virus or an accidental deletion of a system file practically impossible...
Won't all computers end up being embedded devices? I mean really think about it. Why would you load the OS on to a hard drive when you could easly put it on a hardware level and put all the programs on the disk. Makes a lot of sense because you save so much disk space, and at the same time, the OS is more secured against accidental deletion and file corrupting viruses.
So I treat this as the ultimate victory for Linux. The next generation of computers is wireless and mobile and trying to keep everything secure. Firmware Operating Systems is the solution; hail the next coming of a great era, the wireless/linux revolution!
I work for our school as an assistant network admin, which means I'm also in charge of the phyiscal setup of the machines at our school. Just recently, our school purchased 10 new dell workstations for the students. They were all running Windows XP when we bought them from Dell, and when we started them all up they all displayed a screen saying "By hitting next, you agree to all of the individual software user end license agreements." Since our department couldn't read the agreements, we had to strip every machine and install Windows 2000, which Microsoft charged us another 65$ for all 10 of them. Not to mention the fact we have 10 Windows XP disks around that we cannot possibly use because we can't read the EULA. Anyone know of a way to get a refund for these 10 licenses we can't possibly use?
Anyone know if the new kernel has been fixed for the C-Media 9738 AC97 Codec? Last time I checked Alan Cox "patched" this in 2.4.21 and my integrated sound didn't work. I know this has gotta be a pretty big problem.. my board was pretty popular (K7S6A)...
The reason NASA wanted a plane body for their next space craft was pretty deep actually. I remember reading back in the day about how NASA wanted to implement an aircraft that could "fly" into space using a rebreathing Scramjet engine, and booster pods. They thought originally that by now they'd be able to build one light enough to fly into space and return, but this was not the case.
What we do have though, is a great aerodynamics experiment as well. For all intents and purposes, the Space Shuttle was the most expensive glider ever made. But for that, it was a glider, and it did teach us a few things about aerodynamics at higher elevations ( i.e. friction of the air, what kind of tolerances the structure would have to maintain, etc.)
Simply put, the Space Shuttle was one of the best experiments in space we have ever done. With a failure rate of 1/50 or so.. they did hundreds of times better than the Apollo's, and earlier rockets. The problem with NASA is they didn't take the next step like they should have. If everything would have happened like it should have, they would have a next generation space craft, like the lifting body design, that had some kind of atmospheric propulsion agent (a ram- or scram-jet engine), that was lifted with something like the traditional space shuttle's reusable launch system (hopefully with a more useful hydrogen tank:-/). It would be able to lift the weight of the rocket in combination with the rocket engines into space, then shed the rockets (and possibly the [sc]ramjet engine, since it is now useless) and glide back into the atmosphere.
Case and point though, they should have a platform with a lot less drastic reentry proceedure than just slamming themself into the atmosphere, like gliding into it slowly, and not worry about skidding off (possibly flying into the atmosphere upside down: it could use the lift of the airplane to pull itself back into earth, then flip back around and glide in).
I guess my hardware just isn't as compatible with linux as yours seems to be, and secondly, that stream of numbers/letters is just as confusing as the configuration utility.. The only one I've seen that I can make sense of is the one included with debian, anXious I think is what it's called, and even though I can figure it out, I'm still not sure of the refresh rates of my monitor, and I think the typical end user isn't either.. maybe I'm just a complete loser, but sometimes these things need to be addressed..
It's the only reason left I haven't committed my desktop completely to linux.. worries of hardware compatibility..
But as I've experienced X currently, It's as slow as Windows 3.1's graphics, and at least three times as hard to configure.. Even with all the configuration tools, 3 hours of time to kill, and a bottle of migrain medicine, it STILL gave me the worlds biggest headache trying to configure it to work with my card, mouse and monitor (It'd let me either get the monitor and the card, or the card and the mouse, but never the monitor and the mouse and the card...)
Personally I hope to see this. It sounds awesome if they can keep it bug-free and start implementing some speed and neat features (framebuffer mode, desktop anti-aliasing, true alpha blending, and maybe a control panel app to control it all, along side a quick configuration tool that actually works).
I know this is a difficult request.. but could someone PLEASE start a project to replace what ever code SCO claims to have copyright over? And start NOW instead of after SCO wins or loses? This way half way through the case, SCO will lose plainly because they couldn't even claim they had hold in the kernel at all....
This is made difficult by the fact that SCO refuses to tell anyone what code actually is "theirs" in the kernel, other than it has to deal with computers with more than one processor.. I'm just getting sick and tired of hearing SCO's lawyers and execs and everyone else flaming because they can't figure out who really owns the code.... It's disgusting really. Please help:-)
Microsoft has said that IE is now a critical part of Windows. Windows and Office are the only two sources of revenue for Microsoft... doesn't that somehow make IE a critical part of their income stream? And they only got fined five bucks for it?
Truth be it told, $5 is better than $0. It's time Microsoft learned a lesson, but this is a crude and unusal way of getting a lesson across. Hopefully Eolas will be honest to it's intentions and not attack netscape/mozilla. They said in the article that they only sued Microsoft because of the way IE seemed to take over the internet, and I'm holding them to their word on this one. Eolas gives me no reason to believe they are bad people.. they are good people with good intentions.. but power corrupts, and I hope they don't get corrupted by the hordes of cash they just raked in...
I truthfully stand behind Eolas on this one, but I'm weary of the double edged sword they wield...
Yes it will work, I know from experience. My community here in berea has been pretty slammed by this worm, and I've been telling everyone to just firewall off all the ports they dont use. It seems the virus can only connect on ports 135/445 though, so still no worries here. I've been running zonealarm, a great firewall for windows users, to help solve my problem.
I always thought that this was malarky, and now they're trying to shove it to us like its proof or something. Let's get this straight: until someone can harnest this 'dark energy' and prove to me it really exists, well, I'm not going to believe it.
Instead I'm going to believe that gravity is a resultant factor of a lot of mass being in generally one place. Since I also theorize that matter is made of waves that are condensed into tangled balls of electromagnetic energy (sorry, no better definition for "energy traveling in a 3d waveform"), it's simple to believe that the size of atoms are not tiny balls of matter, but instead gigantic clouds of electromagnetic energy, probably reaching miles in diameter, with a super condensed core. It's hard to explain but by lots of these being in one region, its simple to see how gravity works, especially on objects with a velocity vector. But explaining that might take a little while..
But then again, IANAP, although I'de like to be one.. especially if i can prove this waveform partical existance theory.. making teleportation a very simple thing to knock out...
Pwning that site doesn't really help though. That only shows them how malicious file sharer's can be. Letting the site run its course is much better because then we don't get the blame for taking it down and making the whole filesharing community look even less legitimate. So please, any script-kiddies or even more hardcore hackers, don't mess with the site for the good of filesharing.
A lot of the public will hear this tripe and it will slow down file trading a little... but I doubt in the long run if it really puts too much of a hamper on file sharing, since what they are talking about is lies... if anyone is intellegent enough to be file sharing at the level the MP/RIAA is worried about, they will know that you can't get viruses from movie files... It's a sensible attack though, especially targeting us teens... and it will work marginally.. but this will only help slow the bleeding.. the damage has been done, they are going to die still, IHMO of course..
I don't think we as a society are ready to do away with patents. Copyrights yes, I think we are more than ready to get rid of Major Collective Entities claiming ownership of intangable collections of ideas that weren't even created by them. The whole Corporation + Copyright was a really bad idea to begin with IMHO. Giving company's the rights to own someone else's life work just so they could sell it is rediculus.
Patents will have to go when people invent something that allows things to be invented on a mass scale: i.e. a very simple, customizable microchip that can be printed/etched at home with something as simple as a laser printer. When the patent office gets flooded with thousands upon thousands of requests to patent a certain set of logic, then we'll see that dissolve too. But no matter how many walls our society tears down, someone will always build a new one (i.e. copyrighting GENETIC SEQUENCES?!??!??!!!)
my 2 cents (canadian of course)
Hey, I remember in the extremely old day of computers the number of G forces the drive could take was clearly posted on the drive. For example, my old Fujitzu MPU drives had clearly on the label "Do not subject this device to more than 40G's."
I don't really thing the environment will harm things too much, just make sure you have this thing buckled down really well, and that you have it lead shielded (those little dark plastic bags work for electrostatic dissapation, would work great because the shuttle will be highly ionized coming through the atmosphere).
I think if I were designing this though, I'de go solid state. If anything, they run cooler and take up less space, not to mention weighing much less. Like someone posted earlier, it is pin compatiable with IDE, so just stick a bunch on a raid card and you are set.
Slashdot Mirror
If we effectively kill off every port on the internet.. what is the point of having the TCP layer protocol? And if we killed it, wouldn't a lot of devices simply stop working? So I ask.. WHY!?
Personally, I love the idea of having ports. It allows a lot of intrasystem communication, even if it isn't the best way of doing it, and it allows many many services to run on one machine. hell, without TCP, we wouldnt have IMAP or POP3 or SMTP etc.. (unless someone did them from a web front, sorta like yahoo, but then it's the same thing on their end....) Somewhere down the line, people have gotta realize, fixing the problem doesn't mean you have to break something else in the first place. ISP's need to let the users deal with viruses, even if they are 100% computer illiterate. Maybe they should offer a service where they will patch your system for a price, instead of simply blocking a port that someone may have been using constructively. This really outrages me, because Adelphia, my Cable provider, has killed so many ports due to virus outbreakes (Codered killed 80, MSBlaster killed 135, 139, 4444, and a bunch of UDP ports), ports that I would have liked to use (port 80 mainly). I have to redirect to 8080, and not many people will know how to do that. Please people, think before doing something so drastic as cutting off all the ports... There are much better solutions.
I assure you that you have no idea what you are talking about. That quote PROVES our point.
The "mobile Intel Pentium 4 processor-M" is better known as Pentium 4-M. The processor we are talking about here is better known as Banias, a part of Centrino technology, and it offically called by Intel: Pentium M. Notice Penitum M DOES NOT EQUAL Pentium 4-M. There are likenesses, but they are two, completely different processors.
This confusion is the exact reason Intel branded it under the name Centrino. With the addition of a WiFi card, the Pentium M becomes Centrino-compliant, and is marketed under that name. Once again, I ask you to know what the fu you are talking about. Thanks!
Ok, I will say this once again. Pentium 4 Pentium M Pentium 4-M. Each is it's own processor. The Pentium 4-M is the mobile component of the Pentium 4 class. The Pentium M is a mobile component of the Pentium _3_ class, but it has been upgraded with the good parts of the Pentium 4. And secondly, I checked the links before I replied to this.. that's how I knew they were Pentium 4 M and not Pentium M. Thanks.
Yes it is news. Reason: Those are Pentium 4 boards. We are talking about the Pentium M.
This is where intel went wrong..
There are two different processors right now in Intel's Mobile fleet. One is called the Pentium 4-M, the other is simply Pentium M. The one we are discussing is the Pentium M. The boards you linked to are the Pentium 4-M. The difference is that they took technology from the Pentium 4 and applied it to a chopped down version of the Pentium 3's core. Things such as the 400MHz processor bus, the Micro ops L1, and other chip level micro enhancements were copied back to the Pentium 3 (tualitin). This makes the Pentium M really something like Pentium 3.5, but they really couldn't name it that, so they simply dropped the number and it became Pentium M.
Recent delays in Prescott make me think they are probably doing that to a more developed level to the Pentium 4's core so that the "Pentium 5" won't run as hot. Prescott definitely won't see the advantages of the copying, but Tejas, or possibly even a Prescott b revision, will.
It's a port for a WiFi card to make it a completely Centrino-compliant platform. They really couldn't have chosen a worse place for it though, and they didn't do a good job labling it on the website either. But I hope that answers your question ;)
I mean like a BIOS rom, the software is physically stored on the chip instead of a logical representation on a hard drive. this makes the data much more secure against user stupidity and file modifiying viruses..
by this i mean like my pda, it has a rom chip that is flashable: ie it can be updated but for the most part it is non-editable, making a virus or an accidental deletion of a system file practically impossible...
Won't all computers end up being embedded devices? I mean really think about it. Why would you load the OS on to a hard drive when you could easly put it on a hardware level and put all the programs on the disk. Makes a lot of sense because you save so much disk space, and at the same time, the OS is more secured against accidental deletion and file corrupting viruses.
So I treat this as the ultimate victory for Linux. The next generation of computers is wireless and mobile and trying to keep everything secure. Firmware Operating Systems is the solution; hail the next coming of a great era, the wireless/linux revolution!
I work for our school as an assistant network admin, which means I'm also in charge of the phyiscal setup of the machines at our school. Just recently, our school purchased 10 new dell workstations for the students. They were all running Windows XP when we bought them from Dell, and when we started them all up they all displayed a screen saying "By hitting next, you agree to all of the individual software user end license agreements." Since our department couldn't read the agreements, we had to strip every machine and install Windows 2000, which Microsoft charged us another 65$ for all 10 of them. Not to mention the fact we have 10 Windows XP disks around that we cannot possibly use because we can't read the EULA. Anyone know of a way to get a refund for these 10 licenses we can't possibly use?
Anyone know if the new kernel has been fixed for the C-Media 9738 AC97 Codec? Last time I checked Alan Cox "patched" this in 2.4.21 and my integrated sound didn't work. I know this has gotta be a pretty big problem.. my board was pretty popular (K7S6A)...
The reason NASA wanted a plane body for their next space craft was pretty deep actually. I remember reading back in the day about how NASA wanted to implement an aircraft that could "fly" into space using a rebreathing Scramjet engine, and booster pods. They thought originally that by now they'd be able to build one light enough to fly into space and return, but this was not the case.
:-/). It would be able to lift the weight of the rocket in combination with the rocket engines into space, then shed the rockets (and possibly the [sc]ramjet engine, since it is now useless) and glide back into the atmosphere.
What we do have though, is a great aerodynamics experiment as well. For all intents and purposes, the Space Shuttle was the most expensive glider ever made. But for that, it was a glider, and it did teach us a few things about aerodynamics at higher elevations ( i.e. friction of the air, what kind of tolerances the structure would have to maintain, etc.)
Simply put, the Space Shuttle was one of the best experiments in space we have ever done. With a failure rate of 1/50 or so.. they did hundreds of times better than the Apollo's, and earlier rockets. The problem with NASA is they didn't take the next step like they should have. If everything would have happened like it should have, they would have a next generation space craft, like the lifting body design, that had some kind of atmospheric propulsion agent (a ram- or scram-jet engine), that was lifted with something like the traditional space shuttle's reusable launch system (hopefully with a more useful hydrogen tank
Case and point though, they should have a platform with a lot less drastic reentry proceedure than just slamming themself into the atmosphere, like gliding into it slowly, and not worry about skidding off (possibly flying into the atmosphere upside down: it could use the lift of the airplane to pull itself back into earth, then flip back around and glide in).
Lemme see.. now would that be AT&T.com.. oh wait, they don't make computer monitors anymore.. bummer...
I guess my hardware just isn't as compatible with linux as yours seems to be, and secondly, that stream of numbers/letters is just as confusing as the configuration utility.. The only one I've seen that I can make sense of is the one included with debian, anXious I think is what it's called, and even though I can figure it out, I'm still not sure of the refresh rates of my monitor, and I think the typical end user isn't either.. maybe I'm just a complete loser, but sometimes these things need to be addressed..
It's the only reason left I haven't committed my desktop completely to linux.. worries of hardware compatibility..
But as I've experienced X currently, It's as slow as Windows 3.1's graphics, and at least three times as hard to configure.. Even with all the configuration tools, 3 hours of time to kill, and a bottle of migrain medicine, it STILL gave me the worlds biggest headache trying to configure it to work with my card, mouse and monitor (It'd let me either get the monitor and the card, or the card and the mouse, but never the monitor and the mouse and the card...)
Personally I hope to see this. It sounds awesome if they can keep it bug-free and start implementing some speed and neat features (framebuffer mode, desktop anti-aliasing, true alpha blending, and maybe a control panel app to control it all, along side a quick configuration tool that actually works).
is needed. besides, unless it runs linux, who of us cares? :-P
I know this is a difficult request.. but could someone PLEASE start a project to replace what ever code SCO claims to have copyright over? And start NOW instead of after SCO wins or loses? This way half way through the case, SCO will lose plainly because they couldn't even claim they had hold in the kernel at all....
:-)
This is made difficult by the fact that SCO refuses to tell anyone what code actually is "theirs" in the kernel, other than it has to deal with computers with more than one processor.. I'm just getting sick and tired of hearing SCO's lawyers and execs and everyone else flaming because they can't figure out who really owns the code.... It's disgusting really. Please help
Microsoft has said that IE is now a critical part of Windows. Windows and Office are the only two sources of revenue for Microsoft... doesn't that somehow make IE a critical part of their income stream? And they only got fined five bucks for it?
Truth be it told, $5 is better than $0. It's time Microsoft learned a lesson, but this is a crude and unusal way of getting a lesson across. Hopefully Eolas will be honest to it's intentions and not attack netscape/mozilla. They said in the article that they only sued Microsoft because of the way IE seemed to take over the internet, and I'm holding them to their word on this one. Eolas gives me no reason to believe they are bad people.. they are good people with good intentions.. but power corrupts, and I hope they don't get corrupted by the hordes of cash they just raked in...
I truthfully stand behind Eolas on this one, but I'm weary of the double edged sword they wield...
Yes it will work, I know from experience. My community here in berea has been pretty slammed by this worm, and I've been telling everyone to just firewall off all the ports they dont use. It seems the virus can only connect on ports 135/445 though, so still no worries here. I've been running zonealarm, a great firewall for windows users, to help solve my problem.
Never on slashdot have I ever seen so many identical responses.. going to run out of mod points just moddding them all -1, Redundant. Kinda weird...
I always thought that this was malarky, and now they're trying to shove it to us like its proof or something. Let's get this straight: until someone can harnest this 'dark energy' and prove to me it really exists, well, I'm not going to believe it. Instead I'm going to believe that gravity is a resultant factor of a lot of mass being in generally one place. Since I also theorize that matter is made of waves that are condensed into tangled balls of electromagnetic energy (sorry, no better definition for "energy traveling in a 3d waveform"), it's simple to believe that the size of atoms are not tiny balls of matter, but instead gigantic clouds of electromagnetic energy, probably reaching miles in diameter, with a super condensed core. It's hard to explain but by lots of these being in one region, its simple to see how gravity works, especially on objects with a velocity vector. But explaining that might take a little while.. But then again, IANAP, although I'de like to be one.. especially if i can prove this waveform partical existance theory.. making teleportation a very simple thing to knock out...
Pwning that site doesn't really help though. That only shows them how malicious file sharer's can be. Letting the site run its course is much better because then we don't get the blame for taking it down and making the whole filesharing community look even less legitimate. So please, any script-kiddies or even more hardcore hackers, don't mess with the site for the good of filesharing.
A lot of the public will hear this tripe and it will slow down file trading a little... but I doubt in the long run if it really puts too much of a hamper on file sharing, since what they are talking about is lies... if anyone is intellegent enough to be file sharing at the level the MP/RIAA is worried about, they will know that you can't get viruses from movie files... It's a sensible attack though, especially targeting us teens... and it will work marginally.. but this will only help slow the bleeding.. the damage has been done, they are going to die still, IHMO of course..
I don't think we as a society are ready to do away with patents. Copyrights yes, I think we are more than ready to get rid of Major Collective Entities claiming ownership of intangable collections of ideas that weren't even created by them. The whole Corporation + Copyright was a really bad idea to begin with IMHO. Giving company's the rights to own someone else's life work just so they could sell it is rediculus.
Patents will have to go when people invent something that allows things to be invented on a mass scale: i.e. a very simple, customizable microchip that can be printed/etched at home with something as simple as a laser printer. When the patent office gets flooded with thousands upon thousands of requests to patent a certain set of logic, then we'll see that dissolve too. But no matter how many walls our society tears down, someone will always build a new one (i.e. copyrighting GENETIC SEQUENCES?!??!??!!!)
my 2 cents (canadian of course)
Hey, I remember in the extremely old day of computers the number of G forces the drive could take was clearly posted on the drive. For example, my old Fujitzu MPU drives had clearly on the label "Do not subject this device to more than 40G's."
I don't really thing the environment will harm things too much, just make sure you have this thing buckled down really well, and that you have it lead shielded (those little dark plastic bags work for electrostatic dissapation, would work great because the shuttle will be highly ionized coming through the atmosphere).
I think if I were designing this though, I'de go solid state. If anything, they run cooler and take up less space, not to mention weighing much less. Like someone posted earlier, it is pin compatiable with IDE, so just stick a bunch on a raid card and you are set.