PAE fixes the limitation for the OS (if it uses it). It is then only a limit per-process on a 32-bit system. Linux has supported PAE for some time and windows supports more than 4GB in their top 2 tier 32-bit server systems since 2000 with it.
Reprocessing is not being done. It is not even being proposed as a possibility. Nuclear plants are too expensive to make money as it is, and forcing these plants to reprocess would drive even the plants now in operation out of business.
Reprocessing is not the same as a breeder reactor. It involves taking the spent fuel, extracting the usable stuff out of it and refining it to usable quality. In-fact there is a plant about 5 miles from where I work that does just that.
We have a saying at work: "Physical access trumps all security measures."
I have not yet found or been able to think of a security measure that could not be bypassed in some way using physical access (although at some point the physical access needs to be quite low level).
Once you have physical access you can perform a number of counter-security measures to a computer such as hardware based key loggers or direct modification of the OS and/or memory. From a security standpoint these are only detectable events and detection is nowhere near perfect.
Better to make the DRAM chip (the chip itself not the module) clear it's contents when power is applied. That way even if they pop the module out while it is hot they can't use it without clearing the data.
Actually I don't believe there is a polymorphic threat out there that signature detection doesn't work on. The code isn't complex enough, you can always detect the signature of the code that is doing the morphing. The real problem is that signature detection only works on *known* threats, there are plenty of unknown threats and uncommon threats that will not be covered.
Easy, key loggers can be run off of minimal power and placed in the connection between the keyboard and the motherboard. All they have to do is know which keyboard you are using and the pin-out and form of the attachment. They can then place it under your keyboard. This is even harder to detect than hardware loggers on desktops as you have to remove the keyboard to see it.
For many games building the world all at once from the data is just not possible. Not only would it take too long to build but many times it would fill up available virtual memory and still not be done.
My thoughts exactly. I've personally developed a traffic monitoring solution that could catch both packet details (for use metrics) and file names (for monitoring) at 10Mbps using a 133Mhz pentium. Commercial solutions that do the same run just a few thousand and can monitor speeds >100Mbps. We did use the monitor to crack down on p2p (we just used strong warnings and told the users to uninstall it). We haven't seen p2p use reemerge since, but then we don't have a ResNet to worry about.
Actually, "impossible to predict" is precisely what random is.
Not quite. Random needs to be impossible to predict, statistically uniform and capable of producing any number. If it is not statistically uniform then it is not random only unpredictable.
With the graphics card at the remote station the computer only has to send the code to the card to display the screen(s) this means that the remote end can take full advantage of GPU memory, etc. There will be some applications that send full bitmaps to the screen every refresh but these are few and far between in the real world.
Consider your desktop background, most of us have a complex image covering the desktop. The system can send this image to be stored in GPU memory and when a window is moving about the screen it just needs to tell the GPU: "Render the background then render this over the top of it." Remote KVM style solutions would have to send new video data over the wire before it would be available at the remote end (and 1920x1200x4 is a lot of video data).
So, worst case it is just as good and best case it is much better. Sounds like a good reason to place the GPU at the remote side to me.
Interesting, I was under the impression that critical reasoning skills were developed by logical sciences (math) and not by the more physical sciences. When I took biology I don't remember using any critical reasoning skills myself. It may just be the methods we use to teach kids these days but I don't see critical reasoning in about 90% of what we are teaching.
It's been my experience that any programmer worth his/her salt can pick up a new programming language, be working with it in a matter of hours and be proficient in it in days (with the aid of a good reference manual). 90% of all computer languages are the same, they differ only in syntax, API, and best practice. Syntax takes only an hour or so to learn if you have the basics of CS. API is usually a learn-as-you-go thing. Best practice is harder to pickup moving from one language to another but there are usually some simple guidelines to follow (with examples) in the language documentation.
GMail allows authenticated relays through port 465 if you want to use another address. This is also how I setup my mail servers. IMHO clients should stop using port 25 for sending out email port 25 should be for server-to-server and legacy connections only.
Well, I've seen MAC based stuff. I don't consider that authentication, it is more of an informational identification system, and a poor one at that. Most MAC based systems I've seen are either filtering systems or closed DHCP systems. Filtering systems are somewhat harder to get around but a short while sniffing the network will get you thousands of MAC addresses. DCHP systems are trivial to get around, you can assign yourself a static IP on most with just a few seconds of sniffing the network.
I would be interested in the authentication system that they use on your campus. Most campuses I have experience with where the network is run by the school do not have authenticated ethernet networks although many have authenticated wireless. I have seen a few off-the-shelf systems out there for that kind of service but I have not seen them in use yet.
Also, is it still true that a default Ubuntu install doesn't have a password around the root account?
True. This is by design and a security feature. Don't confuse it with a *blank* root password. There is no way for the root user to login to a default Ubuntu install to discourage users running as root.
"Windows is designed to expose hundreds of ports"
Care to list them all?
RPC:)
The truth is, as best I recall, a default Windows XP install has 4 or 5 open ports, all related to SMB and Windows Networking - and anyone with a clue wouldn't ever allow those to be exposed to the Internet - that's what hardware NAT/firewalls/routers are for.
I count 3 by default, 7 if you turn file sharing on, and more than 20 if you disable the windows firewall.
And, from a home perspective - every ISP I've ever dealt with filters those at their routers. I know that Time-Warner still does, on their Roadrunner network, and as far as I know, so does Verizon.
I'd be willing to bet that just about every ISP does as well - they'd be foolish not to.
When I was with Verizon they were filtered from the internet but not from other Verizon customers (2 years ago or longer). The very last time I dealt with a Verizon network was when a friend of mine who had no computer experience went down to the local Best Buy, bought a computer, got service from Verizon got p0wn3d following their directions.
Step 1: Put the CD into your computer.
Step 2: Plug the (pre-SP2) PC directly into the DSL modem.
He never made it to step 3. Time to infection was about 24 seconds. By the time he called me and I drove over he had no less than 10 distinct viruses/worms. He only knew about them because one of them was closing his Anti-Virus software when he tried to activate it.
I hear they are doing better these days and shipping wireless routers with service. When I was with them you couldn't even get support for a dead line if you were not plugged into the modem directly. My point from all of this is that I wouldn't trust your ISP to keep known malicious traffic out. Most ISPs are too large and don't even care enough to disconnect known bots from within their network.
RAID is for uptime and speed. If a drive fails you can rebuild the array on the fly (assuming you have hot-swap drives). Off-site backup is not the only solution (there are always fireproof safes) but it is one of the best in most cases.
Here we use a combination of short-term live snapshots and long term versioned network-off-site backups. It's worked well for us, 90% of the time I can pull files that were accidentally changed from the snapshots. The other 10% just takes a bit longer.
More like an uncontrolled intersection that also happens to duplicate traffic entering the intersection down every road. Hubs cause collisions and packet loss and function as 'dumb' repeaters.
One of the biggest problems with the "road" analogy of the internet is that the internet is built backwards from roads. Think of cities as LAN networks, highways as the internet:
Highways connecting cities would be narrower and slower than the roads in city most times. (Site links are slower than LAN links).
Most highway interchanges would take place in the middle of nowhere. (POP locations are not on networks).
Everyone leases or owns their own sets of roads and pays to use highways based on how much they use them (or how much they are allowed to use them).
Vehicles don't need to make round trips.
The last point is why I don't think you can use any physical medium as a good analogy for the internet. Physical transport works differently. Radically differently. Be it pipes, tubes, or roads you are not sending physical media. Networks *cannot* become plugged, gridlocked, blocked, or full. They can and do become flooded, looped, unreliable, delayed, and non-existent and can be moved into or out-of one of these states almost instantly.
Slashdot Mirror
PAE fixes the limitation for the OS (if it uses it). It is then only a limit per-process on a 32-bit system. Linux has supported PAE for some time and windows supports more than 4GB in their top 2 tier 32-bit server systems since 2000 with it.
The cost may be a bit more but super capacitors solve several of those problems. See the PML electric Mini.
Areva NC is making a profit from *buying* spent fuel, refining it, and selling it to plants as usable rods.
AFAIK this is not a trial program and they have 2 *large* production facilities in the US.
I think Areva disagrees with you on that.
Reprocessing is not the same as a breeder reactor. It involves taking the spent fuel, extracting the usable stuff out of it and refining it to usable quality. In-fact there is a plant about 5 miles from where I work that does just that.
Most likely they have you sign an EULA type contract when you buy it (or have a shrink-wrapped EULA).
We have a saying at work: "Physical access trumps all security measures."
I have not yet found or been able to think of a security measure that could not be bypassed in some way using physical access (although at some point the physical access needs to be quite low level).
Once you have physical access you can perform a number of counter-security measures to a computer such as hardware based key loggers or direct modification of the OS and/or memory. From a security standpoint these are only detectable events and detection is nowhere near perfect.
Better to make the DRAM chip (the chip itself not the module) clear it's contents when power is applied. That way even if they pop the module out while it is hot they can't use it without clearing the data.
Actually I don't believe there is a polymorphic threat out there that signature detection doesn't work on. The code isn't complex enough, you can always detect the signature of the code that is doing the morphing. The real problem is that signature detection only works on *known* threats, there are plenty of unknown threats and uncommon threats that will not be covered.
Easy, key loggers can be run off of minimal power and placed in the connection between the keyboard and the motherboard. All they have to do is know which keyboard you are using and the pin-out and form of the attachment. They can then place it under your keyboard. This is even harder to detect than hardware loggers on desktops as you have to remove the keyboard to see it.
For many games building the world all at once from the data is just not possible. Not only would it take too long to build but many times it would fill up available virtual memory and still not be done.
Another loading mask I've seen games use is short cut-scenes that happen to be timed to just longer than the next level needs to load.
My thoughts exactly. I've personally developed a traffic monitoring solution that could catch both packet details (for use metrics) and file names (for monitoring) at 10Mbps using a 133Mhz pentium. Commercial solutions that do the same run just a few thousand and can monitor speeds >100Mbps. We did use the monitor to crack down on p2p (we just used strong warnings and told the users to uninstall it). We haven't seen p2p use reemerge since, but then we don't have a ResNet to worry about.
Not quite. Random needs to be impossible to predict, statistically uniform and capable of producing any number. If it is not statistically uniform then it is not random only unpredictable.
With the graphics card at the remote station the computer only has to send the code to the card to display the screen(s) this means that the remote end can take full advantage of GPU memory, etc. There will be some applications that send full bitmaps to the screen every refresh but these are few and far between in the real world. Consider your desktop background, most of us have a complex image covering the desktop. The system can send this image to be stored in GPU memory and when a window is moving about the screen it just needs to tell the GPU: "Render the background then render this over the top of it." Remote KVM style solutions would have to send new video data over the wire before it would be available at the remote end (and 1920x1200x4 is a lot of video data). So, worst case it is just as good and best case it is much better. Sounds like a good reason to place the GPU at the remote side to me.
Interesting, I was under the impression that critical reasoning skills were developed by logical sciences (math) and not by the more physical sciences. When I took biology I don't remember using any critical reasoning skills myself. It may just be the methods we use to teach kids these days but I don't see critical reasoning in about 90% of what we are teaching.
It's been my experience that any programmer worth his/her salt can pick up a new programming language, be working with it in a matter of hours and be proficient in it in days (with the aid of a good reference manual). 90% of all computer languages are the same, they differ only in syntax, API, and best practice. Syntax takes only an hour or so to learn if you have the basics of CS. API is usually a learn-as-you-go thing. Best practice is harder to pickup moving from one language to another but there are usually some simple guidelines to follow (with examples) in the language documentation.
Say that to entire highly parallel capable OS's written in C. Also, C has a nice, simple threading model, it's just not quite as nice as some of the others out there (python).
GMail allows authenticated relays through port 465 if you want to use another address. This is also how I setup my mail servers. IMHO clients should stop using port 25 for sending out email port 25 should be for server-to-server and legacy connections only.
Well, I've seen MAC based stuff. I don't consider that authentication, it is more of an informational identification system, and a poor one at that. Most MAC based systems I've seen are either filtering systems or closed DHCP systems. Filtering systems are somewhat harder to get around but a short while sniffing the network will get you thousands of MAC addresses. DCHP systems are trivial to get around, you can assign yourself a static IP on most with just a few seconds of sniffing the network.
I would be interested in the authentication system that they use on your campus. Most campuses I have experience with where the network is run by the school do not have authenticated ethernet networks although many have authenticated wireless. I have seen a few off-the-shelf systems out there for that kind of service but I have not seen them in use yet.
When I was with Verizon they were filtered from the internet but not from other Verizon customers (2 years ago or longer). The very last time I dealt with a Verizon network was when a friend of mine who had no computer experience went down to the local Best Buy, bought a computer, got service from Verizon got p0wn3d following their directions.
Step 1: Put the CD into your computer.
Step 2: Plug the (pre-SP2) PC directly into the DSL modem.
He never made it to step 3. Time to infection was about 24 seconds. By the time he called me and I drove over he had no less than 10 distinct viruses/worms. He only knew about them because one of them was closing his Anti-Virus software when he tried to activate it.
I hear they are doing better these days and shipping wireless routers with service. When I was with them you couldn't even get support for a dead line if you were not plugged into the modem directly. My point from all of this is that I wouldn't trust your ISP to keep known malicious traffic out. Most ISPs are too large and don't even care enough to disconnect known bots from within their network.
RAID is for uptime and speed. If a drive fails you can rebuild the array on the fly (assuming you have hot-swap drives). Off-site backup is not the only solution (there are always fireproof safes) but it is one of the best in most cases.
Here we use a combination of short-term live snapshots and long term versioned network-off-site backups. It's worked well for us, 90% of the time I can pull files that were accidentally changed from the snapshots. The other 10% just takes a bit longer.
Many (or one pretending to be many) computers (or things pretending to be computers), all friends (or pretending to be friends).
Don't forget VLAN = The LAN inside another LAN.
More like an uncontrolled intersection that also happens to duplicate traffic entering the intersection down every road. Hubs cause collisions and packet loss and function as 'dumb' repeaters.
One of the biggest problems with the "road" analogy of the internet is that the internet is built backwards from roads.
Think of cities as LAN networks, highways as the internet:
The last point is why I don't think you can use any physical medium as a good analogy for the internet. Physical transport works differently. Radically differently. Be it pipes, tubes, or roads you are not sending physical media. Networks *cannot* become plugged, gridlocked, blocked, or full. They can and do become flooded, looped, unreliable, delayed, and non-existent and can be moved into or out-of one of these states almost instantly.