More like a brain-dead admin for not scanning your incoming e-mail and blocking the viruses.
No, that was his point... the corporate Outlook server does scan incoming email to block viruses. The admin was upset that I was running a non-corporate-controlled email program (Eudora), and that he *couldn't* block the viruses.
That's why I see his point -- we got hit by the RPC worm, and it was probably due to some sales dude plugging an infected laptop in behind the firewall. How can he tell them to submit to corporate virus control, and not at least complain when I use non-corporate email software?
No anti-virus programs repsonds with the infected file/email attached.
I figured I'd be able to test out your statement... but the cutoff date for the latest SoBig has passed, and I only have two bounce messages today! Either that, or Postini has added virus bounces to their spam blocker. Neither of the bounced messages includes a viral attachment, though one recipient's Outlook gateway attatched a text file:
File attachment: details.pif
The file attached to this email was removed because files of this type are not accepted for delivery by your email gateway.
Perhaps you're right -- maybe MacAfee & co weren't sending me the viruses, it could have been something in the mail gateway software. But if I made such a mistake identifying the culprit, I'm probably not the only one.
Ok, I've got to go close Eudora and turn the virus scanner back on before Data Security throws a fit. The things I do for Slashdot!
Do most users exchange executable files? How about just blocking them if they're executable...
We have that -- the corporate Outlook server blocks all executable files.
Trouble is, I'm in a programming group. We *do* send executable files to each other!.reg (Windows Registry update) files, too. They're all blocked by the server -- it displays a message saying "Outlook deleted the following unsafe attachments: theprogramyouwanted.exe"
No problem, though... we just zip 'em up and send 'em. Giving the heck we went through when LoveLetter hit -- including messages to everyone from a corporate director saying "I Love You!" -- the inconvenience of zipping/unzipping is a small price to pay.
Although shouldn't Outlook's message be a bit more truthful? "Outlook deleted the following unsafe attachments, which are only unsafe because you're running a virus portal instead of an email client..."
I just got a call from the Data Security guy in my office. I've had run-ins with him before, because their scans of my PC would occasionally find that I run Eudora for my personal email rather than routing it through the corporate virus portal known as Outlook Express. My bosses have been supportive -- as long as I get my work done, who the heck cares what I've got installed?
Now, I get 50-100 messages from "helpful" virus checkers telling me that I sent them a virus. Duh, of course I didn't. But what's worse is when they try to help my by sending the damned virus back to me! So my Eudora inbox fills up with viruses. No problem, I just delete them, right?
But we've got real-time virus scanning installed, and the admins take a dim view of tweaking it to skip certain directories. It finds that In.mbx contains a virus and kills the file. Poof, there goes my Eudora inbox. Frustrating, but it was full of junk anyway.
This morning, though, I get a call from the head Data Security honcho. Norton called mommy when it found the virus, and did it often enough for me to show up on the admin guy's radar again. Now, I'm going to have to quit using Eudora at work, just because brain-dead virus protection is sending me viruses! I'd fight it again, but I have to agree -- if I keep downloading viruses, I'm part of the problem.
Thanks for nothing, AV companies. All you're doing is keeping yourselves in business with false virus alerts. Or maybe that was the "2. ???" in between "1. Spread Viruses" and "3. Profit!"
I'm no engineer, but I wonder if a thermometer "one hundredth the diameter of a red blood cell" might find an application in a future generation of super-fast microprocessor chips?
A couple of weeks ago, there was a spate of Slashdot articles that addressed novel technologies for delaying the end of Moore's (so-called) Law. A diamond substrate was one way to get past thermal issues, but even then we'll still want more more MORE.
What if a super-high-end chip came with a built-in layers of heat-detecting nanothermometers? Instead of heat in one area shutting down the entire chip, the chip could selectively slow down processing in the area with the heat problems. You could actually end up with a self-adjusting chip that automatically overcomes the inevitable variations in the fab process for a faster average speed in the end product.
The disadvantage would be that you might not get 100% reproducible speed results. A benchmark test that hits the floating-point unit hard may slow down due to heat, while integer arithmetic is unaffected.
In fact, leaders of the open-source community have acted responsibly and swiftly to end the DDoS attacks -- just as we continue to act swiftly to address IP-contamination issues when they are aired in a clear and responsible manner
See, there's another reason to support open-source. They're working to correct IP contamination! Next time I see an IP address like 66.35.506.150, I'll know where to turn (especially if this helpful page goes away).
Re:O/T: Flash and webcam/microphone
on
MRAM in 2004?
·
· Score: 1
In Soviet Union entertainment portal watches you. OK, I'm sorry. I'll stop now.
Don't be sorry -- nobody looking for on-topic discusison is even going to make it this far.
The only problem, really, is that you don't have to be "back in the USSR" for that quote. One of my favorite Slashdot sigs goes something like this: "IN CORPORATE AMERICA, Yahoo! DSL Internet logs on to YOU!"
O/T: Flash and webcam/microphone
on
MRAM in 2004?
·
· Score: 1
Excellent point -- I can reboot my Palm with a paperclip in the Reset hole. Surely there would be something similar in an instant-on HDD-less system.
The message box you displayed includes "doubleclick.net" in its text because the Flash animation is being served from doubleclick.net. If it were being served from slashdot.org, the message would read: "Allow slashdot.org to access your camera and microphone?"
Someone could design a Flash program that interacts with the user via microphone and webcam instead of keyboard and mouse. There might be a valid reason for this -- maybe a company is developing an in-house Flash-based videoconferencing system, or something. But Macromedia wouldn't want to enable such access by default, hence the dialog to allow it or not.
The fact that it's been a year or two since I last poked around and saw this option tells me that the idea of interacting with a surfer's mic/vid hasn't taken off. That's probably a good thing, 'cause I don't think we want to ever have a situation where your kids turn on the option for their favorite online game without telling you. An entertainment portal that watches YOU is a little too "1984" for me.
By the way, I'm with you -- overuse of Flash animation makes me look for the "Back" button.
Ferrite Core Redux!
on
MRAM in 2004?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I'm struck by how much the HowStuffWorks picture of MRAM memory (*) looks like the donut-on-a-wire ferrite core memory. All that's missing are the 150-ohm terminating resistors.
I like the idea of a HD-less instant-on PC. One of the great things about my Palm Pilot is that the kids can turn it on and off without any "shutdown" process... although all my kids have known how to shut down Windows properly since they could understand the "To turn off press Start" concept.
On the other hand, it's already hard enough to restart a locked-up PC when the so-called power switch doesn't have anything to do with the power. How will I fix a PC when pulling the plug doesn't even reboot the OS?
Next stage is that the parents say "shit", we're in trouble, let's contact the papers and try to get out of this mess by way of our 12-year old daughter.
Plausible, but based on my experience with 12-year-old daughters, not likely.
With the current state of technology, it's really not that difficult to install "stuff" on a PC, if you're interested in doing it. That "if" is the difference -- her parents probably aren't interested, and therefore have no clue. The kid (and her friends) are very interested, and IM even gives them a free tech support network. So she's able to install whatever she wants. If it costs, she just bugs Mommy, who comes over to the PC just long enough to type in that magic 16-digit number.
On the other hand, she still has no clue what she's actually done to her PC. She clicks, she gets music. As a poster in another thread noted, she's probably downloading songz without realizing that Kazaa is saving them on her PC -- and to her, "peer to peer" means chatting with friends at lunch.
If I weren't a geek myself (I'm on Slashdot, after all), I'd probably have no clue what my daughter does online. Which means that 99% of her friends are basically surfing on their own.
Yes, the timescale is centuries. But if you believe that the prospect (however long it takes) of meeting other intelligent beings is "boring" then either you have no imagination whatsoever, or no intelligence whatsoever.
Not exactly on-topic, but this question made me wonder... were I to be faced with the choice, which would I rather lose: my imagination, or my intelligence? Would I rather be a dreamy idiot, or a rocket scientist with no dreams at all?
I'd have to go for the "dreamy idiot". Although, there are those who say the choice has already been made, in my case.:)
I think I'll submit that as a poll question:
If you were forced to give up a personality trait, what would it be?
* Intelligence * Imagination * Wisdom * Insight * Personality? What's that? * I can't give up CowboyNeal
It would apply if you said "if we managed to stick a computer in your skull after removing your useless brain". Even then I'd say it's nothing special, although somewhat cool in a gothy sort of way...
Someone, someday, will have to make a "mod" using one of those high school classroom skeletons. Now *that* would be a gothy mod:
* Motherboard (including the processor, or heart of the system) suspended in the chest cavity.
* Hard drive (long-term memory) mounted in the cranium.
* Power supply (fuel source) clamped to the spine below the ribcage, where the stomach once resided.
* Eye sockets would be a good place for your HDD activity and power lights. Also on the skull are the logical locations for the speaker and microphones.
* The right hand would hold the power cord. In the left, the peripheral connections (USB, mouse, keyboard, etc).
* Of course, the connector for the screen should be at the base of the skull. The location of the game controller port will not be discussed here.
* And to top it all off, a watercooler for the overclocked CPU can have piping and radiators throughout the body! An appropriately-colored fluid would help with leak detection.
Ooh, this is now getting *too* creepy.
On the other hand... it could be worse. Gunther von Hagens has some pretty extreme "case mods" at his BodyWorlds expositions...
Robinson asks: 'Why are our imaginations retreating from science and space, and into fantasy?'
I was hoping that the article would bring up the obvious answer, but it didn't quite reach it. The essence of fiction is that it is not real, and "science fiction" is supposed to take the idea a step further -- beyond real, if you like. To the unreachable, beyond what we consider possible.
But in this century, what is beyond possible? Exploring the planets? Been there, done that, got pictures. Exploring other star systems? Totally possible, but the centuries-long timescale makes it simply boring. Time travel? Everybody knows that you'll just end up meeting the Borg before you should, or something.
In other words, perhaps science fiction is suffering from too much science!
On the other hand, fantasy worlds like Tolkien's are completely unreachable, unimaginable in reality. Even given billions of dollars, NASA could not create a race of half-orcs in a deep trench (strategically located below a large dam).
Science is possible... fantasy is impossible. Perhaps that's the problem.
Before I got my own distribution of Clue, I had no idea how text-based counters could *do* that. I was baffled when I'd pull up a page's source, looking for the IMG tag, and find nothing but "This page has been visited 00042 times." How was I going to give a page fake hits without an image to reload?
I think it's sometimes overblown, but I grew up on a farm. Sometimes after turning over cow patties looking for bugs, I'd find a carrot or pick some berries or something and eat it.
How nice! The fresh fruit and berries must have gone well with your bugs.
Either the parent post has extremely fast typing skills...
Well, 50wpm or so -- tell your kids to take that easy-A "Keyboarding" class first chance they get, or else the only words they'll be able to type without looking at the keyboard will be "brb", "asl?", and "wtf?"
or it was a canned comment that happened to fit just right..."
No... although sometimes I think I've developed a "Slashdot" section of my brain that pops out fully-formed stories when triggered by the proper stimulus.
or I am crazy. Story posted 12:01, comment posted 12:03.
That's it! You're crazy! I'll share my prescription with you, I keep forgetting to take my meds anyway.
No, I'm just a subscriber *and* a fast typer with too many ideas and a boss that doesn't prowl around enough. I think Pavlov would be proud of the way I click when I see a red bar on the Slashdot home page!
Wow, I am impressed.
Don't be... just click the "Subscribe" link, pony up five bucks, and Instant Karma's gonna get you before you can say "Frist Post!"
Now please, don't flame me as a fan of mainland China's repressive regime. But the Taiwanese government doesn't exactly have the world's best track record, as I recall. I hear occasional notes about "problems" with civil rights, and then there's the whole pirated anime problem.
So when I read this line:
"National intelligence has indicated that an army of hackers based in China..."
my BS-o-Meter starts clicking. Though the article is non-technical, it includes other notes that make the meter tick faster:
"...has successfully spread 23 different Trojan horse programs... 10 private high-tech companies... break into at least 30 different government agencies and 50 private companies," Cabinet Spokesman Lin Chia-lung said yesterday.
We have a lot of big, scary numbers... but no hard information about the programs, the companies, or the government agencies.
In fact, the "23 different Trojans" makes me think that the government cabinet member is talking out of his butt. More likely, nobody's been running virus protection, and those 24 Trojans are simply members of F-Secure's wildlist.
Then, there's this "helpful" suggestion:
"If there's any lesson from this experience, it is not to use software developed in China or hire Chinese computer programmers, because you're running the risk of having the software you use implanted with the Trojan-horse program," he said.
That sounds like nothing more than the usual tit-for-tat barbs that Taiwan and China have been throwing across the strait for decades. In fact, I suspect that's what this whole Trojan Horse issue is -- all bluster, no substance.
And finally, off the actual topic: let's watch the Slashdot effect in action! When I first hit the Taipei Times article, it included this text at the bottom: This story has been viewed 1128 times.
By the time I typed this comment, the number had not changed, so I'm probably getting a cached copy. What did it show when you hit it?
The parent shows the real problem with the "icing isn't the biggest problem" argument -- it may not be the biggest problem, but when ice is the cause of a flight failure, it seems to happen in a spectacular and mysterious way.
Also, if I recall correctly, crashes like the 1994 Roselawn, Indiana crash are particularly difficult to trace back to their root cause. Then, when icing is found to be the cause, future crashes without obvious causes are compared against previous mystery crashes. There's nothing that gets people nervous like a crash of unknown cause, so a phantom killer like ice would seem especially frightening.
Remember, perception == reality, even if reality != perception. Similar situation with the AIDS example (though I'm not judging the validity or applicability of the statistics) -- people have died from cancer and heart disease since hearts first evolved, so that's a known danger. AIDS, for a number of reasons, is a mystery to those who haven't been paying attention -- and thus, it's scary.
Those previous novels are not up to par with what they finally do sell. Better advice then given to new novelists is "burn your trunk". 'Trunk' refers to all the writing you've done before you finally sell something. It is not up to the standards of what you are now able to produce and publishing it will lower the public's perception of your current talent.
I see the reason for advising new writers to discard their old, unsold, sub-par beginning works. It would be far too tempting during a bout of writer's block to drag out some old crud, dust it off, and send it in. That *would* lead to the tarnishing you mentioned.
But what about an author like Heinlein, whose works reach a level of persistence such that people are still talking about them long after the author's death? Is it fair to future literary scholars to keep them from learning how your style evolved from "See Dick Run"? For that matter, is it fair to future writers, who can see the mistakes you made in your early, rejected works and how you overcame them in your published work?
Perhaps the "burn your trunk" advice is only applicable to those who don't expect to do anything more than make a living with their writing. Of course, if a writer really thinks their work should be that short-lived, perhaps they should start their burning with the sheet currently rolled into the typewriter.
Another (not so rosy) view of Heinlein
on
New Heinlein Novel
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I ran across this link a while back, and filed it away for future reference. Should have known that Slashdot would come through:
It's a scathing expose of the "dark side" of Robert Heinlein, painting him as a Hugh Hefner wannabe with an ego the size of a god's, masking an inner insecurity the size of the Grand Canyon. It's hard to tell, though, how accurate Kemp's descriptions are, since he's writing from the POV of one of Heinlein's "disremembered" -- close friends who p***ed off the artist and were removed from his list of people worth acknowledging.
I'm curious how much is true, how much is exaggerated, and how much is just made up. I figure this is the place to ask!
As far as the literary side of the man... I've been a fan since I read "The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress" as a kid in the late '70s. The "Future History" stuff left me cold, but "Job" was a great return to form. The last Heinlein book I read (shamefully long ago) was the restored "Podkayne of Mars", with the original (downer) ending.
I haven't seen the "Puppet Masters" movie... and from what I've heard, I'm probably better off for it.
Since the event occurred in Tennessee, how could you forget to include something about Hot Grits?
Unfortunately (?), I wasn't an active Slashdotter when Natalie Portman and Grits were associated in the minds of the troll community, so I can't come up with anything myself. Maybe that's a Good Thing.
But there have been too many trolls lately that repost the article with certain, er, modifications. Like the one about a rocket launch that slipped in several references to other... "rocket-shaped personal entertainment devices".
Besides, there's not much point in Karma Whoring anymore. Who *doesn't* have Excellent karma these days?
Slashdot Mirror
More like a brain-dead admin for not scanning your incoming e-mail and blocking the viruses.
No, that was his point... the corporate Outlook server does scan incoming email to block viruses. The admin was upset that I was running a non-corporate-controlled email program (Eudora), and that he *couldn't* block the viruses.
That's why I see his point -- we got hit by the RPC worm, and it was probably due to some sales dude plugging an infected laptop in behind the firewall. How can he tell them to submit to corporate virus control, and not at least complain when I use non-corporate email software?
I figured I'd be able to test out your statement... but the cutoff date for the latest SoBig has passed, and I only have two bounce messages today! Either that, or Postini has added virus bounces to their spam blocker. Neither of the bounced messages includes a viral attachment, though one recipient's Outlook gateway attatched a text file:Perhaps you're right -- maybe MacAfee & co weren't sending me the viruses, it could have been something in the mail gateway software. But if I made such a mistake identifying the culprit, I'm probably not the only one.
Ok, I've got to go close Eudora and turn the virus scanner back on before Data Security throws a fit. The things I do for Slashdot!
Do most users exchange executable files? How about just blocking them if they're executable...
.reg (Windows Registry update) files, too. They're all blocked by the server -- it displays a message saying "Outlook deleted the following unsafe attachments: theprogramyouwanted.exe"
We have that -- the corporate Outlook server blocks all executable files.
Trouble is, I'm in a programming group. We *do* send executable files to each other!
No problem, though... we just zip 'em up and send 'em. Giving the heck we went through when LoveLetter hit -- including messages to everyone from a corporate director saying "I Love You!" -- the inconvenience of zipping/unzipping is a small price to pay.
Although shouldn't Outlook's message be a bit more truthful? "Outlook deleted the following unsafe attachments, which are only unsafe because you're running a virus portal instead of an email client..."
I just got a call from the Data Security guy in my office. I've had run-ins with him before, because their scans of my PC would occasionally find that I run Eudora for my personal email rather than routing it through the corporate virus portal known as Outlook Express. My bosses have been supportive -- as long as I get my work done, who the heck cares what I've got installed?
Now, I get 50-100 messages from "helpful" virus checkers telling me that I sent them a virus. Duh, of course I didn't. But what's worse is when they try to help my by sending the damned virus back to me! So my Eudora inbox fills up with viruses. No problem, I just delete them, right?
But we've got real-time virus scanning installed, and the admins take a dim view of tweaking it to skip certain directories. It finds that In.mbx contains a virus and kills the file. Poof, there goes my Eudora inbox. Frustrating, but it was full of junk anyway.
This morning, though, I get a call from the head Data Security honcho. Norton called mommy when it found the virus, and did it often enough for me to show up on the admin guy's radar again. Now, I'm going to have to quit using Eudora at work, just because brain-dead virus protection is sending me viruses! I'd fight it again, but I have to agree -- if I keep downloading viruses, I'm part of the problem.
Thanks for nothing, AV companies. All you're doing is keeping yourselves in business with false virus alerts. Or maybe that was the "2. ???" in between "1. Spread Viruses" and "3. Profit!"
I'm no engineer, but I wonder if a thermometer "one hundredth the diameter of a red blood cell" might find an application in a future generation of super-fast microprocessor chips?
A couple of weeks ago, there was a spate of Slashdot articles that addressed novel technologies for delaying the end of Moore's (so-called) Law. A diamond substrate was one way to get past thermal issues, but even then we'll still want more more MORE.
What if a super-high-end chip came with a built-in layers of heat-detecting nanothermometers? Instead of heat in one area shutting down the entire chip, the chip could selectively slow down processing in the area with the heat problems. You could actually end up with a self-adjusting chip that automatically overcomes the inevitable variations in the fab process for a faster average speed in the end product.
The disadvantage would be that you might not get 100% reproducible speed results. A benchmark test that hits the floating-point unit hard may slow down due to heat, while integer arithmetic is unaffected.
In fact, leaders of the open-source community have acted responsibly and swiftly to end the DDoS attacks -- just as we continue to act swiftly to address IP-contamination issues when they are aired in a clear and responsible manner
See, there's another reason to support open-source. They're working to correct IP contamination! Next time I see an IP address like 66.35.506.150, I'll know where to turn (especially if this helpful page goes away).
In Soviet Union entertainment portal watches you. OK, I'm sorry. I'll stop now.
Don't be sorry -- nobody looking for on-topic discusison is even going to make it this far.
The only problem, really, is that you don't have to be "back in the USSR" for that quote. One of my favorite Slashdot sigs goes something like this: "IN CORPORATE AMERICA, Yahoo! DSL Internet logs on to YOU!"
Excellent point -- I can reboot my Palm with a paperclip in the Reset hole. Surely there would be something similar in an instant-on HDD-less system.
.sig:
Hey, I've got a reply to your current
Macromedia + Doubleclick + Webcams + Microphones = WTF?! [josef.org]
The message box you displayed includes "doubleclick.net" in its text because the Flash animation is being served from doubleclick.net. If it were being served from slashdot.org, the message would read: "Allow slashdot.org to access your camera and microphone?"
Someone could design a Flash program that interacts with the user via microphone and webcam instead of keyboard and mouse. There might be a valid reason for this -- maybe a company is developing an in-house Flash-based videoconferencing system, or something. But Macromedia wouldn't want to enable such access by default, hence the dialog to allow it or not.
The fact that it's been a year or two since I last poked around and saw this option tells me that the idea of interacting with a surfer's mic/vid hasn't taken off. That's probably a good thing, 'cause I don't think we want to ever have a situation where your kids turn on the option for their favorite online game without telling you. An entertainment portal that watches YOU is a little too "1984" for me.
By the way, I'm with you -- overuse of Flash animation makes me look for the "Back" button.
I'm struck by how much the HowStuffWorks picture of MRAM memory (*) looks like the donut-on-a-wire ferrite core memory. All that's missing are the 150-ohm terminating resistors.
I like the idea of a HD-less instant-on PC. One of the great things about my Palm Pilot is that the kids can turn it on and off without any "shutdown" process... although all my kids have known how to shut down Windows properly since they could understand the "To turn off press Start" concept.
On the other hand, it's already hard enough to restart a locked-up PC when the so-called power switch doesn't have anything to do with the power. How will I fix a PC when pulling the plug doesn't even reboot the OS?
Next stage is that the parents say "shit", we're in trouble, let's contact the papers and try to get out of this mess by way of our 12-year old daughter.
Plausible, but based on my experience with 12-year-old daughters, not likely.
With the current state of technology, it's really not that difficult to install "stuff" on a PC, if you're interested in doing it. That "if" is the difference -- her parents probably aren't interested, and therefore have no clue. The kid (and her friends) are very interested, and IM even gives them a free tech support network. So she's able to install whatever she wants. If it costs, she just bugs Mommy, who comes over to the PC just long enough to type in that magic 16-digit number.
On the other hand, she still has no clue what she's actually done to her PC. She clicks, she gets music. As a poster in another thread noted, she's probably downloading songz without realizing that Kazaa is saving them on her PC -- and to her, "peer to peer" means chatting with friends at lunch.
If I weren't a geek myself (I'm on Slashdot, after all), I'd probably have no clue what my daughter does online. Which means that 99% of her friends are basically surfing on their own.
Yes, the timescale is centuries. But if you believe that the prospect (however long it takes) of meeting other intelligent beings is "boring" then either you have no imagination whatsoever, or no intelligence whatsoever.
:)
Not exactly on-topic, but this question made me wonder... were I to be faced with the choice, which would I rather lose: my imagination, or my intelligence? Would I rather be a dreamy idiot, or a rocket scientist with no dreams at all?
I'd have to go for the "dreamy idiot". Although, there are those who say the choice has already been made, in my case.
I think I'll submit that as a poll question:
If you were forced to give up a personality trait, what would it be?
* Intelligence
* Imagination
* Wisdom
* Insight
* Personality? What's that?
* I can't give up CowboyNeal
It would apply if you said "if we managed to stick a computer in your skull after removing your useless brain". Even then I'd say it's nothing special, although somewhat cool in a gothy sort of way...
Someone, someday, will have to make a "mod" using one of those high school classroom skeletons. Now *that* would be a gothy mod:
* Motherboard (including the processor, or heart of the system) suspended in the chest cavity.
* Hard drive (long-term memory) mounted in the cranium.
* Power supply (fuel source) clamped to the spine below the ribcage, where the stomach once resided.
* Eye sockets would be a good place for your HDD activity and power lights. Also on the skull are the logical locations for the speaker and microphones.
* The right hand would hold the power cord. In the left, the peripheral connections (USB, mouse, keyboard, etc).
* Of course, the connector for the screen should be at the base of the skull. The location of the game controller port will not be discussed here.
* And to top it all off, a watercooler for the overclocked CPU can have piping and radiators throughout the body! An appropriately-colored fluid would help with leak detection.
Ooh, this is now getting *too* creepy.
On the other hand... it could be worse. Gunther von Hagens has some pretty extreme "case mods" at his BodyWorlds expositions...
Robinson asks: 'Why are our imaginations retreating from science and space, and into fantasy?'
I was hoping that the article would bring up the obvious answer, but it didn't quite reach it. The essence of fiction is that it is not real, and "science fiction" is supposed to take the idea a step further -- beyond real, if you like. To the unreachable, beyond what we consider possible.
But in this century, what is beyond possible? Exploring the planets? Been there, done that, got pictures. Exploring other star systems? Totally possible, but the centuries-long timescale makes it simply boring. Time travel? Everybody knows that you'll just end up meeting the Borg before you should, or something.
In other words, perhaps science fiction is suffering from too much science!
On the other hand, fantasy worlds like Tolkien's are completely unreachable, unimaginable in reality. Even given billions of dollars, NASA could not create a race of half-orcs in a deep trench (strategically located below a large dam).
Science is possible... fantasy is impossible. Perhaps that's the problem.
Foo: Who let the hax0rs out?
leet, 133t, 1337!
Bar: Now that is funny
And me with out mode points...
Yeah, it's funny, in an -1, Offtopic kind of way.
On the other hand, if the title of the article were "Barbados Under Cyber Attack from Jamaica" -- well that would be 5, Funny.
Probably something like this.
Before I got my own distribution of Clue, I had no idea how text-based counters could *do* that. I was baffled when I'd pull up a page's source, looking for the IMG tag, and find nothing but "This page has been visited 00042 times." How was I going to give a page fake hits without an image to reload?
It would be intetesting to know what, and if so, how many agencies and or agents monitor this site.
Excellent point... how many slashdotters had an impulse to look behind them when this Slashdot interview came out?
I think it's sometimes overblown, but I grew up on a farm. Sometimes after turning over cow patties looking for bugs, I'd find a carrot or pick some berries or something and eat it.
How nice! The fresh fruit and berries must have gone well with your bugs.
obDisclaimer: I live in the country now, and the kids and I love finding interesting and unusual bugs.
It's ridiculous. What's next, getting Dennis Miller to be color man on Monday Night Football? Oh wait
Yeah, Dennis Miller's already in the house. Now when they put Rush Limbaugh in there, I'll know that the Apocalypse is at hand.
Oops.
Either the parent post has extremely fast typing skills...
Well, 50wpm or so -- tell your kids to take that easy-A "Keyboarding" class first chance they get, or else the only words they'll be able to type without looking at the keyboard will be "brb", "asl?", and "wtf?"
or it was a canned comment that happened to fit just right..."
No... although sometimes I think I've developed a "Slashdot" section of my brain that pops out fully-formed stories when triggered by the proper stimulus.
or I am crazy. Story posted 12:01, comment posted 12:03.
That's it! You're crazy! I'll share my prescription with you, I keep forgetting to take my meds anyway.
No, I'm just a subscriber *and* a fast typer with too many ideas and a boss that doesn't prowl around enough. I think Pavlov would be proud of the way I click when I see a red bar on the Slashdot home page!
Wow, I am impressed.
Don't be... just click the "Subscribe" link, pony up five bucks, and Instant Karma's gonna get you before you can say "Frist Post!"
Now please, don't flame me as a fan of mainland China's repressive regime. But the Taiwanese government doesn't exactly have the world's best track record, as I recall. I hear occasional notes about "problems" with civil rights, and then there's the whole pirated anime problem.
So when I read this line:
"National intelligence has indicated that an army of hackers based in China..."
my BS-o-Meter starts clicking. Though the article is non-technical, it includes other notes that make the meter tick faster:
"...has successfully spread 23 different Trojan horse programs... 10 private high-tech companies... break into at least 30 different government agencies and 50 private companies," Cabinet Spokesman Lin Chia-lung said yesterday.
We have a lot of big, scary numbers... but no hard information about the programs, the companies, or the government agencies.
In fact, the "23 different Trojans" makes me think that the government cabinet member is talking out of his butt. More likely, nobody's been running virus protection, and those 24 Trojans are simply members of F-Secure's wildlist.
Then, there's this "helpful" suggestion:
"If there's any lesson from this experience, it is not to use software developed in China or hire Chinese computer programmers, because you're running the risk of having the software you use implanted with the Trojan-horse program," he said.
That sounds like nothing more than the usual tit-for-tat barbs that Taiwan and China have been throwing across the strait for decades. In fact, I suspect that's what this whole Trojan Horse issue is -- all bluster, no substance.
And finally, off the actual topic: let's watch the Slashdot effect in action! When I first hit the Taipei Times article, it included this text at the bottom:
This story has been viewed 1128 times.
By the time I typed this comment, the number had not changed, so I'm probably getting a cached copy. What did it show when you hit it?
The parent shows the real problem with the "icing isn't the biggest problem" argument -- it may not be the biggest problem, but when ice is the cause of a flight failure, it seems to happen in a spectacular and mysterious way.
Also, if I recall correctly, crashes like the 1994 Roselawn, Indiana crash are particularly difficult to trace back to their root cause. Then, when icing is found to be the cause, future crashes without obvious causes are compared against previous mystery crashes. There's nothing that gets people nervous like a crash of unknown cause, so a phantom killer like ice would seem especially frightening.
Remember, perception == reality, even if reality != perception. Similar situation with the AIDS example (though I'm not judging the validity or applicability of the statistics) -- people have died from cancer and heart disease since hearts first evolved, so that's a known danger. AIDS, for a number of reasons, is a mystery to those who haven't been paying attention -- and thus, it's scary.
Those previous novels are not up to par with what they finally do sell. Better advice then given to new novelists is "burn your trunk". 'Trunk' refers to all the writing you've done before you finally sell something. It is not up to the standards of what you are now able to produce and publishing it will lower the public's perception of your current talent.
I see the reason for advising new writers to discard their old, unsold, sub-par beginning works. It would be far too tempting during a bout of writer's block to drag out some old crud, dust it off, and send it in. That *would* lead to the tarnishing you mentioned.
But what about an author like Heinlein, whose works reach a level of persistence such that people are still talking about them long after the author's death? Is it fair to future literary scholars to keep them from learning how your style evolved from "See Dick Run"? For that matter, is it fair to future writers, who can see the mistakes you made in your early, rejected works and how you overcame them in your published work?
Perhaps the "burn your trunk" advice is only applicable to those who don't expect to do anything more than make a living with their writing. Of course, if a writer really thinks their work should be that short-lived, perhaps they should start their burning with the sheet currently rolled into the typewriter.
I ran across this link a while back, and filed it away for future reference. Should have known that Slashdot would come through:
Heinlein Happens, by by Earl Kemp
It's a scathing expose of the "dark side" of Robert Heinlein, painting him as a Hugh Hefner wannabe with an ego the size of a god's, masking an inner insecurity the size of the Grand Canyon. It's hard to tell, though, how accurate Kemp's descriptions are, since he's writing from the POV of one of Heinlein's "disremembered" -- close friends who p***ed off the artist and were removed from his list of people worth acknowledging.
I'm curious how much is true, how much is exaggerated, and how much is just made up. I figure this is the place to ask!
As far as the literary side of the man... I've been a fan since I read "The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress" as a kid in the late '70s. The "Future History" stuff left me cold, but "Job" was a great return to form. The last Heinlein book I read (shamefully long ago) was the restored "Podkayne of Mars", with the original (downer) ending.
I haven't seen the "Puppet Masters" movie... and from what I've heard, I'm probably better off for it.
Since the event occurred in Tennessee, how could you forget to include something about Hot Grits?
Unfortunately (?), I wasn't an active Slashdotter when Natalie Portman and Grits were associated in the minds of the troll community, so I can't come up with anything myself. Maybe that's a Good Thing.
If you don't want the karma, post AC.
But there have been too many trolls lately that repost the article with certain, er, modifications. Like the one about a rocket launch that slipped in several references to other... "rocket-shaped personal entertainment devices".
Besides, there's not much point in Karma Whoring anymore. Who *doesn't* have Excellent karma these days?