Not applying security fixes, or not having a minimal level of antivirus/firewall software is a sure way to join a botnet lately. We need those $15/yr. subscribers to pay the white hat hackers who develop antivirus tech, this isn't like letting a magazine subscription lapse.
A DDoS requires many hosts in different places... and that role is usually played by a botnet of unwitting users. If users cared more about their bandwidth consumption, or were responsible for the damage they caused by their insensitivity to the Internet community, then botnets would be a whole lot harder to assemble. I'm sick of the 3am calls from the girl who only calls when her computer won't work for her....
My web host (MediaTemple) got hammered with a DDoS aimed at their DNS servers over the last few weeks. As a result, I've put my most critical domains using ZoneEdit's free-for-your-first-five DNS offer, with the web host playing backup, for my most critical domains. This plan successfully weathered a repeat attack.
To paraphrase Jim Cramer, redundancy must be the only free lunch in IT.
They're likely going to put the users on GooBunto... their secret-filled OS that they've been developing for their own purposes for a few years now. If you have a Linux-offshoot Android already, they most likely have the ability to fork Linux and do whatever they need from it... not to mention any security exploit would require knowledge of this employees-only OS, so it'll dramatically cut back on the number of suspects.
Just wondering, do they give you Business Class TV service too? ESPN charges more to be shown at a business than it does at home... and those situations make the business TV package a little less attractive than the consumer service.
MSDN today sent me an e-mail asking if they can stop sending me DVD shipments because it's all available online. Sorry, not while I'm subject to this.:)
Again, right now Clear is in "public beta" more than general release. They want people to max them out so they can figure out where their limits are at this stage, but will they want that in the long term future when the tech is ready to deploy everywhere?
Right... but a pre-bankruptcy AT&T Wireless (before they were sold to SBC to be part of Cingular, which now calls itself AT&T Mobility) was just starting to roll out spotty GSM, and they had a $99/mo. GSM only unlimited-and-we-mean-it plan. To sales guys in NYC it was great, to the average user it was useless. By the time the national unlimited plans came out, the typical usage restrictions came in.
Yep, the people who are most likely to get hit with this are people who are uploading content, copyrighted or not, using workarounds. If you really want to push out your podcast, get a cloud services account for about $50/mo. and you'll have a much more reliable system and all the bandwidth you need.
I've always thought that the wire/RF owners should be kept separate from the content owners for exact fear of this happening. Comcast would rather you get your TV delivered by their broadcast frequencies, so they provide good but not great Internet service. Look what AT&T and Verizon are doing without any content ownership.
They tried that model... it was called Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles. It got an audience, but not enough of one to make enough money to justify production.
1. They're not suing uploaders, they're taking it to the downloaders. MPAA has never done that, yet. 2. They're not the MPAA, this is a small film maker turning into a lawsuit-powered company. 3. They're setting records for number of defendants in an IP case. They've got IP numbers for a whole lot more than 5,000, and the ISPs are starting to claim this is too many for them to research.
They're also suing for something at this point incomprehensible... a block that prevents the infringer from ever downloading their movies again. Good luck with that at the tech level.
The license to see any movie you want on any platform you want at any time you want is infinitely expensive. It's just that they're having trouble enforcing that.
And the studios all have TV deals for the content they want to broadcast free. Disney = ABC... Time Warner = 1/2 of CW and a lot of cable outlets... Viacom = CBS and the other half of CW (even though they split, they still share a lot of common ownership)... Universal Studios = NBC, News Corp. = Fox.
Yep... the classic Shaggy defense where A says it wasn't me, B says it wasn't me, C says it's wasn't me. Despite evidence that says it must be that A, B, or C did it, they all get off unless there's more specific evidence that says which one it was.
Are there already good alternatives for bittorrents?
1. See it in the theater. 2. Buy the DVD/Blu-Ray 3. Rent the DVD/Blu-Ray 4. Watch on Pay Per View Cable/DBS 5. Watch on HBO/Showtime pay cable 6. Wait until it's rerun on basic cable.
Slashdot Mirror
Not applying security fixes, or not having a minimal level of antivirus/firewall software is a sure way to join a botnet lately. We need those $15/yr. subscribers to pay the white hat hackers who develop antivirus tech, this isn't like letting a magazine subscription lapse.
And if you're a rich company that can pay for more bandwidth and processing than the other guy, you're virtually immune to DDoS problems.
It woulda been nice, but it was Midnight her time when she called.
A DDoS requires many hosts in different places... and that role is usually played by a botnet of unwitting users. If users cared more about their bandwidth consumption, or were responsible for the damage they caused by their insensitivity to the Internet community, then botnets would be a whole lot harder to assemble. I'm sick of the 3am calls from the girl who only calls when her computer won't work for her....
My web host (MediaTemple) got hammered with a DDoS aimed at their DNS servers over the last few weeks. As a result, I've put my most critical domains using ZoneEdit's free-for-your-first-five DNS offer, with the web host playing backup, for my most critical domains. This plan successfully weathered a repeat attack.
To paraphrase Jim Cramer, redundancy must be the only free lunch in IT.
They're likely going to put the users on GooBunto... their secret-filled OS that they've been developing for their own purposes for a few years now. If you have a Linux-offshoot Android already, they most likely have the ability to fork Linux and do whatever they need from it... not to mention any security exploit would require knowledge of this employees-only OS, so it'll dramatically cut back on the number of suspects.
The point-to-point link for 1Gbps may be there, but will such networks have the backhaul to handle a bunch of users at full speed all at once?
Just wondering, do they give you Business Class TV service too? ESPN charges more to be shown at a business than it does at home... and those situations make the business TV package a little less attractive than the consumer service.
MSDN today sent me an e-mail asking if they can stop sending me DVD shipments because it's all available online. Sorry, not while I'm subject to this. :)
Again, right now Clear is in "public beta" more than general release. They want people to max them out so they can figure out where their limits are at this stage, but will they want that in the long term future when the tech is ready to deploy everywhere?
Right... but a pre-bankruptcy AT&T Wireless (before they were sold to SBC to be part of Cingular, which now calls itself AT&T Mobility) was just starting to roll out spotty GSM, and they had a $99/mo. GSM only unlimited-and-we-mean-it plan. To sales guys in NYC it was great, to the average user it was useless. By the time the national unlimited plans came out, the typical usage restrictions came in.
Yep, the people who are most likely to get hit with this are people who are uploading content, copyrighted or not, using workarounds. If you really want to push out your podcast, get a cloud services account for about $50/mo. and you'll have a much more reliable system and all the bandwidth you need.
I've always thought that the wire/RF owners should be kept separate from the content owners for exact fear of this happening. Comcast would rather you get your TV delivered by their broadcast frequencies, so they provide good but not great Internet service. Look what AT&T and Verizon are doing without any content ownership.
Nope. They're giving slight more than one month's notice to a 100% month-to-month customer base.
The 3G networks that seem to be everywhere cap-out at 5GB... they'd have to raise that by 5000% in order to beat Comcast.
Nah... this was brought to us by the lack of US Congress imposing regulation on the wire providers.
The cutoff line (now at 2014) keeps moving, just like copyright lengths. There will come a day when MS stops, then where's XP?
They tried that model... it was called Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles. It got an audience, but not enough of one to make enough money to justify production.
And in that world... just who will pay for movies to be made?
Here's what's different.
1. They're not suing uploaders, they're taking it to the downloaders. MPAA has never done that, yet.
2. They're not the MPAA, this is a small film maker turning into a lawsuit-powered company.
3. They're setting records for number of defendants in an IP case. They've got IP numbers for a whole lot more than 5,000, and the ISPs are starting to claim this is too many for them to research.
They're also suing for something at this point incomprehensible... a block that prevents the infringer from ever downloading their movies again. Good luck with that at the tech level.
The license to see any movie you want on any platform you want at any time you want is infinitely expensive. It's just that they're having trouble enforcing that.
And the studios all have TV deals for the content they want to broadcast free. Disney = ABC... Time Warner = 1/2 of CW and a lot of cable outlets... Viacom = CBS and the other half of CW (even though they split, they still share a lot of common ownership)... Universal Studios = NBC, News Corp. = Fox.
Yep... the classic Shaggy defense where A says it wasn't me, B says it wasn't me, C says it's wasn't me. Despite evidence that says it must be that A, B, or C did it, they all get off unless there's more specific evidence that says which one it was.
Are there already good alternatives for bittorrents?
1. See it in the theater.
2. Buy the DVD/Blu-Ray
3. Rent the DVD/Blu-Ray
4. Watch on Pay Per View Cable/DBS
5. Watch on HBO/Showtime pay cable
6. Wait until it's rerun on basic cable.