Wrong. Unless you're definition of a "good line" is a digital connection to the exchange. But I don't think so, because it doesn't look like you know what you're on about.
You will get 56kbs in NO MORE THAN ONE DIRECTION. That will be from the digital end, to the analog end. This is because the digitally connected equipment can "sync" to the exchange, and time its signals in such a way it can send them more reliably, the only way 56kbs could be achieved with 8kHz TDM.
You and your friend with "good phone lines" might have got more than 33k6 through due to compression, but you didn't get carrier speeds greater than 33k6 bps.
OK. While I still don't quite agree with you, at least I don't think you're a troll anymore.
I don't know if Linux or some other will ever even up with Windows for market share. But if it ever did happen, Linux surely will get targeted as much as Windows does now. That's where we can agree, I think.
I believe, however, that the "other OS", be it Linux or a BSD etc., will stand up to a greater proportion of the ensuing attacks, proving it to be just as secure when widely deployed as it is now.
That's because I believe it to be better by design. OK, I haven't written any source in the kernel, and I haven't read all that much of the source, only what's given me trouble. But I've got no access whatsoever to Windows source, and its security and authentication, so I've no idea how horribly shonky and dodgy it is. I've just got a hunch that it's pretty bad, don't ask me why.
I'm sorry, I must have missed that decade where some other company reached the market penetration of Microsoft.
Obviously something has passed you by. You must have also missed all of Microsoft's responses to the same. Still, at least you're awake now.
You could argue that BeOS is the most secure OS in the world because it has never been hacker or infected. But then again, there are what, 5 people using it?
Why take it to such a stupid extreme? He didn't argue that BeOS was the most secure OS. Stop being such a bigot in defending your OS in this way. All you're saying is "Yeah sure other OS's are better, but nobody uses them".
Wake up dickhead. People do use them. They've often made a conscious decision to place themselves in a minority group in the computing whole, so why do you think they'll be jealous of your majority share argument?
You'll also need a floppy drive to poll. Without a floppy attached, Windows will wait forever for it to finish reading the nonexistant disk, and will appear hung.
Remember, he said they already had a policy of how long passwords lasted for, implying they expired at some stage. While we can't assume it's a Windows environment, if it were, it's as simple as ticking "User must change password at next logon".
So while using that particular password was one exceptionally stupid idea, we can't assume it follows they've done everything else stupid.
You raise an important point, of course. Out of 50,000 users that aren't forced to change from that password, how many actually wouldn't bother. I'd say more than half, based on my experience.
From the episode they get thier house fitted with a computer that controls the whole thing. (it's a halloween episode, Homer gets killed, Pierce Brosnan was the voice for the computer.)
This isn't really a bug in MySpace (well, technically it is now), it's more like a bug in IE which can be exploited on MySpace, or any other site which allows similar tags in which code can be 'hidden'.
I wish people like you wrote/edited the article summaries around here. Cheers
You shouldn't get 403 Forbidden, you should get 404 Not found.
If you get a 403, either the server is misconfigured, the sysadmin is misconfigured, or you hit a 'login required' area where you'd have to use a password, and didn't have one. In which case you'd already know. I guess fiddling with the URL after the latter case would contravene this law, but I can't remember the last time I've seen one.
Aside point: the law says what you can't do when you aren't allowed access, but what if you are?
Does anything in it cover what you can't do when you are allowed (limited) access?
I think I'm being more than reasonable.
I don't. And you're certainly not being more than reasonable.
Two things:
I don't want you to write a virus for a Mac, much less contract you to do so.
When you "put your money where your mouth is", you do just that.
I'm sure we're all talking about a virus that's going to be able to transmit itself upon any unwilling user automatically. If you're thinking you're going to write some app that just deletes what it can and email it to people saying "check this out!", you lose your bet.
If you're good enough to write a virus that can do that, you don't even need one Mac. You've got thousands connected right now.
You probably are a good programmer, I'm not saying otherwise, but I don't think giving you a Mac will in turn give you the insight to crack its OS. Hell do I have to give you a Linux box so you can prove you can infect me in a week, or do you have one handy? I'm on 222.152.8.103 if you're quick!
Do you lock your car? Do you lock your house? Is that Ford's fault, the government's fault, your fault? Or is it simply because it's the smart thing to do given the fact that there are malicious people in the world?
I wondered how long it would be until I saw a stupid analogy.
A computer is not an example of something you need to "lock when you leave it" as is a car or a house. Your computer can be compromised while you're sitting at it "guarding it" as you would think.
You don't get the occasional security advisory from Ford explaining that their locks were vulnerable to a buffer overrun.
Sure you can lay the blame with those that attack us, but what's the point? They're not going to do anything about it. WE'VE got to stop them. The Users AND Microsoft. Fuck the blame, they only way you're going to be able to trust your system is if you can trust who made it.
Yeah, I remember when I was waiting for the operation to remove my wisdom teeth, and the head nurse gave me some patient info to read about the operation first. The surgery formatted all of their stuff with Comic Sans!
While I wouldn't go so far to say "ban comic-sans", it has a place, and a page of medical advise ain't it.
Slashdot Mirror
*chuckles*
You will get 56kbs in NO MORE THAN ONE DIRECTION. That will be from the digital end, to the analog end. This is because the digitally connected equipment can "sync" to the exchange, and time its signals in such a way it can send them more reliably, the only way 56kbs could be achieved with 8kHz TDM. You and your friend with "good phone lines" might have got more than 33k6 through due to compression, but you didn't get carrier speeds greater than 33k6 bps.
I don't know if Linux or some other will ever even up with Windows for market share. But if it ever did happen, Linux surely will get targeted as much as Windows does now. That's where we can agree, I think.
I believe, however, that the "other OS", be it Linux or a BSD etc., will stand up to a greater proportion of the ensuing attacks, proving it to be just as secure when widely deployed as it is now.
That's because I believe it to be better by design. OK, I haven't written any source in the kernel, and I haven't read all that much of the source, only what's given me trouble. But I've got no access whatsoever to Windows source, and its security and authentication, so I've no idea how horribly shonky and dodgy it is. I've just got a hunch that it's pretty bad, don't ask me why.
Obviously something has passed you by. You must have also missed all of Microsoft's responses to the same. Still, at least you're awake now.
You could argue that BeOS is the most secure OS in the world because it has never been hacker or infected. But then again, there are what, 5 people using it?
Why take it to such a stupid extreme? He didn't argue that BeOS was the most secure OS. Stop being such a bigot in defending your OS in this way. All you're saying is "Yeah sure other OS's are better, but nobody uses them".
Wake up dickhead. People do use them. They've often made a conscious decision to place themselves in a minority group in the computing whole, so why do you think they'll be jealous of your majority share argument?
That's hardly fair on it..
Or more to the point, how many lightbulbs am I going to have to change!?
So while using that particular password was one exceptionally stupid idea, we can't assume it follows they've done everything else stupid.
You raise an important point, of course. Out of 50,000 users that aren't forced to change from that password, how many actually wouldn't bother. I'd say more than half, based on my experience.
From the episode they get thier house fitted with a computer that controls the whole thing. (it's a halloween episode, Homer gets killed, Pierce Brosnan was the voice for the computer.)
I wish people like you wrote/edited the article summaries around here. Cheers
You
would trust his data
Your comment
to such a provable piece of shit.
The MySQL database used to run Slashdot.
And while I don't think you could get a lot more relevant than that, NG has (had in the not so distant past) ads.
Thank you for enlightening me. And yes, I agree with you about 410.
No, it's phishy. Get with the times.
If you get a 403, either the server is misconfigured, the sysadmin is misconfigured, or you hit a 'login required' area where you'd have to use a password, and didn't have one. In which case you'd already know. I guess fiddling with the URL after the latter case would contravene this law, but I can't remember the last time I've seen one.
Aside point: the law says what you can't do when you aren't allowed access, but what if you are?
Does anything in it cover what you can't do when you are allowed (limited) access?
I don't. And you're certainly not being more than reasonable.
Two things:
- I don't want you to write a virus for a Mac, much less contract you to do so.
- When you "put your money where your mouth is", you do just that.
I'm sure we're all talking about a virus that's going to be able to transmit itself upon any unwilling user automatically. If you're thinking you're going to write some app that just deletes what it can and email it to people saying "check this out!", you lose your bet.If you're good enough to write a virus that can do that, you don't even need one Mac. You've got thousands connected right now.
You probably are a good programmer, I'm not saying otherwise, but I don't think giving you a Mac will in turn give you the insight to crack its OS. Hell do I have to give you a Linux box so you can prove you can infect me in a week, or do you have one handy? I'm on 222.152.8.103 if you're quick!
I wondered how long it would be until I saw a stupid analogy.
A computer is not an example of something you need to "lock when you leave it" as is a car or a house. Your computer can be compromised while you're sitting at it "guarding it" as you would think.
You don't get the occasional security advisory from Ford explaining that their locks were vulnerable to a buffer overrun.
Sure you can lay the blame with those that attack us, but what's the point? They're not going to do anything about it. WE'VE got to stop them. The Users AND Microsoft. Fuck the blame, they only way you're going to be able to trust your system is if you can trust who made it.
Hard to ignore someone when they but their balls on the line like that...
Personally I still think it's the best idea, and can't see how you can make it harder for phishers without making it harder for customers.
You don't think (Score 5, Funny) is a bit of a giveaway, do you?
Well done. Now see if you can do it in fewer lines.
Were you joking!?
You're the troll, not the trolls.
While I wouldn't go so far to say "ban comic-sans", it has a place, and a page of medical advise ain't it.
No, NULL is not less than, greater than, or equal to anything. Not even NULL itself.