WTF? I replied to this but slashdot seems to have lost a lot of posts. The original reply comment ID was 5211364.
The worm as such has no malicious/destructive payload. All it does is spread. The traffic generated by scanning these hosts in itsself is enough to render many servers unusable. Think of it as a DDoS attack on the entire internet.
Now you want to make a 'good' worm to do just this but close the toilet seat behind it? not wise...
Dont underestimate the damage caused by effectively making millions of host machines DDoS each other with malicious packets.
Having a destructive payload is likely to give each host less time to make the virus propagate.
Also note that only the insane high-profile corportations will run their SQL servers/whatever with admin/root permissions, or on the same PC as which valuable data is stored.
Technology obviously being a lifelong hobby, I imagine it would have been tempting to use a computer when noone else would know (a friend/family members/home PC).
Obviously you can't admit to this, but do you think laws forbidding the use of computes are effective? Or just end up banning legitimate uses while letting people illegitimatly do the illegitimate?
Helping yourself to other peoples labour is one thing. There are already international copyright laws designed to combat this.
The difference with the DCMA is that it doesnt make it illegal for someone to steal other peoples intelectual property, rather it makes it illegal to make TOOLS which could POTENTIALLY be used to circumvent copy protections.
Then it goes further. It is illegal to publish INFORMATION about copy protecion systems which could be used to circumvent the protections. It is illegal to tell someone how to bypass a protection.
Now if a law dissallows you to publish INFORMATION, or even verbally inform someone of something, it is clearly unconstitutional. If ever enforced, then I am surprised you dissagree, but the country isnt 100% free.
PS, how is publishing a site listing prices from different stores "stealing other peoples labour".?
MPAA: "Our records indicate you downloaded an illegal movie." You: "I did no such thing." MPAA: "These logfiles clearly state that you downloaded the file named LOTR.Two.Towers.SCREENER.PROPER.avi" You: "Ahhh... *That* file, well, I was usink kazaa you see..." MPAA: "That is irrelevant. You were violating international copyright laws" You: "no, no, you see the file actually contains raw donkey rape porno, filenames on kazaa are irrelevant, want to see the files contents?" MPAA: "umm.. noo, that won't be neccessary..." You: *** flick on donkey sound clips in background MPAA: "uhm.. well, we won't prosecute this time, but let this be a warning to you"...
Even if the bill was passed, it only deals with illegal file trading. Infecting all MP3 files, and introducing viruses to potentially innocent sound files is something I imagine would make a nice lawsuit with damages exceeding {INF} digits...
In reality there is a total of 0.5% of infected computers. Some of these however have fast (over 1GHz proccessors), bringing the total percentage to the equivelant of 50%. Additionally some had large harddisks, allowing more illegal MP3's to be stored. Hence the equivellant of 95% whole computers.
Yes, but who said anything about it neccessarily being negative effects? According to the chaos therory, and its randomness, every movement we make has the potential to escilate into huge meterological events. Its so random, weather the changes are big or small, that it would be unwise to be able to surpress droughts, yet refuse to do it because when someone happens to fart during the operation it might create a storm in another region...
Yes, its called the chaos theory. It is possible minor variations in weather can cause gigantic reactions some time later, in some other place.
However, does this unpredictibility neccessarilly mean all things we do will cause NEGATIVE effects? On the same logic, perhaps itll PREVENT a disaster in the future. On the same basis, according to the chaos theory, I should avoid moving at all, for the risk of causing a hurricane. But what if a movement I made just happened to COUNTERACT that butterfly flap and yo mommas fart?
We cant predict what will happen in the future as a result of such small actions, itll take its own random cause anyway. But if we can learn how to avoid/deferr natural disasters, its a step in the right direction.
No, perhaps we should continue to let people die from lack of water, or weather-related natural disasters. After all, if we tried to save them we'd have swarms of religious leaders protesting that we are tampering with god/nature/their egos.
Memory is a strange thing. You can think something happened, when really its just an imagination, subconsiously remembering what someone taught you, or even a dream...
At an early age it was common for me to not be sure weather something I had experienced was reality or a dream.
In circumstances like yours, there are some things which can be logically disproven. Firstly, you may not be able to understand the difference between mother and sister, and you wouldnt understand enought to assume they were sisters. They would just be a person you might vaguely remember.
Secondly, the talk of the dazzling light.. umm, correct me if im wrong, but humans are blind inside the womb and only develop eyesight after (several days?) they are born.
1) DVD-R disks have 4.3GB max capacity. Most DVD video disks use two layers. You would have to reencode the video at a lower bitrate (takes hours on a fast modern CPU). Alternatly you could split it into two DVD-R disks.
Wouldnt it be better to have a portable 200+ GB HDD drive. On average 30 DVDs can be stored there before you go home and convert them to DIVX.
2) Dunno about you, but all the rental stores ive seen only have the boxes availible for display. After youve chosen what movies you want, you have to go over to the counter, pay, and get the disk put into the boxes. Quite a big obstacle....
Oh, and.. umm.. its illegal even if it could be possible, and id never think of doing it... urm.. well.. maybe *evil grin*
DVD disks support two sides and two layers, so defacto quadropling the capacity of a single layered, single sided disk.
DVD-R unfortunatly only supports one layer. Although I have seen double sided DVD-R disks, but those require flipping them upside down to access the other half of the data.
Most DVD-Video disks use two layers on one side to increase the capacity above 4.3GB. This means that to copy most DVD-Video disks, it is neccessary to reencode the video at a lower bitrate, or remove some extras.
I would also be looking forward to a release of a dual layer DVD-R disk, but I assume itll be very difficult to acheive with current technology (at least unless its to cost thousands).
Thats why it was for a long time impossible to resume a CD after a buffer underun. However modern advancments in technology let drives precisely find the location where they left off (ie BURN-PROOF). The same might be possible for DVD. I assume its just a matter of accuracy weather or not you can get the two lasers to end up meeting at exactly the right bit...
There is a thing called google cache. Also anyone can make a copy to their own PC or set up a mirror.
By attracting too much attention, the profs are just encouraging everyone to make backups while they still can, and telling them that a good way of cheating exists.
Its happened. Right or wrong they cant change it now... its too late.. so they should just let it rest.
Telling the RIAA you hate them and what you did about it? You mean how you circumvented the copy protection and made an illegal copy of a disk you brought from them and later returned? Im sure thatll go down well... with Bubba your future cellmate.
Writing no less than two letters, and arguing with the returns department, plus messing around trying to get around the DRM... It may be for the greater good, but I certainly understand why people may not be bothered with this proceedure and just prefer to type a track name into their favourite P2P app and press download...
In 2050 companies who have succeeded will have largley done so through the aid of futurologists like me. Any company that in 2002 gave a payrise to these futurologists received huge increases in profits, as they knew excatltly what to plan for......dream on...
We all know it won't be 100% fool proof. The question is if law enforcment will accept this. If they want to argue that the system is brilliantly designed and can't be tampered with, then they must assume that if someone was shot with your gun, you must have been the person who did it. I can think of hundreds of scenarios where innocent people could be framed if the protection was circumvented...
Slashdot Mirror
WTF? I replied to this but slashdot seems to have lost a lot of posts. The original reply comment ID was 5211364.
The worm as such has no malicious/destructive payload. All it does is spread. The traffic generated by scanning these hosts in itsself is enough to render many servers unusable. Think of it as a DDoS attack on the entire internet.
Now you want to make a 'good' worm to do just this but close the toilet seat behind it? not wise...
Hmmm, remember these 'bad' worms do nothing but spread, clogging up bandwidth, causing a massive DDoS attack on the entire internet.
So, you want to release a 'good' worm to do just that with the exception of closing the toilet seat behind it? I think not.
Thats assuming its even possible. The security flaw would have to allow execution of arbitary code under the Administrator account.
Deleting/corrupting files requires higher privelages than sending a UDP packet.
Dont underestimate the damage caused by effectively making millions of host machines DDoS each other with malicious packets.
Having a destructive payload is likely to give each host less time to make the virus propagate.
Also note that only the insane high-profile corportations will run their SQL servers/whatever with admin/root permissions, or on the same PC as which valuable data is stored.
Technology obviously being a lifelong hobby, I imagine it would have been tempting to use a computer when noone else would know (a friend/family members/home PC).
Obviously you can't admit to this, but do you think laws forbidding the use of computes are effective? Or just end up banning legitimate uses while letting people illegitimatly do the illegitimate?
Should company bulleting boards who do not want to put up with this enable verification of posts by moderators?
Or even a simple filter to filter out common offensive messages.
Helping yourself to other peoples labour is one thing. There are already international copyright laws designed to combat this.
The difference with the DCMA is that it doesnt make it illegal for someone to steal other peoples intelectual property, rather it makes it illegal to make TOOLS which could POTENTIALLY be used to circumvent copy protections.
Then it goes further. It is illegal to publish INFORMATION about copy protecion systems which could be used to circumvent the protections. It is illegal to tell someone how to bypass a protection.
Now if a law dissallows you to publish INFORMATION, or even verbally inform someone of something, it is clearly unconstitutional. If ever enforced, then I am surprised you dissagree, but the country isnt 100% free.
PS, how is publishing a site listing prices from different stores "stealing other peoples labour".?
Is a list of numbers even copyrightable? I wouldn't think so.....
Then read this
Yes, it seems INSANE. The DMCA is so fundamentally corrupt I can't possibly see how it was ever accepted. Just shows how free the US is after all.
MPAA: "Our records indicate you downloaded an illegal movie."
You: "I did no such thing."
MPAA: "These logfiles clearly state that you downloaded the file named LOTR.Two.Towers.SCREENER.PROPER.avi"
You: "Ahhh... *That* file, well, I was usink kazaa you see..."
MPAA: "That is irrelevant. You were violating international copyright laws"
You: "no, no, you see the file actually contains raw donkey rape porno, filenames on kazaa are irrelevant, want to see the files contents?"
MPAA: "umm.. noo, that won't be neccessary..."
You: *** flick on donkey sound clips in background
MPAA: "uhm.. well, we won't prosecute this time, but let this be a warning to you"...
Even if the bill was passed, it only deals with illegal file trading. Infecting all MP3 files, and introducing viruses to potentially innocent sound files is something I imagine would make a nice lawsuit with damages exceeding {INF} digits...
... They meant the EQUIVELANT of 95%.
In reality there is a total of 0.5% of infected computers. Some of these however have fast (over 1GHz proccessors), bringing the total percentage to the equivelant of 50%. Additionally some had large harddisks, allowing more illegal MP3's to be stored. Hence the equivellant of 95% whole computers.
Yes, but who said anything about it neccessarily being negative effects? According to the chaos therory, and its randomness, every movement we make has the potential to escilate into huge meterological events. Its so random, weather the changes are big or small, that it would be unwise to be able to surpress droughts, yet refuse to do it because when someone happens to fart during the operation it might create a storm in another region...
Yes, its called the chaos theory. It is possible minor variations in weather can cause gigantic reactions some time later, in some other place.
However, does this unpredictibility neccessarilly mean all things we do will cause NEGATIVE effects? On the same logic, perhaps itll PREVENT a disaster in the future. On the same basis, according to the chaos theory, I should avoid moving at all, for the risk of causing a hurricane. But what if a movement I made just happened to COUNTERACT that butterfly flap and yo mommas fart?
We cant predict what will happen in the future as a result of such small actions, itll take its own random cause anyway. But if we can learn how to avoid/deferr natural disasters, its a step in the right direction.
No, perhaps we should continue to let people die from lack of water, or weather-related natural disasters. After all, if we tried to save them we'd have swarms of religious leaders protesting that we are tampering with god/nature/their egos.
Well, in that case it should perhaps be named 'previous' and 'next', to keep it consistent with terminology used elsewhere in the operating system.
Back usually means go back to where you were before you came here.
Up means move one level up a folder (Saying your referring to moving up a history stack is pushing it).
Previous would best describe visiting the next-older page in your browsers history.
Umm.. no, unless you want to redefine terminology, up would move you up a folder on a web server, like the 'up' feature on konqueror.
The back button system may have its problems, but it is far from incorrectly named.
Memory is a strange thing. You can think something happened, when really its just an imagination, subconsiously remembering what someone taught you, or even a dream...
At an early age it was common for me to not be sure weather something I had experienced was reality or a dream.
In circumstances like yours, there are some things which can be logically disproven. Firstly, you may not be able to understand the difference between mother and sister, and you wouldnt understand enought to assume they were sisters. They would just be a person you might vaguely remember.
Secondly, the talk of the dazzling light.. umm, correct me if im wrong, but humans are blind inside the womb and only develop eyesight after (several days?) they are born.
Would be kewl, but two major obstacles...
1) DVD-R disks have 4.3GB max capacity. Most DVD video disks use two layers. You would have to reencode the video at a lower bitrate (takes hours on a fast modern CPU). Alternatly you could split it into two DVD-R disks.
Wouldnt it be better to have a portable 200+ GB HDD drive. On average 30 DVDs can be stored there before you go home and convert them to DIVX.
2) Dunno about you, but all the rental stores ive seen only have the boxes availible for display. After youve chosen what movies you want, you have to go over to the counter, pay, and get the disk put into the boxes. Quite a big obstacle....
Oh, and.. umm.. its illegal even if it could be possible, and id never think of doing it... urm.. well.. maybe *evil grin*
... but im not that optimistic until I actually see it.
Its all too often companys announce they are working on something revolutionary, and the only outcome is raised stocks for them, and no final product.
Four years ago we had IBM claiming cheaply available 6 Terrabyte solid state hard disks the size of a sugar cube will be availible in 2000...
DVD disks support two sides and two layers, so defacto quadropling the capacity of a single layered, single sided disk.
DVD-R unfortunatly only supports one layer. Although I have seen double sided DVD-R disks, but those require flipping them upside down to access the other half of the data.
Most DVD-Video disks use two layers on one side to increase the capacity above 4.3GB. This means that to copy most DVD-Video disks, it is neccessary to reencode the video at a lower bitrate, or remove some extras.
I would also be looking forward to a release of a dual layer DVD-R disk, but I assume itll be very difficult to acheive with current technology (at least unless its to cost thousands).
Thats why it was for a long time impossible to resume a CD after a buffer underun. However modern advancments in technology let drives precisely find the location where they left off (ie BURN-PROOF). The same might be possible for DVD. I assume its just a matter of accuracy weather or not you can get the two lasers to end up meeting at exactly the right bit...
There is a thing called google cache. Also anyone can make a copy to their own PC or set up a mirror.
By attracting too much attention, the profs are just encouraging everyone to make backups while they still can, and telling them that a good way of cheating exists.
Its happened. Right or wrong they cant change it now... its too late.. so they should just let it rest.
Sounds ok, except:
Telling the RIAA you hate them and what you did about it? You mean how you circumvented the copy protection and made an illegal copy of a disk you brought from them and later returned? Im sure thatll go down well... with Bubba your future cellmate.
Writing no less than two letters, and arguing with the returns department, plus messing around trying to get around the DRM... It may be for the greater good, but I certainly understand why people may not be bothered with this proceedure and just prefer to type a track name into their favourite P2P app and press download...
In 2050 companies who have succeeded will have largley done so through the aid of futurologists like me. Any company that in 2002 gave a payrise to these futurologists received huge increases in profits, as they knew excatltly what to plan for... ...dream on...
We all know it won't be 100% fool proof. The question is if law enforcment will accept this. If they want to argue that the system is brilliantly designed and can't be tampered with, then they must assume that if someone was shot with your gun, you must have been the person who did it. I can think of hundreds of scenarios where innocent people could be framed if the protection was circumvented...