Turner apparently got hit because it had not yet updated the Symantec programs on its computers. A fix for the flaw has been available since May and security experts have repeatedly urged users to protect their computers by applying the update.
...and the gravitational pull of the universe were significantly greater on one side than the other, or in any particular direction, your weight would change drastically as you travel around the earth. If anything, the centrifugal force (aka inertia) would cause you to fly up, but even that wouldn't be significant, at an acceleration of ~0.033 m/s^2.
If you really want a safe, practical flying car... just get/build a personal autogyro. They have near-VTOL capabilities using the jump autorotation thing, are decently fuel efficient, and are fairly time-tested. The day Moller releases his skycar is the day I fly it to buy my copy of Duke Nukem Forever.
...aren't these (or similar) invented by somebody every year? Yet they seem to still be few and far between... What I'm trying to say is, why should this one be any different?
The world has changed a lot, and I mean a lot, in the past millenium (even 2-300 years). The selective pressures that were around previously, causing the stupid to die, are no longer present. In fact, there is very little selective pressure in today's society, where the number of offspring you have is rarely related to prosperity or the like. The death rate is so low that I can hardly imagine selective forces having a large effect on evolution. Random mutation still occurs, of course, and perhaps over the next millenium one society will evolve to be smarter and will destroy the other with superior technology, but I seriously doubt this. I'm one of those people that considers human evolution to be nearly frozen. Soon to be supplanted by willful manipulation, of course (ethics debate about this some other time).
Though I'm still in school, I spend quite a bit of my time surfing the web and doing things not productive in any way. But then I think, if I were to work every moment of my free time, I would get tired. The work would not be so productive. It is because I spend a lot of time doing nothing that I can do much more when I do work. Basically, what I'm trying to say is that it all evens out - the more time you spend working, with insufficient rewards, the less good your work will be. Perhaps it's ultimately more efficient to ditch 2.09 hours a day, so that the other 5.91 or however much will be better.
He is sinply assuming that all anybody ever does is navigate file menus and some word processing. Choosing icons from a desktop, clicking buttons, things like that are not just eye candy... they matter. And for the things I do, multimedia editing and stuff, the mouse is more than essential. I agree fully with the poster that pointed out this is a thinly veiled 3 emacs news item, and rather terrible news. HEY, GEE GUYS, KEYBOARDS ARE BETTER THAN MICE FOR WORD PROCESSING.
Oh, and hey, news flash: copy protection and crap like that won't stop any organization large enough to fund terrorists... it'll screw the home user, but your money is still going to be just as fucking stolen. G'day.
"Further the fact that a man has been (rightfully) charged with a crime for shining a fucking laser at a plane like a dumbass has absolutely nothing to do with a safe, non-obtrusive, well-designed warning system that coincidentally also uses lasers because of their utility that is only invoked if a pilot strays into restricted airspace in the first place, which are likely to be small, private planes, as indicated in the article, and NOT commercial carriers with experienced pilots who know, and have the tools, to stay out of restricted airspace."
Very well said, and to add to your final point, I believe the idiot was arrested after shining it at a plane and then immediately afterwards at a helicopter trying to locate him. Thus, stupid people = bad, laser warning system = good.
Re:Have they considered terrorism?
on
Space Elevator Update
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Terrorism would be costly, but would put few lives other than those of the passengers at risk (if there are passengers at all, instead of just cargo). The asteroid would fly away from earth's orbit, not crash into washington, and the few inch/meter wide ribbon cable holding the elevator would probably flop down without causing significant damage. The elevator could then also have some sort of emergency failsame, so the elevator is in fact not that dangerous.
However, I have the feeling the world will be a very different place by the time one actually gets built... technologically, we may not be quite as close as we would like to believe.
"Instead, they usually add a mix of Windows and Linux server software to expand functionality."
Thus, they have the ability to directly compare between both. If they find Linux to be infinitely better, they would switch. Different tasks -> different tools, however, so they use both.
I don't care about monopolistic issues or anything (at least, not in this case), but having used both... Word is way better than WordPerfect, IMHO. It's just a matter of preference, but I find WordPerfect to be more clumsy and irritating.
Point? We already hear how much worse security Windows has multiple times a day. This doesn't even say it outright... The real thing I gained from the article is the fact that there are still an immense number of infected computers out there, and this brings me to the question: where? How many people could there possibly be out there whose computers are being run by various exploits? We already know that they're all thanks to people that suck at patching their machines, and I find that to be a much larger problem than the security of a fully patched OS.
NASA is dead. When you claim risk and safety as a high priority for exploration and scientific conquest, you know you aren't going to get anywhere. Lewis and Clark didn't wait for the invention of the SUV before going cross-country, they just went ahead and did it. I'm not saying that exploration should cut corners and put people in unnecessary danger, but there are astronauts willing to risk going up to do things like this. Face it, shooting somebody into the sky on a giant bomb is inherently unsafe, and that's something you've just got to accept. I understand that another accident for NASA would cut approval and potentially cost them far more money, and I'm saying that that's the problem. Trying to be unnecessarily safe is going to cost them far too much money, and that's money that they most likely don't have and won't have to spend. (I was referring to the Mars mission as well)
The article mentioned this. The plant wasn't functioning at the time, and I think it took down one of the safety monitoring systems (that had other backups, I would imagine). Perhaps the system was such that you could check the safety status online, causing it to be exposed... *shrug* Still, not a task for Windows, if you ask me... same with running a car, etc.
Regardless of what OS you run mission-critical systems on (though I would in this instance strongly advise against Windows), there really is no reason whatsoever to open it up to an external network. None at all. Physical attack is bad enough, you don't need to leave another door open.
...but one can only hope that as we gradually update our (america's) power infrastructure, things like this will be added. However, one wonders how many regional power outages we will need before we do this... but until we do begin a massive overhaul of the grid, something like this will only be an added benefit of such an overhaul.
Slashdot Mirror
Turner apparently got hit because it had not yet updated the Symantec programs on its computers. A fix for the flaw has been available since May and security experts have repeatedly urged users to protect their computers by applying the update.
Hmm hmm hmm people are dumb.
...and the gravitational pull of the universe were significantly greater on one side than the other, or in any particular direction, your weight would change drastically as you travel around the earth. If anything, the centrifugal force (aka inertia) would cause you to fly up, but even that wouldn't be significant, at an acceleration of ~0.033 m/s^2.
Only 13 feet? Hell, I used to wrestle gators bigger than that in New York sewers...
If you really want a safe, practical flying car... just get/build a personal autogyro. They have near-VTOL capabilities using the jump autorotation thing, are decently fuel efficient, and are fairly time-tested. The day Moller releases his skycar is the day I fly it to buy my copy of Duke Nukem Forever.
...aren't these (or similar) invented by somebody every year? Yet they seem to still be few and far between... What I'm trying to say is, why should this one be any different?
Do they have laser beams?
The world has changed a lot, and I mean a lot, in the past millenium (even 2-300 years). The selective pressures that were around previously, causing the stupid to die, are no longer present. In fact, there is very little selective pressure in today's society, where the number of offspring you have is rarely related to prosperity or the like. The death rate is so low that I can hardly imagine selective forces having a large effect on evolution. Random mutation still occurs, of course, and perhaps over the next millenium one society will evolve to be smarter and will destroy the other with superior technology, but I seriously doubt this. I'm one of those people that considers human evolution to be nearly frozen. Soon to be supplanted by willful manipulation, of course (ethics debate about this some other time).
Though I'm still in school, I spend quite a bit of my time surfing the web and doing things not productive in any way. But then I think, if I were to work every moment of my free time, I would get tired. The work would not be so productive. It is because I spend a lot of time doing nothing that I can do much more when I do work. Basically, what I'm trying to say is that it all evens out - the more time you spend working, with insufficient rewards, the less good your work will be. Perhaps it's ultimately more efficient to ditch 2.09 hours a day, so that the other 5.91 or however much will be better.
Sorry, but this guy could use a beginner's guide to its and it's. Though I'm sure what he says is insightful, it makes it that much harder to respect.
He is sinply assuming that all anybody ever does is navigate file menus and some word processing. Choosing icons from a desktop, clicking buttons, things like that are not just eye candy... they matter. And for the things I do, multimedia editing and stuff, the mouse is more than essential. I agree fully with the poster that pointed out this is a thinly veiled 3 emacs news item, and rather terrible news. HEY, GEE GUYS, KEYBOARDS ARE BETTER THAN MICE FOR WORD PROCESSING.
you forgot that goddamn reveiled. Sheesh.
...but what??? That's really all I can say...
Oh, and hey, news flash: copy protection and crap like that won't stop any organization large enough to fund terrorists... it'll screw the home user, but your money is still going to be just as fucking stolen. G'day.
Apocalypse Now.
Every time I see it, I can't help being amazed at how good it is. Simply an incredible film.
May 13th was a Friday.
(News better late than never, I suppose)
From Fucking The Article?
"Further the fact that a man has been (rightfully) charged with a crime for shining a fucking laser at a plane like a dumbass has absolutely nothing to do with a safe, non-obtrusive, well-designed warning system that coincidentally also uses lasers because of their utility that is only invoked if a pilot strays into restricted airspace in the first place, which are likely to be small, private planes, as indicated in the article, and NOT commercial carriers with experienced pilots who know, and have the tools, to stay out of restricted airspace."
Very well said, and to add to your final point, I believe the idiot was arrested after shining it at a plane and then immediately afterwards at a helicopter trying to locate him. Thus, stupid people = bad, laser warning system = good.
Terrorism would be costly, but would put few lives other than those of the passengers at risk (if there are passengers at all, instead of just cargo). The asteroid would fly away from earth's orbit, not crash into washington, and the few inch/meter wide ribbon cable holding the elevator would probably flop down without causing significant damage. The elevator could then also have some sort of emergency failsame, so the elevator is in fact not that dangerous.
However, I have the feeling the world will be a very different place by the time one actually gets built... technologically, we may not be quite as close as we would like to believe.
"Instead, they usually add a mix of Windows and Linux server software to expand functionality."
Thus, they have the ability to directly compare between both. If they find Linux to be infinitely better, they would switch. Different tasks -> different tools, however, so they use both.
I don't care about monopolistic issues or anything (at least, not in this case), but having used both... Word is way better than WordPerfect, IMHO. It's just a matter of preference, but I find WordPerfect to be more clumsy and irritating.
Unpatched Windows: Bad.
Patched Windows, Mac, Linux: Good.
Point? We already hear how much worse security Windows has multiple times a day. This doesn't even say it outright...
The real thing I gained from the article is the fact that there are still an immense number of infected computers out there, and this brings me to the question: where? How many people could there possibly be out there whose computers are being run by various exploits? We already know that they're all thanks to people that suck at patching their machines, and I find that to be a much larger problem than the security of a fully patched OS.
NASA is dead. When you claim risk and safety as a high priority for exploration and scientific conquest, you know you aren't going to get anywhere. Lewis and Clark didn't wait for the invention of the SUV before going cross-country, they just went ahead and did it.
I'm not saying that exploration should cut corners and put people in unnecessary danger, but there are astronauts willing to risk going up to do things like this. Face it, shooting somebody into the sky on a giant bomb is inherently unsafe, and that's something you've just got to accept. I understand that another accident for NASA would cut approval and potentially cost them far more money, and I'm saying that that's the problem. Trying to be unnecessarily safe is going to cost them far too much money, and that's money that they most likely don't have and won't have to spend.
(I was referring to the Mars mission as well)
The article mentioned this. The plant wasn't functioning at the time, and I think it took down one of the safety monitoring systems (that had other backups, I would imagine). Perhaps the system was such that you could check the safety status online, causing it to be exposed... *shrug* Still, not a task for Windows, if you ask me... same with running a car, etc.
Regardless of what OS you run mission-critical systems on (though I would in this instance strongly advise against Windows), there really is no reason whatsoever to open it up to an external network. None at all. Physical attack is bad enough, you don't need to leave another door open.
...but one can only hope that as we gradually update our (america's) power infrastructure, things like this will be added. However, one wonders how many regional power outages we will need before we do this... but until we do begin a massive overhaul of the grid, something like this will only be an added benefit of such an overhaul.
First, they must have taken a page from the particle physics book: smash things together and see what happens.
Second, we already know they're good at crashing things, so this shouldn't be a problem. In all seriousness, I look forward to it.