In theory, you could create campus-wide policy that all need to respect to connect to the backbone and in theory this solves all security problems.
This sort of thing seems to work pretty well where I am (I think they use ActiveDirectory for authentication (which may in turn back onto LDAP), and setting machine policies which include some very restricted user privileges. Some software is installed to the machines on a per-use basis under the user's privileges, and nuked when they log out. All the essential services are provided by Linux and Solaris servers). Mind you, it slows the machines down something rotten. It can take over five minutes to log into the Windows XP workstations. They used to have Windows 98 machines that were wiped clean (literally --- everything went) whenever the machine (re)booted (which was whenever a user logged out).
You are approaching the problem from a wrong direction.
Surely the bigger problem here is the zombied boxes! Maybe their security policies should be tightened first, and the servers shored up accordingly with a physically separate router.
Somebody else here said that the Mormons are very conservative. But they allow for polygamy? That doesn't sound very conservative! That's what I'd expect from the most hardcore, liberal hippy types!
It's conservative because only men may take multiple spouses. The liberal version is more along the lines of the Denobulans... anyway, I guess you all know the old joke that starts: "What's the punishment for polygamy?"
Apu Nahasapeemapetilon did write a program for his Ph.D. that could beat all but the toughest grandmasters at Tic-Tac-Toe (or, Noughts and Crosses, to give it its proper name). Unfortunately, it was written on several hundred punch-cards, and lost to an accident involving Bartholomew J. Simpson.
It's things like this that make me wish more people would make a real effort to Heal the World.
Yeah, all the children in the world should be loving each other wholeheartedly. And take the news to the marching men who are killing their brothers when death won't do.
In Soviet Russia, Moscow are in Stranger!
All The Girl Are Belong To Me!
I, for one, welcome our new plastic, "not-guilty on all counts" overlords.
I did go there to check facts, but I'm [allegedly] a physicist, dammit! And besides, do you really want to see Windows XP Quantum Mechanical Edition? Schroedinger's Blue Screen of Death?
IMHO, this business of "falsifiability" is used because falsifiable is a subset of testable. I think there may be theories which are testable but not falsifiable, but are isolated and pathological. When it actually comes down to doing science, however, I think many scientists take a utilitarian approach: how useful is Such-And-Such Theory for computing this or that quantity?
Damn, I can't wait until we get gravity to work, so I can get my computer down on the desk.
Don't confuse engineering with science, the latter being largely concerned with measurable predictions and falsifiability. GR is also a remarkably good theory, and has been tested (according to some claims) to as many decimal places as QED.
You can put a QFT on a curved space-time (but I don't know anything about this, suffice to say it's bloody hard and you get things like the Unrah effect and other acceleration anomalies). I think the problem is that quantum field theories of symmetric tensor fields (i.e., gravity) are non-renormalisable.
I suspect that "always" is rather longer than you appreciate.
I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at here. "Always" is a pretty long time (hence emphasis).
...as inventions go [classical computers] haven't even exhibited even an interesting longevity, much less irreplaceability.
Again, I'm probably missing your point, but what about healthcare, transport, communications, lifestyle, construction, entertainment, etc., etc.? One thing classical computers are good at is automation. How would a quantum computer improve on a classical one in this respect?
Good points. There are few "good" uses for quantum computers --- mainly, breaking public keys by factorising the product of two large primes (which may prove unrealisable in practise: I don't know how long one could keep an O(100) qbit state coherent), QM simulations (i.e., designable software experiments), and searching databases more quickly than classically possible. There will always be a need for classical computers.
Kudos to Sophos. My university makes it available for students' home machines, and they generally have a shit-hot response. Sometimes they're a bit too enthusiastic, and I've seen a number of false positives that were corrected a couple of hours later. Still, better safe than sorry.
I can't honestly think of any peace time value of a missile.
Many acts of terrorism occur at peacetime. Peaceful uses of missiles could include: deploying rescue equiment or aid to otherwise unreachable areas; blowing up asteroids (although the feasilibity of this is controversial); deploying high-altitude instrumentation; and widespread distribution of propag^H^H^Hmotional material.
And while we're on it, how about the draconian file-locking schemes, and a path-driven filesystem that won't let you rename directories higher up in the hierarchy of an open file?
I went poking around a bit further before the shit hit the fan, and found this little thingy called "CrashNot" (dunno if it's genuine, www.crashnot.com doesn't work), the self-styled Counter-Slashdot. It's a chuckle.
But I like the idea of a Bugzilla for Microsoft products.
Slashdot Mirror
This sort of thing seems to work pretty well where I am (I think they use ActiveDirectory for authentication (which may in turn back onto LDAP), and setting machine policies which include some very restricted user privileges. Some software is installed to the machines on a per-use basis under the user's privileges, and nuked when they log out. All the essential services are provided by Linux and Solaris servers). Mind you, it slows the machines down something rotten. It can take over five minutes to log into the Windows XP workstations. They used to have Windows 98 machines that were wiped clean (literally --- everything went) whenever the machine (re)booted (which was whenever a user logged out).
Just go down to the local hospital and buy a used pacemaker. Remove the nuclear battery, and hack it into your mouse. Problem solved.
It's conservative because only men may take multiple spouses. The liberal version is more along the lines of the Denobulans... anyway, I guess you all know the old joke that starts: "What's the punishment for polygamy?"
Don't you know, most of us here surf the web by tapping the bared ends of a Cat-5 on the terminals of an AA battery?
And don't forget his horse.
Apu Nahasapeemapetilon did write a program for his Ph.D. that could beat all but the toughest grandmasters at Tic-Tac-Toe (or, Noughts and Crosses, to give it its proper name). Unfortunately, it was written on several hundred punch-cards, and lost to an accident involving Bartholomew J. Simpson.
Is this something the RAF found out to the detriment of several pilots?
But dlsreports.com doesn't.
Is this what you meant? ;)
Yeah, all the children in the world should be loving each other wholeheartedly. And take the news to the marching men who are killing their brothers when death won't do.
In Soviet Russia, Moscow are in Stranger!
All The Girl Are Belong To Me!
I, for one, welcome our new plastic, "not-guilty on all counts" overlords.
It's late, and I have hayfever.
Hey! Making up Michael Jackson jokes is as ABC... or 123.
If I looked like a badger with bad posture, I too could be Jay Leno!
I did go there to check facts, but I'm [allegedly] a physicist, dammit! And besides, do you really want to see Windows XP Quantum Mechanical Edition? Schroedinger's Blue Screen of Death?
Well, do you?!
IMHO, this business of "falsifiability" is used because falsifiable is a subset of testable. I think there may be theories which are testable but not falsifiable, but are isolated and pathological. When it actually comes down to doing science, however, I think many scientists take a utilitarian approach: how useful is Such-And-Such Theory for computing this or that quantity?
Don't confuse engineering with science, the latter being largely concerned with measurable predictions and falsifiability. GR is also a remarkably good theory, and has been tested (according to some claims) to as many decimal places as QED.
You can put a QFT on a curved space-time (but I don't know anything about this, suffice to say it's bloody hard and you get things like the Unrah effect and other acceleration anomalies). I think the problem is that quantum field theories of symmetric tensor fields (i.e., gravity) are non-renormalisable.
I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at here. "Always" is a pretty long time (hence emphasis).
Again, I'm probably missing your point, but what about healthcare, transport, communications, lifestyle, construction, entertainment, etc., etc.? One thing classical computers are good at is automation. How would a quantum computer improve on a classical one in this respect?
Good points. There are few "good" uses for quantum computers --- mainly, breaking public keys by factorising the product of two large primes (which may prove unrealisable in practise: I don't know how long one could keep an O(100) qbit state coherent), QM simulations (i.e., designable software experiments), and searching databases more quickly than classically possible. There will always be a need for classical computers.
Seriously, is this person paranoid or just dangerous?
Kudos to Sophos. My university makes it available for students' home machines, and they generally have a shit-hot response. Sometimes they're a bit too enthusiastic, and I've seen a number of false positives that were corrected a couple of hours later. Still, better safe than sorry.
Many acts of terrorism occur at peacetime. Peaceful uses of missiles could include: deploying rescue equiment or aid to otherwise unreachable areas; blowing up asteroids (although the feasilibity of this is controversial); deploying high-altitude instrumentation; and widespread distribution of propag^H^H^Hmotional material.
Yeah, cuz when our dinky 32-bit machines hit da wall in 2038, world's gonna end. Repent now or go 64-bit!!!
And while we're on it, how about the draconian file-locking schemes, and a path-driven filesystem that won't let you rename directories higher up in the hierarchy of an open file?
Those who do not understand MacOS are condemned... no, hang on, those who do not understand Xerox Alto are condemned..., etc.
I went poking around a bit further before the shit hit the fan, and found this little thingy called "CrashNot" (dunno if it's genuine, www.crashnot.com doesn't work), the self-styled Counter-Slashdot. It's a chuckle.
But I like the idea of a Bugzilla for Microsoft products.