Nor do you apparently care about what english looks like. Yes, we take into consideration that some people, like you, are idiots and a danger to whatever security systems we implement.
How would you propose to educate *without* pointing out flaws?
That's what I can't stand about all of these kinds of "people" like you. It's as if you have your head firmly shoved in your ass.
Ask that question again, "why would anyone target me specifically?" It sounds like you use Windows. It also sounds like you don't know what a script kiddie is. It really sounds like you haven't got a clue.
There is a low likelihood that someone will engage in a targetted attack against your machine. However, with batch attacks being run by adolescents, targetting entire IP address ranges, you b0x could be 0wnz0r3d by such an attack.
Your...question, "My point is, sure, if someone went to the effort, I guess they could hack my computer, but why would anyone target me specifically?" is the same view most people have. The problem is that your are clueless, and don't believe that it takes no effort at all to 0wn j00r b0x.
Those 'crap' computers are going to be running 50 years from now, unlike your Wintel bittybox. It's "useless" in the same sense that old cars are useless. In the same sense that historic relics are useless. You show that you have the software nature.
Actually...there are a few machines that will be around much longer than their creators...the DEC PDP-8s, 10s, and 11s are going to survive much longer. There were fewer earlier PDPs...I don't know what's become of most of them. Some machines, like the PDP-9, seem to mostly be gone...only 7 or 8 remain in the world. The same goes with the UNISYS UNIVAC III...
These are machines that fall into the hands of electrical engineers...people who will maintain them.
I would be inclined to agree. My first real programming experience, outside of a little bit of C, was assembly on a computer with a well-designed instruction set. I find that I'm in a much better position to understand what's going on than I would be if I were just being taught how to use black boxes. The problem is data hiding...in the hands of someone who knows what he is doing, yeah, it's useful. However, when a fool (i.e., CS student) gets his hands on an OO programming language, he doesn't understand the abstraction, and he's clueless when it breaks. The problem is that "Object Oriented" *snicker* programming is "the way of the future". What CS departments are doing is no different from removing a strong history curriculum from Political Science. In order to understand OOP, and why it can be useful (I laugh at the idea, but it *can* be useful), one *needs* to understand what's going on under the hood. One needs to know what the processor does, *how* it does it, and what happens when you feed it crap. Learning to program at the hardware level may not be eminently useful in today's world of gee-whiz optimizing compilers, but it is the ultimate in an educational experience. One can't truly program until one *understands* a computer. Programming languages are shorthands...the problem is, nobody knows longhand anymore. People piece things together that they don't understand.
Slashdot Mirror
Nor do you apparently care about what english looks like. Yes, we take into consideration that some people, like you, are idiots and a danger to whatever security systems we implement.
How would you propose to educate *without* pointing out flaws?
That's what I can't stand about all of these kinds of "people" like you. It's as if you have your head firmly shoved in your ass.
Ask that question again, "why would anyone target me specifically?" It sounds like you use Windows. It also sounds like you don't know what a script kiddie is. It really sounds like you haven't got a clue.
There is a low likelihood that someone will engage in a targetted attack against your machine. However, with batch attacks being run by adolescents, targetting entire IP address ranges, you b0x could be 0wnz0r3d by such an attack.
Your...question, "My point is, sure, if someone went to the effort, I guess they could hack my computer, but why would anyone target me specifically?" is the same view most people have. The problem is that your are clueless, and don't believe that it takes no effort at all to 0wn j00r b0x.
Why are we quoting Stalin?
Those 'crap' computers are going to be running 50 years from now, unlike your Wintel bittybox. It's "useless" in the same sense that old cars are useless. In the same sense that historic relics are useless. You show that you have the software nature.
Actually...there are a few machines that will be around much longer than their creators...the DEC PDP-8s, 10s, and 11s are going to survive much longer. There were fewer earlier PDPs...I don't know what's become of most of them. Some machines, like the PDP-9, seem to mostly be gone...only 7 or 8 remain in the world. The same goes with the UNISYS UNIVAC III... These are machines that fall into the hands of electrical engineers...people who will maintain them.
Hmm. I maintain old computers...I don't have to, but I do. I can also spell 'arguments'. I submit, using your logic, that you are flaming dumb ass.
Do you think that people as sloppy as that have anywhere near the intelligence and attention to detail needed to write a secure OS?
I would be inclined to agree. My first real programming experience, outside of a little bit of C, was assembly on a computer with a well-designed instruction set. I find that I'm in a much better position to understand what's going on than I would be if I were just being taught how to use black boxes. The problem is data hiding...in the hands of someone who knows what he is doing, yeah, it's useful. However, when a fool (i.e., CS student) gets his hands on an OO programming language, he doesn't understand the abstraction, and he's clueless when it breaks. The problem is that "Object Oriented" *snicker* programming is "the way of the future". What CS departments are doing is no different from removing a strong history curriculum from Political Science. In order to understand OOP, and why it can be useful (I laugh at the idea, but it *can* be useful), one *needs* to understand what's going on under the hood. One needs to know what the processor does, *how* it does it, and what happens when you feed it crap. Learning to program at the hardware level may not be eminently useful in today's world of gee-whiz optimizing compilers, but it is the ultimate in an educational experience. One can't truly program until one *understands* a computer. Programming languages are shorthands...the problem is, nobody knows longhand anymore. People piece things together that they don't understand.
For better or worse, IPv6 is still fool's gold. IPv4 with NAT has managed to delay it for many a year so far.
Maybe you're a dumbass.