You misspelled "Running an OS which has too insignificant a population of clueless users for anyone to bother writing a virus"
The majority of modern Windows "viruses" are simple trojans, initially launched by users stupid enough to run untrusted code. What makes you think that they wouldn't punch in a root password too?
The difference for BSD and Linux operating systems is that there is a very small percentage of clueless users who are running the OS, and most of them will have a system administrator (be it their teenage punk kid who talked mom into letting him remove Windows, or a Linux desktop installed at the office) who won't be handing out the root password anyway and will have sufficiently locked down the system.
Come on -- I mean, yes, this is/. so not reading the article is part and parcel. Hell, not even reading the summary, that's okay too. But at least read the two lines of text to which you're replying...
[blockquote]the flight continues on auto-pilot until it lands, taxi's into the gate.[/blockquote]
At no point was control returned to the pilot in this process.
One sharp jerk downward, followed by flying upward, followed by a landing at the nearest military airstrip.
Best case, a bunch of bruised, scared passengers and some very broken terrorists (and anyone else who wasn't seat belt fassoned, table upright, seat-back forward). Middle case, hostage situation. Worst case, everybody dies.
Regardless, the plane lands safely on a runway rather then then 9/11 approach of stopping in at a World Trade Tower to pick up passengers.
As a fairly regular air traveller, if you give me the choice of 1) dying, or 2) dying AND taking out a lot of innocent people with me, I'll choose #1 just about every day of the week.
That would be autopilot to the nearest military air strip, with an automatic landing, and a warm greeting by military folks with an over-abundance of weaponry.
Lets say it's accidentally tripped... Both pilot and copilot and crew radio in and say "oops, sorry -- No problem, someone tripped", the flight continues on auto-pilot until it lands, taxi's into the gate, passengers never even know.
Not at all -- For hijackers to take control, they will need to enter the cockpit. One option would be to trap the cockpit doors for short-haul flights and have an option for the remote control center to return control (and in the event a pilot needs to pee, both pilots AND a crew member are required to radio ground first, otherwise control will not be returned, period)
Another option is that both pilots have heart monitors attached, and if both are disconnected together, or EITHER are disconnected without an appropriate PIN being entered, remote control kicks in. That, plus a short PIN required to deactivate the heart monitors will ensure that the pilot or copilot will have ample opportunity to trip the system (or their deaths, or removable from their chairs will trip the same)
Sure, you could still coerce a pilot, but that's a completely different attack vector.
And if you locate the terminal at 12-24 different military bases, each with a kill switch that will shut down that entire remote terminal, how effective do you think an attack from a group of terrorists will be?
Not only that, but raise the bar a little -- 24 different bases with airfields, all capable of running the show remotely, each with a kill-switch to shut down the entire base for 72 hours.
Taking one military base might be possible. Holding it for more then 19 minutes might also be possible. Taking a dozen at once, and holding them all while also hijacking one or more planes, not going to happen.
Another option entirely is to allow line-of-sight from a fighter jet to completely override the ground remote control, meaning that if the ground station is compromised, any fighter jet that can get within line of sight of the hijacked plane can resolve the problem. Keep in mind that fighter jets will be sent anyway, since if anything goes wrong, all fighter jets already include an ultimate "abort the terrorist's mission" button anyway, for terrorist missions with greater aspirations then killing a passenger jet's worth of people.
Without political restrictions, what kind of crap is that?
I can't totally disagree with this one -- If the US decided to use the "nuke 'em all and let god sort it out" approach to clearing out the Iraq insurgency, the problem could probably be resolved in the better part of 24 hours.
It would probably start a world war though, not to mention the reaction of the American people. Politics.
Okay, fair enough... Lets try "You only need enough to completely destroy the majority of the habited portions of the planet, anything else is redundant."
(Anyone have stats on actual nuke capabilities and capacities?)
While I don't disagree, the end result of the Iraq war is that we've learned two things...
1) A small insurgency can hold their own against the US, therefore the US is much less of a threat against a small but dedicated and organized militia.
2) The US' military might is sufficiently impressive to ensure that traditional outright warfare is unfavourable.
To me, this is a major positive to all concerned, it helps ensure the US' safety and security vs the other larger powers, but also keeps the US from bullying around the smaller countries simply by their might -- Largely preventing smaller countries from needing to ally themselves with a super-power.
Here's a section of the email I received from Richard who I think is the Director of Application Development ast the MPAA:
The material has been removed from our Web server.
* No Web links were ever provided to the blog.
* The blog was never assigned a domain name.
* The blog was never advertised to the public in any way.
* The material on the server was a proof of concept awaiting approval to move into production.
* The blog was only ever used for testing purposes.
* Should we have decided to make the move to production, then we would have paid the 25 Pounds that would have authorized us to run a version of the blog without the logos and links.
Okay, great -- So the question is, how did Patrick become aware of it? If it wasn't linked, assigned a domain name, advertised to the public, and only for testing, why was *anyone* aware of it?
What if someone else violated the license and made a stripped version of Epic Movie available, without any references to the original author? How in general can one tell whether one is getting the original movie with intact copyright notices?
Yeah, that's a better analogy -- And around here, the rules are roughly the same (the lowest price wins, be it tagged on the item, another identical item, the shelf, the printed advertisement, or what the register brings up)
Some stores are notorious for "forgetting" to log sales in the tills (so they overcharge, unless you notice), others don't bother with signage within the store and you end up paying less then expected.
I've sold both product and services below cost by accident, and I've done so intentionally to help out a friend (I own the company, so doing so is my $DEITY given right) -- I've done the same to build relationships with potential clients. I'll take advantage of a loss-leader one day, I'll end up buying a ton of junk I otherwise wouldn't have while I'm loss-leader shopping the next day.
I guess the way I look at it, sometimes in life you win, sometimes you get screwed. When it happens, you look at who made the mistake, and if it was your mistake, you fix it. If not, next time you bring a bottle of lube.
Were I Amazon, I'd take it out of marketing's budget, make a big deal about reversing the requests for returns or payment, and anyone that did return the product would get a coupon or gift card or something, everybody feels all warm and fuzzy and life goes on. But that's just me.
It depends on the store. At stores that have treated me well, I have pointed out errors in the past (although oddly enough, more often then not it was an unadvertised promotion, not an error).
At places that have jerked me around, I'm substantially less inclined to mention it.
There is a pub I used to visit weekly for a couple that *always* screwed up the bill -- One time we went 9 months without them getting the bill right on the first try.
Figuring out my bill is easy, I don't drink alcohol, and generally don't hang out with people that get so drunk they can't remember what they drank (our typical bill was a pizza, a coke, and 1-2 beers -- I'd always pick up the tab for the entire table) -- One day the bill we got was over $500 in hard liquor. Worse, that one was for our table (their most common mistake was dropping the bills on the wrong tables)
Not just one waitress, I was on a "The usual today hun?" basis with two of them, and a first name basis with the most of the rest.
What do you think the odds are I mentioned when they screwed up the bill in my favour one day?
Do I feel guilty? Nope.
Luckily the capitalist system is built to handle this situation -- Each party looks out for their own interests when negotiating a contract (with some exceptions, mostly with regards to mandatory disclosure), once both parties are satisfied, each satisfies the contract and we go on with life. If you can't keep up, don't play.
Slashdot Mirror
You misspelled "Running an OS which has too insignificant a population of clueless users for anyone to bother writing a virus"
The majority of modern Windows "viruses" are simple trojans, initially launched by users stupid enough to run untrusted code. What makes you think that they wouldn't punch in a root password too?
The difference for BSD and Linux operating systems is that there is a very small percentage of clueless users who are running the OS, and most of them will have a system administrator (be it their teenage punk kid who talked mom into letting him remove Windows, or a Linux desktop installed at the office) who won't be handing out the root password anyway and will have sufficiently locked down the system.
Well, there is that little "Intel" startup, I wonder if AC97 will go anywhere.
I won't embarass you by mentioning Turtle Beach, M-Audio, Turtle Beach, E-MU, Roland or Ensoniq either.
Then you'd read the rest of that sentance.
/. so not reading the article is part and parcel. Hell, not even reading the summary, that's okay too. But at least read the two lines of text to which you're replying...
Come on -- I mean, yes, this is
[blockquote]the flight continues on auto-pilot until it lands, taxi's into the gate.[/blockquote]
At no point was control returned to the pilot in this process.
One sharp jerk downward, followed by flying upward, followed by a landing at the nearest military airstrip.
Best case, a bunch of bruised, scared passengers and some very broken terrorists (and anyone else who wasn't seat belt fassoned, table upright, seat-back forward). Middle case, hostage situation. Worst case, everybody dies.
Regardless, the plane lands safely on a runway rather then then 9/11 approach of stopping in at a World Trade Tower to pick up passengers.
As a fairly regular air traveller, if you give me the choice of 1) dying, or 2) dying AND taking out a lot of innocent people with me, I'll choose #1 just about every day of the week.
Next most reliable control option?
That would be autopilot to the nearest military air strip, with an automatic landing, and a warm greeting by military folks with an over-abundance of weaponry.
Lets say it's accidentally tripped... Both pilot and copilot and crew radio in and say "oops, sorry -- No problem, someone tripped", the flight continues on auto-pilot until it lands, taxi's into the gate, passengers never even know.
So that's the solution -- Everyone learn French. Well, except the terrorists.
Not at all -- For hijackers to take control, they will need to enter the cockpit. One option would be to trap the cockpit doors for short-haul flights and have an option for the remote control center to return control (and in the event a pilot needs to pee, both pilots AND a crew member are required to radio ground first, otherwise control will not be returned, period)
Another option is that both pilots have heart monitors attached, and if both are disconnected together, or EITHER are disconnected without an appropriate PIN being entered, remote control kicks in. That, plus a short PIN required to deactivate the heart monitors will ensure that the pilot or copilot will have ample opportunity to trip the system (or their deaths, or removable from their chairs will trip the same)
Sure, you could still coerce a pilot, but that's a completely different attack vector.
And if you locate the terminal at 12-24 different military bases, each with a kill switch that will shut down that entire remote terminal, how effective do you think an attack from a group of terrorists will be?
Not only that, but raise the bar a little -- 24 different bases with airfields, all capable of running the show remotely, each with a kill-switch to shut down the entire base for 72 hours.
Taking one military base might be possible. Holding it for more then 19 minutes might also be possible. Taking a dozen at once, and holding them all while also hijacking one or more planes, not going to happen.
Another option entirely is to allow line-of-sight from a fighter jet to completely override the ground remote control, meaning that if the ground station is compromised, any fighter jet that can get within line of sight of the hijacked plane can resolve the problem. Keep in mind that fighter jets will be sent anyway, since if anything goes wrong, all fighter jets already include an ultimate "abort the terrorist's mission" button anyway, for terrorist missions with greater aspirations then killing a passenger jet's worth of people.
The entire Treo line has IR support... I own a Treo 680 and Treo 650 (GSM editions) that are both PalmOS as well as having IR support.
I can't totally disagree with this one -- If the US decided to use the "nuke 'em all and let god sort it out" approach to clearing out the Iraq insurgency, the problem could probably be resolved in the better part of 24 hours.
It would probably start a world war though, not to mention the reaction of the American people. Politics.
Okay, fair enough... Lets try "You only need enough to completely destroy the majority of the habited portions of the planet, anything else is redundant."
(Anyone have stats on actual nuke capabilities and capacities?)
While I don't disagree, the end result of the Iraq war is that we've learned two things...
1) A small insurgency can hold their own against the US, therefore the US is much less of a threat against a small but dedicated and organized militia.
2) The US' military might is sufficiently impressive to ensure that traditional outright warfare is unfavourable.
To me, this is a major positive to all concerned, it helps ensure the US' safety and security vs the other larger powers, but also keeps the US from bullying around the smaller countries simply by their might -- Largely preventing smaller countries from needing to ally themselves with a super-power.
The US outclassed Iraq pretty badly too. That one is working out well.
You only need enough to completely destroy the majority of the habitable portions of the planet, anything else is redundant.
You'd think -- Stealth isn't a factor either, just turn the thing off when it's not in use, give the pilot a switch to enable it.
Do you think that would stop the MPAA from considering everyone involved to be guilty?
MPAA, not RIAA (Yes, I'm being pedantic)
However, regardless, if a single person other then the individual who modified it managed to view it, a copyright violation occurred.
Okay, great -- So the question is, how did Patrick become aware of it? If it wasn't linked, assigned a domain name, advertised to the public, and only for testing, why was *anyone* aware of it?
What if someone else violated the license and made a stripped version of Epic Movie available, without any references to the original author? How in general can one tell whether one is getting the original movie with intact copyright notices?
Organizing and making accessible information which is already available is one thing, producing information is completely different.
Yeah, that's a better analogy -- And around here, the rules are roughly the same (the lowest price wins, be it tagged on the item, another identical item, the shelf, the printed advertisement, or what the register brings up)
Some stores are notorious for "forgetting" to log sales in the tills (so they overcharge, unless you notice), others don't bother with signage within the store and you end up paying less then expected.
Guess where I do my grocery shopping?
I've sold both product and services below cost by accident, and I've done so intentionally to help out a friend (I own the company, so doing so is my $DEITY given right) -- I've done the same to build relationships with potential clients. I'll take advantage of a loss-leader one day, I'll end up buying a ton of junk I otherwise wouldn't have while I'm loss-leader shopping the next day.
I guess the way I look at it, sometimes in life you win, sometimes you get screwed. When it happens, you look at who made the mistake, and if it was your mistake, you fix it. If not, next time you bring a bottle of lube.
Were I Amazon, I'd take it out of marketing's budget, make a big deal about reversing the requests for returns or payment, and anyone that did return the product would get a coupon or gift card or something, everybody feels all warm and fuzzy and life goes on. But that's just me.
It depends on the store. At stores that have treated me well, I have pointed out errors in the past (although oddly enough, more often then not it was an unadvertised promotion, not an error).
At places that have jerked me around, I'm substantially less inclined to mention it.
There is a pub I used to visit weekly for a couple that *always* screwed up the bill -- One time we went 9 months without them getting the bill right on the first try.
Figuring out my bill is easy, I don't drink alcohol, and generally don't hang out with people that get so drunk they can't remember what they drank (our typical bill was a pizza, a coke, and 1-2 beers -- I'd always pick up the tab for the entire table) -- One day the bill we got was over $500 in hard liquor. Worse, that one was for our table (their most common mistake was dropping the bills on the wrong tables)
Not just one waitress, I was on a "The usual today hun?" basis with two of them, and a first name basis with the most of the rest.
What do you think the odds are I mentioned when they screwed up the bill in my favour one day?
Do I feel guilty? Nope.
Luckily the capitalist system is built to handle this situation -- Each party looks out for their own interests when negotiating a contract (with some exceptions, mostly with regards to mandatory disclosure), once both parties are satisfied, each satisfies the contract and we go on with life. If you can't keep up, don't play.