You've just eliminated IP spoofing by legitimate users of American ISPs. You've done nothing about the rest of the Internet. Besides, botnets don't require IP spoofing; they've already got control of random IP addresses to attack from.
Cameras don't work and never have. Study after study shows cameras in London don't prevent theft.
People I know in my town with nearly one hundred monitoring cameras LIVE in their music store still get robbed regularly. Sometimes they manage to catch the person.
Cameras are NOT a deterant to most people. The people who think cameras work are the same people who wouldn't rob you anyway.
Graphics power isn't nearly as important as processing power, but people have a certain normative graphical level they get accustomed to whether it be on TV or in gaming, and when you don't keep up to par, its obvious and distracting.
The N64 was not a miserable failure over all but it was nowhere near as popular or well-regarded as its running mates in that generation.
That said I agree, Rare made the best and most incredible games for the N64 and I played almost all of them. Their later work for the 360 hasn't impressed me near as much I might add.
Nintendo's own Zelda games for the N64 were also excellent, I enjoyed playing and replaying them thoroughly, although I can't say the same about Mario 64.
J. Michael Straczynski's writing on Babylon Five(he wrote much of season 1 and all of seasons 2-5 with the exception of one episode) is one of the few times anyones ever written full hour long 21-23 episode seasons solo.
And the plot arcs and interconnections as well as the consistency of characters has had no equal since in serial writing.
Babylon 5 deserves a good HD remaster with fresh CGI, it was filmed with that in mind even (wide screen, quality film).
PS, watching Babylon 5 is good for your understanding of the difference between 'rogue' and 'evil' in the military/government;-)
Bruce is the opposite of a traditional peddler in my view; he comes at problems from an obviously wide perspective and a deep understanding of his expertise; cryptography. I see most of his 'light-weight' contributions to security as those moments where he's trying to explain how cryptography, his passion, will not solve your problems.
He frequently explains how cryptography doesn't implicitly guarantee security, that security is a larger process that involves many other factors of which good cryptography is only one.
Depending on poor cryptography will of course weaken the solution should crypto be a major factor, but the design of the whole system needs to be taken into account, and that's where his frequently-cited works come into play.
Can you actually find good examples of him NOT being insightful or seeing an issue correctly? Are you simply annoyed that he doesn't sit in the corner you've made for him as a cryptographer? I don't care if Oprah talks about weight loss; she's been through it. I care that she talks about literature, because the books she likes suck.
Bruce can talk about process security all he likes in my world, he's good at it and doesn't mince words.
The legal system is built on the premises that no one is guilty until proven so in a court of law, and that even traitors deserve to have defence counsel, especially when they haven't yet been proven to be traitors by said court.
Agreed. Due process is essential here, and I think a lot of people get mad at lawyers instead of judges, where some of this blame belongs. A good judge (the SCO case comes to mind) will look a lawyer in the eyes and ask them "does that sound as stupid to you as it does to me?" or something legally equivalent.
Lawyers' jobs are to make a case, the judge's job is to interpret and apply the law. Judges make the decision to actually give credence to what a lawyer says or not.
There is TOO an Internet -- those connected by publicly routable IP addresses via the AS's of the world. THE Internet frequently has routing black-holes, for a variety of reasons, but any ISP should be doing their best allow you to route packets to and from ANY of the other publicly routable ranges on that Internet. Otherwise, they wouldn't be "INTERNET service providers".
Your peers may not be accessible, even if on publicly routable addresses, for security reasons or whatnot, but they're still routable from anywhere else on the Internet -- accessibly or not.
I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, or perhaps you're not aware of how subjective the 'law' really is. Judges are there to interpret the law and apply it to specific circumstances appropriately.
We have juries for severe cases for exactly this subjectivity -- what the people want is how the law should work, in democracies. So yes, my opinions matter.
Performance for disk encryption is a fixed number, not a ratio. 30% of the gp's cycles may well work out to 3% of the questioner's cycles. The number of cycles required to do the encryption is pretty constant, plus or minus the CPU in question and the disk throughput of course.
The PS2 is the most ubiquitous gaming device in the world. If you're targeting the largest market in console owners and want to market your game to that market, you'd be making a PS2 game.
Speaking of data tracking, if you don't want to be considered in the metrics for their site maintenance, make sure you keep doing that.
Personally, I use my Google Analytics data to check screen resolutions and search engine results (aside from basic hit-count). How people reach me and what their capabilities are are very important. If the average user of a site I manage only has 800x600 resolutions, I need to take that into consideration in site maintenance. If they on average have dial-up, I need to consider that too.
Feel free to opt out, but you never gave consent to the data people like Shoppers Drug Mart collect on you either (and you'd be surprised), and no, not with an Optimum card.
I wish I could post and moderate in the same discussion, this made me almost spit my coffee out:
When a citizen runs afoul of a law he didn't even know about, the cop is quick to throw his nose in the air and declaim, "Ignorance of the law is no excuse."
But when the cop cuts corners so he can sit at the station poking donuts down his piehole instead of doing his job, it's all, "Ahhh, yes, but it was a minor error. And besides, the poor dumb fellow 'was acting in good faith.'"
Damn that double standard.
I was sitting at the bar yesterday watching "one of those cop shows" that follows highway patrol vehicles with two cops at the bar. I made sure to regularly comment on the abusive behaviour of the police on the show and how it made me feel as an educated citizen toward their otherwise useful role in society.
In the first case, it wasn't the dominant issue of the case, it simply contributed to the obviousness of the hateful nature of the site.
In the second one, your assumption is not correct -- server logs would confirm how many people saw it, but there's no direct link between paper readership and Internet readership of any given publication.
As for the third, I sure hope people continue to be held responsible for what they say in writing, whether its on the Internet or otherwise. There is no difference between typing a letter out to someone and mailing it and writing a reply to them on Slashdot, and there should be no legal difference either.
Slashdot Mirror
You've just eliminated IP spoofing by legitimate users of American ISPs. You've done nothing about the rest of the Internet. Besides, botnets don't require IP spoofing; they've already got control of random IP addresses to attack from.
I'm not sure they ask many questions in that situation.
Its more like being yelled at to get out of the vehicle and plant yourself on the ground before the bullets do it to you.
I know I wouldn't have got out of grade school if current rules were in place then.
Let me guess (as per a pervious post of mine); you're not a thief, are you?
Not that you'd admit it on Slashdot.
Cameras don't work and never have. Study after study shows cameras in London don't prevent theft.
People I know in my town with nearly one hundred monitoring cameras LIVE in their music store still get robbed regularly. Sometimes they manage to catch the person.
Cameras are NOT a deterant to most people. The people who think cameras work are the same people who wouldn't rob you anyway.
Lots of people pay traffic tickets they don't feel they deserved because the fine is less hassle than showing up in court.
Perfect Dark for the N64 was an excellent FPS by all respects, and I preferred it greatly in single player as a game to Halo.
Graphics power isn't nearly as important as processing power, but people have a certain normative graphical level they get accustomed to whether it be on TV or in gaming, and when you don't keep up to par, its obvious and distracting.
The N64 was not a miserable failure over all but it was nowhere near as popular or well-regarded as its running mates in that generation.
That said I agree, Rare made the best and most incredible games for the N64 and I played almost all of them. Their later work for the 360 hasn't impressed me near as much I might add.
Nintendo's own Zelda games for the N64 were also excellent, I enjoyed playing and replaying them thoroughly, although I can't say the same about Mario 64.
... and they deserve to do so.
Compliments from Miyamoto on game design should be taken seriously.
That said, to honour him properly would be to bow gracefully and say thank-you instead of high-fiving.
Sorry, you're killing me here :-)
I'd love to see Hugh as the Doctor, but I don't want House to end either.
Although it would be highly entertaining to offend the Star Trek crowd by having Dr Who meet up with some Enterprise-looking starship looking like Q.
And the plot arcs and interconnections as well as the consistency of characters has had no equal since in serial writing.
Babylon 5 deserves a good HD remaster with fresh CGI, it was filmed with that in mind even (wide screen, quality film).
PS, watching Babylon 5 is good for your understanding of the difference between 'rogue' and 'evil' in the military/government ;-)
Science fiction is fiction. Tractor beams and replicators don't exist either, but Star Trek is still Sci Fi.
Time travelling aliens may never exist, but that alone doesn't make it pure fantasy.
Bruce is the opposite of a traditional peddler in my view; he comes at problems from an obviously wide perspective and a deep understanding of his expertise; cryptography. I see most of his 'light-weight' contributions to security as those moments where he's trying to explain how cryptography, his passion, will not solve your problems.
He frequently explains how cryptography doesn't implicitly guarantee security, that security is a larger process that involves many other factors of which good cryptography is only one.
Depending on poor cryptography will of course weaken the solution should crypto be a major factor, but the design of the whole system needs to be taken into account, and that's where his frequently-cited works come into play.
Can you actually find good examples of him NOT being insightful or seeing an issue correctly? Are you simply annoyed that he doesn't sit in the corner you've made for him as a cryptographer? I don't care if Oprah talks about weight loss; she's been through it. I care that she talks about literature, because the books she likes suck.
Bruce can talk about process security all he likes in my world, he's good at it and doesn't mince words.
It is, and its true.
If you don't like people killing people with guns, don't give them guns.
If you don't want people suing people, don't give them lawyers.
Of course, the people without lawyers would probably find guns instead.
+1: Insightful and unfortunately misunderstood
Agreed. Due process is essential here, and I think a lot of people get mad at lawyers instead of judges, where some of this blame belongs. A good judge (the SCO case comes to mind) will look a lawyer in the eyes and ask them "does that sound as stupid to you as it does to me?" or something legally equivalent.
Lawyers' jobs are to make a case, the judge's job is to interpret and apply the law. Judges make the decision to actually give credence to what a lawyer says or not.
There is TOO an Internet -- those connected by publicly routable IP addresses via the AS's of the world. THE Internet frequently has routing black-holes, for a variety of reasons, but any ISP should be doing their best allow you to route packets to and from ANY of the other publicly routable ranges on that Internet. Otherwise, they wouldn't be "INTERNET service providers".
Your peers may not be accessible, even if on publicly routable addresses, for security reasons or whatnot, but they're still routable from anywhere else on the Internet -- accessibly or not.
I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, or perhaps you're not aware of how subjective the 'law' really is. Judges are there to interpret the law and apply it to specific circumstances appropriately.
We have juries for severe cases for exactly this subjectivity -- what the people want is how the law should work, in democracies. So yes, my opinions matter.
Performance for disk encryption is a fixed number, not a ratio. 30% of the gp's cycles may well work out to 3% of the questioner's cycles. The number of cycles required to do the encryption is pretty constant, plus or minus the CPU in question and the disk throughput of course.
The PS2 is the most ubiquitous gaming device in the world. If you're targeting the largest market in console owners and want to market your game to that market, you'd be making a PS2 game.
Speaking of data tracking, if you don't want to be considered in the metrics for their site maintenance, make sure you keep doing that.
Personally, I use my Google Analytics data to check screen resolutions and search engine results (aside from basic hit-count). How people reach me and what their capabilities are are very important. If the average user of a site I manage only has 800x600 resolutions, I need to take that into consideration in site maintenance. If they on average have dial-up, I need to consider that too.
Feel free to opt out, but you never gave consent to the data people like Shoppers Drug Mart collect on you either (and you'd be surprised), and no, not with an Optimum card.
I wish I could post and moderate in the same discussion, this made me almost spit my coffee out:
I was sitting at the bar yesterday watching "one of those cop shows" that follows highway patrol vehicles with two cops at the bar. I made sure to regularly comment on the abusive behaviour of the police on the show and how it made me feel as an educated citizen toward their otherwise useful role in society.
Hopefully I don't get random tickets today.
In the first case, it wasn't the dominant issue of the case, it simply contributed to the obviousness of the hateful nature of the site.
In the second one, your assumption is not correct -- server logs would confirm how many people saw it, but there's no direct link between paper readership and Internet readership of any given publication.
As for the third, I sure hope people continue to be held responsible for what they say in writing, whether its on the Internet or otherwise. There is no difference between typing a letter out to someone and mailing it and writing a reply to them on Slashdot, and there should be no legal difference either.