Secondly, if you send an acknowledgement back to the clock, then it can display to the user "OK, you're signed in" or "ERROR, please retry". If you lose either the "sign-in" packet, or the acknowledgement packet, then all the user has to do it swipe again to retry.
As a rule, people who build acknoweldgements into their UDP based protocol should have used TCP.
Do you really want your average slashdot-reading linux-using teenager in the army? Fighting to ensure the safety of freedom (or so they say)? Do you want that?
Apparently the army has never been to a Linux convention.
They should have been capable to put a man on Mars shortly thereafter.
And we probably would have, if it wasn't for the STS-51 (Challenger) disaster. After the Challenger disaster, NASA has greatly reduced their manned missions.
Unmanned missions are cheaper and when things go bad the only loss is resources, not lives. They also tend to be much less popular, but robotic explorers can survive on planets for much longer times in a harsh enviornment than people, who need their air food and water transported everywhere they go.
Granted, I would love to see, in the way distant future, manned exploration of space and the colonization of Mars, but for as long as the main goal is to just learn what's out there (which is an obvious prerequisite for colonization and travel) let's let most of our missions be unmanned.
I would say that the USA is capable of a manned misson to Mars. And I would also say that none of us should second-guess Russia's capabilities. They did beat the USA in getting a man to space, after all. (Personal sidenote- anywhere I can get the footage of the first CCCP spacewalk online?)
Unfortunately there is no biological concept to race (as there is as much genetic variance within a race as there is between races), so you can just as easily say that there is an "American" race as you could say there is a "White" race or a "Black" race.
Anti-GPL people (read Microsoft and their lackies) may try and take this as a weakness in OSS,
Some of us despise the GPL and love open source. Please don't incorrectly associate the two. It may reinforce the popular idea that the GPL is the guardian of everyone and that those who submit to the will of RMS will be saved, but it does nothing but confuse people and obscure the truth. It's no better than saying "People who don't like Microsoft (Mac users) tend to be computer illiterate weenies."
I see your point. Still, would you say the same for all the Windows users that did not patch there IIS code when Red Code hit?
Pragmatically, these are two very different things. The Code Red attack would have been nonexistant if people didn't put vulnerable computers on the internet. The worm would not have propogated. In this case, they're probably serving as some sort of drop for information; if their computer didn't do it, another one would have sufficed.
Of course, you could make the argue that we should hold people accountable on a less pragmatic basis; but on the other hand the party in question isn't innocent, but they aren't at all responsible for the existance of the backdoor.
Could anyone follow that? No? Maybe I'll take off the +1 Bonus...
You know, when I woke up this morning and groggily treaded over to the newspaper and saw this article. Reading it was quite literally how I started my day, and I enjoyed it.
Perhaps the author could have made the article into an attack on the Spam King, but instead he presented the facts and let the reader decide. Most readers don't need to be told how annoying spam is.
Of course, maybe I'm viewing this in the wrong light because I already knew how much I hated this guy before I read the paper; someone who doesn't really mind spam or have email may have interpreted it differently. But for the mostpart, it was clear to me that this article was not condoning what he does.
It's journalism. I don't think it's worth being put on the front page, but there's no reason to get pissed at the Courant for it. Write an editoral about it and mail it to the courant. But posting information about Tribune to slashdot really suggests you're more mad than that; to me it suggests that you want the writer fired or somesuch. Relax a bit. The Courant didn't spam me.
This would also enable spammers to advertise insanely high clickthrough ratios- which will only further their business.
It's a good idea in a closed world, but considering they can always get another customer, and you're simply improving their pitch, I would have to say that this is an insanely bad idea.
But there are a limited number of alternative radio stations to listen to. This isn't internet radio where anyone can open up a radio station and begin competing. When it's only one station out of many that's playing crap, ok, don't listen- when it's all of them because of payola, something should be done.
You're basically arguing that we should be content to give up radio and listen to something else because of the actions of a few companies and the inaction of the government. Hell no. I love radio for the sake of radio- it's a beautiful hobby from the electronics, physics, and practical standpoints. We have total control over what we listen to, but we don't have full control over what we listen to on the radio- and radio is like air.
Analogy: Radio is oxygen. A company is taking all the oxygen out of the atmosphere. You're telling us to go find our own oxygen, because the government shouldn't be regulating commerce. I don't think so.
Think about what an absurd statement that is. The whole point of advertising is for people to listen. You seem to think they if they could, they would be able to sell all 24 hours of radio time to advertisers. How much do you think they would sell if nobody listened?
I don't think they would if they could. But if they could, they would certainly put more advertising on than they do now- they push the advertising envelope already and most everyone puts up with it- and considering it is difficult to measure how many people are listening, they would continue to sell advertising even if they halved the ratio of content to advertising today.
Maybe I just don't have the correct "entitlement" attitude, but I just don't care what is put on "my" airwaves.
Some of us do. As an amateur part-time radio DX'er, the content of the spectrum matters much to me. If they're going to crowd the bandwith close to home, it better be with something that at least some people enjoy- otherwise they should get off the spectrum and let us attempt to tune in something that is interesting. The spectrum is limited and publically regulated. It should be used in the way that's most beneficial to everyone, not benefical to the few's pocketbook.
Why does the government need to step in and tell the market how it's "supposed" to work?
Because the airwaves are publically owned and therefore the usage of them needs to be regulated. The spectrum is limited, and the FCC is granting a natural monopoly of sorts to each broadcaster in each region on a specific frequency. As competition is inherently limited, and the airwaves are in the end owned by the people, the FCC damn well better be regulating the market.
Would you want every commercial radio station gathering together and agreeing only to play paid advertisements and no music? Well, they can't do that under law (broadcast TV and radio have max times for advertising breaks... although this is often circumvented with a "You're watching XXX... which will be back shortly" message, that's besides the point) and that's a good thing. Payola should be limited in a similar fashion because I shouldn't be forced to listen to music that a record company wants me to listen to on *my* airwaves.
As for enforcing payola laws, do so only if you do it unilaterally. We don't need to make a 21st century Alan Freed.
It is RAID5, so a catastrophic loss of data would only occur if several disks failed before they could be replaced. Granted, RAID5 protects against harddrive failure but it's not a backup- but considering it should cover natural HD death, I would say that should be sufficient.
As for the backup, well, the original CDs that were loaded onto the jukebox can act as the backup of music data, no?
On SATs, the only things that are banned are devices housing QWERTY keyboards, which most PDAs don't.
From collegeboard.com:
*You may use almost any scientific or graphing calculator on the tests, however, you are not permitted to use:
pocket organizers
"hand-held" and laptop computers
electronic writing pads and pen-input devices calculators with QWERTY (i.e., typewriter-like) keypads
calculators that require paper tapes
calculators that "talk" or make unusual noise
calculators that require electrical outlets
As for the debate, I can only add my personal experience. I typically always have a calculator in my backpack or otherwise on my person. In fact, for the past 6 months, I've been carrying two calculators (TI-83+ and TI-89) with me everywhere. My calculators hardly ever come out of my backpack.
They're nice to have to do regressions on data, to manipulate numbers with several signifiant figures, and in the case of the TI-89, to do unit conversions. I would not say that the calculator has "crippled" me, only because I view it simply as a tool and for most things I gain more pleasure out of doing math in my head. On the other hand, for MOST people I would say that calculators are a crutch- I've heard horror stories of people taking out their calculators to do 7-11. I think that attitudes towards math develop independently of calculator accessibility.
I've been lucky to have science and math teachers who love math. My physics teacher is notorious for estimating the values of long and complicated formulas largely in his head. It wows the class, and then he shows people how he did the estimation. People, don't blame the calculators. Blame the teachers who taught you to think on the calculator.
This article sucked. This article sucked so much that while I was reading this sucky article I died of suck overdose and my soul tried to go up to heaven but the black hole that is suck sucked by soul back down into my sucking budy to finish reading this sucky article.
CmdrTaco, don't post sucky articles for your sucky friends just because they ask you to. Read the sucky article yourself first. It sucks.
Now do you see how non-constructive criticism feels?
The fact that this was modded up to insightful is hilarious. AvitarX, a moderator just took away your pride in exchange for karma. I think you got the bad end of the deal.
I'd post this anonymously if I was worried about karma. But I don't. I realize that this is offtopic. What are you gonna do, moderator, waste a point to mark this thread, which is a reply to a tangent, offtopic? I KNOW IT'S OFFTOPIC- MAKE MY DAY:P
6--8 characters as a hard password length requirement is just plain worthless, but then you seem to know that. Too bad whoever programmed your system didn't. However, using only numbers greatly reduces the search space. Throw in some letters just for fun.
(This is a serious question) do many cracking programs check all of the numeric-only possibilities early on in the process? It would seem to me that if the cracker did not know that the password was numbers only, they could not take much advantage of it. If I wasn't checking all alphanumeric sequentially, I would certainly check alpha-only before I checked numeric-only!
The best products/systems/protocols/algorithms available today have not been the subjects of any contests, and probably never will be.
I think that contests, when done properly, can't prove security but it certainly can certainly prove a point. I doubt we'll ever see a proof that factoring numbers must be complex, but the RSA challenge proves that, well, anyone who has the technology would rather keep it than the money. Hrm. Well, at least that means a script kiddie or casual hacker can't factor very large numbers, eh?
Correction- the palm m100 has 2MB, not 1MB, of memory.
What are everyone's favorite low-end ($150 or below) PDA currently? You hear so much about the Treo and whatnot, I'm wondering what's going on at the end of the market I'm interested in entering in. I just want something to organize myself. Color screens? Cellphone capability? Not for me!
Slashdot Mirror
As a rule, people who build acknoweldgements into their UDP based protocol should have used TCP.
Apparently the army has never been to a Linux convention.
And we probably would have, if it wasn't for the STS-51 (Challenger) disaster. After the Challenger disaster, NASA has greatly reduced their manned missions.
Unmanned missions are cheaper and when things go bad the only loss is resources, not lives. They also tend to be much less popular, but robotic explorers can survive on planets for much longer times in a harsh enviornment than people, who need their air food and water transported everywhere they go.
Granted, I would love to see, in the way distant future, manned exploration of space and the colonization of Mars, but for as long as the main goal is to just learn what's out there (which is an obvious prerequisite for colonization and travel) let's let most of our missions be unmanned.
I would say that the USA is capable of a manned misson to Mars. And I would also say that none of us should second-guess Russia's capabilities. They did beat the USA in getting a man to space, after all. (Personal sidenote- anywhere I can get the footage of the first CCCP spacewalk online?)
Nice effort, however.
Some of us despise the GPL and love open source. Please don't incorrectly associate the two. It may reinforce the popular idea that the GPL is the guardian of everyone and that those who submit to the will of RMS will be saved, but it does nothing but confuse people and obscure the truth. It's no better than saying "People who don't like Microsoft (Mac users) tend to be computer illiterate weenies."
Pragmatically, these are two very different things. The Code Red attack would have been nonexistant if people didn't put vulnerable computers on the internet. The worm would not have propogated. In this case, they're probably serving as some sort of drop for information; if their computer didn't do it, another one would have sufficed.
Of course, you could make the argue that we should hold people accountable on a less pragmatic basis; but on the other hand the party in question isn't innocent, but they aren't at all responsible for the existance of the backdoor.
Could anyone follow that? No? Maybe I'll take off the +1 Bonus...
Perhaps the author could have made the article into an attack on the Spam King, but instead he presented the facts and let the reader decide. Most readers don't need to be told how annoying spam is.
Of course, maybe I'm viewing this in the wrong light because I already knew how much I hated this guy before I read the paper; someone who doesn't really mind spam or have email may have interpreted it differently. But for the mostpart, it was clear to me that this article was not condoning what he does.
It's journalism. I don't think it's worth being put on the front page, but there's no reason to get pissed at the Courant for it. Write an editoral about it and mail it to the courant. But posting information about Tribune to slashdot really suggests you're more mad than that; to me it suggests that you want the writer fired or somesuch. Relax a bit. The Courant didn't spam me.
It's a good idea in a closed world, but considering they can always get another customer, and you're simply improving their pitch, I would have to say that this is an insanely bad idea.
For a second there, I was scared when I saw those pictures. Then I realized they were Halloween costumes.
They are Halloween costumes, right?
You're basically arguing that we should be content to give up radio and listen to something else because of the actions of a few companies and the inaction of the government. Hell no. I love radio for the sake of radio- it's a beautiful hobby from the electronics, physics, and practical standpoints. We have total control over what we listen to, but we don't have full control over what we listen to on the radio- and radio is like air.
Analogy: Radio is oxygen. A company is taking all the oxygen out of the atmosphere. You're telling us to go find our own oxygen, because the government shouldn't be regulating commerce. I don't think so.
I don't think they would if they could. But if they could, they would certainly put more advertising on than they do now- they push the advertising envelope already and most everyone puts up with it- and considering it is difficult to measure how many people are listening, they would continue to sell advertising even if they halved the ratio of content to advertising today.
Maybe I just don't have the correct "entitlement" attitude, but I just don't care what is put on "my" airwaves.
Some of us do. As an amateur part-time radio DX'er, the content of the spectrum matters much to me. If they're going to crowd the bandwith close to home, it better be with something that at least some people enjoy- otherwise they should get off the spectrum and let us attempt to tune in something that is interesting. The spectrum is limited and publically regulated. It should be used in the way that's most beneficial to everyone, not benefical to the few's pocketbook.
Because the airwaves are publically owned and therefore the usage of them needs to be regulated. The spectrum is limited, and the FCC is granting a natural monopoly of sorts to each broadcaster in each region on a specific frequency. As competition is inherently limited, and the airwaves are in the end owned by the people, the FCC damn well better be regulating the market.
Would you want every commercial radio station gathering together and agreeing only to play paid advertisements and no music? Well, they can't do that under law (broadcast TV and radio have max times for advertising breaks... although this is often circumvented with a "You're watching XXX... which will be back shortly" message, that's besides the point) and that's a good thing. Payola should be limited in a similar fashion because I shouldn't be forced to listen to music that a record company wants me to listen to on *my* airwaves.
As for enforcing payola laws, do so only if you do it unilaterally. We don't need to make a 21st century Alan Freed.
As for the backup, well, the original CDs that were loaded onto the jukebox can act as the backup of music data, no?
Funny movie? My goal in life for the past 4 years has been to hunt down Yahoo Serious and waste two hours of HIS damn time.
The fact that 4 moderators recognized this quote from Young Einstein troubles me. Severely.
*You may use almost any scientific or graphing calculator on the tests, however, you are not permitted to use:
As for the debate, I can only add my personal experience. I typically always have a calculator in my backpack or otherwise on my person. In fact, for the past 6 months, I've been carrying two calculators (TI-83+ and TI-89) with me everywhere. My calculators hardly ever come out of my backpack.
They're nice to have to do regressions on data, to manipulate numbers with several signifiant figures, and in the case of the TI-89, to do unit conversions. I would not say that the calculator has "crippled" me, only because I view it simply as a tool and for most things I gain more pleasure out of doing math in my head. On the other hand, for MOST people I would say that calculators are a crutch- I've heard horror stories of people taking out their calculators to do 7-11. I think that attitudes towards math develop independently of calculator accessibility.
I've been lucky to have science and math teachers who love math. My physics teacher is notorious for estimating the values of long and complicated formulas largely in his head. It wows the class, and then he shows people how he did the estimation. People, don't blame the calculators. Blame the teachers who taught you to think on the calculator.
CmdrTaco, don't post sucky articles for your sucky friends just because they ask you to. Read the sucky article yourself first. It sucks.
Now do you see how non-constructive criticism feels?
I'd post this anonymously if I was worried about karma. But I don't. I realize that this is offtopic. What are you gonna do, moderator, waste a point to mark this thread, which is a reply to a tangent, offtopic? I KNOW IT'S OFFTOPIC- MAKE MY DAY :P
He's pointing out the spelling error. There is a difference between lighting and lightning that should be noted.
(This is a serious question) do many cracking programs check all of the numeric-only possibilities early on in the process? It would seem to me that if the cracker did not know that the password was numbers only, they could not take much advantage of it. If I wasn't checking all alphanumeric sequentially, I would certainly check alpha-only before I checked numeric-only!
That's a pretty clever troll. The problem is, that's not RSA-500! :)
I think that contests, when done properly, can't prove security but it certainly can certainly prove a point. I doubt we'll ever see a proof that factoring numbers must be complex, but the RSA challenge proves that, well, anyone who has the technology would rather keep it than the money. Hrm. Well, at least that means a script kiddie or casual hacker can't factor very large numbers, eh?
Using a PDA to woo the ladies? Yeaaaah. Good luck with that. Tell me how that works out, mmm'kay?
What are everyone's favorite low-end ($150 or below) PDA currently? You hear so much about the Treo and whatnot, I'm wondering what's going on at the end of the market I'm interested in entering in. I just want something to organize myself. Color screens? Cellphone capability? Not for me!
If this were a robotics class in an EE department, I'd be troubled. CS? What's the problem?