I'm sure attacks would still be possible, but at least we wouldn't have to worry about buffer overflows causing problems.
Putting your applications in a sandbox to protect against buffer overflows is a bandaid approach. The way you protect against buffer overflows is by writing the code properly in the first place, instead of hard-coding the buffer sizes in so that skript kiddies can send longer and longer strings into them until they overflow.
It's not that I don't think it should land like an airplane(on a runway), its that too much cost has been put into it to make it land that way vs. landing using a parachute.
The point of having it land like an airplane is that it's a controlled landing rather than dropping into the ocean as Mercury, Gemini and Apollo did. The shuttle lands where we want it to, at an airport or airbase, instead of needing to be picked up by helicopter and transported by ship. Not only that, it's bigger than would be practical with a parachute/chopper type landing. In the pre-shuttle days, astronauts didn't pilot their ships (except on the Moon landings/takeoffs themselves) but were little more than glorified passengers.
mean, star trek is cool and everything, but until we're close to being able to teraform other planets, it's not going to be terribly useful to send people to live in space.
And how do you expect us to learn how to terraform other planets without going out there? For that matter, why do you think we need to terraform them? Space is full of resources just waiting to be exploited, but to do that, we're going to have to get out there because there's just so much you can do with robots and probes and it's just not enough. Right now, we're on the edge of having a long-term, sustainable presence in Earth orbit, and that puts us half-way to wherever else we want or need to go.
I worked mostly on the BPDSMS, using the Sparrow III for Point Defense, and also cross-trained on the Mark 68 Gun Fire Control system. My employer was Uncle Sam's Navy.
They should go back to the old MOPS (Maneuver Orbital Program System) designed and programmed for JPL back in the early '80's. That, and its subsystem TRAM (Trajectory Monitor) never missed. It's only since the replaced it that they've been having trouble. It was so good that a few years later the Soviets aquired it for their own program, with similar results. All written by the late, lamanted Daniel J. Alderson.
That and live like the turtles, taking my house with me as I visit places across the sea.
I lived like that for a few years, long ago. I went from place to place by sea, taking my home with me. But I wasn't on a catamaran, I was on a warship.
In some ways, even Star Wars is a remake. It's simply a six episode serial, as was made in the '30s, '40s and early '50s by Republic, Universal, Columbia and a few others. It even has the standard cliffhangers and resolutions, to keep you coming back. Even that cool angled crawl at the beginning isn't new, it was at least 30 years old when he first used it.
The REAL reason movies suck is the mentality that lead to these POS's...
Yes. And that mentality is based on the desire to be the first person to be the second person to do something. They have no talant, no creativity, no imagination so the only thing left is to copy what's worked before. Alas, they don't understand why it worked the first time, so the remakes are crap.
"Preaching to the choir" doesn't mean what you think it does. It means talking only to those who already agree with you, while ignoring the ones you need to persuade. Presumably, the members of the church choir already believe and try to act on their belief; if not, they'd probably not be willing to spend the time on practice. Kerry spent lots of time in swing states, and the rest in Blue states. The only time he ever saw Middle America is if he looked down as he flew over. He ignored them, and made no effort to win them.
The Democrats seem to feel that they can ignore 90% of the country, as long as they win the swing states.
Please note that in 2004, Kerry almost completely ignored Middle America, running a coastal campaign. He spent almost all his time in the Blue States, preaching to the choir, then wondered why only the choir voted for him and the rest of the congregation didn't.
One of the big problems in this sort of dragnet approach is that without a concept of probable cause there isn't a clear idea of which ones to investigate.
In general, I agree with you. However, checking out suspicious (by their definition) transactons gives them a way to find probable cause. If the money has an honest source, it stops there; if not, they now have a reason to investigate further. The one thing I really dislike about this is freezing the transaction until it's been vetted. It ignores the principle of innocent until proven guilty, and the subject should not be punished just because the're suspected.
If they're tracking us enough that they know on average how much we pay on credit cards per month...
You misunderstand what happened. DHS wasn't monitering his credit card or his payments. His bank noticed that this payment was considerably higher than usual and followed the legal requirement that DHS be informed. Yes, that sucks as does the freezing of the funds. However, Big Brother isn't watching your every transaction (yet) and I doubt they plan to.
Climbing the fence is a crime in progress unless the individual happens to own the property. Making a larger than usual payment on a loan is not a crime.
You're quite right, as far as you go. However, there are a numuber of plausable (to law enforcement, at least) scenarios in which you gained that money by breaking the law. In general, as I understand it, it it's obvious where the money came from, there's no problem. If not, they may decide to ask, just to clear things up. You only have to worry if there's something shady going on or you get investigated by an incompetant. I don't really like this type of Big Brother activity, bot on the whole it's as unobtrusive as possible.
This could get bitch slapped by the Federal Courts for interfering in interstate commerce.
Not only could, it would. What I've been waiting for somebody else to mention is that it also violates the First Amendment, making the bill unconstitutional in two entirely different ways. This bill doesn't have the proverbial snowball's chance of making it into law because enough legislators are lawyers that some of them will see how impossible it is. Frankly, I doubt it will ever get to a vote, but be killed in committee.
Site Advisor is in the business of finding dangerous sites, warning you of them and possibly blocking them. It's in their best interest to call as many sites as possible unsafe, on the thinnest excuse. It's the same thing as how some anti-virus companies count every variant of a known virus as a new one, to make the number they can detect/remove as high as they can.
For that matter, it's like the people feeding mega-doses of different things to lab rats that have been bred to be suseptable to cancer, then announcing that Yet Another Chemical Causes Cancer. You never hear about things that they couldn't manage to "prove" a carcinogen, any more than you're ever told that there's no evidence their rat experiments are relevant to humans. Sorry about the bit of a rant, there, but I do think those "researchers" need to be taken down a peg and forced to demonstrate a relationship between what they're doing and what happens in a human being.
Thanx for the pointer to the report on MSN "support." As a former Tier II agent at an ISP that didn't have a Tier III, much of that rings true for my company as well. (I was laid off when the call center was outsourced overseas.)
However, there are a few differences. First, Tier I didn't have to get Tier II's permission to escallate; at most, a new tech might have to check with his lead. They simply transfer the call to the Tier II queue and go on with their next call. Second, if you asked for a supervisor, you got one; probably the team lead for that tech's team. One of the things they were paid for was dealing with angry callers.
One of the things not mentioned is that sometimes a senior tech will question you about what's been done not because they don't trust the other tech, but because the tech didn't take proper notes. You're not going to get much info if the notes read, "I spent 15 minutes trying to fix his connection then sent to Tier II."
Last, every customer service/tech support center is going to be judging their workers on average call time and number of calls per day, simply because there are very few objective measures of how well they're doing. If you don't close a ticket until you're sure the issue's finished, you can see how mny tickets get closed on the first call, but at one point, we were told to create a new ticket for each call and close it regardless. Not only did it void the "first call" metric, it made it harder to familiarize yourself with the issue's history. Techs do the work at those call centers, but the people deciding how they'll do it generally are MBA's with neither technical experience nor the desire to understand the work.
Of course, if the Dell products I have had were more reliable, the issue of their customer service would be moot.
I have been a Dell customer for a long time (almost a decade). Only recently have they provided such horrible customer service.
There seems to be a controdiction here. If you've had so much trouble with unreliable Dell products, why have you kept buying from them long enough to see the difference in their customer service?
There's one classic, sure-fire method for disposing of zombies. If a zombie ever tastes salt, it remembers it's dead, goes back to its grave an can't be raised again.
This is a very elegant trick; using the victim's anti-virus software as the tool to kick them off the net. Not only that, but you can do this to any number of people who happen to be on that channel and use the affected product. Now, if we could only get the skript kiddies to put their minds to something productive...
Those of us who aren't christian and don't celebrate Christmas don't particularly like having everybody wish them a Merry Christmas. Yes, I know they mea well, but it's still shoving their overly-commercialized holiday down my throat. Happy Holidays is much better, because it makes no such assumptions. The only person I can think of who'd be offended would be a rabid athiest that ignored New Years.
Personally, I'd rather see them finding out how cats adapt to zero G. They're semi-aboreal, good climbers and, with the right wall covering, can hold on and walk around using their claws for traction, just like in a tree. Also, they're smart enough to experiment, find out what works an learn how to get around.
It's funny the lengths journalists will go to in order to convince people that science is interesting. In this case highlighting an unbelievably tenuous link between games and astrophysics.
Would you rather they were writing stories about how boring it is? They may not always get their facts right, if indeed they ever do, but they may be sparking an interest in kids young enough that they haven't decided what to study yet.
Slashdot Mirror
Putting your applications in a sandbox to protect against buffer overflows is a bandaid approach. The way you protect against buffer overflows is by writing the code properly in the first place, instead of hard-coding the buffer sizes in so that skript kiddies can send longer and longer strings into them until they overflow.
The point of having it land like an airplane is that it's a controlled landing rather than dropping into the ocean as Mercury, Gemini and Apollo did. The shuttle lands where we want it to, at an airport or airbase, instead of needing to be picked up by helicopter and transported by ship. Not only that, it's bigger than would be practical with a parachute/chopper type landing. In the pre-shuttle days, astronauts didn't pilot their ships (except on the Moon landings/takeoffs themselves) but were little more than glorified passengers.
And how do you expect us to learn how to terraform other planets without going out there? For that matter, why do you think we need to terraform them? Space is full of resources just waiting to be exploited, but to do that, we're going to have to get out there because there's just so much you can do with robots and probes and it's just not enough. Right now, we're on the edge of having a long-term, sustainable presence in Earth orbit, and that puts us half-way to wherever else we want or need to go.
Nothing new here. I remember people making the same complaints about sitcoms in the '50s.
I worked mostly on the BPDSMS, using the Sparrow III for Point Defense, and also cross-trained on the Mark 68 Gun Fire Control system. My employer was Uncle Sam's Navy.
I had heard they'd replaced Dan's software, and thought they'd done a complete re-write. Did they just replace his version of TRAM?
They should go back to the old MOPS (Maneuver Orbital Program System) designed and programmed for JPL back in the early '80's. That, and its subsystem TRAM (Trajectory Monitor) never missed. It's only since the replaced it that they've been having trouble. It was so good that a few years later the Soviets aquired it for their own program, with similar results. All written by the late, lamanted Daniel J. Alderson.
It would be better if it went on hold so you didn't miss anything. Aside from that, nice idea.
I lived like that for a few years, long ago. I went from place to place by sea, taking my home with me. But I wasn't on a catamaran, I was on a warship.
In some ways, even Star Wars is a remake. It's simply a six episode serial, as was made in the '30s, '40s and early '50s by Republic, Universal, Columbia and a few others. It even has the standard cliffhangers and resolutions, to keep you coming back. Even that cool angled crawl at the beginning isn't new, it was at least 30 years old when he first used it.
Yes. And that mentality is based on the desire to be the first person to be the second person to do something. They have no talant, no creativity, no imagination so the only thing left is to copy what's worked before. Alas, they don't understand why it worked the first time, so the remakes are crap.
"Preaching to the choir" doesn't mean what you think it does. It means talking only to those who already agree with you, while ignoring the ones you need to persuade. Presumably, the members of the church choir already believe and try to act on their belief; if not, they'd probably not be willing to spend the time on practice. Kerry spent lots of time in swing states, and the rest in Blue states. The only time he ever saw Middle America is if he looked down as he flew over. He ignored them, and made no effort to win them.
Please note that in 2004, Kerry almost completely ignored Middle America, running a coastal campaign. He spent almost all his time in the Blue States, preaching to the choir, then wondered why only the choir voted for him and the rest of the congregation didn't.
In general, I agree with you. However, checking out suspicious (by their definition) transactons gives them a way to find probable cause. If the money has an honest source, it stops there; if not, they now have a reason to investigate further. The one thing I really dislike about this is freezing the transaction until it's been vetted. It ignores the principle of innocent until proven guilty, and the subject should not be punished just because the're suspected.
You misunderstand what happened. DHS wasn't monitering his credit card or his payments. His bank noticed that this payment was considerably higher than usual and followed the legal requirement that DHS be informed. Yes, that sucks as does the freezing of the funds. However, Big Brother isn't watching your every transaction (yet) and I doubt they plan to.
You're quite right, as far as you go. However, there are a numuber of plausable (to law enforcement, at least) scenarios in which you gained that money by breaking the law. In general, as I understand it, it it's obvious where the money came from, there's no problem. If not, they may decide to ask, just to clear things up. You only have to worry if there's something shady going on or you get investigated by an incompetant. I don't really like this type of Big Brother activity, bot on the whole it's as unobtrusive as possible.
Not only could, it would. What I've been waiting for somebody else to mention is that it also violates the First Amendment, making the bill unconstitutional in two entirely different ways. This bill doesn't have the proverbial snowball's chance of making it into law because enough legislators are lawyers that some of them will see how impossible it is. Frankly, I doubt it will ever get to a vote, but be killed in committee.
For that matter, it's like the people feeding mega-doses of different things to lab rats that have been bred to be suseptable to cancer, then announcing that Yet Another Chemical Causes Cancer. You never hear about things that they couldn't manage to "prove" a carcinogen, any more than you're ever told that there's no evidence their rat experiments are relevant to humans. Sorry about the bit of a rant, there, but I do think those "researchers" need to be taken down a peg and forced to demonstrate a relationship between what they're doing and what happens in a human being.
However, there are a few differences. First, Tier I didn't have to get Tier II's permission to escallate; at most, a new tech might have to check with his lead. They simply transfer the call to the Tier II queue and go on with their next call. Second, if you asked for a supervisor, you got one; probably the team lead for that tech's team. One of the things they were paid for was dealing with angry callers.
One of the things not mentioned is that sometimes a senior tech will question you about what's been done not because they don't trust the other tech, but because the tech didn't take proper notes. You're not going to get much info if the notes read, "I spent 15 minutes trying to fix his connection then sent to Tier II."
Last, every customer service/tech support center is going to be judging their workers on average call time and number of calls per day, simply because there are very few objective measures of how well they're doing. If you don't close a ticket until you're sure the issue's finished, you can see how mny tickets get closed on the first call, but at one point, we were told to create a new ticket for each call and close it regardless. Not only did it void the "first call" metric, it made it harder to familiarize yourself with the issue's history. Techs do the work at those call centers, but the people deciding how they'll do it generally are MBA's with neither technical experience nor the desire to understand the work.
I have been a Dell customer for a long time (almost a decade). Only recently have they provided such horrible customer service.
There seems to be a controdiction here. If you've had so much trouble with unreliable Dell products, why have you kept buying from them long enough to see the difference in their customer service?
There's one classic, sure-fire method for disposing of zombies. If a zombie ever tastes salt, it remembers it's dead, goes back to its grave an can't be raised again.
This is a very elegant trick; using the victim's anti-virus software as the tool to kick them off the net. Not only that, but you can do this to any number of people who happen to be on that channel and use the affected product. Now, if we could only get the skript kiddies to put their minds to something productive...
Those of us who aren't christian and don't celebrate Christmas don't particularly like having everybody wish them a Merry Christmas. Yes, I know they mea well, but it's still shoving their overly-commercialized holiday down my throat. Happy Holidays is much better, because it makes no such assumptions. The only person I can think of who'd be offended would be a rabid athiest that ignored New Years.
Personally, I'd rather see them finding out how cats adapt to zero G. They're semi-aboreal, good climbers and, with the right wall covering, can hold on and walk around using their claws for traction, just like in a tree. Also, they're smart enough to experiment, find out what works an learn how to get around.
Would you rather they were writing stories about how boring it is? They may not always get their facts right, if indeed they ever do, but they may be sparking an interest in kids young enough that they haven't decided what to study yet.