You only know what's there right now. Considering how many IP addresses today are dynamic, what's there today may not be there tomorrow. Even if the address is either static or a long-term lease, there's a good chance it points to a LAN. There's no reason to think that the machine you're connecting to now is the same one you did before, so anything you learned is probably worthless in attacking.
Here's another one you need: Spyware Blaster. It's so good that if Spybot Search and Distroy detects it, it tells you that some of Spyware Blaster's protections are better than its own.
I went there and tried the simplified page. Went to the index page and went, "Ugh!" Back to preferences and undid that. Checked the index page and the whole article was back. Made no other changes. Weird!
... but the purported explanation for how it works doesn't sound like something that would come from people who had developed a technology that really did work.
Either that, or the people who developed the new process have no idea how it works and don't know enough about chemistry to realize their "explanation" doesn't make any sense. Imaging what kind of explanation the chinese came up with for how black powder works, back when they first discovered it. It probably makes as much sense now as the one in TFA.
ADSL is an "always on" connection and doesn't dial. For most if not all purposes consider it as being about the same as cable. As you say, a dialer won't be able to do anything unless you have the regular modem connected on either dsl or cable.
The GNAA freaks, posts of goatse and other habitual trolls quickly get modded into oblivian. Most of them either post as AC, or at -1 because their karma is so bad. No problem, if you read at 0 instead of -1.
Where do you get the idea that making cheating as hard as possible is a professor's responsibility?
You are allowing parents and students to abdicate THEIR responsiblity to behave correctly.
By that same logic, having police allows parents and children to abdicate their responsibility to obey the laws. Not all parents will teach their children to be honorable, no matter what you do. Some will try to cheat, no matter what you do. Part of the job of any instructor is to prevent that whenever possible. That's why there are proctors at examinations: to watch the students and try to prevent cheating.
Take home exams aren't exams, they're homework, and calling them exams doesn't change the fact. Take home finals abdicate the instructors responsibility to make cheating as hard as possible and catch it if they can. Yes, I'd punish the instructor for making it too easy to cheat, right along with the "students" who cheated. Both are at fault, so both have to take their lumps.
Yes, anybody who wants to badly enough will find a way to cheat. I don't consider take-home finals so much a trust in integrity as giving in to the cheaters.
Considering that allowing students to take finals at home makes it too easy to cheat, I find it hard to see how any "quality instructor" would do that. Colleges and universities schedule extra time for finals, so that they can be taken under proper supervision, to prevent cheating. At the very least, I'd tell all instructors that if they want to remain, use the time alloted for finals, instead of giving their classes a license to cheat.
Of course, what these knuckleheads don't realize is that the same developments that make it easy for them to cheat also make tremendously easy to catch cheaters.
If I were teaching, I'd explain to the class on the first day that I not only know how to use the Internet to check for plagerism, I'm going to, and that I'll fail any and every student I catch. Depending on how I feel I may or may not actually check, but as long as the students think I will...
I took the time to RTFA. In the first example, a student who'd been more interested in night life than their studies found somebody to fill out a take home final exam. Letting the students take the final of all things outside the classroom is simply begging for them to cheat. If not this way, some other, such as getting help from an older friend. That instructor should be fired, unless there's tenure involved. If so, simply don't assign him or her any more classes. Let them strut about with their title of Professor, and their tenure, if they want, but unless they're actually teaching, I doubt they're going to get paid, and they won't be giving any more good grades to cheaters.
When I meta-mod, I'm rather lenient on Off-Topic mods. If the poster is replying to something off-topic, but is clearly *on-topic* relative to the OP, I'll not consider it off-topic. I prefer to leave that for posts that have nothing to do with either the article or whatever it's replying to. YMMV, and probably does. That's just my personal way of thinking.
If the submission's too long, he cuts out personal comments to bring it down to the "right size." If it's too short, he adds them to pad it out a little more. He's not being unfair unless he cuts out the submitter's comments and replaces them with his own.
What bothers me about/. articles that consist of nothing but a link and quotes from the linked item is that it tells you nothing about what the submitter thinks, except that the item's worth seeing. I prefer articles where the submitter put the ideas into their own words, adding their own thoughts and interpretation to it. I don't know about anybody else, but to me, at least, that type of effort adds to the value of the article.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally, I've always preferred MFM.
My own IP has a score of ten; localhost (127.0.0.1) gets 12. *Sigh!*
You only know what's there right now. Considering how many IP addresses today are dynamic, what's there today may not be there tomorrow. Even if the address is either static or a long-term lease, there's a good chance it points to a LAN. There's no reason to think that the machine you're connecting to now is the same one you did before, so anything you learned is probably worthless in attacking.
Here's another one you need: Spyware Blaster. It's so good that if Spybot Search and Distroy detects it, it tells you that some of Spyware Blaster's protections are better than its own.
So? Putting adware vendors in prision just gives the rapists somebody to practice on. Seems reasonable to me!
Either a dumpster, or the cornerstone of a new building like they used in Robin and the Seven Hoods.
I went there and tried the simplified page. Went to the index page and went, "Ugh!" Back to preferences and undid that. Checked the index page and the whole article was back. Made no other changes. Weird!
Either that, or the people who developed the new process have no idea how it works and don't know enough about chemistry to realize their "explanation" doesn't make any sense. Imaging what kind of explanation the chinese came up with for how black powder works, back when they first discovered it. It probably makes as much sense now as the one in TFA.
Personally, I thought it was about running Windows apps under Linux.
The real bad news is the number of colleges givig students what they want instead of what they need.
Thank you, I'd forgotton that there are still some people using that instead of an always-on modem.
ADSL is an "always on" connection and doesn't dial. For most if not all purposes consider it as being about the same as cable. As you say, a dialer won't be able to do anything unless you have the regular modem connected on either dsl or cable.
But...but...but...that would mean no R2 units!
The GNAA freaks, posts of goatse and other habitual trolls quickly get modded into oblivian. Most of them either post as AC, or at -1 because their karma is so bad. No problem, if you read at 0 instead of -1.
By that same logic, having police allows parents and children to abdicate their responsibility to obey the laws. Not all parents will teach their children to be honorable, no matter what you do. Some will try to cheat, no matter what you do. Part of the job of any instructor is to prevent that whenever possible. That's why there are proctors at examinations: to watch the students and try to prevent cheating.
Take home exams aren't exams, they're homework, and calling them exams doesn't change the fact. Take home finals abdicate the instructors responsibility to make cheating as hard as possible and catch it if they can. Yes, I'd punish the instructor for making it too easy to cheat, right along with the "students" who cheated. Both are at fault, so both have to take their lumps.
Yes, anybody who wants to badly enough will find a way to cheat. I don't consider take-home finals so much a trust in integrity as giving in to the cheaters.
Considering that allowing students to take finals at home makes it too easy to cheat, I find it hard to see how any "quality instructor" would do that. Colleges and universities schedule extra time for finals, so that they can be taken under proper supervision, to prevent cheating. At the very least, I'd tell all instructors that if they want to remain, use the time alloted for finals, instead of giving their classes a license to cheat.
If I were teaching, I'd explain to the class on the first day that I not only know how to use the Internet to check for plagerism, I'm going to, and that I'll fail any and every student I catch. Depending on how I feel I may or may not actually check, but as long as the students think I will...
I took the time to RTFA. In the first example, a student who'd been more interested in night life than their studies found somebody to fill out a take home final exam. Letting the students take the final of all things outside the classroom is simply begging for them to cheat. If not this way, some other, such as getting help from an older friend. That instructor should be fired, unless there's tenure involved. If so, simply don't assign him or her any more classes. Let them strut about with their title of Professor, and their tenure, if they want, but unless they're actually teaching, I doubt they're going to get paid, and they won't be giving any more good grades to cheaters.
When I meta-mod, I'm rather lenient on Off-Topic mods. If the poster is replying to something off-topic, but is clearly *on-topic* relative to the OP, I'll not consider it off-topic. I prefer to leave that for posts that have nothing to do with either the article or whatever it's replying to. YMMV, and probably does. That's just my personal way of thinking.
If the submission's too long, he cuts out personal comments to bring it down to the "right size." If it's too short, he adds them to pad it out a little more. He's not being unfair unless he cuts out the submitter's comments and replaces them with his own.
What bothers me about /. articles that consist of nothing but a link and quotes from the linked item is that it tells you nothing about what the submitter thinks, except that the item's worth seeing. I prefer articles where the submitter put the ideas into their own words, adding their own thoughts and interpretation to it. I don't know about anybody else, but to me, at least, that type of effort adds to the value of the article.
Neither, of course. You read the equvalent of several books a month as well you know.
But what happens if you the standard deviations don't float your boat? What happens if you only like non-standard deviations?