my camera hooked up feeds data to a wifi channel 1 on an unspecified ssid. Data is sent essentially to the aether.
I have another hidden box with wifi receiving only recording all udp packets with certain parameters. My recording server. There's no way to probe it, no way to attack it, no way to know it even exists.
And when you bought that drink at starbucks, doesnt the barista DESERVE payment for 150 years because they sold caffeine that increased YOUR intellectual output?
Why is the arts and sciences any different? You get paid for what you do, not what is done with your stuff in the future.
And if it was worth 1M$, why didnt you ASK for 1M$ in a contract? Not my fault you're stupid.
---Still, what you're talking about is copyright violation and not theft. Yeah, it's illegal. But it's a different illegal. Like how jaywalking and vehicular manslaughter are two different things. It would suck to be guilty of one and tried for another. It's the shell game the RIAA is foisting on the public trying to equate the two. And whenever I see it - I point it out. As loud as I can.
Of course. I tell everybody I dont care about petty legal triflings. I instead teach HOW to get any digital work, free of charge, and in a timely manner either by using p2p sources, search engines, or personal trading. You know.. that feed a man a fish story.
As for engineering, its up to 500$ per book.
I found 3 books that we use during our classes. Saved 2000$ that we would have otherwise forced to buy or photocopy.
---I believe it's morally correct to not support someone's extortion racket - "pay us huge bucks each year or you can't do your homework." That's racketeering, and I'd oppose it just as you do.
A digital work is the price it costs to duplicate. That's what I pay. I'm sure SOMEBODY paid the original creator for the time to create. Why should we effectively put money through a shredder when 1: its already made and 2: I lose that much money ?
If the creator of a digital good wasnt compensated during the time of creation, he was doing something wrong.
I saved a bunch of us about 2000$ from what we would have HAD to buy if I couldnt have found it online.
We've also had photocopying sessions where we had 4 scanners operational, making JPEG books ourselves.
Flat out: I dont care about copyright. Im not going to honor the big guys copyright in our current copyright situation. Take it back to 17 years, and I will.
Re:"particles known as protons?"
on
LHC Success!
·
· Score: 1
And my point is how do I know the way I perceive "blue" is the similar way YOU perceive "Blue"?
The key: unless we represent color mathematically in terms of EM, it's just an emotional response from unadjusted sensors.
Recently, the school has submitted yet another rounds of lawsuits against parents who have not paid their book rental ransom.
Re:"particles known as protons?"
on
LHC Success!
·
· Score: 1
Watch out for slippery slope!
I was making the point that describing colors is only useful when we have a real reference point (color frequency composition).
There's women that have a mutated cone (for color vision) that perceives a "goldenness" that others cannot perceive. What the rest of us would call the same color, they see completely different.
There's men who have red-green color blindness. There's also the much rarer blue-yellow color blindness.
Frankly, unless we express numerical graphs of color composition along with brightness, description of color has no uniform base that which we can talk about.
Ass, but www.textbooktorrents.com saved me a bunch of money.
Why pay for rev.2 and rev.3 when you bought rev.1 and are getting reamed by changed question numbers?
I saved my friends about 2k$ this semester from what I found there.
Re:"particles known as protons?"
on
LHC Success!
·
· Score: 1
I can explain colors to blind people.
"People have rods and cones that allow seeing in the frequencies 380nm to 750nm. Some light patterns are mixture of multiple frequencies. 750nm are infrared, to lower terahertz radiation. We only see due to sensors that are sensitive to light in that spectrum. People also have a tough time differentiating blue colors (around 450nm) due to stronger scattering and less sensors in our eyes. Also, due to other differences, some women perceive colors differently than others along with color blindness inherent in many people."
I need not describe what exactly the color "blue" looks like, because EVERYBODY sees colors differently, and I cannot be sure what they perceive.
I just teach people how to search the internet where to find things.
We were taught in the beginning of our lives that "sharing is caring". Too bad they dont teach the capitalist version: "get your hands off my goddamned stuff! get your own!"
Tell me this: is adversarial better or worse than cooperation? I'm thinking somwhere along the lines between Deb and Ian and this guy named Linus. And dont forget the bearded freak who is effectively right: RMS.
Re:Slashvertisement?
on
Review: Spore
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
Why should we do the editors work for them?
That's what bugs me about Web 2.0 or whatever the name it is. The Big Idea is that we can do crap work, and let the users do whatever they want, while they rake in the money.
If you TREAT me like a criminal, and the criminal gets better service than the paying customer, I will be the criminal. If you can give me a good reason why I should deal with sub-standard service whilst paying for it, I will buy it.
If you treat me equally as good as the pirates do, and do not burden me with anti-user technologies, I will buy and recommend it to others.
Also in lan parties: I WILL share it, regardless of cracks, protections, serials, or any other matter. We will play YOUR game. Now, you can win us over by allowing a multiplayer-spawn like Total Annihilation did. 1 legit could "host" 3 machines.
Multiplayer spawn means I dont need to share CD images over SMB. No multiplayer-spawn means everybody gets a "free copy".
Go ahead. Stop us. Thing is.. We're your customer.
---Isn't that in the shrink-wrap license, though? I know just about every piece of software I've ever used disclaims itself from fitness for a purpose.
I dont care what some stuffy license says. Try telling a judge that.
User: "Yer honor, I bought this game, and it wont even run right. I took it to Geek Squad and they said it put some spyware called Secure Rom on it. I want my money back, my time, and court fees."
Game Company: "Judge, our contract stipulates that our software is not guaranteed fitness"
Judge: "So why's it 50$ if you say its worthless? It evidently has worth, and has fitness. After all, you set the price, and claim it is a game. Judgment for Plantiff."
1. Gamers shall have the right to return games that don't work with their computers for a full refund.
Try taking the box store to court for not providing basic fitness. Guess what? The business is willing to "deal with you".
2. Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state.
Definition of finished? Perhaps they want mathematically proven code? I'd rather have a continual ladder of bugfixes and more content.
3. Gamers shall have the right to expect meaningful updates after a game's release.
Conflicts with #2.
4. Gamers shall have the right to demand that download managers and updaters not force themselves to run or be forced to load in order to play a game.
How about: Dont include updates that remove features.
5. Gamers shall have the right to expect that the minimum requirements for a game will mean that the game will adequately play on that computer.
If people had the balls to sue, they could do so under truth in advertising clauses.
6. Gamers shall have the right to expect that games won't install hidden drivers or other potentially harmful software without their express consent.
Companies that do so should be prosecuted under the fullest extent of the law.
7. Gamers shall have the right to re-download the latest versions of the games they own at any time.
8. Gamers shall have the right to not be treated as potential criminals by developers or publishers.
9. Gamers shall have the right to demand that a single-player game not force them to be connected to the Internet every time they wish to play.
10. Gamers shall have the right that games which are installed to the hard drive shall not require a CD/DVD to remain in the drive to play.
All fixed by using the ThePirateBay images backed up with the appropriate cracks and servers. The crackers crack the software so you have no hassle. Why pay fo it when you are treated ike a criminal anyway. Might as well live up to the ideal.
---(And yes, all the analog physics is really digital when you go down far enough.)
Id disagree with you solely on that statement... We're unsure how exactly data and state information could be encoded into quark triplets or femtomechanics. One things' for sure... It's probability fields and they're not binary.
- The UI in WinXP is very inconsistent and horrible once you're used to a more consistent UI. There's not much debate here, WinXP is hardly the epitomy of fine UI design except maybe for the most rabid Microsofties.
The basic UI for Windows IS consistent, for themselves. Anybody programming it will have their idea on the UI and will tinker with it. The third party programs are the ones responsible for "perverting a consistent UI".
- No virus, no spyware.
Just like Linux, the more popular you become, the more nasties are abound. And even with Linux, if you run that naughty binary, whats stopping that naughty bin to downloading a public key from a keyserver and encrypting/overwriting your ~ ? I could even show a nasty message "Pay X$ to Y_Swiss_account number" for private key and decryption code.
In fact, that was already done, but with no keyserver. Rather nasty attack. What matters more:/bin or ~ ?
- Full command-line power with easy to use GUI. Try this with Linux or Windows. Keep a link to a file on your desktop, now drop down to the command line and rename the original file. Used to break Linux, it might try to search now, Windows will try a search if it's similar. OS/2 has no such problem, the 2 are automagically linked.
Softlinks on Linux prevent simple renaming problems, and even works across disparate partitions. Hardlinks work only on that same disk system. Windows has a softlinks system, but refuse to use that instead of.lnk garbage. I have no clue why.
- A real GUI for the OS. Come on, Linux is very pretty (I use Ubuntu everyday at work), but there's a lot of inconsistencies and at heart, it's still basically a X-Window manager. You think it's great, but not after you've used a real GUI. (Dang I wish GNOME or KDE would _copy_ from some of the best GUI's).
I LIKE Xwindows. I can run any program on any machine on my network from and machine. I have complete run-ability. In Windows, I have to use Rdesktop (or whatever they call it) or VNC. And that only provides per-desktop granularity. I can run independent programs from anywhere I can SSH in to. I can also get any amount of graphic candy I can either run or program up.
Or I can run X itself and end up with a basic screen input, with 1 shell window. Windows, Mac, OS/2 all offer 1 choice. Linux offers all.
- OS X is a possibility, but you have to buy Apple hardware only.
Hopefully, that will be chalenged in court for illegal bundling. Not that I would like to run it... If I want Unix, Ill install FreeBSD or Linux.
- It's not a resource hog. I can fit my OS and all my applications (Yes, including OpenOffice 2, GIMP and everything you need under the sun) in a couple of GB if you wanted to.
Debian is the same. I install only what I want. I run what I want. I dont want X, I dont install X. I dont want some server program, I dont install it. I happen to run Ubuntu 8.04 and it works perfectly on my T61 thinkpad. I can optionally re-compile my kernel for the accel sensor in my hard drive, but I dont drop my laptop, and its all backed up anyways.
Not that Linux is the end all-be all, but if you want open source apps, go run the open source OS. I wouldnt be bitching saying that Windows programs run badly on Linux: Id go run Windows either directly, or in a vBox.
Can TBF handle clients that use UDP with spoofed source headers for each packet (perhaps the source could be a crypto sequence from a previously shared secret).
I know what I'd do. I'd use spoofed UDP headers, multi-home my machine for more bit buckets, and other attack-y stuff.
Thats how I keep my karma high. I post drivel like that to get high +5 karma, then I blow it on troll to piss people off.
Posts conjecturing ideas to get past or think up something are some of my truer posts. Posts that demean large companies like the "Phone Company" are always en vogue... Its just like the MS trolls. And as we see from the karma ratings, hater and gimme posts are always rated up. I even come on the other side, bashing the gimmiees when it's conveinant.
Of course, this post is buried far enough that most wont read it. Fools.
I already deal with a high noise floor. It's called EME.
If my math is correct, signal loss is around 250 dB for EME. I can drop out the noise in most cases.
And dont forget, the FCC does NOT control other countries output. You act like it does. There's always pirate stations, laugh stations, the Numbers, screamers, pings, and everything else coming man made and cosmic.
I'd bet you've never had a channel you communicated on in a net jammed with a laugher. We all got mobilized within a half an hour with RDF. He quit by then....
If one was to test using different models (and one of that model), we could create expected cases.
We already have a system that uses only ram and CD: Knoppix. All we need now are hackable IDE drivers, which are a plenty in Linux. The key here is we need to know how to get past the auto-correction in the drives firmware. We need access to the uncorrected information. SpinWrite claims to do exactly this, so I believe it is possible.
After we do that, we need to record to a recording disk (go 1TB, for testing). We record say 1000 sectors and then slowly put the head out of alignment using the firmware codes. We record misaligned data along with that. After say, 1000 passes, we can then calculate statistical information of what WAS recorded.
The key here about finding out was WAS recorded is that we recorded it before 0'ing or 1'ing it. We know what was there, and we know what IS there now. We know the variables, and therefore can calculate it.
Once we know the variations in theory, we can apply that by reading the ??? drive and calculating the percentage of each bit and attempt to recreate the drive.
But that would be a damned nice masters thesis to actually prove mathematically that this attack could be done, and successfully prove it. It would be a decent 1000 fold factor to do so.
Why should a company that controls a much needed resource be allowed to extort users with "tools" such as:multi-year agreements:selling phones that will never be theirs (via permanent locking):restricting what can even be on the network (Ma Bell phone rental all over again):extortionate rates on text messages, data rates, international rates:plain lying about the X$ plans, which are added up to 10% fees they tack on. X dollar should be X dollar.
---Secondly, you really wouldn't like the alternative to FCC mandated frequency exclusivity...
Spoken as a amateur radio operator, you damn straight I would. The FCC is an incompetent pile of crap. All we need witness is the 5$ Billion DSL sellout fraud that they let go. Also, we can see that they care not for the experimental stations under BPL that interfere with international comms under 50MHz.
If I use 50 MHz (6 meter), I can routinely make communications spanning thousands of miles. Those channels do tend to fade in and out, so we make the best usage of them. And that international communication (using a 2W radio) costs only the electricity to sent the electrons.
These companies are predatory. They should serve US, the people. Instead, they stole our spectrum and only hand it back to us while demanding large sums of money. If we used digital radios that could learn new codecs, combined with intelligent peering, we could create a nigh-complete mesh across the country.
Slashdot Mirror
I have a server at home set up like that.
my camera hooked up feeds data to a wifi channel 1 on an unspecified ssid. Data is sent essentially to the aether.
I have another hidden box with wifi receiving only recording all udp packets with certain parameters. My recording server. There's no way to probe it, no way to attack it, no way to know it even exists.
And when you bought that drink at starbucks, doesnt the barista DESERVE payment for 150 years because they sold caffeine that increased YOUR intellectual output?
Why is the arts and sciences any different? You get paid for what you do, not what is done with your stuff in the future.
And if it was worth 1M$, why didnt you ASK for 1M$ in a contract? Not my fault you're stupid.
---Still, what you're talking about is copyright violation and not theft. Yeah, it's illegal. But it's a different illegal. Like how jaywalking and vehicular manslaughter are two different things. It would suck to be guilty of one and tried for another. It's the shell game the RIAA is foisting on the public trying to equate the two. And whenever I see it - I point it out. As loud as I can.
Of course. I tell everybody I dont care about petty legal triflings. I instead teach HOW to get any digital work, free of charge, and in a timely manner either by using p2p sources, search engines, or personal trading. You know.. that feed a man a fish story.
As for engineering, its up to 500$ per book.
I found 3 books that we use during our classes. Saved 2000$ that we would have otherwise forced to buy or photocopy.
---I believe it's morally correct to not support someone's extortion racket - "pay us huge bucks each year or you can't do your homework." That's racketeering, and I'd oppose it just as you do.
A digital work is the price it costs to duplicate. That's what I pay. I'm sure SOMEBODY paid the original creator for the time to create. Why should we effectively put money through a shredder when 1: its already made and 2: I lose that much money ?
If the creator of a digital good wasnt compensated during the time of creation, he was doing something wrong.
Thanks for trying, but...
I saved a bunch of us about 2000$ from what we would have HAD to buy if I couldnt have found it online.
We've also had photocopying sessions where we had 4 scanners operational, making JPEG books ourselves.
Flat out: I dont care about copyright. Im not going to honor the big guys copyright in our current copyright situation. Take it back to 17 years, and I will.
And my point is how do I know the way I perceive "blue" is the similar way YOU perceive "Blue"?
The key: unless we represent color mathematically in terms of EM, it's just an emotional response from unadjusted sensors.
I AM in Indiana.
Recently, the school has submitted yet another rounds of lawsuits against parents who have not paid their book rental ransom.
Watch out for slippery slope!
I was making the point that describing colors is only useful when we have a real reference point (color frequency composition).
There's women that have a mutated cone (for color vision) that perceives a "goldenness" that others cannot perceive. What the rest of us would call the same color, they see completely different.
There's men who have red-green color blindness. There's also the much rarer blue-yellow color blindness.
Frankly, unless we express numerical graphs of color composition along with brightness, description of color has no uniform base that which we can talk about.
Ass, but www.textbooktorrents.com saved me a bunch of money.
Why pay for rev.2 and rev.3 when you bought rev.1 and are getting reamed by changed question numbers?
I saved my friends about 2k$ this semester from what I found there.
I can explain colors to blind people.
"People have rods and cones that allow seeing in the frequencies 380nm to 750nm. Some light patterns are mixture of multiple frequencies. 750nm are infrared, to lower terahertz radiation. We only see due to sensors that are sensitive to light in that spectrum. People also have a tough time differentiating blue colors (around 450nm) due to stronger scattering and less sensors in our eyes. Also, due to other differences, some women perceive colors differently than others along with color blindness inherent in many people."
I need not describe what exactly the color "blue" looks like, because EVERYBODY sees colors differently, and I cannot be sure what they perceive.
I just teach people how to search the internet where to find things.
We were taught in the beginning of our lives that "sharing is caring". Too bad they dont teach the capitalist version: "get your hands off my goddamned stuff! get your own!"
Tell me this: is adversarial better or worse than cooperation? I'm thinking somwhere along the lines between Deb and Ian and this guy named Linus. And dont forget the bearded freak who is effectively right: RMS.
Why should we do the editors work for them?
That's what bugs me about Web 2.0 or whatever the name it is. The Big Idea is that we can do crap work, and let the users do whatever they want, while they rake in the money.
That's why I troll. I'm the S/N increaser.
Xstatic Xenu
Ubuntu Scientology Edition
OK. Here's my rule I follow.
If you TREAT me like a criminal, and the criminal gets better service than the paying customer, I will be the criminal. If you can give me a good reason why I should deal with sub-standard service whilst paying for it, I will buy it.
If you treat me equally as good as the pirates do, and do not burden me with anti-user technologies, I will buy and recommend it to others.
Also in lan parties: I WILL share it, regardless of cracks, protections, serials, or any other matter. We will play YOUR game. Now, you can win us over by allowing a multiplayer-spawn like Total Annihilation did. 1 legit could "host" 3 machines.
Multiplayer spawn means I dont need to share CD images over SMB.
No multiplayer-spawn means everybody gets a "free copy".
Go ahead. Stop us.
Thing is.. We're your customer.
---Isn't that in the shrink-wrap license, though? I know just about every piece of software I've ever used disclaims itself from fitness for a purpose.
I dont care what some stuffy license says. Try telling a judge that.
User: "Yer honor, I bought this game, and it wont even run right. I took it to Geek Squad and they said it put some spyware called Secure Rom on it. I want my money back, my time, and court fees."
Game Company: "Judge, our contract stipulates that our software is not guaranteed fitness"
Judge: "So why's it 50$ if you say its worthless? It evidently has worth, and has fitness. After all, you set the price, and claim it is a game. Judgment for Plantiff."
1. Gamers shall have the right to return games that don't work with their computers for a full refund.
Try taking the box store to court for not providing basic fitness. Guess what? The business is willing to "deal with you".
2. Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state.
Definition of finished? Perhaps they want mathematically proven code? I'd rather have a continual ladder of bugfixes and more content.
3. Gamers shall have the right to expect meaningful updates after a game's release.
Conflicts with #2.
4. Gamers shall have the right to demand that download managers and updaters not force themselves to run or be forced to load in order to play a game.
How about: Dont include updates that remove features.
5. Gamers shall have the right to expect that the minimum requirements for a game will mean that the game will adequately play on that computer.
If people had the balls to sue, they could do so under truth in advertising clauses.
6. Gamers shall have the right to expect that games won't install hidden drivers or other potentially harmful software without their express consent.
Companies that do so should be prosecuted under the fullest extent of the law.
7. Gamers shall have the right to re-download the latest versions of the games they own at any time.
8. Gamers shall have the right to not be treated as potential criminals by developers or publishers.
9. Gamers shall have the right to demand that a single-player game not force them to be connected to the Internet every time they wish to play.
10. Gamers shall have the right that games which are installed to the hard drive shall not require a CD/DVD to remain in the drive to play.
All fixed by using the ThePirateBay images backed up with the appropriate cracks and servers. The crackers crack the software so you have no hassle. Why pay fo it when you are treated ike a criminal anyway. Might as well live up to the ideal.
Wii are not impressed.
---(And yes, all the analog physics is really digital when you go down far enough.)
Id disagree with you solely on that statement... We're unsure how exactly data and state information could be encoded into quark triplets or femtomechanics. One things' for sure... It's probability fields and they're not binary.
I like your bullet points. Ill comment on them.
- The UI in WinXP is very inconsistent and horrible once you're used to a more consistent UI. There's not much debate here, WinXP is hardly the epitomy of fine UI design except maybe for the most rabid Microsofties.
The basic UI for Windows IS consistent, for themselves. Anybody programming it will have their idea on the UI and will tinker with it. The third party programs are the ones responsible for "perverting a consistent UI".
- No virus, no spyware.
Just like Linux, the more popular you become, the more nasties are abound. And even with Linux, if you run that naughty binary, whats stopping that naughty bin to downloading a public key from a keyserver and encrypting/overwriting your ~ ? I could even show a nasty message "Pay X$ to Y_Swiss_account number" for private key and decryption code.
In fact, that was already done, but with no keyserver. Rather nasty attack. What matters more: /bin or ~ ?
- Full command-line power with easy to use GUI. Try this with Linux or Windows. Keep a link to a file on your desktop, now drop down to the command line and rename the original file. Used to break Linux, it might try to search now, Windows will try a search if it's similar. OS/2 has no such problem, the 2 are automagically linked.
Softlinks on Linux prevent simple renaming problems, and even works across disparate partitions. Hardlinks work only on that same disk system. Windows has a softlinks system, but refuse to use that instead of .lnk garbage. I have no clue why.
- A real GUI for the OS. Come on, Linux is very pretty (I use Ubuntu everyday at work), but there's a lot of inconsistencies and at heart, it's still basically a X-Window manager. You think it's great, but not after you've used a real GUI. (Dang I wish GNOME or KDE would _copy_ from some of the best GUI's).
I LIKE Xwindows. I can run any program on any machine on my network from and machine. I have complete run-ability. In Windows, I have to use Rdesktop (or whatever they call it) or VNC. And that only provides per-desktop granularity. I can run independent programs from anywhere I can SSH in to. I can also get any amount of graphic candy I can either run or program up.
Or I can run X itself and end up with a basic screen input, with 1 shell window. Windows, Mac, OS/2 all offer 1 choice. Linux offers all.
- OS X is a possibility, but you have to buy Apple hardware only.
Hopefully, that will be chalenged in court for illegal bundling. Not that I would like to run it... If I want Unix, Ill install FreeBSD or Linux.
- It's not a resource hog. I can fit my OS and all my applications (Yes, including OpenOffice 2, GIMP and everything you need under the sun) in a couple of GB if you wanted to.
Debian is the same. I install only what I want. I run what I want. I dont want X, I dont install X. I dont want some server program, I dont install it. I happen to run Ubuntu 8.04 and it works perfectly on my T61 thinkpad. I can optionally re-compile my kernel for the accel sensor in my hard drive, but I dont drop my laptop, and its all backed up anyways.
Not that Linux is the end all-be all, but if you want open source apps, go run the open source OS. I wouldnt be bitching saying that Windows programs run badly on Linux: Id go run Windows either directly, or in a vBox.
Can TBF handle clients that use UDP with spoofed source headers for each packet (perhaps the source could be a crypto sequence from a previously shared secret).
I know what I'd do. I'd use spoofed UDP headers, multi-home my machine for more bit buckets, and other attack-y stuff.
Thats how I keep my karma high. I post drivel like that to get high +5 karma, then I blow it on troll to piss people off.
Posts conjecturing ideas to get past or think up something are some of my truer posts. Posts that demean large companies like the "Phone Company" are always en vogue... Its just like the MS trolls. And as we see from the karma ratings, hater and gimme posts are always rated up. I even come on the other side, bashing the gimmiees when it's conveinant.
Of course, this post is buried far enough that most wont read it. Fools.
Feh.
I already deal with a high noise floor. It's called EME.
If my math is correct, signal loss is around 250 dB for EME. I can drop out the noise in most cases.
And dont forget, the FCC does NOT control other countries output. You act like it does. There's always pirate stations, laugh stations, the Numbers, screamers, pings, and everything else coming man made and cosmic.
I'd bet you've never had a channel you communicated on in a net jammed with a laugher. We all got mobilized within a half an hour with RDF. He quit by then....
I really think it could be done.
If one was to test using different models (and one of that model), we could create expected cases.
We already have a system that uses only ram and CD: Knoppix. All we need now are hackable IDE drivers, which are a plenty in Linux. The key here is we need to know how to get past the auto-correction in the drives firmware. We need access to the uncorrected information. SpinWrite claims to do exactly this, so I believe it is possible.
After we do that, we need to record to a recording disk (go 1TB, for testing). We record say 1000 sectors and then slowly put the head out of alignment using the firmware codes. We record misaligned data along with that. After say, 1000 passes, we can then calculate statistical information of what WAS recorded.
The key here about finding out was WAS recorded is that we recorded it before 0'ing or 1'ing it. We know what was there, and we know what IS there now. We know the variables, and therefore can calculate it.
Once we know the variations in theory, we can apply that by reading the ??? drive and calculating the percentage of each bit and attempt to recreate the drive.
But that would be a damned nice masters thesis to actually prove mathematically that this attack could be done, and successfully prove it. It would be a decent 1000 fold factor to do so.
I was also 11 when I did that stunt on BBS.
I only conjecture about it now because I'd never do it these days.
Bullshit.
Why should a company that controls a much needed resource be allowed to extort users with "tools" such as :multi-year agreements :selling phones that will never be theirs (via permanent locking) :restricting what can even be on the network (Ma Bell phone rental all over again) :extortionate rates on text messages, data rates, international rates :plain lying about the X$ plans, which are added up to 10% fees they tack on. X dollar should be X dollar.
Fuck the cell companies.
---Secondly, you really wouldn't like the alternative to FCC mandated frequency exclusivity...
Spoken as a amateur radio operator, you damn straight I would. The FCC is an incompetent pile of crap. All we need witness is the 5$ Billion DSL sellout fraud that they let go. Also, we can see that they care not for the experimental stations under BPL that interfere with international comms under 50MHz.
If I use 50 MHz (6 meter), I can routinely make communications spanning thousands of miles. Those channels do tend to fade in and out, so we make the best usage of them. And that international communication (using a 2W radio) costs only the electricity to sent the electrons.
These companies are predatory. They should serve US, the people. Instead, they stole our spectrum and only hand it back to us while demanding large sums of money. If we used digital radios that could learn new codecs, combined with intelligent peering, we could create a nigh-complete mesh across the country.
GNU-Radio is a great step in that direction.