but we wait with bated breath for when you will actually care to inform us about what you are blathering about.
Now, I don't use a whole heck of a lot of OSS software, but isn't there an OSS spellchecker in there somewhere? If you're going to use "childish" in a business letter, I'd think you'd at least run spell check on it before you fired it out into the open. Linux and other OSS projects are looking more and more, well, childish by the day.
Umm, my non-opensource spell checker didn't seem to have a problem with that sentence fragment. Perhaps you misquoted?
The grammar checker complained a bit, but that's not relevant in this case.
No, there really are some very skilled hackers out there. They may as well not exist as far as you are concerned, however. They likely work for sombody, and they are smart enough not to get caught. The famous hacker and the professional hacker are never the same person. Pro's dont get caught. Much like famous spies really. Famous spies are the ones that get caught. The good ones are the ones no body ever hears about. If a spy is really good, I mean exceptional, then he gets to retire, or is retired by (one of) the government(s) that he works for.
Yes, no-one is "untracable" or "undetectable" and yes there is no such thing as a "secure system". Everything has bugs, there is always an exception to the rule, etc. etc. etc...
The fact of the matter is, though, that nothing TRULY important is supposed to be stored on systems that can be accessed by the public. There is such a thing as an "air gap", and it is still quite effective in keeping secret information secret. Any pro hackers in operation today are certainly NOT gaining access to ULTRA TOP SECRET information, except by lucky circumstance, no matter how successful they are. Corporate espoinage is often much more successful, as military/Intelligence agency level security measures are pretty rare still in these areas (although they are getting better).
My.02 anyhow. Feel free to disagree.
I never quite got this... would you really trust a hacker to tell you everything he did? Some anonymous person on the internet breaks into your system and you will just take his word for it? A security incident is a security incident you have to do the same work either way:
offline the system investigate the system to find intrusion do a complete reload from scratch identify other systems on the network with same vulnerability accessable by compromised system make decision to roll dice and guess others were not compromised or rebuild those systems also
number of steps left out but you get the drift, the entire network is compromised and I don't trust my job let alone hundreds of fellow employees jobs, on a completely unknown person telling me they really didn't leave any back doors and didn't do anything at all after they intentionally broke into a system
I agree with this.
Incident response teams cost big money. Forensic examination of multiple systems and/or networks adds days of work for the IR team. Combined with the downtime costs associated with the examination and re-building of the compromised systems and suspect systems, and you're looking at a massive price tag. No sane Incident Response specialist says "well, this system was compromised, but it's probably fine if we just change the password and put it back into production". The fact of the matter is, you shouldn't be hacking into other peoples systems if you're not Explicitly given permission in writing to do so!!! Without permission it's all considered illegal hacking, and can and will be treated as such. You have no right to bypass the security measures of any computer that you do not own. NO RIGHT, unless explicitly granted to you by the system owner. It doesn't matter if you're a saint or Santa Clause or the Fairy God mother of web security. It doesn't matter if you CLAIM to have the best intentions.
Further to this, I find it humorous whenever someone chimes in on these discussions to paint Adrian Lamo as some kind of public service angel.
PUH-LEEZE.
The only difference between what this guy does and what those Russian blackmail hackers do is that at least the Russians give the target company a chance to avoid the publicity!!! (albeit by paying them off.). But hey, the Russians even offer to help secure the systems, just like Lamo. Dude is just a media whore. That's his pay-off: His name in lights as some kind of "hacker genius whiz-kid". Instead of blackmailing the companies he targets, he just runs straight to the presses with his latest trophy.
He probably sucks at hacking too, just has big balls and a "rebel without a cause" attitude.
As a technical person who communicates well with non-technical people, I have to say that the failure of communication is almost always with the technical person.
Being more concerned with being seen as smart and informed than actually providing coherent information, spending too much time on irrelevant details instead of providing step-by-step instructions on what has to be done, geek inferiority complexes leading to arch, grating deliveries, a failure to listen and understand the end-users needs - I've seen it all. And I've almost never met an end-user type whose technical behaviour I wasn't able to amend for the better.
People like you are rare treasures and should be put to use in the best possible way: HELP DESK!!!
BUBHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!
Kinda makes me glad that I'm not as gifted as you are.. I might be a little saddened to realize that my best fit is a job at a help desk.
Funny you should mention the board game "Careers".... My family owns an orignal edition of the game, in a nice orange box. I never understood the game when I was young and no one seemed interested in playing it with me (wonder why?). Now, however, when my family gets together on Christmas or some such occasion, my youngest nephew INSISTS that we all sit down and play careers together. It's actually a pretty fun game, for a board game....
Why you need to know this, I'm not sure. I just figured I was probably one of the few people who's actually played this game.
I've seen HST routines, done them for a bit before and no, I don't like them. Sorry, it's not my thing. It's called a "different opinion" look it up sometime. Just because a theory is more recent doesn't mean it's correct. FYI you sound like a valley girl by the way you type.:) Somehow I can't picture thor saying..."Oh and BTW hard gainer theory is LIKE SO outdated"
Touche.
It is an outdated training methodology, however. You can like it, use it, or whatever, but that doesn't make it any less outdated, and in many cases, wrong. It's your choice really, and I'm not trying to take that away from you, just trying to suggest that you take a look at some of the newer research that is going on. HST isn't the be-all and the end-all either, shit I'm sure it will be considered to be outdated and operating under false assumptions in the future, but still... that's evolution, you know?
I liked the valley girl dig though, probably the best part of your whole response. It's not like I was trying to come across as all superior or anything, I should have included a smiley at the end.:D HG still has some solid ideas, and it was groundbreaking stuff at the time. No need to get your feathers ruffled about it. I wasn't trying to be 'mean' or anything, just honest.
Maybe your friend is all natural, but odds are against it. Do you think he would tell you if he was juicing? How do you think that kind of admission from him would affect your relationship with him? Would you still hold him in such high regard if he was juicing? Do you see where I'm going with this? Maybe he doesn't want to disappoint you.
I rarely have great faith in "I know a guy..." stories, but on the off chance that your friend really is some kind of born-again christian 'all-natural' BB who happens to be severly genetically gifted, I offer you this response:
Fair enough, you caught me making overly broad generalizations. I should have qualified that statement. Of course there are a FEW exceptoins to the rule, but you must agree that _nearly_ all competition-level BBs are using gear. Heck, even the relatively modest looking guys with low bf% that you see on the cover of men's health magazine are juicing. Most people will never be able to attain that size and leanness without help. Oh and BTW, hardgainer theory is like SO outdated. It's called progress, look it up sometimes. I love Trygve's site (some funny shit on there too), but please, look at some more recent research. I hesitate to point you to www.hypertrophy-specific.com but I offer it in the spirit of generosity only. I am in no waya affilitated with them other than thinking that Bryan is one pretty smart dude.
Cheers.
Anyone who told you they got those side effects from "using creatine" was bullshitting you. They were using some serious gear, not just creatine. In case you didn't know, it's actually quite difficult for most people to "look like a juicer" without some form of anabolic steroids or possibly a keen stack of prohormones. Natural body builders don't generally look like body builders, and they rarely compete, because they simply cannot pack on the muscle with the same ease of a hormonally-enhanced body builder. Creatine, while it does work, does not pack on the muscle like steriods do. If it did, it would be a controlled substance. Here comes the cluestick!
Slashdot Mirror
Ugh, you work in the comic book store, doncha?
Umm, my non-opensource spell checker didn't seem to have a problem with that sentence fragment. Perhaps you misquoted?
The grammar checker complained a bit, but that's not relevant in this case.
No, there really are some very skilled hackers out there. They may as well not exist as far as you are concerned, however. They likely work for sombody, and they are smart enough not to get caught. The famous hacker and the professional hacker are never the same person. Pro's dont get caught. Much like famous spies really. Famous spies are the ones that get caught. The good ones are the ones no body ever hears about. If a spy is really good, I mean exceptional, then he gets to retire, or is retired by (one of) the government(s) that he works for.
.02 anyhow. Feel free to disagree.
Yes, no-one is "untracable" or "undetectable" and yes there is no such thing as a "secure system". Everything has bugs, there is always an exception to the rule, etc. etc. etc... The fact of the matter is, though, that nothing TRULY important is supposed to be stored on systems that can be accessed by the public. There is such a thing as an "air gap", and it is still quite effective in keeping secret information secret. Any pro hackers in operation today are certainly NOT gaining access to ULTRA TOP SECRET information, except by lucky circumstance, no matter how successful they are. Corporate espoinage is often much more successful, as military/Intelligence agency level security measures are pretty rare still in these areas (although they are getting better). My
I agree with this.
Incident response teams cost big money. Forensic examination of multiple systems and/or networks adds days of work for the IR team. Combined with the downtime costs associated with the examination and re-building of the compromised systems and suspect systems, and you're looking at a massive price tag. No sane Incident Response specialist says "well, this system was compromised, but it's probably fine if we just change the password and put it back into production". The fact of the matter is, you shouldn't be hacking into other peoples systems if you're not Explicitly given permission in writing to do so!!! Without permission it's all considered illegal hacking, and can and will be treated as such. You have no right to bypass the security measures of any computer that you do not own. NO RIGHT, unless explicitly granted to you by the system owner. It doesn't matter if you're a saint or Santa Clause or the Fairy God mother of web security. It doesn't matter if you CLAIM to have the best intentions.
Further to this, I find it humorous whenever someone chimes in on these discussions to paint Adrian Lamo as some kind of public service angel.
PUH-LEEZE.
The only difference between what this guy does and what those Russian blackmail hackers do is that at least the Russians give the target company a chance to avoid the publicity!!! (albeit by paying them off.). But hey, the Russians even offer to help secure the systems, just like Lamo. Dude is just a media whore. That's his pay-off: His name in lights as some kind of "hacker genius whiz-kid". Instead of blackmailing the companies he targets, he just runs straight to the presses with his latest trophy.
He probably sucks at hacking too, just has big balls and a "rebel without a cause" attitude.
Your post, while interesting, is also entirely irrelevant. Never once was the word "warez" used in the orignial post.
Who pissed in your cheerios today? Why the bug up your ass? Hmmmm?
No one was calling YOU illiterate. Yet.
People like you are rare treasures and should be put to use in the best possible way: HELP DESK!!!
BUBHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!
Kinda makes me glad that I'm not as gifted as you are.. I might be a little saddened to realize that my best fit is a job at a help desk.
Toodles.
Funny you should mention the board game "Careers".... My family owns an orignal edition of the game, in a nice orange box.
:D
I never understood the game when I was young and no one seemed interested in playing it with me (wonder why?).
Now, however, when my family gets together on Christmas or some such occasion, my youngest nephew INSISTS that we all sit down and play careers together.
It's actually a pretty fun game, for a board game....
Why you need to know this, I'm not sure. I just figured I was probably one of the few people who's actually played this game.
I give it a 4/5
Cool, fair enough. Never meant to say it was impossible. Cheers.
Touche.
It is an outdated training methodology, however. You can like it, use it, or whatever, but that doesn't make it any less outdated, and in many cases, wrong. It's your choice really, and I'm not trying to take that away from you, just trying to suggest that you take a look at some of the newer research that is going on. HST isn't the be-all and the end-all either, shit I'm sure it will be considered to be outdated and operating under false assumptions in the future, but still... that's evolution, you know?
I liked the valley girl dig though, probably the best part of your whole response. It's not like I was trying to come across as all superior or anything, I should have included a smiley at the end.
Maybe your friend is all natural, but odds are against it. Do you think he would tell you if he was juicing? How do you think that kind of admission from him would affect your relationship with him? Would you still hold him in such high regard if he was juicing? Do you see where I'm going with this? Maybe he doesn't want to disappoint you.
I rarely have great faith in "I know a guy..." stories, but on the off chance that your friend really is some kind of born-again christian 'all-natural' BB who happens to be severly genetically gifted, I offer you this response: Fair enough, you caught me making overly broad generalizations. I should have qualified that statement. Of course there are a FEW exceptoins to the rule, but you must agree that _nearly_ all competition-level BBs are using gear. Heck, even the relatively modest looking guys with low bf% that you see on the cover of men's health magazine are juicing. Most people will never be able to attain that size and leanness without help. Oh and BTW, hardgainer theory is like SO outdated. It's called progress, look it up sometimes. I love Trygve's site (some funny shit on there too), but please, look at some more recent research. I hesitate to point you to www.hypertrophy-specific.com but I offer it in the spirit of generosity only. I am in no waya affilitated with them other than thinking that Bryan is one pretty smart dude. Cheers.
You're retarded.
Anyone who told you they got those side effects from "using creatine" was bullshitting you. They were using some serious gear, not just creatine. In case you didn't know, it's actually quite difficult for most people to "look like a juicer" without some form of anabolic steroids or possibly a keen stack of prohormones. Natural body builders don't generally look like body builders, and they rarely compete, because they simply cannot pack on the muscle with the same ease of a hormonally-enhanced body builder. Creatine, while it does work, does not pack on the muscle like steriods do. If it did, it would be a controlled substance. Here comes the cluestick!