when I used AOL a few years ago (in UK, free month trials while on holidays from uni), I found it to have quite a good and consistent download speed for a dial-up. the problem was the ping which was so ridiculously high that gaming was completely impossible.
jesus h christ... why do people come up with the stupidest examples imaginable just to be argumentative?
I have difficulty imagining there are hordes of people in the middle of massive reconstructive surgery going on holiday and about to bring the passport system crashing down around them.
even if there were, how does it differ from the current photo only passports? surely having face AND iris AND fingerprints makes the situation a lot better?
am I right in thinking the WWW is pretty much p2p anyway, except that DNS servers convert names like "slashdot.org" into IP adresses? what else is there that has someone "in charge"?
the Russians knowing how to keep people alive in space because of their experience from Mir is what gave us the ISS (plus money and experience of other teams, but none of it possible without Mir).
I personally think Mir functioned fantastically well. sure it had its problems, but it kept people alive for 15 years despite only being designed for 3 or 5 (c.f. Apollo 13 "finest hour").
>You're the one who brought up a liver with a reverse mode
no, that was the original poster, BadCable;
"Just imagine the inevitable result when some black-hat cracker breaks through the encryption protecting your enhanced liver, and proceeds to turn it into 'reverse', whereby it spews toxins into your bloodstream?"
when I said you didn't understand nanotechnology, I didn't mean "you haven't read a BBC article about it", I meant you don't UNDERSTAND nanotechnology.
>This is a very limited application of nanotech.
yeah, cos it's just one example, one example will always be "limited". however the potential applications of carbon nanotubes, and other nanotechnology, ARE significant. there's plenty of hype and BS from "commentators", but theres also a lot of good science behind it. (HINT: if you really want to know about it I suggest reading actual scientific journals)
your other reply seems to be pure BS, e.g.
"But I think that Nanotechnology, and especially the kind of applications that are pushed forward -- such as machines that will cure you of cancer or create a new car each morning out of thin air -- are a pure fantasy."
who the f*** ever suggested this kind of application!!?? I personally guarantee you any amount of money that no one will ever make a car out of thin air, not because of nanotechnology being fantasy, but because it would be contrary to the laws of physics. and no matter how good I think nanotechnology can be, I don't think it'll ever allow us to bypass the laws of physics.
I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a reply to my post or the original, but...
"So, what if someone hacks the liver storage facility and inserts a virus"... what the f*** has this got to do with nanotechnology? it's just complete fantasy garbage. what if somebody hacks the car manufacturer so that those big mechanical arms kill all the workers and start making robot tanks that go off on a murderous rampage?!?!?!?
sure new technology often creates risks or problems, but these ridiculous "what if" situations are meaningless.
I did a little report on nanotechnology for uni. one application I can remember is using carbon nanotubes as probes for scanning tunneling microscopes instead of conventional tungsten tips - greatly increases resolution.
just because YOU don't know about or understand it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I expect you won't consider this "real" nanotech for some contrived reason; "real life" == "your life" ?
don't attack things just because you're ignorant of them.
why do you stupidly assume having technology that helps our bodies == being able to get hacked?
why would an artificial liver support a "reverse mode"? why would it even accept outside instructions in the first place?
are you scared that when you can access the internet from an in-car computer, this will automatically allow some hacker to access your car from the internet? Contrary to the many "In Soviet Russia..." jokes, influences often only happen one-way.
no this doesn't help at all. the spammer can use the work around like you say, so it can only hurt innocent people.
it shouldn't be about stupid arbitrary restrictions or conditions for all users, just about identification and elimination of offenders with no collateral damage.
Re:different levels of importance
on
Real Security?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I hate it when stupid systems try to force me to use "better" passwords. many of my internet passwords (not slashdot) are just variations on 'password'. this is for things like forums where I couldn't care less if they got hacked, and would consider it a bigger security risk to give them a "real" password as it would give them an insight into my thinking.
when setting root/user password on SuSE 8.2 I noticed that if you set all lowercase passwords during installation it's fine, but if you try to change it to another all lowercase password later it bitches about it and won't let you.
I hate requirements on passwords. displaying advice about passwords is okay, but when you have bullshit like "must contain at least one capital and number" all you do is potentially force the user into using an unfamiliar password and hence writing it down or making it trivial or something.
I don't follow tech too closely but this sounds like those worthless AMR slots or whatever they were called - the ones that were like having a built-in sound card or modem (in the sense that the board cost more and had less space available) except didn't actually do anything...?
here's a hint: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ru les 3 A usual, customary, or generalized course of action or behavior: "The rule of life in the defense bar ordinarily is to go along and get along" (Scott Turow).
the point about the article is that the ideas of what constitutes good design are changing, not that there are or aren't actual rules.
> Follow what you think is best.
what an empty statement, what was I going to do before your wisdom? do what I think is worst?
isn't it more disgusting that car manufacturers put CD players, radios, TV's in cars when they haven't bothered to solve the problem of huge numbers of deaths yet?
at least the WiFi allows people to work while travelling, CD players are just indulgent entertainment ffs.
>Try writing a 3D game, which has to run on EVERYBODY'S PC
how about game makers try this first, and not release POS code that will often only run on just a small fraction of PC's until a patch is made a few weeks later?
also, very often a standard engine is used, e.g. Quake 3 engine, which costs money in licensing but is probably still a good deal.
then there's the Valve business model; take an existing mod, burn it to CD, stick it in a box with an absurd price tag.
Slashdot Mirror
when I used AOL a few years ago (in UK, free month trials while on holidays from uni), I found it to have quite a good and consistent download speed for a dial-up. the problem was the ping which was so ridiculously high that gaming was completely impossible.
America (Land of the Free, Die, Osama, Die) Quality World Wide Interactive Internet Value Web On Line
I don't have any points to mod you down as useless, so I'll just use foe modification to banish your lame comments
jesus h christ... why do people come up with the stupidest examples imaginable just to be argumentative?
I have difficulty imagining there are hordes of people in the middle of massive reconstructive surgery going on holiday and about to bring the passport system crashing down around them.
even if there were, how does it differ from the current photo only passports? surely having face AND iris AND fingerprints makes the situation a lot better?
...the witch is dead
yeah, and your name's a dead giveaway...
...or...
Evil Adrian
Axis-of-Evil Adrian !!?!?!?!?!?!?
am I right in thinking the WWW is pretty much p2p anyway, except that DNS servers convert names like "slashdot.org" into IP adresses? what else is there that has someone "in charge"?
the Russians knowing how to keep people alive in space because of their experience from Mir is what gave us the ISS (plus money and experience of other teams, but none of it possible without Mir).
I personally think Mir functioned fantastically well. sure it had its problems, but it kept people alive for 15 years despite only being designed for 3 or 5 (c.f. Apollo 13 "finest hour").
>You're the one who brought up a liver with a reverse mode
no, that was the original poster, BadCable;
"Just imagine the inevitable result when some black-hat cracker breaks through the encryption protecting your enhanced liver, and proceeds to turn it into 'reverse', whereby it spews toxins into your bloodstream?"
when I said you didn't understand nanotechnology, I didn't mean "you haven't read a BBC article about it", I meant you don't UNDERSTAND nanotechnology.
>This is a very limited application of nanotech.
yeah, cos it's just one example, one example will always be "limited". however the potential applications of carbon nanotubes, and other nanotechnology, ARE significant. there's plenty of hype and BS from "commentators", but theres also a lot of good science behind it. (HINT: if you really want to know about it I suggest reading actual scientific journals)
your other reply seems to be pure BS, e.g.
"But I think that Nanotechnology, and especially the kind of applications that are pushed forward -- such as machines that will cure you of cancer or create a new car each morning out of thin air -- are a pure fantasy."
who the f*** ever suggested this kind of application!!?? I personally guarantee you any amount of money that no one will ever make a car out of thin air, not because of nanotechnology being fantasy, but because it would be contrary to the laws of physics. and no matter how good I think nanotechnology can be, I don't think it'll ever allow us to bypass the laws of physics.
I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a reply to my post or the original, but...
... what the f*** has this got to do with nanotechnology? it's just complete fantasy garbage. what if somebody hacks the car manufacturer so that those big mechanical arms kill all the workers and start making robot tanks that go off on a murderous rampage?!?!?!?
"So, what if someone hacks the liver storage facility and inserts a virus"
sure new technology often creates risks or problems, but these ridiculous "what if" situations are meaningless.
I did a little report on nanotechnology for uni. one application I can remember is using carbon nanotubes as probes for scanning tunneling microscopes instead of conventional tungsten tips - greatly increases resolution.
just because YOU don't know about or understand it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I expect you won't consider this "real" nanotech for some contrived reason; "real life" == "your life" ?
don't attack things just because you're ignorant of them.
why do you stupidly assume having technology that helps our bodies == being able to get hacked?
why would an artificial liver support a "reverse mode"? why would it even accept outside instructions in the first place?
are you scared that when you can access the internet from an in-car computer, this will automatically allow some hacker to access your car from the internet? Contrary to the many "In Soviet Russia..." jokes, influences often only happen one-way.
that can't be true, if it is it's absolutely sickening
yep, but those are online games and so being online is already a requirement, being forced to have your PC online just to check your OS is BS.
but if being online isn't required, then it would be pretty useless.
OSDN has collapsed in on itself under the weight of it's own self-satisfaction
yes, that was the general idea I was hinting at. good to see not everyone here is totally dim.
the "I predict.." is also based on a Homer Simpson quote.
3G was just .com-style hysteria flowing over into other markets.
I predict this is the last we'll hear from 3G.
no one will ever need more than 459 SMS characters on a mobile device.
no this doesn't help at all. the spammer can use the work around like you say, so it can only hurt innocent people.
it shouldn't be about stupid arbitrary restrictions or conditions for all users, just about identification and elimination of offenders with no collateral damage.
I hate it when stupid systems try to force me to use "better" passwords. many of my internet passwords (not slashdot) are just variations on 'password'. this is for things like forums where I couldn't care less if they got hacked, and would consider it a bigger security risk to give them a "real" password as it would give them an insight into my thinking.
when setting root/user password on SuSE 8.2 I noticed that if you set all lowercase passwords during installation it's fine, but if you try to change it to another all lowercase password later it bitches about it and won't let you.
I hate requirements on passwords. displaying advice about passwords is okay, but when you have bullshit like "must contain at least one capital and number" all you do is potentially force the user into using an unfamiliar password and hence writing it down or making it trivial or something.
I don't follow tech too closely but this sounds like those worthless AMR slots or whatever they were called - the ones that were like having a built-in sound card or modem (in the sense that the board cost more and had less space available) except didn't actually do anything...?
> they are by no means written in stone
u les
who said they were?
here's a hint:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=r
3 A usual, customary, or generalized course of action or behavior: "The rule of life in the defense bar ordinarily is to go along and get along" (Scott Turow).
the point about the article is that the ideas of what constitutes good design are changing, not that there are or aren't actual rules.
> Follow what you think is best.
what an empty statement, what was I going to do before your wisdom? do what I think is worst?
wasn't that the joke? both answers are correct.
isn't it more disgusting that car manufacturers put CD players, radios, TV's in cars when they haven't bothered to solve the problem of huge numbers of deaths yet?
at least the WiFi allows people to work while travelling, CD players are just indulgent entertainment ffs.
>Try writing a 3D game, which has to run on EVERYBODY'S PC
how about game makers try this first, and not release POS code that will often only run on just a small fraction of PC's until a patch is made a few weeks later?
also, very often a standard engine is used, e.g. Quake 3 engine, which costs money in licensing but is probably still a good deal.
then there's the Valve business model; take an existing mod, burn it to CD, stick it in a box with an absurd price tag.