A question though: I am living outside the US, so I don't know if any offers of foreign aid have come in. Not just money, but doctors, freshwater, etc. With the level of support sent by the US to disasters around the world (like the Boxing Day Tsunami), I wonder if the rest of the world is trying to help the US now?
Last I heard, aid from the Dutch was offered but not accepted yet, but nevertheless is on its way pre-emptively in the form of a marine frigate with fresh water supplies and equipment, marines, smaller boats, emergency rations, helicopters for medical evacuations, and such. The frigate is called "Hr.Ms. Van Amstel". Other material and expertise has also been offered, such as pumps, F-16s and identification teams, but is pending American request. (This roughly summarized and translated from the awfully crappy news site http://www.nu.nl/news/584318/22/Nederland_stuurt_f regat_naar_New_Orleans_%28video%29.html in Dutch.)
I have little doubt it exists many places, however I know it from Babylon 5.
FWIW, the last time I recall seeing it is the first non-pilot Alias episode: http://www.alias-tv.com/episodes1.html,
called "So It Begins".. I'm curious what the root of it is.. it sounds biblical or something:)
And what I don't like about palladium or whatever it's called nowadays, is that their so-called security is protecting parties outside the PC from the PC owner. In other words, the PC owner is the adversary in these 'security' features. Great thought, isn't it.
The only chance of getting a repeated song is if the last song of a shuffled playlist is the same as the first song of the next shuffled list, which is 1/n^2.
No, it would be 1/n^2 if that song had to be a particular song. The probability of any song repeating, it's 1/n.
So what happens if they use a one-way mirror for the sensor housings?
Then the laser can't shine out, but can shine in, killing the sensors. Or did you want to turn the mirror the other way, making the sensors blind to the outside world?
Where do they? In either of the articles? I'm curious about context.
Re:The schmuck might actually fix his box
on
Spammers on the Run
·
· Score: 1
He'll probably notice the slowdown, or his ISP will, and this will provide a huge incentive to get his machine fixed. If your box is hacked and the *worst* thing that happens to you is that you get DDOSed, you should consider yourself extremely lucky, and should be happy you were warned that something was amiss, even if the result was pretty painful.
Yes, sure. But in the meantime, the spammer is uncaught and spamming from the next hacked box (or running his website on the next hacked box, whatever he was doing).
Actually i believe the main reason they used Linux vs. BSD is that apart from all the pros for BSD, BSD does NOT scale well, admittedly so. Google has a huge array of servers, they need scalability almost as much as the ability to modify stuff.
What are you talking about? How can a single OS be a factor in scalability when the type of scalability you mean is the number of machines? The only scalability concern there is efficiency and cleverness of inter-node communication (protocols, really). Totally OS independent, I'd say. So, would you like to clarify?
These guys seem to be pretending to be doing it for the good of the industry, but their site seems to list a lot of Bluetooth Hacks & Attacks. And they didn't seem to have made any effort to contact vendors to get the problem corrected, either.
Don't be too tough on them. I saw their demo at WhatTheHack last weekend. After the session I asked which brand to buy for security, and the reply was that Nokia had done a good job of making up for their mess. Also their story at the time was that they test a lot of bluetooth stuff for the industry, working with the industry to find holes before phones go to market (not quite sure of the timing, but I am sure that they cooperate).
(rest snipped) great idea. I can imagine this will work well.
I play warcraft iii occasionally, and also occasionally deal with the trash-talking. Not as bad as the rest of this story's comments though.
On WC3 it's either the opponents trash-talking my team (this doesn't really get to me), but being trash-talked by my own allies (noob, etc., whether they're right or not) does get to me. I usually say "be an asshole one more time and I'll leave" (and I mean it of course) (meaning they'll have to finish the game without me, much harder than with me). So far it's always shut them up.
So I can download the recipe, but not the ingredients. Isn't that rather like being able to download the makefile for a software project, but having to write the code yourself?
I know you were probably kidding, but..
No, no no. It's like downloading all the code but having to run it on a machine you had to buy yourself.
Spammers misuse a cheap communication medium for unwanted advertising and nothing can stop them. So massive (mis)use of their own reply mechanism (btw. that was exactly what they wanted me to do by sending the spam in the first place) will drive the cost up for them (bandwidth etc.), so in theory at some point their action will be no longer profitable and they will stop.
Except that these sites are mighty likely to be living on hacked machines spammers don't pay the bill for in the first place.
The current overusage of the word MEME is a FAD, that's for sure.
Yes.. YES. I have nothing to add but thanks for saying that, this 'meme' usage where 'fad' (or 'habit' or 'trend' or whatever) was meant drives me nuts too.
Well, of course Google takes a large cut. That's their business model, and that is what makes them survive.
I think you and Hyperchicken misread GP's post; he said the bank takes a large cut when cashing checks, something I have first-hand experience with too.
It also seems you only show one ad per page, when you can show up to 4. Why is this? What if the second, third or forth would have made a click? Use a larger banner format (skyscraper?) and try again.
Eww, it doesn't sound like you're making his pages prettier..
It's not bogus. It's on the same level as murders, drunk drivers, invasions of enemy armies, etc. As far as the "end user" is concerned, they're all random and all practably as preventable as any other item in the list.
It seems to me such 'using past events to predict the future' is bogus. I gotta admit, I'm not sure either way though.
But people do die in traffic accidents. In fact, when averaged out over any significant timeframe, "terrorist" attacks become stastistical noise. If someone is frightened by terrorists, they should be unable to go out near the street.
I am arguing that statistics don't apply, because terrorist attacks are not random events; they are actively perpetrated. So making probability calculations based on how often they have happened in the past is bogus. Not so for heart attacks and traffic accidents.
* Increase of death rate on 7 July: 23%
If there had been 50 extra heart attacks in London on 7 July, do you think that it would have been noticed? If it weren't for the wall to wall media coverage, this would have been a non-event.
I understand your line of reasoning, but it doesn't apply to terrorism. The difference is that other deaths are caused despite people's best efforts - people don't want to have heart attacks or die in traffic accidents. But a terror attack is a result of a planned and active and concerted effort on the part of people, and as such can't be lumped in with the 'statistical' deaths. With a little more expertise and planning, the death toll could easily have been orders of magnitude larger, I think.
BTW, couldn't agree more with this:
Terrorism is about publicity, and over-reporting it simply feeds it. But it seems that the dymanics have changed. Now there are too many organisations who have a vested interest in a continual state of terrorism.
Slashdot Mirror
Last I heard, aid from the Dutch was offered but not accepted yet, but nevertheless is on its way pre-emptively in the form of a marine frigate with fresh water supplies and equipment, marines, smaller boats, emergency rations, helicopters for medical evacuations, and such. The frigate is called "Hr.Ms. Van Amstel". Other material and expertise has also been offered, such as pumps, F-16s and identification teams, but is pending American request. (This roughly summarized and translated from the awfully crappy news site http://www.nu.nl/news/584318/22/Nederland_stuurt_f regat_naar_New_Orleans_%28video%29.html in Dutch.)
FWIW, the last time I recall seeing it is the first non-pilot Alias episode: http://www.alias-tv.com/episodes1.html, called "So It Begins".. I'm curious what the root of it is.. it sounds biblical or something :)
From where is that? I've seen the quote around before, but I don't know who or what originated it.
And what I don't like about palladium or whatever it's called nowadays, is that their so-called security is protecting parties outside the PC from the PC owner. In other words, the PC owner is the adversary in these 'security' features. Great thought, isn't it.
No, it would be 1/n^2 if that song had to be a particular song. The probability of any song repeating, it's 1/n.
Then the laser can't shine out, but can shine in, killing the sensors. Or did you want to turn the mirror the other way, making the sensors blind to the outside world?
Where do they? In either of the articles? I'm curious about context.
Yes, sure. But in the meantime, the spammer is uncaught and spamming from the next hacked box (or running his website on the next hacked box, whatever he was doing).
Fat lot of good that will be if it's some schmuck's hacked box. (As is often the case.)
Idioms? Don't you mean memes?
(I'm making fun of the over-use of the word 'meme' round these parts, for those that are wondering what I am saying here.)
What are you talking about? How can a single OS be a factor in scalability when the type of scalability you mean is the number of machines? The only scalability concern there is efficiency and cleverness of inter-node communication (protocols, really). Totally OS independent, I'd say. So, would you like to clarify?
Who is ScuttleMonkey?
Don't be too tough on them. I saw their demo at WhatTheHack last weekend. After the session I asked which brand to buy for security, and the reply was that Nokia had done a good job of making up for their mess. Also their story at the time was that they test a lot of bluetooth stuff for the industry, working with the industry to find holes before phones go to market (not quite sure of the timing, but I am sure that they cooperate).
Check the hall of fame. http://developers.slashdot.org/hof.shtml
(rest snipped) great idea. I can imagine this will work well.
I play warcraft iii occasionally, and also occasionally deal with the trash-talking. Not as bad as the rest of this story's comments though.
On WC3 it's either the opponents trash-talking my team (this doesn't really get to me), but being trash-talked by my own allies (noob, etc., whether they're right or not) does get to me. I usually say "be an asshole one more time and I'll leave" (and I mean it of course) (meaning they'll have to finish the game without me, much harder than with me). So far it's always shut them up.
Briefly, it makes me feel better, too.
I know you were probably kidding, but..
No, no no. It's like downloading all the code but having to run it on a machine you had to buy yourself.
Except that these sites are mighty likely to be living on hacked machines spammers don't pay the bill for in the first place.
Yes.. YES. I have nothing to add but thanks for saying that, this 'meme' usage where 'fad' (or 'habit' or 'trend' or whatever) was meant drives me nuts too.
Time for my medication I think.
I think you and Hyperchicken misread GP's post; he said the bank takes a large cut when cashing checks, something I have first-hand experience with too.
It also seems you only show one ad per page, when you can show up to 4. Why is this? What if the second, third or forth would have made a click? Use a larger banner format (skyscraper?) and try again.
Eww, it doesn't sound like you're making his pages prettier..
Who's talking about terrorists?
(waiting cowboy)
Don't you mean shill.. :)
Google Earth is very worth checking out. Plus Google is just cool.
Awesome comment. I presume by cool, you mean totally sweet. But.. Does Google flip out and kill people?
It seems to me such 'using past events to predict the future' is bogus. I gotta admit, I'm not sure either way though.
I am arguing that statistics don't apply, because terrorist attacks are not random events; they are actively perpetrated. So making probability calculations based on how often they have happened in the past is bogus. Not so for heart attacks and traffic accidents.
If there had been 50 extra heart attacks in London on 7 July, do you think that it would have been noticed? If it weren't for the wall to wall media coverage, this would have been a non-event.
I understand your line of reasoning, but it doesn't apply to terrorism. The difference is that other deaths are caused despite people's best efforts - people don't want to have heart attacks or die in traffic accidents. But a terror attack is a result of a planned and active and concerted effort on the part of people, and as such can't be lumped in with the 'statistical' deaths. With a little more expertise and planning, the death toll could easily have been orders of magnitude larger, I think.
BTW, couldn't agree more with this: Terrorism is about publicity, and over-reporting it simply feeds it. But it seems that the dymanics have changed. Now there are too many organisations who have a vested interest in a continual state of terrorism.