Face it. People have affected the climate. They will continue to affect the climate one way or another until they're all dead (at which point it will probably be because they've affected the climate with nuclear bombs or something - boom boom boom). We are stuck in a global climate experiment, and there is no real way to shut it down entirely. Instead, we need to figure out how to deal with it, and anyone who's not considering some sort of technological assistance to at least help counter this largely technologically-induced problem is depriving themselves of an incredibly useful tool. Reduction of emissions? All fine and dandy, but don't dismiss mitigation of emissions as well.
Perhaps some other hacks would be better. I recall this article on climate controls which covers a wide variety of ideas, dismissing some as obviously impractical (orbiting mylar screen? Haha!) but ultimately concluding there are plenty of things we can do on a variety of levels to begin to help counter warming.
Wikipedia is like a public toilet -- when you need it, you're sure glad it's there, but you never know who used it last.
I'll also bet you that the average public toilet seat is, on average, cleaner than the average residential toilet seat. It's certainly the case for telephone headsets.... People with "public" resources like these and Wikipedia go around and clean things up, at least in theory. Most 'private' sources are plenty more likely to be "dirty" and biased.
The problem is that when you give "every nation control over their own destinies", you get nations which, say, go off in the corner and say, to use the Nazi reference you brought up, round up Jews and put them in death camps. Or engage in any other of amazing variety of human rights abuses. Or just sit around burning tons of smoggy coal and ruining neighbors' environments. And you will have some nation who thinks its destiny is to go and take over their world (oohheynazis), or their neighbors, and are unwilling to leave those nations to control their own destiny.
The current administration is not evil. It's one thing for you to think of them as stupid, wrong, or misguided, but they're not evil and certainly not as evil as the Nazis; you're only cheapening your own position against them if you start saying they are.
I'm speaking theoretically, so Microsoft is not part of my concern in this question. I was just wondering if somehow the driver could even execute self-modifying code to begin with, and if the operating system would check its entire signature every time it tries to run a secure operation.
Excuse me, sir. None of that evades me. I may be overestimating the time and effort involved for regular wiretap warrants (in compliance with 4th-amendment-fu) to be provided, but I didn't advocate their complete removal- just a little sympathy for their concerns, and a hope for a way those concerns could be addressed while still respecting the Constitution; a way to remove Needless Bureaucracy from the equation so they could apply for warrants - at least temporary ones- with just a little paperwork and a judge's approval, instead of mountains of it.
I'm sure that the bulk of the law enforcement officers in question are well-meaning, even if the agency as a whole is considered to be gutless, lawbreaking, and cowardly. This sort of incentive you propose is a little.... extreme, at best, and it would just result in any truly conniving, devious agency just going and setting up a series of fall guys for any such monitoring. Or wiretapping without any sort of oversight and just breaking the law anyway.
While I don't particularly relish the prospect of eavesdropping without warrants, the fact is that warrants take a gigundous mountain of paperwork to get, and that sometimes they really won't be obtainable fast enough to make a difference. It would be nice to see some sort of intermediate position: a sort of 'temporary warrant' with a fraction of the paperwork, while they wait around for the regular warrant. Maybe you could require them to destroy the recordings if the regular warrant isn't granted, as well... hmm.
Theoretical question. What if you could load a signed driver that proceeded to load unsigned code into itself? The signed portion would act as a sort of a "bootstrap" mechanism, and it would replace the guts with something potentially unsigned. Is this sort of self-modifying code possible under the Windows driver architecture?
If the game-makers don't want people to sell used games at $30 off, they should start cutting their prices sooner so people can get the game new for $30. I used to see PC games doing this effectively- the game would be $50 new, then in a month or two it'd be down to $40 or $30, and it'd eventually migrate down to the $5 bin somewhere - so that everyone who wanted it could get it new for the price they wanted, just not necessarily immediately.
But they don't seem to fall as quickly as they used to, and I haven't seen this nearly as much for the console games.
A few clarifications for the pedant in all of us: First, Wikipedia is under control of the Wikimedia Foundation these days, not just Jimmy Wales; second, the "German club" in question is actually the German chapter of the Wikimedia foundation and not just some totally random club. And yes- wikipedia.de remains down even as de.wikipedia.org remains up.
From the form:By filling out and submitting this form you authorize AFP and its agents and/or representatives to contact you (via e-mail, phone, and/or mail) about its products and related services, including announcements of special promotions.
Uhh, I don't know if you realize this, but plenty of other protocols besides AIM support buddy icons- Yahoo! Instant Messanger, MSN Instant Messanger, Jabber (which is XMPP itself)...
AIM may be coming or it may not but don't rely on the buddy icons to tell you.
Remember back during the Little Red Book/Homeland Security scare? They sold out or something and didn't display this anymore, but I got an HTML scrape/screenshot which I posted to my blog randomly.... went something like...
Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung (Paperback)
by Mao Tse-Tung "The force at the core leading our cause forward is the Chinese Communist Party..." (more)
(22 customer reviews)
List Price: $9.95
Better Together Buy this book with The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx today!
Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung The Communist Manifesto
Buy Together Today: $15.90
caching the images that people link to. You could do it entirely transparently and ensure that the images are safe... it's just a matter of providing enough space.
The problems now become: your bandwidth, your potential copyright violation, your disk space and processing time, your risk if there's an image-based exploit on your image-checker (always a remote possibility)... and in many of the random phpBB communities and such on the Web, all those are in short supply- and moreover, many of them have users who like their dynamically generated image from their own webserver and use it for some sort of webcam or "This is your IP address and user-agent" or system-uptime script or slideshow...
No, but you can't be sure that everyone patched themselves. I mean, maybe you can on Slashdot, but certainly not on half the random phpBB user communities across the web.
How are you supposed to tell? It's one thing to check file extensions, but you could still have something sending a different Content-Type: via CGI, or an HTTP redirect, or something. Does this mean that you should check every image hotlinked by users' code for safety? What if the image is subsequently changed? What if it triggers an exploit in your checking library? It's all very troublesome. Maybe you should download the image in question and check it and refer users to the downloaded version instead of the one originally linked- but then it's your image, your bandwidth, your copyright violation worries, and if it's like on many online bulletin boards someone will want a little cutesy image in their forum signature that IS dynamically generated (slideshow?) and maybe has some sort of hit count or echoes your IP address and browser or something. So what do you do?
There's an older medium for doing that. It's called a MUD. Some MUDs, especially the MOO variety, make it easy to whisk together interesting objects, often without programming, sometimes in a programming language somewhat similar to C. And while you can't "see" the results of your creation per se, that also means that you don't need spectacular artistic skills to pull it off. You also get to exercise the imagination.
Speaking of AWACS, I recall an article from The Wall Street Journal a while ago to the effect that some companies were looking at stratospheric blimps as a replacement/supplement to satellites. It's not very windy up there, and launching them is probably a lot easier and cheaper than depending on NASA and friend, and they can be replaced much more readily, as well. A quick Google search on the topic turns up a BBC article as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Face it. People have affected the climate. They will continue to affect the climate one way or another until they're all dead (at which point it will probably be because they've affected the climate with nuclear bombs or something - boom boom boom). We are stuck in a global climate experiment, and there is no real way to shut it down entirely. Instead, we need to figure out how to deal with it, and anyone who's not considering some sort of technological assistance to at least help counter this largely technologically-induced problem is depriving themselves of an incredibly useful tool. Reduction of emissions? All fine and dandy, but don't dismiss mitigation of emissions as well.
Perhaps some other hacks would be better. I recall this article on climate controls which covers a wide variety of ideas, dismissing some as obviously impractical (orbiting mylar screen? Haha!) but ultimately concluding there are plenty of things we can do on a variety of levels to begin to help counter warming.
I'll also bet you that the average public toilet seat is, on average, cleaner than the average residential toilet seat. It's certainly the case for telephone headsets.... People with "public" resources like these and Wikipedia go around and clean things up, at least in theory. Most 'private' sources are plenty more likely to be "dirty" and biased.
The current administration is not evil. It's one thing for you to think of them as stupid, wrong, or misguided, but they're not evil and certainly not as evil as the Nazis; you're only cheapening your own position against them if you start saying they are.
Some are made up in advance, or ex post facto.
I'm speaking theoretically, so Microsoft is not part of my concern in this question. I was just wondering if somehow the driver could even execute self-modifying code to begin with, and if the operating system would check its entire signature every time it tries to run a secure operation.
Your vehemence is unwarranted.
I'm sure that the bulk of the law enforcement officers in question are well-meaning, even if the agency as a whole is considered to be gutless, lawbreaking, and cowardly. This sort of incentive you propose is a little.... extreme, at best, and it would just result in any truly conniving, devious agency just going and setting up a series of fall guys for any such monitoring. Or wiretapping without any sort of oversight and just breaking the law anyway.
While I don't particularly relish the prospect of eavesdropping without warrants, the fact is that warrants take a gigundous mountain of paperwork to get, and that sometimes they really won't be obtainable fast enough to make a difference. It would be nice to see some sort of intermediate position: a sort of 'temporary warrant' with a fraction of the paperwork, while they wait around for the regular warrant. Maybe you could require them to destroy the recordings if the regular warrant isn't granted, as well... hmm.
Theoretical question. What if you could load a signed driver that proceeded to load unsigned code into itself? The signed portion would act as a sort of a "bootstrap" mechanism, and it would replace the guts with something potentially unsigned. Is this sort of self-modifying code possible under the Windows driver architecture?
But they don't seem to fall as quickly as they used to, and I haven't seen this nearly as much for the console games.
Didn't Pixar leave Disney not that long ago? Hmm. "If you can't keep their business, buy them out", is it?
A few clarifications for the pedant in all of us: First, Wikipedia is under control of the Wikimedia Foundation these days, not just Jimmy Wales; second, the "German club" in question is actually the German chapter of the Wikimedia foundation and not just some totally random club. And yes- wikipedia.de remains down even as de.wikipedia.org remains up.
spamspamspamspamspam!
AIM may be coming or it may not but don't rely on the buddy icons to tell you.
Which flash? The Tungusaka event, or Chernobyl?
Most of the MOOs do. Which is why I hilighted them.
The term "jury rig" comes from Latin, of course, "de jure" (pronounced about 'day jury') meaning "for the day".
Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung (Paperback)
by Mao Tse-Tung
"The force at the core leading our cause forward is the Chinese Communist Party..." (more)
(22 customer reviews)
List Price: $9.95
Better Together Buy this book with The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx today!
Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung The Communist Manifesto
Buy Together Today: $15.90
The problems now become: your bandwidth, your potential copyright violation, your disk space and processing time, your risk if there's an image-based exploit on your image-checker (always a remote possibility)... and in many of the random phpBB communities and such on the Web, all those are in short supply- and moreover, many of them have users who like their dynamically generated image from their own webserver and use it for some sort of webcam or "This is your IP address and user-agent" or system-uptime script or slideshow...
No, but you can't be sure that everyone patched themselves. I mean, maybe you can on Slashdot, but certainly not on half the random phpBB user communities across the web.
How are you supposed to tell? It's one thing to check file extensions, but you could still have something sending a different Content-Type: via CGI, or an HTTP redirect, or something. Does this mean that you should check every image hotlinked by users' code for safety? What if the image is subsequently changed? What if it triggers an exploit in your checking library? It's all very troublesome. Maybe you should download the image in question and check it and refer users to the downloaded version instead of the one originally linked- but then it's your image, your bandwidth, your copyright violation worries, and if it's like on many online bulletin boards someone will want a little cutesy image in their forum signature that IS dynamically generated (slideshow?) and maybe has some sort of hit count or echoes your IP address and browser or something. So what do you do?
There's an older medium for doing that. It's called a MUD. Some MUDs, especially the MOO variety, make it easy to whisk together interesting objects, often without programming, sometimes in a programming language somewhat similar to C. And while you can't "see" the results of your creation per se, that also means that you don't need spectacular artistic skills to pull it off. You also get to exercise the imagination.
I guess it's about time to break out the theme music from Close Encounters of the Third Kind...
Speaking of AWACS, I recall an article from The Wall Street Journal a while ago to the effect that some companies were looking at stratospheric blimps as a replacement/supplement to satellites. It's not very windy up there, and launching them is probably a lot easier and cheaper than depending on NASA and friend, and they can be replaced much more readily, as well. A quick Google search on the topic turns up a BBC article as well.