Maybe you should learn how to use the free command. Linux uses memory for buffering (making things faster). If it needs more memory, it will make the buffers smaller and use that space before going into swap space (which contains buffers as well).
Obviously you didn't read anything of what I wrote. Commercial software companies are going to promote themselves (duh). I said nothing about saving money. Capitalism only works as well as the companies who compete. Microsoft plays dirty.
Appearently Microsoft wants us to get used to the Palladium mentality: Want to run something non-MS on your computer? TOO BAD. MAKE YOUR OWN ARCHITECTURE. The Bill-Borg is looking more realistic every time I look at it.
It's time the government stepped in. Is there not anyone who is being paid by Microsoft to shut up? These people are laughing at our government. Why don't they see? "We are not a monopoly", and then they do things like this. Someone needs to wake up!
This is definitely an interesting article. The author is very clever, and I agree with him 100%! However, there is one problem: we live in a capitalist world.
Although free (speech) software developers compete based on merits, as they don't sell their software, commercial software developers will do anything they can to make sure that people buy more of their software. I think commercial software should not even be considered, as we have seen before, Microsoft can be very sneaky. Look at DRM sneaking into Media Player.. If they truly followed the open format idea, this wouldn't be a problem. But, you know who we're talking about here.
Today's Internet is a poor respecter of national boundaries, as many repressive governments have found to their cost.
The whole point of the Internet is to connect the world. If you live in a country where this is not appreciated, you shouldn't have the Internet there.
Unfortunately this freedom has been so extensively abused by the United States and its politicians, lawyers and programmers that it has become a serious threat to the continued survival of the network as a global communications medium.
So, to make a better global communications medium we must kick out everyone except Europe?
If the price of being online is to swallow US values, then many may think twice about using the Net at all, and if the only game online follows US rules, then many may decide not to play.
The Internet contains many, many different cultures. If you are finding US values, you may want to look at a different area. Better yet, you may want to create your own, non-US valued content.
We have already seen US law, in the form of Digital Millennium Copyright Act, used to persuade hosts in other countries to pull material or limit its availability. US-promoted 'anti-censor' software is routinely provided to enable citizens of other countries to break local laws; and US companies like Yahoo! disregard the judgements of foreign courts at will.
Anyone in another company that pulls something down using the DMCA is just stupid. Unless Yahoo! is hosting servers in France, the user is responsible to keep their activity legal in their own homeland.
Unless we can take back the Net from the libertarians, constitutional lawyers and rapacious corporations currently recreating the worst excesses of US political and commercial culture online, we will end up with an Internet which serves the imperial ambitions of only one country instead of the legitimate aspirations of the whole world.
You were just saying that Yahoo doesn't obey France's laws, well, why shouldn't you be able to get DoS'd because a US law says the RIAA can? You aren't making sense.
I believe that the time has come to speak out in favour of a regulated network; an Internet where each country can set its own rules for how its citizens, companies, courts and government work with and manage those parts of the network that fall within its jurisdiction; an Internet that reflects the diversity of the world's legal, moral and cultural choices instead of simply propagating US hegemony; an Internet that is subject to political control instead of being an uncontrolled experiment in radical capitalism.
Any country that wants to can do it now, without imposing any silly ideas to other countries.
Europe is the birthplace of the Web, with a wealthy, technically literate population, a network infrastructure that rivals that of the US and a rich cultural and political tradition which can counter US constitutional imperialism.
The web is not the Internet, make up your mind.
As for the rest, he goes on to spout about "Mapped networks". I hack you, from one network to another. Whose jurisdiction is it then? My country believes hacking is not illegal, yours does. That is also the problems with Britain's laws that you mentioned: jurisdiction.
What you find to be problems with the US, has more to do with the inadequacies of yourself. Go build another Concord, it will make you feel better.
Does anyone still actually use PPC anymore, besides Apple? I havn't seen many IBM machines at all with them, even the big ones. Why is IBM going through the trouble?
IMHO this is more of a design problem, than a problem with Windows. The same problem is in X, too. Otherwise, window managers wouldn't be available (doh). Likewise with Windows, stuff like Windowblinds wouldn't work without these "features".
From the interview: So if you get code and it's not from anyone you trust, you can choose to not run it.
Well, that's good./. made it sound like Microsoft would be able to decide what everyone could run. I'm not sure why I care anyway, there's no way I will ever run Palladium or get a "security chip".
Demonstrations like this are perfectly legal, and only show consumers how to use what they bought to the maximum potential. I think what companies seem to be missing is that consumers don't want copy protection! I'm not sure how many of you play NWN, but the latest patch broke the copy protection for many people. The funny thing? The crackers don't care, since they just make their own copies with the protections removed. A quote from the Bioware BB: "when is bioware going to learn that copy protection is hurting the buyers of the game and not the hackers!!!"
Besides that, there is no good way to have complete and failproof protection (short of having EVERYTHING be controlled by one group). For non-interactive content, video and sound is eventually going to be displayed/played by something. Most of the time, you can intercept that signal with a non-copy protectioned device. If not, then you sacrifice a little quality and capture the display/sound through other means.
As for interactive content, short of having the whole computer controlled by a dictidorian system, you can't really stop someone from editing assembly.
What can be done? Well, if the public is willing to give up their freedoms and have one group control their entire AV systems, and have their computer completely controlled by one group as well (sound familiar? think M$), then yes it can be done. However, this is not the American way. The RIAA/MPAA would have us give up our right to breathe if they thought they could make more money. We must resist, and continue to fight for our rights!
Let me get this straight. You automatically commit a crime in Australia if you live in another country where the offense is not illegal? That sounds like an interesting way of doing things. This article is more or less flamebait, I'm not sure why it was posted.
It IS ok under the GPL. Neonapster released the source. I agree that it's sad that a company would do something like this. Morpheus and Neonapster are scum, agreed, but as you can see on download.com, I think a lot of people will take notice and download the right one.
Come on, wake up and smell the coffee/pizza/flowers or whatever you want to smell, but there's no way "self defense" cracking is going to become legal. Without someone drawing the lines, the line between cracking and "self defense" will be very blurred:
"Well, his computer pinged me a few times, so I used a buffer overflow to gain access to his machine, and formatted his harddrive."
As you can see, there are two issues that are left unresolved: what defines an illegal attack, and what defines an appropriate "counter attack".
As for this falling under a self-defense part of the law, I would suggest looking at the goal of self-defense: stopping an attack against you. Self defense does not mean kill someone, does not mean detain someone, or anything else. Although it is possible that those could be necessary in an act of self defense, in most cases they are not.
With all this in mind, take a look at how you can stop the attack on you. The best way would be with a firewall or patching the problem. From there on, you should report the problem to the authorities (ala "real life"), probably being the machine's isp, and possibly the police/fbi.
Vigilanties are not protected by the law, and their best hope is to convince a jury/judge that they were doing the "right thing". Unfortunately, most of them aren't qualified to make that decision:]
Well, I always thought passwords to accounts and stuff were pretty secure. About a month ago, I started working for a local non proft organization in my spare time, helping with tech things, one of those things being redoing the website. Unfortunately, no one knew the host, username, password.. etc etc. So, I called up the host (which was pretty easily discerned) and prepared myself for a long, long time of persuation, arguing, threatening, etc etc to get our password changed:)
Five minutes later, we had a new password. I wasn't asked for an invoice number, name, or anything. I was a little worried. Should ISPs and such start taking 'hints' and stuff (mother's maiden name.. etc)?
Personally, I think it's a dilemma. Customer service reps think that since someone went to the effort to call, they must be the account owners. It's no surprise Kevin Mitnick knows more about the Vegas phone system than the phone company does! Ask, and ye shall receive. Someone else ask, and they shall receive too.:(
Why bother with a colocated server? Most casual spammers will just get dialup or broadband, and use open relays. Otherwise, they just goto Verio, who doesn't really give a f!@# about spammers:(
Boss: "Look what I just read on this website called slashdot! They STOLE OUR GAME!!!" Lawyer: "It only looks like they wrote something to let additional people run the game" Boss: "No. It's a trick. They stole our code, I know it! In fact, they are promoting piracy by letting more people play the game! Sue them! I love suing innocent developers!" Lawyer: "Actually this project is owned by Transgaming...." Boss: "Oh, nevermind. Go get me some coffee."
The receiver, which typically is portable, calculates its distance from the various satellites and triangulates to determine its own location within an inch.
I thought GPS was only accurate to a few meters. Was there an upgrade? I would think even with a lot of satellites to do triangulation off of, measuring a distance that exact wouldn't be easy.
AT&T Broadband said UltraLink will serve power users, which it described as those who have "set up home networks, send or receive large files such as when downloading software, or enjoy other bandwidth-intensive applications."
Isn't that what broadband is for in the first place? Why should you have to 'upgrade' your broadband just to get what you should be anyway?
In a letter to Victory dated today, the trade association representing the European registry operators said that they had worked closely with VeriSign "in reaching a common view of a lightweight ICANN."
Lovely. So now, Verisign and company are envisioning a new lightweight ICANN that Verisign can push around. This isn't going to be solved until a responsible group takes control, and until Verisign is out of the picture as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Why use dead hard drives when you can use repeat /. articles? Come on, Taco...
Maybe you should learn how to use the free command. Linux uses memory for buffering (making things faster). If it needs more memory, it will make the buffers smaller and use that space before going into swap space (which contains buffers as well).
Obviously you didn't read anything of what I wrote. Commercial software companies are going to promote themselves (duh). I said nothing about saving money. Capitalism only works as well as the companies who compete. Microsoft plays dirty.
It's time the government stepped in. Is there not anyone who is being paid by Microsoft to shut up? These people are laughing at our government. Why don't they see? "We are not a monopoly", and then they do things like this. Someone needs to wake up!
Encrypt your content with RC5-64, send it to distributed.net, sit back, and watch the cracking!
Although free (speech) software developers compete based on merits, as they don't sell their software, commercial software developers will do anything they can to make sure that people buy more of their software. I think commercial software should not even be considered, as we have seen before, Microsoft can be very sneaky. Look at DRM sneaking into Media Player.. If they truly followed the open format idea, this wouldn't be a problem. But, you know who we're talking about here.
The whole point of the Internet is to connect the world. If you live in a country where this is not appreciated, you shouldn't have the Internet there.
Unfortunately this freedom has been so extensively abused by the United States and its politicians, lawyers and programmers that it has become a serious threat to the continued survival of the network as a global communications medium.
So, to make a better global communications medium we must kick out everyone except Europe?
If the price of being online is to swallow US values, then many may think twice about using the Net at all, and if the only game online follows US rules, then many may decide not to play.
The Internet contains many, many different cultures. If you are finding US values, you may want to look at a different area. Better yet, you may want to create your own, non-US valued content.
We have already seen US law, in the form of Digital Millennium Copyright Act, used to persuade hosts in other countries to pull material or limit its availability. US-promoted 'anti-censor' software is routinely provided to enable citizens of other countries to break local laws; and US companies like Yahoo! disregard the judgements of foreign courts at will.
Anyone in another company that pulls something down using the DMCA is just stupid. Unless Yahoo! is hosting servers in France, the user is responsible to keep their activity legal in their own homeland.
Unless we can take back the Net from the libertarians, constitutional lawyers and rapacious corporations currently recreating the worst excesses of US political and commercial culture online, we will end up with an Internet which serves the imperial ambitions of only one country instead of the legitimate aspirations of the whole world.
You were just saying that Yahoo doesn't obey France's laws, well, why shouldn't you be able to get DoS'd because a US law says the RIAA can? You aren't making sense.
I believe that the time has come to speak out in favour of a regulated network; an Internet where each country can set its own rules for how its citizens, companies, courts and government work with and manage those parts of the network that fall within its jurisdiction; an Internet that reflects the diversity of the world's legal, moral and cultural choices instead of simply propagating US hegemony; an Internet that is subject to political control instead of being an uncontrolled experiment in radical capitalism.
Any country that wants to can do it now, without imposing any silly ideas to other countries.
Europe is the birthplace of the Web, with a wealthy, technically literate population, a network infrastructure that rivals that of the US and a rich cultural and political tradition which can counter US constitutional imperialism.
The web is not the Internet, make up your mind.
As for the rest, he goes on to spout about "Mapped networks". I hack you, from one network to another. Whose jurisdiction is it then? My country believes hacking is not illegal, yours does. That is also the problems with Britain's laws that you mentioned: jurisdiction.
What you find to be problems with the US, has more to do with the inadequacies of yourself. Go build another Concord, it will make you feel better.
Does anyone still actually use PPC anymore, besides Apple? I havn't seen many IBM machines at all with them, even the big ones. Why is IBM going through the trouble?
Personally, I think selling DVDs for $20+ is censorship!
ARGH!!!!!
From the interview: So if you get code and it's not from anyone you trust, you can choose to not run it.
Well, that's good. /. made it sound like Microsoft would be able to decide what everyone could run. I'm not sure why I care anyway, there's no way I will ever run Palladium or get a "security chip".
Besides that, there is no good way to have complete and failproof protection (short of having EVERYTHING be controlled by one group). For non-interactive content, video and sound is eventually going to be displayed/played by something. Most of the time, you can intercept that signal with a non-copy protectioned device. If not, then you sacrifice a little quality and capture the display/sound through other means.
As for interactive content, short of having the whole computer controlled by a dictidorian system, you can't really stop someone from editing assembly.
What can be done? Well, if the public is willing to give up their freedoms and have one group control their entire AV systems, and have their computer completely controlled by one group as well (sound familiar? think M$), then yes it can be done. However, this is not the American way. The RIAA/MPAA would have us give up our right to breathe if they thought they could make more money. We must resist, and continue to fight for our rights!
This is news? Hey CmdrTaco, I have a new article. Attack a computer in Britain, get arrested! " France " ... etc, etc.
Let me get this straight. You automatically commit a crime in Australia if you live in another country where the offense is not illegal? That sounds like an interesting way of doing things. This article is more or less flamebait, I'm not sure why it was posted.
It IS ok under the GPL. Neonapster released the source. I agree that it's sad that a company would do something like this. Morpheus and Neonapster are scum, agreed, but as you can see on download.com, I think a lot of people will take notice and download the right one.
CDex's SF page has it. It looks like their webpage was pulled though, since it got slashdotted :)
Look at the developer's page. The source is all there.
"Well, his computer pinged me a few times, so I used a buffer overflow to gain access to his machine, and formatted his harddrive."
As you can see, there are two issues that are left unresolved: what defines an illegal attack, and what defines an appropriate "counter attack".
As for this falling under a self-defense part of the law, I would suggest looking at the goal of self-defense: stopping an attack against you. Self defense does not mean kill someone, does not mean detain someone, or anything else. Although it is possible that those could be necessary in an act of self defense, in most cases they are not.
With all this in mind, take a look at how you can stop the attack on you. The best way would be with a firewall or patching the problem. From there on, you should report the problem to the authorities (ala "real life"), probably being the machine's isp, and possibly the police/fbi.
Vigilanties are not protected by the law, and their best hope is to convince a jury/judge that they were doing the "right thing". Unfortunately, most of them aren't qualified to make that decision :]
Five minutes later, we had a new password. I wasn't asked for an invoice number, name, or anything. I was a little worried. Should ISPs and such start taking 'hints' and stuff (mother's maiden name.. etc)?
Personally, I think it's a dilemma. Customer service reps think that since someone went to the effort to call, they must be the account owners. It's no surprise Kevin Mitnick knows more about the Vegas phone system than the phone company does! Ask, and ye shall receive. Someone else ask, and they shall receive too. :(
Why bother with a colocated server? Most casual spammers will just get dialup or broadband, and use open relays. Otherwise, they just goto Verio, who doesn't really give a f!@# about spammers :(
Boss: "Look what I just read on this website called slashdot! They STOLE OUR GAME!!!"
Lawyer: "It only looks like they wrote something to let additional people run the game"
Boss: "No. It's a trick. They stole our code, I know it! In fact, they are promoting piracy by letting more people play the game! Sue them! I love suing innocent developers!"
Lawyer: "Actually this project is owned by Transgaming...."
Boss: "Oh, nevermind. Go get me some coffee."
I thought GPS was only accurate to a few meters. Was there an upgrade? I would think even with a lot of satellites to do triangulation off of, measuring a distance that exact wouldn't be easy.
Isn't that what broadband is for in the first place? Why should you have to 'upgrade' your broadband just to get what you should be anyway?
Lovely. So now, Verisign and company are envisioning a new lightweight ICANN that Verisign can push around. This isn't going to be solved until a responsible group takes control, and until Verisign is out of the picture as well.
That is from the 'about box'. Last time I checked, the human hearing range was 20Hz to 20000Hz...