So, you'd enjoy occupation duty, convoy escort, standing guard, or any of the other "boring" parts of being in the army? This simulator isn't about standard combat situations. A typical scenario in this simulator would be occupation troops in Bagdad responding to a suicide bombing of a police station.
apache www: Fairly secure from my understanding, only mentioned here because it runs over half the websites out there. Ask yourself this: Name one other webserver for linux/*bsd. Most people can't.
Apache for Linux isn't the same as Apache for BSD isn't the same as Apache for Solaris isn't the same as Apache for Windows isn't the same as...
A worm that can exploit a vulnerability in Apache for BSD might simply crash Apache for Windows, be totally ineffective against Apache for Solaris, and have differing effects against Apache for Linux depending on what compiler was used. A worm that can exploit a vulnerability in a given version of IIS can attack all copies of that version, because all the copies are running from identical binary images on operating systems with identical memory layout schemes. In order to be a monoculture, a program needs to have more than just the source code the same.
This is from the article: Being the top species in the information chain means more attention from the malicious coders.
On the desktop, MS is definately "top of the information chain", so naturally more attention will be brought their way.
Apache is the top web server, running over 2/3 of the sites on the Internet. Why is it that Microsoft's IIS, at less than 20% of web sites, is the one that keeps getting exploited?
Linux can't be a monoculture in the way that Windows is. There are too many variations from box to box -- one worm that targets a buffer overflow in OpenSSL uses over a dozen different attack modes just to handle different versions of RedHat, and this is just to deal with boxes that use standardized, pre-compiled binaries. Once you factor in the fact that there are at least two different programs you can use for a given operation, and that many of these programs are compiled by the end user (using any of a number of different, binary-incompatible compilers), you find you've got a platform that can't be vulnerable to the "one-size-fits-all" attacks that Windows keeps getting hit with.
The computer lab where I used to work still has seven of the eight ten-year-old SGI GDM monitors still working. The one that was replaced still worked fine, except for a half-hour warmup period before it would show an image.
Of course, the really ancient monitor there is the 12" Hitachi monitor attached to the CD burner machine. It's got such wonderful features as a fixed refresh rate.
'm sorry, but you are kidding, right? The 2nd amendment was written at a time when it was my musket vs. your musket. Now, anyone trying to overthrow the government would be facing a highly advanced military force. What good is an AK-47 when you can be smart-bombed out of existence without even seening your enemy?
An AK-47 (or even better, a regular single-shot rifle) is extremely useful, even (perhaps especially) when the opponent has things like tanks and smart bombs.
A smart bomb can only hit you if the bomber pilot knows where you are. It's much easier for a man with an AK-47 to hide than it is for a man with a tank. Someone armed with low-tech weaponry such as a molotov cocktail or sniper rifle can take out a tank.
It's about time too. The current shuttle fleet has computers less powerful than the modern car and structural materials about as sophisticated as a shopping trolley.
And this is a bad thing? Older computers are more resistant to radiation, and any quirks are very well-known. Steel and aluminum may be "primitive", but once again, it is well-known how they behave under almost any conditions.
Maybe not, but I'd be fairly concerned about a cargo jet getting hijacked. We all know how pathetic ground security is in airports. I wonder how hard would it be for a for a couple terrorists to sneak onto a FedEx jet, stowaway for awhile, and pull another 9/11?
Stow away on a cargo plane? Easy. Break down the cockpit door and kill the flight crew, before the pilot has a chance to land or crash the airplane? A lot harder.
For that matter, a cargo pilot doesn't need to worry about the comfort of passengers. Try hijacking an airplane while the pilot's putting the plane through a barrel roll!
Perhaps a planeload of these fine, upstanding citizens is your cup of tea. Personally, I'd rather have better detection systems and better trained airport security personnel.
Personally, I'd rather have a recognition that the only way to hijack an airplane these days is to kill every passenger and every member of the flight crew before the pilot has a chance to crash the airplane.
In case anyone didn't read the title, it's a satiric comment on the racist assumptions inherent in the "War on Terror". So far, every "anti-terrorist" action has either been targeted specifically against Arabs or Islam, or has been targeted against everyone, then enforced primarily against those groups.
African-Americans were included because they get shafted no matter what.
I wonder if this will be about as useless as our fabled Homeland Security "Orange Alerts"?
In order for this to be as useless as the Homeland Security system, they'd need to ground all airplanes every time someone gets red-flagged. The Homeland Security system is so broad in its effects, every time the security level is raised, police throughout the country, even in places terrorists couldn't care less about, need to put in overtime guarding pointless "targets". For example, a village with a population of 50 in the middle of Wyoming would be required to have a full-time guard on the water tower!
If this system does not implement some method of appealing a classification expece to hear about a massive wave of lawsuits.
There is no appeal. Why should there be? The system is flawless, so anyone it flags must be a terrorist! Why let terrorists waste the time of honest, upstanding American citizens with an appeal that is certain to be denied? Are you suggesting the system might be flawed? That the Government might be wrong? Are you trying to undermine the all-important War on Terrorism? Is it possible that you are in league with the terrorists? Is it possible that you are a terrorist?
Fellow Americans, we must be endlessly vigilant! Terrorist could lurk anywhere! Your next-door neighbor might be one! How well do you really know them? Is it possible they might be hiding something? That they have some dark secret?
Don't hesitate! It is better to be safe than sorry! If you see someone acting suspicious, report them to the nearest federal agent as soon as possible!
--------- Seriously, I expect the lawyers at the ACLU are already preparing their case.
Can somebody please explain to me why there's a coaxial socket on the back labeled "cable modem"?
I don't get it - I thought cable internet provider's signals and boxes were proprietary, but had an ethernet port on the back that you connected to. Your computer never sees the raw cable connection and is still able to transmit & receive.. so why would this device need it?
Almost all cable modems use the DOCIS 1.1 standard these days, so just about any cable modem can be used with any cable ISP. The big difference between ISPs is which cable channel is replaced with the modem signal, and that's something the modems are designed to handle.
If it's this tough for someone out of the loop to get mars rover data. I think the chances of seti discovering a usable alien signal are next to nothing.
There's a major difference between the two: SETI is just looking for the existence of a signal. With the Mars rovers, you'd be trying to interpret the signal as well. SETI would have no trouble finding the signal from Spirit and recognizing it as being sent from an intelligent source, if it looked in the right place at the right time.
I wouldn't be too worried. My first encounter with Lego robotics was a book with instructions on how to make an interface board for controlling Lego motors from an Apple ][. If Mindstorms vanishes, I'm sure there will be any number of companies willing to fill the gap.
Slashdot Mirror
Asymmetric Warfare? Is that what you call it when America attacks another country?
More or less, yes. Asymmetric warfare is when one side has a tank, and the other has a machine gun in the back of a pickup truck.
So, you'd enjoy occupation duty, convoy escort, standing guard, or any of the other "boring" parts of being in the army? This simulator isn't about standard combat situations. A typical scenario in this simulator would be occupation troops in Bagdad responding to a suicide bombing of a police station.
apache www: Fairly secure from my understanding, only mentioned here because it runs over half the websites out there. Ask yourself this: Name one other webserver for linux/*bsd. Most people can't.
Apache for Linux isn't the same as Apache for BSD isn't the same as Apache for Solaris isn't the same as Apache for Windows isn't the same as...
A worm that can exploit a vulnerability in Apache for BSD might simply crash Apache for Windows, be totally ineffective against Apache for Solaris, and have differing effects against Apache for Linux depending on what compiler was used. A worm that can exploit a vulnerability in a given version of IIS can attack all copies of that version, because all the copies are running from identical binary images on operating systems with identical memory layout schemes. In order to be a monoculture, a program needs to have more than just the source code the same.
This is from the article: Being the top species in the information chain means more attention from the malicious coders.
On the desktop, MS is definately "top of the information chain", so naturally more attention will be brought their way.
Apache is the top web server, running over 2/3 of the sites on the Internet. Why is it that Microsoft's IIS, at less than 20% of web sites, is the one that keeps getting exploited?
Linux can't be a monoculture in the way that Windows is. There are too many variations from box to box -- one worm that targets a buffer overflow in OpenSSL uses over a dozen different attack modes just to handle different versions of RedHat, and this is just to deal with boxes that use standardized, pre-compiled binaries. Once you factor in the fact that there are at least two different programs you can use for a given operation, and that many of these programs are compiled by the end user (using any of a number of different, binary-incompatible compilers), you find you've got a platform that can't be vulnerable to the "one-size-fits-all" attacks that Windows keeps getting hit with.
Moon rocks contain plenty of oxygen, but no hydrogen. You'd need to import it, and the most efficient ways of doing so are as either methane or water.
The computer lab where I used to work still has seven of the eight ten-year-old SGI GDM monitors still working. The one that was replaced still worked fine, except for a half-hour warmup period before it would show an image.
Of course, the really ancient monitor there is the 12" Hitachi monitor attached to the CD burner machine. It's got such wonderful features as a fixed refresh rate.
'm sorry, but you are kidding, right? The 2nd amendment was written at a time when it was my musket vs. your musket. Now, anyone trying to overthrow the government would be facing a highly advanced military force. What good is an AK-47 when you can be smart-bombed out of existence without even seening your enemy?
An AK-47 (or even better, a regular single-shot rifle) is extremely useful, even (perhaps especially) when the opponent has things like tanks and smart bombs.
A smart bomb can only hit you if the bomber pilot knows where you are. It's much easier for a man with an AK-47 to hide than it is for a man with a tank. Someone armed with low-tech weaponry such as a molotov cocktail or sniper rifle can take out a tank.
The Moon is noticeably lacking in one critical ingredient for long-term occupation: water. Mars, on the other hand, has plenty of water.
It's about time too. The current shuttle fleet has computers less powerful than the modern car and structural materials about as sophisticated as a shopping trolley.
And this is a bad thing? Older computers are more resistant to radiation, and any quirks are very well-known. Steel and aluminum may be "primitive", but once again, it is well-known how they behave under almost any conditions.
I'm not talking "the airplane the person is trying to board", I'm talking "every airplane in the country".
Maybe not, but I'd be fairly concerned about a cargo jet getting hijacked. We all know how pathetic ground security is in airports. I wonder how hard would it be for a for a couple terrorists to sneak onto a FedEx jet, stowaway for awhile, and pull another 9/11?
Stow away on a cargo plane? Easy. Break down the cockpit door and kill the flight crew, before the pilot has a chance to land or crash the airplane? A lot harder.
For that matter, a cargo pilot doesn't need to worry about the comfort of passengers. Try hijacking an airplane while the pilot's putting the plane through a barrel roll!
Perhaps a planeload of these fine, upstanding citizens is your cup of tea. Personally, I'd rather have better detection systems and better trained airport security personnel.
Personally, I'd rather have a recognition that the only way to hijack an airplane these days is to kill every passenger and every member of the flight crew before the pilot has a chance to crash the airplane.
Well they'll only get me for one flight...As i move to Canada...
I'm not going to fly. I've got too much stuff that the luggage screeners would object to -- if they were paying attention.
Pretent that you are tasked with protecting American lives from Islamic terrorists on your own soil. How would YOU do it?
I'd start by not making the assumption that the terrorists would be Islamic.
In case anyone didn't read the title, it's a satiric comment on the racist assumptions inherent in the "War on Terror". So far, every "anti-terrorist" action has either been targeted specifically against Arabs or Islam, or has been targeted against everyone, then enforced primarily against those groups.
African-Americans were included because they get shafted no matter what.
I wonder if this will be about as useless as our fabled Homeland Security "Orange Alerts"?
In order for this to be as useless as the Homeland Security system, they'd need to ground all airplanes every time someone gets red-flagged. The Homeland Security system is so broad in its effects, every time the security level is raised, police throughout the country, even in places terrorists couldn't care less about, need to put in overtime guarding pointless "targets". For example, a village with a population of 50 in the middle of Wyoming would be required to have a full-time guard on the water tower!
If this system does not implement some method of appealing a classification expece to hear about a massive wave of lawsuits.
There is no appeal. Why should there be? The system is flawless, so anyone it flags must be a terrorist! Why let terrorists waste the time of honest, upstanding American citizens with an appeal that is certain to be denied? Are you suggesting the system might be flawed? That the Government might be wrong? Are you trying to undermine the all-important War on Terrorism? Is it possible that you are in league with the terrorists? Is it possible that you are a terrorist?
Fellow Americans, we must be endlessly vigilant! Terrorist could lurk anywhere! Your next-door neighbor might be one! How well do you really know them? Is it possible they might be hiding something? That they have some dark secret?
Don't hesitate! It is better to be safe than sorry! If you see someone acting suspicious, report them to the nearest federal agent as soon as possible!
---------
Seriously, I expect the lawyers at the ACLU are already preparing their case.
They could save a lot of time and money if they would just red-flag every black and Arabic person in line.
Can somebody please explain to me why there's a coaxial socket on the back labeled "cable modem"?
I don't get it - I thought cable internet provider's signals and boxes were proprietary, but had an ethernet port on the back that you connected to. Your computer never sees the raw cable connection and is still able to transmit & receive.. so why would this device need it?
Almost all cable modems use the DOCIS 1.1 standard these days, so just about any cable modem can be used with any cable ISP. The big difference between ISPs is which cable channel is replaced with the modem signal, and that's something the modems are designed to handle.
If it's this tough for someone out of the loop to get mars rover data. I think the chances of seti discovering a usable alien signal are next to nothing.
There's a major difference between the two: SETI is just looking for the existence of a signal. With the Mars rovers, you'd be trying to interpret the signal as well. SETI would have no trouble finding the signal from Spirit and recognizing it as being sent from an intelligent source, if it looked in the right place at the right time.
LaserMonks? With a name like that, they've got to be electric!
If you believe this, I've got a Packard-Bell to sell you.
>> ...and then you will have to figure out what you are going to use 1000 static addresses for...
...my cat...
> My server, my laptop, my cellphone, my PDA, my Game Boy, my coffee machine, my graphing calculator, my car, my watch...
I wouldn't be too worried. My first encounter with Lego robotics was a book with instructions on how to make an interface board for controlling Lego motors from an Apple ][. If Mindstorms vanishes, I'm sure there will be any number of companies willing to fill the gap.