If the people who are defending this idiot took the time to read the article they would learn that he didn't just employ 1337 hacking techniques to gain access. He installed key loggers and a magnetic stripe-reader to capture student's information in order to gain access to the system. This is criminal behavior. He's no Robin Hood. More like Robin Hoodlum.
I suspect the parent poster was looking for differences within files...that is, only backing up the 'diff' between two files, not the entire file when it changes.
That's not what "differential backup" means at all. Differential backups contain all files that have changed since the last FULL backup. That has nothing to do with changes within files.
There's nothing to apologize for and in your attempt at being witty, you have demonstrated your willingness (again) to resort to the lowest form of insults: personal attacks. That's sad.
Again, all I was saying was that offering aid is not the same as following through with payment. I really appreciate the Answers.com article. Nobody took the effort to properly respond to the challenge and that is appreciated. But do realize that in the list only a handful of countries actually did something. Words like "offered" and "pledged" do not count. Weed those out and you get what's needed.
Actually, the onus is on those trying to prove me wrong to provide the proof. Unfortunately, however, it seems that some have resorted to 2nd grade tactics such as name calling and the like, which I suppose is typical for/., when replying to my comments:-)
There's a big difference between offering to help and actually helping. I remember hearing on the news that only Britain and Canada actually did something. No other country contributed anything. That may have changed since then but that's the last I heard. I just wish that I could remember the source...
If it was any other year besides an election year nobody would care. But since the political karma is high this season, everyone's quick to cry "censorship".
Their naming convention needs to be more user friendly. The average consumer has no idea what a Pentium D processor is but they could understand that a Pentium 4 was better than a Pentium III. It's all about marketing to the masses in this over-saturated market.
I know you were making a funny but exactly the opposite is coming true these days. More and more jobs in the military, no matter whose country it belongs to, are increasingly high-tech. Military systems are being redesigned to behave more like video games than the "designed to spec" systems of yester-year. This new systems will put to use those eye-hand coordination talents that kids are developing by playing video games. No, you don't have to be a high school graduate to play video games but you do need it to attend the many technically focused schools the military now has to offer.
Your analogies don't fit what's being discussed here. The topic concerns people asking for help in public forums or in IRC channels and not people who are seeking professional help that don't want to pay for the help. If someone who provides professional support is there it is entirely up to them whether or not they should reply. If they reply in a demeaning fashion then they should keep in mind that they are reflecting poorly on their company. Lost sales suck.
I've read some comments from slashdotters who have said that they were told to RTFM only to find that the section they needed hadn't been written. In fact, in one case the chapter was referenced in the todo that said, "Someone please write." But, as we all know, every situation is different.
Nevertheless, I think we both agree that if someone asks a question such as, "How do I make a web page with Perl" instead of asking, "I can't quite understand how to use cookies to keep track users. The docs are a little vague" they probably need to study up on the basics before venturing into a more advanced topic. But, I feel that pointing them down a path of learning is much more beneficial to the Open Source community than a blanket, "Why don't you RTFM and get back to us" response, which implies that "my time is much too valuable than to entertain a noob such as yourself". You're better off not saying anything at all.
Just to bring this topic back to reality, let me say that nobody is assuming they are seeking professional Linux (or whatever) help for the problem at hand. I really don't know where you're coming from with those remarks.
It's really sad that you feel that way because that attitude goes against the very foundation by which GNU/Linux was founded. It takes a community of people with a common goal to make an Open Source project successful. Refusing to point people in the right direction and insulting them in the process is irresponsible and elitist. If you feel your time is too valuable to waste on so-called noobie questions then don't bother responding to someone's willingness to learn from those who have gone before.
It is not snobbish and snubbish to tell someone to RTFM. It is snobbish and snubbish to tell someone to RTFM without telling where to RTFM.
In a way, I think the very acronym, RTFM, is snobbish but that's just from a person who was deeply involved in the OS Wars in the mid to late 90's.
When people who are new to a discussion group or IRC channel ask a simple (to the experienced) question and receive a RTFM response, they can be quite offended by the apparent harsh reaction. They see Read The F'ing Manual and think, "How rude! What a bunch of snobs" and don't ask again or they become defensive and respond in kind.
Whether experienced people know that RTFM is a casual response or not is irrelavant. The new guy doesn't know that will more than likely be offended. That, IMO, is a barrier to people migrating to Linux (or any other OS for that matter).
There were other, more important reasons why OS/2 failed. First and foremost was Microsoft's marketing machine. Secondly, since OS/2 was initially a joint venture between MS and IBM, MS owned way too many pieces of the OS. HPFS anyone?
You are using a clipper chip for all your encryption right?
I know you probably meant that as a joke but the clipper chip was also invented by the NSA. Although it was controversial (allowing the government to listen to communication) the idea of key escrow did stay with us. Most of them use algorithms/techniques such as DES, El Gamal and Diffie-Hellman. This site goes into great detail concerning the different types of key escrow methods.
Re:What are the entry requirements?
on
Hacker Boot Camp
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I attended Vigilar's CISSP Boot Camp (Larry Greenblatt was the instructor) and had a very good experience. Passed the test the first time. They strictly adhere to the Code of Ethics of the various certification organizations and their NDAs. They will not tell you what's on the test like certain MS training camps.
It is amazing because sometimes you can include your own so-called "off-topic" quote and get a better rating. I think this is due to the fact that people are lazy and do not lower their visible threshold while modding.
Slashdot Mirror
If the people who are defending this idiot took the time to read the article they would learn that he didn't just employ 1337 hacking techniques to gain access. He installed key loggers and a magnetic stripe-reader to capture student's information in order to gain access to the system. This is criminal behavior. He's no Robin Hood. More like Robin Hoodlum.
The proof takes up 5.5 pages all typed up and pretty. His original proof was hand-written and consumed 8 pages.
Just go to Radio Shack and buy an ohmmeter. They're a lot cheaper.
What I originally said holds true. I have no idea where you got your definition. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_backup
There's nothing to apologize for and in your attempt at being witty, you have demonstrated your willingness (again) to resort to the lowest form of insults: personal attacks. That's sad.
Again, all I was saying was that offering aid is not the same as following through with payment. I really appreciate the Answers.com article. Nobody took the effort to properly respond to the challenge and that is appreciated. But do realize that in the list only a handful of countries actually did something. Words like "offered" and "pledged" do not count. Weed those out and you get what's needed.
Again, thamks for the article.
Actually, the onus is on those trying to prove me wrong to provide the proof. Unfortunately, however, it seems that some have resorted to 2nd grade tactics such as name calling and the like, which I suppose is typical for /., when replying to my comments :-)
I guess your reply proves that low /. UIDs do not correlate to high IQs. Thanks for enlightening everyone, jerk.
Actually, yes. Like I said offers are not the same thing as following through with the commitment.
There's a big difference between offering to help and actually helping. I remember hearing on the news that only Britain and Canada actually did something. No other country contributed anything. That may have changed since then but that's the last I heard. I just wish that I could remember the source...
If it was any other year besides an election year nobody would care. But since the political karma is high this season, everyone's quick to cry "censorship".
My mistake. I was in the federal contractor side of my mind.
You won't find polygraphs used on anything less than TS SCI.
Commercial companies are doing far worse and most of them don't ensure the same level of privacy as the government would maintain.
Their naming convention needs to be more user friendly. The average consumer has no idea what a Pentium D processor is but they could understand that a Pentium 4 was better than a Pentium III. It's all about marketing to the masses in this over-saturated market.
I know you were making a funny but exactly the opposite is coming true these days. More and more jobs in the military, no matter whose country it belongs to, are increasingly high-tech. Military systems are being redesigned to behave more like video games than the "designed to spec" systems of yester-year. This new systems will put to use those eye-hand coordination talents that kids are developing by playing video games. No, you don't have to be a high school graduate to play video games but you do need it to attend the many technically focused schools the military now has to offer.
Your analogies don't fit what's being discussed here. The topic concerns people asking for help in public forums or in IRC channels and not people who are seeking professional help that don't want to pay for the help. If someone who provides professional support is there it is entirely up to them whether or not they should reply. If they reply in a demeaning fashion then they should keep in mind that they are reflecting poorly on their company. Lost sales suck.
I've read some comments from slashdotters who have said that they were told to RTFM only to find that the section they needed hadn't been written. In fact, in one case the chapter was referenced in the todo that said, "Someone please write." But, as we all know, every situation is different.
Nevertheless, I think we both agree that if someone asks a question such as, "How do I make a web page with Perl" instead of asking, "I can't quite understand how to use cookies to keep track users. The docs are a little vague" they probably need to study up on the basics before venturing into a more advanced topic. But, I feel that pointing them down a path of learning is much more beneficial to the Open Source community than a blanket, "Why don't you RTFM and get back to us" response, which implies that "my time is much too valuable than to entertain a noob such as yourself". You're better off not saying anything at all.
Just to bring this topic back to reality, let me say that nobody is assuming they are seeking professional Linux (or whatever) help for the problem at hand. I really don't know where you're coming from with those remarks.
It's really sad that you feel that way because that attitude goes against the very foundation by which GNU/Linux was founded. It takes a community of people with a common goal to make an Open Source project successful. Refusing to point people in the right direction and insulting them in the process is irresponsible and elitist. If you feel your time is too valuable to waste on so-called noobie questions then don't bother responding to someone's willingness to learn from those who have gone before.
I've always advocated that. But, who wants to be polite when anonymity prevents accountability?
In a way, I think the very acronym, RTFM, is snobbish but that's just from a person who was deeply involved in the OS Wars in the mid to late 90's.
When people who are new to a discussion group or IRC channel ask a simple (to the experienced) question and receive a RTFM response, they can be quite offended by the apparent harsh reaction. They see Read The F'ing Manual and think, "How rude! What a bunch of snobs" and don't ask again or they become defensive and respond in kind.
Whether experienced people know that RTFM is a casual response or not is irrelavant. The new guy doesn't know that will more than likely be offended. That, IMO, is a barrier to people migrating to Linux (or any other OS for that matter).
There were other, more important reasons why OS/2 failed. First and foremost was Microsoft's marketing machine. Secondly, since OS/2 was initially a joint venture between MS and IBM, MS owned way too many pieces of the OS. HPFS anyone?
How about a variety of encryption systems dating all the way back to post-WWII.
I know you probably meant that as a joke but the clipper chip was also invented by the NSA. Although it was controversial (allowing the government to listen to communication) the idea of key escrow did stay with us. Most of them use algorithms/techniques such as DES, El Gamal and Diffie-Hellman. This site goes into great detail concerning the different types of key escrow methods.
Instead of going with that company I would recommend either EC-Council or Vigilar/IntenseSchools for your CEH training needs.
I attended Vigilar's CISSP Boot Camp (Larry Greenblatt was the instructor) and had a very good experience. Passed the test the first time. They strictly adhere to the Code of Ethics of the various certification organizations and their NDAs. They will not tell you what's on the test like certain MS training camps.
It is amazing because sometimes you can include your own so-called "off-topic" quote and get a better rating. I think this is due to the fact that people are lazy and do not lower their visible threshold while modding.