That's how you do directional EMP. Do that, and bingo, you get an EMP reflection. Not total, though, so you better not have a mobile on you. Perhaps the best system would be a directional pringle can EMP, because if you make them right the beam becomes quite tight.
Especially as the beauty of *nix is the ability to install what you want. With windows, you end up with all sorts of crap - are we going to see HPC Media Player?
It says very clearly when you try to convert a basic disk to a dynamic disk in XP that you will not be able to dual-boot.
There's no point, anyway. Single disk systems default to basic disks under XP (Pro) because dynamic offers no advantages - you can't do fancy error correction, fault tolerance or RAID on one disk. The only advantage I've found is that it seems to make defragmenting the MFT a little easier, but that's conjectural.
(OT - I know - why do you think I hit 'No Karma Bonus')
I see exactly what you mean, but the simple way to avoid it is to be original. Someone is always going to post this, and if you do scan down, you post appears redundant to the average reader, at which point it pretty much is redundant. It's only the real first post maniacs who are successful. Live with it, it's not as if karma is the end of the world.
Hold on, to join you must need an e-mail address. Surely that means that this is a wonderful harvesting opportunity (or even better, does it allow people to avoid being spammed if the spammers believe them to be on 'their' side).
Because it still takes time to load when you plug in the network cable. On most broadband connections (the most vulnerable), the firewall only loads when the connection becomes active. Hooray, another little hole between connection and protection.
And so, that being said, would you object to computer viruses being created to patch their own exploits (the same technique)?
1) Computer viruses can't mutate in the way that HIV can - even if somebody got the code and rewrote it with a 'bad' payload, then there would still be enough of the original to combat it. And the majority of systems should end up patched before that happens.
2) People ought to patch their boxes (especially Windows) simply to keep the rest of the net working. There is a strong utilitarian argument for keeping the rest of the net working.
3) Perhaps, for the tinfoilhat crowd, you could produce an equivalent of a robots.txt file.
Considering the monumental idiocy of the majority of Windows users, this might actually be a time where reducing freedom noticeably increases safety.
Re:Not so good behind a corporate proxy
on
Freecache
·
· Score: 1
I have the same problem, but got round it when I badgered my proxy admin to block all the archive.org urls with waybackmachine in them, but to let us into the rest of archive.org.
Of course, if he was half smart, he would just block URLs containing the url he wanted to block, as that would deal with everything.
Re:USHERING IN A NEW ERA OF KARMA-WHORING
on
Freecache
·
· Score: 2, Informative
(OT)
Aah, but remember, you don't get karma for funny posts. Better wait until next time.
At the moment, those with case mods are the people who know how to mod their machines, and actually know a little. They do it partly for the kudos, but also for the fun.
But I can just imagine your standard 1337 gamer wanting to have a console looking like that, but unable to do so. And some of them, many of them, would pay for the priveledge.
So no, although those currently who have mods, won't buy this thing, there is probably a market who will, who haven't been able to get modded machines before.
About Linus, though, it depends on what criteria you think are necessary. Gates in in there and he, after all, bought MSDOS, rather than building it himself. Linus's achievement isn't purely technical, but that doesn't stop it being an acheivement worthy of recognition.
Sorry - a slight clarification - I know both von Neumann and Torvalds are on the list of nominees, what I'm asking is why they have been left out for so long, and questioning whether the hall of fame has the right people in it if we are only adding these people now.
The really shocking thing is the people who aren't already there!
John von Neumann - considering he started off the base design for the logic interaction systems we use today, he is often known as the father of computing - so why are we voting for him now?
Linus Torvalds - I don't need to say who he is - but why isn't he there either.
Those are two particularly egregious omissions, but I reckon more than 5 need to get added.
Definitely a web browser.
I can just see a PHP application forming. Instead of posting on pages "Where do we send the pizza?", you now have a form to fill out to send the pizza to the developers.
So, for gastronomic heaven every night:
1) Write a popular program
2) Put an auto-pizza-order system on your website
3) Profit! (from the number of pizzas you eat)
(This is a serious suggestion, designed to improve the lives of programmers everywhere)
Certainly, breaking a simple civil agreement between two parties is never illegal - though you may end up with a writ for doing it.
However, if you break that agreement in a criminal way, for example by copying in such a way as to violate the provisions of the DMCA should you be in the US, then that would be illegal. What's important is that the criminal act is legally separate from the cause of the civil suit, even though they may have been made at the same time by the same action. (this is pedantic, I know)
That's an interesting point. Let's do some CB analysis on this one.
Currently: Windows: Cost - initial high, software widely available for free. Easy to use (contentious, but Linux is more difficult, let's face it, if only through lack of experience)
Linux: Cost - initial free, software free - time - high, harder to use
That excludes security, because most half-sane people I know either install updates regularly, (automatically in most cases), and then just remove the worm when/if it hits them.
Should Windows software become expensive, that tips the balance the other way, because it becomes cost efficient to learn to use *nix.
Simple solution: outsource the democracy to India. They can do the electronic voting at lower cost and with higher reliability than anybody else can.
Actually, a new, large techno-literate state like India can only be a good thing because it will give us better ideas about how to deal with this kind of problems (why buy American voting machines? Indian ones will do!)
Apologies for flaming slightly, but this is entirely wrong. You disprove the hypothesis. You learn a hell of a lot if you can show that there is an observerable flaw in general relativity. (Care is needed, though, to ensure that the problem is not with your experimental setup. (hence the software checks)).
Slashdot Mirror
That's exactly what SCO did to IBM, and IBM successfully got the court to agree that the stuff must be given electronically.
You can't have the cake and eat it.
You would, after all, only do that if you thought that your case was so weak that you couldn't give your opponent fair access.
If quotation, of Hubbards works or no, is not fair use, I don't know what is.
We need to fight for fair use all the time these days, on the internet and elsewhere.
That's how you do directional EMP. Do that, and bingo, you get an EMP reflection. Not total, though, so you better not have a mobile on you. Perhaps the best system would be a directional pringle can EMP, because if you make them right the beam becomes quite tight.
Especially as the beauty of *nix is the ability to install what you want. With windows, you end up with all sorts of crap - are we going to see HPC Media Player?
It says very clearly when you try to convert a basic disk to a dynamic disk in XP that you will not be able to dual-boot.
There's no point, anyway. Single disk systems default to basic disks under XP (Pro) because dynamic offers no advantages - you can't do fancy error correction, fault tolerance or RAID on one disk. The only advantage I've found is that it seems to make defragmenting the MFT a little easier, but that's conjectural.
I live in London. 30 inches a year is not a lot.
(OT - I know - why do you think I hit 'No Karma Bonus')
I see exactly what you mean, but the simple way to avoid it is to be original. Someone is always going to post this, and if you do scan down, you post appears redundant to the average reader, at which point it pretty much is redundant. It's only the real first post maniacs who are successful. Live with it, it's not as if karma is the end of the world.
Hold on, to join you must need an e-mail address. Surely that means that this is a wonderful harvesting opportunity (or even better, does it allow people to avoid being spammed if the spammers believe them to be on 'their' side).
Yes, but WinZips support of tar.gz files is pretty rudimentary, because it can't elegantly decompress and then untar like tar xvzf can.
Exactly.
The most secure cypher in the world (Vernam) is also one of the simplest. (just one XOR).
Though I happen to believe that the Vernam cypher isn't really a secure system; it just allows you to time-delay the exchange of unsecured data.
Because it still takes time to load when you plug in the network cable. On most broadband connections (the most vulnerable), the firewall only loads when the connection becomes active. Hooray, another little hole between connection and protection.
And so, that being said, would you object to computer viruses being created to patch their own exploits (the same technique)?
1) Computer viruses can't mutate in the way that HIV can - even if somebody got the code and rewrote it with a 'bad' payload, then there would still be enough of the original to combat it. And the majority of systems should end up patched before that happens.
2) People ought to patch their boxes (especially Windows) simply to keep the rest of the net working. There is a strong utilitarian argument for keeping the rest of the net working.
3) Perhaps, for the tinfoilhat crowd, you could produce an equivalent of a robots.txt file.
Considering the monumental idiocy of the majority of Windows users, this might actually be a time where reducing freedom noticeably increases safety.
I have the same problem, but got round it when I badgered my proxy admin to block all the archive.org urls with waybackmachine in them, but to let us into the rest of archive.org.
Of course, if he was half smart, he would just block URLs containing the url he wanted to block, as that would deal with everything.
(OT) Aah, but remember, you don't get karma for funny posts. Better wait until next time.
Hold on.
At the moment, those with case mods are the people who know how to mod their machines, and actually know a little. They do it partly for the kudos, but also for the fun.
But I can just imagine your standard 1337 gamer wanting to have a console looking like that, but unable to do so. And some of them, many of them, would pay for the priveledge.
So no, although those currently who have mods, won't buy this thing, there is probably a market who will, who haven't been able to get modded machines before.
He's already in the Hall of Fame.
Erm. Sir Clive Sinclair might not be on the list because he was already inducted
About Linus, though, it depends on what criteria you think are necessary. Gates in in there and he, after all, bought MSDOS, rather than building it himself. Linus's achievement isn't purely technical, but that doesn't stop it being an acheivement worthy of recognition.
Sorry - a slight clarification - I know both von Neumann and Torvalds are on the list of nominees, what I'm asking is why they have been left out for so long, and questioning whether the hall of fame has the right people in it if we are only adding these people now.
The really shocking thing is the people who aren't already there!
John von Neumann - considering he started off the base design for the logic interaction systems we use today, he is often known as the father of computing - so why are we voting for him now?
Linus Torvalds - I don't need to say who he is - but why isn't he there either.
Those are two particularly egregious omissions, but I reckon more than 5 need to get added.
Definitely a web browser. I can just see a PHP application forming. Instead of posting on pages "Where do we send the pizza?", you now have a form to fill out to send the pizza to the developers. So, for gastronomic heaven every night: 1) Write a popular program 2) Put an auto-pizza-order system on your website 3) Profit! (from the number of pizzas you eat) (This is a serious suggestion, designed to improve the lives of programmers everywhere)
Certainly, breaking a simple civil agreement between two parties is never illegal - though you may end up with a writ for doing it.
However, if you break that agreement in a criminal way, for example by copying in such a way as to violate the provisions of the DMCA should you be in the US, then that would be illegal. What's important is that the criminal act is legally separate from the cause of the civil suit, even though they may have been made at the same time by the same action. (this is pedantic, I know)
I Would Like To Be An IP Lawyer
That's an interesting point. Let's do some CB analysis on this one. Currently: Windows: Cost - initial high, software widely available for free. Easy to use (contentious, but Linux is more difficult, let's face it, if only through lack of experience) Linux: Cost - initial free, software free - time - high, harder to use That excludes security, because most half-sane people I know either install updates regularly, (automatically in most cases), and then just remove the worm when/if it hits them. Should Windows software become expensive, that tips the balance the other way, because it becomes cost efficient to learn to use *nix.
Simple solution: outsource the democracy to India. They can do the electronic voting at lower cost and with higher reliability than anybody else can.
Actually, a new, large techno-literate state like India can only be a good thing because it will give us better ideas about how to deal with this kind of problems (why buy American voting machines? Indian ones will do!)
In other word there is no point to it
Apologies for flaming slightly, but this is entirely wrong. You disprove the hypothesis. You learn a hell of a lot if you can show that there is an observerable flaw in general relativity. (Care is needed, though, to ensure that the problem is not with your experimental setup. (hence the software checks)).
Especially the bit about dropping customer feedback cards.
Oh yes, and for acceptance tests, read somebody releasing a virus that clogs up the net for a couple of weeks.