What the hell is a "manual" attack, one carried out with bare hands?
Or does he mean manual as in "the manual". I'd say my Assembler Language manuals have suffered from more attacks than average. They've all been manual, too, now that I think about it.
I guess they'd be manual manual attacks.
I've rarely been more tempted to just respond with "whatever".
you don't see people taking the arms manufacturers to court do you?
Actually, you do. What you don't see is anybody winning those cases except the manufacturers.
City of Chicago v. Beretta USA Corp is but one example. There are a couple of dozen other municipalities in the US who have sued. I'm not going to look them up, but there must be hundreds of private citizen lawsuits against gun manufacturers, typically filed by victims of gun-toting, trigger-happy criminals.
How come you guys think that people can only migrate from the applications downwards, rather than from the OS-up?
Because the only things that matter are the applications. No user cares any more about the OS than about the diode or capacitor in his garage-door opener.
If it's so important to you that people switch operating systems, either give them some applications that drive the switch or deliver a genuine ROI.
(Bleh, and I know comparing Pink Floyd to Shakespeare might be stretching it a bit, but the analogy holds...;o))
I don't see it as any kind of stretch at all;-). Shakespeare wrote his sonnets to be enjoyed one at a time, and he wrote the plays to be experienced as a whole. There's room in music, too, for both concepts, and even Pink Floyd produced both. It wasn't all that long ago that we did buy (at least popular) music one song at a time and albums were something of a luxury item.
Overall spending is down, and the disparity quoted is due, according to the article, to the one-third of downloaders who buy more than they used to. This overcomes the two-thirds of downloaders who buy less.
It's something of an apples-to-horses comparison anyway - comparing illegal file sharers to "average music fans", that is. I guess I'm an "average music fan" and I don't do peer-to-peer at all and rarely download music, period. My way of experiencing music isn't really supported by song-by-song purchase in the first place. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but music that I find most interesting - and most likely to purchase - is packaged as a collection where the artist created a 60-75 minute experience, not just a 3'05" experience.
I suppose many people like to create their own lengthy music experience one song at a time from different artists, and good for them, but that's just not me. I suppose that's why there's a market for short story collections as well as novels.
When the Chinese actually do something, the US will react. I remember hearing this same alarming stuff when I was in grade school, high school, college, the military, and I keep hearing it about one society or another overtaking the US in some really imiportant area.
There are just too many words like "may" in there for me to get really excited.
The last major gigantic push for scientists and engineers in the US came when the Soviets launched Sputnik. It's going to take an event like Sputnik by the Chinese to get the US going.
I remember one wag telling me that China was the market/power/society of the future...and it always will be.
I usually ping a known server and when the line is ok I get around 30-40 ms. When the line is not ok I get more than 4 seconds in respons. What else is this than latency?
Congestion.
Latency is observed when intermediate nodes on the network add delay due to inherent processing demands in each device that are not related to the amount of traffic, i.e., how much time it takes to process one message. Congestion is caused when the intermediate nodes have to wait to even begin their processing due to the amount of traffic being carried by the medium.
In other words, a ping of a particular node should experience exactly the same latency every time it is issued - assuming the same network path is followed each time. The response might take longer because it passes through more nodes (which does add latency) or because the network is busy (congestion - devices have to wait) at one or more of the dots or lines on the path.
Ping is not a very good tool to discover where or why network delay is occurring, only that it is occurring.
I used to use a metaphor involving a six-lane highway, toll booths, and dump trucks of various sizes filled to various capacities with rocks to illustrate the different networking concepts, but text just doesn't do it justice.
A 2400 foot reel of 6250 bpi 9-track tape contains about 160 MB, given large block size. If they're the 3490 type tapes, each cartridge can hold as much as 1600MB. Block size is important because there's an inter-block gap on the tapes that is essentially wasted space, and the more blocks, the more waste.
After years of analysis, but without a final conclusion, NASA, astonishingly, gave up trying to solve the "Pioneer Anomaly" and provided no funds to analyze the data. The Pioneer data exists on a few hundred ancient 7- and 9-track magnetic tapes, which can only be read on "antique" outdated computers. The agency is going to scrap, literally demolish, the only computers able to access and process that data in the next few months!
Looks to me like they're scrapping the 'puters, not the tapes. I doubt they're the last ones on earth capable of reading old tapes. It isn't the computers anyway, it's the tape drives and software that connects them that are the critical items.
Further, it looks like they are asking for money to do analysis (read: salaries of humans), not necessarily save the data.
Still and all, we need to save the data. I wonder what other really cool stuff is stored on media that nobody can read?
I don't believe there is any distribution going on here - I'll bet the adware sends a URL to the servers. The URL the user visited.
You could be right about that. This is the argument I hear, though. We all know how creative lawyers (not to mention copyright holders) can get over what constitutes "copyrighted material"
For myself, I take advertising as a normal piece of life in the United States. It does strike me as unfair to splash somebody else's ad on top of my product display.
This practice, by the way, predates the geekdom by decades. My father was a route driver for a bakery in the 50's, and there were frequent disputes over placement of product and display ads in/around/above his racks in grocery stores. The retailers were usually unaware - or uncaring - of the practice of obscuring one product with a display ad for another. It came down to the establishment of gentlemen's agreements among the bread guys. That this sometimes only occured after a physical confrontation appears to be something of a precursor to what we see today in web advertising.
Utah & Michigan do not have the authority to regulate interstate commerce.
They are not regulating interstate commerce. They are regulating activities that occur within the state. Are you suggesting that if, say, Phillips Petroleum's North Salt Lake refinery spits out too much pollution that they are protected from prosecution under state environmental statutes because they are headquartered elsewhere?
If so, you are in error.
Are you suggesting that Utah jurisdiction does not reach outside the state for crimes committed in Utah?
If so, you are in error.
Before you start tossing about words like "unconstitutional", you'll be needing some more education. While the presence of an accused in a location other than the state in which he committed a crime complicates the process of getting him prosecuted by that state, the state does not violate the Constitution by charging him with that crime.
Encrypted mail passing through corporate servers is immediately suspect. If I'm in charge of an installation and I see an employee encrypting his email, I will want to know why.
I find myself frowning when US companies export work to people who will never be buying their products. They sacrifice the top line for the bottom line. What they fail to realize is that nobody will ever save themselves to prosperity.
Maybe an example is in order. A local firm where I live just sent 90 jobs to India. That firm sells travel products. The 90 people they laid off occasionally buy those travel products, but the 90 people hired in India will most certainly not, because they're not even sold in India. Those 90 people occasionally bought Buicks and bacon and countless other products from the local economy. How much of the income earned by those 90 people in India will find its way to my company? I know I've lost the business of the 90 newly-unemployed workers.
Laying off your customers is a Very Bad Idea. Laying off my customers means that I might have to lay off your customers. Is that really what US business wants?
The government can see that you're checking out perfectly legal books from a public library and use it to build a case* to arrest or further invade you.
Paranoia runs deep.
If you must be anonymous, you are going to forfeit certain privileges, in the public as well as private domain.
Public libraries have a valid government interest in knowing who has a particular book. It's not just a matter of money, it's a matter of preserving the collection. If it's such a concern that government knows that you once had some particular title, have the libraries destroy check-out history of their books once they're returned.
Anonymity is not the only answer to privacy, any more than it's never appropriate.
Since when does privacy equate to anonymity? I have every right to demand to know who you are if you want to engage in a transaction with me, and you have every right to retreat from the transaction if you don't want to identify yourself.
Your right to privacy extends to me in our transaction only to the extent that I may agree to conceal your identity from others in accordance with a clearly articulated policy - or by explicit or implied contract.
You have no right to anonymity. You have a right to privacy. If you think the only way to preserve your privacy is to hide behind anonymity, your cynicism exceeds your grasp of reality.
Slashdot Mirror
Or does he mean manual as in "the manual". I'd say my Assembler Language manuals have suffered from more attacks than average. They've all been manual, too, now that I think about it.
I guess they'd be manual manual attacks.
I've rarely been more tempted to just respond with "whatever".
Actually, you do. What you don't see is anybody winning those cases except the manufacturers.
City of Chicago v. Beretta USA Corp is but one example. There are a couple of dozen other municipalities in the US who have sued. I'm not going to look them up, but there must be hundreds of private citizen lawsuits against gun manufacturers, typically filed by victims of gun-toting, trigger-happy criminals.
Because the only things that matter are the applications. No user cares any more about the OS than about the diode or capacitor in his garage-door opener.
If it's so important to you that people switch operating systems, either give them some applications that drive the switch or deliver a genuine ROI.
...get a Windows/Linux/BSD/OS X debate. I mean, really...
I don't see it as any kind of stretch at all ;-). Shakespeare wrote his sonnets to be enjoyed one at a time, and he wrote the plays to be experienced as a whole. There's room in music, too, for both concepts, and even Pink Floyd produced both. It wasn't all that long ago that we did buy (at least popular) music one song at a time and albums were something of a luxury item.
It's something of an apples-to-horses comparison anyway - comparing illegal file sharers to "average music fans", that is. I guess I'm an "average music fan" and I don't do peer-to-peer at all and rarely download music, period. My way of experiencing music isn't really supported by song-by-song purchase in the first place. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but music that I find most interesting - and most likely to purchase - is packaged as a collection where the artist created a 60-75 minute experience, not just a 3'05" experience.
I suppose many people like to create their own lengthy music experience one song at a time from different artists, and good for them, but that's just not me. I suppose that's why there's a market for short story collections as well as novels.
There are just too many words like "may" in there for me to get really excited.
The last major gigantic push for scientists and engineers in the US came when the Soviets launched Sputnik. It's going to take an event like Sputnik by the Chinese to get the US going.
I remember one wag telling me that China was the market/power/society of the future...and it always will be.
Sorry to demonstrate a solid command of the obvious, but nothing is "genuinely free".
Congestion.
Latency is observed when intermediate nodes on the network add delay due to inherent processing demands in each device that are not related to the amount of traffic, i.e., how much time it takes to process one message. Congestion is caused when the intermediate nodes have to wait to even begin their processing due to the amount of traffic being carried by the medium.
In other words, a ping of a particular node should experience exactly the same latency every time it is issued - assuming the same network path is followed each time. The response might take longer because it passes through more nodes (which does add latency) or because the network is busy (congestion - devices have to wait) at one or more of the dots or lines on the path.
Ping is not a very good tool to discover where or why network delay is occurring, only that it is occurring.
I used to use a metaphor involving a six-lane highway, toll booths, and dump trucks of various sizes filled to various capacities with rocks to illustrate the different networking concepts, but text just doesn't do it justice.
A 2400 foot reel of 6250 bpi 9-track tape contains about 160 MB, given large block size. If they're the 3490 type tapes, each cartridge can hold as much as 1600MB. Block size is important because there's an inter-block gap on the tapes that is essentially wasted space, and the more blocks, the more waste.
After years of analysis, but without a final conclusion, NASA, astonishingly, gave up trying to solve the "Pioneer Anomaly" and provided no funds to analyze the data. The Pioneer data exists on a few hundred ancient 7- and 9-track magnetic tapes, which can only be read on "antique" outdated computers. The agency is going to scrap, literally demolish, the only computers able to access and process that data in the next few months!
Looks to me like they're scrapping the 'puters, not the tapes. I doubt they're the last ones on earth capable of reading old tapes. It isn't the computers anyway, it's the tape drives and software that connects them that are the critical items.
Further, it looks like they are asking for money to do analysis (read: salaries of humans), not necessarily save the data.
Still and all, we need to save the data. I wonder what other really cool stuff is stored on media that nobody can read?
Are you sure it's latency and not congestion? Large downloads have little effect on latency.
If, on the other hand, you're using the $5 word "latency" to describe the $.50 symptom "slow", never mind.
not particularly important for casual surfer, though.
You could be right about that. This is the argument I hear, though. We all know how creative lawyers (not to mention copyright holders) can get over what constitutes "copyrighted material"
For myself, I take advertising as a normal piece of life in the United States. It does strike me as unfair to splash somebody else's ad on top of my product display.
This practice, by the way, predates the geekdom by decades. My father was a route driver for a bakery in the 50's, and there were frequent disputes over placement of product and display ads in/around/above his racks in grocery stores. The retailers were usually unaware - or uncaring - of the practice of obscuring one product with a display ad for another. It came down to the establishment of gentlemen's agreements among the bread guys. That this sometimes only occured after a physical confrontation appears to be something of a precursor to what we see today in web advertising.
It's a stinging defeat for online merchants, and their copyright infringement logic goes something like this:
1. The only way the adware server knows what to pop up is to read the information I'm sending to the consumer.
2. I gave the consumer permission to look at my site, but I did not give him permission to distribute its content to the adware servers.
3. Since I can't go after the consumer who is using the adware, I go after the adware suppliers.
With any luck they'll buy them and then blow them up.
They are not regulating interstate commerce. They are regulating activities that occur within the state. Are you suggesting that if, say, Phillips Petroleum's North Salt Lake refinery spits out too much pollution that they are protected from prosecution under state environmental statutes because they are headquartered elsewhere?
If so, you are in error.
Are you suggesting that Utah jurisdiction does not reach outside the state for crimes committed in Utah?
If so, you are in error.
Before you start tossing about words like "unconstitutional", you'll be needing some more education. While the presence of an accused in a location other than the state in which he committed a crime complicates the process of getting him prosecuted by that state, the state does not violate the Constitution by charging him with that crime.
Right or wrong, Firefox absolutely must work with the standards that IE has set.
No, no, no.
Microsoft doesn't set "standards" for browsing any more than Ford or GM sets "standards" for parking lots.
At least, that's the way it's supposed to work...
I'm reminded of why railroad guages are what they are and just who conforms to whom.
Somebody please remind me what Google actually makes.
...apart from money, that is.
Google's potential for evil is a temptation I don't think they can resist forever.
Encrypted mail passing through corporate servers is immediately suspect. If I'm in charge of an installation and I see an employee encrypting his email, I will want to know why.
Paranoia cuts both ways.
That's fine.
I find myself frowning when US companies export work to people who will never be buying their products. They sacrifice the top line for the bottom line. What they fail to realize is that nobody will ever save themselves to prosperity.
Maybe an example is in order. A local firm where I live just sent 90 jobs to India. That firm sells travel products. The 90 people they laid off occasionally buy those travel products, but the 90 people hired in India will most certainly not, because they're not even sold in India. Those 90 people occasionally bought Buicks and bacon and countless other products from the local economy. How much of the income earned by those 90 people in India will find its way to my company? I know I've lost the business of the 90 newly-unemployed workers.
Laying off your customers is a Very Bad Idea. Laying off my customers means that I might have to lay off your customers. Is that really what US business wants?
karma
The government can see that you're checking out perfectly legal books from a public library and use it to build a case* to arrest or further invade you.
Paranoia runs deep.
If you must be anonymous, you are going to forfeit certain privileges, in the public as well as private domain.
Public libraries have a valid government interest in knowing who has a particular book. It's not just a matter of money, it's a matter of preserving the collection. If it's such a concern that government knows that you once had some particular title, have the libraries destroy check-out history of their books once they're returned.
Anonymity is not the only answer to privacy, any more than it's never appropriate.
Since when does privacy equate to anonymity? I have every right to demand to know who you are if you want to engage in a transaction with me, and you have every right to retreat from the transaction if you don't want to identify yourself. Your right to privacy extends to me in our transaction only to the extent that I may agree to conceal your identity from others in accordance with a clearly articulated policy - or by explicit or implied contract. You have no right to anonymity. You have a right to privacy. If you think the only way to preserve your privacy is to hide behind anonymity, your cynicism exceeds your grasp of reality.