It doesn't default to Google on *my* computer. Perhaps that is the defaul on MS Windows - I get some Apple page...perhaps there's a reason for that (I don't think I set it manually, but it could have 'imported' it from Safari or something).
"better"? Not from the point of view of the vulnerability, it isn't. Sure, it's better practice to do as you describe (saves on bandwidth), but it doesn't make any difference how they get an infected file - email, copy, http, ftp - all the same from the virus's point of view.
> I mean I could have designed a firewall that would easily pass their tests with 100% reliability, it's called "unplug the network firewall", and it's very simple to install, just reach behind your computer, find the ethernet cable, and pull it out. Viola! Perfect Score!
>...on my fairly modern laptop,
So, your laptop doesn't have wifi? How do you unplug a network that has no plug?
Although I can believe what you say about "OFF" not really meaning off, I don't see any perceivable delay (compared to from standby) from the TV really being off (effectively unplugged from the wall), to being fully on (ie displaying a picture). I guess there is a difference, but it isn't very noticable. Perhaps I just don't pay enough attention...
My wife has the laudable habit of switching stuff off from the wall, rather than leave them in standby....annoying, but laudable.
Truth is truth, no matter where it comes from, and it has no 'degrees' other than 100% (or 0%, I suppose), so there's no 'ness' about it, since that implies an entire range.
More interesting, IMO, and relevant to this topic as a whole, is further down the page; concerning the French involvement :
" In 2005, a book written by President Mitterrand's psychoanalyst, Ali Magoudi, gave a different account of French co-operation, quoting him as saying: "I had a difference to settle with the Iron Lady. That Thatcher, what an impossible woman! With her four nuclear submarines in the South Atlantic, she's threatening to unleash an atomic weapon against Argentina if I don't provide her with the secret codes that will make the missiles we sold the Argentinians deaf and blind. "
I guess the UK feels it prefers not to be in a similar position that the Argentines were at the time.
Are you say that the US's position is illegal (they're supposed to share it, right)?...or perhaps you can't be sure there's GPL code in the system in question?...or perhaps the GPL doesn't apply to the (US) military?...or...nope, can't think of anything else.
>> To me, "fifty" is greater than one, and has no place in numbers less than one. > As opposed to "five" ??? Your argument does not make sense.
Sure it does. "Five" is the name of the digit. It's like called "11" eleven when it's base 2.
In any case, I wasn't making an argument so much as stating what I am used to and what it means to me.
> If you need convincing that 0.5 = 0.50 just use a different unit. > Say 0.5 kilograms = 0.50 kilograms because both equal 500 grams. > Quite simple to grasp.
Indeed. The equality isn't the problem. The words used to describe the amounts is the problem.
If I had to use "fifty" in the sentence, I would not use the word "point", something like, "zero kilograms and 500 grams", but that sounds terrible to me; however, this wouldn't, "One dollar fifty cents".
I hated the title sequence, with the fist unrolling as it comes towards you. Just that gave me nightmares, I think. Very disturbing, the whole thing, IMO.
Well, I would take issue with the '5' followed by '0' in '0.50' being referred to as 'fifty'.
I'm not sure what issue I would have exactly, except that it has no meaning to me. "Point five zero" has meaning. To me, "fifty" is greater than one, and has no place in numbers less than one.
I guess it's just what you're used to...
However, on hearing "point fifty", after a momentary pause of total incomprehension, I would almost certainly conclude that the meaning was the same as what I know as "point five". I can't imagine what other conclusion one could come to. I'm very curious what "someone in payrol" thought it meant?
Well, I'm not sure how the 'exploit' knows which sources are trusted and/or if the reciept of any document is expected. If it does know, then does it somehow say, "Oh, I am *expected*. Oooh, then I'll not do anything bad.", or, "Oh, the user is about to send that document, so I'll not infect that file.".
Right. If I wanted to take advantage of an exploit, I'd make sure I infected files that were about to sent and were to expected. Not sure how I would be able to tell those files, but still - perhaps prefer newly created files?
I suppose this advice helps to avoid *direct* exploits - ie people who specifically make a doc files that makes use of the exploit, and then sends it to random people - but not viruses that infect someone's machine to infect doc files that people will send to other people who trust them and are expecting them.
Slashdot Mirror
It doesn't default to Google on *my* computer. Perhaps that is the defaul on MS Windows - I get some Apple page...perhaps there's a reason for that (I don't think I set it manually, but it could have 'imported' it from Safari or something).
...correct me if I'm wrong, but that behaviour makes no sense at all.
I think you'll find everyone has an agenda of some kind.
> I am quite a few others
Scitzo.
any links to videos that play in something other than MS Windows?
"better"? Not from the point of view of the vulnerability, it isn't. Sure, it's better practice to do as you describe (saves on bandwidth), but it doesn't make any difference how they get an infected file - email, copy, http, ftp - all the same from the virus's point of view.
> I mean I could have designed a firewall that would easily pass their tests with 100% reliability, it's called "unplug the network firewall", and it's very simple to install, just reach behind your computer, find the ethernet cable, and pull it out. Viola! Perfect Score!
...on my fairly modern laptop,
>
So, your laptop doesn't have wifi? How do you unplug a network that has no plug?
Not quite so easy, eh?
Hrm, I wonder...
Although I can believe what you say about "OFF" not really meaning off, I don't see any perceivable delay (compared to from standby) from the TV really being off (effectively unplugged from the wall), to being fully on (ie displaying a picture). I guess there is a difference, but it isn't very noticable. Perhaps I just don't pay enough attention...
My wife has the laudable habit of switching stuff off from the wall, rather than leave them in standby....annoying, but laudable.
Since being bald is having no hair, once you have plucked the last one, then I would go from being 0% bald to 100% bald.
Truth is truth, no matter where it comes from, and it has no 'degrees' other than 100% (or 0%, I suppose), so there's no 'ness' about it, since that implies an entire range.
> Its interesting,
More interesting, IMO, and relevant to this topic as a whole, is further down the page; concerning the French involvement :
"
In 2005, a book written by President Mitterrand's psychoanalyst, Ali Magoudi, gave a different account of French co-operation, quoting him as saying: "I had a difference to settle with the Iron Lady. That Thatcher, what an impossible woman! With her four nuclear submarines in the South Atlantic, she's threatening to unleash an atomic weapon against Argentina if I don't provide her with the secret codes that will make the missiles we sold the Argentinians deaf and blind.
"
I guess the UK feels it prefers not to be in a similar position that the Argentines were at the time.
..but they *are* distributing it - by selling it to the UK. At least, they would be if the UK would buy.
Perhaps the first think you should do is thing.
Are you say that the US's position is illegal (they're supposed to share it, right)? ...or perhaps you can't be sure there's GPL code in the system in question? ...or perhaps the GPL doesn't apply to the (US) military? ...or...nope, can't think of anything else.
>> To me, "fifty" is greater than one, and has no place in numbers less than one.
> As opposed to "five" ??? Your argument does not make sense.
Sure it does. "Five" is the name of the digit. It's like called "11" eleven when it's base 2.
In any case, I wasn't making an argument so much as stating what I am used to and what it means to me.
> If you need convincing that 0.5 = 0.50 just use a different unit.
> Say 0.5 kilograms = 0.50 kilograms because both equal 500 grams.
> Quite simple to grasp.
Indeed. The equality isn't the problem. The words used to describe the amounts is the problem.
If I had to use "fifty" in the sentence, I would not use the word "point", something like, "zero kilograms and 500 grams", but that sounds terrible to me; however, this wouldn't, "One dollar fifty cents".
"The Tomorrow People"
Oh wow, man. take me back why don't you?
I hated the title sequence, with the fist unrolling as it comes towards you. Just that gave me nightmares, I think. Very disturbing, the whole thing, IMO.
> they do that because it is quicker. Actual computer work is boring as hell to watch in a movie.
..or both? ...or are these comments unrelated?
Which is the reason? Quicker, or boring as hell?
Well, I would take issue with the '5' followed by '0' in '0.50' being referred to as 'fifty'.
I'm not sure what issue I would have exactly, except that it has no meaning to me. "Point five zero" has meaning. To me, "fifty" is greater than one, and has no place in numbers less than one.
I guess it's just what you're used to...
However, on hearing "point fifty", after a momentary pause of total incomprehension, I would almost certainly conclude that the meaning was the same as what I know as "point five". I can't imagine what other conclusion one could come to. I'm very curious what "someone in payrol" thought it meant?
Care to share?
> $300 billion total cost (yes that's billion with a B)
No, that's billion with a 'b'. You mean 'Billion'; that's billion with a 'B'.
Well, I'm not sure how the 'exploit' knows which sources are trusted and/or if the reciept of any document is expected. If it does know, then does it somehow say, "Oh, I am *expected*. Oooh, then I'll not do anything bad.", or, "Oh, the user is about to send that document, so I'll not infect that file.".
Right. If I wanted to take advantage of an exploit, I'd make sure I infected files that were about to sent and were to expected. Not sure how I would be able to tell those files, but still - perhaps prefer newly created files?
I suppose this advice helps to avoid *direct* exploits - ie people who specifically make a doc files that makes use of the exploit, and then sends it to random people - but not viruses that infect someone's machine to infect doc files that people will send to other people who trust them and are expecting them.
...not sure why files expected from trusted sources can't be infected too.
Any reference for that? I'd love to be able to quote such to ... well, anyone, really.
So, if evolutionary theory is correct, it seems to have favoured a line of cry babies. There's evidence against, if ever there was any.
I suppose he could be a mutant....and his predecessors are all non-cry babies.
trouble is, it's next to impossible to know if a site is blocked or it's just some network problem.
didn't some chinese gov. official, at an internet conference in europe somewhere, recently claim all inaccessible sites were just networking problems?