Supposing the event is indeed apocalyptic in scale that it would destroy the very foundation of civilization, then indeed on a short to medium term the more practical skills and knowledge sets will be way more valuable.
However, from medium to long term onwards the scientists, the engineers, the historians and also the knowledge they have or have salvaged in some kind of material, eventually recoverable form will be of much greater importance for the restart of the civilization. Libraries, data banks of any kind will be of great importance, while relics, artpieces and historical sources of information of and about the "old world" will eventually come to hold great value for those who managed to protect such artefacts (just as we praise today artpieces of the past epochs). Unfortunately it may take some time until the focus switches from "immediate survival" to "planning for the future" and it will be important for those knowledge holders to be protected until their skills can be again used. How to protect the knowledge holders and knowledge containers ? That may be the the greatest challenge of all, and I myself don't know what kind of social entity could have the vision, the power and will to find,recover,keep, guard and evolve them until the world is able to use them again. The church ? The remnants of the state ? Other social of economic organization(s) ? We'd better not get in this situation at all,rebuilding stuff is not as easy as breaking it in the first place.
The same limitations apply to todays warfare as even modern artillery and ballistic weapons impose a certain time delay between the moment of firing and the moment the projectile hits the target. We ALREADY aim not at where the target IS but at a the estimated/computed point of intersection between the target's trajectory and the projectile's trajectory. This will even more so adapted and evolved for space combat, no matter if you apply this for short range combat with classic projectiles (explosive missiles or purely kinetic) or long range where you will have to take into account delays imposed by light speed.
Also consider that most missiles are in a way or another intelligent and will adapt trajectory to follow the target, in this way a nuclear missile can be argued to have more hitting chances than a laser fired from far away.
Challenges for future : If future ship design will not reduce/zero the ship's mass, then inertia may very well be a problem: it will limit it's maneuverability. It may also impose to actually maintain greater distance between the ships with hostilities happening from afar. We ALREADY use technology to attack and hit targets that are way out of visual range, current fighters can engage and hit an enemy fighter from many miles away. This will happen even more so for space fights.
If future ships will have the ability to neutralize mass and annihilate inertia, then extreme maneuverability will become possible making the job of the attackers harder.
BUT, for EITHER scenario the way to gain the advantage would most likely come from computational power (be it AI or not) : the ship having the better computer will be able to better anticipate the actions of the others in order to either have a better trajectory estimate or better alter its course (constantly) in order to be in another place than where the next enemy hit will "land". If i remember correctly this issue of computing power used to better predict enemy actions in order to adapt its own actions is already exploited in SF. I don't remember if I read it in a SF story or if it was part of a game's universe. Or both.
It's not the index that counts now, it's the users.
Today "searching the internet" is synonymous with google and with "to google". Unlisting from google's index would mean absolutely nothing. Users (usually) do not use google to search for "Company X". Users usually search for products and services. Take away the first entries and users will click on the following results, eventually buying from the "underdogs". Unsubscribing from google's index would be suicidal from a sales point of view and only a moron or digital era impaired old dinosaur like murdoch could actually believe such a scenario would be good for business.
Not to talk about the fact that 1000 sites is a grain of sand in the desert of google's index.
And not to mention about the proposed sum being too little to bribe giants that could be significant. (1 mil is peanuts for ibm, hp or amazon, for example).
These being said, this must be some april fools' joke or that guy is smoking some serious shit.
Since firefox 3 I never had crashes due to flash movies like i had with firefox 1.5 or 2.
Maybe you should try to upgrade ?
Also flashblock helps at managing resources by starting the flash content only when you want to, this way avoiding resource consumption by various banners or ads.
As about gnash, that's just a poor joke.
Don't be silly. Without a proper certificate one can sit right between you and amazon.com and rip you off. Don't confuse cheap lookalikes like amaz0n.com or variations with professionally made man in the middle attacks where you will really go to www.amazon.com but you will actually talk to someone else.It seems to be a lot of misconception and ignorance about certificates today.
Also, do not forget that CA's bureaucracy is partially justified, think that their role is actually to grant certificates to a valid and verified entity, not just anyone.Same goes for entering the market, you would not want your average Chinese to open his own CA and then grant certificates without properly verifying who's behind them, right ?
A certificate is ultimately an electronic ID for a service, and as with any ID, they must be granted under a more strict rule, or otherwise anyone will be printing his own driver license or ID card at home - problem being that one could easily impersonate anyone.
Yes, but for a public user there is no difference between your self signed certificate and Harry Hacker's self signed certificate. If your application is to be used just by a finite number of user on which computers you took care of also installing your self signed certificate, then this is ok. But for a publicly accessible site, like your webmail, or your bank's internet banking application, you need a CA signed certificate, otherwise a certificate self signed by the bank looks exactly like one that a middle man can create on himself to impersonate the bank.
Of course they have a firewall, just watch the difference between a tcptraceroute to a public port (like 80) and tcptraceroute to the same ip but some other port (like 110 pop3 for example). You'll see that packets get dropped at some point indicating a firewall. It's not a RST (port closed) it's just dropping packets for nonpublic services. That is a packet filtering firewall.
1.Vinyl is not so convenient/straightforward to duplicate.
2.Vinyl always wears when it's used. The most you use it the most you will need to *buy* another copy at some point in time.
3.Digital media can be made to sound as good as someone wants, with the proper equipment and setup (same is true for any media in fact)
Now think why someone would like to phase out digital media and reintroduce analog media.
As long as the decoder is just an external module (library) there is no GPL violation whatsoever.
Having xine sources and altering those sources in any kind (including dvd decoding capability for example) and by this creating a derivative work from xine WOULD be GPL violation.
Hidden was the initial sense of the thing. However, being aware of the cache and using this information (without even altering subplatform compatibility like in using specific processor instructions !) can provide quite significant improvements at no other cost than using cpuid once.
As about benefits, certain repetitive operations can benefit a lot. For example an array operations fitted into the cache can run significantly faster (you can test this yourself). These kind of operations occur a lot when dealing with image manipulation. Of course this won't matter for your usual desktop application, but it does matter in a few particular applications and it will be of great benefit.
I agree to you that cache is always a good thing, I agree that it was initially supposed to be transparent, however knowing about it can in SOME cases (a few to be correct) give a much better improvement than some people would think.
Not true. There are some _very_ sensitive areas where cache sensitive coding can improve performance _a_lot_.
For example making a certain loop or a certain intensive used data structure fit into the processor's cache will greatly improve performance due to the much faster nature of the cache compared to the general purpose memory.The benefits of this awareness are much greater than using processor specific instructions (586, 686...). Just take your usual benchmark and compare the cache's bandwidth with the RAM bandwidth, and then consider a loop or a data structure that will be run/accessed _a_lot_ of times (a sort operation, a matrix operation and a lot other things) and you will get an ideea about the magnitude of the benefits. I am not discarding the benefits of cpu specific instruction compiling (tough, the actual speed improvements obtained
with this technique largely used for gentoo for ex are not so great in the real life) . What I want to pinpoint is that smart programming(hard to find today...) -even using plain old 386 instructions - can give much better performance improvements than using a few processor specific instructions. Professional game programmers usually employ this "smart programming" in order to optimize some certain known critical operations. Of course, there are a lot of gray tones between the two extremes (coding in assemblers and arranging instructions/structure sizes by hand on one side and relying only on compiler optimizations on the other side) and the best thing is to place yourself on a graytone in order to maximize development time but also performance.
As long as you grab the page itself it does not matter that the form sends the number of the choice, you just have to compare with the actual page grabbed.
You can do a lot of things with a browser plugin. Think that being loaded in the address space of the browser, the plugin becomes the browser, this way it is much harder to detect for the usual end user, as any action the plugin will take will be masqueraded as an action of the browser itself.
Untill now I think the token variant is the best. As about the usual problems with such tokens (getting out of sync) I think this could be solved for good in a few hours at most. We already have the technology to produce very small atomic clocks, and as soon as we will be able (technically and financially) to integrate an atomic clock in theese tokens, the desync-ing problem will be gone. The technology is still vulnerable to social engineering fraud (person calls and asks for the current token number) but however it will be much harder to commit fraud this way, and only works with the most stupid users out there. And when you are SO stupid to give personal information to any stranger that calls you on the phone, I think you deserve your fate. Being so stupid you should not be allowed to have a bank account or a credit card. What you need is a nanny to take care of you and your money. BTW, a carefully crafted filter to reject potential clients that are too stupid will be a much better measure than any technology deployed. Much of the online fraud is only possible because of the stupidity of those who click on any link/page they received and enter all their personal data there. Stupidity the number one cause for online fraud. Make your user smarter (or reject those that are too stupid) and you will see a sudden drop in online fraud.
D'ooh beacause it's as easy to steal form data (including your smart "xxx") instead of screenshots. All you have to do is write a nice plugin for your browser.Why steal screenshots when you can steal both the data produced by the browser and the data entered by the user on that certain webform right before data is sent back to the bank's webserver.Given the fact that the information is stoled right in the browser, SSL will be useless - in front of the user all informations are not encrypted, and passwords are stolen before they enter the encrypted SSL channel.
Well, this might be true if you consider just the
operating system itself, but it doubt even this.
For the begining, let's consider the following :
1). The bare OS (be it linux at a minimal install or windoes) it's mostly unusable except for browsing the web, writing things in notepad or wordpad and a few other minor things. In the real world there are a lot other things you install, from movie players, codecs to complex applications like IDE's, Office suites or business applications. In the end a typical workstation has a bunch of applications NOT included in the OS itself (I'm talking about windows here).
2). Second, Microsoft has the bad habit of counting all applications in a distribution when counting vulnerabilities, so than they can say "look, redhat had 50 security bugs this year, we had only 5". Well, let's take it the microsoft way, and consider all the applications in a distribution.
Now, in the linux world a lot of applications are
open source and/or supported with patches directly by the vendor (Redhat/Novell-Suse/Debian/Ubuntu,etc). In the windows world on the other hand the whole bunch of installed applications are not controlled by anyone. So, let's consider that 5 of the applications on the system need update (firefox,one office suite, and other applications).
The linux way : The distro's update manager signals you that 5 security updates need to be installed. You click on the alert or manually open a terminal and run apt-get upgrade or yum update,etc and you have the system up to date again.
The windows way : You go windowsupdate.com where
a patch for the kernel is downloaded to prevent a a newly discovered DoS attack, then you launch mozilla firefox, where mozilla firefox's own update manager alerts you that you have to update the browser, then you go to officeupdate and update the office suite, and then you check the following app and learn that you have to download and install the patch manually, and so on for all the 5 apps.
No think what happens when there are 20 or more apps to be checked, INCLUDING various supporting libraries that cannot be easily checked automatically and you have to check them one by one and patch them one by one.
In the linux world the package manager updates almost anything for you in one move.(With some exceptions, of course).
In the windows world, that has not a real update
manager/supervisor for the whole list of installed applications, you have to do the updates one by one, by hand because there is no unified windows update manager.
So... what way is simpler ? After all, it all comes to the the time required to mantain an IT infrastructure up to date, and windows falls short on this one. And we all know that time is money, right ?
I have such a setup for about 4 years, and even at the initial setup date 4 years ago this was not "cutting edge".
It seems that you have just discovered an old technology.Congratulations:)
While not purchasing the game is a solution for the alleged violation of some rights, the poor technical support for those who purchased the game has absolutely no excuse.
So, we get a mouse WITHOUT a wire, just to get a pad WITH wire. So, what's the use of this thing ?
On the other side, this is WAY too stupid :
>
Since when RFID is equivalent with "no lag" ? Since wheb RFID implies SPEED ? Is RFID using some other form of energy that propagates signals at speeds greater than the speed of light ?
Jeez, this world seems to be falling apart. Every day appears a new idiot with a new (and totally USELESS) "invention".
I suppose someday another idiot will invent the method to preserve farts in cans or bottles and everybody will say he's the 21'st century's Einstein.
In fact, they did. The last spams I receive are composed of two parts : the spammy part, and
a longer part that is usually a news paragraph from a public news site like news.google.com or cnn. The
second part usually has a very small or none spammy fingerprint, cloaking the first spammy part.
Besides that, it's true - any hard disk drive has sectors reserved for the bad sectors management. However, those sectors are only available to the drive's internal firmware.
That "method" just overlaps partitions so that it seems that you have more space.
Slashdot Mirror
Supposing the event is indeed apocalyptic in scale that it would destroy the very foundation of civilization, then indeed on a short to medium term the more practical skills and knowledge sets will be way more valuable. However, from medium to long term onwards the scientists, the engineers, the historians and also the knowledge they have or have salvaged in some kind of material, eventually recoverable form will be of much greater importance for the restart of the civilization. Libraries, data banks of any kind will be of great importance, while relics, artpieces and historical sources of information of and about the "old world" will eventually come to hold great value for those who managed to protect such artefacts (just as we praise today artpieces of the past epochs). Unfortunately it may take some time until the focus switches from "immediate survival" to "planning for the future" and it will be important for those knowledge holders to be protected until their skills can be again used. How to protect the knowledge holders and knowledge containers ? That may be the the greatest challenge of all, and I myself don't know what kind of social entity could have the vision, the power and will to find,recover,keep, guard and evolve them until the world is able to use them again. The church ? The remnants of the state ? Other social of economic organization(s) ? We'd better not get in this situation at all,rebuilding stuff is not as easy as breaking it in the first place.
The same limitations apply to todays warfare as even modern artillery and ballistic weapons impose a certain time delay between the moment of firing and the moment the projectile hits the target. We ALREADY aim not at where the target IS but at a the estimated/computed point of intersection between the target's trajectory and the projectile's trajectory. This will even more so adapted and evolved for space combat, no matter if you apply this for short range combat with classic projectiles (explosive missiles or purely kinetic) or long range where you will have to take into account delays imposed by light speed. Also consider that most missiles are in a way or another intelligent and will adapt trajectory to follow the target, in this way a nuclear missile can be argued to have more hitting chances than a laser fired from far away. Challenges for future : If future ship design will not reduce/zero the ship's mass, then inertia may very well be a problem: it will limit it's maneuverability. It may also impose to actually maintain greater distance between the ships with hostilities happening from afar. We ALREADY use technology to attack and hit targets that are way out of visual range, current fighters can engage and hit an enemy fighter from many miles away. This will happen even more so for space fights. If future ships will have the ability to neutralize mass and annihilate inertia, then extreme maneuverability will become possible making the job of the attackers harder. BUT, for EITHER scenario the way to gain the advantage would most likely come from computational power (be it AI or not) : the ship having the better computer will be able to better anticipate the actions of the others in order to either have a better trajectory estimate or better alter its course (constantly) in order to be in another place than where the next enemy hit will "land". If i remember correctly this issue of computing power used to better predict enemy actions in order to adapt its own actions is already exploited in SF. I don't remember if I read it in a SF story or if it was part of a game's universe. Or both.
It's not the index that counts now, it's the users. Today "searching the internet" is synonymous with google and with "to google". Unlisting from google's index would mean absolutely nothing. Users (usually) do not use google to search for "Company X". Users usually search for products and services. Take away the first entries and users will click on the following results, eventually buying from the "underdogs". Unsubscribing from google's index would be suicidal from a sales point of view and only a moron or digital era impaired old dinosaur like murdoch could actually believe such a scenario would be good for business. Not to talk about the fact that 1000 sites is a grain of sand in the desert of google's index. And not to mention about the proposed sum being too little to bribe giants that could be significant. (1 mil is peanuts for ibm, hp or amazon, for example). These being said, this must be some april fools' joke or that guy is smoking some serious shit.
Did anyone else notice that every single stallman interview is basically the same ?
Since firefox 3 I never had crashes due to flash movies like i had with firefox 1.5 or 2. Maybe you should try to upgrade ? Also flashblock helps at managing resources by starting the flash content only when you want to, this way avoiding resource consumption by various banners or ads. As about gnash, that's just a poor joke.
Don't be silly. Without a proper certificate one can sit right between you and amazon.com and rip you off. Don't confuse cheap lookalikes like amaz0n.com or variations with professionally made man in the middle attacks where you will really go to www.amazon.com but you will actually talk to someone else.It seems to be a lot of misconception and ignorance about certificates today. Also, do not forget that CA's bureaucracy is partially justified, think that their role is actually to grant certificates to a valid and verified entity, not just anyone.Same goes for entering the market, you would not want your average Chinese to open his own CA and then grant certificates without properly verifying who's behind them, right ? A certificate is ultimately an electronic ID for a service, and as with any ID, they must be granted under a more strict rule, or otherwise anyone will be printing his own driver license or ID card at home - problem being that one could easily impersonate anyone.
Yes, but for a public user there is no difference between your self signed certificate and Harry Hacker's self signed certificate. If your application is to be used just by a finite number of user on which computers you took care of also installing your self signed certificate, then this is ok. But for a publicly accessible site, like your webmail, or your bank's internet banking application, you need a CA signed certificate, otherwise a certificate self signed by the bank looks exactly like one that a middle man can create on himself to impersonate the bank.
A stateless firewall is still a firewall even it's the oldest form of firewall.
Of course they have a firewall, just watch the difference between a tcptraceroute to a public port (like 80) and tcptraceroute to the same ip but some other port (like 110 pop3 for example). You'll see that packets get dropped at some point indicating a firewall. It's not a RST (port closed) it's just dropping packets for nonpublic services. That is a packet filtering firewall.
1.Vinyl is not so convenient/straightforward to duplicate. 2.Vinyl always wears when it's used. The most you use it the most you will need to *buy* another copy at some point in time. 3.Digital media can be made to sound as good as someone wants, with the proper equipment and setup (same is true for any media in fact) Now think why someone would like to phase out digital media and reintroduce analog media.
As long as the decoder is just an external module (library) there is no GPL violation whatsoever. Having xine sources and altering those sources in any kind (including dvd decoding capability for example) and by this creating a derivative work from xine WOULD be GPL violation.
Hidden was the initial sense of the thing. However, being aware of the cache and using this information (without even altering subplatform compatibility like in using specific processor instructions !) can provide quite significant improvements at no other cost than using cpuid once. As about benefits, certain repetitive operations can benefit a lot. For example an array operations fitted into the cache can run significantly faster (you can test this yourself). These kind of operations occur a lot when dealing with image manipulation. Of course this won't matter for your usual desktop application, but it does matter in a few particular applications and it will be of great benefit. I agree to you that cache is always a good thing, I agree that it was initially supposed to be transparent, however knowing about it can in SOME cases (a few to be correct) give a much better improvement than some people would think.
Not true. There are some _very_ sensitive areas where cache sensitive coding can improve performance _a_lot_. For example making a certain loop or a certain intensive used data structure fit into the processor's cache will greatly improve performance due to the much faster nature of the cache compared to the general purpose memory.The benefits of this awareness are much greater than using processor specific instructions (586, 686...). Just take your usual benchmark and compare the cache's bandwidth with the RAM bandwidth, and then consider a loop or a data structure that will be run/accessed _a_lot_ of times (a sort operation, a matrix operation and a lot other things) and you will get an ideea about the magnitude of the benefits. I am not discarding the benefits of cpu specific instruction compiling (tough, the actual speed improvements obtained with this technique largely used for gentoo for ex are not so great in the real life) . What I want to pinpoint is that smart programming(hard to find today...) -even using plain old 386 instructions - can give much better performance improvements than using a few processor specific instructions. Professional game programmers usually employ this "smart programming" in order to optimize some certain known critical operations. Of course, there are a lot of gray tones between the two extremes (coding in assemblers and arranging instructions/structure sizes by hand on one side and relying only on compiler optimizations on the other side) and the best thing is to place yourself on a graytone in order to maximize development time but also performance.
As long as you grab the page itself it does not matter that the form sends the number of the choice, you just have to compare with the actual page grabbed. You can do a lot of things with a browser plugin. Think that being loaded in the address space of the browser, the plugin becomes the browser, this way it is much harder to detect for the usual end user, as any action the plugin will take will be masqueraded as an action of the browser itself. Untill now I think the token variant is the best. As about the usual problems with such tokens (getting out of sync) I think this could be solved for good in a few hours at most. We already have the technology to produce very small atomic clocks, and as soon as we will be able (technically and financially) to integrate an atomic clock in theese tokens, the desync-ing problem will be gone. The technology is still vulnerable to social engineering fraud (person calls and asks for the current token number) but however it will be much harder to commit fraud this way, and only works with the most stupid users out there. And when you are SO stupid to give personal information to any stranger that calls you on the phone, I think you deserve your fate. Being so stupid you should not be allowed to have a bank account or a credit card. What you need is a nanny to take care of you and your money. BTW, a carefully crafted filter to reject potential clients that are too stupid will be a much better measure than any technology deployed. Much of the online fraud is only possible because of the stupidity of those who click on any link/page they received and enter all their personal data there. Stupidity the number one cause for online fraud. Make your user smarter (or reject those that are too stupid) and you will see a sudden drop in online fraud.
D'ooh beacause it's as easy to steal form data (including your smart "xxx") instead of screenshots. All you have to do is write a nice plugin for your browser.Why steal screenshots when you can steal both the data produced by the browser and the data entered by the user on that certain webform right before data is sent back to the bank's webserver.Given the fact that
the information is stoled right in the browser, SSL will be useless - in front of the user all informations are not encrypted, and passwords are stolen before they enter the encrypted SSL channel.
... While other used hours to patch their windows infrastructure I did it in minutes and I saved time to post on ./ ;)
Well,
Well, this might be true if you consider just the operating system itself, but it doubt even this. For the begining, let's consider the following : 1). The bare OS (be it linux at a minimal install or windoes) it's mostly unusable except for browsing the web, writing things in notepad or wordpad and a few other minor things. In the real world there are a lot other things you install, from movie players, codecs to complex applications like IDE's, Office suites or business applications. In the end a typical workstation has a bunch of applications NOT included in the OS itself (I'm talking about windows here). 2). Second, Microsoft has the bad habit of counting all applications in a distribution when counting vulnerabilities, so than they can say "look, redhat had 50 security bugs this year, we had only 5". Well, let's take it the microsoft way, and consider all the applications in a distribution. Now, in the linux world a lot of applications are open source and/or supported with patches directly by the vendor (Redhat/Novell-Suse/Debian/Ubuntu,etc). In the windows world on the other hand the whole bunch of installed applications are not controlled by anyone. So, let's consider that 5 of the applications on the system need update (firefox,one office suite, and other applications). The linux way : The distro's update manager signals you that 5 security updates need to be installed. You click on the alert or manually open a terminal and run apt-get upgrade or yum update,etc and you have the system up to date again. The windows way : You go windowsupdate.com where a patch for the kernel is downloaded to prevent a a newly discovered DoS attack, then you launch mozilla firefox, where mozilla firefox's own update manager alerts you that you have to update the browser, then you go to officeupdate and update the office suite, and then you check the following app and learn that you have to download and install the patch manually, and so on for all the 5 apps. No think what happens when there are 20 or more apps to be checked, INCLUDING various supporting libraries that cannot be easily checked automatically and you have to check them one by one and patch them one by one. In the linux world the package manager updates almost anything for you in one move.(With some exceptions, of course). In the windows world, that has not a real update manager/supervisor for the whole list of installed applications, you have to do the updates one by one, by hand because there is no unified windows update manager. So... what way is simpler ? After all, it all comes to the the time required to mantain an IT infrastructure up to date, and windows falls short on this one. And we all know that time is money, right ?
I have such a setup for about 4 years, and even at the initial setup date 4 years ago this was not "cutting edge". It seems that you have just discovered an old technology.Congratulations :)
The system's memory can also be used for textures via AGP. This is one thing that made AGP "revolutionary" at his introduction time.
While not purchasing the game is a solution for the alleged violation of some rights, the poor technical support for those who purchased the game has absolutely no excuse.
So, we get a mouse WITHOUT a wire, just to get a pad WITH wire. So, what's the use of this thing ? On the other side, this is WAY too stupid : > Since when RFID is equivalent with "no lag" ? Since wheb RFID implies SPEED ? Is RFID using some other form of energy that propagates signals at speeds greater than the speed of light ? Jeez, this world seems to be falling apart. Every day appears a new idiot with a new (and totally USELESS) "invention". I suppose someday another idiot will invent the method to preserve farts in cans or bottles and everybody will say he's the 21'st century's Einstein.
In fact, they did. The last spams I receive are composed of two parts : the spammy part, and a longer part that is usually a news paragraph from a public news site like news.google.com or cnn. The second part usually has a very small or none spammy fingerprint, cloaking the first spammy part.
I run apache 2.x with mod_php in production (apache,php and oracle database backend) for some time, and I can't see any problem by now.
Besides that, it's true - any hard disk drive has sectors reserved for the bad sectors management. However, those sectors are only available to the drive's internal firmware. That "method" just overlaps partitions so that it seems that you have more space.