No, because the rich and powerful will have their life whitewashed and hidden from the masses giving the appearance of moral superiority over any that would rise to challenge them.
>Carrier grade wireless is far better and addresses many of these issues, but they are not cheap.
Most people don't realize that. Getting a chunk of private spectrum costs. Getting radios that are good and talk in that spectrum costs. All of a sudden you're paying a significant fraction of the fibre costs with none of the benefits. If you want more bandwidth with wireless, you might have to buy more spectrum and new equipment for it to work. With fibre, well hopefully you ran a full bundle in your pipe and just connect it to end points.
Oh, and if you over build your fiber network, depending where you are, it's not hard to sell extra capacity to third parties.
Once you start putting any serious amount of traffic over it, you find yourself putting up more radios over different channels to avoid all kinds of different issues.
Or you can pay more up front and get your actual speeds with incredibly low latency with fiber.
>Most people I know don't live in cities because they're too fucking expensive,
But that is exactly the point, if you, living in the country had to pay the 'true' cost it would cost far more to live in the country, and less to live in the city. $30,000 for electric service, $10,000 for water, $20,000 to have telephone so you can live $10 miles away from anyone else and all of a sudden city life is cheap.
Hey asshole, men get raped too. The situations you describe may be avoidable, if people are allowed to talk about the warning signs, what to look for, and what to do if your in the middle of the shit.
But instead fuckheads like you, yes you, think that hiding what is occurring because you don't want to hurt the people it's already happen to, GET MORE PEOPLE HURT.
It makes about as much sense as...
"We shouldn't talk about hacking in front an audience, because Bob got his server hacked and we might set off a SHAME TRIGGER", regardless of the fact we'll save 50 other people from getting hacked.
Problems with a society are never solved by hiding them.
Yes, and we address social/behavioral problems by not talking about them!
How the fuck do you expect to behave like this hypothetical 'functioning adult' you are talking about, without talking about it?
Lastly, if you want women to enter the IT/geek world, have parents hand girls screwdrivers instead of barbie dolls. Trying to blame the current IT crowd for an entire culture raising women that don't want to enter IT, engineering, or sciences is fucking ridiculous.
These statistics sound like absolute nonsense. One in six? Doubtful. Very dubious.
Oh, wait. Their definition of "rape" must have come from one of these rare nutty feminists who think that everything is rape.
>One of six U.S. women has experienced an attempted...
Key word is attempted, and what the definition of that is. On the subject of attempted I can believe it very much for the weaker forms of getting pushy with a woman. Most of the time the guy that does the attempt does it with no one else around, and is trusted by the woman before that point. The same guy will get away with attempting it with many woman because they are so unlikely to report it and very little is done about it.
Depends how big the company is. If there are not enough code checks, hacking the developer box is eventually hacking the production database no matter how isolated the two are.
The problem is we have only two choices currently. Government control of the internet or corporate control of the internet. (And govt' control may just be puppet control by corps that write fat checks).
Who do you want controlling the internet, the FBI, who can send death squads to trash your house? Or the MPAA who can send the FBI death squads to trash your house?
I had a friend in the AF at Barksdale. He said he was kinda weirded out when a drone landed and taxied over to his fueling station. He made a joke that he expected it to say "Feed me meatbag". I told him the feeling he had was foreboding.
>And frankly, if you had decent spam filters on your own personal domain, you probably wouldn't be seeing these emails anyway. I doubt anyone with a Gmail or Yahoo or Outlook.com address sees this stuff.
Depends how and how many were sent. If you were on any of the above and gave me your mail, I could send you a spam that wouldn't be classified or blocked. Because I would only send one. GYO blocks most spam going to you because they get hundreds of copies of it (or similar so it fails sameness tests). It is like being part of a herd, you're protected by numbers, but not from individual attack. And you are more at risk when disease strikes the herd.
I managed a domain for a client where the domain was similar to a large universities domain. One day spam just started flooding in to every username and combination of username you could imagine. Catchall was the first to go (getting 80,000+ messages a day, around a connection a second). I started blocking IP addresses of the senders, but they changed frequently and there where hundreds. At the time I accepted all mail, and deleted ones to addresses that didn't exist after passing it thru the spam detection system. But that ate up way to much CPU time. Eventually after a few weeks of this, I set the SMTP service to give a 553 error once a bad address was detected. Once 10 bad mail from were detected I stuck the IP in iptables for two days. The attack finally stopped a few days later. I don't have the logs about bad addresses any more, but they were being auto generated from what I could tell...
To almost all the degree it can be laid to cover fire. We can shoot more bullets in a day then were shot in the entire civil war. Back then you had to make your shot count because you didn't have a second one (in any reasonable amount of time). If we want to kill people with the fewest rounds possible we use snipers. Back then they stood in long lines and shot each other.
Stop romanticizing history. The south lost to the economic force of the north, how good each side shot didn't matter.
>We should be working toward a world where guns are not needed,
It will never exist. There will always be thorns on wild plants, some will have poison, others will make so many seeds you can't possibly kill them all. If the world put down all it's guns today and melted every weapon in to slag, the next bully with a large stick and a violent attitude could take it over.
You, like most other people are a violent person, if I attack you most likely you will fight back. If you don't directly, you will call in violence by proxy (the police).
Rocks, swords, guns, nuclear bombs, the weapons change, but the people stay the same.
Slashdot Mirror
No, because the rich and powerful will have their life whitewashed and hidden from the masses giving the appearance of moral superiority over any that would rise to challenge them.
>Carrier grade wireless is far better and addresses many of these issues, but they are not cheap.
Most people don't realize that. Getting a chunk of private spectrum costs. Getting radios that are good and talk in that spectrum costs. All of a sudden you're paying a significant fraction of the fibre costs with none of the benefits. If you want more bandwidth with wireless, you might have to buy more spectrum and new equipment for it to work. With fibre, well hopefully you ran a full bundle in your pipe and just connect it to end points.
Oh, and if you over build your fiber network, depending where you are, it's not hard to sell extra capacity to third parties.
WiFi is great till you actually have to use it.
Once you start putting any serious amount of traffic over it, you find yourself putting up more radios over different channels to avoid all kinds of different issues.
Or you can pay more up front and get your actual speeds with incredibly low latency with fiber.
There are also trees in lots of places, they like to fall over on to your lines.
>Most people I know don't live in cities because they're too fucking expensive,
But that is exactly the point, if you, living in the country had to pay the 'true' cost it would cost far more to live in the country, and less to live in the city. $30,000 for electric service, $10,000 for water, $20,000 to have telephone so you can live $10 miles away from anyone else and all of a sudden city life is cheap.
Hey asshole, men get raped too. The situations you describe may be avoidable, if people are allowed to talk about the warning signs, what to look for, and what to do if your in the middle of the shit.
But instead fuckheads like you, yes you, think that hiding what is occurring because you don't want to hurt the people it's already happen to, GET MORE PEOPLE HURT.
It makes about as much sense as...
"We shouldn't talk about hacking in front an audience, because Bob got his server hacked and we might set off a SHAME TRIGGER", regardless of the fact we'll save 50 other people from getting hacked.
Problems with a society are never solved by hiding them.
Yes, and we address social/behavioral problems by not talking about them!
How the fuck do you expect to behave like this hypothetical 'functioning adult' you are talking about, without talking about it?
Lastly, if you want women to enter the IT/geek world, have parents hand girls screwdrivers instead of barbie dolls. Trying to blame the current IT crowd for an entire culture raising women that don't want to enter IT, engineering, or sciences is fucking ridiculous.
These statistics sound like absolute nonsense. One in six? Doubtful. Very dubious.
Oh, wait. Their definition of "rape" must have come from one of these rare nutty feminists who think that everything is rape.
>One of six U.S. women has experienced an attempted...
Key word is attempted, and what the definition of that is. On the subject of attempted I can believe it very much for the weaker forms of getting pushy with a woman. Most of the time the guy that does the attempt does it with no one else around, and is trusted by the woman before that point. The same guy will get away with attempting it with many woman because they are so unlikely to report it and very little is done about it.
Depends how big the company is. If there are not enough code checks, hacking the developer box is eventually hacking the production database no matter how isolated the two are.
>can be completed against some third party proprietary application that the busness cannot fix....
Live by the black box, die by the black box.
I think the point of this story is.
You are already hacked. Doubly so if you use Java in the browser or anything else that's had any number of security flaws in the past year.
Make sure your IDS is up and running and stick it between your developers and your servers.
Oh, and make your developers run their updates. They have to be the worst at ignoring the java, adobe, and microsoft warnings from the task bar.
The problem is we have only two choices currently. Government control of the internet or corporate control of the internet. (And govt' control may just be puppet control by corps that write fat checks).
Who do you want controlling the internet, the FBI, who can send death squads to trash your house? Or the MPAA who can send the FBI death squads to trash your house?
Killer robots are people!
*sentient beings seeking equal rights.
The evolution of humans means it takes 4 years to get another 4 year old kid to put a bomb on.
The evolution of Ford Motor Company means it takes 4 hours to get another killbot off the factory line.
Oh shit, open source really is going to destroy the world.
I had a friend in the AF at Barksdale. He said he was kinda weirded out when a drone landed and taxied over to his fueling station. He made a joke that he expected it to say "Feed me meatbag". I told him the feeling he had was foreboding.
You need to be the first post in this topic.
>And frankly, if you had decent spam filters on your own personal domain, you probably wouldn't be seeing these emails anyway. I doubt anyone with a Gmail or Yahoo or Outlook.com address sees this stuff.
Depends how and how many were sent. If you were on any of the above and gave me your mail, I could send you a spam that wouldn't be classified or blocked. Because I would only send one. GYO blocks most spam going to you because they get hundreds of copies of it (or similar so it fails sameness tests). It is like being part of a herd, you're protected by numbers, but not from individual attack. And you are more at risk when disease strikes the herd.
Use myname@site name.mydomain
And change site name.mydomain to their mail servers! : D
I managed a domain for a client where the domain was similar to a large universities domain. One day spam just started flooding in to every username and combination of username you could imagine. Catchall was the first to go (getting 80,000+ messages a day, around a connection a second). I started blocking IP addresses of the senders, but they changed frequently and there where hundreds. At the time I accepted all mail, and deleted ones to addresses that didn't exist after passing it thru the spam detection system. But that ate up way to much CPU time. Eventually after a few weeks of this, I set the SMTP service to give a 553 error once a bad address was detected. Once 10 bad mail from were detected I stuck the IP in iptables for two days. The attack finally stopped a few days later. I don't have the logs about bad addresses any more, but they were being auto generated from what I could tell...
john@
john1@-john9999@
johna@-johnzzzz@
john.aname@-john.zname@
for john, bob, thomas, and any other of the common U.S. names you could think of.
Open wireless access points.
The proper way is to kill the connection at MAIL TO: before your bandwidth is wasted at DATA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials
Being that only 23 of the god knows how many soldiers Germany had, I'd say "I was just following orders" worked OK for the survivors.
To almost all the degree it can be laid to cover fire. We can shoot more bullets in a day then were shot in the entire civil war. Back then you had to make your shot count because you didn't have a second one (in any reasonable amount of time). If we want to kill people with the fewest rounds possible we use snipers. Back then they stood in long lines and shot each other.
Stop romanticizing history. The south lost to the economic force of the north, how good each side shot didn't matter.
>We should be working toward a world where guns are not needed,
It will never exist. There will always be thorns on wild plants, some will have poison, others will make so many seeds you can't possibly kill them all. If the world put down all it's guns today and melted every weapon in to slag, the next bully with a large stick and a violent attitude could take it over.
You, like most other people are a violent person, if I attack you most likely you will fight back. If you don't directly, you will call in violence by proxy (the police).
Rocks, swords, guns, nuclear bombs, the weapons change, but the people stay the same.