Multicast DNS, which is sort of how things are done at the moment for load handling (root server queries go to the nearest one, but only the nearest one). Straight multicasting to everyone - anyone who can reply does - would be the best way from the decentralisation point of view, but gives no way to handle conflicting replies. If two companies want www.foo.com, I can't see how you can get reliable service without deciding on some root server which is declared to be absolutely correct.
But really... if an organisation is to take over the root servers, UN is not far from Al Quaeda and RIAA. Just add corruption and take away any traces of balls.
On the rest of the world's list, the US comes far below the UN in terms of "people we'd be happy about controlling our internet"
I believe that the UN should be kept away from things like root DNS servers, and any internet policy decisions. Arguments between members of the UN are much worse than any usenet flame war.
Oh yes, so much better to have a single country imposing its will on everyone.
If you want North Korea to have a say in how the internet is administered, it's impossible. You can give Dear Leader a say in Internet administration, but you can't make him share that authority with the rest of the country. Letting totalitarian governments "represent" the populations they control would make international representation less democratic, not more.
This doesn't stop the US negotiating and signing treaties with such governments, or if it does, then they won't be part of the UN. If the rest of the world has normal diplomatic relations with that government, we accept it as representative of that country, and should count their vote on world affairs as much as that of any other country. If there's an illegitimate government somewhere, they don't get a place in the UN.
Yes, how true. More governments being involved always means more freedom.
Oh yes, having less countries controlling a thing makes it more free. After all, governments made up of a single person are so much freer than those where there are a group of people.
Buy yourself a £2 snorkel facemask and swim down 3-5m sometime. It's amazing what you see down there, even in cold British water s. Certainly worth doing.
It was awesome for multimedia, because the scheduler was just amazing. Not so important now, but BeOS would let you play four videos at once on a pentium 1. I still haven't seen a system as responsive, even on my 2600+.
Not meaning to troll, but how exactly would a meteor jump or ricochet off mars and impact Earth? The idea just seems damned far-fetched.
It happens all the time, a lot of meteorites we have come from Mars. I don't know how it happens - possibly they're thrown out from other impacts - and it surprised me, but it's true.
And wouldn't the atmospheric burn leaving mars and impacting earth and months or years of hard vacuum time do a nice job of sterilizing most things?
Bacteria are pretty darn tough. We've found them alive on things that have been left on the moon (IIRC) for two years. They could live deep inside the rock, and spread out to the puddle the rock has landed in once it's come to rest.
And if this idea you posit says earth's organisms needed to come from Mars, where'd Mars get 'em?! After all, any creation story that posits that it is 'monkeys all the way down' loses my confidence pretty damn fast.
Assuming our current theories on the history of both planets are correct, Mars had a lot more time for life to arise. My figures may be off a bit but we think that just 20 million years before life arose on Earth the planet was being heated past the evaporation temperature of rock on a pretty frequent basis. Wheras Mars had been reasonably temperate for a billion and a half or so of our years before that.
Given the huge range of temperatures, minerals, electrostatic activity, etc. here on earth, seems easier to imagine various 'crawled out of primordial soup' origin theories to space debris carrying lucky spores or enzymes. I mean, I like my infinite-improbabilities when they come packaged in a world that rolls the dice a millions of times per second for a few billion years.
If you're saying life can arise as quickly as it must have done to come up here on Earth then the Femri (sp?) paradox becomes pretty serious. I mean, it's believable, and there are possible environments on Earth that were more stable and life-friendly even while the surface was still being bombarded (e.g. black smokers at the bottom of the oceans, when said oceans weren't boiling off), but most are missing some critical component for life, and getting them out to the rest of the planet is often just as hard as getting something from Mars.
With Mars, you have several orders of magnitude more time, and far more space than in any of the stable-ish terran environments. And once a planet has life, you get it everywhere - there isn't one place on Earth (at least within a few kilometers of the surface) that doesn't have at least bacteria, even inside rocks. so then all you need is some of the Martian bacteria to survive a few months in space - not easy, but something we know our bacteria can do - and re-entry - harder, but quite possible - and then land somewhere they can survive, a piece of cake next to the other two bits.
Again, I don't mean to troll. We can't prove or disprove what you're suggesting, but your suggestion starts with 3 or 4 soon-to-be-tested requirements (residue of life-supporting ecology on mars, evidence of life on mars, that life's genetic resemblance to earth life, matching timelines). I even like seeing scientific trial-ballons like yours. But your idea seems astronomically unlikely given the alternatives.
It's not my idea, it's a serious hypothesis that explains things about as well as the alternatives. It's very difficult to guess how life started just because it's so long ago, but this is as good a theory as any given current evidence. As you indicated, it will soon get some pretty strong support or damning evidence against once we can see whether mars supported life.
That said, could the performance of handheld devices be improved by compiling the Linux kernel and most Linux software with the Metrowerks compiler, rather than GCC? Considering the kernel's use of GCC-specific features in its code, it would of course not be an easy task.
Intel managed to get ICC compiling the kernel (though I hear it took them some work), so it's not impossible that Metrowerks could do the same.
Seeing as how we do not behave exactly like every other animal, would there be a way that we could have come from Mars?
We're incredibly similar to every other animal - same basic chemistry, most of our genome the same. We have the same ancestors as every other living thing on this rock. A better (and open) question is whether all life on Earth is descended from (primitive) life that originated on Mars and was carried here by meteorites before Mars became uninhabitable.
Spyware attached to IE that changes the home page denies you from getting to your home page.
That doesn't stop you getting to it. If it actually stops the browser working, then yes, it's a DoS, though that's probably far less important than other aspects of the spyware.
Worms steal CPU cycles, denying you from using them.
They don't (normally) stop you doing anything, just make it a bit slower. If a worm actually crashes the box it's called a DoS.
He is right and you are wrong. Admit it.
If I thought I was wrong I wouldn't still be here. Besides, if he's right why did he need to insult me?
i) Web browsing isn't a server process, it's a client process.
No. But the effect is the same.
ii) You can kill the browser and go to another web page. Hell, you can just start another instance of the web browser. Which must take all of three nanoseconds.
Not if your whole machine has been crashed.
If you prevent login, or send a SYN flood that prevents http connections, you can't just restart the appropriate service.
No. But if you just kill the httpd that's still classed as a DoS.
If you really can't see why causing a client to crash is different from preventing a server from functioning, I suggest you look in some elementary computer science textbooks.
Argument from authority, and not a very good one at that. Not to mention not even being accurate.
I don't have time any more time to explain the basics to fools.
Yeah, insult me, that shows real confidence in your arguments
I don't think you understand quite how big a 32 bit address space is. IPv6 has something on the order of 1000 addresses for everyone on the planet. Public addresses would simply cease to be rare or valuable. Your ISP could get the addresses it wanted with no trouble, anyone who wanted multiple ones for their home network would simply ask for them. We will not run out of IPv6 addresses on this planet, and I suspect we'll need a new routing protocol anyway once our networks move beyond it.
It's worse, far worse. It's hard to run a server from behind nat, which borks the internet (no servers=no internet). Also, there are services which expect the IP they're sending from to be their real IP.
Point, but we call it a DoS if you can crash (for example) apache even though it will probably be automatically restarted pretty quickly. A short and not very effective DoS this exploid is, but a DoS nonetheless.
Yes, but it isn't login that you crash, any more than you're crashing (for example) firefox. The exploit can be against any program (a recent one I read was IIRC a kernel flaw that could be exploited using vim)
Oh, and the Horus link is a PDF whitepaper... please warn when a link points to a PDF.
Why? You can set up your browser to handle a pdf link any way you like (if it bothers you that much, you can redirect yourself to a google html conversion of it).
Slashdot Mirror
Multicast DNS, which is sort of how things are done at the moment for load handling (root server queries go to the nearest one, but only the nearest one). Straight multicasting to everyone - anyone who can reply does - would be the best way from the decentralisation point of view, but gives no way to handle conflicting replies. If two companies want www.foo.com, I can't see how you can get reliable service without deciding on some root server which is declared to be absolutely correct.
Rather you than the U.S. Government. And your argument makes about as much sense as theirs.
On the rest of the world's list, the US comes far below the UN in terms of "people we'd be happy about controlling our internet"
Oh yes, so much better to have a single country imposing its will on everyone.
This doesn't stop the US negotiating and signing treaties with such governments, or if it does, then they won't be part of the UN. If the rest of the world has normal diplomatic relations with that government, we accept it as representative of that country, and should count their vote on world affairs as much as that of any other country. If there's an illegitimate government somewhere, they don't get a place in the UN.
Oh yes, having less countries controlling a thing makes it more free. After all, governments made up of a single person are so much freer than those where there are a group of people.
And that's why you should always encrypt your emails.
Buy yourself a £2 snorkel facemask and swim down 3-5m sometime. It's amazing what you see down there, even in cold British water
s. Certainly worth doing.
It was awesome for multimedia, because the scheduler was just amazing. Not so important now, but BeOS would let you play four videos at once on a pentium 1. I still haven't seen a system as responsive, even on my 2600+.
It happens all the time, a lot of meteorites we have come from Mars. I don't know how it happens - possibly they're thrown out from other impacts - and it surprised me, but it's true.
And wouldn't the atmospheric burn leaving mars and impacting earth and months or years of hard vacuum time do a nice job of sterilizing most things?
Bacteria are pretty darn tough. We've found them alive on things that have been left on the moon (IIRC) for two years. They could live deep inside the rock, and spread out to the puddle the rock has landed in once it's come to rest.
And if this idea you posit says earth's organisms needed to come from Mars, where'd Mars get 'em?! After all, any creation story that posits that it is 'monkeys all the way down' loses my confidence pretty damn fast.
Assuming our current theories on the history of both planets are correct, Mars had a lot more time for life to arise. My figures may be off a bit but we think that just 20 million years before life arose on Earth the planet was being heated past the evaporation temperature of rock on a pretty frequent basis. Wheras Mars had been reasonably temperate for a billion and a half or so of our years before that.
Given the huge range of temperatures, minerals, electrostatic activity, etc. here on earth, seems easier to imagine various 'crawled out of primordial soup' origin theories to space debris carrying lucky spores or enzymes. I mean, I like my infinite-improbabilities when they come packaged in a world that rolls the dice a millions of times per second for a few billion years.
If you're saying life can arise as quickly as it must have done to come up here on Earth then the Femri (sp?) paradox becomes pretty serious. I mean, it's believable, and there are possible environments on Earth that were more stable and life-friendly even while the surface was still being bombarded (e.g. black smokers at the bottom of the oceans, when said oceans weren't boiling off), but most are missing some critical component for life, and getting them out to the rest of the planet is often just as hard as getting something from Mars.
With Mars, you have several orders of magnitude more time, and far more space than in any of the stable-ish terran environments. And once a planet has life, you get it everywhere - there isn't one place on Earth (at least within a few kilometers of the surface) that doesn't have at least bacteria, even inside rocks. so then all you need is some of the Martian bacteria to survive a few months in space - not easy, but something we know our bacteria can do - and re-entry - harder, but quite possible - and then land somewhere they can survive, a piece of cake next to the other two bits.
Again, I don't mean to troll. We can't prove or disprove what you're suggesting, but your suggestion starts with 3 or 4 soon-to-be-tested requirements (residue of life-supporting ecology on mars, evidence of life on mars, that life's genetic resemblance to earth life, matching timelines). I even like seeing scientific trial-ballons like yours. But your idea seems astronomically unlikely given the alternatives.
It's not my idea, it's a serious hypothesis that explains things about as well as the alternatives. It's very difficult to guess how life started just because it's so long ago, but this is as good a theory as any given current evidence. As you indicated, it will soon get some pretty strong support or damning evidence against once we can see whether mars supported life.
Intel managed to get ICC compiling the kernel (though I hear it took them some work), so it's not impossible that Metrowerks could do the same.
We're incredibly similar to every other animal - same basic chemistry, most of our genome the same. We have the same ancestors as every other living thing on this rock. A better (and open) question is whether all life on Earth is descended from (primitive) life that originated on Mars and was carried here by meteorites before Mars became uninhabitable.
That doesn't stop you getting to it. If it actually stops the browser working, then yes, it's a DoS, though that's probably far less important than other aspects of the spyware.
Worms steal CPU cycles, denying you from using them.
They don't (normally) stop you doing anything, just make it a bit slower. If a worm actually crashes the box it's called a DoS.
He is right and you are wrong. Admit it.
If I thought I was wrong I wouldn't still be here. Besides, if he's right why did he need to insult me?
You care about your energy use?
He diagnosed himself, and is certainly not qualified to.
Mud1 has been running since 1980 and is still going.
Bah, sorry, got my measurements mixed up. I was confused by american/british billions and ended up counting a million instead.
Yes, absolutely. And setting the computer on fire.
No. But the effect is the same.
ii) You can kill the browser and go to another web page. Hell, you can just start another instance of the web browser. Which must take all of three nanoseconds.
Not if your whole machine has been crashed.
If you prevent login, or send a SYN flood that prevents http connections, you can't just restart the appropriate service.
No. But if you just kill the httpd that's still classed as a DoS.
If you really can't see why causing a client to crash is different from preventing a server from functioning, I suggest you look in some elementary computer science textbooks.
Argument from authority, and not a very good one at that. Not to mention not even being accurate.
I don't have time any more time to explain the basics to fools.
Yeah, insult me, that shows real confidence in your arguments
I don't think you understand quite how big a 32 bit address space is. IPv6 has something on the order of 1000 addresses for everyone on the planet. Public addresses would simply cease to be rare or valuable. Your ISP could get the addresses it wanted with no trouble, anyone who wanted multiple ones for their home network would simply ask for them. We will not run out of IPv6 addresses on this planet, and I suspect we'll need a new routing protocol anyway once our networks move beyond it.
It's worse, far worse. It's hard to run a server from behind nat, which borks the internet (no servers=no internet). Also, there are services which expect the IP they're sending from to be their real IP.
No more or less than you've prevented web browsing.
Point, but we call it a DoS if you can crash (for example) apache even though it will probably be automatically restarted pretty quickly. A short and not very effective DoS this exploid is, but a DoS nonetheless.
Yes, but it isn't login that you crash, any more than you're crashing (for example) firefox. The exploit can be against any program (a recent one I read was IIRC a kernel flaw that could be exploited using vim)
Why? You can set up your browser to handle a pdf link any way you like (if it bothers you that much, you can redirect yourself to a google html conversion of it).