Having used (regularly) cain and abel, netstumbler etc. I'm beginning to think that security in a modern age (specifically related to the internet and subsequent technologies) may eventually become a cost to corporations and/or private developers that they no longer wish to entertain or even risk.
I see these continual "exploits" or taking advantage of someone that may not know better, or simply not even care, as being irresponsible on the part of the exploiter, not the exploitee.
I realize that security is paramount, however, the supposed hacker ethic that has been touted all these years has lead to countless intrusions and/or exploits, that in certain situations, are questionable.
For instance, some of the folks at the beginning of this comment list mention making their wireless connections available publicly. Does it mean that anyone with Network Stumbler should come along and hijack their connection and cause malicious attack? Come on. Script kiddies aside, I'm really sick of this irresponsibility factor that allows others to take advantage simply because someone else did not protect themselves 110%.
All you are doing is undermining the future of internet-based technologies (even if you think you are helping) because on a cost-based structure, companies and/or organizations will simply resolve that it's cheaper to no longer offer the service (with security flaws intact) than to offer the service at all.
Afterall, the internet itself (IP, DNS etc.) are open-source technologies to begin with. Sounds like the home team is facing-off against itself.
Not to mention the hypocritical nature of your actions.
Also, the net result of (hopefully) less CO2 in the atmosphere, could potentially result in less smog, thereby reducing the possible greenhouse effect that has been amassing through the years as heat from the sun is simply bounced back into the troposphere. Without that sunlight, the lake has been gradually cooling already (and the oceans) and this is a much, much harder problem to fix than simply shutting down the system if it proves to be problematic.
Besides, as someone already mentioned, this is not exactly ground breaking technology. It has been used in other areas to a large degree of success. There is no reason it could (and will) not work here as well.
As a number of people have already stressed, all this is doing is taking water from a slightly lower (colder) level, running it through aqueducts for cooling purposes, THEN ending up in the city's drinking water. It's just a more indirect route to your taps is all.
MS will never do right. Granted, they do have a history of poor design (in relation to security) to contend with, but given the popularity (which some would argue, leads to greater responsibility) should leave a larger margin of "error" that is ill-afforded given current reports/reviews/opinions (especially on/.).
People complain about the lack of supposed (and any supposed free/commercial - non-enterprise firewall has the same problem) security that allows certain applications out based on user-input in an annoying pop-up.
Next, the supposed "incompatibility" of applications that have been designed to automatically assume that certain ports will be publically available throughout the lifespan of the specific product line (and, yes, MS is just as responsible) which further leads to increased customer disatisfaction.
Basically, the idea here is that MS will never, ever, do anything right. In my opinion, based on increased customer base and/or expectations, it is absolutely impossible for MS to possibly meet 90-100% of the supposed customer expectations (even less with the more "tech-savvy") if such "high-standards" are continually expected, or even worse, demanded of any company.
And yes, to make myself further unpopular, no Linux distro, given the same popular numbers (especially among the a-typical user base that MS shares) would ever expect similar or less than the exact same complaints that MS receives regarding current or future improvements to their OS.
These continues reports/articles of problems with SP2 are starting to get repetitive. I think people need to get over the fact they the OS does not offer much in the way of advanced user support, but this user base does not account for over 80% of the users out there. In a corporate environment, Windows is the best solution (not for EVERY service) for desktop support, and anyone that has experience in this area and says otherwise has not utilized it to it's full potential.
Believe me, I trust the Mozilla Foundation, and I sincerly doubt that they would ever bundle this extension in, but my comment was based more on http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15045/.
AOL has a nasty habit of dropping cash (much needed, yes) on the MF whenever they decide to release a new version of Netscape (which was supposed to be dead).
Now, it's most likely because they take some of the key players from Mozilla to make it work with their "enhancements", but this is AOL we're talking about, and I don't trust them at all.
As for starting your own project, this is all well-and-good for the more tech-savvy, but with IE being the main opponent for Mozilla (or Firefox in particular), finding an offshoot of the Mozilla product will not be easy (at first, the project may garner enough of a following) but there will be a initial fallback to IE. With the latest improvements in SP2, and the so-called re-investment in IE 7, the competition just got a lot more fierce.
.. whether or not Mozilla (most likely pressured by AOL) starts to bundle this extension with their browser distro.
Of couse, the likelihood of this happening is so small, simply because it would most likely alienate about 98% of their current market.
Aside from that, an extension that displays advertisements in a browser? Sounds like a horrible idea. Shame on the developer.
... I'm happy he's alright, and that the transplant was a success. However, what worries me is the number of people repeatedly passed-over for transplants based on questionable justification.
Speaking from experience, the donation and subsequent dole-out process is supposed to be on a first-come-first-serve priority, based on compatibility and/or severity. Any attempts to get around this process are not only unfair for those that wait (painstakingly) in line, but also for the unfortunate soul that may have been bumped back a position in favour of the media-savvy Todd.
Unfortunately we may never know their name, they did not invest in billboards or an online advertising campaign.
I only hope that the next available donation arrived in time.
Slashdot Mirror
Having used (regularly) cain and abel, netstumbler etc. I'm beginning to think that security in a modern age (specifically related to the internet and subsequent technologies) may eventually become a cost to corporations and/or private developers that they no longer wish to entertain or even risk.
I see these continual "exploits" or taking advantage of someone that may not know better, or simply not even care, as being irresponsible on the part of the exploiter, not the exploitee.
I realize that security is paramount, however, the supposed hacker ethic that has been touted all these years has lead to countless intrusions and/or exploits, that in certain situations, are questionable.
For instance, some of the folks at the beginning of this comment list mention making their wireless connections available publicly. Does it mean that anyone with Network Stumbler should come along and hijack their connection and cause malicious attack? Come on. Script kiddies aside, I'm really sick of this irresponsibility factor that allows others to take advantage simply because someone else did not protect themselves 110%.
All you are doing is undermining the future of internet-based technologies (even if you think you are helping) because on a cost-based structure, companies and/or organizations will simply resolve that it's cheaper to no longer offer the service (with security flaws intact) than to offer the service at all.
Afterall, the internet itself (IP, DNS etc.) are open-source technologies to begin with. Sounds like the home team is facing-off against itself.
Not to mention the hypocritical nature of your actions.
Also, the net result of (hopefully) less CO2 in the atmosphere, could potentially result in less smog, thereby reducing the possible greenhouse effect that has been amassing through the years as heat from the sun is simply bounced back into the troposphere. Without that sunlight, the lake has been gradually cooling already (and the oceans) and this is a much, much harder problem to fix than simply shutting down the system if it proves to be problematic.
Besides, as someone already mentioned, this is not exactly ground breaking technology. It has been used in other areas to a large degree of success. There is no reason it could (and will) not work here as well.
As a number of people have already stressed, all this is doing is taking water from a slightly lower (colder) level, running it through aqueducts for cooling purposes, THEN ending up in the city's drinking water. It's just a more indirect route to your taps is all.
This is just silly.
/.).
MS will never do right. Granted, they do have a history of poor design (in relation to security) to contend with, but given the popularity (which some would argue, leads to greater responsibility) should leave a larger margin of "error" that is ill-afforded given current reports/reviews/opinions (especially on
People complain about the lack of supposed (and any supposed free/commercial - non-enterprise firewall has the same problem) security that allows certain applications out based on user-input in an annoying pop-up.
Next, the supposed "incompatibility" of applications that have been designed to automatically assume that certain ports will be publically available throughout the lifespan of the specific product line (and, yes, MS is just as responsible) which further leads to increased customer disatisfaction.
Basically, the idea here is that MS will never, ever, do anything right. In my opinion, based on increased customer base and/or expectations, it is absolutely impossible for MS to possibly meet 90-100% of the supposed customer expectations (even less with the more "tech-savvy") if such "high-standards" are continually expected, or even worse, demanded of any company.
And yes, to make myself further unpopular, no Linux distro, given the same popular numbers (especially among the a-typical user base that MS shares) would ever expect similar or less than the exact same complaints that MS receives regarding current or future improvements to their OS. These continues reports/articles of problems with SP2 are starting to get repetitive. I think people need to get over the fact they the OS does not offer much in the way of advanced user support, but this user base does not account for over 80% of the users out there. In a corporate environment, Windows is the best solution (not for EVERY service) for desktop support, and anyone that has experience in this area and says otherwise has not utilized it to it's full potential.
Believe me, I trust the Mozilla Foundation, and I sincerly doubt that they would ever bundle this extension in, but my comment was based more on http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15045/.
AOL has a nasty habit of dropping cash (much needed, yes) on the MF whenever they decide to release a new version of Netscape (which was supposed to be dead).
Now, it's most likely because they take some of the key players from Mozilla to make it work with their "enhancements", but this is AOL we're talking about, and I don't trust them at all.
As for starting your own project, this is all well-and-good for the more tech-savvy, but with IE being the main opponent for Mozilla (or Firefox in particular), finding an offshoot of the Mozilla product will not be easy (at first, the project may garner enough of a following) but there will be a initial fallback to IE. With the latest improvements in SP2, and the so-called re-investment in IE 7, the competition just got a lot more fierce.
.. whether or not Mozilla (most likely pressured by AOL) starts to bundle this extension with their browser distro. Of couse, the likelihood of this happening is so small, simply because it would most likely alienate about 98% of their current market. Aside from that, an extension that displays advertisements in a browser? Sounds like a horrible idea. Shame on the developer.
... I'm happy he's alright, and that the transplant was a success. However, what worries me is the number of people repeatedly passed-over for transplants based on questionable justification.
Speaking from experience, the donation and subsequent dole-out process is supposed to be on a first-come-first-serve priority, based on compatibility and/or severity. Any attempts to get around this process are not only unfair for those that wait (painstakingly) in line, but also for the unfortunate soul that may have been bumped back a position in favour of the media-savvy Todd.
Unfortunately we may never know their name, they did not invest in billboards or an online advertising campaign.
I only hope that the next available donation arrived in time.