I said "If you learned to research anything with some efficacy you would know that you CAN go to wikipedia and use the cited references there to write your own information."
So, lets say this, if you find me terrifying, perhaps you should rethink your opinion of yourself. If you go to wikipedia and find the cited references are not any good (circular, tabloid, etc.) then keep searching, unless of course you want to cite such references, but don't blame me or wikipedia, or anyone because you did not do YOUR part in researching the information that you need. DAMN!
I heartily reject the idea, and your assertion that my teacher are wiser than I am. They may well be more educated, but that does NOT make them wiser. meh
Yes, exactly. The Internet and Google are only showing us what idiots we were before they showed up. Interestingly, there is a bell curve here.
Think about one group that doesn't seem to need the Internet or Google to do their job or live their life? Politicians. Sure they could use them, but they seem to be on the whole, rather ignorant of technology in general. What does that say about them?
Inversely, what does it say about people whose lives are very involved with technology and the internet?
Is it making us stupid, or did some of us just find enough information on the intarwebstube to finally realize something? "holy fsck batman, the world is full of idiots. How did we ever make it through evolution?"
I've always wondered what the deal is with not being allowed to use wikipedia for school etc. If you learned to research anything with some efficacy you would know that you CAN go to wikipedia and use the cited references there to write your own information. You are also not allowed to use someone else's paper from last semester.
As far as political figures and celebreties, wikipedia is about as accurate as ANYTHING else in the world. You can't trust MSM about them, can't trust fan magazines, can't trust any information you get about political figures unless it's backed up by multiple other sources.
So, really, why is it such a pain to not be allowed to cite wikipedia?
Finding cheap and powerful processors like the Cell processor is an amazing step forward for everyone. Not because it can be part of a supercomputer, but because you can fit 5 of them on your desktop and have a supercomputer at home.
If you can put 5 PS3s inside your desktop system, and use the big CPU you normally have as the admin CPU, you could have a virtual world as your desktop UI. Imagine walking your little avatar to your home office, clicking on a file cabinet, opening the folder for your budget, clicking on the latest date report folder, and it opens the right file for you. It would allow people to use computers and their tools in the same way that they operate in normal life, just VR.
Then you walk to the kitchen of your desktop interface and click on the cook book and it opens a web browser loaded with links to cooking recipes and information. There are many more ways to use it, that's just an example. There are many more.
If such power is made available to the home user, it will get used, and the uses will be amazing:) IMO anyway.
I'm guessing you have never watched a fish tank for any period of time. Even gold fish who tend to try eating everything will have a taste and ignore it after. Now, if the robo-fish gets any algae on it, it could be problematic as that would make it taste like something to eat.
Other than that, all those old boats sitting on the bottom have not been eaten bit by bit, so you can relax and quit worrying about the fish being killed by poisonous parts from the robo-fish.
Grouper and sharks and larger predatory fish might damage them in the initial lets have a taste moment, but I don't think there is too much to worry about there.
I like that. It would be nice to be able to filter for only posts that are higher than some value, and/or modded in some category. For instance, let me filter for posts that are either > +7 or modded as funny/insightful. I'd like the 'also show post it is responding to' option as well in order to keep the context of the post at hand.
Then I could read only those posts that I want when I've not got tons of time to read everything.
Since we did go a bit off topic, I'd also like to see each thread's links. Say someone asks about something that causes posters to post 43 URLs of further information. I'd like to see those links herded onto a page by themselves (kind of like moderation is now) where I can use them without scrolling through all the comments. That is one of the important reasons for using slashdot and news aggregation sites. To find the knock on information that others have found useful without having to index the Internet on my own servers out in the garage... DOH!
I tried to, read the review. Something struck me as curiously odd:
The big drawback right now is video selection. While there are over ten thousand titles available, it's possible to get through everything you may really enjoy in just a couple of months. I really think they (netflix) need to step up the licensing and video transfer to make this service great. I have to imagine that it will happen sometime in the near future as the instant video on PC has always felt like somewhat of a beta test program to me. Bold highlights added by me. Is this supposed to be the answer for marathon movie watching couch potatoes? I realize that I watch much less tv than do many people, but really, do people rent 2 and 3 movies a night? for months on end?
I can't remember where now, but I remember some military contractor type company working to clear up image meshing like this on a robotic vehicle program somewhere (at least I think I do, but now can find no links for it). If they clean up the details with revised software, this would be an awesome terr^H^H^H^H^Hflight training sim setup.
The story I read was about creating 3D maps from sat pictures, inserting geodata where it was known, and using this as guidance data for unmanned passenger vehicles like the latest DARPA challenge.
Theoretically, if you can update photos every other day, you could use this to map alternate routes for drivers, and correct inconsistencies in map data for Google maps and Yahoo maps et al.
It's all about the speed of updates. I'd think a single helicopter flying with a rather fancy camera setup (something like they use for capturing a murder scene etc.) could cover a metropolitan area in a day, crunch the photo data, update... presto, accurate maps. Even 8 days is pretty damn fast.
is there any greater confirmation of the value of OSS than companies wanting to give you access so you will help them out later?
Hold on, so the megacorp will 'give' you access so you'll be ready to help them later.... uhm, can we sue them? This is entirely the process of OSS, well sort of. If it is open, people will use it. If you build it, they will come. To me, this validates RMS rather than saying anything about Sony, unless you want to say that maybe they get it now? but huh? They don't get it, they just want cheap labor.
Well, perhaps people will learn... software is free. Excruciating customer service experiences cost money.
You are almost there. For any given metropolitan area, I can find out how to bring it to it's knees in less than 30 minutes and no loss of life. If you want loss of life, I guarantee that it's possible. The whole idea was to make Americans afraid. If they are afraid, the world is (more or less) and the terrorists have won.
There is no method to make any mode of transport safe, or any building other than restricting all access to it/them. So by spreading fear, they win. Logic loses, fear wins. Think it through, just for a minute. Any target but airlines is now easy, just as easy as the airlines were on 9/11 because all efforts are spent on screening passengers... not airport staff, not water supplies, not power stations.
You are buying into the fear and somehow believing that this 'extra' measure makes you more safe? Who would want you to believe that? If there was genuine fear of terrorism in the USA it would cover every possible attack vector, not JUST airlines. See what the MSM wants you to be afraid of? remember who rattles their leashes?
I'm not saying there is some big conspiracy, just saying hey! why wouldn't terrorists attack water supplies? If they really wanted to harm citizens, why try to smash into buildings when a small vial of poison is enough?
They were making a statement, one that would put you and others in a frenzy, one that would cause you to waste all your money and liberties on protecting yourself from something that does not exist.
....You should travel the world some before speaking about countries you've never been to. I have, trust me, that platinum card is not all it's cracked up to be, despite comforts provided by it.
There are simple, pre-9/11 ways of running a secure air transport system. I have been through Athens airport many times and it is considered a hub of terrorist traffic in it's day. It never needed the same intrusive checks that you see in the USA today. Perhaps before you take someone's comments as off-hand conversational fodder you might consider that they are not ill-considered or uneducated comment.
The world was secure for airport traffic before 9/11, and it is safe now without all these security measures. Nothing on the plane will stop someone from hijacking it if they have enough manpower and willpower. period. think it through. The alleged story from the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania shows that it is not possible to hijack if passengers don't want it. It takes multiple security failures to allow it. Up until 9/11 everyone was told that hijackers don't want to kill everyone, they want money or some other media recognition etc. So on 9/11 things failed. Not because there were no scanners or people took toothpaste onboard, but because the terrorists stepped outside the standard paradigm. They will do so again IF they want to attack, despite extra precautions for air transport. If the general thought that terrorists are smart is true, airliners will be the last thing they would use next time. It's far easier to sabotage the electric grid, water supply, or nuclear power plant.
BTW, terrorist acts on the infrastructure are next, not loss of life. The idea is to get us to spend tons of money trying to protect ourselves from what we are told is to be feared. To waste that money and resources. They will always be able to find an easy target that we are not watching.
So, what again is the point of such measures in the airport? Do you mean to tell me that no one in the government whose job it is to predict terrorist acts has thought of this?
What is the point of intrusive security checks again?
Nope, not posting anon. If you've flown El Al and find they need security, well, ask yourself why? Go ahead, history is not just for librarians, look it up, ask why? Find the answer.
The nation of Israel has been called one of the biggest terrorist threats facing mankind in the last 40 years. So, again, why?
....Who are we protecting ourselves against again? That is the most sane question to ask. period.
Where are the threats? Where are the terrorists? Where is the danger? Is there ANYONE on/. that knows where the proven irrefutable answers are?
These scanners are not necessary in any other country. Not even those that have actual terrorist living there (according to bushco). What is the real reason for these scanners?
I'm betting that it is to acclimatize the populace to intrusive searches for 'security' reasons.
Yes, put on the tin foil hat, pass the ammo pal. Only the most ignorant of terrorists would attack with airplanes again. While we are concentrating on making sure grandma is wearing her support hose and not disguised C4, they will be happily planning to poison water supplies or 'assplode' nuclear power stations... well, that is if there ARE any more terrorist plots.
If you listen to what Bin Laden supposedly said, he has already won. He knew what the neocons had planned for the NWO, and was probably part of it. He played his part.
Now, take off the tin foil hat and put on the thinking one. What are these scanners protecting us from? Where is the evidence,never mind proof, that we need protection from that? Go ahead, give us a list of things, and cite your original source of information provided as proof of such threats.
This is an open challenge to anyone. Show me the money!! Prove that such measures are needed. Don't forget to prove how these measures stop airport staff from planting bombs or drugs in someone's luggage.......
For a Friday night, that is a very nice thought. A project funded by the public, and at least in part, built by the public. Nothing says OSS works better than that. At least I can't think of anything that does... very nice.
Actually, considering it a minor problem is not irresponsible risk. When you are that cock sure of the equipment you designed that you can think of it as a minor problem when space radiation knocks your system into safe mode for a bit, you have awesome mad design skills, not risk taking behaviors.
Yes, they used tax payers' money, and I'm pretty glad that I helped contribute in some way. Exploring our solar system and beyond with instrumentation is an absolutely needed step to find more space for all the humans on this planet. Not sure if you have noticed, but there are a few things we are running out of here despite China's one child rule.... room, food, fuel, and some other less dramatic things. Mother nature has a way of balancing things, so she'll kill a lot of us off. If we want to continue growing, expanding, space is the only viable option with current trends and technology. Improving the technology we command and the information that we have is the only way to viable improvements. The space exploration programs aim to do this in very calculated ways, very methodical steps to discover new information on a cost per answer type basis.
It is NOT irresponsible. There are a lot of irresponsible uses of tax payers' money, but trying to expand human knowledge and capabilities is not.
Not sure about others, but designing software and systems (software & hardware) that understand the data they are using, and when conditions are not right AND know how to go to safe mode rather than just fall apart is awesomeness in physical form.
Then just considering it a minor problem is an even higher form of awesomeness:)
As a hobby I build small robotic creations. I can tell you that working with limited resources, and having to deal with the completely unexpected is just brain damage for the fun of it. Testing your new code on the same hardware you've had for months and thinking "I really did not know that you could bend this metal piece with so little force" or "why the hell is it doing that" and find out that you missed a decimal point on force calculations or a typo leaves you reacting with subroutine x instead of y.
Those engineers have to be fscking proud of their work. I know I would be. Some days I look at code I've had running 24/7 for several years and am amazed, not just at myself, but that I managed to find the bugs and fix the "I didn't know that would happen" issues. It's a lot of type and bounds checking to be certain, but something always creeps in.
I say they should be proud. The Mars missions have been nothing short of exemplary awesomeness. When they figure out the failure they did have, I'm certain that the absolute goodness they built into it will help reveal totally amazing discoveries about why there was a failure. Nothing simple like metric conversions, or wrong alloy for the screws.
I'd go just a bit further and say that it speaks well for the software coders. There are at least three ways to treat any 'out of bounds' condition. They chose to make sure that the safe action was chosen.
An area where that loosely controlled type of team work gets into trouble unless all coders treat data passed to their code, and from their code in the same uniform functional ways.
It also makes me wonder how the code will react to certain malicious software, should it get loose in the facility. If I were writing code to destroy a nuclear facility, it is how data is passed from one process to another that I would definitely attack as well as other vulnerable places.
It is sort of reassuring to have seen a failure result in a controlled shutdown rather than some other, more undesirable action.
The first thing I thought.. OH, IE catches up, Mozilla moves ahead. FF3 is awsomeness, and now better security development? Impressive. Yes, it's not client side, but offers a way for site owners to add that extra bit of security... hmmm Mr Banker? hello? Are you listening? I hope that something solid comes of this to offer better security for people in general and the Internet as a whole.
No, it won't stop all identity theft attacks, but it is improvement.
Perhaps one day I'll get to use my pager/phone as second path authentication for the bank? I am hoping for it, but any improvement in the meantime is a good thing.
especially here on/. but why doesn't your company get a WiMax connection AND and ADSL connection and bridge them through your router?
That gives you both improved performance and redundancy in the case of an outage.
Yep, that disaster recovery planning is for small businesses also. You'll enjoy the greater speeds on normal days, and when there is an outage you'll be very glad to have the reduced performance.
Of course, that is just a suggestion. Not like I'm a CTO or anything. I just act like one on/.
Maybe it will not surprise you to know that Geek Squad is behind this scam. They will never try to collect extortion money as their real target revenue is the 65 dollar check-up fee they will get when consumers bring their computers in to find out what has gone wrong. Of course, the fee is higher if you don't have extended warranty, or if you installed your own antivirus software.
It's not the corporate network where this will be problematic. It is TimeWarner and Comcast. Remember the recent story about MediaDefender? Assumptions about scans are just that. As soon as this methodology is implemented, worms will scan much slower. After all, a virus/worm author normally has some time to build the botnet before they want to activate it. Nothing really depends on quick proliferation except damaging worms.
IMO, it is the botnets that do the most damage as a collective thing. Stopping a worm that bricks your machine is not hard LOL, stopping one that bricks other machines is good. Stopping DDoS attacks is even MORE important. It is the attack for hire model of hacking that really sucks bad.
If the botnet owner takes a few months to build the botnet, it is still a botnet. Even better if s/he hides data in video packets or VoIP or IM packets.
The only real way that I can see to stop the damage is to have 99.9999%+ computers in the world running in a sandbox where the perimeter monitors everything that the user software is doing. So, even if the corporate network is functioning like a sandbox (as it already should be) the danger from worms forming botnets is still a threat, this merely lessens the threat of a quickly spreading/created botnet/worm.
Well, let me have a stab at this. For some time now, it 'seems' like MS business decisions might have been made by looking at the chairs scattered in the hallway outside the boardroom like so many tea leaves in the bottom of a cup.
Whether you like MS or not, clearly Vista was not the big deal it was supposed to be, and has failed to live up to expectations of even many MS fanbois. With users and businesses requesting XP be installed on new machines, and requests for longer lifecycle for XP added to the growth in GNU/Linux marketshare plus GNU/Linux shipping on some big name OEM machines. The trend here is not a positive one for MS. MSN is not making money, Zune is not making money, XBox isn't making any real money, XP is not causing the finance group to be all smiles either. Clearly the bid for Yahoo was a sign to everyone that MS does not plan to innovate it's way out of the maelstrom they find themselves in right now. When you get caught bluffing at poker, your hand is played out.
MS will have to do something rather extraordinary to turn the current trend around. Trying to do that in the midst of a recession might be difficult. There are very large organizations (whole countries even) that have decided to dump MS Windows products for various reasons. It really doesn't matter how good XP was or is, MS marketshare is leaching away in many areas. Wii helped with that. Ubuntu et al have helped with it. Dell et al helped too. In a recession Free sounds a lot better than 350 bucks, especially when it runs better on your old hardware than Vista does on brand new hardware. Of course there is the whole DRM thing to think of also. Then there is the iPod halo effect bringing more Mac customers.
There are plenty of reasons for NOT choosing Vista or MS products. Linux is one alternative, and it does deserve some of the lime light in this situation. If Linux wasn't working so good, MS would be making money off of Vista de facto.
The fact that there is only a very minute chance that you managed to post your message without relying on some version of Linux sort of technically means that Linux *IS* related and germane to a whole lot of things in the world today.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey pal! Guy is my friend, leave him out of it you insensitive clod!
Slow down, take the lens cap off for a bit.
I said "If you learned to research anything with some efficacy you would know that you CAN go to wikipedia and use the cited references there to write your own information."
So, lets say this, if you find me terrifying, perhaps you should rethink your opinion of yourself. If you go to wikipedia and find the cited references are not any good (circular, tabloid, etc.) then keep searching, unless of course you want to cite such references, but don't blame me or wikipedia, or anyone because you did not do YOUR part in researching the information that you need. DAMN!
I heartily reject the idea, and your assertion that my teacher are wiser than I am. They may well be more educated, but that does NOT make them wiser. meh
Yes, exactly. The Internet and Google are only showing us what idiots we were before they showed up. Interestingly, there is a bell curve here.
Think about one group that doesn't seem to need the Internet or Google to do their job or live their life? Politicians. Sure they could use them, but they seem to be on the whole, rather ignorant of technology in general. What does that say about them?
Inversely, what does it say about people whose lives are very involved with technology and the internet?
Is it making us stupid, or did some of us just find enough information on the intarwebstube to finally realize something? "holy fsck batman, the world is full of idiots. How did we ever make it through evolution?"
I've always wondered what the deal is with not being allowed to use wikipedia for school etc. If you learned to research anything with some efficacy you would know that you CAN go to wikipedia and use the cited references there to write your own information. You are also not allowed to use someone else's paper from last semester.
As far as political figures and celebreties, wikipedia is about as accurate as ANYTHING else in the world. You can't trust MSM about them, can't trust fan magazines, can't trust any information you get about political figures unless it's backed up by multiple other sources.
So, really, why is it such a pain to not be allowed to cite wikipedia?
Finding cheap and powerful processors like the Cell processor is an amazing step forward for everyone. Not because it can be part of a supercomputer, but because you can fit 5 of them on your desktop and have a supercomputer at home.
:) IMO anyway.
If you can put 5 PS3s inside your desktop system, and use the big CPU you normally have as the admin CPU, you could have a virtual world as your desktop UI. Imagine walking your little avatar to your home office, clicking on a file cabinet, opening the folder for your budget, clicking on the latest date report folder, and it opens the right file for you. It would allow people to use computers and their tools in the same way that they operate in normal life, just VR.
Then you walk to the kitchen of your desktop interface and click on the cook book and it opens a web browser loaded with links to cooking recipes and information. There are many more ways to use it, that's just an example. There are many more.
If such power is made available to the home user, it will get used, and the uses will be amazing
I'm guessing you have never watched a fish tank for any period of time. Even gold fish who tend to try eating everything will have a taste and ignore it after. Now, if the robo-fish gets any algae on it, it could be problematic as that would make it taste like something to eat.
Other than that, all those old boats sitting on the bottom have not been eaten bit by bit, so you can relax and quit worrying about the fish being killed by poisonous parts from the robo-fish.
Grouper and sharks and larger predatory fish might damage them in the initial lets have a taste moment, but I don't think there is too much to worry about there.
I like that. It would be nice to be able to filter for only posts that are higher than some value, and/or modded in some category. For instance, let me filter for posts that are either > +7 or modded as funny/insightful. I'd like the 'also show post it is responding to' option as well in order to keep the context of the post at hand.
Then I could read only those posts that I want when I've not got tons of time to read everything.
Since we did go a bit off topic, I'd also like to see each thread's links. Say someone asks about something that causes posters to post 43 URLs of further information. I'd like to see those links herded onto a page by themselves (kind of like moderation is now) where I can use them without scrolling through all the comments. That is one of the important reasons for using slashdot and news aggregation sites. To find the knock on information that others have found useful without having to index the Internet on my own servers out in the garage... DOH!
It's sad that you can't be modded +7, Funny AND Insightful
Wow
I can't remember where now, but I remember some military contractor type company working to clear up image meshing like this on a robotic vehicle program somewhere (at least I think I do, but now can find no links for it). If they clean up the details with revised software, this would be an awesome terr^H^H^H^H^Hflight training sim setup.
The story I read was about creating 3D maps from sat pictures, inserting geodata where it was known, and using this as guidance data for unmanned passenger vehicles like the latest DARPA challenge.
Theoretically, if you can update photos every other day, you could use this to map alternate routes for drivers, and correct inconsistencies in map data for Google maps and Yahoo maps et al.
It's all about the speed of updates. I'd think a single helicopter flying with a rather fancy camera setup (something like they use for capturing a murder scene etc.) could cover a metropolitan area in a day, crunch the photo data, update... presto, accurate maps. Even 8 days is pretty damn fast.
is there any greater confirmation of the value of OSS than companies wanting to give you access so you will help them out later?
Hold on, so the megacorp will 'give' you access so you'll be ready to help them later.... uhm, can we sue them? This is entirely the process of OSS, well sort of. If it is open, people will use it. If you build it, they will come. To me, this validates RMS rather than saying anything about Sony, unless you want to say that maybe they get it now? but huh? They don't get it, they just want cheap labor.
Well, perhaps people will learn... software is free. Excruciating customer service experiences cost money.
Just my opinion
You are almost there. For any given metropolitan area, I can find out how to bring it to it's knees in less than 30 minutes and no loss of life. If you want loss of life, I guarantee that it's possible. The whole idea was to make Americans afraid. If they are afraid, the world is (more or less) and the terrorists have won.
There is no method to make any mode of transport safe, or any building other than restricting all access to it/them. So by spreading fear, they win. Logic loses, fear wins. Think it through, just for a minute. Any target but airlines is now easy, just as easy as the airlines were on 9/11 because all efforts are spent on screening passengers... not airport staff, not water supplies, not power stations.
You are buying into the fear and somehow believing that this 'extra' measure makes you more safe? Who would want you to believe that? If there was genuine fear of terrorism in the USA it would cover every possible attack vector, not JUST airlines. See what the MSM wants you to be afraid of? remember who rattles their leashes?
I'm not saying there is some big conspiracy, just saying hey! why wouldn't terrorists attack water supplies? If they really wanted to harm citizens, why try to smash into buildings when a small vial of poison is enough?
They were making a statement, one that would put you and others in a frenzy, one that would cause you to waste all your money and liberties on protecting yourself from something that does not exist.
They won.
....You should travel the world some before speaking about countries you've never been to. I have, trust me, that platinum card is not all it's cracked up to be, despite comforts provided by it.Here is an example of comparisons for you:
http://www.bobharris.com/content/view/1566/1/
There are simple, pre-9/11 ways of running a secure air transport system. I have been through Athens airport many times and it is considered a hub of terrorist traffic in it's day. It never needed the same intrusive checks that you see in the USA today. Perhaps before you take someone's comments as off-hand conversational fodder you might consider that they are not ill-considered or uneducated comment.
The world was secure for airport traffic before 9/11, and it is safe now without all these security measures. Nothing on the plane will stop someone from hijacking it if they have enough manpower and willpower. period. think it through. The alleged story from the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania shows that it is not possible to hijack if passengers don't want it. It takes multiple security failures to allow it. Up until 9/11 everyone was told that hijackers don't want to kill everyone, they want money or some other media recognition etc. So on 9/11 things failed. Not because there were no scanners or people took toothpaste onboard, but because the terrorists stepped outside the standard paradigm. They will do so again IF they want to attack, despite extra precautions for air transport. If the general thought that terrorists are smart is true, airliners will be the last thing they would use next time. It's far easier to sabotage the electric grid, water supply, or nuclear power plant.
BTW, terrorist acts on the infrastructure are next, not loss of life. The idea is to get us to spend tons of money trying to protect ourselves from what we are told is to be feared. To waste that money and resources. They will always be able to find an easy target that we are not watching.
So, what again is the point of such measures in the airport? Do you mean to tell me that no one in the government whose job it is to predict terrorist acts has thought of this?
What is the point of intrusive security checks again?
Nope, not posting anon. If you've flown El Al and find they need security, well, ask yourself why? Go ahead, history is not just for librarians, look it up, ask why? Find the answer.
The nation of Israel has been called one of the biggest terrorist threats facing mankind in the last 40 years. So, again, why?
I'm waiting for your answer too.
....Who are we protecting ourselves against again? That is the most sane question to ask. period.Where are the threats? Where are the terrorists? Where is the danger? Is there ANYONE on
These scanners are not necessary in any other country. Not even those that have actual terrorist living there (according to bushco). What is the real reason for these scanners?
I'm betting that it is to acclimatize the populace to intrusive searches for 'security' reasons.
Yes, put on the tin foil hat, pass the ammo pal. Only the most ignorant of terrorists would attack with airplanes again. While we are concentrating on making sure grandma is wearing her support hose and not disguised C4, they will be happily planning to poison water supplies or 'assplode' nuclear power stations... well, that is if there ARE any more terrorist plots.
If you listen to what Bin Laden supposedly said, he has already won. He knew what the neocons had planned for the NWO, and was probably part of it. He played his part.
Now, take off the tin foil hat and put on the thinking one. What are these scanners protecting us from? Where is the evidence,never mind proof, that we need protection from that? Go ahead, give us a list of things, and cite your original source of information provided as proof of such threats.
This is an open challenge to anyone. Show me the money!! Prove that such measures are needed. Don't forget to prove how these measures stop airport staff from planting bombs or drugs in someone's luggage.
time passes
I'm waiting... well?
For a Friday night, that is a very nice thought. A project funded by the public, and at least in part, built by the public. Nothing says OSS works better than that. At least I can't think of anything that does... very nice.
Actually, considering it a minor problem is not irresponsible risk. When you are that cock sure of the equipment you designed that you can think of it as a minor problem when space radiation knocks your system into safe mode for a bit, you have awesome mad design skills, not risk taking behaviors.
Yes, they used tax payers' money, and I'm pretty glad that I helped contribute in some way. Exploring our solar system and beyond with instrumentation is an absolutely needed step to find more space for all the humans on this planet. Not sure if you have noticed, but there are a few things we are running out of here despite China's one child rule.... room, food, fuel, and some other less dramatic things. Mother nature has a way of balancing things, so she'll kill a lot of us off. If we want to continue growing, expanding, space is the only viable option with current trends and technology. Improving the technology we command and the information that we have is the only way to viable improvements. The space exploration programs aim to do this in very calculated ways, very methodical steps to discover new information on a cost per answer type basis.
It is NOT irresponsible. There are a lot of irresponsible uses of tax payers' money, but trying to expand human knowledge and capabilities is not.
Not sure about others, but designing software and systems (software & hardware) that understand the data they are using, and when conditions are not right AND know how to go to safe mode rather than just fall apart is awesomeness in physical form.
:)
:)
Then just considering it a minor problem is an even higher form of awesomeness
As a hobby I build small robotic creations. I can tell you that working with limited resources, and having to deal with the completely unexpected is just brain damage for the fun of it. Testing your new code on the same hardware you've had for months and thinking "I really did not know that you could bend this metal piece with so little force" or "why the hell is it doing that" and find out that you missed a decimal point on force calculations or a typo leaves you reacting with subroutine x instead of y.
Those engineers have to be fscking proud of their work. I know I would be. Some days I look at code I've had running 24/7 for several years and am amazed, not just at myself, but that I managed to find the bugs and fix the "I didn't know that would happen" issues. It's a lot of type and bounds checking to be certain, but something always creeps in.
I say they should be proud. The Mars missions have been nothing short of exemplary awesomeness. When they figure out the failure they did have, I'm certain that the absolute goodness they built into it will help reveal totally amazing discoveries about why there was a failure. Nothing simple like metric conversions, or wrong alloy for the screws.
Makes me want to work with them.
I'd go just a bit further and say that it speaks well for the software coders. There are at least three ways to treat any 'out of bounds' condition. They chose to make sure that the safe action was chosen.
An area where that loosely controlled type of team work gets into trouble unless all coders treat data passed to their code, and from their code in the same uniform functional ways.
It also makes me wonder how the code will react to certain malicious software, should it get loose in the facility. If I were writing code to destroy a nuclear facility, it is how data is passed from one process to another that I would definitely attack as well as other vulnerable places.
It is sort of reassuring to have seen a failure result in a controlled shutdown rather than some other, more undesirable action.
are there others reading /. that are thinking.. Yawn, wake me when it's working like Google maps only much better?
I realize that it's new, and takes effort, but I can't break out the oohs and aaahhhs just yet. No matter how good it is, is it worth upgrading for?
Car analogy: Isn't this like demonstrating a concept car that they intend to put into production, but production will be a little bit different?
I'll wait for SP2 (or equivalent), thanks very much.
The first thing I thought.. OH, IE catches up, Mozilla moves ahead. FF3 is awsomeness, and now better security development? Impressive. Yes, it's not client side, but offers a way for site owners to add that extra bit of security... hmmm Mr Banker? hello? Are you listening? I hope that something solid comes of this to offer better security for people in general and the Internet as a whole.
No, it won't stop all identity theft attacks, but it is improvement.
Perhaps one day I'll get to use my pager/phone as second path authentication for the bank? I am hoping for it, but any improvement in the meantime is a good thing.
especially here on /. but why doesn't your company get a WiMax connection AND and ADSL connection and bridge them through your router?
/.
That gives you both improved performance and redundancy in the case of an outage.
Yep, that disaster recovery planning is for small businesses also. You'll enjoy the greater speeds on normal days, and when there is an outage you'll be very glad to have the reduced performance.
Of course, that is just a suggestion. Not like I'm a CTO or anything. I just act like one on
Cheers
Maybe it will not surprise you to know that Geek Squad is behind this scam. They will never try to collect extortion money as their real target revenue is the 65 dollar check-up fee they will get when consumers bring their computers in to find out what has gone wrong. Of course, the fee is higher if you don't have extended warranty, or if you installed your own antivirus software.
Of course I could be wrong.... but it's a thought
It's not the corporate network where this will be problematic. It is TimeWarner and Comcast. Remember the recent story about MediaDefender? Assumptions about scans are just that. As soon as this methodology is implemented, worms will scan much slower. After all, a virus/worm author normally has some time to build the botnet before they want to activate it. Nothing really depends on quick proliferation except damaging worms.
IMO, it is the botnets that do the most damage as a collective thing. Stopping a worm that bricks your machine is not hard LOL, stopping one that bricks other machines is good. Stopping DDoS attacks is even MORE important. It is the attack for hire model of hacking that really sucks bad.
If the botnet owner takes a few months to build the botnet, it is still a botnet. Even better if s/he hides data in video packets or VoIP or IM packets.
The only real way that I can see to stop the damage is to have 99.9999%+ computers in the world running in a sandbox where the perimeter monitors everything that the user software is doing. So, even if the corporate network is functioning like a sandbox (as it already should be) the danger from worms forming botnets is still a threat, this merely lessens the threat of a quickly spreading/created botnet/worm.
Well, let me have a stab at this. For some time now, it 'seems' like MS business decisions might have been made by looking at the chairs scattered in the hallway outside the boardroom like so many tea leaves in the bottom of a cup.
Whether you like MS or not, clearly Vista was not the big deal it was supposed to be, and has failed to live up to expectations of even many MS fanbois. With users and businesses requesting XP be installed on new machines, and requests for longer lifecycle for XP added to the growth in GNU/Linux marketshare plus GNU/Linux shipping on some big name OEM machines. The trend here is not a positive one for MS. MSN is not making money, Zune is not making money, XBox isn't making any real money, XP is not causing the finance group to be all smiles either. Clearly the bid for Yahoo was a sign to everyone that MS does not plan to innovate it's way out of the maelstrom they find themselves in right now. When you get caught bluffing at poker, your hand is played out.
MS will have to do something rather extraordinary to turn the current trend around. Trying to do that in the midst of a recession might be difficult. There are very large organizations (whole countries even) that have decided to dump MS Windows products for various reasons. It really doesn't matter how good XP was or is, MS marketshare is leaching away in many areas. Wii helped with that. Ubuntu et al have helped with it. Dell et al helped too. In a recession Free sounds a lot better than 350 bucks, especially when it runs better on your old hardware than Vista does on brand new hardware. Of course there is the whole DRM thing to think of also. Then there is the iPod halo effect bringing more Mac customers.
There are plenty of reasons for NOT choosing Vista or MS products. Linux is one alternative, and it does deserve some of the lime light in this situation. If Linux wasn't working so good, MS would be making money off of Vista de facto.
The fact that there is only a very minute chance that you managed to post your message without relying on some version of Linux sort of technically means that Linux *IS* related and germane to a whole lot of things in the world today.