Uh, that is a bad thing. What value our nation if in the act of defending her we strip her of the constitutional guarantees which have made of her the finest nation on earth? If we continue as we have begun here, we will soon live safely in a place no different than, say, the USSR under J. Stalin.
(Boy, I'm gonna get flamed for my arrogance here, but damnit I do consider my nation, the United States of America, the single finest nation on earth)
Intel would smack them back to infancy and spank them!
Besides, I'd be more impressed if I could buy bare metal from their retail locations rather than pay the M$ tax. Getting AMD chips instead of Intel would just be the icing on the cake IMHO.
and they didn't have to clear away the rubble of a previous city before they got started.
You might want to cut 'em a little slack - if their first effort at patent reform falls short, then it's up to us to give 'em another nudge in the right direction. Until then, it might make sense to just watch and see.
<insert poster name here> posts a lot of stories in order to drive traffic to his website for personal gain? If the article being posted is valid and the links in the post are all valid, what do I care where the user's contact link takes me?
Really, I've read several posts by BB (some good, some fairly poor in fact IMHO), never once have I clicked on the "Beatles-Beatles" link to look at the poster information.
I read the articles which capture my attention. I respond to posts on subjects where I feel I have something to contribute. If <insert poster name here> wants to link his ID back to a personal website, that's <insert poster name here>'s business. It's not as though I'm paying for the content I see here, although I'm aware that some of us here do; I'm recieving free information, and I should exercise normal judgement regarding the content of that information accordingly, not expect some "higher authority" to vet and sanitize the information first. If I wanted that, I'd be using AOL.
Better yet, what makes this man's unsupported opinions with which I strongly disagree worthy of note?
I've seen more coherent and well thought-out writing from my teenage son. This guy starts right off admitting that he's one of the pundits whose opinions I should almost discard out of hand; I still haven't figured out why I didn't stop reading right there. Senility, perhaps; oh, well.
I found the blog to be quite annoying. Shame he put his name on it or I'd consider having him arrested.
is only guaranteed as far as the government is concerned?
To list an egregious example: I publish a newsletter. You ask me to print an article in the newsletter, but I refuse because I personally disagree with your article.
No violation of your right to free speech here. Case closed.
It's only when there is direct government involvement that constitutional issues arise.
From my example: I publish a newsletter for a government/quasi-governmental agency. You ask me to print an article in the newsletter, but I refuse because I personally disagree with your article.
You should sue. You should win. Case closed(?)
There are many exceptions to the point I've made (for example, the media are privately owned but face governmental oversight regarding editorial opinions).
Now that's a different kettle o' fish. I'm pretty much screwed, as is everyone I work for.
All of this makes me want to yell "MOVIE!" in a crowded fire-house.
Yes, but inserting NOP's into a DLL requires you to compute and store entry points, does it not? I mean, there's gotta be a jump table somewhere, right? That computation must be replicable in order for software to use it; so all an enterprising cracker need do is perform the same count valid software has to and voila - security bypassed.
Doesn't matter where in the software you hide the algorithm, the algorithm must be available in software and therefore provides only the illusion of security. Sorta like locking the front door, but leaving the key under the door mat (when everybody knows that you leave the key somewhere near the front door).
Put it in hardware, and you've begun sliding down the slippery slope leading to "Trustworthy Computing".
This is all wide of the point, however; the problem isn't a buffer overflow, it's a well-coded but ill-concieved functionality built into Windows by design. Going back to that front door, it's a mail-slot large enough to put your arm into, in case you ever need to spin the doorknob from the inside. Not intended to make your home insecure, but rather to make your life easier. Oopsy! Didn't realize that thieves could also reach through the mail slot.
People in his position are generally heavily funded to perform what I'm sure his investors hoped would be fruitful research. If his research is flawed due to negligence it ends right there with public ridicule and disgrace.
BUT . . . if the fraud was perpetrated intentionally, one is obliged to wonder if verification of the financial practices might not be a good idea (to go along with the scientific review of the lab's "data"). After all, it's a damn sight cheaper to invent scientific data than it is to gain it by hard work and diligence.
Why not take the SID of a system, or some GUID, and use it to morph all the binary images on a system in a unique way for that system?
Now that sounds quite similar to M$'s "(un)Trustworthy Computing" bit. Since the keys and the encryption algorithm both reside on any given system, the decryption must take place within a (hardware embedded) subsystem in order to prevent the system software from being compromised. Uh, what happens if I want to install LINUX, or even when I just want to reinstall Windows? Absent hardware encryption and hardware checking, I don't see how such a scheme can be made secure, and I think you will find that the majority of/.'ers are vehemently opposed to embedded hardware preventing valid users from installing valid software on their systems (a known and expected result of implementing M$'s "(un)Trustworthy Computing" protocols).
For the record, I can only recall one instance where it was more reasonable to reinstall LINUX than to fix it; my experience with Windows, however, includes many reinstalls. Software-based encryption means that it will be difficult at best to rescue files from a compromised system; hardware-based encryption means that M$ (via the agency of your hardware manufacturer) pwns j00r 50u1.
And you don't have to worry about seventy-million monkeys asking you to review a script they've just whomped up for Shakespear, or having your underwear spontaneously jump three feet to the left.
I could calculate the odds of this engine ever working, but you won't like it!
A vague theory that "maybe if we have a *really strong magnetic field, we'll get some cool n-dimentional effects", absent supporting evidence that this will actually happen - somehow, I'm just not excited.
And where are the flying cars? I was promised flying cars!
It's an external drive - presumably it'll use a standard interface (SCSI or IDE - who cares?).
I suspect that it'll be possible to connect either item of hardware via the same interface. Now, the existence of drivers, DRM, media to use either type of drive - that's another story.
Television manufacturers wisely avoided this by using a standard interface which would work with either Beta or VHS.;^) I suspect something similar applies here.
That's what they used to say about the atmosphere - breathed in Los Angeles lately?
That's what they used to say about the Great Lakes - had any seafood from there lately?
That's what they used to say about the land in the USA - been to Love Canal lately?
We don't need to overwhelm any given sector of the ecology - we need only have enough of an effect to trigger an event which could concievably have world-altering results.
I don't think the exec's at Fox will bring back Futurama just on a whim.
Regardless of where the viewer support comes from (Adult Swim on Cartoon Network in this case), the people at Fox obviously percieve that there is a sizeable percentage of the viewing population ready to see more of the antics of Frye, Leela, Bender and a cuddly alien that excretes spaceship fuel.
Slashdot Mirror
(Boy, I'm gonna get flamed for my arrogance here, but damnit I do consider my nation, the United States of America, the single finest nation on earth)
Besides, I'd be more impressed if I could buy bare metal from their retail locations rather than pay the M$ tax. Getting AMD chips instead of Intel would just be the icing on the cake IMHO.
You might want to cut 'em a little slack - if their first effort at patent reform falls short, then it's up to us to give 'em another nudge in the right direction. Until then, it might make sense to just watch and see.
Really, I've read several posts by BB (some good, some fairly poor in fact IMHO), never once have I clicked on the "Beatles-Beatles" link to look at the poster information.
I read the articles which capture my attention. I respond to posts on subjects where I feel I have something to contribute. If <insert poster name here> wants to link his ID back to a personal website, that's <insert poster name here>'s business. It's not as though I'm paying for the content I see here, although I'm aware that some of us here do; I'm recieving free information, and I should exercise normal judgement regarding the content of that information accordingly, not expect some "higher authority" to vet and sanitize the information first. If I wanted that, I'd be using AOL.
n/t
Would you like fries with that?
|
|
|
|
Oh, but you know the rest.
I've seen more coherent and well thought-out writing from my teenage son. This guy starts right off admitting that he's one of the pundits whose opinions I should almost discard out of hand; I still haven't figured out why I didn't stop reading right there. Senility, perhaps; oh, well.
I found the blog to be quite annoying. Shame he put his name on it or I'd consider having him arrested.
What's left after you acquire arbitrarily large amounts of money and power?
So that they can add it to their already lengthy list of known LINUX exploits!
Which would seem pretty likely, actually. Boy, slip into a dimension where electromagnetism doesn't work - bummer!
To list an egregious example: I publish a newsletter. You ask me to print an article in the newsletter, but I refuse because I personally disagree with your article.
No violation of your right to free speech here. Case closed.
It's only when there is direct government involvement that constitutional issues arise.
From my example: I publish a newsletter for a government/quasi-governmental agency. You ask me to print an article in the newsletter, but I refuse because I personally disagree with your article.
You should sue. You should win. Case closed(?)
There are many exceptions to the point I've made (for example, the media are privately owned but face governmental oversight regarding editorial opinions). Now that's a different kettle o' fish. I'm pretty much screwed, as is everyone I work for.
All of this makes me want to yell "MOVIE!" in a crowded fire-house.
Doesn't matter where in the software you hide the algorithm, the algorithm must be available in software and therefore provides only the illusion of security. Sorta like locking the front door, but leaving the key under the door mat (when everybody knows that you leave the key somewhere near the front door).
Put it in hardware, and you've begun sliding down the slippery slope leading to "Trustworthy Computing".
This is all wide of the point, however; the problem isn't a buffer overflow, it's a well-coded but ill-concieved functionality built into Windows by design. Going back to that front door, it's a mail-slot large enough to put your arm into, in case you ever need to spin the doorknob from the inside. Not intended to make your home insecure, but rather to make your life easier. Oopsy! Didn't realize that thieves could also reach through the mail slot.
BUT . . . if the fraud was perpetrated intentionally, one is obliged to wonder if verification of the financial practices might not be a good idea (to go along with the scientific review of the lab's "data"). After all, it's a damn sight cheaper to invent scientific data than it is to gain it by hard work and diligence.
Why not take the SID of a system, or some GUID, and use it to morph all the binary images on a system in a unique way for that system?
Now that sounds quite similar to M$'s "(un)Trustworthy Computing" bit. Since the keys and the encryption algorithm both reside on any given system, the decryption must take place within a (hardware embedded) subsystem in order to prevent the system software from being compromised. Uh, what happens if I want to install LINUX, or even when I just want to reinstall Windows? Absent hardware encryption and hardware checking, I don't see how such a scheme can be made secure, and I think you will find that the majority of /.'ers are vehemently opposed to embedded hardware preventing valid users from installing valid software on their systems (a known and expected result of implementing M$'s "(un)Trustworthy Computing" protocols).
For the record, I can only recall one instance where it was more reasonable to reinstall LINUX than to fix it; my experience with Windows, however, includes many reinstalls. Software-based encryption means that it will be difficult at best to rescue files from a compromised system; hardware-based encryption means that M$ (via the agency of your hardware manufacturer) pwns j00r 50u1.
Palladium, anyone?
I could calculate the odds of this engine ever working, but you won't like it!
And where are the flying cars? I was promised flying cars!
His wife could not be reached to comment on this!
***rimshot***
Thanks folks! I'll be here all week. Don't forget to tip the wait staff.
The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak.
Or have they fixed that old bug yet? (Seen during tests of EnglishRussian translation about, oh, seven years ago)
You mean like SuSE LINUX?
I suspect that it'll be possible to connect either item of hardware via the same interface. Now, the existence of drivers, DRM, media to use either type of drive - that's another story.
Television manufacturers wisely avoided this by using a standard interface which would work with either Beta or VHS. ;^) I suspect something similar applies here.
That's what they used to say about the Great Lakes - had any seafood from there lately?
That's what they used to say about the land in the USA - been to Love Canal lately?
We don't need to overwhelm any given sector of the ecology - we need only have enough of an effect to trigger an event which could concievably have world-altering results.
Regardless of where the viewer support comes from (Adult Swim on Cartoon Network in this case), the people at Fox obviously percieve that there is a sizeable percentage of the viewing population ready to see more of the antics of Frye, Leela, Bender and a cuddly alien that excretes spaceship fuel.