Just about the first thing he says in the article is:
Is it an Office XP Killer?
I'll address this issue right off the bat. This is great software, but it
isn't an Office killer, nor is it designed to be. gobeProductive is designed to be a lighter, faster office suite.
Lighter and faster is fine with me, I couldn't care less if it kills Office. I sometimes have to use sub-P200 computers with 64MB of ram, and overbloated aps are a huge irritation. It makes me sick how wasteful things like MS Office, Mozilla, IE, etc. are when other products prove it can be done so much more efficiently. An Opera install, for example, is a featherweight by comparison to other browsers (not to mention faster on slow computers and more memory efficient), but still has basically all the important features. Where is all that other memory, CPU time and hard drive space getting wasted in the bloat-browsers?
Even if it weren't for the anti-bloat factor, the "Family" license is enough to give this suite a big advantage over M$'s offering. Heck, even that more flexible license is probably cheaper than a single-cpu license for Office (which is also bloated in price).
Does that 6.3 million number just count the sale of "The Sims" or does it include "Livin' Large" also? Does it include the expansion packs (e.g. "Hot Date")?
Of course, I'm not gonna complain - Myst is the most overrated game in the history of the universe and deserves to be relegated to the footnotes of gaming history. I mean, does anyone think that more people played Myst than other games of the era (i.e. Doom?)
Counter-countermeasure engineering problem...
on
Spy v. Spy
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
It would have been best if they had just taken engineering challenge and designed something that couldn't be detected. but instead they just decided to break our program. That's kind of lame.
Of course, the anti-spy people could treat these countermeasures as an engineering problem.
A couple possible (partial) solutions:
1) Check for beligerant spyware during the install process (the install program would presumably be running from a CD, so it couldn't be corrupted). Later, if it detects that spyware is being installed, fire off warnings, send e-mails, make logs, etc. to make sure that the spyware can't cover it's tracks.
2) In the documentation, note that failure for the program to run or a crash could indicate the presence of spyware (and that you should run an "emergeny check" from the install disk).
3) Put a check on the integrity of the software in the MBR (using CRCs and such). If a spyware messes with that, it should trip off the BIOS virus checking. That would also have to be documented of course so the user understands what the heck is going on.
4) Have the anti-spyware run entirely from a separate disk (maybe a boot disk to be sure the spyware isn't running waiting to thwart the anti-spyware). When you come in to work, or sit down at your computer, throw in the disk to be sure nobody installed spyware when you weren't there.
5) Make the anti-spyware as stealthy as the spyware. If the spyware or the person installing isn't aware of the presence of anti-spyware, the anti-spyware is much more likely to be successful. Using polymorphic code, constantly changing file names, etc. could probably be pretty effective.
None of these solutions are perfect of course, but a bit of a battle is probably inevitable, as the two types of software both have legitimate and illegitimate uses, and the only way one of the two can succeed is by defeating the other.
There should be corrolary to the Hitler/Nazi usenet rule for Slashdot. Anytime someone makes comparisons to Bill Gates or Microsoft the argument would immediately be declared dead and no further discussion would be allowed.
This is probably just propaganda for the MMPI test. I've always heard it associated with Cults, diagnosis of disesases that don't exist and Ritalin marketing.
The computer should call a psychic hotline - it'd be just as scientific.
I find it interesting how the thinnest parts of the coin (the areas closest to the bust or the image of the horse on the reverse, such as under George's chin), seemd to collapse and pile up next to the image... The images and text, being thicker, didn't deform as much and instead flowed closer together, and even flowing underneath eachother.
I would like to see this done with older coins with higher relief (i.e. pennies prior to the 70's).
Why are there no good space borne RPGs? Star Control II was THE best game ever (not to mention pretty much the first game with GUS support). What ever happened to games like that? That game had the most diverse and innovated cast of alien races, fun gameplay (action packed space battles and RPG type stuff), a cool soundtrack (for its day), humor, drama, mystery, and the best storyline of any game ever made in the history of the universe.
> So, basically, allowing any arbitrary VBS > script to execute without prompting the user > isn't a security vulnerability. What is it, > a ''feature''?
This is the kind of post that makes me mad that I even bother reading slashdot. Is your head made of wood?
You M$ flamers don't pay any attention to reality. How many times do you have to be told? It doesn't do this, and it never did this. In order for.vbs files to be opened the user must first chose to open the attachment, then click "Yes" on a screen that says something along the lines of "Are you sure you want to open this attachment? It could contain malicious code!" You don't seem to understand that though, and continue to rant on and on about something that doesn't even occur. All your unix e-mail programs will let you decode and run attachments if you want to. Most unix users aren't that dumb though.
Essentially what this patch does is prevent all the idiot users from their own stupidity. With this patch installed, you won't be able to open executable attachments AT ALL. It's not a security fix, it's a stupidity fix.
Admitedly, there WAS a bug in some activex (eyedog) control that did what you suggest. That's how bubbleboy worked (but NOT iloveyou). In any case, that bug was patched a very long time ago. Tons of unix programs have had buffer overflows which allowed unauthorized access. Why aren't slashdot people getting all angry at Quallcom or Sendmail about r00t exploit bugs they fixed months ago?
For those of you who aren't living in the real world, the fact is people still use Microsoft OS's 90-some percent of the time. Linux has NOT become a viable alternative for a serious portion of the computer users out there. I wish it was. Just because you like it, and all the other Linux freaks you talk to like it, doesn't mean it's taken over the world! It seems that/. has totally lost its grip on reality. Maybe once people realize that Linux ISN'T the M$ killer everybody want's it to be, then they can go about making it into OS for geeks AND real people.
It was the "Judge Dread" of X-Files episodes. It was bad all around. The acting, the writing, the everything. It didn't make sense, and didn't even try. The munch who wrote it should be shot. It had no redeeming qualities. Thank God it wasn't the "Last Action Hero" of X-Files episodes.
I wish the freaks that come up with all these great new technologies would put freaking jackets on the things. That is like the biggest problem with CD's. They don't have jackets, so they get scratched and dirty unless you're super careful with them. When they made DVD, they could have fixed that, but no, they didn't. So with double sided ones it's even worse beacause the label has to be on the stupid inner ring! If they put jackets on them, they'd be more reliable, easier to label, more convienient AND self cleaning.
I do tech support, and I can testify that it DOES NOT occur because they install the software incorrectly. A lot of people use a regular internet provider to access AOL because they don't have a local AOL number, and for some reason they really like hearing "you've got mail!" When they install AOL 5 (to upgrade from a previous version), it will usually prevent the regular DUN stuff from working (i.e. they can only use the AOL software to access the internet). The article is somewhat misleading - it has nothing to do with whether or not you choose to have AOL as your default browser.
There may be some reason to believe that this is an intentional FUD tactic (since the AOL software works, and regular IE and whatnot doesn't, it makes the ISP look bad as most ignorant people will assume that it's ISP's fault).
Usually, removing AOL 5 and the "AOL Dial-up adapter" from the network control panel fixes the problem, but not always.
Even though the problem is widespread and well known, AOL denies that it exists and will not provide support to fix the problem.
Everybody keeps wondering why Linux isn't taking over the desktop (and never will). I've been saying forever that since non-programmers don't have a say, it won't ever be useful to them. Geeze, you don't have to be to bright to figure out that most open source projects (that people would love to think would work for the average joe, like Linux) are nearly IMPOSSIBLE for most users to catch on to. Pointing out exceptions just proves the rule. There's no signs of this changing.
Quite frankly, Quicktime is stupid. Now, I know that sounds like a troll or something, but it does. Apple keeps proclaiming that it's the "ultimate multimedia standard technology" or some junk. But really, it's just a file format. Not a particularly special one at that. The technology is in the compression codecs, and that can be put in all kinds of file formats (even crappy AVI or whatever). Quicktime's not anything special, and isn't worth proclaiming as some great OS advancement. I hate it when I run in to some quicktime crap on the web. Usually I just ignore it and move on because Apple's Quicktime software for [insert your favorite OS] is so absolutely horrible, or worse, non-existant. Probably it would be good if it were open sourced. The only problem is that lots of jerks out there have patented/whatever the various compression schemes which make everything suck.
I really love it when people ask you a question because you are an expert on the subject, then reject your expert opinion because it doesn't match their preconcieved notions and/or heresay/hype. Examples:
Luser: Does tea have caffene? Me: Yes, but moreso it's got some other chemicals that are similar to caffene. Luser: No, it can't because it doesn't list it as one of the ingredients on the label. It just says "Tea brewed from tea leaves, etc."
Luser: Will there be chaos when the new year rolls around? Me: No, there might be a few minor annoyances though. Luser: You're wrong; you're just saying that 'cause you're part of some conspiracy. My cuzin's building a bunker and says all of Russia's missles will come and blow me up. My tee-vee says the power will go out and...
If you don't want the truth go bug somebody who will tell you the lies you want to hear. Don't bother me.
I've been complaining forever!
on
Apocalypse Not
·
· Score: 1
I've been saying all along that Y2K was overhyped (mostly because people don't understand how a computer actually works.) Nobody listened to me. I'm actually surprised at how many problems actually occurred (I expected even less). People wasted money on it in many cases (though there was some money well spent). In some cases, it would have been faster, cheaper and safer to wait until the bugs made themselves apparent and then fix them.
I'm really irritated by these alarmist groups that are just randy for the end of the world. I love how people are still holding out hope that we still might have trouble later down the road. Yeah, I'm sure more minor annoyances will pop up. Big friggin' deal. You're no better than the various religous cults that keep trying to put a date to armageddon. I was very dissapointed in total absence of mass suicides. If you are so anxious for the world to end, why don't you do us all a favor and whack yourself?
Linux for the desktop might be alright for some people, but from my experience (doing tech support), many users (especially the new ones) don't need anything that's harder to use/install/whatever. In fact, for a large group of them, Windoze (or even Mac) is too hard to use. What is really needed is an operating system that is even easier than any that is currently available, and doesn't even give the most ignorant user enough rope to hang themselves. In fact, there should be a whole super-easy computer with all the basic software that the average idiot needs already on there. Hmmm, I think I'll patent that idea and make a gazillion dollars.
I can understand people complaining about bugs and security holes in Microsoft software, but in the case of the Melissa virus (unless I've got it confused), their software acted as it should. In a default-setup Windows computer with Outlook Express and Microsoft Word, the user is warned, not once, but twice that the file they are opening could be dangerous. First they are warned by their e-mail client that files transmitted by e-mail may have viruses or trojan horses. Then, Word's macro virus protection warns them that the file they are opening runs a macro on startup, which may be a virus. If they go ahead at that point (or if they had turned off the warnings), it's their own fault.
If you are warned against something in life, you are accountable for the results. If you drive a car off a cliff because you didn't realize it was dangerous, you can't sue the car company. Why should software be any different?
We have to make the distinction between near-infrared and far-infrared/thermal imaging.
Near-infrared is much like regular light, but just a bit longer wavelength than visible red light and doesn't have much to do with the temperature of an object. It is used by remote controls, computer IR ports, etc. and can be imaged with Sony Nightvision cameras. Many tranditional camcorders, digital cameras, quickcams and other CCDs can pick it up to a lesser extent (remote controls can be seen to blink for example). Some digital cameras can photograph in near-infrared with the addition of a filter and conventional cameras with special film. The Nightvision trick worked because many materials that appear opaque to us are transparent to varying degrees to near-infrared light. The sun is used as a big fat IR light source, and the visible light which would normally obscure the image is blocked out by a special filter, sold separately:-). I haven't had a chance to check out one of those cameras, but I suspect that they have some small source of IR light (IR LEDs probably) for actually nighttime photography.
Far-infrared or thermal imaging reqires more expensive equipment and actually picks up on warm objects. You can see that sort of thing on Cops when they're chasing the baddies around with the helicopter at night. I suspect that's what this uses because near-infrared would pick up on everything and would require an infrared light source that extends farther than your headlights. If it does use far-IR then I don't think you could pull off the same trick as with the Sony Nightvision cameras. If it uses near-IR, I still doubt you could pull it off because it would only work in the day, during which the feature is probably not useable. Either way, it would be MUCH cheaper for your average pervert to get a Sony Nightvision camcorder than a Cadillac (I'm sure somebody's found a way to get around the modifications Sony's made to "fix" it.)
> what legitimate use requires the micro- > fragmentation feature? That's there just to > avoid string scanning intrusion detection
Well, you could use it to test your firewall/network monitor to see if can detect such stealthy activities. That's true with any of the features in nmap. In fact it could be argued that when cracker types write exploits for security bugs that pop up (like the recent bind bugs for example), they can have a positive use for network security types, like determining if you're vulnerable, or if you've installed the patches correctly, or for the author, to determine if you've solved the problem. Even a book on cracking safes could help somebody determine how to build, a safer safe.
I won't argue with you though, because I agree with your post.
If this theory holds, couldn't we communicate (if the other brane is listening) by moving around big heavy things in weird patterns? Would the arrangements of matter in other branes be similar because gravity can go between branes (and hence, matter in one brane would be attracted to matter in another). Would black holes poke into other branes (or at least, would the other branes have black holes at the same spot because the gravity from ours would attract enough matter from the others to form another black hole?)
They should peak around 2am your time, which means you're in one of the better viewing places, but only if the weather cooperates, and the prediction is accurate.
There was a really fantastic fireball meteor around 7pm EST last night. It was viewable across most states in the midest, but ironically, it was going the wrong direction to be a leonid.
The peak IS supposed to be between 9-10pm EST (2am UT), but the shower is unviewable at that time from the US. Because of the position of the radiant (near the constellation Leo), very few meteors can be seen prior to midnight (local time) and the viewing isn't at its best until after 2am, and improves until dawn. The best part of the world for viewing that is the Middle East, Eastern and Northern Europe, and Africa. However, in the past, predictions for this particular shower have been way off base (18 hours late in the case of the 66 shower, and 12 early in case of last year's). If it arrives 3-9 hours late, the eastern US will be one of the best spots. You'll want to start viewing as early as possible (just before midnight), since (if the predictions are right)the most meteors will be falling then. However, there's no telling if this will be an amazing year like the '66 shower (dozens of meteors per second at the peak), or if it will be just a nice shower (50-200 meteors per hour). Check out http://www.leonidslive.com/
Slashdot Mirror
Is it an Office XP Killer?
I'll address this issue right off the bat. This is great software, but it isn't an Office killer, nor is it designed to be. gobeProductive is designed to be a lighter, faster office suite.
Lighter and faster is fine with me, I couldn't care less if it kills Office. I sometimes have to use sub-P200 computers with 64MB of ram, and overbloated aps are a huge irritation. It makes me sick how wasteful things like MS Office, Mozilla, IE, etc. are when other products prove it can be done so much more efficiently. An Opera install, for example, is a featherweight by comparison to other browsers (not to mention faster on slow computers and more memory efficient), but still has basically all the important features. Where is all that other memory, CPU time and hard drive space getting wasted in the bloat-browsers?
Even if it weren't for the anti-bloat factor, the "Family" license is enough to give this suite a big advantage over M$'s offering. Heck, even that more flexible license is probably cheaper than a single-cpu license for Office (which is also bloated in price).
Does that 6.3 million number just count the sale of "The Sims" or does it include "Livin' Large" also? Does it include the expansion packs (e.g. "Hot Date")?
Of course, I'm not gonna complain - Myst is the most overrated game in the history of the universe and deserves to be relegated to the footnotes of gaming history. I mean, does anyone think that more people played Myst than other games of the era (i.e. Doom?)
Of course, the anti-spy people could treat these countermeasures as an engineering problem.
A couple possible (partial) solutions:
1) Check for beligerant spyware during the install process (the install program would presumably be running from a CD, so it couldn't be corrupted). Later, if it detects that spyware is being installed, fire off warnings, send e-mails, make logs, etc. to make sure that the spyware can't cover it's tracks.
2) In the documentation, note that failure for the program to run or a crash could indicate the presence of spyware (and that you should run an "emergeny check" from the install disk).
3) Put a check on the integrity of the software in the MBR (using CRCs and such). If a spyware messes with that, it should trip off the BIOS virus checking. That would also have to be documented of course so the user understands what the heck is going on.
4) Have the anti-spyware run entirely from a separate disk (maybe a boot disk to be sure the spyware isn't running waiting to thwart the anti-spyware). When you come in to work, or sit down at your computer, throw in the disk to be sure nobody installed spyware when you weren't there.
5) Make the anti-spyware as stealthy as the spyware. If the spyware or the person installing isn't aware of the presence of anti-spyware, the anti-spyware is much more likely to be successful. Using polymorphic code, constantly changing file names, etc. could probably be pretty effective.
None of these solutions are perfect of course, but a bit of a battle is probably inevitable, as the two types of software both have legitimate and illegitimate uses, and the only way one of the two can succeed is by defeating the other.
There should be corrolary to the Hitler/Nazi usenet rule for Slashdot. Anytime someone makes comparisons to Bill Gates or Microsoft the argument would immediately be declared dead and no further discussion would be allowed.
This is probably just propaganda for the MMPI test. I've always heard it associated with Cults, diagnosis of disesases that don't exist and Ritalin marketing.
The computer should call a psychic hotline - it'd be just as scientific.
I find it interesting how the thinnest parts of the coin (the areas closest to the bust or the image of the horse on the reverse, such as under George's chin), seemd to collapse and pile up next to the image... The images and text, being thicker, didn't deform as much and instead flowed closer together, and even flowing underneath eachother.
I would like to see this done with older coins with higher relief (i.e. pennies prior to the 70's).
Why are there no good space borne RPGs? Star Control II was THE best game ever (not to mention pretty much the first game with GUS support). What ever happened to games like that? That game had the most diverse and innovated cast of alien races, fun gameplay (action packed space battles and RPG type stuff), a cool soundtrack (for its day), humor, drama, mystery, and the best storyline of any game ever made in the history of the universe.
> So, basically, allowing any arbitrary VBS
.vbs files to be opened the user must first chose to open the attachment, then click "Yes" on a screen that says something along the lines of "Are you sure you want to open this attachment? It could contain malicious code!" You don't seem to understand that though, and continue to rant on and on about something that doesn't even occur. All your unix e-mail programs will let you decode and run attachments if you want to. Most unix users aren't that dumb though.
> script to execute without prompting the user
> isn't a security vulnerability. What is it,
> a ''feature''?
This is the kind of post that makes me mad that I even bother reading slashdot. Is your head made of wood?
You M$ flamers don't pay any attention to reality. How many times do you have to be told? It doesn't do this, and it never did this. In order for
Essentially what this patch does is prevent all the idiot users from their own stupidity. With this patch installed, you won't be able to open executable attachments AT ALL. It's not a security fix, it's a stupidity fix.
Admitedly, there WAS a bug in some activex (eyedog) control that did what you suggest. That's how bubbleboy worked (but NOT iloveyou). In any case, that bug was patched a very long time ago. Tons of unix programs have had buffer overflows which allowed unauthorized access. Why aren't slashdot people getting all angry at Quallcom or Sendmail about r00t exploit bugs they fixed months ago?
Go ahead and moderate this down you freaks.
For those of you who aren't living in the real world, the fact is people still use Microsoft OS's 90-some percent of the time. Linux has NOT become a viable alternative for a serious portion of the computer users out there. I wish it was. Just because you like it, and all the other Linux freaks you talk to like it, doesn't mean it's taken over the world! It seems that /. has totally lost its grip on reality. Maybe once people realize that Linux ISN'T the M$ killer everybody want's it to be, then they can go about making it into OS for geeks AND real people.
/dev/recycle_bin
Freaks.
Send flames to
That book was good if a bit fanciful and optimistic about life.
Sigh.
It was the "Judge Dread" of X-Files episodes. It was bad all around. The acting, the writing, the everything. It didn't make sense, and didn't even try. The munch who wrote it should be shot. It had no redeeming qualities. Thank God it wasn't the "Last Action Hero" of X-Files episodes.
I wish the freaks that come up with all these great new technologies would put freaking jackets on the things. That is like the biggest problem with CD's. They don't have jackets, so they get scratched and dirty unless you're super careful with them. When they made DVD, they could have fixed that, but no, they didn't. So with double sided ones it's even worse beacause the label has to be on the stupid inner ring! If they put jackets on them, they'd be more reliable, easier to label, more convienient AND self cleaning.
ARRRGGG!
There may be some reason to believe that this is an intentional FUD tactic (since the AOL software works, and regular IE and whatnot doesn't, it makes the ISP look bad as most ignorant people will assume that it's ISP's fault).
Usually, removing AOL 5 and the "AOL Dial-up adapter" from the network control panel fixes the problem, but not always.
Even though the problem is widespread and well known, AOL denies that it exists and will not provide support to fix the problem.
-- Tom
Fang you very much.
Warning: the following is an angry rant.
Everybody keeps wondering why Linux isn't taking over the desktop (and never will). I've been saying forever that since non-programmers don't have a say, it won't ever be useful to them. Geeze, you don't have to be to bright to figure out that most open source projects (that people would love to think would work for the average joe, like Linux) are nearly IMPOSSIBLE for most users to catch on to. Pointing out exceptions just proves the rule. There's no signs of this changing.
Go ahead Linux freaks, moderate me down.
Quite frankly, Quicktime is stupid. Now, I know that sounds like a troll or something, but it does. Apple keeps proclaiming that it's the "ultimate multimedia standard technology" or some junk. But really, it's just a file format. Not a particularly special one at that. The technology is in the compression codecs, and that can be put in all kinds of file formats (even crappy AVI or whatever). Quicktime's not anything special, and isn't worth proclaiming as some great OS advancement. I hate it when I run in to some quicktime crap on the web. Usually I just ignore it and move on because Apple's Quicktime software for [insert your favorite OS] is so absolutely horrible, or worse, non-existant. Probably it would be good if it were open sourced. The only problem is that lots of jerks out there have patented/whatever the various compression schemes which make everything suck.
Rant mode off.
Luser: Does tea have caffene?
Me: Yes, but moreso it's got some other chemicals that are similar to caffene.
Luser: No, it can't because it doesn't list it as one of the ingredients on the label. It just says "Tea brewed from tea leaves, etc."
Luser: Will there be chaos when the new year rolls around?
Me: No, there might be a few minor annoyances though.
Luser: You're wrong; you're just saying that 'cause you're part of some conspiracy. My cuzin's building a bunker and says all of Russia's missles will come and blow me up. My tee-vee says the power will go out and...
If you don't want the truth go bug somebody who will tell you the lies you want to hear. Don't bother me.
I've been saying all along that Y2K was overhyped (mostly because people don't understand how a computer actually works.) Nobody listened to me. I'm actually surprised at how many problems actually occurred (I expected even less). People wasted money on it in many cases (though there was some money well spent). In some cases, it would have been faster, cheaper and safer to wait until the bugs made themselves apparent and then fix them.
I'm really irritated by these alarmist groups that are just randy for the end of the world. I love how people are still holding out hope that we still might have trouble later down the road. Yeah, I'm sure more minor annoyances will pop up. Big friggin' deal. You're no better than the various religous cults that keep trying to put a date to armageddon. I was very dissapointed in total absence of mass suicides. If you are so anxious for the world to end, why don't you do us all a favor and whack yourself?
Linux for the desktop might be alright for some people, but from my experience (doing tech support), many users (especially the new ones) don't need anything that's harder to use/install/whatever. In fact, for a large group of them, Windoze (or even Mac) is too hard to use. What is really needed is an operating system that is even easier than any that is currently available, and doesn't even give the most ignorant user enough rope to hang themselves. In fact, there should be a whole super-easy computer with all the basic software that the average idiot needs already on there. Hmmm, I think I'll patent that idea and make a gazillion dollars.
I can understand people complaining about bugs and security holes in Microsoft software, but in the case of the Melissa virus (unless I've got it confused), their software acted as it should. In a default-setup Windows computer with Outlook Express and Microsoft Word, the user is warned, not once, but twice that the file they are opening could be dangerous. First they are warned by their e-mail client that files transmitted by e-mail may have viruses or trojan horses. Then, Word's macro virus protection warns them that the file they are opening runs a macro on startup, which may be a virus. If they go ahead at that point (or if they had turned off the warnings), it's their own fault.
If you are warned against something in life, you are accountable for the results. If you drive a car off a cliff because you didn't realize it was dangerous, you can't sue the car company. Why should software be any different?
Near-infrared is much like regular light, but just a bit longer wavelength than visible red light and doesn't have much to do with the temperature of an object. It is used by remote controls, computer IR ports, etc. and can be imaged with Sony Nightvision cameras. Many tranditional camcorders, digital cameras, quickcams and other CCDs can pick it up to a lesser extent (remote controls can be seen to blink for example). Some digital cameras can photograph in near-infrared with the addition of a filter and conventional cameras with special film. The Nightvision trick worked because many materials that appear opaque to us are transparent to varying degrees to near-infrared light. The sun is used as a big fat IR light source, and the visible light which would normally obscure the image is blocked out by a special filter, sold separately :-). I haven't had a chance to check out one of those cameras, but I suspect that they have some small source of IR light (IR LEDs probably) for actually nighttime photography.
Far-infrared or thermal imaging reqires more expensive equipment and actually picks up on warm objects. You can see that sort of thing on Cops when they're chasing the baddies around with the helicopter at night. I suspect that's what this uses because near-infrared would pick up on everything and would require an infrared light source that extends farther than your headlights. If it does use far-IR then I don't think you could pull off the same trick as with the Sony Nightvision cameras. If it uses near-IR, I still doubt you could pull it off because it would only work in the day, during which the feature is probably not useable. Either way, it would be MUCH cheaper for your average pervert to get a Sony Nightvision camcorder than a Cadillac (I'm sure somebody's found a way to get around the modifications Sony's made to "fix" it.)
> fragmentation feature? That's there just to
> avoid string scanning intrusion detection
Well, you could use it to test your firewall/network monitor to see if can detect such stealthy activities. That's true with any of the features in nmap. In fact it could be argued that when cracker types write exploits for security bugs that pop up (like the recent bind bugs for example), they can have a positive use for network security types, like determining if you're vulnerable, or if you've installed the patches correctly, or for the author, to determine if you've solved the problem. Even a book on cracking safes could help somebody determine how to build, a safer safe.
I won't argue with you though, because I agree with your post.
If this theory holds, couldn't we communicate (if the other brane is listening) by moving around big heavy things in weird patterns? Would the arrangements of matter in other branes be similar because gravity can go between branes (and hence, matter in one brane would be attracted to matter in another). Would black holes poke into other branes (or at least, would the other branes have black holes at the same spot because the gravity from ours would attract enough matter from the others to form another black hole?)
They should peak around 2am your time, which means you're in one of the better viewing places, but only if the weather cooperates, and the prediction is accurate.
There was a really fantastic fireball meteor around 7pm EST last night. It was viewable across most states in the midest, but ironically, it was going the wrong direction to be a leonid.
The peak IS supposed to be between 9-10pm EST (2am UT), but the shower is unviewable at that time from the US. Because of the position of the radiant (near the constellation Leo), very few meteors can be seen prior to midnight (local time) and the viewing isn't at its best until after 2am, and improves until dawn. The best part of the world for viewing that is the Middle East, Eastern and Northern Europe, and Africa. However, in the past, predictions for this particular shower have been way off base (18 hours late in the case of the 66 shower, and 12 early in case of last year's). If it arrives 3-9 hours late, the eastern US will be one of the best spots. You'll want to start viewing as early as possible (just before midnight), since (if the predictions are right)the most meteors will be falling then. However, there's no telling if this will be an amazing year like the '66 shower (dozens of meteors per second at the peak), or if it will be just a nice shower (50-200 meteors per hour). Check out http://www.leonidslive.com/