Anything that has rules someone will try to cheat at. Everyone dies, right? Well, that doesn't stop people from trying to cheat death. Why? Rules inherently suck.
The lesson that rules teach us is that we (that means me, Kimihia, and you, Hrunting, and you, the reader) cannot keep them. Not that they are made to be broken.
Rules are strict. Rules are hard. Rules set standards that we are expected to keep.
But frankly, we are lousy. We *can't* live up to them. Just a few days ago I drove 1 km/hr over the speed limit. I broke the law! I'm done for now!
That's what rules are about. They show that we can't live up to them and we need a saviour to pull us out and save us (because saviours save, that's their job).
Hell, human players can detect cheaters, so why not computers?
Because the difference between a good player and a stupid cheater is small. There are also whiners and l0sers.
An example. I'm fairly accurate with my aiming. Unless something takes me by surprise and gives me a heart attack and knocks me out of my seat, I can usually land a torso shot with the sniper rifle on someone right across the map.
That's me, an organic entity landing the shot.
Now, on the other hand an aimbot could do the same thing. Same end result. They land a torso shot with the sniper rifle on someone right across the map.
Being able to spot the cheating is pretty tuff. My biggest indicator is: erratic behaviour. eg, a huge jerk in orientation prior to shooting. If someones mousing is usually smooth, then the instant before they shoot they yank it around and headshot someone, that is a good sign they are cheating.
And yes, that would be best done server-side by a software agent.
Purple underline eh? That'll go nicely with my site colours.
Seriously... purple wiggly lines are a stupid idea. Here are some reasons:
Is it purple? Not everyone can see colour as well as the next blue-eyed cloned Aryan. People reading the web right now have disabilities that don't let them tell whether than link is purple or grbleen.
On the web, someone could have trashed it with CSS. (As parent post noted.) How many times have you seen a fresh, un-visited link, and it is the purple "you just clicked me" colour? Colours don't mean anything. Wiggly lines, straight lines, kinky lines, no lines. What does it matter? It's a link.
People don't understand. Already any features past left-click, reload, stop, and back are boggling people's brains. Do you think they can handle another feature? (Personally I think reload and stop are advanced features, seeing the way newbies don't use them.) Folks look at the wiggly underlines in Word and say "HEY! I didn't underline that!". Wait until a Frontpage user previews his website and sees all these MSSmartTags(TM) on his document. Won't he be confused?
Or maby it will be shipped off in a way that the novice can easily accidently turn it on
You can bet your buns that MS will spin Smart Tags as a desireable feature. Their copy writers are full of fluff, and they'll twist the arm of their users right off just so they'll accept the feature and drive a few more clicks over their way.
The copy won't say "Enable smart tags and we'll modify webpages without permission to give you links we think are relevant". The copy will more likely say: "Enable this feature to receive relevant and informative links. You really can't live without it. Make the web live up to its full MSPotential(TM) by enable this essential feature."
If you ask them, and the default setting is "Yes, gimme dose Smart Tags baby", who is going to take the extra time + brain power + effort to:
Read the dialog box
Move the mouse 2 cm to click the 'Disable' option
Go against MS's theoretically superior default (they wrote it, they should know I want the "feature" right?)
The same reasoning that says, "hey, ask the user, they'll disable it" is the same reasoning that says "enter your email address and click 60 tincy tiny checkboxes so we don't spam you".
It's newbie abuse. And I don't want my loved family members abused.
The moral of the story is: Have an understanding ISP. I've had experience with a few. Not too many tho.
One wasn't understanding, and he lopped my account real fast.
My current one seems to have a bit of a clue and knows a little of what I get up to, so I can trust they won't be unplugging anything too soon.
Try and be like jelly: They squash you here, you appear there. If FreeNet does gain critical mass ahead of the dodgy dealers influx, then we may have a case for our survival. So don't trade those MP3z just yet.
It is fairly easy to create a system whereby the DNS can be updated with your machine's current IP.
I have yet to document the system I use for a friend, but it allows his system to automatically update my DNS server with his current DHCP assigned address. Those changes are then propogated to the other DNS server. TTL = 300, reload every 900 seconds.
But that's kinda off-topic. Back on topic... port scanning can be expected, so don't look so surprised. There are many legitimate, and many illegitimate reasons for scanning. The values outweigh the risks. Put a lock on your door. Use a firewall. Smile for the cameras. Your mileage may vary.
There are 86400 seconds in a day. Assume 10 bits per byte (stop bits, etc) and you get 2.3Gigabit/sec. Assuming that the 20,000 Gigabyte/day figure is accurate.
Portscanners have very PRACTICAL and good purposes you know, such as, me, as a sysadmin can use one to make sure the ports I wanted closed ARE closed... To ban portscans and portscanning means more systems will be left open and vulnerable!
Agreed! The majority of my targets for nmap are local hosts that I own and administer. If I want to know if a port is open, nmap is my first thought. It saves the hassle of connecting to that host and running 'netstat -lp' and deciphering the list.
nmap is a network exploration tool, and it comes in very handy debugging my network and finding out what ports are open or shut.
Portscanning dial-up hosts and portscanning a potential service provider with a fixed IP could arguably be for different reasons. ie, easy-to-own systems run by rookies, vs. professionally (paid) run servers.
But the fact of the matter is... does driving down the road and looking at house doors to see if they are open cause me to become a criminal? If they don't want me to see their front door, plant a tree in the way!
Did you know that Fat Wreck Chords is a member of the RIAA? Shocking eh?
Fat Wreck are the label for a whole pile of anti-establishment bands, including IIRC Less Than Jake. One of Fat Wreck's artists did that track "Sell Out".
I rip my CDs at 160K, and a complete album takes between 84 and 32MB.
Just some names from du:
re>84M./Superhuman
81M./You've Come a Long Way, Baby
86M./The Saint (Motion Picture Soundtrack)
51M./Step Up To The Microphone
32M./Real Live
78M./Neverburn
67M./Transmitter CD Sampler Vol. 3
60M./Transmitter CD Sampler Vol. 2
58M./Loud and Clear
Important moral of that story is that if you want truly independant reviews then:
Buy your own stuff to review
Don't accept advertising
It'll be hard financially, having to pay hard cash to purchase crappy stuff to blast in reviews. But readers should be willing to pay extra money to read good quality, unbiased reporting.
No not always. Back when CSC started they had a big furor when they pulled a few clients, invalidated results, and revealed that they were actually sending the same blocks to multiple people to check for cheating.
The end result was that the number of CSC blocks processed was greater than the number of CSC blocks in the possible solution set.
It'll be in one of the finger archives on d.net if they go that far back.
Also I doubt they'll be able to apply this to servers. All the crap I had to go through when my IP address changed - notifying all my clients, changing zone files, updating WHOIS info,...
Now imagine doing this every 5 minutes when your IP changes.
IMO this is due to pop culture's perception of hacking. If I told people that I was hacking some code people I know would swoon at the thought of my 'illegal' behaiour.
The school threatened the poor guy and got all up tight and crazy about it and scared the crap (and life) out of him.
That's a real pity. Maybe they should have got a clue about security instead.
My worst crime at school was programming stuff when I should have been writing essays. Ooops. A week without computer access. But even with that black mark against me I still had the root password and was responsible for adding new users and resetting passwords. Props to my old school.
I believe repeating lies eventually causes people to accept them as reality.
I have been told many many times the opinions my friends have of something I do. While they are wrong, I am beginning to accept it reality and I keep catching myself thinking along the same way that they've been telling me for the last few months.
It is dangerous.
Excuse me, I'm off to buy a New Zealand Herald and a 'Designed for Windows' cash register.
I forgot to mention, if MS says it, people will do it.
When the installer says you should have IE, OE, Msgr, WMP, YATLA, ETC, etc they will install it and will never hear about any competitors. Will anyone who has WMP go searching for a media player? No, because they already have one that does the job (to some degree of success).
Want to try this out? Want to see how automated Windows users are?
Here's how...
Stand near someone using a computer. When a dialog comes up and they dismiss it ask them what the dialog said.
I'll bet they just slammed space or enter as soon as it appeared and chose the default option and won't have a clue what was asked.
What the fodge? Who moderated the parent of this? It's a -1, Troll dammit! Still, I allow myself to be trolled and continue typing...
Actually, I believe that IE allows you to look at NS all you want - in fact, it lets you look at just about everything out there on the web, since *that* is what it was designed for.
I assume by 'that' you are referring to the majority of the web. You are correct that the web was designed for IE. IE's standards (coff, coff) are botched. I use Mozilla and as a content producer am extremely happy with its support of standard standards. A lot of websites display poorly in standards compliant user agents because they were designed around the flawed algorithms in IE.
It complies with mail standards just fine,
Which mail standards?
AND I can check Hotmail without having to use the web interface. Oh no, it's the tool of Satan!
You use Hotmail???
Well, no, actually, their addons don't limit anyone's choice.
You are a naive silly little boy. Go back to kindy. Have you ever talked to someone using a piece of trash? Do they want to change? No, because their piece of trash works just fine for them.
If I was to say to someone... don't use MSThat, use This... they would say: But why? MSThat already does what I want to do, and it is installed already!
MS has abused its position of being the desktop of choice for clones (such as yourself) and you get people who are too lazy to install a technically superior product because they already have something 'good enough'.
Go back under that rock again. If you missed the DOJ vs MS then you... well... just go back under that rock already!
Unless you feel that if you've already got MSN Messenger then it'd be an unholy act for you to install AIM as well.
Apple. Orange.
Totally different systems.
because it actually IS convenient to have all sorts of goodies already installed on the machine
Convenient for who? The consumer to have to take the extra step of removing WMP? It is convenient for the supplier to boast and say... Well hey, 4101998 people installed our product
Bottom line is you don't know what you're talking about. Go home to Mummy and ask her to put that rock back on your head where it belongs and where it has been for the last five years.
It's all very nice to drop TLAs such as 'CVS' in to conversations and hope for a response, but why not look at what already exists.
Word '97 added a feature whereby you could 'save [a] version' of a document so that the document contained multiple copies of itself. You could then go back and look at earlier revisions (within the same file) and run diffs.
So stop the buzzword-whoring and ask Clippy how to use the features that already exist.
Slashdot Mirror
So tell me now, what is wrong with having an opinion like that? Angelina Jolie might just not be "your thing".
Anything that has rules someone will try to cheat at. Everyone dies, right? Well, that doesn't stop people from trying to cheat death. Why? Rules inherently suck.
The lesson that rules teach us is that we (that means me, Kimihia, and you, Hrunting, and you, the reader) cannot keep them. Not that they are made to be broken.
Rules are strict. Rules are hard. Rules set standards that we are expected to keep.
But frankly, we are lousy. We *can't* live up to them. Just a few days ago I drove 1 km/hr over the speed limit. I broke the law! I'm done for now!
That's what rules are about. They show that we can't live up to them and we need a saviour to pull us out and save us (because saviours save, that's their job).
Hell, human players can detect cheaters, so why not computers?
Because the difference between a good player and a stupid cheater is small. There are also whiners and l0sers.
An example. I'm fairly accurate with my aiming. Unless something takes me by surprise and gives me a heart attack and knocks me out of my seat, I can usually land a torso shot with the sniper rifle on someone right across the map.
That's me, an organic entity landing the shot.
Now, on the other hand an aimbot could do the same thing. Same end result. They land a torso shot with the sniper rifle on someone right across the map.
Being able to spot the cheating is pretty tuff. My biggest indicator is: erratic behaviour. eg, a huge jerk in orientation prior to shooting. If someones mousing is usually smooth, then the instant before they shoot they yank it around and headshot someone, that is a good sign they are cheating.
And yes, that would be best done server-side by a software agent.
Purple underline eh? That'll go nicely with my site colours.
Seriously ... purple wiggly lines are a stupid idea. Here are some reasons:
Friends don't let friends do Microsoft.
Or maby it will be shipped off in a way that the novice can easily accidently turn it on
You can bet your buns that MS will spin Smart Tags as a desireable feature. Their copy writers are full of fluff, and they'll twist the arm of their users right off just so they'll accept the feature and drive a few more clicks over their way.
The copy won't say "Enable smart tags and we'll modify webpages without permission to give you links we think are relevant". The copy will more likely say: "Enable this feature to receive relevant and informative links. You really can't live without it. Make the web live up to its full MSPotential(TM) by enable this essential feature."
If you ask them, and the default setting is "Yes, gimme dose Smart Tags baby", who is going to take the extra time + brain power + effort to:
The same reasoning that says, "hey, ask the user, they'll disable it" is the same reasoning that says "enter your email address and click 60 tincy tiny checkboxes so we don't spam you".
It's newbie abuse. And I don't want my loved family members abused.
The moral of the story is: Have an understanding ISP. I've had experience with a few. Not too many tho.
One wasn't understanding, and he lopped my account real fast.
My current one seems to have a bit of a clue and knows a little of what I get up to, so I can trust they won't be unplugging anything too soon.
Try and be like jelly: They squash you here, you appear there. If FreeNet does gain critical mass ahead of the dodgy dealers influx, then we may have a case for our survival. So don't trade those MP3z just yet.
It is fairly easy to create a system whereby the DNS can be updated with your machine's current IP.
I have yet to document the system I use for a friend, but it allows his system to automatically update my DNS server with his current DHCP assigned address. Those changes are then propogated to the other DNS server. TTL = 300, reload every 900 seconds.
But that's kinda off-topic. Back on topic ... port scanning can be expected, so don't look so surprised. There are many legitimate, and many illegitimate reasons for scanning. The values outweigh the risks. Put a lock on your door. Use a firewall. Smile for the cameras. Your mileage may vary.
I was reading today that the next patch for Half-Life will include funky little voice communication.
The article is on Gamespy, but b'dern it, Links is not letting me grab the text with my mouse. Um ... I think this is the link.
That would be 20 Gbit/sec non-stop bandwidth
There are 86400 seconds in a day. Assume 10 bits per byte (stop bits, etc) and you get 2.3Gigabit/sec. Assuming that the 20,000 Gigabyte/day figure is accurate.
Agreed! The majority of my targets for nmap are local hosts that I own and administer. If I want to know if a port is open, nmap is my first thought. It saves the hassle of connecting to that host and running 'netstat -lp' and deciphering the list.
nmap is a network exploration tool, and it comes in very handy debugging my network and finding out what ports are open or shut.
Well that's completely different.
Portscanning dial-up hosts and portscanning a potential service provider with a fixed IP could arguably be for different reasons. ie, easy-to-own systems run by rookies, vs. professionally (paid) run servers.
But the fact of the matter is ... does driving down the road and looking at house doors to see if they are open cause me to become a criminal? If they don't want me to see their front door, plant a tree in the way!
Did you know that Fat Wreck Chords is a member of the RIAA? Shocking eh?
Fat Wreck are the label for a whole pile of anti-establishment bands, including IIRC Less Than Jake. One of Fat Wreck's artists did that track "Sell Out".
-1, garbled
I rip my CDs at 160K, and a complete album takes between 84 and 32MB.
Just some names from du:
re>84M ./Superhuman ./You've Come a Long Way, Baby ./The Saint (Motion Picture Soundtrack) ./Step Up To The Microphone ./Real Live ./Neverburn ./Transmitter CD Sampler Vol. 3 ./Transmitter CD Sampler Vol. 2 ./Loud and Clear
81M
86M
51M
32M
78M
67M
60M
58M
So what? Your response is just another typical meta-Slashbot reaction.
Haven't I already heard what you've said before 50 times in other threads? -50, Redundant dude!
Important moral of that story is that if you want truly independant reviews then:
It'll be hard financially, having to pay hard cash to purchase crappy stuff to blast in reviews. But readers should be willing to pay extra money to read good quality, unbiased reporting.
Which reminds me that my completely unoffical, unbiased, say-it-like-it-really-is-not-how-the-advertiser-th inks-it-is, fan site recently completely peed our subject material off and got us bad press. No worries. People visit our site not for candy coating, but cold hard facts.
Stay true to the facts, not the money.
No not always. Back when CSC started they had a big furor when they pulled a few clients, invalidated results, and revealed that they were actually sending the same blocks to multiple people to check for cheating.
The end result was that the number of CSC blocks processed was greater than the number of CSC blocks in the possible solution set.
It'll be in one of the finger archives on d.net if they go that far back.
To the contrary. Because he has balls he isn't letting himself get pushed around by silly soft porn pushing companies.
Pity you don't have the guts to stand up against women getting turned into sexual objects.
Sounds like obscurity to me.
Also I doubt they'll be able to apply this to servers. All the crap I had to go through when my IP address changed - notifying all my clients, changing zone files, updating WHOIS info, ...
Now imagine doing this every 5 minutes when your IP changes.
At this link that says that www.transactie.org has been online for 1142 days.
IMO this is due to pop culture's perception of hacking. If I told people that I was hacking some code people I know would swoon at the thought of my 'illegal' behaiour.
The school threatened the poor guy and got all up tight and crazy about it and scared the crap (and life) out of him.
That's a real pity. Maybe they should have got a clue about security instead.
My worst crime at school was programming stuff when I should have been writing essays. Ooops. A week without computer access. But even with that black mark against me I still had the root password and was responsible for adding new users and resetting passwords. Props to my old school.
I believe repeating lies eventually causes people to accept them as reality.
I have been told many many times the opinions my friends have of something I do. While they are wrong, I am beginning to accept it reality and I keep catching myself thinking along the same way that they've been telling me for the last few months.
It is dangerous.
Excuse me, I'm off to buy a New Zealand Herald and a 'Designed for Windows' cash register.
For example, take a look at this ... about upcoming video-game-based movies and how they'll probably all suck.
Oh man, you probably haven't heard of Mr Cranky Rates the Movies. It all sucks!
I forgot to mention, if MS says it, people will do it.
When the installer says you should have IE, OE, Msgr, WMP, YATLA, ETC, etc they will install it and will never hear about any competitors. Will anyone who has WMP go searching for a media player? No, because they already have one that does the job (to some degree of success).
Want to try this out? Want to see how automated Windows users are?
Here's how ...
Stand near someone using a computer. When a dialog comes up and they dismiss it ask them what the dialog said.
I'll bet they just slammed space or enter as soon as it appeared and chose the default option and won't have a clue what was asked.
What the fodge? Who moderated the parent of this? It's a -1, Troll dammit! Still, I allow myself to be trolled and continue typing ...
Actually, I believe that IE allows you to look at NS all you want - in fact, it lets you look at just about everything out there on the web, since *that* is what it was designed for.
I assume by 'that' you are referring to the majority of the web. You are correct that the web was designed for IE. IE's standards (coff, coff) are botched. I use Mozilla and as a content producer am extremely happy with its support of standard standards. A lot of websites display poorly in standards compliant user agents because they were designed around the flawed algorithms in IE.
It complies with mail standards just fine,
Which mail standards?
AND I can check Hotmail without having to use the web interface. Oh no, it's the tool of Satan!
You use Hotmail???
Well, no, actually, their addons don't limit anyone's choice.
You are a naive silly little boy. Go back to kindy. Have you ever talked to someone using a piece of trash? Do they want to change? No, because their piece of trash works just fine for them.
If I was to say to someone ... don't use MSThat, use This ... they would say: But why? MSThat already does what I want to do, and it is installed already!
MS has abused its position of being the desktop of choice for clones (such as yourself) and you get people who are too lazy to install a technically superior product because they already have something 'good enough'.
Go back under that rock again. If you missed the DOJ vs MS then you ... well ... just go back under that rock already!
Unless you feel that if you've already got MSN Messenger then it'd be an unholy act for you to install AIM as well.
Apple. Orange.
Totally different systems.
because it actually IS convenient to have all sorts of goodies already installed on the machine
Convenient for who? The consumer to have to take the extra step of removing WMP? It is convenient for the supplier to boast and say ... Well hey, 4101998 people installed our product
Bottom line is you don't know what you're talking about. Go home to Mummy and ask her to put that rock back on your head where it belongs and where it has been for the last five years.
In an utopian society then maybe people wouldn't be as dumb as in the article, but this is Earth we are talking about.
Consumers will be dumb enough to purchase licenses not copies, and they will be duped into high-costing service contracts.
It's all very nice to drop TLAs such as 'CVS' in to conversations and hope for a response, but why not look at what already exists.
Word '97 added a feature whereby you could 'save [a] version' of a document so that the document contained multiple copies of itself. You could then go back and look at earlier revisions (within the same file) and run diffs.
So stop the buzzword-whoring and ask Clippy how to use the features that already exist.
-1; Cranky