Unsupported like Red Hat Enterprise? ReactOS opens the door for any number of companies to sell and support an XP-compatible platform, for as long as the customers want.
Thanks very much for the information! Does the difference between 2D and 3D have anything to do with the fact that 3D dynamical systems can be chaotic while 2D systems can't? Or am I seeing patterns in smoke here?
There's more information on Kolmogorov's scaling laws here, not that I understand most of it. As far as I can tell, in a turbulent system the difference between the values of a physical property at two points follows a power law with respect to the distance between the points; the power laws for different physical properties have different exponents, but they all seem to be multiples of a third (?).
The approval rating for their government is probably higher than ours is in the US (and we're supposedly a democracy!).
What makes you think disapproving of the government is incompatible with democracy? I'd say just the opposite: any country where 90% of people claim to support the government is probably a country that doesn't allow open political debate.
Freedom isn't free - it is bought and paid for by the blood of patriots.
Unless you've personally shed blood for your freedom, that's just patronising cant. My guess is that you inherited your freedom like the rest of us, and like the rest of us you're in no position to criticise those who weren't so lucky.
The DoS attacks mentioned in the paper aren't attacks against the firewall - they're attacks using the firewall to block communication between a machine on the inside and a machine on the outside. This is possible because the firewall's keyword-detection logic is stateless - it doesn't use TCP sequence numbers to detect spoofed packets. However, the connection-blocking logic is not stateless: once a blacklisted word is detected, all communication between the apparent source and destination is blocked for up to an hour. So by sending a single spoofed packet that appears to come from, say, windowsupdate.com, you can prevent the victim from reaching windowsupdate.com.
Google's main justification for setting up google.cn was speed - google.com is available in China, but it's slow, partly because of the firewall between the users and the servers. Google.cn's servers are located inside China, which means they're faster for Chinese users, but they can only spider content that's available inside the firewall. So in theory there's no need for Google to implement its own filters - the firewall determines which sites google.cn can spider.
Slashdot thinks you should post such suggestions anonymously.;o) Interfering with the Great Firewall in order to influence the Chinese government would fall under the UK's definition of terrorism. (Subsections 1(a-c), 2(e) and 4(d).)
This paper was presented at the Privacy Enhancing Technologies Workshop, alongside with papers about Tor and Mixminion. I'm pretty confident that the authors aren't trying to help the Chinese government. What they are doing is embarrassing the Chinese government, presenting it with a difficult choice between dismantling its firewall and suffering DoS attacks, and publicising a method of circumventing the firewall. By using the normal channels for vulnerability disclosure, the authors protect themselves from politically-motivated accusations of "cyberterrorism".
That's exactly the problem. What happens when you put a wire in a fluctuating electromagnetic field? If the control systems weren't designed to tolerate radio interference from inside the cabin, I'd rather they spent a billion testing the system than just assumed it was safe.
My guess is that it's the brain, not the hands, that makes you more likely to have an accident while talking on the phone. When I'm on the phone, especially during a long call, I tend to notice a change in my spatial awareness: I become less aware of the space around me, and more aware of the space around the person I'm talking to, particularly if they're in a place with a lot of background noise or a place I can easily visualise.
Good spatial awareness is essential for safe driving, and as you pointed out a lot of people drive with one hand anyway, so I wouldn't be surprised if the accident rate was equally high for people using hands-free phones. You could test this theory in a driving simulator by asking one group of subjects to perform a spatial awareness task (eg matching rotated shapes) and a second group to perform a verbal task (eg listening comprehension).
Great, another headline about a statistically insignificant but spectacular risk. How long before we launch the War On Thunder?
This whole story is based on a letter (not a peer-reviewed article) describing essentially anecdotal evidence that using a mobile phone increases your risk of injury given that you have been struck by lightning. The letter does not say that using a mobile phone increases your (negligible) chances of being struck by lightning.
This story says a lot about the inability of people (including doctors, it would seem) to evaluate risks. I'm surprised the British Medical Journal decided to publish the letter.
I agree that ninjas are the likely culprits - I tried to inform the Hong Kong police about my suspicions, but when I reached for the phone I discovered that my right arm had been neatly severed from my body.
Now instead of obscure names like W32/worm.169/06A they can give them meaningful names like W32/fucks.your.harddrive.and.emails.itself.to.all. your.friends.169/06A.
And does it have an Alt-Gr key, or are you expected to only ever write in English on it?
It's a truly international device. Not only does it have Alt-Gr, it has Alt-Mk, Alt-Cw, Alt-Fü and several other Alts I can't even type on this keyboard.
MY FIREND I HAVE SOME VERY IMPORTANT BUSSINESS TO TRANSACT WITH YOU. I REPRESENT MR EFENDE CHARLES chukwu, AGE 15 YEARS, THE YOUNGEST SON OF THE FORMER PRESIDENT OF NIGERIA. MY CLIENT HAS COME INTO THE POSSESION OF A $100 LAPTOP, BUT DUE TO THE INSTABILITY IN MY COUNTRY HE IS UNABLE TO MAKE FULL USE OF THIS ASSET, THEREFORE HE HAS DECIDED TO SELL HIS LAPTOP VIA THE PRESTIGIOUS EBAY ELECTRONIC AUCTION WEBSITE. UNFORTUNATELY DUE TO THE UNJUST TAKEOVER OF THE NATIONAL POSTAL SERVICE BY REBEL ELEMENTS, SINCE 1997 IT HAS BEEN NECESSARY TO PAY FOR ALL INTERNATIONAL SHIPMENTS IN ADVANCE. PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT YOU MUST SEND US JUST $110 INCLUDING SHIPPING AND HANDLING BY WESTERN UNION MONEY ORDER OR IN SMALL UNMARKED BILLS. THEN WE WILL CONTACT YOU TO ASCERTAIN YOUR SHIPPING ADDRESS. GOD BLESS YOU AND KEEP YOU AND YOUR FAMILY.
SINCERELY YOURS,
DR KENAGWE RUFUS
How many musical instruments can you play? How many countries are you an expert in their history? How many languages can you speak? How many crafts have you mastered? How many sports are you expert in? How many cooking disciplines are you expert in? How well can you sculpt? How good a hunter are you? How well can you farm? How well can you broker deals?
Why do I have the disturbing feeling you just read that list off a GURPS character sheet?
Thanks for the info, it's interesting to see different countries' perspectives on this issue. The recent EU copyright directive also contains an exception for copies made "for the sole purpose of enabling... efficient transmission in a network between third parties by an intermediary".
Isn't actually downloading anything from such sites still illegal?
As far as I know the question's never been settled by a court, but there seems to be a general consensus that the uploader creates a copy (which is illegal) whereas the downloader just receives a copy (which is not).
The pro-copyright side doesn't want to point out that both users' computers and every router in between make copies of the data, because that would make their 'copying equals theft' position look absurd. The anti-copyright side doesn't want to point out that the downloader initiates the transfer, because that could bring a flood of new lawsuits against downloaders. So for the moment the consensus that the uploader makes the copy seems to be holding...
Slashdot Mirror
Unsupported like Red Hat Enterprise? ReactOS opens the door for any number of companies to sell and support an XP-compatible platform, for as long as the customers want.
Thanks very much for the information! Does the difference between 2D and 3D have anything to do with the fact that 3D dynamical systems can be chaotic while 2D systems can't? Or am I seeing patterns in smoke here?
There's more information on Kolmogorov's scaling laws here, not that I understand most of it. As far as I can tell, in a turbulent system the difference between the values of a physical property at two points follows a power law with respect to the distance between the points; the power laws for different physical properties have different exponents, but they all seem to be multiples of a third (?).
Thank you for the information, a T-800 has been dispatched to correct the error.
What makes you think disapproving of the government is incompatible with democracy? I'd say just the opposite: any country where 90% of people claim to support the government is probably a country that doesn't allow open political debate.
Freedom isn't free - it is bought and paid for by the blood of patriots.
Unless you've personally shed blood for your freedom, that's just patronising cant. My guess is that you inherited your freedom like the rest of us, and like the rest of us you're in no position to criticise those who weren't so lucky.
The DoS attacks mentioned in the paper aren't attacks against the firewall - they're attacks using the firewall to block communication between a machine on the inside and a machine on the outside. This is possible because the firewall's keyword-detection logic is stateless - it doesn't use TCP sequence numbers to detect spoofed packets. However, the connection-blocking logic is not stateless: once a blacklisted word is detected, all communication between the apparent source and destination is blocked for up to an hour. So by sending a single spoofed packet that appears to come from, say, windowsupdate.com, you can prevent the victim from reaching windowsupdate.com.
Google's main justification for setting up google.cn was speed - google.com is available in China, but it's slow, partly because of the firewall between the users and the servers. Google.cn's servers are located inside China, which means they're faster for Chinese users, but they can only spider content that's available inside the firewall. So in theory there's no need for Google to implement its own filters - the firewall determines which sites google.cn can spider.
Slashdot thinks you should post such suggestions anonymously. ;o) Interfering with the Great Firewall in order to influence the Chinese government would fall under the UK's definition of terrorism. (Subsections 1(a-c), 2(e) and 4(d).)
This paper was presented at the Privacy Enhancing Technologies Workshop, alongside with papers about Tor and Mixminion. I'm pretty confident that the authors aren't trying to help the Chinese government. What they are doing is embarrassing the Chinese government, presenting it with a difficult choice between dismantling its firewall and suffering DoS attacks, and publicising a method of circumventing the firewall. By using the normal channels for vulnerability disclosure, the authors protect themselves from politically-motivated accusations of "cyberterrorism".
There is no evidence of cooperation between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda.
we may have helped him BEFORE he commited atrocities
The US and Britain continued to sell Iraq materials for making biological and chemical weapons after Halabja the gas attack.
I hope when the s*&t hits the fan in Iran or N. Korea that people remember the threats they have been giving us and our allies all along.
The US has also made threats - does that justify a pre-emptive strike against the US? I don't think so.
That's exactly the problem. What happens when you put a wire in a fluctuating electromagnetic field? If the control systems weren't designed to tolerate radio interference from inside the cabin, I'd rather they spent a billion testing the system than just assumed it was safe.
Good spatial awareness is essential for safe driving, and as you pointed out a lot of people drive with one hand anyway, so I wouldn't be surprised if the accident rate was equally high for people using hands-free phones. You could test this theory in a driving simulator by asking one group of subjects to perform a spatial awareness task (eg matching rotated shapes) and a second group to perform a verbal task (eg listening comprehension).
Is that what they mean by meta-moderation?
Who sold Saddam those weapons?
Cheney's predictable response: anyone who criticises mass surveillance is helping terrorists.
This whole story is based on a letter (not a peer-reviewed article) describing essentially anecdotal evidence that using a mobile phone increases your risk of injury given that you have been struck by lightning. The letter does not say that using a mobile phone increases your (negligible) chances of being struck by lightning.
This story says a lot about the inability of people (including doctors, it would seem) to evaluate risks. I'm surprised the British Medical Journal decided to publish the letter.
I agree that ninjas are the likely culprits - I tried to inform the Hong Kong police about my suspicions, but when I reached for the phone I discovered that my right arm had been neatly severed from my body.
Now instead of obscure names like W32/worm.169/06A they can give them meaningful names like W32/fucks.your.harddrive.and.emails.itself.to.all. your.friends.169/06A.
It's a truly international device. Not only does it have Alt-Gr, it has Alt-Mk, Alt-Cw, Alt-Fü and several other Alts I can't even type on this keyboard.
MY FIREND I HAVE SOME VERY IMPORTANT BUSSINESS TO TRANSACT WITH YOU. I REPRESENT MR EFENDE CHARLES chukwu, AGE 15 YEARS, THE YOUNGEST SON OF THE FORMER PRESIDENT OF NIGERIA. MY CLIENT HAS COME INTO THE POSSESION OF A $100 LAPTOP, BUT DUE TO THE INSTABILITY IN MY COUNTRY HE IS UNABLE TO MAKE FULL USE OF THIS ASSET, THEREFORE HE HAS DECIDED TO SELL HIS LAPTOP VIA THE PRESTIGIOUS EBAY ELECTRONIC AUCTION WEBSITE. UNFORTUNATELY DUE TO THE UNJUST TAKEOVER OF THE NATIONAL POSTAL SERVICE BY REBEL ELEMENTS, SINCE 1997 IT HAS BEEN NECESSARY TO PAY FOR ALL INTERNATIONAL SHIPMENTS IN ADVANCE. PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT YOU MUST SEND US JUST $110 INCLUDING SHIPPING AND HANDLING BY WESTERN UNION MONEY ORDER OR IN SMALL UNMARKED BILLS. THEN WE WILL CONTACT YOU TO ASCERTAIN YOUR SHIPPING ADDRESS. GOD BLESS YOU AND KEEP YOU AND YOUR FAMILY. SINCERELY YOURS, DR KENAGWE RUFUS
Why do I have the disturbing feeling you just read that list off a GURPS character sheet?
How did you know it went twice? Guesswork. What if it had been 123 into 614?
Ripping a CD you own is illegal in the UK. Unlike the fair use doctrine in the US, the fair dealing defence doesn't allow format shifting.
Thanks for the info, it's interesting to see different countries' perspectives on this issue. The recent EU copyright directive also contains an exception for copies made "for the sole purpose of enabling ... efficient transmission in a network between third parties by an intermediary".
As far as I know the question's never been settled by a court, but there seems to be a general consensus that the uploader creates a copy (which is illegal) whereas the downloader just receives a copy (which is not).
The pro-copyright side doesn't want to point out that both users' computers and every router in between make copies of the data, because that would make their 'copying equals theft' position look absurd. The anti-copyright side doesn't want to point out that the downloader initiates the transfer, because that could bring a flood of new lawsuits against downloaders. So for the moment the consensus that the uploader makes the copy seems to be holding...