ATMs were socially cracked not long after they became popular.
Someone would rent a security suit, take a chair and a box, then sit next to the ATM, at an angle where the camera couldn't see him. When people would come up for a withdrawal, he'd tell them it was broken. When businesses were closing and dropping off the day's proceeds, he'd tell them the ATM was broken, but he'd been entrusted with the box and at some particular time would deliver all of the collected deposits to the main branch.
It's not "for who". It's "for whom". Use "who" for nominative case - the subject of a sentence. Everywhere else, it's "whom" - such as the object of a preposition - as you've done.
Oh, wait. You're going to cover that tomorrow.
How's summer school going? ;)
My thoughts have been voters could have a card with more stamina - like a credit card. Swipe the card and the voter isn't registered - you don't know who holds what VoterID - you just know it's been used. Just like the receipt for the vote. Between the two, you know what voter cards have been used and can recreate the votes from the receipt, but you can't identify the voter, only prevent duplication.
Here's something I have in journal:
"The true voice of American citizenship: implemented for everyone; private, accurate, accountable, recreatable, and secure."
...to friends & family who have asked my opinion has been, "It's like sending someone into a room with a blackboard where the votes are being tallied like tic-marks (||||) on a chalkboard for each candidate and you mark your vote, then exit when you are done. The reason nothing illicit has happened is because they've chosen not to do it; or if it has, it's because no one has brought it to light - mostly because they haven't detected it, because the security is just that poor and likely couldn't be detected.
The question is how much of an effort it would take to effect a change in something other than local election (because fewer votes would need to be fixed) or in the case of the previous Presidential elections, what keystones[1] would need to be adjusted. It's easy to say 2000's lynchpin was Ohio and in 1996, Florida, but some of that may have to do with when things were counted and in what order, rather than where. If you dredge up the red|blue map which appears on t-shirts, mousepads, and coffee cups, it would be interesting to find one which identified those areas where the differences were within a given margin, identifying them as a potential target. Depending upon the political climate, those may or may not be consist places to attack.
In terms of people not trusting the practice, can you blame them? So many things are untrustworthy, and as you can tell from some of my quotes|observations over time:
--"Bad coders can write bad code faster than good coders can fix bad code."
--"You don't have to be good, just good enough. (unfortunately, that's not good enough)
--"95% of the people in the business really don't belong. They are largely at a level less than a hobbyist; practically at a level of trial and error when an unfamiliar error stops them. But they like to do it and presume because they like it and can make things "sort of" work for other people, they are good...and likely, smart - a big ego stroke! Were architects, engineers, or physicians as sloppy as those 95%, there would be some serious problems in today's society."
Seriously: if you were to take all of the Slashdot society who write code for a living and gather them in a big room, then instruct them with this:
"All of you who are good coders, go to this side (the left). All of you who are bad coders, go to this side (the right)."
Which side do you think they would go to?
Do you think they would all go to the left?
Which side would you go to? Why?
Are you being honest with yourself?
If they all, or even most, go to the left, how do you explain all of the problems in the tech industry? The computer errors we hear about in the news?
________________
[1]]This is how some of the publishers used to tinker with the best-seller list. They discovered the key junctures where a quick count was used as data to extrapolate into the final rankings. It hasn't been that many years ago (less than fifteen years ago). Publishers just routed their books through those nodes and their books floated higher than they should have.
Because just as people in the 60s, 70s, and 80s believed, "You can never go wrong by buying IBM." there are plenty of people today who believe, "You can never go wrong by buying Microsoft."
There's obvious dissent to this but if it's not true (the part where people believe it, not that you can't be wrong to do it), then how do they make so much money?
They (customers) see no long-term viable, durable alternative and play the sure thing.
Try putting more than a pair of HDs in there and the heat will build up. On the positive side, the newer graphics cards are starting to address the issue on their own.
There'll be two teams: a diversion in the air, break-out on the ground.
We burn as many one-offs of M$ software most likely to be of interest to them.
The air team begins dropping the discs for everyone to collect. When the jail staff runs out to get their share, the ground team breaks in and extracts Schappelle Colby.
Afterwards, Indonesia pays $1 to Microsoft for each of the discs they picked up.
You're forgetting about Windows Server 2003 Computer Cluster Edition.
And here's what I wrote about it (it's in my hardback journal I carry with me):
"You can take a blow-up doll and use her at the intended size. But you cannot keep pumping air into her and expect to get a bigger, working blow-up doll unless she was designed to achieve those proportions."
IANAL, but I got to see the entire tv coverage of the OJ trial. I know there's plenty of backroom wrangling, but it was better than nothing. I'd been in a severe car accident with a severe concussion. I couldn't read and wasn't allowed to drive. So it was books on tape or tv. I hate listening to books on tape so I watched OJ on trial.
It's too bad this didn't happen: <ESP>OJ, forget the Dream Team...the prosecution is brown-eyed and not blue-eyed. Save yourself some money!</ESP>
________________________
my apologies in advance to Hawk, esq.
It's the way the jokes reads:
What's the difference between a brown-eyed lawyer and a blue-eyed lawyer?
The blue-eyed lawyer is a quart low.
There's a severe burden to prove a negative, isn't there?
If you could prove you didn't do it (e.g.an alibi), you likely wouldn't have been convicted in the first place.
I know this is just television, but there was one episode of Columbo which I found very interesting. Cops on practically every show get a woody when they find a suspect without an alibi. Once, Columbo was talking to someone and they didn't have an alibi, then remarked to Columbo, "I suppose that means I'm a suspect,eh?" Columbo's response was, "No. If you were guilty, I'd expect you to have an alibi." That may not be "real", but it makes a lot more logical sense than most of what we see.
I'm commenting on Mickey Mouse and Beatles and I know they are copyrights. I fully expect, however, Microsoft to try to find a means to put pressure to find a loophole to protect their patents in a similar fashion.
I thought that would be rather obvious for people smart enough to participate on this list. I guess I was mistaken.
...they bragged how many patents they received last year and claimed they were going to receive...what was it? 3'500? 5'000? patents this year. Not apply for, but receive approval for.
We know they've got a cast of landsharks trained like trick ponies to jump through hoops, creating an additional revenue stream, and it's obvious Jeff|Amazon isn't far behind, but at some point, someone is going to have to sneak in to the PTO and alter the firmware which automatically stamps "Approved" on those applications as they roll down the assembly line.
The pharmaceutical industry continually tries to extend the life of their patents without altering their formulae, somehow forgetting the Constitutional provisions, Congress has passed the Mickey Mouse laws, we're seeing an extension on the Beatles; so:
How long will it be before we see Microsoft's one-company PAC start sending email
to Congress Critters, <ESP>urging</ESP> them to extend their patents when they become due? Even better: when will they attempt to amend the Constitution?
_______________________________ Next time, try stopping by eBay and buying a clue.
The brown is probably the skidmark in the driver's shorts. With everything scanned & tracked it shouldn't be too difficult to determine the "last known address" and perform a witch hunt from there.
Microsoft gets patents for anything[1] whenever they apply for it. Someone cries because Mickey Mouse might fall into public domain. Now, the Beatles might end up in a freeforall.
Does Jacko still own a substantial portion of the Fab Four? If so, it would be better for the Beatles' music to be available to all. It's better than lining the pockets of a pervert.
__________________________________
[1]"Someday, we'll find Microsoft has patented the alphabet and we'll find ourselves paying royalties every time we sit down at the keyboard." -phil paxton
As has previously been mentioned, he can have his source. Should they nail him down faster than he can skip domains+countries:
"Well, you see, I did use a friend as an off-site backup system. Everyone makes backups."
A tech version of the tv|movie plot of "if anything happens to me, a copy will be sent to the authorities".
In these cases, however, it's quietly known as, "if anything happens to me, my friend will drop the source in a public, online resource and the genie will be out of the bottle."
Today's Indianapolis Star. The mention of Scott Jones - the guy who invented voicemail - has a good project background.
People have been coming from all over the state (literally) to work on the project (just down the road a piece) on a very regular basis, just for the fun of it.
I've talked to several people who have been tinkering with it and are having a good time. Sometimes, bordering on obsession.
As a bit of synchronicity, the June issue of Technology Review (MIT's Magazine of Innovation) is bannered "Intellectual Property Issue" and "Who Will Own Ideas?" along with: The People Who Use Them. The People Who Create Them Not Microsoft! It's Complicated...
I haven't read much yet but there are a couple of soundbites worth noting:
"Microsoft achieved dominance by imitating the products of others, copying IBM's PC systems, and cannibalizing the computer industry..."
"Given its lower growth, Microsoft finds itself a victim of the forces that it once exploited: its costs are fixed and high, while those of Linux are low and declining."
These are from an article written by Charles Ferguson, which the article points out he sold Vermeer Technology to Microsoft for $133M in '96. If that company doesn't ring a bell, perhaps the product will - FrontPage, as you can see from all of the FrontPage files: vti_*
Re:Of course they're going to deny it!
on
Intel Claims No DRM
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
we have not added any unannounced
I agree completely. Now we have to go back through all of their announcements, minor and major, to determine if there's something which has been said which can be interpreted as DRM.
This is a case of where the media need to reask the question: "Q: Instead of making us reread everything to see if something has been intimated to know what was or wasn't announced, will there be DRM technology incorporated?" There are only two answers: Yes. and No. And if they appear evasive, the media either needs to repeat the question or realize the answer is yes.
And because the spectre of DRM still looms, there are going to be plenty of people who will hold back purchasing the Intel chip until someone reports a problem (you really can't prove there isn't one - back to the old issue of trying to prove a negative) or there will be a mass exodus of people who want to control their environment to AMD; i.e. those of you who haven't already done so.
Intel et al. are going to continue to find themselves in a pickle: do they bed with fellow corporate entities which exert pressure upon them to incorporate these technologies to make it more & more difficult for us to cheat or face "election day" where everyone votes with their checkbook. Some (on the pro-DRM side) may feel people will vote one way with their personal equipment and be forced, in spite of their decision-making position, to make a different choice in the corporate environment; i.e. a "pebbles vs. boulders" situation but it's been my experience the corporate world really doesn't care what's under the covers if the budget and end-users are both happy.
The only thing (other than AMD) which would help keep Intel in check is the same as US politics: three participants. Then it goes from zero-sum to cut-throat. The strategy changes dramatically and it's a lot more fun to watch!
It's probably been ten years ago but 60 Minutes - the real one, not the one they're getting ready to can - showed a segment with Nokie as the driving force where people could walk up to vending machines (and practically anything else), call the number in question, and receive whatever it was they wanted, and the value would be charged to their phone.
If a bunch of people who collectively are so old they fart dust demonstrated this ten years ago...
Slashdot Mirror
ATMs were socially cracked not long after they became popular.
Someone would rent a security suit, take a chair and a box, then sit next to the ATM, at an angle where the camera couldn't see him. When people would come up for a withdrawal, he'd tell them it was broken. When businesses were closing and dropping off the day's proceeds, he'd tell them the ATM was broken, but he'd been entrusted with the box and at some particular time would deliver all of the collected deposits to the main branch.
It's not "for who". It's "for whom". Use "who" for nominative case - the subject of a sentence. Everywhere else, it's "whom" - such as the object of a preposition - as you've done.
Oh, wait. You're going to cover that tomorrow.
How's summer school going?
My thoughts have been voters could have a card with more stamina - like a credit card. Swipe the card and the voter isn't registered - you don't know who holds what VoterID - you just know it's been used. Just like the receipt for the vote. Between the two, you know what voter cards have been used and can recreate the votes from the receipt, but you can't identify the voter, only prevent duplication.
Here's something I have in journal:
"The true voice of American citizenship: implemented for everyone; private, accurate, accountable, recreatable, and secure."
The question is how much of an effort it would take to effect a change in something other than local election (because fewer votes would need to be fixed) or in the case of the previous Presidential elections, what keystones[1] would need to be adjusted. It's easy to say 2000's lynchpin was Ohio and in 1996, Florida, but some of that may have to do with when things were counted and in what order, rather than where. If you dredge up the red|blue map which appears on t-shirts, mousepads, and coffee cups, it would be interesting to find one which identified those areas where the differences were within a given margin, identifying them as a potential target. Depending upon the political climate, those may or may not be consist places to attack.
In terms of people not trusting the practice, can you blame them? So many things are untrustworthy, and as you can tell from some of my quotes|observations over time:
--"Bad coders can write bad code faster than good coders can fix bad code."
--"You don't have to be good, just good enough. (unfortunately, that's not good enough)
--"95% of the people in the business really don't belong. They are largely at a level less than a hobbyist; practically at a level of trial and error when an unfamiliar error stops them. But they like to do it and presume because they like it and can make things "sort of" work for other people, they are good...and likely, smart - a big ego stroke! Were architects, engineers, or physicians as sloppy as those 95%, there would be some serious problems in today's society."
Seriously: if you were to take all of the Slashdot society who write code for a living and gather them in a big room, then instruct them with this:
"All of you who are good coders, go to this side (the left). All of you who are bad coders, go to this side (the right)."
Which side do you think they would go to?
Do you think they would all go to the left?
Which side would you go to? Why?
Are you being honest with yourself?
If they all, or even most, go to the left, how do you explain all of the problems in the tech industry? The computer errors we hear about in the news?
________________
[1]]This is how some of the publishers used to tinker with the best-seller list. They discovered the key junctures where a quick count was used as data to extrapolate into the final rankings. It hasn't been that many years ago (less than fifteen years ago). Publishers just routed their books through those nodes and their books floated higher than they should have.
Because just as people in the 60s, 70s, and 80s believed, "You can never go wrong by buying IBM." there are plenty of people today who believe, "You can never go wrong by buying Microsoft."
There's obvious dissent to this but if it's not true (the part where people believe it, not that you can't be wrong to do it), then how do they make so much money?
They (customers) see no long-term viable, durable alternative and play the sure thing.
Not the sure thing of: No questions asked, no strings attached, no guilt involved...a sure thing.
Try putting more than a pair of HDs in there and the heat will build up. On the positive side, the newer graphics cards are starting to address the issue on their own.
Let's plan an extraction.
There'll be two teams: a diversion in the air, break-out on the ground.
We burn as many one-offs of M$ software most likely to be of interest to them.
The air team begins dropping the discs for everyone to collect. When the jail staff runs out to get their share, the ground team breaks in and extracts Schappelle Colby.
Afterwards, Indonesia pays $1 to Microsoft for each of the discs they picked up.
You're forgetting about Windows Server 2003 Computer Cluster Edition.
And here's what I wrote about it (it's in my hardback journal I carry with me):
"You can take a blow-up doll and use her at the intended size. But you cannot keep pumping air into her and expect to get a bigger, working blow-up doll unless she was designed to achieve those proportions."
IANAL, but I got to see the entire tv coverage of the OJ trial. I know there's plenty of backroom wrangling, but it was better than nothing. I'd been in a severe car accident with a severe concussion. I couldn't read and wasn't allowed to drive. So it was books on tape or tv. I hate listening to books on tape so I watched OJ on trial.
It's too bad this didn't happen: <ESP>OJ, forget the Dream Team...the prosecution is brown-eyed and not blue-eyed. Save yourself some money!</ESP>
________________________
my apologies in advance to Hawk, esq.
It's the way the jokes reads:
What's the difference between a brown-eyed lawyer and a blue-eyed lawyer?
The blue-eyed lawyer is a quart low.
There's a severe burden to prove a negative, isn't there?
,eh?" Columbo's response was, "No. If you were guilty, I'd expect you to have an alibi." That may not be "real", but it makes a lot more logical sense than most of what we see.
If you could prove you didn't do it (e.g.an alibi), you likely wouldn't have been convicted in the first place.
I know this is just television, but there was one episode of Columbo which I found very interesting. Cops on practically every show get a woody when they find a suspect without an alibi. Once, Columbo was talking to someone and they didn't have an alibi, then remarked to Columbo, "I suppose that means I'm a suspect
Um, no. I am not confusing the two.
I'm commenting on Mickey Mouse and Beatles and I know they are copyrights. I fully expect, however, Microsoft to try to find a means to put pressure to find a loophole to protect their patents in a similar fashion.
I thought that would be rather obvious for people smart enough to participate on this list. I guess I was mistaken.
They're only harmful to Friends Of the Same Sex?
We know they've got a cast of landsharks trained like trick ponies to jump through hoops, creating an additional revenue stream, and it's obvious Jeff|Amazon isn't far behind, but at some point, someone is going to have to sneak in to the PTO and alter the firmware which automatically stamps "Approved" on those applications as they roll down the assembly line.
The pharmaceutical industry continually tries to extend the life of their patents without altering their formulae, somehow forgetting the Constitutional provisions, Congress has passed the Mickey Mouse laws, we're seeing an extension on the Beatles; so:
How long will it be before we see Microsoft's one-company PAC start sending email to Congress Critters, <ESP>urging</ESP> them to extend their patents when they become due? Even better: when will they attempt to amend the Constitution?
_______________________________
Next time, try stopping by eBay and buying a clue.
The brown is probably the skidmark in the driver's shorts. With everything scanned & tracked it shouldn't be too difficult to determine the "last known address" and perform a witch hunt from there.
yup. More Mickey Mouse legislation.
Why limit it to 100 years?
Let's just make it permanent.
Microsoft gets patents for anything[1] whenever they apply for it. Someone cries because Mickey Mouse might fall into public domain. Now, the Beatles might end up in a freeforall.
Does Jacko still own a substantial portion of the Fab Four? If so, it would be better for the Beatles' music to be available to all. It's better than lining the pockets of a pervert.
__________________________________
[1]"Someday, we'll find Microsoft has patented the alphabet and we'll find ourselves paying royalties every time we sit down at the keyboard." -phil paxton
No, the purpose of the competition is to find a replacement for UPS.
(see the newer
Isn't helium used to offset the nitrogen issue (bends)?
(always be strategic)
;)
As has previously been mentioned, he can have his source. Should they nail him down faster than he can skip domains+countries:
"Well, you see, I did use a friend as an off-site backup system. Everyone makes backups."
A tech version of the tv|movie plot of "if anything happens to me, a copy will be sent to the authorities".
In these cases, however, it's quietly known as, "if anything happens to me, my friend will drop the source in a public, online resource and the genie will be out of the bottle."
p.s.
(I never said this)
Today's Indianapolis Star. The mention of Scott Jones - the guy who invented voicemail - has a good project background.
People have been coming from all over the state (literally) to work on the project (just down the road a piece) on a very regular basis, just for the fun of it.
I've talked to several people who have been tinkering with it and are having a good time. Sometimes, bordering on obsession.
As a bit of synchronicity, the June issue of Technology Review (MIT's Magazine of Innovation) is bannered "Intellectual Property Issue" and "Who Will Own Ideas?" along with:
The People Who Use Them.
The People Who Create Them
Not Microsoft!
It's Complicated...
I haven't read much yet but there are a couple of soundbites worth noting:
"Microsoft achieved dominance by imitating the products of others, copying IBM's PC systems, and cannibalizing the computer industry..."
"Given its lower growth, Microsoft finds itself a victim of the forces that it once exploited: its costs are fixed and high, while those of Linux are low and declining."
These are from an article written by Charles Ferguson, which the article points out he sold Vermeer Technology to Microsoft for $133M in '96. If that company doesn't ring a bell, perhaps the product will - FrontPage, as you can see from all of the FrontPage files: vti_*
we have not added any unannounced
I agree completely. Now we have to go back through all of their announcements, minor and major, to determine if there's something which has been said which can be interpreted as DRM.
This is a case of where the media need to reask the question: "Q: Instead of making us reread everything to see if something has been intimated to know what was or wasn't announced, will there be DRM technology incorporated?" There are only two answers: Yes. and No. And if they appear evasive, the media either needs to repeat the question or realize the answer is yes.
And because the spectre of DRM still looms, there are going to be plenty of people who will hold back purchasing the Intel chip until someone reports a problem (you really can't prove there isn't one - back to the old issue of trying to prove a negative) or there will be a mass exodus of people who want to control their environment to AMD; i.e. those of you who haven't already done so.
Intel et al. are going to continue to find themselves in a pickle: do they bed with fellow corporate entities which exert pressure upon them to incorporate these technologies to make it more & more difficult for us to cheat or face "election day" where everyone votes with their checkbook. Some (on the pro-DRM side) may feel people will vote one way with their personal equipment and be forced, in spite of their decision-making position, to make a different choice in the corporate environment; i.e. a "pebbles vs. boulders" situation but it's been my experience the corporate world really doesn't care what's under the covers if the budget and end-users are both happy.
The only thing (other than AMD) which would help keep Intel in check is the same as US politics: three participants. Then it goes from zero-sum to cut-throat. The strategy changes dramatically and it's a lot more fun to watch!
Froogle shows a bunch of hits all over the board. Amazon has what must be retail and eBay has about seven hits, all for what must be clearance prices.
It's probably been ten years ago but 60 Minutes - the real one, not the one they're getting ready to can - showed a segment with Nokie as the driving force where people could walk up to vending machines (and practically anything else), call the number in question, and receive whatever it was they wanted, and the value would be charged to their phone.
If a bunch of people who collectively are so old they fart dust demonstrated this ten years ago...
Don't worry about the spurious check. It was worth the info...nice link - I've not seen this before.
_______________________________
Free to good homes:
200 GMail invitations
I think the first jump [before immortal] would be regeneration of missing body parts.
Change it from unchecked growth to a fixed target and turn it loose.