Wow 12 years. It's been a long time. Curiosly enough back in my last university year (2001), as a final project for the telecommunications degree, I simply took your great Snort program (i do not remember the exact version, maybe 0.9) and patched it so Snort could take advantage of multiprocess and multithread configurations, so multiprocessor (no multicore at those days) machines could use all the available processors when processing network traffic. It was a trivial solution, since parallelization was carried out on a packet basis (we left out preprocessing), but with this simple trick we could literally multiply the performance of the sniffer per the number of processors present on machine.
It is incredible that no one has thought about that way of improving Snort until now. I have not looked at Suricata code or Snort's newer releases, but from the comments above I suppose the path followed by those developing Suricata must have been the same. The only difference is that it didn't take us 1 million dollars to develop a similar solution, since an unpaid programer (myself) plus a few months was all what we used.
I must agree with MPAB to a certain point. That fear of the right wing parties to be related by left wing powers to fascims is what made former president Aznar ridiculously label his own conservative party as a centric party. IMHO it will still take some generations to weaken the mainstream idea of relating the conservative parties to something intrinsically non-democratic thanks to our historic heritage. What is more interesting is that other countries under recent dictatorship regimes, but with other ideological perspective, such as Poland, tend to bind left wing ideology to something intrinsically bad, corrupt or anti-democratic (just the same thing that happens in Spain but with the opposite ideology).
I am totally fed up with the terms commonly used in media, here in Spain, where they usually intentionally mix "Internet downloads" with piracy, when they want to refer to P2P networks, that are the real ones that are supposedly causing troubles to Entertainment Industry. Most Internet users do not distinguish between a website or FTP download from a download from a P2P network, but judges and lawyers do.
When you upload a file to an FTP server you are violating copyright laws, since you are using the right to distribute copyrighted content. When you share the same file on a P2P network, from the legal point of view, you are using your right to private copy of copyrighted content. Here in Spain we do still have the right to private copy, so when I buy a CD I can copy it for personal use. I have the right to lend my original copy of the CD to a friend, but private copy rights allows me to lend not the original but also the copied CD to a friend. And what can be shocking is that private copy law in Spain does not restrict users to a fixed number of copies for personal use. So, from the juridical point of view, sharing your CD songs on Bittorrent network is no different from lending your CD copies to friends.
Having reached this poing technology has evolved much more than laws. So copyrighted content sharing is no longer related to lend some CDs to some friends or relatives, but to the whole world. Spanish RIAA (SGAE) is struggling to press politicians so they "adapt" the private copy law or even make it disappear. I think they are taking the steps, though the things go slower that in other near countries. They have not managed to limit private copy law but they have succedeed in broadening the range of the "Canon compensatorio", that could be translated as compensatory fee. This is a tax that has been around since tape times, and used to add a percentage to the price of blank tapes or photocopiers among others (books, as copyrighted content, were also protected by this law). Nowodays SGAE has managed to extent this compensatory fee to not only blank media supports (DVDs, CDs, etc.) but also flash cards, mobile phones, hard disks, computers, mp3/4 players, etc. They even managed to ask for a fee on the Internet connection, though I think they have succedeed in it yet. It has been reported that the average Spanish family pays now over 300 euros a year with the current compensatory fee, that is entirley redistributed between Entertainment companies and artists (though the say they share it between artists) by SGAE itself, which is an obscure and privately led organization. 300 euros a year pro family is much more than what an averege Spanish family spent on copyrighted content a few 10 years ago (when copying means where not so effective).
Having said all this I would thank that at least I no longer have to put up with the ads at movie theaters or on TV calling me a thief for legally sharingmy copyrighted content, when I am just using a right, for which I have literally paid a significant amount of money. And not only that, but also taking into account that this money goes to an obscure and mafioso association (not even a company, that must keep its balance clearer), whose role in society is quite a bit less than beneficial.
> almost all the incumbent members of congress went back for another term.
> Why is this, when approval ratings are so low?
Because of the lack of viable 3rd, 4th, 5th etc. party candidates. By viable I don't meant the candidates themselves as they have at least as much to offer as anybody else on the ballots but the representation of them. The almost complete lack of coverage of them to the point of people being surprised to see other names they never heard of on the ballots besides the two D/R candidates. This is IMHO a true shame for the nation as a whole and the media in particular. I would welcome alternative views and more than two parties of importance since I believe that the views of well over 100 million voters can not possibly be properly represented by 2 parties.
We usually desire what we lack. In Spain it is just the opposite. There are so many parties that it is rather difficult to build up a strong government, and pacts are almost always mandatory after a presidential election.
What is more dramatic is that the parties involved in these pacts are usually small sized nationalist parties that do not precisely look for the general interest of the country but just the opposite, to weaken it so their demands be more feasible.
If you want that to be really ubiquitous, use Java instead. Here in Spain, and the same goes for the rest of Europe, every single cellular phone not older than 3 years has a J2ME JVM inside.
Symbian is getting more and more popular, but it is still reserved to high-end models.
The same shit here in Spain, were mobile phones outnumbered population some time ago... No always-connected service has succeded and no one will do until an affordable (3G ??) flat rate is common.
What is the big advantage of this "ipodish" phone over another top media phones such as Nokia N-Series?
It IS a cruel massacre of animals, and you people are sick and demented for continuing it after all this time. Why don't you just have a fight to the death between two humans, like the Romans did with their gladiators? I think that would be a lot more fair. And to make it more like your bullfighting, one of the fighters should be some random person from the crowd, forced to fight and/or die against his will.
I always laugh when I read news reports about matadors being gored and killed. Serves them right. They should get a Darwin Award for it.
I just showed you a comparable situation, but you do not even have the intelligence to try to look a t it from a different point of view. You just assume your point of view is just right. You did not even try to abstract yourself from your way of seeing things. I can assume americans have firearms in their culture as something normal. I do not share the vision that you must own a firearm to defend yourself, but at least I can understand your point of view and I am no one to dictate what is good or bad for you.
I am no supporter of bull fighting. I do not like or enjoy it, but I respect people who enjoy it. It is a really old tradition, and such it has not evolved with time as it should have to. I know that these words will tell you nothing, since you have got a really distant point of view. My mother's region in Spain has a tradition to breed bulls for bull fighting. Brave bulls are breed free in countryyard. They are probably the "domestic" animals that lead the best life, but have one of the most horrible deaths. There are other examples of animals, such as goose in farms for foie gras, that lead a much worse life.
I do not try to change your mind, but to transmit you another point of view.
And a gun would save her for getting beaten, raped or sth worse? Everyone is answering that Police is not in charge of protecting people. What does "To serve and protect" really mean then?
I think that we simply have different points of view in Europe and in the States. Someone have said it is a long-time established law, so I guess it is not only a law, but also a way of live, sth that is inside the culture of everyone and it is really difficult to change it. Even more when many people do not even think there is something wrong with it.
I suppose something similar would be bull fighting, here in Spain. Many people from abroad can not understand the underlying culture, excitement or admiration for the fight of a man versus an animal. From outside it is only usually seen as a cruel massacre of poor and indefense animals.
I must admit that I share the opinion of pario. I don't even live in the States. So when looking from an outer point of view, I can't either understand the so-called right to defend oneself. I thought the duty to defend us from external risks was an issue concerning the Authorities, by means of Police or even the Army.
What I can assure is that everewhere in the world is full of insane people. But the pain they might cause to other people is proportional to the power of destruction associated with the availability of weapons. Of course you can slaughter with a knife, but far less than with a gun and even far less than with a semi-automatic firearm.
But it is difficult to change people's mind. Should you feel you have the right and the need to own a firearm, maybe you should have one.
All that great free stuff, like that TrueShit(TM), must be really useful without online service:
With the launch of the Xbox 360, Xbox Live went through a major change. The most notable change is the establishment of two subscription types, called Silver and Gold. Xbox Live Silver is free to all Xbox 360 owners. While it does not allow access to online play, it still has access to other Xbox Live features such as the friends list, messages, and the Xbox Live Marketplace. Xbox Live Gold, which requires a monthly or yearly subscription fee, allows users to access all available features on Xbox Live.
Well, when in the core of the matter I can agree with you, there is a slight difference. The tricky part is that P2P does not legally or technically mean downloading, just sharing. I agree that in practice P2P is most used to get (aka download) copyrighted material. That is because SGAE is all the day bitching about P2P.
Should you set up a web/ftp site site and let people download your MP3, is just a matter of time that you get paid a visit form the Guardia Civil (equivalent to FBI) or the Policía Nacional (Police). Put the same content in your shared folder on eDonkey/eMule or Bittorrent network and you just get away with it. The first case means (legally) distributing/broadcasting copyrighted media without the permission of the copyright holders. The second case means (legally) sharing the private copy (MP3 is other form of private copy, isn't it) of your own collection or your friend's collection (aren't we all friends in this such a great community that is called Internet). Practically in both cases many other anonymous people get the MP3 from you, but in first case you are an outlaw. Current IP legislation was aimed towards considering P2P another kind of distribution, just that and the game is over.
At least I think they haven't get for the time being, but time will tell. Just keep awake...
I also owned an Amstrad CPC 464 with green monitor in 1986. It was pretty popular at time in Spain along with Sinclair Spectrum ZX. Indeed Spectrum was much more popular, but those crappy block-colored games made throw up. But worse was that when sprites moved on screen got re-colored. I still remember myself playing "Last Duel" at a friend's home. It was impossible to follow the car or the bullets since they changed their color when crossing over a stone or a tile. At least Amstrad could display a pixel always the same way, no matter how long did it travel across the screen.
I guess the only reason Spectrum beat Amstrad in my country was that first one plus a small color TV was a little bit more expensive than an Amstrad with a crappy mandatory green monitor, and you got the extra of a TV in your room.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow 12 years. It's been a long time. Curiosly enough back in my last university year (2001), as a final project for the telecommunications degree, I simply took your great Snort program (i do not remember the exact version, maybe 0.9) and patched it so Snort could take advantage of multiprocess and multithread configurations, so multiprocessor (no multicore at those days) machines could use all the available processors when processing network traffic. It was a trivial solution, since parallelization was carried out on a packet basis (we left out preprocessing), but with this simple trick we could literally multiply the performance of the sniffer per the number of processors present on machine. It is incredible that no one has thought about that way of improving Snort until now. I have not looked at Suricata code or Snort's newer releases, but from the comments above I suppose the path followed by those developing Suricata must have been the same. The only difference is that it didn't take us 1 million dollars to develop a similar solution, since an unpaid programer (myself) plus a few months was all what we used.
I must agree with MPAB to a certain point. That fear of the right wing parties to be related by left wing powers to fascims is what made former president Aznar ridiculously label his own conservative party as a centric party. IMHO it will still take some generations to weaken the mainstream idea of relating the conservative parties to something intrinsically non-democratic thanks to our historic heritage. What is more interesting is that other countries under recent dictatorship regimes, but with other ideological perspective, such as Poland, tend to bind left wing ideology to something intrinsically bad, corrupt or anti-democratic (just the same thing that happens in Spain but with the opposite ideology).
I am totally fed up with the terms commonly used in media, here in Spain, where they usually intentionally mix "Internet downloads" with piracy, when they want to refer to P2P networks, that are the real ones that are supposedly causing troubles to Entertainment Industry. Most Internet users do not distinguish between a website or FTP download from a download from a P2P network, but judges and lawyers do.
When you upload a file to an FTP server you are violating copyright laws, since you are using the right to distribute copyrighted content. When you share the same file on a P2P network, from the legal point of view, you are using your right to private copy of copyrighted content. Here in Spain we do still have the right to private copy, so when I buy a CD I can copy it for personal use. I have the right to lend my original copy of the CD to a friend, but private copy rights allows me to lend not the original but also the copied CD to a friend. And what can be shocking is that private copy law in Spain does not restrict users to a fixed number of copies for personal use. So, from the juridical point of view, sharing your CD songs on Bittorrent network is no different from lending your CD copies to friends.
Having reached this poing technology has evolved much more than laws. So copyrighted content sharing is no longer related to lend some CDs to some friends or relatives, but to the whole world. Spanish RIAA (SGAE) is struggling to press politicians so they "adapt" the private copy law or even make it disappear. I think they are taking the steps, though the things go slower that in other near countries. They have not managed to limit private copy law but they have succedeed in broadening the range of the "Canon compensatorio", that could be translated as compensatory fee. This is a tax that has been around since tape times, and used to add a percentage to the price of blank tapes or photocopiers among others (books, as copyrighted content, were also protected by this law). Nowodays SGAE has managed to extent this compensatory fee to not only blank media supports (DVDs, CDs, etc.) but also flash cards, mobile phones, hard disks, computers, mp3/4 players, etc. They even managed to ask for a fee on the Internet connection, though I think they have succedeed in it yet. It has been reported that the average Spanish family pays now over 300 euros a year with the current compensatory fee, that is entirley redistributed between Entertainment companies and artists (though the say they share it between artists) by SGAE itself, which is an obscure and privately led organization. 300 euros a year pro family is much more than what an averege Spanish family spent on copyrighted content a few 10 years ago (when copying means where not so effective).
Having said all this I would thank that at least I no longer have to put up with the ads at movie theaters or on TV calling me a thief for legally sharingmy copyrighted content, when I am just using a right, for which I have literally paid a significant amount of money. And not only that, but also taking into account that this money goes to an obscure and mafioso association (not even a company, that must keep its balance clearer), whose role in society is quite a bit less than beneficial.
Yo envié a mis naves a pelear contra los hombres, no contra los elementos
That means:
I sent my navy to fight against men, not the elements (weather/sea conditions)
> almost all the incumbent members of congress went back for another term.
> Why is this, when approval ratings are so low?
Because of the lack of viable 3rd, 4th, 5th etc. party candidates. By viable I don't meant the candidates themselves as they have at least as much to offer as anybody else on the ballots but the representation of them. The almost complete lack of coverage of them to the point of people being surprised to see other names they never heard of on the ballots besides the two D/R candidates. This is IMHO a true shame for the nation as a whole and the media in particular. I would welcome alternative views and more than two parties of importance since I believe that the views of well over 100 million voters can not possibly be properly represented by 2 parties.
We usually desire what we lack. In Spain it is just the opposite. There are so many parties that it is rather difficult to build up a strong government, and pacts are almost always mandatory after a presidential election.
What is more dramatic is that the parties involved in these pacts are usually small sized nationalist parties that do not precisely look for the general interest of the country but just the opposite, to weaken it so their demands be more feasible.
The solution is clearly the WDS (WorldDHCPServer). One to rule them all.
If you want that to be really ubiquitous, use Java instead. Here in Spain, and the same goes for the rest of Europe, every single cellular phone not older than 3 years has a J2ME JVM inside.
Symbian is getting more and more popular, but it is still reserved to high-end models.
The same shit here in Spain, were mobile phones outnumbered population some time ago... No always-connected service has succeded and no one will do until an affordable (3G ??) flat rate is common.
What is the big advantage of this "ipodish" phone over another top media phones such as Nokia N-Series?
It IS a cruel massacre of animals, and you people are sick and demented for continuing it after all this time. Why don't you just have a fight to the death between two humans, like the Romans did with their gladiators? I think that would be a lot more fair. And to make it more like your bullfighting, one of the fighters should be some random person from the crowd, forced to fight and/or die against his will.
I always laugh when I read news reports about matadors being gored and killed. Serves them right. They should get a Darwin Award for it.
I just showed you a comparable situation, but you do not even have the intelligence to try to look a t it from a different point of view. You just assume your point of view is just right. You did not even try to abstract yourself from your way of seeing things. I can assume americans have firearms in their culture as something normal. I do not share the vision that you must own a firearm to defend yourself, but at least I can understand your point of view and I am no one to dictate what is good or bad for you.
I am no supporter of bull fighting. I do not like or enjoy it, but I respect people who enjoy it. It is a really old tradition, and such it has not evolved with time as it should have to. I know that these words will tell you nothing, since you have got a really distant point of view. My mother's region in Spain has a tradition to breed bulls for bull fighting. Brave bulls are breed free in countryyard. They are probably the "domestic" animals that lead the best life, but have one of the most horrible deaths. There are other examples of animals, such as goose in farms for foie gras, that lead a much worse life.
I do not try to change your mind, but to transmit you another point of view.
And a gun would save her for getting beaten, raped or sth worse? Everyone is answering that Police is not in charge of protecting people. What does "To serve and protect" really mean then?
I think that we simply have different points of view in Europe and in the States. Someone have said it is a long-time established law, so I guess it is not only a law, but also a way of live, sth that is inside the culture of everyone and it is really difficult to change it. Even more when many people do not even think there is something wrong with it.
I suppose something similar would be bull fighting, here in Spain. Many people from abroad can not understand the underlying culture, excitement or admiration for the fight of a man versus an animal. From outside it is only usually seen as a cruel massacre of poor and indefense animals.
I suppose everyone is both right and wrong.
IMHO it is not an issue of the presence of insane people, which are ubiquitous, but the availability of firearms.
I refer to my previous post
I must admit that I share the opinion of pario. I don't even live in the States. So when looking from an outer point of view, I can't either understand the so-called right to defend oneself. I thought the duty to defend us from external risks was an issue concerning the Authorities, by means of Police or even the Army.
What I can assure is that everewhere in the world is full of insane people. But the pain they might cause to other people is proportional to the power of destruction associated with the availability of weapons. Of course you can slaughter with a knife, but far less than with a gun and even far less than with a semi-automatic firearm.
But it is difficult to change people's mind. Should you feel you have the right and the need to own a firearm, maybe you should have one.
Regards
All that great free stuff, like that TrueShit(TM), must be really useful without online service:
With the launch of the Xbox 360, Xbox Live went through a major change. The most notable change is the establishment of two subscription types, called Silver and Gold. Xbox Live Silver is free to all Xbox 360 owners. While it does not allow access to online play, it still has access to other Xbox Live features such as the friends list, messages, and the Xbox Live Marketplace. Xbox Live Gold, which requires a monthly or yearly subscription fee, allows users to access all available features on Xbox Live.
One major drawback:
You must pay for all that. I and I guess a few people more don't feel like dropping some euros (or bucks) for that.
Well, when in the core of the matter I can agree with you, there is a slight difference. The tricky part is that P2P does not legally or technically mean downloading, just sharing. I agree that in practice P2P is most used to get (aka download) copyrighted material. That is because SGAE is all the day bitching about P2P.
Should you set up a web/ftp site site and let people download your MP3, is just a matter of time that you get paid a visit form the Guardia Civil (equivalent to FBI) or the Policía Nacional (Police). Put the same content in your shared folder on eDonkey/eMule or Bittorrent network and you just get away with it. The first case means (legally) distributing/broadcasting copyrighted media without the permission of the copyright holders. The second case means (legally) sharing the private copy (MP3 is other form of private copy, isn't it) of your own collection or your friend's collection (aren't we all friends in this such a great community that is called Internet). Practically in both cases many other anonymous people get the MP3 from you, but in first case you are an outlaw. Current IP legislation was aimed towards considering P2P another kind of distribution, just that and the game is over.
At least I think they haven't get for the time being, but time will tell. Just keep awake...
...who preferred good olde pound over new euro some time ago. Stick to the british tradition for the sake of God and the Queen.
I think I can pack my suitcase and take a tour through Europe before it gets done...
I also owned an Amstrad CPC 464 with green monitor in 1986. It was pretty popular at time in Spain along with Sinclair Spectrum ZX. Indeed Spectrum was much more popular, but those crappy block-colored games made throw up. But worse was that when sprites moved on screen got re-colored. I still remember myself playing "Last Duel" at a friend's home. It was impossible to follow the car or the bullets since they changed their color when crossing over a stone or a tile. At least Amstrad could display a pixel always the same way, no matter how long did it travel across the screen.
I guess the only reason Spectrum beat Amstrad in my country was that first one plus a small color TV was a little bit more expensive than an Amstrad with a crappy mandatory green monitor, and you got the extra of a TV in your room.