I heard this months ago on/. , it's hardly news to those who had actually been following things.
If there was any serious cause for concern, this wouldn't be going ahead. I doubt every scientist working on the project is also desiring to commit suicide/genocide/planetacide/whatever.
Hahahahahahaaa... yeah, good one. No, it just has incredibly fucking annoying overuse of bold font, and why put every sentence in its own double spaced paragraph? Annoying. Not to mention completely offtopic. You need to find a more appropriate context for your little crusade. I have better things to do with my time than go through a mess like that.
And I didn't actually read it, just checked over to see if it was one of those randomly generated posts (it *really* looks like one from the offset due to the strange formatting), and the other bit caught my eye and amused me. If you or whoever wrote this post can't see why people simply don't want to read this shit, you have major problems.
There are plenty of other "gods" for you to be wrong about than just the Christian one. I think you might need to expand the list ever so slightly (into infinity).
Why do I get the feeling ForeDecker (an MS mgt. person here, whom I addressed with these points 3-4 times now & he just "evades them") OR, that I am just going to be "adhominem" attacked, rather than my points here being confronted &/or disproved instead?
Probably because the way you've written this, you've made it bloody annoying to read, and nobody can be bothered.
I've never actually considered doing this. Clever. Almost completely useless as I don't have much use for physical counting references, but clever nonetheless!
Slashdot moderation is like the average fuel consumption on your car's trip computer. If you reset it while rolling down a hill you'll get insane MPG figures, but after that it'll fix itself up in the long run and evaluate to a correct value.
Yeah, there's a big difference between fixed vulnerability, unknown vulnerability, privately known vulnerability, publicly known vulnerability, and exploited vulnerability.. if they're not measuring everything apart from the unknown vulnerabilities, and not noting the actual potential damage and exploitability of each one, then trying to draw any useful conclusion is pretty difficult.
I knew it had to be a bunch of FUD. I'm open to the idea that FF could be more holey than IE, it may happen one day.. but I really wouldn't bet on it.
Well, because you could choose to run without certain plugins to be safer. I'd think that a plugin should be able to do *anything* on the system? Once the plugin is running it can presumably present vulnerabilities without the browser itself having to be directly involved in the process. Say if you view a maliciously formed PDF. How can you possibly blame Firefox for Adobe's PDF reader having a bug? I think that situation did occur earlier this year.
Blaming Firefox for vulnerabilities in 3rd party plugins is like blaming MS for some third party drive partitioning software you just downloaded screwing up your system. I'm pretty sure you need to allow root access to install plugins at least in Ubuntu, so they really have the potential to do anything.
I didn't mean yourself, only realised after that it could have been construed that way. I was of course referring to the parties involved in the story (I suppose it works for either, and is most funny when applied to the minor). My apologies.
This poster I think has exposed himself over and over again as a guy who has a deep-seated desire for underage same sex partners....I'm not saying he likes little boys, I'm saying he has a problem. This guy is, I believe, a gay pedophile.
Sorry, that might have been going a bit far. But I can't help wonder.. why doesn't he deny it?
It seems that the posts in the comment thread in question have all been censored now, but from other comments here it just sounds like he asked if the guy often invites other people round. It isn't the same as saying that he does, it sounds far more like a joke. From hipcheck16's other comments he does seem a bit overzealous, but he also seems fairly intelligent and reasonable. IMO he must regularly comment on that site and this woman is just looking for an excuse to make his life awkward. Also as far as I can tell hipcheck wouldn't (initially) have had any hint that "UncleG" or whatever he is called was in fact Lisa Stone's son, or was a minor. IMO the whole thing is just being blown all out of proportion. It's hard to know the actual truth thought without seeing the original comments, of course, so maybe he did know from previous occasions that this guy is her son, and he just is making things far too personal. Even if I don't like someone, I wouldn't start insulting their children just because they are unfortunate enough to be related.
Well, I'm pretty sure I've read of botnets actaully attacking each other, but usually for their own gain rather than to actually reduce the spam load. I've always liked the idea of taking these down myself, but I've never really looked into security in a big way, especially from a blackhat perspective. The chances of someone being both skilled, motivated and altruistic enough to just take all the zombies down seems pretty low. Especially considering most of the motivation for this stuff is money. We'd need to have the online equivalent of Batman or Ironman. Someone who already has all the money they want, yet has a will to do good, and a lot of brainpower just sitting there wanting to be exercised. And is not scared of breaking a few laws to get things done. Heh.
Spam isn't so much an economics problem as a "some people are just dicks" problem. A lot of the problem with spam is the current system we use for email. It was never intended for such widespread use and has little-to-none in the way of authentication or security measures. You can encrypt emails for security sure, but it doesn't help get around the problem of spam..
Not to mention a lot of people would be seriously PISSED and you'd be in deep legal shit for messing with other people's computers.. I'm sure these guys could still face possible trouble even for just admitting they've brought down the head of the botnets, but IMO they're pretty justified to do that. Wiping people's machines, while tempting, is just a no-no. If we want vigilante justice to become more acceptable in these situations, then it's best to be 'nice' about it.
Burgers - no (well apart from the bun - I'd be okay eating a burger with a wholemeal bun). Fries - most definitely. Starchy carbohydrates. If people ate 2 or 3 burgers and passed on the fries and insanely sugar padded drink, they'd be a lot better off than if they had just gone for the standard "meal" deal.
It has has been conclusively proven that excess saturated fat leads to atherosclerosis - that is one of the damaging myths that is being perpetuated. Ever since that message has been being pushed, we've seen many more cases of heart disease, obesity, diabetes, etc.
There's a big difference between asking a question of random people on the internet when you're too lazy to google (although, it sucks when the answer is not available on google and you still get berated), and asking your boss about your perceived performance and any goals he may have for your dept..
Heh, that asbestos thing is a stroke of marketing genius I have to say..
Well, surely if there are any service outages then the service is not "unlimited" even in always on terms? There is just something very definitely wrong about it all, it really riles me when I see stuff like this on billboards. UNLIMITED* data plan! Or FREE texts for life**!
*subject to fair use policy of 1GB, thereafter you are LIMITED.
Slashdot Mirror
I heard this months ago on /. , it's hardly news to those who had actually been following things.
If there was any serious cause for concern, this wouldn't be going ahead. I doubt every scientist working on the project is also desiring to commit suicide/genocide/planetacide/whatever.
Hahahahahahaaa... yeah, good one. No, it just has incredibly fucking annoying overuse of bold font, and why put every sentence in its own double spaced paragraph? Annoying. Not to mention completely offtopic. You need to find a more appropriate context for your little crusade. I have better things to do with my time than go through a mess like that.
And I didn't actually read it, just checked over to see if it was one of those randomly generated posts (it *really* looks like one from the offset due to the strange formatting), and the other bit caught my eye and amused me. If you or whoever wrote this post can't see why people simply don't want to read this shit, you have major problems.
There are plenty of other "gods" for you to be wrong about than just the Christian one. I think you might need to expand the list ever so slightly (into infinity).
*whoosh*
PS that whip up is not even the same whip up from the original post..
Why do I get the feeling ForeDecker (an MS mgt. person here, whom I addressed with these points 3-4 times now & he just "evades them") OR, that I am just going to be "adhominem" attacked, rather than my points here being confronted &/or disproved instead?
Probably because the way you've written this, you've made it bloody annoying to read, and nobody can be bothered.
This time I'll count using Binary on my fingers.
I've never actually considered doing this. Clever. Almost completely useless as I don't have much use for physical counting references, but clever nonetheless!
Slashdot moderation is like the average fuel consumption on your car's trip computer. If you reset it while rolling down a hill you'll get insane MPG figures, but after that it'll fix itself up in the long run and evaluate to a correct value.
Do not pass Go! Do not collect £200
Yeah, there's a big difference between fixed vulnerability, unknown vulnerability, privately known vulnerability, publicly known vulnerability, and exploited vulnerability.. if they're not measuring everything apart from the unknown vulnerabilities, and not noting the actual potential damage and exploitability of each one, then trying to draw any useful conclusion is pretty difficult.
I knew it had to be a bunch of FUD. I'm open to the idea that FF could be more holey than IE, it may happen one day.. but I really wouldn't bet on it.
Well, because you could choose to run without certain plugins to be safer. I'd think that a plugin should be able to do *anything* on the system? Once the plugin is running it can presumably present vulnerabilities without the browser itself having to be directly involved in the process. Say if you view a maliciously formed PDF. How can you possibly blame Firefox for Adobe's PDF reader having a bug? I think that situation did occur earlier this year.
Blaming Firefox for vulnerabilities in 3rd party plugins is like blaming MS for some third party drive partitioning software you just downloaded screwing up your system. I'm pretty sure you need to allow root access to install plugins at least in Ubuntu, so they really have the potential to do anything.
How many of these vulnerabilities were due to Firefox itself, and how many due to plugins?
I didn't mean yourself, only realised after that it could have been construed that way. I was of course referring to the parties involved in the story (I suppose it works for either, and is most funny when applied to the minor). My apologies.
This poster I think has exposed himself over and over again as a guy who has a deep-seated desire for underage same sex partners....I'm not saying he likes little boys, I'm saying he has a problem. This guy is, I believe, a gay pedophile.
Sorry, that might have been going a bit far. But I can't help wonder.. why doesn't he deny it?
It seems that the posts in the comment thread in question have all been censored now, but from other comments here it just sounds like he asked if the guy often invites other people round. It isn't the same as saying that he does, it sounds far more like a joke. From hipcheck16's other comments he does seem a bit overzealous, but he also seems fairly intelligent and reasonable. IMO he must regularly comment on that site and this woman is just looking for an excuse to make his life awkward. Also as far as I can tell hipcheck wouldn't (initially) have had any hint that "UncleG" or whatever he is called was in fact Lisa Stone's son, or was a minor. IMO the whole thing is just being blown all out of proportion. It's hard to know the actual truth thought without seeing the original comments, of course, so maybe he did know from previous occasions that this guy is her son, and he just is making things far too personal. Even if I don't like someone, I wouldn't start insulting their children just because they are unfortunate enough to be related.
They're not fixes. They're just there to introduce more vulnerabilities that will "encourage" people to shift to Windows 7 ;)
eventually, and inevitably, any powerful regime is liable to become corrupt and you never know, it could be your rights on the firing line.
American citizens' rights have been on the firing line since 9/11 and freedom of speech doesn't seem to have helped matters any..
So now nobody in America can make a joke online without fear of a court case??
Well, I'm pretty sure I've read of botnets actaully attacking each other, but usually for their own gain rather than to actually reduce the spam load. I've always liked the idea of taking these down myself, but I've never really looked into security in a big way, especially from a blackhat perspective. The chances of someone being both skilled, motivated and altruistic enough to just take all the zombies down seems pretty low. Especially considering most of the motivation for this stuff is money. We'd need to have the online equivalent of Batman or Ironman. Someone who already has all the money they want, yet has a will to do good, and a lot of brainpower just sitting there wanting to be exercised. And is not scared of breaking a few laws to get things done. Heh.
It was the wording of the summary led me to believe they'd actively attacked the control channels rather than doing everything legally, my bad.
Spam isn't so much an economics problem as a "some people are just dicks" problem. A lot of the problem with spam is the current system we use for email. It was never intended for such widespread use and has little-to-none in the way of authentication or security measures. You can encrypt emails for security sure, but it doesn't help get around the problem of spam..
Not to mention a lot of people would be seriously PISSED and you'd be in deep legal shit for messing with other people's computers.. I'm sure these guys could still face possible trouble even for just admitting they've brought down the head of the botnets, but IMO they're pretty justified to do that. Wiping people's machines, while tempting, is just a no-no. If we want vigilante justice to become more acceptable in these situations, then it's best to be 'nice' about it.
You don't get an insightful rating without authoritatively spouting some piece of nonsensical claptrap.
[/irony]
Burgers - no (well apart from the bun - I'd be okay eating a burger with a wholemeal bun). Fries - most definitely. Starchy carbohydrates. If people ate 2 or 3 burgers and passed on the fries and insanely sugar padded drink, they'd be a lot better off than if they had just gone for the standard "meal" deal.
It has has been conclusively proven that excess saturated fat leads to atherosclerosis - that is one of the damaging myths that is being perpetuated. Ever since that message has been being pushed, we've seen many more cases of heart disease, obesity, diabetes, etc.
There's a big difference between asking a question of random people on the internet when you're too lazy to google (although, it sucks when the answer is not available on google and you still get berated), and asking your boss about your perceived performance and any goals he may have for your dept..
Heh, that asbestos thing is a stroke of marketing genius I have to say..
Well, surely if there are any service outages then the service is not "unlimited" even in always on terms? There is just something very definitely wrong about it all, it really riles me when I see stuff like this on billboards. UNLIMITED* data plan! Or FREE texts for life**!
*subject to fair use policy of 1GB, thereafter you are LIMITED.
** when you spend £15 a month