So, to recap: don't show the page in question for which this story is directly mentioning, and shut up and get in line with the other voiceless people until you can build bigger bombs or find a pocket of oil in your backyard? Nice...
So, to recap, if these people breached your security and defaced your web site, you'd be ok with that, right?
Get a grip. The idea is not to suppress the story but to not give it more credence that necessary. This is a story about how a group of hackers broke the law and defaced a US Government web site. We do not need to give any more publicity to this event than to state those facts. But this is the era of sensationlism, so let's show what the defacement looked like, to somehow garner these malcontents some publicity and sympathy. I say: wrong!!! What I propose is the same thing they do during televised baseball games when some nutjob runs out on the field -- they don't show it. There's no reason to give the moron free publicity or allow him bragging rights.
And if these poor, pitiful individuals have no voice, then how were they able to get on the Internet and connect to NASA's website and break security? Why couldn't they have addressed their concerns to a news website? Amnesty International? Why couldn't they put up a web site fo their own, like stopthewaronlebanon.com?
I don't buy it. These hackers certainly have the capability to hack web sites, so that means that they also have the ability to find less destructive means to get their message across. They are not to be lauded, applauded, or admired. Do you mean to tell me that the citizens of a South American country that elected a woman president can't protest and make the world news?
This group goes with the others that in last days carried out attacks against governmental and commercial websites both from America and Israel, whereas other blackhat groups attacked Israeli websites provoking a denial of service (DDoS) of that particular webpage.
On the one hand, this is news; NASA is a big target. On the other hand, why are we posting a link to the defacement? We don't need to see it -- just report the story.
Look, I seriously doubt you're going to find that many people who think the war in Lebanon is a good thing, besides anyone with a vendetta against the Lebanese or the people selling bombs and rockets. You want to protest the war, fine -- but don't exepct me to care what you have to say when you can't make your voice heard in a public and legal forum. Defacing a website, any web site, is not the way to make me feel sympathy for your point of view.
But the Firefox "NoScript" extension completely blocked it until I told it to temporarily allow the host site.
And that's lovely, until you realize that not everyone runs Firefox and in many corporate environments, IE is still the defacto standard. Hoping a browser will rescue application developers from bad security design is like hoping Paris Hilton wins a Nobel Prize.
Security starts with code; if the code isn't secure, then you're asking for trouble. Programming classes in colleges and tech institutes are going to need to start stressing secure code writing if we're ever to stem the tide of these kinds of things.
I seriously doubt there are that many minors who read Slashdot, except maybe for the Gaming articles (I profess ignorance; you'd have to ask CmdrTaco for statistics I think)
The idea behind the bill, is, like so many other ideas Congress has about the Internet, inane and pointless. Their staggering ignorance is only eclipsed by their pandering to the masses and their attempts to do the parenting for America's parents
If politics mattered so much to you, you'd take the time to vote, rather than bitch about inaccessibility for "informed people who have shit to do." Evidently, since you have shit to do *other* than politics, you are content to delegate to those people who will gladly worry about politics for you.
Perhaps it is because it's Friday, but I don't remember the parent mentioning their voting/not voting. One would like to believe that anyone that passionate about the subject does in fact vote. I know I do, but the parent has a point: a lot of people vote who a) follow strictly party lines no matter what, b) vote for "the nice people who left that flyer at my house," or c) don't have a clue what or who is on the ballot but are going to vote anyway.
The people who don't vote are the people you have to convince when it comes to issues. Groups that vote tend to be polarized, and you can pretty much tell which way they will lean in an election. It's the non-voter that holds the real power, if you can find an issue which fires them up enough to get them to the polls. The problem is, you just never know what that issue is.
The bill only restricts minors from accessing them in public, not everybody. In effect, the worst thing that's going to happen is minors will have to have an adult's permission before using a public terminal to access a poorly-defined type of site.
And as well know, minors have no business reading Slashdot...
To me, same difference. It doesn't matter what the root causes are: slow coding, bugs, power struggles, idiotic requirements. There comes a point where coding the same thing day in and day out given all that's going on around you is impossible. It sucks your energy and creativity away, until the code all blurs together you and can't even remember what you wrote five minutes ago.
Lead developer for Zend engine of PHP quits... pandemonium and chaos ensue!
Please! Happens all the time; guy/gal works on project for a zillion years, sits down one day in front of their terminal, calls up the code, gives it a glance and goes: I can't freakin' do this anymore! I worked on one project for three years and it was blessed when I was finally released from my contract and moved on to other things. I was proud of the app, don't get me wrong, but if I had to finagle the code yet again for the umpteenth time, I was going to lose what remains of my mind.
Whatever the reason, he's gone. Move along... nothing to see here.
Ok, so you get the virus in an email... what if you don't have Firefox? Blasphemy, I know. More importanly, if you do have Firefox, are you necessarily going to be running Outlook to catch this bug in the first place?
Well? I don't think the US owns the modern Internet, most of which is neither built nor used in the US.
Yes, but we developed the original Internet backbone to meet our defense and industry needs and we still seem to think we own it, and we're certainly not giving away any of our control over it if we don't have to. This is pretty much a joke, meant to make it look as if we're doing something when we're not. The rest of the world will catch on in pretty short order.
...no one will be at work to thank their Sysadmin, unless they've brought their laptop to the beach and are logged on remotely. Summer hours, people! And mind you, most Sysadmins never see the light of day, so you'd never find them at the beach.
We actually did something in the spirit of cooperation with other countries.
In related news, Mr. B. L. Zeebub claims that for the first time in recorded history, his swimming pool has frozen over and can be used for ice skating.
Not really -- it's more like the US's position is contradictory or more realistically, a facade:
"The historic role that we announced that we were going to preserve is fairly clearly articulated: the technical verification and authorisation of changes to the authoritative root," Kneuer explained following an afternoon of explicit statements from US-friendly organisations and individuals that it was no longer viable for one government to retain such power over the future of a global resource.
Despite the sentiments, however, it was apparent from the carefully selected panel and audience members that the internet - despite its global reach - remains an English-speaking possession. Not one of the 11 panel members, nor any of the 22 people that spoke during the meeting, had anything but English as their first language.
So the US is more than happy turn over administrative control of the Internet domains to ICANN, but retains the right to control the root structure. In essence, ICANN becomes a semi-legitimized world front for the Internet. Other countries can't claim they don't have control over the process now, and the United States retains the true power. This will appease a few countries but on the whole nothing will change. In the end, the US hasn't given up a thing but a bloated and malformed beaureaucracy anyway.
What's that? Look at Napster? Didn't they get sued to oblivian?
THAT'S a pay service now too?! We're doomed...
Not to mention , Napster stinks now. My wife tried using them to get music for her iRiver but had nothing but technical problems with the downloads not working, plus all sorts of extra fees for the songs she really wanted, as opposed to the general tripe they peddle. Kinda sad to see this happening.
If the artists actually owned their music, they would see some decent money. After being pressured by the label, being told that there are a thousand more waiting in the wings to sign on the dotted line, lest they pass up the "chance of a lifetime", they'll sign anything, including the part about the label owning the copyright to their songs.
"We have won another battle in an ongoing war," said John Kennedy, chairman and CEO of the International Federation of the Phonographic Industries (IFPI). "We move forward with a spring in our step."
The International Federation of the Phonographic Industries? Ok guys, it's the 21st Century, so you may want to update the name a little. Although, I have to admit, the new USB turntable I installed on my multi-media PC is smokin'!
I wonder if they ever get confused with the International Federation of the Pornographic Industries?
Luckily, the fruit itself still does. Do you really need science to tell you not to eat the dark brown apples or fuzzy green oranges?
No, but having seen people in the line at the supermarket and clerking behind the cash register look at a piece of fruit or a vegetable and go "What is this?" I can heartily say that these stickers might actually save a few of the dimmer members of our species from extinction. Then again, I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not. We have this idea in the US that you can successfully legislate stupidity.
Slashdot Mirror
So, to recap, if these people breached your security and defaced your web site, you'd be ok with that, right?
Get a grip. The idea is not to suppress the story but to not give it more credence that necessary. This is a story about how a group of hackers broke the law and defaced a US Government web site. We do not need to give any more publicity to this event than to state those facts. But this is the era of sensationlism, so let's show what the defacement looked like, to somehow garner these malcontents some publicity and sympathy. I say: wrong!!! What I propose is the same thing they do during televised baseball games when some nutjob runs out on the field -- they don't show it. There's no reason to give the moron free publicity or allow him bragging rights.
And if these poor, pitiful individuals have no voice, then how were they able to get on the Internet and connect to NASA's website and break security? Why couldn't they have addressed their concerns to a news website? Amnesty International? Why couldn't they put up a web site fo their own, like stopthewaronlebanon.com?
I don't buy it. These hackers certainly have the capability to hack web sites, so that means that they also have the ability to find less destructive means to get their message across. They are not to be lauded, applauded, or admired. Do you mean to tell me that the citizens of a South American country that elected a woman president can't protest and make the world news?
Couldn't have said it any better myself... someone mod the parent up.
On the one hand, this is news; NASA is a big target. On the other hand, why are we posting a link to the defacement? We don't need to see it -- just report the story.
Look, I seriously doubt you're going to find that many people who think the war in Lebanon is a good thing, besides anyone with a vendetta against the Lebanese or the people selling bombs and rockets. You want to protest the war, fine -- but don't exepct me to care what you have to say when you can't make your voice heard in a public and legal forum. Defacing a website, any web site, is not the way to make me feel sympathy for your point of view.
And that's lovely, until you realize that not everyone runs Firefox and in many corporate environments, IE is still the defacto standard. Hoping a browser will rescue application developers from bad security design is like hoping Paris Hilton wins a Nobel Prize.
Security starts with code; if the code isn't secure, then you're asking for trouble. Programming classes in colleges and tech institutes are going to need to start stressing secure code writing if we're ever to stem the tide of these kinds of things.
Yes, one vote is a drop in the ocean... But 1 million votes is a tsunami
Your argument is inane and pointless.
Does anyone have any figures for how many kids have actually been solicited compared to those who are molested by family etc?
Hey now, you're letting facts get in the way of ignorance, fear-mongering, and politics. We're talking votes here!
You forgot the law making teenage girls wear chastity belts with built-in GPS transponders.
Perhaps it is because it's Friday, but I don't remember the parent mentioning their voting/not voting. One would like to believe that anyone that passionate about the subject does in fact vote. I know I do, but the parent has a point: a lot of people vote who a) follow strictly party lines no matter what, b) vote for "the nice people who left that flyer at my house," or c) don't have a clue what or who is on the ballot but are going to vote anyway.
The people who don't vote are the people you have to convince when it comes to issues. Groups that vote tend to be polarized, and you can pretty much tell which way they will lean in an election. It's the non-voter that holds the real power, if you can find an issue which fires them up enough to get them to the polls. The problem is, you just never know what that issue is.
And as well know, minors have no business reading Slashdot...
To me, same difference. It doesn't matter what the root causes are: slow coding, bugs, power struggles, idiotic requirements. There comes a point where coding the same thing day in and day out given all that's going on around you is impossible. It sucks your energy and creativity away, until the code all blurs together you and can't even remember what you wrote five minutes ago.
Lead developer for Zend engine of PHP quits... pandemonium and chaos ensue!
Please! Happens all the time; guy/gal works on project for a zillion years, sits down one day in front of their terminal, calls up the code, gives it a glance and goes: I can't freakin' do this anymore! I worked on one project for three years and it was blessed when I was finally released from my contract and moved on to other things. I was proud of the app, don't get me wrong, but if I had to finagle the code yet again for the umpteenth time, I was going to lose what remains of my mind.
Whatever the reason, he's gone. Move along... nothing to see here.
Cryptic is stuff like "beware of the dwarf" and "under a big 'W.'"
I'd always heard that about the dwarf, but I never understood why.
Ok, pleasing image but not something I should be thinking about here in my cube...
Ok, so you get the virus in an email... what if you don't have Firefox? Blasphemy, I know. More importanly, if you do have Firefox, are you necessarily going to be running Outlook to catch this bug in the first place?
Well? I don't think the US owns the modern Internet, most of which is neither built nor used in the US.
Yes, but we developed the original Internet backbone to meet our defense and industry needs and we still seem to think we own it, and we're certainly not giving away any of our control over it if we don't have to. This is pretty much a joke, meant to make it look as if we're doing something when we're not. The rest of the world will catch on in pretty short order.
...no one will be at work to thank their Sysadmin, unless they've brought their laptop to the beach and are logged on remotely. Summer hours, people! And mind you, most Sysadmins never see the light of day, so you'd never find them at the beach.
For example, (since I forgot to log in the first time on this thread), the US invented the Internet.
That's right... and it was Al Gore who did it... and he didn't use any "tubes"...
We actually did something in the spirit of cooperation with other countries.
In related news, Mr. B. L. Zeebub claims that for the first time in recorded history, his swimming pool has frozen over and can be used for ice skating.
Even the original article is contradictory:
Not really -- it's more like the US's position is contradictory or more realistically, a facade:
So the US is more than happy turn over administrative control of the Internet domains to ICANN, but retains the right to control the root structure. In essence, ICANN becomes a semi-legitimized world front for the Internet. Other countries can't claim they don't have control over the process now, and the United States retains the true power. This will appease a few countries but on the whole nothing will change. In the end, the US hasn't given up a thing but a bloated and malformed beaureaucracy anyway.
Not to mention , Napster stinks now. My wife tried using them to get music for her iRiver but had nothing but technical problems with the downloads not working, plus all sorts of extra fees for the songs she really wanted, as opposed to the general tripe they peddle. Kinda sad to see this happening.
And even when an artist tries to retain control of their songs, business interests get in the way.
The International Federation of the Phonographic Industries? Ok guys, it's the 21st Century, so you may want to update the name a little. Although, I have to admit, the new USB turntable I installed on my multi-media PC is smokin'!
I wonder if they ever get confused with the International Federation of the Pornographic Industries?
No, but having seen people in the line at the supermarket and clerking behind the cash register look at a piece of fruit or a vegetable and go "What is this?" I can heartily say that these stickers might actually save a few of the dimmer members of our species from extinction. Then again, I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not. We have this idea in the US that you can successfully legislate stupidity.
See? That's got to be a fake! C'mon people, wake up!