Sorry to nitpick, but XSS is nothing about how you input data and everything about how you output data. There's nothing wrong with being very liberal with what you accept as input (javascript, tag soup, whatever) as long as it's properly encoded on output. If you restrict yourself to just filtering input, that model breaks when a new interface is built that inputs data into your database which doesn't do input filtering.
I currently have 81 processes running on my Win7 install. Each one of them can address 2GB (I think) virtual memory. If you turn off the page file and a few processes decide to make full use of their addressable space, then everything will stop working. That's why a page file is a good idea.
I'd wager that only stupid security engineers care about routable/non-routable addresses. The rest of us know enough to implement segregation and access controls properly.
Just out of interest, you know that the BBC doesn't get the whole license fee, right? I believe that some of it goes into maintaining the broadcast infrastructure that all channels use. The Beeb get the most of it, so if you elect to not touch any of their services it can seem to be unfair. Personally, I think that £12pm for the beeb TV output, radio stations and website is worth it. I'd probably pay that for Radio 4 alone.
If you watch or record television programmes as they're being shown on TV you must, by law, be covered by a TV Licence, no matter what device you're using.
It's only a lie if they're claiming to be something they're not. I don't think it follows that a domain name which is someone's name is therefore a site created by that person and/or speaks for that person. Given that names->people aren't 1:1, I think it takes a particularly non-logical step to assume that's true.
There's nothing stopping me creating "bob-smith.com" and putting a page there which says "I think people called bob smith are stupid". Nor should there be.
And on your last point, I believe every individual should have the right to lie whenever they want.
Except it can't be trademark infringement, because there is no company or entity which trades under the name of 'Stephen Conroy'. A 'Trademark' is a 'Mark' under which you 'Trade'.
I don't think I accept your distinction between your weak atheism definition and your agnosticism definition. Specifically, I don't think there is one. Either a person asserts that they don't believe there is a god, or they assert that they do believe there is (or isn't) a god. I'm not sure why the question of whether the answer is knowable or not comes into it?
Scientifically, the hypothesis is non-testable, so I don't think there's much dispute in the scientific arena about how knowable the answer is (ie: it's not)?
On the contrary, if you state that "there is no god", that is a specific claim in itself. It is also a faith-based claim given that there is not only no evidence to suggest that thtere is no god, but you cannot possibly tell me what that evidence would look like, or what experiment you would do to demonstrate this claim.
In short, it's a non-testable hypothesis, therefore is non-scientific. Because it's a faith based position, you might say that it's appropriate to call it a religion.
Now, you could argue that a lot of atheists don't assert this, but I'd subsequently argue that this is an issue of terminology. I recognise that those saying "There is no god" and those saying "I don't know! No-one can know!" hold different poisisionts, but these debates would be easier if we labelled the former as 'Atheists' and the latter as 'Agnostics'. No?
It's the source ports you're worried about, not the destination ones. I get in the office and along with 6,000 other people turn on my desktop and open my browser which may have 15 saved tabs. With the HTTP and DNS requests (and whatever other connections from other IM etc. apps), I could simultaneously be opening tens of connections out to different servers on the WAN. With NAT, every connection uses up a source port on the public IP. At some point, you run out of ports.
Yes, I use an SPF for my domain. No I don't have any idea how effective it is, because my SPF record is used by other people. I haven't had any complaints about people not getting my mails.
Slashdot Mirror
So we should sue the hdd manufacturers because operating systems have a bug in them?
GiB and GB have very precise meanings that are easy to understand, assuming you're not stupid. Are you stupid?
Nothing? How many clocks per second does a 2GHz CPU run at?
It's not a standard in the computer world though. How many bits per second does your gigabit network carry?
Sorry to nitpick, but XSS is nothing about how you input data and everything about how you output data. There's nothing wrong with being very liberal with what you accept as input (javascript, tag soup, whatever) as long as it's properly encoded on output. If you restrict yourself to just filtering input, that model breaks when a new interface is built that inputs data into your database which doesn't do input filtering.
Let me guess: System, System Idle Process, svchost and winlogon.exe?
I currently have 81 processes running on my Win7 install. Each one of them can address 2GB (I think) virtual memory. If you turn off the page file and a few processes decide to make full use of their addressable space, then everything will stop working. That's why a page file is a good idea.
I'd wager that only stupid security engineers care about routable/non-routable addresses. The rest of us know enough to implement segregation and access controls properly.
Just out of interest, you know that the BBC doesn't get the whole license fee, right? I believe that some of it goes into maintaining the broadcast infrastructure that all channels use. The Beeb get the most of it, so if you elect to not touch any of their services it can seem to be unfair. Personally, I think that £12pm for the beeb TV output, radio stations and website is worth it. I'd probably pay that for Radio 4 alone.
I was responding to his point that you need to be licensed if you "...have a TV that can receive broadcasts...". This isn't true.
In the UK, if you go to the iplayer website and select a TV channel (or Radio), you get the option of watching what's on right now as a live stream.
But you're right that to watch historical stuff, you don't need a license, and I guess that what most people use the service for.
Except the requirement to have a TV license has bugger all to do with how much equipment you own.
If you watch BBC1 live on iPlayer, you need a license.
If you plug your PS3 into your TV and only use your TV for that, you don't need a license.
From http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/
Ah, fair enough - I thought you meant all spam. No, 3000 a month is a hell of a lot for that!
3000 a month?
:)
Try 3000 a *day* to my personal account. It is domain I guess, but I'm now discovering spamd/OpenBSD
http://www.growse.com/projects/spamwatch/
How about a bit of tape over the lens if you're that paranoid?
It's only a lie if they're claiming to be something they're not. I don't think it follows that a domain name which is someone's name is therefore a site created by that person and/or speaks for that person. Given that names->people aren't 1:1, I think it takes a particularly non-logical step to assume that's true.
There's nothing stopping me creating "bob-smith.com" and putting a page there which says "I think people called bob smith are stupid". Nor should there be.
And on your last point, I believe every individual should have the right to lie whenever they want.
Except it can't be trademark infringement, because there is no company or entity which trades under the name of 'Stephen Conroy'. A 'Trademark' is a 'Mark' under which you 'Trade'.
So we go through a huge difficult, expensive process to save us, what? A couple of years? Why bother?
I don't think I accept your distinction between your weak atheism definition and your agnosticism definition. Specifically, I don't think there is one. Either a person asserts that they don't believe there is a god, or they assert that they do believe there is (or isn't) a god. I'm not sure why the question of whether the answer is knowable or not comes into it?
Scientifically, the hypothesis is non-testable, so I don't think there's much dispute in the scientific arena about how knowable the answer is (ie: it's not)?
On the contrary, if you state that "there is no god", that is a specific claim in itself. It is also a faith-based claim given that there is not only no evidence to suggest that thtere is no god, but you cannot possibly tell me what that evidence would look like, or what experiment you would do to demonstrate this claim.
In short, it's a non-testable hypothesis, therefore is non-scientific. Because it's a faith based position, you might say that it's appropriate to call it a religion.
Now, you could argue that a lot of atheists don't assert this, but I'd subsequently argue that this is an issue of terminology. I recognise that those saying "There is no god" and those saying "I don't know! No-one can know!" hold different poisisionts, but these debates would be easier if we labelled the former as 'Atheists' and the latter as 'Agnostics'. No?
You could, you know, use a firewall?
If not-letting-people-route-to-your-ip is your security mechanism, you've got the wrong tool for that particular job.
It's the source ports you're worried about, not the destination ones. I get in the office and along with 6,000 other people turn on my desktop and open my browser which may have 15 saved tabs. With the HTTP and DNS requests (and whatever other connections from other IM etc. apps), I could simultaneously be opening tens of connections out to different servers on the WAN. With NAT, every connection uses up a source port on the public IP. At some point, you run out of ports.
Yes, I use an SPF for my domain. No I don't have any idea how effective it is, because my SPF record is used by other people. I haven't had any complaints about people not getting my mails.
Oracle called, they disagree.
My Eee901 fits in my jacket outside pocket. Can even button the flaps down over it. If you can't, you need a better jacket :)
Maybe that's a USP for the jacket industry: "Pockets can take a netbook".