As he said , networks are (usually) insecure as hell - not by nature but by incompetent setup. You can use airsnort if you really, really want to crack WEP but the bigger problem is that most companies don't even bother to enable it, through laziness, incompetence or just being unfamiliar with the technology.
I've sat in a pub in London and seen three wireless networks accessed in five minutes. I won't say 'cracked' because that overstates the difficulty of doing it.
If you want proof, here's a story about WEP's inherent weaknesses.
To prove it's not just endemic in London, here's a story about War Driving in San Francisco.
And here is the story that I think the original poster was referring to. The key phrase is 'comprehensive seven-month audit' - this is not hearsay, it's concrete figures.
I know tech paranoia is annoying, but in this case it serves a purpose - it should help close up all these damn holes.
Unfortunately Sci-fi is the genre least likely to embrace HDTV. TV props are made to a lower standard than film props - they can be, because you'll never see them in as much detail on low-res TVs. HDTV requires a similar level of investment to film in terms of props, costumes, sets, etc etc. Plus the rendering time for CGI shots is higher, models cost more to produce, etc etc.
Sport will be the killer app for HDTV - imagine golf where you can actually see the ball!
If you're only watching BBC1, I quite agree - that's why I said it shouldn't be chasing ratings. What about Radios 1-5, BBCi, Local Radio, BBC2, the non-commercial digital channels, DAB tests, the Open University, BBC Publications, etc etc etc.
Or look at it this way - if you didn't pay your hundred quid a year, ITV would only have to worry about competing with channel 5 (Channel 4 is a minority market that they wouldn't worry about). How good would TV be then?
The point I was address was about the license fee, which does not cover Channel 4, which is a commercial broadcaster with a social affairs remit under its licence to broadcast.
Until the majority of people in the country have an interest in science beyond 'press the button, the box in the corner soothes my confused little mind,' the BBC will remain the only station in this country that's purely committed to public service broadcasting. Can you see ITV broadcasting the RI lectures, or 'What the Romans did for us'? Can you even see UK Horizons, a supposed science channel, broadcasting anything more advanced than Robot Wars or Scrapheap Challenge? Of course not. The mongo on the street doesn't give a shit about cybernetics or astrophysics, he just wants to know whether Charlene is shagging Mandy Dingle. And sadly, by demographic, the mongos have more spending power, by dint of greater numbers, than the people who would be interested in true science. That's what the BBC is there to safeguard.
The 'enforced taxation' troll you dangle so enticingly is the same mechanism that's allowing the BBC to test Ogg streaming, provide one of the world's best news websites, and provide programming for minorities in this country - whether they be minorities by race, age, religion or intellect. If you want a (nearly) pure commercial entertainment look at digital TV - wave after wave of Temptation Island and When Animals Attack. Can you see Sky One dedicating an evening to science more serious than Voyager?
Frankly the only problem with the BBC is BBC1's strategy of chasing ratings. That's what should be left to ITV and the commercial operators. Leave public service broadcasting to the public.
And anyway, aren't the Christmas Lectures supposed to be to introduce children to science?
Oh, and Kevin Warwick is an attention grabbing buffon. Ithankyou.
The motivation behind this is entirely political. Putin took a great deal of criticism for his handling of the crisis when the Kursk was first sunk and the recovery of the bulk of the sub - where the bodies of the crewmen are - is his reaction to that.
Russia as a culture has an extremely militaristic structure - Russian as a language differentiates between 'glorious death in battle' and 'ordinary death' - and the payoff is that it has to be seen to honour its heroic dead. Putin was insensitive to this mood and refused to come back from his holiday when the sub first sank. He won't make the same mistake again.
I can't see that being the case with a hotsync; you settle the palm onto the connector and then you either hit the hardware button on the cradle or you trigger the sync in software on the palm. It's only then that the connection with the serial port is opened.
Having said that, the hotsync is triggered by shorting two pins on the palm's connector, and on li-ion palms the cradle also supplies a charging voltage, but I'd be very suprised if it was possible for these to feed back along the serial cable and do any damage.
And surely any damage that's done via a serial connection must be down to the motherboard manufacturer? The RS-232 spec (and I'll admit my knowledge here is next to zero) surely must have a fixed maximum voltage on the pins?
I've been using one of these for about three years now, it's a really lovely little semi-pro mixer with two stereo inputs on RCA jacks, and four mono selectable (XLR/Jack) inputs - the mono channels have pan controls so you can double them up to be stereo. It's got some other useful functions too, like tape input, so you can kill the main inputs and have an auxiliary. It cost me just over UKP100, don't know what it costs in the US. It's probably more than you were looking to spend, but I have yet to find a better mini-mixer anywhere. I thoroughly recommend it. Hell, I've recorded two satellite radio series using it...
I had a go at Logitech's demo at a trade show recently and underwhelmed is not the word. Not only does it do nothing but buzz - any description using the word 'texture' should be done under the trade descriptions act - but the vibrations are at a frequency that brings to mind a dental drill. Ouch.
I'm more worried about the ability to make a cursor gravitate to a particular point on screen you described with the Wingman - how long until someone teams that up with the no-click purchasing procedure from yesterday?
Uri Geller annoys the hell out of me. He's made a huge fortune winding up gullible people who desperately want to believe in something spiritual. To add to the other debunkings people have mentioned, James Randi went head to head with him a few years ago in the UK. He had no sense of humour then and evidently has no sense of humour now.
Oh and as for everyone quoting The Matrix, I give you The Tick: Spooooooooooooooooon!
Slashdot Mirror
As he said , networks are (usually) insecure as hell - not by nature but by incompetent setup. You can use airsnort if you really, really want to crack WEP but the bigger problem is that most companies don't even bother to enable it, through laziness, incompetence or just being unfamiliar with the technology.
I've sat in a pub in London and seen three wireless networks accessed in five minutes. I won't say 'cracked' because that overstates the difficulty of doing it.
If you want proof, here's a story about WEP's inherent weaknesses.
To prove it's not just endemic in London, here's a story about War Driving in San Francisco.
And here is the story that I think the original poster was referring to. The key phrase is 'comprehensive seven-month audit' - this is not hearsay, it's concrete figures.
I know tech paranoia is annoying, but in this case it serves a purpose - it should help close up all these damn holes.
Sport will be the killer app for HDTV - imagine golf where you can actually see the ball!
And in fact ITV and Channel 4 are separate entities, although they are both governed by the same regulatory body.
So you're saying we're the stupid, passive ones because a smaller percentage of us get murdered?
If you're only watching BBC1, I quite agree - that's why I said it shouldn't be chasing ratings. What about Radios 1-5, BBCi, Local Radio, BBC2, the non-commercial digital channels, DAB tests, the Open University, BBC Publications, etc etc etc.
Or look at it this way - if you didn't pay your hundred quid a year, ITV would only have to worry about competing with channel 5 (Channel 4 is a minority market that they wouldn't worry about). How good would TV be then?
The point I was address was about the license fee, which does not cover Channel 4, which is a commercial broadcaster with a social affairs remit under its licence to broadcast.
And yet, per thousand head of population, our murder rates are far below those of the US. Odd, that.
Until the majority of people in the country have an interest in science beyond 'press the button, the box in the corner soothes my confused little mind,' the BBC will remain the only station in this country that's purely committed to public service broadcasting. Can you see ITV broadcasting the RI lectures, or 'What the Romans did for us'? Can you even see UK Horizons, a supposed science channel, broadcasting anything more advanced than Robot Wars or Scrapheap Challenge? Of course not. The mongo on the street doesn't give a shit about cybernetics or astrophysics, he just wants to know whether Charlene is shagging Mandy Dingle. And sadly, by demographic, the mongos have more spending power, by dint of greater numbers, than the people who would be interested in true science. That's what the BBC is there to safeguard.
The 'enforced taxation' troll you dangle so enticingly is the same mechanism that's allowing the BBC to test Ogg streaming, provide one of the world's best news websites, and provide programming for minorities in this country - whether they be minorities by race, age, religion or intellect. If you want a (nearly) pure commercial entertainment look at digital TV - wave after wave of Temptation Island and When Animals Attack. Can you see Sky One dedicating an evening to science more serious than Voyager?
Frankly the only problem with the BBC is BBC1's strategy of chasing ratings. That's what should be left to ITV and the commercial operators. Leave public service broadcasting to the public.
And anyway, aren't the Christmas Lectures supposed to be to introduce children to science?
Oh, and Kevin Warwick is an attention grabbing buffon. Ithankyou.
Russia as a culture has an extremely militaristic structure - Russian as a language differentiates between 'glorious death in battle' and 'ordinary death' - and the payoff is that it has to be seen to honour its heroic dead. Putin was insensitive to this mood and refused to come back from his holiday when the sub first sank. He won't make the same mistake again.
If you just wanted to prove you're clever enough to take 4 characters out of an email address, you could have just emailed me, you know.
Having said that, the hotsync is triggered by shorting two pins on the palm's connector, and on li-ion palms the cradle also supplies a charging voltage, but I'd be very suprised if it was possible for these to feed back along the serial cable and do any damage.
And surely any damage that's done via a serial connection must be down to the motherboard manufacturer? The RS-232 spec (and I'll admit my knowledge here is next to zero) surely must have a fixed maximum voltage on the pins?
I'm more worried about the ability to make a cursor gravitate to a particular point on screen you described with the Wingman - how long until someone teams that up with the no-click purchasing procedure from yesterday?
Oh and as for everyone quoting The Matrix, I give you The Tick: Spooooooooooooooooon!