You have to admit it was as at least part trolling. You knew very well that the popular definition of "hacking" isn't what the hacking elite maintain it to be, but posted anyway.
I've taken a compromise approach: all crackers are hackers, but not all hackers are crackers. As in my lockpicking example: you can do it professionally (locksmith), as a hobby (yes, some people make a hobby of picking locks...I've seen stranger), or you can get criminal with it.
According to Cingular, they never distribute cell phone numbers. I have cingular and have never received such a message.
Phone prefixes (the three numbers after the area code) are general specific to a provider. If your number is 214-555-8752, then someone who is 214-555-9761 probably has the same carrier as you. What this means is that Everyone with 214-555 is a Cingular customer, thus all cell users. That's ten thousand known victims--I mean potential marks--I mean customers to text message.
They're probably picking prefixes in areas where they think they'll find more timeshare holders (upper middle class suburban areas) and just messaging them all.
That link is population density in urban areas, which is completely irrelevant here. The whole point is that OUTSIDE OF URBAN AREAS, the US has a lot more ground to cover.
And I'd wager that our rural to urban land area ratio is significantly higher.
"But lower population density doesn't actually matter that much, since not only aren't there any marked differences with regards to suburbs, but because the telephone and TV cables through which to offer broadband are already installed. Few people live in ranches 30 miles from the nearest center of civilization, where the population density is pronounced and acquiring a broadband connection could actually be a problem."
So there's urban, suburbs, and ranches 30 miles from anywhere?
I live in a town of 6,000 people. It got broadband a little over two years ago. There are another 20,000 people in low-density areas around this town with no broadband access. Towns of several hundred people, communities, homes a quarter mile apart. In fact, that pretty much describes all of east Texas and most of the south...it's a nightmare to deliver broadband to *most* of the population down here.
Seems like every rating like this completely ignores the fact that the US has a significantly lower population density than nearly every nation above us on such lists. What's more, they also don't account for the ratio of rural to urban homes in nations.
Absolutely. These "vigilantes" are working to prevent criminal acts. For some reason, I have a hard time having sympathy for the people caught engaged in those acts.
I suppose that depends on the definition of "support".
If by "support" they mean support groups like AA where "minor-attracted adults" seek help in not acting on impulses and addictions, then not really; it bears distinguishing between pedophiles and people who recognize that their attractions aren't healthy, even if they feel natural.
If "support" is more like a NAMBLA textbook for seduction, then a euphemism it is.
There's a balance between the two. An all-smear campaign alienates voters; I personally believe that John Kerry lost 2004 because he was perceived as having a campaign that primarily said "we're not Bush." Most voters I talked to said they wouldn't vote for Kery because they had no idea what he really stood for. He campaigns against his opponents rather than for himself; recent events support that.
That said, never going after your opponent won't do a lot for you either. In northeast Texas there's a state race that's caught my interest. Chuck Hopson, the Dem incumbent, has from the start been in a heavy smear campaign against his Republican rival. His rival (Durrett, I think) has responded largely by addressing the issues, with only a handful of attacks on Hopson (all of which that I've seen were based on Hopson's own voting record conflicting--or seeming to--with his campaign messages).
Given the recent stunts pulled by both sides in the races, Durrett's style has earned my respect.
On the subject of the article, I keep getting messages from Bill Clinton telling me how great the Dem candidate for governor is. I'm pretty sure he's not a Republican scheme, and I've deleted the same message four times so far. The Dems don't need any help on annoying voters:)
I remember a pretty fair coat of snow on the ground for a few days in 2003. Driving on it was fun. Parallel parking was a breeze: just slide the car sideways. You'd parallel park without evey trying as ill-equipped as Texans are for icy weather.
See the post above yours. Do you think the system driving the ship was written by MS? The only thing we know they made was the OS, which has nothing to do with the data entry system.
It's probably a bug with the Windows version, and might even be a problem with an extension that didn't upgrade well.
If it's an extension, that's still a problem for Firefox (remember, we've been blaming Microsoft for bad applications causing Windows issues for years). First off, it means that I have to perform a lot more maintenance and troubleshooting on my browser because it doesn't properly handle extensions that don't run well on its version. Of the ten extensions running on my Firefox, it disabled none when I moved from 1.5 to 2.0. I shouldn't have to go through and tweak all those until I figure out which is the culprit just because the FF team changed something in the browser that caused a working extension to no longer work.
Firefox needs a method for identifying problematic extensions. I'm not a developer so I can't even begin to lay out a method for doing so, but if they're going to push their extensibility so much they need a way to detect problems with extension.
Firefox just crashed again. I'm on a forum powered by VBull, just clicking from one thread to another, only one page open (no tabs). Program locked up, mouse cursor is an hourglass, and I'm having to kill it. Posting from IE6 because FF2 hates me.
"In September 21, 1997 while on maneuvers off the coast of Cape Charles, Virginia, a crew member entered a zero into a database field causing a divide by zero error in the ships Remote Data Base Manager which brought down all the machines on the network, causing the ship's propulsion system to fail."
I'm not sure what Microsoft had to do with bad data entry.
I've accidentally closed a tab once I think. What I don't like about it is that it makes it hard to close multiple tabs. Every tab closed resizes the rest, so I can't just clickclickclickclickclick to close five tabs like I used to.
Seriously. Of course the Firefox users jumped on the bandwagon and downloaded 2.0 (which is buggy and crash-prone, glad I'm still using 1.5 at work because my home browser is barely useable). If you've gone to the effort of getting a replacement browser you're obviously more up on what's available.
So tens of millions of users didn't swarm to download IE7 as soon as it was available. Seeing as I never once saw a major news report on it, the majority of users don't read technology news, and even most of the users who do don't care what browser they use so long as it works, why is the summary written as if there's a problem that the masses didn't mindlessly rush out and downloaded the latest shiny package from Microsoft?
I find the "forced" update (which isn't really forced) a little worrying, though. It should *at least* pop up a window saying that a new version of IE has been downloaded and is ready to install if the user wants it. It's a pretty major UI shift, people should be made aware of it. Blindsiding them with that isn't going to win MS any fans.
Who are we defending here...the website, or the filters?
Because it seems to me that the companies filtering sites are the ones being trampled on by lawyers, forced by threat of litigation to back off their initial judgement that the page contained racist ideas. It sounds like it's THEIR rights being interfered with here.
After a quick reading of a few things on the site, I'd say that if it's not racist, it teeters on the edge of it.
The stores didn't ban it. They chose not to sell it. They made a business decision and that's their right. This isn't a ban; they won't be preventing others from selling it or kicking in your door to take it from you.
But don't let the facts get in the way of your Slashbotism.
Because DX10 is a year away for most of us (the non-early adopters) and not everyone wants to spend the money on an OS upgrade AND a vidcard replacement at the same time. For people who replace their vidcards every 18 months or so (like me) it's a good way to get around ugrading everything at once.
Slashdot Mirror
Or perhaps sealing it in small spherical packages and hitting it with a stick. Like a golf club maybe.
You have to admit it was as at least part trolling. You knew very well that the popular definition of "hacking" isn't what the hacking elite maintain it to be, but posted anyway.
I've taken a compromise approach: all crackers are hackers, but not all hackers are crackers. As in my lockpicking example: you can do it professionally (locksmith), as a hobby (yes, some people make a hobby of picking locks...I've seen stranger), or you can get criminal with it.
About the same time lockpicking became a crime: whenever it's used to compromise someone's security and go somewhere you aren't supposed to.
According to Cingular, they never distribute cell phone numbers. I have cingular and have never received such a message.
Phone prefixes (the three numbers after the area code) are general specific to a provider. If your number is 214-555-8752, then someone who is 214-555-9761 probably has the same carrier as you. What this means is that Everyone with 214-555 is a Cingular customer, thus all cell users. That's ten thousand known victims--I mean potential marks--I mean customers to text message.
They're probably picking prefixes in areas where they think they'll find more timeshare holders (upper middle class suburban areas) and just messaging them all.
The internet is like...tubes, man. Tuuuubes. Can ya dig?
That link is population density in urban areas, which is completely irrelevant here. The whole point is that OUTSIDE OF URBAN AREAS, the US has a lot more ground to cover.
And I'd wager that our rural to urban land area ratio is significantly higher.
"But lower population density doesn't actually matter that much, since not only aren't there any marked differences with regards to suburbs, but because the telephone and TV cables through which to offer broadband are already installed. Few people live in ranches 30 miles from the nearest center of civilization, where the population density is pronounced and acquiring a broadband connection could actually be a problem."
So there's urban, suburbs, and ranches 30 miles from anywhere?
I live in a town of 6,000 people. It got broadband a little over two years ago. There are another 20,000 people in low-density areas around this town with no broadband access. Towns of several hundred people, communities, homes a quarter mile apart. In fact, that pretty much describes all of east Texas and most of the south...it's a nightmare to deliver broadband to *most* of the population down here.
Seems like every rating like this completely ignores the fact that the US has a significantly lower population density than nearly every nation above us on such lists. What's more, they also don't account for the ratio of rural to urban homes in nations.
"it's like y2k but worse"
I know what you mean. Y2K was supposed to put an end to civilization, but at least we'd have been able to post on slashdot.
Clearly that's exactly what I was trying to do.
Ooooor maybe I was demonstrating that pointing the finger just at the Republicans is partisan hackery.
Absolutely. These "vigilantes" are working to prevent criminal acts. For some reason, I have a hard time having sympathy for the people caught engaged in those acts.
I suppose that depends on the definition of "support".
If by "support" they mean support groups like AA where "minor-attracted adults" seek help in not acting on impulses and addictions, then not really; it bears distinguishing between pedophiles and people who recognize that their attractions aren't healthy, even if they feel natural.
If "support" is more like a NAMBLA textbook for seduction, then a euphemism it is.
There's a balance between the two. An all-smear campaign alienates voters; I personally believe that John Kerry lost 2004 because he was perceived as having a campaign that primarily said "we're not Bush." Most voters I talked to said they wouldn't vote for Kery because they had no idea what he really stood for. He campaigns against his opponents rather than for himself; recent events support that.
:)
That said, never going after your opponent won't do a lot for you either. In northeast Texas there's a state race that's caught my interest. Chuck Hopson, the Dem incumbent, has from the start been in a heavy smear campaign against his Republican rival. His rival (Durrett, I think) has responded largely by addressing the issues, with only a handful of attacks on Hopson (all of which that I've seen were based on Hopson's own voting record conflicting--or seeming to--with his campaign messages).
Given the recent stunts pulled by both sides in the races, Durrett's style has earned my respect.
On the subject of the article, I keep getting messages from Bill Clinton telling me how great the Dem candidate for governor is. I'm pretty sure he's not a Republican scheme, and I've deleted the same message four times so far. The Dems don't need any help on annoying voters
I remember a pretty fair coat of snow on the ground for a few days in 2003. Driving on it was fun. Parallel parking was a breeze: just slide the car sideways. You'd parallel park without evey trying as ill-equipped as Texans are for icy weather.
See the post above yours. Do you think the system driving the ship was written by MS? The only thing we know they made was the OS, which has nothing to do with the data entry system.
It's probably a bug with the Windows version, and might even be a problem with an extension that didn't upgrade well.
If it's an extension, that's still a problem for Firefox (remember, we've been blaming Microsoft for bad applications causing Windows issues for years). First off, it means that I have to perform a lot more maintenance and troubleshooting on my browser because it doesn't properly handle extensions that don't run well on its version. Of the ten extensions running on my Firefox, it disabled none when I moved from 1.5 to 2.0. I shouldn't have to go through and tweak all those until I figure out which is the culprit just because the FF team changed something in the browser that caused a working extension to no longer work.
Firefox needs a method for identifying problematic extensions. I'm not a developer so I can't even begin to lay out a method for doing so, but if they're going to push their extensibility so much they need a way to detect problems with extension.
And you think MS wrote the frontend and code for operating a Navy vessel?
Firefox just crashed again. I'm on a forum powered by VBull, just clicking from one thread to another, only one page open (no tabs). Program locked up, mouse cursor is an hourglass, and I'm having to kill it. Posting from IE6 because FF2 hates me.
"In September 21, 1997 while on maneuvers off the coast of Cape Charles, Virginia, a crew member entered a zero into a database field causing a divide by zero error in the ships Remote Data Base Manager which brought down all the machines on the network, causing the ship's propulsion system to fail."
I'm not sure what Microsoft had to do with bad data entry.
I've accidentally closed a tab once I think. What I don't like about it is that it makes it hard to close multiple tabs. Every tab closed resizes the rest, so I can't just clickclickclickclickclick to close five tabs like I used to.
I've used NoScript since I adopted FF.
The program frequently crashes, with no apparent pattern. It just stops responding, and I have to kill the process and start it back.
Fortunately they now have that nifty recover feature to restore my tabs and pick up right where I left off.
Seriously. Of course the Firefox users jumped on the bandwagon and downloaded 2.0 (which is buggy and crash-prone, glad I'm still using 1.5 at work because my home browser is barely useable). If you've gone to the effort of getting a replacement browser you're obviously more up on what's available.
So tens of millions of users didn't swarm to download IE7 as soon as it was available. Seeing as I never once saw a major news report on it, the majority of users don't read technology news, and even most of the users who do don't care what browser they use so long as it works, why is the summary written as if there's a problem that the masses didn't mindlessly rush out and downloaded the latest shiny package from Microsoft?
I find the "forced" update (which isn't really forced) a little worrying, though. It should *at least* pop up a window saying that a new version of IE has been downloaded and is ready to install if the user wants it. It's a pretty major UI shift, people should be made aware of it. Blindsiding them with that isn't going to win MS any fans.
Who are we defending here...the website, or the filters?
Because it seems to me that the companies filtering sites are the ones being trampled on by lawyers, forced by threat of litigation to back off their initial judgement that the page contained racist ideas. It sounds like it's THEIR rights being interfered with here.
After a quick reading of a few things on the site, I'd say that if it's not racist, it teeters on the edge of it.
The stores didn't ban it. They chose not to sell it. They made a business decision and that's their right. This isn't a ban; they won't be preventing others from selling it or kicking in your door to take it from you.
But don't let the facts get in the way of your Slashbotism.
Because DX10 is a year away for most of us (the non-early adopters) and not everyone wants to spend the money on an OS upgrade AND a vidcard replacement at the same time. For people who replace their vidcards every 18 months or so (like me) it's a good way to get around ugrading everything at once.