Why is the only thing discussed in this whole article thread the "solution" of getting a goddamn gun?
To cite the poster:
So I ask you, Geeks of Slashdot, what tricks do you guys have to defend yours and your loved ones homes against crimes like this? Not looking for anything that would get someone injured, but more in the area of detection and repulsion.
(Emphasis added by me.) Why does not a single post on this entire page seem to mention other ideas? Like, good ideas on installing surveillance, better alarm systems, etc. etc.
I find the fact that we're just discussing guns here -- which are, after all, ultima ratio and not the first thing that should come to mind -- somewhat sickening.
Somebody please make some more sensible suggestions so the poster gets something that actually answers his question.
Well, it gets even better - some guy in Australia has patented the wheel (credit for that link goes to one of the comment posters on the article page).
Very good comment. It's everyone's right to be outspokenly against the Bush administration and the GOP, or for it. But such a cheap attack is not even remotely acceptable, and we 'anti DRM, "info wants to be free", OSS support' people should distance ourselves from shit like this. This is about free speech. And apparently these DDOSers don't have smarter arguments. Sad little pathetic idiots. You remember that saying - "I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to death for your right to say it." This still applies here, and we all should speak up and say that that is what we believe. If you want to speak out against Bush (and I for one certainly do), do it in a smarter way, not by bullying. Don't make yourself (and others, like the parent poster pointed out) look like idiots.
Quite true. That's why the Munich government has held their project... the patents. So there you go: if there's one thing software patents could possibly achieve, it's the destruction of Free software. Although I might want to call that censorship...
Microsoft has started the largest FUD campaign that I can remember against open source. It is doing all it can to portray Linux as not a real operating system, but the hobby of bunch of loony hippies.
And MSNBC isn't any better (surprise). Quoting the article:
open-source programming, so called because anyone can examine and make changes to the underlying source code. (The guts of Microsoft's software, by contrast, have long been closely guarded.)
To any not-so-technically inclined reader, this indicates that anyone could tamper with the source code and thereby change everyone's software... open source is dangerous because anyone might change the code, instantly making all the offical packages of that software useless. Yes, I do think that to a non-hacker reading this it helps to point out that anyone can change the software, yet the original software as provided on the project webpage can be trusted to still work.
But then again, I didn't really expect MSNBC to go out of their way to carefully explain what Open Source or Free software actually mean and how it affects the software user.
By the way, my personal opinion is, I don't care what they want to do to Linux/OSS/Free software. The point in Free software is that it's Free. It's completely impossible to do anything against it unless you manage to brainwash each and every hacker to make them stop coding because they want to. MS would have to pay big lumps of money to, say, close down Free software related organizations and companies to actually hinder Free software development. An I doubt that'll happen. Now, for people/companies using Linux etc. just for business reasons, it might work given they exercize enough power to hinder Free software projects and actually churn out a better product for a good price - but for me, personally, and many others there's nothing they can do to stop the growth of the Free software movement. I use Free software because it's free and it works for me, and no one can do anything against it - except developing even better Free software, or maybe gaining power over the whole world by means of a totalitarian dictatorship which forbids free speech and expression as well as free coding...
Hmm weird... here in Germany (all of Europe, in fact), most wireless phones operate using the DECT standard at 1.9 GHz. At least those don't interfere with any Wi-Fi equipment (afaik)... how come your phones are using a different standard at 2.4/5.8 and not DECT? What type of standard is used on your phones? Some googling indicates that it seems to be called DCTS. What are its advantages? How come DCTS and 802.11 are allowed to operate and interfere in the same frequency range? Can someone shed some light on this please?
But wouldn't it still be possible to write a php script that, using libpng, loads a png file, and upload a malicious png for it to load? Yeah, encoding a png is probably safe. But, I mean, do something like this:
...and a malicious test.png will have to get loaded first.
Well, of course you won't be able to execute arbitrary code as root (just as www-data or something, and you can already do that in your php script:)). But I'm not so sure how much a malicious png could actually take down in a crash.
Too bad, though, that suspend-to-ram doesn't work too well yet in Linux. My laptop (Fujitsu P-2120) suspends but won't come back up. Anyone know of good HOWTOs or the like on how to get all the drivers to behave nicely with suspend? Cause that's where I think the problem lies.
Of course, the cpu is a bit outdated. And I only do work on it, if I were to watch DVDs or stuff I'd probably hook it up to A/C power anyway. But I like the small size, the light weight, and the fact that pretty much everything is in it.
But I hated the fact that I had to order it from the US (I live in Germany) and it took me forever to find a retailer who would send it, just because Fujitsu refuses to send them to Europe, and Fujitsu-Siemens in Germany doesn't even offer them.
If you want something ultra-portable with everything in it that you want to use mostly for working, it's quite lovely. Unfortunately, it looks like it's not being sold anymore.
I know this doesn't quite answer your request, but it might still be a good idea to check Portable One (they used to be called Global Computers when I ordered from them).
Don't know about the new Fujitsu P series anymore. And, I have to say, I still hold a grudge against laptop manufacturers and computer magazines, because practically all of them advertize performance, never battery life. Most laptop tests I see do performance benchmarks, and stuff like Quake III benchmarks and all that bullshit. WTF? No one really seems to want to make an effort in constructing a laptop with long battery life. Quite frustrating, that. I don't wanna play games for half an hour. I wanna use the thing for work, preferably nine or more hours before having to recharge.
The only problem with programmable tab completion at the moment is that you provide functions for different completion schemes, and all these function definitions clutter the output of 'set' (which I sometimes like to look at). That gets a bit on my nerves.
Actually, there have been such articles. Check out this one in the German magazine Spiegel Online (Google's translation here).
It states, for instance, that recently the US Homeland Security office issued a recommendation to switch to another browser, and also that many popular magazines have recently had articles regarding the switch away from IE.
Is it right for a discredited man to have his pHD removed? Is it right that popular opinion can determine how qualified someone is to make a statement in their field?
The university he got his degree from was the University of Konstanz in Germany. Here's a German article (babelfished) on the whole thing. The educational laws of the German state of Baden-Wuerttemberg state that a PhD title can be removed if "through his behavior at a later point in in his career, the owner has proven unworthy of the title."
From Bell Labs' summary, we can find more about what he was charged with:
Substitution of data (substitution of whole figures, single curves and partial curves in different or the same paper to represent different
materials, devices or conditions)
Unrealistic precision of data (precision beyond that expected in a real experiment or requiring unreasonable statistical probability)
Results that contradict known physics (behavior inconsistent with stated device parameters and prevailing physical understanding, so as to suggest possible misrepresentation of data)
[...]
The Committee's main findings and conclusions can be summarized as follows.
By all accounts, Hendrik Schön is a hard working and productive scientist. If valid, the work he and his coauthors report would represent a remarkable number of major breakthroughs in condensed-matter physics and solid-state devices.
Except for the provision of starting materials by others, all device fabrication, physical measurement and data processing in the work in question were carried out (with minor exceptions) by Hendrik Schön alone, with no participation by any coauthor or other colleague. None of the most significant physical results was witnessed by any coauthor or other colleague.
Proper laboratory records were not systematically maintained by Hendrik Schön in the course of the work in question. In addition, virtually all primary (raw) electronic data files were deleted by Hendrik Schön, reportedly because the old computer available to him lacked sufficient memory. No working devices with
which one might confirm claimed results are presently available, having been damaged in measurement, damaged in transit or simply discarded. Finally, key processing equipment no longer produces the unparalleled results that enabled many of the key experiments. Hence, it is not possible to confirm or refute directly the validity of the claims in the work in question.
The most serious allegations regarding the work in question relate to possible manipulation and misrepresentation of data. These allegations speak directly to the question of scientific misconduct. The Committee carefully investigated each of these allegations and came to a specific conclusion in each case.
The evidence that manipulation and misrepresentation of data occurred is compelling. In its mildest form, whole data sets were substituted to represent different materials or devices. Hendrik Schön acknowledges that the data are incorrect in many of these instances. He states that these substitutions could have occurred by honest mistake. The recurrent nature of such mistakes suggests a deeper problem. At a minimum, Hendrik Schön showed reckless disregard for the sanctity of data in the value system of science. His failure to retain primary data
files compounds the problem.
More troublesome are the substitutions of single curves or even parts of single
curves, in multiple figures representing different materials or devices, and the use
of mathematical functions to represen
I think the lifetime is more around 10,000 hours. In one of the recent/. discussions relating to OLEDs there was a discussion about this, can't seem to find it though. This article does mention 10,000 hours, and so does this very interesting OLED Technology Roadmap (PDF). It actually says about the performance targets that by 2004, the lifetime for 300 cd/m^2 should be about 10k hours, while for 2007 and 2010, the aim is 20k and respectively 40k hours. Note: I just skimmed that document, but it should be an interesting read...
Slashdot Mirror
My god, are you saying that timer is gonna roll over now in only 584 554 531 years? Stupid short-sighted programmers...
Have you tried googling for it?
My apologies. SCNR
Yes they do. Only instead of dog food it's electricity.
Maybe we should have a poll that looks somewhat like this:
Where are you from, and do you care about the US presidential election?
"Do you care" might be the wrong question though... feel free to refine the question, I'll GPL it :)
Sorry, I already replaced my Windows with Linux.
SCNR
Excuse me everyone, but...
Why is the only thing discussed in this whole article thread the "solution" of getting a goddamn gun?
To cite the poster:
(Emphasis added by me.) Why does not a single post on this entire page seem to mention other ideas? Like, good ideas on installing surveillance, better alarm systems, etc. etc.
I find the fact that we're just discussing guns here -- which are, after all, ultima ratio and not the first thing that should come to mind -- somewhat sickening.
Somebody please make some more sensible suggestions so the poster gets something that actually answers his question.
Maybe in Soviet Russia.
Please, forgive me...
Well, it gets even better - some guy in Australia has patented the wheel (credit for that link goes to one of the comment posters on the article page).
I wasn't entirely sure if I should laugh or cry.
Very good comment. It's everyone's right to be outspokenly against the Bush administration and the GOP, or for it. But such a cheap attack is not even remotely acceptable, and we 'anti DRM, "info wants to be free", OSS support' people should distance ourselves from shit like this. This is about free speech. And apparently these DDOSers don't have smarter arguments. Sad little pathetic idiots.
You remember that saying - "I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to death for your right to say it." This still applies here, and we all should speak up and say that that is what we believe.
If you want to speak out against Bush (and I for one certainly do), do it in a smarter way, not by bullying. Don't make yourself (and others, like the parent poster pointed out) look like idiots.
Quite true. That's why the Munich government has held their project... the patents. So there you go: if there's one thing software patents could possibly achieve, it's the destruction of Free software. Although I might want to call that censorship...
And MSNBC isn't any better (surprise). Quoting the article:
To any not-so-technically inclined reader, this indicates that anyone could tamper with the source code and thereby change everyone's software... open source is dangerous because anyone might change the code, instantly making all the offical packages of that software useless. Yes, I do think that to a non-hacker reading this it helps to point out that anyone can change the software, yet the original software as provided on the project webpage can be trusted to still work.
But then again, I didn't really expect MSNBC to go out of their way to carefully explain what Open Source or Free software actually mean and how it affects the software user.
By the way, my personal opinion is, I don't care what they want to do to Linux/OSS/Free software. The point in Free software is that it's Free. It's completely impossible to do anything against it unless you manage to brainwash each and every hacker to make them stop coding because they want to. MS would have to pay big lumps of money to, say, close down Free software related organizations and companies to actually hinder Free software development. An I doubt that'll happen. Now, for people/companies using Linux etc. just for business reasons, it might work given they exercize enough power to hinder Free software projects and actually churn out a better product for a good price - but for me, personally, and many others there's nothing they can do to stop the growth of the Free software movement. I use Free software because it's free and it works for me, and no one can do anything against it - except developing even better Free software, or maybe gaining power over the whole world by means of a totalitarian dictatorship which forbids free speech and expression as well as free coding...
Well yeah, but can you honestly ignore this historic document?
If Zero Wing says it, it must be true...
Hmm weird... here in Germany (all of Europe, in fact), most wireless phones operate using the DECT standard at 1.9 GHz. At least those don't interfere with any Wi-Fi equipment (afaik)... how come your phones are using a different standard at 2.4/5.8 and not DECT? What type of standard is used on your phones? Some googling indicates that it seems to be called DCTS. What are its advantages? How come DCTS and 802.11 are allowed to operate and interfere in the same frequency range? Can someone shed some light on this please?
But wouldn't it still be possible to write a php script that, using libpng, loads a png file, and upload a malicious png for it to load? Yeah, encoding a png is probably safe. But, I mean, do something like this:
...and a malicious test.png will have to get loaded first.
Well, of course you won't be able to execute arbitrary code as root (just as www-data or something, and you can already do that in your php script :)). But I'm not so sure how much a malicious png could actually take down in a crash.
SCNR...
Too bad, though, that suspend-to-ram doesn't work too well yet in Linux. My laptop (Fujitsu P-2120) suspends but won't come back up. Anyone know of good HOWTOs or the like on how to get all the drivers to behave nicely with suspend? Cause that's where I think the problem lies.
I'm most happy with my Fujitsu Lifebook P-2120 (runs Linux nicely). With the extended main battery and the drive bay battery, I get up to nine hours.
Of course, the cpu is a bit outdated. And I only do work on it, if I were to watch DVDs or stuff I'd probably hook it up to A/C power anyway. But I like the small size, the light weight, and the fact that pretty much everything is in it.
But I hated the fact that I had to order it from the US (I live in Germany) and it took me forever to find a retailer who would send it, just because Fujitsu refuses to send them to Europe, and Fujitsu-Siemens in Germany doesn't even offer them.
If you want something ultra-portable with everything in it that you want to use mostly for working, it's quite lovely. Unfortunately, it looks like it's not being sold anymore.
I know this doesn't quite answer your request, but it might still be a good idea to check Portable One (they used to be called Global Computers when I ordered from them).
Don't know about the new Fujitsu P series anymore. And, I have to say, I still hold a grudge against laptop manufacturers and computer magazines, because practically all of them advertize performance, never battery life. Most laptop tests I see do performance benchmarks, and stuff like Quake III benchmarks and all that bullshit. WTF? No one really seems to want to make an effort in constructing a laptop with long battery life. Quite frustrating, that. I don't wanna play games for half an hour. I wanna use the thing for work, preferably nine or more hours before having to recharge.
Can somebody with mod points please mod this (-1, Redundant)?
The only problem with programmable tab completion at the moment is that you provide functions for different completion schemes, and all these function definitions clutter the output of 'set' (which I sometimes like to look at). That gets a bit on my nerves.
Actually, there have been such articles. Check out this one in the German magazine Spiegel Online (Google's translation here).
It states, for instance, that recently the US Homeland Security office issued a recommendation to switch to another browser, and also that many popular magazines have recently had articles regarding the switch away from IE.
Quite true, actually... try links -g on an old machine, it's really nice and fast when you don't have a lot of computing power available.
Where have you been? Why didn't you submit an article?
The university he got his degree from was the University of Konstanz in Germany. Here's a German article (babelfished) on the whole thing. The educational laws of the German state of Baden-Wuerttemberg state that a PhD title can be removed if "through his behavior at a later point in in his career, the owner has proven unworthy of the title."
From Bell Labs' summary, we can find more about what he was charged with:
Umm, wouldn't that be Software Libre?
Livre is French for book, that confused me a bit...
I think the lifetime is more around 10,000 hours. In one of the recent /. discussions relating to OLEDs there was a discussion about this, can't seem to find it though. This article does mention 10,000 hours, and so does this very interesting OLED Technology Roadmap (PDF). It actually says about the performance targets that by 2004, the lifetime for 300 cd/m^2 should be about 10k hours, while for 2007 and 2010, the aim is 20k and respectively 40k hours. Note: I just skimmed that document, but it should be an interesting read...