Then again I live in the UK and my car has high powered projectile weapons in it pretty much all the time.
No licence needed, or restrictions on purchase, and frankly they're lethal at half a kilometre.
I also walk around with a large knife some weekends (usually the ones I'm not walking around with a pair of machetes) and the policemen I see on such jaunts seldom do anything other than wave, say hi or (occasionally) just join me.
You may not easily get a gun (but frankly it can't be that hard, look how many utter muppets manage it) but you can very easily acquire other lethal weapons.
I will agree though that walking down the street with them amongst football fans is a good way to get yourself arrested - I think the offence is carrying an offensive weapon, or some such.
(Oh, and in some parts of the UK the police are routinely armed, including more than one part of Nottingham)
You'd be amazed how playable muds were in the early 90s, with latency measured in 100s of ms.
I'm not saying modern gamers would settle for this, and I'm not pretending it was better than Unreal Tournament on a 26ms ping server, but it was very playable and good fun.
As an example, a ping summary from a mud session in 1993: 26644 packets transmitted, 19888 packets received, 25% packet loss round-trip (ms) min/avg/max = 240/1177/17729.
Don't even pretend that was good latency. Do realise that I was playing the game throughout that ping, and I wouldn't have kept with it had the game not been fun - bear in mind I had a major Angband addiction at the time.
Oddly though there does tend to be a strong correlation between bandwidth and latency.
Especially when you're buying the bandwidth to access a specific service - the ISP likes to reduce the hops from you to the service to minimise the amount of their own network being used and to minimise their peering costs.
That said, even WoW needs sub-100ms latency on interactions, which is asking a lot of a pipe that's also streaming full video.
Have you tested your software on - Windows XP Pro, no service packs - XP Home, none - Pro/home/Media Center edition, service pack 1 - SP2, 3, etc - Vista, etc - Win XP MCE SP2 with IE8 - Win XP Home SP1 with.Net CLR1 and CLR2
I've skipped around 782 permutations, any of which may cause a crash that will not occur on another combination.
Release software to enough users and they'll let you know when it fails. If one customer in 10,000 suffers a crash once ever then you have a lot of very happy customers, and on a 100m install base you also have 10,000 crash reports to sift through.
Which crash do you spend the 8 man-months trying to replicate so you can fix it?
Unless == has been overloaded to do something silly, there are no null pointer exceptions possible in this method.
get_application_vendor can be easily written to successfully return without errors irrespective of the parameter passed to it, and the rest of the code makes no assumptions that vendor is non-null.
Unnecessary null pointer checking is crufty and should be avoided. Your unit tests should include passing a null parameter and will thus catch any incorrect handling should someone subsequently introduce a bug anyway.
Perhaps it's because the issue isn't being run by Scottish MPs, it's getting fucked over by them: - I didn't vote for a labour MP - I can't vote on laws passed in the Scottish parliament - Scottish MPs get to vote on laws passed in the British parliament that wont apply in Scotland - Scottish MPs have been the deciding factor is passing some frankly atrocious legislation
Note that I didn't vote for Thatcher or Major either.
Feel free to get sick, but don't pretend there isn't a significant flaw in our current model.
Absolutely, this wont prevent abusive mods and is clearly following a different agenda. I wasn't challenging your main point, just highlighting the capability for hidden comms.
So every time I buy a new computer I have to buy a new monitor, keyboard, mouse, speakers, headset, USB powered missile launcher?
The only time I want a computer to come with all those things is when I buy a laptop, and frankly I don't want the headset, mouse or USB devices with that either.
It's possible for addons to communicate through in-game chat without it being visible to the player.
This is how many raid add-ons work for example.
So you could - write nasty add-on - capture information - wait for innocuous world-spam message (trade channel message saying "wtb green parrot, paying 3g" from character called "Naughtyperson") - send hidden chat message with details
They run the server mod that stores received details in flat-file on their PC for out-of-game retrieval.
All automated, all easy, all invisible to the user.
Obvious flaw is the need to see the trigger message, but I can think of a few ways around that too.
A prophecy along the lines of "oh no, bad shit will happen" is not exactly scientific.
Scientific predictions on the other hand would be unlikely to be omitted from the bible. People claim success as their own; the use of science to make accurate predictions will obviously be reported in a religious tome as the success of that religion.
Could you please express your "hypothesis" of creationism in terms that permit objective evaluation and verification, and provide supporting evidence?
Just that I'm struggling to differentiate creationism from pastafarianism, both at a philosophical and evidential level.
I wondered whether to test and see if the IWF had added the Danish sites to their own blacklist but frankly the implications if they hadn't would be a tad unfortunate. So I don't know.
Sadly it's impossible to test whether all the entries on the Danish site are child pornography or not without going to look at them. Even then, there's a chance that the some entries had such material on them when added to the list, but have had it since removed.
Nonetheless unless someone checks, there is no assurance that the list is not being used for political purposes. Clearly the Thai list is.
So although Wikileaks has simply shown that the Danish government is doing exactly what it claims, that is in itself a valuable and reassuring action.
I want to know which web pages the IWF is banning in the UK. I want that list published. I want someone to go through it and check that everything on it should be there. I don't want to be that person.
Cynically part of me wants the BBC staff to go through the fear of having all that happen to them - purely because then we might finally get some realistic reporting of the stupidity of current computer related laws.
Accessing an open wifi connection that's broadcasting an offer of service can get you time in prison; hacking 22k computers had better have some comeback.
The double standards are a factor. I name-dropped Gary McKinnon as a reference point when I wrote to my MP; he did nothing worse than the BBC yet he's facing decades in prison in a foreign country he didn't even enter.
There's a thought. I bet some of those 22,000 computers were in the US. Can someone in America please ask the FBI to extradite the BBC reporter and prosecute him?
Slashdot Mirror
Infantilize?
In the UK we'd spell it infantilise, and comical though it would be I see little evidence here of widespread infantilism...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraphilic_infantilism
Then again I live in the UK and my car has high powered projectile weapons in it pretty much all the time.
No licence needed, or restrictions on purchase, and frankly they're lethal at half a kilometre.
I also walk around with a large knife some weekends (usually the ones I'm not walking around with a pair of machetes) and the policemen I see on such jaunts seldom do anything other than wave, say hi or (occasionally) just join me.
You may not easily get a gun (but frankly it can't be that hard, look how many utter muppets manage it) but you can very easily acquire other lethal weapons.
I will agree though that walking down the street with them amongst football fans is a good way to get yourself arrested - I think the offence is carrying an offensive weapon, or some such.
(Oh, and in some parts of the UK the police are routinely armed, including more than one part of Nottingham)
Although a lot of people are (correctly) pointing out the latency issues of twitch-mechanic games, one area that impacts any online game is text chat.
Local buffer of text input followed by submission of the complete sentence to the server is a significantly superior user experience than remote echo.
Although console games generally don't support text chat anyway - one reason I dislike them..
You'd be amazed how playable muds were in the early 90s, with latency measured in 100s of ms.
I'm not saying modern gamers would settle for this, and I'm not pretending it was better than Unreal Tournament on a 26ms ping server, but it was very playable and good fun.
As an example, a ping summary from a mud session in 1993:
26644 packets transmitted, 19888 packets received, 25% packet loss
round-trip (ms) min/avg/max = 240/1177/17729.
Don't even pretend that was good latency. Do realise that I was playing the game throughout that ping, and I wouldn't have kept with it had the game not been fun - bear in mind I had a major Angband addiction at the time.
What do I mean, 'at the time'. I still do :(
Oddly though there does tend to be a strong correlation between bandwidth and latency.
Especially when you're buying the bandwidth to access a specific service - the ISP likes to reduce the hops from you to the service to minimise the amount of their own network being used and to minimise their peering costs.
That said, even WoW needs sub-100ms latency on interactions, which is asking a lot of a pipe that's also streaming full video.
Have you tested your software on .Net CLR1 and CLR2
- Windows XP Pro, no service packs
- XP Home, none
- Pro/home/Media Center edition, service pack 1
- SP2, 3, etc
- Vista, etc
- Win XP MCE SP2 with IE8
- Win XP Home SP1 with
I've skipped around 782 permutations, any of which may cause a crash that will not occur on another combination.
Release software to enough users and they'll let you know when it fails. If one customer in 10,000 suffers a crash once ever then you have a lot of very happy customers, and on a 100m install base you also have 10,000 crash reports to sift through.
Which crash do you spend the 8 man-months trying to replicate so you can fix it?
Ha! Finally he admits it! We always knew you'd written that backdoor into DNS.
Very clever of you given your age at the time, and the way you got someone else to front the code as their own...
(Hmm. Now I'm wondering. You're possibly young enough that the code predates you. Now that _is_ clever!)
Unless == has been overloaded to do something silly, there are no null pointer exceptions possible in this method.
get_application_vendor can be easily written to successfully return without errors irrespective of the parameter passed to it, and the rest of the code makes no assumptions that vendor is non-null.
Unnecessary null pointer checking is crufty and should be avoided. Your unit tests should include passing a null parameter and will thus catch any incorrect handling should someone subsequently introduce a bug anyway.
Although being from the UK I'm doomed to forever misname yet another MS technology.
Please tell me Pling-Exploitable wasn't written in C-Hash?
Perhaps it's because the issue isn't being run by Scottish MPs, it's getting fucked over by them:
- I didn't vote for a labour MP
- I can't vote on laws passed in the Scottish parliament
- Scottish MPs get to vote on laws passed in the British parliament that wont apply in Scotland
- Scottish MPs have been the deciding factor is passing some frankly atrocious legislation
Note that I didn't vote for Thatcher or Major either.
Feel free to get sick, but don't pretend there isn't a significant flaw in our current model.
Absolutely, this wont prevent abusive mods and is clearly following a different agenda. I wasn't challenging your main point, just highlighting the capability for hidden comms.
So every time I buy a new computer I have to buy a new monitor, keyboard, mouse, speakers, headset, USB powered missile launcher?
The only time I want a computer to come with all those things is when I buy a laptop, and frankly I don't want the headset, mouse or USB devices with that either.
So I need to stick an Apple logo to my computer during the install process?
That's not hard.
Meanwhile I'm not homosexual but do find myself wondering where I can acquire a feather boa and a nylon rainbow jumpsuit
It's possible for addons to communicate through in-game chat without it being visible to the player.
This is how many raid add-ons work for example.
So you could
- write nasty add-on
- capture information
- wait for innocuous world-spam message (trade channel message saying "wtb green parrot, paying 3g" from character called "Naughtyperson")
- send hidden chat message with details
They run the server mod that stores received details in flat-file on their PC for out-of-game retrieval.
All automated, all easy, all invisible to the user.
Obvious flaw is the need to see the trigger message, but I can think of a few ways around that too.
They're communicating with the game client. The client is communicating with the server.
That's a subtle distinction, but an important one.
A prophecy along the lines of "oh no, bad shit will happen" is not exactly scientific.
Scientific predictions on the other hand would be unlikely to be omitted from the bible. People claim success as their own; the use of science to make accurate predictions will obviously be reported in a religious tome as the success of that religion.
Could you please express your "hypothesis" of creationism in terms that permit objective evaluation and verification, and provide supporting evidence?
Just that I'm struggling to differentiate creationism from pastafarianism, both at a philosophical and evidential level.
Never explain the joke (even via a Youtube link).
The IWF predates the 1997 General Election that brought Labour into power.
Would you rather the Government replaced the IWF with a Governmental body that had no independence from the party in power? I sure as hell wouldn't.
I wondered whether to test and see if the IWF had added the Danish sites to their own blacklist but frankly the implications if they hadn't would be a tad unfortunate. So I don't know.
Sadly it's impossible to test whether all the entries on the Danish site are child pornography or not without going to look at them. Even then, there's a chance that the some entries had such material on them when added to the list, but have had it since removed.
Nonetheless unless someone checks, there is no assurance that the list is not being used for political purposes. Clearly the Thai list is.
So although Wikileaks has simply shown that the Danish government is doing exactly what it claims, that is in itself a valuable and reassuring action.
I want to know which web pages the IWF is banning in the UK. I want that list published. I want someone to go through it and check that everything on it should be there. I don't want to be that person.
Cynically part of me wants the BBC staff to go through the fear of having all that happen to them - purely because then we might finally get some realistic reporting of the stupidity of current computer related laws.
Accessing an open wifi connection that's broadcasting an offer of service can get you time in prison; hacking 22k computers had better have some comeback.
The double standards are a factor. I name-dropped Gary McKinnon as a reference point when I wrote to my MP; he did nothing worse than the BBC yet he's facing decades in prison in a foreign country he didn't even enter.
There's a thought. I bet some of those 22,000 computers were in the US. Can someone in America please ask the FBI to extradite the BBC reporter and prosecute him?
Hence writing to my MP asking that this matter be taken seriously.
The BBC is a corporation. The individuals that perpetrated these actions are not. They can and should be prosecuted.
Evidence of actual crime is being published by the BBC. It is illegal to use computing resources owned by other people without their permission.
Illegal. That means it's a crime.
I completely accept that there's minimal harm to any given individual. This does not make it legal.
I don't want punitive damages. I don't really care about punishment of any tangible form. I do want prosecution and the full process of the law.
I do not want media organisations thinking it's acceptable to hack computers while pursuing a story.
It is not in the public interest to have media organisations misusing computers belonging to other people in order to pursue a story.
Admittedly Crimestoppers refused to take the details and told me to ring the police, who have left me on hold for ages.