Really effective security would be to bring every last troop home, and place them in every port and border crossing into the US. Even more effective than their inspections would be the fact that they aren't in foreign countries blowing stuff up. It's very difficult to recruit people to kill the infidel when he's across the ocean behind hundreds of thousands of highly trained Marines, minding his own business. Given that folks promoted you 'insightful', I have to point out the flaws in your argument:
- The borders of the US are wide enough that stationing guards to even keep the borders under observation, let alone shifts enough to make that possible, is impractical. Likely, greater than the size of the US army currently. And that's just watching, without having forces sufficient to DO anything. Assuming you do find the manpower to do it, you also have to find the money to pay those people.
- Your 'guard the borders' defense fails once there is ANY recruiting within the borders. And recruiters do NOT have to cross the borders, the internet does just fine. So does the phone. And the post, newspapers, radio...
You've fallen for the fallacy that the 'war against terrorism' is a war against people. It is not. It's a war against a meme, and the rules are entirely different. You have to make people not want to do it.
'Guarding the borders' is as effective a defense against terrorism, as CSS is against DVD copyright infringement. It'll stop the little stuff, for a little while, but is otherwise entirely ineffective at its stated purpose.
> You would deny me the right to sell my copyright why?
Because copyright is not property, it is a right.
Current law allows copyright to be transferred or sold because it has been successfully argued that this encourages the production of creative works. Work-for-hire is an example, where a condition of your employment is transferral of copyright.
Some rights are inalienable - you may not abridge them. Copyright is not among them. Thus it IS subject to restriction... or broadening. Those come with the package.
> The people that don't have legal copies will either get one, hassle with it, or give up because it's too annoying.
You are quite right, that these people will not affect Spore at all. A boycott is only effective if it is advertised, and none of those solutions cause any feedback on the publisher. Returning merchandise, calling customer support (why doesn't my game work?) writing to the publisher, these things have more effect. And convincing others to do the same has much more effect.
>... EVERYONE here is in that 99%. What's the problem? Your figures aside, the trivial answer is that the CD solution covers 100% of purchasers, where the internet connection solution does not. You might read the other comments on this topic for more in-depth reasons.
> Linux is so much of a now popular version of UNIX
Just thought I'd pick a geek nit here...
Linux is interoperable with many varieties of UNIX, but it is not UNIX. Nor is it based off of UNIX, at least as far as SCO vs IBM declared. (If the Linux kernel includes UNIX code, it isn't from SVRX, at least...)
Note that the big decision in SCO vs Novell was over copyrights and (SCOsource) licenses. SCO vs IBM has been waiting for Novel vs SCO (née SCO vs Novell) to finish before continuing.
Still, given just how very similar they are from the keyboard, command line side, it's understandable.
You're right, SCO was suing everyone. But In SCO v Novell, ALL of SCOs claims were dismissed by summary judgement. All that's left for trial are Novells counterclaims. Thus, SCO = defendant.
Wiser heads than mine claim to be puzzled by the lack of witnesses on SCO's side (to say "it was really all about UNIXWARE"), so I hesitate to speculate on SCO's plans.
if I had the know how I would send a low level format command out. Leaving aside the issue of "they'll just do it again", your strategy fails in that by doing this, you take out one node at a time. Much like a virus that is "too successful" and kills its host before it reproduces.
I think you would get better results by passing your 'counterinfection' on for a bit before de-botting completely.
He did say he's got a VoIP line. Add to that that he's complaining about being unable to call 911. I think it fair to conclude that he did not have a normal phone service connection before he switched.
And a modem on a VoIP line is an exercise best left to the bored-and-masochistic crowd.
There is no substitute for the mark one eyeball in the trusted head.
Open Source is only a security solution for those things that can be examined, and only to the extent they actually ARE examined, and by people "you" trust (for any given "you").
You've sort of waved a magic wand over hardware security here. If the security failure only has to happen once, then random chance can play a factor.
And you seem to be ignoring active sabotage. Substitute a compromised item for a normal item in the trusted supply chain, and all your open source "peer reviewed" benefits fly out the window.
Wizards of the Coast is owned by Hasbro (a recent development likely not unrelated to this change of heart). I find the Hasbro arguments less than compelling... Hasbro bought WotC in 1999.
D&D 3E and the Open Gaming License came out in 2000. 3.5 in 2003. 4E coming out soon.
I'm thinking you don't really need to look higher than WotC for these strategies.
Game design wants to be free. Rent wants to be paid.
Yes. Union City. Caught in 2005. The thenewspaper link refers to an earlier article that is not now available. Perhaps the wayback machine still has it, though...
I wonder if this also occurs in Aerospike engines? It would seem a bit easier to get access to any part of the exhaust plume or 'virtual nozzle' you wanted, but perhaps harder to anchor sensors...
> However junk mail helps keep the United States Postage Service running. And for relitivly low stamp prices for the level of service the USPS offers us.
This reminds me of a short story I read some decades ago (yeah, that old... me AND the story). The premise was that productivity had grown so much that consumption had to be increased as well to keep the economy going. At some point, people simply could not consume fast enough.... and some bright eyed young man decided, "well, robots build it, why not have robots consume it as well?" - and the economy was saved!
An no-prize to the person who most thoroughly picks apart the logic... Don't know what I'd give the person who identifies the short story... Kudos?
I find this unhelpful. You seem to assume that the memory not in use right now is wasted, and that consuming it preemptively makes the computer run faster somehow. 'T ain't necessarily so.
Yes, it is.
M: Oh look, this isn't an argument. A: Yes it is. M: No it isn't. It's just contradiction. "Swapping" only slows down the system if it's thrashing. Swapping when the machine is otherwise idle does not. Further, pre-emptively swapping out idle processes will improve overall performance if those processes genuinely need to be swapped out at some point - because it's already happened.
You're assuming that the extra "400k consumed" was all "speed up cache". You're further assuming that it will all be either swapped out (as idle) or returned to the system dynamically. Would you be kind enough to point out where you find a basis for these assumptions?
Blindly stabbing in the dark at memory usage figures is meaningless, just like saying "Windows uses X amount of memory straight after boot". You have no idea how much memory the OS "needs" just on its own.
You're quite right, I don't know how much memory the OS "needs" just on its own. That's why I look at memory while it is under load. Many popular online video games are not particularly good at conserving memory. Performance of these applications shows a correlation to available memory. Specifically, when the application has asked for all available memory +30%, whatever is required by the OS is... required and unavailable to your app. This is the test I had in mind particularly.
You may have seen Windows' Task Manager's "Physical Memory Available" statistic, and "Commit Charge - total". These numbers, too, provide useful gauges to the OS's "Needs". Again, under load.
Again, you seem under informed opinion that this additional memory required by the OS is entirely refunded or swapped out under load. Would you please educate me by showing me your sources? Otherwise, we might as well be in that skit I quoted earlier.
Reports of our new Giant Mecha Overlords have been exaggerated.
TFA doesn't mention size, that I saw, but if you can cause non-negligible damage with a pin, I'm guessing the mecha would have to be measured in mm or cm rather than meters...
So? What is with this obsession with memory usage? Idle RAM has a slightly negative value - it does nothing while still consuming a non-zero amount of energy. How RAM is used is much more important than whether or not it is used. Now, it may be that this guy only has 1 GB of RAM. It could be that this is the result of a problem. But who knows? Not the author.
Some had 'insightful' comments complaining about increased memory usage. Memory usage is a worthless metric! How memory is usage is more important than how much - and really, would you rather have that RAM in use making your system respond faster, or would you rather have it sit there doing nothing? There's some give and take here, but complaining about memory usage without context is meaningless. I find this unhelpful. You seem to assume that the memory not in use right now is wasted, and that consuming it preemptively makes the computer run faster somehow. 'T ain't necessarily so.
Any memory the OS consumes is memory not available to a running application, current or future. If the OS allows some of the memory it uses to swap out to disk, either it wasn't in use (IE not speeding up the system in the way you're talking about), or is actively slowing the system by causing swapping.
If instead, it causes your application to use disk-based VM, then your application is slower. Wherein lies the speed increase there?
You mention "maybe he only had 1GB of RAM". If so, then yes, he had a big problem. ANYTHING he does is going to be invoking non-RAM virtual memory. 2GB? You're going from having 1.6GB to 1.0GB for applications - losing about 40% of what space you had available. 4GB? about 20%. You make that up by swapping *something* to disk. And the more you're relying on the disk, the more thrashing you're going to do.
So tell me again about how much faster my computer is going to be. I need the laugh.
Using any given card (any variety) over time, will build a profile. Anonymous or not, magnetic stripe or not, stolen credit card data or not.
A new card each time may well be tracked ("show the pattern of anonymous new card usage"), but is useless individually for profiling.... But that's like getting folks to change their password regularly, isn't it?
You seem to be blithely disregarding issues of trust. And bandwidth. And disability. (Just how well do those interactive pages work with page readers?)
For me, when a company puts up a page that is utterly useless unless you run flash, or javascript, that's a company I turn away from.
Maybe I'm just one of those "stuffy people" you mention. But even if I am, it doesn't mean I don't have legitimate grievances.
But the problem is that you're assuming power is held equally. The actors (rocket launching people) don't necessarily CARE about the people upon whom reprisals would come; and the people the reprisals would fall upon would not necessarily have the means to stop the actors.
I'm thinking, with the accuracy reported for the katyushas, they have a bit of trouble aiming them at anything smaller than a village. But for anything more accurate than that, I'd guess you're right. And you only need to get lucky once, or have a few usefully accurate shots mixed into the "spray and pray" saturation.
Now, what do you think that guy showed the cop to make him reverse a legally given ticket? Perhaps proof that it was his house? With a tale of how he was just in-and-out, and thus the equivalent of "standing" instead of "parked"?
Some punk kid shoots out my headlight with a BB gun. I'm driving to the store to get a replacement. You're saying I should get pulled over on an equipment violation that I'm in the process of correcting?
How about speeding to the hospital because I've got someone suffering a heart attack in the back seat, and the ambulance would have taken another 10 minutes. I'm doing 50 in a 35 zone with light traffic. The cop should give me a ticket right there? Or perhaps escort me to the hospital THEN ticket me?
Slashdot Mirror
How many people turned instead to other content because of this? After all, it's not like American Gladiator and Medium are all that great...
- The borders of the US are wide enough that stationing guards to even keep the borders under observation, let alone shifts enough to make that possible, is impractical. Likely, greater than the size of the US army currently. And that's just watching, without having forces sufficient to DO anything. Assuming you do find the manpower to do it, you also have to find the money to pay those people.
- Your 'guard the borders' defense fails once there is ANY recruiting within the borders. And recruiters do NOT have to cross the borders, the internet does just fine. So does the phone. And the post, newspapers, radio...
You've fallen for the fallacy that the 'war against terrorism' is a war against people. It is not. It's a war against a meme, and the rules are entirely different. You have to make people not want to do it.
'Guarding the borders' is as effective a defense against terrorism, as CSS is against DVD copyright infringement. It'll stop the little stuff, for a little while, but is otherwise entirely ineffective at its stated purpose.
> You would deny me the right to sell my copyright why?
Because copyright is not property, it is a right.
Current law allows copyright to be transferred or sold because it has been successfully argued that this encourages the production of creative works. Work-for-hire is an example, where a condition of your employment is transferral of copyright.
Some rights are inalienable - you may not abridge them. Copyright is not among them. Thus it IS subject to restriction... or broadening. Those come with the package.
> The people that don't have legal copies will either get one, hassle with it, or give up because it's too annoying.
You are quite right, that these people will not affect Spore at all. A boycott is only effective if it is advertised, and none of those solutions cause any feedback on the publisher. Returning merchandise, calling customer support (why doesn't my game work?) writing to the publisher, these things have more effect. And convincing others to do the same has much more effect.
>... EVERYONE here is in that 99%. What's the problem?
Your figures aside, the trivial answer is that the CD solution covers 100% of purchasers, where the internet connection solution does not. You might read the other comments on this topic for more in-depth reasons.
> Linux is so much of a now popular version of UNIX
Just thought I'd pick a geek nit here...
Linux is interoperable with many varieties of UNIX, but it is not UNIX. Nor is it based off of UNIX, at least as far as SCO vs IBM declared. (If the Linux kernel includes UNIX code, it isn't from SVRX, at least...)
Note that the big decision in SCO vs Novell was over copyrights and (SCOsource) licenses. SCO vs IBM has been waiting for Novel vs SCO (née SCO vs Novell) to finish before continuing.
Still, given just how very similar they are from the keyboard, command line side, it's understandable.
It's not so much that SCO had a choice here.
You're right, SCO was suing everyone. But In SCO v Novell, ALL of SCOs claims were dismissed by summary judgement. All that's left for trial are Novells counterclaims. Thus, SCO = defendant.
Wiser heads than mine claim to be puzzled by the lack of witnesses on SCO's side (to say "it was really all about UNIXWARE"), so I hesitate to speculate on SCO's plans.
Previous posts in this thread have already noted that modern keyloggers also track mouse movements and the clipboard.
Nothing that QA software from 15 years ago couldn't do.
This story merely repackages this one.
I think you would get better results by passing your 'counterinfection' on for a bit before de-botting completely.
He did say he's got a VoIP line. Add to that that he's complaining about being unable to call 911. I think it fair to conclude that he did not have a normal phone service connection before he switched.
And a modem on a VoIP line is an exercise best left to the bored-and-masochistic crowd.
There is no substitute for the mark one eyeball in the trusted head.
Open Source is only a security solution for those things that can be examined, and only to the extent they actually ARE examined, and by people "you" trust (for any given "you").
You've sort of waved a magic wand over hardware security here. If the security failure only has to happen once, then random chance can play a factor.
And you seem to be ignoring active sabotage. Substitute a compromised item for a normal item in the trusted supply chain, and all your open source "peer reviewed" benefits fly out the window.
D&D 3E and the Open Gaming License came out in 2000. 3.5 in 2003. 4E coming out soon.
I'm thinking you don't really need to look higher than WotC for these strategies.
Game design wants to be free. Rent wants to be paid.
Yes. Union City. Caught in 2005. The thenewspaper link refers to an earlier article that is not now available. Perhaps the wayback machine still has it, though...
I wonder if this also occurs in Aerospike engines? It would seem a bit easier to get access to any part of the exhaust plume or 'virtual nozzle' you wanted, but perhaps harder to anchor sensors...
> However junk mail helps keep the United States Postage Service running. And for relitivly low stamp prices for the level of service the USPS offers us.
... and some bright eyed young man decided, "well, robots build it, why not have robots consume it as well?" - and the economy was saved!
This reminds me of a short story I read some decades ago (yeah, that old... me AND the story). The premise was that productivity had grown so much that consumption had to be increased as well to keep the economy going. At some point, people simply could not consume fast enough.
An no-prize to the person who most thoroughly picks apart the logic...
Don't know what I'd give the person who identifies the short story... Kudos?
Yes, it is. M: Oh look, this isn't an argument.
A: Yes it is.
M: No it isn't. It's just contradiction. "Swapping" only slows down the system if it's thrashing. Swapping when the machine is otherwise idle does not. Further, pre-emptively swapping out idle processes will improve overall performance if those processes genuinely need to be swapped out at some point - because it's already happened.
You're assuming that the extra "400k consumed" was all "speed up cache". You're further assuming that it will all be either swapped out (as idle) or returned to the system dynamically. Would you be kind enough to point out where you find a basis for these assumptions?
Blindly stabbing in the dark at memory usage figures is meaningless, just like saying "Windows uses X amount of memory straight after boot". You have no idea how much memory the OS "needs" just on its own.
You're quite right, I don't know how much memory the OS "needs" just on its own. That's why I look at memory while it is under load. Many popular online video games are not particularly good at conserving memory. Performance of these applications shows a correlation to available memory. Specifically, when the application has asked for all available memory +30%, whatever is required by the OS is... required and unavailable to your app. This is the test I had in mind particularly.
You may have seen Windows' Task Manager's "Physical Memory Available" statistic, and "Commit Charge - total". These numbers, too, provide useful gauges to the OS's "Needs". Again, under load.
Again, you seem under informed opinion that this additional memory required by the OS is entirely refunded or swapped out under load. Would you please educate me by showing me your sources? Otherwise, we might as well be in that skit I quoted earlier.
Reports of our new Giant Mecha Overlords have been exaggerated.
TFA doesn't mention size, that I saw, but if you can cause non-negligible damage with a pin, I'm guessing the mecha would have to be measured in mm or cm rather than meters...
Some had 'insightful' comments complaining about increased memory usage. Memory usage is a worthless metric! How memory is usage is more important than how much - and really, would you rather have that RAM in use making your system respond faster, or would you rather have it sit there doing nothing? There's some give and take here, but complaining about memory usage without context is meaningless. I find this unhelpful. You seem to assume that the memory not in use right now is wasted, and that consuming it preemptively makes the computer run faster somehow. 'T ain't necessarily so.
Any memory the OS consumes is memory not available to a running application, current or future. If the OS allows some of the memory it uses to swap out to disk, either it wasn't in use (IE not speeding up the system in the way you're talking about), or is actively slowing the system by causing swapping.
If instead, it causes your application to use disk-based VM, then your application is slower. Wherein lies the speed increase there?
You mention "maybe he only had 1GB of RAM". If so, then yes, he had a big problem. ANYTHING he does is going to be invoking non-RAM virtual memory. 2GB? You're going from having 1.6GB to 1.0GB for applications - losing about 40% of what space you had available. 4GB? about 20%. You make that up by swapping *something* to disk. And the more you're relying on the disk, the more thrashing you're going to do.
So tell me again about how much faster my computer is going to be. I need the laugh.
Using any given card (any variety) over time, will build a profile. Anonymous or not, magnetic stripe or not, stolen credit card data or not.
... But that's like getting folks to change their password regularly, isn't it?
A new card each time may well be tracked ("show the pattern of anonymous new card usage"), but is useless individually for profiling.
You seem to be blithely disregarding issues of trust. And bandwidth. And disability. (Just how well do those interactive pages work with page readers?)
For me, when a company puts up a page that is utterly useless unless you run flash, or javascript, that's a company I turn away from.
Maybe I'm just one of those "stuffy people" you mention. But even if I am, it doesn't mean I don't have legitimate grievances.
We're both speculating with insufficient facts. And we're unlikely to get the facts needed to do more than speculate.
Want some of my popcorn?
Prisoner's Dilemma, and all that. I get it.
But the problem is that you're assuming power is held equally. The actors (rocket launching people) don't necessarily CARE about the people upon whom reprisals would come; and the people the reprisals would fall upon would not necessarily have the means to stop the actors.
I'm thinking, with the accuracy reported for the katyushas, they have a bit of trouble aiming them at anything smaller than a village. But for anything more accurate than that, I'd guess you're right. And you only need to get lucky once, or have a few usefully accurate shots mixed into the "spray and pray" saturation.
Some punk kid shoots out my headlight with a BB gun. I'm driving to the store to get a replacement. You're saying I should get pulled over on an equipment violation that I'm in the process of correcting?
How about speeding to the hospital because I've got someone suffering a heart attack in the back seat, and the ambulance would have taken another 10 minutes. I'm doing 50 in a 35 zone with light traffic. The cop should give me a ticket right there? Or perhaps escort me to the hospital THEN ticket me?
Even Rule of Law can be taken too far.