I've heard you hosted pictures of your daughter groping a nine-inch sambo dildo on your personal webserver (along with numerous movies, programs, and other copyrighted content). Confirm/Deny?
Does anyone recall the code for Grubbnix? It was a quick hack in the early to mid 90s, but it worked quite well. Call it a cross-over between a bootloader and an OS, I suppose.
Anyways, the interesting part of Grubbnix was that it had a lot of capability and use when it came to flashing your BIOS (most major motherboard companies today still use a Grubbnix variant with their flashing utilities). I still remember one variant called Hucker (or something like that, maybe Huckey) that was spread around on disks to unsuspecting users. When you loaded it and left it running, it opened up your system enough so that someone via TCP/IP could execute commands, one of which was to completely shitfuck your BIOS, and sometimes even managed to cause damage to the CPU/motherboard by modifying threshold settings in the BIOS (depending on your model #).
It used to be passed out to "enemies" at HackerCons, who would then take it home, load it, and end up with a fucked PC.
Perhaps Senator Hatch needs to give the Cult of the Dead Cow an e-mail and see if they still have the source around somewhere;-)
This may be true for some, but it's not for me
on
Robots Without a Cause
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Just because the author seems to believe all robots fall under the classification of useless gadgets doesn't mean the rest of us see them that way. This articles strikes of the typical attitude that non-technically-inclined people get when they see us geeks fiddling with robots.
The truth is, with the generation of people in their late teens and twenties, robots will be not only commonplace, but expected. We've grown up with the first wave of robot companions (Furby!) and it will be far from out of the ordinary for us to expect our vaccuuming to be done by AI.
Not everyone is ignorant enough to excuse robots as mere toys, their application will grow infinitely in the coming years and they will be all the more transparent in our day-to-day lives. Right now we're afflicted with a overflow of gimmick bots that give people the impression all they're only good for entertainment, but that couldn't be further from the truth. Just wait 10 years and see.
I've read it and found it to be grossly simplified
on
Special Ops
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I'd rate it somewhere around 6 or 7 out of 10, certainly no where near 9. My major complaints are similar to those of the author of the article:
- Gives no mention of its focus on Microsoft OS's, but it concentrates on them nearly entirely. - Simple, simple, simple. If you know your basics, most of this book is redundant and a review. There's a lengthy discussion on how a traceroute works. That's a little too simple for my tastes. - Though not required, the author seems excessively biased towards Microsoft OS's. He even goes so far to suggest (in mild language) that it's easier to track invaders using Microsoft products than using freely available tools. C'mon, I think we all know the pile of open source tools available for these applications outnumber and outwork anything out of Redmond.
It's something I think newbie MS admins should read, but it doesn't hold much new content for anyone who's been admining for a year+.
I'm not debating the legal implications of what I did. Again, I have to repeat what I said: I would feel 100% justified in downloading and watching it, knowing that I wouldn't keep it as a backup and watch it repeatedly.
- I rent a DVD from Blockbuster for $5 -To my disappointment, the DVD doesn't play on my PC's DVD-drive because of copy protection -Having already paid to see the movie, I feel fine downloading a rip of it and watching that
I'd gladly pay them directly for a download, but until they offer that service, I can't. All I said was that having already paid for the movie, and being unable to watch it in its original format, I'd download it so I could at least see the movie.
Like I said: I've never downloaded a movie before. You're barking up the wrong tree if you're calling me out as some sort of pirate. I just think there are some justifications for grabbing a rip of a movie, like when you've already paid for it.
You know, I considered myself a pretty moral person -- sure, I've got a few mp3s, but I try my best to purchase albums of artists I've enjoyed. I have never downloaded a full-length movie.
If this is where the future is going, that just might change. I usually play DVDs on my PC, and if I bring one home from Blockbuster and it won't play because the MPAA assumes I'm a pirate, I will feel 100% justified in seeking out a rip of that movie in XViD or SVCD (or DVDR) and watching it.
They're digging their own grave, but then again, maybe that's what they want to do. More invasive media -> More piracy -> More lobbying power to create strict DMCA-like laws.
Either way, you're going to be seeing a lot of people downloading movies who normally didn't. And it's just going to give all the people who do download movies all the more reason.
Thanks for assuming I'm a pirate, MPAA. You might just've made me one.
This was exactly my reaction too -- I'm very interested to see how Palm handled this, if they handled it at all.
I've had a part in developing a few touchscreen devices and this was a problem our group ran to as well (our hardware was going to be situated in high-traffic areas and geared towards kids, who would no doubt put it through the ringer).
Touchscreens work by sensing not only your "x" and "y" position on the screen, but most of them now also have what's called the "z-loc" (or z-pin depending on the hardware manufac.), and it's basically a way to sense where someone has gently pushed their finger onto the surface. It's calculated using the same sensors, but it reports many less false-positives because it only detects when someone makes a motion "downwards" towards the screen.
The problem I can see is that when the surface of the monitor (or in this case, watch) becomes irregular, the z-pin stuff has trouble picking up actual signals, and sometimes sits there reporting signals constantly. It relies on the regularity of the surface of the device. Considering watches' ability to become scratched up (ever tried doing hardware upgrades on a Compaq desktop machine with a watch on?;), I'm very interested to see how Palm prevented this from happening. If they haven't accounted for it, you could see a massive return-rate because your watch thinks you're opening your address book 24/7.
I'm usually not one to complain about posts on Slashdot. I might moderate it down if it really deserves it, but most of the time I just move on.
I feel the need to comment on this post, however. As a second generation Japanese American, whose parents were imprisoned by a racist government in WW2, I have to put up with enough stereotyping and racism in my day-to-day life. I hoped I could escape it in a community like Slashdot.
Apparantly not. Do you realize this statement is equivelant to saying, for example: "A black person eating watermelon? I am shocked." or perhaps "A person of Jewish faith being cheap? I am shocked."
Not only does it perpetuate a stereotype of Japanese people, but it pokes fun at entire nation of people.
Like I said, I expect this in the Southern US, but didn't think I'd ever see it on Slashdot. I'm a little ashamed to be a slashdotter today.
Note: For those wondering about my name, Gunth, it was taken on by my father in the 1940's in an attempt to fit in better with American culture. It's quite a funny story, actually, the common rumor in my family is that he got the name from a jar of Gunth's Brand Sardines:)
Your description of QNX, though elegant, is a little off. If QNX is straight out of any book, it'd be "Unix for Dummies". Its endless striving towards reckless simplification, abstraction, and minimalism is what keeps it from being one of the "big boys".
QNX's major problem is its lack of focus on who its userbase is (or should be). They're catering to the wrong people, not realizing that their core userbase could (and should) be the typical knowledgable Linux geek. Instead, they seem to be chasing after an elusive "newbie" core of users.
I, for one, am glad Linux lacks QNX's "design niceities". That's what seperates the two, and I am more than glad to have an OS which isn't concerned with things I consider to be a waste of code -- which seems to be where QNX spends most of its development time.
Robustness is definitely comparable, so I wouldn't give QNX the upper hand in that corner -- all you need to do is take a look at the GPH support in both to figure out which is more robust.
My view on QNX is this: Good, but not great. I'm actually a little suprised to see such support here at Slashdot.
I've never understood the fear of "big brother". The only people who have something to fear from something like this are the people who are doing something wrong in the first place. Downloading some source code? No problem. Pirating software? Bingo, you're caught. Isn't this just effective policework?
I'm not saying you personally are doing anything wrong. Unless you're using your internet connection for something illegal in the first place, this shouldn't be a concern. Heck, think of all the extra bandwidth we'll have once the fileswappers are stopped!;-)
I've heard a lot of "off with his head!" comments around these parts in regards to Mr. Northrup, but can we look at his point of view with a shred of objectivity for a moment?
Let me introduce a hypothetical situation. You, a programmer, create some wonderful technology. It's so wonderful, in fact, that it spreads all over the world and is used by nearly everyone on a daily basis. Would you not want some measure of control on this technology that you labored over for so many hours? Would you not like some shred of claim to its origin? Though it's easy to tie this man to a cross for his pursuits in I.P., I think the honest answer most of us would give is "Yes, I would."
Perspective is a difficult thing to deal with; however, I think Mr. Northrup is on the "good side" in this fight.
You must be new here. Here's a handy hint: train your eye to read "News for nerds. Stuff that matters." as "Scare-mongering and hypocrisy. Uninformed opinions."
Slashdot Mirror
I bet these jokes are a big hit at your LUG
More bandwidth, processing power, and resources. I hope this goes through ASAP.
Between jobs because you got caught using your company's resources for pirated material. You deserve no sympathy.
Stuck at 99% can someone reseed Mohawk.iso
I've heard you hosted pictures of your daughter groping a nine-inch sambo dildo on your personal webserver (along with numerous movies, programs, and other copyrighted content). Confirm/Deny?
Does anyone recall the code for Grubbnix? It was a quick hack in the early to mid 90s, but it worked quite well. Call it a cross-over between a bootloader and an OS, I suppose.
;-)
Anyways, the interesting part of Grubbnix was that it had a lot of capability and use when it came to flashing your BIOS (most major motherboard companies today still use a Grubbnix variant with their flashing utilities). I still remember one variant called Hucker (or something like that, maybe Huckey) that was spread around on disks to unsuspecting users. When you loaded it and left it running, it opened up your system enough so that someone via TCP/IP could execute commands, one of which was to completely shitfuck your BIOS, and sometimes even managed to cause damage to the CPU/motherboard by modifying threshold settings in the BIOS (depending on your model #).
It used to be passed out to "enemies" at HackerCons, who would then take it home, load it, and end up with a fucked PC.
Perhaps Senator Hatch needs to give the Cult of the Dead Cow an e-mail and see if they still have the source around somewhere
Just because the author seems to believe all robots fall under the classification of useless gadgets doesn't mean the rest of us see them that way. This articles strikes of the typical attitude that non-technically-inclined people get when they see us geeks fiddling with robots.
The truth is, with the generation of people in their late teens and twenties, robots will be not only commonplace, but expected. We've grown up with the first wave of robot companions (Furby!) and it will be far from out of the ordinary for us to expect our vaccuuming to be done by AI.
Not everyone is ignorant enough to excuse robots as mere toys, their application will grow infinitely in the coming years and they will be all the more transparent in our day-to-day lives. Right now we're afflicted with a overflow of gimmick bots that give people the impression all they're only good for entertainment, but that couldn't be further from the truth. Just wait 10 years and see.
I'd rate it somewhere around 6 or 7 out of 10, certainly no where near 9. My major complaints are similar to those of the author of the article:
- Gives no mention of its focus on Microsoft OS's, but it concentrates on them nearly entirely.
- Simple, simple, simple. If you know your basics, most of this book is redundant and a review. There's a lengthy discussion on how a traceroute works. That's a little too simple for my tastes.
- Though not required, the author seems excessively biased towards Microsoft OS's. He even goes so far to suggest (in mild language) that it's easier to track invaders using Microsoft products than using freely available tools. C'mon, I think we all know the pile of open source tools available for these applications outnumber and outwork anything out of Redmond.
It's something I think newbie MS admins should read, but it doesn't hold much new content for anyone who's been admining for a year+.
I'm not debating the legal implications of what I did. Again, I have to repeat what I said: I would feel 100% justified in downloading and watching it, knowing that I wouldn't keep it as a backup and watch it repeatedly.
You're assuming things. What I meant was:
- I rent a DVD from Blockbuster for $5
-To my disappointment, the DVD doesn't play on my PC's DVD-drive because of copy protection
-Having already paid to see the movie, I feel fine downloading a rip of it and watching that
I'd gladly pay them directly for a download, but until they offer that service, I can't. All I said was that having already paid for the movie, and being unable to watch it in its original format, I'd download it so I could at least see the movie.
Like I said: I've never downloaded a movie before. You're barking up the wrong tree if you're calling me out as some sort of pirate. I just think there are some justifications for grabbing a rip of a movie, like when you've already paid for it.
You know, I considered myself a pretty moral person -- sure, I've got a few mp3s, but I try my best to purchase albums of artists I've enjoyed. I have never downloaded a full-length movie.
If this is where the future is going, that just might change. I usually play DVDs on my PC, and if I bring one home from Blockbuster and it won't play because the MPAA assumes I'm a pirate, I will feel 100% justified in seeking out a rip of that movie in XViD or SVCD (or DVDR) and watching it.
They're digging their own grave, but then again, maybe that's what they want to do. More invasive media -> More piracy -> More lobbying power to create strict DMCA-like laws.
Either way, you're going to be seeing a lot of people downloading movies who normally didn't. And it's just going to give all the people who do download movies all the more reason.
Thanks for assuming I'm a pirate, MPAA. You might just've made me one.
This was exactly my reaction too -- I'm very interested to see how Palm handled this, if they handled it at all.
;), I'm very interested to see how Palm prevented this from happening. If they haven't accounted for it, you could see a massive return-rate because your watch thinks you're opening your address book 24/7.
I've had a part in developing a few touchscreen devices and this was a problem our group ran to as well (our hardware was going to be situated in high-traffic areas and geared towards kids, who would no doubt put it through the ringer).
Touchscreens work by sensing not only your "x" and "y" position on the screen, but most of them now also have what's called the "z-loc" (or z-pin depending on the hardware manufac.), and it's basically a way to sense where someone has gently pushed their finger onto the surface. It's calculated using the same sensors, but it reports many less false-positives because it only detects when someone makes a motion "downwards" towards the screen.
The problem I can see is that when the surface of the monitor (or in this case, watch) becomes irregular, the z-pin stuff has trouble picking up actual signals, and sometimes sits there reporting signals constantly. It relies on the regularity of the surface of the device. Considering watches' ability to become scratched up (ever tried doing hardware upgrades on a Compaq desktop machine with a watch on?
I'm usually not one to complain about posts on Slashdot. I might moderate it down if it really deserves it, but most of the time I just move on.
:)
I feel the need to comment on this post, however. As a second generation Japanese American, whose parents were imprisoned by a racist government in WW2, I have to put up with enough stereotyping and racism in my day-to-day life. I hoped I could escape it in a community like Slashdot.
Apparantly not. Do you realize this statement is equivelant to saying, for example: "A black person eating watermelon? I am shocked." or perhaps "A person of Jewish faith being cheap? I am shocked."
Not only does it perpetuate a stereotype of Japanese people, but it pokes fun at entire nation of people.
Like I said, I expect this in the Southern US, but didn't think I'd ever see it on Slashdot. I'm a little ashamed to be a slashdotter today.
Note: For those wondering about my name, Gunth, it was taken on by my father in the 1940's in an attempt to fit in better with American culture. It's quite a funny story, actually, the common rumor in my family is that he got the name from a jar of Gunth's Brand Sardines
Your description of QNX, though elegant, is a little off. If QNX is straight out of any book, it'd be "Unix for Dummies". Its endless striving towards reckless simplification, abstraction, and minimalism is what keeps it from being one of the "big boys".
QNX's major problem is its lack of focus on who its userbase is (or should be). They're catering to the wrong people, not realizing that their core userbase could (and should) be the typical knowledgable Linux geek. Instead, they seem to be chasing after an elusive "newbie" core of users.
I, for one, am glad Linux lacks QNX's "design niceities". That's what seperates the two, and I am more than glad to have an OS which isn't concerned with things I consider to be a waste of code -- which seems to be where QNX spends most of its development time.
Robustness is definitely comparable, so I wouldn't give QNX the upper hand in that corner -- all you need to do is take a look at the GPH support in both to figure out which is more robust.
My view on QNX is this: Good, but not great. I'm actually a little suprised to see such support here at Slashdot.
I've never understood the fear of "big brother". The only people who have something to fear from something like this are the people who are doing something wrong in the first place. Downloading some source code? No problem. Pirating software? Bingo, you're caught. Isn't this just effective policework? I'm not saying you personally are doing anything wrong. Unless you're using your internet connection for something illegal in the first place, this shouldn't be a concern. Heck, think of all the extra bandwidth we'll have once the fileswappers are stopped! ;-)
Your post was way too long and I didn't read any of it.
Just the thought of that bastard getting a dime of my money makes my blood boil.
I've heard a lot of "off with his head!" comments around these parts in regards to Mr. Northrup, but can we look at his point of view with a shred of objectivity for a moment? Let me introduce a hypothetical situation. You, a programmer, create some wonderful technology. It's so wonderful, in fact, that it spreads all over the world and is used by nearly everyone on a daily basis. Would you not want some measure of control on this technology that you labored over for so many hours? Would you not like some shred of claim to its origin? Though it's easy to tie this man to a cross for his pursuits in I.P., I think the honest answer most of us would give is "Yes, I would." Perspective is a difficult thing to deal with; however, I think Mr. Northrup is on the "good side" in this fight.
How is this "Informative"? Golly gee, it's like the normal books, but with that crazy Chinese writing? Useless.
No, I think his unreadable writing style does.
chrisd failed reading comprehension in high school, sadly.
Blackwolf the Dragonslayer claims this first post for the Nation of Scotland! Hear ye, hear ye!
in the pootie
Yeah, after a crackfix and a fucking repack. What a screw-up!
You must be new here. Here's a handy hint: train your eye to read "News for nerds. Stuff that matters." as "Scare-mongering and hypocrisy. Uninformed opinions."