Then I considered the volume of food we eat and just couldn't fathom what was happening to it.
When I was little, some grownup mentioned me eating like I had a hollow leg. Well that's what I wound up seriously believing for a brief period.:) But like you, I couldn't see how it would keep from filling up. Weird how one can be going to the bathroom on one's own for a couple years and still not get it, heh.. This also reminds me of a more recent bit of idiocy I read only a few years ago. Somebody was saying the reason you get the munchies from smoking pot is because it warms up your liver, which heats your stomach causing it to expand, and thus feel less full.
Those natural fluctuations are going to happen with or without us. But they are fluctuations, happening over perhaps hundreds or thousands of years and then shifting to something else. What we output to the atmosphere is continuous, and on the rise. I do not understand how logic is absent here. If we all disappeared suddenly, like if aliens came and beamed us all onto their mothership for cattle, it is likely that all the crap we've got in the air right now would be nicely absorbed and dealt with, and the planet continues merrily on its way. But that's if we stop RIGHT NOW. What's to say that another 50 years of our continuous and increasing output isn't going to tip the system right on its ass? We might find out that, while our total amount of contribution is small compared to the natural processes, it may also be much faster in its movement, and that can be a real problem in a system that is accustomed to more gradual change.
I didn't claim it was a valid argument to make something illegal. What I said was that if enough people chose, together, a different moral path, the world might be improved. I didn't intend to imply that this would need to be forced. In the case of porn, oh it's definitely not going to happen. I was looking at what could happen if people simply chose to amuse themselves some other way.
My point was that just because you can do a certain thing alone, no influences on anyone else, doesn't mean that someone else didn't have to sacrifice something or suffer somehow in order for it to be available to you.
The average global temperature may have been higher a few hundred years ago, but this does not say anything about us making somehow less CO2 now. Yes I know trees breathe the stuff.. But I also know that a few hundred years ago we didn't have cars and factories. We didn't dig oil wells and then have them blown up and burn out of control for months on end. We plant trees, but we cut down a hell of a lot of them too, and we burn a lot of them.
The mass of humans on earth would if a billion die.
The mass of the planet remains the same, the mass of humans remains the same. Which has more mass, a live human or a freshly dead human? Exactly. Then we stick that dead human in a sealed box so the stuff of his body does not rejoin with the earth. That mass will be tied up in a human body (or pile of debris in a box) for all time, it just won't be walking around anymore.
I realize you're joking, but, unless we shoot the bodies into space, the Earth's mass has not changed in any significant way, and would not even if a billion died in a heat wave.
We may not have an accurate record, but we can say that CO2 levels have increased over the past decades. How could they not? We've come up with many many ways to pump out more of it, and we weren't doing that a few hundred years ago. The planet puts out CO2 on its own, and now we are adding to that, so of course levels are going to be higher now than they used to be.
the choice to view pornography or to not view it is a choice that I as an adult can make for myself
Just to play devil's advocate here, I think porn is fine, but... Your (my) choice to view pornography supports a market where exploitation and drug use just might be hurting someone, and influencing their personal choices in negative ways. It is harmless for me to sit and watch it, but was it harmless when it was being produced? Quite possibly not. And if I, and you, and billions of others chose not to support that market, it would shrink in size, and some of the people currently involved in the industry might have better lives as a result, perhaps more 'moral' ones. On the other hand, without a porn career there's always prostitution to fall back on, so maybe it doesn't matter after all.
I guess my point is that when one chooses to use a product or service that only appears to be affecting ones'self, that is not necessarily so.
Me smoking pot, by myself, affects nobody else right? Right, though somebody had to grow it and ship it, while taking risks with bikers that might beat them up or kill them, or perhaps they risk many years of jail to get that product to me. If that dealer goes down, demand will bring in another, to take similar risks. All just so I can 'harmlessly' spark one up.
There is no other face a person can have, that sits at a machine hours and hours and hours. That blank glazed stare is a pretty good poker face if you ask me.;)
What is a 'detuned' TV? Does that just mean not hooking up rabbit ears? What if it's got an (albeit crappy) internal antenna, do you have to disable that somehow to 'prove' you can't use broadcast signals?
How about people growing up with the idea that if they're not constantly buying shit, that there is something wrong with them? That's how us North Americans get raised these days. Looking back on my own life and how I developed, I have no doubt that there would be certain improvements (in the family I grew up in as well) if we had never seen or heard of TV.
Oh and the "filth" comment was very likely sarcasm, which much of the post was dripping with.
Is this feature unique to Germany? Or can people in all/most countries do this? Any links on it?
That's making use of your video card's TV tuner funtion if it has one. This will typically include a coaxial input on the card, though might be through RCA or S-Video instead. Your typical tuner software will have presets for the different flavors of NTSC and PAL for different regions. Myself, I use an MSI GeForce 4 that has RCA/S-Video ins and outs, and it runs off my digital cable box (or PS2 for games/DVDs). I do the tuning on the cable box, and run the video through TheFlyDS, trialware version (saving disabled, but nice fullscreen mode, I don't care I just want to watch TV with it).
What 'vulnerability' are you talking about though? That's what makes this all very weird. Would this same 'vulnerability' let me run arbitrary code, or arbitrarily cause some unrelated pre-existing code somewhere else on the machine, to run? Or does it just let me disallow the saving of content within that one program, for that one session? If I have read this all correctly, it is the latter case, so again I must ask, how is this a security vulnerability? Plenty of stuff happens on your computer without your express consent, all the time. Unless you can somehow micromanage all your 0's and 1's, you do not have the level of control and consent you would appear to feel comfortable with.
It is only affecting your ability to manipulate content that you did not create. You ask how this is *not* a security vulnerability, as if that answers it, but you have not stated how this *is* a security vulnerability. It is not using an exploit to introduce code that wasn't there before, it is making use of a function that has been built into the program ahead of time. Just like crippleware, the software has been designed to allow or not allow you to do certain things under certain conditions. Choose to use something else that fits your wants better if you don't like what these programs permit you to do.
Frankly, if Google were as smart as they're hyped to be, they'd know this.
Google is smart enough to realize that MOST of the users that are confronted with such a document will not be able to save it, and will not try any further than the first failure or two. Sure, a determined individual will get the file, and put it on P2P or usenet or something, and it can spread from there. But it will still spread slower than having it just unrestricted on the web.
That definition's too broad though. Is crippleware of any sort then, a security risk? That doesn't make sense. Though, we're talking about a full app here that already saves other things fine but just not this particular content. So what? How is that a loss of 'control'? I still have control over *my* system, just not the ability to manipulate *someone else's* material.
Well, I myself never agree to such EULAs, so it doesn't get installed on my system (well unless you're including cookies in the definition). Ignorance of the law is one thing, but we're talking about people on computers, intimidated by them, and in almost constant fear of messing up. It's difficult for them to focus, and remember everything they've been told, when that little (scary) box suddenly jumps up asking them Yes or No... See this crap works because our world is still loaded with technophobes, and they are the victims of criminal companies that produce spyware/browser hijacks. That's why this senator is a retard, I stand by what I said.
And of course there is still the issue of whether or not an implied agreement is even fair in some cases. User wants a piece of software, and to get said software they are forced to agree that their preferred homepage will never work for them again? That they can never log into their Yahoo account, for example, because the hijack program is poorly written and keeps resetting the page when a user is merely trying to log in? Is that a fair trade? No, that's a paddlin'.
I guess it's neat that he's not a 'sell-out' to his ideals. Too bad his ideals make him a retard. This is not about willing transactions between citizens, this is about people being abused by criminals. At least, we'll be able to finally call them that now.
The attraction is not the improved amount of power, but rather the 'cleanliness' with which such weapons could be deployed. Nobody sane wants to detonate a nuclear device because of the long-term consequences, not only to the enemy but to themselves as well. There are shitloads of nukes in the world, but will any of them ever be fired? Now imagine you have clean anti-matter bombs. Just as destructive, or more, at the time of blast, and the area is available for occupation almost immediately.
That makes this stuff scary as hell. But using anti-matter makes something like Project Orion much less scary. I mean someone actually thought at one time that it would be a good idea to leave a trail of exploded nuclear bombs behind a travelling ship, whoah...
Saying that most don't implies that some of them do. Hence, various people do agree that it was flamebait. Not reading the article is one thing, we are all guilty of that.. But not reading even the SUMMARY? I was patched before I finished reading it fer cryin out loud. Not reading anything but the headline, and then posting, well that's flamebait, or just raw cluelessness, but either deserves a bit of a smack.
You don't have to uninstall, there's a patch, read the summary. Why is it worthwhile to protect your downloads folder? Well if you have to ask that, then I will tell you to nevermind, just use IE, it's probably easier for you.
Slashdot Mirror
Then I considered the volume of food we eat and just couldn't fathom what was happening to it.
:) But like you, I couldn't see how it would keep from filling up. Weird how one can be going to the bathroom on one's own for a couple years and still not get it, heh.. This also reminds me of a more recent bit of idiocy I read only a few years ago. Somebody was saying the reason you get the munchies from smoking pot is because it warms up your liver, which heats your stomach causing it to expand, and thus feel less full.
When I was little, some grownup mentioned me eating like I had a hollow leg. Well that's what I wound up seriously believing for a brief period.
Those natural fluctuations are going to happen with or without us. But they are fluctuations, happening over perhaps hundreds or thousands of years and then shifting to something else. What we output to the atmosphere is continuous, and on the rise. I do not understand how logic is absent here. If we all disappeared suddenly, like if aliens came and beamed us all onto their mothership for cattle, it is likely that all the crap we've got in the air right now would be nicely absorbed and dealt with, and the planet continues merrily on its way. But that's if we stop RIGHT NOW. What's to say that another 50 years of our continuous and increasing output isn't going to tip the system right on its ass? We might find out that, while our total amount of contribution is small compared to the natural processes, it may also be much faster in its movement, and that can be a real problem in a system that is accustomed to more gradual change.
I didn't claim it was a valid argument to make something illegal. What I said was that if enough people chose, together, a different moral path, the world might be improved. I didn't intend to imply that this would need to be forced. In the case of porn, oh it's definitely not going to happen. I was looking at what could happen if people simply chose to amuse themselves some other way.
My point was that just because you can do a certain thing alone, no influences on anyone else, doesn't mean that someone else didn't have to sacrifice something or suffer somehow in order for it to be available to you.
The average global temperature may have been higher a few hundred years ago, but this does not say anything about us making somehow less CO2 now. Yes I know trees breathe the stuff.. But I also know that a few hundred years ago we didn't have cars and factories. We didn't dig oil wells and then have them blown up and burn out of control for months on end. We plant trees, but we cut down a hell of a lot of them too, and we burn a lot of them.
The mass of humans on earth would if a billion die.
The mass of the planet remains the same, the mass of humans remains the same. Which has more mass, a live human or a freshly dead human? Exactly. Then we stick that dead human in a sealed box so the stuff of his body does not rejoin with the earth. That mass will be tied up in a human body (or pile of debris in a box) for all time, it just won't be walking around anymore.
So, I wasn't tripping, that really was Cthulhu in my toilet last night? Unholy shit..
I realize you're joking, but, unless we shoot the bodies into space, the Earth's mass has not changed in any significant way, and would not even if a billion died in a heat wave.
We may not have an accurate record, but we can say that CO2 levels have increased over the past decades. How could they not? We've come up with many many ways to pump out more of it, and we weren't doing that a few hundred years ago. The planet puts out CO2 on its own, and now we are adding to that, so of course levels are going to be higher now than they used to be.
the choice to view pornography or to not view it is a choice that I as an adult can make for myself
Just to play devil's advocate here, I think porn is fine, but... Your (my) choice to view pornography supports a market where exploitation and drug use just might be hurting someone, and influencing their personal choices in negative ways. It is harmless for me to sit and watch it, but was it harmless when it was being produced? Quite possibly not. And if I, and you, and billions of others chose not to support that market, it would shrink in size, and some of the people currently involved in the industry might have better lives as a result, perhaps more 'moral' ones. On the other hand, without a porn career there's always prostitution to fall back on, so maybe it doesn't matter after all.
I guess my point is that when one chooses to use a product or service that only appears to be affecting ones'self, that is not necessarily so.
Me smoking pot, by myself, affects nobody else right? Right, though somebody had to grow it and ship it, while taking risks with bikers that might beat them up or kill them, or perhaps they risk many years of jail to get that product to me. If that dealer goes down, demand will bring in another, to take similar risks. All just so I can 'harmlessly' spark one up.
There is no other face a person can have, that sits at a machine hours and hours and hours. That blank glazed stare is a pretty good poker face if you ask me. ;)
What is a 'detuned' TV? Does that just mean not hooking up rabbit ears? What if it's got an (albeit crappy) internal antenna, do you have to disable that somehow to 'prove' you can't use broadcast signals?
How about people growing up with the idea that if they're not constantly buying shit, that there is something wrong with them? That's how us North Americans get raised these days. Looking back on my own life and how I developed, I have no doubt that there would be certain improvements (in the family I grew up in as well) if we had never seen or heard of TV.
Oh and the "filth" comment was very likely sarcasm, which much of the post was dripping with.
Is this feature unique to Germany? Or can people in all/most countries do this? Any links on it?
That's making use of your video card's TV tuner funtion if it has one. This will typically include a coaxial input on the card, though might be through RCA or S-Video instead. Your typical tuner software will have presets for the different flavors of NTSC and PAL for different regions. Myself, I use an MSI GeForce 4 that has RCA/S-Video ins and outs, and it runs off my digital cable box (or PS2 for games/DVDs). I do the tuning on the cable box, and run the video through TheFlyDS, trialware version (saving disabled, but nice fullscreen mode, I don't care I just want to watch TV with it).
I'd get a cluster of Intel machines together, and map the human genome so as to develop an immunity to anthrax. Or get a mask.
What 'vulnerability' are you talking about though? That's what makes this all very weird. Would this same 'vulnerability' let me run arbitrary code, or arbitrarily cause some unrelated pre-existing code somewhere else on the machine, to run? Or does it just let me disallow the saving of content within that one program, for that one session? If I have read this all correctly, it is the latter case, so again I must ask, how is this a security vulnerability? Plenty of stuff happens on your computer without your express consent, all the time. Unless you can somehow micromanage all your 0's and 1's, you do not have the level of control and consent you would appear to feel comfortable with.
It is only affecting your ability to manipulate content that you did not create. You ask how this is *not* a security vulnerability, as if that answers it, but you have not stated how this *is* a security vulnerability. It is not using an exploit to introduce code that wasn't there before, it is making use of a function that has been built into the program ahead of time. Just like crippleware, the software has been designed to allow or not allow you to do certain things under certain conditions. Choose to use something else that fits your wants better if you don't like what these programs permit you to do.
Frankly, if Google were as smart as they're hyped to be, they'd know this.
Google is smart enough to realize that MOST of the users that are confronted with such a document will not be able to save it, and will not try any further than the first failure or two. Sure, a determined individual will get the file, and put it on P2P or usenet or something, and it can spread from there. But it will still spread slower than having it just unrestricted on the web.
That definition's too broad though. Is crippleware of any sort then, a security risk? That doesn't make sense. Though, we're talking about a full app here that already saves other things fine but just not this particular content. So what? How is that a loss of 'control'? I still have control over *my* system, just not the ability to manipulate *someone else's* material.
Well, I myself never agree to such EULAs, so it doesn't get installed on my system (well unless you're including cookies in the definition). Ignorance of the law is one thing, but we're talking about people on computers, intimidated by them, and in almost constant fear of messing up. It's difficult for them to focus, and remember everything they've been told, when that little (scary) box suddenly jumps up asking them Yes or No... See this crap works because our world is still loaded with technophobes, and they are the victims of criminal companies that produce spyware/browser hijacks. That's why this senator is a retard, I stand by what I said.
And of course there is still the issue of whether or not an implied agreement is even fair in some cases. User wants a piece of software, and to get said software they are forced to agree that their preferred homepage will never work for them again? That they can never log into their Yahoo account, for example, because the hijack program is poorly written and keeps resetting the page when a user is merely trying to log in? Is that a fair trade? No, that's a paddlin'.
I guess it's neat that he's not a 'sell-out' to his ideals. Too bad his ideals make him a retard. This is not about willing transactions between citizens, this is about people being abused by criminals. At least, we'll be able to finally call them that now.
The thing accepts voice commands: hold down scroll lock and tell it things like "reload", "back", "close window", "zoom in", etc
:)
So, I have to remember the command I want, and use the keyboard to make it happen. And I'm talking to it, why?
The attraction is not the improved amount of power, but rather the 'cleanliness' with which such weapons could be deployed. Nobody sane wants to detonate a nuclear device because of the long-term consequences, not only to the enemy but to themselves as well. There are shitloads of nukes in the world, but will any of them ever be fired? Now imagine you have clean anti-matter bombs. Just as destructive, or more, at the time of blast, and the area is available for occupation almost immediately.
That makes this stuff scary as hell. But using anti-matter makes something like Project Orion much less scary. I mean someone actually thought at one time that it would be a good idea to leave a trail of exploded nuclear bombs behind a travelling ship, whoah...
Saying that most don't implies that some of them do. Hence, various people do agree that it was flamebait. Not reading the article is one thing, we are all guilty of that.. But not reading even the SUMMARY? I was patched before I finished reading it fer cryin out loud. Not reading anything but the headline, and then posting, well that's flamebait, or just raw cluelessness, but either deserves a bit of a smack.
How is asking others on /. for their insight into this vulnerability "flamebait"?
Well just look at the responses he got. Stupid questions deserve stupid answers.
You don't have to uninstall, there's a patch, read the summary. Why is it worthwhile to protect your downloads folder? Well if you have to ask that, then I will tell you to nevermind, just use IE, it's probably easier for you.