Re: All your data belongs to Redmond
See http://www.windows-help.net/WindowsXP/tune-08.html and http://www.ciac.org/ciac/bulletins/m-005.shtml Major Variola wrote: >I am currently working as a security consultant at a major kiretsu >that makes printers/fax/copiers/scanners. Important eg in >a hospital where HIPAA requires that info not be leaked. >Eg the xerox-tech swaps a drive and gets to look >at the data on it. Or your accountant is using a wireless laptop >to print your bank numbers. > >A program I was working on crashed, and M$'s XP asked me if it >could tell M$ about the "bug". > >I looked at the info the "anonymous" message would contain. It >included the data I was testing with. > >Nice. > >I sent a note to my boss. > >Anyone know if this can be shut off? > >[Apologies if this is an old issue. As an aside, the 3Ghz work machine >with half a Gig of RAM runs no faster than the 333 Mhz 128Meg Win95 >PC this is composed on. When quantum computing chips come out, >if they run M$ OS, they won't run any faster, but the "assistants" will >be more annoying.] > >--- >"This is by-design behavior, not a security vulnerability. " >-- Scott Culp, Microsoft Security Response >Center, discussing the hole allowing ILOVEU to >propogate, 5/5/00. >
Re: Wipe your Lamo notes now
From: "Tyler Durden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Tim May wrote... > > "If it's a felony for _me_ to say "Sources tell me that Valerie Plame, the > wife of Ambassador Joseph Wilson, has been a CIA covert operative since > 1980," it is a felony for Robert Novak to do so." > > Hum. Particularly in the era of the Internet and blogs. Even if "The Press" > should have some special treatment, the clear and obvious thing to do is to > set up an Internet Press of some minimal sort, and start "reporting". There's not a special exemption for reporters. It is only a crime to reveal the identity of covert agent if you learn of it because of authorized access to classified information or your are engaged in "a pattern of activities intended to identify and expose covert agents and with reason to believe that such activities would impair or impede the foreign intelligence activities of the United States". http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/50/421.html
Re: "Real Facts" and "Good Facts"
Eric Cordian writes: > In another teletext moment on CNN, the shuttle was described as traveling > at "Mock 18." There was an interesting article in the New York Times (http://tinyurl.com/5b4x) back in Nov 2001 about stenographers working on 9/11--that was an angle I didn't see anywhere else. When these special reports come on--and then go on and on and on--the captioners don't get a break. There are no commercials and they have to keep typing even though the talking heads get to take turns. On 9/11 it was even worse because communications in NY were so screwed up. Y'all are making a big deal about the "dangerous debris". As you may have noticed, there were very few real facts to report so they kept repeating the few tidbits they had, whether they made sense or not. The danger may well be overblown, but it is just prudent of NASA to say not to touch it. There were some pretty big pieces that fell and it is plausible they are still dangerous: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030203/170/36q9q.html http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030203/168/36jm1.html Good article from 1980 on the boondoggle that is the space shuttle: http://washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/8004.easterbrook-fulltext.html
Re: Who owns stuff that falls onto someone's property?
From: "Steve Schear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Expect the first EBay auctions of debris from the "Columbia" to be a > > > constitutional issue soon. (Actually, the censors at fascist EBay have > > > probably already flagged any transactions which mention "space shuttle" > > > and "Columbia" to be illegal thoughtcrime sales.) > > > >Yep, ebay has already removed such auctions, e.g., item #2156954390, > >`SPACE SHUTTLE COLUMBIA PIECE OF WRECKAGE PART'. > > Perhaps this is an opportunity for competitive, even offshore, auction > sites to take the fore. I don't think there are any difficult legal issues involved. If you drop your wallet on someone's property, it is still your wallet. If you crash your car onto somebody's front yard, it's still your car (for better or worse). If a plane crashes carrying U.S. mail, the Post Office gathers up whatever mail it can find and tries to deliver it. Would you have it any other way? Even if ownership was in question, does anybody really think it's a good idea to sell the pieces of evidence while the accident investigation is going on?
Re: Definitions, Proofs, Derivations
"Sarad AV" writes:
> there will be no inconsistency in a formal axiomatic
> systems
Huh?
>-but can any one point me to a contradicting
> set of axioms in an axiomatic system?
In general you have to consider the whole system, including derivation
rules, not just the axioms, although you can certain start with a set of
axioms like:
{ x=1, x=2}
or, come to think of it,
{ 1=2 }
Most famously, Frege's system was shown to be inconsistent by Russel. More
recently, the first edition of Quine's Mathematical Logic (1940) was shown
to be inconsistent by Rosser.
For Frege, see "From Frege to Gvdel: A Source Book in Mathematical Logic,
1879-1931" by Jean van Heijenoort
Re: Akamai
Harmon Seaver writes: >Anyone know anything about Akamai (www.akamai.com, also > akamaitechnologies.com)? I was getting about a zillion hits on my web server > from them this morning. They seem to offer services to gov't agencies according > to their website. Their main service is serving static content, so as to reduce the load on their client's servers and improve response time. Originally almost all they did was deliver graphics. Their clients would place graphics on Akamai's servers and their html would point to Akamai's servers for images. Now they can put together content within an HTML page based on "edge-side includes" (http://www.esi.org). They also serve streaming formats for their clients. None of that would explain why they were hitting your site. Perhaps they are working on client-caching or a search engine.
Re: ...(one of them about Completeness)
Jim Choate says: > Godel's does -not- say mathematics is incomplete, it says we can't prove > completeness -within- mathematics proper. To do so requires a > meta-mathematics of some sort. You are mixing up what Godel says about proving consistency within a system, and his incompleteness theorem. Godel most certainly DOES prove that mathematics is incomplete. >To write a string down to feed to your truth engine is one thing, to be > able to write it in either the 'true' or 'false' list is something > entirely different. Nobody cares about the first part, they care a great > deal about the second. >And no it won't be 'true for some, false for some'. The actual content of > the symbols is of -no interst-. We are trying to determine if the string > is legitimate within the axioms and their grammer, not it's absolute > context sensitive result. Here you are wrong. The content of the symbols is very important. The study of mathematical logic, including Godel, depends on comparing semantic truth (validity in models) to syntactic truth (provability). You are only dealing with the syntax. "Completeness" means that every _valid_ formula can be _proved_. The only connection I see between completeness and what you said about "writing down" every "true" string is this: If the set of valid formulas in a system is not recursively enumerable, then the system cannot be complete. This is true of arithmetic. But this is not the definition of "complete." There are systems that are incomplete for other reasons, even over finite models. And there are infinite systems (e.g. the first-order logic) that are complete, but they are not sufficient to describe all of arithmetic.
Re: The End of the Golden Age of Crypto
Jim Choate writes: > > It's not I who is doing the misreading. I sent this along because I don't > know -your- level, which considering your understanding of > 'completeness'... Peter Fairbrother has said nothing inaccurate about completeness, whereas your statements about completeness having to do with the ability to write statements is nonsense.
Re: Secret Court Says U.S. Has Broad Wiretap Powers
> But you forget - the BATF agents were all beeped and informed to not > bother to come in to work that day, and instead met up elsewhere, suited > up so they could arrive just in time (a few minutes after the boom) to be > heroic. > > That indicates something, what exactly it indicates is left as an > excercise to the reader. Mainly it indicates how gullible you are when it comes to conspiracy theories. http://www.courttv.com/casefiles/oklahoma/nichtranscripts/1126pm.html http://www.courttv.com/casefiles/oklahoma/documents/grandjury_123098.html http://www.okcitytrial.com/content/dailytx/050697a/LukeFraneyDirectExaminatio.html http://63.147.65.175/bomb/bomb0109.htm
Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne
Harmon Seaver wrote: > I don't see that Saddam is any less moral than Dubbya and Asscruft. What can you possibly mean by saying this? You lose all credibility for real criticism when you utter such inanities. It's like comparing a shoplifter with Jeffrey Dahmer. Either you're ignorant of what Saddam is about or you have no sense of proportion. Or maybe I'm just not paying attention. Was I not watching the news the night when Bush, after seizing power, marched onto the floors of Congress in front of cameras and had 21 top officials hauled off for summary execution, as Saddam did in 1979? (btw, the U.S. had nothing to do with Saddam taking power) Did I miss it when Bush had Colin Powell's brother tortured to death, like Saddam did with his foreign minister's son? http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,801613,00.html I must have missed the revelation of the prison where Bush is holding children hostage, like Saddam's prison which was too horrible for Scott Ritter to talk about. (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,351165,00.html) I must have missed the testimony about Bush crippling and maiming children with torture. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/from_our_own_correspondent/2058253.stm or http://tinyurl.com/2p21) I must have missed the thousands of political prisoners executed. I must have missed it when Bush invaded Canada AND Mexico. I think my radio was broken the day Bush gassed Berkeley. Get a clue! Check out Amnesty International's annual report on Iraq. http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/aireport/ar99/mde14.htm or ANY OTHER YEAR!
Some non-DRM uses of TCPA/Palladium
I've thought of some non-DRM uses of TCPA/Palladium technology 1. Electronic voting machines (as in Brazil)--that way you can tell that the vote totals that are communicated to you were indeed generated using the authorized software. I still think there should be an auditable paper trail. 2. Prevent cheating in open-source network games. In competition, you could know whether you're competing against the un-modified versions of the software. This problem was noted with Quake: http://slashdot.org/articles/99/12/26/1255258.shtml http://slashdot.org/articles/99/12/27/1127253.shtml Kind of ironic that TCPA could actually solve a problem of open source software.
